Twitter Sings Happy Song with IPO, Telecoms Paid by CIA for Data Collection, Toronto's Rob Ford Becoming Household Name: P.M. Links

|

  • Buy Twitter Stock #ThreeWordInvestmentTips
    Credit: shareski / Foter.com / CC BY-NC

    Twitter's initial public offering today is a far cry from Facebook's first-day disaster. It initially offered stocks at $26 a share, but its first trade came in at more than $45 a share.

  • Wondering why telecom companies aren't objecting to handing over data to the feds? Money, of course. The CIA is paying AT&T more than $10 million a year for their assistance.
  • 250,000 Colorado residents will lose their current insurance coverage thanks to Obamacare.
  • Toronto Mayor Rob Ford continues his public transformation character into a Saturday Night Live character with a hilarious but also angry and violent rant that was secretly recorded and recently distributed.
  • Fearing (probably correctly) that New York City's new mayor will drop the appeals against the implementation of stop-and-frisk reforms, police unions are asking permission to intervene and keep the challenge going.
  • Iranian officials say they're being offered some relief from their crippling sanctions from Europe and America for their cooperation with efforts to scale back the country's nuclear ambitions.

Get Reason.com 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.

Advertisement

NEXT: Prosecutors Ask for Two Life Terms for Whitey Bulger

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. 250,000 Colorado residents will lose their current insurance coverage thanks to Obamacare.

    It was centrally determined that those 250,000 people didn’t like their plans.

    1. I was told today on Derpbook that white men like me having to pay more is an acceptable cost to provide healthcare for the children.

      1. And yeah, they actually said white men.

        1. Sorry, not racist. You aren’t the right color for that statement to be racist.

          1. RACISM = POWER + OPPRESSION

            YOU CANNOT BE RACIST AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE
            YOU CANNOT BE RACIST AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE
            YOU CANNOT BE RACIST AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE

            1. Obama is the President of the United States of America..

              Can he be racist against white people?

              1. Ha, once I told a lefty friend that NPR was insufficiently critical of Obama, one of the most powerful men in the country…

                He cut me off, insisting the Koch brothers are more powerful.

          2. The funny thing is, idea that only white people can be racist is itself racist.

            1. You’re a racist simply for questioning the racism doctrine.

              1. They are the Knights Who Say “Racist!”

      2. Unless you have children, in which case FYTW.

    2. If you’re losing a plan you liked, you only thought you liked it. Fortunately, the great Obama can tell the difference between plans you like and plans you only think you like. By doing away with the second kind, he’s actually helping you, and hoping you’ll change.

      1. I was told almost that exact thing as well.

        Poe’s Law strikes again.

      2. I’m not a Marxist. I don’t suffer from false consciousness.

      3. Men who like plans that don’t cover things like women’s birth control are stupid and don’t deserve to keep them anyway.

        -Typical left wing dickhead

    3. And, on queue, the Republicans bring abortion restrictions back to the forefront. Tweedledum and Tweedledummer.

      1. If the Inner Party is in trouble, the Outer Party must do what it can to help.

    4. It’s okay. Four people have been able to sign up for Obamacare in Maryland. All is well.

      Weigel is all over it:

      The AP broke the news yesterday: In a month and change, my home state of Delaware saw four signups for Obamacare. What went unreported, because nobody cared: My younger brother appears to have been one of the four.

      Fucking pathetic.

  2. The CIA is paying AT&T more than $10 million a year for their assistance.

    See? They’re not all about coercion and drug running.

    1. “Assistance”?

      1. Directory Assistance … and you thought it only cost $0.10/call.

  3. 250,000 Colorado residents will lose their current insurance coverage thanks to Obamacare.

    But they can take comfort in marijuana as the president as promised “if you like your legalized pot, you can keep it.”

  4. Oh China, don’t use fanart for movie posters. Or do. I’m torn on this one.

    1. No bueno.

    2. My woman was incredibly pissed that there was only one scene of shirtless Thor in the first one. I mean, really, what the fuck were they thinking.

    3. THEY’RE BROTHERS. But they don’t call it Asgard for nothing.

      1. Don’t forget the Rainbow Bridge.

    4. At least it is honest.

  5. …police unions are asking permission to intervene and keep the challenge going.

    For, um, officer safety?

  6. Toronto Mayor Rob Ford continues his public transformation character into a Saturday Night Live character with a hilarious but also angry and violent rant that was secretly recorded and recently distributed.

    Has anyone actually seen Mike Myers in recent years? Hmm….

    1. It’s Martin Short in a fat suit.

      1. It’s Chris Christie in a skinny suit.

        I still say he looks like Brian Dennehy’s pussified cousin. What a laughriot, though!

        1. Now I have an image of Chris Christie in spanx. Where’s the brain bleach?!

      2. It’s Martin Short in a fat suit.

        Did you see a picture of Ford? It should be obvious that Chris Farraley pulled an Andy Kaufman.

    2. Didn’t Rob Ford just get suspended from the Dolphin’s O-Line?

      1. No, it was that dude that never looks like himself – he always looks like….someone else…

        1. He looks like he’s 12 in some pictures.

        2. There’s a word for that. Something about blending in with the background and not standing out.

          1. yeah – it’s like a thing – a meme or something

            1. DOPPLEGANGER!!!

  7. Iranian officials say they’re being offered some relief from their crippling sanctions from Europe and America…

    All they have to do is go to this website and sign up…

  8. This Week in Derp:

    So I had a prog tell me that wanting to repeal ineffective gun laws is no different than wanting to legalize murder. I pointed out that this could be used to argue against the repeal of any law, like so:
    A: I think X should be legal.
    B: Well, why not legalize murder?

    This is a textbook case of the slippery slope fallacy. Anyone who says this is basically saying that no law should ever be repealed.

    I’ve has always been fascinated by poor thinking and the people who engage in it. Every time I talk to them, I get the strong impression that they have spent very little if any time examining their own beliefs or those of others. And yet these are the very same people who are so sure of everything!

    Why do they do it? I think fanatics get and emotional high from demonizing their enemies as well as a distraction from looking at their own beliefs. Since it’s all emotional, facts and logic have no effect on them.

    1. This is the feeling I got arguing with progressives in law school. I went to law school with a lot of people who were smarter than me, but when it came to political issues, all they relied on were feelings.

      1. So far—even though i’m only 3/4 of a semester into law school—the curriculum seems like a bunch of feelings. The “reasonable person”? Just the jury’s feelings. “Policy considerations?” Feelings considerations.

        1. This has been posted before, but it’s worth repeating: The Myth of the Rule of Law:

          http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj…..ythWeb.htm

        2. Just wait until you get to con law. That’s when the feelings really start flowing.

    2. It’s because it’s their identity. You don’t question who you are, you just are that.

      It would be like me questioning whether I’m white or not.

    3. Why do they you do it?

      Seriously, why do you talk to these little, fucking totalitarians? There’s no upside, except drinking more.

      1. It’s fun to back then into a corner and watch them reel from the blow of fact after fact. Some prog told me that it would be cool to see a libertarian colony somewhere. I said there was- It was called the United States.

        1. I hear you, that used to be me, too. But now, I could care less.

          Life’s too short to waste it on these those flaming turds.

          1. Yeah. I’m going to get some beer and a nice pulled pork sandwich.

            “The driving dream of the idealist is that if he could only explain things to enough people, carefully enough, thoroughly enough, thoughtfully enough?why, eventually everyone would see, and then everything would be fixed.”

            -Michael Kelly

        2. I use this line a lot too when guns come up:

          “Why don’t you crazy gun freaks start your own country?”
          “We did. Who let you in?”

    4. Narcissism.

  9. We should all pee sitting down because science.

    The best way to avoid unwanted urine splash seems to be sitting on the toilet, a technique that has been advocated by certain restaurants, Taiwan’s Environmental Protection Administration minister, and one Swedish politician, and shouted down by many corners of the Internet. You’re about five times farther from the bowl when you stand as when you sit, creating a bigger splash, but if standing to pee is essential to your manhood, Hurd says that you can also switch the “angle of attack,” so to speak. Smaller angle between stream and toilet water, less splatter. Even better, hit the porcelain instead of the water, which Hurd says makes the process “a lot less chaotic.”

    1. and quieter.
      I DONT WANT TO HEAR YOU PEE

      1. … making you something of an oddball w.r.t this commentariat.

      2. Just a random thought, but do some guys purposely use the stall so they can pee into the water and make noise? It’s like they are trying to prove their manhood by making it known to everyone in the bathroom how loud and how long they go.

        1. Instant Poll!
          Me? No. You are less likely to get splash back from a toilet in the stall. I wear flip flops a lot, and therefore do not appreciate splash back.

          1. You know, after that thread a few weeks ago on things foreigners find odd about America, it sounds like we need a urinal redesign.

            1. Catheters for all!

            2. Floor length urinals are awesome IMO.

              1. Wouldn’t they create the most splash back?

              2. I have some rowdy friends who take advantage of those when we are out drinking. If someone is taking too long, they just walk up and start peeing in between the person’s legs. The person can’t move or protest, lest they get peed on…

          2. I aim for the porcelain when I’m in the stall because it’s less noisy, but generally use urinals when available because of the convenience.

        2. Don’t piss in the shitter! Didn’t every locker room have a dirty swirly enforced DPITS rule?

    2. 1st world problems.

      1. So true! Knowing how sanitation is done elsewhere is one thing, living it something else entirely.

    3. Peeing into a toilet standing up is a gracious male concession – they’d rather piss of the front porch and measure how far they could go. Why should they compromise any further?

    4. I would also like to say, fuck all of you short bastards who go into the bathroom and take the last tall urinal, leaving me the shorter one which will inevitably result in some splash back.

    5. I thought toilet bowls were just for the ladies or making number two. I use a tree to relieve myself, and nature never complains about the splash.

      1. So that’s the reason you cannot have trick-or-treaters.

      2. Part of marking my territoryproperty, really.

    6. I didn’t realize splash back was such a problem. Urine washes off, you know. And unless there is something wrong with you, it is pretty sterile.

      1. It’s the people before me that I’m worried about.

        1. And I don’t want to wash my feet in a public restroom.

    7. “Sometimes you just have to pee in the sink.”

      1. My kid tells on me for that.

    8. I like to intimidate and assert my natural superiority over other males without mounting them. So when I’m in the stall, I stand at the edge of the stall wall and piss into the urinal with my arms folded and whistle.

    9. Sitzpinklerwissenschaft.

  10. Embattled Toronto Mayor Rob Ford has apologised for a video of him making threats to commit “first-degree murder” against an unknown person.

    1. The Red Star is overjoyed. When are Canada’s Pulitzer’s happening?

  11. Top Men can criminalize revenge porn without violating the First Amendment

    Free speech advocates worry that revenge porn laws are too broad and vague, and thus risk chilling protected speech. Is there a collision here with the First Amendment? These concerns are real, but not insurmountable. Careful and precise drafting is the key. Revenge porn laws can and should make clear that it is a crime to distribute someone’s sexually explicit images without consent if those images do not concern matters of public importance. Worded that way, a law wouldn’t apply, for example, to the woman who published Anthony Weiner’s crotch shots. Revenge porn laws should also make clear that to win a conviction, prosecutors must show that the poster of the revenge porn intended to do harm. They should only punish the person who distributes sexually explicit photos knowing that the subject expected them to be kept confidential. We don’t want revenge porn statutes to make criminals of teenagers who sext with friends, who then foolishly share them with other friends, without knowing they are breaching someone’s confidence and trust. And statutes may need to require proof that the victim suffered harm, emotional, economic, or otherwise, to ensure that they are not too broad.

    The naivete is cute.

    1. To be sure, the government cannot censor the expression of an idea because society finds it offensive or distasteful. Truthful speech should not be banned because it makes people uncomfortable. But certain categories of speech can be regulated because they bring about serious harm and make only the slightest contribution to free speech.

      No.

      1. Does the 1A say “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, unless the speech brings about serious harm and makes only the slightest contribution to free speech”?

        It doesn’t? Then why does this idiot claim that it does?

        1. But fire in a crowded theater!! or something.

        2. It amazes me how even judges and lawyers can’t think critically about this stuff.

          Yelling fire in a crowded theater is not a crime because of your speech. It is because you caused a stampede. If you had done it by setting off a fire cracker it would be the same crime. At the same time, if it doesn’t cause a stampede, you have not committed a crime. So that example is idiotic. It is not an example of a restraint on speech. It is a restraint on action.

          Now, if you want to make it a crime to intentionally inflict emotional distress on someone, I suppose you could do that and that might make sending revenge porn in some cases result in you committing a crime. But there the crime is inflicting distress not sending the picture. If you send the picture and the chick is into it or there is no evidence she is under emotional distress, it is not a crime.

          You can criminalize an action and thus by implication criminalize speech that is done for the purposes of creating that action. But you cannot criminalize speech in a blanket manner like this.

          Or at least you shouldn’t be able to if judges would read the damned 1st Amendment properly.

          1. Well that and the whole fire in a theater idea was used as a by a fascist to implement fascist restrictions to anti-war speech.

            it isn’t even about a crowded theater. it is about a person saying we should not be at war and some tyrant saying well you can’t yell fire in crowded theater so then it is OK for me to put you in prison for protesting this war I like.

        3. In short, it is a crime to rob someone not say “Give me all your money”.

    2. “Careful and precise drafting is the key”.
      In other words, a good defense attorney can always beat the charges.

    3. Revenge porn laws can and should make clear that it is a crime to distribute someone’s sexually explicit images without consent if those images do not concern matters of public importance.

      You have a right to all the free speech you like, provided the government thinks it is of “public importance”

      The sad fact is that they are not being duplicitous here. They actually believe that you can draft a law like this that won’t be abused. They are really that stupid.

      1. surely there is an argument that revenge porn is of public importance.

        1. Hey, it sure is to those of us you like our porn amateur.

          1. Truly, people should copyright their amateur porn then sue for damages/illegal distribution. If it’s good enough for MPAA and RIAA, it’s good enough for Ted in accounting when his ex GF sends all the nude selfies he took to gay dating sites.

      2. Aren’t there already laws against publishing recognizable pictures of people without their consent? If not, why do photographers bother about model releases?

        1. Not criminal.

    4. This is the Central Scrutinizer.

    5. I’ve been telling my daughters for about two years now that if they ever think it’s a good idea to send a guy a picture of themselves in their underwear or topless or in their birthday suits, they might as well send it to all of his friends first and then post it somewhere public, because that’s where it is going to end up. I’m not especially optimistic that the message will sink in.

      1. Exactly. Whenever I hear about this stuff I always think, did that women have parents? How can anyone grow up in this day and age and not know anything you send to anyone is, if it is interesting enough, going to end up being seen in public. And yes, your boobs are definitely interesting enough.

  12. When Fraud Is Legal
    Under socialism, there’s no such thing as consumer protection.

    …The answer to Alter’s question is that Obama said it both before and after the law was enacted. The famous New York magazine montage features two dozen clips of Obama saying essentially the same thing. The earliest dates from October 2008; the latest, September 2010. So perhaps it is an unrealistic promise that turned into a lie.

    But calling it a “lie” offers Obama another excuse–the one to which Page resorted when he observed dismissively that “that’s one of those political lies.” After all, politicians break promises all the time, and isn’t it a little naive to expect them not to lie?

    It seems to us, however, that this is not just “one of those political lies.” To understand why, let’s try a thought experiment. Enlarge Image

    Suppose BHO Insurance Co. decides it wants to corner its state’s market in automobile coverage. It begins an aggressive ad campaign offering a too-good-to-be-true deal: Sign up with us, and we’ll give you better coverage at lower premiums. We’re so sure you’ll love our deal that if you like the terms of your existing policy, you’ll be able to keep them–GUARANTEED!


    1. The ad campaign, with the company’s charismatic president acting as pitchman, is a smashing success. The competing companies lose so much business that they declare bankruptcy or are acquired by BHO. But BHO’s policies are more expensive, and they include “comprehensive” coverage most customers neither need nor want. Take it or leave it, the company says, reneging on its guarantee in the knowledge that state law requires cars to be insured before they can be driven on public streets.

      You’d call that a bait-and-switch. The legal term is fraud….

      …Consumers and honest businesses need protection from unscrupulous market participants. That is nearly impossible when an industry is owned, or effectively controlled, by the government. To socialize an industry is to put it in a position to regulate itself. It legalizes fraud by recasting it as mere “political lies.”…

    2. Consumers don’t get protection from the government.

      Or, every time you hear somebody being called a “consumer advocate”, think of them as a government advocate and you’ll be closer to the mark.

    1. I smell a Sylvester Stallone sequel…

    2. I’m surprised Sheik didn’t challenge him to a coke off.

      1. Cocaine is a young man’s game.

  13. “Christian college’s student leader ‘comes out’ as atheist

    “…Northwest Christian University is, according to its Web site, a school “that fosters wisdom, faith and service through excellent academic programs within a Christ-centered community. It has 623 enrolled students, 62 percent of them female.

    “Fromm, who won an election to become president of the study body, told the Register-Guard that he decided to make his atheism public because of rumors on campus of his beliefs, and he wanted to clear the air.”

    University administrator Michael Fuller flips out and panics:

    “]Fromm is] “a man of very high character and respect” and “a great advocate for our student body, which is exactly what he’s supposed to be and do.”

    “”We’re an open and welcome community, and we meet students exactly where they’re at.””

    Oops, I mean Fuller took it totally in stride and said nice things about the atheist.

    Oh, well, no story here, I guess…

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..ist/?clsrd

    1. The bad thing is that it is a private college. They could have, as far as I am concerned, kicked the kid out of school for not adhering to the core values of the school. But the WAPO operates under the assumption that would have been outrageous and not allowed.

      1. It appears (and I can be corrected) that it is “historically affiliated” with a church like TCU or SMU are rather than some place like BYU or Bob Jones. It looks like WAPO was looking for a controversy that was never there.

        1. Pretty much.

          1. I mean I doubt anybody would bat an eye if this happened at Georgetown in their own backyard and Georgetown actually is presently affiliated and operated by the Catholic Church.

            1. Yes it is. And frankly the church needs to either step up and make those schools Catholic and adhere to Catholic principles or shut the fuck up because they clearly don’t believe anything they say.

            2. But see this – William Peter Blattie tries to exorcise anti-Catholic elements from Georgetown, or alternatively have them admit they’re not Catholic:

              http://www.ncregister.com/dail…..om-the-ch/

      2. Unless they made it clear up front that believing was a requirement to attend the school, it would be outrageous. It doesn’t sound like he deceived anyone about his beliefs.

        1. Yes. But then it becomes a contract issue.

          1. Sure. And the WaPo was definitely looking for controversy where there was none. That article is utterly pointless.

  14. In case you guys are wondering how Ford became mayor here were his two main opponents:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Smitherman

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Pantalone

    1. So, Torontonians chose a fat drunk over a druggie or a Sicilian.

    2. Joe Pantalone

      most predictable nickname ever

      1. aside from Kevin Martin

  15. The White House effort to blame insurance companies for lost plans
    …During the drafting of the health-care law, insurance companies had wanted to extend the effective date for grandfathered plans until Dec. 31, 2013, which would have meant that few at this moment would be complaining that they had lost a plan they liked. Of course, that would have also meant fewer potential customers for the Obamacare exchanges in the first year.

    Blaming the insurance companies can only go so far. First of all, the administration wrote the rules that set the conditions under which plans lose their grandfathered status. But more important, the law has an effective date so far in the past that it virtually guaranteed that the vast majority of people currently in the individual market would end up with a notice saying they needed to buy insurance on the Obamacare exchanges.

    The administration’s effort to pin the blame on insurance companies is a classic case of misdirection. Between 75 and 95 percent of the problem stems from the effective date, but the White House chooses to keep the focus elsewhere.

    1. I don’t understand why the republicans are trying to fix this right now. Let it burn.

    2. You should read some of the comments. People still want to believe in the sincerity of the semi-black Jesus.

  16. The north Russian region Arkhangelsk has become the first to repeal its local ban on “homosexual propaganda” to minors following two years of enforcement.

    Yay, good news!

    lawmakers in Arkhangelsk believe there is no longer a need for a local law given the recent federal ban, signed into law in June by President Vladimir Putin.

    Sigh. Is it bad that I still kind of like these guys for actively scrubbing their laws to avoid redundancy?

    1. Admit it. You just think they’re hotties.

      1. There are certainly some, but Russians tend to be blond and shovel nosed. They tend to fall lower on my great chain of attraction.

  17. Bizarre asteroid discovered

    A bizarre, never-before-seen asteroid with six comet-like tails has been found in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, and scientists are shocked.

    “I’m trying not to use the word ‘freak,'” said David Jewitt of UCLA and lead author of a paper about the six-tailed asteroid, “but that’s what it is. It is definitely freakish.”

    A NASA release described the asteroid as looking like “a rotating lawn sprinkler” with dust radiating out from it like spokes on a wheel.

    What makes this find especially weird is that asteroids almost never have any kind of tail at all.

    Those dramatic blue tails we see in images from space are generally associated with comets — “dirty snowballs” that originate in the outer regions of our solar system. The tail forms when the comet’s orbit takes it close enough to the sun that the ice in its nucleus melts, releasing dust and gas that trail behind it.

    But asteroids, also known as space rocks, generally originate in the asteroid belt where it is mostly too hot for ice to survive. When they zoom through space, they look like small, moving points of light.

    Stop othering the asteroid!

    1. The Book of Revelations talks about that. (Somewhere in the back.)

    2. There also some crazy meteor showers in SoCal right now. A whole bunch of people called the cops last night about it…

      1. I haven’t seen any myself, but some footage was on the news earlier.

        I think we’re around that time of year where the Leonids start.

        1. I think this one was part of the Taurids. Apparently this has convinced people that we’re all going to die asteroid related deaths.

    3. Its the Black Knight.
      http://greaterancestors.com/wp…..telite.jpg

    1. That doesn’t surprise me at all. Remember to post up the “slew of kids jump in front of subway” followup article when the results are out.

  18. Text: Obama’s Speech on Health Care Reform
    …Published: June 15, 2009

    So let me begin by saying this: I know that there are millions of Americans who are content with their health care coverage ? they like their plan and they value their relationship with their doctor. And that means that no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what. My view is that health care reform should be guided by a simple principle: fix what’s broken and build on what works….

    1. Put this into the politician-to-English feature of Google Translate, and the speech comes out like this:

      “I am a pathological liar, and this speech is strictly for the rubes. When I’m caught in my lie, my defenders will say that nobody should have believed me to begin with, and that you can’t make omelettes without breaking eggs. So suck it!”

  19. Rob Ford may be a crack head but he has enough sense to oppose a plastic bag ban.

  20. Dear Prudence: My girlfriend isn’t an intellectual

    I have now been with my lovely and smart girlfriend for nearly three years and I love her. We started dating as we were nearing graduation at different colleges. She has settled successfully into fashion merchandising, her area of study, while I have struggled to find a footing in a creative field after studying liberal arts. We enjoy each other’s company immensely and I am mostly content. But there is one thing that undermines my full contentment: She is uninterested in pursuing intellectual hobbies and interests outside her work and social life, while I am committed to discovering and pursuing cultural and intellectual stimulation. She has a naturally high intellect, but it would seem she has a lazy mind. She rarely reads anything but online articles, displays no interest in developing an ideological or political viewpoint, and ignores most news. I have encouraged her repeatedly to seek out books, hobbies, and pursuits of more cultural relevancy rather than shopping and being social with friends, but this is met with a shrug. Am I crazy for wanting to raise the bar of my intellectual entanglement as a necessary part of my romantic relationship with this girl? Or have my liberal arts studies and well-adjusted, progressive middle-class background made me a pretentious blowhard? Her family background is one of economic hardship, divorce, and no higher education.

    This has to be a spoof of a progressive.

    1. It’s not a spoof, because he is alert to the possibility that he may be egregiously wrong:

      “Or have my liberal arts studies and well-adjusted, progressive middle-class background made me a pretentious blowhard?”

      A pure progressive would even consider this possibility.

      1. *wouldn’t* even consider…

        1. Division of labor: She earns the money, he does the deep intellectual stuff.

    2. “while I have struggled to find a footing in a creative field after studying liberal arts”

      The correct tern is pseudointellectual.

      1. Damn iphone!

      2. Dear Prudence,

        My girlfriend has a job, productive skills and common sense. How am I supposed to deal with someone like that?

      3. Are you sure this isn’t the correct tern?

        1. More like an albatross. Around her neck.

      4. The correct terM is barista.

    3. Or have my liberal arts studies and well-adjusted, progressive middle-class background made me a pretentious blowhard?

      Is that a rhetorical question?

    4. Or have my liberal arts studies and well-adjusted, progressive middle-class background made me a pretentious blowhard?

      Do I really need to say it? I kinda don’t want to, but at the same time, for idiots like this, if you don’t drop the anvil right on their heads, they won’t get it.

    5. Her family background is one of economic hardship, divorce, and no higher education.

      Lived a hard life, got an education, and now works for a living.

      He doesn’t deserve her. More importantly, she doesn’t deserve his bullshit.

      1. Liberalman’s burden. Fuck him.

    6. She has a naturally high intellect, but it would seem she has a lazy mind. She rarely reads anything but online articles, displays no interest in developing an ideological or political viewpoint, and ignores most news.

      The only thing that would make her perfecter is raging lipstick bisexualism and an attraction and flaming loyalty to older, married and not well-monied men.

      1. Apparently she is attracted to not well-monied men.

        1. One down….[rubs hands and cackles maniacally]

    7. I am committed to discovering and pursuing cultural and intellectual stimulation.

      Gee, it’s too bad his girlfriend’s cultural pursuits are just so beneath him. The only thing he’s not admitting to here is that he’s embarrassed to introduce her to his equally elitist friends.

      1. He sounds like a retarded version of the Sheldon character on The Big Bang Theory. The difference of course is Sheldon really is smart.

        1. Sheldon is also not a progressive.

          Apolitical southern boy with hints of social conservatism…at least in the first couple of seasons he was…I have not watched the show after the first 2 seasons.

          1. Extremely intelligent. Very poor social skills. Doesn’t agree with his family’s Christian fundamentalism.

            Sounds like a libertarian to me.

    8. My suspicion is that this fellow’s girlfriend is simply trying to avoid his bullshit.

    9. I have now been with my lovely and smart girlfriend for nearly three years and I love her. We started dating as we were nearing graduation at different colleges. She has settled successfully into fashion merchandising, her area of study, while I have struggled to find a footing in a creative field after studying liberal arts. We enjoy each other’s company immensely and I am mostly content. But there is one thing that undermines my full contentment: She is uninterested in pursuing intellectual hobbies and interests outside her work and social life, while I am committed to discovering and pursuing cultural and intellectual stimulation. She has a naturally high intellect, but it would seem she has a lazy mind. She rarely reads anything but online articles, displays no interest in developing an ideological or political viewpoint, and ignores most news. I have encouraged her repeatedly to seek out books, hobbies, and pursuits of more cultural relevancy rather than shopping and being social with friends, but this is met with a shrug. Am I crazy for wanting to raise the bar of my intellectual entanglement as a necessary part of my romantic relationship with this girl? Or have my liberal arts studies and well-adjusted, progressive middle-class background made me a pretentious blowhard? Her family background is one of economic hardship, divorce, and no higher education.

      Sincerely,
      Alvy Singer

    10. and ignores most news.

      Probably the smartest person he will ever meet.

      Her family background is one of economic hardship, divorce, and no higher education.

      Also funny that she is the one with a job. I hope she dumps his ass ASAP.

  21. I think Rob Ford could use some of Ike Brovlovski’s medication.

  22. Violence? Amongst soccer fans? I’m shocked.
    SHOCKED.

    1. Well I’m definitely not shocked about Celtic fans, with Rangers current troubles they have to let their violence out somewhere.

      The only violence I plan to do at the Dynamo game on Saturday is to my liver.

    2. “C’mere, lemme give ya a littel kiss!”

  23. American Family Association, the gift that keeps on giving: [Bryan] Fischer: Michelle Obama Is Inviting Demons Into The White House

    Citing an article from CNS that reported that First Lady Michelle Obama would be “hosting an event on Tuesday to mark the Hindu festival of Diwali, or ‘festival of lights,’ to honor Lakshmi, the goddess of wealth and prosperity,” Bryan Fischer warned that Obama was inviting “demons into the White House.”

    “This is a counterfeit religion,” Fischer said. “It is an Eastern religion. It is, in essence, an occult religion. It’s a counterfeit, a false alternative to Christianity. It ultimately represents the doctrine of demons, that is what you have with Hinduism and now this is being celebrated in the White House.”

    Fischer concluded by renewing his call for America to elect a Christian president in 2016 who will bring clergy into the White House who will “spiritually cleanse” of all the demonic spirits after the Obama’s leave:

    We assume that Fischer called for the White House to be similarly cleansed after President George W. Bush left office, since he did the same thing. [Emphasis mine]

    1. In order to keep myself sane, I tell myself that Fischer is a brilliant comedic performance artist.

    2. None of us like Valerie Jarrett, but Jesse, calling her a demonic spirit is a bit much don’t you think?

      1. I don’t think even proggies would compare Valerie Jarrett to “Lakshmi, the goddess of wealth and prosperity”

        1. Valerie Jarrett is a lot more evil than that.

          1. Mmmmm….forbidden Lakshmi.

      2. Yeah, she’s a lizard-person, not a demon.

    3. White House press release:

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog…..hite-house

    4. I thought Obama was Satan. She doesn’t need to invite demons into the White House.

    5. “Vatican City, 28 October 2013 (VIS) – “Christians and Hindus: fostering human relationships through friendship and solidarity” is the theme of the message addressed to followers of Hinduism by Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue on the occasion of Deepevali, the feast of lights, which is celebrated on 3 November this year. The document is also signed by Fr. Miguel Angel Ayuso Guixot, M.C.C.J., secretary of the same dicastery.

      “”In this highly competitive world where increasingly individualistic and materialistic tendencies adversely affect human relationships and often create divisions in families and society as a whole, we wish to share our thoughts on how Christians and Hindus can foster human relationships for the good of all humanity through friendship and solidarity….

      “”Sadly, with the increase of materialism in society and a growing disregard for deeper spiritual and religious values, there now exists a dangerous trend to accord the same value to material things as to human relationships, thereby reducing the human person from a ‘someone’ to a ‘something’ that can be cast aside at will. Furthermore, individualistic tendencies engender a false sense of security and favour what His Holiness Pope Francis has described as ‘a culture of exclusion’, ‘a throwaway culture’ and ‘a globalisation of indifference’.”

      http://www.news.va/en/news/mes…..-deepavali

      1. Catholicism has a history of being comfortable with Hinduism, particularly the highly ordered Brahmanism variant. I remember reading letters from early Catholic missionaries who saw it as structurally compatible with the church but with the wrong gods and saints. I’m actually a little surprised that the church wasn’t better at getting its syncretism on in India.

        1. I am at heart too much of a Protestant to be a full on Catholic. But their whole Demonology and such is better than Tolkien.

        2. Syro-Malabar Church – descended from Indian Christians who were by tradition converted by St. Thomas:

          http://www.syromalabarchurch.in/

          1. I read somewhere that Hindus were syncretic, and that they would be more likely to add Jesus to their pantheon than to change to exclusive worship.

            1. As opposed to Europeans converting to Catholicism and renaming their goddesses Mary?

              1. Yeah, more like adding Jesus and Mary alongside Thor etal.

                1. There are arguments (as far as I’m aware the church disputes them) that many of the early saints were syncretizations or cooptions of local gods. They would have similar domains of influence and stories with a Christian moral overlay. They did the same thing with holidays like the Yule log, Christmas trees, and egg hunts.

                  So in a way, that’s exactly what was done.

            2. Right. Hindus have no problem accepting Jesus. Not as their Lord and Savior. But Jesus as another manifestation of Krishna. Still not their Savior. Because Krishna, Jesus, Shiva, Kali, Vishnu, Muhammad, etc. are all part of Godhead. Oh, so are you and me and the Pope. We’re all part of Godhead. Except Warty. Warty raped Godhead.

              1. Well, of course not Warty. He’s part of Demonhead.

    6. Sounds like my stepson, formerly a fanatical SGI member who chanted incessantly and loudly, but who has now found Jesus and a new band of wackos with whom he spends hours praying and denigrating any other belief system. He also sees demons everywhere including in my “misguided” atheist self. He prays for me. How…quaint.

  24. Chris Christie: The GOP’s Joe Lieberman

    The Republicans will never nominate Governor Chris Christie for president. And the reason is not that he is a moderate. No, the reason is that he stabbed the last GOP nominee in the back.

    Remember his keynote speech at last year’s Republican convention. Christie was supposed to tell the American people what a splendid guy Mitt Romney is. Instead, Christie spoke almost entirely about Christie, as if the 2012 election was over and this was his big audition for 2016.

    Then there was his performance during Hurricane Sandy, right before Election Day. Christie knew by then that Romney was definitely a goner, that President Obama would carry New Jersey big, and so he effusively embraced Obama. Any chance Romney might have had to win was put away by Christie who helped the Democratic president come across as a leader beyond politics and Romney as a mere politician who was too insignificant to bother mentioning (let alone invite to New Jersey to view the hurricane damage with Christie, as Obama did).

    None of this bothered me then and it doesn’t bother me now. I am an Obama man and I practically kissed Christie’s image on my television screen for doing his part for my candidate.

    Somehow I don’t think Republicans see it that way. They know that he helped do in their nominee to advance himself.

    Finally someone admits it.

    1. I’m just not buying the idea that Governor Stay Puft’s photo op with Obama was some kind of game changer. Obama would have won with or without it because electing the president is a personality contest, and Romney doesn’t have a personality. Therefore Obama continues serving as the national boyfriend for four more miserable years.

      1. It doesn’t matter if it was. The GOP voters think it was. And that is all that matters.

        1. Well, fuck them. Maybe they need to not run an empty suit who makes Al Gore look like The Rock because “hurr durr, he’s electable”.

          Christie can suck it, too, but hanging Romney’s defeat around his nonexistent neck is silly.

          1. Fuck Christie. He should have known better to be seen sucking Obama’s cock a month before an election. If he doesn’t like being the fat scape goat, too fucking bad. Couldn’t happen to a better lardo.

            1. Sure, they’re buttmad now, but come primary time they’ll all be going on about how electable Christie is.

              1. The media and the establishment will. But I doubt many actual Republicans will.

          2. Say what you will about Christie, his suit is mighty damned full.

  25. In case you missed it, here’s a gif of Rob Ford attempting to hike a ball.

    1. Thanks for the warning that it’s a GIF substituting for video.

    2. Chris Farley faked his own death, got the long con going.

  26. Progressive ‘science’

    Let’s talk about morality. I’m personally offended by the tea partiers’ resistance to giving uninsured people health care. I find it a bit shocking that a political movement could be so filled with animosity toward the idea. But according to NYU social psychologist Jonathan Haidt conservatives have a different moral compass entirely. Can you tell us a little bit about that?

    Chris Mooney: There are many people doing research in the psychology of politics. Jonathan Haidt is a pioneer in the psychology of morality and how that feeds into politics, and it really helps with something like this where you have strong emotional passions that are irreconcilable on the left and the right.

    So what you’re describing is his moral foundation of “harm,” which liberals tend to feel more strongly about. These are emotions relating to empathy and compassion ? measured by the question of how much someone is suffering and how much that suffering is a moral issue to you. How much is caring for the weak and vulnerable a moral issue to you?

    It’s not that conservatives don’t feel that emotion, but they don’t necessarily feel it as strongly. They feel other things more strongly. So to Haidt, this explains the health care debate because liberals feel, most of all, this harm-care-compassion thing. Conservatives feel it a little bit less strongly.

    1. In other news, pagan priests find it shocking that Christians could be so filled with animosity that they won’t sacrifice a virgin to ensure a good harvest.

      It’s not that conservatives don’t feel that emotion, but they don’t necessarily feel it as strongly. They feel other things more strongly.

      Sure they do. You feel lots of things strongly, things like you know, logic and reason and all that other racist white male stuff.

      1. CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE KKKochBOT!!!1!!one!

    2. I wonder if psychology can explain progressives’ refusal to take their opponents as rational humans, and their need to pathologize them. Oh wait, it did.

      1. They’ve been doing it since at least Goldwater.

    3. They start off citing Haidt and the rest of the piece is the kind of progressive circle jerk that Haidt has been skewering.

    4. “tea partiers’ resistance to giving uninsured people health care”

      Oh for fuck’s sake. Tea partiers want to forbid people to pay cash? Or forbid doctors from taking charity cases? Health insurance is not health care. And as our old friend Dr. Groovus would point out, it’s medical care they are talking about, not health care.

      1. tea partiers’ resistance to giving uninsured people health care.

        In order to give something, you must first possess it. Does the government possess a means to care for the health of uninsured people? No, didn’t think so. Therefore, they have to acquire it from somewhere, either by trade or theft. Do you think the government has anything to trade for health care? No, didn’t think so.

        I find it a bit shocking that a political movement could be so filled with animosity toward the idea.

        It’s because you lack empathy, and simply project your feelings and motives upon others.

        conservatives have a different moral compass entirely.

        Yest, based on principle, not on what “feels right.”

        1. So what you’re describing is his moral foundation of “harm,” which liberals tend to feel more strongly about.

          By harm, you mean grievance. The greatest commandment of the liberal is “he with the least privilege is most aggrieved.”

          It’s not that conservatives don’t feel that emotion, but they don’t necessarily feel it as strongly.

          Or, perhaps, they feel it for all people, and not just the aggrieved classes?

          They feel other things more strongly.

          Individualism, Logic, self-determination, self ownership?

          this explains the health care debate because liberals feel, most of all

          It’s sad that i have to take something so out of context to actually pull truth out of this dreck.

    5. Let’s talk about morality. I’m personally offended by the tea partiers’ resistance to giving uninsured people health care.

      Let’s talk about true morality. I’m personally offended by the left’s resistance to understand that just because some person needs a thing it does not suddenly become the responsibility of another person to pay for it.

      Now let’s talk about logic. Just because you call it “health care” does not turn health insurance into health care. They’re NOT the same thing.

    6. I’m personally offended by the tea partiers’ resistance to giving uninsured people health care.

      I keep repeating this in the vain hope that someone might listen, but here we go again: Insurance is NOT medicine. Insurance is insurance.

      It’s not that conservatives don’t feel that emotion, but they don’t necessarily feel it as strongly. They feel other things more strongly. So to Haidt, this explains the health care debate because liberals feel, most of all, this harm-care-compassion thing. Conservatives feel it a little bit less strongly.

      I have a lot of feels for you right now. None of them are good.

      1. Insurance is NOT medicine. Insurance is insurance.

        What these twisted and witless fucks are blathering about isn’t insurance either. It’s a pre-paid health plan, paid for by OPM.

        1. Exactly. Car insurance doesn’t pay for oil changes. Idiots.

      2. As the Obamacare juggernaut rolls forward, the difference between “coverage” and “care” will be seared into the national consciousness.

    7. So, basically, what he’s saying is that his own view is an emotional reaction and his opponent have thought the issue through. And that’s why we should go with his position.

      1. Yeah, he’s arguing that those evil teathuglicans are dead inside, and thus liberals have a monopoly on compassion.

    8. I’m personally offended by the tea partiers’ resistance to giving uninsured people health care.

      I am offended with progressive policies and manipulations of the market that has made health care so expensive that it has become nearly impossible for Americans (the richest people in the world) to afford it.

  27. Has Reason covered this yet? Man dies in jail after arrest for pot possession

    Video obtained by KIRO 7 through a public records request shows a Snohomish County Jail inmate questioning the breakfast he was fed that ultimately killed him.
    Michael Saffioti, 22, was no career criminal.

    He had turned himself in because of an outstanding misdemeanor warrant for marijuana possession.
    The video comes from jail module E-4 on the morning of July 3, 2012.

    Around 5:46, a group of inmates arrived to serve breakfast and men began lining up.

    While others sat to eat, the camera first captured Saffioti at the guard’s desk, holding his tray.

    Saffioti suffered from extreme dairy allergies and took regular pains to protect himself.

    Because he had been at the Snohomish County Jail once before, guards had a medical file on him.

    “Our theory is that they absolutely knew about Michael’s medical needs,” said Cheryl Snow, the attorney for Saffioti’s mother, Rose. Snow has filed notice of a $10 million claim against the county, which says no special diet trays were sent to the module that morning.

    We’re winning the War on Drugs!

  28. You know I’m from Toronto and the sad thing is that Rob Ford is one few people in the municipal government who isn’t a crazy prog. I mean he opposed the plastic bag ban and his opponents were a prog and the former provincial health minister. But he is a fat drunk cokehead, so Toronto is going to get a crazy prog in the mayor’s chair again.

    1. I bet you folks are totally embarrassed that you have a fat drunk cokehead, while Calgary has a Harvard-educated non-white Muslim mayor.

      1. Dude looks white to me.

        1. Yup. Southern Asians are considered Caucasian.

      2. I bet you folks are totally embarrassed that you have a fat drunk cokehead, while Calgary has a Harvard-educated non-white Muslim mayor.
        Well if I was a prog then I probably would be.

        1. Rob Ford vs. Naheed Nenshi: Understanding Toronto’s jealousy.
          Why some Torontonians wish they had Calgary’s mayor
          http://o.canada.com/news/rob-f…..-jealousy/
          The contrast between the two mayors has been even more apparent in the last two weeks, as a drug scandal erupted in Toronto. Also more apparent than ever is that contingent of Torontonians whining about how unfair it is that Calgary got the cool mayor while Toronto got a crack cocaine scandal as only the latest of a seemingly never-ending series of public embarrassments.

          1. charismatic, progressive

            Paging barfman…

          2. Keep voting cool. See where that gets you. (And by the way, when did drinking and smoking crack stop being cool?)

            1. (And by the way, when did drinking and smoking crack stop being cool?)

              When a non-prog does it?

    2. Honestly, I’d take a fat drunk cokehead over a proggie any day of the week.

  29. Let’s talk about morality.

    OK, lets.

    I’m personally offended by the tea partiers’ resistance to Dem’s insistence on taking my money to allow them to take credit for giving uninsured people health care free shit.

    I think that’s pretty goddam immoral. How about you?

    1. Lets talk about the morality of taking trillions of dollars in tax money to spend it on programs that are shown time and again to not do what they are sold as doing. What is the morality of spending trillions of dollars in the name of ending poverty or improving education and having after 40 years nothing to show for it?

      1. Look, that road to Hell was not going to pave itself, and now it’s the best financed road in America.

      2. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me 3,486,987 times, shame on you.

      3. How about the morality of selling folks an idea based on their money going into a “lockbox” and being there when they retire? Then—and here comes the funny part— we’ll take other people’s money from their “lockbox” to pay the first person when they retire!

  30. Frat pledge loses testicle in hazing gone wrong

    After having limburger cheese stuffed in their mouths, the pledges were each given a “ball of stuffing” and ordered to “simulate having sexual intercourse with it.” Specifically, the trio was told to “fuck the sheep.”

    The pledges were then hit with “towels and shirts that had the ends balled up in knots” or which had “items tied inside them to inflict pain.” Pledge Tyler Lawrence, 19, was struck in the testicles with “a towel fashioned as a weapon,” according to an affidavit sworn by Wilmington Police Department Detective Brian Kratzer.

    Lawrence “went to the ground immediately in pain and was clutching himself in the groin.” Frat members eventually got Lawrence to his feet so they could conclude the hazing by stuffing vinegar-soaked bananas into the mouths of the three men (who were told the item was “poop or shit”).

    After the initiation, Lawrence complained of significant pain in his testicles. He was transported to a local hospital where he underwent surgery to have a testicle removed as a result of “damage caused to him when he was struck by the towel.” Detective Kratzer also noted that Lawrence had “large bruising and contusions upon much of his upper torso resulting from being struck during the initiation.”

    Why do frats do the gayest things?

    1. They take the Greek stuff too literally?

    2. + 1/2 Darwin Award

    3. Why do frats do the gayest things?

      You have to ask?

    4. Well, his frat name is definitely “Half-sack”.

  31. Charlie Sheen’s little hellions. Can’t wait til these two hit the Hollywood scene in a decade. It’s going to be massive. PR firms will be able to put there kids through college on damage control fees alone.

    http://cdn.wwtdd.com/wp-conten…..les-LB.jpg

    1. That bitch is on way more crack than Rob Ford. What a waste.

    2. Notice the foundation name behind them.

      1. Man that one on the right looks like an angry vile little shit.

        1. It could be that he just doesn’t like the photographer.

        2. I call OD on a speedball for the one on the left, and single-vehicle accident at a speed of at least 120 for the one on the right.

          1. If either one reaches 30, I will lose my bet.

            1. Call the number of bastards they’ll produce. I say 4 and 3.

              1. Depends on how much cash they get from their dad. If you don’t have any money to pay child support, the fame whores are not interested.

                1. Grandpa has money.

          2. I bet evangelical preacher on the left and failed b-actor who stars in 2 gay porno films for the one on the right…both live to be at least 500 years old as the singularity will hit when they are in their late 20s.

        3. Kid on the left becomes a successful Realtor on the Westside/Malibu. The kid on the right makes it to AAA baseball, but never the big league. Later, he opens an exotic car boutique in Beverly Hils.

    3. They look like they really need a nap.

  32. Guns & Ammo Editor Fired For 2nd Amendment Piece

    Guns & Ammo magazine has apologized for running a column opining that regulating the Second Amendment is not an infringement on gun owners’ rights.

    The publication has also fired the column’s writer, Dick Metcalf, a long-time editor at the firearm enthusiast magazine, which enjoys a circulation of 416,224, according to Alliance for Audited Media.

    […]Metcalf took the position that regulation does not equate to an infringement to bear arms, arguing that all constitutional rights are rightly regulated.

    “Freedom of speech is regulated,” he wrote. “You cannot falsely and deliberately shout, ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater. Freedom of religion is regulated. A church cannot practice human sacrifice.”

    He should’ve been fired just for starters for his problems with logic. In the first place, there is no such regulation that prohibits a patron from yelling “Fire!” in a crowded theater. The author is confusing regulation with civil liability. In the second place, his argument begs the question; just because the government regulates a behavior does not mean it is right or moral to regulate that behavior.

    1. “Freedom of speech is regulated,” he wrote. “You cannot falsely and deliberately shout, ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater.

      Yes, yes you can. And “DRINK!”

    2. Freedom of religion is regulated. A church cannot practice human sacrifice.”

      Huh?

    3. He should have been fired for stupidity and the apparent desire to destroy his employer.

      Up next, Cosmopolitan editor pens editorial about how clothes and lingerie are just really shallow pursuits

      Road and Track writes editorial in favor of the 55 mph speed limit and ten dollar per gallon gas tax.

      The jokes write themselves. How is it that someone comes to the conclusion doing that is a good idea?

      1. Reason editor writes why he voted for Obama.

        1. I always wanted to vote for a black man for President.

          1. Had a High School english teacher tell me essentially that when Jesse Jackson was running. Anyone remember Jesse Jackson running for President? As a serious candidate?

            1. Hymietown, going off to Cuba and embracing Castro, ‘you ain’t no bitch’, and the pale faces crying at his retarded speeches. I left in party soon after voting Dukakis, Jackson was as significant factor as the clarification of my own political ideology after the Dukakis loss.

              1. Aaah, Dukakis. It all takes me back.

            2. yup – but the Asses avoided disaster by nominating Walter Mondale instead…

              1. The Romney of the Democratic party.

            3. I think my older brother voted for him.

    4. Wow. This dude is the Weigel of G&A.

      1. The interesting thing is that the article says he was a long time writer and editor for Guns & Ammo. Did it really take all this time to find out that he is this big-time anti-gun rights statist? Look:

        He questioned whether Second Amendment purists would find it acceptable for someone to drive a car on public roads without any training, testing, or license. To Metcalf, the two scenarios share the same basic principle.

        What the hell does one thing (driving a car in a public street) have to do with owning and carrying a gun? The reason that drivers are asked to have training and insurance is because so many of them share a road by traveling together at 40-60 miles an hour in 2-ton wheeled machines, whereas carrying a gun does not mean USING the gun or wearing down a road. And what’s with this “purists” qualifier, clearly a term of derision? The guy is a certified lefty.

        1. They guy is a certified moron. Since when is having a gun in my home like driving a car on public roads?

          CCC permits are more akin to that. And those do require training.

        2. And what’s with this “purists” qualifier, clearly a term of derision? The guy is a certified lefty.

          You know what the opposite of “pure” is?

          1. Coward?

    5. “You cannot falsely and deliberately shout, ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater

      First, let me give credit where credit is due: at least the dumbass remembered to put “falsely” in that “fire in a crowded theater” metaphor. On to the problem: Schenck v. U.S. (1919) (distributing fliers telling people not to join the military) was overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) (Klan rally).

      Therefore, stop referencing bad caselaw.

      Freedom of religion is regulated. A church cannot practice human sacrifice.”

      I think the resulting murder charges would be more pressing than any Establishment Clause challenge you might mount.

      1. See above my post about that. I think that rule is completely stupid and misses the point. You can’t cause a riot or a stampede in a theater. Falsely yelling is not the crime. If I am an actor and one of my lines is “Fire”, I have just falsely yelled “fire in a crowded theater”. And if I say nothing and set off a fire cracker and this causes a stampede, I have just done exactly what the court is talking about.

        To me that rule is like taking the crime of robbery to mean “you can’t falsely tell someone give me all of your money”.

        1. Here’s a fun little fact about Schenck: That evil socialist, Charles Schenck, that Saint Woodrow wanted imprisoned for printing anti-war flyers in violation of the Sedition Act?

          They were printed in Yiddish.

  33. It initially offered stocks at $26 a share, but its first trade came in at more than $45 a share.

    Interesting financial bit on NPR yesterday about how an initial IPO “pop” where the stock shoots up on first day of trading can actually hurt the firm– or at least isn’t an unalloyed good thing.

    http://www.npr.org/2013/11/06/…..c-offering

    1. I was watching it pretty carefully today, and decided against. Maybe next week.

      1. Those “hot” stocks are always dangerous on IPO day.

        However, I would like to announce!

        *drum roll*

        My stock guy called me today and I am officially invested in the Koch Brothers!

        I am now a card-fucking-carrying teabagger.

        I can’t wait to hear the crack of the whips as my soon-to-be child laborers landscape my lawn in the rain. Or polish a monocole or something.

        1. I thought they were entirely privately held. Subsidiary?

          1. Actually, it’s a company that the Koch brothers have invested in which is why it’s being recommended. I was told in passing that Koch industries had taken a recent interest in the company (I already held stock in it before this) so my stock guy thought I should increase my holdings in it. It went up today– in a down market.

            But, association with the Kochs is everything.

      2. Definitely wait till next week. Sub $40 and I’ll start buying in small quantities.

  34. Pretty cool: Man raising money to honor female WWII pilots with Rose Parade float

    A definitely true story about Dorothy “Dot” Lewis: In 1942, she was one of 25,000 women to apply, one of 1,830 women to be accepted, and one of 1,102 women to earn her “silver wings” with the Women’s Airforce Service Pilots. For two years as a WASP, she trained male fliers, flew the P-63, the B-26 and the P-40, and did a hell of a barrel roll.

    Lewis died in September, a few weeks shy of her 98th birthday. Her son, Albert “Chig” Lewis, a Washington lawyer, wants to put a float in the Rose Bowl parade, honoring his mother and all of the other women who performed domestic operational missions during World War II ? but who were unsummarily dismissed when male pilots came home.

    His group has raised more than $100,000. He still needs $29,000. He is trying to do it in less than a week.

    Hope he reaches his goal.

    1. Me too. They didn’t fly in combat. But they allowed a lot of other people to do so by fulfilling the vital role of getting those planes from the factory to where they could be flown in combat. Someone had to do that. And back then flying any plane was a pretty risky job.

    2. Women’s Airforce Service Pilots. For two years as a WASP

      lulz

      Also, fuck the parade. PLAY THE DAMN GAME ALREADY

    3. And nowhere in that article does it say where you can donate to the guy’s cause.

      Top notch journalism there.

    4. I’ve only seen it covered in Tillman’s “Whirlwind”.
      Paul Tibbets was involved in training B29 pilots when the thing had a well-earned rep as a widow-maker.
      He searched the WASPs and found the smallest, cutest, best pilots he could, trained them on the -29 and had them fly ’em in to the training centers.
      He bragged he ‘shamed all those college jocks into flying the things’.

      1. There was also Lilya Litvyak, The Rose of Stalingrad; the very first female ace and still the record holder for most kill by a female pilot. She had 12 solo kills and 4 shared kills in 1942-43 in her Yak-1 with the 9th Guards Fighter Regiment.

  35. Police taser man multiple times to stop him from attempting to rescue son from fire

    City Administrator Bob Jenne says firefighters were called to a home in the 400 block of South Main Street around 1 a.m. He says the back of the house was fully engulfed in flames when firefighters arrived.

    A mother, father, and their 3-year-old son were home when the fire started. The parents were out of the home when firefighters arrived, but their son was still in his bedroom.

    Jenne says firefighters determined the fire was too hot for them to enter, so the father decided to go in after him.

    The father ran around to the front of the home, kicked in the front, door, and was tasered by a police officer. The dad was wearing only pajamas and had taken his shirt off and put it over his head. Jenne says authorities knew the fire was too dangerous for the man to run inside the home and had no choice but to taser him.

    The 3-year-old son, identified as Riley Jeffrey Miller, was found deceased inside the home.

    Jenne says firefighters fought the fire for eight hours. The state marshal is investigating the cause of the fire, and has determined in started in an added-on recreation room at the back of the house. They say there is nothing suspicious about this fire.

    I think the use of force was excessive, but at the same time if it’s too hot for firemen they probably both would have died.

    1. I will actually stand up for the cops there. You can’t let the guy go in and die. Tazering him might have been the only way to stop him.

      1. I will actually stand up for the cops there. You can’t let the guy go in and die. Tazering him might have been the only way to stop him.

        Fuck that.

        If a cop tasers me whilst I’m trying to save my son’s life, that would be a dead cop. It might take a while, but I would kill him as surely as he made sure that my son didn’t have a chance.

    2. IF that guy was running into sure death, then it’s smart for cooler heads to stop him by any means.

      1. If.

    3. Yeah, tragic situation made less tragic by saving the guy’s life.

      But the family is threatening to sue the police according to the Daily Mail.

    4. It was too hot for firefighters by the time they arrived.

      Which presumably was quite a while after the cop tazed him three times.

    5. Fuck all involved; that’s not their call.

      I hope the father is methodically hunting down every one of those who participated in stopping him.

      1. Now now, the cops did the right thing battering and arresting a man who wanted to go back into his own house, on his own property, in an attempt to save his own child.

        It’s almost like he doesn’t actually own any of it, not even his own body.

        Bit totalitarian, innit?

      2. I hope the father is methodically hunting down every one of those who participated in stopping him.

        This.

    6. The 3-year-old son, identified as Riley Jeffrey Miller, was found deceased inside the home.

      Jesus… fuck…

      I think the use of force was excessive, but at the same time if it’s too hot for firemen they probably both would have died.

      And now the father feels way better about the outcome.

    7. It’s kind of weird to hold a candlelight vigil for a fire victim.

    1. Is Warty a hipster? I haven’t heard of it before so it must be good.

    2. Interesting. I like the first song.

      Here’s one I like:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlcIKh6sBtc

      1. That’s just cruel, Lady B.

  36. Blackhawk fan steals helmet off Winnipeg Jets player

    It was a rude welcome to the United Center for defenseman Adam Pardy of the Winnipeg Jets.

    An otherwise routine Chicago Blackhawks 4-1 victory Wednesday got some comic relief in the third period when Brandon Bollig crunched Pardy through the glass in the corner.

    Purdy encountered several unruly fans after the glass was dislodged and a scrum ensued. One fan yanked off Pardy’s helmet and put it on his own head and another spilled beer over the player’s head.

    “I definitely smelled a little booze for about six minutes,” Pardy said, via the Tribune’s Chris Kuc. “I guess somebody reached around (and took the helmet). I don’t know what happened to my stick, either — that got lost in the crowd too. A little insult to injury there. It was tough enough to get put through the glass but then to get a beer thrown on my head, too, was not a good thing.”

    Pardy, who said “there was a lot of yelling going on, a lot of screaming” eventually retrieved his helmet and was good-natured about the encounter.

    1. The fun part was the woman looks at helmet guy and says “meh” reaches over and pours her beer on the poor player’s head…

  37. BTW, to all those who voted for either the Shit Sandwich or the Giant Douche, and are getting fucked by Obamnycare…

    GOOD.

  38. Can I interest you in a government-subsidized, really pricy cigarette lighter?
    “3rd Model S fire drives down Tesla stock”
    http://blog.sfgate.com/energy/…..sla-stock/

    1. For a car with no gasoline, that thing sure burns easily.

      1. I was told (IOWs, unconfirmed) that L-i battery fires are as hard to put out as Mg fires.

  39. “Rand Paul still isn’t ready for prime time

    “BY: Philip Klein

    “…time and again, he has shown why he shouldn’t be taken seriously.

    “The latest controversy surrounding Paul…involves a pattern of plagiarism…

    “Instead of simply owning up to it, Paul lashed out at the media…

    “…to win the nomination in 2016, Rand Paul has to expand his appeal beyond this core group. He won’t be able to accomplish that if he continues to behave like an amateur.”

    http://m.washingtonexaminer.co…..le/2538708

    1. YAAAA…..AAAA….AAAWN

      This is predictable, uninspired, and entirely expected.

      1. This is predictable, uninspired, and entirely expected.

        Agreed.

        But that doesn’t make any of what the author said untrue. So long as elections, particularly national elections, are nothing more than popularity contests, you have to do better than appealing only to your base.

    1. Rabbit and Angel are the same house. Cant tell if same person.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.