A.M. Links: DOJ, Internet Companies Agree on How to Disclose Government Demands for User Information, Obama Wants Higher Pay for Federal Contractors, Prince Suing Over Internet Links


  • hit n run!
    Yves Lorson/Wikipedia

    The Justice Department and several Internet companies, including Google, Facebook, and Microsoft, have reached an agreement on how the latter may disclose demands for user information by US security services.

  • President Obama is expected to propose a minimum wage of $10.10 for federal contractors in his State of the Union address tonight.
  • Chuck Schumer is using the death of an autistic child in New York City after the student went missing to push for a federal program that would provide tracking devices for autistic children.
  • South Africa's opposition parties, including the Democratic Alliance, the largest of the group, are coalescing around the candidacy of a former anti-apartheid activist who is challenging Jacob Zuma for president.
  • Prince, who once claimed the internet was a fad that would pass, is suing 22 fans for providing links online to bootleg recordings of his performances. Quentin Tarantino, meanwhile, is also claiming copyright infringement to sue Gawker for posting a script for a Western the director was planning to film.
  • Folk singer Pete Seeger died at the age of 94.

Follow Reason and Reason 24/7 on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.  You can also get the top stories mailed to you—sign up here. 

NEXT: South African Opposition Groups Uniting Around Candidacy of Anti-Apartheid Activist for President

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. Chuck Schumer is using the death of an autistic child in New York City after the student went missing to push for a federal program that would provide tracking devices for autistic children.

    Chuck just wants to embrace the children to the state’s bosom.

    1. Implant the chips in the elected officials first.

      1. Make them exploding chips while we’re at it.

        1. I was thinking corn chips.

    2. I’d like to see chips implanted in my tax dollars.

    3. tracking devices in kids, because they’re just like, what, dogs? This is repulsive on so many levels.

      1. Only becasue you haven’t yet embraced your inner Hobbes.

    4. Chuck just wants to embrace the children to the state’s bosom

      I thought it was like banding geese – tag and release.

    5. Perhaps we could mandate all Autistic kids wear the Purple Star of Autism on the sleeve of their jackets. That way every one will know who they are. You know, for their own good.

      Then maybe we could go smash all their parent’s houses windows.

      And then we could put all the Autistic kids in Kamps where they could “concentrate” on getting better.


    1. Also, it’s cold.

      ‘It’ being the heart of the state you mean?

      1. If the heart of the state is in the northeast, then yes.

    2. Oh, hey there, Matt Drudge.

      1. Speaking of Matt Drudge, what is up with his cryptic ‘have an exit plan’ tweet? Just being a good boy scout?

        1. Maybe he is sticking it in crazy and just passing along sage advice?

    3. This isn’t cold. This is mild. Canada is coming.

      1. And I’ve got some nasty in me!

        1. And I’ve got some nasty in me!

          Been visited by Warty, I see.

        2. Will you bring poutine?

          1. Truly the best way to survive the cold Montreal winds.

          2. No.

            1. Mebbe some of those infamous Quebequois pole-dancers?

  2. Prince, who once claimed the internet was a fad that would pass, is suing 22 fans for providing links online to bootleg recordings of his performances.

    Don’t make him get another slave tat.

    1. As long as he doesn’t record anymore Minnesota Vikings fight songs, I don’t care what he does.

      1. Perhaps he should buy some pull-tabs to help with the stadium construction. 🙂

        1. Only if there’s enough leftover after covering a round for everyone at the bar.

    2. This is what happens when doves cry.

      They go court crazy.

      He shoulda taken it to Judge Mathis.

  3. Hello.

    1. Hi.

    2. Lovely morning. Glad we can share it together.

      1. No. It’s stupid and I hate it.

    3. ‘Morning Rufus.

      Due to an fiscal and calendar year ends, I haven’t been able to peruse the morning H&Rs;, so forgive me if you’ve already commented, but are you content with the Seedorf hire? Seems to me they should have waited until Prandelli or possibly Spalletti were available. In his defense, Seedorf always came off in interviews as a pretty bright guy. Although — on the third hand — that may or may not translate to (a) having to manage a team, and (b) having to deal with the Berlusconi (both Barb and Silvio) and Galliani triangle.

      1. They seem to have improved since hiring him.

        Although I suppose it must be nice to have a 10-point lead with a game in hand.

        1. Yeah, he may inspire them. Not holding my breath though.

          Incidentally, have to watch Hallo Bundesliga! I recorded later.

      2. Indifferent to Seedorf. I don’t know anything of his tactical abilities but I did adore him as a player. He was much under appreciated in my view.

        Yes, Prandelli would be a great fit.

        Alas, there’s so much a manager can do with the the players he has. Milan’s defense is atrocious. Mazzari is another splendid coach but even he’s hampered at Inter. Truth is, they have neat players here and there but not much else.

        I like that Seedorf first order of business was to start Honda. He, Kaka and Balotelli can make some noise.

        1. Spalletti would also be good for the record. He’s nuts. He’s not above in-game formation changes. We see a lot of that in Serie A. I like that. It’s part of the game that goes right over the average fans head.

          1. He made a tactical switch at Anfield last year in the second leg of a EL game which was made a huge impression on me — LFC were down either two or three goals on aggregate but had pulled a couple back and had Zenit on the ropes, yet Spalletti was able to get his guys to rally and start pressing further up the pitch. Zenit didn’t create much the rest of the way, but they prevented LFC from creating anything.

            Seedorf is lucky in that the bar is pretty low right now. I would think the milanista’s would be content if he has Milan show reasonably well against Athletico (not necessarily win, as that club is damn good this year — possible darkhorse candidate at 14/1 odds to win the CL) and can sort out the attacking options (getting SES back in form would be nice).

            1. Atletico is better than Barca in my view so, yeah, tall task even for a side with such a pedigree like Milan.

              Spalletti made AS Roma such a joy to watch. Never a set formation and the players had no issues with it.

              1. Ugggh!!

                Metric feetsball!

                (Well, I guess it takes all kinds….)

                Kevin R

  4. Schumer is supremely and sufficiently ignorant.

    1. No no, he must be seen as DOING SOMETHING! And also, television cameras. He is just a supreme douchebag.

      1. Mooby S. Needs to attach a GoPro to each moob, pointed up at his.face, and livestream that to MSNBC.

        1. Schumer 3D: The Quest for Re-Election, the most horrifying film ever created!
          SEE! His nose hairs quiver as he talks!
          FEEL! Revulsion as he panders for votes!
          RUN! Away screaming!

          1. SEE! The Moobs quiver with antici…

    2. He’s evil, because despite his repeatedly being demonstrably ignorant, he still presents himself as somebody whose public policy proposals ought to be taken seriously.

  5. have reached an agreement on how the latter may disclose demands for user information by US security services.

    Let me guess…the agreement does not mention the word ‘warrant’ anywhere?

  6. Prince. What a dolt.

  7. President Obama is expected to propose a minimum wage of $10.10 for federal contractors in his State of the Union address tonight.


    1. Why $10.10? Why not $10.27 or even $100.10?

      1. He’s studied the situation and found that sweet spot.

        1. He’s studied the situation and found that sweet spot.

          I would guess that this is exactly why. It implies precision – that he actually has studied the situation and found the right amount.

      2. Flunky: Mr. President, we really need to fix a minimum wage figure for tonight’s speech. Mr. President?

        Obama: Fine. Fine.

        /sticks thumb up his ass, opens window and sticks it out.

        Obama: $10.10. It has a nice ring to it. People will remember it. Like me.

        /looks around.

        Obama: Well? This thumb isn’t gonna wash itself. Who wants to be the first to lick this piece of history?

        1. You’re Hit & Run’s Garry Trudeau.

        2. [Flunky sees a bottle of Heinz ketchup]

          Obama: We must raise the mimimum wage to FIFTY-SEVEN DOLLARS!

          1. Make that ’57 low-salt dollars!’ and we got a deal!

            1. [Flunky sees a bottle of Heinz ketchup]

              So that’s where O came up with the number of states he visited.

              1. +1 ketchup packet (which is never enough)

        3. I’m surprised he didn’t Herman Cain it and go with $9.99.

          1. Why would Obama follow a failed white businessman?

          2. It’a better. It’s one more.

        4. Herman Cain suggested $9.99 and Obama had to one-up him.

      3. Because there are only 50* jobs below that and several thousand jobs at that number?

        *numbers approximated but scale probably appropriate

      4. Well, Time Magazine told me Obama is supposed to be the reincarnation of FDR, right?

        When Roosevelt told Morgenthau he was thinking of raising the price of gold by 21 cents, his entourage asked him why. “It’s a lucky number”, Roosevelt said. “Because it’s three times seven.” As Morgenthau later wrote, “If anybody knew how we really set the gold price through a combination of lucky numbers, etc., I think they would be frightened.”

    2. “You cheap!”

    3. Is it more interesting if he does it unilaterally?


      1. The president … does not have the power to unilaterally raise the minimum wage for private sector workers


        1. Here in Quebec, there was talk that employers would be forced to offer group savings plans (as if the payroll taxes to pay for OAS and pensions weren’t enough) with the added twist that we’d have to deal with ONE bank – and it’s not even a bank but a horrendously inefficient, corrupt and irrational credit union called Caisse Desjardins.

          1. That is the problem with forced government savings plans like Chile has. Sounds nice until you look at our government and realize who would be managing such savings. It will just get looted.

            That is what happened in Japan. Japan had this system of postal savings. You literally set up a savings account at the post office. The Japanese, being hard working and compulsive savers, put hundreds of billions into the system. And the money was largely stolen as the various cronies gave bad loans to each other and the government depressed the value of the Yen and interest rates destroying the value of savings.

            1. But it will never happen here, my CPA told me so.

              1. Hey, I didn’t tell you anything.

            2. And given Quebec’s track record, this is EXACTLY what will happen.

              In fact, pensions have already been looted here.

    4. This is really up there on completely meaningless actions. There are already a number of laws (e.g. Service Contract Act and Davis Bacon Act) that ensure pretty much every worker on a federal contract makes well over the minimum wage.

    5. Let me be clear, I will not rest until low-wage jobs are a thing of the past.

      Also, jobs in general.

    1. Indeed! He has a pen and an Obama Phone afterall.

  8. The Justice Department and several Internet companies, including Google, Facebook, and Microsoft, have reached an agreement on how the latter may disclose demands for user information by US security services.

    The agreement? They really can’t.

  9. Turkish Prime Minister Delivers Speech As a Hologram

    But, NOOOOO! Our President has to do it IN PERSON!

    1. Help me Obi-Wan, you’re our only hope!

      1. Who did Homer tell Lisa to call for help, Bat-Man or Superman?

    2. Please state the nature of the governmental emergency.

      1. “National Security.”

        “Compelling Interest.”

    3. Not that there really is much difference in any way at all between the live POTUS and a hologram.

      1. hologram is smarter

  10. No links from me today. Snowpocalypse. I’m putting the meat I got from my neighbors out in the ice to preserve it, and by “meat I got from my neighbors” I of course mean their dead bodies.

    1. Speaking of bodies, anyone catch the ending of True Detective?

      Nothing spells creepy than a machete wielding nut in diapers walking around on grass.

      1. No Spoilers!!

        The wife and I are catching up tonight.

      2. I only watch it for the boobs.

        1. *blows whistle, throws flag*
          15 yard penalty, Misleading the Commentariat, Lack of Nudity.

          1. This is why there are no women libertarians.

            1. Yeah. I’ve counted at least five around these parts.

            1. Oh. My. God.

        2. “Hey, her eyes are up *there*!”

        3. Those are spectacular. I hope her getting naked in every episode has been worked into the plot.

        4. Saw that scene. Jesus, she is fucking fine.

      3. That was supremely creepy.

  11. Pete Seeger is dead huh? Another dead commie. Good riddance, pinko bastard.

    1. Lou Reed died too

      1. And the Professor, and Mr Kincaid.

      2. Wait, Lou Reed died?! Why didn’t somebody say something???

        1. We were counting on the Cleveland Browns to tell you but I guess they let us down once again.

          1. Maybe they were busy acting as pallbearers?

            1. Naw, they were with that nun. The immaculate injection.

    2. More coverage at Rolling Stone, with a comment section. Just in case you’re of the mind to pass a morning tormenting some old commies.

      1. I just had the opportunity to do that over on Michael Totten’s site, on his latest post about his visit to Cuba. And here on H&R too.

      2. This got me chuckling:

        fitj John Yaeger ? 3 hours ago
        Whats wrong with communism that isnt wrong with capitalism?

        1. Hey, he had to stand in line for his iPad just like people used to stand in line for bread. No difference, man, no difference at all.

      3. Don’t get me wrong, I like rock’n roll, but is there anything more vulnerable to tackiness than rock?

        It tries so hard to be cutting edge it more often than not flops – especially when it comes to the rock-politics fusion.It’s not surprising the comments are what they are.

        I can’t think of any musician that makes me think. Springsteen sure, but he’s a left-wing nut job now.

        Richman has a ‘conservative-libertarian’ streak in him.

        For the life of me, I can’t understand how musicians can support commie, marxist gibberish and not libertarianism. The former would crush it.

        I’m sure, in this sweeiping generalization, I’m missing something.

        1. Neil Peart makes me think but that’s just me. Most people don’t bother to listen to lyrics.

        2. I’m sure, in this sweeiping generalization, I’m missing something.

          Rush, perhaps?

          1. What Restoras said.

          2. Yeah, Rush.

          3. I thought they disavowed libertarianism “now that they’re older and wiser”.

            1. Made ya think!

            2. I recently heard Neil describe himself as a bleeding heart libertarian. Not exactly sure what that means. Perhaps the state can have a role in improving society but with restrictions that preserve individual liberty? Clockwork Angels presents a world of several dystopias living in fragile coexistance – none of them idyllic or free, or a place where someone that thinks differently is welcome.

            3. Have they?

              Time to burn Tom Sawyer.

        3. but is there anything more vulnerable to tackiness than rock?

          Sure there is, it is called Disco. But in all seriousness, part of being a genius in rock or pop music is being a bit tacky and making the tackiness work. If an average musician does a song like Stairway to Heaven they would look ridiculous and tacky. If four geniuses like Led Zeppelin do it, it becomes the most played FM radio song of all time.

          A lot of the best rock is at heart shameless and tacky. But that is the challenge of it in some ways.

          1. Some people want to fill the world with silly love songs. And what’s wrong with that?

            1. That he could sing such a song with a straight face and have a hit with it, is tribute to McCartney’s genius.

            2. Nothing! Maybe, I’m amazed at the way we make fun of love songs.

              1. Don’t make it bad Rufus.

                1. Just let it be, John.

                  1. Yeah. Gotta go. My band is on the run.

                    1. We’re so sorry if we caused you any pain.

        4. it’s about the feelz. That’s how lefties always present ideas that logic shows to be oppressive if not murderous. The intent is equality or justice or some nice-sounding term that does not mean what the speaker thinks it means.

        5. but is there anything more vulnerable to tackiness than rock?

          Yes. Politics. Politicians trying to rock out are much tackier than rock & roller’s being political.

          1. The tackiest thing I ever saw (maybe it was far more infuriating) was Chuck Schumer walking by himself in a St. Patrick’s Day parade in Albany a few years ago. He had a bullhorn and was saying stupid things in the most pandering way possible like “Let’s here it for the Irish, everybody.”

            I had my kid with me which was unfortunate because I really wanted to shout at him to go fuck himself and given the general non-reaction he was getting I’m pretty sure I would have earned some free beer with that comment. Sadly, the pipe bands and firetrucks were not close enough to drown the mother fucker out. He really is loathesome on every level. Can’t even get walking in a parade to not be douchey.

            1. You should have done the truly Irish thing and thrown your empty bottle at him.

              What? Your bottle wasn’t empty? Fix that problem first.

      4. Sounds like a Plan.

    3. Many years ago I saw Pete Seeger live with Arlo Guthrie. They both kinda sucked but Pete was more entertaining.

      /over and out.

    4. writing a great song was according to Solomon Linda’s ability. keeping 100% of the royalties was according to Pete’s needs. redistribution of wealth was achieved.

      1. Just Google’d Solomon Linda. Typical Marxist, “What’s yours is mine too!” Pete Seeger truly sucked.

      2. Pete Seeger has recently said of the publishing situation, “I didn’t realize what was going on, and I regret it. I have always left money up to other people. I was kind of stupid.”

        And yet people took his advice on politics.

    5. Another dead commie. Good riddance

      I was going to say the same thing but with folk singer instead of commie. This works, too.

      1. Charlie Manson made records too. But he isn’t remembered as a musician. I think being a commie over shadows whatever you did for a day job.

          1. That is what Charlie claims. Dennis Wilson was big buddies with Charlie for a while. My God he must have been doing heavy drugs to think Charlie was a good guy.

      2. I fail to see the distinction.

    6. They said that Louise was not half bad.

      1. Are you implying old Pete was a prostitute?

        Never mind?.

    7. At least Pete lived long enough to see socialism in his own country. It must have been gratifying.

      Now he’s off to organize the Angels into a labor union.

    1. It would have been awesome awful if the building had collapsed on them.

  12. SoConzzzzzzzzz

    OKLAHOMA CITY ? Oklahoma Republicans are promoting a bill that could make marriage a private institution in their state. The legislation, filed by Rep. Mike Turner, could end all government regulation of marriage and leave the matter to individuals and their churches.


    1. We talked about this last night, but there’s just a placeholder bill. A friend of mine who works for the FL state lege spent several hours yesterday trying to find text and there’s nothing. Its a trial balloon and a stunt.

    2. This is no doubt some serrupticious means by the whack job Bible Belt to finally take all remaining control over the country. They are the biggest threat to personal liberty since the advent of gun control.

    3. It’s going to be fun watching liberals AND libertarians go out of their skulls the first time a deep red socon state decides it would rather privatize marriage than allow civil marriage for queers. Liberals will, of course, at least have the consistency to base their opposition entirely on their feels. But the 40 Reason articles all consisting of “Yes, we support the privatization of marriage, but…” will sure be a lollercoaster. Naturally, Bo Cara will be here to present the defense.

    4. They may indeed be SoCons, but at least they are giving the appearance of following their stated desire to get the state out of marriage. They have long been subject to well-deserved criticism for their words not matching their actions on this. It remains to be seen, of course, whether this bill is larded with grandfather clauses and exceptions which render it nothing more than another transparent SoCon effort to deny state marriage to same sex couples while preserving state marriage for different sex couples.

      1. I thought you claimed there was no organized effort to do this.

  13. Chuck Schumer is proof that if their is a God, he certainly hates us.

    1. If their what is a god?

    1. Someone should have told those cows not to turn on the.light when they smelled gas.

    2. Sounds like they need more regulatin’.

  14. The Manufacturing Renaissance Continues!

    Durable Goods orders Negative, Trend Negative Unexpected miss of course. Or the weather. Or racism. Or something.

    1. Yeah, but look at teh S&P 500! PROSPERITY! OBAMA! FORWARD!


  15. Ok, now I am really trying to figure out why the sudden deluge of liberal quasi-scholarly articles on why libertarianism is strange / weird / stupid / etc. Did they have a convention or something?

    1. Journolist 2.0 lives.

    2. Because this way when the Democrats get their teeth kicked in, the base will already be conditioned to the new bogeymen and the punditklatura will already have bona fides in identifying and prescribing against the new bogeymen.

      1. I mean in the 2014 midterms. No one will mention ObamaSebiliusCare, so it must be the rise of the evil libertarians who are heartless and want to steal your benefits and sell your children into slavery, and think it should be illegal for people to help other people.

        1. Damn it, if only we didn’t oppose people getting together to accomplish a goal (which, of course, is only possible through an enormous state).

        2. Wreckers and kulaks abound

          1. You left “splitters” out…. is there a particular reason for that omission, comrade?


    3. Social psychologists have demonstrated how anomalous is the Western, especially American, view of autonomous selves.

      And if that anomaly results in the greatest creation of wealth of all time, and far greater happiness for everyone, what’s so bad about it? Have progtards become full-on primitivists?

      1. What the fuck is a ‘social psychologist?’

        And what the heck does that mean? That autonomy – or the need for it – is a myth?

        1. Yeah, I have no idea. I really regret even reading that ‘article,’ which seems to insinuate that because most of human history was filled with slavery, collectivism, and its attendant poverty, there’s no reason to ever want to do better.

        2. As opposed to a biological psychologist, social psychologists investigate how non biological factors can be used to predict and explain human behavior. Its a great racket.

        3. It means that we kick ass and that it is largely a good thing that western culture has spread around the world to the extent that it has.

          Has anyone seen Niall Ferguson’s “The West and the Rest”? He makes a great case for why western civilization has been able to be so dominant in the world and why that is a pretty good thing.

        4. it means that America is different from most other societies in that it is decidedly not collectivist, despite the efforts of our proggie friends. The focus here is on the individual, always has been and that’s a one-off from a global perspective. Perhaps more amazing is that this is a story since it’s along the lines of saying “astronomists discover sun gives off heat and light.”

          1. Just finished reading a history book on Venice. Much similarities with America on the ideas of individual liberty and business. Much overlooked. Rome we like to compare to Washington, but Venice is worth a second look.

            1. That is a really good point Rufus. They were basically a functioning Democracy or at least they were by the standards of the time. And they were a very successful commercial people.

              1. And it was reactionary ‘liberals’ from Jacobin France and Napoleon who destroyed it.

        5. What the fuck is a ‘social psychologist?’

          The opposite of an antisocial psychologist, I suppose.

          1. Or the opposite of a social scientist.

          2. A sociologist that took a psych class.

          3. Reminds me of a friend who wasn’t much into soccer. When I mentioned Real Salt Lake to him he said, ‘what, as opposed to the fake one?’

            1. The “real” in “Real Madrid” isn’t pronounced “reel,” but “ree-al.” It’s espanol. How do Utahns pronounce the first part, and which king is the “Real” supposed to refer to?

              I’m looking at you too, KC Royals, Sac Kings. UnAmmurrican, the lot of you, but especially metric feetsball teams.

              Kevin R

      2. Have progtards become full-on primitivists?

        They’re tribalist, because tribes believe in their chiefs.

      3. Why can’t they just say “demonstrably better” rather than “anomalous?”

        1. It’s all about jargon. Illusion of importance.

          When I was a broker meaningless terms were exploding during the tech bubble.

          I still laugh at EBITDA.

          Does the fucker make money or not and what’s the PE so I can get an idea if it’s over-valued. Next!

          1. PE is wide-open for manipulation too. Just sayin’.

            1. Yeah, but simple. Overall PE multiple of said market to PE of stock. Compare.

              If trading 60x above market, raise an eyebrow if can’t be justified.

          2. EBITDA has some value.

            Especially in a depreciation-heavy business. Its pretty much cash flow at that point.

            1. I mock what I don’t understand!

      4. And if that anomaly results in the greatest creation of wealth of all time, and far greater happiness for everyone, what’s so bad about it? Have progtards become full-on primitivists?

        You don’t understand. Anything the West does differently than the rest of the world is evil. The entire planet would be living in a racially and sexually tolerant utopia were it not for the ideas of Western liberty forced upon them by the patriarchy.

    4. Social psychologists have demonstrated how anomalous is the Western, especially American, view of autonomous selves.

      This is awesome. The West is the richest place in the history of planet Earth and we’re supposed to think it’s bad that we came up with this ‘anomalous’ idea?

      Maybe if everyone else adopted our anomalous idea, poverty would end.

    5. Because they are terrified of Rand Paul.

      See any other Republican they can beat with relative ease using tried and true recipes. With Paul however he is a different animal. First, he to this point has been remarkably ideologically consistant while still managing to be effective in getting his agenda moved along, second his platforms in a national election will actually threaten to draw significant support from some of the core Democrat constituencies.

      There is no guarantee that Paul can win the Republican nomination in 2016 but if he does right now they havn’t got a good way to attack him so they have to lay the groundwork now that libertarianism is somehow icky and really bad so that they can attack him with that if it becomes necessary.

      1. What do you mean they don’t have ways to attack him? His opinion on the Civil Rights Act is all they’ll ever need. Then all they have to do is repeat shit like, “roll back the clock,” and “grandma dying in the street,” and it’s over for him. That’s all they need to do and sadly it works every time.

        For those getting your hopes up, let me repeat, Rand Paul will never be president nor will he be a candidate for president. You might as well get over the idea now.

        1. , Rand Paul will never be president nor will he be a candidate for president.

          Last I looked being a candidate was up to him and he seems pretty keen on the idea.

          It is almost like you are here to concern troll or something.

      1. An advanced stop line or “bike box” is not a “bike lane,” though it can be used in conjunction with the vile things.

        I’m with John Forester. Cyclists aren’t helped by bike lanes, they are lulled into a false sense of safety.

        Kevin R

    1. Huh. I had a roommate who punched out one guy (who was in the passenger seat) and made it all the way around to the driver side when the driver decided red-light or no, he wasn’t up for getting his ass whipped that day after they impinged on his space in the bike lane.

    2. That driver needs to get a medal. The only thing that could improve that video would be finding out the cyclist is Will Wilkinson.

      1. If the guy were Wilkinson, I take back what I said below. Maybe I can condone just punching someone in the face.

      2. This is the best comment of the week.

    3. I can’t condone violence. You can’t just punch people in the face. But if you have to do such a thing, there are a lot worse people to punch then some asshole cyclist.

    4. Wankers.

      Not to say nothing but why did the biker have to go after the guy? I see stupid shit from both bikers and drivers on the streets all the time. Just let it go. You ain’t gonna change shit except get a bruised jaw or broken nose.

    5. I do notice that the crucial seconds to see if the cyclist initiated violence is missing. If he was trying to punch the guy’s windshield in or key his car door, popping the cyclist in the jaw is perfectly acceptable in my mind.

      1. That is a good point. And he doesn’t even have to actually be doing any of that. He just has to be acting in such a way that the driver had a reasonable fear that the cyclist was going to do that.

        And my guess is that the person recording that didn’t start recording when the film start. I bet he started before. And I bet that the missing tape shows that motorist to be a lot more justified than it appears.

    6. Having been intentionally run off the road by a van while biking and watched some stupid bitch with a broken arm and on a cellphone drive down the middle of a bike lane, I can say that your temper gets a little short sometimes.

      1. Cycling does raise your awareness that there are far more assholes driving cars than should be.

        1. Hm. My experience shows it’s equal. Edge to cars though. Bad drivers tend to panic so this may give the edge to them.

          Now, pedestrians. That’s a different matter. The new breed of assholes texting with their heads down while crossing the road without a care in the world infuriates me.

          1. Well I’d suggest that since there are far more drivers than cyclcists on the road the edge goes to drivers ;). Not to mention that an asshole driving a car represents a real potential danger to any and all around him or her.

            I agree on pedestrians texting while walking. When one is heading for me on the sidewalk I don’t get out of the way and make them look up from what they are doing. Once a woman bumped into me and her phone fell to the ground and into a puddle of water. She was pissed. I merely pointed out that she should be watching where she is going. She had no response.

            1. I honk.

              1. The last time I started honking as a pedestrian, people started throwing sunflower seeds at me.

      2. I had to give up bike commuting because of the drivers at one intersection. The road I was on is marked as a “bike route”, which means there is no lane and no sidewalk, you’re just out in traffic.

        The intersection is with a toll road, so everybody and their uncle is trying to get into the right lane to make the turn. Invariably, once or twice a week, I’d get some impatient moron merge in on me with their horn full blast as they were crossing 2 lanes to make the turn to the toll road. It’s not like I was doing anything wrong, they were simply trying to cut in line, and thought that I made a better target to impose themselves upon than a pickup truck. I ended up kicking one of the cars while still pedaling on my bike at 15mph, because they were literally less than a foot from side swiping me.

        As much as there are dumb cyclists, they’re just an annoyance, especially in suburban settings. Asshole drivers were a serious safety hazard at least a couple times per week.

        1. Same here. I liked biking to work, but I figured with a wife and a new kid it was irresponsible of me to be risking my life every day. And this was in San Diego, where they supposedly are nice to bikers.

        2. Yes. It’s amazing how often people in cars do things around cyclists out of annoyance, etc that could actually have lethal results. Would people still have the same sense of smug satisfaction if they accelerated a little bit and ran over me? Or if I wasn’t able to take evasive action and was driven off the road and died? People routinely do things in their cars around cyclists that could end in a murder charge if things go just a little differently.

          1. after biking into work for that period of time, I’ve found a new respect for bicyclists. I don’t care if they’re being polite or fiendish dick-buffoons, I give them as much space as i possibly can.

            I also have a new found respect for my biking coworkers, some of whom do 60 miles round trip. That’s just ridiculous!

    7. Reminds me of a time a few months ago when a bike rider would not get over into the bike lane and was holding up traffic. The driver in front yelled at him to get over into the bike lane (yes, there was one). The biker pulled up to the driver side and spit all over the window. I’m surprised he didn’t get run over for it. I swear if that happened to me I’d be in jail for peeling out on that asshole’s face.

    8. Before I even clicked the link, I thought to myself, “Is the car going to be an Audi? I’ll totally bet it’s an Audi.”

      Yep. Sure as shit, it’s a self-absorbed yuppie fuckwit driving an Audi.

      This isn’t to say that the cyclist wasn’t being a complete prick himself, it’s just that in my experience Audi drivers more often than not tend to be a special breed of total asshole.

      1. Could have been a 7-series Beemer.

      2. They are angry because they can’t afford a beemer.

        1. Go on Porsche message boards and you will find BMW drivers talking about how anyone who drives a Porsche is a cock.

          I often wonder if they are just too young to remember the 1980s when BMW became the first “I am a cock yuppie” brand of car. The irony burns.

    1. Darius Rucker won a grammy in a country category.

      This means we should have more black people singing country.

      1. The big winner was a couple of French dudes in silly hats on the strength of a giant hit sung by a black dude known for his work in hip hop.

        Producer of the year was said black dude.

        Top country performance was by a different black dude.

        The top rap artists were a couple of white dudes because the committee really wanted to stick it to all the squares by pimping their terrible gay marriage song (seriously, Same Love sucks, just admit it already. I’m not even negatively disposed to either gay marriage or Macklemore, it’s just a shitty, boring song).

        The theme this year isn’t racism, it’s crossover appeal. That and the seeming abject terror Kendrick Lamar inspired in voters.

        1. The big winner was a couple of French dudes in silly hats on the strength of a giant hit sung by a black dude known for his work in hip hop.

          It’s the worst song on the album. I still haven’t figure out why they went with it as the first single.

          1. Most appealing to the pop crowd. Usually what happens when a group writes an awesome album and the distributor can’t hear the single.

        2. Mackelmore is terrible and that song is completely unlistenable.

  16. Main Force Patrol…we’re out of the game…unable to continue pursuit. You’d better send a meat truck. Charlie’s copped the saucer in the throat.

    I’m outta here H&R members…busy working on a new novel and getting burned out from trying to do too much at once.

    1. Do the death of the blank page!

    2. Good luck with it. Come back drunk and rich(er).

    3. Good luck. You have my infinite respect for doing it, rather than starting ten of them and never finishing them like I do. I don’t care if it turns out to be the most hated novel ever written, finishing it puts you in the top 1%.

      1. Write short stories instead.

        1. Those are even harder.

    4. I hope you write better sex scenes than Epi.

      1. I would definitely not use H&R as an inspirational source for sex scenes.

        1. Hey, SugarFree — Are you going to take that lying down standing up well are you?

          1. I just dance with the one that brung me.

            1. QE-fickin’-D.

      2. If by better, you mean less weeping and colostrum, then I agree.

    5. I liked nanozombies. Good luck on what’s next!

    6. I’ll miss the hell out of you, Humungus.

      You fly back to school now, little Hummy. Fly, fly, fly. Fly, fly, fly.

    7. Write a pamphlet.


      1. How about a fortune cookie fortune?

    8. Wah! Good luck. You’ll be missed. I think no one else can wear that codpiece as well as you do.

  17. The legislation, filed by Rep. Mike Turner, could end all government regulation of marriage and leave the matter to individuals and their churches.

    End times.

  18. Chuck Schumer is using the death of an autistic child in New York City after the student went missing to push for a federal program that would provide tracking devices for autistic children.

    We have friends who have a nonverbal autistic son. He does wander off a lot. Funny thing is, his parents bought a tracking bracelet for him. They didn’t need Chuck Schumer to pay for it.

    1. Why do they want children to die?

    2. Good thing they can afford it. I hear Chuck, and many of his generous colleagues, already spend 90% of their income helping those they consider less fortunate.

    3. Only the state can properly take care of and raise children. All suggestions to the contrary are heretical nonsense.

  19. President Obama is expected to propose a minimum wage of $10.10 for federal contractors in his State of the Union address tonight.

    What kind of work does the government contract out at minimum wage?

    1. It’s about the work they contract out at a multiplier of the minimum wage.

      1. ^Yeah, this. And also it conveniently makes more people dependent on government largesse.

    2. What kind of work does the government contract out at minimum wage?

      Walking behind congresscreatures and administration officials with a shovel and bucket.

      1. What if they get college credit for it?

    3. None. All service jobs (janitors, lawncutters, etc.) are subject to the Service Contract Act and all construction jobs are subject to the Davis-Bacon Act. These laws require contractors to pay way over minimum wage.

    1. That is… disappointing…

      1. Yeah. WTF was that banned for? Her not showing enough skin?

        1. Scarlett Johansson’s Controversy refers to the online backlash surrounding American actress Scarlett Johansson’s formal endorsement of SodaStream, an Israeli home carbonation product company which runs one of its factories inside Ma’ale Adumim, the third largest Jewish settlement in the disputed territory of the West Bank.

          Because, you see, when you lob rockets into your neighbors yard indiscriminately you are a victim of right-wing tyranny, or something.

          1. Of course the actual reason it was “banned” is in the first part of the article:

            Fox has reportedly rejected this Super Bowl commercial from SodaStream starring actress Scarlett Johansson, not because of any sexual messaging, but because it ends with her saying “Sorry, Coke and Pepsi.”

            Pretty much a made up controversy, and SodaStream likely knew it going in. They figured they would get a bunch of press and views without having to pay for it. And it is working apparently.

            1. Just like Daniel Defense.

            2. Now if they can only make a god damned bottle which doesn’t melt when you put it in the Dishwasher

              1. Its top shelf safe. Unfortunately, nobody makes a dishwasher with a top shelf that tall.

                1. Yes. Hand wash them with a bottle brush. And thanks Apatheist for the clarification.

            3. Yup, that was obvious since Pepsi is an official sponsor of the Super Bowl. It’s smart marketing. They knew full well the ad would never get approved, so they saved whatever money it costs to air during the game, and get all the free advertising this conversation just triggered.

    2. Less Sugar, Fewer Bottles . . . ARRRRRRRRGGGGGG!

  20. Smith & Wesson unveils monster .460 caliber gun

    The manufacturing company is billing it as “great for a back-up gun, or for hunting,” and has dubbed it the “Backpack Cannon”.

    “Backpack Cannon”?! Why do they want CHILDREN to have this?!

    1. As I posted last week. That kind of power on a 3″ frame, for me, is just a noise maker, because no way am I ever going to anything but delope, shit myself, and hope I smell spoiled if I get charged by a bear IRL. So hopefully, the gun is noisy enough to scare the bear away.

      1. I don’t see the point. It will just give you a headache and take your arm off with the recoil. If you really need that kind of power, carry a rifle. I guess maybe if I were hunting wild hogs with a knife and wanted something that would kill a hog that got loose from the dogs at close range, maybe. But otherwise, I can’t see the point of that beyond dick measurement.

        1. But otherwise, I can’t see the point of that beyond dick measurement.

          Well, they are marketing it to cops.

          1. That’s rich. Most cops can’t hit shit with a 9mm and 17 rounds. Give them a hand cannon with 5 or 6 and you’ll just end up with slightly fewer, but mortally wounded, bystanders.

      2. Bear defense is when you actually need full auto. Rapid transfer of momentum and multiple impacts in short periods of time are most debilitating. I would probably trust a .45 ACP SMG or a full auto .300 Blackout against a big animal more than a big revolver that hits once and required precise control just when your sphincter is losing it.

        1. Or at close range a shotgun. I have an uncle who was an avid bear hunter for a long time. He said you never went into bear country without a 12 gauge being within reach at all times. I never went with him. But he never mentioned a handgun or anything but a shotgun as an emergency weapon against a bear who shows up foraging in your camp.

          1. I believe Ted Nugent used to tell a story about being bow-hunting but packing a .45 that he used to take down a charging bear.

            1. Teds has some balls. The problem with a bear is that if it gets close enough it can kill you with a dying blow.

              1. I can’t remember if it was a bear or not, but I think so.

                Pretty sure this was on the Merv Griffin show and I was like 12.

                1. I remember he’s telling this story about bow-hunting and shooting a bear and Merv was like, “Uhmm…..gee…”

          2. John, do you happen to know what kind of a load he used? Buckshot or slugs and if slugs sabot or rifled?

            1. Honestly no. I just remember the shotgun part. I was a kid and wasn’t bright enough to ask that question.

    2. Do you want your children to be eaten by bears?

    3. Why not a handheld Claymore?

      1. “This side toward target.”

          1. “I’d like you to have this. Use it to protect your property.”

          2. *clack* *clack*

    4. You don’t have to load it with .460

      You can also fire .454 Casull (which is plenty powerful) out of it and .45 Long Colt, IIRC.

      I bet it’d be a complete pussy cat even with the hottest .45 Long Colt rounds you can buy but still enough to take down most animals in the US.

  21. .460 with a 3 inch barrel? Why yes, I love the imprint of rear sights in my forehead.

    1. Thanks for that. Now I have to clean up the coffee I just sprayed all over my screen.

  22. Woman who was sentenced to just two days in jail ends up serving five MONTHS after judge forgot to sign her release

    Destiny Hoffman, 34, was given 48-hours for violating her drug treatment program in Indiana
    Judge Jacobi forgot to sign release form in August leaving the woman incarcerated until December
    The judge reportedly ordered her to jail without a hearing or legal counsel

    Will anything else happen?

    1. It is unclear why Ms Hoffman did not let prison officials know that she was being held for an undue length of time.

      Perhaps because she was *enjoying* it?

    1. I think so. He did what he did. And he deserved to be fired for it. But I don’t think he deserves never to work again. I think it is more just the establishment being angry at him for showing the New York Time to be the pathetic rag it is.

      Dorris Kerns Godwin was caught lying. That hasn’t hurt her career. David Gregory committed a felony on national TV by holding up a high capacity magazine in Washington DC. Yet he has a career.

      1. Actually, if you read the article, it is pretty justified…

        Glass was going to law school when his lying was exposed. Shortly afterwards, he applied to be in the NY bar, where he claimed that he had helped the people who employed him identify the false passages that he had penned and that they had published.

        He then withdrew that application voluntarily.

        Now, ten years later, he applied to the bar again, and the newspapers said that he hadn’t cooperated and as a result they had no idea which bits he wrote were accurate and which bits he wrote weren’t.

        They concluded that his behavior in the past decade was more concerned with his image than in fixing the damage he caused.

        So, the bar is right to reject his application; as officers of the court, there is a dependence on attorneys being honest.

        Yes, I said honest.


        Will you guys stop laughing!?!

        1. I take it back. I didn’t read the article and assumed Glass had reformed. My mistake. No, fuck him. He is a fucking lying sociopath who has no business with a law license.

        2. I particularly liked this:

          “We also observe that instead of directing his efforts at serving others in the community, much of Glass’ energy since the end of his journalistic career seems to have been directed at advancing his own career and financial and emotional well-being”

          Shock! Horror! How dare he focus on trying to pick up the pieces of his life and launch a new career after totally fucking off his first one.

          I thought the real irony though is that this same court was okay with admitting someone who outrightly broke the law as a political statement. Officers of the court. Laws. Honesty. Something something. Even if you disagree with the law, the disparate treatment is… interesting.

          1. So he tried to make an honest living. He clearly has no business being a lawyer.

            The parts Tarran quoted make me agree with the Court. But the part you quote makes me think the court is so loathsome they have no business denying anyone.

            1. Oh the guy is a total piece of shit, it’s just that the court isn’t much better. Then again, if not for double standards, they’d never be able to reject any applicant.

          2. I was in court yesterday in a dispute with my ex.

            I witnessed 15 cases being heard by the judge before we were called.

            Some of the lawyers struck me as being somewhat … er… flexible with the truth.

            1. Everyone in America should be required to spend a day watching a typical state trial court. If people say how stupid and corrupt it is and how many people get fucked by it, it would change the way they think. People think court looks like something on Law and Order. Real court is some judge and DA screwing over some otherwise harmless poor and or stupid person who got crossways with some bullshit law. For every case that involves a real no shit this is why we build penitentiaries criminal, there is ten or twenty that leave any reasonable person wondering why the hell we are doing any of this.

              1. In the probate court, the saddest cases are the pro-se ones.

                There was a brother and sister going up against their mom’s nursing home. In the end, the judge denied the nursing home’s motion. Then the brother and sister asked if they could be reimbursed for all the money they spent fighting the nursing home. It was so sad watching their faces as they realized they weren’t going to be reimbursed one dime.

                1. We so need loser pays in this country. Not having loser pays means there is no price to telling someone to go fuck themselves even if they have an honest claim. If the nursing home knew that when they lost they would be on the hook for attorneys fees, they would be less likely to make the claim in the first place. But as it is, people who pay lawyers anyway, have no reason not to wait out honest claimants or make false claims.

                  1. One other case kind of irritated me.

                    The dispute was over child support. Dad was required to pay child support until the kid graduated from college or dropped out.

                    Kid stopped going to school after he got sick a year ago. Dad stopped paying child support. Kid signed up for 12 credits online a few months. Dad said, I’m not paying child support anymore.

                    Mom was pro-se, and sobbing as she told the judge she only had $9 to her name.

                    It was pretty clear that the child support was her sole source of income…

                    The child support had been ordered back in 1992.

                    So she had twenty years to prepare for the day the kid left the nest… and she hadn’t….

                    I suspect that she was basically using the young man-child as a meal ticket…. which is all kind of messed up.

                    1. I have a relative who divorced his wife in the late 80s. He had a very successful company and paid her alimony to the tune of $35,000 a year. His kids were grown at that point so no child support just alimony.

                      He gets married again and his second wife cleans him out a couple of years ago. Meanwhile, he is getting older and doesn’t spend the time on his business he once did and thus doesn’t make the money. So after the second wife cleans him out he is in a bit of a financial pinch. He goes to his very successful adult kids and asks for help. They tell him no that they are busy helping their mother, the first ex wife.

                      So it turns out that after he hits a certain age, he no longer has to pay alimony. So he hits that age and stops paying his ex and is saved from bankruptcy. His kids now won’t speak to him because he “abandoned their poor mom”. I am really speechless at how anyone could think that your divorced father owes your mother a living for the rest of her life.

                    2. ^^ This is why I want to be a corporate attorney. I pretty much said “what’s the opposite of family law?” and picked that.

                  2. And if it was straight loser pays the brother and sister never would have filed the claim because the risk that if they lost they would not only have to pay their own legal fee’s but also the Nursing Homes was too great.

                    I agree that there needs to be some way to punish ridiculous suits and groundless defenses designed solely to bleed the plaintiff’s of the ability to continue the case but you can’t just say “well you lost the case so now you gotta pay the other guys legal costs”.

                    A better system would be to have 4 possible outcomes from the trial Judgement for the Plaintiff/Defendent like we have today combined with Judgement against the Plaintiff/Defendent. The difference between a Judgement for and a Judgement against is in the first case the court acknowledges that the losing side had a legitimate legal or factual basis for their defense it was just insufficient to carry the case, in the latter case the court rules that there was no legal of factual basis for the losing side of the case and in addition to whatever remidies the court assigns the loser must pay triple damages, all court costs of the other side, and their lawyers must pay a penalty equal to all monies recieved for this case to the court for wasting the courts time.

                    1. Rasillo,

                      The brother and sister would have if they knew they were right. The problem with not having loser pays is that insurance companies and banks and large corporations have no incentive to pay honest claims. Suppose their lawyers value a claim at 100K. In exchange for 10K in legal fees, their lawyers can drag the claim out for two years and get the plaintiff to get desperate and accept $80K. That means they not only get the benefit of keeping the 100K an extra two years but also get out of 20K of their honest debt.

                      We have loser pays in civil rights suits and the system works fine. It just gets defendants to pay honest claims instead of holding out.

                    2. John,

                      Earlier you said:

                      Everyone in America should be required to spend a day watching a typical state trial court. If people say how stupid and corrupt it is and how many people get fucked by it, it would change the way they think.

                      Why would the brother and sister have any confidence they could prevail against a hopelessly corrupt system?

                    3. You have a massive assumption that the correct side always wins and that the losing side always goes into a case knowing it should lose

                      In fact loser pays tips the scales even further in the balance of large entities with huge sums of money because an individual plaintiff is probably only going to be able to come up with $50k max to spend on his defense, the plaintiff can then go and threaten to spend $100k and use the threat of an additional $100k bill piled on him to get the plaintiff to accept far less. It basically gives corporations the same power DA’s have to get plea bargains “accept our offer or if you lose we hammer you with legal costs”. Sure it would mean the company would lose money on individual cases against them but in the aggregate it would prevent so many cases or buy off plaintiff’s so cheaply that in the end they would save money.

      2. I’m sure he thought licensing schemes and regulations were great before.

      3. I think it is more just the establishment being angry at him for showing the New York Time to be the pathetic rag it is.

        Stephen Glass worked at The New Republic. Jayson Blair was the New York Times.

        1. Yeah. I lose track of my leftist rags.

    2. Serial liar in a public forum? Shit, I thought that was a prerequisite for being a lawyer, or at least a prosecutor.

      1. It is really too bad he didn’t get his license. The California AG’s office could have hired him out of professional courtesy.

        1. I thought you, of all people, would have taken offense at that. I guess I owe you a free engineer joke.

          1. I have seen that from the inside. Whatever my faults, and they are legion, lack self awareness about my profession is not one of them.

            It is like jokes about government employees. The only time I even take mild exception is when people try and pretend that big private sector companies are not also often insane. But I will freely admit the government is a giant waste of money and the fact that I accept their money is a sell out on my part. And if the day ever comes that the whole thing goes belly up, I mean really belly up as opposed to me in particular getting fucked and no one else, it will suck for me. But I will be okay and I will never claim justice wasn’t served.

            1. I’d tell you to take it down from the inside, John, but they’d just spend more money “fixing” whatever you broke.

              1. And they would probably put me in charge of fixing it.

    3. My favorite part about Stephen Glass is that his articles are so obviously fake if anyone had thought about them for even a second. The article that got him caught was called Hack Heaven. It’s about a company called ‘Jukt Micronics’ which got hacked by a 15 year old and then hired him as a consultant. Here is the opening paragraph:

      Ian Restil, a 15-year-old computer hacker who looks like an even more adolescent version of Bill Gates, is throwing a tantrum. “I want more money. I want a Miata. I want a trip to Disney World. I want X-Men comic [book] number one. I want a lifetime subscription to Playboy ? and throw in Penthouse. Show me the money! Show me the money! …” Across the table, executives from a California software firm called Jukt Micronics are listening and trying ever so delicately to oblige. “Excuse me, sir”, one of the suits says tentatively to the pimply teenager. “Excuse me. Pardon me for interrupting you, sir. We can arrange more money for you.”

      Jukt Micronics is a company that does not exist. How on Earth could TNR be such a shitty magazine that they could publish something that seems so obviously fictional about a company that 20 minutes of fact checking would have proven to be fake?

      He was only caught when a Forbes magazine writer tried to find out how Glass had scooped Forbes on this story and found out the company didn’t exist.

      1. You gotta be shitting me?! That wasn’t true? Next thing I know you’re gonna be telling me Blank Check was a work of fiction…

      2. I am friends with a fair number of journalists. All of them tell me about what a pain in the ass fact checkers are at the publications they write for. How the hell did TNR not bother to fact check that? You just call the company and the kid who is the subject of the story. It is not hard.

        All of my friends though are free lancers. It must be that these publications think anyone that works for them full time is automatically right and trustworthy and any free lancer is a lying bum who must be ruthlessly fact checked. It is the only explanation I can think of. Glass was in the club so we don’t need to check anything he writes.

        1. Multiple people who were the subjects of Glass’s work claimed he had fabricated quotes, incidents, or entire articles. TNR got letters to the editor from D.A.R.E., the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the head of the National College Republicans, and Hofstra University.

          With the exception of D.A.R.E, which is run by total hacks, the other three are pretty reputable organizations that were accusing him of lying. CSPI actually accused him of plagiarism. There’s no excuse for TNR not to get suspicious when a reporter is being accused of plagiarism and fabrications.

          1. When the New Republic decided not to follow up on complaints, they were no longer the victim. Stephen Glass *was* the New Republic.

              1. And then came the movie with Hayden Christiansen as Glass.

                1. Makes sense to have a no talent hack play a no talent hack

          2. CSPI is the very *OPPOSITE* of “reputable organization”.

            Look in the dictionary next to “Fascist Nanny-State Bloombergesque Fun-Hating Food Police Nutters” and you will see their full-color logo.

            Just ask Baylin Linekin.

  23. Has the left-o-sphere finally mastered the art of pearl clutching and simultaneous smug snarkiness?

    You decide.

    Some article that not only blames crime victims for their predicament but calls them stupid and gives them responsibility for the criminals further actions.

    The comments are especially fun… if you’re into smug hoplophobes.

    1. Yet another Esquire piece which makes me wonder just who the hell their target audience is supposed to be nowadays.

      Also I note that the author of the piece is a LTC. I seem to be coming across quite a few Americans in the military who loathe the country they volunteered to fight for recently.

      1. Also I note that the author of the piece is a LTC.

        He fought to be one of the King’s Men. It’s only good to be one of the King’s Men and one of His Scribes if the proles are in line and unarmed.

        I like how he’s arrogant enough to think a meathead with a history degree is up for giving physics lessons.

      2. I’ll take him on in an LTC trial by combat… winner gets either a rebuttal column or a follow up piece.

        1. OK, this is simple. Any round which sheds most of its mass upon initial impact is not going to penetrate much more than, well, heavy winter clothing. Remember, Force = Mass x Acceleration, a simplistic equamass is reduced by, say 75%, then force is not what they claim for penetration.

          How about he stands behind a plate of glass in a winter coat and I shoot this ammo at him? If he lives, as per his physics, he gets the next column. If he dies his wife goes to warty and episiarch gets to write the inscription on his headstone.

          1. I’ll go with the General.

    2. The writing, it’s horrific

      1. “When even the people who run for office are building entire campaigns and PACs upon the idea that a significant proportion of the “law abiding” voters are so poorly educated that they do not even remember basic high school civics lessons, then perhaps the nation should take that into consideration and require at least an IQ test before letting a person with such intelligence vote. I mean, really, if the political environment acknowledges this as a fact and builds entire campaign strategies upon the presumption that a significant proportion of voters do not know how government work, then all pro-government advocates must acknowledge this as true, right?”

        Read more: Bateman G2R Ammunition – Meet The Most Insane Ammo To Hit The Market – Esquire
        Follow us: @Esquiremag on Twitter | Esquire on Facebook
        Visit us at Esquire.com

        1. Yeah, that “free market” thing was the most convoluted piece of horseshit I’ve read today.

    3. if you’re into smug hoplophobes

      …for me to poop on.


    4. Esquire uniformly sucks. That is all.

    5. Bateman is quite a piece of work. He was last seen in December writing this.


      You see he has been to war. And that makes him much more of an expert on the 2nd Amendment than the Supreme Court Justices who wrote Heller.

      If Pauli Krugnuts were in the army and writing about guns, he would be Bateman.

  24. he party of free shit offers more free shit:
    “President Obama is expected to propose a minimum wage of $10.10 for federal contractors in his State of the Union address tonight.”

  25. I’d like to party with this Max Mosley fella!

  26. We do not yet know the full story on this shooting at a mall in Maryland. We probably never will

    But that won’t stop smug assholes at Esquire from fabricating a terrifying narrative about evul kkkorporate purveyors of murder.

  27. But then they do make significant claims and imply others, and in effect the video makes it look like this round is a cop-stopper (because why would you need this round except to shoot at the police?). Why would you need a bullet marketed as being able to penetrate walls and car windows, if you did not want to shoot at American police?

    Oh, NOES!

    WAR ON KOPZ!!!!!

    1. I’m confused. Are police the only people with access to window and wall technology?

    2. Why would you need a machine that could print thousands of sheets in minutes if you did not want to publish anti-government literature?

    3. Why would you need a bullet marketed as being able to penetrate walls and car windows, if you did not want to shoot at American police?

      I don’t know, why do American police need armored vehicles and fully automatic weapons and body armor and riot suppression gear and …

      I mean, if they didn’t mean to wage war on the American public, why would they need all this military hardware?

      1. Um…um…ummm…

        Aw, damn..

    4. I’m confused, how is this bullet a cop-killer when LTC Newton clearly proved, using physics, that a winter coat could stop this bullet?

  28. Yet another Esquire piece which makes me wonder just who the hell their target audience is supposed to be nowadays.

    Closet case hipsters, apparently.

  29. In case it didn’t get mentioned elsewhere, Tom Perkins apologizes for Nazi comparison. I think he shouldn’t have apologized, he’s right.

    1. He did say his general point is correct but that he should have stayed away from Nazi references.

      The irony here is that if he called them ‘fascists’ no one would have cared, but once you make it more specific and call them ‘Nazis’ it’s mean spirited political rhetoric.

      He should have compared them to the Khmer Rouge or the Reign of Terror. No one gives a shit so long as it’s not the Nazis.

      1. Very good point. There is a reason why there is such a term as “to godwin.” The Nazi treatment of European minorities has an emotional power to it because since an early age, we have all been taught that there were never any regimes as bad as the Nazis, and never will be. This, regardless of similar patterns of genocide in the Soviet Union and various Asian venues.

        1. True, but I remember BushHitler and that nonsense from the left. Unlike that, this is actually appropriate.

    1. You are not kidding.

      1. Not Nigella.It is some other Brit celeb dating her abusive ex.

        1. She has a very nice lower half, whoever she is.

  30. Now that I’m moved into the new abode, I have enough room to start homebrewing. What do you all think of this as a starter kit?


    1. It’s pretty standard as kits go. You may want a bigger bottling bucket but if you get into brewing you will want to move.to.kegging ewrly on. Botlting is a major pain in the ass and adds more variables in the final product.

      Sanitation is absokutely key to successful brewing. Buy some Star San and make a squirt bottle.of it. Douse absolutely fucking everything in.it before brewing (except the boiler, heat is good.)

      Get a big fucking pot, it.is best to do full volume boils, although you will then.need.a.wort chiller. I recomend Morebeer.com for equipment. IMO they make the.best pots.and.other equipment lfor the.money and they ship quickly.

      1. Botlting is a major pain in the ass

        Repeated and bolded for emphasis.

        Its even a pain to spell.

    2. Don’t buy anything twice.

      I imagine you’ll be moving to all-grain at some point. That means you want a big brew kettle. Ten gallon minimum. And an outdoor gas burner. When doing all grain you’ll starting with at least seven gallons, and you need head room in case it tries to boil over.

      StarSan is a must. For cleaning I’ve found PBW is awesome. Made by the same company that does StarSan.

      Oh, and check out the BeerSmith forum. There’s a wealth of knowledge there.

      Cleaning fifty-odd bottles sucks. You’ll be looking into kegs before long.

      This hobby can get expensive. Especially if you end up buying things twice.

      1. I like the beeradvocate.com homebrew forum.

        Insanely timely responses.

        I disagree on the expensive part, it can be done amazingly cheaply, but yeah, dont buy stuff twice.

        And I use an 8 gallon brewpot. Its tight sometimes and a 10 gal would be better, but it works.

        1. I said it can get expensive. Doesn’t mean it must.

      2. For cleaning I just use OxiClean. It kills and bleaches everything. Plus it.is.ok.for.stainless. i soak my carboys in it for a couple of days after kegging and the gunk just sloughs off the sides with oxicleqn. No scrubbing necessary.

        1. I use PBW (Powdered Brew Wash) in part because it was developed specifically for brewing. I’ve read of people using OxiClean with good results. If it ain’t broke…

  31. A bunch of army helicopters and ospreys just flew over the house.

    Has it begun?

    1. You are in Pittsburgh, right? The Pres is.in town and the whole area is under multiple TFRs.

      1. Oh.

        What a pain in the ass Dear Leader is.


        I’m dreading electionin’ season. This area is in play for either party so we get lots of traffic-fucking visits, as you probably know.

        1. Yes, and my commute takes me past KPIT so I have to look out to see.if there.is a motorcade during rush hour.

        2. Someant to say he 8s in town tomorrow, so the birds were probably advance security and scouting.

  32. I saw part of Perkins’ interview on Bloomberg. Of course, it had been edited to conform to the narrative. I think he should have played up the wealth envy class warfare angle, rather than Krystallnacht, but….

    At the end of the segment, the Bloomberg bint made some nonsensical assertion about how Perkins’ comments regarding successful investment and wealth creation are no longer meaningful, because a high school dropout can’t go to work at GM sticking hood ornaments on Cadillacs for $70k anymore.

  33. A bunch of army helicopters and ospreys just flew over the house.

    Duck and cover! There’s no telling when those Ospreys might fall out of the sky.

  34. He did say his general point is correct but that he should have stayed away from Nazi references.

    It may not technically be copyright infringement, but the JOOS don’t appreciate unauthorized use.

  35. I just dropped this comment on the WFUV* blog:


    I know it’s considered rude to speak ill of the dead, but i wish folk fans would stop turning a blind eye to Seeger’s apologizing for tyranny.

    [Link is to a H&R roundup on Seeger’s 90th birthday.]

    Sane people were against, say the Vietnam war, without singing the praises of the murdering b*st*rds who ran N Viet Nam. Also, one could be for civil rights without buying into statism whole hog. I often ask “non-violence” activists of a socialist bent, “just how do you intend to take people’s property against their will, with pretty words?”


    *WFUV is the Fordham University radio station. I love to listen to their music programming, especially the Irish and other Cetic stuff on Sundays, but they go overboard with the Seegerolatry.

    A bit trollish, I expect, but I bitched about it to them when he was alive, too.

    Kevin R

    1. Jeff Lynne is nobody’s favorite? Fuck off.

      1. I never was that big on ELO. they created some decent pop. As English art-poppers went, I preferred 10CC.

        Pub rockers, punk and new wave was more my style.

        Kevin R

  36. Looks like mother nature will deliver – about 2′ of snow if forecast for the Wasatch high elevations mid-week this week, with intermittent squalls on a daily basis thereafter. This after a 10+ day dry spell. Just in time for my arrival on Saturday!

    1. Nice! Have a great time! Have you skied Utah before?

      1. Never skied anywhere but VT, and one time in PA.

        1. You will love it but powder took.me some time to get.used to, having skied in PA all my life on sheets of ice.

        2. Utah is the best. You will love it. Powder skiing is a bit different than VT “packed powder”…

          1. Yeah, my dad was in a restaurant and some guys were talking about how it was “icy” in Park City/Deer Valley. He interpreted that to mean “packed powder”, which is not “icy” in the New England sense of the word. For me, packed powder is ideal. But I pretty much only ski groomers.

    2. Enjoy. We are preparing for “Winter Mix”, which I expect to be very cold rain and maybe some ice. I’ll try to document the apocalypse and link some pictures if the internet tubes don’t freeze and burst.

      1. I’m listening to MSY ATC feed as we speak. Not much going on there. Probably most of the flights were already cancelled. I sooooo wish there was an internet feed for ATL airport. That’s gonna be good.

        1. So is the ATC feed listening a train-spotting level hobby?

  37. Sorry to pollute the links with all of this advice column crap, but I know there are a ton of lawyers here.

    When I applied for law school, the school made it sound like the part-time program was “made for working professionals like me!” However, one semester in, I realize that they meant “made for people who are able to quit their job and work part time as a barista.” Point being, I’ve got a mortgage and a family, and can’t exactly quit my full time engineering job without us ending up in the bread lines.(To rant, they had a seminar on how to get legal experience while working a job, and their entire suggestion was to quit the job and “take a risk”)

    Do you know of any options that I may have for legal experience? I’ve had research assistantships suggested to me, along with taking a 6 week sabbatical to do an internship/clerkship. However, I don’t know how kindly my company would look upon me taking 6 weeks to work for another company or a court.

  38. Quitting engineering to lawyer seems like a bad idea. Unless you’ve got an early lead on a sweet, well-paying lawyerin’ gig.

    1. I’m just not that big of a fan of being an engineer. I’m good at what I do, but I don’t enjoy spending all day playing with computers. I could do 5 to 10 years of engineering, but I’m already burning out a little bit after 3.

      OTOH, I love law (so far), and enjoy the opportunities that are presented there. It may be verboten here, but I wanna go into IP. My company has a pretty awesome policy when it comes to patents, so the end game is to end up in their patent group.

      1. It may be verboten here, but I wanna go into IP

        In most of those threads, it seems like Im a single voice fighting against IP.

        Its far from verboten here.

  39. Quitting engineering to lawyer seems like a bad idea.

    No shit. There was a weepy article in NYT the other day about teh poor downtrodden legal profession, featuring some sad sack with ten fucking thousand dollar per month alimony payments who has been “forced” to declare bankruptcy. Apparently, three hundred grand per year just doesn’t go as far as it used to, in Manhattan. Poor little fella.

    1. Except, I know someone that did engineer-to-lawyer and he is now a patent lawyer – and doing really well.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.