Prosecutors Want 60 Years for Manning, Recall Effort Begins Against Bob Filner, Scott Brown Mulls Presidential Run: P.M. Links


Have a news tip for us? Send it to:

Get and Reason 24/7 content widgets for your websites.

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

NEXT: NYC's Lively Gun Black Market Makes Use of Discount Buses for Smuggling

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The White House denies having any involvement in the detaining of the partner of Glenn Greenwald…

    I have a feeling the Brits will be disputing that.

    1. Obama has such a track record of telling the truth on this issue. How could you doubt him?

      1. You’re saying a black man can’t tell the truth? RACIST!

        1. He could tell the truth. It’s just that he’s yet to do so, as far as anyone knows.

        2. no, john is saying this black man can’t tell the truth.

    2. Just like they deny having any involvement with gun walking, or the IRS targeting conservative groups or …

      1. or …

        The NSA spying on all Americans.

        1. or something about movies about Mohammed and terrorist activities?

          1. Ok. Ok. You guys have had your fun.

            But, seriously, enough of these phony scandals. There’s a serious scandal involving a rodeo clown to investigate.


    3. The White House denies having any involvement in the detaining of the partner of Glenn Greenwald…

      I’d be embarrassed by that Busch League level intimidation tactic too. I’d hope our government is better and less transparent about their motives than that.

  2. A very simple health insurance plan New Jersey offered to those who couldn’t afford better is going to be killed by the Affordable Care Act. It covered about 106,000 people.

    Was the plan to get people to stop living in New Jersey?

    1. That’s a good plan.

      1. That’s a good plan.

        No, according to my theoretical model, anytime you chase undesirables out of another state they end up in CA. It is a bad plan. A vote for is a vote for sending all of the New Jerseyans back home and not admitting any new ones.

        1. Sounds like a good plan to me.

          First step in the Lex Luthor plan for improving California and the rest of the United States.

    2. As long as they go to the state you’re living in and don’t come here, I’m fine with it. If I had my own state, the first thing I would ban is NJ expatriates.

  3. 60? Why they are so generous.

  4. Efforts have begun to recall sex-scandal-tainted San Diego Mayor Bob Filner.

    Filner? He hardly even knows her! (Has anyone used that yet?)

    1. His taint is tainted.

    2. Co-founder of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Gotta love that.

  5. A very simple health insurance plan New Jersey offered to those who couldn’t afford better is going to be killed by the Affordable Care Act.

    Eggs for the omelette.

  6. Is Coffee Good for you or bad for you?
    Let’s spin the wheel: Good good bad bad good bad good bad bad bad good bad

    1. Guess I’ll just up the gin, then.

    2. I just take caffeine tablets. Much more precise that way.

      1. Some of us like the tast of coffee. And I’ve always drunk it plain black, without sugar. None of those overpriced Starbucks drinks for me.

        1. When I do partake, it is always 7-11 coffee. My lunch should cost $5, not my coffee…

          1. That’s why you prefer caffeine tablets.

            Starbucks drinks are $5 because they’re 20 ounces of milk and syrups with whipped cream, and you’re paying for the extra ingredients, plus the expertise to make a hundred absurd dessert drink variations. If you go to a place that gives you good drip coffee without worrying whether it might offend the tastes of a 14 year old girl, the ROI is better.

      2. IIRC the health benefits from coffee aren’t just the caffeine.

    3. It’s always good for you if you aren’t drinking any of it. It’s also good for you if you own a huge coffee plantation with 3rd world laborers working for exploitation level low wages.

      1. you make the latter sound like a bad thing.

        1. It would only be bad if the workers didn’t polish your monocle, after hours, for free.

    4. Is Coffee Good for you or bad for you?

      Love the title: “Can drinking too much coffee kill you?”
      Hell, drinking too much water can kill you.
      A woman who worked for me used to drink so much water she washed out her electrolytes and ended up in the hospital for several days. I heard she did it again after she got a job with the State.

      1. You see hyponatremia occur when in the desert and superiors are constantly barking about hydrating, leading some youngsters to overdo it. As you point out, it can be serious.

  7. New York City’s Police Commissioner Ray Kelly says “stop-and-frisk” contributed to the Big Apple’s drop in crime and worries about the trend reversing. But what about all the other cities who have seen drops in crime and didn’t resort to racist, Fourth-Amendment-ignoring tactics?

    But Nuu Yawk is special and so different a city compared to the rest of us backwater hicks who don’t live there.

    1. But Nuu Yawk is special and so different a city compared to the rest of us backwater hicks who don’t live there.

      Thank god! If Central Kentucky were the same as NYC, it would be a horrible place to be.

  8. Why the red-hot tattoo boom is bound to end

    1. Well, tattoos being ugly and trashy is another reason.

      1. I’ve seen some nice ones, but the question is really if they’ll look that way in 30 years. And the memorial ones are sorta sweet.

        1. Well, its a better memorium than putting a sticker on a car you intend to trade in 3 years from now.

        2. Because the rest of you is going to look awesome in 30 years, I bet…

      2. C’mon, Epi. All the finest skanks have tramp stamps.

        1. You might be hitting too close to home there.

        2. No, the finest ones are the ones that don’t. Rare, I admit.

          1. You would kick Jadzia Dax out of bed.

            1. Yeah, but not Terry Farrell.

              1. From Jane’s Addiction? That’s weird.

            2. Is that the bad kind of threesome?

              1. Is there a bad kind of threesome?

                I mean as long as the other two are women, who cares?!

                1. Dianne Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi.

                  Boom, instant limp-dick.

      3. Well, tattoos being ugly and trashy is another reason.

        Since when are you anti-trashy?

        1. Wrong kind of trashy. I really don’t like ink.

          1. What if a girl got a full body tattoo that was an exact replica of herself?

      4. Sailors and whores. That’s who they used to say got tattoos. Wonder if they’ll regain their duopoly?

    2. How cute, they put little stylized maple leaves on their illustration since they’re Canadian.

    3. FTA:

      Once a tribal rite of passage, a signifier of dangerous associations, or a mark of freakish deviance, the tattoo is now commercialized, ironic, often tacky or maudlin, rarely edgy, and widely available at low cost, all of which bodes ill for the future of ink.

      Yes a commercially successful product available at low cost definitely “bodes ill for the future of ink!”

      1. More FTA:

        “On a global scale, tattoos are more common now than they ever have been before,” said Nina Jablonski, professor of anthropology at Penn State, and author of Skin: A Natural History. It is difficult to tell if we are at peak tattoo, she said, the point of maximum output before a steep and terminal drop in production, comparable to the theory of peak oil.

        If this theory is modeled after peak oil, then we should expect tatts to become even more plentiful, with even better ways of getting them.

        This article os so full of stupid one can scarcely go one line without seeing idiocy.

        1. I think it’s just a rhetorical flourish by a stupid author. More likely, once even grandmothers are likely to have tattoos, they’ll simply go out of style for younger generations.

    4. Every idiot and their mother in my neighborhood has shitty tats. Can’t even read half of them.

      1. I think it’s pretty stupid to get tattoos with Chinese characters if one does not really understand the language.

        I am fluent/literate in Japanese and conversant in Mandarin so when I see a westerner with a Kanji tattoo it looks prety stupid even when they seem to have done a little research for the character they chose. There are just too many nuances which can be read into a single character that it really doesn’t work the way they seem to think it does.

        I have seen people in the US sporting tattoos that had no possible meaning – completely random jumbles.

        One guy I saw had a set of characters which seemed to have been chosen at random off a newspaper. “Tin, indicator, Summer, tendency” WTF??

        1. I feel the same way when people get Latin ones & it’s like…yeah, everything about that horror show you just put on your body is all kinds of wrong.

          1. I have a tattoo in Old English.

            I guess one difference is that I studied Old English in grad school and know exactly what it says.

      1. And… here’s the original location of this chart.

    5. Bound to end?

      Just wait until we get the tats with electronics in ’em.

  9. But what about all the other cities who have seen drops in crime and didn’t resort to racist, Fourth-Amendment-ignoring tactics?

    They’re saps.

  10. Now the percussionist has 10 minutes to impress a Boston Symphony Orchestra selection committee.

    1. I thought for sure this was a Rush joke setup.

  11. The White House denies having any involvement in the detaining of the partner of Glenn Greenwald of The Guardian in England, but the country did give them a “heads up.”

    ” Ok, thanks for the heads up, guys! Do your thing!”

  12. When did health insurance become what it is? I mean, why isn’t health insurance like property insurance or car insurance — it’s there in case of disasters. If your car is in an accident, your insurance covers it. If you’re going for an oil change, it doesn’t. Simple. Why isn’t health insurance like that — there if you have an accident or contract a severe illness, but you pay for simple doctor visits?

    (serious question; I really don’t know)

    1. Does your employer pay for your property insurance or your car insurance?

      1. So was it the IRS rules not counting employer-paid health insurance as income that did it?

        1. Among other things yes, it was the seperation of the payer from the benefit reciever that was the chief culprit.

        2. I thought this is commonly understood to be the case. Convention doubtless has a lot to do with it, in the same sense that bachelor’s degrees are considered a prerequisite for glorified secretarial jobs rather than the mark of distinction for highly technical careers. Everybody offers it, and therefore the expectation is that everybody offers it.

    2. When health insurance became tax deductible compensation for business (and tax-free compensation for the employee).

    3. During WW2, FDR put a wage freeze in place. Companies bumped up benefits instead of giving raises. Health Insurance was one of the major benefits that was used.

      1. +1. And, Those first policies were major medical or hospitalization policies. They reimbursed only for a serious accident or illness. Later, policies that covered doctors fees were offered and were called wrap-around coverage. Originally, heath insurance was just that – insurance against a catastrophic illness or major accident. Inflation in medical services started to increase exponentially when “first dollar” policies and managed care became more prevalent.

        So, says Lady B – a former Benefits Analyst.

        1. At the same time, many large employers had on site doctors for their employees, something that’s disappeared from most workplaces. I wonder if employees having increased access to medical care through their health plans had anything to do with that (in addition to the usual increasing costs for an in-house doc, etc, etc.).

    4. When health insurance became tied to employment is what really fucked things up. All the incentives got perverted. Employers try and find blanket policies for all their employees, even though some employees need way less insurance than others. The employees don’t see the true cost of the insurance, and so want more (it’s factored into their cost to the company, but not included in their salary numbers).

      Making health insurance a personal purchase again would do a lot.

      1. Putting health insurance costs on the W2 would cause a lot of employees (but not all) to drop work coverage in favor of what they could get themselves.

        1. That’s assuming they had the option of getting the saved money themselves.

          1. If its a taxable benefit, employees will demand it, or at least a portion of it.

        2. Exactly. Because most people don’t realize how much of what could have been their salary goes to the insurance premiums.

          1. And if they had to buy their own insurance, they would get to keep that money how? And the employers sure as hell know how much is going for health insurance. They have just as much incentive to keep rates down as the employee would. They do get to keep any money they save.

            1. Its isnt about the money. Its about the coverage for the money. Employers have a one size fits all model, which will work for some employees and wont for others.

              Just for example, a 20 something with a comprehensive low-deductible policy at work might be willing to take 1/2 the money instead and then buy a high-deductible HSA plan. But most employers wont offer that plan because other employees would bitch about it.

              1. See my comment below. What that is doing is pooling the risk. Without that, you end up with a system where few people can afford health insurance when they actually need it. The problem is that old people cost more than young people. So much so, few old people could afford insurance if they were charged based on their individual risk. So your choices are to just let old people die or create a system where risk is pooled and everyone pays a more equal amount throughout their life.

                1. Costs are costs.

                  Young people have low costs and SHOULD pay extremely less for insurance.

                  Old people also have a fucking life time to save up money to buy more expensive insurance. Like, you know, by investing the savings due to your cheap insurance policy.

                  And also, since you brought up life insurance below, the same thing could develop as with it. Buy TERM health insurance. For the term of the insurance, the costs never change. In that case, you would be doing exactly what you are talking about, paying more young to pay less when old, but you are doing by CHOICE.

                  1. Old people also have a fucking life time to save up money to buy more expensive insurance. Like, you know, by investing the savings due to your cheap insurance policy.

                    But you have no idea when your 30 what kind of a risk you are going to be when you are 70. You can’t plan for it. You have no idea how much to save.

                    It is amazing how simple minded you guys are on this issue. Yeah, choice and individual pricing and risk is great. But the market can’t work if people don’t have accurate information on which to plan and make decisions. And the nature of health insurance is such that they can’t have that information. It is only available in the aggregate. This is why buying in groups makes so much sense. It fixes costs so people can plan.

                    1. THEN BUY A FUCKING 80 YEAR TERM POLICY AT AGE 18.

                    2. You could potentially do that. But that would make health insurance like term life insurance. Young people would purchase it early so they could get it cheap. I am not sure how that is any better than the system we have.

                    3. I am not sure how that is any better than the system we have.

                      Because the term life insurance market is a fucking awesome free market with real competition and dropping prices.

                      Not to mention portability. I buy a policy young and never have to think about it again, as long as I pay my bill.

                    4. Because the term life insurance market is a fucking awesome free market with real competition and dropping prices.

                      And medical prices have gone up only because of this and not other reason? That is what you guys don’t get and will never get; that not every market causes forever lower prices. Sometimes people demand more and technology produces more but costs more.

                    5. And medical prices have gone up only because of this and not other reason?

                      Of course they have gone up for other reasons. But the primary driver is the government interference.

                      That is what you guys don’t get and will never get

                      I fucking get it, you are the one not clueing in.

                      Despite all of the “new technologies” my HSA plan was dirt cheap until ACA regs started driving it up.

                2. Wrong, because those old people could realistically have saved several hundred thousand additional dollars to cover their end of life medical needs by not carrying insurance when they were younger

                3. So your choices are to just let old people die or create a system where risk is pooled and everyone pays a more equal amount throughout their life.

                  IOW, ObamaCare.

                  I reject the “risk pooling” conception of insurance, which is fundamentally socialist (as in, insurance exists to socialize risk and costs).

                  My insurance is a contract between me and my insurer. It is a valid, enforcable contract regardless of how many other people have similar arrangements. I am indifferent to how my insurer goes about finding the money to perform its side of the contract.

                  1. John, your objections to a free market in health insurance all seem to boil down to “people will make stupid decisions”, and so we must prohibit anyone from giving them the option to do so.

        3. I’m guessing my lazy, chain-smoking, half dozen doughnuts for breakfast co-worker would not like this.

      2. Not necessarily. There is an advantage to purchasing insurance in bulk. It evens out the risk pool and keeps insurance from being completely unaffordable once you get old. If everyone gets charged based on their individual risk and can’t pool with a group to average it out, you end up with cheap insurance when you are young followed by insanely expensive insurance when you get old. It would be like life insurance. And since you can’t just drop health insurance when you get older the way you can life insurance, you are better off paying a bit more when you are young so that it doesn’t go through the roof when you get older.

        1. No, you aren’t better off. It would average out. You’re only worse off if you spend all the money you make when you’re young.

          1. No, you aren’t better off. It would average out. You’re only worse off if you spend all the money you make when you’re young.

            You are totally better off. Since you don’t know what your risk is going to be when you get older, you can’t plan for it. How do you know you have saved enough? You don’t. That is the problem with health care and why it is such a quirky market. You can predict risk and costs for a group but you can’t really for an individual. Thus, leaving it totally to the individual to plan for themselves doesn’t work. You can’t plan if you don’t know your personal risk to assume for planning.

            1. Insurance is inherently a losing bet. The compensation you get for that is reduced risk.

              Regardless of whether you pay the same rate your whole life or you pay one that changes as you age, the insurance company is going to price it so they keep making money off of you. The overall risk is the same regardless of how they slice the market up; you’ll pay the correct amount regardless of that.

              Constant rates regardless of age are bad for the young and good for the old.

              1. Insurance is inherently a losing bet. T

                No it is not. It may be a winning bet. You just don’t know. You buy it because you can’t afford to lose the bet.

      3. “When health insurance became tied to employment is what really fucked things up”

        and, of course, the ACA builds on this fundamentally flawed system. It’s really taking the worst of any system and combining them into one massive fuck up.

        1. I don’t think it is fundamentally flawed. It is actually a pretty good system that takes into account the quirks of the market for health care.

          1. the lack of portability is a problem. I also think we’re chopping up the risk pool in an arbitrary way by basing it on employment. as it stands, the insurer is selling what the employer wants, which might not be what the employee needs/wants.

            you can address the group discount aspect through modified community rating.

            1. But who says the employee should be the end all be all? If he doesn’t like it, he can always get a different job. The quality of health insurance is a huge selling point to potential employees. So it is not like employers don’t have an incentive to make good choices.

              1. well, that’s kind of the rub. it is benefit or something the individual is responsible for. the ACA says both — which is wrong.

                the other thing that shifting away from the employer-sponsored system would do is eliminate the mandates that violate employer beliefs.

                [i’m out the door, but happy to discuss later]

            2. Ive never understood why 100 individual policies are any less of a “pool” than 100 policies from a single employer.

              That is a lie/scam perpetrated by the insurance industry.

              The only reason the employer policies should have any savings is due to the sale being in bulk. Not due to any risk changes.

              The pool is every policy holder that the company has.

              1. Ive never understood why 100 individual policies are any less of a “pool” than 100 policies from a single employer.

                Because the insurance company agrees to charge the employer based on the risk of all 100 rather than the risk of each individual policy holder.

                1. The pool size is their 10 million customers. 1 or 100 doesnt matter.

                  They dont need to make money on each individual policy, no insurance company expects that, but on the entirety of their whole customer base.

                  The EV per person on 1 is the same as on 100 (ceteris parabus) The only difference is the variance. But the variance is spread across the entire pool, not the “pool” of 1 or the “pool” of 100.

                  The only difference between 100 employees and the same 100 individuals buying policies individually is the amount of paperwork in setting it up. And the sales staff.

                  As such, yes the company should get a discount, but not a risk based one, as the risk for the 100 individuals in this case is literally exactly the same as the risk for 100 employees.

                  1. The only difference between 100 employees and the same 100 individuals buying policies individually is the amount of paperwork in setting it up

                    Only if they agree to pool the risk.

                    1. All risk is pooled automatically by the insurance company.

                      Anthem, to pick my company, doesnt have 1000 different pools of 100. They have one fucking pool of 100,000. My policy isnt a pool of one. Im in the same pool with all the other individuals and with any corporate accounts. From a MATH perspective, there is no fucking difference.

                      Note: no ideas on their actual numbers, but you get the idea.

                    2. You mean, just like those employees in the company policy agreed to “pool” their risk.

                      From the insurance company’s enterprise risk management perspective, every policy is pooled with every other policy.

                      Pricing is a different matter. There, the company trots out the “risk” of your “pool” to justify a higher premium (or a lower one, if they are in a competitive bid). There’s no reason, at all, why they can’t generate a single price for everyone they insure.

                    3. From the insurance company’s enterprise risk management perspective, every policy is pooled with every other policy.

                      Thank you, I was worried I was the only person that understood that.

          2. You are not thinking anywhere near creatively enough.

            Group plans ARE a good idea, the problem is not the group plans per se, but rather their being intimately entwined with employment on a tax preferential basis.

            You could separate those plans from employers by allowing pretty much anyone to sponsor a group plan with an Insurance company and then run them through churches, civic organizations, municipalities, Homeowners Associations, and even corporations.

            Then you get all the benefits of the risk pooling with a plethora of group plans available for people to choose from and they get to see the entire cost of the insurance up front, not hidden from them by a 3rd party payer

            1. Many policies that today are marketed as “individual” policies are offered through an association group. The group is the ultimate policyholder and issues a certificate to the individual insured.

              For major medical policies, most of these association groups are just associations set up by the insurance company for the purpose of selling insurance through this vehicle (one example is the Federation of American Consumers & Travelers). The advantage of these types of plans to the insurer is that they allow them to circumvent many state regulations which are generally toughest on individual policies and much more lenient on group rating practices.

    5. In addition to the above reasons, the Obama administration has done everything they can to re-define the terms “health insurance” and “healthcare coverage”. Sort of like they tried to re-define the word “investment”.

      1. Or “fairness” or “racism” or “transparency” or “recovery” or….

    6. Besides the big one already listed (namely, wage caps causing employers to start pimping benefits packages), state mandates for specific, usually really expensive, illnesses and conditions caused insurance rates to increase for loads of people. This, in turn, had a perverse impact on pricing (surprise, surprise).

      Which is why my individual plan for an adult male covers maternity care and it now costs tens of thousands of dollars to have a doctor essentially play catch…

  13. But what about all the other cities who have seen drops in crime and didn’t resort to racist, Fourth-Amendment-ignoring tactics?

    Clearly they would have had even greater drops in crime if they had resorted to racist, Fourth-Amendment-ignoring tactics.

    1. If you don’t let us break the law, there will be criminals!

    2. It’s difficult to implement racist, fourth-amendment-ignoring tactics when you’re not as racially segregated as NYC is and when you don’t have a never ending pool of racists to hire as officers.

      If I was a criminal, I’d go to NYC to prey on victims as they seem the most likely to just roll over and take it and not, you know, stand up for themselves like the rest of the country might.

  14. Former Mass. Sen. Scott Brown is considering a presidential run in 2016, which is pretty obvious from his recent trip to Iowa.

    Maybe he’s Christie’s second? He’s more the VP type – not Alpha Dog.

    How’s this for Christie’s campaign slogan:

    Chris Christie for President: 2016
    I’m Too Big to Fail!

    Huh? HUH?! How about THAT!!

    1. At first I laughed when I read about his interest. But the establishment is going to need a horse. And fatso isn’t going to cut it no matter how many lefty concern trolls claim otherwise. He can’t win. But right now the position of “establishment candidate” only has fatso applying for the job. So why not Brown?

      1. Why can’t it be McCain’s turn again?

        1. I don’t think he wants the job. Seriously, who is going to be the “reasonable” Washington concern troll candidate? There is always one. Right now Fatso is the only one angling for it. I guess maybe Rubio. But he may not run.

          1. Mitch McConnell?

            1. You can’t run a Turtle Head for POTUS. You could but the comedy that would ensue…

              1. But if you can draw him, you can totally get into mail order art school.

        2. People seriously hate McCain. I really never hear anyone say anything positive about the guy anymore. About the best comments I have heard about him in the last year or so, is something like ‘maybe you were a hero at one time and even a good Senator at one time, but it’s time to retire now’. But most people seriously despise the guy.

          1. It doesn’t matter if he’s popular with the voters, only with the establishment. Who the hell liked him in the 2008 primaries? He just mysteriously happened.

        3. Why can’t it be McCain’s turn again?

          I’m not sure why, Fist, but that one made me laugh till I had tears.

      2. Best hope for Christie is to be Hillbillarys bitch boy, if he can overcome Uncle Joes bid for bitch boy, that is. Maybe he’ll threaten to sit on old Joe and that will scare him out of the race.

        1. Hillary would have to be pretty desperate to go for a unity ticket with Fatso. Also doing that would piss off the Hispanics and blacks who are already going to be in a foul mood over a white person being at the top of the ticket.

          1. It’s Hillarys turn. Both Teams know this. It’s only a matter of what RINO Blue Team Lite the GOP establishment chooses to lose to her.

            1. It is not Hillary’s turn. Blacks are not going to show up in record numbers for Hillary. Neither are Hispanics. The Obama majority was built on turnout. But an aging white woman can’t get that kind of turnout. The Dems have a real problem. If they run Corey Booker or a black person, they Hispanics are going to start to feel left out and the feminists are going to have a fit. But if they don’t run a minority, it is unlikely that they can get the turnout they need.

              1. Sorry, John. Hillary will be the nominee. There’s probably not anyone on the planet that I dislike more than that awful woman. But, she will be the next POTUS, I have almost zero doubt of that. It will be no different than the first black POTUS. And all of the disillusioned Obama drones will be going ‘If only we would have elected Hillary last time, she’s truly the one!’. And that’s pretty much the whole story, except who will be VP.

                1. And all of the disillusioned Obama drones will be going ‘If only we would have elected Hillary last time, she’s truly the one!’. And that’s pretty much the whole story, except who will be VP.

                  The stupid white people will vote D anyway. They voted D in 04. That is not what gave the Obama coalition a majority. What did that was historic turnout by blacks and Hispanics. That is why obama wants amnesty so bad and why he has turned into Al Sharpton. The only way his coalition works is with historic turnout. But Hillary will never achieve that kind of turn out. She is screwed. Remember Obama only got 52% of the vote. A drop in D turn out and a return to normal R turnout and the result of the election switches.

                  So Hillary has to figure out a way to get black and Hispanic turnout at levels that Obama achieved and hope the Republican base doesn’t feel the need to turn out. Possible, but unlikely. The math is what it is.

                2. There’s probably not anyone on the planet that I dislike more than that awful woman.

                  She will probably be better on the economy then Obama was.

                  Of course the same thing could be said about any person picked randomly out of a phone book.

            2. It’s Hillarys turn. Both Teams know this.

              It was her turn in 2008. She was beaten by a dude who is the closest thing I’ve ever seen to “generic liberal Democrat” candidate. Obama was a fucking nobody. His speeches sucked (and most people knew it), his debate performances against Hildog were equally shitty. He had no legislative history. But he had two things going for him, he was, like Hilary, a “minority” candidate, and he wasn’t Hilary.

              A whole lot of Democrats loath Hilary. About the only way that woman could win the nomination or election is if GWB somehow managed to be a Democrat or on the ticket again.

    2. Chris Christie 2016 — Vote for me even if you don’t like me. I’m bound to die of a heart attack while in office anyways!

      (too long?)

      1. Maybe, but I like the sentiment!

  15. So many unmanned vehicles.

    Some of them are quite cool looking, graceful, etc. Others are not.

    Will unmanned vehicles eventually require some sort of IFF if they are near someone or something important?


    Matt Damon, the king of leftwing flops. Looks like Elysium bombed.

    1. I thought I saw a headline that said it was doing well. It’s about Damon saving people from Obamacare, right?

      1. Not so much

        After two full weekends, “Elysium” has only cleared $56 million in North America and another $38 million worldwide, which puts it way behind such high-profile disappointments as “Cowboys and Aliens” and “Pacific Rim.” Mega-flop “John Carter” (which would only clear $73 million in North America), was at $53 million domestic after its second weekend, only $2 million behind “Elyisum.”

        Unless it gets some massive word of mouth, it is going to lose a ton of money.

        1. Well, except that the word of mouth is bad. My co-worker saw it and she totally warned me not to bother (and she has pretty good taste). Preachy movies are not really what people want.

          1. Preachy movies are generally bad movies. Beyond that, even if it were a good movie, you can’t make a movie that needs broad appeal to make money and also pisses off half of its potential audience. You make political statements in small art films that only cost a few millions, not in hundred million dollar summer movies.

            1. Unless it features giant blue aliens.

              1. Avatar was the opposite of a preachy movie. It shoved some vaguely environmentalist and pro-indigenous crap around haphazardly, but was basically just a Big Dumb Action Movie.

            2. Completely agree.

              Bad political and religious films (and really, is there such a thing as a *good* film in either genre?) have the same thing in common: the people involved are too invested in their ideology to tell a meaningful, realistic, and moving story with good characters.

              It’s Atlas Shrugged Symptom — no one is going to recommend The Jungle or Uncle Tom’s Cabin as engrossing reads or impressive pieces of literature; no one will recommend Elysium as a good movie if it’s preachy.

              1. There have been a ton of great religious films. Many of the best movies in history were religious films. IN fact a religious film is a guaranteed winner at the box office. The Passion was nothing but a gothic horror flick. But it made over a half of a billion dollars because religious films are nearly always winners. Hollywood just doesn’t make them because they are culturally not allowed.

                1. Well, John, their were other factors. First of all, Mel Gibson is a damned good filmmaker. Secondly, there was a massive KULTUR WAR component involved. I still think it would have made a ton of money, but the KULTUR WAR around it definitely made more people go see it.

                  1. For sure there was a massive KULTURE War component. And make another film just like it and you will do just as well. Make your film a way of telling the establishment to fuck itself and you will make a fortune.

                  2. First of all, Mel Gibson is a damned good filmmaker.

                    I hope you’ve all seen Apocalypto, because it is awesomely good.

                    1. Yes! I really enjoyed it and second your recommendation.

                2. Disagree, John. The Biblical movies that people remember from Hollywood’s Golden Age were basically epics drawing from Biblical foundational tales — they weren’t very different from, say, movies in that genre about Hercules. Like you yourself said, the Passion was a gothic horror film. Those films make bank because those films are actually good at the story they’re trying to tell. It doesn’t really matter that their story comes from the Bible.

                  What I’m talking about is an ideologically Christian film — something like the medieval morality play or John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress, where the story plays second fiddle to didactic impulses.

                  1. I don’t see how the Ten Commandments is not a religious film.

                    1. It’s not. The Biblical packaging is window dressing for an epic. It does have some ideological content that Christians/Jews would find good, but it is more like Avatar in that those elements are shoved into what is essentially a conventional genre piece.

                      Would you call any of the Hercules or Homeric epic films from Hollywood an Indo-Aryan Pantheon film?

                      There are no scenes trying to explain/justify a Judeo-Christian worldview; it is taken as a given and the movie goes from there. A didactic film or book can’t help but explain itself — over, and over, and over again. That’s what makes religious/political films tiresome.

                    2. There are no scenes trying to explain/justify a Judeo-Christian worldview; it is taken as a given and the movie goes from there. A didactic film or book can’t help but explain itself — over, and over, and over again. That’s what makes religious/political films tiresome.

                      I would agree with you, but fucking Fireproof made 33 million dollars despite having 0 mainstream distribution or advertising. It was the highest grossing independent movie of 2008 and had explicitly religious messages. It was made on a shoestring budget as well, and made far more money than most movies on that kind of budget could ever hope to.

                      There is a huge number of evangelical Christians in this country who will go to explicitly religious movies.

                    3. Sure, and Harriet Beecher Stowe sold lots of copies of Uncle Tom’s Cabin. I’m just trying to point out that, if you make a film with a didactic lens, you’re guaranteed to only get an audience that sees it for the didactic purpose (and you have a didactic/artistic tradeoff). The people at my church who were pleased with Fireproof expected to see a didactic film and that’s what they got. Anyone outside that audience would have been disappointed with the film on its merits.

                      There are some borderline cases and exceptions (CS Lewis and perhaps Orwell), but for the most part didactic literature and movies are poorly made and not remembered for their entertainment or artistic value.

              2. Preachiness does distract. However, you can make a movie with a political point and not have it destroy the movie. District 9 is a good example of that.

                1. That’s because District 9 was an allegory with explosions and heads that blow up. It’s not like they stopped the movie every 10 minutes to make sure you’re getting the message.

                  Plus exploding heads!

            3. Well put. Also, even most leftists realize that the “hoard all the wealth” distopia doesn’t really ring true, whatever they say otherwise. Places depicted in movies like Land of the Dead or Elysium are just very unlikely, unless you have someone who is mentally unbalanced running it.

              1. When I saw the extended trailer of Elysium, the first thing I asked was “if they have this magic technology, what possible reason is there to restrict it to a very few?” It just didn’t make sense.

                At least if you are going to be preachy, be plausible.

                1. You’re asking Hollywood to ignore their long, long tradition of making sci-fi movies with absolutely no regard to sci part.

                  1. You mean like all the Star Trek and Star Wars movies?

                    Oh, I know. But there are a ton of ways one could come up with a plausible anti-utopia, and instead Blomkamp went with something absurd.

                    1. Holy shit, and Blomkamp was the guy who did District 9, which treaded far more lightly (or perhaps just much more intelligently) on the political aspects of the story.

                    2. Yeah, which is why I was holding out some hope for Elysium, but I have now gotten eyewitness reports that it is both preachy and nothing but another superhero movie. I guess he even has a arch-enemy and slugs it out with him at the end. If I wanted to see that for the thousandth time, I’d have gone to see Man of Steel.

                2. Maybe for some reason it can’t be left around total assholes or they’ll misuse it, like assholes; thus, all the assholes stay on earth and the tech stays up in space.

    2. MATT DAMON!

      1. HODOR!

    3. I think a lot of people will avoid it because of Matt Damon being such a clueless shill for causes that he really could care less about.

      But I just read a review earlier today that said, despite Damons poor performance, it’s not too bad and that it’s not really leftist propaganda like some say it is. That always kills a movie for me.

      I might watch it after reading that.

      1. But if it really isn’t leftist propaganda, then Damon is even dumber than I thought. He just managed to make an apolitical movie into a flop by marketing it as some polemic.

        1. It is a movie about some guy without health care flying into space to kill rich people and steal their health care….

          How can this not be leftist propaganda?

          One thing interesting is the Atlas shrugged angle.

          The movie probably finds a a way to blame the rich people in space for all the poor people’s problems….but from the look of the previews the rich people simply left the planet and made a rich person’s utopia.

          It really takes a special kind of left wing nut to hate on people who fled poverty and built their own utopia.

          1. Those mean rich people fled to space to avoid the ACA medical device tax on their magic machine!

        2. It’s not really Damon’s fault — all the trailers and marketing screaming “Commie bullshit”. Given that District 9 was actually pretty good, I was sort of interested, but the trailers did it in for me.

      2. I think a lot of people will avoid it because of Matt Damon being such a clueless shill for causes that he really could care less about.

        One of the few cases where that malapropism works…

    4. According to Steve Sailer, it’s not a left-wing movie at all but about “the horrors of mass immigration and nonwhite overpopulation.” And District 9 was really about black immigrants from Zimbabwe.

  17. Former Mass. Sen. Scott Brown is considering a presidential run in 2016, which is pretty obvious from his recent trip to Iowa.

    I guess there’s room now that Christie is running as a democrat… or is that not official yet?

    1. I’m convinced that the Dem ticket in 2016 is going to be Clinton/Christie.

      1. As a mixed ticket no doubt. “Elect a Democrat AND a Republican! Because what difference, at this point, does it really make?”

        1. Oh that’s good, Hamilton.

        2. It’s a bi-partisan ticket! How can you beat that? Now congress will be able to come together in a big love fest orgy of bloated bills, and all of them will pass and be signed! We’re finally saved!

          1. Why do I equate “bipartisan” with “I’m gonna need twice as much lube”

      2. Totally agree.

        It’s a fight between Christie and Uncle
        Joe to be bitch boy on the Hildebeast ticket.

        1. You think Joe Biden as perpetual vice president is something anyone wants?

  18. The White House denies having any involvement in the detaining of the partner of Glenn Greenwald

    Well, in that case, then I am convinced that they were directly involved in it.

  19. Uh oh, looks like Mr. Jones might be returning to Animal Farm: Hosni Mubarak may soon be released

    After Monday’s court ruling, the only legal grounds for Mubarak’s continued detention rest on a second corruption case which his lawyer, Fareed el-Deeb, said would be settled swiftly.

    “All we have left is a simple administrative procedure that should take no more than 48 hours,” Deeb told Reuters.

    “He should be freed by the end of the week.”

    Without confirming that Mubarak would be released, a judicial source said he would spend another two weeks behind bars before a court ruling on the outstanding case against him.

    Arrested in April 2011 as talk of democracy swept from Tunis and Cairo across the Arab world, the former strongman appeared in a courtroom cage at a trial in which he was convicted of complicity in the murder of protesters. But in January, Egypt’s highest court ordered a retrial, a process which is continuing.

    Fareed Ismail, a Muslim Brotherhood politician, compared the possible release of Mubarak with the laying of new accusations against Mursi, who is held at an undisclosed location. The two decisions were, he said, “not surprising, as we are expecting Mubarak to be released while we see honorable people jailed”.

    “This is a continuation of the coup,” he told Reuters.

    1. If they are killing the MB, I still can’t figure out why we are not sending them more bullets or at least letters of congratulations.

      1. What makes you think Obama opposes the Muslim Brotherhood?

  20. Four year old MI kid shoots self with gun left in a closet. Let the gun grabbing begin!

    1. Al Jazeera America is the most ambitious American television news venture since Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes started the Fox News Channel in 1996.

      Yes, because freedom is right up there with muslims blowing shit up.


    2. Holy shit – there are commenters claiming this is good because they’re tired of CNN’s “conservative slant”…uh, wtf channel are they watching?

  21. This past weekend Portland, Oregon attempted to regain the world record for most redheaded persons gathered in one location

    Portland, Oregon broke a Guinness World Record on Saturday after assembling a group of roughly 1,600 natural redheads in one location. As of now the record is unofficial, and organizers will have to wait two to three months before the official tally is in and the record is broken.

    Unofficial counts at the ten minute gathering that took place in Pioneer Courthouse Square estimate the number of participants to be anywhere between 1,300 and 1,600.

    The previous record for redheads assembled in one place was set on October 1, 2010. It was set at the 1st annual “Redheads and More Redheads Day” at Skyline High School in Sammamish, Washington. They were able to assemble a redheaded sea of 890 participants.

    Given that only two percent of the population is naturally redheaded, all participants were required to bring a baby picture of themselves in order to prove their locks were in fact their natural color.

    Reminds me of my favorite Sherlock Holmes story, I’ll bet this was a ruse to cover up a crime.

    1. all participants were required to bring a baby picture of themselves in order to prove their locks were in fact their natural color.

      Sounds to me like a carpet/drapes check would be more in fitting with the spirit of the occasion.

      1. I’ll take the ladies, you get to check the dudes.

    2. Given that only two percent of the population is naturally redheaded, all participants were required to bring a baby picture of themselves in order to prove their locks were in fact their natural color.

      I was going to make a joke about the proof, but that ruined it.

    3. Given the number of gingers we saw on the World Pipe Band broadcast, Portland, they got some work to do to set any kind of “world record”.

      Fucking Scotland and Ireland – they just BREED gingers. On PURPOSE.

      1. You will not badmouth redheads. Readheads are all that is good and pure in this world.

        1. I’m not badmouthing anyone. I’m just saying there’s a LOT of them in their putrid, stinking homelands in the North Atlantic.

        2. You will not badmouth redheads. Readheads are all that is good and pure in this world.

          I had to weigh in on this.

          Despite not having a soul, redheads are the best thing left in this cruel, cruel world.

      2. Who’s “we”, Kemo Sabe?

        Bagpipes are the devil’s instrument. :-p

        1. Apparently, just me and my wife.

    4. didn’t Montreal do this a few months back?

      1. Yes, and now Portland wants to reclaim the record from those dirty Frogs.

    5. Less soul than a Muzak concert.

    6. Oh to be a sunscreen vendor on that day.

      1. I was going to make a quip about not needing it because it’s Portland, which is like Seattle’s less mopy sister, but it’s been really sunny for the last couple of days…

    7. They must be insane.

      If you get that many soulless gingers together in one place, it will likely bring about the apocalypse.

    8. Holy shit, someone else with the same favorite Sherlock Holmes story. I’m no longer alone in this world!

      Wanna hang out over an encyclopedia down by the bank this weekend?

  22. Doesn’t it rain a lot in Singapore? Singapore trying out driverless shuttle.

    1. A shit-ton. The dry season just means that it rains like once a day.

  23. Your tax dollars at work: Pew-pew-pew edition.

    Boeing solid-state laser weapon system outshines expectations

    The likelihood of lasers appearing on the battlefield was boosted last week when Boeing announced that its Thin Disk Laser system had achieved unexpected levels of power and efficiency. In a recent demonstration for the US Department of Defense, the laser’s output was 30 percent higher than project requirements and had greater beam quality, a result which paves the way toward a practical tactical laser weapon.

  24. my roomate’s step-aunt makes $70/hour on the laptop. She has been laid off for 7 months but last month her pay was $13277 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Read more on this site ,….

    1. Oh yeah? My father’s brother’s nephew’s cousin’s former roommate was laid off for 7 months and made $99,999 a month working for 1.5 hours! Beat THAT!

      1. So what does that make us?

    1. Do they come with special sauce?

      1. Their wrapper looks like a pair of shorts.

  25. From Star Wars-obsessed clients to naked tenants: estate agents confess the worst things they’ve ever witnessed.

    1. Darth Vader and Leia? That’s just wrong, yo.

    2. “One tricky tenant who was due to move out didn’t want us to show the flat while he was still there, so he wrapped everything in tarpaulin, which completely hampered the marketing and was an absolute nightmare.”

      Gee, he didn’t want you going into his place while he’d already paid for it? The nerve!

  26. Herp derp: Free-market fundamentalist Americans hate centralized planning unless it’s done by the military

    In the case of energy policy, what’s holding back innovation and domestic production is the absence of assured markets for startups. But in this anti-government, laissez-faire nation, the military gets a safe conduct pass to do something that no other branch of government is ideologically allowed to do — commit the sin of economic planning.

    Not only that, the military commits another sin against free markets. It commits social engineering. Once the military establishment decides to so something, it is something of a hierarchy. So when the Pentagon was ordered to desegregate and then to achieve genuine equality of racial opportunity, it was well ahead of the rest of the society.

    1. this anti-government, laissez-faire nation

      So – Libertopia DOES exist! Where?

    2. Could it be that the military is not in the business of being efficient?

      1. I would agree with your guess. Any efficiency observed is *in spite of* itself.

  27. Yet another Progressive Paradise:

    As the Philadelphia School District scrambles to come up with enough cash to open for students in September, a new report suggests the city’s school funding crisis is on par with municipal issues in Detroit, Chicago and elsewhere.

    At the heart of it all: pensions.

    Payments to retired teachers and public employees are a growing threat to government budgets everywhere, and it is no different in Philadelphia. A new report from the Thomas Fordham Institute, a conservative education nonprofit, estimates the district’s total retirement costs will balloon from $73 million in 2011 to $349 million by 2020.

    On a per-pupil basis, that works out to $900 per pupil in the district for 2011, growing to $2,300 per pupil by 2020.


    The report examines the pension costs of the Philadelphia School District. Costrell said the financial mess unfolding in Pennsylvania’s largest city is on par with what has been seen recently in Detroit and Chicago.

    “Pennsylvania hasn’t gotten as much play nationally as Illinois, but it should be,” Costrell said, referring to media coverage of Illinois pension woes and the trouble in the Chicago School District. “It might not be on the same level as Detroit, but it’s getting there.”

    I can’t wait to hear how it’s all because of libertarians.

    1. Solution by Mayor Nutter, borrow another $50 million to open the schools this year, then scream and beg Harrisburg for more money (in between gigs to talk about Trayvon’s assassination.) I bet none of you knew that libertarians have now ruled Phila. for sixty years.

    1. From whole grains, oats, and fruits.

      So not the fun kind of carbs. Move along people.

    2. You can also reward yourself once a week with a chocolate or a couple of glasses of wine.

      Yeah…any diet that restricts my alcohol consumption to a couple of servings per week isnt an option.

  28. So… which one of you guys did it?

    It’s been brought to my attention that the old URL for Pandagon, before it moved her to Raw Story, expired without my or Jesse Taylor’s knowledge, and has been purchased by a bunch of bigots who are using it as a platform to hate on transgender people. In case there’s any confusion?and I firmly believe that people of good faith know straightaway what Jesse and I have been targeted here and have nothing to do with this?let me state firmly, for the record: Jesse and I have nothing to do with this. I suspect what’s happened here is that a small group of obsessive anti-trans bigots?in order to “punish” me both for defending the rights of trans women to be called women and because I’ve pointed out before that transphobes claiming to be “radical feminists” are a marginal group of people who use social media and blogs to make themselves seem more relevant than they are?have hijacked the URL.

    Marcotte is so, so easy to troll.

    1. Not me. I don’t give a damn about other people’s crazy that doesn’t affect me.

    2. Not I, either. I’d never heard of these people before now.

  29. For your viewing pleasure, I present Christie Brinkley and her daughter

  30. I left my job over a computer-desktop hoodie

    I needed to do something. The Monday after the trial ended, I went to my job at a small doctor’s office and made my computer desktop wallpaper (which was not viewable to the public) an image of a hoodie….

    That’s because I left the short meeting with my boss knowing that I couldn’t take the image down. I knew that he had every right to ask me to take it down, but I would not have respected myself if I had….

    So, I went to my computer and composed a letter of resignation. It would be the last document I would ever complete at my workplace of six years. It wasn’t easy, but it also wasn’t hard. Either way, the real problem remained. When everything was said and done, the life of a young man who should have made it home safely that night still had been cut short.

    1. This person has stupid, shallow principles, but they have osme. I won’t make fun.

      1. I will.

        WHAT A FUCKING TARD! I was thinking about a short story we read in high school – a kid bacgging groceries who quits on the spot when some hotty is dissed…although it’s clear she doesn’t recognize that he’s quitting to support her, so it’s all emotion and useless symbolism.

        Life immitates art. Brilliant! What a fuckhead – go fuck yourself. Enjoy your hoodie screensaver somewhere else.

        The End

      2. But the stupid goddamn principles don’t change a goddamn thing.

        Whether she left or stayed the image gets removed. I guess it’s symbolic, or something.

        Symbolic of a pathological stupidity and chromosome damage.

        1. And telling the cops you won’t cooperate at a DUI checkpoint is in the same vein. It changes nothing, but its the right thing to do.

    2. More jobs for sane, rational people. I’m fine with that.

    3. the life of a young man who should have made it home safely that night still had been cut short.

      He could have. Instead he decided to double back and teach the creepy assed cracka a lesson.

    4. Put that on your resume for why you left your last job if you’re so fucking proud of yourself. Good Luck!

    5. Then, at the end of the week, President Obama went into the White House press room and made history.

      Fuck, these fucking fucks are fucking sick. Motherfucker gets on teevee and speaks some strife causing shit up that a harvard white boy wrote and it’s “history”. How sad that these idiots worship a fucking slime ball politician. How fucking sick, sad and stupid. Worthless shits.

      1. Every time they trot out that “historic” bullshit line I picture that douche who said he got tingles up his leg or whatever.


  31. -Christian Right Group Praises Move to Restrict Voting on Sabbath

    -“We have always opposed voting on Sunday for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that Sunday is the church’s prime time for developing the character of a nation,” Dr. Creech said. “It is a Sunday-cultivated character that makes an electorate fit to guard and preserve its liberties.”

    He said a nation that wants to secure the blessing of liberty for posterity cannot, at the same time, ignore the Fourth Commandment.


  32. Cool (and expensive) watch not only tells time but takes pictures and connects with your smartphone.

    1. Dick Tracy?


      Cool (and expensive) smartphone not only tells time but takes pictures and makes phone calls.

  33. I’m a slutty slut slut and there’s nothing wrong with that

    I never thought I would thank Aaron Sorkin. For like, anything. But I quietly thanked Aaron Sorkin.

    Later in the episode, Sabbith confronts her ex who leaked the pictures while he is in a meeting. She kicks him in the balls, punches him in the mouth, and takes a picture of his bloody nose.
    Then came Maggie. Maggie said everything I’ve been saying for years. “What’s wrong with being a slut?”

    We all fear this label. And the ironic part is, most of us (and maybe I’m wrong here but I’m pretty sure I’m not) do the slutty slut stuff. We take pics. We sext. We sleep with our boyfriends. Husbands. We give blowjobs. We get naked. We have vaginas. We use them. Some of us, sometimes, even enjoy using them. We have boobs and nipples and butts. Which clearly we should all be ashamed of. Because we’re the only ones doing it. You hear me, every woman on the planet? You are the only one doing what you’re doing with that guy (or girl, or worse, BOTH). And it is so, so, incredibly hurtful and wrong and shameful. What? You wanna know why? Oh. Because… slutty slut?

    1. This type of thing is why I never wanted to be an English teacher.

    2. *Backs away slowly while cradling a copy of Strunk & White*

    3. Is she praising an episode where a woman commits assault as a good thing?

      1. Yep, I had to excise it because of the stupid character limit, but she says that Maggie ‘won’ and that it was a magical moment for female empowerment.

        1. I think the reason so many “feminists” are obsessed with domestic abuse and violence is (wait for it) the flat out projection that they engage in regarding their own violent impulses.

          I’m getting to the point where if I see someone obsessed with any particular subject at all, the more obsessed they are the more they are doing/fantasizing/dreaming about whatever that subject is. Whether it’s a virulently anti-gay preacher or a feminist talking about domestic violence, you know there’s something going on with them.

          1. This is fair and mostly accurate.

            But not in all cases. I know a lot of people who are vehemently anti-agression, hate cops, hate big government and really do not have an interest in oppressing others. Myself included.

      2. I like how she is praising Aaron Sorkin. The biggest misogynist in Hollywood today.

        “Oh he is ok now cuz he had a female character beat the crap out of male character.”

    4. Lovely how violence against men is just so okay.

      1. It’s sort of like racism, John. You can’t be a racist unless you’re white.

        You can’t be abusive, unless you’re male.

        This is how the left operate. If all people are equal and there’s not a privileged group and oppressed groups, the entire divide and agitate plan falls apart.

        1. Considering the effectiveness of such a strategy, I wonder how you remain so optimistic. Exploiting human impulses towards tribalism seems to work every fucking time.

    5. Maggie said everything I’ve been saying for years. “What’s wrong with being a slut?”

      Not a thing. I don’t know why you women hate sluts so much and want to shame them into not giving up the ass.

      I once thought maybe I’d find a nice monogamous slut who I could settle down with, stick my face her bush and didn’t mind me playing in her pooper, but since there are no libertarian women, those dreams were dashed.

      1. Once again, projection. She’s decrying the slut-shaming that she almost assuredly engages in herself.

        1. ^^This i.e.

          “I’m all for shaming other sluts, but I hate it when someone shames me”

          Also, shame is a self inflicted wound; you can only be shamed if you feel bad about what you did. This is why most guys could never be ‘slut-shamed’.

      2. At least in my experience, women engage in as much or more slut-shaming than men do

        1. You probably just think that because you’re a filthy whore. Why don’t you try and keep you legs shut for five seconds, okay?

          1. Well, I’m a guy, so …

        2. I’ve never heard a guy slut-shame — honest to God.

          What the hell kind of guy is going to complain that a girl is just too enthusiastic about sex?

          1. I don’t think any guy is going to complain about a girl being a slut if they’re looking for a hookup. But a lot of guys are hypocritical and will hold it against them if they’re looking for girlfriend material

      3. I don’t know why you women hate sluts so much and want to shame them into not giving up the ass.

        Teenage boys are shitty to sluts as well.

        It is not just women.

        1. Teenage KIDS are shitty to everyone. Like…fucking everyone.

          I may be crazy, but it seems to me that 95% of the people who are always outraged by how their group is treated, are still holding grudges from high school, as they were too self-involved and oblivious to realize that the shit they go was the same as the shit everybody else got.

  34. Feminists are still Orwellians, just in case you were wondering…

    Part of the problem is an old and frequent one: The victim’s lack of cooperation appears to have allowed prosecutors to lull themselves into believing Remy wasn’t that big of a threat. Martel did not come in to renew the emergency restraining order that had been put on Remy[…]

    However, as critics point out, a dangerousness hearing doesn’t require the victim’s cooperation, though that cooperation does dramatically improve the chances that a judge will decide to hold an abuser[…]

    Still, even with a high-risk assessment team on hand and much more pressure on law enforcement officials to use the dangerousness hearing and strategies like GPS trackers on abusers to keep them away from their victims, without a victim willing to file a restraining order, it can be hard for prosecutors to make the case that a man is dangerous.

    Yes, let’s make sure that felons have pretty much no chance of reintigrating into society and getting some semblance of civil rights back — nothing wrong with lowering the burden of proof or going ahead and setting up inquisition courts without the victims’ cooperation. That can only lead to good things, and if you disagree then you hate women.

    1. If I am reading that right, she is advocating that law enforcement decide for the “victim” if they are allowed to see the person. If a person doesn’t want a restraining order, maybe they don’t want a restraining order. Good thing feminism is all about female empowerment.

  35. Dear Prudence: My bastard son is about to marry my niece (his cousin)

    Over 20 years ago I had an affair with a married woman who became pregnant with my child. She reconciled with her husband and they raised the boy as their own. I have not had any contact with my biological son, at the husband’s request. No one in my family knows I have a secret son. Two weeks ago I found out my niece (my sister’s daughter) is engaged, and the groom to be is none other than my biological son! Prudie, I am livid that my son’s mother and her husband did not stop this relationship in its early stages. “No, Bobby, you can’t date that girl because she’s you’re biological cousin” is all it would have taken. I contacted the woman and she swore she didn’t know our son was marrying my niece since my niece has a different last name. I asked her what she planned to do to stop the wedding and she said she’s doing nothing! Our son doesn’t know anything and according to her, cousin marriage is harmless! Prudie, how do I bring this up with my niece and her parents? I have never had any contact with my son and I don’t think I should approach him about it. He doesn’t know his father is not his biological father. I don’t want my niece to live in incest because of my past mistake, Please help.

    1. according to her, cousin marriage is harmless!

      The science does seem to suggest this.

      1. according to her, cousin marriage is harmless!

        The science does seem to suggest this.

        Yeah, the odds of birth defects is minimal unless you marry cousins generation after generation. I do think that the two people who are getting married should know. If they still want to get married they should be allowed to, but it seems wrong to not tell them they’re related.

        1. Yeah, but chances are if you told them it would ruin their lives because they’re probably going to be emotional retards who can’t handle irrational taboos. Eh, so maybe they would deserve that I guess.

          1. How they handle it isn’t relevant. You don’t know how they’ll handle it. I think it’s wrong for people not to know something that might result in them changing their minds about getting married.

            1. That sounds reasonable, but who’s to say what might make someone change his mind about getting married? I mean, I think the cousin-incest thing is 100% crazy and irrational, but I know it’s something that totally would change many people’s minds. Who the fuck knows what other crazy absurd shit would make someone change his mind about marrying someone? I mean, what if you one time heard your buddy’s fianc?e fart. Do you have to tell him, because someone somewhere might decide not to marry anyone who has ever farted in public? I assume your answer is “no, because that would be a ridiculous reason to change your mind about marrying someone, and I wouldn’t even have thought about it as something relevant for them to know before getting married.” And yet there will be someone out there in the world for whom any crazy ridiculous thing that you couldn’t possibly, as a bystander, expect would be a marriage dealbreaker.

                1. Like man hands!


                  Also, what jesse said.

              1. Won’t everyone be embarrassed when this couple starts popping out European royals.

                Just by making a big deal about the the adults would be putting a trip on the betrothed which will alter the fabric of their relationship on some level. Suddenly they’ll be second guessing how they fit into society. Also if the groom has no idea that he’s a “bastard child” it could rock his sense of how he fits in more generally if this bomb gets dropped on him.

        2. One generation probably isn’t going to result in abnormalities. But it can over time. There is a minimum necessary for a healthy breeding population, due to the effects of inbreeding over time

    2. Dude, incest is best.

    3. There’s some Rutgers prof who said that historically most marriages were between second cousins. I don’t remember the citation, though.

      1. Which is totally unsurprising since people used to live in very small communities and didn’t travel far from home.

      2. There’s lots of places today where the majority of marriages are between first or second cousins.

      3. Kind of hard not to fuck your second cousin in hunter gatherer societies….which “historically” makes up about 99% of human history.

        1. Back before the officers engaged in Gambol Lockdown.

    4. This guy is really uptight for an adulterer who had nothing to do with his son’s life, and doesn’t really even care about him: “I don’t want my niece to live in incest because of my past mistake”.


  36. Breaking Bad’s Aaron Paul on The Price is Right – As A Contestant

    1. Bitchin’.

    2. I wonder how different is life would have been if he won that showcase.

    3. I only recently discovered that Walter White (Bryan Cranston) had a recurring role on Seinfeld.

      1. Tim Watley the dentist.

        1. Anti-Dentite!

    4. Cool, he didn’t pull that “one dollar over the highest person” crap to get on stage, either.

  37. -The Central Intelligence Agency, via declassified documents, has acknowledged its central role in the subversion of democracy in Iran. The coup took places six decades ago, so better late than never:…..-documents

    1. …is this supposed to be controversial? I’m pretty sure that Kermit Roosevelt pretty much said as much in other declassified memos.

      To be frank, though, Mossy wasn’t running much of a “democratic” or legal regime by the end — legally speaking, Iran was a constitutional monarchy in which the monarch and parliament were invested with certain powers which were being unlawfully abrogated by the Prime Minister unilaterally.

      Oil nationalization wasn’t the only thing on Mossadegh’s agenda.

      1. I don’t think that makes our intervention there wise.

        1. Our intervention wasn’t wise for a number of reasons, none of which is “the subversion of democracy.”

        2. Agreed, but given the intelligence that the US was operating under at the time I’d say it’s not nearly the cut-and-dried case that people pretend it is.

          The UK straight up lied to the US about what was going on in the region, and that fueled a lot of our mistaken policy there. Post-WWII, the US’ main source of intel in the region was through partners like France and the UK; the UK dishonestly played up Mossy as a Communist stooge and from the documents available it appears that the CIA believed this to be the case.

          IMO something like the Marine occupation of Haiti or the US occupation of the Philippines after the Spanish-American War makes non-interventionists’ points far better than the Iranian coup — but it doesn’t involve Muslims or justify the current Iranian state, so I guess we have to go for the more specious example. *shrugs*

          1. Not to mention the whole 1941 invasion of Iran. An event from WWII that involved Stalin and was directed against a supposed pro-Nazi regime. Gee, I wonder why the “anti-war” left would hesitate to bring that up?

    2. A republican associate of mine once told me it was ludicrous to blame CIA shenanigans then with the overthrow of the shah and the rise of Islamic theocrats. Too many years had passed for it to be relevant. I pointed out, the Church committee revelations came out in ’75, and indeed fueled widespread vitriol used by Khomeini to strengthen his support. That’s just the facts, Jack.

      1. Yep. Lots of Iranians were pissed off by the CIA’s meddlings. That said, Iran does have a history of radicalist religious regimes rising up and ruling the country — so it wasn’t exactly unprecedented.

        1. It’s a shame. Cyrus the Great was enlightened compared to the current crop of assholes.

          1. I blame the Safavids…

        2. I hope for your average republican that his attitude is changing from one of a knee jerk support of everything the CIA and national security types do. The CIA really was created by a cabal of social democrats given the green light to run our spy network. It worked like everything else that SDs get their hands on, badly.

    3. Subversion? Their population was hardly literate 60 years ago, which seems to be basic requirement for any ‘democratic’ system.

    4. So what does Mother Jones think of the 1941 Anglo-Soviet Invasion of Iran which was also conducted by Churchill and Eden to keep British control of Iran’s oil?

  38. New Utah NSA center requires 1.7M gallons of water daily to operate (to run a server farm)…..-related-3

    1. Why don’t they recycle the water?

      1. That’s really the least of my concerns about that construction.

    2. Meanwhile, the feds are decreasing the outflow from Lake Powell due to a “drought”.…..l/2667677/

    3. That’s so that they can water board everyone that writes stuff on blogs that they don’t like.

  39. According to Music News Net, the three remaining members of The Clash will gather together for a BBC interview next month.

  40. The Warty mating call has been completed.

    1. The damn reporter talks over it the whole time. How will I ever no the mysteries of his call.

  41. Creditors file objections to Detroit bankruptcy

    Individual creditors who fear losing their pensions and paying more for health care were among those who began filing objections on Monday to Detroit’s request for bankruptcy protection, the largest municipal filing in U.S. history and a move aimed at wiping away billions of dollars in debt.
    A restructuring team representing Detroit’s Police and Fire Retirement System and General Retirement System, the city’s two largest creditors, was expected to file objections by Monday’s deadline.

    Bankruptcy filings show the pension systems are the top two unsecured creditors. The city has about 21,000 retired workers who are owed benefits, with underfunded obligations of about $3.5 billion for pensions and $5.7 billion for retiree health coverage.

    The same leeches who had no problem voting themselves greater and greater benefits are surprised that the gravy train is derailed. But they don’t want the wreckage moved either.

  42. First, the SFFD announced it was going to ban helmet cams ‘in the interests of privacy’. Like to keep what the officers do private.
    Took over the weekend to hear from a bunch of folks, and the Chief figured that wasn’t such a hot idea:
    “SFFD backtracks, may allow helmet cameras”
    “Critics questioned Hayes-White’s (the Chief) timing and said the restriction could be interpreted as an effort to avoid having firefighters’ mistakes recorded on video. Among the critics was an attorney whom Ye’s family has retained to consider filing a lawsuit against the Fire Department.”…..744090.php

  43. Did someone say “Filner”?

    Back in the old days, Planned Parenthood and Sandra Fluke endorsed him against his (gay) Republican opponent.

    “The old days” = 2012. Remember back then? I bet PP doesn’t.

    “It’s about time you had a real prochoice…mayor!”

    From Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorsement of Filner:

    “Women’s right to choose and access to safe birth control are under attack.

    “For twenty years, Bob Filner has defended women ? our right to choice, our right to healthcare, our right to equal pay.

    “Bob Filner has a 100% voting record on women’s health. He put the Lily Ledbetter Equal Pay for Women Act on President Obama’s desk. Now, it’s the law.”

  44. ” Egypt’s Christians Are Facing a Jihad

    “By Nina Shea

    “…The Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party has been inciting the anti-Christian pogroms on its web and Facebook pages. One such page, posted on August 14, lists a bill of particulars against the Christian Coptic minority, blaming it, and only it, for the military’s crackdown against the Brotherhood, alleging that the Church has declared a “war against Islam and Muslims.” It concludes with the threat, “For every action there is a reaction.” This builds on statements in the article “The Military Republic of [Coptic Pope] Tawadros,” carried on the MB website in July, about the Coptic Church wanting to “humiliate” Muslims and eradicate Islam….

    “As of Sunday night, some 58 churches, as well as several convents, monasteries, and schools, dozens of Christian homes and businesses, even the YMCA, have been documented as looted and burned or subject to other destruction by Islamist rioters. The Coptic Pope remains in hiding…

    1. “Fr. Rafic Greiche, spokesman of Egypt’s Catholic Bishops reported to the Vatican news agency Fides that of the destroyed churches, 14 are Catholic, while the rest belong to the Coptic Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Anglican, and Protestant communities. While the anti-Christian attacks are occurring throughout Egypt, they are concentrated especially in the areas of Al Minya and Assiut, “because it is there that we find the headquarters of the jihadists,” according to Fr. Greiche.

      “…As jihad has come to the Arab world’s largest country, our foreign-policy leaders and press ignore this turn of events at our peril.”

    1. Best Comment: That still only counts as one!

    2. lame.

      1. even lamer.

  45. Fully armed SWAT Team performs practice drill on a school bus full of students who have fucking clue what’s going on. Students taken off the bus safely. In fucking RESTRAINTS.

    1. “Wow, this could actually happen on my bus.”

      How the fuck does the police doing something show that it could happen for real.

      1. “Yes, that’s right, kids. Just remember that terrorists could be hiding under your bed, planning to leap out and attack at any moment. So if the police bust down your door in the middle of the night, taze your parents and shoot all the family pets, it’s for your safety!”

        /fascist douchebags

      2. Well, it certainly proves that you could be attacked and terrorized by heavily armed paramilitary psychos at any time.

    2. Our police state is coming along nicely.

    3. Thank the Lords of Kobol that none of the kiddies had a toy gun on him.

    4. So, cops hijacked a bus full of kids, and nothing else happened? It’s almost worth getting out my surprised face. Almost.

    5. It’s almost like they’re softening their target up so they can implement totalitarianism nationwide or something.

    6. You see those kids’ reactions? The raid met its intended purpose. Those kids love Big Brother.

    7. What if a couple of the braver kids had a “Let’s Roll!” moment?

      1. What if a couple of the braver kids had a “Let’s Roll!” moment?

        You’d get a “we don’t condone heroics here” type comment followed by a punishment.

    8. Look, without a militarized police force, there would be people out there who would choose to put chemicals in their bodies that weren’t approved of by other people. Even worse, there would be people who would choose to sell those people those self same chemicals.

      It’s not a risk we should take. Now down on the floor while we check your papers, citizen.

    9. Call me a traditionalist, but I assume the unlawful detention suits have been filed, along with civil suits for batter and assault? I’ll just assume no criminal charges.

  46. Yasiel Puig: Fuck the media!

    Nice to see he’s learned some English.

    1. Thanks, I’ll take Wil Myers, who is better and less annoying. Not in a big city, so far less hype, too.

    2. I hope Jose Fernandez gives him the Barves-Harper/Dempster-ARod treatment.

      1. without the HRs

  47. Your experiences are racist.

    The next time I saw a reference to Orange Is the New Black was on a giant video billboard during the massive march in New York following George Zimmerman’s acquittal in connection with the killing of Trayvon Martin. As thousands of people took to the streets against white supremacy, there was an intense irony about a fictionalized depiction of black women cheering on a prison fight as a very blond white woman stood there, shocked with horror. I crudely tweeted, “Racist shit playing W 35 and 6th. It never ends. Neither do we. #HoodiesUp,” with a looping vine to illustrate my disappointment.

    Since that time, many a friend and colleague has taken the time to explain to me that I was wrong about my gut reaction to Orange Is the New Black. They point out that the series is based on a book, whose author, Piper Kerman, spent time in prison.

    1. But most often, Orange Is the New Black fans tell me I need to give the series a real chance. If I can just get through the first two episodes, I’ll be content by episode three. And so I watched and cringed through six whole episodes, called it quits and hope to never again see another one in my entire life. With very little exception, I saw wildly racist tropes: black women who, aside from fanaticizing about fried chicken, are called monkeys and Crazy Eyes; a Boricua mother who connives with her daughter for the sexual attentions of a white prison guard; an Asian woman who never speaks; and a crazy Latina woman who tucks away in a bathroom stall to photograph her vagina

      1. Yeah, because self-vagina-photography is stereotypically Hispanic.

      2. So this show is lady-Oz?

        Does this mean there will be no Christopher Meloni shower scenes?*

        *Waist up, but still not work friendly. I apologize if Reasonable renders it guys; I made it a second link to avoid that.

      3. The meth head evangelical christian is white.

        Also she shot up an abortion clinic.

        Why someone who shot up an abortion clinic is in a min security prison is anyone’s guess.

      4. black women who, aside from fanaticizing about fried chicken

        The Russian woman fantasizes about Chicken Kiev…in fact everyone in the show fantasizes about the chicken including the white protagonist.

        To be honest the chicken episodes were some of the best of the show…i kind of wish the whole season centered around it….the love triangle story line and the out of the blue religious fanatic story at the end seemed rushed over dramatic and unnecessary.

        1. I’m going to agree that the chicken segment was the best part of the series.

    2. As thousands of people took to the streets against white supremacy, there was an intense irony about a fictionalized depiction of black women cheering on a prison fight as a very blond white woman stood there, shocked with horror.

      Hispanic guy getting acquitted = white supremacy. Whenever someone tries to argue that the Zimmerman case had anything to do with white supremacy, I always want to ask them if they think George Zimmerman would be welcome at a Klan rally.

      1. Let’s, for the sake of argument, pretend that Zimmerman is white in the way that the media narrative portrays.

        How are white supremacists a threat to ANYONE that it should warrant a massive protest? There are very few actual white supremacists anymore, and those who do remain are tucked in to a small hollow or are in the marshes in very small, insulated communities. They are not a real threat to anyone at all.

        What those people were protesting was a giant strawman of their creation.

        1. You just described TEAM OUTRAGE to a T. The outrage orgy is the point; getting there can be done however they need it to be done.

        2. What those people were protesting was a giant strawman of their creation.

          Of course you’d say that, RACIST!~|!

        3. They believe that white racism is the source of all problems for blacks, therefore, when an “innocent black child” is killed, it must be the fault of white racism. If you don’t see that, it’s because you are a white racist, or under the spell of white racism. It’s all very simple.

    3. My wife is going through that show now and it is funny enough to draw some of my attention as I curb stomp Novograd in Europa Universalis IV.

      1. I pre-ordered the game, but still haven’t had a chance to play it. How does it compare to EU3?

        1. I like the changes, I’ll just have to get used to them. They’ll probably need to do some balancing patching eventually. The Monarch Points system is the key to the game and forces you to pick priorities. Still learning how to manage. I was gonna play England first but I forgot to turn on Ironman mode and at game start you get fucked pretty bad. I decide to go Muscovy instead (in EUIII I always liked forming Russia as Novograd so I decided to switch it up). I restarted the play through twice once I figured out a strategy. Formed Russia right before going to bed last night.

          1. That sounds awesome.

            Does the AI still blob like crazy?

            1. The overextension system works pretty good to slow it down. You still see some with the historical lucky nations (which has to be on for ironman mode). Still, I’ve seen france blob and get torn apart in only 5 early game playthroughs. Same with Ottomans. You want some blobbing so it is historically realistic.

              I have a feeling they might re-balance lucky nations.

      2. Does that game work with Windows 8? Because my copy of EU III sure as fuck didn’t.

        1. Donno, I got a new comp with Windows 7 shortly before the switch because fuck that shit.

        2. EUIII even worked on Macs

    4. It’s a prison show, dummy. If you don’t like like it, don’t watch it. How many times do you have to be told?

    5. Call me crazy, but I think the person who looks at a still from a program and sees “black women and a white woman,” without any concern for context or individual character is the racist. And I don’t really care what racists have to say.


    Political allies of Vice President Joe Biden have concluded that he can win the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination?even if Hillary Clinton enters the contest?and are considering steps he could take to prepare for a potential candidacy.

    Biden allies believe he could run on some of the accomplishments Mr. Obama notched over two terms. If the economic recovery continues, Mr. Biden could run on the basis that he was a partner in combating the recession. Unemployment hit 10% in the first year of Mr. Obama’s term and as of July was down to 7.4%.

    “My guess is it would be a legacy campaign, continuing to build on the success they’ve had in the administration,” Mr. Rasky said.

    1. No, no, I agree. Run, Joe, run!

    2. “My guess is it would be a legacy campaign, continuing to build on the success they’ve had in the administration,” Mr. Rasky said.

      Are people living in a totally different universe than I am? In this world, Barack Obama’s approval rating has fallen to almost 40% and is still dropping. The drop in unemployment has been almost completely the result of people exiting the work force. Very few people have actually seen their lot improve the last 5 years and things will only get worse when Obamacare further guts the full time work force.

      What success?

      1. The success that Obama’s supporters insist is there! Just because you can’t see it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist!

        Biden running would be the most hilarious clown car wreck imaginable. I really, really hope he does it.

        1. Me, too, and I really, really mean it. This country could use a good laugh.

          I still think he should be the permanent vice president. He’s really perfect for the role.

          1. This. A Biden 2016 run would be hilarity.

          2. We need a new office. We will call it “The Clown in Chief” and it will be a powerless position, but one held for life. The duties will include scampering, making gaffes, cavorting, and jestering. The holder of the position will get one tiny car that they and all their Secret Service agents have to fit into.

            I nominate Biden to be the first one.

            1. I’m with you on this, but as long as it replaces the current office that we call “President of the United States.” All of the aforementioned offices’ powers & duties are to be nullified.

        2. He’s got appeal to the common man, according to people who have insultingly little regard for the intelligence of the common man.

      2. See, you don’t employ the same metrics that they do. Obama got elected and reelected. That’s it. That’s all that matters. The total disaster of his actual performance in office is absolutely irrelevant.

        1. That’s par for the course, really. The objective is to get as much power and status as possible. Using it well or competently after getting it is, to be as charitable as possible, taken for granted. Hence, Obamacare, not mention any number of other administrative failures.

      3. Maybe they’re using Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness Index.

      4. All Republicans would have to do is create a series of TV commercials of every Biden blooper, with images of every weird thing he’s ever done, including this.

  49. The Gordian Knot of Sex Work

    My focus on the female is deliberate. All who propose prostitution policy are aware that men sell sex, but they are not concerned about men, who simply do not suffer the disgrace and shame that fall on women who do it.

    tha fuck?

    1. I’ll just leave this here: Brostitute.

      It’s only tangentially on topic.

  50. Well alrighty, then.

    #solidarityisforwhitewomen tertiary thread: WOC commentors only
    By Moderator Team on August 19, 2013
    Several regular readers/commentors have suggested that, due to some derailings and erasures of WOC on the primary thread, a third thread specifically for WOC commentors to contribute feedback/analysis regarding the #solidarityisforwhitewomen hashtag and the history behind it is needed. This is that thread.

    [Content note: comments may include mentions of Hugo Schwyzer, suicide & murder attempts, self-harm, manipulative abuses]

    1. Remember folks, Hugo Schwyzer was the ideal New Feminist Man.

      Why people in the West listen to this cult is beyond me.

    2. Can you imagine if the H&R commentariat were concerned with “derailings”?

      1. I imagine anyone concerned with such has long since left us.

    3. Solidarity may be for white women, but the entertainment is free to all.

      Say, does anyone know if Jezebel ever responded to that petition demanding that they make half their writing staff non-white?

      Seriously, whichever 4channer or whoever is behind this stuff is the God damn Sun Tzu of Internet warfare.

    4. The Moderator Team will be relying on the honor system with respect to commentors identifying as WOC.

      I’m so glad they said, because I really wanted to know.

      1. Bullshit. You should have to send in a geneology dating back at least until the Mayflower Compact and an unedited picture of your taint before you are allowed to post on that thread.

        1. Mayflower Compact



          2. speaking of you people, Brits getting naked to save tigers.


            Not Safe for your digestive track.

          3. And to be fair, your Madonna (she’s all yours now!) looking hot on her 55th birthday.


            I mean after you entirely obscure her actual skin texture with a yellow brush, er, bucket in Photoshop, she looks totally hot!

            1. Hey, Brits plus Madonna does cover both my ethnicities.

      2. Bullshit. You should have to send in a geneology dating back at least until the Mayflower Compact and an unedited picture of your taint before you are allowed to post on that thread.

        1. Or you can just double-post. That works, too.

  51. Found this awesome quote on the Financial Times comment section on the Miranda detention:…..z2cSPl2l00

    Thumbscrew | August 19 9:58pm | Permalink
    The idealist would say that this an abominable abuse; the cynic would observe that the UK broke the eleventh commandment. But seriously – can’t perfidious Albion even do realpolitick now?

  52. Krugman is a tool, part 24,618:

    Bill Keller has a strong, stinging column about Republican attacks on the entirely praiseworthy, up to now bipartisan effort to create a Common Core curriculum.

  53. pointless link, since you shouldn’t click. Post is in it’s entirety below.

    Quote of the Day
    Posted by Melissa McEwan at Monday, August 19, 2013
    [Content Note: Violence; racism.]

    “You can’t give people the authority, whether civilian or police officers, the right to just stop somebody because of the color of their skin.”?Sybrina Fulton, mother of Trayvon Martin, speaking about New York City’s “Stop and Frisk” policy on Meet the Press yesterday.

    I love that she connected the overtly institutionally-supported “Stop and Frisk” policy to the covertly institutionally-supported vigilantism of men like George Zimmerman. I hate that she had to do it. But I love that she did it.


    1. So, uh, her name is Fulton but her son’s name is Martin?

      Oops, sorry, sorry, shouldn’t even have mentioned that.

      Seriously, what exactly is the evidence that Zimmerman followed Fulton – I mean Martin – because of the color of his skin? I mean, the prosecutors had every opportunity to throw everything they had against the wall to see if anything stuck – if they had shown a racial motive on Zimmerman’s part I imagine they could have gotten a conviction, or at least a hung jury. Recall the juror who said that she *felt* Zimmerman was guilty but had to go by the evidence?

      1. I’ll bite, what kind claim are you trying to hint at without actually making?

        1. I suppose it’s a reference to what, in the past, would have been called TM’s “broken home.”

          1. Hmm. Maybe I’ll go watch some incredibly dated reruns of Murphy Brown in tribute.

    2. We don’t know that Zimmerman stopped Martin. When Zimmerman’s 911 call ended, he had lost sight of Martin. We don’t know what happened after that. Furthermore, Zimmerman has every right to ask someone in his neighborhood what they’re doing there without getting assaulted. If he went further, and tried to physically restrain Martin to force him to answer or prevent him from leaving, that’s one thing. But there isn’t any evidence to indicate that this is what happened.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.