Senate Passes Debt Ceiling Hike, Rand Paul Sues Obama Over NSA Surveillance, Killing in Syria Accelerates: P.M. Links


Credit: Gage Skidmore/wikimedia
  • The Senate voted to raise the debt ceiling this afternoon. Before the vote, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) urged Republican senators to reject their "Tea Party overlords."
  • Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has filed a suit against President Obama and administration officials over NSA surveillance.
  • Former New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin has been found guilty on corruption charges and is facing up to 20 years behind bars.
  • President Obama signed an executive order raising the minimum wage for federal contractors to $10.10 an hour.
  • Killing in Syria has accelerated amid faltering peace talks in Switzerland. Over 230 people a day have been killed in Syria since Jan. 22.  
  • The trial of Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will begin on Nov. 3.

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: Connecticut Pols Shocked That 'Tens of Thousands' of Gun Owners Defy Registration Laws

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has filed a suit against President Obama and administration officials over NSA surveillance.

    That suit is going to be one big redaction.

    1. Hello.

      1. Wyoming to fight back against EPA annexation, transfer of state lands to Injun tribes…..e-land-to/

    2. How is that even possible!? I was spamming F5 and there were already two comments by the time I got links.

      1. If it was easy there wouldn’t be any glory in it.

        1. Your mom is easy and there’s lots of glory holes in her future too.

          1. Don’t be crass. Save that for some place other than the internet.

            1. I’ll be whatever I wanna do!

      2. I blame my consistent failure to.ex3cute an early links post on the fact that my phone’s c9nnection must go through a proxy server (of the 0hone company’s).

        1. They should put in a spell-check, too. 😉

        2. You’re never going to get a first using a phone. I mean, who are you even calling to have post for you?

          1. Fist, Fist, Fist.

            Your Mother, of course.

            And then I call her on my home to tell her what to post.


      3. Fist has the least latency.

        1. Fist is inside the building?

      4. his typing orphans are better fed than yours.

        1. You feed your orphans. That’s cute.

          1. I feed mine…to my pack of vicious jackals.

      5. jesse, I think they discriminate against you because TEH GAIZ! I may be mistaken, but I don’t think I am.

        1. No, Al. I’m certain you are correct. I’ll get ACT UP! on the case.

      6. I was first yesterday.

        1. Glory days, well they’ll pass you by
          Glory days, in the wink of a young girl’s eye
          Glory days, glory days

          1. I thought the third line was, “Glory says, Glory daaaaaaaaaays”.

              1. Cocaine, probably.

            1. *days

    3. That suit is going to be one big redaction.

      Maybe. If only there were some guy out there, maybe living in Russia or something, who could release the unredacted records if the government does try to play that game….

  2. Former New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin has been found guilty on corruption charges and is facing up to 20 years behind bars.

    CNN, for some reason, would not name his party affiliation in their article.

    1. Those God Damned Urban Machine Republicans. Glad to see one of them finally brought to justice. They have been ruining our cities for decades.

    2. IIRC, Nagan was seen initially as a brilliant up-and-comer.


    3. But what happened in New Orleans had nothing to do with local and state corruption, right?

    4. To think, he wasn’t even caught with a live boy or a dead hooker.

      Over a little graft?

      What the hell, Louisiana?

  3. “President Obama signed an executive order raising the minimum wage for federal contractors to $10.10 an hour.”


    1. All three of them not already making above that will be thrilled.

      1. Are there federal contractors who make more and have their wages pegged to the minimum wage?

        1. Probably but I doubt this would classify as a minimum wage increase for such purposes

      2. I don’t think this is true. Federal contractors likely do things such as janitorial and cafeteria services. I would not be the least surprised to learn there are thousands of these workers making minimum wage. Of course I oppose a minimum wage, but that’s another story.

        1. There are some federal contractors do janitorial work. If there are thousands it is because there are so many federal contractors. Most probably do administrative or program management type work.

    2. And it is so easy to remember!

    3. My stupid Government teacher told us that spending originated in Congress.

    1. I mean, just read the headline. It makes you want to quiver in your boots.

    2. Banks aren’t scary… banks who are given preferential treatment by Congress are scary. Banks who are allowed to intentionally crash the economy to drive out ownership and temporarily debase the value of property or order to buy up the means of production are scary.

      I’m all for deregulation, but cutting the big banks loose without plugging up the revolving door to Washington first was foolish. And allowing them to borrow nearly limitless funds from the Fed for less than 1% interest is, aside from being anti-competitive, just plain stupid. The low interest rates and creeping inflation serve to prohibit the accumulation of capital not under their “control”.

      1. Eliminate the moral hazard, first.

  4. Before the vote, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) urged Republican senators to reject their “Tea Party overlords.”

    Democrats are lucky to have absolutely no dissension within the ranks.

    1. Concern troll is concerned.

    2. IF ONLY the GOP was controlled by those dangerous extremists who want to follow the Constitution and not spend money we don’t have!

      1. I know, I’d fucking celebrate in the streets if that were even mostly true.

  5. President Obama signed an executive order raising the minimum wage for federal contractors to $10.10 an hour.

    So who does that benefit, the janitors that work for upstanding contractors like CGI?

    1. I thought they already had to pay prevailing wage.

    1. That hissing sound you are hearing is the steam going out of her fervent supporters.

      What a doofus. Way to validate the “she’s just in this for herself” impression made by the revelations about her family life. She should pose for Playboy for big bucks and then call it a day.

      1. What? Is this the 70s? You mean publish a sex tape while pretending it was stolen.

        1. I’m assuming she still has a bit of class left, and I think Playboy still pays celebs big bucks for posing.

          1. Class? Do public figures have that anymore? I thought that went the way of morals and ethics.

    2. Didn’t she filibuster just such a bill?

      1. Yeeeee-up.

  6. The rising minimum wage prices out quality alt-text.

    1. I see no point in awards of any kind.

      1. They signal what movies to watch!

        1. Bah. The ones I watch don’t go Oscars.

      2. It’s like dressing up. There is no point, except that other people care and you want them to like you because eventually you will make more money or something like that. And why do the other people care? Because they think that everyone else cares.

  7. I, for one, welcome our new Tea Party Overlords. (new band name?)

  8. The FCC Will Begin Investigating Bias In the Media (and By That, They Mean Conservative Bias)
    …The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about “the process by which stories are selected” and how often stations cover “critical information needs,” along with “perceived station bias” and “perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.”

    How does the FCC plan to dig up all that information? First, the agency selected eight categories of “critical information” such as the “environment” and “economic opportunities,” that it believes local newscasters should cover. It plans to ask station managers, news directors, journalists, television anchors and on-air reporters to tell the government about their “news philosophy” and how the station ensures that the community gets critical information….

    1. Its about time the DemOp lame-stream media gets what they deserve.

    2. I am going to assume this is a joke. It’s a joke, right?

      1. I’m afraid not. We’ve been past joking for a long time now.

    3. Oh goody. I remember the Clinton administration when TV shows were strong-armed into putting anti-drug messages into their plotlines.

    4. ..The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about “the process by which stories are selected” and how often stations cover “critical information needs,” along with “perceived station bias” and “perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.”

      That is some very sinister shit there. Having 90% of the media licking their boots and acting as a court media isn’t good enough. They are Progessives. They want it all.

      Next they can use the campaign finance laws to go after blogs and the internet as unlawful in kind contributions to candidates.

      1. The giveaway here is the FCC’s focus on “underserved communities”

        Damn that critical information needs inequality!

        1. Because in the day and age where even the poorest people have smart phones and internet access, lack of access to information is one of our biggest problems.

          1. Lack of access to *properly-nudging* information.

            1. The right to be free from hate speech and right wing propaganda is sacred.

              1. Muh feels

      2. Don’t forget electioneering laws, John. Blogs that say to vote for a candidate, or even say they will vote for a candidate, are clearly illegal attempts to influence the sheeple (provided it is the wrong candidate). Shit, by electioneering laws, you could go after people on Facebook who post, “I support Romney (Or whomever)” 60 days before an election.

        1. Yup. And don’t forget hate speech laws. They have pretty much made saying you own a gun in public a criminal offense if someone calls the cops. Look at the cases where people got arrested after putting a picture of a firearm on facebook if you don’t believe me. They would love to expand that and make “being a Republican” a form of hate speech.

    5. Any government employee doing anything remotely like that deserves 100 year to life of hard labor.

    6. Horrifying.

      And here I thought the Obama administration couldn’t go any lower.

      Pieces of shit, all of them.

    7. What about statist bias in the media?

  9. Oh, crap.

    Comatose Michael Schumacher has developed pneumonia, Bild reports

    1. Man, the news for him is just getting worse and worse.

  10. Liberals Getting a Little Tired of Defending the Indefensible Obamacare “Law”
    …The win-at-all-cost mentality helped create a culture in which a partisan-line vote was deemed sufficient for passing transcendent legislation. It spurred advisers to develop a dishonest talking point?”If you like your health plan, you’ll be able to keep your health plan.” And political expediency led Obama to repeat the line, over and over and over again, when he knew, or should have known, it was false.

    Defending the ACA became painfully harder when online insurance markets were launched from a multi-million-dollar website that didn’t work, when autopsies on the administration’s actions revealed an epidemic of incompetence that began in the Oval Office and ended with no accountability….

    1. You try to swallow something that big, of course you’re going to get a sore jaw!

  11. The Browns let Mike Lombardi down one last time

    I’d say they have the worst ownership in the league, but Jerry Jones still lives and breathes so… sorry, Cleaveland fans.

    1. The Browns were better than I thought they would be. And they robbed the Colts out of a first rounder by shipping off the corpse formerly known as the artist Trent Richardson.

      How do you fire the guy after one year? And what GM with any other options would work there after the last guy was fired after one year?

      1. Bill Simmons?

        1. No. I made that one up. But I totally stole it from Simmons. As annoying as he can be, some of his schticks are pretty funny.

          If ESPN would just give him an editor and ban him from saying anything about any subject beyond sports, he would be worth reading. Sadly, his success long since has gone to his head and he has convinced himself that anyone gives a shit about his and his loser friends trips to Vegas or his opinions on pop culture or TV shows no one over the age of 14 watches.

          1. No, my joke would be that Simmons, who keeps doing wanna be GM things, would totally take the job.

            Of course, he’d trade all their good players and picks to the Pats to accumulate 7th rounders, and claim that he was going with Seattle’s strategy of building a team… but you didn’t specify competent GM.

            On Simmons: The Vegas stuff can be fun, and he hasn’t quite gotten to Peter King levels of blow hardery. Also, while you can tell his politics are very left, he isn’t super overt about it just yet. I mean, you can tell, but it’s not as bad as some sports journalists. Which says everything you need to know about sports journalists, I guess. It used to be guys like Ring Lardner. Now, it’s what J-School major who couldn’t hack the local beat do, but the minute they get any recognition they turn into the White House Correspondent they always believed they should be.

            1. I don’t mind his politics. He keeps them out of it.

              The good news about this is that hopefully this means Mike Lombadi will go back to doing podcasts with Simmons next NFL seasons. Those were great. Lombardi is really smart and Simmons is smart enough to stay out of his way and they really work well together.

              This last season without Lombardi Simmons just had his retarded cousin Sal and his degenerate gambling habit. Those and when he calls his Yankee fan friend from college. Fuck, why doesn’t he call me. I would have more to say than those clowns.

          2. Simmons stinks, John, imo.

            1. He often does. And that is what is so frustrating about him. He doesn’t have to. When he writes about the NBA he is quite good.

      2. I thought they were improving, then they decided to start all over again. I saw a movie just like this that involved Cleveland, too, only it was about baseball.

        1. Burn on big river.

        2. Well then, they need to draft Michael Sam. He might be the only player right now who will play harder to see clothing stripped off the owner’s cutout.

      3. I agree. I could but shake my head at that one.

    2. This is not as bad as it looks from the outside. Maybe. Lombardi was a known dipshit and Banner was a laughingstock around the league. So as long as Farmer has an IQ above 80, he’ll do better than the last 5 or 6 GMs. Maybe.

      1. Yes, but why did you fire your coach? Who is the new Number 2?

        1. Apparently Banner and Lombardi were behind that, and Haslam fired them because when they failed so spectacularly to get a better replacement, he realized what fuckups they are.

          1. Um, okay. Good luck and everything.

            1. The 2014 season is doomed anyway. Weeden wants out. NOOOOOOOOOO

              1. What? But he has a positive QB rating and an almost 1:1 TD/interception ratio! That’s got to be Cleveland’s best QB since, what, Joe Flacco?

      2. The Steelers have had three head coaches since I started following them in 1971.

        The Clowns have had three coaches since 2012.

        Embrace the suck, Warty!

    1. Perhaps, but you know what? If we’re honest about history and look at things in a bigger way, Britain and France were just as much to blame.

      Leading up to the wars they had empires and were controlling everything. Germany – and Italy too – newly united, wanted their ‘place in the sun.’ Systems of entanglements and a furious race to conquer led to a cinder box itching to explode.

      Not only, that, the Ottoman’s too had a play in there.

      This is just scratching the surface, and to me, that’s typical British take on things.

      Many factors and nations share the blame.

      1. I did a term paper once blaming the war on the Kaiser’s megalomania.

        1. I wrote a paper on Wagner’s contradictions.

      2. Yep, only the 2 historians that blame all 6 parties provide a convincing argument IMO. It was a bizarre, complicated mix of conditions, and to pin it on any one country is insulting.

      3. Leading up to the wars they had empires and were controlling everything. Germany – and Italy too – newly united, wanted their ‘place in the sun.’

        I think that is absolutely true if you say WWI. WWII is a little different. So, I wouldn’t personally say “wars”.

        That said, I think you have to realize that Germany’s very existence as a nation state threw the European balance of power into disarray and meant, eventually, even if the Germans had no colonial ambitions, there was going to be a war to reorder things. You don’t just start up a great power in the middle of Europe and not expect things are going to get a little dicey. That was really the tragedy of Bismark’s unification of Germany. Only a Bismark could manage it without it becoming a cause of everything blowing up.

    2. Germany is absolutely at fault for starting the war. But that doesn’t alienate Britain’s responsibility to its people for getting involved. A German dominated continent was not enough of a threat to Britain to justify bankrupting the country and killing a generation to stop.

      1. What’s really bizarre to me about the war, which we’ve discussed before, is how all the monarchs were related. Closely related.

        1. Yeah. Really, The Kaiser was kind of the geeky kid in Victoria’s family and always felt left out and insecure compared to Edward VII. And for that reason he decided to build a Navy and in doing so turned England from friend to enemy.

          The Imperial Germans were total diplomatic bumblers. They managed to turn Russia and England against them such that they had to back up Austria against Serbia because they were the only reliable ally they had.

          1. The Imperial Germans were total diplomatic bumblers. They managed to turn Russia and England against them….

            I think that’s a bit of an overstatement. Look, Germany’s emergence as a really big-ass and powerful nation state wasn’t just a trivial human interest story. It was a really big deal that shifted around the balance of power in Europe incredibly. English strategic interest went from looking to contain French power to seeing France as an offset to German power. You’d have to be an Otto von Bismark to stop that sort of situation from devolving into a giant clusterfuck.

        2. It’s really eyeopening when you look at post Roman Europe and realize that the whole of the monarchies are just a few powerful Germanic families and they wars are a result of the Franks splitting property between sons.

          1. I also blame the lack of primogeniture in Frankish society (looking at you Charlie “the Great”) for most of Europe’s ills.

            1. It’s tempting to think that, but put your libertarian hat back on–how well would a unified empire have done, even with primogeniture?

              1. Not well. We could just pull different German names off wikipedia.

                1. Or that is to say we’d just be pulling different guys names out of history for starting different wars. The problem is murdering your neighbor for his shit and then everyone going along with it. Of course we all agree to that basic premise of the NAP (well mostly) or we wouldn’t be here.

                  1. Yes, I fear the problem is more fundamental than that–the species is messed up deep down.

      2. Germany obviously played a significant role in starting the war, but I don’t see how you can ignore or minimize the role that Russia, Austria-Hungary, Serbia, and to a lesser extent France played. Russia especially doesn’t get nearly as much blame as they deserve

      3. Hardcore History is going over WWI right now. The way Dan Carlin tells it, yeah, the Germans.

      1. It all goes back to the Field of Lies.

        1. While I was somewhat joking an argument could be made that the Germanic custom of splitting a kingdom between surviving sons then them fighting about it lead to a great deal of the wars in Europe between 511 and WWI and consequently the nation states we have today.

          1. And I said that to you above basically. Because I pay attention.

        2. Pepin the Short, here.

    3. WW I is Britain’s fault. If Britain had minded its own business and not entered the war, it would be known as the Second Franco-Prussian war. Lenin would have lived out his days on Lake Geneva, and Adolf Schicklgruber would have had a career in paperhanging to support his dabbling in watercolors.

  12. Instapundit: Domestic surveillance will be a vehicle for oppression, sooner or later
    …That such widespread spying power exists, of course, doesn’t prove that it has actually been abused. But the temptation to make use of such a power for self-serving political ends is likely to be very great. And, given the secrecy surrounding such programs, outsiders might never know. In fact, given the compartmentalization that goes on in the intelligence world, almost everyone at the NSA might be acting properly, completely unaware that one small section is devoted to gather political intelligence. We can hope, of course, that such abuses would leak out, but they might not….

  13. So I’m sitting around with some people and there’s these two brothers, one of whom is a sixth-year physics student (undergrad). I get to listen to a 30-minute spiel on why capitalism is slavery, CEOs are parasites, and mathematicians and engineers should be making all the money because theoretical physicists work harder, largely courtesy of the sixth year student who thinks he is some kind of progeny but is enrolled in absolutely zero classes last year and spends much of his time playing video games and mooching off others.

    I’m also a college student. I’m not particularly economically valuable. But I still had trouble not blowing up on the spot.

    1. Are you in class with them, or are you getting drunk with them?

      If the first, why aren’t you currently doing the second?

      1. I wouldn’t drink with these people without a lot of attractive women about. They have issues, and the last time I was at a party with the younger one, he spent most of the night complaining about being a virgin. I’m just part of the same organization as they are and they turned up to our area when I was looking for a quiet place to get some work done.

        1. Virgins are the worst possible company.

          1. We should send Warty in for a mercy raping.

            1. Would Warty even want to? I don’t think he likes complainers.

              1. How do you complain with a balled up sock in your mouth?

                1. You’d be surprised.

                  1. mmmmmphh mmmmmphhh mmmmmphhh!! Really isn’t much of a complaint though.

            2. Contest closed: “Mercy-rape” is the 2014 Term of the Year.

              Congrats, Jesse, your prize is a–what was it called?–mercy rape.

              1. It feels good to be a winner!

                1. Is a mercy rape one where you apologize a lot while you’re doing the raping?

        2. It’s hard to believe someone who complains that often would still be a virgin.

        3. Why would you hang out with Bo?

    2. Physicists are smarter than me, but not that guy.

      1. Smart people can have really stupid political opinions.

        1. Yeah. A doctor friend of mine pulls the ‘Mao did some good things’ crap on me.

          But overall, he’s pretty good.

      2. It’s amazing how dumb smart people are at times. It’s something about being told that you’re better than everybody else from age 4 that makes you sympathetic to trying to run other people’s lives.

        1. I used to work with a lot of PhDs (from a variety of disciplines), and very few of them were what I would consider smart when it came to politics or, for that matter, in their personal lives. Not a slam, as some of them were quite brilliant in their disciplines.

          1. That’s the point of it though isn’t it? A PhD is a narrowing of focus. Certainly there is a baseline of rigorous thinking required but, it is by it’s very definition it’s about depth of an increasingly narrow subject not about breadth of competency or knowledge.

            1. Sure. Though I’ve also known PhDs with extremely broad interests. It’s not something that has to be that way. Look at, say, Feynman.

              1. No, I totally agree with you. And if I’d have to make broad generalization I’d say intelligent people often have a wide variety of interests and could bring that intelligence to other subject outside their specialty. However, people often equate a PhD with having a broad knowledge of subjects at large which is exactly not what it means, and they should realize that anyone can be out of their element.

                1. No doubt. In my mind, the true genius is one that has a brilliant way of thinking that cuts across disciplines. He may be mostly smart in one area, but the genius shows in anything he puts his mind to.

                2. However, people often equate a PhD with having a broad knowledge of subjects at large which is exactly not what it means…

                  And all too often those people are the PhDs themselves.

          2. If you want to see the Dunning-Kruger effect at its most startling level, start asking hard-science researchers for their political opinions. The asshole at Pharyngula is far from alone.

            These are people who’ve never read Popper, Hayek, Bastiat, or even Burke, and half of them are ready to run the world for us.

    3. Let me guess…he supports unionization of graduate students, too.

      If six.years on his.undergrad.physics degree because he just.didn’5 las5 year? Fuck, he’s.not.Ph.D. material, that’s for sure. That and he will.never make it. .

      Don’ you, just wwalk.away. if, say you have better.people to listen to than an undergrad who.doesn’t even take classes and plans to mooch off others the rest.of

      Seriously, he deserves a verbal beat down, and.possibly everyone else it too.You will lose nothing by losing him as a “friend,” and gain in the eyes of the.others. no reqson to get angry.or violent, just you have fqr better things

      1. Let me guess…he supports unionization of graduate students, too.

        Why else would it be called a Student Union?

  14. Science was settled:

    One of the largest and most meticulous studies of mammography ever done, involving 90,000 women and lasting a quarter-century, has added powerful new doubts about the value of the screening test for women of any age.

    1. Oh what’s the harm. They’re free, right?

      1. If they come to me, yes they are!

    2. You don’t need a mammogram. You just need a horny guy. He’ll feel around enough that any tumor should become evident.

      1. You see, America? We CAN provide decent jobs for teenagers!

    3. It’s OK.

      TSA will buy the machines.

    4. I didn’t read the article at the link, but I can’t wait to see how many of the TV news reports on the subject are apologetic about any possible confusion caused to women — why are they trying to kill women by suggesting they get fewer mammograms?!?!?!?!!!

  15. We all know about Solyndra. But in Massachusetts, Governor Patrick through away millions at Evergreen. According to Patrick, the state didn’t lose money on the company which went bankrupt:…..vvorF5SKqQ

    Why did Evergreen fail?

    “Extensive competition surely impacted Evergreen but the real reason for their demise is really the same reason that Solyndra declined. They produced a non-standard panel that frankly did not have market acceptance. Evergreen gambled that the cost of silicon would be the single largest driver of solar panel cost and developed a panel, that while less efficient than wafer solar panels, used less silicon in its production and as a result cost them less to produce. The problem was that silicon never dramatically rose in price and so Evergreen was left with a non-standard solar panel that performed below market levels. Shocker that they would have failed.”…..-bankrupt/

    Deval Patrick is a moonbat.

    1. Extensive competition surely impacted Evergreen but the real reason for their demise is really the same reason that Solyndra declined. They produced a non-standard panel that frankly did not have market acceptance.

      So in other words a complete lack of demand.

    2. The problem was that silicon never dramatically rose in price

      Holy fuck.

      Silicon is virtually everywhere. The only thing closer to a bottomless resource would be seawater. The only way price could go up is if production was not high enough to meet demand and any price jump would spur producers to produce more.

      How shit eating stupid do you have to be to base your specialty high tech manufacturing business model on a short term bet on the commodities market?

      1. The same kinds of retards who keep predicting we’ll run out of {oil,natural gas,iron,aluminium,water,etc}.

    3. So they thought that as demand for silicon grew, people wouldn’t come up with new ways to make the second most common substance on the planet viable for production? Peak silicon?

    4. According to Patrick, the state didn’t lose money on the company which went bankrupt:

      It makes more sense when you recognize that when he said the state, Patrick meant Deval Patrick.

      And it says something that your product is less efficient than the standard solar panel, which, prior to Obama’s dour 2013 inauguration, consumed more energy in its production than it would capture in its lifetime.

  16. Man gets job at Apple, then fucks over his recruiter by walking off the job because his boss was a dick to him

    Without so much as a hello, my boss hit me with another weird low-blow insult wrapped up nicely as a joke. I tried to ignore it and get back to work, and I realized I just couldn’t focus at all on my job.
    Then at lunch time I wiped the iPad data clean, put the files I had been working on neatly on the server, left all their belongings on my desk, and I got in my car and drove home. I left a message for my boss and told him he’s the worst boss I had ever encountered in my entire professional career and that I could no longer work under him no matter how good Apple might look on my resume.

    The third party company that contracted me is furious because I’ve jeopardized their relationship with Apple, and of course they feel that I’ve acted highly unprofessionally by walking out. I’m not really proud of myself for doing that, and I do feel terrible for destroying the long relationship I had with the recruiter who helped me land the interview. This is all an especially difficult pill to swallow because I was so excited to work for Apple. I’m not sure if this will haunt me or not, but all I know is that I wanted to work at Apple really bad — and now not so much.

    p.s. I’m currently looking for a new design job. Please contact me if you have one that’s cool.

    1. I can see walking out if the environment is not what you expected, though one would hopefully have figured that out in the interview process. There are a surprising number of little bitches in IT who act like petty tyrants in their positions, and they are not who you want to be working with.

      1. I don’t blame him for quitting if it wasn’t for him, but the way he quit and the tone of his article reeks of entitlement. Not to mention the damage it did to the third party recruiter that got him the job.

        Plus he’s a dumbass since he just put his name on an article that explains why you shouldn’t hire him.

        1. I agree that his way of going about it was dumb, but honestly, if you find out to your chagrin that you’ve suddenly started working for an asshole or assholes, getting out is a good move.

          If he’s an entitled moron, he’ll pay for it no matter what.

        2. Seriously. It’s fine if you realize the job is not for you. There’s no shame in that, and the recruiter shouldn’t blame you for that. But walking out in the middle of a shift like a self-entitled shit makes it terrible.

    2. p.s. I’m currently looking for a new design job. Please contact me if you have one that’s cool.


      Best of luck with that.

      1. I immediately was uneasy about the rigid hours and long commute…

        Just what any prospective employer wants to hear!

        1. Ha! Exactly.

        2. to be fair, in silicon valley tech industry if you have rigid hours for your employees you are competing against a lot of (usually better) companies who don’t.

          Being at the office 9-5 is just silly for tech workers

          1. Point taken, but when you couple that statement with the other stuff in the piece, he sounds like a terrible employee.

      2. I immediately was uneasy about the rigid hours and long commute…

        Just what any prospective employer wants to hear!

      3. Yeah, that got a nice bark of laughter out of me. It is one thing to leave a job because the environment sucks, it is quite another to burn bridges.

        I know.a woman who actually told her.boss, “Fuck you, [boss], I quit!” and stormed out. She spent 1 1/2 years working odd jobs (including construction helper) before she took a basic job paying far.below her.previous.scale doing work totally, mainly because.of market for.her.skills in her geographical area, which she.won’t.move.away.from.

        1. Gotta. Ask. What’s. With. The. Periods?


          1. You try posting from a phone while operating a pavement tamper in the middle of the George Washington Bridge in this weather.

            1. Ah.

          2. Ask your mother.

          3. There are no female libertarians, so db is trying to make up for it.

          4. My guess is he’s having the same problem with me and the iOS7 keyboard. They made the spacebar smaller and I keep doing the same shit.

            1. Maybe you should both be more coordinated. Or not buy jerkPhones. Or be less of jerks in general.

              1. You say that as if it’s not entirely appropriate for me to have a jerkPhone.

                1. Good point, nicole. Thanks for being the worst when I needed you to be.

            2. LG G2 android phone. Key placement and sizing is different than my old phone. I don’t knownif.I’ll ever adjust.

    3. This fucking idiot. He didn’t just burn two bridges, he may have jeopardized his chances at any decent career. Welcome to the bottom of the barrel, kid.

    4. I’ve done that. I think I lasted four weeks. But the boss who usually shielded me from the owner went on vacation. Fuck that guy. He came in every two hours every day for a week to get me to drop everything to work on his problem of the moment. Then spent 15 minutes on Friday morning berating me for my lack of progress. I told him I obviously wasn’t the guy for him, that I hoped he’d find someone who could meet his needs, told him I expected my last paycheck to be postmarked with the next day’s date, and left.

      With a decade more experience, now I’d probably just tell him to shut the fuck up and stay out of my office if he wanted things done and 50/50 he’d do just that or fire me and I could collect unemployment in the week it would take me to start my next job.

      1. Yep, generally better fired fromba jobblike that than quit, unless your and you want to remain in that field/geographical area.

        1. Meeesa quitta fromba Jabba the Hutt, no jobblike.

    5. How hard it is to give your two weeks?

      Why burn bridges when you can simply lie?

      “My dad died and it changed my view on my life’s direction”

      Instead of “Your a dick boss and I want you to know that so you can fuck up my career later.”

      1. On your first day? Just leave politely.

    6. This guys problem is he never said a word about the issues with his contracting agency or Apple HR.

      LONG before it got to that point he should have been on the phone about his bosses unprofessional behavior and his agency should have been made aware that he was going to leave if things did not straighten up quickly

      He should also have filed a complaint about unprofessional behavior with the HR department long before he left, appraised them of the fact that it either failed to stop or he was being retaliated against for speaking up, then when he left he should have sent a letter directly to his contract agency and HR ONLY, nothing directly to the boss stating that the unprofessional behavior of his producer had made his continued employment there no longer tennable and as such he was terminating his relationship with apple immediately.

      Still, I have a hard time faulting him for his complaints, even the “entitlement issues” like objecting to rigid hours and the long commute. He didn’t say he wasn’t willing or able to deal with them, just that they were issues of concern for him given how much of the tech industry had adopted flexible schedules and frequently working from home

    7. If you want to kill some brain cells, read the comments. Some retired hippy is saying “YOU NEED A UNION!”. And of course they all agree.

  17. In The Simpsons Movie, there’s an ominous NSA scene. The film was made, what, in 2007? Which suggests to me NSA was always spying on Americans or others. So how are NSA’s actions or transgressions different under Obama?

    1. Well, unless you want your name to become Dufus J. Firefly, then I’m pretty sure that a D is a very different letter than an R.

      1. is that an insult of some sort?

    2. The Simpsons also posited that Major League Baseball was spying on Americans. 😉

      1. They gave it up after the Sox won the series.

    3. The baby did it.

    4. 3 problems with this.

      1) Drawing conclusions about what the government was or wasn’t doing from the Simpsons probably isn’t a very valid approach to the world.

      2) The NSA’s technical capabilities have evolved significantly in the last 6 years, like by several orders of magnitude. Obama has also shown even less concern for Constitutional niceties than Bush so things they could only dream of a decade ago are now routine.

      3) Does it really matter? Wrong is wrong and we can’t fix the past. It is utterly irrelevant what kind of spying the government was doing under Bush and Clinton, even if it was worse than what is happening today (it isn’t), all that really matters is what they are doing today and what they are doing is wrong and therefore must be opposed and stopped.

  18. “Harry Reid (D-Nev.) urged Republican senators to reject their ‘Tea Party overlords.'”

    I’ve got a better idea. How bout we reject our D.C. overlords.

    1. Lewis the Dauphin: For the Dauphin, I stand here for him: what to him from England?

      Duke of Exeter: Scorn and defiance; slight regard, contempt,
      And any thing that may not misbecome
      The mighty sender, doth he prize you at.
      Thus says my king; an’ if your father’s highness
      Do not, in grant of all demands at large,
      Sweeten the bitter mock you sent his majesty,
      He’ll call you to so hot an answer of it,
      That caves and womby vaultages of France
      Shall chide your trespass and return your mock
      In second accent of his ordnance.

      Reid better go find some womby vaultages to hide in, because I think some Tea Partiers are coming to the Senate to kick a lot of his fellow-travelers out.

    2. It is exceedingly weird that Nevada is a Ron Paul stronghold on the one hand and the state that consistently elects Harry Reid on the other.

  19. Why the hell doesn’t the alt text say “Tea party overlord”?

  20. Judge George O’Toole said he believed a trial date this November was “realistic and fair”, despite defence lawyers arguing they needed more time to prepare their case.

    Would one of our resident legal-beagles *kindly* explain why TF it takes so long to prepare these cases?

    Seriously, is it bullshit like tracking down the babysitter who may have spanked him and set him on the road to perdition?

    1. Considering the police shutdown one of the biggest cities in the U.S., engaged in a massive manhunt, and captured the suspect after a shootout, I imagine there is a little bit of evidence to go over. Every officer would’ve generated a report, there would be videos and witness statements, and all that is just the stuff generated by the government. The defense will need to interview witnesses, look for other witnesses that the govt has overlooked, and try to find any evidence that casts doubt on the govt’s case.

      Tracking down the character witnesses is a thing, too, but that’s more for sentencing.

  21. Deja vu all over again: Washington math teacher faces charges for sexual conduct with two teenage students

    A 24-year-old high school teacher has confessed to performing sex acts with multiple students, one as young as 15 years old, inside her locked classroom, as well as sending them sexualized pictures of herself.

    Meredith Powell, of Tacoma, Washington, allegedly is accused of sending three male students inappropriate pictures of herself in a bathtub, as well as engaging in sex acts with two of the students, police said.

    Powell, a math teacher at Lincoln High School, pleaded not guilty on Friday to two counts of third-degree child rape and one count of communication with a minor for immoral purposes for alleged inappropriate conduct with three students, according to The News Tribune.

    Tacoma police began investigating this week after learning that Powell wrote a letter to one of the boy’s girlfriends apologizing for ‘promiscuous’ and ‘unprofessional’ drunken text messages she exchanged with one of the boys.

    Powell was arrested on Thursday and placed on unpaid leave.

    Don’t blame the ‘victims’ one bit, but she doesn’t seem too smart. Also paid administrative leave is apparently reserved for the police guild.

    1. Remember though. as the guy who does instapundit says, men can’t be teachers because there is too much risk of them being sexual predators.

      And of course, the Catholic Church is the biggest source of sex abuse in this country not the public schools.

      1. Glenn Reynolds says that?

        1. Yes. He says it sarcastically every time there is a sex scandal involving a female teacher.

          Sorry I forgot the sarc tags.

          1. I figured that’s what you meant shortly after I posted. Time to recalibrate.

    2. Remember: men make horrible teachers because they are rapey.

    3. If there was ever a word that needed a scare quote, it’s ‘victims’ in this story. I’m sure they’re traumatized…

    4. *looks at teacher pics*


      1. Warty, you do realize those are not cats, right?

      2. Teacher needs to see me after school.

      3. Yep, throw out the case!

    5. Whenever I see these stories I try to think of what would’ve happened to me if a hot teacher* would’ve come on to me when I was, say, 15, and I would’ve succumbed to her advances?

      No matter how much I think about it, from my perspective, I really can’t see any downside.

      1. Well if she got caught there could have been downside as you would have had to deal with everyone freaking out, half the people telling you it was wrong and (and depending on your self confidence levels maybe wondering if there was something wrong with you for liking something supposedly so wrong).

        If she didn’t I agree, I can’t really think of a downside.

        1. If she didn’t I agree, I can’t really think of a downside.

          Child support?

    6. She was just teaching them how to multiply

  22. Obamacare lawlessness charge sticks
    …The Post’s editorial board explains just how indefensible is the president’s “increasingly cavalier approach to picking and choosing how to enforce this law.” They warn Obama supporters: “Imagine how Democrats would respond if a President Rand Paul, say, moved into the White House in 2017 and announced he was going to put off provisions of Obamacare he thought might be too onerous to administer. ? The law is also explicit that the government should be enforcing penalties already; that’s the plainest interpretation of Congress’s intent. The administration shouldn’t dismiss that without exceptionally good reason. Fear of a midterm shellacking doesn’t qualify as good reason.” …

    1. In a recent WaPo comments section, there were numerous defenses of Obama, because there’s a clause in the law that says he can modify things. But is that legal?

      I mean, can laws say, in effect, “Tax this, subsidize that, create this bureaucracy, create this crime, and by the way, the President can change all this as he sees fit?”

      I want a lawsuit about this, more than I want a lawsuit about the NSA.

      1. …there’s a clause in the law that says he can modify things. But is that legal?

        Well… first, who read the whole thing… but it is my understanding that there are some dates which can be modified and that is written into the law.

        But the dates Obama is pushing back are not part of those pieces.

        As to whether it’s “legal” – so long as it’s written in the law, I guess by definition it is legal.

        But Obama is pushing back mandates and such which have no legal basis through either precedence nor in the language of the law itself – this is illegal.

        Just like his rewriting of bankruptcy law, attempted rewriting of union laws (NLRB suits), etc, etc, etc.

        He doesn’t care and neither do his supporters – all that matters is that they are all good people (meaning they all agree on a variety of things, many of which are contradictory, but since they know all good people think that way…).

        1. Why don’t Republicans (or anybody else) care enough to sue?

    2. Eh, they’re owned by Bezos now. Wake me up when the NY Times publishes a similar article.

      1. Yeah but they are the NYT’s retarded beltway cousin. If Wapo ever starts being honest, that will be a big deal.

  23. French media reports that the White House, that bastion of free press and openness, is upset that French journalists took unauthorized selfies

    White House officials were not amused when French journalists took advantage of President Francois Hollande’s Washington visit to take “selfies” in the Oval Office.

    Canal Plus reporter Laurence Haim said irritated White House staff told the journalists it was “not the done thing” to take a picture of oneself with a mobile phone with two heads of state in the president’s official office.

    One particular picture was doing the rounds of French media outlets on Wednesday, showing Thomas Wieder, a reporter at respected French daily Le Monde, grinning broadly as he took a “selfie” with Hollande and US leader Barack Obama in the distant background.

    But if White House officials were annoyed at the self-indulgent behaviour of some French journalists in the Oval Office, Obama himself is no stranger to the “selfie” photographic phenomenon.

    The American president made his own headlines in December 2013 when he was caught on camera posing for a “selfie” with Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt and her UK counterpart David Cameron at the memorial service for former South African president Nelson Mandela.

    Capturing an unauthorized image of the king? That’s practically blasphemy!

    1. That selfie is great. Looks like two other journalists are doing the same thing. He even got the “annoyed staffer” in frame.

    2. They get excited around Americans and then go back to bashing them at home.

  24. Sid Caesar dies at 91

    Way, way before my time, but how many reason articles for Mr. Caesar?

    1. I never thought he was funny. I guess I am just too Midwestern to get the borsch circuit.

      1. Whether you do or not, his comedy tree is tremendous: Brooks, Allen, Simon, Reiner, Gelbart, and so on.

        1. Yeah. He was the Adolph Rupp of comedians.

      2. As I understand it, Your Show of Shows was the precusor to both variety shows and stuff like SNL.

        Also, Mel Brooks wrote for him. In fact, as I recall, Your Show of Shows had a stacked writers room. According to wiki:

        Writers for the series included Mel Brooks, Neil Simon, Danny Simon, Mel Tolkin, Larry Gelbart and Carl Reiner who, though a cast member, also worked with the writers.

        1. I know he was important. But the clips I have seen just don’t seem that funny.

          1. Humor has evolved over the years, and what they usually did for general public consumption was seriously neutered. Even the Carol Burnett Show drags. Where you really saw these guys shine was at stuff like roasts where they could be as crass as they wanted.

            1. Yeah. Of course Carol did a lot of shows and had to fill a lot of time. A lot of it is still funny.

              But you are right, some of the roasts and such were funny as hell. Don Richols was and I assume is pretty much the king of that kind of stuff. No one can insult people like him.

              1. Did you ever see the clip when Triumph met Don Rickles?

              2. The Carol Burnett Show aged fairly well. I find it funny. Strong line up.

      3. It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, World

        He and Edie Adams stuck in the hardware store basement is comedy gold. The first scene after Intermission is a lighted fuse, which brings the viewer back into the whole mood.

        I admit, some of the old-style Borsch Belt stuff is a bit dated but you can’t discount his contribution to the next generation of comedy (Brooks, Simon, among others).

        91 was a good run.

        … Hobbit

    2. I think the only thing I saw him in was Vegas Vacation

      1. A movie that is in part about him that I like very much is My Favorite Year. It stars a great Peter O’Toole, too.

    3. He’s the one I most closely identified with in Mad World. He starts off so rational and methodical and completely loses it by the end.

  25. If I’m ever lucky enough to move to a rural area, I sure will miss grocery delivery. No long Snowasaurus checkout lines for me! Although Safeway failed to deliver beef broth and Annie Chun’s dumplings.

    1. Amen. I hate going to the grocery store. My wife is too cheap to get it delivered. So I refuse to go with her. What an awful experience it is.

      1. I go grocery shopping just for fun. What’s not to like?

        1. Some people love it. My dad loves it. But to me it is just a pain.

    2. Where I come from, grocery delivery is.for the.infirm, the lazy, and the rich. Where “the rich”=your daddy’s boss or anyone who wears a white hard had or who earns more than about $50,000/year.

      1. Here it’s for people who hate people.

      2. Here in Seattle we had (and have) the advent of Amazon Local, so people can get grocery delivery very easily and cheaply. I am far too anal about my produce and meat to use it, though. I have to fondle my food before I buy it. There’s nothing wrong with that!

        1. My cucumber. It’s bigger than that. Vegetables can be really sensuous, don’t you think?

    3. I will have to look into that the next time I move somewhere. Never really realized it was a thing outside of stuff like Amazon Fresh.

      How do you set it up?

      1. Here in DC both Safeway and Giant (via Peapod) have delivery. You just go on their web sites and pick a delivery time and shop like you would on any other web site. I would guess Amazon also has delivery here, but I haven’t tried it. You pay by credit card online and don’t tip the drivers. Giant also offers curbside service here.

        1. Why don’t you tip the drivers?

          1. It’s not allowed by the grocery companies, and I don’t keep cash around to slip them any under the table.

    4. Can they get you the plums with the red on the inside?

    5. If I’m ever lucky enough to move to a rural area, I sure will miss grocery delivery.

      Walmart is open late. I have come to enjoy tooling around a mostly empty Walmart at 11PM….plus you will be driving a 4X4.

    6. I love grocery shopping, especially with my wife.

      Of course, I live in rural Waltons-ville, MI, where going to the grocery store doesn’t involve any traffic or other hassle, and you can move around the store without feeling like you’re in a living People of WalMart experiment, etc. etc.

      Someone to deliver my shit? Nope – don’t think so. Plus, like Epi, I gotta touch my meat…

      1. Yeah, the grocery store is pure hell for me. All these fucking idiots milling around, not moving fast enough, not getting out of your way, AND THEY CAN ALL VOTE. Also, the most efficient way to have a line is one line feeding multiple checkouts, motherfuckers at the self-check. Yeah that is just not a place for me to go. Peapod 4 life!

        1. The solution is to get a Costco membership. The membership fee keeps out some of the retards, but more importantly, you only need to go once a week. I don’t shop for groceries, I obtain provisions.

          1. Warty needs to buy his 40-packs of Vaseline and Rockstar in bulk.

            1. Don’t forget my full ribeye roasts and 20 rotisserie chickens.

          2. The lines at our local Costco are absurd. Very often you spend more time waiting in line than you do shopping.

            1. Every Costco I’ve ever been to is staffed with relentlessly competent checkout people. Maybe they just go slow for you because they hate you. Which they should.

              1. Of course they should, but all that waiting hinders everyone else in the store too. You’d think they’d be competent enough to come up with a better plan.

                1. You guys are completely missing the point. Costco is for poor people. What possible reason could compel you to shop there?

          3. Costco is not always that great for apartment living. Although I have a bigger place now. But I have a man do this shit for me anyway.

        2. See, db? It’s for people who hate people, like Nikki and myself!

          1. I see. In fact, on my way home today, I was behind a Schwan’s delivery truck.

            I have always thought that name was hilariously chosen, considering the lore concerning home delivery drivers and housewives.

    7. The only other thing I’d be sad about if I moved rural is no more Ethiopian food. Though I suppose I could learn to cook it and order my injera and berbere online.

      1. There’s an Ethiopian place here, too. Yummy.

        1. Mmmmm One of the few things I miss about Louisville is Queen of Sheba. There are a couple of Ethiopian places (as well as an Eretrian place which is similar) in and around Cambridge but that is 20 miles from me and parking hell.

          It is kinda wierd that if you exclude Chinatown there is better Ethnic food in Lousiville Ky than there is in Boston Ma (and I am speaking about the entire metro areas, not just the cities proper)

          1. That’s funny, because I the place here we go to is called. . .Queen of Sheba. Kind of an obvious name for an Ethiopian restaurant, I suppose.

            Tampa is a good town for ethnic cuisine. DC is, too, or, at least, it used to be. I suppose that makes sense, given all the international representation there.

            My wife and I found an Indian restaurant that may be our favorite in Boone, North Carolina. Go figure.

      2. Ethiopian food

        Sand? A piece of rice stuck sideways in your throat?


        1. Never heard that one before! 🙂

        2. You’re channeling Sam Kinison. And he was right, except that he was also wrong, because those that eat there eat well.

    8. This is why God invented Peapod.

    9. They always leave at least one thing off and that’s why we don’t do it. I need that one thing and if I have to drive to the store to get that one thing, getting delivery is pointless.

    10. Schwan’s was made for rural areas. Although Im not sure if thats still a thing. I remember they came to our house twice a month when I was a kid.

    1. Snow is white. Q.E.D.

    2. Watch out for that black ice.

      Just sayin’.

      1. The first thing I think about after I wreck my car from driving over black ice is what a racist I am for not seeing it.

        1. I know.

          And all the patches look pretty much alike.

    3. My understanding is that there is a major highway that circles Atlanta and its speed limit is like 45 and everyone drives 70.

      The snow-grid-lock is probably because everyone is for the first time driving the speed limit.

      1. There were a lot of problems with hills and overpasses, too. People not realizing that they weren’t going to make the top on an icy hill or bridge, nor be able to decelerate on the way down.

      2. If you boil the article down, it is:

        1. People got stuck in cars because no choo-choo
        2. No choo-choo because racism

        Therefore, traffic jams caused by weather are racist.

        1. Well the no choo-choo because of racisim thing is actually real.

          The folks in Gwinnett and Dekalb counties are violently opposed to commuter rain being extended from Funton county out to them because they believe it will bring criminals out to their upper middle class suburbs

          1. And that’s racist? There aren’t more violent criminals in those counties than their suburbs? They just think there are because of the majority race of the inhabitants? No crime stats at all to back that up?

    4. I thought it was because people are such big pussies that they can’t deal with a light dusting of snow. It’s comical.

    5. Well, it wasn’t freezing in Atlanta when General Sherman…

      “Shut up about General Sherman already!”

  26. Ohio woman legally changes her name to ‘Sexy Crabtree’

    An Ohio lady legally changed her name from Sheila to Sexy in court just after 10 a.m. Tuesday.

    “That was the last piece I needed for my life to feel complete, kind of like a puzzle,” Sexy Ranea Crabtree told the Daily News. “That’s all I needed, to get rid of that ugly name ? thankfully I’m rid of it for good!”

    Crabtree, of Pataskala, Ohio, was terrified on her way to the Licking County courthouse because she heard that judges are not required to grant name-change requests.

    “I told my husband privately that I would refuse to leave without a name change,” she said.

    But the judge only had a few questions for Crabtree. Chief among them was why she wanted that name in particular.

    She explained: “I’m a free-spirited person. I like to have a lot of fun and just enjoy my life.” And with that, Sheila officially became Sexy.

    I don’t know about you, but the name Sexy sound incongruous with the word “Crab” in her last name.

    1. She’d better not talk about Richard Sherman, damn it!

    2. “I’ll need to see you in my quarters later, Sexy.”

      1. Quarter s/b “chambers.”

    3. Don’t come at me with that sorry name change.

    4. In Australia she would be changing it from Sexy to Sheila.

      1. Jemaine: I’m not sure I got your name.

        Aussie girl: It’s Keitha.

        Jemaine: … Pardon?

        Keitha: Keitha.

        Jemaine: (Confused) Keitha?

        Keitha: Yeah, it’s like Keith. But with an ‘a’ at the end. I was named after mi’dad.

        Jemaine: Umm…

        Bret: She’s got a man’s name!

        1. She sounds like Marilyn Monroe.

          Yeah, I guess… if you squint your ears.

    5. Next thing you know, she’ll be suing her boss for sexual harassment because he kept calling her sexy.

  27. How to rebut common pro-gun arguments

    Pro-gun argument: “The assault weapon law wouldn’t have stopped Newtown” or other claims that one particular law wouldn’t have prevented one particular crime.

    Say . . .
    But we don’t make any laws that way. The law against murder doesn’t stop all murders; we don’t expect it to. The law that lowered the blood alcohol level for driving didn’t stop all drunk driving; we didn’t expect it to. The question is not whether this law would have certainly stopped any particular crime, it is whether our communities would be safer with this law.

    1. Ooh, my favorite:

      Pro-gun argument: “The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”

      Say . . .
      It just doesn’t work. Columbine High School had an armed deputy sheriff. Virginia Tech had an entire police force, including a SWAT team. At the Tucson shooting, not only was there an armed civilian who failed to stop the shooter, but he almost shot one of the brave unarmed people who tackled and disarmed the shooter. The Fort Hood massacre happened at a military base filled with soldiers. President Reagan and his press secretary Jim Brady were surrounded by armed police and Secret Service, and yet both were shot. Let’s get back to the real debate.

      Why . . .

      You could also say that in all the mass shootings over the past 30 years, not one of them was stopped by a civilian with a gun. But again, the important thing is to return the debate to the actual legislation. Nothing in that legislation prevents any “good guy” from getting a gun.

      1. You could also say that in all the mass shootings over the past 30 years, not one of them was stopped by a civilian with a gun

        Patently false, but the BAN BONER crowd is too stupid to realize that their beloved media suppresses stories like that, so the morons think those things haven’t happened.

        1. Don’t bother him with facts Episiarch.

          And whatever you do don’t point out that if someone with a gun stops a mass shooting from ever starting, it won’t be a mass shooting.

          He has feelings and don’t other him with your bourgeois logic and facts.

          1. And whatever you do don’t point out that if someone with a gun stops a mass shooting from ever starting, it won’t be a mass shooting.

            That was my first thought on that one as well. Who are these people arguing with that they think that these logic-devoid arguments hold any weight at all? 2nd graders?

            1. Other people who are that stupid I guess.

            2. Yep, my first thought too. I had a very McBain reaction. Mass shootings aren’t stopped by civilians with guns? That’s the joke point.

      2. Can we get back to the issue?why do you think we should be selling these guns and magazines to any adult, no questions asked?

        Can we get back to the real issue?why do you think I think we should be selling these guns and magazines to any adult, no questions asked?

        1. Can we get back to the real issue?why do you think we should care at all what anyone else buys from a willing seller?

      3. Arrrrgggg!!! The stupid is just painful! In relation to the Ft. Hood shooting… soldiers do not walk around on base with firearms. Hell on every base I was ever stationed on even the on-duty Military Police keep their weapons unloaded, gun on one hip ammo on the other.

        Privately owned firearms MUST be kept under lock and key in the armory with all of the government issued weapons.

        …ignorant ass-clowns.

    2. 1, The murder law may not stop all murders but we expect it to stop some murders.

      2. We don’t have murder laws just to stop murders. We have them so the state can do justice for the victim. That justification is not applicable to gun laws since there is no victim from the act of owning a gun.

      If a law can’t be justified by providing justice for the victim, it must be justified by preventing some harm. Therefore, whether gun laws actually prevent harm is a very relevant consideration in a way that it never will be with murder laws.

    3. Pro-gun argument: “Gun possession doesn’t increase your chances of suicide.”

      Do… Place a gun to your temple. Pull the trigger. BOOM. Drop Mic.

  28. Now Sid Caesar too?


    That is all

  30. Drove Louisville to BG today. As I went by the Vette Museum, I drove in the far left lane, just to be safe.

  31. Hell yeah

    No murder charge for man who fatally shot Texas deputy
    Deputy was shot after entering a home with other officers looking for guns and marijuana

    1. First time ever in Texas, I believe.

      1. There was a thread on that a few days ago. There was a link to Police One. The butt hurt on Police One over this is epic. They ended up banning a bunch of accounts because people were trolling the hell out of them.

  32. I posted this in AM Links yesterday and only John cared (because he’s awesome; also because I was late), but y’all should see the Chicago Reader on Dismantling the stigma of guns.

    The first lesson Gerald Vernon shared with his conceal-and-carry class is, to him, the most fundamental: “The only thing that stops bad people with guns is good people with guns.”

    His ten students?eight men and two women, all African-Americans?were listening intently. They had gathered in a meeting room at a south-side social service center to learn about gun ownership and self-defense from Vernon, a veteran firearms instructor who was seated at the front of the room next to a table set with an array of revolvers and semiautomatic handguns from his collection.

    The students didn’t appear to need any convincing. “I’m interested in protection,” explained Thomas Brandon, 57, when it was his turn to introduce himself. The others said they were there for the same reason.

    “Over the last 20 years, I’ve been places I don’t think a lot of other black people have been,” he told the class. “I’ve spent a lot of time and a lot of money traveling the country and getting this training so I could bring it back to the community.”

    He added: “Most of what Americans know about guns they learned from TV and the movies, and 99 percent of it is wrong.”

    & lots more

    1. And I will say it again.

      That guy really is out there doing God’s work in some of America’s toughest neighborhoods.

    2. “The only thing that stops bad people with guns is good people with guns.”

      But the counter-gun arguments upthread TOTALLY REFUTE THIS!


    3. Good for him.

    4. I cared. I just didnt respond. Because curling.

    5. This obsession with having and using guns, and willful ignoring of the “well-organized militia” part of the Second Amendment (setting the right to bear arms in the context of an actual militia, not individual ownership) is a national mental illness. I may never understand it.

      You don’t say.

      1. Hey, he lives in my neighborhood! Fucker.

        1. It’s my new favorite incredibly dumb phrase. Why do you knowingly live so close to such a megadipshit? I may never understand it.

          1. Well I didn’t know it until like 20 minutes ago.

            1. That’s not an excuse.

              1. Can’t you just be happy for her that she’s getting married? She’s experiencing the greatest joy a woman can feel: worshiping some low-life jerk.

                1. Plus I hugged him today with his carry gun on for the first time and it was SO HOT YOU GUYS.

      2. Nothing says militia like asking permission from a distant bureaucrat if, how, and when you’re allowed to defend yourself.

    6. Don’t a lot of Black Americans join the military?

      It is weird that this has not already happened through osmosis from black vets.

      Then again maybe black vets end up in the suburbs.

    7. also because I was late

      You’re preggers?

    8. For those who don’t know, the McDonald of the case that brought handgun ownership back to Chicago was an older black dude on the South Side too.

    9. He voted against Mitt Romney in the last presidential election?though he can’t quite bring himself to admit that he cast a ballot for President Obama.

      Bitch, he voted for Gary Johnson.

  33. That is one fucked up dance move —

    1. Um, hellloooooooooooo – WHITE GUY.


      1. THAT’S RACI . . . oh, white. Nevermind.

    2. PS I’m glad you don’t have to be on the run any more, k

      1. It was good for my figure to be on the run, but I’m happy to be settled in, too.

  34. The faces in my fries have stopped yelling ‘who wants cake?’.

    Now they’re whispering ‘Remake of “The Princess Bride”, but with a steampunk aesthetic.’

    1. I read that as “The feces in my fries…”

      Now I’m questioning everything.

      1. Strangely enough, that’s what I originally wrote, before proof-reading.

      2. “The farts in my cake, the feces in my fries” …. Soon you’re talking real perversion.

  35. Has anyone had experience being married to a progressive/feminist? My significant other is a “moderate” progressive/feminist (that is, she likes Jezebel but is not a radfem) and we often get into serious disagreements about politics/feminism. I hate those disagreements because she inevitably gets emotional about it and it stops being an intellectual discussion and turns into a fight. I am seriously concerned about the long-term implications of this. We’ve been dating for nearly 3 years now and it’s about that time to either get engaged or end it for good. Has anyone been able to make it work? How do you get around it?

    1. My wife is somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun, so – no, and good luck!

      Now that I’ve finally got her shooting guns (20+ years of marriage to get to that point), things are getting better and better…

      1. My wife can watch political news for all of 30 seconds before screaming “fuck you, spend your own money” at the TV.

        1. What a woman!

    2. Leave her. Now. You idiot.

      But do it in a fun way. Smack her in the face with an enormous dildo that has I’M DUMPING YOU written all over it, something like that.

      1. Warty’s inimitable good cheer conceals some solid advice.

    3. I was involved with a European (Catalonian) for a while, and she was very pro-socialized medicine and other stuff. We just didn’t argue about it, because after an initial discussion or two, we realized it just wasn’t productive and agreed to give each others’ beliefs space. We didn’t end up working out but it wasn’t because of politics.

      You can do it if you are serious about not arguing about this stuff.

      1. I keep trying to tell myself that it’s not that important, but unfortunately I can’t keep my mouth shut and neither can she. It’s part of who we are. I’d like to go to Cato University or on the reason cruise or to other events someday, but that’s something I suspect I wouldn’t be able to do.

        1. If neither of you can stop getting into it, you…have a problem. It’s possible you can make it work but you’d have to both be people who can argue about something and then just fucking drop it. Like, really, actually drop it.

          If you can’t, you might want to start thinking about getting out.

          1. We are generally good about dropping it after the fight and not having it carry over into other areas (which I am thankful for). But the arguments still occur. And I don’t like it, which is why I’m not sure about it.

            1. Well, my advice (take with a grain of salt) is that if you’re already having worries about this stuff, just get the fuck out. But I am admittedly a person who prefers to just cut my losses and try to avoid any kind of sunk cost fallacy in my life. You have to determine for yourself if you want to make it work. If you don’t, or think you can’t, the sooner you reset your life, the better.

        2. I suspect the greater issue is the fact that she resorts to emotional warfare when the discussion doesn’t lean her way… run like hell you stupid fuck.

          You’re welcome.

    4. Can’t you ask for advice on easier subjects like how to get someone to stop being gay or how to get the Jews and Arabs to stop hating each other?

      1. Ha. I liked that one almost as much as your meme-launching “there’s no sugar coating it…”

        1. Thanks. And I am not kidding below when I say that the only thing worse than losing an argument with a woman is winning one. If you win they get resentful and plot their revenge. If you lose they feel vindicated and lord it over you, but at least they don’t plot revenge.

          1. Bob Heinlein: “If you find yourself winning an argument with your woman, apologize immediately, then shut up.”

    5. My dad did. But he’s been legally deaf since he was a kid. So he just turns the gain down on the hearing aids.

    6. Just remember one thing. The only thing worse than losing an argument against a wife or girlfriend is winning one.

      It is like war games. The only way to win is not to play. Seriously, either figure out a way to not talk about the subjects or don’t do it because she will make your life hell.

      1. “The only way to win is not to play”

        I did this when I came to the realization I didn’t give a fuck about my wife (lefter 15 years ago). Oh how she tried to fight, but I just ignored it. Got to the point where she was dredging up stuff that had been argued years earlier with the hope that I would take the bait. Really pissed her off to the point of her being totally irrational. Threw. the. bitch. out.

        1. You stopped playing. There is no winning. Either figure out a way to not argue or get a new wife like you did.

    7. I haven’t been married. I have dated a progressive woman and other left leaning women, but no one that openly called herself a feminist.

      Based on those experiences, if I date any woman that fits in those categories, I’m going to keep it casual. Their beliefs and values are too different from mine. As I approach middle-age, life is too short to try and convert someone like that to a way of thinking more palatable to me.

      Your mileage may vary, but I fear your relationship is doomed unless one of you changes. Getting engaged and married don’t fix problems, if anything the problems get worse. Good luck.

      1. Thanks. This is what I am afraid of. I can see us being happy for a while, but one of us is going to make a choice to live in a city we wouldn’t otherwise live in, and take jobs we otherwise wouldn’t, and I could see one of us really regretting that choice a few years down the line. I’m not saying it would happen for sure, but I can see it.

        1. but one of us is going to make a choice to live in a city we wouldn’t otherwise live in

          That’s a red flag for me. If I can’t agree with a woman on where to live, then she and I are done.

      2. What I’ve found, that is absolutely maddening, is that most women who have any conservative leanings tend to be the “praise jebus” sort… and I’m not sure which is harder for me to deal with. Overly emotional feminist-hypocrite or religious-moon-bat…

    8. If she’s going to make the personal political to where you can’t be yourself or enjoy the things that you enjoy without her reading some feminist victim bullshit into it, then you can’t change her and you’d be doing both of yourselves a favor by ending it.

      But if you simply have different views on abstract political subjects that don’t pop up in your daily life, have a talk with her where you explain that you love her and don’t want something petty like politics to come between you two. I’m sure you could work something out if she’s willing to be reasonable.

      1. It comes up the worst with the feminist crap. When it comes to econ we usually (sometimes) will agree to disagree, but when it comes to feminism, it gets personal.

        Example- we both happen to know personally the AEI intern who wrote an article disagreeing with the campus rape epidemic, which was posted and discussed here when Jezebel started shrieking (PB’ing?) about it. I thought the article was well reasoned and made some great points. She thought it was awful and sided with Jezebel (though noted the tone of the Jezebel article was awful). I sided with my friend (the AEI intern). It did not go well.

    9. Ouch. You know, ultimately the political belief system comes from being a disagreeable and likely horrible, at least on the inside to oneself, person. Maybe she has some redeeming qualities to counter the ugliness there that make her worth the time you have invested in her. Perhaps, suggest she go to a therapist to resolve personal issues that drive her personality. If she becomes aware of those matters, and brings them under control, her disgusting ideology will take care of itself because she’ll become a more beautiful person.

    10. Let me just remind you of something. Men marry women and hope they will never change, but women marry men and try their damnedest to change them. Even if YOU agree to disagree about politics, she will very likely never stop prodding that sore.

    11. Well, I’m not married, and my fianc? is a libertarian, so our political disagreements are pretty minor, but I feel like after three years you probably already know the answer to this question. One thing I would think about is, if you do get married and potentially have kids, how are your differences going to affect rearing them? But I think it also makes a lot of sense to talk to her about this in a meta way: “Look, I know we disagree on politics. We’ve made it work for three years, but this is hard on me and I’m sure it’s hard on you and I think we need a better solution than fighting and making up over and over.” Maybe it doesn’t bother her at all that you disagree but she wants to keep certain topics off-limits because she doesn’t want to fight, but maybe you feel it’s too much of a burden to keep those topics off-limits for the rest of your life. I’m really on board with trying to talk this stuff out.

      And ask questions about feelings. How do you feel when we argue about this? How do you feel about the fact that we move from intellectual discussion to emotional argument? Etc. Yeah I know that sounds gay but you gotta talk to your girl and as it turns out feelings are actually important.

      1. Wait, is this ‘womansplaining’?

        1. I’ve had to teach myself how not to be a robot.


            1. Don’t forget about the tea. That shit is vital.


      2. I brought it up again last night, I think I need to continue to do it.

        “But maybe you feel it’s too much of a burden to keep those topics off limits for the rest of your life.”

        I am afraid this is the case.

    12. I am seriously concerned about the long-term implications of this.

      Couples fight. It is healthy and normal and if your fights center around something with no real stakes (politics/feminism) rather then something with real stakes (money) you should consider yourself lucky.

      Just be sure to fuck and/or blow her 3 to 4 times a week and you should be fine.

      1. Yeah that’s a good point. You don’t want to drive yourself up the wall, of course, but I mean, would you rather be fighting about whether you’re going to have kids and how much you’re going to spend on this that and the other?

      2. Also i think the jezebel thing has to do more with women at a certain age.

        Is you GF in her 20s early 30s?

        I looked at the demographics of jezebel and discovered that not only is all women who read it (no surprise) but that the age is actually lower then readers of Kotaku which is gawker’s videogame website.

        She will probably outgrow it.

        1. This is also very true.

        2. Yeah that is hopefully true. She’s seen the light on things like school choice. She’s started to recognize how awful it is. Maybe I souled be hopeful.

    13. My wife generally votes Democrat. (Her father likes to engage in quixotic campaigns.) It has not been a problem for us, but that brings me to my advice about marriage:

      If it’s a problem before your wedding day, it’s a problem after your wedding day.

    14. My wife is not exactly a progressive or radical feminist but she shares a few beliefs in common with them, especially around issues like rape culture and gender wage inequality.

      The biggest fight we have had this year was over the Jamus Winston case when I dared to state that Winston probably raped the girl and probably should have served time if it weren’t for the police fuckups in the case but that at the same time he probably was telling the truth and didn’t believe that he raped her and so the time should be minimal.

      My wife exploded on me for having the audacity to believe that there was no difference between a date rapist and a violent predator.

      She even brought up the “what if it was one of our daughters” cannard, of course by that point I was down to monosyllabic answers because her brain had shut down and I knew there was no further point in discussing the issue or I would have brought out the “what if it was one of our sons retort”

      1. Always fun when dealing with someone whose “reptilian brain” overpowered the rational mind during a heated discussion…

    15. First wife. UW English Lit major. I plead “little head doing the thinking,” since she was varsity basketball and volleyball and in GREAT shape. She got me a copy of Barry Goldwater’s autobiography for my birthday one year, then after I was done, she started reading it. She was horrified to discover that what he said made a lot of sense, so she refused to finish it, threw it away, then filed for divorce.

      1. Jesus.

        UW Madison? Or Washington? I went to Madison.

    16. Thanks to all who responded.

  36. Anyone have any good recommendations for reading about the history of the Soviet Union? I’m looking for something pretty broad in scope, but not necessarily “pop history”, if you catch my drift. I’m a history buff but have little background in Russia specifically. I’m most interested in the period spanning the revolution through WWII.

    Any good suggestions?

    1. I’d recommend reading something about early modern Russia–I mean, pre-Revolution stuff. Because nothing makes sense there, but it makes even less sense if you don’t know what led up to the Soviet Union.

      1. I do have some knowledge of pre-revolution Russia, though it’s mostly in a literary context (love me some Dostoevsky!). I’ll keep that in mind, though, thanks.

        The other recommendations look good, especially that Stalin biography John suggested. I may just read all of them!

        1. If you have spare time, I like (John does, too), Robert K. Massie’s various Russian biographies, starting with Peter the Great.

    2. Read Court of The Red Tsar

      Fabulous biography of Stalin. Came out a few years ago.

    3. I enjoyed Oleg Gordievsky’s KGB, but that was mostly focused on the evolution of the Soviet Secret police, though it did touch on other things.

      1. Oooh, I read that years ago – really good.

        1. No electronic version though.

    4. The Rise and Fall of Communism by Archie Brown covers a longer time period than you are looking for, but I thought it was a pretty good book.

    5. In Soviet Union, history reads you!

    6. The Forsaken: An American Tragedy in Stalin’s Russia. Chronicles the experiences of Americans living in the Soviet Union, before and during the time of Stalin’s purges.

      1. I second this recommendation. It is a great book.

    7. See the many books by Robert Conquest, who I have not read, but is hugely respected in the field despite his distinctly non-PC (i.e. anti-communist) assessments.

    8. I like The Whisperers by Orlando Figes. Unfortunately, I don’t know about the quality of the scholarship, but it sounds right, and the writing’s good.

  37. Addenum to Nikki’s article: Anti-gun people, like the ones at Gawker, are idiots that don’t realize how impotent they are

    Liberty-loving bears of small brain have found a five-syllable word, and it must necessarily lead to their promised land. Kansas and Alaska have already passed gun nullification laws, while Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Missouri have been pushing. Nine states, led by Montana, have passed laws asserting that gunmakers in their states are exempt from federal regulations, and so they can make all the full-auto machine guns and assault weapons they want.

    The real fun comes when local politicians and law enforcement officers get in the nullification game: Nearly 250 sheriffs from Oregon to California to Arizona to Minnesota have written open letters defying federal gun laws and threatening to arrest U.S. government officials working in their jurisdictions. One rural Florida sheriff even beat prosecution last fall for releasing (and destroying evidence related to) a suspect who’d illegally held a concealed weapon.

    It’s fun times in America when libertarians and John Birchers are openly praising law enforcement officers for picking and choosing which laws they’ll enforce, you know, to protect the good, law-abiding folk from federal interference. What could go wrong?

    There’s no way the Feds can push an anti-gun agenda in America now.

    1. And the epic butthurt is so delicious that I have to be careful that I don’t gorge myself on it. I don’t want to throw up.

    2. It makes me extremely happy that the Gawkerites are identifying us as their kulaks. Come get me, you fucks.

      1. We will never have a terror in this country. But we might have a civil war. And I don’t think the Gawkerites are going to like that very much.

      2. There’s plenty of internet tuff gai’s that are happy to oblige:

        Yes, they’ve been trying this on every law they don’t like

        They should all be informed that the FBI will be paying them a visit, with swat teams if necessary should they pull this.

        It’s reall time we joined the civilized world and eliminated state government. They’re always howling that were one nation under god. Well, one nation has one set of laws. At the same time we remove gerrymandering. Put in place huge restrictions with huge penalties to,prevent it happening again. And add additional senators to strip the power of the rednecks to obstruct and abuse.

        The south was never punished for the civil war. Hardly a man even was out on probation for their treason, and that’s why we have the problems we have today. It’s a good tine to start. And it’s a better time to stop,folimf lawsuits, and arrest, arrest, arrest

        Bunch of fascists. But again, so impotent the scenario above can only exist in their sick little minds.


        2. Give them the space and the prompting, and they will always go FULL FASCIST on you. They have to; it’s the inevitable conclusion of their world view. So just start reeling out the rope and let them hang themselves.

          Also, as Warty says, COME AT ME BRO.

          1. Same guy, this time escalating the rhetoric when some Gawkerites argue his solution wouldn’t work out the way he thinks because the states would just secede:

            No they won’t, they’re all blowhards. They can’t leave anyway. They rely on the blue states to operate.

            The conservative diseased brain thrives on being a victim, not putting oneself at risk. If they knew in 1861 what would happen they never would have done it. A bunch of rich sociopaths thought it’d be fun to play war for a summer and it got out of hand.

            Sock please try it again. Red states possess few deep water ports that are easy to blockade (and I doubt VA would go this time). Much less “my state is my nation” crap, and we have guided missiles to shoot down airlifts. The red state are a hundred times less self sufficient that they were in 1865, and I look forward to the kinds of punishment that can be meted out for their treason. Hell, we should use existing laws right now to arrest anyone who endorses the confederacy for sedition. And if yiu think that’s unfair, ill give you their 250-1 kill ratio over Osama bin Ladin

            That bolded part is just, wow. Clearly this guy thinks Obama can just snap his fingers and make the military bring states across the country into line without any issues.

            1. The bolded part is also projection extraordinaire. Which should be expected.

              But I love watching these impotent fucks get their WAR BONERS on over this shit. Especially talking land assault tactics and shit like they went to West Point. God this stuff is hilarious.

              1. Holy shit. They really like murder and force, huh?

                1. I hate to be all “this is triggering,” but at what point is this kind of rhetoric, I don’t know, actually kind of triggering? Not in a legit, PTSD way, but as far as I’m concerned, a rape victim who gets the vapors hearing about rape is no different from a state victim being exposed to bullshit like this.

              2. Just imagine what it is going to be like if the Democrats really do get their asses kicked in the next two elections.

                Remember, they are basically in power and they sound like this. What will they be like if they are out of power?

                1. They’ll shut up. They’re so ridiculous now because they think they are in power and will have it forever (the never-ending disease of the partisan, hah).

            2. The conservative diseased brain thrives on being a victim, not putting oneself at risk.

              That rhetoric is straight out of the killing fields or gulags. We laugh but people don’t just one day decide to start killing. It takes years of rhetoric and dehumanization to get them to do it.

              This kind of shit is getting so common on the Left. They are so ready to start killing. They just don’t have the opportunity. Lets hope they never get it.

            3. Reading stuff like this makes me so happy to have thrown in my lot with the libertarians, instead of these people. You know why? I’ve never heard a libertarian outline some bold plan of action and then conclude it with, “And if that doesn’t work, we’ll just kill them all.”

            4. It’s rather telling that this noodle-armed dipshit is talking about what the military is going to do in a situation like that. Not once do you see him promise to run down to the recruiter’s office and enlist the minute an actual shooting war breaks out.

              Twerps like that talk a good game, but they’d melt in less than five minutes if shit got real.

              I’ve said it before, if two skinny yabbos can fold Boston, the cradle of the revolution, into a fetal position using nothing more than a couple kitchen utensils, some fireworks, and a knockoff Glock, armies of blue-prog college students would fold in less than a month if they met any kind of organized resistance. They’re bullies at heart, and when you go berserk on a bully, that shit stops pretty fast.

              1. Seriously, guys like that really don’t seem to realize that the bulk of the military just might side with the “rebels” and while the blue states are richer the red states have the majority of the manufacturing and ALL of the oil

            5. I’ve been thinking it would be interesting to watch what happens if the republicans won big in 2014 (especially if there are a lot of small government types). I’d be interested to see what committed partisan liberals first reactions would be and then how they would spin it to minimize the republican win.

              1. I am wondering that too Economist. I think what will happen is you will see a lot of crying and whining and a good dose of leftist violence and terrorism like we had in the 1960s as these various losers “go underground” and give up on the system. But I don’t think it would amount to much and would mostly hurt the Democratic Party.

                1. I seriously, seriously doubt we will ever see an outbreak of 60’s like leftist violence ever again. One of things these people like to do most is whine and complain and commiserate about how evil everyone else is and how compassionate and wonderful they are. The internet gives them the ability to do that in spades (as we see every day). This is all the outlet they need, because they are cowards anyway.

                  Like I said below, they’ll go suck their thumbs and echo-chamber about how unenlightened everyone else is, and they’ll be satisfied with that. Because they’re pathetic.

            6. Clearly this guy thinks Obama can just snap his fingers and make the military bring states across the country into line without any issues.

              Not many military boys are of the leftist persuasion. if it came down to it i am pretty sure they would rather frag their officers then burn their home town.

          2. The thing about “successful” fascists is that in Germany and Spain and Italy is they were the armed rural hicks who were probably all WW1 vets or sons of WW1 vets and they owned guns.

            Why is the US urban fascist left so blind about the fact that have no guns and have no idea how to use them?

            Furthermore why are they so blind that they don’t realize that the military grunts and state and local law enforcement are very likely to be unsympathetic with their politics especially when it means using force against armed American civilians?

            1. The SA were street thugs. They were no shit criminals who were violent as hell.

              The other thing that happened in Germany is that they had the tacit support of the authorities long before they came to power.

              Democracy died in Germany long before 1933. It died in the 1920s when gangs of brown shirts would show up at their opponents political rallies and terrorize and beat the shit out of people and the authorities would do nothing about it except arrest any of the victims who resisted.

              We would be very hard pressed to have that kind of shit go on in the US. The US population is too well armed. Even the brown shirts would have been deterred by a population as armed and violent as US society.

              The urban fascist left is at least right now a joke.

              1. It died in the 1920s when gangs of brown shirts would show up at their opponents political rallies and terrorize and beat the shit out of people and the authorities would do nothing about it except arrest any of the victims who resisted.

                In the 1920s those would be the WW1 vets.

                The Nazis also had the support of the Bavarian (xenophobic) rural population who were traditionally armed.

                The urban fascist left has neither support from military vets nor the rural population. Rather then being blood thirsty statists they should be thanking their lucky stars that in the US our vets and rural population is astronomically tolerant in historic terms.

                1. I agree. In any kind of mob rule, they would get their asses kicked.

                  This is why they would like to ban guns and create a huge unionized and militarized police force. Take away everyone’s guns and give them the support of the police and the Urban fascists are not such pushovers anymore.

            2. “using force against armed American civilians”

              Uh, how about using force against their families or their squad member’s families?

              Sorry bro I had to shoot your mom… Cap’ins orders.

        3. It’s reall time we joined the civilized world and eliminated state government.

          I just have to say it. You know who else eliminated state governments, along with thousand year tradition of local autonomy?

          Hint, he had a funny mustache and was the subject of a Mel Brooks musical.

          They really must work hard to be that stupid and utterly uninformed of history.

        4. The south was never punished for the civil war.

          Florida exists and self punishment counts.

            1. Shrike says he is from Georgia that counts as self punishment as well.

          1. Right, because Re-construction was like a May-day celebration? Ignorant pukes.

        5. The south was never punished for the civil war./blockquote

          1) Excuse me, what now?
          2) Somewhere there’s a bit from a Christopher Hitchens speech where he talks about humanity’s central sadomasochistic streak. This little ape here is a perfect example. CRUSH THE INFIDELS! RAPE THEIR WOMEN!

          Hitchens was talking about this in the context of religion, and the more I look at this comment, the more I realize how deeply these evil little fucks love the state. It truly is their god, and they truly hate those of us who reject their religion.

          1. Fuck. Well, you can figure out what’s his quote and what’s mine.

            1. Well, “CRUSH THE INFIDELS! RAPE THEIR WOMEN!” that’s definitely you.

              1. And hear the lamentations of the women!

            2. Why should I bother, HTML retard? Tell me that, huh?

              1. It’s not his fault. He’s using HTML 17.0.

            3. You know, we really need a preview button.

              1. You can edit the site yourself when HTML 15.0 comes out in 2027. At least, that’s what Dr. Hugeman says.

          2. The South was never punished for the civil war. So lets go punish the people who live there 150 years later to make up for it.

            Honestly Warty, if you or I went over to troll them by trying to put up the most insane and hateful shit we could just to see how bad it would have to be before one of them finally said “hey I am on your side but that is going too far”, would there be anything we could write, no matter how vile that would do that? I don’t think so.

            1. Let’s count:

              1) Collective historical guilting
              2) WAR BONERS
              3) Bloodthirsty hatred for those who refuse to agree with them
              4) Fantasies of violence
              5) REGION WAR
              6) Massive projection

              Quite a list, isn’t it?

              1. I remain shocked that so many people seem to think these horrible thoughts in the U.S. Even ten years ago, I wouldn’t have believed it.

                1. People think it, ProL, it’s just that saying it out loud was roundly condemned by everyone. But the advent of the internet and echo chambers has caused people to drop their masks. A lot. Personally, I prefer masks being dropped; it’s more honest. Let me know what kind of scumbag you really are upfront so that I know and can shun you.

                  1. I agree, it’s largely because of the Internet that this shit is coming out, but I never really believed it was this bad. I wonder if it’s some sort of feedback loop, making a small psychosis more acute.

              2. You forgot fantasies of mass murder and genocide.

                And yeah, it is quite a list. But remember these people are tolerant and reality based unlike us.

            2. I don’t think you could. Salon, Slate, and Gawker are getting into Der St?rmer territory, aren’t they? Like, you’d think that if you write an article where you literally state that you want to murder people who disagree with you about politics, you might have a moment where you say, “Wait, I might be getting into bad territory here.” But no. They don’t. Things are getting weird and dangerous.

              1. You’d have more of a point, Warty, if these people weren’t so brutally impotent. They will call all day for violence, but unless someone does it for them, it ain’t happening.

                You have to realize that these people are abject cowards. Their cowardice paralyzes them. There’s a reason they’re losers, and it’s all related. That’s why they want a strongman to come in and order their violence for them. They really are this pathetic.

                1. There’s another thing to keep in mind, Episiarch. Hard-left statists have been behind revolutions conducted by other people. Look at the French and Russian revolutions, for instance. It was the lower classes that were out fighting, but it was this political class (mostly composed of middle-to-upper-class people) who took over.

                  1. It was the lower classes that were out fighting

                    Right, because they were starving and had nothing to lose. One of the funniest things about the leftist hardon for a welfare state is that it makes the lower classes vastly less likely–to the point of “no fucking way”–to fight and die for the class warriors who want to utilize them in that way. They shot their own class war in the foot. It’s hilarious.

                2. The thing is, John is right to point out that these sorts of demonization campaigns are dangerous. These idiots are abject pussies and wouldn’t dream of doing actual violence (although they would absolutely cheer a president throwing Tea Partiers into work camps).

                  But what if this sort of rhetoric continues for a generation or two? And what if the economy stagnates for that time? Having a lot of unemployed angry idiots who have been told all their lives who to blame for it is a recipe for disaster. It’s a dangerous road to start down.

                  1. This kind of thing reminds me how all of us, with such disparate views on government and culture, are political allies.

                3. That is true Episiarch. They are cowards. But don’t think for a moment they won’t kill if things ever get to the point where they think they can get away with it.

                  Just think about Eichman. He was a pathetic clerk. The guy was fucking Joe From Lowell literally. He never served at the front or put himself in any sort of danger or even pulled a trigger doing his dirty work. But he happily assisted and enabled the deaths of millions. That is who these people are. We just have to make sure they never have any kind of opportunity.

              2. It’s hard not to imagine the really nasty stuff that could happen with a minarchist victory or two at the polls.

                Not that this is going to happen, but let’s imagine for a moment that Rand Paul is the next president, and he has libertarian coattails that affect the composition of Congress. The government starts rolling back lots of programs, drastically cutting spending, the whole nine yards.

                What do these extremists do then?

                1. They would murder Paul Pro. They would murder him. I gaurentee you. And then celebrate when it happened.

                  Remember when Sad Beard said that “the world is a better place” when Breitbart died? They would do the same thing if Paul or Cruz or Palin or any other of their designated enemies are ever murdered.

                  We are basically a couple of political murders away from a real shit storm of political violence. You don’t realize those things are going to happen until they do.

                2. What do these extremists do then?

                  Nothing. They’re cowards. They’ll suck their thumbs and whine to each other in their echo chambers. They’re about as formidable as a drowned kitten.

                  1. I hope you’re right, of course, but like I said above, they have a rich tradition of getting poorer people to kill their political enemies for them.

                3. These are people for whom the ends justify the means. They already lie, cheat, and steal to get their way. If ProL’s hypothetical came to pass, they’d turn it up to 11, but I think that’s it. They know full-well they can’t stage a revolution when they have virtually none of the firepower.

                  1. They know full-well they can’t stage a revolution when they have virtually none of the firepower.

                    And anyone wonders why they hate guns so much. What they want is mob intimidation and terror. And an armed populace is the only thing standing in the way of that.

              3. I would think so. But I would also think that when you started seriously calling your opponents diseased and defective such that they are no longer human, you would think things over a bit then.

                I think that sort of thinking becomes an addiction. The person doing it gets a feeling of vindication thinking it. It allows them not to have to worry about any problems with their thinking because they other side is so wrong and inhuman their criticisms don’t even merit consideration.

              4. But they are doing it in the name of peace. To end gun violence, they have to end the manufacturing of guns for commercial purposes, and regulate the industry so the guns don’t wind up in the wrong hands. When the industry resists regulations through lobbying, they are on the opposite side of peace, and deserve to be punished for their aggressions against the public order.

                Likewise, when southern states prevent those laws from doing what they are suppose to accomplish through nullification, they are enemies of the peace. Being the enemies of peace makes them aggressors. Surely we have the right to defend against aggression? You can’t just jail Southerners like you can a manufacturer, so you must use the resources that are appropriate to that response. You must raise an army to counter the lawlessness, or else you become consumed by it, and helpless to respond against this aggression.

                This isn’t an attempt to eradicate a culture, it is simply to bring them under the law, and render them harmless to the greater good of maintaining a peaceful society.

                /sarc tag

                1. You know that if I left off the /sarc tag, and could post it under Tony, there would be a hundred replies already, right?

        6. It’s reall time we joined the civilized world and eliminated state government.

          What. The. Fucking. Fuck???

          1. I’ll translate: Get rid of any limit on central government power. Kill enemies. Take stuff. Rule.

      3. kulaks

        Canada is about to balance its budget…

        Then I realized that a kulak is not a Canuck.

        1. Close enough – OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!

    3. Liberty-loving bears of small brain have found a five-syllable word, and it must necessarily lead to their promised land.

      I’m too tired of this idiocy to make the obligatory “right to bear arms” joke.

    4. One rural Florida sheriff even beat prosecution last fall for releasing (and destroying evidence related to) a suspect who’d illegally held a concealed weapon.

      Outright lies.

      I’m sure this thread is dead now, but I have to set the record straight. He or she is referring to Nick Finch, Sheriff of Liberty County, FL. The man had a gun in his pocket while he was driving through a national forest. He got pulled over and a cop told him to get out. At that point, he needed a concealed carry permit for the gun and was arrested, though he did not violate the law by having it in the car. Once he got to the jail, the Sheriff realized that the man had done nothing wrong and released him, which he has the discretion to do. A corrupt, overzealous state attorney tried to throw the book at Sheriff Finch. Finch easily beat the charges because he was innocent (“destroying evidence” related to Finch tearing out and throwing away the page in the jail log where the man had signed in, which was standard procedure when charges were dropped).

      Don’t take my word for it. Google if you’re interested.

  38. The trial of Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will begin on Nov. 3.

    That’s what’s known as a speedy trial. Ah, the terrible swift sword of justice.

  39. SoLib Austin reporter praises SoLib NYT reporter for trying to rehabilitate Wendy Davis:

    “But, Draper [NYT hack] places any flaws in [Davis’] narrative in the context of a broader metanarrative ? of the exigencies of a Democrat trying to get traction in Texas, and even more powerfully, of a woman in politics ? that I think will leave most of her supporters in Texas, as well as national donors, satisfied that what she did was well within the acceptable limits of political myth-making.”…..paragraph/

    1. Do you have a translation of that dreck into – I dunno – English or something?


      1. Her exaggerations were OK because she’s a female Democrat trying to get elected in Texas.

      2. Its ok to lie if its for a good cause.

        1. I’ve said this before, but just imagine the vast improvements we could make to our society if people just stopped accepting lying, cheating, stealing, killing, etc. as so easily justifiable.

  40. let’s imagine for a moment that Rand Paul is the next president, and he has libertarian coattails that affect the composition of Congress. The government starts rolling back lots of programs, drastically cutting spending, the whole nine yards.

    Ponder the carnage wrought by a return to 2005 spending. My god, the living would envy eat the dead.

    1. I know. My hands trembled as I typed that set of horrors. It would be just like the Killing Fields, except that people would have to pay for the ditch to be executed in. Or something, I’m not clear on this kind of thinking.

  41. Eh, they’re owned by Bezos now. Wake me up when the NY Times publishes a similar article.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.