A.M. Links: Shooting at Maryland Mall, Rand Paul Says Women are Winning 'War on Women,' Ukraine's Justice Minister Threatens To Call For State of Emergency

|

Credit:Mstyslav Chernov/wikimedia

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: Rep. Trey Radel To Resign Following Cocaine Possession Arrest

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. Speaking on “Meet the Press” yesterday Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said that women are winning the “War on Women.”

    Is there any war Republicans won’t lose?

    1. Whew! Not recycled comments!

      1. What, did someone make that joke already? Here’s another one:

        We’re losing the war? I vote we double down. Time for a surge of testosterone.

        1. Time for a surge of testosterone.

          I think that will have to be imported as domestic supplies are on the decline.

        2. “Low-T! Low-T! We need an Androgel airstrike NOW!”

      2. Fist actually posted that comment 5/6/13 @ 10:08AM. He was able to change the date because he is that good.

        1. Hey, what ever happened to Suki?

          1. I think you know what happened to her.

            1. I heard she was dead.

              1. Was that before or after she played with Leo?

    2. You’re saying it’s just not the caveman mentality of the modern-day Republican saying “Me, Ow!” at the pain inflicted by these female opposition forces?

    3. But But… The Republicans aren’t French

      1. Freedom fries was a red herring.

  2. Weeding out Williamsburg: Book recalls the years when marijuana grew wild across New York and the special squad called in to destroy it

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..1950s.html
    Puritans.

    1. During WWI, there was an awful lot of hemp grown in Winnebago County, IL for the war effort. Needless to say, it spread and the county had an eradication squad that was still working in the 1970s to fight the evil ditch weed…

      1. Ditchweed eradication, the gift that keeps on giving. In the southwestern parts of Virginia and eastern Kentucky, the “eradication” project occurs every year, after it’s gone to seed. Guaranteeing a need and budgetary requirement for next year’s project.

  3. ‘He’s out of control’: As Justin Bieber recovers from arrest ordeal, worried friends express concern over ‘?5,000 a WEEK marijuana habit’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..iends.html
    I’m thinking he’s getting ripped off.

    1. Yeah, it might be hard to smoke $8,000 worth of weed in one week.

      1. “It’s for my FRIENDS!!”

        1. “If I don’t keep all this weed around, then they won’t want to hang out with me anymore!”

          1. Groupies? Also, if he can afford it who cares?

            1. What gave you the impression that I cared?

              1. It wasn’t directed at you but at the article. Who cares enough to write about how much he spends.

                1. The same kind of person that buys a typical gossip magazine.

                  1. People buy those things?

      2. Maybe Bieber has just been lying to them about how much it costs so they think they need him to afford it.

    2. Pssh. Elton John had a ?1M/week drug habit for himself and his entourage for a while back when that was real money. This scrawny little ponce couldn’t carry Elton’s coke spoon.

      1. Not that I’ve done much comparison shopping, but I believe that coke is also a lot more expensive than pot.

  4. Negative perceptions of the Obamacare rollout are easing.

    Poor media attention spans are always the friend of official buffoonery.

    1. Wait until penaltax time and the employer mandate hit…

      1. It’ll be a year before the penaltax kicks in though. After it matters.

          1. “2016 will feel it, though.”

            +2 years

  5. Head of DEA slams Obama for saying marijuana is no more dangerous than alcohol

    DEA head Michele Leonhart is infuriated by President Obama telling the New Yorker that marijuana is less harmless than alcohol
    She said ‘her lowest point’ more than three decades at the DEA was when a hemp flag was flown over the Capitol last July 4
    President Obama made his divisive comments during a recent New Yorker Magazine interview

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..mless.html
    Her lowest point was when a flag made from natural fibers flew over the capitol?

    1. Obama committed the very definition of a political faux pas – he told the truth.

    2. I might actually have a modicum of respect for Obama if he were to tell her in his State of the Union address that she’s an evil POS.

      1. Or fire her.

        1. Too bad the czar can’t do anything about those damn Cossacks.

      2. Since, Obama nominated her in 2010, that seems unlikely.

    3. #FirstWorldStatistproblems

    4. Her lowest point was when a flag made from natural fibers flew over the capitol?

      She’s spent 30 years at DEA. She has a different definition of “low” from everyone else.

      Because she has no fucking idea what “high” is.

      1. She’s spent 30 years at DEA. She has a different definition of “low” from everyone else.

        Because she has no fucking idea what “high” is.

        Based on my experience with DEA agents, I suspect she has had higher highs than most people.

        Back when I helped friends with activities of marginal legality I found it very easy to sort out DEA types, because they were the ones who came to “meet and greet” coked out of their minds. In fact, DEA made it really easy to pick out who their guys were because every agent I encountered flew the giant red flag of being an inveterate drug addict. At the level to which I was providing sec/intel buyers simply do NOT use product.

        Even “uniformed” agents had/have fairly obvious habits. A SEAL buddy of mine (I was never a SEAL, I just know a few, just to make that clear) who worked with DEA on opium interdiction in Afghanistan said keeping the agents from snorting/smoking/shooting/smuggling the product seized was as much a challenge as dealing with the heavily-armed Taliban types defending the processing plants. He strongly implied that at least a few times that attempts by agents to redirect product for their own smuggling operations came to shots fired.

      2. She looks like a stoner to me.

    5. ‘This is a woman who has spent 33 years of her life fighting drug abuse in the DEA, her entire life,’

      Yeah, drug abuse, that’s what she’s fighting…

    6. I would think her lowest point would be when she found out she was a retarded bitch.

  6. Thank goodness it’s Monday. I had almost forgotten what original content looks like.

    1. My blog had original content over the weekend. 😉

      1. Not mine. I pre-load it for Monday, then come in and find new things to add.

  7. Obama is willing to work with OR without Congress to meet goals, say aides

    Aides to President Obama offered a preview of the strategy of the president’s State of the Union address on Sunday
    They emphasized Obama’s willingness to bypass a gridlocked Congress to achieve his goals
    Dan Pfeiffer, the president’s senior adviser, said Tuesday’s speech would include proposals that could be pursued without Congress

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..aides.html
    Dictators don’t need no stinking Congress!

      1. Aren’t they all?

  8. Hello.

    1. “Good morning, Rufus!”

      1. He’s guten-sensitive, you clod.

      2. You don’t know if it’s Morgen where he is, you westocentric prick.

    2. Hey

  9. Dancing queen Taylor Swift busts a move as she lights up the dancefloor at Clive Davis’ pre-Grammy party

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..party.html
    She certainly knows how to show off her legs.

    1. I would. Yes I would.

  10. American party girl ditches the cocktails for COW PAT CAKES to fly across the world and become a traditional housewife in rural India after meeting her husband on Facebook

    Adriana Peral, 41, met Mukesh Kumar, 25, online in February last year
    She travelled to Haryana, India, in August and wed within months
    The Californian now lives in a remote farm house 30 minutes drive town
    She has no inside toilet, a bucket for a shower shared with cows
    Mother-of-one said leaving her daughter, 25, in the U.S. was traumatic
    Mr and Mrs Kumar now plan to have children of their own

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..ebook.html
    I’m sure that will last.

    1. And 41 is a great age to start having kids. If you want them to have an extra chromosome that is.

      1. Technically she isn’t starting having kids, she’s just resuming it.

    2. You can’t fool me. That’s an Arrested Development story line.

    3. Once again, why is anyone meeting someone on Facebook?

      1. Poking people is more fun in reality.

    4. Hey Adriana! Gandhi says it is your turn to rake and cover the the latrine. Try to do it without bitching so much this time.

  11. Negative perceptions of the health care rollout have eased, a new Associated Press-GfK poll finds.

    It could be because more people responded “Pretty bad” than “Really fucking awful”.

  12. Ukraine’s justice minister has threatened to call for a state of emergency if anti-government protesters do not leave the justice ministry.

    Thanks for calling them anti-government protesters instead of “pro-EU” protesters, Feeney. I still hate you, but credit where it’s due.

    1. No, they are not anti-government protesters, they want to become the government.

  13. Thank god I’m back in the real time zone. It’s almost impossible to use Reason out in that weird “prime time is at 5” zone.

    1. Yeah, they don’t have much use for reason on the left coast.

    2. Did you go get cocktails at the (sorta) new Reason Monocle-plex?

      1. I did not, though I had a ton of cocktails across San Diego. I thought they were supposed to have really good Mexican food there? I might as well have just eaten tacos from here in Boston.

  14. The ‘smart bra’ that tells if you’re in LOVE: Underwear only undoes for partners that raise your heart rate

    The concept bra, created by Japanese lingerie brand Ravijour, has a built-in heart monitor and connects to a smartphone app
    It is not on sale yet and there is no indication it will become available
    Smart bra is designed to ward off unsuitable men and claims to be ‘an instrument to detect true love’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci…..-rate.html

    1. Doesn’t fear generally raise your heart rate?

      1. I have a feeling the “Rape Bra” is not going to sell well
        In the US.

        1. That made my morning.

          I’m going to hell.

          1. I’m going to hell.

            I will see you there. I hope the rest of your day goes well.

      2. Same thing for stress or anxiety. So if I’m at work and it comes undone that’ll be completely appropriate.

      3. BOO!

        bies!

    2. Just don’t wear them while at the gym ladies.

    3. “I just bought a Living Bra, but I don’t have anything to feed it.”

    4. I distinctly recall having posted this somehwere recently, but I don’t remember where.

    5. Yes, the Japanese need one more excuse to not have sex

      1. They need to get back us when they have STEVE SMITH proof undies.

  15. ‘Secret dealing’? Emails show cozy relationship between EPA, environmental groups
    Newly disclosed emails suggest senior policy officials at the Environmental Protection Agency and environmental groups are working closely to kill the Keystone XL pipeline, critics say.

    1. Are they still using fake names like Richard Windsor?

    2. No shit, Sherlock. (This isn’t directed at you, Longtorso; it’s rhetorical.)

  16. Both Republican and Democratic 2014 candidates are running against the NSA.

    And yet the domestic spying will continue unabated.

    1. They only said “running” against, not “doing anything” against!

  17. Newspaper conglomerate considers building massive database of gun owners
    A U.S. newspaper conglomerate has considered building state-by-state databases of people who have the right to carry concealed firearms.

    1. I believe they responded that they were not going to do this. That it was a horrible idea and impractical.

    2. One local newspaper (I think in Westchester County, NY) did this on a local level and people responded by publishing the addresses of the newspaper’s editors.

      1. They’ve graduated from passively aggregating terabytes of data to insouciantly sticking apostrophes where they don’t belong.

        1. Bah, meant to reply to Bee Tagger below.

          1. Thanks. I’m not sure why, but apostrophe abuse drives me up a wall, far more than any other grammatical error. I was wondering if I had screwed up using an apostrophe or something.

          2. My plan to only look like the 2nd biggest idiot worked.

            1. 3d; you’re still behind me.

  18. Both Republican and Democratic 2014 candidates are running against the NSA.

    The NSA is stepping up it’s cleverness game, I see.

  19. Early morning wake-up fall: Daredevils tackle series of spectacular sunrise base jumps hurling themselves off top of desert canyon

    Scott Rogers, from Denver, Colorado, and friends basejumped from cliffs in the Moab desert, Utah
    Jumpers fall for 20 second then must navigate to their landing through 20ft tall cacti
    They reach speeds in excess of 100 mph during the free-fall to the canyon floor
    Dangerous pursuit of BASE jumping got its name because people leap from buildings, antenna, span and earth

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..anyon.html
    I’m pretty sure that what they are doing is illegal in the Land of the Free. The wingsuit anyway.

    1. I actually had had no idea where the name base jumping came from.

  20. The great LED lightbulb rip-off: One in four expensive ‘long-life’ bulbs doesn’t last anything like as long as the makers claim

    Consumer group Which? tested 46 types of light bulb for endurance
    More than a quarter did not meet claims of a 15,000-hour life
    Disappointing result comes despite claims of them lasting 25,000 hours
    Some even fell below the legal minimum of 6,000 hours

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..claim.html
    You mean that companies have no incentive to live up to expectations when their competition is legislated out of existence? I’m shocked!

    1. I’m shocked!

      See?! They’re electrical hazards too!

    2. Well, they still have to compete with CFLs and halogen lights, which are much less expensive. Not that that makes the ban on regular incandescents any less stupid.

      1. Yes, but it’s been my experience that the no-name, or store brand CFL’s are pieces of crap. And even the big name brand CFL bulbs (GE, Sylvania, Phillips, etc) tend to get significantly dimmer after a couple of years of use.

        1. The CFLs I have are failing at an alarming rate, much faster than incandescent.

          Im going to replace them with LED, which Im cool with. I hated the CFLs, but my power company sent them to me for free.

  21. A 19-year-old man shot and killed two people and himself in a Maryland shopping mall on Saturday.

    I’m not hearing much about him. He must not fit the profile.

    1. Well he used a shotgun, so it was clearly a hunting accident

      1. Which he purchased legally after the new tough gun laws went into place.

        1. JUST SHOWZ WE NEED MOAR RESTRICSHUNZ!!!!

          /prog

        2. Next on the docket in MD: a law requiring that shotgun barrels be welded to the receiver so they’re impossible to disassemble and conceal.

      2. He was just firing it into the air to ward off intruders.

        1. Not if he wasn’t on his back porch he wasn’t.

    2. Yeah, it’s remarkable how fast the media completely lost interest in this story once they got wind that it was just a black killing two whites. If it had been the other way around, they wouldn’t be talking about anything else this morning. The American media are the absolute lowest scum of the earth.

      1. Ibrahim Shkupolli

        The above article asks the reasonable question that a lot of people in Finland would have had, but were afraid to ask for fear of being called racist.

        This other article completely misses the point, almost implying that it’s understandable for an immigrant like Shkupolli to go on a shooting spree (that by all accounts was a dosmestic dispute) because society isn’t pro-immigrant enough.

        1. My Finnish is restricted to ‘Saku Koivu’ ‘Jari Kurri’ and ‘Teemu Selanne.’

          1. Pekka Rinne has a sad.

      2. the local news, however, is providing round the clock coverage. with nothing new to report.

      3. I think you are reading just a little too much into this.

    3. Let’s see, not a white guy, no connection to the Tea Party, no ‘Assault Weapon’ or hand gun…Yup, nothing to see here, move along!

    4. If Obama had a son…

  22. Negative perceptions of the Obamacare rollout are easing.

    Is there a WebMD entry for quantitative easing?

  23. Settled Science: New paper finds effect of man on climate is “highly uncertain”
    A new paper published in Science finds “the radiative forcing (that is, the perturbation to Earth’s energy budget) caused by human activities is highly uncertain, making it difficult to predict the extent of global warming.”

    The ‘Pause’ of Global Warming Risks Destroying The Reputation Of Science
    Global temperatures have not risen for 17 years. The pause now threatens to expose how much scientists sold their souls for cash and fame, warns emeritus professor Garth Paltridge, former chief research scientist with the CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research.

    1. former chief research scientist with the CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research.

      Clearly he is just a shill for Big Chill.

    2. No, scientists abandoning the scientific method and becoming willing shills for political causes risks destroying the reputation of science.

    3. LIES! DENIER! HERETIC! INFIDEL! BLASPHEMER! You will burn as decreed by the Holy Church of Warmology! BURN I TELL YOU, BURRNNNNNNNN!!!!!!

  24. DEA head Michele Leonhart is infuriated by President Obama telling the New Yorker that marijuana is less harmless than alcohol

    This was presumably not in the text of her outraged letter of resignation.

    Because that would require some sort of strength of character, as opposed to stark authoritarianism.

    1. Obama would gain a little respect from me if he would fire her over this.

  25. Schumer Calls for Using IRS to Curtail Tea Party Activities
    …Arguing that Tea Party groups have a financial advantage after the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, Schumer said the Obama administration should bypass Congress and institute new campaign finance rules through the IRS.

    1. That’s some evil shit right there by that guy.

      1. There was absolutely no “provable” connection between The White House and/or Congress and the actions of rogue IRS agents denying Tea Party applications! 😉

    2. Well, they got away with the previous abuse by the IRS, so why not double down?

  26. DEA head Michele Leonhart is infuriated by President Obama telling the New Yorker that marijuana is less harmless than alcohol

    So hopping mad that she doubled up on her Xanax?

    1. Wait.. less harmless?

    2. less harmless? Who would phrase it that way? The double negative is the last refuge of a spineless man. (not about you, Rich, just noticing.)

      1. The Mail would phrase it that way.

  27. Apparently, the President will demonstrate his commitment to personal freedom by inviting some sort of homosexual basketball player to the State of the Union address.

    So we’ve got that going for us.

    1. Someone ought to tell him he could get massive positive publicity by french-kissing Boehner at some moment during the speech.

      1. And taking a selfie while doing it.

    2. Apparently, the President will demonstrate his commitment to personal freedom by inviting some sort of homosexual basketball player to the State of the Union address.

      One of the more pathetic blurbs from a Grantland article prior to the NBA season was the prediction that some team would pick up Collins and it would be an “amazing story.”

      Because what NBA teams really need is an over-the-hill journeyman center who’s averaged about 2 points a game since 2004 to take it to the next level.

      1. Because what NBA teams really need is an over-the-hill journeyman center who’s averaged about 2 points a game since 2004 to take it to the next level.

        Hey, it worked for OKC.

  28. I know you guys aren’t crazy about the abortion subject (neither am I) but I think this is a great read by Savage in the LA Times from 2005 titled, ‘Roe:More than its author intended.’

    1. Yikes, link:

      http://articles.latimes.com/20…..abortion14

    2. I’m glad nobody did a tasteless “give us Barabas” joke.

      1. Fwee Wodewik!

    1. This girl?

      404

      The webpage cannot be found.

    2. I’m glad nobody gave us a tasteless “give us Barabas” joke.

  29. The Columbia Mall story is a little late, this is old news.

    That same day of the shooting, the wife wanted to go to the mall and was trying to decide if she wanted to go to Columbia, or Towson, or Arundel Mills. We wound up going to Towson. I’ve been in that mall in Columbia probably at least 1000 times.

    I think there’s once again, a lot of disappointment on the left that the shooter was not a teabagging cracker anarcho anti-government libertarian type. Actually, from the pictures, he COULD have been Obamas son.

    1. I only went to Columbia for LL Bean, which now gone gives me no reason to go. Although in general, I avoid malls.

      1. We don’t go there nearly as often as we used to. Wife seems to prefer Arundel Mills now and even Towson. Arundel Mills, that place is a mad house on the weekends, ye gawds I hatez it.

        I used to go over to Columbia Mall and walk around to kill time when my wife was taking classes 2 nights a week in Columbia.

        If not for taking my wife, my mall visits would probably be 2 or 3 times in a year. My preferred method of shopping is from my desk here at home.

    2. Parking at Towson Mall is a pain in the ass – I’ll go to Columbia Mall over Towson in a heartbeat just to avoid the pain of getting in and out.

      1. Park in the garage right across from Macys. I never have a problem there. Arundel Mills however is a parking nightmare on weekends.

    1. The pope used it as a teachable moment. The doves representing the poor, while the crow and seagull were capitalists.

    2. I have it on good authority that satan uses seahawks.

      1. At least you didn’t say cardinals.

    3. Hmmm… I don’t think God is being particularly subtle here. I’ll guess Ukraine is in for some trouble.

    4. Ahem. They’re white pigeons.

    5. So this is what it sounds like when doves cry.

  30. A brain-dead pregnant Texas woman was removed from life support yesterday after a judge ruled that the hospital where she was staying was misapplying the law.

    …meaning that the brain-live fetus (23 weeks since conception) was also removed from life support. Funny how that never gets mentioned.

    I’m totally against abortion, but admit this is a difficult case philosophically since it’s not really abortion. It’s letting nature take its course. I still find it pretty horrible that the husband and family are going to let the unborn die when absolutely no one is even inconvenienced by continuing the pregnancy a few weeks until a C-section becomes feasible.

    1. Speaking of brain-dead.

      1. Struck a nerve? npi

      2. Uh…I usually don’t agree with Tulpa, but why would it be so bad to leave the poor woman on life-support a little longer and give the baby a chance?

        She obviously wanted to bring this pregnancy to term.

        1. It’s messy because she had supposedly said she didn’t want to be kept pseudo-alive on life support. I haven’t seen anything indicating she had opined on being kept pseudo-alive while pregnant, but due to the fictions our federal courts rely on to keep abortion deadly and legal, this has to be the logical conclusion when the family supports the decision.

        2. If she didn’t want to be kept alive, and didn’t articulate that there was a pregnancy exception to her wishes, then that implies that would not have wanted to be kept alive under these circumstances.

          1. If she didn’t want to be kept alive, and didn’t articulate that there was a pregnancy exception to her wishes, then that implies that would not have wanted to be kept alive under these circumstances

            Where I suppose it would get tricky is if this happened, say, 33 weeks into the pregnancy. Not quite full-term but within about a month of being considered able to survive outside the womb without ICU support.

            The irony is that 50-60 years ago, the doctors and family probably would have pulled the plug by now, just due to the costs of keeping both of them alive and bringing the baby to term. While people would have thought it a tragedy, no one would have seriously questioned it because previous generations accepted the reality of death a lot easier than we do today. The concept of “heroic measures” seems to be a very post-Woodstock feature of the medical industry.

            1. While people would have thought it a tragedy, no one would have seriously questioned it because previous generations accepted the reality of death a lot easier than we do today. The concept of “heroic measures” seems to be a very post-Woodstock feature of the medical industry.

              You can see it in all facets of society, not just the medical industry. Sports will never be the same since the “Safety first” culture took over. Construction is forever altered. Space exploration? A shell of its former self.

              It’s not necessarily all for the worse. There have been many lives saved by the safety advances that have been made. However, when you lose your zeal and you favor security over ambition, you lose any chance of doing the awesome things that come from taking risks.

      3. The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to rationalize it.

    2. Well, whoever’s paying to keep her on life support and then care for a premature baby would be inconvenienced. That being said, the husband and family are some sick baby-killing bastards in my opinion.

      1. OK, I wasn’t thinking about that. The baby would probably be viable in 4 weeks, not sure how much life support costs… it’s just a ventilator and a feeding tube, right? Those can’t be too expensive.

        1. Lots of babies are viable at 36 weeks. My kiddo was 4 weeks early, they tested his lungs while I was in labor to make sure he wouldn’t need a ventilator, and he didn’t. I did have a c-section, he was a bit cyanotic the first two days, but nothing that required IC.

          1. Yes they are, but that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to remove them from the womb that early. I have a family member who was an extreme preemie and there’s a whole laundry list of problems that comes with that.

            But ultimately this is an issue of parental choice. Abortion remains legal, even in Texas so this kinda abortion under rare circumstances is also legal.

        2. Ventilator, feeding tube, diaper changes, possible urine catheter changes, repositioning and massaging the body so it doesn’t get bed sores, bathing the body.

          And, of course, no consideration for the husband about his need for closure and knowing that his wife’s body being kept alive as a grisly incubator.

          1. knowing that his wife’s body being kept alive as a grisly incubator.

            Of his child. Bizarre that the death of his one physical link to his deceased wife would be considered “closure”. If the child had been born, I would assume he would have given it up for adoption?

            That is royally fucked up.

          2. Supposedly the baby was showing significant abnormalities. I don’t recall whether it was expected to actually survive to viability, but I know it was a question.

            1. The baby was not healthy. Severe hydrocephalus and lower body deformation.

    3. Funny how that never gets mentioned.

      Are you seriously going to say that the entire basis of why this was even a case “never gets mentioned”???

      1. Forget it. It’s Tulpatown.

    4. “brain-live” is the slipperiest argument I’ve yet heard from the anti-abortion crowd. Yep, the brain is alive, but that says nothing about conciousness. Remember that horses can stand minutes after birth; humans can’t do that for a whole year. Human eyes don’t track (follow objects) until weeks after birth. Etc, etc, etc.

    5. “inconvenienced” Wow, way to trivialize and demonize that guys feelings. Here’s a better usage of “inconvenient” – it’s really inconvenient for your argument that medically sophisticated people just want nature to take its course and don’t agree with you.

      1. medically sophisticated

        Nothing says medical sophistication like determining that a living human being is not a “person”. So sophisticated that when they see early human development they say “Icky clump of cells”?

    1. Volokh’s response was fantastic.

      1. You know, between Volokh and Balko, the WaPo is already starting to differentiate itself from the NYT, SF Chron and other “main source” dailies.

  31. Again, I ask: Once everyone has arrived and has taken their positions for the State of the Union festivities, can we just seal all the doors and windows and gas those motherfuckers?

    1. Sounds like something the Joker would do.

    2. That’s pretty hideous from a moral standpoint.

      From a practical standpoint, there are 546 other sociopathic fucksticks waiting in the wings ready to take their place. You’re not solving the root problem.

      1. Serious question: What do you consider the root problem?

        1. The root problem is an apathetic, ignorant, gullible electorate. Not sure if PB has a Zyklon solution for that problem too.

          1. Serious question: What do you consider a solution(s) to the root problem?

            1. It’s so far gone that I don’t know if there is a practical solution. Right now we need to buy time and stop making things worse. Twiddling our thumbs and attacking his opponent while BO got reelected was not a good approach, and Reason’s approach to 2014 doesn’t look much better.

              There are a FEW hopeful signs that large portions of the electorate are getting more aware and more fed up with government expansion, but it’s not translating into votes. That’s where the gullibility comes in.

              1. It’s so far gone that I don’t know if there is a practical solution.

                Thanks for the responses, Tulpa.

                I fear you are correct, and …

                “It’s not sustainable!”

              2. Twiddling our thumbs and attacking his opponent while BO got reelected was not a good approach,

                It seems to be a rather unprincipled approach to simply vote for the “lesser of two evils”. Are you suggesting that we should have all held our noses and pulled the “R” lever?

              3. Reason attacked Gary Johnson?

          2. “The root problem is an apathetic, ignorant, gullible electorate. ”

            Wow. Twice in a single thread we agree!

      2. It is an interesting thought experiment to imagine if the retarded fuckers on 911 had been smart enough to hit the capital building like they intended rather than just killing a bunch of low level bureaucrats at the Pentagon.

        1. If you think the JFK fellating is bad, think what would happen if we saw 500+ of our “best and brightest” politicians die horribly graphic deaths on live TV.

          There would be a monument in every neighborhood, the TSA would rent out ad space in our colons, and anything sharper than a nerf football would be banned.

      3. I don’t know that it’s any more hideous than killing the nice Nazis when you bomb the bad ones.

        It might not solve the root problem, but it may reduce the number of people willing to loot the fucking country for the benefit of cronies and government itself.

        1. Too bad it would also justify an extremely oppressive response in the name of combating the act of terrorism that PB was presumably joking about.

  32. Yay! Another Salon article about the evils of Libertarianism!

    A summary for those of you with weak stomachs:

    In this week’s episode, our kind, emotive, Buddhist writer takes us into his dark early years as a selfish libertarian, until he finally couldn’t reconcile his Deep Feeling and Such Like with the Evil Selfishness that clearly was responsible for him being an asshole! So, thank goodness, he switched from his self-centered lifestyle to one more in keeping with the Buddha’s teachings, which clearly state how important it is to force people to be compassionate by taking their stuff. The End.

    1. We talked about this yesterday and HM quoted Buddha in order to show how hilarious it is that this guy couldn’t figure out how to reconcile Buddhism with libertarianism.

      Lucy Steigerwald also wrote something about it and pretty much expressed my feelings. He basically admits that he became a progressive entirely based on feelings and peer pressure, but we’re all supposed to applaud him for being too unintelligent to reasonably answer his friend’s criticism.

      1. 1. THERE ARE NO WEEKEND LINKS.
        2. You know what happens when you mention Lucy.

        1. At least it’s more acceptable than mentioning lawyers who may or may not have carnal knowledge of sheep.

        2. There are only Weekend Recycled Posts.

        3. “You know what happens when you mention Lucy.”

          Crows and seagulls eat the Pope’s peace doves?

      2. Stop being so mean, Irish. He wanted the cocktail party invitations. Who would begrudge him that?

      3. Isn’t “every man for himself” the basic premise of Buddhism?

    2. Compassion originates from the barrel of a gun.

    3. I think the worst part about the people at Salon is how smart they think they are. This includes the comments. They have smug handles and post things like “You libertarians are so dumb because government is compassionate and made of people,” or some such nonsense. People who are so wrapped up in their own ignorance are impossible to reach. I wouldn’t care much about people’s positions if they would argue in good faith, but they are just annoying. I must hate myself to keep reading these comments.

      1. What makes them even more annoying is the unwarranted sense of self-regard. They’re like the grad school douchebag on Good Will Hunting whose only skill is memorizing the work of more intelligent people and mocking the proles for not having read the books they did. Their philosophies and relationships are as superficial as their academic rigor, which allows them to maintain the delusion that they offer anything of substance to society other than their own solipsism.

        1. Ha, ha. Remember that scene.

          Will was annoying.

        2. Yes, but every libertarian they know is a smug asshole, they’re just trying to reach out and teach people. If it weren’t for projection they would have no arguments. I’m not smug.

    1. “Trying to design sensible health care reforms is wrong because it interferes with the political imperative of getting votes for our TEAM!”

      This guy should be asamed.

      1. I read it more as “the first objective should be getting rid of Obamacare, back to the previous status quo. This will weaken that effort.” I don’t think that’s unreasonable.

        1. You are on crack if you think there is any way to just “Undo” Obamacare and go back to the way things were.

          There is no road to outright repeal, you can only replace and before you can do that you have to have something to replace it with.

      2. What BP said. There is no reason to change the subject to “look what the evil GOP wants to do”.

        1. Just what this country needs, politicians getting publicly shamed for putting forth constructive ideas which conflict (allegedly) with short-term political expediency.

          It’s like encouraging an alcoholic he needs to take some vodka shots, or telling Beavis and Butthead they need to jack off more.

          This kind of thinking is why Republicans haven’t come up with realistic plans re the national debt and the entitlement crisis – no, that would distract us from the important thing, which is to beat the Democrats in the upcoming election!

          And the same reasoning would apply to Rand Paul’s bills to liberalize the mandatory-sentencing laws – because bashing the Dems as Soft on Drugs is more politically urgent than ruined human lives.

          And the same reasoning would apply to curbing the NSA – we can’t afford to look soft on terrorism, because the Dems might use it to beat us in the next election.

          Don’t stand for election if you’re not willing to stand for something.

          1. And if they offer a stand-alone bill to repeal Ocare, then the line will be, “the evil Republicans support the pre-2010 status quo,” which many voters genuinely didn’t like.

            Plus, “look, Rush Limbaugh just said something stupid!”

            So by losing their soul, they won’t even gain the world.

          2. 1. I doubt the idea is going to be that great.

            2. Even if it is, it can’t be enacted anyway.

            3. If it ever is enacted it will be years from now and probably changed a lot.

            There is no reason to do anything right now. Let Obama and the Dems wallow in their own shit. Then after 2014 present your plan and let your nominee in 2016 sell it.

            1. 1. We don’t know what the plan is going to be. Criticize it when they put it forward.

              2. Obamacare can’t be repealed, either.

              3. If it’s a long-term project to come up with practical reforms, then start now.

              4. It’s always manana in Washington – we’d love to offer these reforms, but just wait until after the next election, and there’s always a next election.

              What if Rand Paul filed a bill to legalize catastrophic insurance? Would you say “we can’t support that bill because Democrats?”

              1. The fact remains that offering the reforms now will do nothing but harm. It will just allow the Dems to change the subject from how they fucked everyone to “you need to elect me to keep the evil Republicans from making things work”.

                Now is not the time. The Republicans are not in charge. The Democrats made this shit, make sure they are held accountable before you start dreaming of ways to make yourself accountable.

                1. So if the Democrats are unpopular, it’s “don’t come up with any controversial ideas because it will ruin our chances to capitalize on the Democrats’ unpopularity.”

                  And if the Democrats are riding high in the polls its “we can’t afford to rock the boat right now because we’re unpopular. We need to build up a moderate image without any nonsense about free-market health reforms, debt reduction, entitlement reform, or mandatory minimums.”

                  In short, Republican reform ideas can only be introduced manana, circumstances are never propitious. It’s too cold out, or it’s too hot out, and in any case I’m not going to go outdoors.

                  This sounds like an Obamaphile’s justifications for why the Light Bearer refuses to do what his base wants – the Republicans are obstructing him, just vote Democrat long enough and finally he’ll do something.

                  It sounds like the establishment’s line on Paul, Cruz and Amash – too controversial, divides the Republicans, etc.

              2. Bronze plans ARE catastrophic insurance…at regular insurance rates.

          3. Don’t stand for election if you’re not willing to stand for something.

            Unfortunately, standing for something is pretty much a guarenteed way to lose an election.

            Take the debt and entitlement problem. Any proposed solution will invariably be portrayed as “EVUL RETHUGLIKKKAN HATEZ POOR PEOPLE.” Hell even Paul Ryan’s medicare reforms, which were pretty week tea, were presented as “Paul Ryan want to throw grandma out in the cold and reduce her to subsisting on cat food.” There’s just no way to win votes and have principles and integrity.

            That and the kinds of people attracted to political power tend to be the kinds of people who have no principles or integrity to begin with.

            1. Well, I can hardly refute that. It’s quite possible things are hopeless – I don’t know, though personally I would prefer working for reform and seeing if it works or not. But I understand those who focus their attention on riding out the coming storm rather than wasting their time on politics.

              But those who keep talking political strategy should have some interest in finding useful reforms to advocate, rather than looking to beating the other TEAM in the next election. And that kind of focus often doesn’t work on its own terms. Remember how Republicans had to work within the system by nominating a blue-state governor with business experience, because only then could the evil Democrats be defeated?

    2. The GOP is just stupidly earnest. Unlike the Dem politicians who are generally just craven idiots, the GOP pols really are the A students who tried hardest to impress the teacher. So they are incapable of any sort of tactical retreat or restraint. See the New York Times and the Washington Post keep saying bad things about the Republicans not offering an alternative. And these clowns really want to be liked and they want to show they really are the A students they always have been. They just can’t help themselves. Pathetic.

      1. So even considering a way to address the country’s problems means they’re “incapable of any sort of tactical retreat or restraint.”

        Yeah, let’s wait for manana before tackling any important issues facing the country. Entrench behind the Maginot Line and let the Democrats waste their energy attacking us.

        1. If I wanted a party which kept voting for the status quo, then I could always cut out the middleman and vote Democrat.

  33. Odd, every link to this story fails to load, but my internet connection is fine otherwise:

    Snowden: NSA conducts industrial espionage too

    1. Go back to bed and try again tomorrow.

    1. I always read that as the “shinola” cartel. Then I wonder if there is a shit cartel to tell them apart from.

    2. It went from 2000 to 2012. That means Clinton Bush and Obama were involved. Since it is a bipartisan scandal, does that mean the US media can cover it or does the “we never mention any bad things about the Black Jesus” rule still apply?

      1. Three presidents …. *Clearly* a Matter of National Security?.

      2. They’ll report it as being a ‘program primarily run by the Bush administration.’

        1. For four full years after he left office. Obama was just too busy raising his daughters to notice it was going on and stop it.

    3. Another fake scandal!

  34. Yay! Another Salon article about the evils of Libertarianism!

    Is this some sort of ongoing “readers write” contest?

    SEND US YOUR SPECIAL TALE OF SALVATION AND REDEMPTION. HOW WERE YOU SAVED FROM THE SHAME AND DEGRADATION OF LIBERTARIANISM? IF YOUR STORY IS SELECTED, WE’LL SEND YOU THIS SPECIAL LEATHER BOUND iPHONE HOLDER WHICH ALSO CONTAINS THE FULL TEXT OF MAO’S LITTLE RED BOOK.

    We should send our submissions.

    1. SEND US YOUR SPECIAL TALE OF SALVATION AND REDEMPTION. HOW WERE YOU SAVED FROM THE SHAME AND DEGRADATION OF LIBERTARIANISM?

      That is downright disturbing. But Tom Perkins is “nuts” to actively wonder how long it will be before these people start killing.

      http://online.wsj.com/news/art…..3982034286

      1. He’s nuts for comparing it to Kristallnacht. There’s not going to be an organized mass killing by progs.

        I do think it’s only a matter of time until progressives kill a rich person or a tech worker, though. I can’t see that nonsense in San Francisco ending without someone getting seriously beaten by those thugs.

        1. That is how the violence starts. The history to look at is the French Revolution. What happened in the French Revolution is the political elite started encouraging and using mob violence for political purposes and it quickly got out of control. Robespierre, for all of his evil, started out as and thought of himself as a good government liberal. There were political groups that were more evil than he was. And the mob was completely out of control. So he started killing as a way to satiate the mob and give the government a monopoly on force again without resorting to the even more hideous things the radicals wanted. He honestly thought he was making the best of a bad situation.

          Consider that history and look at the various violent fantasies the hack media puts out. Think about the Ackerman journolist email about throwing people threw windows. Think abbout Sad Beard’s unrestrained glee at the death of Andrew Beitbart. What happens is the nuts on the left start killing and people like Ackerman and Sad Beard cheer it on or at best excuse it and ignore it. Once the killing starts it gets very hard to stop.

          Meanwhile, the Right won’t take it laying down and unlike Revolutionary France, the right in this country is armed. We are closer to things getting really bad than anyone realizes.

          1. John, I don’t think modern leftists, who spend most of their time posting angry blog journals on Daily Kos, are going to start rioting.

            We’re talking about the craven and pathetic cowards of the modern progressive left. These are people who write teary eyed blog posts on Jezebel because they think a man was oppressing them earlier that day with the male gaze.

            I don’t think they’re going to attack people.

            1. John, I don’t think modern leftists, who spend most of their time posting angry blog journals on Daily Kos, are going to start rioting.

              There are plenty of them who are violent. This country has a long history of leftist violence going back the 19th Century. And most political terrorists are pathetic cowards and opportunists. These people are totally capable of violence. They are like a bunch of angry chimps beating their chest trying to build up the courage. But give them time and a few of them will get the courage and that will give the others the courage.

              1. Today’s left doesn’t engage in violence. That’s what the police are for.

            2. Didn’t Occupy groups try to keep conservative groups from holding meetings in some places?

              1. And a couple of them were caught by the FBI in a plot to blow up a bridge in Cleveland.

                1. That was three guys. We’re talking about legitimate organized violence that should actually have us worried on a national level.

                  That’s not going to happen. I think it’s very possible there will be small scale violence, but it’s insane to compare the losers on the modern left to either the French Revolution or Kristalnacht.

                  People in the French Revolution were downtrodden peasants trying to get back at an aristocracy. The Nazi base of power was among blue collar workers and tradesmen. Both of those groups are going to be willing to utilize violence because both of those groups are from tough backgrounds.

                  Compare that to the average prog. They’re children of privilege who hyperventilate over microaggressions.

                  Look at Jesse Myerson, the Rolling Stone Communist. That guys a pathetic dweeb who is no legitimate threat to anyone. Comparing him to the Bolsheviks would be like comparing a lion to a semi-retarded tabby cat.

                  1. That was three guys. We’re talking about legitimate organized violence that should actually have us worried on a national level.

                    Very simple. Use the IRS to get the names of people who give to conservative causes. All you need is a few vandals in various cities willing to start breaking windows.

                    Further, in our celebrity and fame driven culture, the first leftist who murders a prominent right wing politician or journalist is going to hailed as a hero in a lot of places. That will drive more of them.

                    If you don’t think that just a few violent committed nuts can put a muzzle on things, consider the treatment of Islam in this country.

                  2. People in the French Revolution were downtrodden peasants trying to get back at an aristocracy.

                    They also had very little to lose. The average proggie “barista until someone buys his movie script he’s been working on for 3 years whose parents pay his rent in a nice uptown apartment” isn’t much of a threat because they have their itoys, can afford to eat well, and generally have it pretty good, thanks to the aforementioned enabling parents. There’s really not much of a pissed off underclass with nothing to lose in this country. For all their bleating about inequality and social justice bullshit, there’s very few actual starving peasants here.

                    1. For all their bleating about inequality and social justice bullshit, there’s very few actual starving peasants here.

                      As a general rule, people with full bellies don’t revolt.

                    2. As a general rule, people with full bellies don’t revolt.

                      No one was starving in Cuba.

                    3. John, do you know what “as a general rule” means? Apparently not. Let me explain. What “as a general rule” means is that there are exceptions. Like Cuba.

                      hth

                    4. That’s why they’re searching desperately for starving bellies.

                    5. The mob in the French Revolution were not starving peasants. They were mostly middle class.

                    6. The mob in the French Revolution were not starving peasants. They were mostly middle class.

                      There was widespread famine in France at the time. Oh, you mean the specific people in the streets, not the people in general! I get it! You’re being a clever pedant! Like you’re buddy Tulpa! Maybe I should start calling you Tulpa!

                    7. If the people doing the violence were not the ones starving Sarcasmic, that disproves the idea that people rebel when they are starving. The existence of starving people in France at the time of the revolution only means that the Revolution is evidence of how starvation causes revolt if the starving people were the ones revolting.

                      I am not being a pendent. I am just pointing out that what matters is who is rebelling and doing the violence.

            3. I think he is saying they would be the cheerleaders and justifiers – they are too pathetic to pick up the sword. Others will have to do that.

              1. Yes, and there are enough working class folks in this.country sympathetic.to progressive politics that it is possible it could take another economic downturn (down lower than out existing not-a-recovery) to start the demonstrations and violence. The talkers and goaders, pansies though they might be, will find it easy to cheer on the others who turn to violence.

                When.it is over, if.they win, they will always.have.time to write soul searching articles on how bad it got, and how unpredictable it was, in order to assuage their consciences.

            4. individually, they might not. But wait until someone in a group tosses the first punch/rock/whatever. Then mob mentality kicks in and people do things they might never consider doing if alone.

              1. What wareagle said.

              2. Like Vancouver Canucks hockey fans?

                A lot of those idiots were privileged kids acting like fuckheads.

        2. That’s only because they don’t have the guns.

    2. We should send our submissions.

      If this were a real thing, I would troll the hell out of them.

  35. Sarcasmic didn’t post this:

    GENDER EQUALITY IS A MYTH!

    1. I will say it. Beyonce is a no talent ass clown with a barely passable voice. She might be the one person less deserving of fame than Millie Cyrus. At least Cyrus was a legitimate child star. What the hell is Beyonce?

      1. A woman with a nice face & body who can dance while pretending to sing?

        1. Aren’t they all mostly like that?

          Singing is just part of the overall package so you can get away with a ‘passable’ voice. Which is why I find it hilarious when they become judges on singing shows.

        2. There are strip clubs all over America filled with such women, many of whom are much better looking than her.

      2. I think she can sing better than Miley.

      3. A successful popular entertainer who has consistently sold lots of records (or whatever you call it now)? There’s no point trying to make sense of who makes it in pop music.

      4. Eh, I don’t know about all that. I think she is talented and definitely attractive.

        But apparently economically stupid.

        1. Try and explain to them why the unit price of a money market remains at $10!

  36. Bailin: not just a dwarf-lord of Moria anymore:

    Germany’s Bundesbank said on Monday that countries about to go bankrupt should draw on the private wealth of their citizens through a one-off capital levy before asking other states for help.

    “(A capital levy) corresponds to the principle of national responsibility, according to which tax payers are responsible for their government’s obligations before solidarity of other states is required,” the Bundesbank said in its monthly report.

    1. the principle of national responsibility, according to which tax payers are responsible for their government’s obligations

      Exactly. It’s right there in The Social Contract.

    2. If we’re going to have a capital levy (which is a dangerously bad idea), it ought first be imposed on the government-sector workers. This of course includes the elected officials, who should probably be at the head of the line.

      1. 100% on everyone who has ever held a position in a government or inter-governmental organization.

  37. What do you consider the root problem?

    FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

  38. “An earned path to citizenship for those currently present in this country is a matter of, in my view, homeland security to encourage people to come out from the shadows.”

    “But legalizing drugs to ‘encourage people to come out from the shadows’ and improve homeland security — Fuck that shit.”

    1. Drug users don’t vote Rich. If it doesn’t increase the potential for graft, fraud and corruption, there is no point in doing it.

      1. *** rends garment ***

    2. If you want to live, count the shadows.

      1. “Hey! Who turned out the lights?!”

        1. This is our forest; they are our meat.

  39. The root problem is an apathetic, ignorant, gullible electorate.

    Blame the victim.

    1. 468 of those douchenozzles could be out on their asses by this time next year if the electorate wised up and decided to make it so; and the rest within five years. This isn’t the goddam Roman Empire. Democracy means responsibility.

      1. Vote out every single member of the House and every Senator up for re-election regardless of party. It will never happen. But if it did, a few things might change.

        1. But if it did, a few things might change.

          Why would replacing one bunch of bored lawyers with another bunch of bored lawyers change anything?

          1. Because the old group being put out on their asses would put the fear of God into the new group. If you do it once, you can do it again. They will only change if they know changing is the only way to stay in power.

          2. The point is not to replace them with bored lawyers.

        2. It will never happen.

          Perhaps not, but my point is that the electorate could do it any time they want as an act of will. That corrupt and destructive politicians continue forever in office is an indictment of those who keep reelecting them. Don’t see how one can argue otherwise.

          1. You never know. People are getting more and more pissed off. The thing about that sort of upheaval is you never see it coming.

          2. it’s been said before, but the electorate sees every member of Congress except its own as a venal creature. Their guy/gal is wonderful.

            The effort to replace incumbents with something other than typical lawyers began in 2010 with the tea party folks, who were immediately vilified by both teams.

            1. it’s been said before, but the electorate sees every member of Congress except its own as a venal creature. Their guy/gal is wonderful.

              Yep. Everyone hates Congress. Just not their Congressmen.

              1. They don’t even like their Congressmen. But they don’t feel there is any reasonable alternative and thus either don’t vote or just vote team.

                1. They don’t even like their Congressmen.

                  I don’t know about that. At least in my state the people seem to genuinely like their representatives. The Maine RINOs are quite popular, and one of the Dem reps is running for governor.

    2. It’s been a long time since the electorate could just count themselves as victims. No one puts a gun to their head. They line up for free shit and more war and turn on the tube to get their media equivalent of Soylent Green.

      It gets harder and harder to feel sorry for them.

  40. Josh Marshall wonders why rich people feel persecuted.

    I don’t know, Josh. Maybe it’s because their employees are getting attacked in San Francisco and protesters are coming to their houses to threaten them? Maybe it’s because Rachel Maddow lies about their involvement in drug testing laws?

    1. Instapundit has a great rundown of all of the Obama “I am going to punish my enemies and the rich” quotes over the years.

      http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/183114/

      Is Marshall just a racist who thinks Obama is just some big talking Negro?

      1. Is Marshall just a racist who thinks Obama is just some big talking Negro?

        Probably.

  41. So, apparently prisons in Austria allow the inmates access to Facebook. At first I thought that sounded like a dumb idea, until I realized that it’s actually brilliant because prisoners will do stupid shit, like post incriminated selfies with their pot plant that they somehow managed to grow.

    Actually I suspect the guards hadn’t busted him for it before because they were probably some of his best customers.

  42. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..-Yard.html

    Nigela won’t be prosecuted for her confession of cocaine use. Damn nice of Scotland Yard. Meanwhile, Nigela is still hot, on the market, and appears to be a damn good time.

    1. She has a massive jaw.

      1. She has a lot of other things too.

        1. There’s more to a woman than big tits.

          1. I know. She is a whale and fat. But we already knew that.

            1. I didn’t say that either. Whatever, John. It’s not my fault you weren’t breast-fed.

          2. Like one who rubs garlic all over her pussy and demands her lover lick it?

            1. To make sure he’s not a vampire?

    2. Michael Jackson plastic surgery nose makes me feel funny!

  43. This isn’t the goddam Roman Empire.

    Rome wasn’t burned in a day.

    Democracy means responsibility.

    Americans have been taught for generations exactly the opposite.

    When I was in high school, for fuck’s sake, I coined the term “expert-ism” after being told over and over and over that good Americans should not take matters into their own hands, whether it be extinguishing the blaze when their kitchen caught fire instead of waiting subserviently in the front yard in the snow for FireMan! to come, or building a tree fort without filing a structural analysis with the county before driving the first nail, or TEACHING THEIR CHILDREN TO READ ABOVE GRADE LEVEL AND THINK FOR THEMSELVES.

    God forbid Americans would arise as one and toss their elected betters overboard.

    1. Speaking of teaching your kids to read in lieu of public schools, this book is the shit.

      1. Put on a list and thank you.

        1. Well you got quite a while to go but it really works. The first few lessons can be a struggle, the big jump is from learning letter sounds to learning how to run the sounds together, IME.

  44. I am having a bullshit day. Was out of town, came back to a burst pipe flooding a quarter of my house. Apparently the sequence of events was this:

    Heater fan ate a wire
    Thermostat shorted out
    Pipes froze
    Poorly soldered pipe joint came undone
    Laundry room ceiling exploded from water sitting on it

    Heat is back on and plumbing is fixed, but FUCK FUCK FUCK.

    1. Oh goddam. Can you just wait for it all to freeze again, then jackhammer the whole worthless pile out?

    2. So the rollout of Obamahouse is going well, then.

      Seriously, sorry to hear that.

      1. So the rollout of Obamahouse is going well, then.

        Shut it down, folks, BakedPenguin wins the internet for today. I’m calling it early.

    3. Ouch.

  45. “We” (by which I mean the political elites and the people who work directly for them) have pretty much perfected a system in which they, as Party A and Party B, collude to determine the amount and distribution of the money they steal from Party C (the taxpayer).

    What more could the nation need to reveal the ultimate bonecrushing failure of that system than the example of Detroit (or Bell, California)? But nobody wants to hear about it. Because they have been trained since birth to behave themselves and let the experts take care of things.

    1. They would be willing to hear about it. They just don’t have the time or the inclination to go and look for themselves. Most people have lives and better things to do.

      They don’t hear about it because the media lies and makes sure that they don’t.

  46. Why is Justin Bieber an annoying little shit, you ask? Well, it’s obvious. Roid rage.

    In other steroid news, a gorilla’s knees exploded. Here’s Tom with the weather.

    1. That puny little 140lb fuckshit is on ‘roids? He should get his money back.

      1. Imagine how small he’d be if he wasn’t on them!

  47. In case anybody hasn’t guessed, the Kelly Thomas verdict has left me deeply depressed. The idea that those jurors could have allowed themselves to be convinced a bunch of baboons were justified in ganging up on a scruffy hobo because that was what they were trained to do, and moreover, that by doing that, they were somehow keeping America safe, is deeply unnerving to me. This country is honestly and truly fucked.

    The Great Experiment is a failure.

    1. Jury nullification goes both ways.

    2. The audience was full of vocal uniformed officers.

      This was obviously a case of jury intimidation.

  48. That wasn’t jury nullification.

    Unless those jurors were trying to tell us murder should not be illegal.

    1. I think the intimidation angle is a bit overblown. I think it is more likely that it was a case of the jury not liking the victim and really not caring if the cops beat him to death.

      The victim was a mentally ill homeless man. The fact is most people hate the mentally ill and they really hate the mentally ill homeless. The jury just didn’t give a fuck that the cop murdered him and ignored the law and acquitted him.

      It is jury nullification.

  49. this book is the shit.

    Title, plz.

    For some reason that comes up as some fucking bullshit amazon.com link.

    No clickey.

  50. It is jury nullification.

    Bullshit. Every verdict I don’t like is not jury nullification.

    Unless the jury said, yeah, those cops were guilty as hell, but we think laws against murder are an outrageous affront to the Rights of Man, it wasn’t nullification. They were somehow convinced those cops were acting completely within the existing laws of the land when they snuffed that annoying little hobo because RESISTANCE IS FATAL.

    1. but we think laws against murder are an outrageous affront to the Rights of Man, it wasn’t nullification.

      No. They said sure murder is illegal, but it shouldn’t be if the victim is a mentally ill homeless man who gets in a fight with the cops. Call that what you want. But I would call acquitting the defendant of murder because the jury hates the victim nullification.

      Compare this case to the Culpepper, VA case. You don’t think the cops in that small town did everything they could to lien on that jury? I would be more afriad of the cops in a small town out to get me than ones in a big city. People really do disappear or mysteriously hang themselves in jail cells in small towns.

      But the jury still convicted of something even though the facts were about the same on the outrage scale. Why? Because the victim in VA was someone the jury cared about and the guy in California wasn’t.

      That is the sorry reality of humanity Brooks. Get used to it.

  51. I think you’re accusing me of making an argument I never made. I don’t buy the intimidation stuff. I’m accusing the jury of something much worse. I’m accusing them of being Good Germans.

    They sat there and allowed the defense attorneys and the judge and, more likely than not, the DA, to convince them those cops acted legally and properly. The cops had uniforms, and badges; they were FOLLOWING ORDERS. Those cops were doing their jobs. America will devolve into chaos and anarchy if cops aren’t allowed to summarily croak anybody who exhibits the slightest resistance to authority.

    IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

    1. I misunderstood you Brooks. I don’t think they were being Good Germans, although I will buy that before I buy the intimidation angle. I think they very well might have acquitted a non cop of beating the guy to death, assuming it was an otherwise respectable person.

      I don’t think it is that the jury will just let the cops get away with anything. Cops do get convicted from time to time. I think it is that juries will let nearly anyone get away with about anything if the victim is someone who is mentally ill or otherwise defective. Sadly, people just don’t view the mentally ill or the handicapped as full human beings.

  52. Heat is back on and plumbing is fixed, but FUCK FUCK FUCK.

    You patriarchal oppressors and your RAPE KULTUR!

  53. ‘He’s out of control’: As Justin Bieber recovers from arrest ordeal, worried friends express concern over ‘?5,000 a WEEK marijuana habit’

    Actually I suspect the guards hadn’t busted him for it before because they were probably some of his best customers.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.