A.M. Links: FBI Director Doesn't Think Snowden is a Whistle-Blower, Former NJ Transport Official Held in Contempt, E-Book Sales of Mein Kampf Surge

|

Credit: Wikileaks' Youtube Channel Via Wikimedia
  • FBI Director James Comey doesn't think that Edward Snowden is a whistle-blower, saying that he has "trouble applying the 'whistle-blower' label to someone who just disagrees with the way our country is structured and operates."
  • A former New Jersey transportation official has been held in contempt by the New Jersey General Assembly's Transportation, Public Works and Independent Authorities Committee for not answering questions relating to the Christie administration's lane closure scandal.
  • E-book sales of Adolf Hitler's manifesto Mein Kampf are surging despite the fact that sales of the printed edition have remained mostly unchanged for years.
  • South Koreans are not happy about Dennis Rodman's visit to North Korea.
  • The Central African Republic's interim president has resigned after a meeting of the Economic Community of Central African States in Chad.
  • A chemical spill in West Virginia has closed down much of the state's capital.

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.

NEXT: Russian Authorities Investigate Suspicious Deaths, Car Explosion 150 Miles From Site of Winter Olympics

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. Howdy.

    2. Hello.

      1. G’day there Rufus.

          1. We need a Rufusdome.

          2. Fucken-right.

            /raises shot glass.

            1. I mean really, how hard is it to pick a handle that isn’t almost exactly like the handle of a long time poster?

              1. Ask Palin’s Buttplug.

              2. BC i would forget my handle otherwise….its a handle i use on everything i do. BTW ill be on the PM links later this evening drinking crappy vodka and diet orange soda if you guys wanna verbally rumble over it.

          3. That’s Rufus J. Canuck to you

          4. is this similiar to when Ric Flair came to the WWF and declared himself to hogan as the “Real World’s Heavyweight Champion”…..I do not mind playing Flair in this scenario!

      1. LOL. Harsh, but still funny.

      2. that’s a low blow. Here I am trying to bring cheer in these dark years of the republic and all I get is snark. It’s plain mean. *walks out in a huff*

        1. Mr Plisskin to you, Hockey Mask.

    3. Eh, fugoff yer curnt. Ahve a sinus cold and it’s makin me miserable. Pershistant bug too. Drag.

      1. Feel better soon, Dude.

        1. Thanks man. It’s just plain unfortunate that whiskey isn’t a cure for the common cold.

          1. But it is! If by cure you mean muffle the effects of.

          2. But it does provide symptom relief.

          3. Nothing works. Mind you, Tylenol sometimes and Nyquil is lethal.

            Ride it out unfortunately.

            1. Depends on what you mean by “works”. I find continuous intake of Sudafed (the good kind) and Benadryl keeps they symptoms of a head cold well in check for me.

            2. The key is to get a hold of some vicodin or stronger narcotic with tylenol. The tylenol helps with the fever, and the narcotic makes it so that you don’t give a shit about the other symptoms because you’re in a daze.

              1. Vicodin already has Tylenol in it.

                1. (vicodin) or (stronger narcotic with tylenol)

                2. Vicodin already has Tylenol in it.

                  Bad BP!

                  (vicodin) or (stronger narcotic with tylenol)

                  Good Zeb!

          4. Hot Irish whiskey is good for symptoms, though (if you don’t have a lot to do).

            1. Or the results of what you are doing aren’t that important.

        1. Didn’t even see this. Great minds? Addled minds?

          1. I’ve stopped taking “cold medicine” and instead just get drunk and play video games. Wait, am I talking about my job?

  1. E-book sales of Adolf Hitler’s manifesto Mein Kampf are surging…

    You know who else reported on this?

    1. Paul Krugman?

      1. We should start calling him “Kristallnacht Krugman”

    2. Der St?rmer?

    3. Nancy Kerrigan?

        1. seconded.

    4. Sigfried & Roy?

  2. Chicago man says cops raped him with a gun

    http://www.vice.com/en_au/read…..with-a-gun

    1. Do they call it “Getting the Rahm?”

      1. +1 fire in the hole

  3. South Koreans are not happy about Dennis Rodman’s visit to North Korea.

    They didn’t like him that close to their soil.

  4. Meanwhile in Australia:

    Doctors pull ‘large’ cockroach from Australian man’s ear in 10-minute procedure

    Darwin-based Hendrik Helmer’s ordeal began in the early hours of Wednesday morning when he was woken by a sharp pain in his right ear, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation said.

    “I was hoping it was not a poisonous spider ? I was hoping it didn’t bite me,” he said, adding that as the pain got worse he tried to suck the insect out with a vacuum cleaner before squirting water in his ear.

    1. This stuff seems pretty bizarre, but it happens.

      My grandfather was at a night baseball game and a moth flew into his ear canal. The flapping around just about drove him crazy before they stopped it and got it out.

      1. Ear screens! Could be a big business.

      2. That same thing happened to a friend of mine. Seemed very unpleasant.

    2. Hey at least it wasn’t a mutant, fire-starting cockroach

      1. That movie creeped me the fuck out when I was a kid.

      2. That movie has the best ending EVAH! 😎

      3. Back in the 70’s, I actually read the book that movie was based on, The Hephaestus Plague.

    3. Time to add one more to the Encyclopedia of Dangerous Australian Life Forms…

      1. Wouldn’t it be easier to make an Encyclopedia of Non-Dangerous Australian Life Forms?

          1. “This page intentionally left blank”

          2. You could file it with the leaflet on famous Jewish sports legends.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoACIIz33II

    4. Are they sure it wasn’t an earwig that tunneled through his brain and laid eggs there?

      1. +1 Khhhhhaaaaaan!

        1. Actually, not this time. I’m talking about “The Caterpillar” episode of Night Gallery:

          To be brief, a nasty little carnivorous insect crawls into Laurence Harvey’s ear as he sleeps; it proceeds to burrow through his middle and inner ears and into his brain. Harvey is tied down to his bed and writhes in screaming, tortured, insane agony for days, as the bug EATS its way through his head and emerges through his other ear. The attending physician is amazed — he’s never even heard of anyone surviving this ordeal, and yet Laurence Harvey somehow manages to pull through it. Until, that is, the earwig is identified as a female, and the doctor solemnly informs Harvey that the thing apparently LAID EGGS on its way through his brains. ARRRRGGHHHH!!!

          1. Gotcha. I never watched Night Gallery, but recently have been watching Twilight Zone, which for the most part holds up well.

            1. That episode was creepy, even if earwigs don’t actually do such things. Unless they think you deserve it, anyway.

  5. Slim mother-of-four devours 72oz steak in less than 3 MINUTES to smash world record (and she still has room for fries!)

    Molly Schuyler, 34, of Nebraska, tackled the hefty lump of beef at Sayler’s Old Country Kitchen in Portland on January 3
    The previous record, which stood at 6 minutes and 48 seconds and was held by a ‘body building huge man’
    ‘I started doing this about a year ago, and I guess it’s like a stupid human trick,’ Mrs Schuyler said of her speed-eating abilities

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/fem…..steak.html

    1. Of course she’s from Nebraska.

    2. Paging Kobayashi-san.

      1. Not Maru though. She doesn’t appear to have cheated at all.

        1. It wasn’t cheating!

    3. Your puny mind cannot comprehend how much I want to sexify this woman.

      1. Just…no.

        That 34 looks about 50.

    4. Does Joey Chestnut know that the gauntlet has been thrown?

    5. That’s a hard 34.

      1. Concur, nearly breaking bad level

    6. So what? My dog could eat a 72 oz. steak in about 30 seconds. 10 if you ground it up first.

    7. The previous record, which stood at 6 minutes and 48 seconds and was held by a ‘body building huge man’

      I am told Warty is crushed about it.

  6. E-book sales of Adolf Hitler’s manifesto Mein Kampf are surging despite the fact that sales of the printed edition have remained mostly unchanged for years.

    Weimar Republic!

    1. despite the fact that sales of the printed edition have remained mostly unchanged for years.

      Relatively speaking to the printed book market at large, that means the sales of the printed are brisker, too.

  7. Another reason to thank Satan for 3D printers – they can make sweets!

  8. FBI Director James Comey doesn’t think that Edward Snowden is a whistle-blower, saying that he has “trouble applying the ‘whistle-blower’ label to someone who just disagrees with the way our country is structured and operates.”

    Fucking Constitutional Republics- how do they work?

    1. So then I guess he’ll never call Obama and members of Congress whistleblowers.

    2. Who disagrees with the (secret) way our country is structured and operates. Its the exposing the secret part that makes him a whistle blower..”

      1. In James Comey’s world there are no whistleblowers. Only Patriots and Traitors.

    3. if that’s not what whistle-blower means, that what the hell is the definition?

    4. Correct me if I’m wrong, Sandy, but Snowden’s political views have no impact on whether what he revealed was consistent with whistle-blowing. “Acceptable” or “unacceptable” motivation doesn’t change the nature of what he disclosed.

      1. Wasn’t Deep Throat considered to be a whistleblower?

        Like Comey, Deep Throat was a FBI prick, and he ratted out the Nixon Administration for the most venal of motivations.

    5. How dare you complain about the way we are secretly fucking you in the ass!

  9. Suspected drug-dealing couple leave waitress crystal meth as a tip after dinner and drinks at a ‘classy’ Oregon steakhouse

    Ryan Benson and Erica Manly are suspected drug dealers and meth producers
    Short on cash, the couple paid for their meal with a gift card and used an envelope full of crystal meth to tip their waitress
    A search of their hotel room turned up several items used to cook crystal meth

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..house.html

    1. Too lazy to sell their meth for cash? But at least they have a sense of morality and didn’t skip out on the check, right?

    2. One of my favorite scenes from Breaking Bad was Jesse trying to purchase gas with meth.

      1. It led to Jesse’s undoing as well.

    3. I don’t understand. Is this restaurant so nice that the cooks can afford cocaine all the time? Seems like the waiter/waitress could have exchanged the drugs literally in the kitchen for something he/she valued more.

  10. A former New Jersey transportation official has been held in contempt…

    Gentlemen, we have our scapegoat.

    1. Well, I’m in awe of the legislature for doing this. Hey, US Congress, grow a pair.

      1. Holder is in contempt of Congress – the effect is….?

      2. That’s actually a good question, Swedish Waiter. I guess powers vary by legislature, but do any of them have the power to order jail time for contempt? I believe that judges do.

        1. Yes they can order you to jail for contempt of Congress, the problem is they probably cannot do it to an executive branch officer and even if they could Congress has no police of it’s own.

          1. Congress does have police. The Sergeant at Arms of the House. US Capitol Police. Don’t know if they have even a small lockup in the capitol, but it would be a treat seeing some bureaucrat hauled off to the DC jail to serve his four hours, or whatever.

            Yes, there is the executive privilege thing which several executives have extended far beyond original intent (which was only the Pres, VP and cabinet officers, IIRC).

  11. Let me get this straight.

    The Director of the FBI thinks Snowden is “someone who just disagrees with the way our country is structured and operates”?

    1. The way the country (read: government) is structured and the way it operates are two different things.

      1. Oh, I understand that, Fist.

        But Rand Paul, say, is also “someone who just disagrees with the way our country is structured and operates”, and he’s not forced into exile.

        1. Paul not embarrassed the power structure by laying out their mendacity.

        2. Yeah, but it’s easier to refer to Snowden as that then to acknowledge that he may have been on to something about systemic constitutional abuses.

    2. No, he doesn’t really think that. He just says it because his boss told him to. Just like Bobby Gates.

  12. It’s the pachyderm Picasso! Elephant paints amazing self-portraits you’ll never forget

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..orget.html

      1. To be fair, many people considered Picasso to suck too.

        1. Well some people try to pick up girls
          And get called assholes
          This never happened to Pablo Picasso
          He could walk down your street
          And girls could not resist his stare and
          So Pablo Picasso was never called an asshole

          Well the girls would turn the color
          Of the avacado when he would drive
          Down their street in his El Dorado
          He could walk down you street
          And girls could not resist his stare
          Pablo Picasso never got called an asshole
          Not like you
          Alright

          Well he was only 5’3″
          But girls could not resist his stare
          Pablo Picasso never got called an asshole
          Not in New York

          Oh well be not schmuck, be not abnoxious,
          Be not bellbottom bummer or asshole
          Remember the story of Pablo Picasso
          He could walk down your street
          And girls could not resist his stare
          Pablo Picasso was never called an asshole
          Alright this is it

          1. +1 male gaze

          2. LOVE that song.

            Plus-plus Modern Lovers.

    1. In demand: Funds from the sale of his work – some of which come with a price tag of up to $700…

      What a dumbo. That’s peanuts in the art world.

    2. Sorry — I call hoax.

      1. That elephant says “Forget you!”

    3. There’s a bloke here called Pricasso who paints portraits with his cock

      1. There are also apparently several women who paint with their breasts.

        1. “My art has been commended as being strongly vaginal which bothers some men. The word itself makes some men uncomfortable. Vagina”

    4. Noppakhao – also known as Peter – shows an impressive use of colours

      So he also works at a call center. Amazing.

  13. Reindeer get reflectors to stop car crashes

    As many as 10,000 reindeer in northern Norway are to have their horns decorated with special biodegradable reflector cuffs to stop them being run over by motorists.

    The reflectors, which are made of corn to avoid them littering the environment, have been shown to successful in trials run since 2010 and are now being rolled out across the country’s herds.

    1. 1st World Problems (and solutions).

      1. Sort of. Collisions with wildlife and livestock are a real road safety issue. Even if you are completely indifferent to needless suffering and death of animals, this also benefits motorists.

        1. Wouldn’t it be easier and cheaper to cull the herd and use the meat to feed poor(er) people?

          1. Reindeer are mostly semi-domesticated livestock, so they already do that.

          2. There’s a group in NoVA that’s trying sterilize deer at about $1000 a surgery. Right now, it’s private funding, but they want to show that it’s a sustainable method.

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..n-of-does/

            1. Or just kill em in your backyard inside the beltway…like me!

            2. Liberals. That’s the group we need to sterilize.

          3. A collision with a deer (my experience limited to whitetail and mule deer) can fuck your car up real good, particularly smaller, lighter vehicles. So, motorist safety…

    2. “It’s enough to tag a part of the herd.”

      Right.

    3. I’d be willing to bet that there aren’t enough accidents in Northern Norway to justify this kind of wasteful shit. There are less than 5 million people in the entire country, and most of them live in a small handful of cities in the south.

      1. As it says int he article, the reindeer are mostly livestock owned by Saami people, who have previously tried other methods to make the deer more visible at night, so there would seem to be some need for it. It is not clear in the article how much is paid by the government or by the owners of the herds. And it’s Norway. They have to spend all that oil money on something.

        1. If the owners (the Saami people) are the ones spending the money, you can rest assured that this is the exact same thing as the government spending it. They are subsidized nearly $2k per annum for EACH reindeer owned in Norway. Nearly every stock animal is subsidized at one level or another because NO farming is profitable in Norway.

          Norway is a magical place, but their economics are entirely fucked up, and the people think it’s because of the incantations of their betters in Oslo rather than the oil fund.

  14. I’m blowing the whistle on this alt-text-less Links thread.

  15. This Christie thing is interesting.

    If he did shut down lanes to make a political point that not only points to outrageous abuse of power, but to the fact he’s one big, unprofessional asshole.

    1. Or, he’s just a typical politician.

    2. As much as the hypocrisy of the media’s coverage of this ‘fake’ scandal bugs me (as opposed to say, IRS, Fast and Furious, Benghazi and the other fake scandals), I am glad Christie is getting a taste of what pandering to the left will get him.

      1. Fast and Furious was a “fake” scandal? WTF?

        1. I think ‘fake’ was in quotations to indicate that the scandals listed thereafter weren’t, in fact, fake.

        2. Per our resident troll, those are “fake scandals”.

    3. It’s also nice to see the press does have the capability to investigate scandals by an executive, even if that capability has atrophied somewhat. They’ve already doubled the amt of investigation they did into F+F and Benghazi and Solyndra and the IRS tea party targeting.

      1. the press is perfectly willing to look into scandals that do not involve Dems.

      2. Like 0*2?

        They’ve exponentially increased the amt of investigation: 0^2!

    4. I think he was always one, big unprofessional asshole.

    5. But even if he did, and it looks like he did, how is him doing that any different than Obama shutting down all of the national parks to inflict the maximum pain possible on the country during the shutdown?

      1. It’s not, but it still makes him an asshole in the same way it makes Obama an asshole.

      2. There is not difference. They are both childish assholes.

      3. But even if he did, and it looks like he did, how is him doing that any different than Obama shutting down all of the national parks to inflict the maximum pain possible on the country during the shutdown?

        I guess it’s worse because by gridlocking a town, he effectively committed thousands of acts of false imprisonment.

        Obama, on the other hand, only falsely imprisoned a handful of people (the guys in the hotel at the park), and committed numerous acts of tortious interference with trade (by preventing businesses from operating).

        Both are abuses of power, motivated by similarly psychopathic personalities, but the harm committed is different.

        1. I guess it’s worse because by gridlocking a town, he effectively committed thousands of acts of false imprisonment.

          Not being able to leave at an accommodating pace and not being able to leave at all are two very different things. I don’t think increasing a 2 hour commute to an 8 hour commute could reasonably be described as imprisonment.

          1. If I restrain you in your house for four hours, and you go to the cops, I’m getting hit with a false imprisonment charge.

            IT may not fit the legal definition of false imprisonment, but it definitely fits the spirit of it.

            1. No one was restrained in their house, they were slowed down in their cars. It’s still a dick move, but I don’t think it rises to nearly the same level. If some moron on a single lane highway was doing 5 mph in front of me when the speed limit was 55 mph I’d feel perfectly comfortable calling him an asshole, but I wouldn’t try to nail him with false imprisonment.

                1. Yeah, clearly you have to be a team red cheerleader to take issue with characterizing a traffic jam with kidnapping…

                  1. Those wooshing sounds? They’re points sailing right over your head. Make sure you keep your head down! They hurt when they hit an unprepared brain! 😀

                    1. Yeah, your esoteric logic is just incomprehensible breh. That’s gotta be it.

              1. And anyway, there was at least 1 tangentially-related death in the national park shutdown as well: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/he…..-in-idaho/

          2. It’s worse because this happened in a suburb of New York City. A traffic jam in NYC is more important and more newsworthy than, say, a tornado wiping out Topeka.

        2. Another difference – apparently someone passed away due to delaying medical care.

          That said, they’re both scum.

          1. apparently someone passed away due to delaying medical care.

            My understanding is the delay was not very long (as in minutes) and did not contribute in any significant way to the death.

            1. I’m sure the press won’t see it that way. I saw a headline from Maddow already claiming this has sunk his chances at Pres (no way I’m actually reading that).

        3. But the principle is the same Tarran. We can debate the harm all we want. But in the end both Obama and Christie view their executive power as something to be used to punish their enemies. That is what matters, not the particulars of who was harmed.

          1. But the principle is the same Tarran.

            Oh, I agree!

            Both are trying to inflict pain on innocent third parties willfully and unnecessarily to harm a political opponent.

            I view what Christie did as being worse than what Obama did, just as kicking someone in the balls is worse than kicking them in the gut. That fact doesn’t make kicking someone in the gut no big deal. 🙂

  16. So, which Democrat-lite, statist loser will the GOP turn to now that Christie is toast? Rubio?

    1. Christie should just blame Bush (works for wasshisname)and join the Democrats.

      They’ll ‘get’ him there.

    2. Another Bush?

  17. Outrage as transgender teen who fought back against female bullies is the only one to face criminal charges in schoolyard brawl

    A California district attorney’s office has charged a 16-year-old transgender Jewlyes Gutierrez with misdemeanor battery
    Gutierrez was charged for her part in a schoolyard brawl late last year
    The other girls have not been charged
    The school suspended all four girls involved and held meetings to address the fight and bullying in general
    School district president Charles Ramsay says he doesn’t know why the DA has chosen to involve itself in the issue
    The brawl was caught on camera in the schoolyard
    According to reports, the transgender teen was a victim of ongoing bullying

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..clash.html

    1. I’m not surprised when a fight breaks out and the only one charged is also the only boy involved.

      1. I guess it’s not surprising, but fuck that. You have the right to defend yourself against anyone trying to do you harm, regardless of gender or glasses wearing.

    2. So when do we outlaw parents teaching their kids to defend themselves?

      1. Soon enough.

        Many schools already have an “if you’re involved in a fight in any way we’re suspending you” rule. If my son got suspended for defending himself, there’d be a few administrators who’d have need to defend themselves.

        1. I got hit with one of those 20 years ago when I was in high school. Kid came up & started swinging at me. I never swung back, but I clinched him so he couldn’t continue swinging at me. We both got the same suspension.

          I didn’t mind being ” forced” to miss a few days of school, but I was offended by the idiocy of the policy.

  18. A puppet is being investigated by authorities in Egypt over claims that it is behind a terror plot.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/maga…..r_bbcworld

      1. Yes – Achmed gets his own TV show and hey cool. Some obscure jackass makes a youtube video and half of North Africa goes into a frenzy.

    1. But isn’t that often the case in third-world countries…oh, wait, you mean an actual puppet-puppet, not a leader whose support base is a major power outside that country.

  19. ‘Girls’ producers go on ‘rage spiral’ defending nudity

    In the moment, Dunham herself spoke clearly about her position on the nudity, saying it is “a realistic expression of what it’s like to be alive. But I totally get it. If you’re not into me, that’s your problem and you’re going to have to work that out with professionals,” she retorted. And later, fellow EP Jenni Konner interrupted her response to another question to add, “I literally was spacing out because I’m in such a rage spiral about that guy,” she said pointing to the question-asker. “I was just looking at him looking at him and going into this rage [over] this idea that you would talk to a woman like that and accuse a woman of showing her body too much. The idea it just makes me sort of sick.”

    *swallows bile*

    1. I love it the critics basically asked in polite terms “why the hell do you feel the need to have a fat homely actress walk around naked in your show all of the time?”. The GOT reference in that article is funny too. GOT shows people naked to “titillate”, which is another way of saying “GOT shows people naked that viewers actually enjoy seeing naked”.

      1. I tried watching that show. Tried. Yuck. I know some of you look at it as satire, but it goes way beyond cringe. The people portrayed in that show are beyond repulsive. It’s not just their physical appearance it’s the whole way they conduct themselves. I’m far from the target audience, I get that. But I could not conjure up more detestable characters if I wanted to. And then watch them have awkward, disgusting sex? No thanks.

        1. Yeah, it’s bloody overrated, but did Lena Durham ever really have a chance?

          Her father, Carroll Dunham, is a painter of “overtly sexualized pop art”, and her mother, Laurie Simmons, is a photographer and designer, who creates artistic domestic scenes with dolls

          1. in other words, her parents are “worthless”

        2. I found the show somewhat funny but only because the people in it were so awful. Apparently they are all based on Dunham’s actual friends.

          We were talking about this the other day. There is a long history of authors basing horrible characters on friends. In every case I am aware of that resulted in the friends feeling betrayed and angry. Capote portrayed his New York Society friends as immoral, shallow and hedonistic in his unfinished novel “Prayers Answered”. After a teaser was published in the New Yorker, his friends never spoke to him again.

          Dunham’s friends seem to think her portrayal is great. They are so insulated and so lack self awareness that they have no idea any of the things they are doing are repulsive and love Dunham for making them famous in her show. It is pretty fucked up.

        3. I really wanted another Sunday night HBO show to like – I tried for a episode and a half, then couldn’t stand any more.

          The Vikings came along and I felt better.

          1. It is too bad Vikings isn’t on HBO. If Katherine Wynnick got her kit off, Vikings might be the greatest show in the history of television.

          2. Vikings is great, if only for giving Australian models a job

    2. Jesus Christ.

      Rage spiral?

      Sad little twirps.

    3. I really hope Judd Apatow doesn’t get involved in this. I like most of his stuff.

      1. Too late

        If you ask exec producer Judd Apatow, who addressed the incident after the panel, the wording of the reporter’s question itself, directed to creator and star Lena Dunham, was not only “offensive” but “sexist” and “misogynistic.”

        (For the record, here it is verbatim: “I don’t get the purpose of all the nudity on the show ? by [Dunham] in particularly. I feel like I’m walking into a trap where you go, ‘Nobody complains about all the nudity on Game of Thrones,’ but I get why they do it. They do it to be salacious and titillate people. And your character is often nude at random times for no reason.”)

        “That was a very clumsily stated question that’s offensive on it’s face, and you should read it and discuss it with other people how you did that,” Apatow said, speaking to the reporter who asked the question. “It’s very offensive.”

        Guess who’s not going to see another one of his movies?

        THIS OUTLAW.

        1. Ah, fuck.

          I will probably see his movies anyway, though. I’m such a whore (or a John?).

        2. It’s also bullshit because plenty of people complain about the nudity on GoT. Including fans. And for the same reason this guy is complaining about Dunham’s nudity: it can sometimes be random and unnecessary.

    4. Re: Lena Dunham,

      But I totally get it. If you’re not into me, that’s your problem.

      “You have the choice of gouging your eyes out to keep your sanity, but I will continue to flaunt by flaps!”

      1. Well, no. You have the choice of not watching the show, which is quite reasonable. It’s not as if she is coming to your house and walking around nude.

    5. Dunham’s response was fine. Konner is an idiot.

      I’M HAVING A RAGE SPIRAL…. LITERALLY

      1. The one suffering the “rage spiral” needs to relax a bit, but the response was pretty reasonable. People can get naked for whatever reason they want. And no one has to watch the show.

        1. And Dunham is right that nudity, particularly random nudity, is a part of life for normal people.

          I walk to the fridge naked and get a drink on occasion. I don’t need to be showering or fucking to be nude, and a show that acknowledges that is refreshing. It’s just that Dunham is fucking ugly and the characters on the show are infinitely shallow and petty.

          1. she isn’t fucking ugly, just a very average looking woman.

            1. Yeah. “Plain” would be a better description. If I met someone looking like that who had a great personality compatible with mine, her appearance would not be a deal breaker.

            2. You’re right in that you wouldn’t notice her in real life. However, I think most people here grade on a TV curve, which means they’re not comparing Dunham to the full set of women, but rather comparing her to, say, these women. (possibly NSFW)

              And compared to them, she is homely.

            3. You are right. She is not Melissa McArthy or something. She is just a below average looking young woman with a couple of really poorly done tattoos.

              For her age, I would not call her average. She is in her late 20s. I see a lot of late 20 something women and most of them are more attractive than her. She is definitely in the lower half or third among women her age.

    6. If you’re not into me, that’s your problem and you’re going to have to work that out with professionals,”

      Right–because if I decide not to watch a dumpy, nasty piece of cottage cheese like Lena Dunham get pretend-railed on national television, I’m the mentally broken one.

      Dunham once again confirms her place as the Honey-Boo-Boo of the upper-class set.

      1. No. If I’m not into her I can just ignore her. She clearly is popular with some people. Raging at her just gives her more attention. I had a morbid curiosity so I took a gander. Now I know better.

    7. Yep, I don’t think question is offensive but it’s their show they can do whatever nudity they want.

      1. Yes, I don’t get why it’s unreasonable to ask for an artist’s motivation for their art. Everything in a piece like this should have a purpose. Her answer was fine, she feels it’s more authentic, or whatever, but the anger is uncalled for. They’re all looking for offense.

        1. On the other hand I can understand her rolling her eyes at how the question was asked. The nudity in GOT doesn’t serve much more of a purpose most of the time either. She wants to be naked on her own show, whatever. And she’s right that someone people who get angry over an ugly check getting naked need to get over themselves. It’s not some damaging event. Either watch the show or don’t, it’s just some nudity.

  20. Unemployment rate at 6.7%…economy is saved! Oh wait, what’s that? You say more than 300,000 people left the labor force in December? And that labor participation is at a 30 year low?

    “74K jerbs created in December!

    1. The plug will have something to say about this!

      1. SUCK IT CHRISTFAG GOP LOSERS! THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE AFTER 5 YEARS OF HOT AND HEAVY RECOVERY UNDER OBAMA IS FINALLY WITHIN 2 POINTS OF WHERE IT WAS WHEN BOOOOOOOOOOSH LEFT OFFICE!

        There, saved him the trouble.

        1. A+. That is how it’s done, people.

        2. A-

          you forgot to mention how gold has pulled back from an all time high and how the Dow is at near record amounts.

    2. Only several years and a trillion dollars behind the “catastrophic” no-stimulus scenario!

    3. WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. employers hired the fewest workers in almost three years in December, but the setback was likely to be temporary amid signs that cold weather conditions might have had an impact.

      AGW is taking our jobs!

      http://finance.yahoo.com/news/…..53368.html

      1. Guess nobody knew about this catastrophic weather 19 hours ago

        December’s employment report is expected to show about 200,000 payroll jobs-a steady rate of growth and an encouraging sign that the labor market and economy may have finally started to turn after years of false starts.

        http://finance.yahoo.com/news/…..39285.html

    4. Retirements are the main reason for the decline in the labor rate.

      1. Yeah, especially those “downsized and can’t find another job” retirements.

      2. Are you sure? The labor rate only counts people 16-64. Of course, some people retire young, but has that been increasing the past few years?

        1. I imagine so. Over 55 it’s often displacement – LT Unemployment – SSDI – retirement. I’m not sure how those on SSDI are calculated towards the labor rate, though.

    5. Jesus, what is the real unemployment rate? People dropping out in frustration should count, too.

  21. Florida moves ahead with bill legalizing ‘warning shots’

    Florida legislators are pushing ahead with a bill designed to make it clear people can show a gun, or even fire a warning shot, without drawing a lengthy prison sentence.

    The legislation was partially inspired by the case of Marissa Alexander, a Jacksonville woman who was given a 20-year prison sentence after firing a gun near her estranged husband during an argument. Alexander’s conviction was thrown out by an appeals court and she is scheduled to have a new trial this year.

    1. I thought Uncle Joe Biden said this was ok already?

      1. Only if you live next to a school.

    2. Ah, the Joe Biden school of self-defense.

      Fuck that.

    3. Showing a firearm should be legal. Warning shots, no so much. Those rounds are going some where.

      1. You could also stove pipe the round, thus inviting instant attack.
        With a revolver you sure don’t want to waste the round.

        1. Deos stove pipe = hung round?

            1. Thanks Shoog.

          1. Back in the day we called it stove piping when the case does not fully eject and wedges the slide partially open, also likely preventing the next round from feeding properly.

    4. Ugh. So its okay to shoot up a house with kids in it? Great. Thanks. Assholes. The problem is that a woman with a restraining order was in the house of the target of the restraining order without the police supervision she is required to have to have contact. And then proceeded to tell a story that the jury didn’t buy about how the garage door worked fine when she pulled her car in the night before but didn’t work when she went out to the garage to “escape”.

      Oh, and you know who called 911 about this incident? Not her.

  22. Ultra-conservative senator in Virginia is proposing a bill that would make oral sex between teenagers a FELONY

    Senate Bill 14 defines ‘crimes against nature’ as knowing ‘any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth’
    Consenting adults who perform these sex acts in private and aren’t practicing prostitution are excepted from the felony
    The wording therefore makes it illegal for two consenting teens to have oral sex
    Senator Thomas Garrett is sponsoring the bill and says he is drafting an amendment to address complaints about the bill’s ‘unintended consequences’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..ELONY.html

    1. Why is this atheist senator so concerned about teens having oral sex?

      1. In America, even the atheists are prudes.

      2. Because his motivation is the exercising of power, not religion.

    2. Senate Bill 14 defines ‘crimes against nature’ as knowing ‘any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth’

      And what, pray tell, is ‘knowing’ defined as?

      1. So proctologists and dentists will no longer be seeing teenagers?

      2. I think the biblical definition of “knowing” is having sex with.

      3. sex aka “carnal knowledge”.

        Virginia’s original sodomy statute dates from the 1600’s and they’re still in love with renaissance English at the statehouse here.

    3. Oh, and, obligatorily: This is an isolated incident. There is no vast Socon apparatus trying back-door (!) approaches to re-criminilizing sodomy, etc.

      /socon

      1. It’s not difficult at all for you to square the idea of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy with the fact that the best its done so far is propose a bill in Virginia that will probably never even get voted on?

        1. Well, the bill is replacing a law that only needs replacing because the SCOTUS struck it down (twice).

          1. True, but the law in question was, what, 200+ years old? I don’t have a hard time believing there’s a contingent of Puritans who want to see it reinstated, I just have a hard time believing they’re a large or representative group given their relative lack of success.

            1. Like most states I imagine Virginia re-adopts their penal code regularly (it appears from this they did so in 1950, 1960, 1975, 1981, 1993, and 2005), each time they kept this law. From what I read during the Cuccinelli flap over this, the law was very nearly amended after Lawrence, but the social conservatives in the legislature blocked it. Then Cuccinelli pushed the right to use the law where not specifically contrary to Lawrence, but the 4th Circuit and SCOTUS slapped it down. Now this fellow introduces this law. That is pretty persistent, if nothing else it demonstrates how much they care about this issue to be wasting so much time and effort on it.

              1. Like most states I imagine Virginia re-adopts their penal code regularly…

                There’s antique laws that go relatively unnoticed by the vast majority of people that get reauthorized in the same manner. There’s gotta be a million “dumbest laws still on the books” lists comprised entirely of them. I still contend the influence of the vast SoCon apparatus is kind of sad if this is the best it has produced. If they team up with the WBC there’ll be no stopping them!

              2. IMO they have a fixation with this sexual act. Maybe they should be tied to a chair and forced to watch it for about a week straight.

            2. No Puritans in Virginia Colony, PMS. Crown colony, not religious refuge. The Jamestown settlers were mostly ne’er-do-wells and petty criminals.

              300+ actually.

              1. That Puritans/Virginia thing is particularly LOL-tastic since as a Crown Colony the Church of England was the State Religion in Virginia. The Puritans were, you know, not very keen on the Church of England…

                1. Clearly I meant Puritan in the literal 17th century historical context, and not as a generic reference to officiously moralistic religious types.

                  1. No, it wasn’t clear what you meant, so I assumed literal meaning. You know, the literal reading of the original meaning of the words which is the fashion here.

                    Brave but futile attempt to save face.

        2. Lighten up, PMS. It was a joke.

      2. Although he didnt use the term, this seemed a legit use of the term socon above.

        I think ultra-conservative is more technically accurate though.

        However, although I didnt comment on it, Bo’s use of it wrt to the Schlafly post the other day was wrong. While she is a socon, it wasnt her soconishness that caused her economic ignorance.

        Proper tag for that post was something like “Economic moron Phyllis Schlafly”.

        1. It is one thing to be pedantic, but an idiosyncratic pedantry is pretty bad. I said ‘SoCon Phyliss Schafly.’ You conceded ‘she is a socon.’ But I should not label her what she is, and what she is best known for, but should instead label her only according to the topic of the particular article she wrote there. Bizarre.

          1. Its like referring to Adulterer Tiger Woods when discussing a golf tournament.

            Its technically true, but seems off the point.

            1. Actually, since she is known chiefly as a socon it would be like referring to Golfer Tiger Woods when talking about adultery.

      3. Apparently there isnt, as consenting adults are exempted.

        The question I would have would be if the “adults” in question in this bill matches up with the VA age of consent law. As long as that is the case, its already illegal of some sort for the underage ones to be having sex, maybe, depending on how the law is written in VA.

        1. robc, libertarian Professor Eugene Volokh describes the silly ins and outs of the law here:

          http://www.volokh.com/2014/01/…..qus_thread

    4. What the hell is wrong with my state?

      1. Your fellow residents keep voting in these munchkins.

    5. “Crimes against nature” is a really weird concept, if you think about it. Nature is just whatever happens. Crime and sexual morality are the unnatural things, if anything is.

      Though I suppose it’s a bit different if you believe that nature was invented by a dude named YHVH for some purpose.

      1. Good point, Zeb. And look at how the modern environmental lefties have revised this concept, although in vastly different form.

        1. Yeah, a lot of them really are reactionary conservatives in their own special way.

          I’m a great lover of nature and wild places, but you have to accept that humans are part of the world and will change it.

    6. Wait, I thought minors couldn’t consent, by definition. Isn’t that the whole premise of statutory rape?

      1. The age of consent and the age of majority aren’t the same

      2. The bill would criminalize two 17 year olds 69ing.

  23. Why is so hard for women to get a job in programming? I mean, I can’t fathom it.

    Sane women exist and they need jobs as well.

    1. In the years it took me to get my degree, and in the years I’ve worked in software, I’ve known one female programmer who was worth a shit. All of the rest were deadweight.

      1. This person’s skills seem irrelevant in the face of her rampant paranoia and hair-trigger outrage gland.

        1. Seriously. OMG a man checked with his wife before going to lunch with a colleague who just happens to be a woman! Sexism! Outrageometer pegged at 11!

      2. Every big corporation I am aware of is obsessed with gender and racial balance in their workforce. I would think that programing would be guaranteed employment for any woman that can do it even competently. If you are a woman, why would you go into a field full of women and competition when you can instead go into a field where the fact that you are a woman will guarantee you lifetime employment? Hell, from what you and others say incompetent women programers manage to make a living. A woman of even average competence would clean up.

        1. A woman of even average competence would clean up.

          True. As evidenced by the fact that alot of very average males do likewise.

        2. I assume this will still be the case in 20 years, so I plan to make my daughter a barely functional Linux box for her eighth birthday and have her figure out how to make it do everything she wants.

        3. I knew several girls who studied engineering while I was in undergrad and grad school. Some of them would occasionally make some comment about how hard it was to be a women in engineering. Yet when it came time to get jobs, they all had to beat off offers with a stick, while the guys who were getting much better grades couldn’t even get an interview (let alone the guys who also had mediocre grades).

          1. Yeah, that’s my experience in math academia too.

          2. Funny you say that. One attractive lady in my classes who barely passed her exams and got constant “help” with her projects is pulling down six figures from Microsoft, while the guys who did her work for her are lucky to get a job as a dishwasher.

          3. I am sure they did. There is no more privileged and pampered class of people in our society and maybe the world than upper middle class college educated women. So it is no wonder they still thought it was hard even though employers where taping job offers to rocks and throwing them threw their window at night.

            1. “even though employers where taping job offers to rocks and throwing them threw their window at night.”

              I laughed.

            2. One specific instance which really highlights this:

              I had one friend whose resume I reviewed and helped edit. She ended up applying for the same job I did at a aerospace company. I never heard anything from them, but she got flown out for an interview immediately (she ended up turning down a job offer).

              As I said, I reviewed and edited her resume. There were literally three differences between ours (we were in the same program and did our master’s work on the same project): I had a GPA a full point higher than hers, I had been a TA on top of classes and research, and she was a woman.

              1. She wrote that she was a woman on her resume?

                1. She wrote that she was a woman on her resume?

                  In most cases a person’s gender can be deduced from their name, dumbass.

                  1. In most cases a person’s gender can be deduced from their name, dumbass.

                    I have yet to meet a guy named Tricia.

                  2. This is the real story behind “A Boy Named Sue.”

              2. She’s a Jobforce vampire. She sucked the job out of you.

                1. I should have let her suck other things out of me instead.

                  1. You should’ve known she was a Jobforce vampire by the fact that she walked around nude all the time.

                    1. Nobody walks around nude in Ithaca. They’re all wusses and think it’s cold there.

                    2. She was nude under her clothes! Ah, ha!

              3. I wonder which of those three differences mattered. And I also wonder if the diversity police have any heartburn at all over this course of events, unless hiring the less qualified but genitalia-correct person is the new norm.

              4. Because if you were hired, they were running the risk of

                a) a lawsuit from her

                b) adverse federal regulatory action

            3. My daughter is a High School junior with and A in Honors C++. She thinks she wants to major in Engineering (probably computer). I’m pretty happy about it.

              1. She should.

              2. You should be Drake.

          4. My wife is an engineer (even got a “diversity” fellowship for grad school) and I would say those types who complain are weeded out the further up you go especially in oil and gas. In fact they all roll their eyes at the older women at their company who organize women in engineering events who complain about how tough it is out there.

            The most sexism she experiences is mostly because of the do gooders like the lab tech guys apologizing when a dirty joke or something slips as if she can’t handle it because she’s a frail woman. That’s not their fault though.

            1. And that attitude just hurts women. If men are afraid of offending women, they won’t speak freely in front of them and won’t include them in the group. All sexual harassment laws do is ensure that men don’t trust women and only include them when they have to.

            2. My wife is the Principle Engineer for a large company here in Denver. She is actually feared (She was one of the original 7). I find it funny. The only person who “might” not respect her ability and results is the Architect (also original) but I think that is mostly a personality issue and not a gender one. The CEO, COO, and CMO all listen when she speaks up. Every other dev shits bricks when she comes calling…Cause most of the devs (all men) suck. And by the way, they have had other female devs and they really sucked too according to my wife.

              I feel I should be more scared of her than I am and I just don’t know it.

          5. It’s the same in law.

        4. This is very true. I have not seen any man rise as fast in my company as the women. Don’t get me wrong, some really deserve it, like my wife and her friends, and most mid-level managers are incompetent whether man or woman. I just think it’s hilarious when I see women on the employee message boards talking about pay or other gender discrimination and want to ask if they actually believe women in our company really only make 75% of the men’s salaries.

      3. I’ve known (not in *that* sense) very good women programmers. However, my “favorite” was a noobie who, having been given an assignment, returned empty-handed a week later and said “I can’t do this”. She got pregnant and resigned shortly thereafter.

        1. How was getting pregnant related to confessing incompetence to her boss? I mean…ohhhhhhhhhhh. I understand.

          1. No you don’t.

          2. “It’s still physically possible for you to pass this course.”

      4. There aren’t that many competent male programmers, either.

        1. Just because you are incompetent doesn’t mean everyone else is.

          1. You wouldn’t know competent if it performed an appendectomy on you with a flashlight.

            1. Speak for yourself.

      5. My old girlfriend’s mom was a math major who started at the bottom rung as a programmer, ended up as VP. She didn’t cotton much to women as victims in business narratives.

        1. Most successful women like that don’t.

          My wife holds two masters in something, something, and her father was a prominent corporate guy and she doesn’t cotton much to it as well. In fact, she’s annoyed by token sports reporters and anchors for some reason.

          1. Token sports reporters are genuinely awful, especially on the major networks.

            Except Jenny Dell.

            1. I don’t understand people who don’t cotton to token sports reporters.

              Sports “reporting” is a joke. It’s all scripted, formulaic nonsense and at the end of the day is nothing but entertainment. Entertainers should be attractive. It doesn’t matter to me if Jamie Erdahl knows less about baseball than Peter Gammons, because their commentary is mere entertainment.

              1. Well said. But if you are going to have commentary as entertainment then make it more entertaining to the audince by at least making the sideline reporters attractive. The local networks seem to be better at this than the national networks.

                Also, more more more shots of cheerleaders please. Especially at NCAA Men’s Basketball games.

                1. Also, more more more shots of cheerleaders please. Especially at NCAA Men’s Basketball games.

                  I read somewhere that producers of music videos used focus groups to determine that men were more interested in videos where they never quite get a good look at the hot chick(s).

                  The key was to show flashes or odd angles that implied you were about to see a hot chick, but you never quite did.

                  I am convinced that the CBS Sports guys are employing that technique, because they are very good at just barely getting the cheerleaders into the frame, for just a moment, before adjusting the angle. They’re also very good at showing the cheerleaders with advertising graphics on top of the image. Or doing the “quick pan” where the guy with the handheld quickly passes the line of cheerleaders but then turns away.

                  Damn you and your psychosemiotic knowledge, CBS Sports!

                  1. ESPN was doing a good job of that last night during the UCLA/Arizona game. Bastards.

            2. Melissa Stark (and her sweaters) was not “Token” reporter

      6. We’ve got a good number who are decent, but most do end up getting fast-tracked into a “leadership” position, which takes them out of actual engineering work pretty quickly.

    2. She’s a programmer, is a print-published author on programming, has lectured on programming numerous times, has been attending programming meetups with said boyfriend for a decade

      Maybe because 4 out of 5 of the things you mention to prove your bona fides have fuck all to do with actual work output.

      Fuck you with your magazine articles and your lectures. What have you fucking built?

    3. Why is so hard for women to get a job in programming?

      Because they’ve already taken all of the jobs in HR so you need somewhere to stash the men to the numbers balance out?

    4. I tried reading that, but after 3 paragraphs I got tired of reading Seventeen Magazine.

      1. Yeah. I made it 50% through, quit, and came back to finish it after another cup of coffee.

        Finding microaggression sexism because a guy might want to call his wife before he has an out of office 1 on 1 lunch with a female co worker just shows the lack of real world experience and social knowledge. I imagine that situation probably bothers some people, and he would know more than you if that would bother his wife. And if that makes his wife uncomfortable, then you’re going to have to get the fuck over it and find time in the office for this meeting.

  24. Owner Attempts to Warm up Car by Charcoal Fire, Car Burns

    Lac du Flambeau police Chief Robert Brandenburg tells The Associated Press temperatures were about minus 23 degrees and the woman’s 2007 Dodge Caravan wasn’t starting. So first she took out the battery, warmed it up inside and reinstalled it.

    Then she shoved a mound of hot coals under the van hoping to warm up the engine chamber. He says the undercarriage of the front bumper caught fire, causing about $1,000 of damage.

    1. Does the insurance company have to pay foor this kind of stupid, or can they write it off as an act of god?

      1. God made her that stupid, so…

  25. Exclusive: New Videos Released In Attack On Hollywood Teen

    http://miami.cbslocal.com/2014…..wood-teen/

    Hollywood Police say the videos depict Ericka Avery and Patricia Montes relentlessly punching and kicking the victim while telling her that the beating will cease if she has sex with a man named Jayvon Woolfork. Last month prosecutors showed a series of videos in court of the attack from inside the house. These new videos show what occurred before the attack moved inside.

    1. the beating will cease if she has sex with a man named Jayvon Woolfork.

      A case of sextortion?

  26. So I was having breakfast and the place where I was had Fox News on. They had the chief of the Detroit police department talking about how more guns and liberal conceal and carry makes cities safer. It turns out that criminals are more afraid of running into an armed citizen than they are of the cops.

    The Chief was a black guy. So the liberals at media mutters monitoring it must have had a stroke. I would really like to think that the black community at some point will get tired of being victimized. Imagine living in working somewhere like inner city Chicago, where there are some very bad people looking to victimize you and having to listen to some asshole rich white liberal tell you how it is just unsafe for you to have a gun to defend yourself. How do working black people not hate white liberals with the heat of a thousand suns?

    1. Imagine living in working somewhere like inner city Chicago, where there are some very bad people looking to victimize you

      And that most certainly includes their supposed protectors, the Chicago PD.

      1. That too. Seriously, I would love to take a few of these anti-gun asshole white reporters and make them live and work in a bad area of Chicago or New York for a year and see if they think guns are just so unnecessary.

    2. They had him on The Independents the other day, good interview, and drove the Dem punching bag nuts.

      1. I know there is a lot of justifiable hate directed at cops on here. But at least from what I saw, that guy seems like a legitimately good guy.

    3. John, can you imagine what would happen if black people in inner cities began demanding concealed carry to defend themselves? Why wouldn’t they – the cops don’t care about them and in any case can’t defend them against crime. Cuomo and Bloomberg would have epileptic siezures. It would really be beautiful.

      1. It would be. There was a black professor at GW law school when I was there who had written a bunch of law review articles arguing that under the militia clause and a couple of other sections of the Constitution, inner city black communities had the right to arm themselves and form militias because the government had so utterly failed at providing basic protection and safety. He was a very interesting guy. He was black and economically pretty liberal so the liberals were terrified of challenging him. So they basically just ignored him and hoped he would go away.

        But if blacks ever went full NRA pro 2nd Amendment, the liberals would have to finally drop the mask and admit that they are full paternal racists. And that would be beautiful.

      2. Or if they began demanding school choice, or scaling back the drug war, or…

        Sad reality is, as long as they vote 93% Dem every election, their demands don’t matter. Just like the pro-lifers in the GOP.

        1. Things don’t go on forever. Black voted 90% Republicans for decades. I do not believe that any community will forever allow itself to be victimized. At some point they will turn. It often takes a long time and you never know when it will happen. But it will happen.

      3. Would it be anything like how Reagan and California Republicans reacted to the Black Panthers exercising open carry rights a few decades ago?

        1. No idea. What do you think?

          1. I think the idea of armed black people has scared quite a few people across various political spectrums for various reasons.

            1. Which probably just shows that one side is inherently ‘racist’ and willing to cloak their racism in ‘public safety’ language while the other side is inherently ‘controlling/fascist/progressive’ and also willing to cloak their authoritianism in ‘public saftey’ language.

              1. I actually think for most conservatives and Republicans their commitment to the 2nd Amendment has overcome any tendencies to take positions like Reagan and other conservatives did back then. At some point rhetoric matters, and can constrain what might be someone’s initial policy position that is easily found inconsistent with that rhetoric.

                1. I tend to agree.

                2. Ya I remember Coolio and G Gordon Liddy agreeing publicly about this a few years ago.

    4. Detroit is in an unusual situation due to their tiny police force compared to the population and the area they cover. When response times are at least 30 minutes, even a Team Blue political appointee can’t keep up the illusion that people are supposed to call 911 and wait for their badged protectors.

      1. Detroit is hardly the only see with long response times for police. I would be very surprised if it is even the worst.

        1. 911 is a joke wasnt written by Detroit residents.

        2. Are response times even correlated with crime levels? In Baltimore, the police department is essentially a huge jobs program, and within two minutes of calling for police you’ll have five squad cars pulling up, even for minor shit. The ghettos are filled with police and police cars. Yet crime is terrible and everybody seems to think we can solve it with “more police!”

    5. You deny the magical powers of Hope and Change?

    6. Imagine living in working somewhere like inner city Chicago, where there are some very bad people looking to victimize you and having to listen to some asshole rich white liberal tell you how it is just unsafe for you to have a gun to defend yourself.

      You mean like McDonald in McDonald v Chicago? He brought rich white liberals and their shitty policy all the way to the SCOTUS and won.

    7. it won’t be long until they find a few nicer words that replace what they really want to call the guy, “Uncle Tom”.

      1. it won’t be long until they find a few nicer words that replace what they really want to call the guy, “Uncle Tom”.

        And that’s the nicer of the terms they have for blacks who don’t subscribe to liberal thought.

        House nigger, lawn jockey, etc are some of the more egregious.

  27. This tingly cold pair of underwear will make your sperm swim better

    Your underwear can save your sperm. Or at least that’s what Snowballs believes. What’s Snowballs? A type of cooling underwear that basically uses ice packs for “scrotal cooling”. Ball air conditioning, basically. It’s for the kids.

    The idea behind the underwear is that tests of men with fertility problems tend to “be naturally warmer by an average of over one degree Celsius”. That little number adds up to a big difference and by lowering temperature in the precious area can improve the motility of the sperm.

    1. Pass. If my sperm swim any better, they won’t require intercourse to impregnate my wife. Neither she nor I want that.

  28. From Matt’s post last night:

    Though the two stories on the surface would seem to have nothing in common, dig a fingernail into both and you’ll quickly hit the same conclusion: Politicians and the organizations around them are largely in the business of getting elected, for which they will use whatever tool, or stake whatever position they can get away with.

    I wonder if you could get even this through the impermeable skull of America’s Foremost Public Intellectual (you know who she is) with the aid of the Ludovico Technique.

  29. Analysis: Housing experts warn of hiccups as new U.S. mortgage rules go live

    On Friday, lenders must be prepared to verify that borrowers can repay their home loans, under rules written by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and required by the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street oversight law.

    Banks will have to consider a list of factors that show the consumer’s financial health, including income, existing debt obligations and credit history.

    The reform seeks to prevent a repeat of the 2007-2009 financial crisis, when millions of people’s homes went into foreclosure, in many cases because the borrowers received loans they could not afford.

    1. lenders must be prepared to verify that borrowers can repay their home loans

      The tight credit market has already done this.

      Contrast with 2003-07 when the market didn’t bother checking credit.

      Even Fannie/Freddie are winning huge settlements because lenders sold them shitty loans.

      1. You know what else would reduce bad loans? Making the banks take the loss.

        1. That is what is happening. Fannie/Freddie are spitting out record profits and only take high-FICO paper.

          Geithner really shaped them up.

          NEW YORK (TheStreet) — Freddie Mac (FMCC_) said it will pay the Treasury $30.4 billion in dividends after posting a profit for the eighth consecutive quarter.

          1. Geithner really shaped them up.

            Priceless!

          2. Anyone else confused how Fannie/Freddie posting profits 5 years after the housing crash and a several-hundred-billion-dollar capital infusion from Uncle Sam has anything to do with banks taking losses on their bad loans, for which they were bailed out at the same time as Fannie/Freddie?

          3. Crony capitalism is crony. Bursting the current stock market bubble will crash the housing market again within another few years.

            “While I’m always glad when taxpayers see a return on investment, we can’t forget that Fannie and Freddie wouldn’t be earning one penny today without the government guaranteeing their transactions,” Republican Senator Bob Corker said in a statement. “I don’t know of any other company in America that gets that kind of deal.”

          4. That is what is happening. Fannie/Freddie are spitting out record profits and only take high-FICO paper.

            Geithner really shaped them up.

            completely offset by FHA becoming a subprime lender.

        2. You know what else would reduce bad loans? Getting rid of the Community Reinvestment Act.

    2. Banks will have to consider a list of factors that show the consumer’s financial health, including income, existing debt obligations and credit history.

      That is racist straight up.

      1. That is racist straight up.

        It’s virtually guaranteed that this argument will be made, especially being as it already had been made when government was extorting banks in to giving out loans to minorities who couldn’t afford to pay them back or else suffer ramifications from the fedgov.

        1. They are just putting the banks in a sued if you do and sued if you don’t situation. Follow the rules and get Jesse Jackson suing you for redlining. Meet Jackson’s demands and have the SEC prosecute you for making irresponsible loans.

          But you watch, these people will be shocked when the available capital for home loans dries up as banks just say to hell with it.

      2. CRA! CRA!! CRA!!!

        Red Line! RedLine!! RED LINE!!!

    3. On Friday, lenders must be prepared to verify that borrowers can repay their home loans.

      That’s unfair. Homeownership is a right, just like healthcare and a free college education -slash – frat party!

  30. FBI Director James Comey doesn’t think that Edward Snowden is a whistle-blower, saying that he has “trouble applying the ‘whistle-blower’ label to someone who just disagrees with the way our country is structured and operates.”

    After which he masturbated furiously to a picture of Woodrow Wilson with his boot on the neck of Eugene Debs.

  31. Say good-bye to our Middle East allies

    The Saudis just flipped the bird at President Obama. It’s hard to blame them: They’re just looking after their own interests in the increasingly chaotic Middle East. The question is when, if ever, America will get off the fence and start protecting its interests in the region.

    In promising $3 billion to Lebanon to bolster its military, Riyadh attached two conditions: 1) that the cash go to the Lebanese army’s stalled drive to disarm the terrorists of Hezbollah, and 2) that Lebanon buy its arms from France.

    Goodbye!

    1. The question is when, if ever, America will get off the fence and start protecting its interests in the region.

      Um, no. The question is when will we get the hell out of there and stay out.

    2. Good riddance, thanks to hydraulic fracturing!

    3. I am so feeling the loss of friendship

    4. Impossible. I was assured that the Noble Peace Prize Lightworker, along with such noble statesmen such as Kerry and Clinton, would re-establish America’s global reputation.

      1. …would re-establish America’s global reputation.

        To be fair, they HAVE re-upped it.

    5. French guns? Seriously? Like the FA MAS?

      The Lebanese should beg permission to buy from the Belgians at least.

      1. French war surplus: Never fired, only dropped once.

  32. This is a week old, so maybe it has already been discussed.

    The blaze broke out in an opulent new Hollywood Hills home that was scheduled to be the set for a television series, “Germany’s Next Top Model,” just a few days later. Flames escaped from a fireplace ? designed for outdoor use, but installed indoors in violation of the fire code on the home’s top floor by Gerhard Albert Becker, a wealthy German architect.

    Mr. Becker, who built the home and had recently moved in, fled with his girlfriend on that night in February 2011. By the time firefighters arrived, the entire attic was engulfed in flames.

    Working frantically to break through the ceiling and extinguish the blaze, firefighters heard a loud crack. The roof collapsed on top of them, seriously injuring several firefighters and killing Glenn Allen, 61, a veteran of 36 years with the Los Angeles Fire Department.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01……html?_r=0

    I agree that this guy committed a crime. How does an architect do something that stupid? Was he just so arrogant he figured the laws of physics and heat transfer didn’t apply to him? Is this a case of our society’s penchant for narcissism and magical thinking?

    1. It’s pretty clear from the article that arrogance was a cause, but there was also his:

      safety inspectors had failed to find the illegally installed fireplaces.

      1. In libertopia, would there be safety inspectors at all? I would say definitely not, not required by law anyway. Likely required by insurance companies, or at least stipulated that a pass from a safety inspector would lower insurance premiums.

        1. Agreed, but then again I wasn’t suggesting the contrary, merely that his incompetence was aided and abetted by that of the government which had claimed it was uniquely placed to make buildings safe

          1. No, no. I didn’t mean to suggest that you were. I guess I was just thinking out loud. More in reference to my rant down thread about licensing tradesmen.

      2. safety inspectors had failed to find the illegally installed fireplaces.

        Bullshit. They either didn’t inspect him at all, got paid off, or provided professional courtesy. This is in fucking California where you need a permit to change a switchplate.

        1. How do you fail to notice giant outdoor fire places in the living room?

          They got paid off or just rubber stamped it because he was an architect.

          1. You are assuming said ‘inspectors’ are qualified to distinguish between outdoor and indoor fireplaces. They are GOVT employees, don’t forget.

        2. This is in fucking California where you need a permit to change a switchplate.

          You also need to show that you have low flow toilets to get a permit to remodel any part of your house, even if that part is the bedroom or living room.

    2. Your fire code grows tiresome.

      1. Would you like to touch my flame retardant money?

    3. I agree that this guy committed a crime.

      Does that, by implication, mean you believe in the legitimacy of “building codes”?

      I agree that he’s civilly liable, but this doesn’t change my opinion that building codes are bollucks.

      1. It has nothing to do with building codes. He committed a crime because he built a house in such a negligent way that it caused a fire which foreseeably resulted in the death of a fire fighter.

        In fact, this being a crime argues against the need for building codes. You don’t create codes. You hold people responsible when they negligently construct a building and that negligence causes harm.

        1. Exactly. But the common retort will be that these codes *prevent* these accidents. This is the typical argument I get from drug prohibitionists. Drug laws *prevent* people from hurting other people while high.

          1. The codes don’t prevent shit. Throwing someone in jail or making them face civil liability in contrast, prevents a lot.

            The other people who dropped the ball here were his insurers. How would you like to underwrite the home insurance policy on such a house?

            That shows the harm of codes. Without codes, the insurance company would have come down and inspected and said “no fucking way are we underwriting this” and his mortgage company would have forced him to make changes to the design. Instead, everyone relied on the code inspectors thinking that if it makes code it must be good, and we got this.

            1. The guy put in sprinklers for the inspection, and then ripped them out once the inspectors were gone.

              If the firemen and their survivors won a massive judgement that took 75% of his income for the rest of his life to pay off, I wouldn’t be too pissed.

              1. I am not pissed. I agree with him going to jail and I agree with the judgement. My original post was more about how someone trained as an architect could be that irresponsible. I really do think that there is something to the idea that our society has become so self centered and our education system so bad that people seem to believe the rules of physics don’t apply to them.

            2. I completely, 100% agree with you John.

              I was pointing out the typical prog/regular joe line of thinking when it comes to codes.

    4. Too many architects these days are not engineers. Aesthetics come before actual structural integrity and proper construction.

      1. Which is as it should be.

        Architects design, and engineers make sure it’s structurally sound.

        1. But they need to work together. And there are a lot of architects who are decent engineers as well.

          1. Yes.

            It seemed you were taking issue with architects not being engineers, to which my answer is, “yeah, so?” Of course architects need to work with engineers lest their buildings fall.

  33. it seemed like a good idea at the time…

    Waitress says couple left meth for a tip

    After Ryan Bensen, 40, of Beaverton and Erica Manley, 37, of Cascade Locks allegedly paid for their drinks at the Twisted Fish in Seaside, they tipped their waitress with an envelope filled with a crystal-like substance, as first reported by The Daily Astorian.

    The waitress called Seaside police after receiving the tip and police identified the substance as methamphetamine.

    1. I beat you by eight minutes.

      1. meh – when I’m on a posting roll, I’m in a fog.

        1. Meh? You forgot the ‘t’.

  34. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjbhVWuSt4Q

    It literally looked like a doll hitting the ground.

  35. George Will: Liberalism by gesture

    The next item on Gesture Liberalism’s agenda is to raise the minimum wage for the 23rd time. Less than 3 percent of the workforce earns the minimum; more than 60 percent of those who do earn it get a raise within a year; more than half of minimum-wage earners are students or other part-time workers from households with average incomes of $53,000. Never mind. Raising the minimum is a gesture of devotion to “equality.”

    As is Obama’s support for universal preschool, the centerpiece of the agenda of New York City’s new mayor, Bill de Blasio. When, in Obama’s first inaugural address, he vowed to “restore science to its rightful place,” he evidently meant to exclude social science: There is much discouraging data about the efficacy of universal preschool.

    It will, however, mean billions for hiring more members of teachers unions, whose dues will help elect the likes of Obama and de Blasio. So this component of Gesture Liberalism is more than just a gesture.

    1. Gestures signal good intentions. George Will hates gestures, therefore, he hates good intentions.

      /derplogic

    2. The gesture being a upraised middle finger to the taxpayers.

    3. OT, I’m looking forward to the new content at your blog, as per yesterday’s announcement.

      1. thanks – I have a friend who wants to get writing (and apparently leach off my audience). He’s obsessed with the Beatles, different pressings of records, and the differences between tubes. It should make for some opinionated blog posts.

        For example, he actually bought four different vinyl versions of George Harrison’s “All Things Must Pass” – the original British, an American, the Japanese, and the German.

        1. For example, he actually bought four different vinyl versions of George Harrison’s “All Things Must Pass” – the original British, an American, the Japanese, and the German.

          That’s common in collecting circles. There is one obscure Finnish Folk black metal band that I own every version of vinyl for every album they have ever made. If they released it on vinyl, I own a copy of it (including test pressings in two cases).

          SOme pressings are simply better than others, even when made in the same country. Rush’s Moving Pictures is like this. The pressing from the NY plant are superior because they have different vinyl masters that were done better.

          1. Rush’s Moving Pictures is like this. The pressing from the NY plant are superior because they have different vinyl masters that were done better.

            Do you have a link for this? It’s not that I doubt you, but I have a friend who collects Rush, and I’m sure he’d be interested if he doesn’t already know this.

            1. No.

              I read it offhand somewhere a while back when wondering why a particular copy of Moving Pictures sounded better than another of the same issue. When what I had read described exactly what I was hearing, and I checked it against the matrix numbers, it was clear that it was the case.

          2. very true – I do hear differences between different pressings. My Japanese pressing of Ziggy Stardust, for example, is BRIGHT compared to my old RCA version. But the jap vinyl is so damn quiet.

          3. I had the original Japanese Alive! She Cried by The Doors.

            Then I got robbed and was never able to find another copy of the CD opting for the American LP release.

            Still pissed about it.

            1. discogs.com is your friend for sourcing down shit like that.

    1. God only has four fingers? God is a Simpsons character? And who cut off God’s hand? And what’s all that red shit shooting out of God’s severed, abandoned hand?

    2. At least He’s not giving us the finger.

      1. But wait!

        “With NuSTAR, the hand looks more like a fist, which is giving us some clues.”

        1. FoE is a prophet?!!!

          *flings self to the ground and grovels toward FoE*

          1. Bring me women so that I may know them. They don’t have to be virgins. (In fact, I prefer someone who knows her way around a shepherd’s staff, if you catch my drift.)

            1. A woodpecker?

              1. Okay, Tim isn’t in charge of this part of my adoration.

  36. Too lazy to provide a link, but Dave Ramsey was on Stossel last night downing socialism. I guess the lefties will continue to have spaz attacks about things he says.

    1. Dave Ramsey was on Stossel last night downing socialism

      And so was Tibor Machan, with much more flair I might add.

  37. FBI Director James Comey doesn’t think that Edward Snowden is a whistle-blower, saying that he has “trouble applying the ‘whistle-blower’ label to someone who just disagrees with the way our country is structured and operates.”

    Methinks it’s FBI Director James Comey who is confused on how our country is structured and operates.

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    Fuck all of these government bureaucrats whose sole mission is to make their own jobs easier, and make sure that their position is seen as necessary to freedom as we understand it. I’m fucking tired of hearing of these motherfuckers insisting they have a monopoly on how the constitution is supposed to work, especially when shit is clear as fucking day.

    What the fuck is so hard about “shall not be violated”, asshole? I don’t recall seeing an “unless an unelected bureaucrat thinks it needs to be done” clause in the 4A.

    It’s time to clean house. At what point do people say enough is enough?

    1. u mad bro?

      1. Yes. It’s right there in his name. [shakes head, walks away muttering]

        1. THAT WAS THE POINT CAPTAIN DIABETES

          1. u mad bro?

            1. recursive loop alert.

              1. u recursive bro?

              2. tail call optimization alert

                1. u optimized bro?

  38. So yesterday, on 4chan’s /b/, someone posted a picture of a box fan with the grille removed, to which they had affixed a fleshlight. Later in the thread they posted an animated GIF of it in action.

    It was… well, it was what you would expect.

    On an unrelated note, gaijin, would you please email me?

    1. Shriek hangs out at 4chan?

  39. Trappists open brewery in Massachusetts: “people ‘love the idea of monks brewing beer.'” They themselves drink geer only on some holidays.

    From the Boston Globe

    http://www.b.globe.com/1iXk4Os

    1. That’s not far from my work at all. I’ll have to check it out.

      Also your link doesn’t work. here’s one I found.

      1. There are jobs in Worcester?

        1. I didn’t say I worked in Worcester.

          1. Well there ain’t anything else near Spencer. 😉

            1. Spencer is right off the pike so it’s only about 45 minutes from where I work in metrowest.

        2. A fuckload of freight goes through Worcester. There is more going on there than you might think. A good friend of mine lives there and despite my inclination to hate the place, it’s really not so bad.

  40. The Dirty Politics of Deer Management:

    One of the seven tenets of the North American Model of Conservation is that wildlife policy should be dictated by science, and hunters are the principal tool biologists use to manage deer. This is what my Wildlife Management 101 professor called the happy triangle: trained biologists, whitetails, and sportsmen.

    In the real world, it’s more like a dysfunctional decahedron, with special-interest groups, lobbyists, legislators, governors, biologists, and factions of hunters all pulling in odd directions, often behind closed doors. At the ground level, it’s a messy, sometimes dirty business where money, power, and influence can matter as much as or more than what biologists prescribe, what hunters want, or what’s best for the deer.

    Not even fucking game management can be performed honestly.

  41. Zero Hedge on the Jobs #s:

    So, Who’s Lying?

    As was reported to mass jubilation on Wednesday, the ADP private payrolls number soared to the highest monthly change since November 2012, a 238,000 increase driven by what the report said was a 48,000 increase in construction jobs. ADP’s Mark Zandi went on the record to say that “The job market ended 2013 on a high note. Job gains are broad-based across industries, most notably in construction and manufacturing. It appears that businesses are growing more confident and increasing their hiring.” It appears not. According to today’s BLS report in December, on a seasonally adjusted basis, the construction industry lost 16K jobs. And where it gets really funny is when one looks at construction on a non-seasonally adjusted basis, construction jobs plummeted by a whopping 216,000! However you cut it someone is obviously lying. If we cared we would ask who. However, since both data series are completely fabricated, who even cares?

      1. Yet the media and the administration will continue to celebrate this strong economy. What’s real unemployment, now, anyway? 18%?

        1. Why would you count people who don’t have jobs as unemployed? What’s the logic in that?

          1. It’s funny that people say that with a straight face. Really, how hard would it be to estimate the number that might be starting their own business (who have to file lots of documents and can be identified, anyway), those who drop out to stay at home with kids, and so on? Giving up because you can’t get a job is not the same thing. At all.

            Also extremely significant are the millions who are taking jobs below their paygrade. Those should count somehow, too.

            1. Personally I would still count stay at home moms as unemployed.

              1. You could, but I think that would distort the picture. My wife is staying at home, but that’s totally voluntary. She’s very able and has a couple of marketable master’s degrees. With homeschooling picking up in popularity, that situation is becoming increasingly common.

                1. I never said it wasn’t voluntary. But I don’t think that the unemployment number should represent anything other than the number of people who don’t have jobs. If people want a number which does reflect only the people who want a job but don’t have one, go ahead, but I don’t think it should be called the unemployment number.

            2. It is a tough issue Pro. I totally agree that people taking lower paying jobs and people who just give up ought to count. But people in nursing homes or jail or mental hospitals ought not to count, nor should kids in college who have no genuine interest in getting a job.

              No single number is going to be perfect. The full picture only emerges if you look at the participation rate in historic terms, the job creation numbers visa vie the increase in population and of course the number of unemployed actively looking for work.

              But doing that doesn’t make for simple headlines like the UE rate does. And doing that paints a really dismal picture for America which doesn’t fit the narrative of the Black Jesus saving America that the media wants to push.

              1. The guy who campaigned on “hope” has made millions hopeless.

                1. No, see, my moving the prize out of reach, he’s stimulating hope, because that’s all people can have.

                  1. By moving. I don’t have prize movement authority.

                    1. You do if the prize is “have reached the edge of the solar system”.

          2. I don’t think it matters much how they count it as long as they explain exactly who is being counted and how. Which they don’t.

      2. Fewer jobs

        http://afterdeadline.blogs.nyt…..r-vs-less/

        The basic rule for precise use of “less” and “fewer” is simple (though we slip often). Use “fewer” with countable, individual things, and “less” with uncountable amounts, volumes, etc.

        I’m not a gramar-nazi, but this is one that drives me nuts.

        1. By the way, that comment is directed at the original author. The great and powerful Lord Humungus was merely quoting the dipshit that made the mistake.

        2. I’m not a gramar-nazi

          Joez Law?

          You know who else wasn’t a grammar-nazi?

          1. spelling error != grammar error

            1. Meh. Make it a corollary.

        3. This is one of the few corrections I’ll make of my wife’s speech (which is generally very good). FEWER.

        4. I literally thanked the manager of my local Safeway years ago when they changed out the signs on the express lanes to “15 items or fewer” instead of “15 items or less”.

          1. funniest store sign I saw was:

            Store under Video Survey-Lance.

            which was made with metal and appeared to be printed at a professional shop. Drove to the same place a month later and they had taken it down by then.

          2. “Stationary” over the office/school supplies aisle in a CVS Pharmacy. But it didn’t move until they took it down. More loltastic since the mistake was probably with CVS corporate instead of the local manager.

        5. I’m not a gramar-nazi, but this is one that drives me nuts.

          Relax. You’ll live more.

          1. One thing you can’t say about Nazis is that they’re relaxed.

        6. Maybe it reflects the fact that the administration is treating jobs as if they are not countable, individual things.

    1. But the economy’s booming, Shreek told me so.

  42. On Friday, lenders must be prepared to verify that borrowers can repay their home loans, under rules written by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and required by the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street oversight law.

    You’d think the banks might have figgered this out on their own. You don’t suppose there were some sort of weird perverse incentives at work, do you?

  43. At-Home Genetic Testing Reveals A Sperm-Swapping Nightmare

    Couples trying to get pregnant through artificial insemination may have been victims of a disturbed fertility clinic worker who swapped his own sperm in place of at least one client’s, CeCe Moore writes at Your Genetic Genealogist.

    Apparently, the dude had kidnapped a college girl and held her for 3 weeks to perform “love experiments” on her prior to being hired at the clinic.

    1. 23andme uncovered this bit of nastyness. Talk about a huge disappointment for the dad.

  44. Was out having some beers with my buddies last night. One of them is a carpenter and he started talking about his boss saying that it’s just a matter of time before all carpenters are required to be licensed like plumbers, etc. This is in Ontario, FYI.

    The boys start talking about it and most seem to think that this will be a good thing in the long run and “elevate the quality of the trade”. I pipe in inquiring how they think this will be good for anybody in the the trade to create this artificial, arbitrary barrier to entry into the trade, not to mention the customer who is now forced by law to hire a “licensed” carpenter? I explain that I cannot see a way that this won’t just result in the cost of hiring a carpenter to increase with this artificial barrier to entry, and the cost for any man who wants to become a carpenter to now increase.

    One guy agreed with me but most just thought “hardy har har this will ensure I don’t hire a crappy carpenter because government”. It is fucking hopeless, people have no problem with government forcing rule onto every sector of every fucking thing.

    I don’t understand how people don’t see these “licenses” as a big middle finger to us from government. Thank you very much for trying to be my mother, but I can decide for myself who I want to hire to build my house. There is no reason, right now, that I cant hire a licensed carpenter. If I wan’t to save money and hire a non-licensed carpenter, that’s my fucking choice.

    /rant over

    1. They assume that they will be the licensed carpenters and once the system is in place they can charge more for their services.

      “We need to professionalize our trade” is always code for “Let’s make sure young guys can’t take our customers by charging less than us.”

      1. ^^THIS^^

        Worse still, “professionalizing” makes the problems they claim it solves worse. All professionalizing does is give the crooks the cover of a license.

      2. I said basically this exact thing. Most of them are fine with this sort of shit. And I’m not gonna sway anyone when were all drinking and arguing. It pisses me off though, I really am almost completely alone in my libertarianism. I try to inject my point of view into convos because most people have never even conceived of it and just default to “how can government fix this?”. Most times its fine, until we get talking about firearms and healthcare. Those subjects will always lead to very heated arguments.

      3. It’s also subconscious rent-seeking. I am beginning to think we are hard-wired for this.

    2. Smilin’, boy do I have stories for you about the construction industry here in Quebec.

      Licenses are nothing but a racket and you point straight to the reality: People accept it. Like my high-income, six-figures buddy who’s ‘not complaining’ that the government takes 54% of his money.

      Bertrand Russell: History of Western Philosophy.

      Try it. Big book but I found it illuminating.

      1. I’ve heard stories about the construction industry in Quebec.. it sounds fucking awful. I mean they get a 2 weeks mandatory holiday in the middle of the summer (the best time of the year up here for doing construction).

        Thanks for the book suggestion, I’m going to check it out.

        1. Well you can’t expect them to take their vacation in the 6 months a year the ground is frozen and they can’t do exterior work.

          1. Of course not. That would be inhumane!

            I can’t stand that it is mandatory. The owner of the construction company just gets fucked over for 2 weeks that he could be making revenue during the 6 months of the year that he can make good revenue. Although, the construction company owners I probably don’t have much sympathy for since they are all probably grabbing as much as they can from the tax payer trough.

    3. Licensing for carpentry/construction really sucks. It’s one of the few kinds of work where, in a lot of places anyway, a person can just start an independent business without a lot of licenses and other hurdles.

      And having a license doesn’t guarantee anything. I’ve seen far more half-assed work from big contractors than from any of the independent people I know in that field.

      1. I’ve seen first hand teams of four guys and girls who start up a paint company without licenses come to a grinding halt.

        So they have to register and suddenly $15/hr for a job shoots up to $35.

        Carpentry/construction etc. is a great way for immigrants to earn an honest living but it’s so dirty and corrupt with the aid of stupid government regulations they get screwed.

        Inspectors came into my father’s building and sent home a couple of Mexicans installing a window home for not having appropriate permits.

        It’s just awful. Better to have them on god dang welfare, though.

        But that’s progressive economics for you.

  45. 70 percent of adults report ‘digital eye strain’

    “We don’t blink as much when using screens,” Dunaief told NBC News, “because the blink response is suppressed. So we don’t spread tears across our eyes and they wind up drying out.” The solution, he said, is to blink every 10 seconds or so.

    Fortunately, there’s a reminder app for that.

    1. Warty strikes again

    2. He didn’t stab his mother, he tried to bite her. And he didn’t cut his cock off, it fell off. Open your eyes, people. They’re covering up the start of you know what.

    3. The young man was also stable at University College London hospital, where surgeons are thought to have successfully sewn his penis back on.

      What about the front of his penis?

      1. Take two:

        At which point the lad happily murmured, “Ummm, back on!”

    4. So because cocaine is illegal and hard to get, people use inferior drugs with worse side effects. Thank you, government.

      1. SUPERCISION!

        1. WRONG SUBTHREAD!

    5. Did he stab her with the penis? Because then I can see why he would have cut it off.

  46. “More than 1K camp out for union jobs”

    NEW YORK (MYFOXNY) – The line wrapped nearly around an entire city block on Friday as approximately 1,500 people waited in Queens for a chance to apply for a coveted union job.

    The first few people on line had been there since 1 p.m. on Tuesday when the temperature in New York City was in the single digits.

    District Council 9 is accepting 500 applications in Long Island City for painting and decorating apprenticeships.

    http://www.myfoxny.com/story/2…..z2q0TKVrUo

    1. Is there 500 jobs up for grabs or are they only reviewing 500 applications?

      1,500 people lined up for 500 jobs is really pretty good odds.. I applied for a job last year where 1,500 people applied for 20 positions.

      1. Pretty sure they are taking a limited number of applications since it’s an apprentice position for a relatively low skill job.

        1. Why the fuck is there such a position as “painter’s apprentice”?

          I would think that “painter’s apprentice” would be another word for “Hispanic guys hanging out in the parking lot of Home Depot”.

          1. How are we supposed to know if they are good at painting if they haven’t worked 2000 hours at $17/hour under a master painter?

            What the hell do the non-apprentice painters make?

          2. Painting well and quickly is not a trivial skill. Though the requirement for apprenticeship is certainly union bullcrap.

  47. 13,000 Obamacare Applicants Have No Records with Health Insurers

    Insurance companies are still trying to sort out cases of so-called health insurance orphans, customers for whom the government has a record that they enrolled, but the insurer does not.

    Wait just a doggone minute! I thought Democratcare covers orphans!

  48. SoCon Catholic: Marijuana Legalization Sign We Are Wrongfully Raising the Individual Over the Common Good

    “It is fair to say that we are living in the midst of a crisis of the common good. In fact, we tend to think that the ultimate good is the individual. Personal inclination?our pleasures, emotions, and desires?more and more are the “moral” foundation of our choices. What is shared is the common pursuit of material goods: “It’s the economy, stupid.” Wealth creation is the standard by which we judge the success of our society. In fact, marijuana is playing into this consumerist culture: the individual wants the pleasure of the commodity and the State wants tax revenues. In response, we need to rediscover the common good, a good that transcends the limits of personal whims and the fluctuations of the economy. To overcome the cultural problem of the legalization of marijuana, we need to rebuild a shared culture with ends beyond the individual?ultimately the end, which all share, and which can only make us truly happy.”

    http://www.crisismagazine.com/…..quinas-say

    1. Some of the comments are illustrative:

      “Marijuana use doesn’t enhance one’s quality of life. It’s an escape. It alters brain chemistry thereby changing users’ attitudes and not necessarily for the better. For me it led to undue satisfaction with mediocre circumstances. Only I didn’t recognize those circumstances as mediocre because I was high. There was an esoteric quality to it’s usage. An induced sense that usage was the product of a heightened sense of liberty from accepted social norms. I stopped because I finally decided I was dumb enough without it. I came to regard time spent high as time wasted. Contributing to my cessation was the fear of how disappointed in myself I would be if I got into legal trouble over it. Thank God for the laws against it. They helped motivate me to better myself.”

      “Our society is SO messed up that we are now promoting the use of brain numbing substances. It will be come a “norm” just like contraception and abortion.”

      “The legalization of pot is just one more nail in the coffin of what used to be a healthy culture.”

      Will say some of the commenters push back though, promising that.

      1. I really wish I could find a difference between this line of thinking and the statists who think that prohibition is good because it nanny’s the population into a healthier attitude, but I can’t.

        Local pro-prohibition editorial.

        1. I do not see any difference, that is sort of my point.

      2. It’s an escape. It alters brain chemistry thereby changing users’ attitudes and not necessarily for the better. For me it led to undue satisfaction with mediocre circumstances. Only I didn’t recognize those circumstances as mediocre because I was high. There was an esoteric quality to it’s usage.

        [cough] projection [cough]

      3. For me it led to undue satisfaction with mediocre circumstances. Only I didn’t recognize those circumstances as mediocre because I was high.

        You mean like prayer?

        Our society is SO messed up that we are now promoting the use of brain numbing substances

        You mean like communion wine?

      4. Marijuana use doesn’t enhance one’s quality of life. It’s an escape. It alters brain chemistry thereby changing users’ attitudes and not necessarily for the better. For me it led to undue satisfaction with mediocre circumstances.

        One might say the same things about Catholicism.

        Even if that’s all true, how does it justify locking innocent people up. Being lazy and not caring about stuff is not a crime. You can do all of those things without drugs too.

    2. Our annual Catholic church bazaar has a raffle/drawing for a literal wheelbarrow full of liquor (wheelbarrow included). About 75% of the money they make off the entire thing is due to beer sales. I wonder how that squares with this dude.

  49. Dork Deer:

    These deer have recessive genetic flaws that manifest physically as an overbite and piebald coloration (though not all piebalds are dork deer). Sadly, many “environmental groups” are calling for these deer (and albino deer) to be protected from hunters because of “how pretty” they are, when in reality they are weakening the gene pool and should be culled.

    Fucking idiots.

    1. Idiots is a weak word. In Washington the deer population is so large it has ate all of the saplings in the city’s park. They are finally conducting night hunts to thin the herd. But that is over the objection of a lot of environmentalists. If something isn’t done about the deer population, the parks will lose all of their trees as they die of old age and are not replaced by new ones. But we can’t shoot the deer to stop that.

      1. What has this world come to where the uproar over shooting deer in urban centers is more successful than the uproar to stop our drones from killing children in Pakistan and Afghanistan?

        1. People used to be “conservationists” meaning they wanted man to properly conserve and manage nature. Sadly, they have become “environmentalists” meaning they want man out of nature even if that means walking away from his responsibility to manage it.

          Man is the one who hunted out all of the large predators and cut down the forests creating perfect deer habitat. So it is man that has the duty to cull the deer population so it doesn’t do further damage.

        2. Deer are cute and brown people 10K miles away are not?

    2. We’ve got a few dork deer in our area. From a distance they tend to look like goats.

      1. Deer are more closely related to goats than to cattle.

  50. FBI Director James Comey doesn’t think that Edward Snowden is a whistle-blower, saying that he has “trouble applying the ‘whistle-blower’ label to someone who just disagrees with the way our country is structured and operates.”

    There are light years of difference between the way our country operates and the way it’s legally supposed to operate. It’s that gap, between what the government is doing and what it’s allowed to do that makes Snowden a whistleblower. Even if there are some problems with Snowden’s methods, at the heart of the matter, he exposed endemic and blatantly unconstitutional and illegal acts.

    1. That is idiotic on so many levels. We really have internalized the ad homonym fallacy. Since when does the person’s opinions or motives somehow make any wrong doing they point out invalid or not true?

    2. I’m not sure if anyone could every be a whistle blower under his definition.

      1. That, I’m guessing, is the point.

  51. Feminist Rag Rails Against Candance Cameron For Saying She Obeys Her Husband

    Marie Claire‘s tweet:
    “Thanks Candace Cameron, for setting women back approximately a billion years…”

    Link to the original article

    Mrs Bure’s 17-year-old marriage has produced three children, ages 16, 14, and 12.

    She insists that her outlook on power distribution within her marriage is the key to its success.

    ‘I love that my man is a leader. I want him to lead and those major decisions to fall on him,’ she said.

    She was careful to add that this ‘doesn’t mean I don’t voice my opinion, that I don’t have an opinion – I absolutely do.’

    I have found that proper power distribution is the key to not burning your house down.

    1. Wouldn’t the actual feminist thing to do be to say if she likes it that way, that’s great but that setup might not be for everyone?

      1. The same women who are having a fit about this, are in the next breath complaining about how men refuse to grow up and take charge and be responsible husbands.

        It is almost as is feminists are really confused or something.

      2. I do not know about that. Imagine a black man who said he really wishes he could go back to being a white man’s slave.

        1. Is he making other black guys do it too?

          1. I get that, but you are assuming that feminists have our libertarian ideals built into their beliefs. A feminist would be a person who thinks that women should not take an inferior role in leading their lives, so someone forfeiting that would be condemnable, regardless of whether they wished their choice forced on others.

            Consider an analogy: if all women but one feminist voluntarily decided to let a male mate rule them, would you expect that feminist to be pleased with it? Should she be? Given what she wants I would think no would be the answer for both.

            1. A feminist would be a person who thinks that women should not take an inferior role in leading their lives

              No. A feminist should be a person who thinks that women should not be forced by men into taking an inferior role in their lives.

              There are GIGANTIC logical problems with constructing the definition your way, as this discussion highlights.

              1. “should not be forced”

                I think it is right here that you are assuming libertarian beliefs into feminist beliefs.

                If you google the definition of feminism you get this:

                ‘the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.’

                Notice the social part.

                1. That doesn’t even prove anything about choosing to take a specific social role.

                  1. The definition literally says ‘social…equality to men.’ That means equality, not a woman ‘letting her man lead.’ You are smuggling choice into that because it is important to you (and me btw). Maybe that is what feminism should be, or maybe that is what a libertarian feminism (even better in my opinion) would be, but that is an idiosyncratic reading of what feminism is usually thought to be in theory and practice.

                    1. The definition literally says ‘social…equality to men.’ That means equality, not a woman ‘letting her man lead.’

                      If you’re not able to make your own choices because of what some asshole feminist thinks, how does that make you socially superior to someone who listens to what her husband says?

                      In either instance, you are subjecting yourself to someone else’s authority.

                    2. The definition literally says ‘social…equality to men.’ That means equality, not a woman ‘letting her man lead.’

                      A woman letting a man take the lead is equality. Just as long as she has the option to not let him, and as long as men have the option to let a woman take the lead too. The outcome isn’t equality, it’s the opportunities.

                      Maybe that is what feminism should be

                      That’s exactly what we’re talking about(emphasis in original):

                      Wouldn’t the actual feminist thing to do be to say if she likes it that way, that’s great but that setup might not be for everyone?

                2. ‘the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.’

                  Notice the social part.

                  If both of us can choose what social role we wish to fill, we are socially equal.

                  I think it is right here that you are assuming libertarian beliefs into feminist beliefs.

                  No, I’m subjecting your definition to a rationality test, and it’s failing.

                  If you are free to make the choices you want, there is no rational basis for being upset if other people make different choices.

                  So if there ARE people who subscribe to a variety of feminism that fits your defintion, fuck those irrational fucks. I’m glad they’re unhappy and I would be delighted if one of them found herself in exactly the situation you describe, because irrational people deserve psychic pain and it would be just swell if she was subjected to it by her own hand.

                  And it would be by her own hand, and NOT because of the choices the other women were making. Upset about other people’s choices? Either stop concerning yourself with their choices, or get different fucking feelings.

                  1. “Upset about other people’s choices? Either stop concerning yourself with their choices, or get different fucking feelings.”

                    I really do not think I could do any better than highlighting these passages to illustrate that you are talking about libertarianism, not feminism. I mean, that quote right there is the essence of libertarianism.

                    Maybe feminism should just = libertarianism, but that would be an idiosyncratic way to understand it.

            2. Consider an analogy: if all women but one feminist voluntarily decided to let a male mate rule them, would you expect that feminist to be pleased with it? Should she be? Given what she wants I would think no would be the answer for both.

              I’d expect her not to be pleased, because I expect people to behave in irrational, collectivist, and authoritarian ways.

              But with regard to “should”, as long as she’s free to not make that choice, she “should” have a Coke and a smile and shut the fuck up.

            3. Yes, she should be happy with that. The only reason that she wouldn’t be is that your definition of feminist is retarded (though it does fit the people who call themselves feminists fairly well). An actual feminist would want women to be allowed to do what she wanted. And just like some men will want their wife to run things, some women will want their husband to run things.

              1. “An actual feminist would want women to be allowed to do what she wanted.”

                An actual libertarian would. Talk to ‘an actual feminist’ and I bet you would get a different view! Now, you could chalk up their different view to the idea that they just have a wrong, irrational view of feminism, or you could accept that feminism does not necessarily=libertarianism.

                I mean, when you get to a situation where you, who I would bet do not think of yourself as a feminist, are telling people who do think of themselves as one, that you have a better idea of what they believe in than they do, I suggest you’ve lost the game.

                1. I am an actual feminist as I think women should be equal. The bulk of women who call themselves such are not, which is why I would not use the label to describe myself. If you don’t want a woman to be free to choose to listen to someone else, then you don’t want women to be equal to men. They’ve managed to convince too many people, like you, otherwise.

                  You are acting like because libertarianism and feminism agree on the one issue they are the same. Nothing I said about feminism says anything about government. You can be an actual feminist while also being a full on communist, as long as women are allowed to make all the same choices that men are (which may be a short list of choices).

                  1. What I mean is that for you choice is important, not result. That is kind of the essence of libertarianism. But many other philosophies do not adopt that view. The classical definition of a feminist is the one I gave you, one that advocates social equality for women.

                    Again, I think it is easy to see this from my example about every woman in America but one choosing a subservient role for themselves in relation to some man (or men in general). According to your argument the one woman left, if she were an ‘actual feminist’ would have to be pleased as punch since all she desires is for every woman to freely choose her role. Does that sound right to you?

                    1. Absolutely. So what if a lot of people who call themselves feminists are assholes who don’t care about equality? Dondero called himself a libertarian and was crazy about Guilani, but that has no effect on what an actual libertarian would do.

                      If you actually want women to be socially equal, then you want them to have the same options men do. The only way you can actually be a feminist and say that women shouldn’t be able to choose to listen to their husband is if you say that men shouldn’t be able to choose to listen to their wife.

                    2. Let me try this one last ‘angle.’ I think you would agree with me that as a libertarian we think people are free when they make their own choices, even if what they choose seems to us to be something we would find demeaning or undignified, does that sound right? So, for example, if some young woman you cared for decided to be a bukakke film star you might be disappointed in her though you would of course defend her right to so choose.

                      OK, if we are in agreement up to that point (and perhaps we are not), now imagine that a feminists is someone who thinks every woman should have the right make her own choices, including the right to be subservient to a man, but who also thinks that women should choose otherwise, that they should choose to be ‘social equals’ with a man. So she would of course allow women to make choices she thinks are putting them into an inferior position, but she would be disappointed and perhaps want to persuade the choice made. What do you think of that?

            4. A feminist would be a person who thinks that women should not take an inferior role in leading their lives, so someone forfeiting that would be condemnable, regardless of whether they wished their choice forced on others.

              no, feminists have always presented themselves as advocating for women to have the power to make their own choices. Well, this woman IS making her own choices but those choices run afoul of what the feminist movement sees as right and proper, so she must be criticized.

              1. A feminist would be a person who thinks that women should not take an inferior role in leading their lives, so someone forfeiting that would be condemnable

                The other problem is that ALL “highest and best use” arguments are asinine.

                Every time you go to sleep, take a vacation, have a beer, get laid, go to a museum and look at art, stop what you’re doing and listen to a song, engage in conversation with a friend, undertake reflection, laugh at a joke, etc., you are failing to achieve your maximum economic and social potential, and are therefore choosing to “take an inferior role in leading your life”. EVERY time.

                Are all of those activities condemnable?

                As long as you make no demands for support on others, it’s not your responsibility to contort your life to somebody else’s definition of its highest and best use. Whether it makes it harder for them to achieve a society that looks the way they want, or not.

                1. You are confusing something quite basic, the feminist view is that the woman should not take a view of life where they are inferior to a man or men in general, not that they should lead their life to the maximum potential.

                  1. You are confusing something quite basic, the feminist view is that the woman should not take a view of life where they are inferior to a man or men in general, not that they should lead their life to the maximum potential.

                    No, I’m not confusing anything.

                    I understand it completely, and am subjecting it to the reductio ad absurdum to try to show you that’s it’s logically untenable.

                    You think it’s reasonable for feminists to be angry at this woman because she’s “taking an inferior position” in life.

                    I am trying to demonstrate to you that this is illogical nonsense, for a couple of reasons:

                    1. Everyone who fails to make their own choices is equally “taking an inferior position” in life. Therefore the person who pursues a career because feminists think they should is violating the “rule” you define just as much as someone who lets her husband manage their finances.

                    2. Everyone, including the feminists promulgating this rule, fails to do everything they can to not “take an inferior role in life”, because doing that would require the unrelenting drive of an automaton and no one has possessed that, ever. Therefore, the rule is absurd on its face. You are attempting to temper the rule and place artificial limits on it, but there’s no real way to do that within the confines of the rule. You’d have to apply the rule to EVERY decision the woman makes in life, not just the single decision of whether or not to defer to her husband.

                    1. I do not think the feminist would require that every woman take a career, just that they not take a position of inferiority to a man (or men in general). Inferior for the feminist means relative to a man or men, not in some cosmic sense of ultimate potential.

                      Your number 2 point just repeats the mistake I described in the preceding comment of mine.

                    2. I do not think the feminist would require that every woman take a career, just that they not take a position of inferiority to a man (or men in general).

                      You aren’t breaking these decisions down into discrete enough components.

                      “Should I let my husband make certain decisions in my marriage?”

                      “No, that’s taking an inferior position to a man and letting other women down.”

                      “Should I not work 80 hours this week just because I don’t really feel like it?”

                      “No, because then you won’t get that promotion and a man might, and that’s taking an inferior position to men and letting other women down.”

                      You can say, “Well, feminists wouldn’t be that literal and inflexible about the rule.” But that’s crap, both because I’ve heard feminists do exactly that, and because hypocrisy in application of the rule does not defend the rule logically.

                    3. I think it is you that are being too literal. Feminists do not say women have to outperform men or else be inferior, they just can not live such that men have more authority over the woman.

                    4. Gay male bottoms kinda throw a wrench in this argument, no?

      3. feminist does not mean the same thing to you, Auric, that it does to them.

        1. Yeah, that’s my point. They don’t want equality, they want supremacy. If men and women are equal, then some men will be in charge of some women (and vice versa).

    2. But as far as I know, feminists don’t have a problem with BDSM. So if Cameron were a submissive in a BDSM relationship and said that, I have no doubt Marie Claire would view that as a “lifestyle choice”. But since her saying it isn’t practicing some lifestyle that is supposed to shock polite society, they have kittens about how horrible it is.

      1. There are lots of feminists that absolutely have a problem with BDSM. It’s internalized misogyny and violence against womyn, after all.

        1. Some would. But it doesn’t seem to get much press despite BDSM being oddly common.

        2. There are anti-BDSM feminists, but their numbers pale compared to the number of anti-surrendered-wife feminists.

          I think the difference is that BDSM is about sexual pleasure, while the surrendered wife is generally a religious or pseudoreligious phenomenon. Feminists hate the religious. No woman is allowed to make any choice that is based on a religious conviction, because none of those choices are real.

          Choose to have something take a shit on your face? EMPOWERMENT.

          Choose to stay home and take care of your kids? FALSE CONSCIOUSNESS AND GENDER BETRAYAL.

          1. That is a very good explanation fluffy.

  52. Yay. My local is #6 on Barfinder’s top 100 list.

    Although, I think I’ve been down there once in the last six weeks. May need to stop off tonight.

    1. I’ve been to 9 of those. The highest one is only #8, though.

    2. One of my best bar experiences was at El Squid Roe in Cabo. That was about ten years ago, but that place was a blast.

    3. I’m really skeptical of this list when there are 2 bars in Massachusetts on it and they are Jery Remy’s and Bleacher Bar. It sounds like whoever voted for this went to Boston one time and saw a Sox game.

      1. I took my son to Fall River this past summer to see the USS Massachusetts and we went to Jerry Remy’s afterward for lunch. He keeps asking me to take him back to both places.

      2. We did get a nod from Pat Forde in a column this year, but the ESPN crews have been hanging out since at leas 2010. Seriously, though. They serve only good beer, rotate the taps through a large selection, and have a great and staff who have probably had all of two people move on in five years.

        Also I dated steadily out of the female bargoers there up to and including meeting my wife there. Lots of nice women out there, still.

        1. Lots of nice women out there, still.

          I hope so. Would like to meet one someday.

    4. I’ve been to 4 of those. The only one in NJ is in Newark and I’ve never heard of it, but it looks like a RU-Newark / NJIT college bar. Might have to give it a go next time I go to a Devils game.

      I’m not sure why Pat O’Brien’s is on the list; of all the famous French Quarter bars I might have liked that one the least.

      1. I’ve been to at least 4 (#4, #15, #73 and #95). Usually can’t remember the bars I go to in Chicago so I may have been to more.

  53. Keepin’ It Classy: Virginian Democrat Running For Senate Seat Compares Republicans With Rapists

    Transcript from her approved message:

    A woman assaulted at night by the reservoir. Another by an intruder who forced his way in through her bedroom window. And for so many, traumatized again by facing the criminal in court.

    I’m Jennifer Wexton and as a prosecutor I put violent offenders in prison. In the Virginia Senate, I’ll fight just as hard against Tea Party Republicans who would take away a woman’s health care and her right to choose, even in cases of rape and incest. On election day, help me stand up for her.

    1. And for so many, traumatized again by facing the criminal in court.

      So I guess Ms Wexton thinks that we should spare women of this trauma by dispensing with trials? Unsurprising that she is a DA.

      That add is weapons grade stupid. Too bad no reporter will ask her why she thinks it is okay to trivialize the suffering of a rape victim by comparing it to the horrors of cutting government spending.

      1. She is clearly not tying it to government spending, that is not mentioned at all. She seems to be tying prohibitions on abortion in the case of rape to the traumatization of rape in general.

        1. Yes it is:

          against Tea Party Republicans who would take away a woman’s health care

          1. You think that, rather than the ‘her right to choose, even in cases of rape and incest’ is the key part?

            1. [government spending] is not mentioned at all.

              I’m going to call you Jimmy Graham from now on.

        2. But no one is going to outlaw abortion, just restrict it. And saying that restrict abortion causes the same harm to a woman as being raped is profoundly insulting to rape victims. Abortion is whatever your opinion a very contentious and debatable issue. The harm caused by rape, not so much. Every rape victim male or female should be insulted by that ad. Wexton should stop belittling people’s tragedies in order to make political points.

          1. “But no one is going to outlaw abortion, just restrict it.”

            How is this any different than telling a gun rights person ‘no one is going to outlaw the RKBA, just restrict it.

            “saying that restrict abortion causes the same harm to a woman as being raped is profoundly insulting to rape victims”

            I do not see saying that a woman has to actually bear her attacker’s child for nine months as being a harm comparable to the rape itself as being insulting at all.

            1. How is this any different than telling a gun rights person ‘no one is going to outlaw the RKBA, just restrict it.

              It is not. But if anyone said “taking gun rights from someone is just like raping them” that person would be a caloous half wit who either doesn’t care or doesn’t understand the harm associated with rape.

              The problem is not with her position. That is a different debate. The problem is her equating losing a political debate or access to a right to being the same thing as having someone break into your home and rape you.

              This is appalling Bo. And it is not going to help her win many votes.

              1. “The problem is her equating losing a political debate or access to a right to being the same thing as having someone break into your home and rape you.”

                She is not doing that, at least by my reading. Her ad amounts to the following:

                “I have credentials in fighting rape. I have seen the devastating harm rape does to the victims, a harm that can be revisited when they have to face their attacker in court, or when they become pregnant with their attacker’s child. Forcing a victim to have their attacker’s child by restricting abortion in the case of rape as the Tea Party wants is something I will therefore fight.”

                I really do not see any difference between that ad and one like this:

                “An unarmed mother has to watch while her child is murdered in a ‘gun free zone.’ A man attacked on the street is put into a coma because he had to leave his handgun stored in a safe at home. As a prosecutor I have seen these things and fought against the perpetrators, and as delegate I would fight to keep liberal Bloomberg type Democrats from disarming such honest citizens.”

                1. I really do not see any difference between that ad and one like this:…

                  Leaving aside that your reading of the ad spares no contortion to change the plain meaning of the language, it’s worth pointing out that your theoretical gun ad has never been run either.

            2. Re: Bo Cara Esq.

              How is this any different than telling a gun rights person ‘no one is going to outlaw the RKBA, just restrict it.

              Abortion is murder, the killing of another human being, a violation of the Non-Aggression Principle; whereas gun possession is not.

              So they’re very different, not even comparable.

              1. Good lord.

                1. ???

                  Is there something wrong with what he said?

                  1. Yes, it has nothing to do with whether my analogy is apt, since my analogy does not rest on abortion being comparable to RKBA, but on the structure of the comparison to rapists-Tea Party in the first and predators-Bloomberg Democrats in the second.

                    It is as if we were talking about a bill to push mandatory ultrasounds for those seeking abortions on the grounds that it would more fully inform the person seeking the abortion and I replied ‘well, do you support laws mandating people be fully informed in a similar way before other medical procedures’ and the reply was ‘no, that is different because abortion is murder.’

                    1. Notice in the second paragraph the discussion would not be about whether abortion is comparable to other medical procedures, but whether regulation is justified on the grounds of fully informing patients about any medical procedure.

                      I took OM and John to not be saying ‘this woman is awful because abortion is murder’ but ‘this woman is awful because she is equating Tea Partiers who want to restrict abortion in the case of rape to rapists,’ so I proceeded to argue about whether she was making that equation or not. My hypothetical sought to create a similar ad using a different restriction to see if people would think that ad was equating the attackers of unarmed victims with the pols who would unarm them. For OM to then respond ‘abortion is different because it is murder’ is a non-sequitor there.

                    2. …I proceeded to argue about whether she was making that equation or not.

                      Committing rape of logic in so doing…

                      For OM to then respond ‘abortion is different because it is murder’ is a non-sequitor there.

                      Not entirely, because if one believes, as he does, that abortion is murder, and therefore a NAP violation, then it’s not a comparable right to the right to bear arms, and therefore your analogy is itself a non-sequitur every bit as much as comparing the restriction of abortion to the restriction of the right to steal cars would be.

              2. Huh, I had not thought about applying the NAP to abortion. Looks like we are headed toward another 1,000 comment thread.

    2. I do not think that is the only or best way to read that, if only because of the insertion of ‘even in cases of rape and incest.’ The first part is supposed to establish her credentials and commitment to fighting rape and any secondary traumatization from such an attack, and then she ties it to what is commonly thought of as a secondary traumatization of rape, making the woman carry her attacker’s child to birth.

      1. No, it isn’t. It’s clear and gross innuendo. She’s comparing the two types of opponents as if what she had was a simple disagreement with violent criminals.

        1. Rather than debate the semantics of this forever let me just say: Intent sheds light on meaning when there is ambiguity. I am pretty sure she is making that ad for abortion rights supporters. Ask them what they think it is doing there, I bet they will say it is doing something closer to my reading than yours.

          1. Re: Bo Cara Esq.

            Intent sheds light on meaning when there is ambiguity.

            The message was clear: By her on words, she places the fight against her political opponents on the same level as her fight against violent criminals. The clear purpose is to dehumanize her opponents.

            1. Dehumanization and demonization is a standard tactic in politics. The dirtbags that want power will stop at nothing to get it, and keep it once they have it. These are useful tools for them.

              1. I will make my last comment about, partly because I could care less about this woman or her GOP opponents and partly because I can see no one is going to change their mind here, but I think this can be read in a way that is not demonization. It is common for politicians to describe some ‘noble fight’ they have fought in their lives, and then to say they will fight with the same tenacity or with the same uncompromising unswervability in some other, perhaps even related area important to the voters they are trying to reach. ‘I have spend ten years as a DA bringing dishonest CEO’s to justice, and I will use the same focus and perseverance to bear in stopping corporate lobbying from robbing our future.’ It seems to me that is what this ad is doing, she tries to establish the horrors of rape and her experience and commitment to fighting it, and then pledges comparable efforts to fighting efforts to restrict health care and access to abortion in cases of rape and incest.

                Like I have said, if you think I am wrong, ask the kind of pro-choice voter this ad was obviously intended to read it and tell you if their take away is ‘the VA Tea Party are rapists (or as bad as)’ or something closer to my reading.

                1. …partly because I could care less about this woman or her GOP opponents…

                  Clearly

                  1. Has anyone even established that there is any TEA Party anti-abortion agenda, especially in her race?

                    I know it’s not much of a stretch to say that it’s not beyond believability, but is her opponent running on anything anti-abortion AND is a member of the TEA Party?

  54. Aaron Sorkin and Courtney Love are dating, thus making only two people miserable, not four

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..-Love.html

    1. Please please please do not reproduce. For the love of god….

    2. If Sorkin ends up wrapping his toes around a shotgun trigger, I will have…some feelings about that.

  55. Boxer isn’t getting enough ink, staffers say ‘go with the global warming, Babs. That always gets some coverage’:
    “Democratic Sens. Barbara Boxer of California and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island said Thursday that they would lead a new Senate task force to knock down a “barricade of special interest lies” on climate change.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/default/…..129383.php

    Darn thermometer! Hit it again, maybe it’ll go up! Those Kock Bros musta put something in it!

  56. as a prosecutor I put violent offenders in prison. In the Virginia Senate, I’ll fight just as hard against Tea Party Republicans

    Off with their heads!

    What a loathesome cunt.

  57. Hillary Should Sue Christy For Copyright Infringrement: “I Invented The Traffic Jam!”

    Michael Whouley, founding partner of the strategy group tied to Hillary Clinton’s budding 2016 presidential effort, orchestrated a traffic jam to help his client Al Gore win the 2000 New Hampshire primary against Bill Bradley.

    Gore campaign manager Bob Shrum wrote in his memoirs about Whouley’s last-minute gambit to use the Gore motorcade to suppress the vote on primary day, as Slate’s David Weigel noted on Wednesday.

    “Michael Whouley came up with a last-ditch scheme: Send Gore into areas of southern New Hampshire where there was a lot of Bradley support among upscale voters and commuters who worked across the border in Massachusetts. Many of them cast their ballots late in the day after driving home. Gore’s motorcade ? candidate, press, Secret Service, and police ? could snarl traffic and keep some of the commuters from ever getting to their polling places or even trying to,” Shrum wrote.

    That makes Hillary and Christy very presidential. They certainly know how to choose very dedicated staffers!

    1. Bill Clinton once shut down all of LAX for something like 90 minutes, so he could get a haircut.

      I stand behind no one in my dislike of Fatso. But watching liberals pretend to be outraged over this after a combined 13 years of never saying a word about Clinton and Obama’s total misuse of executive authority is too much even for me.

      1. I think Christie is and should be doomed by this, as far as presidential ambitions go, but the stark contrast between how he handled this yesterday and the behavior of the current administration is extreme. Christie repeatedly placed responsibility on himself, the principal actors were fired, and he left himself open to questioning for two hours.

        Even if Christie is a total goon who stops traffic for fun, he at least responded as if there were consequences to just blowing it all off. Obama, who has allowed (and done) far worse, with much greater harm, has never done this. President Not My Fault.

        1. But Obama knows he doesn’t have to address any scandals because of the D designation. Christie knows the media will get all over him since his R designation.

        2. You are right. He took responsibility for it. I don’t think Obama has ever done that in his life. As much as I hate fatso, that is pretty rare in politics today.

          I think Christie shouldn’t be President if he is in fact the kind of good who shuts down traffic to get back at political enemies. What bugs me is that that won’t be the lesson here. The lesson will be “Republicans can’t be goons” instead of “neither party should get away with being a goon.”

          In some ways I almost hope he gets away with it in the faint hope that maybe the media will realize that when they ignore and cover up for Democrats’ abuses, they destroy their ability to hold Republicans accountable for theirs. But that is probably me just dreaming.

          1. I’m hoping the contrast in coverage will catch some people’s attention. I bet it does, because it’s really stark.

            Christie needs to go as a presidential candidate, because he either is a lying goon, or he employs them at high levels. Either way, not a safe option. Not to mention that his people thought that doing such things was fine, which means they either were running amok or toeing the line of governor.

          2. John-

            You are right. He took responsibility for it.

            Bullshit.

            “Responsibility” would be-

            “I FAILED in hiring my aides.”

            “I FAILED in my duty to oversee their actions.”

            “I FAILED to follow-up on the original reports of misconduct.”

            “I therefore must resign due to my abject failure at managing the job I was expected to perform.”

            THAT’S what “responsibility” would look like.

        3. Where’s tarran to call you Tulpa for deigning to disagree with his assessment of trafficgate-as-kidnapping.

  58. I had a corporate “team building” event last night, wherein we were forced to build catapults with wooden dowels, tape, rubber bands and binder clips with total strangers; listen to some shitbags talk about some alphabet soup nonsense related to the Department of Transportation; and get candy bars thrown at us for a “job well done” (Kudos candy bars – get it? Haha.).

    I hate the world today.

    1. You wanted to build trebuchets instead?

      1. Speaking of, my 7 yr old son’s latest obsession, castles, medieval weapons, and most especially drawbridges and portcullises. Half a year ago it was Batman this and Batman that, now he wants to visit every castle in Europe with a portcullis and a drawbridge.

        1. Syria has some nice Crusader castles, if you care to visit a war zone 🙂

          1. Well, there are quite a few here in Czechia, and the neighboring environs without having to put ourselves in mortal danger.

        2. I’d call that an improvement.

      2. I should mention that I work for a tech company with a ton of engineers, but our shitty little team didn’t have a single one. None of us knew jack shit about flinging bean bags with cheap dowels. I tried to remember the machines I’d seen on Punkin Chunkin, but came up short. Mainly because I resented being there in the first place.

        The only good thing is, in the two years I have been forced to go to this event, I have never been assigned to the CEO or COO’s teams. That would be a waking nightmare.

        1. Seems like it would be better to make a crossbow with dowels. Sharpen one up and use it for a bolt.

          “I thought this was about our team winning?”

          1. All the slingshot and bow & arrow type models were DQed. As were the handheld models. Out of 18 teams, I think only 2 had “true” catapults.

            But it wasn’t like there was a big cash bonus or anything for the winners. The prize was literally a round of “attaboys”.

    2. Is it just me or are all “team building” exercises mammoth wastes of time that completely miss the real issues with building a team?

      If the office isn’t a “team” it is because either the leadership are crap weasels that the workers don’t trust, a critical mass of workers are crapweasels that don’t trust each other and can’t be trusted by others or both. Team building never solves any of that.

      Mostly lack of team work is the result of the leadership not creating an environment where everyone feels they are contributing and that they will be given credit for the work they do. If you don’t have that and some people feel like outsiders to the “in crowd” or people feel like the leadership or co-workers will steal credit for other people’s work, you won’t have a team. None of these exercises ever address these issues.

      1. None of these exercises ever address these issues.

        The exercises are designed to try to create an emotional attachment to the group that will lead individuals to decide not to care about the issues you describe.

        That’s why they fail. Because nobody is that stupid any more.

        Basically you’re saying “The solution is to treat people fairly.” But the people running the team building exercise don’t want to do that. They want to treat people unfairly but get maximum commitment anyway.

        1. They want to treat people unfairly but get maximum commitment anyway.

          That made me laugh and then cry because it is so true.

          We spend all of this time and effort in trying to teach “management” when 90% of it involves just treating people fairly. The art of management I suppose is avoiding that.

      2. They’re generally meant to stimulate creative thinking. The problem is, study after study has shown that creativity is stifled by group engagement. Introverts like me simply shut down, and even most extroverts will just go along with the group. This results in a shitty product at the end of the day. The best ideas generally come from quiet contemplation.

        Apparently the whole “group brainstorm” system was invented by some asshole advertising exec in the 1950’s and people just kind of latched on, creating a nightmare for introverts ever since.

        1. Groups rarely accomplish anything because well spoken and strong willed people like me usually run over introverts like you. So, not everyone makes an equal contribution. This is why lawyers are such dangerous people to have around a planning team. They are trained in making weak arguments look strong and often know just enough about what the group is doing to be dangerous.

          The other problem with groups is that people are afraid to confront each other and say why something is wrong. So, you often end up with a compromise solution with obvious problems people were unwilling to point out.

        2. Learning to work with groups is important because sometimes you just have to. But pretending that it is the best way to get most things done is just dumb for all of the above reasons.

          1. I love working on my team, at work. It’s a great bunch of people, and we all work well together. I don’t see the point of making us go to a Marriott after hours and engage with colleagues that we don’t work with and only see once a year.

    3. Just like no-talent corporate team building hucksters to suck all the fun out of tabletop siege engines. Those people are the people who can’t cut it in the low-standards worlds of HR and pop psychology.

  59. we were forced to build catapults with wooden dowels, tape, rubber bands and binder clips

    You’ll shoot your eye out, Kid.

    1. Several teams almost did. I was hoping for a nice tort suit against the company (my company is so fucking cheap, it would serve them right)

  60. the stark contrast between how he handled this yesterday and the behavior of the current administration is extreme.

    But that Christie staffer is a total bitch. Kathleen Sebelius is a warm and wonderful human bean who wants nothing but good things to happen for us.

    Can’t you see the difference?

  61. and partly because I can see no one is going to change their mind here

    Not because of your arguments, that’s for certain.

  62. None of us knew jack shit about flinging bean bags with cheap dowels.

    Was it some sort of “NO GOOGLING” zone?

    Did they confiscate your laptops and iphones?

    1. That would involve caring

  63. Re: Restoras,

    Huh, I had not thought about applying the NAP to abortion. Looks like we are headed toward another 1,000 comment thread.

    They’re already up to 617 in the little time I went to get some coffee for myself.

    I apply the NAP because I have no right to deny the personhood of another human being. I know I am a human being, for that is my nature; I know I am a person, for I can reason. If I acknowledge that other people are humans just like I am human, then I have to acknowledge their personhood as well, even if I don’t know them personally. The moment I deny someone’s humanity and personhood, I am ipso facto giving license to anybody else to deny my existence and my personhood, just like denying someone’s freedom puts my freedom at risk. I am talking about, of course, negative rights or natural rights.

    Thus, I extend the courtesy towards others of not denying their personhood just as I want them to acknowledge mine. I, therefore, acknwowledge the personhood of human beings that are living inside the womb of a woman, which means I am bound by the Non-Aggression Principle to respect the freedoms and rights of that person.

    1. OM, in my view this is a perfectly fair and reasonable viewpoint. I also tend to think that, if you are a responsible adult and you have sex, knowing that procreation may result, then you already made your choice. Why exactly should another human being be forced to suffer should you change your mind?

      Also, by way of a thought experiment, let’s say for example at sometime in the future that a sperm and egg can be combined and the resulting bunch of cells grows into a human being. When did life begin in this case? Did it begin at the moment of genetic material combination, or did it begin 270 days following?

      With all that said, at this juncture it is so divisive an issue, and in the near-term we have other, more pressing concerns that I can accept abortion within the first trimester, as long as it is completely non-taxpyer funded.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.