A.M. Links: Obama to Announce Executive Action on Immigration, 3 Students Shot at Florida State University, Director Mike Nichols Dead at 83

|

  • Credit: White House / Flickr.com

    President Barack Obama will announce his plan to take unilateral executive action on immigration in a primetime speech tonight.

  • Tony Blinken, deputy national security adviser to President Obama, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the White House is "open" to limits on the duration of its military efforts and the use of ground troops against ISIS.
  • "After 13 years, 2 wars and trillions in military spending, terrorist attacks are rising sharply."
  • "The global response to the Ebola virus in Liberia is being hampered by poor coordination and serious disagreements between Liberian officials and the donors and health agencies fighting the epidemic, according to minutes of top-level meetings and interviews with participants."
  • Mike Nichols, the Oscar-winning director of The Graduate, has died at age 83.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily updates for more content.

Advertisement

NEXT: Jeffrey Rogers Hummel: How the Fed Got Huge

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. President Barack Obama will announce his plan to take unilateral executive action on immigration in a primetime speech tonight.

    BEHOLD YOUR KING IN ALL HIS GLORY.

    1. you are preternaturally quick.

      1. You sound like one of my girlfriends.

        1. No. If I was to be one of your “girlfriends” I would say you are pedernaturally quick.

        2. They call him The Minuteman

          1. +1 Pointy Phallic Missile.

    2. I’ll be listening to the football game.

      1. You going to stay up till the end of that one?

        1. I might listen in bed to the fourth quarter if the game is close. I’ve got a radio in the same room as my computer, and will probably spend a good portion of the evening on the web, listening to the game.

      2. There is no reason to watch the Raiders play…unless your other option is a presidential speech.

        1. I’m a life long Raiders fan. And it sucks.

          1. Silver and black is a good look at least….?

          2. ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’ is a great movie.

            Wait. You mean the other Raiders.

            Yikes!

          3. It’s been a brutal season. But they look better than they have in the last 5 seasons. Now they just need to win a game.

            1. Hey, at least you drafted the good Carr brother. In all seriousness, Derek Carr looks like he has potential to be decent.

              1. Except for fumbling the first snap against San Diego and throwing to a lineman who then fumbled the ball against Denver.

                1. True. Still, the potential is there, and at least Carr doesn’t drink Purple Drank. That we know of at least.

            2. Tomorrow night is their chance.

              1. Because they have no chance tonight?

                Go Chiefs!

          4. Raiders? I prefer professional football.

            1. Exactly. That’s why I’m a Buckeyes fan.

              1. One of their players refused to go to the NFL because he didn’t want the pay cut.

        2. Duke-UNC is the important game tonight.

          With a UNC win, I might have to make plans to drive to Charlotte.

          1. Is this a basketball or football game?

            1. Football.

              Duke was a powerhouse in football during the 1950s, why is it so weird that its happening again?

              And, also, the only host of the Rose Bowl outside of Pasadena. For some reason, their was worry about having a big crowd on the West Coast on Jan 1, 1942.

              1. And beaten by the OSC Beavers in that game.

              2. “Duke was a powerhouse in football during the 1950s, why is it so weird that its happening again?”

                Well, they were never a “powerhouse” and that was 60 fucking years ago.

                1. Regularly ranked. They werent winning national titles or anything, but it depends what you mean by the term.

          2. Little League football, how cute.

        3. TCM is showing The Birds as part of a night of Rod Taylor movies.

      3. There may not be a game if it keeps snowing like it has. I’ve read reports that they’ve removed an estimated 200,000 tons of snow from the stadium already, and that the Bills are hiring anyone in the vicinity to help shovel snow.

    3. Buenos d?as.

      He has a sceptre pen and a crown phone.

    4. I will be unable to.

      Unless, of course, he does something like this.

    5. President Joe Biden grew up in a working class family in Scranton, PA, in case your wondering.

      You’ll need this soon.

      http://www.brianweinberg.com/dictionary.html

      1. Heh.

    6. Hello.

      “President Barack Obama will announce his plan to take unilateral executive action”

      Remember when libprogs used to go ballistic over the word ‘unilateral’ during the Bush years?

      1. I think they were talking about military action then

        1. What’s the difference?

          1. Unilateral action is OK if it’s warm and fuzzy.

            1. Warm and fuzzy wins out over cold and hard…

          2. The idea was unilateral military action by the country makes us look like a ‘cowboy’.

            1. Well, there was a significant international coalition involved, as I recall. Including trips to the UN. Doesn’t seem same.

              1. The UN turned them down, and the Coalition of the Willing seemed more like the Coalition of the Bribed.

                1. Thankfully, the president doesn’t need any approval from the UN to take military action, no matter how much liberals like you wish that they did. He only needs to get approval from congress.

                  1. He only needs to get approval from congress.

                    Well, I think President Obama has put that quaint little notion to rest….

                  2. Cowboyz Duhplomacy!

        2. So what?

        3. I think they were talking about military action then.

          The military actions that were all properly approved by Congress?

          Let me explain to you a little basic english: when the action is approved by Congress, by definition it’s not “unilateral”.

      2. Unitary Executive

        /spoken in the same hushed and terrified tone as people used to say “Universal Monarchy” referring to Charles V.

      3. I can’t wait until President Cruz announces his unilateral executive orders instituting private social security accounts, amnesty for tax cheats, and that the Supreme Court needs 11 more originalists.

    7. There are a lot of reasons for a libertarian to dislike Obama (and I mean a lot), but this strikes me as an odd one. I’m for freedom of movement, and he’s exercising power that other Presidents have and which Congress could have tightened up long ago if they were really so concerned.

      1. And thus Bo summons the Improved Order of Red Men.

        1. You have to summon them? I think they try to always have someone on duty at all times, kind of like church deacons.

          1. Eternal vigilance is the price of xenophobia.

      2. So, because other presidents have exceeded their Constitutional authority that makes it ok for him to do it? Is there some clause in the Constitution that says if Congress is shirking it’s duty then it is up to the President to Do Something?

        1. Congress can address this type of executive action any time they want. They’ve been enabling this for a long time. The fuss here is because Immigrants Will Become Dimmycrats!

          1. So it is ok for the Chief Executive to take Unilateral Action in this case because Immigrants. In other cases it is not. Sounds kind of ambiguous and open for abuse.

          2. I disagree, Bo. I think part of the fuss is because the Prez is doing something that is supposed to be handled by another branch of the government, while his job is supposed to be about faithfully executing the laws, or . . . something.

            1. Why do you people do this to yourselves?

              1. You’d think everyone would have learned by now.

              2. Yeah, you people shouldn’t waste your time talking with libertarians who disagree with you, but should be talking with SugarFree about His Interests. What’s wrong with you people?

                1. You do realize that it’s not because you’re dissenting, but because it takes 15 comments to tease out any semblance of a salient point from you, right? By then, most people have given up.

                  By the end of the slavery thread last night, you had a defensible point. It just so happened that it had nothing to do with the original thread, but after you carried the goalposts a mile down the road, there was a good point in there. It’s too bad that you articulated the point in a way that exposed your complete lack of reading comprehension, because it would’ve been a good debate to have if not clouded by the fact that you entirely hacked up my original comment, completely missing where I addressed your point.

                  1. Dudes upset about last nite’s thread and carrying on about me moving the goalposts. Wow.

                    1. Is there some reason you think being a condescending prick and ignoring criticism is a successful posting strategy?

                    2. Is there some reason you think being a condescending prick and ignoring criticism is a successful posting strategy

                      The new common core speech class adds a little to the curriculum. It’s now ethos, pathos, logos, and pedantos

                    3. Is there some reason you think being a condescending prick and ignoring criticism is a successful posting strategy?

                      You might be mixing up the means with the ends.

            2. He cannot enforce the law completely as written, so he’s going to focus on what he sees as the most important part and ignore the ‘offenders’ he thinks are least culpable and threatening. That kind of thing is not that remarkable.

              1. He cannot enforce the law completely as written

                Why not? It’s not like it’s, say, *Obamacare*.

      3. meh I don’t care either way, it seems to be a political stunt(as is everything politicians do) with little to nothing changing long term. However it’s an interesting one as I have yet to see a single poll where its perceived as a popular idea.

        1. Everything Obama does is a political stunt, everything. But at least this time some good might inadvertently come from it

          1. What good would that be?

            1. Having people not hunted down and literally put into camps because they crossed a line to come work and associate here?

              1. Oh I see. I wasn’t aware you are an Open Borders believer.

                1. As a True Believer in Open Borders, I declare Bo a heretic.

                  1. What? I pray to the Open Border five times a day!

                  2. I declare Bo an apostate, and appropriately, we should get into a rambling pedantic argument over the definition and technicalities between the difference that stretches for 30 entries.

              2. Except, of course thanks to the way Obama is doing it, the blowback will be that a lot of pissed of people will seek to start putting them in camps and sending them back to the shitholes they fled from. The blowback will come with a vengeance, and the people Obama is pretending to help will be left worse off, because there is almost no chance that Congress will do the right thing by them.

                Bo, I pity the man who ever hires you to negotiate an agreement, because your knowledge of human nature is only slightly less abject than your knowledge of history. My prediction is that you will fuck up something as easy as negotiating getting a blowjob in a Tijuana whorehoues.

                1. As a True Believer in Getting Blowjobs in Tijuana, I declare Bo a heretic.

                2. You of course have the unassailable political knowledge and not some guy whose parlayed a terrible name and middling background into two terms as President of the United States. Whatever Obama’s faults are, lack if political savvy is not one of them.

                  1. You couldn’t be more wrong. He’s been taking political beatings for most of his administration. Compare him with Bill (not Hillary) Clinton, who was political astute when still in office.

                    1. The guy won reelection in a terrible economy, while being outspent and having an incredibly unpopular signature achievement. Dude has some political skills.

                    2. The dude has awesome rhetorical skills.

                      He is awesomely deficient in political skills.

                      Rhetorical skills are necessary to mount a successful election campaign. Admittedly, the election campaign is part of politics in a democratic republic. However, in addition to the rhetorical skills, the successful candidate must have political talent to be a successful leader. Political talent requires the requisite skills and ethics to govern well. Despite his awesome rhetorical skill, Obama fails miserably as a successful leader.

                  2. His lack of political savvy was made clear when he couldn’t get one Republican to support Obamacare.

                    1. It’s a terrible bill. The fact that he got anyone to sign their name to it was really something.

                    2. Yes it is a terrible law. Those that voted against it pointed that out. But instead of displaying some political savvy by engaging in some kind of compromise to win broader support for it on the political spectrum, he went with ‘I won’.

                      Not very savvy.

                    3. He delivered on a campaign promise to his foolish base, a promise previous Democrats with Congress under Dem leadership could not deliver. Yeah, he’s pretty unsavvy there!

                    4. Well, following the passage of that bill his party lost the House, and then lost the Senate.

                      Not savvy.

                    5. And, his party now has its lowest representation in the state legislatures since the late ’20s.

                      Not savvy.

                  3. Whatever Obama’s faults are, lack if political savvy is not one of them.

                    Way to miss the point, you jacknape! It’s not about Obama, but everyone else!

                    As I wrote last week:

                    Full disclosure: I am an open borders radical, so I my heart is in the end-all-immigration-restrictions- and-mandatory-employer-verifiction-checks camp.

                    With that being said, what Obama is doing is pretty stupid. None of the steps he is taking actually fix anything. His statement to the effect that Congress must fix the problem is correct. To do that he needs to step back and let Congress tackle the problem. If he hadn’t squandered what good-will the legislators had for him with his systematic contemptuous behavior, he could influence the process.

                    But being a narcissist, he can’t stand not being in charge. His personality disorder impels him to show the Congress that he is in charge and do it in a way that humiliates them. All this does is engender bad feelings for him and makes actually building a consensus that is acceptable to a supermajority of legislators more difficult to build. Thanks to this proposal, the task is now sisyphean.

                    In effect it’s actually screwing over the people it’s supposed to help, since the backlash that’s building up will lead to whomever replaces Obama rescinding his executive orders as a big fuck you.

                    1. No no, tarran, that’s savvy! Savvy means the same thing as spite, and/or stupidity!

                    2. Have you noticed you do a lot of: ‘let me say, I’m an anarchist/open borders radical/ etc., BUT I’m now going to say something that’s hard to square with my introductory declaration?

                    3. As to the substance of your comment let me repeat: 1. Did you really think this coming Congress was going to do something pro liberty in this area? And 2. Perhaps, just maybe, you’re wrong about how this will play out politically?

                    4. 1. Did you really think this coming Congress was going to do something pro liberty in this area?

                      No. I expect they will fuck around doing populist shit that will generally harm liberty.

                      2. Perhaps, just maybe, you’re wrong about how this will play out politically?

                      Oh, yes! I could well be wrong! Just like there was a non zero chance that Ron Paul would win the Republican nomination in 2008, there is a non zero chance that the Republican dominated congress will ignore their nativist impulses and make it easier for immigrants to enter the U.S. legally. Of course, thanks to what Obama just did, that possibility is even more remote. At this point I am much more likely to win a pony in the lottery than to see this happen.

                    5. Have you noticed you do a lot of: ‘let me say, I’m an anarchist/open borders radical/ etc., BUT I’m now going to say something that’s hard to square with my introductory declaration?

                      I don’t believe I’ve ever done that, Bo. Can you cite an example?

                    6. So tarran would allow his preferences to be put aside so he can support the procedures we have in the Constitution. Horrors!

        2. However it’s an interesting one as I have yet to see a single poll where its perceived as a popular idea.

          You have to strip out the target demos. Obama gave up on being universally adored years ago.

      4. Because some of us are also concerned about constitutionalism and federalism.

        The last doesnt come into play here, but just thought I would throw it in.

        Libertarianism doesnt say anything about preferred FORM of government, but I prefer those.

      5. Bo, I’m Canadian and can see this is outrageous so soon after the American people handed the Senate to the GOP. Perhaps I read American politics wrong (at which point I will renounce my high university grades in political science) but isn’t this a way of the people saying to the President, ‘check your executive privilege?’

        It’s not that he can do it but his timing of it, the issue he chose to do it and the naked fact he’s doing it for political expediency and little else. He’s basically giving the middle finger with one hand and signalling martial arts style with his hand daring the GOP to ‘get a piece of him’.

        That’s not a leader. That’s just a person not able to handle power.

        1. Do you see the new GOP Congress increasing freedom in this area, even if Obama did or said nothing? I don’t

          1. Bo – I don’t see how vastly expanding the welfare rolls, and thereby increasing the tax burden of current or future taxpayers, by increasing the freedom of travel for a select group of people is a net win for liberty.

        2. He isn’t a leader. Very few politicians are. Elected representative? Yes. Leader? No.

          He is also upset at the American People for repudiating him and his party. Obama is going to take his revenge on them – we are not worthy of his greatness.

          1. Please. This is a good political bet for him. Very few voters turned out in the recent midterms. The Democrats have a long term strategy of courting Hispanics and Asians.

            1. Well, when you have nothing to lose every bet seems like a good one. If you call that leadership that’s ok by me.

            2. That’s the point. This is not the time to play that game after he just publicly said he wants to work with the GOP. I don’t see this as leadership at all.

              Congress should be handling this issue.

              Not him unilaterally.

              1. Sometimes people confuse rushing headlong into a certain defeat as leadership when it is really just a poor decision made out of spite.

                Classic narcissistic personality disorder.

          2. And I really don’t want a leader at all. Trouble is they keep trying to be leaders even when they are utter failures at it which is probably even worse than having an effective leader.

      6. It’s far from the worst thing Obama will have done. I’m quite keen on the right to freedom of movement, but I think that any executive action by Obama is likely to be counterproductive to any immigration reform of the sort that I would like to see.

        Whether or not doing so would be illegal or exceeding constitutional authority is purely academic. He does de facto have the power to do so and he won’t get impeached for it either. I’d like to see a non-activist presidency, but I’d like to see a lot of things that aren’t going to happen.

        1. Obama isn’t about being productive, that’s for sure. He’s a craven, political creature with few actual principles or empathy. But look, I’ll ask again, do you really think this coming Congress was going to do anything promoting freedom of movement in this area? The majority is heavily based on the South and Southwest, it ain’t gonna happen any other way.

          1. I wouldn’t expect the upcoming congress to do much to improve freedom of movement, no. But backlash is a thing. I guess we will see what happens. Some will depend on exactly what Obama intends to do.

        2. Ah. So harmless political games given the EO may have no teeth anyway?

      7. If the Repubs responded to this by limiting or stopping access any of these “Dreamers” had to the welfare state, I would have no problem with it, along with limiting the power of the welfare state over all of us. The people are already here and moving freely – I don’t really care. But since the president’s agenda (at least in a passive sense) behind this is to increase the influence of the welfare state, I am torn by it.

      8. Well, it’s not really within his discretionary power to basically refuse to enforce the law. I believe he’s even acknowledged that he doesn’t really have the authority to do anything on a large scale.

        I’m far less concerned about the larger immigration issue than I am with yet another expansion of power in the executive. Consider what this logic can mean for other laws where some power has been delegated to the executive.

        1. Remember the story recently if the officer who issued a ticket to a woman for obstructed plates when she was in a funeral procession? I wish that guy had exercised his discretion to not enforce the law there. And if his department adopted an official policy not to issue tickets to people in funeral processions I’d clap my hands.

          1. Because traffic violations are exactly the same as breaches of Constitutional authority.

            1. It’s an analogy, the specifics are supposed to be different.

              1. I know it’s an analogy, it’s just a bad one.

                1. It is? It’s supposed to get at the idea that discretion enforcement is not a bad thing because it’s regularized in an officially stated policy.

                  1. Discretion in this case doesn’t equal don’t enforce at all. It’s a clear violation of the law, and there’s precedent about how far granted discretion can go.

                    This is also judiciable, because, for the most part, there is no inherent authority here, only that granted by Congress.

                  2. It is because traffic infractions are meaningless in the course of events, even one person’s life. Exceeding Constitutional authority has far wider and deeper ramifications.

                    You know this.

            2. Prosecutorial discretion = deciding on a case by case basis, depending on the facts and circumstances, not to prosecute.

              Nullification of the law = deciding not to enforce the law against anybody.

              This isn’t that hard.

              1. As John would say, Bo doesn’t care about the method just as long as he gets his pony.

              2. Exactly. And I might even grant that a president could take some more radical action against a law he’s been calling unconstitutional all along, because the executive has some independent authority in that regard. But that’s not what’s happening here. He’s just following some odd political path.

                1. It’s not odd at all, it’s actually incredibly savvy of him, we are just too stupid to realize it! You’ll see!

      9. One difference is the numbers talked about. If reports are accurate, Obama is going an order of magnitude larger than the other presidents.

        1. Do people here not realize we’re talking about the exact same power/principle behind the administrations memo to not go after those violating federal drug laws but not state drug laws? That applies to millions of people too, but the only criticism of Obama on that here is his failure to follow it.

          1. Of course, we all know that memo resulted in zero change in actual prosecutorial activity.

            Now, if this just turns out to be another exercise in PR and fraud, and he makes no change to immigration enforcement, well, that is what it is.

            But, he’s already nullifying chunks of immigration law. This announcement will just make it formal, official policy.

          2. “but the only criticism of Obama on that here is his failure to follow it.”

            That’s simply a not true. I distinctly remember John making the point that it would be silly for anyone to consider opening a pot business in the current climate. He then went on to do exactly what you claim is not being done here, at length.

            1. The real criticism was that he issued a fucking press release, and didn’t actually do anything to change the law.

              Try to grasp these nuances, Bo, and you’ll do better.

    8. Stossel will be doing analysis at 9:00. Did I say FdA likes Stossel?

      1. I don’t like Stossel, but I’m glad he exists.

  2. …the White House is “open” to limits on the duration of its military efforts and the use of ground troops against ISIS.

    Not any limits set by Congress, mind you.

    1. Or by the Constitution.

      1. Mostly, limits set by ISIS?

        1. Let’s not forget Putin.

  3. IRS cites user comments from the website legal insurrection in court document,s in an effort to avoid giving judicial watch Lerner’s emails requested using the FOIA:
    Examples of said comments-

    C. Lashown | October 9, 2014 at 5:27 pm
    Actually, I public whipping with a buggy whip would not be that far out-of-line! The woman is a thief of the ‘public’ trust and a deceptive liar. Cutting her tongue out and cutting off here lips might be a little to far (maybe), but most things short of that she has earned in spades! Can I use the term ‘spade’ without being called a racist?

    I don’t believe that Lerner should be confronted on her own lawn. But I would like for her to be paralyzed with fear. Seized with spontaneous diarrhea. Worried sick. Unable to eat. Sleepless. Shaking like a leaf. Wondering if she will end up in jail. All those things the average taxpayer experiences when confronted by the IRS.

    These seem incredibly tame, I hope reason doesn’t request anything via the FOIA.

    1. The next time around, they will use Onion articles as an excuse to not disclose information.

    2. So, they committed egregious illegal acts and now people are mad at them. Therefore they should be able to get away with it.

      If I am ever put on trial I will use this defense.

      1. Just like other IRS defenses, it only works for them. See Turbo Tax Timmy.

  4. “After 13 years, 2 wars and trillions in military spending, terrorist attacks are rising sharply.”

    Good enough for government work!

    1. That’s just proof they need more money and a bigger bureaucracy.

      1. We just need to teach ISIS how to create a bureaucracy. If they spend all day in meetings, they won’t have time for any beheadings.

        1. “Do you have that Powerpoint deck for me yet, Abdul?”

          1. In shalah, I’ll get to get as soon as I’m done with this FOIA!

          2. How does one shout “next slide!” in Arabic?

    2. War on poverty, war on drugs, war on terror. What’s that thing called when you keep doing the same thing and expect a different result? Oh, yeah, government.

      1. Thanks for not saying “insanity”.

        1. Yeah, severe nut punch to the next person who uses that totally fucked-out cliche.

          1. And an extra punch in the face if you attribute it to Einstein.

    3. At least we met our obligation under international law!

  5. President Barack Obama will announce his plan to take unilateral executive action on immigration in a primetime speech tonight.

    The NFL decided to at least tie a hand behind their back by having a terrible team and a team barely anyone cares about playing.

    1. I for one like the chiefs.

      1. +1 tomahawk chop!

  6. “The global response to the Ebola virus in Liberia is being hampered by poor coordination and serious disagreements between Liberian officials and the donors and health agencies fighting the epidemic, according to minutes of top-level meetings and interviews with participants.”

    The United Nations is failing at something important? Africa doesn’t have its shit together? I find all of this hard to believe.

  7. San Francisco sees sharp rise in property and violent crimes

    “Certainly, we’ve seen an increase in theft-related offenses, particularly car thefts,” Adachi said in an interview Wednesday.

    “In San Francisco, you definitely have this tale of two cities. You have a lot of very rich people. The top 5% have a median income of $350,000. And then you have 23% of the population at poverty levels,” Adachi said. “When you have income disparities like that, you’re going to see crime rates that may reflect that.

    “Theft, often, is a crime of poverty, and certainly, the spike in thefts causes us concern,” Adachi said.

    People are only stealing because other people are so rich!

    1. The top 5% have a median income of $350,000. And then you have 23% of the population at poverty levels

      The solution is for the top 5% to move out, and leave the city 100% poor. There will 100% income equality and everyone will be happy and there will be no crime.

      1. See, for example, Detroit.

      2. Fascinating. Please do go on. [/Marion Barry]

      3. Things wouldn’t be getting stolen if they weren’t there in the first place. The way that rich people tie up valuable resources is intolerable. If they would just leave that would free up the police and local government to work on actual issues impacting the poor instead of having to devote all their time and resources to protecting the rich. It’s basically just subsidies to the rich on the backs of the poor.

    2. Why are the proggies in SF tolerating this horrible inequality? Shouldn’t they be voluntarily redistributing their incomes to address this?

      1. Sorry WTF. The word “voluntary” was removed from the last edition of the Progressive Dictionary of Newspeak. It has been replaced with doubleplusungood.

        1. Yes, the only progressively moral thing to do is force other people to hand over their wealth at the point of a gun.

      2. Hey…they earned that money! Makes more sense to take the money from people who have jobs or opinions they don’t like.

  8. “After 13 years, 2 wars and trillions in military spending, terrorist attacks are rising sharply.”

    Cheddar is slang for money and can be sharp. I rest my case.

      1. Don’t lock eyes with ’em, don’t do it. Puts ’em on edge. They might go into berzerker mode; come at you like a whirling dervish, all fists and elbows. You might be screaming “No, no, no” and all they hear is “Who wants cake?” Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.

    1. Citizen Nothing, you’re trying to seduce us. … Aren’t you?

      1. The room number, Rich. I think you ought to tell me that.

  9. Three students were shot at the Florida State University library before campus police killed the gunman.

    If only the assailant was required to go through a universal background check and register all his guns would this shooting have been prevented.

    1. Least appropriate responses so far from Tallahassee:

      — “I hear someone told him that the NCAA Playoff Committee was meeting at Strozier”

      — #BlameJameis

      (I’ll also note that the library at which he was shot does require an FSU ID card swipe to get beyond the lobby. I’m still not sure if he was just shooting up the lobby or got beyond that.)

      1. I hope my sarcastic comment was not perceived as inappropriate. But the fact of the matter is that the hoplophobes use these tragedies to push for their pet causes which will have zero effect, and will only enable the government to disarm the people in the long run.

        1. No worries. My feelings were not hurt. You put 30000 people between 18 and 25 in a pressure cooker of hormones and stress, someone is going to do violently stupid things. At least nobody but the gunman was killed, and, as bad a rap as TPD has, they definitely engaged the shooter immediately rather than locking down and letting him rampage.

      2. I think it was outside on the ramp up to the front.

        I’m an FSU student but I was at home blissfully unaware, instead of at school, where I imagine I’d be feeling confused/disoriented and/or wishing I wasn’t disarmed.

        The library in question is basically a place college kids go to study, or more often, try to look good and flirt. It gets pretty crowded in the evenings sometimes.

        1. I learned Organic in the lobby. But on Sunday afternoons. I don’t mean to run down the people who were actually there, but there are a bunch of vultures latching on to this to display their bona fide feels. It always makes me uncomfortable. Maybe its my Aspie side.

          1. In the 1990s there was a great and phenomenally well trafficked glory-hole in the 2nd floor bathrooms. Or, so I was led to believe.

            1. Or, so I was led to believe.

              He said, wiping his chin…

            2. According to Reddit, there is one in the nearby Bellamy building. I’ve miraculously escaped having STDs thus far, and would like to keep it that way.

          2. Lately I’ve been more annoyed by the people who are suddenly huge FSU fans again…now that they’ve won a national championship.

        2. I’m an FSU student but I was at home blissfully unaware, instead of at school, where I imagine I’d be feeling confused/disoriented and/or wishing I wasn’t disarmed.

          So…classes canceled? Hit the bars a day early?

          1. So…classes canceled? Hit the bars a day early?

            Classes are cancelled, but I am doing some upper level chemistry and biology classes and am using the time productively. After a brief sideline on Hit n’ Run of course. Also I am a parent and my son wants to play soccer with me after school.

    2. Oh, ye Gods. My FB looks like Virginia Tech or the UT shooting, not some limp dick who managed 3 hits and no kills before being shot down within minutes. It disgusts me how quick people are to adopt the suffering of 6-8 people as their own.

      1. I’m glad none of the victims were killed. WTF, America? And no, that’s not a question that says we should strip all of the college students and make them attend class naked.

  10. Revealed: Off-duty St. Louis cop who killed black teen by shooting him six times from behind – and had previously ranted about how Michelle Obama looks ‘high and dumb’

    Jason Flanery shot and killed VonDerrit Myers Jr. in St. Louis in October just as racial tensions in nearby Ferguson remained high
    His family was delivered a package that included Flanery’s name along with materials sent to Myers’ funeral home
    Myers’ attorney says Flanery’s social media posts against Obama and about how the first lady looks ‘drunk, high and dumb’ were racially biased

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..amily.html
    Who cares. He shot someone in the back six times. What else do you need to know?

    1. Because all that matters is the identity politics and the feels

    2. Shooting a civilian in the back is dishonorable indeed. Even criminals consider it cowardly.

    3. Revealed: Off-duty St. Louis cop who killed black teen by shooting him six times from behind

      Agreed, all you need is that part. I can’t understand the lawyers need to make his clients case LESS universal

    4. Police have said Myers shot first at the officer. They released details of lab tests by the Missouri State Highway Patrol that showed gunshot residue on Myers’ hand, waistband and shirt…

      …Police Chief Sam Dotson has said Myers fired three shots before his gun jammed.

      Millikan said Myers was shot in the back of the legs while lying on his side with a gun in his hand.

      From the article. If Myers dropped the gun and raised his hands, I’d have a problem with the cop shooting him. But that didn’t happen. The cop was supposed to let an armed guy just run away from him? Especially when the deceased had just taken three shots at the cop?

      Cops do enough vile, hyper-agressive shit without having to deify a shithead like Myers.

      1. You actually believe the cops?

        1. In this case, yeah, I do. You’d have to fake the gunshot residue, the spent cases at the scene, the multiple photos of shithead posing with all sorts of handguns (and I will bet money that he was a prohibited person), the autopsy: at a certain point, you have to say that if they can fake all of that, they’re omnipotent and there’s nothing we’ll be able to do about it.

          Not to mention Myers had a previous record already, and he was only 18.

          Charge/Judgment
          Description: Unlawful Use Of A Weapon (Subsections 1 ? 4) { Felony D RSMo: 571.030 }
          Date: 06/27/2014 Code: 3102000
          OCN: CJ001706 Arresting Agency: ST LOUIS METROPOLITAN POLICE
          Next Charge/Judgment
          Description: Resisting/Interfering With Arrest, Detention Or Stop { Misdemeanor A RSMo: 575.150 }
          Date: 06/27/2014 Code: 2704000
          OCN: CJ001706 Arresting Agency: ST LOUIS METROPOLITAN POLICE

          God only knows what shit he’d been up to as a juvenile. At least he’d upgraded in his choice of weaponry. I give the juvenile justice system in MO credit: I’m stunned that Mike Brown’s or this guy’s juvie sheet haven’t been leaked to the media. I guess sealed really means sealed in Missouri.

          1. That record says it all. It’s pretty tough these days for young black kids in big cities to get arrested.

            1. Inorite? Who here didn’t get popped at 18 for carrying a Hi-Point and scufflin with the po-po? I thought that shit came with the birthday cake. Hey, at least our strong gun laws were able to keep him from getting another gun…

              Getting angry at the cops for shooting people who’d just been shooting at them isn’t going to convince many on-the-fence people that the police are out of control in the country.

              1. This is naive. Cops in cities like St Louis don’t give any fucks about whether an arrest is justified. I’ve got some experience with this…having been arrested is a meaningless indication of character thsee days.

                1. Were his priors for dope, public intox, simple assault, etc…: I’d agree with you. Those are like shooting fish in a barrel.

                  Being out on bond for unlawful use of a weapon and getting into a shootout with a cop while he’s wearing an ankle monitor, speaks a little bit more to his character.

                  But I sense we aren’t going to agree on this.

                  1. Being out on bond for unlawful use of a weapon and getting into a shootout with a cop while he’s wearing an ankle monitor, speaks a little bit more to his character.

                    Indeed, he was dumber than the cops. That doesn’t really exonerate the cops. With the details you’ve brought to light, this incident screams gang fight/turf war. It is entirely possible he was a no-good criminal and the noble, professional police did all they could to reign him in. It’s far more likely that the cops and whatever gang this idiot belonged to were competing over territory.

  11. ‘Somebody is missing a lot of marijuana:” Puzzled clothing store manager receives 90 pounds of packaged marijuana over two days running

    Two packages of 30 pounds of marijuana each were delivered to the City Blue clothing store in Upper Darby on Tuesday followed by a 30 pound package Wednesday
    The drugs have an estimated street value of $3,000 per pound, bringing the total to $180,000 pounds
    Police say the have identified who the drugs were meant to be sent to and are now on the hunt

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..nning.html
    Oh, man!

    1. These are actually days 3 and 4 after he had sold all the pot his buddies could move.

    2. The manager got lucky that they didn’t arrest him.

      1. City Blue clothing store is obviously a place of business where illegal activity takes place. Civil asset forfeiture anyone?

      2. I think that shipping big boxes of weed to unsuspecting recipients is common enough way of moving it around the country that police often don’t jump to the conclusion that the recipient necessarily is involved in the smuggling. Of course, it’s far from universal, so he’s still pretty lucky.

        1. tell that to mayors in MD

          1. Hence “still pretty lucky”.

  12. Three students were shot at the Florida State University library before campus police killed the gunman.

    How long before somebody tries to blame Jameis Winston, or global warming?

    1. See upthread. We’re also expecting ESPN to start talking about how this would never happen at SEC schools.

      1. Are they smart enough to operate firearms at SEC schools?

        /justAJoke

    2. Here you go.

      A University of Alabama student who serves as a campus reporter for ESPNU was heavily criticized on Twitter Thursday morning after posting a Jameis Winston-related joke about the shooting at Florida State University.

      1. Why am I not surprised?

      2. I have to admit that I wondered for a brief instant whether he was the shooter.

  13. High times are for grandmas too! Three grandmothers’ bemused reactions as they smoke legal marijuana for the first time

    A new video shows three grandmothers enjoying weed for the first time in Washington, where the drug is legal
    The ladies smoke out of both a bong and a vaporizer, soon after getting giggly and hungry
    The ladies all seem to enjoy the experience, and say they would smoke again

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..chies.html

    1. I see bemused used so often as a near synonym for amused, that I wonder if they shouldn’t just change it’s definition in the dictionary already.

      1. People change the meanings of words literally overnight.

        1. Hopefully this will stop.

        2. They’ve decimated the usefulness of words by doing so.

        3. Liberal use of words is increasing.

      2. Though in this case it might be appropriate.

    2. Wow. I just got an awesome idea. Feign disability, collect Social Security Disability checks, and smoke pot on the taxpayer’s dime. Now that’s what a good life is supposed to be.

  14. Florida Man arrested for being drunk on a bicycle at Taco Bell Drive-Thru

    As police asked him to leave, they noticed a red Swiss Army knife on his belt loop and tried to reach for it.

    1. I think Swiss Army knives are too fancy for Florida Man. I’d think he is more of a Buck knives devotee.

      1. Florida Man has a custom Swiss Army knife, which includes, among other things, a machete and an emergency dose of meth.

      2. I carry a zero-tolerance

    2. That guy has to have some serious coordination.

    3. Sounds like self defense. Or are police allowed to just take shit now?

      I’m a bit surprised they didn’t do him for DUI.

      1. Or are police allowed to just take shit now?

        Police do whatever they want. Who’s going to stop them? The police?

        1. Yeah, silly question, I know.

  15. Barking mad: The moment a fearless guard dog took on a polar bear more than twice its size? and WON

    The giant polar bear approached the the guard dog, who is used to pulling sleds in Churchill, Canada
    But rather than running away in fear, the dog stands his ground and begins to bare his teeth and growl
    Eventually the bear is forced to make a retreat away from the frenzied animal and trudges off into the distance
    The incredible moment was captured on camera by Italian photographer Alberto Panizza while visiting the area

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..e-WON.html

    1. That dog’s teeth are too clean. FAKE!

    2. I wouldn’t fuck with that dog either. Jesus.

      1. +1 Cujo.

    3. Polar bears do some strange things during their pre-Winter torpor. I think the encounter would have gone a lot differently in January. Jesus, those bears are friggin gigantic.

      One of these days, I’d love to go visit Churchill during the polar bear migration.

      1. When I would camp in Northern Canada in the 90s they drilled it into my head that I should be more terrified of polar bears then anything else, and now even at the zoo those things give me the shivers. They are vicious fuckers.

    4. Bear looks more bemused than anything. And it looks more like the bear just got bored with the encounter more than forced to retreat.

    5. Looks photo-shopped to me.

  16. Look into my eyes, look directly in the eyes, don’t look around the eyes . . .

    Lawyer attempted to hypnotize client into sex

    The client, backed by recorded evidence, contends that Sheffield attorney Michael Fine hypnotized her into performing sex acts and made explicit sexual comments to her, including an instruction to bring a vibrator to a meeting, reports the Chronicle-Telegram in an article based on the Ohio Supreme Court case.

    http://www.abajournal.com/news….._suspensio

    1. Wait. That worked?

  17. Scarborough, according to his comments this morning, believes Supreme Court decisions should be based on poll results.

    Maybe they should just turn the whole thing over to Wapner, and let the viewing audience determine the verdict.

    1. Scarborough is a clown.

      1. He’s a beet-red, sweaty fatty is what he is.

        1. He was one of the biggest crony capitalists going when he was a Rep. in Florida. Single-handedly torpedoed most attempts to introduce a reciprocal wine shipping bill, which is not surprising considering how much money Southern Wine and Spirits was giving him.

          The mandated three-tier system needs to die already.

          1. Policy-schmolicy. He’s one butt-ugly dude.

    2. Wouldn’t it be Milian?

      1. Wapner! You’re still alive, my old friend?

        1. doug llewelyn was the real star of that show.

      2. He had a dignified, judge – like mien. Never felt the need to scream and squawk. So naturally they ultimately decided he wasn’t edgy enough.

    3. Wouldn’t that be more “American Idol”? I thought Wapner made his own decisions.

  18. How Ferguson’s peacemaking state police captain ‘infuriated’ cops: Leaked emails show anger over ‘soft’ approach to protesters

    Current and retired law enforcement officers sharply criticized Missouri State Police Capt Ron Johnson for apologizing to protesters
    Emails from August show officers were opposed to an order requiring them to patronize Ferguson businesses at lunchtime
    Police tried to find a way to protect members of the clergy who were in the protest crowds
    Missouri Governor Jay Nixon declared a state of emergency and called in the National Guard ahead of grand jury decision in Michael Brown shooting

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..ctics.html
    Serve and protect? Ha! The citizens serve us while we protect each other!

  19. The AM links are so bad today, it’s not worth comment. But it is worth a comment about commenting.

  20. So how much would the pay have been?

    Lawyer offers job in exchange for sex, without actually offering it explicitly:

    A sexual harassment suit filed against a San Diego trial lawyer alleges he used his legal knowledge to avoid explicit offers of jobs for sex.

    Rejected job applicant Alexa Zanolli, a staff lawyer for the federal court in San Diego, filed an amended suit against John Gomez of Gomez Trial Attorneys last month. The suit says Gomez “refined and honed his techniques in carrying out his ‘quid-pro-quo’ sexual proposals ? without explicitly proposing an exchange of employment or employment benefits for sex.” NBC San Diego covered the allegations.

    http://www.abajournal.com/news….._avoid_exp

    1. “Because of the implications….”

      1. Are you gonna’ be raping these women?

      2. I had a strange client intake where the potential client did start the “haven’t we met before” line almost immediately. Then launches into a description of his legal problem, intertwined with complimenting me on how I look Middle Eastern (?) and young.

        It was too strange and bizarre of a legal problem to be solely an attempt at him getting a date.

        Anyway, this is my roundabout way of saying that this guy in the article could be falsely accused, and just not know how to “turn off” his pick-up routine. Because some guys get stuck on it, they feel like they have to compliment women . . . and don’t realize how socially awkward they are being.

        1. Do you look Middle Eastern and young? I am confused.

            1. Do you look Middle Eastern and young?

              I was tempted to say “go on…”

              It is appropriate, being Thursday and all.

              The legal job market is so bad, Gomez’s probably had more than a few successes using a job offer as a way to sex.

    1. This is going to be such an awesome source of rants for the foreseeable future.

      1. I’m imaging cheese-flavored won’t be a big seller.

        1. Oh I dunno, I nice creamy Brie or Camembert could be nice…

          1. — Camenbert, perhaps?

            — Yes sir. It’s, ah, it’s a bit runny…

            1. I like it runny.

          2. Doritos, obviously…

            1. Maybe Mountain Dew?

        2. Dewritos Extreme!

      2. So Jezebel is going to start running articles about how their snatches are supposed to smell like Stilton cheese and old tuna sandwich?

        I think that this is another issue (like clothing) that women worry about a lot more than men. Unless there is really something wrong, vaginas generally smell rather nice, I thought. Probably not something you’d want anything else to smell like, but not bad per se.

    2. The next Yankee Candle?

    3. Its not MY fetish, but these guys have found a brilliant way to monetize their sniffler fetish.

    4. ‘The idea is personal empowerment,’ he said. ‘All your smells are not human. They’re produced by the creatures that live on you.’ Sweet Peach is also working with Petomics, which will “hack” dog and cat feces, making them smell like bananas.

      You can’t fool *me*, Johnny. That’s from The Onion.

    5. Sweet Peach is also working with Petomics, which will “hack” dog and cat feces, making them smell like bananas.

      As if my dog needs more reasons to eat her poop.

      1. ^this!

      2. I dunno, my dog will eat poop, but doesn’t like bananas.

      3. Something I’ve learned as a parent is that anything with an odor that is associated with baby poop, soon enough smells like baby poop to me, too. The smell of Desitin and the smell of poop have pretty much merged for me. So all this sounds like it would do is ruin bananas.

    6. What the hell?

      If I want to smell apples I will buy apples or an apple smelling candle.

    1. Bullying, the latest word to lose all meaning

    1. Conservatives are someone last I checked.

    2. So this is what happens when the shameless are confronted with the bald faced lies they tell. They put their fingers in their ears and say ‘la la la la la la I can’t hear you!”.

    3. There’s probably an element of truth in that assertion.

      Sure, libertarians and conservatives would like everybody to know that the statist proponents of ObamaCare relied on outright deceit, obfuscation, and a complete lack of transparency.

      Obviously, progressives don’t care about means if they can accomplish progressive ends.

      More importantly, low-information independents don’t care enough to ever find out how thoroughly they have been deceived. It’s just not worth their while. Public choice theory strikes again.

  21. IFH is excited:

    Australia’s first colonial cookbook with kangaroo brain, roasted wombat recipes is republished after 150 years

    Sample these recipes from 1864:

    Slippery Bob: Take kangaroos brains and mix with flour and water, and make into batter; well season with pepper, salt etc; then pour a table-spoonful at a time into an iron pot containing emu fat and take them out when well done. “Bush fare” requiring a good appetite and excellent digestion.

    Pan Jam: Roast kangaroos tails in the ashes with the skin on; when nearly done, scrape them well, and divide at the joints. Then put them in a pan with a few slices of fat bacon, to which add a few mushrooms, pepper etc. Fry gently and serve.
    First-rate tack.

    Roast wombat: This animal feeds on grass and roots, and its flesh is eaten roasted; some persons like its flavour, others, again decry it. It is also cooked in steaks. Native porcupines are cooked in a like way.

    1. I suspect eating Slippery Bob would give you Spotted Dick.

      1. Or Mad Kangaroo disease.

    2. “Bush fare” requiring a good appetite and excellent digestion.

      In other words, inedible crap.

    3. Neat-o. Thanks!

      Also: Boooooooossssshhhhh Fare!!!!!

      1. Needz moar CHRISTFAG fare!!!

    1. Fuck you. No.

    2. Well, Wednesday is a creepy control-freak when it comes to her little brother. Who says she couldn’t “stabilize” the internetz?

  22. So you think you had a bad morning?

    Michael Phelps’ self-proclaimed girlfriend Taylor Lianne Chandler has revealed she was born David Roy Fitch

    1. He must have had his beer goggles on. Give the man a break.

      1. Why would you assume that? For all we know that is what attracted him to….herrrrrr…him?….in the first place.

    2. Let’s be fair. Nobody’s going to notice an Adam’s Apple if they are standing next to Phelps.

    3. Of course ‘she’ has not a single photo of her and Phelps together.

    4. It’s a bit weird he’s trolling Tinder for ass..

  23. A new libertarian mascot – the Chocolate turtle
    http://www.demetsturtles.com/images/img02.png

    Spats… Monocle… top hat. A twinkle in his eye and a rapier wit.

    1. The Chocolate Turtle = Obama x McConnell?

    2. He even has an orphan thrashing cane at hand!

    3. Do they have a bacon turtle?

    4. “Rapier” wit has nothing to with a sharp instument and everything to do with being more rapy.

      1. No no! That means he would have to be a seal, not a turtle!

  24. A sexual harassment suit filed against a San Diego trial lawyer alleges he used his legal knowledge to avoid explicit offers of jobs for sex.

    Just like “structured” bank transactions, this proves his guilt. Off with his head.

  25. The small print taketh away:

    WA Fisheries Department refuses to pay for whale carcass removal as they are ‘mammals, not fish’, mayor says

    Around $100,000 was spent on equipment hire and about $40,000 on tip fees, cleaning and remediation of the beach, as well as labour and security costs.

    City of Stirling mayor Giovanni Italiano told 720 ABC Perth he had written to both the Premier and the Minister for Fisheries asking for the State Government to pick up the bill.

    However, the council had only been offered a contribution of $8,000, which included the waste levy and the cost of contaminated sand.

    1. According to cladistics, fish dont exist period, so does that mean they dont have to spend on anything?

      1. According to Swiss Servator it’s a fish because it lives in the water and has fins. 😛

      2. According to reality, specific fish exist, though.

    2. They should dump the whale carcass in front of the Department of Fisheries.

      1. That would be great, but they still need to pay to move it.

    3. Sell it to the Japanese. For “research.”

      1. Only fresh, tasty whale is suitable for…um,…”research”.

  26. “President Barack Obama will announce his plan to take unilateral executive action on immigration in a primetime speech tonight.”

    Well, if he waits to spill the beans until the bad news Friday before Thanksgiving, then you know it’s got to be good.

  27. Health Dept: Don’t eat gas station’s fish

    Health officials said in a news release Wednesday night that inspectors found the fish at the Shell station at 136 Valley Street was not properly refrigerated.

    It had been repackaged and wasn’t labeled, health officials said.

    The health department said it had not received reports of anyone getting sick from the fish.

    1. “This tastes like the authentic stuff I had in Vietnam”

    2. gas station’s fish

      Nice band name, albeit perhaps too Phishy.

      1. How about “Gas Station Sushi”?

        1. Are we back to talking about the Sweet Peach product?

          1. GACK! I will never understand how you guys and lesbos enjoy putting your mouths down there.

            1. Is that a complaint?

              1. Thank you

        2. We’ve a gas station that sells sushi in Houston, and supposedly it’s not that bad. Though naming the place, “Natto” is some kind of sick joke.

  28. Now this is a mystery.

    How did someone else’s DNA get in a murder suspect’s mouth while he was in jail?

    Mobile County Assistant District Attorney Jo Beth Murphree thinks Bryant manipulated the DNA test. That’s what she told 12 jurors Wednesday — the last day of Bryant’s murder trial — when she explained during her closing argument why she thought an analysis of the swab showed two people’s DNA were in Bryant’s mouth — his and someone else’s.

    “So what do you think he did?” Murphree asked the jury. “Somebody dumped his DNA from whatever source in his mouth. That’s pretty gross. That’s pretty desperate, but he knows he has got to do something to mess it up. So I submit to you all of the possible DNA that he may have obtained from a fellow inmate, saliva would have been the most likely to have gotten the mixture.”

    1. I’d love to be a fly on the wall if an industry bench chemist, say someone from Big Pharma, well-steeped in cGMP, were to visit a typical county crime lab and observe their technique.

    2. Not for nothing, but I think having someone else’s DNA in someones mouth is probably fairly common in jail.

      Bubba: “You wanna be the wife or the husband?”

      Billy: “Husband.”

      Bubba:” OK, get over here and suck your wife’s dick!”

  29. Rampaging Woodchuck Terrorizes N.H. Neighborhood

    Two men, an animal control officer, and a dog all narrowly escaped a groundhog attack in Hampton, New Hampshire on Tuesday.

    Gary McGrath, a woodworker, was out in his yard when a groundhog ran up to his foot, CBS Boston reports. McGrath lightly kicked the groundhog, also known as a woodchuck, but it came back. McGrath kicked harder this time and then fled into his garage. The rampaging rodent stayed on his heels and made its way into the garage, forcing McGrath to hide inside his house.

    1. Yes, but how much wood did the woodchuck chuck during the episode?

    2. 1) Stomp, don’t kick
      2) Fire the dog

      1. They are very large for rodents. But yeah, fire the dog. Any good terrier should be able to handle it and a decent dog of any size should too.

        1. Yeah, I have a German Shepherd who would happily murder the shit out of any woodchuck that even came near our yard.

          1. My FiL had a dachshund that was so fat his belly and the tip of his dick would drag the ground.

            Rabbits and groundhogs would come into the yard and not last 5 minutes.

            He’d also eat them whole… Meanest little sumbitch I ever seen.

            1. Damn…like some sort of camouflage job, an alien carnivore disguised as a small, fat dog.

              1. Dachshunds aren’t your typical small dog. They were bred to kill badgers.

          2. More dobe got schooled by a small woodchuck in our yard in OH. Wasn’t exactly a fair fight though since the ‘chuck was tucked in a corner and I pulled the bitch off after he drew a nice amount of blood from her lip. She would have finished it, but she would have gotten bloodier. Out in the open: different story

            1. *My dobe.
              Holy shit, I’m off today

        2. I wouldn’t want my dog fucking with an aggressive whistlepig. They are mean and I care about my dog getting hurt.

          1. True. That is why God gave us firearms.

          2. Add to it that the woodchuck is probably rabid, and yeah I’m not thrilled if my dog were to throw down on Mr. Chuck. OTOH, doesn’t a woodworker have plenty of sharp things he could use to stick or bludgeon the kamikaze critter?

            1. Why do you people have dogs if not to keep the varmints at bay? Ol’ Yeller screwed you guys up.

              1. Why do you people have dogs if not to keep the varmints at bay?

                Mainly to turn dog food into dog crap, it seemed. But as high as my dog’s prey drive was (she’s been dead for the last year and a half), and as energetic as she destroyed squeaky toys and anything else she could chew on, I wouldn’t want to be that woodchuck. Hell, she’d think that Xmas came early. “Oh boy! A fuzzy thing that wants to run and fight! Yes! Best day ever!”

                Ol’ Yeller screwed you guys up.

                Sure. I cried during Old ‘Yeller. “Who cried when Old Yeller got shot at the end?

              2. I have no idea why most people have dogs. Vanity, probably.

                I also think that dogs are working animals.

            2. Expensive sharp things.

    3. I saw my mom kill a woodchuck with a shovel once. I was always very polite to her after that.

  30. Are Democrats Out of Data Analysts?
    A Democratic think tank publishes a chart that would get laughed out of Econ 101.

    Klein includes a chart from the report in his piece showing that “median income for all families” fell 8 percent from 2000 to 2012 while rent, medical care, child care, and higher education have grown more expensive.

    Except this “vise” is invented. (The report actually indicates that the median income of Tanden’s double-earner-two-kid family rose slightly, but we’ll let that slide and focus on the median for all families shown in the chart.) There’s an amateur-hour mistake in this chart, which is the basis for the CAP report, which in turn is the sort of analysis driving the thinking of CAP’s (and therefore Democrats’) economic agenda. The chart shows that median household income has declined by 8 percent ? but that’s the change after adjusting for the increase in the cost of living. It makes no sense to point out that income has decreased by 8 percent while the cost of living has increased, because the increased cost of living is already included in that 8 percent figure. Tanden’s lament about a family getting hit from both sides is based on double counting.

  31. “An individual can be heard over the intercom saying “There has been a shooting in the library. Stay where you are,” and instructing people to call 911 if they have been shot.”

    I’m not saying that millennials should be a new protected class or anything, but if I were them, I’d find that announcement both insensitive and degrading.

      1. Your shushing is perpetuating a culture of generatio-normative discrimination!

        1. Why should they have to call 911? That’s blaming the victim.

  32. The issue of why the political left is overwhelmingly supportive of the climate change alarmist ideology/faith, and hence there are relatively few left wing sceptics, is quite complex [].

    First is that most leftish British people get politically involved because they genuinely believe they wish to contribute to the common good in our society. [] At first this drew many to sympathise with Marxist ideology, until the Soviets discredited that. More sympathised and many still do with the social democratic ideals of equality and civil liberty, though that position lacks the ideological certainties and claimed scientific basis of old Marxism. With the collapse of Marxism, there was created a vacuum on the left. Those seeking an ideological faith to cling on to for moral certainty, felt bereft.

    They also wanted a faith which again gave them a feeling of still pursuing the common good of society, especially the new global society, and even more a feeling of moral superiority, which is a characteristic of many middle and professional types on the left. Climate change and the moral common good of saving the planet , with its claimed scientific certainties, offered to fill the vacuum. It may or may not be a coincidence that the climate change faith gained momentum in the 1990s immediately after Marxism collapsed with the Berlin Wall.

    1. Interesting.

    2. It’s strange how political history unfolds.

      In the early 20th century, the vacuum left after the collapse of liberalism (that is, classical liberalism) leading to progressivism allowed for fascism, communism and Nazism to enter the arena.

      1. Classical liberalism didn’t so much collapse as the more aggressive philosophies displaced it. Classical liberalism is a very passive philosophy – leave me alone and I’ll leave you alone. Most of the competitors are very aggressive – do what we say for the good of (the children, the planet, the state, the leader, your health, society’s health, etc.).

        1. I think some of those ideologies were driven by stronger nationalism sentiments as well, most obviously fascism.

    3. *rousing applause*

    4. If only there were some place that they could go once, or even twice, per week and listen to someone discuss morality and ways to contribute to the common good. A place they could interconnect with others in their area and form a community.

      It seems like something like that ought to exist.

      1. They don’t have Unitarians in Britain?

        1. Is the CoE that much different?

          They probably have them too, but they arent well attended either.

          With all the state churches in Europe, and the low attendance, its almost as if the state is intentionally trying to destroy the church.

          1. Isn’t the CoE just popeless Catholicism? All the ritual, none of the infallibility?

            Of course, More Britons Believe In Aliens And Ghosts Than God

            1. The CoE was originally that. But it has a lot of protestant elements as well.

      2. Government would have to create it, since individuals can’t organize themselves like that without the guiding hand of government.

      3. If only there were some publicly-accessible books, articles or videos they could access from the privacy and comfort of their own homes…no religious mumbo-jumbo or awkward hymns.

      4. Well, plenty of mainline protestants manage to combine church, climate change fanaticism and socialism-lite pretty effectively. Church isn’t a cure for religious devotion to politics.

    5. “With the collapse of Marxism, there was created a vacuum on the left.”

      Note the neoconservatives–and I mean everyone from Christopher Hitchens to Wolfowitz. I think they were struggling with the same problem.

      When your whole world view is shaped by a leftist ideology that proves to be fundamentally unsound in practice, you don’t fundamentally change.

      You look for another way to apply the same old thing that–they hope–will work.

      1. That or you could just conclude that wars are won by killing people and making life so miserable that the other side gives up and not by convincing them to love you. There is always that.

        1. You sure set that straw man straight.

          1. I am pretty sure it is the NEOCONS who thought they could convince the world to love them by nation building and setting up Democracies rather than just defeating the enemy. So that criticism was directed at them. But if you feel it was directed at you, well maybe you should consider changing your views.

            1. I didn’t see anyone making that argument, but you soundly defeated it anyway.

              1. Note the neoconservatives–and I mean everyone from Christopher Hitchens to Wolfowitz. I think they were struggling with the same problem.

                In was in response to t hat. If you don’t understand the conversation ask or just don’t join in.

                1. I read that as wondering what to do after the end of the Cold War, with no Marxist boogie man to contend with.

                  1. Weren’t the necons reformed commies – mostly Trotskyites?

                    1. Yes, some of them were self-described trotskyists, I think it’s safe to say the neocons were ideological trotskyists in certain ways.

                      Take a look at this section on uneven and combined development.

                      “A new stage in Trotsky’s understanding of uneven and combined development in world history was reached in his analyses of fascism and populism in Germany, France, Spain and Italy.[10] Trotsky makes it clear, the human progress is not a linear, continuously advancing process of bourgeois modernization – progress can also be reversed or undone, and ancient cults, superstitions or barbarous traditions can be revived”

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U…..he_concept

                      Those barbarous traditions are revived in the guise of the fascism in those countries–how do you combat that?

                      I guess you call it “islamo-fascism”, bomb, invade, and occupy–permanent revolution, until the people there finally develop into the kind of American style democracy they’re supposed to develop into.

                      Doesn’t that sound like neoconservatism to you?

                  2. +1

                    I still don’t know what John is talking about.

                    1. I still don’t know what John is talking about.

                      Well, he is the authority in all things. So he must be right.

    6. So, they are lost sheep.

      No surprise here.

  33. Isn’t Mike Nichols Diane Sawyer’s husband?

    President Barack Obama will announce his plan to take unilateral executive action on immigration in a primetime speech tonight.

    Better see what’s cooking on the DVR tonight! Should have left last night’s Top Chef for tonight. Oh well.

  34. Do’s and don’ts for Thai tourists in Japan

    Thailand’s Embassy in Japan has some tips for Thai visitors: Don’t put your chopsticks in the serving bowl. If driving, stop for pedestrians at crosswalks. And just because you have kids doesn’t mean you can cut the queue.

    The advice is part of a new online manners guide the embassy has posted on its Facebook page in response to criticism on social media about the behavior of Thai tourists in Japan. Most of the criticism came from Thai residents in Japan who reported sightings of “inappropriate” behavior on a popular Thai web forum, which inspired the embassy’s consular chief to pen the list of 10 do’s and don’ts.

    1. And just because you have kids doesn’t mean you can cut the queue.

      Oh, proggies would love that. Also, seniors, women and a sort of idealized version of complete Renaissance Men.

  35. As if you needed more evidence that Pelosi is one of the most vile creatures on the planet…

    Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) sacrificed her legs in Iraq when a rocket hit the helicopter she was piloting. But Nancy Pelosi is unwilling to make any sacrifices for Duckworth’s sake, and so the war veteran is losing the right to vote for her party’s congressional leadership along with her 200 peers.

    House Democrats are continuing to criticize Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s refusal to allow Rep. Tammy Duckworth ? a double amputee Iraq War veteran whose pregnancy has made her unable to travel ? to vote by proxy in leadership elections this week.

    Pelosi and her allies have been saying since Nov. 13, when the issue first came up, that House Democratic Caucus rules prohibit proxy votes, and that allowing exceptions for the Illinois Democrat would create a slippery-slope scenario.

    1. “the Illinois Democrat would create a slippery-slope scenario.”

      oh. i see. cause she’s in a chair. really nice, Nancy.

    2. From comments:

      “Holy shit. That’s crass. When did Pelosi become a Republican searching for ways to prevent minorities from voting?”

      Wtf?

        1. Not from that commenter. He’s a true blue ballwasher for the Dems.

          1. Then that person should be pitied…and scorned.

      1. Well, at least he’s on the right side, however petulantly he got there.

      2. Christ. Pelosi has to shove a legless female vet on the ground and kick her. This is how far they have to go before the cult members can see a glimpse of truth, and even then it is opaque to them. Pelosi is no true democrat!

    3. How hard would it be to change the rule? Seems like congress could just teleconference without losing much. It’s not like anyone really listens to the speeches given on the floor anyway.

      1. Its not in the fucking Constitution. Congress gets to set its own rules.

        1. It’s not even Congress. It’s the party caucus.

  36. Goldman Fires Two Bankers After Getting Secret Fed Documents

    Goldman Sachs Group Inc. dismissed two bankers after one of them allegedly brought secret documents from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York into the firm.

    A junior banker, who had joined the company in July from the New York Fed, was fired a week after the discovery in late September along with another employee who failed to escalate the issue, according to an internal memo obtained by Bloomberg News that didn’t identify the pair. Jake Siewert, a bank spokesman, confirmed the contents of the memo, which was prompted by a report yesterday in the New York Times.

    “We have zero tolerance for improper handling of confidential information,” Goldman Sachs said in the memo. “We are reviewing our policies regarding any hiring from governmental institutions to ensure that they are appropriately effective and robust.”

  37. Banks Had Unfair Advantage From Commodity Units: Senator

    Wall Street’s biggest banks have used their ownership of metals warehouses, oil tankers and other commodities businesses to gain unfair trading advantages and dominate markets, according to a U.S. Senate investigation.

    In a report on Goldman Sachs (GS) Group Inc., Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan Chase & Co., a Senate panel said the firms have eroded the line separating banking from commercial activities to the detriment of consumers and the financial system. The holdings give banks access to non-public information that could move markets and increase the likelihood that industrial accidents will spur taxpayer bailouts, the report said.

  38. Congressman suggests moat around White House

    Faced with an increasing number of White House intrusions that led to the resignation of a Secret Service director, a congressman on Wednesday suggested that maybe a moat should be erected around the president’s home.

    The suggestion was made by Rep. Steve Cohen, a Tennessee Democrat, at a House Judiciary Committee hearing.

    With hand gestures, Cohen suggested a moat roughly six-feet wide may be “attractive” and “effective.”

    and filled with alligators…

    1. …and ill-tempered sea bass…

      1. And sharks with laser beams on their heads.

        1. And man-eating cows.

            1. BSE infected cows are kind of pyrrhicly man-eating.

            2. MEC became the singular hero by being the only survivor in the pit of cows and alligators.

          1. and ill-tempered man-eating cow sharks. With laser beams.

    2. It’s within Congress’ power to build a fifty-foot wall around the White House. . .without any doors.

      1. In all seriousness, they should cut off his golf game. Just put a rider on the next Secret Service appropriations bill prohibiting any expenditure of funds to provide transportation to and from or security at any golf course for the President and further prohibit the acceptance of any private party funds to do the same.

        Make it so the mother fucker can’t golf until he leaves office. It would be mean and petty but not so mean that the public at large would care.

        1. That’s racist!

        2. I’d rather he spent the next two years on the golf course than in the White House.

          1. Not me. Playing golf hasn’t seemed to have slowed down the damage he is doing. Fuck him. Lock his sorry ass in there as a prisoner. He wanted the office so bad, let him have it.

            1. And cut off his Blackberry and cigarettes (you just know he still smokes like a fiend behind the curtain).

              1. YES!! Make the White House a “smoke free zone” and install smoke detectors that can’t be tampered with and are in every single room.

                1. Do you want a President Biden?

                  1. Yes I do want a President Biden. Biden is a laugh a minute but he actually does care about the long term prospects of the Democrats and thus can be deterred from doing really crazy and stupid things. Obama doesn’t care and can’t be. I would take Biden over Obama in a minute.

              2. Oh, let him smoke. It’s the only thing I like about him.

                1. Me, too.

                  Anyway, does anyone think it would be safe to entrust the nuclear codes to a guy having a nicotine fit?

        3. Shit, I think the President should only be provided with security at his official residences and for thing that are absolutely necessary to performing the required duties of the office. He wants to go anywhere else, he can pay for his own security. Why the fuck are we paying politicians campaign expenses? That’s what most of the security really is.

          1. With security being the guy who opens the door for any citizen that wants to come into public property and give the employee-in-chief a good verbal reaming.

        4. There’s a lot that should be done to reign in the Imperial/Celebrity Presidency.

          The fundamental problem is that we don’t distinguish between his job and his personal life. So we fund everything as lavishly as if it were job-related.

          Sorry, buddy, but in the real world your employer doesn’t shell out for your star-studded parties, your vacation travel, or your hobbies.

          Those should be on his dime. And not some bullshit pay-coach-class-and-use-Air-Force-One. Nope. Actual fully loaded cost.

          And, your job does not include party activities, fundraisers, etc. Travelling for fundraisers and all that crap are on his dime also.

          Also, no “private” funding of anything while he is in office. That’s a straight-up conflict of interest. Out in the real world, letting a big vendor pay for your week-long vacation on Martha’s Vendor gets your ass fired.

          That would be a good starting place. We could clean up the edges after we got that in place.

          1. Those should be on his dime. And not some bullshit pay-coach-class-and-use-Air-Force-One. Nope. Actual fully loaded cost.

            My employer would fire someone for using company resources for their own use, even if it’s fully reimbursed.

            You want a private flight? Book on NetJets.

          2. Pretty much what I keep saying. There are very few things the president actually is required to do that necessarily involve leaving the whitehouse or other already secure (in theory) areas. If he wants to do anything else, he can pay for it himself. Especially for party/election related stuff. Should probably have to compensate people who are inconvenienced by all of the security when he does travel.

      2. I would also cut the White House food budget and fire the Chef. No more five star meals for him and Michelle. Make them live on take out.

    3. Or maybe they could just quit using diversity standards for the SS and hire only the most competent.

  39. Looks like ol’ Jim “Combat Boots” Webb may be throwing his hat in the ring for 2016. He’s not as old a fogey as the rest of ’em, so maybe he’ll get some traction.

    1. First, he, like every other Democratic Senator in office at the time, cast the deciding vote for Obamacare. So his claims of being disenchanted with Obama ring a bit hollow. It would have been nice if he had figured that out when doing so made any difference.

      Second, he is at least not insane like the rest of the party. He would be about as good as you could ever get from the Democratic Party. I think, however 2016 is a bit early for him. The lunatics are still running the asylum and there is no way he could get the nomination. The Democrats need to suffer a few more soul crushing defeats and spend at least four years completely out of power before they will be willing to listen to someone like Webb. I think he will be too old by 2020.

      1. I liked the idea of him running in ’08 quite a lot. Then again, I am a giant fan of his writing, especially “Fields of Fire,” and so he gets more of a pass from me than perhaps he should.

        He doesn’t get along well with others, however. Or at least he didn’t when he was Secretary of the Navy.

        1. Not getting along with the cretins who inhabit the Pentagon is not necessarily a bad thing. I always liked him too. And he was supposed to be the kind of Democrat who kept the party from doing truly horrible shit like Obamacare. And when the time came to stop it, he failed.
          That is a real black mark against him.

          Even still, he is a hundred times better than Hillary, Jerry Brown, Fauxchontus or any of the other retards the party has. I still can’t see the full retard left being chastened enough to let him have the nomination though. They have gone insane and are likely going to reject Hillary for a total unapologetic leftist. It will take them being completely out of power before the sane people like Webb are able to get the party back under control.

          1. I think the “Mitt Romney of the Left” (guess to whom I am referring) will run and could have a shot at the nom.

            1. I don’t know who you are referring. Romney is a technocrat middle of the road guy. So that rules out Warren who has never done anything in her life but pretend to be an Indian and is totally far left. Martin O’Malley is done. He couldn’t get his idiot successor elected in Maryland and is so disliked even in the deepest of blue states he would be lucky to win it if he ran for President.

              The Left would be doing well to have a Romney to run at this point.

              1. I think Hillary kind of captures the “I’ll say anything to get elected” ethos of Mitt, but that’s just me.

                1. If Romney were willing to say anything to get elected, he would have gone after Obama instead of trying to be a nice guy and not appear racist and would have won the election. Whatever Romney is, “a cold hearted cynical say anything politician” isn’t it.

              2. Mark Warnerbot.

                1. I don’t see how his chances were not killed by his close call in the election. The guy can barely win Virginia, voted for Obamacare, has no accomplishments as a Senator to speak of beyond voting exactly the way Harry Reid told him to vote, and was a middling governor.

                  Maybe if Warner really stood up to Obama and accomplished a few things working with the GOP to stop him, he would have a chance. But there is no way Warner will do that. The guy is an empty suit. He is got re-elected and will continue to vote in lock step with the party and exactly the way Reid tells him to. You would think that would help him get the nomination. But his voting record wouldn’t do him any good with the left. He is out of the hive and they wouldn’t support him. His record would just make him a loser with the rest of the country and do no good with the left.

                  1. But he’s middle of the road, innocuously handsome with an innocuous personality. He won his seat back in a year when Democrats were killed, margin notwithstanding.

                    Obamacare voting record is not gonna come into play in the D nomination, because practically all of them voted for it, and the Party faithful that vote in primaries actually like the thing.

                    1. But Kristen, the Party faithful are largely Tony level retards. They are not going to vote for him when they could vote for someone like Warren or even Hillary.

                      The days of stupid but not embarrassingly so empty suits like Warren having a place in the Democratic Party are over. It is full retard now.

                    2. We shall see summer of ’16! My bet (at this point) would be that the D party is gonna go for vanilla and inoffensive. They got 3rd-degree burned by voting solely on race.

                    3. Warner is a terrible public speaker but yes he wouldn’t be a bad presidential candidate for the dems.

            2. Howard Dean? They’ve gotten over his Rarghhhah!? Though why that was supposed to be a reason to not vote for him, I can’t tell.

              A youtube commenter makes the rare, interesting observation that,

              “How was this guy the head of the Democratic Party? Doesn’t believe in socialized medical care, doesn’t believe in big government, believes in gun rights, believes in state rights over federal. How is he still in the Democratic Party??

              I can’t figure it out either. He probably believes in a bigger government than I do, however.

              1. Dean’s fall after that was really odd. I’m still not sure how that worked either. I wonder if he would have fared any better than Kerry.

                1. Dave Chapelle murdered him.

      2. Is Webb this generation’s Sam Nunn or Scoop Jackson?

        1. He would be, if the Party wasn’t run by retards. So instead of being that he is going to spend his life with little support or influence within the party.

  40. http://hotair.com/archives/201…..everybody/

    NBC tries to discredit its own poll after results show every group in America, including Democrats and Latinos, object to Obama’s amnesty action.

    1. Obama is acting for all those who couldn’t be bothered to answer the phone to be polled.

        1. More silent minority, I think.

      1. And for all of the people in other countries who are unfairly denied the right to vote in this one who support this action.

      2. If Obama is so obsessed with his legacy, why is he so intent on doing things everyone hates? Strictly speaking, being the asshole that everyone on both sides hated is a legacy I guess. I just don’t think he understands the meaning of the term “legacy” very well if that is his plan.

        1. It’s going to be a very long two years.

          1. Yeah but I bet they’ll be entertaining.

          2. I think he just wants a group of sycophants to kiss his ass and give him big money to give speeches when he leaves office. If the price of obtaining that is doing grievous harm to the country and even the Democratic party, well so be it.

            I have faith in the country. It has been here for 225 years and will be here after me. It has survived a lot worse than this asshole.

            You know what hasn’t always survived? Political parties. They have come and gone over the years. He won’t destroy the country but he might destroy the Democratic Party before he is done.

            1. Sure, the US can survive this asshole.

              The question is whether it can survive an electorate that re-elected him.

        2. If Obama is so obsessed with his legacy, why is he so intent on doing things everyone hates?

          I think it’s yet another data point that supports my hypothesis that he has Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

          NPD (as opposed to mere narcissism) often manifests itself in its sufferers doing things that are harmful in the long term to themselves or others in a bid to put themselves in control.

          A classic example would be the guy who pretends he is a war hero on his way to a reunion to get short term adulation despite the fact that the guys in the unit will recognize him as a fraud.

          I believe the legacy Obama is looking for isn’t good things happening to others, it’s Obama appearing to be in control – and those who threaten his centrality being humiliated.

          1. That would explain a lot of his behavior. Even with the Amnesty thing, he seems to be doing it more to humiliate and bait the Republicans than help his party with Latinos or accomplish anything.

            He knows that there is a problem with too many people coming over the border and he also knows that the UAC crisis hurt the Democrats in the last election. You would think he would want to hold off and let things settle down and do this in a more slowly and methodical way. The worst way to handle this from any perspective is to do what he is doing and potentially create a real flood of refugees at the border.

            Some on the Right say he is doing some kind of Cloward-Piven strategy to just destroy the country. The problem with that theory is that you do Cloward-Piven when you are out of power so that you can blame the other side for the results. You don’t do it when you are in power and will get your side blamed.

            So your explanation makes a lot more sense than the Cloward-Piven one.

            1. Or, maybe Obama just doesn’t grasp the essential point that Cloward-Piven should be done while out of power. He’s smart, but in a very narrow way that doesn’t seem to extend to grasping real-world complexities and second order/knock-on effects.

              1. RC, yes “he is really that stupid” is always a reasonable option when trying to explain Obama.

              2. Ya. When all you have is Cloward-Piven, everything looks like a nail.

    2. It may be unpopular with everyone but it’s politically savvy!

      1. People on the right are bitching about him meeting with just Democrats before announcing this. That is not an insult to Republicans. He knows there is nothing he can do to get Republicans on board. His problem is that this is going to piss off a huge number of Democratic supporters and put the Democrats in Congress under tremendous pressure to finally stand up to this asshole. If that ever happens, he is done, finished. All it takes is even a significant minority of Democrats in Congress to break from him and start cutting deals with the Republicans and his vetoes will be overridden. Worse, the Court media won’t be able to cover for him anymore by calling the revolt partisan politics and just Republicans who hate a black President. At this point any 13 Democratic Senators along with any 30 or so Democratic House members can sell him out and start overriding his vetoes and become bipartisan and the most powerful group in Washington. He is going to anything necessary to try and keep that from happening.

        1. The thirteen defecting Dem Senators can do a bit more than just override his veto.

          God, if only.

          1. There is always that. And yes, if only. Even if they didn’t do that, watching them override his vetoes and Congress effectively take control of the government away from him would in some ways be better than seeing him impeached. If they impeached him, it would just make him a martyr in his own mind. If they just left him in office with no power undoing everything he has tried to do, he couldn’t claim to be a martyr and would be left angry, bitter and miserable.

            1. I get the whole making him a martyr thing. And if you thought rioting was going to be bad after the Michael Brown impending no-bill…I’m thinking people would be pissed that the First Black President got impeached by a crowd of mostly white men.

              I just want to see a Church Commission, only this one directed at the White House. Rip the scab off, and show the American people exactly all of the unConstitutional, illegal crap this office has been doing for the last 6 (o.k., 13) years. Benghazi, F&F, Solyndra, fundraising shenanigans, conspiracy to commit voter fraud, sicing the IRS on your political opponents, recording every phone call in the U.S: all of it. Show the American people all of it. Then start throwing bastards in jail.

              1. The blacks might turn out to vote for him but they are not going to riot to save him. He has managed to screw them so badly that they will only support him but no enthusiastically so.

            2. Obama would LOVE to be impeached and convicted.

              1. Impeached, yes. Convicted, no. That would mean his own party was in on it. That would make it legitimate in his eyes and they eyes of many of his supporters. It’s not happening anyway unless he starts butchering children on the White House lawn.

  41. For any of ya hippie redneck cowboys out there, check out Sturgill Simpson
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gBV-Nzq7Pg

    He has bit of a Waylon Jennings outlaw country voice. And no Bro Country shat.

  42. Some Jehovah’s Witnesses stopped by my home when I wasn’t at home. I know because the left some literature wedged between my garage door’s doorknob and frame.

    This reminded me of a funny story that happened to a buddy of my older brother.

    My older brother’s buddy is a hunter. He got home from a deer hunt with his deer. He had the deer hanging from a tree in his backyard, draining the blood out of it. He went into his living room and started cleaning his rifle. While he was cleaning his rifle, someone knocked at his door. He answered the door, and without thinking carried his disassembled rifle with him. He opened the door, and there were Jehovah’s Witnesses at the door. They looked at him, his rifle, at him, back at his rifle, and then ran away.

    He never again had a visit from the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

    1. I had a friend in HS who was a Jehovah’s Witness. He got a subscription to the Watchtower and tried to convert me. That led to a number of arguments about science vs. religion. He is incredibly smart/logical so it was plenty of fun at the time.

      A few years ago we hung out again. He’s no longer a JW and thanked me for planting the seed of doubt in his head.

      It really was his wife’s difficult birth that was the final deciding point – something about blood transfusions at the hospital?

      1. Yeah, JWs aren’t allowed to get blood transfusions. Its analogous to rape to them, if I recall correctly.

        When it comes to their kids, though, we used to go through a little song and dance where we would wink and nod through a threat to call CPS, and they would buckle under the threat, and the kid would get the transfusion.

    2. When my wife was growing up, her parents raised animals and had a bit of a hobby farm.
      One day the Jehovahs came by while her dad was butchering a pig. She directed them to where he was working, elbow deep in blood.
      They never came back.

    3. The JWs around here are quite nice. They tend to hand out tracts at the train stations, and they actually ask “would you like a tract?”

      If politeness were a factor in my choice of religion, I would be a jehovahs witness. Thankfully, it is not.

      1. Mormon theology is a bit better than JW’s. JW’s say only 144,000 people will get to go to heaven. Mormons say almost everyone goes to some kind of heaven. Even people who go to hell have a chance to go to heaven.

  43. It’s within Congress’ power to build a fifty-foot wall around the White House. . .without any doors.

    A hermetically sealed dome would be preferable.

    1. That would be illegal. However, a steel net to prevent helicopter access would not be. Obviously, Congress will send food in and leave the water on.

  44. Is this thing out or warrantee by now?

    “Immigrants baffled by Obamacare option for green card holders”
    […]
    “There is no clear way to upload a copy of their green card, the government identification document that shows they are legal U.S. residents and therefore entitled to benefits under President Barack Obama’s health care law.”
    http://latino.foxnews.com/lati…..d-holders/

  45. Any lawyer types want to chime in on the Adrian Peterson situation? The guy’s a scumbag in my book, but it really looks like the NFL is screwing him in regard to the additional suspension. He’s a first time offender under league rules and pled no contest to a misdemeanor. He went on the exempt list to take the heat off the league and was told it would count as time served. Under the CBA it looks like he should have received a max penalty of six games. Now they’re saying he is banned until April of next year which makes no sense as it’s a time frame instead of games.

    1. He got paid for the ten games he didn’t play. So the NFL position is that they can still suspend him without pay for the remaining six games of the season as a first time offender. But even still, I don’t see how that gets them to April. If the Vikings were to make the playoffs, he still should be able to come back and certainly should be eligible to participate in off season programs before April.

      It appears to me the NFL is wrong here and should lose in court in both this case and the Ray Rice case. The CBA goes both ways. Yes it gives the idiot son commissioner the power to suspend but it also sets the maximum punishment by number of previous offenses not the seriousness of the offense. So it doesn’t matter how badly Ray Rice beat up his wife or Peterson beat his kid, they both are “first offenses”. The NFL doesn’t consistent with the CBA get so say “well since this case has pictures and is really embarrassing, it is different.”

      I am amazed at what nitwits the lawyers ESPN gets on are. The Munson guy is a complete fucking moron. Time and again they act like the NFL can do this because “the CBA said Goodell is the last word in discipline”. Ah no. Goodell may be the single and final arbiter of guilt or innocence but his punishment options are limited by the CBA.

      1. If the Vikings were to make the playoffs

        Good one!! HAHAHAHAA!

        1. I will be here all week.

    2. He did not Genuflect correctly while performing his Pennace. So it totally doesn’t count.

  46. my neighbor’s aunt makes $75 /hour on the laptop . She has been laid off for 7 months but last month her pay check was $18092 just working on the laptop for a few hours. read the article………. http://www.payflame.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.