Christie Sworn In Amid Scandals, More Gay Marriage Lawsuits, Casinos Start Taking Bitcoins: P.M. Links

|

  • Not poker chips … yet.
    Credit: antanacoins / Foter.com / CC BY-SA

    Gov. Chris Christie was sworn in today for his second term, which looks to be full of sunshine and happiness.

  • Utah is now being sued for refusing to recognize the gay marriages that were legally performed there after a judge struck down the state's ban but before a stay was put in place pending appeal. Meanwhile, some gay couples in Florida are suing to try to get the state's ban on recognizing same-sex marriages there struck down as well.
  • Republican Sen. David Vitter has announced he's running for governor of Louisiana.
  • In the latest example of how broken various trademark, copyright and intellectual property laws are, the makers of the video game Candy Crush Saga have managed to secure a trademark on the word "candy" in video game titles (and clothing). According to reports, Apple is enforcing the trademark claim on any apps in their stores.
  • Ezra Klein will be leaving the Washington Post to try to start his own news organization after the news company declined to bankroll his efforts.
  • Two Las Vegas casinos will start accepting bitcoins for some purchases, dining and their front desks, but apparently not for gambling yet.

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: Nick Gillespie Talks NSA, Janet Yellin, Obama, and More on HuffPostLive

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. Republican Sen. David Vitter has announced he’s running for governor of Louisiana.

    Yawn.

    1. Just you wait until Vitter builds that Death Star.

      1. I think I’ll take my chances with any death stars built in Louisiana.

        1. Don’t mock…the Army Corps of Engineers is hard at work!

        2. If a womp rat is the size of a nutria…

  2. Ezra Klein will be leaving the Washington Post to try to start his own news organization …

    Double yawn.

    1. Maybe he’ll be as successful as Algore! Or Al Franken!

      1. He already transformed our nation’s healthcare system. How much more success can we afford?

    2. I’m pretty sure Weigal wrote an article about how this was the worst thing in the history of the Washington Post.

      1. As long as he didn’t use 100-year-old language that no one understands.

    3. How long until Klein’s venture crashes and burns? He was well known because he was a propagandist who had the Washington Post as a vehicle. I don’t think anyone is going to care about his propaganda without the WaPo label.

      1. Pretty sure it will burst into flames before it reaches the end of the driveway.

        1. I saw someone comparing Klein’s leaving to the guys who went and formed Politico.

          I’m going to go out on a limb and say Klein is not going to form the next Politico. The man is completely incompetent in any capacity beyond propaganda purveyor.

        2. Pretty sure it will burst into flames before it reaches the end of the driveway.

          Just call him Tesla Klein!

      2. I still can’t believe there’s no viable market out there for progressive spin. Or is it saturated?

        1. I think it’s saturated. Remember Adam Weinstein’s hilarious temper tantrum about how poor he is even though he’s written for so many ‘big name’ publications?

          The reason for that is simple. You can find nebulously left-wing idiots to spin out useless pablum on pretty much any street corner of any major city. If someone like Klein or Weinstein, people who are, in short, complete morons, tries to set out on their own without a ‘brand’ to cover them, there is no way they’ll be successful. There are simply too many useless J-school graduates who are willing to work for peanuts and a couch to sleep on.

          1. Prestige is its own reward for these types.

      3. If it’s successful, Bezos could just buy it, too.

        1. Dude, I think Bezos was just waiting for reason to fire this pompous gas-bag.

          I’m a big Bezos fan.

          1. I think Bezos knows Klein wasn’t actually bringing anything to the table and that the entire value was in the WaPo brand.

            He apparently gave Klein no counteroffer. If you’re not giving someone a counteroffer, that means you don’t think they’re worth that much.

            1. I’d love to read a transcript of that meeting.

    4. Wasn’t he out fishing around for $10mm or somesuch to start this thing? I wonder who the sucker is funding it?

      1. Very important midterm elections are coming up. Let’s see if he gets up and operational by then or if 2016 is the target.

      2. Let me guess: Soros, or tied to Soros in some way.

  3. Hello.

    Damn long 24 hours.

    1. You forgot to factor in the conversion rate from Canadian.

      1. 25.743355 hours!

        1. Canadians live longer because universal health care.

          1. It’s Canuckia, it just seems longer.

  4. Ezra Klein will be leaving the Washington Post to try to start his own news organization after the news company declined to bankroll his efforts.

    Maybe he’ll attract all the young, smug pundits into one Smug Singularity.

    1. The Smugularity?

      1. +1 douchebag

    2. one Smug Singularity

      Arianna Huffington would like a word.

    3. I want him to hire Matthew Yglesias. Imagine Yglesias and Klein being together again, just like the bad old days of the American Prospect.

      That blog would be completely insufferable.

      1. We can only hope that Krugman joins in.

        1. Don’t leave out Marcotte.

  5. “Happy Birthday Michelle Obama… It is most unfortunate that you and your wonderful husband cannot live at least 1,000 years… But I can assure you will be remembered at least that long… maybe longer… All My Love”-Jay Oliver Sax

    1. You know who else had a thousand-year Reich?

      1. The 2992 Buffalo Bills?

      2. Robert Reich?

    2. Jay Oliver Sax, who the fuck is that guy?

      1. I don’t know, but I bet he’s a lot less interesting than Oliver Sachs.

      2. He’s best known as part of the comedy-music nightclub entertainers, Sax and Violins.

    3. As far as I can tell, Jay Oliver Sax is some sort of homeless man living in New York who posts a lot on twitter.

      Or is this a different Jay Oliver Sax? Otherwise why should I care about this guy?

    4. He may well be remembered for 1,000 years.

      Just not for being a great President.

      1. This is true. Nixon will also be remembered for 1000 years.

        1. And then he will be elected President for Life of all Earthicans.

      2. “I see a greedy hand reaching out from Washington, and millions of people calling out his name..”

        “His followers?”

        “His victims.”

  6. Gov. Chris Christie was sworn in today for his second term, which looks to be full of sunshine and happiness.

    It looks like Mother Nature closed some lanes on him for the inauguration ceremony.

  7. What do we want ?! POVERTY!!
    When do we want it?! FOREVER!!
    “Anti-gentrification protesters again blocked tech buses carrying workers out of San Francisco on Tuesday morning.”
    Yep, that’ll bring down rents!
    http://blog.sfgate.com/stew/20…..19836101=0

    1. Part of me wants the endgame of this to be the major tech companies leaving the Bay Area. Just to see how badly the economy collapses there.

      1. Part of me wants the endgame of this to be the major tech companies leaving the Bay Area. Just to see how badly the economy collapses there.

        Only part?

        I can’t imagine that tech companies will be able to stay forever with the regulatory climate in both CA and SF, much less the douches who loudly proclaim that they don’t want successful businesses in the area.

        I’d love to see the only thing that keep the Bay area afloat move away so that those left can see the results of their policy and be forced to live in it.

        1. Why are any companies operating in SF/CA?

          1. The view is gorgeous, there are lots of cool places to hang out, and it’s near Stanford.

            As Adam Carolla explains, California is like a hot blond. People will put up with a ton of crap they wouldn’t normally deal with because its scenic and has great weather.

    2. I hope the busses ran over the protesters, who were engaging in illegal forcible detainment.

      1. What?! The last thing we want is these people procreating!

        1. I hope this meme never dies. I’m so proud to have been part of the genesis of it. Plus it’s just so damn funny.

    3. The fuck is wrong with these people?

    4. This entire controversy continues to be completely insane to me. How do you even respond to this kind of mentality?

      For some, the buses, used by companies like Google and Apple, have become symbols of income disparity in San Francisco.

      It’s a disparity between the kind of people capable of generating an income and the kind of people who have nothing better to do in the middle of a Tuesday morning than stop people with jobs to do from going about their day. I’m absolutely baffled at the fawning sympathy the protesters keep getting in these stories.

      1. it’s San Fran. Why would fawning over idiocy baffle you, particularly when said idiocy is aimed at one of progville’s favorite hobby horses.

        1. Remember, this is a city that had a ballot initiative to allow naked people to be allowed to walk freely on the sidewalks and be allowed in restaurants. As in naked crotches and bumholes on the nice upholstered chairs. And the media coverage around it was mostly serious, often fawning.

          1. a ballot initiative to allow naked people to be allowed to walk freely on the sidewalks

            I’m having a hard time coming up with a strong libertarian argument against this.

            and be allowed in restaurants

            and I’d probably have trouble arguing against this either, except that it’s SF so this probably means “and be allowed in restaurants over the objections of the restaurant owners, staff, and other customers”. Because when “rights” are in conflict, the tie goes to the more “oppressed”.

            1. I’m having a hard time coming up with a strong libertarian argument against this.

              Agreed. OTOH, I immediately have a good view of how serious a human being you are if you think this is a problem desperately in need of attention and a ballot initiative.

      2. I’m absolutely baffled at the fawning sympathy the protesters keep getting in these stories.

        But they’re fighting against their oppressors! You know, the ones who have the power to, uh, er, make a good product that people want to use!

      3. Nothing will help San Francisco pay for their social programs like driving away all the rich people with threats of violence!

        Genius!

        1. The last time I checked, we were spending about $200 million/year on the homeless.

      4. How do you even respond to this kind of mentality?

        With guns.

  8. Two Las Vegas casinos will start accepting bitcoins for some purchases, dining and their front desks, but apparently not for gambling yet.

    Putting those two evil things together would definitely bring down the fire and/or brimstone.

    1. You can already buy a hooker and gamble with bitcoins, just not in a casino. Not that hookers and blow aren’t important things to buy anonymously, but I still don’t think that’s the full potential of bitcoin.

  9. Dear Prudence: Help! My boyfriend wants me to take herpes suppressing medication!

    The guy I lost my virginity to was not as forthcoming about certain things as my naive teenage self expected him to be. As a result, I got herpes the moment I lost my virginity. I’ve worked through the initial feelings of having an STD years ago and have lived very comfortably since then. I’ve always been completely open and careful with partners and, to my knowledge, have not passed it along to anyone.

    Now I only have one or two mild outbreaks a year, if that. I’ve never been on suppressive therapy until recently, at the urging of the guy I’m currently seeing. He knew before we started dating about my “condition,” and asked me if I would go on suppressive therapy in order to reduce the risk for him. Initially I was fine with this?I completely understand his cautious attitude and I wanted to do my part to “protect” him. However, this leaves me taking a pill twice a day, and what was for a long time just a background issue and occasional mild annoyance is now a daily presence. Am I being selfish and thoughtless for wanting to stop taking this medication, knowing that it puts somebody I care about at a greater risk?

    True love means never having to say your sorry for genital outbreaks.

    1. I think if you have an STD you have a responsibility to at least minimize the chances of spreading it to your partner. Of course the simple solution would be to talk about it with the guy instead of Dear Prudence.

    2. Yes. You are being selfish. Also, he should wear a condom, because you obviously cannot be trusted with oral birth control. And you are dirty.

    3. “Am I being selfish and thoughtless…”

      There’s a word on the tip of my tongue for what you are, but I can’t seem to place it.

        1. Nailed it.

    4. Am I being selfish and thoughtless for wanting to stop taking this medication, knowing that it puts somebody I care about at a greater risk?

      Yes.

      Next question. And this time let’s make it a question that isn’t fucking stupid.

    5. However, this leaves me taking a pill twice a day

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNUr__-VZeQ

    6. “Am I being selfish and thoughtless for wanting to stop taking this medication,…?”

      1. Do you want to continue to have sex with this uninfected guy?

      2. Can you afford it?

      3. Are there any debilitating side effects to the treatment aside from the fact it reminds you that you have herpes?

      If the answers to 1 & 2 are yes and the answer to 3 is no, then you are mind-bogglingly selfish.

  10. Two Las Vegas casinos will start accepting bitcoins for some purchases, dining and their front desks, but apparently not for gambling yet.
    —-

    Wouldn’t bitcoin be perfect for online casinos? Does such a thing exist? If not, it’s a shame, given that I doubt I could set such a thing up without breaking a few dozen federal laws.

    1. New Jersey just legalized online gambling.

      Other (illegal) online gambling has existed (and will exist) forever.

    2. Yeah, online gambling was one of the first things you could do with bitcoin.

  11. Socialist paradise Sweden has such a great health care system that one tenth have gotten private insurance. Are you listening Mr. Prez?

    One in ten Swedes now has private health insurance, often through their employers, with some recipients stating it makes business sense to be seen quickly rather than languish in national health care queues.

    More than half a million Swedes now have private health insurance, showed a new review from industry organization Swedish Insurance (Svensk F?rs?kring). In eight out of ten cases, the person’s employer had offered them the private insurance deal.

    “It’s quicker to get a colleague back to work if you have an operation in two weeks’ time rather than having to wait for a year,” privately insured Anna Norlander told Sveriges Radio on Friday. “It’s terrible that I, as a young person, don’t feel I can trust the health care system to take care of me.”

    http://www.thelocal.se/2014011…..ance-trend

    1. Those Swedes are obviously trying to make Obama look bad, like when they gave him the Peace Prize ironically.

    2. Prog: Yes, because hundred of millions of Europeans and Canadians are all wrong about public health!

      /rolls eyes.

      1. This will devolve into a 2-tier health care system – the government system for the proles, and a private system for the rich connected.

        1. Already happening in Canada.

          1. which seems to confirm the point your faux prog was making in jest. Unless people suddenly decided to pay into a private system for no particular reason.

      2. One in ten Swedes now has private health insurance

        Hey, this means that 90% of Swedes love their health care system!

        …or 90% cannot afford to purchase private insurance since they are taxed to death to pay for the broken gov’t system.

    3. Is that more or less than the number who had private health insurance this morning?

    4. It’s terrible that I, as a young person, don’t feel I can trust the health care system to take care of me.

      Why is it terrible that you can’t trust people whom you don’t know and don’t owe you a goddamn thing to pay for your health care?

  12. Christine Sworn In Amid Scandals

    Christine Aguilara?

    1. and now it’s fixed…like it was never there

    2. The car from the Steven King novel, which is now blocking bridges instead of running people over.

      1. Don’t forget burning leaded gas and generally chlimate-changing the whole place.to.death.

        1. IIRC, both tetra-ethyl lead and Freon were developed by the same chemist. I’m surprised he hasn’t been posthumously proclaimed history’s greatest (chemist) monster.

          1. Eh. I’m pretty sure the Haber of Haber-Bosch who, aside from figuring out how to make ammonia and nitrogen also developed mustard gas and, I believe, chlorine gas and was a proponent of their uses in WWI is probably going to be the winner.

            1. Shit. Ammonia and nitrate. Synthetic processes for nitrogen for plants.

            2. Well I was thinking more from environmentalists’ POV but Haber is a solid contender.

  13. I hope Vitter gets elected and then….

    gets presented with a bill to legalize prostitution in Louisiana.

    Can you think of a faster way to revitalize New Orleans?

    (A man can dream, right?)

    1. Especially if they created an Amsterdam-style red-light district.

      It would lead to quite the gawker crowd, especially with the large amount of morbid obesity that resides in the area. They could have entire districts of “The More the Cushion…”

      1. Storyville was very popular back in the day.

  14. Listening to Cuomo’s idiotic rant the other day (he was, of course, misquoted) someone mentioned the infamous ‘vote for Cuomo, not the homo’ campaign against Koch in 1977.

    http://gothamist.com/2013/02/0…..rew_fo.php

    1. I believe Cuomo was also the first one to bring up Willie Horton.

  15. Meanwhile, some gay couples in Florida are suing to try to get the state’s ban on recognizing same-sex marriages there struck down as well.

    While I wish them luck, I would remind them that they would probably ultimately be happier not trying to glue their relationships together with a government stamp of approval. If that’s what they’re doing. Which they probably are.

    P.S. Thanks for sneaking the word “recognizing” in there. You’re my favorite, Shackford.

    1. Is it a ban on recognizing same-sex marriages performed in another state, a refusal to license same-sex marriages, or both?

      1. I still haven’t figured out where full faith and credit play into these marriage licenses. I mean, other marriage licenses are automatically honored, no?

        1. I believe some states that don’t recognize first cousin marriages do not honor those from states that do but I might be wrong.

          1. How would they ever know? If you marry your first cousin in [some state where that’s legal] and then move to [some state where it’s not], I can’t imagine how the new state would ever even know about it.

        2. That part of the federal DOMA is still in effect, so that is up to the states.

      2. In Texas I think our constitutional amendment was for both. I’d bet others are the same.

  16. Hackers get 70,000 identities off of Healthcare.gov in 4 minutes. Are you listening Mr. Prez?

    After the bevy of problems Healthcare.gov encountered in its first few months of life, dumping one more onto the pile shouldn’t phase you all that much, right? Well, not if that hiccup is actually a gaping vulnerability?and one that can grant hackers access to over 70,0000 private records in just four minutes, at that.

    David Kennedy, a white hat hacker and TrustedSec CEO, has been warning anyone who would listen since November that the flawed government website was highly insecure. Now, after using passive reconnaissance, “which allowed [him to query and look at how the website operates and performs,” Kennedy revealed that he was able to access 70,000 records in under four minutes, granting him access to information such as names, social security numbers, email addresses, and home addresses just to name a few. What’s more, he didn’t even technically have to hack into the website at all.

    http://gizmodo.com/hackers-swi…..1505786371

    1. This has to be a fake story.

      I don’t believe 70,000 people tried to sign up at healthcare.gov.

    2. What could be better for an online thief than an one-stop shop for everything from medical records to IRS information and SS#s?

      Obamacare is a disaster waiting to happen. And nothing will happen.

    3. “Obamacare website passed recent security test”

      By Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar of The Associated Press
      Thursday, January 16, 2014 – 5:13 pm
      “WASHINGTON ? Cybersecurity concerns over President Barack Obama’s health care website have been cleared up through testing, a government security professional who initially had qualms about the system assured lawmakers Thursday.”
      http://www.news-sentinel.com/a…../LEININGER

  17. Norwegian curling team plans to take Sochi Olympics by storm with their fabulously loud uniforms

    The Norwegians ? Thomas Ulsrud, Torgor Nergard, Christoffer Svae and Havard Vad Petersson ? caused a stir at the Vancouver Olympics in 2010 when they took to the ice for the tournament’s opening game against Canada sporting bold, diamond-printed golf pants in their nation’s colors. With curlers having always worn basic black uniforms, tradition was thrown out of the window.

    Spectators couldn’t believe what they were seeing. The pants became one of the talking points of the games, quickly going viral. Even the Norwegian monarch, King Harald V, received a pair.

    A Facebook page dedicated to ‘The Norwegian Olympic Curling Team’s Pants’ peaked at 695,000 followers during the games, according to its founder Anthony D’Orazio ? that figure is currently back down to close to 540,000 but is sure to grow before and during Sochi. Two of the biggest clusters of followers are in China and Brazil.

    Norway’s emboldened curlers ? trend-setters in their own right ? are taking some new patterns over to Russia.

    Four have already been revealed ? one has a zig-zagging chevron print, and another is black and flowery and called “rosemaling” ? and several more will be unveiled throughout the Olympics. It’s all very top-secret at the moment, but prepare to be amazed.

    1. This is an affront to the soul of curling. I expect vigorous protests by many ones of ones.

      1. Oh, I’d bet a goodly portion of Canada will be up in arms at what’s being done to “their” sport.

      2. Most from Saskatchewan.

    2. The one to watch is their women’s team. Sweden’s too.

      1. This. I was disappointed theee were only pictures of the men’s team. Who cares about them?

    3. Norwegian curling team plans to take Sochi Olympics by storm with their fabulously loud uniforms

      Damn, that looks like an album cover for Huey Lewis and The News.

  18. Interesting article on China’s courting of some of the world’s nastier governments.

    “…far from being a strength, China’s dictatorship diplomacy is a sign of its weakness. Because China entered the globalization game relatively late, almost all the most attractive economic partners already had strong and long-standing ties to Western nations. As a result, China to some degree has simply had to settle for the more problematic nations that the West refused to deal with.”

    1. So we’re living a new, stupider Scramble for Africa, I guess. Doesn’t anyone in China read history?

      If we’re going to have the Great War all over again, I at least want a dreadnaught named after me.

      1. Hmm, USS Warty sounds like more of a heavily armed monitor to me, lazily motoring up the Congo…

        1. My methods have become…unsound.

          1. I’d say no one wants to see your methods, but then I’m just a grocery boy sent to collect a bill.

          2. That implies that at some time your methods were sound.

  19. I can’t decide if this is incredibly stupid or stupidly awesome. I suppose it could be awe-inspiringly stupid.

    Later this month, two guys plan to walk into a North Las Vegas bar and shoot each other.

    The combatants will be wearing ballistics-grade head and body armor, carrying dinner plate-sized forearm shields and modified police-issue 9 mm Glocks.

    They will be standing at opposite ends of a 30-by-8-foot steel cage ? fully enclosed, UFC-style ? in the middle of what used to be a couple of stage-side tabletops at Whiskey Dick’s, 2750 E. Craig Road.

    That’s where a new sport, known to its North Las Vegas-based creators as tactical fast draw, is set to make its Jan. 31 debut.

    1. Come for the whiskey dick. Pay out the nose for our insurance policy.

    2. I mean, its not Russian roulette with a semi-automatic stupid. They are at least trying to live. I think the odds are higher that ricochet kills/injures a spectator.

      1. “There’s only 1 round in a 15 round magazine! That’s good odds!”

        1. And yet, I know I read of an incident in the Houston Chronicle where an honors student did just that. Apparently, being obsessed with the idea, but not understanding the finer differences between a revolver and a semi-automatic.

      2. They’re using 9mm paintball ammunition. I’m sure it hurts like a bitch, but it won’t kill anyone.

          1. exactly that

        1. Brandon and Bruce Lee calling on the courtesy phone.

          1. That one was caused by a squib being shot out of the barrel of an unmodified gun by a blank. With Simunitions actual 9mm ammo can’t be fired out of it.

    3. I wasn’t expecting George Zimmerman to be shoehorned into this.

      1. When all you have is a retarded hammer, every problem is a retarded nail.

  20. Developers are being asked to remove their apps from the App Store or prove that their [games] do not infringe upon the Candy Crush trademark.

    Hmm. Can you imagine reading:

    Governments are being asked to remove their laws from the books or prove that their regulations do not infringe upon the Second and Fourth Amendments.

  21. Interesting question:

    Is doxing ok When a pseudoanomyous blogger Uses their own identity to call out another scientist?

    Or was this just an excuse to use a tactic that he knew would invoke a disproportionate response?

    1. I don’t see how that’s different that any other form of doxing.

      But the real question is who is she and why should I care? What was the context of doxing her?

      1. She hates the guy for believing that there are physical neurological differences between men and women.

        Now, don’t get me wrong. I love a cute pair of shoes as much as the next gal. But, in my womanspace I have the ability to enter a store and buy bread and milk without soiling myself over a pair of heels. That’s because I am usually trying to buy that bread and milk in the 5 minutes of free time I have between leaving a meeting with my collaborators, or submitting a grant, and needing to pick my children up from daycare.

        I also don’t particularly like to shop without a purpose and I hate to meander. I suspect there are other women like me. Maybe we are not women enough for womenspace.

        He outed that her real name which indicated that she was born male.

        There’s been a lot of proggie talk about this issue since the Dr.V article about the inventor of a putter and her subsequent suicide.

        1. Yeah but I don’t see how this is different from other doxing. He is a public figure and she is not (as I understand it). Is she important in some way or just some random blogger? If just a blogger why is an editor/board member of Nature wasting his time with this stuff?

          1. Excellent question. I believe she has organized letter campaigns against him to his employers. That article in 2011 is the first of many. He feels personally under attack. Although, if she’s been trying it since 2011, and it’s obviously not working, you’d think he’d just let it go.

          2. A blogger isn’t a “public figure”?
            Is their some magical threshold?

            1. Well some random anonymous blogger. All he has linked to is her blog which looks like that. That’s why I asked. It just seems kind of petty on his part with out more information.

              1. There was a bunch of shit about the “lady scientist” being some sort of PC diversity expert/activist like it was a bigger deal than her exercise physiology science.

        2. There’s been a lot of proggie talk about this issue since the Dr.V article about the inventor of a putter and her subsequent suicide.

          I thought that “Dr. V” killed herself prior to the publication of the article?

          1. She did. She blamed her suicide on the article he was going to release. He didn’t try to hide that at all, it’s in his article.

  22. Warren Buffet and other investors team with Quicken Loans to offer one billion dollar prize for perfect March Madness bracket

    Detroit-based Quicken Loans, the nation’s fourth largest mortgage lender, has joined forces with Warren Buffett and Berkshire Hathaway to offer a chance at a $1 billion prize for completing the perfect bracket in this March’s men’s college basketball championship tournament.

    Any qualified entrant who correctly enters the contest and predicts the winners of every game in the tournament will share the total $1 billion prize paid in 40 annual installments of $25 million. Alternatively, the winner(s) may elect to receive an immediate $500 million lump sum payment or share in that lump sum payment if there is more than one perfect bracket submitted.

    “We’ve seen a lot of contests offering a million dollars for putting together a good bracket, which got us thinking, what is the perfect bracket worth? We decided a billion dollars seems right for such an impressive feat,” said Jay Farner, President and Chief Marketing Officer of Quicken Loans.

    In addition to the potential grand prize, Quicken Loans will award $100,000 each to the contest’s 20 most accurate ‘imperfect’ brackets submitted by qualified entrants in the contest to use toward buying, refinancing or remodeling a home.

    1. Only 8.44 * 10^96 possibilities. Piece of cake.

      1. That’s a lot of brackets to fill out.

        1. Oh, one per household. Well played Quicken.

      2. Sorry, it’s 1 in 9.2 * 10 ^ 18 to get 63 games right.

    2. Take out an insurance policy for the rare event that somebody gets a perfect bracket. Even if each game can be predicted with 85% accuracy (yeah right for the 8-9 and play-in games), there’s only about one chance in 20,000 of getting every game right.

    3. Apparently the clip is not online: SNL Peyton Manning and Amy Poehler March Madness skit transcript.

    4. I did a spreadsheet a couple of.years ago that correctly predicted about 80% IIRC. And I know nothing about basketball.

    5. $1 billion prize paid in 40 annual installments of $25 million.

      So, not a $1BB prize at all. More like an annuity worth probably only $500mm, give or take.

      1. Alternatively, the winner(s) may elect to receive an immediate $500 million lump sum payment

        Apparently they agree with you.

        I don’t know why anyone is complaining, it’s a free lottery ticket. I sure as shit am entering a bracket.

    6. Holy crap, one Billion??

      I think they’ve finally come up with a prize I’d pick over a golden ticket to tour the Wonka factory.

  23. Black GOP candidate is trolling liberals like there’s no tomorrow

    “I make no apologies for saying that the President is not above the People. If ordinary Americans should be executed for treason, so should he,” he explained. “So, don’t stop at impeachment. Remove him. Try him before a jury (the very right that he arbitrarily denied to al-Awaki and his 15-year-old son), and, upon his sure convictions, execute him. Thus has he done, thus it should be done to him.”

    He later added: “I guess that makes me a racist, according to the President’s latest speech.”

    1. That’s idiotic and shouldn’t be condoned. It’s especially moronic when you’re a black GOP candidate who is going to need to fight against racist accusations of being an ‘Uncle Tom.’

      He specifically said the president should be hanged. Given the history of hanging black people in this country you have to be a total jackass to use that phrase even if you’re black.

      1. The difference is, I don’t want his team to win, so I’m enjoying sending money to prolong the crazy and expose the lack of seriousness of everyone who engages seriously with him.

        1. I understand that. I’m just wondering why on Earth this guy could be so dumb as to say this.

          You’re a black representative of a party that has trouble attracting black voters. You could help the Republicans make inroads among black voters and decrease their deficit with that demographic.

          Instead you say the first black president should be hanged. The GOP is astonishingly good at taking good opportunities and squandering them immediately.

          1. Congenital retards versus Massive head trauma. The story of US politics.

          2. He’s going to be called an Uncle Tom anyway. Fact is, he’s totally right and he’s awesome for calling his GOP colleague a criminal in essence. The butthurt in the comments is pretty funny too.

            1. Which is of course irrelevant because even if someone is right they should not be saying this.

              This is how Democrats clean house among minority groups and slowly but surely destroy entire states. Maybe if Republicans weren’t such fucking morons about racial issues they could have maintained some power in California and stopped Democrats from turning it into the state with the highest poverty rate in the country.

              Sorry, but I don’t much care if Republicans speak ‘truth’ if that truth allows the Democrats to turn the United States into the largest open air cesspool the world has ever seen.

              1. I totally agree with your general statement about the GOP and race (although immigration is the one they’re really retarded on), but come on, Black is a black! He can say this stuff.

              2. Agreed, and indicative of a larger problem among conservatives and libertarians: they are more interested in having their candidates “speak truth” than in actually winning elections and moving policy. I mean, FFS Ron Paul could have had it in 2012 if not for the boneheaded things he’s said and done.

                1. In retrospect, it’s amazing Ron Paul got as far as he did.

                  The problem, TIT, is that we don’t have a brainstem connection to ‘our candidates’ so we don’t know when they are really sooth-saying to the public while actually one of us or just pissing down our backs. See Harper, Stephen.

                  1. That’s a good point, which is why I have always been in favor of developing our candidates in a lab.

                    Romney’s hair, Obama’s skin color, Reagan’s witticism’s, Mises’ brain — and Thatcher’s iron will.

                    It can’t fail.

      2. Stay classy, Black.

        Joshua Black, a candidate for Florida House District 68

        1. Florida?? No. Way.

    2. Even better, his last name IS Black.

  24. Why are people fascinated with Richard Sherman’s rant? Why, race of course!

    There’s a lot of different storylines with Richard and reasons for why this blew up, but I think a really important one here is race. This seethes into this narrative of race in America and race logic. Think about who Richard Sherman is. He’s a kid from Compton who graduated second in his class and went to Stanford to earn a degree in Communications. He’s at a critical point in his football career, makes a huge play, then a reporter sticks a mike in his face. What does he do? He not only speaks, he shouts. And now you have an angry, almost violent black man, in a very passionate moment, yelling on national television.

    http://mmqb.si.com/2014/01/21/…..scination/

    1. Whatever. I thought it was obnoxious, but big effing deal. It’s certainly not worth ten minutes of consideration.

      By the way, Revis is still better than Sherman. Good lines can make a world of difference for DBs.

      1. You’re not fascinated by angry black men? That might also be racist.

        1. No, I’m not fascinated by Michelle Obama either.

      2. Seriously. Overfuckingblown. His rant with the chick was worse than the one with the guy. I found it hilarious.

        The guy was jacked up.

        Let the Seahawks deal with it.

      3. I really, really don’t get why this is even a small deal. A sports guy just talked shit about another sports guy whom he’d just beaten. WOW!

        Barring off-season moves, Crabtree will have a couple chances next year to get payback.

    2. I think it’s more a combination of angry SF fans, older sports fans in general (Get off my lawn!) and sports media seizing on whatever is “controversial” and beating it to death. Toss Erin Andrews in and you have a perfect storm of butthurt.

      1. I forgot to add the compulsion to be offended that many people have these days.

    3. He’s a grade-A heel and he knows it. He’s self-consciously playing that role, which makes his antics completely unlike those of ordinary dipshits like Ray Lewis or whoever when they whine about dey ain’t give us no respect. Sherm fucking rules.

      1. He needs to murder someone if he wants to be taken seriously.

        1. I can’t believe that fucker is on TV. Or Moss for that matter.

          1. *Pulls out Ravens flag and waves it around*

            1. DEY AINT GIVE US NO RESPECT! PURPA AN BLAK!

              Fuck off.

              1. +1 Dawg biscuit

              2. Perhaps a final peace of sorts could occur if Ray Lewis were named head coach of the Cleveland Browns. I mean the one in Cleveland, not the one in Maryland.

                1. And lead the Browns to many morally questionable championships. That would only be fitting.

                  1. A suspicious death on the other team each week?

    4. Also, obligatory fuck Peter King.

    5. Is that Jason Whitlock? I know he tweeted something similar, albeit in under 140 characters.

      He’s a kid from Compton who graduated second in his class and went to Stanford to earn a degree in Communications.

      Perhaps he should have been able to communicate a bit better, then?

      1. His column the next morning was decent.

        But, if all I knew of him was that Erin Andrews rant, I probably wouldn’t be able to discern that he’s actually a smart guy.

    6. The majority of people watching that game were probably only vaguely aware who Richard Sherman was, so this was their first impression of him. He chose to make that first impression on the public by being a pissed off lunatic more concerned about the dick-measuring contest he was having with Crabtree then with the fact he just put his team in the Superbowl. Being judged by first impressions may be unfair but that’s life and it has little to do with race (except for when some black athlete behaves like this, his apologists often offer the excuse that this type of outburst is an authentic expression of black culture).

  25. The American Federation of Teachers supports those who support a War on Poverty

    Justice means that hardworking people must have access to a living wage. It means that great educational opportunity must be the standard for all students in all our schools. It means that paid sick leave must not be the province of only the well-to-do and those who still have a union contract that provides for it. It means we must remove obstacles to forming and joining unions, which built America’s middle class and are key to rebuilding it.

    Throughout America, foot soldiers for justice have taken up Dr. King’s call. New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has pledged to confront the city’s deep economic chasm. California and several cities, such as Washington, D.C., have significantly increased their minimum wage. U.S. Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown have shown that it is ethical and patriotic, not quixotic, to take on financial reform and income inequality. Hillary Clinton is championing the advancement of women and girls, not simply as a “nice thing to do,” but because it is a “core imperative for every human being.” In Cincinnati, the teachers union and school district have partnered to make every public school a community school, addressing the social, emotional and health needs of students and their families.

    As long as they get a piece of the action who cares about results?

    1. In Cincinnati, the teachers union and school district have partnered to make every public school a community school, addressing the social, emotional and health needs of students and their families.

      I don’t know what a “community school” is, but I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that it’s a very expensive means of accomplishing absolutely none of those things.

      1. Since they obviously have that whole educating people thing licked, might as well branch out, eh?

    2. It’s like they’re blowing some kind of a dog whistle

    3. At our hospital all the unions traded in their 10 annual days of sick leave — which technically can only be used when “sick” – for 10 days of “paid time off” each year, i.e. an extra two weeks vacation. Amazingly enough, almost no one calls in sick anymore. This is great for us, as it’s much easier to staff the ER when people want to take vacation (arranged in advance) than trying to fill in for a “sick” person at a moment’s notice.

      And it would still fulfill the needs of the whiner here, who must assume that all “hard-working” Americans can’t help but get so sick they can’t work for ten full days each and every year.

  26. CBC KW sends bitcoin over the airwaves

    On The Morning Edition, CBC Kitchener-Waterloo was able to successfully transmit bitcoin over radio waves.

    This makes what is believed to be the first known transmission of the digital currency by a public radio station.

    1. The CBC is promoting BTC? That’s pretty amusing given their political bent.

      And that’s very cool that BTC can be transmitted on radio and in sound waves. That’s a lot of application.

    2. It’s not really a first. A few weeks ago someone showed his bitcoin QR code in a news segment, and some viewer used that to steal it from him.

  27. Damn, they can really circle the wagons fast.

    Comments about Wendy Davis and that mean old poopyhead Limbaugh.

    1. RL rents top floor corner office head space from them at bargain basement prices.

    2. You know why Rush is so good, is that he has such impeccable timing. He waits until people become invested in people with feet of clay before attacking. I don’t actually give a shit about anybody in this. Davis was no more going to be governor of Texas than Chris Christie could.

  28. So WaPo hires Radley Balko and let’s Klein go. Coincidence or design? Let’s hope design.

    Right now, Kennedy’s on Cavuto.

    1. So WaPo hires Radley Balko and let’s Klein go.
      People do this deliberately just to piss me off, don’t they?

      1. Hey, its not our fault your a grammer nazi.

      2. Nah, its just squirrel’s.

      3. Yes, Ted. It’s all about you.

        1. The name Theodore means “gift of God”. I’m God’s gift to H&R. 😉

      4. They do it to you 2PM in the afternoon?

      5. Let us Klein go!

        Happy?

  29. Arizona state rep proposes bill to address problem of gay couples shanghaiing religious photographers and bakers, women hit the hardest

    Arizona state Sen. Steve Yarbrough has introduced a bill that would allow businesses that are sued for discrimination to claim an exemption from anti-discrimination law based on their religious beliefs. Or, put more simply, if a business owner decides not to serve you, he or she can say it’s because your presence offends Jesus and can, if this bill becomes law, get away with that. In fact, the bill may even give employers the right to deny you a job because they think God doesn’t approve of you.

    Because it’s always obvious why a person doesn’t hire you and the law should be able to read minds or assume the worst when member of protected class X doesn’t get a job.

    Today it’s not getting your full insurance benefits. Tomorrow it’s being told that you and your boyfriend have to pay for separate rooms because the hotel owner disapproves of your private sexual choices. Or that your boss needs to fire you now that you’ve gotten married, because his religion teaches that a married woman’s place is in the home serving her husband.

    With at-will employment I think your boss probably could fire you for getting married, there not being a protected class for marital status

    1. My only gripe is that it only offers protection for the religious, but gotta be realistic.

  30. Did a group you support do something you disagree with?

    What do you do? Well, if you’re Pezus, you obfuscate like it’s your job. Hell, that might be considered his job now. At least in terms of his online activities.

    But the two Republicans didn’t write the bill, they’re just sponsoring it. Who wrote it? A former president and current lobbyist for the NRA, Marion Hammer. Being a politician sure is the cushy life. No work at all; if you’ve got a bill to regulate an industry, you just ask the industry to write it for you.

    And who was it written for Krugman jr? Cause it wasn’t the NRA.

    1. Why anyone is surprised at this point that fashion magazines retouch photos is a mystery.

      On the other hand, she is not someone famous for being beautiful and glamorous, quite the opposite really, so why fix the photos to look more so?

      1. To not retouch a Lena Dunham photo is to extend a giant middle finger to humanity.

        1. Yeah, I think they don’t want to be sued for the lunches lost by their readers.

    2. I haven’t exactly been living under a rock or anything, but I fail to get the whole Lena Dunham thing that apparently has come outta nowhere in just the past week or so. Who is this below average looking chick and what’s so special about her?

      1. The only place I have ever seen her name is here and I don’t think incidences.of.it have particularly spiked here.

      2. She’s the star (and I think, to some degree the creator) of the HBO shows Girls.

      3. HBO gave her a show to indulge her exhibitionist fetish.

  31. Trolling libertarians or just plain crazy?

    1. You might be knew here since I don’t recognize your name. That person is named Mary though and she was a crazy stalker here years ago. She apparently tried to get a poster kicked out of school and another fired from his job. She then idiotically left her email address so everyone figured out who she was.

      She is now wandering the lonesome highways of the internet screaming impotently at an uncaring world.

      1. Well, that latter point is one thing she actually does have in common with libertarians, I suppose.

      2. He might be unknown here, too.

      3. Damn, how do I get a credit on that shit?

        1. Well, I was the first to point out that there was a real email address linked in one of her posts. Others did much more.

          1. Is doxing OK with certain libertarians here?
            One wouldn’t think so.

            1. She tried to do it first and threw a fit when the tables were turned. No sympathy for a scumbag getting hoisted by her own petards.

              Based on the fact that you posted that video here and are defending a known sociopath, I’m assuming that you’re Mary.

              1. I’m not defending anyone. I’m just asking if doxing is an acceptable practice here. Is it?

                1. What is doxing?

                  1. According to the video, doxing is

                    the internet-based practice of researching and publishing personally identifiable information about an individual. It is closely related to cyber-vigilantism, hacktivism and cyber-bullying. Doxing is a tactic most commonly utilized by amoral anarchists, criminals and sociopathic narcissists to extort, coerce, harass and publicly shame an ideological enemy.

                    Seems like a pretty accurate definition.

                    1. Is the video just.someone reading wikipedia articles on.camera?

              2. “No sympathy for a scumbag getting hoisted by her own petards.”

                So doxing is OK then? I notice you evaded the question, Irish.

                1. Libertarianism is based on the Non-Agression Principle. The NAP states that it is immoral to initiate force, fraud, or theft. Doxing someone, particularly with the intent to harm them financially, could be considered an initiation of force.

                  However, the NAP isn’t a pacifist idealogy. It allows for one to use force in self-defense. Therefor doxing someone in response to their doxing of another, as was done in the case of Mary, would be considered a response-in-kind rather than an initiation and is OK in that specific case.

                  So to answer your question, doxing is generally not OK, but if done in self-defense is acceptable.

                  1. The NAP states that it is immoral to initiate force, fraud, or theft.

                    Great. So how do chatroom disagreements that take place on a site you don’t own constitute “force, fraud, or theft?” Who was forcing whom? How? Who was defrauded? How? What was stolen?

                    Admit it, the doxers doxed “Mary” because they hated her, not for any ethically justifiable reason.

                    1. “Admit it, the doxers doxed “Mary” because they hated her, not for any ethically justifiable reason”

                      In certain parts of Southeast Asia, when a monkey in the public square starts throwing shit at people, the citizenry beat the monkey to death with brooms. And its considered a ‘public service’. That’s how a community reacts when some entity with no other purpose than to disrupt, offend, insult, etc. makes itself known for what it is.

                      Lesson = Don’t be a shit throwing monkey.

                    2. Great. So how do chatroom disagreements that take place on a site you don’t own constitute “force, fraud, or theft?” Who was forcing whom? How? Who was defrauded? How? What was stolen?

                      Admit it, the doxers doxed “Mary” because they hated her, not for any ethically justifiable reason.

                      When you (and I’m starting to think the “you” isn’t the general “you”, but may in fact literally be YOU) try to get someone fired from their job or kicked out of their university over an internet chatroom disagreement, that can most certainly be taken as a use of force and/or fraud.

      4. “‘That person is named Mary… and she was a crazy stalker here years ago.”

        Thanks for making me feel *old*

        I consider the Mary-Era not that long ago. By contrast, Donderoooooo et al are like, pre-historic myths.

        re: videos = Jesus, what a sad person.

        My SWAG diagnosis= she’s some kind of libbrul-anarchist, thought she’d carve out some personal playpen here, everyone thought she was an idiot, her dream was shattered and has since turned into a psychopath whose only purpose is to pretend she was a ‘victim’ of you horrible, horrible, people.

        I’m thinking sorta “cathy bates in ‘Misery'”. She was our #1 biggest fan. But then you had to get all fancy pants with your potty mouth Mr MAN!!

    2. Interesting that she’s the only one commenting.

      1. I AM SHOCKED

    3. Hey, I’m one of the stars of the video! My Google-Fu must have hit home!

      For anyone first seeing this, Mary was a long-time, hugely verbose troll around here. She’s a major reason why registration was implemented, because she would just take over threads with stupid, repetitive, insulting, flamebaiting sock-puppetry. Now she’s acting like a victim, as if she was attacked for simply “disagreeing.” Nope, she got what she deserved, and maybe not everything she deserved.

      1. You’re defending the practice of doxing, then? You have no ethical qualms with it? Outing an ideological enemy, however irksome, is A-OK with libertarians? Because revenge?

        1. It all depends on the circumstances. I would not consider it ethical if it was done to someone simply because of disagreement or personal dislike. However, I do consider it ethical as a means of defense against persistent, griefer trolls who show no manners or restraint and who do their best to ruin discussions, repeatedly. Then, it’s just the online equivalent of throwing a drunk and obnoxious person out of a party. In Mary’s case, she went so far beyond the bounds of propriety that such action was entirely warranted.

        2. Zzzzzzzzzzz.

      2. Haven’t you people learned to recognize her voice by now? Talk to her for the lulz if you must, but be aware that’s what you’re doing.

        1. The fact that there’s an actual doxing discussion going on upthread and all “diggit” wants to do is talk about mary, is pretty much all you need to know as to identity of diggit.

          1. “there’s an actual doxing discussion going on upthread”

            What, my doxing thread isn’t actual?
            There can’t be more than one?
            What kind of anarchy is this?

        2. I am responding more to anyone else reading this, but also to her, just in case she really doesn’t understand why it was done to her, and really does want to know. I am giving her the benefit of the doubt.

          1. In Summary:

            Libertarians in the know sanction doxing as an ethically justifiable retaliatory measure based on the nonaggression principle.

  32. Trust us, we’re here to protect you.

    We’ve mentioned things in the past like former NSA and CIA director Michael Hayden “jokingly” talking about how he’d like to put Ed Snowden on a “kill list” while simultaneously suggesting that the NSA should be a part of determining who to target. While some would dismiss this as a tasteless “joke” it seems like he’s not the only one in the intelligence community with such thoughts. We just recently noted that reporter Steven Levy, who spent over two hours interviewing NSA officials, had said that they appear to have a real and passionate hatred towards Snowden.

    Now, Benny Johnson, over at Buzzfeed, has been able to get a bunch of intelligence community and military officials to comment anonymously, but on the record, about how much they want to kill Snowden, often including full descriptions of how they’d do it — and the fact that they don’t see any reason to support things like basic due process. The quotes are chilling.

    1. Damn. What is it going to take to get the Republic back on track? I’m thinking a life time ban on anyone currently in the intelligence community from any further government employment, and pink slips en masse. Our enemies will have an advantage on us for a good decade, some things that intelligence agencies are good at smoothing over to avoid international embarrassment we are just going to have to eat, even a 9-11 or two are possible, but they created this intolerable condition, and are in whole responsible. Short of that, another Church Commission. They’ll bitch about even that. Again, they did it to us.

  33. Protesters in San Francisco blockade private tech corp buses

    The day after an uncomfortable internal leak out of Google, anti-gentrification activists in San Francisco are attempting to shut down private shuttles from Facebook and Google, the old fashioned way.

    It appears two buses in total are stopped in traffic, with protestors turning out from Heart of the City.

    I’m not sure how to describe the protesters. Maybe pukes, the lowest form of life on Earth. They are not even human fucking beings. Nothing more than unorganized grabastic pieces of amphibian shit.

    1. I’m not sure how to describe the protesters.

      “Assholes” works.

    2. You can tell who shows up here and just starts posting immediately. :-p

      1. Yeah, Sevo beat me to it. I don’t always go through every link.

        1. I manage to land one of those once a week or so, ’cause all the right-coast folks are filling the AM links.

          1. I suffered several of them in the AM links today myself, although it was only with follow-ups, and not original articles, thankfully.

  34. Bubble Busters the App

    Bubble Busters? the App is a one-of-a-kind toolbox for progressives that provides fingertip access to numerous stats, graphs, talking points, quotes, analogies, and more to use with far-right conservatives when discussing topics ranging from health care reform to gun control to income inequality. It’s everything a progressive would want all in one convenient place. Whether you are a policy expert looking for new ideas or a novice looking to understand the issues better – this is app a must have!

    Created by progressives for progressives, Bubble Busters? the App includes:

    ? An in-depth look at these political issues*:

    – Climate Change
    – Death Penalty
    – Gun Control
    – Health Care Reform
    – Income Inequality
    – Legalizing Marijuana
    – Marriage Equality
    – Military Spending

    * More issues will be added to this app over time.

    ? Each political issue contains these sections:

    “Common Progressive View”: Potential discussion points to use with conservatives about the issue that aim to better resonate with them + links to learn more about the issue from other progressives.

    “Common Conservative View”: Potential discussion points about the issue you may hear coming from conservatives + links to learn more about the issue from conservatives themselves.

    Sadly no section on how to deal with “Common Libertarian View”.

    h/t: John Cochrane’s blog

    1. It would be cheaper to outsource this kind of script-reading. *Indian accent* Hello, my name is Billy, may I cynically read some talking points to you?

      1. My app (see below) will be read, of course, by John Cleese.

    2. Ye gods. I want an app that generates the most abusive possible response to each of these pre-digested responses. Not argumentative, just abusive.

      1. I would pay up to $2.99!

          1. But you didn’t let me tell you about my sister’s cousin’s brother’s former roommate who did exactly what you are talking about and made $778 a day working from home.

            1. [Takes money.] Now fuck off.

    3. Nothing says independent thinker like referencing a TEAM app for talking points during a political “discussion.”

      1. This reminds me of the bit in Life of Brian:

        Brian: Look, you’ve got it all wrong! You don’t need to follow me! You don’t need to follow anybody! You’ve got to
        think for yourselves! You’re all individuals!
        Crowd: Yes, we’re all individuals!
        Brian: You’re all different!
        Crowd: Yes, we are all different!
        Homogenous Man: I’m not.
        Crowd: [Multiple Silencing Sounds]
        Brian: You all got to work it out for yourselves!
        Crowd: Yes, we’ve got to work it out for ourselves!
        Brian: Exactly!
        Crowd: Tell us more!

    4. They seriously named it BubbleBusters? As in conservatives live in a bubble that the “reality-based” community must contend with?

      Holy shit the lack of awareness is hilarious. This is even better than Jezbel unironically naming its collaborative blog GroupThink.

      1. The reality-based community nonsense was the most insane meme of the last 100 years. I mean, could they be much less attached to reality?

        1. Wasn’t it Colbert that started it with his “Facts have a liberal bias!” shtick?

          1. It would be amazing if people wouldn’t pound their chests in their ignorance and illogic.

        2. I mean, could they be much less attached to reality?

          They are DESPERATE to be the ‘right people’. They are so insecure and small that it manifests in these tryhard labelling attempts.

          1. They’ve been telling themselves for decades that TEAM RED is composed of backwards weirdo bible-thumpers, whereas intelligent progressives base their beliefs on reality and math and the good works of Mr. Marx. Ironically, it doesn’t matter to them how out of touch with reality they are, because that’s what they believe.

            1. Heck, the religious right is less faith-based in its politics than the left, and I’m not exaggerating at all.

      2. Can one of you please please get this app and tell us all what it says about stuff? My guess is that it won’t be worth it’s price even if it’s free.

    5. In a political discussion, if your opponent goes to his phone to find talking points to use against you, I believe it’s perfectly legal to kick him in the nuts.

      1. And said kick to nuts should be easy to deliver with your opponent distracted with phone gaze.

    6. Holy fuck that is awesome. Progs aren’t even pretending to think for themselves any more.

      1. you eyerish baasterd! you beat me to the obvious.

        I guess that’s why they call it ‘obvious’

    7. “I just don’t buy that. Social Security and Medicare obviously won’t destroy the deficit thanks to CONNECTION ERROR, PLEASE TRY AGAIN LATER”.

    8. Long ago I advocated a libertarian version of this, in the form of a Wiki that would include supporting evidence for various libertarian positions on major topics.

    9. They need a marketing-slogan

      Because Thinking For Yourself is Hard!

  35. Social justice is eating itself.

    Remember the racism=bigotry+power bullshit?

    Now they’re using rape the same way. White feminists are pissed, and have no real argument. There’s even a hashtag on twitter “whitewomencantberaped”. Not doing any searches at work, but it won’t be hard to find.

    1. I don’t see this hashtag on twitter. I just searched for it.

      You sure this is real?

      1. saw it yesterday. Might have gotten the wording wrong. It could always be a poe, designed to show how ridiculous the logic is (as many feminists have said the exact thing about men since the 2010 CDC info came out with roughly identical rates of “penetrated” and “made to penetrate”, but it was retweeted and added to. Someone may have wiped it by now.

  36. Ethics question of the day:

    A mother gives birth to an autistic baby with a blocked small intestine. Without surgery the baby will die. The surgery is rather simple, so assume that giving the baby the surgery would result in no complications. The parents decide that they don’t want the baby to have the surgery. The physician accepts their will, and the baby is left in the hospital for 15 days to die from dehydration.

    What was/is the ideal outcome from a libertarian perspective?

    1. How can you tell a newborn is autistic?

        1. Suppose it’s Down syndrome where genetic testing is readily available. In this case (1969 John Hopkins) the doctor diagnosed the baby with “Mongoloidism” which was the non-pc form of Down syndrome, based on physical appearance and the duodenal atresia.

          The parents didn’t want to give treatment because the baby had Downs, and so the doctors and nurses let the baby dehydrate until death.

          1. Johns***

          2. Letting it dehydrate to death is pretty sick. It should be put down humanely, and the idiot parents should try genetic testing next time.

              1. Straight to GodWin?

    2. Not my problem and I don’t care. If someone wants to pay to fix the baby and then take care of it, good for them.

    3. My view:

      If an adult (or at least somebody with the capacity to understand such things, the age can be discussed) wants to discontinue medical treatment for whatever reason and dies, more power to them.

      Insomuch as children are unique human beings rather than possessions of their parents, they have certain rights over and above the decisions their parents make for them. This includes the right to medical treatment (SLD: Not from a “government must provide it” point of view) where available.

      1. So who should provide the treatment? Who would then care for the child after the child is treated?

        1. This is certainly a rights problem. Any state which exists or really any society which exists could find a number of ways of caring for the child by voluntary action. If the parents have no further interest there might be, oh, several thousand people on a waiting list hoping to adopt that child who have the resources to pay for the surgery and future care. Lacking voluntary action, well, I hope I never live in that society.

        2. Payment for the treatment should be the responsibility of the parents who brought the child into the world. The child should be put up for adoption after that point if the parents choose to relinquish their parental prerogative.

        3. The problem with your question is asking “who should?” instead of “who will?”

          See, if you ask “who will?”, the whole problem goes away. As long as you don’t let the parents veto treatment, there are more than enough private dollars around that will pay for the kid’s surgery and gladly take custody. The local Catholic diocese, for example, can be relied on to set up a program if nobody else does.

          On the other hand, if you insist on finding an answer to “who should?” without regard for the fact that there is an answer to “who would?”, then you are just looking for an excuse to coerce people.

          Consider “Who should grow our food?” versus “Who will grow our food?” Our society doesn’t answer the former at all, it only answers the latter. And that answer is perfectly adequate, even though we’d all starve if nobody chose to grow our food. We don’t need to re-invent serfdom to avoid starvation, and a response like, “What if nobody decided to farm?” does not justify re-establishing serfdom.

          1. That is a really, really fantastic answer to the question. I mean that sincerely.

              1. By which, I mean it is a good general statement on libertarian views about many social questions. It is a matter of people putting their values where it matters: in their priority.list.

                If people truly value something they will do it.or organize.to.do it. On the.other hand, if you only.care.about.something.enough to spend other people’s money on it, you don’t really care enough about.it.

          2. – Slow golf clap, building to a torrent of ‘Bravos’ and ‘Huzaahs’, followed by the climax from the 1812 Overture

            side note= Tchaikovsky? BEST EVAH.

    4. Because the surgeon was a WOMAN!

      I think I’m bad at this.

    5. Does circumcision factor into this at all?

      1. No. Only female genital mutilation is a violation of rights.

    6. Two things: One, I think most libertarian theories recognize children alive outside the womb as wards, not possessions. Therefore, it would be key to determine whether the parents thought they were acting in the best interests of their child (which is what the ward/guardian relationship is defined upon). Second, no, they are not going to keep the baby in the hospital to die. That’s not what hospitals do.

      1. This is an actual case. Hopkins let the baby die.

        1. So its a TOP. MEN. problem that has nothing to do with rights theory or libertarianism.

          1. More seriously, hospitals also don’t let people die of STDs that are treatable with antibiotics. Except sometimes when they do. That a hospital was wrong should not except the statement that hospitals do not, as a rule, offer beds and refuse treatment, or even feeding.

    7. Dunno about libertarianism per se, but in my conception of rights parents are not the holders of a child’s rights (which are intrinsic to the child), but rather guardians who exercise their ability to rationalize on behalf of the child’s well-being until the child attains the age of reason. Given that the child will die without the operation and thus cease to exist, this is clearly a case where such rationalization is not being carried out for the child’s being, well or otherwise. Ergo, it is appropriate to override the guardian for the sake of the child’s life.

    8. Eat the baby.

      1. And absorb its genetic frailty into yourself?

    9. Would the child’s condition have prevented them from being a good monocle polisher? I assume no, so the killing of the child is downright criminal.

  37. These people think that this is a decent argument.

    Equally amazingly, Wayne is a full-grown adult (I checked) who thinks that it is polite and reasonable to equate the word “creep” with comments from my post like “you’re a cunt” or that I left a “vagina-shaped hole” when I left an organization I founded. And he lumps a gif response to his email into the category of “abuse,” a category that I have put campaigns to have me arrested or fired from my podcast, and relentless online stalking and rape and death threats.

    You also put re-tweeting in that category.

    But most importantly, “creep” is not a word that marginalizes and dehumanizes men because men are not a marginalized class. For some reason, this is a very difficult fact for anti-feminists to accept.

    Her bolding.

    1. Who the fuck isn’t a marginalized class these days? Besides, what if the man was a magical black man elected to the White House? Same answer?

      1. According to left-wing logic, Wendy Davis is a victim because she has a vagina but Greg Abbott is not a victim even though he has been paralyzed for 26 years.

        Two X chromosomes makes you more of a victim than being a paraplegic.

        1. You know, it would fucking rule if we cared about character, ability, accomplishments, and actual actions rather than some random identity class, wouldn’t it?

          1. Didn’t some guy make a speech about that? Granted, he was ONLY a man…

            1. That was ages ago, and what did people back then know about real oppression?

        2. Well they are both pretty terrible candidates and their is no real opposition in either primary. Same with the Senate primary. Quite a yawn worthy Texas election year.

    2. And he lumps a gif response to his email into the category of “abuse,”

      GIFs substituting for video are a form of abuse.

  38. Right piles on Wendy Davis to save Chris Christie

    I don’t know how or why the 50-year-old Davis got the three-decade-old events of her personal timeline wrong. Frankly I think a woman never forgets exactly when her first marriage died, but maybe I’m wrong. But I do know that if a woman getting some details in her history wrong is not getting massive attention, it might be because it’s not all that important.

    Oh sure, she got no benefit from tailoring her story by lying.

    Christie’s situation is vastly different because, as Blake Zeff wrote last week, “In this plot, those harmed were the actual citizens of Chris Christie’s state.” Or as my colleague Joan Walsh noted earlier Tuesday, “The Wendy Davis story is NOT ‘analogous’ to the Chris Christie story. She’s not accused of abuse of power.” To even suggest so, to pounce on a biographical inconsistency like it’s a political vendetta, is simply idiotic.

    It comes down to this: Did a politician do anything that hurt his or her constituents? Did this person waste taxpayer time or money? Did this person reveal something like, say, a basic misunderstanding of biology, that would call his or her leadership into question? No? Then don’t make it more than it is. And Wendy Davis is no Chris Christie.

    Well she’s never going to be governor. And her campaign will just a giant money sinkhole for the Democrats.

    1. “The Wendy Davis story is NOT ‘analogous’ to the Chris Christie story. She’s not accused of abuse of power.”

      So a young and attractive woman marrying an older man for his money, using him to pay her student loans, and immediately divorcing him isn’t an abuse of power?

      It seems to me that she used her attractiveness and youth to abuse an older man and manipulate him into cashing in his trust fund.

      1. Eh that’s not the same. She didn’t abuse any political power, just her relationship.

        The real difference you should highlight is that Christie probably did not give the order directly and he fired the guy who did. Wendy did all her dirty work and she has no remorse.

      2. Hmmm. No. They were married for 14+ years. If she married him simply for money and position, she’s a hell of a long term planner. I’m sure his situation influenced her choice, but exclusively with intent to abandon him in the future? Seems too Machiavellian.

        1. I don’t think that from the get-go she was planning on abandoning him, but it does look like once she had the financial freedom to leave him she did. So it wouldn’t surprise me if she resolved to end the marriage before hand.

          Maybe he was a bad husband, I don’t know, but it does undercut the “tough, independent woman” narrative since she would likely not be where she is without a wealthy, older husband supporting her and her kid.

          1. She left her daughters with her husband while she went to Harvard Law and then gave up custody of her youngest. Whether sexist or not, that will damn her with voters.

            1. She left her husband the day after he finished paying her student loans.

              That strikes me as a surprising coincidence. I don’t think she entered the marriage saying ‘I will take advantage of him.’ It certainly appears she decided at some point to do so.

              1. I agree with Lady Bertrum that whatever we think about the rest of the story, abandoning her daughter is the part that voters will care about.

                But it doesn’t matter, she never had a chance in hell of winning in the first place.

    2. Did this person reveal something like, say, a basic misunderstanding of biology, that would call his or her leadership into question? No?

      What does misunderstanding biology have to do with leadership?

      1. You either support Wendy Davis or that Akin guy.

        1. Yeah, and by not.moving to Somalia, we have all signed the Social Contract.

  39. Colorado group thinks couples should have mandatory (by force of law) marriage counseling before getting the government’s blessing.

    “DENVER (KDVR) ? A Colorado group wants to force couples to take pre-wedding marriage classes before walking down the aisle.

    The group is working to get the measure, which would make it mandatory for every bride and groom to go through marriage counseling, on the ballot next November.

    The proposal would require 10 hours of classes if it’s your first marriage. Twenty hours would be required for second marriages and 30 hours for third marriages.

    The group needs 86,000 valid signatures by August to get the initiative on the ballot.”

    Remember, when marriage is outlawed only outlaws will have in-laws!

    1. Meatier article here.

      “the proposed Colorado Marriage Education Act calls for 10 hours of pre-wedding marriage education.

      If either the bride- or groom-to-be is marrying for the second time, the requirement kicks up to a minimum of 20 hours. It goes up to 30 hours for a third- time’s-the-charm.

      A re-marrying widow would be held to the same standard as a first-timer. The law would not apply to civil unions.”

      1. Eh. IIRC, you can skip the waiting period between applying for a license in FL and getting married if you take some sort of marriage education class. The idea that 20 hours of education is going to make people who have already allowed their hope to triumph over their experience is just silly.

  40. In the latest example of how broken various trademark, copyright and intellectual property laws are, the makers of the video game Candy Crush Saga have managed to secure a trademark on the word “candy” in video game titles (and clothing). According to reports, Apple is enforcing the trademark claim on any apps in their stores.

    So NOW can reason do something about whatever the fuck advertiser.it.is that has a script that fucking opens up the Google Play app on my phone and tries to install CandyCrush Whatever randomly on my phone and tablet?

  41. In the latest example of how broken various trademark, copyright and intellectual property laws are, the makers of the video game Candy Crush Saga have managed to secure a trademark on the word “candy” in video game titles (and clothing). According to reports, Apple is enforcing the trademark claim on any apps in their stores.

    So NOW can reason do something about whatever the fuck advertiser.it.is that has a script that fucking opens up the Google Play app on my phone and tries to install CandyCrush Whatever randomly on my phone and tablet?

  42. Christie in his inauguration address:

    We will end the failed war on drugs that believes that incarceration is the cure of every ill caused by drug abuse.

    Radley Balko tweeted a link hours ago. I’m surprised there’s no mention on H&R.

    1. Wow, is he working closely with Senator Booker? Imagine that bipartisan ticket in 2016.

    2. No one believes the fat fuck.

  43. I’m gonna post this tomorrow also, because this really shows what we’re up against with the income inequality folk

    The upper middle class of 2014 lives a lifestyle that was assumed to be bare minimum to be considered middle class in the 60s: Able to afford children and their education and save for retirement. The actual middle class lives a lifestyle that is closer to what 60s era folks would have recognized as working class. Working class Americans, on the other hand, drift in and out of poverty.

    1. Good grief. Pointing out the fact that college graduates are a much higher proportion of the population today than during the 60s wouldn’t change any minds at Ms Marcotte’s stomping grounds, would it? Pointing out that food as % of household spending is at record lows wouldn’t, either? That the retirement age has gone down over the years? That “affording” children is purely a function of how many children you have and *how* you raise them (hint: that Xbox, brand new bike, and completely furnished room are not necessities)?

      What am I saying — of course it wouldn’t.

    2. So I’m to understand from this that big-screen TVs, air conditioners, and automobiles were ubiquitous possessions for the working class of the 1960s? I must have missed that day in history class.

      1. Hey now, TVs were bigger in the 60’s, the screens were smaller, but the boxes were definitely bigger.

    3. As long as you don’t count better cars, bigger houses, more clothes, more restaurant meals, bigger TVs, cable TV, computers, games, and the Internet, the middle class is suffering!

    4. Is it bad that I completely agree with the facts at hand, but can smell the “wealth redistribution” narrative a mile away?

      It’s fairly obvious that many “middle class” people are struggling. Perhaps that’s because they own $10k worth of entertainment electronics, pay $150 per month in telephone service, pay $200 per month for cable tv and internet in the house, and have $300 per month in car payments. Add on top of that the fact that they’re all house poor, and they hardly have any money left at the end of the paycheck. Then you add on top of it a 25%+ federal gross taxation rate, state sales and/or income tax, county and locality taxes, and whatever was left in the pocket is now gone.

      Self and government, the two biggest stumbling blocks to pulling yourself up by your bootstraps.

      1. they own $10k worth of entertainment electronics, pay $150 per month in telephone service, pay $200 per month for cable tv and internet in the house, and have $300 per month in car payments

        Not in my house. I don’t consider someone to be worse off or “struggling” if their live has improved in every way except in the area of life choices and the choices they make in personal finances. If anything, the stats out there show nothing more than that there are many more avenues for the average household to spend money (and thus that there are more choices).

        1. I think i misplaced my scare quotes, they should’ve been around “struggling”. However, struggling may be a legitimate description. You can’t fault people for not using tools that they’ve never seen before. They get caught up in the “keeping up with the Joneses” because they’ve seen nothing else their entire life.

          Granted, I think the most humane and helpful thing for those people is to get dropped on their collective ass and see that their decisions aren’t fiscally sustainable, but I can’t blame them too much for not responding to signals that are intentionally shielded by Mother Government.

    5. Another Amanduh article, another awful sentence:

      Indeed, I hadn’t really considered how the conservative narrative is about subtly trying to stoke resentment between people who are poor and drift in and out of poverty and people whose employment is more stable but who are finding that their higher incomes are getting eaten up by housing and education costs and therefore are facing down the strong possibility that they may not be able to retire.

      68 words, potentially more than one sentence, no actual ideas or factual content expressed.

    6. Another Amanduh article, another awful sentence:

      Indeed, I hadn’t really considered how the conservative narrative is about subtly trying to stoke resentment between people who are poor and drift in and out of poverty and people whose employment is more stable but who are finding that their higher incomes are getting eaten up by housing and education costs and therefore are facing down the strong possibility that they may not be able to retire.

      68 words, potentially more than one sentence, no actual ideas or factual content expressed.

      1. The idea seems to be “Conservatives are even meaner than I had thought.” And I always love it when leftists accuse opponents of “stoking resentment,” which is easily 90% of what leftists do.

  44. “In the latest example of how broken various trademark, copyright and intellectual property laws are, the makers of the video game Candy Crush Saga have managed to secure a trademark on the word “candy” in video game titles (and clothing).”
    I understand you can’t call any electronic device Apple. But from “Candy Crush” to “Candy” there is a significant step.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.