A.M. Links: Pentagon Preparing Military Options in Syria, CBC Members Want "Police Czar," Space Probe Crosses Orbit of Neptune

|

  • Neptune
    NASA

    The Pentagon is preparing military options against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant in Syria, where President Obama has reportedly authorized aerial surveillance of the militant group. Syria's government said it would welcome the help of any country in its fight against Islamist extremists. The Islamist militia Dawn of Libya, meanwhile, claims it has consolidated control of Tripoli, the capital, and taken over the international airport. Egypt and the United Arab Emirates reportedly conducted airstrikes in Libya without informing the United States.

  • Several members of the Congressional Black Caucus, most of whom voted against an amendment to limit the transfer of military supplies to local governments just two months ago, would now like to see a national "police czar." No word about whether the position would be sunsetted at the end of President Obama's term. CNN, meanwhile, released an unverified audio recording that allegedly caught the sound of Officer Darren Wilson shooting Michael Brown. There are about 11 shots heard, with a two or three second pause in the middle of the volley.
  • Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed a bill requiring phones made in California to include a "kill switch."
  • Ukraine's president, Petro Poroshenko, has dissolved parliament and called for new elections.
  • This year's Emmys were awarded last night. Stuff on television won.
  • The space probe New Horizons has crossed the orbit of Neptune on its way to Pluto.

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: Jerry Brown Signs Cellphone "Kill Switch" Into Law in California

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The space probe New Horizons has crossed the orbit of Neptune on its way to Pluto.

    Slumming with nonplanets now.

    1. Hey! It merely passed Neptune, it didn’t slum with the gas cloud!

        1. (insert appropriate Uranus joke here)

          1. They renamed the planet Urrectum to get rid of that stupid joke once and for all!

            1. Urectum? Nearly Ukilledhim

    2. Hello.

      “Several members of the Congressional Black Caucus”

      There can be ONE CBC and that’s the Canadian Broadcast Corparashun!

      They want a Czar, eh? Start in Chicago.

      1. Will the Police Czar come with a loud Sziren?

        1. They’re Tsirens

          1. Tsirens of Titan?

    3. Ming the Merciless

      “Pathetic earthlings. Hurling your bodies into the void, – – without an inkling of who or what is out here. If you knew anything about the Universe, you’d hide from it.”

  2. The space probe New Horizons has crossed the orbit of Neptune on its way to Pluto.

    And left the solar system.

      1. And it feels like the first time
        Like it never did before
        Feels like the first time
        Like we’ve opened up the door
        Feels like the first time
        Like it never will again, never again…and again and again 🙂

        1. How prescient of Foreigner. So, what does “Head Games” predict?

    1. Really, aren’t we all leaving the solar system?

      1. No….not all of us have a base in the Oort Cloud, Mister.

        1. Which is why all of you are leaving the solar system. We’re evicting you.

  3. Ukraine’s president, Petro Poroshenko, has dissolved parliament…

    Where can we get some of this politician solvent?

    1. France dissolved its government also.
      Or should I say, surrendered to ineveitable dissolutionment.
      http://news.yahoo.com/frances-…..kAXU3QtDMD

      1. But its all lies, both the French and Ukraine governments are still there.

        1. Yeah, the tricky part is keeping it dissolved. Reminds of the liquid metal cop from Terminator 2.

        2. They should merge.

          Frukraine!

          1. Or just ‘Ukraine’ I don’t think the French would be able to muster the will to protest (beyond burning a few Citreons)

      2. Parliaments come and go, but bureaucracies are forever.

        Q: How long did Belgium go “without a government”?
        A: 589 days.

        http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..n-belgium/

  4. Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed a bill requiring phones made in California to include a “kill switch.”

    STOP RESISTING! STOP RESISTING! Did you remember to hit the kill switch? Good. STOP RESISTING!

    1. I guessing this will ensure no more phones are built in Califirnia.

      Wait, are any built there anyway.

      1. No, but Apple assures us they’re *designed* there.

        1. Well sure they are. Apple’s campus there pretty much assures us of that.

          Also, does anybody believe there’s not already a way for cops to track the signature of a single,phone any time they want to whether they have a warrant or not? If they do, then they’re either naive or retarded.

    2. also known as the ‘Reason App’

    3. killSwitch.activate (thisCell.returnAllConnectedPhones() );

    1. Have you Americans *still* not gotten over this whole Marxist/Communist/Socialist = EVIL thing yet? Your government really did a good job with the propaganda during the Cold War it seems.

      1. You kill a few hundred million people and all of a sudden you’re some kind of villain.

        1. And even without that, Marxism is a clearly wrong and anti-human way of looking at the world.

          1. Socialism and primitive communism are not inherently evil. If a group of people were to pool resources together voluntarily to purchase land and capital to form a commune, there would be nothing evil about that. It’s often been tried in America with dismal results.

            Marx understood that people had to be coerced to socialize via a proletarian state. That is evil. Lenin understood that the proletarian state had to governed by a totalitarian vanguard of the proletariat. Trotsky understood that it was essential to fashion a “new Soviet man”. That is not just evil, but fundamentally anti-human.

            As bad as the Marxist/Leninist history is, it is important to understand that these guys were idealists who, in their fevered minds, believed that they were advancing the dignity of mankind. Their intellectual followers believe the same.

            1. Socialism and primitive communism are not inherently evil. If a group of people were to pool resources together voluntarily to purchase land and capital to form a commune, there would be nothing evil about that.

              I’m not sure that’s the true definition of “socialism” or “communism”. A business organized as simple partnership would meet your definition, but I doubt a socialist or a communist would agree. Cooperation between peers for mutual benefit is a cornerstone of many social and political ideologies, capitalism included, and we dropped the ball when we allowed the Reds to “own” this issue.

              1. “Communalism” is probably a better word. Whatever communism or socialism might have meant, they now refer to the state based systems and not voluntary cooperation.

                If people want to give commune living or some other social experiment a shot, I wish them all the best.

                It is a damn shame that the commies have managed to own the cooperative thing. Cooperation between individuals is really far more of a feature of capitalism than of any kind of hard socialism.

              2. A business organized as simple partnership would meet your definition, but I doubt a socialist or a communist would agree.

                They don’t know what they agree on. Ask a socialist if a tile factory in Argentina that’s owned entirely by workers with little or no hierarchy is anarcho-syndicalist and they’ll say, of course, hell yeah. Ask them if it’s a private firm with all the employers as partners, they’ll say well, maybe, but no, they aren’t capitalists. This factory makes profits by the way. They don’t follow the Marxist “production for use” model. They sell for profit. Anyway, they don’t know what their own terms mean.

          2. And even without that, Marxism is a clearly wrong and anti-human way of looking at the world.

            What!? And get in the way of FREE SHIT? Allow people their own agency?

            Lunacy.

    2. So many people who talk about “net neutrality” really seem to be saying that they want to use government force to favor their preferred part of the Internet.

      1. Everyone is entitled to “free” high-speed internet, otherwise Somalia.

        1. It only took two comments for someebody to mention ROADZ!!!111!!!

      2. If we don’t have Net Neutrality, Comcast will wind up controlling the internet. Net Neutrality ensures that the FCC will control the internet. Comcast will still control the FCC either way.

        And I am seeing a lot more people supporting the idea of municipalities setting up their own high-speed ISPs a la Chattanooga because the free market did such a terrible job of bringing high-speed internet to everybody – as if municipalities didn’t already effectively set up their own systems when they granted cable franchise monopolies back in the day. We need more government interference in markets to fix the problems caused by too much government interference in markets.

        One of their arguments is that cable is a natural monopoly like water and electricity delivery and the government does a good job of delivering water and electricity cheaply and efficiently, right? Well, I don’t know – let me switch over to the free market water and electrical supply and compare it to the government monopoly. Oh, there isn’t one. So how do you know water and electricity are supplied cheaply and efficiently if you have nothing to compare it to? Given that they operate on a cost-plus basis with a guaranteed profit margin, the incentives are certainly there for them to not be efficient.

        1. I’m reminded of this old Virginia Postrel piece.

          1. Back when Reason was so much better.

            1. Drink!

        2. Wireless is the real market changer. Continuing advances will eliminate the stranglehold that cable companies have.

          1. Spectrum controls, man. You can’t have corporations broadcasting godknowswhat over the air. Who knows what content our kids would have access to, given their inevitable technological savvy? Not to mention crowding out local broadcasters and underserved communities. And don’t even get me started on electromagnetic hypersensitivity syndrome.

            (Elided in all this will remain the dismal fact that corporate broadcasters will themselves determine spectrum allocation.)

        3. I work for an electric utility. Have for more than a decade. Electricity would be a hell of a lot cheaper were it not regulated. We spend millions upon millions upon millions on regulatory reporting.

          1. More importantly: in many regulatory jurisdictions, rates for companies that generate and sell electricity were established based upon what was essentially a primary energy cost plus cash operating expense plus depreciation plus regulated return on capital. Regulators looked hard at regulatory reporting to make sure the numbers were in the right boxes, and paid attention mainly to capital/expense split that would affect rate setting. Since primary energy costs could pass through to customers, utility management had significantly less incentive to improve energy efficiency than in a free market. A small degree of liberalization allowed independent power generation with much less regulation, and efficiencies greatly improved. However, there’s a fleet of plants out there that would have been more efficient if government would laissez faire.

        4. In Lehigh and Northampton counties in Pennsylvania, there are two cable companies. I can choose between RCN and Service Electric. Service is fast, cheap, and friendly. Natural monopoly, my ass.

          1. But who will rebuild the roads after cable companies tear them up to plant their cables!? The roaaaaaaaaaaaaaadzzz!

    3. Someone actually pointed out the elephant in the room, namely, local monopolies. I have a glimmer of hope for humanity.

    4. And every single one of those people were crying the horrors of PIPA and SOPA. But suddenly the regulatory state that proposes such measures are the good guys.

      1. Well if politicians do it, it’s bad. If bureaucrats do it, it must be wise and good.

        1. Hrmmm… as a bureaucrat I wish some of that reasoning would be applied to me.

          Sadly, I don’t make decisions here, I’d get fired if I did.

    5. There’s a reasonable argument that services like roads, power transmission/distribution, and the physical backbone of the internet are necessarily going to tend toward mono- or oligopoly, and that power can be leveraged to make markets that are depend on those carriers, that would otherwise be highly competitive, into monopolies or oligopolies as well.

      Forcing transmission companies (which are necessarily going to have local market power) to treat all generation companies without favoritism allowed for the establishment of generation “markets”. Forcing backbone providers to treat all higher level services equitably would do the same for the internet. It might as well be expanded to include cable, since any sort of video over IP service is going to be competing with the telco’s content otherwise.

    1. Pathetic what passes for clever on the left these days.

    2. I stand on the side of NAY.

      Fuck those idiotic takers.

    3. Team going to team. noone is going to find common ground at democratic underground. A jew in gaza is more likely to find commonground.

      1. I’ve been up,in HuffPo for the past few days commenting on some libertarian solutions to abusive cops. Obviously many of them involve either outlawing cop unions or at least limiting their bargaining to compensation only. And I’ve got to say, I’ve actually converted a few people.

        There is hope on this issue. Unfortunately, the election will be focused on other areas like how much free shit the right wants to keep people on the left from doling out. Because heaven forbid the election would be on actual civil liberties instead of how much theft one party wants to commit.

        1. I don’t see that limiting cop unions is going to do much. That will just empower police administrators, who are as likely to use that power to punish cops that stand up to bad cops as they are to use it punish bad cops. The kind of cop that rises to administrator is likely the worst of all worlds.

          I think making lawsuits against them easier is one solution, and having some type of regular civilian oversight like they do in some cities another. Of course demilitarizing them is helpful to.

          1. Civilian oversight would be susceptible to a) corruption, b) intimidation, and c) both.

            Accountability commensurate with their power and responsibility. Also, no collecting pensions until 10 years after retirement from police work.

            1. See the Kelly Thomas case.

          2. “having some type of regular civilian oversight like they do in some cities another.”- Isn’t that what locally elected politicians are supposed to be for?

            1. Sure, but I’m thinking of the places that have boards of citizens reviewing complaints against the police instead of a police subunit doing that. In my libertopia it would be like jury duty with rotating calls to serve.

              1. But the unions tend to bargain to either have input on who sits on those boards or to have them now be granted subpoena power or the ability to indict.

                And they’ve done it all through collective bargaining.

                1. Whether or not getting rid of the unions will by itself will make a big difference, getting rid of them is probably still the first thing that needs to happen.

                  Public sector unions are all terrible, but the police is probably the worst since they not only take our money, but they can also shoot you.

              2. Read this: http://www.rwgmlaw.com/rwm/new…..f972fd3125

                The “citizen review board” of the NYPD, for example, consists of three deputy chiefs in accordance with the CBA.

                So they’ve negotiated to exclude actual citizens from the review,process. How can you not think that’s a HUGE freaking dent in transparency and oversight?

                1. Need to get rid of the citizen/civilian crap (since police are both of those things generally) and have a “not the police review board”.

                  Another idea that keeps bouncing around in my head is to have a special police force whose only job is to police other police.

                  1. have a special police force whose only job is to police other police.

                    REPEAL THE KEENE ACT!

                2. That’s a great example, because note that in the highly union deferential environment of NYC there is at least a civilian review board. I can’t think of one in places like SC where I live and where police collective bargaining is barred.

                  1. You call three cops a civilian review board?

                    You’re laughably stupid.

                    1. Is it just three cops on the board?

                    2. Looks like your information is erroneous:

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C…..view_Board

                    3. It used to be. I misread that and it was amended in 1991, so I am wrong.

                      Although,the board may only advise the police commissioner and does not have the authority to subpoena, cannot convene a grand jury and can’t take a case directly to the DA. That has remained the same.

                    4. “so I am wrong.”

                      So you might want to lay off the ‘you’re laughably stupid’ comments next time.

                      Btw, you know what power the civilian review board has in Charleston where CBAs are barred?

                      None, because there is no civilian review board. The police police themselves.

                    5. Yes,I might want to lay off that comment because I was wrong. I’m sorry.

                    6. Thanks, that’s a stand up admission.

          3. Not going to do much?

            You mean limiting their ability to use the CBA to determine who sits on review boards isn’t going to do much? Or them negotiating for the process of how and when an accused officer is to be interrogated (in a way very different than the interrogation of a “civilian”) when accused of a crime isn’t going to do much? Or or them negotiating to determine the makeup of arbitration panels when officers are disciplined isn’t going to do much? Or them establishing,through the CBA, administrative justice panels in lieu of courtrooms and grand juries isn’t going to do much?

            Take your head out of the sand, or your ass, Bo. They’ve stripped away the fundamental principle of equal protection under the law through the bargaining process with the people who’ve elections they financed. If that’s not going to do much, then I don’t know what the fuck is.

            1. They’ve stripped away the fundamental principle of equal protection under the law through the bargaining process with the people who’ve elections they financed.

              Yup.

              1. And that’s why it has to be terminated completely. It fundamentally changes the principle of equal protection. And that cannot be tolerated at all.

            2. sloopy, by far more protection has been given to the police by conservative jurists than any CBA. Here’s something to think about: many states and localities do not allow police unionization/bargaining, are the police more accountable in those states? The answer is of course no.

              1. They’re certainly more accountable.

                Compare this story: http://chronicle.augusta.com/node/566951

                (Officer fired for DUI in non-union state)

                To this story:
                http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com…..70261.html

                (Philly officer reinstated in arbitration after caught on camera punching unarmed and innocent woman in the face, his sworn statement contradicted by video and other officers testified that he intended to punch her – in union state)

                Oh, they’re much more accountable to the community in states without CBA’s that stack arbitration panels. It’s obvious when you look at how much they pay out in settlements from thenChicago PD, the LAPD and the NYPD relative to the amounts paid out by cities like Jacksonville, Birmingham or even a Charleston.

                1. I don’t think you can conclude that by cherrypicking two cases. I mean, here’s a story from a state that allows police collective bargaining of police being promptly fired:

                  http://rt.com/usa/175396-seabr…..ive-force/

                  and one from a state that does not doing the opposite:

                  http://www.11alive.com/story/n…../12753503/

                  “It’s obvious when you look at how much they pay out in settlements from thenChicago PD, the LAPD and the NYPD relative to the amounts paid out by cities like Jacksonville, Birmingham or even a Charleston.”

                  Do you have any general data to back this claim up (and one that would take into account the very different standards of living between places like NYC and Birmingham?)? If we are just talking anecedotes there are many stories about questionable police tactics and not punishing of the officers here on Reason from states where collective bargaining is barred.

                  1. General data on Chicago: http://www.suntimes.com/266178…..ce-04.html

                    I guess the main data point is the $500 million in less than a decade number.

                    1. This establishes only that one city engaging in collective bargaining paid a lot in settlements in police lawsuits. While interesting it doesn’t establish much generally without comparisons holding other factors constant.

                    2. While interesting it doesn’t establish much generally without comparisons holding other factors constant.

                      Then find me a non-CBA city that has comparable rates of settlement payments per officer or per population.

                  2. Meanwhile, LAPD officers that opened fire on two women delivering newspapers in a truck not remotely close to the one Dorner was supposedly in were never disciplined and are back on patrol after the city,paid out $6M to settle the suit.

                    Remember,the officers admitted that they opened fire on the occupants trying to kill them without even identifying them at all. But their NEGOTIATED review process and progressive discipline process prevented them from being terminated since no criminal charges were issued.

                    1. Again, I don’t think you can conclude that by cherrypicking cases. Do you really doubt that I could go ‘tit for tat’ with horror stories of excused police abuse from states that bar collective bargaining?

                      Look, as someone who lives in a state that bars collective bargaining (so do you now iirc, Virginia, right? browse their police horror stories), I can tell you why it makes no difference: when such bargaining is barred the police still form ‘associations’ and play equivalent roles in pressuring politicians to make sure police friendly policy is enacted.

                    2. Pressure < institutionalized double standards.

                  3. bargaining of police being promptly fired:

                    Promptly fired after 5 years?

                    And the 2nd case doesn’t have the stink of out-right evil, more like rank incompetence.

                    Talk about cherry picking.

          4. I think making lawsuits against them easier is one solution, and having some type of regular civilian oversight like they do in some cities another. Of course demilitarizing them is helpful to.

            Bo, you are dead on target with this. All three of these could be used to fix the cop problems. Of course, the lawsuits have to affect the individual, the civilian oversight needs to be independent(possibly even anonymous), and plenty has already been said about demil.

            A blind pedant finds a nut.

            1. A blind pedant finds a nut.

              Better than busting one.

              For us, anyway.

            2. None of those things matter in the absence of stopping the union from negotiating who sits on CRB’s and their qualified immunity.

              So Chicago PD has paid out over $500 million in the past decade to settle police anise charges. Big fucking deal unless you allow the community to determine the professional fate of bad officers and whether or not they will face criminal charges for their actions.

              1. “Anise charges”

                Auto-correct is funny.

                1. Derp. ABUSE CHARGES.

            3. The lawsuits currently are structured to be against the individual officer more easily, its just that lawyers know the agency has more dollars for damages and go after them.

      2. Another solution that has been bandied about here for some time: make all abuse settlement awards payable from the poolside retirement fund and/or from their operational budget.

  5. There are about 11 shots heard, with a two or three second pause in the middle of the volley.

    Um… no one needs more than ten bullets?

    1. I thought it was seven.

      /end SAFE Act

    2. A two or three second pause – was that a speedloader or where he switched guns?

      1. The 9 mm Glock that most police forces use has a standard 10 round magazine, so 10 in the mag and one in the pipe would be his 11 shots.

        1. The pause is when it jammed?

          1. GLOCKS DON’T JAM. I read it on teh internetz.

          2. Had to swallow his last bite of doughnut.

          3. He paused in disbelief that he actully hit him.

            1. Young Mr. Brown was pretty big.

              1. He was no barn.

        2. I think police tend to be issued the G17 which has a standard capacity of 17 or so. The only Glocks I know of that have a standard 10 round capacity are the subcompacts like the 26 (9mm) or 27 (.40)

          1. Unless they have blocked magazines to comply with state laws.

            1. Why would a cop comply with the law?

            2. What cop does that? They get exceptions written into the laws for them.

        3. not meaning to be a nitpick, but a glock 17(most used LE pistol) has a 17+1 capacity.

  6. NSA records, it’s not just for spooks anymore

    The National Security Agency is secretly providing data to nearly two dozen U.S. government agencies with a “Google-like” search engine built to share more than 850 billion records about phone calls, emails, cellphone locations, and internet chats, according to classified documents obtained by The Intercept.

    1. “Did you mean: rachel’s new boyfriend?”

  7. GOP creates videogame: Mission Majority. It’s almost like they are trying to be ridiculed at every turn.

    1. They should have adapted Fallout 3 instead.

      1. I vote for Q*bert. The lovable thing swears every time he loses a life.

  8. Several members of the Congressional Black Caucus, most of whom voted against an amendment to limit the transfer of military supplies to local governments just two months ago…

    Few are as racist as the CBC. They are likely very in favor of planning for urban pacification.

    1. I would like to start a Congressional White Caucus. Just for fun.

      1. That’s called the Tea Party, isn’t it?

        1. The one Tea Party event I happened to attend briefly actually had black speakers, so no.

          1. actually had black speakers

            I don’t think the sound system counts.

          2. Kind of a joke Drake.

          3. Same here.

            The meme that the Tea Party is exclusively white is bogus. The African-American speakers at the event I went to were more conservative than libertarian. A couple were local pastors and a couple were national movement conservatives.

            The melanin deficiency of libertarians does seem to be real, however.

            1. HM would question that.

  9. Pro-Life GOP Primary Voter’s High Standards!

    “In 2012, Tennessee Republican Representative Scott DesJarlais was exposed as having had extramarrital affairs, having slept with his medical patients, and having supported his ex-wife’s decision to get two abortions before their marriage, despite his staunch public pro-life stance. Roughly one month later, he won re-election to Congress. It seems he may go on to do so again: DesJarlais officially won his Republican primary contest on Monday.”

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the….._with.html

      1. “”For the Judeo-Christian tradition, it’s an abomination; it’s giving someone the power that God has. Only God knows the future,” says Leo Morton.

        http://www.wjla.com/articles/2…..z3BVHgPo3V

        Simple economics would solve this, those that sought tarot counselling would get false predictions, incentives should do the rest.

        1. Fortune telling has been around for several thousand years. I doubt economics or religion is going to put a halt to it.

          1. Yes, I was kind of kidding.

        2. As someon once said “A sucker is born every minute”. Besides it’s so much easier to blame the witches for your problems.

        3. I know I’ve mentioned it before, but I was once one of five city-licensed astrologers in my town. I had to take a test and everything. (When I got my license, the city was shamed into ending the astrologer-licensing program.)
          I still display my license on my office wall, though. One of my proudest achievements. That and my Scorpionic powers.

          1. “city-licensed astrologers”

            It’s like something out of a Heller novel.

            1. Not just anyone can come down here read the stars in this municipal city. Citizen Nothing pulls water in this town, you don’t pull shit.

            2. You don’t want just anybody casting natal charts and stuff.

        4. I have encountered people from that area who believe dancing is sinful as well if that gives you an idea of the mindset.

          1. There were many people in the church I grew up in that thought the following were sinful:

            dancing
            going to the theater
            playing cards (some just opposed playing card games with face cards)
            drinking any alcohol

            Granted, most of these people were older.

            1. Grew up attending the ‘Church of Christ’ that frowns upon dancing, alcohol, gambling and during the service, no music instruments just singing. Oh, and no special Xmas or Easter services. An exciting denomination for sure.

              1. Jesus that’s depressing

                1. I always found it strange since Jesus clearly went to parties.

              2. Reminds me of the old joke:

                Why don’t baptists fuck standing up?

                Someone might think they’re dancing.

            2. That explains a lot.

              1. I’ve mentioned many times that I was raised in a very conservative church, though I didn’t expect you to note it. Just like the many times I’ve noted that I still regularly attend a conservative church and that my parents (who homeschooled me part of the time) were for a time missionaries and still attend the denomination I grew up in. The people at both churches are wonderful people in most regards, as many socons are. I only lament it when they turn to the state to push their agenda, and I find some of their attitudes about sex and ‘the occult’ to be frankly silly.

                1. I’ve never seen you mention it before, but I don’t doubt you have – I’m not in every thread.

                  I only lament it when they turn to the state to push their agenda

                  Of course. Or on rare occasion when they insidiously disguise themselves as libertarians having ethical or philosophical discussions on a libertarian website…

                  1. You may have also missed where I’ve frequently said that there are almost certainly very few social conservatives posting here. Perhaps you confused the times in which I’ve said that there are a curiously large number of people here who get upset when social conservatives are criticized here? I’ve said that those people most likely are conservatives generally, not of the socon variety, but who still see social conservatives as allies against the Other Team and so don’t care for any focus on them. To be honest other than Eddie I’m not sure there are any full blown social conservatives that post here (robc and a few others lean that way, but are more ‘paleolibertarian’ than anything else).

                    1. I’m pretty socially conservative. But I doubt anyone would know,it unless I bring it up.

        1. Know who else wanted gypsies gone?

          1. The UKIP?

          2. Lindsay Buckingham?

          3. This guy I saw in the Prague train station?

          4. Most of Europe?

          5. Nucky Thompson

      2. The article says they *repealed* the ban.

        1. look at you reading the article before commenting and such. Making me look like a mouth breather.

    1. Do you read the things you link to?

      A decade before calling himself “a consistent supporter of pro-life values,”

  10. The space probe New Horizons has crossed the orbit of Neptune on its way to Pluto.

    I see the word probe so i know this is innuendo, I just don’t get it.

    1. Neptune. Not Uranus.

        1. Great flick. I watched Hero’s Island last night. James Mason, Neville Brand, Warren Oates, Rip Torn, and Harry Dean Stanton. So much awesomeness.

  11. Several members of the Congressional Black Caucus, most of whom voted against an amendment to limit the transfer of military supplies to local governments just two months ago, would now like to see a national “police czar.”

    Maybe they should just pray for guidance.

    1. I saw we place this Czar atop the Department of Justice. …oh,wait.

  12. would now like to see a national “police czar.”

    Who better to take cues on police civility than the Russians?

    1. The Russian police are kind enough to let you buy your way out of an incident openly. Sounds reasonable.

  13. …would now like to see a national “police czar.”

    It’s been a while since we’ve heard from or about the czars.

    1. They tend to go quiet whenever communists take over the government.

  14. There are about 11 shots heard, with a two or three second pause in the middle of the volley.

    I have been wondering if “we” even know how many rounds were fired in total.

    1. Brown was hit six times, right? So that means a minimum of 50 shots?

        1. It’s nice finally to beat somebody else to the punch. 🙂

          1. Yeah, but… I mean you beat LTC John… really?

            It’s almost like beating yourself.

    2. 6 hits…that means 318 shots fired.

  15. Egypt and the United Arab Emirates reportedly conducted airstrikes in Libya without informing the United States.

    Is that considered an act of war against the United States?

    1. It’s failure to respect authority, so… not unless we’re actually the world’s police.

  16. Egypt and the United Arab Emirates reportedly conducted airstrikes in Libya without informing the United States.

    They should be welcome to police their own part of the globe.

  17. Does Culture Make All the Difference? Palestinian Entrepreneurship Runs Into Bureaucratic Obstacles

    “The first 600 apartments in Rawabi, a short commute from Ramallah, the Palestinian Authority’s administrative capital in the West Bank, were sold over a year ago and should have been turned over to their new owners in the spring. But there are no people living in Rawabi, because there is no water here. Connecting the new city to a nearby water main depends on long-awaited approval from Israel. As a result, the future of the whole enterprise is hanging in the balance.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08…..-well&_r=0

  18. Man badly beaten after warning to stay out of restaurant where Ferguson argument underway

    The money’s in the comments

    haugenpaul ? 11 hours ago
    Black folks aren’t going to take anymore crap. That is the point of the protests in Ferguson, and if white supporters of the police are upset, they best shut their mouths, avert their eyes, and walk on the other side of the street when they hear black folks talking about Ferguson. Either that, or have a honest discussion, which I am sure these black folks would have had. I have little sympathy for a white man in Mississippi who went into a crowd of black folks and stirred the pot.

    Danielle ? 12 hours ago
    Sounds like he went looking for trouble and found it! Probably got what he deserved!

    bigdawg1 ? 13 hours ago
    The dumbasses were told they shouldn’t go in. They ignored the advise and started the provocation. I don’t condone the results, but they brought it all on themselves!

    darter22 ? 13 hours ago
    The headline could have read: “Two men go out late at night looking for trouble and find it”.

    Trollhunter ? 14 hours ago
    Idiots. If someone tells you not to go in the water because there are sharks circling and you jump in, don’t come crying that you got bit.

    1. “He shouldn’t have dressed like that, he was asking for it.”

    2. Others attacked Knighten, and he said he heard racial slurs yelled from the crowd, but police said that was not enough to support a hate crime charge.

      Totally works the same way if a gang of white guys attack a couple of black guys.

      1. I was going to ask how people would react if the roles had been reversed, but I have it on good authority that any suggestion of reversing the roles is RACIST!!!

    3. Yes, because there’s no possible way that the people could, you know, not engage in violence for no goddamn reason whatsoever.

    4. I guess O.J. squared nothing!

    5. The 32-year-old former Marine who served in Iraq

      Weems and Knighten, an Air Force veteran who served in Afghanistan,

      I expected utterly irrelevant mention of military service from Fox, but from fucking Rawstory??????

      Everything I once held sacred has been lost and there is now nothing that shall save this planet from its final judgement at the hands of Galacticus.

      1. In a paradox worthy of my namesake, people with experience in combat are presumed to be less violent.

        1. You ever notice how all the hysterical news stories about Gulf War 2/AfPak vets coming home with PTSD to wreck havoc upon an unsuspecting America were memory-hole once the Ascended One was faced with the dilemma of entering us into the fray again?

          1. No, but now that you mention it …

    6. If someone tells you not to go in the water because there are sharks circling and you jump in, don’t come crying that you got bit.

      Well that’s not racist at all…

  19. NFL players would least like to play for Oakland, new poll claims

    “I’ve never heard anybody that said they didn’t want to play for the Raiders, so that’s pretty shocking,” Oakland DB Charles Woodson said. “Over the years, I’ve known and talked to countless players that said, ‘Man, I would love to come play in the Silver and Black.’ So I think that poll might be kind of skewed.”

    Says the guy who is playing in Oakland because no one else would sign him.

    1. honestly after how terrible we’ve been I can’t believe the Redskins didn’t make the list. Of course after dumping money on mediocre talent may be paying off.

    2. To be fair he did start his career in Oakland and played there for 8 seasons before heading to the Packers.

      1. Why did he leave then?

        1. Well, he did get a ring from that move so it seems like a wise one. That doesn’t mean Oakland didn’t take care of him, just that he thought his chances were better in GB.

          1. I still don’t find it hard to believe that a team which plays in a stadium that fills up with shit tops the list of least desirable places to play.

            1. Fair enough.

            2. Playing on a chewed up parking lot of a field is pretty fucking great, too.

              1. So we have negatives:

                1. Sewage
                2. High Taxes
                3. Baseball field
                4. Legacy of Al Davis

                Positives:

                1. Nice uniforms

        2. Free agency and nobody else wanted him.

      1. Fucking n00b. It is Minnesoda. And all we had to do was give the Vikes a billion dollar stadium to have them finally give up on Xstian Ponder.

        1. Well, now you have Matt Cassell, who is the very definition of heartbreak.

          A massive stat whore, who will disapear as soon as you need him to show.

    3. Why would anyone who makes a lot of money during a short career want to work in the highest taxed state in the country?

      1. And again, a stadium with sewage problems.

        Which, I guess in all fairness only happens during baseball season, but still.

  20. No word about whether the position would be sunsetted at the end of President Obama’s term.

    Why would you do that? Everyone knows that the monster that you create never turns on you.

    1. Bill is all the czar Hillary will need.

      1. I read that as “all the cigar that Hillary will need.” Then I retched.

      2. Bill is all the czar Rasputin Hillary will need.

  21. What is being said during the CNN video? Can the time be verified if it’s a TV program, because they would either render it in admissible or verify the likelihood that it’s genuine.

    Also, the shot sequence is probably in line with someone shooting at either an assailant or what they viewed (I will not say reasonably or not in the absence of other evidence) as a threat…you shoot off a few shots, you reassess the threat and then you shoot more if the threat is not completely incapacitated.

    Now, I’m not saying it’s justified or not. But it does sound like an expected firing timeline to me. Which of course doesn’t answer the question of WHY he chose to fire the first round.

    1. you shoot off a few shots, you reassess the threat and then you shoot more if the threat is not completely incapacitated.

      Or you shoot off a few shots, watch them drop, notice they’re still moving, take careful aim, and put a few in the head.

      1. Or, fire five shots at fleeing ‘perp’, miss all five, ‘perp’ stops and decides to turn around and surrender rather than get shot at, cop puts six shots into now-stationary target.

        Not saying that’s what happened, just showing there are a lot of scenarios that could explain the firing sequence.

        1. And since all,but one of the entry wounds in in close,proximity, your theory is quite plausible and probably more likely than mine.

          It’s unlikely that any of the crime scene was secured before it was looked at by inspectors, but the footprints of the cop and Brown would both likely shed some light on which probably happened.

      2. Not as likely, in my opinion. By that point in the shooting, adrenaline is likely to have taken over and the decision-making process takes a back seat to instinct.

        I’m just guessing. I’d like to get some peoples perspective that have been in this situation with other humans…are there any soldiers on here that came face to face with someone on the battlefield (not that the Ferguson case is the same)? The closest I came was a charging feral pig once. And I reacted by shooting it a few times…pausing a second…then emptying my magazine because he was still grunting and moving.

        1. I have managed not to empty my magazine into someone – but the adrenaline had my pulse thundering in my ears. I can see how he might have just fired until click-click-click.

          1. Thanks, Col John. I appreciate the answer.

      3. Or you fire off a few shots, unholster the weapon and start firing in the direction of the threat.

          1. I play cards with a guy who was a small town cop. He tells the story of pulling over a guy who was wanted for Armed Robbery, so he was amped up and being cautious, and had his side-arm pulled.

            The guy took off running, and my buddy ran after him. The runner pulls up and quits running.

            My friend, whose big as a bear, asked him why he quit running, because there was no way he would have caught him.

            “You were shooting at me!”

            Turns out my friend was so amped up, he pulled the trigger everytime he swung his arm when running, shooting into the parking lot.

  22. would now like to see a national “police czar.”

    If you’re a fan of the esteemed Robert Anton Wilson, you know he advocated that “Every Man, Woman and Ostrich is a Tsar!”
    http://www.rawilson.com/gadp.html
    As such, we must police ourselves.

  23. Is anyone else noting how out of surreal the conversation over those shots seems? And the fact that every reporter and anchor never mentions the conversation at all?

  24. This is hilarious.

    Tonight you party with…The Machine!!!

    1. This Machine is better. 🙂

    2. That is hilarious. But who.is.Brett Kreischer?

    3. Good story telling. As it started off all I could think was ‘this is how penthouse letters get started…”

  25. So Obama, McCain and the rest will finally get their ‘kinetic action’ in Syria. Patience, some imperiled fire worshipers, and switching the target was all it took.

    We really live in a time of madness.

    1. There are also people in the Pentagon making and filing away plans to invade Brazil, Latvia, and South Africa. That’s what they do.

      Doesn’t mean a thing until the politicians start giving them orders to actually do it.

    2. Fire and peacocks. Don’t forget the peacocks.

      SLD: An individual’s religion being hilarious doesn’t make their life less valuable.

  26. Which of course doesn’t answer the question of WHY he chose to fire the first round.

    Or why he felt it necessary to initiate the contact, or what was said.

    Jaywalking? Seriously? I continue to assume the cop just decided to fuck with those two guys because he thought he could.

  27. This just in! Kate Beckinsale is still hot!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..jeans.html

  28. This just in! Youth is still wasted on the young!
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..iends.html

    1. The Bella chick looks like she is stoned, and not in a good way.

    2. dat chin tho

  29. Unless they have blocked magazines to comply with state laws.

    That’s funny.

  30. This is what the rest of the world likes to call obstruction of justice.

    http://observer.com/2014/08/ir…..destroyed/

    The IRS filing in federal Judge Emmet Sullivan’s court reveals shocking new information. The IRS destroyed Lerner’s Blackberry AFTER it knew her computer had crashed and after a Congressional inquiry was well underway.

    People are in federal prison right now for much less than this.

    1. People are in federal prison right now for much less than this.

      That may be the case, but I am willing to bet none of them were Federal employees.

      1. I think there might be a few. But all of them were whistle-blowers not people covering up government corruption. They will throw a fed in jail in a minute; if they do something that embarrasses them.

      2. Yeah, those laws do not apply to the Nobility. Because FYTW.

    2. In a properly functioning Republic, Federal Marshals would be handcuffing those responsible right now.

      1. Even better, the entire story was left off all of the major network news casts last night and both the NYT and the WAPO. We are a banana republic now complete with a state run media.

        1. But RACISMMMMMM in ferguson is soooo much more important than a fake scandal or impending war.

      2. In a properly functioning Republic

        Hmmm, I think I’ve identified the problem.

    3. It’s incomprehensible to me that the emails solely resided on LErner’s local hard drive.

      If the IRS is using an Exchange server, the emails are retained on the server. The fact she had a blackberry means that the emails *had* to be on some server so that her blackberry could download them. Ergo, other copies exist somewhere.

      These people are scum.

      1. The attorney for the group suing the IRS was on Fox News yesterday saying that the DOJ attorneys admit that the emails exist and are on the government continuity backup files. The emails exist and they will be produces at some point. Federal judges have a way of getting what they want.

        1. They won’t be produced before November, I can promise you that. Maybe after Thanksgiving, the truth will be revealed.

          1. After thanksgiving 2016 – and by then it will be old news. Oh and expect some blanket pardon from Bammy around Christmas that year to protect good people from republican witch hunts.

            1. That is the plan. I suspect this judge will throw a wrench in it. Federal judges can throw you in jail for contempt. That gets people’s attention. I give it about a year. Those emails will be found and be made public around summer of 2015.

      2. Oh and it is even better than that. Lerner had a Admin assistant who had full access to her emails. So the emails were on her harddrive as well. Yet, Gosh darn it the IRS forgot to look there.

    4. The coverup that followed the IRS scandal is enough to persuade me to vote Republican. I got disgusted with the GOP in 1991 and haven’t looked back. But the grotesque perversion of justice, the lying, the deceit, and blatant corruption of this case … well, maybe it justifies viewing the enemy of my enemy as my friend. Kind of like the way the US viewed the Taliban back in the Cold War days.

  31. Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed a bill requiring phones made in California to include a “kill switch.”

    I don’t see this ever being a problem. Hackers will never exploit this. Spurned lovers will use this to shut off the phone of their ex-SO. Police will never abuse this. Nope. None of those things will ever happen.

    1. Are there any phones actually made in California?

      1. No. Motorola is making some in Texas. Everything else is imported, mostly from Taiwan.

      2. He just wanted to make sure nothing is ever made in CA again.

  32. Warren Buffett, champion of higher taxes and “Economic Patriotism” does the correct thing: making money by sending Burger King to Canada.

    1. Higher taxes and economic patriotism are for other people (chapter CXCVIII).

    2. Daily Fail concocts a tale that Americans are upset over BK moving to Canada.

  33. Dancing teletubby considered sexual harassment.

    http://totalfratmove.com/mizzo…..teletubby/

    1. God, I wish I had gone to a SEC school. Also I would have never pegged you for a TFM browser.

      1. I am not. It was linked off of Instapundit. I have no idea what that site is.

        1. That’s what they all say

          1. I just look at the coeds. I never read the articles. Really.

    2. So Jerry Falwell was right all along.

    3. Title IX has turned into a monster

      1. Title IX was a monster from day 1.

  34. Or, fire five shots at fleeing ‘perp’, miss all five, ‘perp’ stops and decides to turn around and surrender rather than get shot at, cop puts six shots into now-stationary target.

    Or, “perp” stops, turns, and asks, “What then fuck is wrong with you? Why are you trying to shoot me for JAYWALKING, you dumb motherfucker?”

    *BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM*

    *”perp” falls to hands and knees, wounded*

    *BLAM BLAM*

  35. Rant On Garages, a short essay, by robc

    My neighborhood, and the one next, has a lot of new homes being built. One thing I dislike, and that my* house doesnt have, is a prominent garage in the front. Ours is in the back, because we have an alley. But for some of our neighborhood and for the neighboring hood, the driveways are in front. A front garage is fine, but IMO, it should **NEVER** stick out in front of the front door. The porch/door area should be the primary visual feature of the front of the house.

    But that is beside the point.

    1. I was looking at HOA** docs yesterday, ours requires a 2 car garage (but not larger than a 3 car garage). It got me thinking about the Google car. Ive said before that I hope to never buy another car, I just want to call JohnnyCab whenever I want to go somewhere. I realize my timing isnt right, there may be one more round of car purchases in my lifetime. But, I know its coming.

      Im no futurist (for one thing, some of my predictions are right. Thanks for the 6 pack Baked Penguin) but I can see this clearly. Arent these very nice, expensive houses with prominent garages going to look really damn silly in 20 years? Not to mention the parking lots around big box stores.

      And that actually gets my rant to a libertarian point. Or maybe not, maybe its just a general governance thing. They say the military is always fighting the last war, but we are also building infrastructure for the last tech. Louisville is building two*** new bridges, it might be they dont really even need 1. This is a multi-billion dollar project being built to solve a problem that might be going away on its own.

      Anyway, end rant.

      *By “my”, I mean my wife’s house, the prenup makes that clear
      **Yes, I loved that my house in Louisville wasnt in an HOA. See footnote 1.
      ***It being 2 is a whole ‘nother issue

      1. If the nerds like Ron Baily win and no one drives anymore in 20 years, that will be a very very sad future.

        1. People will still drive, just for fun, not for transportation.

          1. I could see owning an expensive sports car that never sets wheel on public pavement.

            1. People still ride horses.

          2. Then they will still own cars and want garages.

            1. Car ownership will be like boat ownership.

              Actually, bet like with boats, HOAs wont want you parking your car in sight.

              1. What a nightmare future.

                1. I wish we could still post with fake handles.

                  I wanted to post as “19th century John” lamenting the nightmarish future in which horse drawn buggies are no longer the means of transportation.

                  Of course, 21st century John ignored my 9:35 post that people still ride horses. You arent* going to have to sneak out past the wire to your uncles place to drive your car around.

                  *well, maybe you will, but not due to self-driving cars. Obama seems to want to build a wall to keep us in.

                  1. So I will be able to own a car, I just won’t be able to drive it on the roads anymore. yeah, that is much better rob.

                    1. I just won’t be able to drive it on the roads

                      1. Who said that? Self-driving cars are good at avoiding idiots.

                      But, assume driving is banned:

                      2. You will still be able to drive on private roads. And what libertarian could object to that?

                    2. 2. You will still be able to drive on private roads. And what libertarian could object to that?

                      I don’t know about Libertarians, but as a tax payer, I sure as hell object to that.

                      What fascist nerds like Baily want is to reduce driving to something rich people do at race tracks. Fuck that.

                    3. I don’t know about Libertarians, but as a tax payer, I sure as hell object to that.

                      As a taxpayer, you object to being able to drive on private roads?

                      That makes no sense.

                    4. No Rob. I object to not being able to drive on public roads that I pay for, which is what Bailey and his ilk want.

              2. I, and much of the country, still do not live in your artsy fartsy prepackaged planned communities. I don’t see waiting for a JohnnyCab show up way out in the sticks. Cars forever!

                1. You can own your own self-driving car then.

                  1. WHY WON’T YOU LET ME KEEP MY EXISTING TRUCK?

                    1. Im fine with it. But why would you not want a self-driving truck? Maybe you arent out drinking as often as I am.

                      Or used to be.

                    2. If I am allowed to sleep while the thing is driving, I’m okay with it.

                    3. If I am allowed to sleep while the thing is driving, I’m okay with it.

                      We damn well better be able to sleep. Sleep, drink, read, whatever. The short hop airline industry just died if I can do that.

                      Its like independent trains without tracks.

                    4. Another benefit would be road head being much less of a perilous of an endeavor.

                    5. Maybe you arent out drinking as often as I am.

                      They will never give up that dwi revenue.

                      Mark my words:

                      If robot cars become popular, we will have more checkpoints than nazi germany,

        2. Don’t worry – there is not a jurisdiction in the country that will allow a car without a driver. My prediction, anyway.

      2. The garage is a place to store all your power tools, not a place to put your car.

        1. Nothing wrong with an attached shed.

          But it doesnt need two large doors in the front.

        2. I’m sure his is used as a brewery.

          1. My previous one, yes.

            Update time: my lawyer is reviewing lease, have a meeting with her on Friday. The lease is dated Sept 15, so that is target to get it signed by.

            1. You’re in FL now, so isn’t it a meth lab?

              1. ???

                Im still in KY. Closer to Nashville than Louisville, but still in KY.

                1. No shit?

                  I could have swore you moved to FL.

                  What former KY guy am I getting you cornfused with?

                  I’m in the FT Knox area.

        3. I’ve become quite attached to my 2×2 square garage, that is unfortunately detached. 2 cars, plus tools, plus yard stuff plus full-up gym: the tits

          1. …but alas I’m renting.

      3. I agree that the front-facing out-sticking garage is an architectural abomination.

        1. I wish someone would explain why that is done. Im guessing its function over form, so they can put rooms behind the garage. But ugh.

          And no one seems to be commenting on the actual point of my rant. But thats okay, thats how rants work.

          1. Narrow side yards, and pavement is expensive.

      4. Fuck this self driving car shit. I prefer to drive myself and I actually enjoy it. I honestly couldn’t see, even.if I was a billionaire, taking a limo or a cab everywhere. I hate being limited by someone else, even.someone who.is.hired.to drive me wherever I want. I want to just get in and go, not have to call someone and wait for.them to show up or to get the car ready or whatever.

        1. Ditto. I even had jobs with a secretary and I don’t even like turning over my calendar to someone else.
          …A cook on the other hand, I could put a cook to work.

      5. This is a multi-billion dollar project being built to solve a problem that might be going away on its own.

        Every time I see a piece of ruin from the old Ohio-Erie Canal, (which was obsoleted soon after it was built by railroads) I’m reminded of how the government is always spending fortunes on solving yesterday’s problems.

        1. Actually, the canal wasn’t built by railroads. But I hope you get my point despite my lack of grammarliness.

    2. You know what irks me? When homes are built with garages on a different level than the kitchen. I see this with townhomes in Pennsylvania a lot – there’s a one-car garage on the lowest level and then some crap space taking up the rest of the footprint on that level.

      Why not use that space for an eat-in kitchen? The heaviest thing I bring into my house on a regular basis is groceries.

    3. The official term is “Snout House”. While I once owned one in Las Vegas 20 years ago, I too do not care for the standard developer snout house on a quarter acre, with 3 square bedrooms and no windows on at least 1 side.

      1. We have been going to a lot of open houses, checking out what builders are doing, getting ideas for when we build our final house. We are going to move ONCE.

        Another thing that is common and annoying: The master walk in closet off the master bath instead of off the bedroom. Neither of us like it, but I at least understand it and its only mildly annoying to me. But what is unfathonable, is when that closet is on the front of the house and has a window. What the hold fuck! That is the stupidest fucking design in all history. I DONT WANT A FUCKING WINDOW IN MY FUCKING WALK IN CLOSET YOU FUCKING MORONS.

        I cant imagine anyone actually prefers to have a window in their closet. “I cant buy this house, the closet isnt windowed.”

        1. Maybe someone originally meant for that closet to be an office?

          Because, truly, WTF?

          1. No, this is in aobut 50% of the new houses being built near me.

            They put the master bedroom on back, with master bath in front of it, and master closet in front of that.

        2. Detached garages FTW. I fucking love them.

    4. The car is the focal point of most Americans’ lives – the architecture just reflects that.

      1. My point is that that will be changing.

        1. I’m dubious of the whole “self-driving car” thing, so I doubt it.

          1. Why? Google has insanely proved that it works, IMO.

            1. I haven’t studied it but my gut FWIW says it won’t scale up. Also, no town in America will permit it.

  36. 50 toddlers who are best friends with their dogs

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/lilybo…..-dogs-538l

    1. I like number seven with the outfit that looks like the dog. Okay, that is cute overload. Only a real monster like Episiarch wouldn’t like that.

    2. You have to be one cold-hearted bastard to not enjoy those photos.

  37. Boycott threats against unpatriotic Burger King –

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/….._hp_ref=tw

    1. Has this been mentioned before? How man of the same people on the left that are upset about Burger King were making or laughing at jokes about moving to Canada if Bush won in 04?

      1. Dissent is only patriotic when our side isn’t the one in charge!

      2. I am going to be.eating so much Burger King now… I also hope they get Tim Horton’s to move.into PA. there are non around except maybe in Erie or Scranton.

    2. My guess is that maybe 0.5% of the people calling for a boycott have been in a Burger King in the last decade. And I may be a bit generous there.

  38. Anyone else watch the new Doctor Who?

    1. It was an … odd episode. It also seemed (after the beginning part) like Moffat had written a script for Sherlock and decided to adapt it for Doctor Who.

      But Capaldi is an awesome actor, and is gonna make a damn good Doctor.

      1. The lesbian lizard is sherlock in doctor who. The stories of sherlock were supposedly based upon her and her ninja wife.

    2. Not since I realized they’d turned it into a soap opera.

      1. 1) Romantic subplots

        2) Continuity between adventures

        3) Blowing the budget on special effects

        It’s not the Dr. Who I grew up with!

        1. You’re right. It’s better.

          1. In my day, Dr. Who did more with less – they didn’t have fancy CGI, they had good old fashioned rubber suits, cellophane wrapping, and crude film-splicing.

            And another thing, they didn’t try to cater to the female audience with constant relationship talk.

            And when they wanted the Doctor on a new adventure, they just picked a writer, gave him four (or six) episodes, and told him to go to town. No concerns about having one adventure mesh with the previous ones, because they *cared* about the audience’s attention span!

            And we liked it, we LOVED it!

            1. They had one monster who looked a guy wrapped in bubble wrap, other monsters who were guys in werewolf makeup, and they *scared* me! Because I was an imaginative child with a sense of wonder who didn’t need meticulous special effects to keep me entertained!

              1. But what about the kids on your lawn?

                1. I have kids on my lawn when I want it mowed, then when they’re done I have the dogs chase them off.

                  1. Smithers! Release the hounds!

              2. Because I was an imaginative child with a sense of wonder who didn’t need meticulous special effects to keep me entertained!

                You know what’s scary? The Weeping Angels. Seriously. Those are some scary fucking monsters. Even though you never see them move. But they still manage to be frightening.

                I was skeptical at first, being someone who grew up with Tom Baker, but I like it. My wife got into the Matt Smith episodes a bit, but none of the others. And she won’t give the new one a chance. All she said was “He’s ugly” and she went back to killing time on Facebook.

                1. OK, the Weeping Angels were good, and delightfully low-budget.

            2. I’ve got a good portion of the Tom Baker years on DVD, and I like the new show as well.

              1. I hope you mean “I also like the new show,” not “I like the new show just as well as I liked the Baker episodes.”

                1. I hope you mean “I also like the new show,” not “I like the new show just as well as I liked the Baker episodes.”

                  I like it more. There. I said it. The new one is better.

                  *ducks and runs*

                  1. I’ll just pretend I didn’t hear that.

                    1. I’m serious. Check it out, starting in 2005. The initial reboot didn’t have the budget that it has today. Some of the monsters are downright hokey. Then the effects got better as the growing budget reflected the growing popularity. The writing is good, the acting is good, the effects are good, what’s not to like, other than it not being Tom Baker?

                    2. I tried to get into the new show ~2006 – 2007. Couldn’t do it. When it wasn’t being boring, it was annoying. I found myself rooting for a supernova or something to kill *everyone* because I hated them so much. I can’t think of a single character in the reboot that I didn’t find repellent or loathsome. Finally I gave up.

                      Finding some of the old episodes on Netflix was a joy.

        2. I’m hoping the soap opera crap goes away with an older doctor. I got really tired of one kid doctor after the next.

  39. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..dding.html

    Jodi Foster’s wife kind of works.

    1. Wait. Jodie Foster is gay?

      1. Don’t tell John Hinkley.

  40. A front garage is fine, but IMO, it should **NEVER** stick out in front of the front door. The porch/door area should be the primary visual feature of the front of the house.

    I have noticed this trend, too, and wholeheartedly agree.

    The garage door should not be the most prominent architectural feature of the house.

  41. Life Lessons for Reasonoids:

    If you let the Cap’n Crunch soak in the milk for 10 to 12 minutes, you can proceed to eat it without shredding the roof of you mouth.

    1. Or you can read Cryptonomicon and get a CnC eating strategy from it.

      It involves using the nuggets against themselves.

  42. “University of Cambridge changes dress code so men can graduate in skirts

    “The University of Cambridge has rewritten its graduation dress code after hundreds of years to allow men to graduate in skirts – and women in suits – following complaints from transgender students.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new…..kirts.html

    1. Universities continuing their mission to prepare students for the real world.

    2. “The University of Cambridge has rewritten its graduation dress code after hundreds of years… following complaints from transgender students.”

      And Scots.

      1. I was gonna say. Centuries at Cambridge, I’m sure there’s been a few in kilts.

      2. A kilt is nae a dress, laddie, it’s totally manly, we wear them in battle, and bagpipe contests, and stuff!

    3. Oh no, the continuing blurring of traditional (and often government enforced historically) gender roles! What are we going to do? Soon I just will not know whether to marry a man, woman or dog I guess.

      1. Don’t you oppress me!

  43. I’m sure we’re just one or two bombing campaigns away from getting this whole “Muslim World” thing squared away for good.

    1. Well, if you use the right bombs… Dead people are never a problem.

  44. Fuck this self driving car shit. I prefer to drive myself and I actually enjoy it.

    THANK YOU.

    1. Y’all can drive. I drive 45 minutes to work and 45 minutes back every day and I can’t stand it. I can’t wait to be driven around by a robot.

      1. I would prefer the robot had my dinner ready when I get home.

          1. Because I enjoy driving more than cooking and cleaning.

      2. I hear you, but to me the worst thing about driving is being in the car itself, the best thing is controlling the driving, so I don’t see self driving cars as much of a plus.

        1. If cars no longer have to be designed for constant human input, I’d imagine they could be made a lot more comfortable.

          1. Right. You can throw out the current notion of what a car should look like. In the future, I envision we will be whisked from place to place in what I like to think of as “jacuzzi’s on wheels”.

      3. I don’t think people who want driverless cars should be prohibited from using them, how’s that?

        My motorcycle is designed to drive far above the speed limit, and the government’s inability to enforce things like speed limits universally is an important part of what makes life fun.

        Please don’t take my sunshine away.

        1. Ima ask again, Ken – whatcha ridin’?

        2. I never said that people shouldn’t be able to still drive themselves. Go all out. I just want to be able to kick back and not deal the bullshit that is my daily commute.

          1. I’m stuck on a little Suzuki 250 right now. I also ride my brother’s old KLR.

            In a few weeks, I’ll have a new Yamaha FZ-07.

          2. You see where this is going though, right?

            If driverless is safer than driven, and driverless saves children’s lives, how long do you think my freedom to drive myself is going to be tolerated?

            Hell, they don’t even have to use the children. Most people don’t like motorcycles on the road anyway. And they’re dangerous.

            They initiated a Drug War to stop people from smoking things that are less dangerous than motorcycles–to save people from themselves.

            If driverless cars are widely available ten years from now, I suspect there won’t be many bikes left on the road twenty years from now. As recently as the early 1990’s, who thought that governments would be making restaurants go smoke free–all over the world, much less all over the country.

            It’s gonna be like that.

            1. We need a Cash for Driverless-less Cars? program to get these death traps off our streetz!

              1. Can’t have people just driving around making choices for themselves.

                Some 30,000 – 40,000 people die in car accidents every year in this country.

                Wanting to drive myself around makes me ten times worse than Al Qaeda in some people’s estimation.

            2. Another thing about driverless cars that is likely to be highly regulated is maintenance and modification. Do you think that the government is just going to leave maintenance up to the owners if driverless cars become common?

            3. Ken- Even worse, by the early 90’s, all the fast food/fast-casual had already gone “non-smoker”- voluntarily!

              Any “full-service” restaurant had a population that was prepared to decide if they wished to dine where they couldn’t smoke. That wasn’t good enough…

          3. The thing with self-driving cars though is that the traffic optimization only really works if everybody (or at least the majority) uses them. And as cool as the technology is all on its own, it’s the traffic optimization that has the urban planners all moist in the shorts.

            1. I’m not in the traffic biz, but I would think an eventual evolution of these cars would permit chains of cars to draft to split/share the drag on the highway not unlike race cars. Of course lots of details to work out to make it a feasible reality, but I would think the tangible boost in fuel economy would push the idea along.

              1. I think they’ll just be going at high speed bumper to bumper. If they’re all going at the exact same speed and in the exact same direction, they can’t collide.

                There will be some kind of merge lanes and a program to facilitate that, I’m sure. And getting local batches of driverless cars to coordinate with each other probably won’t be a problem.

                Have you see stuff like this?

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDyfGM35ekc

                1. Connecting the dots, if they can get drones to do coordinate to do something like that, then programming cars to merge with each other really shouldn’t be a problem.

                  1. Yeah, cool stuff. We’re doing stuff with manned aircraft as well to fly in formation. Some of the bugs I see are how to coordinate people entering/leaving the caravan due to dissimilar routes and how to account for varying stopping distances in case of a random obstacle (deer) appearing.

      4. I want a giant pneumatic tube.

    2. If there was no one else on the road, I would enjoy driving to work. As it is, I hate it.

      1. I got up early this morning and left the house at 6.

        I would do it more often if people didn’t think leaving early was a sign of weakness.

  45. Huffingtonpost: Scientist’s worried about climate change let us look at their worried faces. maybe that will change those deniers minds.

    1. FEELINGS…..

    2. No real scientist wants his theories challenged.

      1. Or his grants to go away after the mass hysteria fades.

    3. It works for dogs- so why not planetary irritants and parasites who ever so clearly lack intelligence to fear the climapocolypse.

    4. Scientist’s what worried about climate change?

      1. *models

    5. Oh sweet merciful crap. What a bunch of pretentious bullshit.

      “This is my serious face”

      “Now suck my dick”.

    6. Wow! Marine biologists and oceanographers posed for pictures to illustrate their concern.

      I suppose even the deniers will acknowledge that it’s settled science now!

  46. Closing should be going on now on the ridiculous house I’m selling. Reducing all my housing costs by a third is going to make me feel like a rich man.

    We got the house for a steal, poured a lot of money into fixing it up, and are selling it a price that means we nearly lived for free for the past two years, so we have no complaints. But it’ll be good not to have it anymore.

  47. It was bound to happen:
    Local lefty (redundant) columnist beginning to find bombing ISI(X) a GOOD THING!
    And this is only because ISI(X) is ‘like the Nazis’ and ‘like Ebola’ and stuff. Absolutely nothing to do with the guy in the WH! OH NO! Cannot be!:

    “Upon further re-reconsideration”
    […]
    “I got called “Obama’s Leni Riefenstahl” the other day,”
    http://www.sfgate.com/entertai…..711550.php

    No, I wasn’t the one who called him that; Riefenstahl had talent.

    1. No, I wasn’t the one who called him that; Riefenstahl had talent.

      10/10

  48. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..years.html

    Miley Sirus now dating a homeless fugitive. No kidding. I have a friend whose daughter is 19. She was mortally offended when I said I thought Cyrus had frown into one of the homeliest least attractive celebrities in my life time. The poor girl, who is very attractive herself, really thinks Cyrus is attractive. WTF?

    1. I know it’s a stupid magazine, but I get really mad when I think about Maxim putting her at the top of the Hot 100 a few years ago.

      I mean, the Hot 100 should mean something.

      1. She is just tragically ugly. She literally doesn’t have an attractive feature. The only positive thing you can say about her is that at least she isn’t fat. Despite being thin, she still manages to have the nasty curvless skanky body of a heroin addict.

        She really doesn’t have a single thing going for her. That is all the whole twerking thing was. It was her saying “my dead beat dad and accountants stole all the money I made as a child star, I can’t sing, I am homely, I don’t have a shred of talent, so I will rub my ass on this guy’s crotch because well that is all I got”.

        1. I disagree about the singing part. She can sing. Granted, she chooses crappy songs, but she’s got quite a voice.

          1. I honestly haven’t heard enough of her to judge. So maybe so.

            1. I’ve heard one or two songs while browsing on the radio, and I was impressed. With her voice. Not with the song or anything, but I’ll give credit where credit is due. She can sing. But she still sucks.

              1. How, with any of these auto-tuned, over produced, Maddonna wannabe, disney created, consumer products can you actually be sure that they even have a signing voice, or that it is their own?

                1. Uhmmm Autotune is pretty readily discerned; it messes up the normal harmonics that comprise the human voice.

                  I don’t think I’ve ever failed to detect autotune when it’s being used – the voice sounds monotonal.

                  1. Auto-tune is a lot more capable and a lot more prevalent than you give it credit for.

                    Have you heard Britney Spears latest? Someone snuck an un-tuned version out.

                    GOD DAMN!

                    Most of this crowd’s live performances revolve around dance routines, some of which are so strenuous, that they should be weezing like… me when I yell at kids on my lawn.

                    Nothing but commercial product.

        2. I just did a Google Image search for Miley Cyrus. Part of the problem is she seems to stick her tongue out and wink in all of her photos. I suppose she thinks it makes her look cute. Like some cute character from a manga (Urusei Yatsura or Ranma 1/2 maybe?). It’s definitely not working. Does she still sing?

    2. There’s some women who aren’t necessarily knock-out attractive, but they ooze a certain indefinable sex appeal. Unfortunately, Miley Cyrus is neither.

      1. She is skinny, so I am sure sarcasmic would go for her. But the rest of us? not so much.

        1. I can’t see past that disgusting face of hers.

  49. The space probe New Horizons has crossed the orbit of Neptune on its way to Pluto.

    Are we there yet?

    1. Fuck, I know what this is all about. Zeno was right–you can’t get there from here.

    2. We’re somewhere.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.