Nairobi Siege Declared Over, Sen. Cruz Hits Senate Floor to Fight Obamacare, Army Restricts Tattoos: P.M. Links


  • Ted Cruz on Senate floor having a filibuster that isn't technically a filibuster.

    The al Shebab siege of the Westgate Mall in Nairobi, Kenya, has been declared over. The death toll stands at 67 people (though there are still more missing), and three floors of the mall have collapsed. The battle lasted for four days. The battle continues on Twitter.

  • Senate GOP leaders say they do not support efforts from within the party to stop funding of the Affordable Care Act, but Sen. Ted Cruz has taken to the floor to fight anyway.
  • The president of Brazil has condemned the National Security Agency's behavior for spying on her country. You didn't need to be engaged in Internet surveillance to see that one coming.
  • The U.S. Army is about to ban tattoos below the elbows and knees and above the neck.
  • At least 45 are dead in a 7.8 magnitude earthquake in Pakistan.
  • President Barack Obama is demanding that any United Nations resolution on Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles have "consequences" for noncompliance.  

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: NCAA to Restore Penn State Scholarships

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. President Barack Obama is demanding that any United Nations resolution on Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles have “consequences” for noncompliance.

    No consequences means not media distraction.

  2. Senate GOP leaders say they do not support efforts from within the party to stop funding of the Affordable Care Act, but Sen. Ted Cruz has taken to the floor to fight anyway.

    You know who else liked to give long, rambling speeches?

    1. You know who else used to repeat the same joke in multiple threads?

      1. People trying to bust my balls? 😉

        1. You know who else tried to bust balls…

            1. +2 nutcrackers

          1. Billy Batts?

      2. That guy who always complains about alt text?

        1. You know who else complained about alt text besides that one guy….

      3. You know who else used to complain about overused memes…

        1. Lucy Steigerwald?

      4. The man let down one last time by the Cleveland Browns?

      5. The Cleveland Browns?

    2. Grandpa Simpson?

    3. President Bill Pullman?

      1. Today we celebrate our Independence Day!!!!

    4. Please, explain to me how a Republican can say he doesn’t want to kill Obamacare with fire? I mean, what’s the difference between the parties again? It grows fuzzy.

  3. The president of Brazil has condemned the National Security Agency’s behavior for spying on her country.

    She should be flattered we think it’s worth spying on. That puts Brazil on par with teabaggers.

    1. nice.

  4. Everybody at once now:

    1. They’re building an army!

    2. Awwwwww….

    3. Just another day at the slipper factory.

  5. Sure, they had a terrible, lethal earthquake, but they also have new waterfront property.

    “Pakistani TV Geo News, citing Pakistan’s deputy inspector general, reported that the 100-feet-wide island arose out of the Arabian Sea about 350 feet off the coast of Gwadar.”

    1. I’m pretty sure there is a lost treasure, magical item or temple on that island that will make us rich, give us super powers or bring about the end of the world. Unless it’s just traveling through time.

      1. Why can’t it be all of the above?

      2. Can’t we occupy it and declare it a free country?

  6. any time I hear al Shebab I think El Kabong

    1. I’ll do the thin’in around here

    2. To me it sounds like a menu item at a kabob place. I will take the al Shebab with a side of humus and a diet coke please.

      1. Is that where the diet coke is actually an IED?

        1. You need Mentos for that.

    3. I hear al Shelob. Occasionally, al Baobab, but usually al Shelob.

      1. Which one of those was on Wings?

        1. Well, I never really watched that show, but did it have a giant tree or a giant spider?

          1. That one guy was in that show. And that one girl, too. We used to like that show.

            1. Did we? I really don’t remember watching it.

      2. Please stop troubling the unhappy world with talk of al Shelob.

  7. Plaxico Burress says “What The Fuck? I shoulda become a cop!”

    A $200 fine and a few days off from work sure beats a couple of years in the slammer. But I’m sure a “civilian” would have gotten worse.

    1. Totality of circumstances! Jesus, Sloop! You just couldn’t possibly understand!

      -Because I kind of miss dunphy.

      1. I get the feeling that somewhere out there on the internet all the people who feel/were chased away from Reason gather for an e-drink and talk crap about Hit and Run. And all the women who could have been libertarians somehow end up there.

        1. What a estro-pussy-fest that must be. Losertarians – Unite!


  8. Gizmodo: The Plan to Defrost Walt Disney and Save Capitalism With Sea Cities

    Remember that time back in the 1990s when Walt Disney was awakened from his cryogenic sleep, started building artificial islands off the coast of Massachusetts, and then privatized the U.S. military to protect his new capitalist paradise from an evil, one-world government?

    Yeah, neither do I. But that was the techno-libertartian fever dream of one Jerome Tuccille, who wrote about just such a scenario in his 1973 book Here Comes Immortality.

    1. With a name like Tuccille, that book’s gotta be gold.

      1. Is this a case of an apple falling in the general vicinity of its originating tree?

    2. Why privatize the US military when you can just hire Blackwater?

  9. Another value of reddit is that people find and share things like this.

    1. Do people actually believe any of it when they post drivel like this?

      (The stuff you linked to, that is, not your words.)

  10. Hey guys, I found Shreeeeek’s youtube account.

    He’s a lot more handsome than I thought he’d be.

    1. Holy shit, that’s a genetic warfare experiment gone wrong.

        1. Classic Shreeeek.

      1. Because you asked them twice.

    2. He got in a hell of a fight with the Ugly Tree.

      1. He went to Amy Winehouse’s dentist.

    3. Where are the parents?

  11. 83,000 scientists collaborate to create a space catalog of over 300,000 galaxies

    Scientists have come up with a catalog of more than 300,000 nearby galaxies. A group of more than 83,000 volunteer citizen scientists have worked upon the project via the effort of crowdsourcing.

    Dubbed as Galaxy Zoo 2, it is the second phase of the project to categorize the galaxies.

    The crowdsourcing effort is becoming a useful tool for scientists as it can tackle more challenging characteristics that computers can’t handle like citizen scientists can determine the shape and structure of galaxies in our universe, but computers fail to determine these properties.

    The huge number of scientists looked at images online between February 2009 and April 2010 that were gathered from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. Each image was then classified after the scientists ensured in average of 40 to 45 times like whether the galaxy had spirals, or it had galactic bars, or counting the number of spiral arms present in it and more such questions.
    Researchers say the crowdsourcing initiative was a major success in the project as the combined effort represents the work of a full-time research of about 30 years by one scientist.

    I remember hearing that there are more stars in the universe than there are grains of sand on Earth. This seems to support that.

      1. Why buy a galaxy? Just buy a starship and homestead it.

        1. No, I want to be an extremely distant landlord. Give me one with a wormhole connected to here, though, because I can’t abide late rent payments.

          1. Sorry, the wormhole will be taxed and regulated by an orbiting space station.

            But you can always stop for a drink at the bar.

            1. That Einstein-Rosen bridge. You didn’t build that.

              1. I chastise my tenants via spooky action at a distance.

        2. Only if they’re uninhabited.

      2. Um, yes, I can sell you a galaxy. I’ll even send you a certificate of ownership.

        1. Don’t mess with me. I’m a space lawyer.

          That should be a TV show. Fred Garvin, Space Lawyer.

          1. It’ll be like Harvey Birdman meets Sealab… But in Space!!

    1. Dubbed as Galaxy Zoo 2, it is the second phase of the project to categorize the galaxies.

      Wait until Samsung sues for trademark infringement. 🙂

      1. Shouldn’t it be Galaxy Zoo 2: Stellar Boogaloo?

    1. That would be the well used drug exception to the Bill of Rights.

      1. Clearly the Bill of Rights should have been a lot longer, if the Founders really intended to protect any of our rights.

    2. So Dunphy wasn’t violating the Constitution all along.

    3. BS – if we have a constitutional right to privacy for abortion, and I assume therefore medical procedures, and there are literally a ton of medical procedures one could identify from just prescription records, there is an obvious…

      #Land of the free

    4. Coming from an agency whose very existence is unconstitutional.

  12. The hours are great, but the pay is lousy: 47% of US jobs under threat from computerization.

    “Almost 47 percent of US jobs could be computerized within one or two decades according to a recent study that attempts to gauge the growing impact of computers on the job market. It isn’t only manual labor jobs that could be affected: The study reveals a trend of computers taking over many cognitive tasks thanks to the availability of big data. It suggests two waves of computerization, with the first substituting computers for people in logistics, transportation, administrative and office support and the second affecting jobs depending on how well engineers crack computing problems associated with human perception, creative and social intelligence.”

    1. Why is this a bad thing?

      1. One of the biggest problems that libertarians have, I believe, is the whole “how do people without a job live?” Now, progs have an answer, a terrible one, to be sure, namely government will do it, but at least they have an answer. We say the freeish market will come up with new ways for people to make money, but we can’t prove it. I’m really not trying to slag libertarians, I don’t know that anyone has an answer to “what will people do when there aren’t any jobs?”

        We can’t all write for each other, make twee art objects for each other, etc. We don’t all have STEM or medical backgrounds.

        How can we have a functioning economy if most of the people are unemployed? If libertarians can’t come up with a good answer for that (besides what the proggies would say that we say, namely fuck ’em), then the proggies promise to take care of everyone will look like the only answer to a lot of people.

        I’m not trying to be a luddite, honest. It will almost certainly be better to have the computers doing the work, but if you think people howl now about all the jobs shipped overseas, imagine the howling that will come when it’s white collar workers losing their jobs.

        1. I’m not trying to be a luddite

          But, you’re succeeding spectacularly.

          Clearly, we should still be plowing fields with sharp sticks.

          1. Reminds me of this (almost certainly apocryphal):

            At one of our dinners, Milton [Friedman] recalled traveling to an Asian country in the 1960s and visiting a worksite where a new canal was being built. He was shocked to see that, instead of modern tractors and earth movers, the workers had shovels. He asked why there were so few machines. The government bureaucrat explained: “You don’t understand. This is a jobs program.” To which Milton replied: “Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it’s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels.”

          2. Nope, no intellectual blinders here at Reason. Not a one.

            1. Oh, posting blithering idiocy demands a different response?

              Silly me.

              1. Where is the idiocy? I would not be surprised a bit for computers to take over more and more office jobs. And I am not arguing that we should bring back elevator operators or ditch ATMs. I am concerned that we have no intellectual argument for the future unemployed beyond “if the lousy government would get out of our way the free market would take care of everything.” It is and will be a losing argument in a world full of progressive “we will all take care of each other” propaganda.

                I don’t believe I’m a luddite. But I do wonder, what is it that YOU do that a computer couldn’t do better, and what will you do when it does?

                1. As someone whose goal has always been to have enough money to not have to work, I am probably not the best person to answer that question. But since you ask, if the point comes in my life where computers are actually better at any intellectual task than me (which is unlikely), I will simply devote my time to reading, hiking, climbing, skiing, shooting, and anything else that arouses my curiosity or interest. People don’t exist to work, they simply work to provide themselves and their families with necessities and luxuries as their talents and abilities allow. I understand that you luddites believe that, if all work is taken over by computers, people will become lazy and indolent, which is possible, but that is not my problem, and not something that I am likely to fall into. Technological innovation is almost overwhelmingly a good thing, and I have yet to see any complaints about it that come close to overriding the good it does.

                  1. Brandon, that’s my personal goal as well.

                    My concern is that if most work is taken over by computers (and I believe it will), why should most people get a paycheck? Are we going to have a glorious star trek economy where everything is so cheap that no one really needs to work (which is fine with me, I’ve worked my share of lousy jobs), are we going to have the proggie nightmare where the only employed people are plutocrats, their personal servants and guards on one side, “community organizers” on the other, demanding their cut in the name of fairness and equality?

                    1. I think we’re a long way from a Star Trek economy yet, but we might be within a few decades of people not having to work as much to provide for themselves and their families.

                    2. My concern is that if most work is taken over by computers (and I believe it will), why should most people get a paycheck? Are we going to have a glorious star trek economy where everything is so cheap that no one really needs to work (which is fine with me, I’ve worked my share of lousy jobs),

                      Implicit in the idea that OMG machines will do everything and no one will have a job is that everything will be super cheap and people won’t really need to work much to survive, or that they will have machines working for them.

                      And things have been moving in that direction for decades now. All types of manufactured items have all time low real prices and all time higher quality. For example, Today it’s cheaper to throw away and replace a 42″ LCD TV than it is to have it repaired. That was not the case forty years ago with a 27″ CRT TV.

                2. I fix computers. Looks as though I’m good.

            2. My answer would be that the fears of a jobless economy are misplaced, as free markets have always come up with new (and usually better paying) jobs to replace the old ones. In this regard, history in our favor.

              1. I sincerely hope you are right. I suspect a lot of us will keep our office jobs for the same reason offices in China sometimes pay westerners in suits to hang out when they have visitors – it suggests they are prosperous, happening companies. Effectively we’ll be being paid to surf the internet all day and sign off on reports.

                1. I realize a lot of us are already doing this.

                2. Effectively we’ll be being paid to surf the internet all day and sign off on reports.

                  Who will put content on the internet? Computers will never understand the hilarity of captioned animal pictures.

                3. Effectively we’ll be being paid to surf the internet all day and sign off on reports.

                  That’s pretty much what I do now.

            3. A lens is not a blinder, it’s a focusing device.

        2. We say the freeish market will come up with new ways for people to make money, but we can’t prove it.

          Except that at every technological leap in the past, this happened.

          Sure, past success is no guarantee of future results, and the next time MIGHT BE DIFFERENT, but there’s no reason to doubt it won’t work in the future as well.

          1. “The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea. They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is clear: To build and maintain those robots.”

            That’s the libertarian answer.

          2. You said it first, and better. Miniature American flag for you (or an abortion, your pick).

        3. I think this is an instance where the article is question-begging that society will continue to function normally with so many professional functions being computerized.

          Even technology will hit the limits of scale eventually. As you pointed out, a country where 47% of the jobs are run by computers would be extraordinarily difficult to maintain.

          I think the libertarian answer in this instance is that this kind of scenario won’t last very long even if it is achieved, because people have to eat. A nation where 47% of the jobs are done by computers will likely collapse under the weight of its own social dysfunction if allowed to remain in that state for very long, especially one where the population is as large and diverse as ours. Communities will begin finding solutions in contravention to the occupational status-quo, and a regression to the mean will take place, irrespective of what government or cultural elites attempt to do to maintain it.

          1. I see absolutely no evidence of this. There are not a finite number of “jobs.” And if machines are able to create more value than is required to build them, then people might just have to work less to maintain whatever lifestyle they desire. Maybe the 40 hour workweek becomes less common, with more people able to work part time and still afford housing, food, clothing, transportation and leisure activities. Or maybe with more time on their hands, people will want to hire more other people as fishing guides, chefs, custom-ski-builders, anything that people are willing to pay for. People might just move up from being data-entry drones to serving the demands of higher-level markets. And the trend of increasing leisure time, higher standards of living, and less of a subsistence-level existence will likely continue as it has for the last few millenia. And Mary Stack will be driven completely insane.

            1. If you look at the trajectory of the work week over the past hundred and fifty years or so, it sure looks like we got stuck at eight hours a day being the default. Given our productivity gains from our current state of computerization, we probably should be down to five or six hours a day. But we’re stuck at work for the whole eight.

              1. 8 hours? More like 10 or 11 a day, plus half the weekend.

                1. +1 real job

                2. Yeah. A real full time job is exactly that – full time – these days.

                  Only when the ability for computers to take over most jobs tips past some tripping point where the number of humans available to do the parts the computers can’t handle, and thus humans become scarce, will human worked hours (for the same pay) start to decline.

              2. “we probably should be down to five or six hours a day. But we’re stuck at work for the whole eight.”

                You are mistaken. The average work week is 32 hours (and has been declining since the 60s, when it was around 39.5). That’s 6.4 hours per day.

                Yes, there is an 8-hour traditional “structure” that exists, but that is just a standard that exists to coordinate business hours and facilitate business. It doesn’t have anything to do with how much people actually work.

            2. I see absolutely no evidence of this.


        4. If they just stand there with their mouth open, are the progs gonna make us feed em like baby birds?

        5. We say the freeish market will come up with new ways for people to make money, but we can’t prove it.

          Unless we refer to 6,000 years of recorded human history.

        6. The idea is to become competent in a number of valuable skills that can be applied as broadly as possible.

          Starting in the 80’s I picked up an engineering degree, learned Japanese and have worked in computers, logistics, process design, and now construction – all around the Pacific rim. Now I’m learning WordPress so I can link my company’s data to our sales force via on-line tablets.

          Get deep enough in a skill to be useful/competent but don’t get invested too deep.

      2. Why is this a bad thing?

        Because it doesn’t understand how the world works. Technology is little more than fancy black magic.

        1. Still won’t – or can’t – answer the question – how do people participate in an economy if there’s no reason to give them a job?

          1. Wha’ happened? Did Leela stick you with the wrong career chip?

          2. Since human wants are limitless, I imagine people will find ways to serve one another. Not everything can be computerized – or be as satisfying if it can. And since I imagine the essentials will be astoundingly cheap in such a near-post-scarcity world (what with computers and robots doing all the truly unpleasant work), I wouldn’t be surprised if it were possible to keep yourself and your family in relative comfort working a only few weeks a year.

            1. er.. only a few weeks a year

              Damn lysdexia. 🙁

            2. I sincerely hope so.

          3. Judging from the abundance of redneck reality shows, even those without discernible skills will continue to be employed, for our amusement.

          4. There will be a subset of jobs that are either impossible for computers to do, or require human input to optimize. Computers and robots are still nothing more than tools that need operators.

            As we move down the continuum towards 100% automation, things will become so cheap that living on the excess and waste products of society will provide a comfortable level of absolute, if not relative, wealth.

            If a day ever arrives that computers can do literally every job better than humans can–art, sex, conversation, philosophy–we’ll probably become cyborgs.

          5. You are asking that libertarians be omniscient, when that is the very reason we argue (and history has demonstrated) planned economies cannot work.

            And while you claim not to be a luddite, you are using the very same argument they used in the past against the printing press, spinning jenny, assembly line, and every other technological innovation.

            Few people in, say, 1900 would have predicted the automotive, aerospace, and computing industries or the huge amounts of wealth and standards of living they brought in the 20th century.

            No one can predict how the next technological leap will affect the economy, but it will almost certainly raise the standard of living for everyone, even if fewer people get paid for filling out Excel spreadsheets.


    McAuliffe pledges Colorado like gun control if elected. Of course the local media will never report this and the GOP is too stupid to make an attack ad out of it. So McAuluffe will get elected and do exactly this and the shocked voters of Virginia will wonder how such a moderate could have done such a thing.

    1. What makes you think that Hoochinelli will fail to campaign against this.

      1. He doesn’t seem to be running a very good campaign. I hope I am wrong. This should kill McAulliffe.

        1. It’s a fucking gift, I can’t imagine any republican outside of the northeast being too stupid to hammer the D with it.

          1. being too stupid to not hammer the D with it.

        2. Coochi did worse to himself with his seeming desire to ban oral sex and sodomy. Fuck them both.

          1. Cooch has little chance of getting that passed. The gun grabbers have been successful – so McAuliffe is more dangerous.

          2. “seeming desire”

            The meme that just won’t die.

  14. The U.S. Army is about to ban tattoos below the elbows and knees and above the neck.

    The last thing they need is someone getting woodland pattern tattoos when the deployment calls for choclate-chip.

    1. But the ladies won’t know how tough I am unless they can see my sweet “Born 2 Murder-drone” sleeve.

      /UAV pilot

      1. “Ooooooh. Do you fly one-a those ‘Queef 16’ drone jets?”

    2. What about the bald people that get tattoos of stubble

    3. Although it’s totally anti-libertarian, but the world without tattoos would be a much better place.

      1. Better for who?

        1. For me. My aesthetic sensibility wouldn’t be offended so often.

    4. I was in the Navy when they banned beards.. I saw guys who didn’t re-enlist just because of that.

      1. The beard ban was actually for a practical not aesthetic reason. OBAs do not make the proper seal on your face when you have a beard.

    5. Wouldn’t a squadron of Mike Tyson looking guys be more intimidating though?

    6. This has to do with recruiting. They can tighten standards now because they are reducing the force.

      The neck thing is unsurprising. That was a longstanding rule, but was relaxed in the mid-2000s when they needed to increase the recruiting numbers.

      I am surprised at the stupidity of below the elbow, though. About half the guys in any infantry unit will have at least one sleeve tattoo.

    7. The first tattoo parlor in New York City, established in 1846, served to mark up Civil War soldiers.

      Did New York have an inordinate amount of two-hundred year old English Civil War veterans?

  15. New York woman sues police in federal court after she is arrested for harassment and “obstructing governmental administration” after lodging a complaint against an off-duty officer.

    What the fuck is “obstructing governmental administration”?

    1. It’s the New York cop’s ultimate contempt of cop weapon, for when they can’t even find an excuse for an obstruction of justice or resisting arrest charge.

    2. they charged that guy in New York with it, when the cops shot a few bystanders trying to apprehend him. I guess he made them miss.

  16. Man’s Pro-2nd Amendment signs keep getting stolen. He sets up camera to catch the thief
    Guess who was stealing it?
    If you answered, “a police officer,” then you are right.

    1. Those signs promoting 2nd amendment rights interfered with this cop’s right to be in the only club with 2nd amendment rights.

    2. I presume the cop is on a paid vacation right about now?

    1. she’s lucky they didn’t shoot her. Officer safety is PARAMOUNT!

    2. About 15 minutes later, Johnson arrived in the classroom with Lane, who is assigned to Riverside as its prevention resource officer, the suit says. Instead of inquiring about her medical status, the suit claims they gave B.D. “multiple warnings to awaken and come down to the office.”

      A kid is passed out in the special ed room. Don’t call the nurse. Call the cop and order her to wake up. Forget how evil these people are. I can’t imagine being that stupid.

      1. Public education is child abuse.

      2. She won’t wake up! Yell louder! A seizure is no excuse for not complying.

    3. It’s rare that a story here makes me completely speechless, but you’ve managed to do that. Seriously, what can you even say to that? I hope her family bankrupts both the city and the school board.

      1. And the principal and the cop. I hope the board and the district goes down for not immediately firing both. I can’t fathom how evil those two people are.

        Reason should do an interview with one of these creatures sometime. I would love to hear them rationalize their behavior. It would be scary but interesting.

        1. No, you don’t. It’d make you vomit. Go read the rationalization in the article about the woman who called 911 over the kids playing with toy guns. It made her feel ‘uncomfortable’.

        2. I would love to hear one of these creatures talk, too. I would like for someone to point out and ask them if they realize how fucking evil they are. And if there are any limits to what they are will to subject children to in the name of Authorataa..

      2. I’m glad I was able to(briefly) return with the desired effect. Have a nice fucking day, everybody.

        1. thanks for nothing, you nut kicking sadist.

    4. What a vile, craven piece of shit he is. You can tell by how he reacted to a mentally-handicapped girl not respecting his authoritah while sleeping. How low of an i.q. must you have to be so offended?

  17. Detective claims to have solved the Jack the Ripper murders

    In total Mr Marriott has discovered 17 unsolved Ripper-like murders committed between 1863 and 1894. He believes a German merchant seaman called Carl Feigenbaum was responsible for some, but not all of those killings.

    Feigenbaum was a crew member on ships that regularly docked near Whitechapel. He was executed in New York in 1896 after being caught by US police fleeing the scene of a Ripper-style murder there.

    “The reality is there was just a series of unsolved murders and they would have sunk into oblivion many years ago, but for a reporter called Thomas Bulling,” said Mr Marriott.

    Bulling was a drunken journalist with many police contacts at Scotland Yard, who in 1888 was working for the London-based Central News Agency. He was paid to supply crime stories for newspapers.

    “Police got a letter that Bulling had written about the murders which he signed ‘Jack the Ripper’,” said Mr Marriott.

    “It was the most ingenious piece of journalism that has kept this mystery alive for 125 years. Even now any modern-day serial killer is called a ‘Ripper’.

    Warty’s great-great grandfather?

    1. Bulling was a drunken journalist

      The only thing worse than a drunken journalist is a journalist who has a word count quota to meet.

      1. Sober journalists are obviously not selling copy.

        1. What sober journalists?

    2. Warty time travels, and it’s been alluded that he may have been Jack the Ripper.

      Although you can’t rule out Warty being his own great-great grandfather, either.

      *shudder* I looked too deep into SugarFree’s writings today

      1. The phrase “prehensile futurecock” will haunt me forever. Just like herpes.

        I suspect that was the effect SF was aiming for.

  18. I resent Cruz for mentioning pancakes.

    1. Well, obviously it’s not meant to be taken literally. It refers to any manufacturer of fluffy, sweet, bread-like products.

  19. The al Shebab siege of the Westgate Mall in Nairobi, Kenya, has been declared over. The death toll stands at 67 people (though there are still more missing), and three floors of the mall have collapsed. The battle lasted for four days. The battle continues on Twitter.

    Kenya’s President, Barack Hussein Obama Uhuru Kenyatta, declared the outcome satisfactory, and praised the skill of government troops in overcoming the terrorists.

  20. Jesus. Talk about overracting to good advice.


    “Some women find themselves engaging in behaviour that they may not be comfortable with to make them ‘popular’ at work. There are women who want to engage in banter and other stereotypical’male behaviour such as colourful language.”
    “a female employee who instigates sexist jokes has demonstrated to others that she enjoys risqu? banter and so once that boundary is broken down she has to be comfortable with that behaviour in her working relationships.”
    “If you do not define your own boundaries then you cannot expect others to be able to either. A great example is the ‘lap dancing club with male clients’ analogy. If a women is genuinely comfortable with entering the club then fine, but it is painful to hear a female college say she found the experience ‘liberating’ when she in fact did not. Colleagues will make judgments on her boundaries for having attended.”

    1. Results in this critique:

      One of my favorite parts of James’s retro-chic argument is the idea that mysoginists who sexually harass women have any regard or awareness whatsoever for the boundaries women establish. I guess I’ve never met this more emo, touchy feely (in both senses) sexual harasser. Does he, for instance, think about a woman’s boundaries before he decides to tell her what nice breasts she has? Does he ask himself “will she be OK with my telling her that if she wants a raise she’ll need to felate me. Is that within her boundaries? I’m trying to remember if she ever told me a dirty joke. Because if she did, she’s totally down.” Does he play Ani di Franco and Dar Williams spotify playlists as he engages in the sexual harassment he has so considerately contemplated?

      1. “Don’t tell me to take responsibility for my actions and be aware of what is going on around me.”

        1. Also, “I don’t understand men, social cues or basic male-female interaction.”

  21. A new Serpico? Police officer supports story of handcuffed man accusing another officer of kicking him in the face.

    The officer in question faces misdemeanor charges of “official oppression”. Not felony assault and battery, but misdemeanor oppression charges which can result in a hefty fine of $1000.

    1. Don’t count on it.

      Remember that Dorner supported a victim of police abuse’s story and was subsequently booted off the force for being a bad cop.

    2. Surely you’re not suggesting there’s a double standard?!

  22. Want to read a really dumb article about the Pope? No? Well, that’s just your white privilege talking:

    Then on Friday, Pope Francis hastened to remind everyone what he really thinks about abortion.

    Pope Francis offered an olive branch of sorts to the doctrine-minded, conservative wing of the Catholic Church on Friday as he denounced abortions as a symptom of today’s “throw-away culture” and encouraged Catholic doctors to refuse to perform them.

    Apparently abortion rights violate rad pope’s notion that “people have a dignity that is priceless”?lovely phrasing that casually excludes women from the category of “people” deserving of the basic dignity of controlling their own bodies[…]

    He quotes Miguel A. De La Torre, a professor of social ethics and Latino/a studies at Iliff School of Theology in Denver, who suggests that it doesn’t go much beyond that, as Francis hasn’t done anything “to change the social structures that create poverty.”

    Is it a rule among leftists that they set unrealistically high standard for voluntary organizations that would never be met by government, if similarly scrutinized? (Or their compatriots for that matter: what have feminist done to “change the social structures that create poverty”?)

    1. Yes. Leftist are totalitarian. They think any organization that doesn’t promote their ideology must either change to do so or be destroyed. Commitment to abortion is part of the ideology. Therefore, the Catholic church is not allowed to object to it.

    2. From the URL, with underscores removed so as to placate the server squirrels:

      pope francis on abortion ladies he will let you down.html

      I would have thought he was a Cardinal, not a Cleveland Brown.

  23. From Not Always Learning: The Ugliest Person in the Room
    (I work out at my college’s student recreation center, which has a VERY strict sexual harassment policy. One complaint against you and you are banned for a year with no exceptions. There is one female student who works out there and has made about a dozen claims against male students; all of them have claimed they only talked to her. I have just been assigned to a group project working with her.)

    Don’t know if the story is true, but it does seem to follow what I’ve read frequently here at Reason about the kangaroo court nature of collegiate punishment.

    1. The story at the link seems fake. The evil people don’t reveal themselves so easily.

      1. Because college students are always discreet?

    2. The heckler’s veto writ large.

  24. Progtard tries to explain why progressive populism is good, Tea Party populism is bad

    The biggest question is who they get angry at. The goal of the right wing is to make them angry at the other people struggling to make it.

    Populist progressives also want to stir people’s anger at the fact that times are tough, but in combining hope and intelligent solutions with that anger, are creating something constructive in the body politic.
    There is no rocket science to all this. Tough times and massive concentrations of wealth and power at the top tend to stir up progressive passion. And when you have an effective spokesperson with a powerful brand like Elizabeth Warren, a lot of people will get excited about pushing progressive ideas and candidates.

    The contrast between tea party extremism and populist progressives could not be more telling. Both are based in part on the anger tough times stir up, but these two movements are moving in opposite directions. Tea Party conservatism is out of control and out of ideas, spiraling down the drain and trying to destroy everything in its path. The progressive movement is on the rise, fueled by ideas and excitement about how we build something, namely a strong prosperous middle class that is growing again as wages rise and concentrations of wealth and power are broken up.

    1. Everyone is allowed free speech and association as long as they use that freedom properly. Who could argue with that?

      God these people are grotesque.

      1. And pathetic. He honestly thinks Elizabeth Warren is a powerful figure that can make America progressive.

        She’s the most unabashedly authoritarian Senator in Congress.

        1. And she is the most uncharismatic, unremarkable and ineffective Senator there is. Even the Massachusetts Dems admit that she is pretty much a joke. The Democrats control the Senate and she still hasn’t managed to author a single successful bill.

          I don’t think the GOP is living well enough to see the Dems nominate that idiot school marm in 2016. She makes Hillary look dynamic and charming.

          1. Pretty much. Scott Brown consistently had higher approval ratings then she does…and in the bluest state in the country.

        2. Not voting for Scott Brown was a sinful mistake of any Mass libertarian, but has Warren done anything dangerous? Seems all quiet on that front.

    2. And when you have an effective spokesperson with a powerful brand like Elizabeth Warren…

      Your brand isn’t as powerful as you think it is, and your spokesperson is openly mocked?

  25. Even more feminist circular logic:

    In summary:

    You’re a misogynistic organization if no women are speaking on your panel. If you asked women and they didn’t want to attend, then it’s obviously because you’re a misogynistic organization.

    1. Oh yeah, here’s what got their granny panties in a twist:

      I am a fanatical, misandristic ‘feminist’. May I drone on about the lack of women in the line-up and despatch abusive, bigoted, mis-spelt, ungrammatical missives to the organisers and presenters?

      No. Please save your talents for Twitter and Facebook, that is what they are for.

      We’re actually very disappointed that none of our female invitees accepted, but that is just how it was. As scientists we have no choice but to accept reality. Wanting something to be otherwise does not make it so.

      1. The thing that makes me laugh the most bitterly about all this is that an event which is ostensibly supposed to be about science and skepticism and understanding things is trying to deflect criticize by seriously claiming (“As scientists we have no choice but to accept reality. Wanting something to be otherwise does not make it so.”) that scientists are helpless in the face of magical forces they cannot hope to comprehend, and that they are utterly unable to effect a change in the world, nor can they study and understand the causes of things in order to alter that which is into that which is desired.

        I don’t think she understands what science is.

    2. Can they supply binders full of potential female speakers so we know who to invite? Or do I have to call Mitt?

      1. Nope, apparently doing exactly what they say they want opens you up to ridicule. Just like dating.

  26. Drunk cop t-bones car and kills the occupant. No charges are filed yet.

    FTA: He says investigators are waiting for toxicology test results from both the officer and the victim, and that the State Police are retrieving vehicle data from the officer’s car.

    Ramsey says the case is being treated like any other and will be turned over to the district attorney if charges are warranted.

    Yes, because they always wait until all the facts are in before arresting a drunk civilian that kills somebody while behind the wheel.

    Also FTA: Action News is not naming the officer because he has not been charged with anything yet. But sources say his blood alcohol level was over the limit.

    Yes, they never, ever name suspects in crimes until they are officially charged. Nope, not ever.

    1. Why are they waiting on toxicology test results from the victim? Why did they test toxicology on the victim?

      1. Because they desperately want an excuse to blame someone other than the cop?

        Remember those high schoolers killed by a speeding cop in PA? Even thought he cop was going 100mph, the union said it was the girls fault because they were out late on a school night.

      2. It’s not because they would use it as a get out of jail free card for the accusedly drunken officer. They’re just being? thorough. Yes, that’s it.

    2. Oh god, why did I click on it?

      The story is nothing less than a compound tragedy for everyone involved.

      The respected officer may soon be facing criminal charges after the accident, which happened just days after he buried his ex-wife.

      That is the second and third paragraph. That poor officer! His career might now be damaged due to the insensitivity of the man he drunkenly murdered.

      1. It gets worse.

        The officer and his ex-wife had three children who’ve lost their mother and whose father is now facing the possibility of a long jail term.

        On the other hand,

        Sources say he was with a young female friend who later ended up in his car but was not injured in the accident.

        So he was drunk and out with a young lady two days after his wife’s funeral, but we have to go easy on him because his children already lost their mother, so what kind of monster would take their father away now?

        1. So hookers are “young ladies” when accompanied by cops, huh?

          1. “Young female friends.”

  27. Calling something I don’t like a “legal loophole” means never having to say I’m sorry, feminist edition:

    Right now, there aren’t really any criminal penalties for jerks who feel entitled to shame and harass women for the sin of choosing not to date them any longer. California, however, is finally taking steps to close this legal loophole, passing a law criminalizing revenge porn. Unfortunately, it doesn’t go far enough:


    The problem with this law is that it doesn’t address nude selfies, which can be extracted by controlling boyfriends with emotional manipulation. As one victim, Marianna Taschinger, explained, her much-older boyfriend allegedly browbeat her into providing the selfies. “He said if I didn’t want to send them to him, that meant that I didn’t trust him, which meant that I didn’t love him.”

    That poor, shattered psyche! How can anyone be expected to withstand the mental abuse that your average 6-year old subjects his parents to when they don’t take him out to ice cream?!

    Remember kids: the only thing that women can consent to vis a vis her reproduction is a pair of scissors in her kid’s brain. Consenting to anything else utterly vexes the poor dears.

    1. I do love feminist’s reliance on manipulation. One one hand women are supposed to be these strong independent creatures which are no different than men. On the other hand women are weak defenseless creatures uniquely vulnerable to emotional manipulation that doesn’t seem to work the other way towards men.

      Well which one is it?

      1. Either one. Or even different amounts of both at the same time, depending on how they feel.

        Aren’t you paying attention?

  28. Krugman doubles down on stupid:

    I don’t want to pretend to spurious precision here. Instead, I just want to make the point that given what we know and have learned about macro these past five years ? and given the modest recovery that has taken place ? we’re now at a point where, to repeat, to a first approximation the depressed state of the economy is entirely due to destructive fiscal policy.

    The austerians have a lot to answer for.

    1. Nothing says austerity like running nearly a trillion dollar deficit year after year. He is not stupid. He knows better. He is just craven and evil. He loves the adoration of stupid people and knows just what he needs to say to get it.

      1. Nearly a trillion? It was $1.5T-$1.1T for the first 4 years of Obama’s presidency.

    2. I guess that in the lefty mind, just as reducing a future spending increase from 5% to 4% counts as a “cut” (if not a “draconian cut”), the massive spending increases under Obama can count as “austerity.”

    3. Has anyone ever seen Tony and Krugman in the same place at the same time?

    4. Krugman is such a great economist that he has made enough money on his own predictions to bail out (or buy out) the US Government, right? No? Then STFU. I’m telling every economist, even the ones I agree with, to post specific, falsifiable predictions about the future state of the economy or STFU.

      1. I’m telling every economist, even the ones I agree with, to post specific, falsifiable predictions about the future state of the economy or STFU.

        No economist worth listening to would ever do such a thing. There are far too many variables in play. The only correct responses to a question on economics predictions are:
        1)Supply and demand.
        2)It depends.
        3)We’ll know more when we get the revised numbers.

      2. post specific, falsifiable predictions about the future state of the economy

        I don’t think you understand what economics is.

      3. That’s cute, you think economics is an actual science capable of such.

        1. No, I have just decided that my opinion is just as valid if there’s no fucking science involved.

  29. James Taranto on Tony Blair’s take on the upcoming IPCC report:

    Manbearpig may be super serial, but the key Blair phrase is “serious people.” Perhaps you recognize the logical fallacy. If not, here’s a hint: Although Tony Blair was born in Edinburgh, his father was English and his mother was Irish.

    1. When the NYT is posting things about the underperforming, giant, unlicensed fusion reactor in the sky, maybe it has some effect on the flat temperatures… Nah.

  30. Cops make sure a man is intimidated and wrongfully convicted of carjacking, landing him in jail for life by selectively editing his interrogation. Now that that has been proven to be bullshit, the man is being released.

    Nobody in the department is to be held accountable.

    Seriously, I have no idea how I would react to being set up and losing four years of my liberty. I can assure you there would be some retribution though.

    1. 1. Very very bad move by police to edit the interrogation.

      2. They edited out their own statements which used threatening and racist language, but thete’s no mention that they selectively edited the accused’s words to make him appear guilty.

      3. The defense either wasn’t given the unedited recording or didn’t bother to notice the threats made by the interrogators.

      A collossal fuckup by several parties.

      1. There is the obvious exculpatory DNA evidence which shows he didn’t commit the crime, so why wasn’t that considered in the original trial? Was the defense denied access to it?

      2. Right, totally not a malicious attempt to intimidate a suspect at all, just a bad move. And it’s not the cops’ fault, because really, aren’t we all to blame here?

      3. 1. No shit, but it’s not like they’ll be held personally responsible for their intentional deception.

        2. If they edited their own statements, they should be fucked. End of story.

        3. Care to wager a guess which one happened?

        I’m sorry, but unless the defense was given the unedited tape, they can’t be accused of “fucking up”. This bullshit is all on the criminal actions of the police officers involved in the interrogation, the DA involved in discovery and the custodians of evidence. And it’s criminal to do so but these fine upstanding officers have been able to go on their merry way while this man was put in a fucking cage for 4 years.

        1. You misunderstood me. I am not apologizing at all for the cops in this case.

          1. Oh, I didn’t think you were defending the pigs. I was just remarking on what you said.

            1. Sloopy is this your new libertarian rest home?


  31. You know Amanduh’s extra chromosome has been acting up when the usual screechings about quashing freedom of conscience aren’t the dumbest thing in her article…

    For anyone who would like to believe that employers would only use the religious exception to deprive their employees of very specific health benefits like contraception, think again. Already there’s an attempt to cite religion as an excuse for union-busting. As reported by Ian Millhiser at ThinkProgress, Duquesne University of Pennsylvania is fighting an attempt by United Steelworkers to unionize adjunct faculty at the school


    1. The steelworkers union has nearly run out of steel mills to ruin, so they are moving on to nearby universities.

    2. Based on my experiences working at a USWA plant, if the USWA ever tried to unionize a business I owned, I would liquidate the business. IF they unionized a place I worked at, I’d quit and go someplace else, even if the pay was lower.

      That union is scum. No, calling the USWA scum is insulting to scum. They are pieces of excrement that are so awful that not even Sugarfree would use them in a piece of fanfic.

      1. …wow that’s strong.

        1. Strong but, if my dad’s experience with PR’s unions are any indication, 110% on the money.

      2. And of course their president, Leo Gerard, is a regular writer for HuffPo.

        1. I seem to remember that asshole for his antics during the LTV Steel bankrupcy.

          One lovely thing he would do:
          1) IF the company floated an idea to cut costs to the court without the union knowing about it beforehand he’d scream bloody murder and file motions to block the move on the ground the union wasn’t consulted.

          2) IF the company told him before they publicly disclosed the idea, he’d go crying to Kucinich and the media about the company’s secret plan to fuck over the workers and request an injuction banning the effort.

          3) If the company told him and notified the media, he’d go crying to Kucinich and the media about the blindsiding him with a plan to fuck over the workers and request an injuction banning the effort.

          The sad bit was a letter to an editor by one of the young 35 year old workers asking the Union to allow the company to cut its fucking costs so that he could continue to feed his family. They didn’t give a shit. The USWA was quite happy to allow LTV to go under and send their workers to the projects rather than risk giving US Steel, Bethlehem et al negotiating leverage that would shrink the money being sent to USWA coffers from all the integrated mills.

          I hope he gets anally raped by a rabid porcupine with tetanus.

      3. I work for a company that has several workforces at different plants represented by USWA. There are plenty of stories to tell but once I went to a control room to talk to the operator (who happened to be the shop steward), who, when I walked in, was on his personal cell phone talking to another union employee (who was just injured in a non-work-related motorcycle accident) about how to claim worker’s comp and disability for certain of his injuries. I was aghast.

  32. Tha fuck?

    Wow, that is certainly a hilarious routine, Mr. Ferrell! No doubt based on the many times you have been afraid for your job because you couldn’t get child care! Because you knew that if you showed up less-than-perfectly groomed, your boss might chide you for being “unprofessional”! Because even if you can bring your kids to work, you know that you’ll be judged “unfocused” for it! And if you’re super-duper lucky, you’ll be the subject of pitying/disapproving remarks about how you really shouldn’t have even had those children if you can’t magically provide for them without it interfering with your availability to work! How irresponsible of you.

    Oh, no, WAIT. Your routine is definitely not based on those experiences. Because you are pretty completely insulated from them based on your class and gender! HOW NEAT FOR YOU!

    The outrage machine must be fed, even if it doesn’t even make any damn sense.

    1. Holy shit, the comments are pure unadulterated crazy.

      “I also suspect that Helen Mirren and Maggie Smith were chosen for the joke because it was imagined (by whomever wrote the joke) that it would be immediately taken as absurd that either Helen Mirren or Maggie Smith would present at the Emmys, the focus of which is television rather than film.

      Which elides the fact that Maggie Smith is currently on one of the most popular television series, Downton Abbey.

      So in the suggestion they’re “too good” for television, Maggie Smith’s highly-celebrated role on a current television series was totally disappeared.

      But, hey, I hear it’s a SHOW FOR LADIES, so I wouldn’t expect the men who run the Emmys to know about it.”

      1. “FWIW, Ferrell is also a fan of treating rape and murder as punchlines. While making fun of environmentalists. :/

        ETA. Which, by the way, I note not to suggest you shouldn’t like him, but just as a warning, in case you (or anyone else) has triggers around violence. He’s not a “safe” comedian, so I want people to be able to approach his stuff with that information.”

        1. Anchorman is just Ferrell being himself, right?

    2. SmellieJ 35 minutes ago in reply to PixiesaurusRex
      Has it not been considered possible that he was trying to draw attention to the plight of these people, and actually poking fun at those who would ignore or degrade them?!! Think about it people.

      Like Reply

      hallelujah_hippo Moderator 5 minutes ago in reply to SmellieJ
      Whatever the intent was, the result was a joke the appeared to make fun of the working poor with a side of misogyny thrown in. A joke that is indistinguishable from the behavior it may (or may not) be intended to call out is still a failure.

      Intent is not magic.

      Additionally, admonishing people here to ‘think about’ something, when they clearly already have (hence, having commented on it) is not engaging in good faith.

      1 person liked this. Like Reply

      When defending your well-developed sense of outrage, “intent is not magic.” Irony?

      1. Q: How many feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?

        A: THAT’S NOT FUNNY!!

      2. If you read the whole context of the joke, their outrage falls under pure crazyville:

        Ferrell, 46, jokingly explained that Helen Mirren and Maggie Smith had dropped out of their presenting duties “literally 45 minutes ago” and the actor had to bring the kids along because he “couldn’t find child care, OK?”

        “We had a soccer game, there was a neighbor’s birthday party, a nut allergy,” he listed off. “I didn’t have time to do my hair! It doesn’t matter, it’s great to be here.”

        How the fuckity fuck they got making fun of (or bring attention to the plight of) the working poor out of not being able to find a babysitter at the last second is fucking beyond me.

    3. Because men can’t be active parents? So a man rearing children, or even just having them around, is misogynistic now? I guess it’s foolish to try to look at their complaints logically. I believe that’s the center of crazy on the internet.

    4. The Emmy’s are the Cleveland Browns of awards shows.

      That is all.

    5. Liss and I are debating on Twitter whether it’s the “sophistication” or the “edginess” we just don’t get. Being humorless feminists, and all.

      Social media DOES breed retardation!

  33. OK, I’m rapidly becoming convinced that 19th-century colonial administrators had more respect for the intelligence of aboriginals than Marcotte does for other womens’ intelligence…

    In a different study about how men and women use park space, city planners found that changing the infrastructure can help dissuade more direct forms of oppression aimed at the female half of the species, at least when it comes to girls.

    The study, which took place from 1996 to 1997, showed that after the age of nine, the number of girls in public parks dropped off dramatically, while the number of boys held steady. Researchers found that girls were less assertive than boys. If boys and girls [wound] up in competition for park space, the boys were more likely to win out.

    The planners responded by redesigning two parks to create more discrete sections, instead of simply wide open spaces, so that the girls who were feeling bullied and pushed around by the boys could just go to a different part of the park. The plan worked, and girls immediately started using the parks more.

  34. Why the poor don’t work, or how misogynists keep women at home.

    Is it not good news that the only poor people are the sick, the old, people in school, and those who choose family over work?

  35. Gun activist faces $263 fine for bringing a live chicken to a gun rights protest

    APPLETON, Wis. — When Mark Scheffler was asked to leave a gun protest, along with his brown hen named Winchester, on Saturday, it was precisely the point he wanted to make at the popular gathering.

    Chickens are far safer than firearms and laws allowing for open carry need to change, said Scheffler of Appleton.

    “Carrying a loaded assault weapon in downtown Appleton, the fine is zero dollars,” he said. “The fine for carrying a loaded chicken ? and she is loaded ? is $263.50.”
    Appleton’s farm market was thrust into the national conversation on Second Amendment rights two weeks ago as Charles Branstrom and Ross Bauman walked along the street with AR-15 rifles on their backs.
    Police received three 911 calls Sept. 7 about the men as they walked with the rifles. They claimed they were carrying the guns for self-defense. Officers drew their guns, briefly handcuffed the men and checked identification and paperwork.

    They weren’t arrested or fined. Branstrom recorded the incident and posted it to YouTube. Soon, Internet discussion groups lit up, and many claimed police violated their constitutional rights.

    I don’t think carrying either should be illegal.

  36. It’s a bummer to find out that Playboy is not behind a funny article with insights like, “Rape is kryptonite to sexual pleasure.”

    And they say feminists don’t have a sense of humor! If peals of laughter aren’t escaping from your lips at this very moment like a spayed dog from a PETA shelter, you just might be a rapist.

    Bonus derp:

    overall the guide actually fits quite nicely into the long-standing Playboy tradition of both celebrating all things sex while maintaining an air of dignified intelligence. This is probably why so many smart people actually thought it was real.

    “So many smart people” = the lesbian wymyn’s studies major on welfare disability who posts on Jezebel and lives with 38 cats

    1. Link:…..sh_it.html

      1. I posted this the other day with a feministing link. The author was amazed that most people didn’t find this controversial. They assume that any that doesn’t’ agree with their CCC bullshit is a rapist. When they see this, they thing CCC. When a normal person sees this, they thing “consent”.

        1. Did you break your “k” button?

          1. Just got so used to not having preview, I forgot to use it.

        2. Yes, exactly. “Rape culture” simply cannot meaningfully be proved to exist nor is it useful as a concept.

          I used to give feminists a slight pass when they referred to a “rape culture” in the historical sense, but TBH that is bullshit as well: there are things like wartime rape being accepted among ancient peoples, but they were really the result of in-group out-group thinking and not “rape culture”: treatment of POWs and captured male civilians was equally horrific and brutality towards such equally casual.

          I defy anyone to find any culture which could honestly be described as a “rape culture”. (I don’t like modern Islamic-inspired cultures, but they are not “rape cultures”.)

          1. My argument (which cost me a Facebook friendship with a feminist) is that it’s absurd to call something a “culture” when the vast majority of people in the culture disapprove of it, and it’s illegal, and nobody wants to make it legal. There might be a “rape subculture,” but that’s it.

          2. I think cultures where it is expected of 8 year old girls to have sex with their “husbands” can be accurately described as “rape cultures”

            1. Yes, but they’re not Rape-rape cultures.

              -Whoopi Goldberg

  37. It’s hard to hate Rand Paul

    What separates Paul from many of his tea-party peers is his meticulous insistence on blaming Republicans and Democrats alike for the outrages he finds in every tentacle of the federal Leviathan. He also takes a moderate rhetorical tone, far removed from that of the other right-wing politicians, Fox News talking heads, and radio bloviators who share his views. “I believe no one has the right to pollute another person’s property, and if it occurs the polluter should be made to pay for cleanup and damages,” he writes in one typical passage. “I am not against all regulation. I am against overzealous regulation.” There’s no “Don’t Tread on Me” overkill in his public preachments. He harbors no impeachment fantasies and not so much as a scintilla of Obama hatred even as he leads the charge against what he sees as the oppressive government nightmare of Obamacare. This has been the case from the start. When Paul began running for the Senate, it was during the red-hot tea-party year of 2009, with its tsunami of raucous town-hall meetings and death threats to the president. Though the liberal editorial page of the Louisville Courier-Journal was dismissive of his views during his Senate race, it went out of its way to observe that the man himself was “neither an angry nor resentful person” and was instead “thoughtful and witty in an elfin sort of way.”

    1. Death threats to the president? I don’t recall that one.

      1. They just rewrite their own history. I would bet you money that Rich honestly believes that someone yelled a racial slur during the one tea party rally. The fact that Breitbart offered cash money for anyone who had proof and every tape available shows it didn’t happen, doesn’t matter. For people like Rich, the enemy being racist and evil and an article of faith. If they ever gave up on that, they would have to actually take the other side’s arguments seriously. And Rich certainly doesn’t want to do that.

        1. Well, of course he does. The meat of the article is right here:

          Though he has been at or near the top of near-meaningless early primary polling, he is nonetheless a long shot to ascend to the top of the GOP ticket, let alone to the White House. And a good thing too: A Paul presidency would be a misfortune for the majority of Americans who would be devastated by his regime of minimalist government.

          It’s an article written to provide some rhetorical justification for leftists to acknowledge the obvious fact that Rand Paul is highly intelligent (for a politician) and non-conspiratorial, without actually having to examine the substance of what he is saying.

        2. Of course there’s a huge media double standard on this. If someone had an offensive sign or t-shirt at a Tea Party rally, it “proves” that Tea Partiers are all racists. But an Occupy rally can be organized by Communists and be filled with communist signs, but somehow, in those cases, there’s really no connection.

    2. It’s hard to hate Rand Paul, so here are some pointers because we are going to tell you to hate him with all your heart and soul for a few months in ’16.

  38. I dare someone to wade into the Daily Kos comments on the Filibuster.
    I triple dog dare you!

    1. Sorry, I don’t feel like drinking myself to death this evening.

    2. A left-leaning friend is giving me a running commentary on it. Apparently it’s so fake he pre-negotiated it with harry reid. his communication director leaking this information was a hilarious burn.

  39. From the OP:

    Though he has been at or near the top of near-meaningless early primary polling, he is nonetheless a long shot to ascend to the top of the GOP ticket, let alone to the White House. And a good thing too: A Paul presidency would be a misfortune for the majority of Americans who would be devastated by his regime of minimalist government.

    We don’t want to miss sight of what is truly important, comrade: affirming the role of Father Government.

    1. When you read things like this, it is like reading the old Soviet pravda. The author usually means exactly the opposite of what the words say. In this case, the fact that Rich goes so out of his way to dismiss Paul’s chances, tells you they are very afraid of him. Rich is a hack who writes propaganda for the faithful. The faithful are being told to dismiss Paul so they won’t fear him or get discouraged.

  40. An appeals court in Minnesota upholds the right of a Rastafarian teen to carry a cannabis pipe, as part of the free exercise of his religion.


  41. Australia is starting to come to their collective senses:

    A strong cold wind of reform is sweeping around Australia:

    PROFESSOR Tim Flannery has been sacked by the Abbott Government from his $180,000 a year part time Chief Climate Commissioner position with the agency he runs to be dismantled immediately.

    Environment Minister Greg Hunt called Prof Flannery this morning to tell him a letter formally ending his employment was in the mail.

    In the letter, Mr Hunt tells Prof Flannery:

    “The Climate Commission does not have an ongoing role, and consequently I am writing to advise you that the Climate Commission has been dissolved, with effect from the date of this letter.”

  42. Lech Walesa wants the German occupation back:

    “We need to expand economic and defence co-operation and other structures to create one state from Poland and Germany in Europe,” he said.

    Plus Poland is going broke, and this way the Germans can bail them out.

    1. “Prussians are Slavs who forgot where they came from.”

  43. Yet another study confirms some PUA observations:

    “It’s well known that testosterone is linked to aggression and competitiveness,” lead author Jon Maner, a Florida State University psychologist, told Discovery News. “Based on our testosterone findings, one could speculate that women exposed to the scent of ovulation might become more antagonistic or competitive.”

    For the study, published in the latest issue of the journal Evolution and Human Behavior, Maner and co-author James McNulty measured the testosterone levels of women before and after they smelled t-shirts that were previously worn by other women aged 18-21. The latter group wore the shirts when they were at high fertility — days 13, 14 and 15 of the menstrual cycle — and at low fertility- days 20, 21 and 22.

    1. Somewhat related, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if pheromones contributed to increased pregnancies, i.e. in an office where several women become pregnant in a short space of time, joking about something in the water. If we recall that humans until quite recently lived in small bands threatened by starvation, successful pregnancies could signal that there were sufficient resources available in the area/for the tribe.

  44. Is Marco Rubio now filibustering Ted Cruz?

    1. And Rubio is finally done.

      1. Finally? It only took him 2 years.

  45. I’ll just leave this here:…..04135.html

    1. Nate, hide un-public your email address for a bit until the squirrels let go of Reasonable…pretty please. The public emails are causing the wide history box problem.

      1. Taken care of.

        Damn squirrelz.

    2. So as the data slips outside the 2 SD range of the models, and has been continually on the low side, we’re going to claim that 19 of the next 20 measures will be inside the 2 SD range? Because I do fucking well know what standard deviations from a normal distribution mean.

  46. Florida Man attempts to pay water bill with coke:…..-1.1465862

    1. And yes, you all know that she is, in fact, wearing a Buckeyes onesie in that picture.

      1. That is a cute baby, but I’ve been informed that 100% of my assets are now allocated. Maybe 200%. I hope Liberty gets a pretty middle name.

  47. Craig James, one of the biggest dickheads in sports because of what he did with the Texas Tech situation while on the air for ESPN, finally gets what’s coming to him even if it’s for the wrong reason.

    Seriously, fuck that assclown for calling out Texas Tech for treating his son like the petulant dickhead he was. And fuck him for being a helicopter parent demanding an athletic department do “the right thing” when he was part of the Pony Express scandal at SMU.

    1. Yeah. I can’t say I’m sorry Nemesis delivered.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.