A.M. Links: Eric Garner Protests Close NYC Bridges and Thoroughfares, AG Nominee Loretta Lynch to Oversee Federal Inquiry into Garner's Death, Satanists Join Florida Capitol's Holiday Display


  • Thousands of protesters occupied the streets of New York City again last night in response to a grand jury's failure on Wednesday to indict the police officer who killed Eric Garner. At times protesters clashed with police and temporarily succeeded in shutting down traffic on both the West Side Highway and the Brooklyn Bridge.

  • "The federal civil rights investigation into the chokehold death of Eric Garner could present a new complication for Loretta E. Lynch's nomination as attorney general, because she will be heading the inquiry as the United States attorney for the Eastern District of New York even as she undergoes scrutiny in the new Republican-controlled Senate."
  • House Republicans have voted to repudiate President Obama's unilateral executive actions on immigration.
  • Is Mitt Romney planning to run for president again in 2016? Members of his inner circle seem to think he will.
  • Florida will grant equal representation to the Satanic Temple in this year's religious-themed holiday displays at the state capitol. The Satanic Temple's display will reportedly feature "an angel falling into a pit of fire."

Reason is your voice in debates about politics, culture, and ideas. Our annual Webathon is underway and your tax-deductible gift will help us fight against big government, crony capitalism, the drug war, and so much more. For details on giving levels and swag, go here now.

NEXT: Baylen Linnekin on the Neverending Vestiges of Prohibition

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. At times protesters clashed with police and temporarily succeeded in shutting down traffic on both the West Side Highway and the Brooklyn Bridge.

    Equally as presidential as Christie.

    1. Hello.

      Some conservatives I’ve heard on the radio are defending the cop who killed Garner.

      De Blasio for his part isn’t blameless since it’s his directive that ordered a crack down on ‘loosies’.

      1. “Some conservatives I’ve heard on the radio are defending the cop who killed Garner.”

        Not surprising. Some of them just can’t help themselves.

    2. Darn you Fist. I just spat out my coffee on my keyboard.

      1. I was wondering if anyone ever actually reads my firsties.

        1. Nope. I skip to Rufus’ ‘hello’.

          1. Well people have to somehow let us know or Reason is going to fire me.

            1. Well people have to somehow let us know or Reason is going to fire me.

              Wait, so does this mean Reason isn’t secretly tracking our eye movements and hijacking our webcams?

              1. AND recording your key strokes.

                1. You know they’d get a lot more “strokes” to record if they brought Lobster girl back

                  1. This is the second time I’ve seen a reference to Lobster Girl. The first time it was about a mug and this time it seems to be about an actual person.
                    Do you mind telling someone fairly new here to what or whom you’re referring?

        2. Unfortunately, I do read them. Fortunately, your Firsts don’t happen very often.

  2. Name’s Ash. Defense.

    1. We are going to have a Pokemon trainer as SecDef?!

      1. Lockheed, I choose you!

        1. Lockheed uses minitature Fusion Plant!

          Forward base is energized!

      2. No worse than having a coal miners daughter as AG, is it?

    2. Never trust a man with beady little eyes.

      1. You mean the mouse that refuses to get caught in the traps isn’t trustworthy?

  3. 8) Sorry to keep harping on U-Va when everyone wants to move on, but I’ve been thinking about the story and I’ve developed a theory of what actually happened. I think the girl did go to the Phi Kappa Psi house, as alleged, and flirted with “Drew”, and then want up to his room. But rather than the gang rape she claims, I think they made out, and she didn’t want to go all the way but he forced her to. But afterwards when the administration, seeing this as a “he said, she said” scenario, wouldn’t take action against him, she was so angry she made up the lurid story about the gang rape to garner more attention. It was easy to justify this in her mind?she had really been raped after all, and this was the way to make sure her attacker suffered. This is why her rape story seems believable when she tells it, and yet the details of the story seem so incongruous?the counselor advising her not to report the case to the police, or her friends wondering if it’s worth making a big deal over it, for instance?with the gang rape, they seem unbelievably callous, but in this scenario they’re offering reasonable advice.

    1. But afterwards when the administration, seeing this as a “he said, she said” scenario, wouldn’t take action against him,

      You haven’t been paying attention. This is exactly the type of case they will take action on if asked.

    2. I don’t think what she says means anything until she actually names names. And if someone did something illegal she needs to go to the police or get a lawyer and sue.

    3. I don’t believe anything anymore. I think Michael Crichton said it best:

      “Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward?reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them.
      In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”

      1. Thanks for posting this. I didn’t know it had a name. I just finished a book that included several pages on the town I live in — I found 2 or 3 errors. Made me skeptical of the rest of the book.

      2. Ultimately, the sites you trust the most are the ones who get stuff right that you know about. Court cases where I know the lawyer or police shootings involving my neighbors. Reason has gotten it right in both cases.

        Though that’s not to say they always get it right, or I don’t look at stuff with a critical eye. Just that I place higher trust in them than others whom I know are wrong.

      3. Every article on guns basically

        1. No.

          He’s saying that you know they’re full of shit when they write about guns because you know that issue well. The problem is that you then think that they are not full of shit about every other topic that they write about, where you lack the knowledge to say why they’re full of shit.

    4. I agree with this theory, more or less, entirely. “The administration won’t pay attention to me. Well I’ll make them pay attention!”

    5. I re-read the story and I don’t find anything inherently unbelievable about the gang rape scenario. It’s definitely extreme, but I don’t find it unbelievable or improbable.

      I don’t understand why people can’t just say “It seems sort of extreme, so I’ll definitely need more evidence before I really believe it.” Instead, a lot of people seem to feel the need to claim the entire thing is a hoax or to invent their own version with no supporting evidence.

      1. I think it is the weaselly manner of the reporter that sets people to REJECT IN TOTO mode.

      2. As opposed to the vast amount of evidence sighted in the original story?

        1. Exactly. So asking for supporting evidence is perfectly warranted. But when you say “This is a lie” or “This is what I think actually happened” without any supporting evidence of your own, it isn’t scepticism. It’s weaving your own narrative based on what you want to be true, or based on your own experiences or judgements about how people act that may or may not have any relevance to the people involved in this story.

          And I understand that reaction. I too worry that if this story holds up, the emotional reaction by the do-something crowd will be used to pass bad laws or policies. But if it did happen, or if there really is a rape subculture within the fraternity subculture at UVA and/or elsewhere, we need to face that. Denialism only cedes action to people who will trample over individual rights to get what they want.

          So by all means, demand evidence before taking action. But don’t jump to conclusions before said evidence even has a chance to materialize.

          1. The problem is it often doesn’t matter whether this story is true or not the narrative is already set it’s time to pick a side. If this story is in fact false most people will sadly never know it. See duke lacrosse, trayvon martin, war on women stats, global warming hyperventilating, fracking, the need for a stimulus.

            1. That’s why your seeing such strong pushback now people on the right feel like they have to counter a possible narrative before it leaves the headlines IMHO because once it is out of sight it will be out of mind. Journalist have proven they can’t be trusted at this point the burden of proof is on them, not people doubting the story.

          2. The point many people are making though, is that “said evidence” has had plenty of of time to materialize.

            The story shouldn’t have been published without “said evidence”.

            1. That would be because it doesn’t exist. The authors only evidence of it happening are from a girl who went to UVA during the time discussed and claims to have been raped.

            2. Really? It’s been only a couple weeks at most since the police started investigating.

              1. C’mon LynchPin what makes you think that they are investigating for any reason other than political pressure? the burden of proof is on the author who wrote the story to show what she wrote wasn’t a complete fabrication and based on here interviews that I’ve heard and follow up I doubt she can even prove any of the characters(aside from jackie) even exist much substantiate that the rape happened. If she’s not expected to have evidence to prove her story why should we.

                1. They were only recently made aware of the allegations. But even if they are investigating out of political pressure, they could still turn up evidence. Or maybe not. Wait and see.

                  If she’s not expected to have evidence to prove her story why should we.

                  Because we’re better than that.

                  1. Because we’re better than that.

                    Sure okay, but the only reason we are having this conversation is because a major publication published a story that reflected badly on several institutions with admitting little/no fact checking which I find to be a bigger story than the gang rape itself. Of course if this story turns out to be true I will be the first to admit I’m wrong and eat crow, the same will not be said for rolling stone.

      3. I re-read the story and I don’t find anything inherently unbelievable about the gang rape scenario.

        I do find it inherently unbelievable.

        An annual, ritualized gang rape initiation? No. Just, no. As boorish as frats can be, that’s beyond the pale.

        Gangraped with a beer bottle, and no trip to the hospital? Uh-uh. That would case damage that you absolutely go to a hospital for.

        Gangraped on broken glass? Even broken safety glass will cut, if you are being smashed against it. Again, this is ER-level stuff, no kidding at all.

        Gangraped for three hours by seven men? No way that happens, again, without the kind of injuries that would make walking out and going home impossible.

        Sorry, but the Rolling Stone story is inherently incredible.

      4. A girl being gang raped at a frat party, entirely believable.

        A group of frat members premeditatedly planning a gang rape over the course of several days including in those plans pledges they barely know and targeting a girl who does know at least a couple of them on a face to face basis is extremely implausible. Throw in some of the other implausible details and the entire story rises to the level of being unbelievable

        If she said she was drunk and agreed to sleep with Drew and it turned into a gang rape I’d believe that in a heart beat, this story however way too many logical holes in it.

  4. Is Mitt Romney planning to run for president again in 2016? Members of his inner circle seem to think he will.

    They saw what happened when the dog disagreed with Mitt.

    1. Where’s the dog, Paden?

      1. Where’s the dog, Paden?

        It ended up on President Obama’s breakfast plate?

      2. It left me, Restoras.

    2. Well, if they don’t know what he’s going to do, they wouldn’t be the “inner circle”, would they?

  5. House Republicans have voted to repudiate President Obama’s unilateral executive actions on immigration.

    Hey, Congressional action of some sort on immigration. Isn’t that what we wanted?

    1. repudiate President Obama’s unilateral executive actions

      Didn’t Obama, by definition, do the job of repudiating for them?

      1. Well, they’re just repudiating his repudiation!

        1. “We’ve learned some hard lessons since the government shutdown last year,” said Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a Boehner ally. “People are swallowing things that are difficult to swallow on all sides of the conference.”

          The GOP swallows Obama and his executive overreach because they know the worm will turn and soon enough they will have one of their own in the White House. They want to be careful of how strongly they make the argument against executive overreach so they don’t look like such hypocrits when they applaud the new guy for doing the exact same thing they’re rebuking Obama for.

  6. Game over, man! Game over!

    Libertarians lost their “moment”: GOP’s law-and-order old guard still prevailing

    A lengthy New York Times Magazine piece this summer asked, “Has the Libertarian Moment finally arrived?” Everyone had a good laugh, because ? as the author of the piece himself noted ? American politics has supposedly been on the cusp of the “Libertarian Moment” ever since some dude came up with the term “libertarian” however many decades ago.

    The answer remains no. For it to be the Libertarian Moment, there would have to be evidence that public opinion is in favor of the whole libertarian bundle. It’s not. For every area where libertarian positions are growing in public support ? same-sex marriage, pot legalization and drug war/criminal justice reform ? there are those positions that remain tremendously unpopular: eliminating the large social insurance programs and letting the free market do its magic everywhere, opening the borders. Even curbing military action overseas, a position that was pretty popular following the Iraq disaster, is less so after ISIS started chopping off heads on camera. Is this becoming more libertarian? On some issues, yes, on other issues, no. Glad we had that discussion.

    1. What is so delicious is how desperately proggies cling to feelings of smug condescension.

      And by delicious, I mean pathetic in people I like, but funny in people I despise.

      1. What is so delicious is how desperately proggies cling to feelings of smug condescension.

        It’s salon – “smug condescension” is all they do.

        1. It’s Salon – it’s all they have

          1. It’s Salon – it’s all they are

    2. Was there really a libertarian moment at all? If I say “Murder is bad” and then say “Throwing kittens in a stump grinder is good”, just because many people agree with me about murder doesn’t make it a “stump grinding moment”.

      The way I see it is that most people, regardless of political persuasion, want a government they can trust rather than believing that government is inherently untrustworthy.

      1. I think it’s not so much a libertarian moment as a slow inundation that will take centuries to submerge the proggie city walls.

        The proggies gain their power from non-proggies who support the proggies’ political agenda. The primary reason why the non-proggies do this is because they fear privation and want. For instance, most people don’t want the state to dictate who treats them and what treatments they can have, but will submit to a state-run health-care system because they fear otherwise they won’t be able to afford any treatment at all.

        As material well being improves – and it will improve unless the earth is consumed by a nano Mataglap or similar civilization ending disaster – the proggie offer of protection from want will resonate less. People will be less willing to settle for the crummy quality of state provisioned services when they can afford something better without too much trouble.

        Ultimately, the proggie movement is as doomed as the counterpart movements promoting theocracy or feudalism were a millenia ago.

        1. And the conservatives? Bear in mind that a lot of them really idealize the already idealized culture of the 50’s – when every Good American trusted the government. Granted they want less of it (although substantially more than they’ve led you to believe and only at the higher levels) but they’re no less believers in government authority than any progressive.

          1. The conservatives look the the state to protect them against malignant forces. Non-conservatives then to listen to the conservatives when they feel threatened by change.

            Because people’s perception of unacceptably high risk and danger is tuned by the amount of danger that’s normal, no matter how good things get on long timescales, the level of fear will stay constant; a risk of being murdered that today is viewed as normal will in a thousand years constitute an unacceptably dangerous situation – a crisis situation – requiring a large response by the state.

            It’s like what Jesus said about the poor. You will always have conservatives.

          2. the already idealized culture of the 50’s – when every Good American trusted the government.

            And weird foreigners and Negroes knew their place in society, by gum!

            1. Don’t forget about the fags!

          3. And the conservatives? Bear in mind that a lot of them really idealize the already idealized culture of the 50’s

            It’s so funny that you clearly don’t realize that this is leftist catechism, having as much relation to reality as their take on economics.

            1. *And the conservatives? Bear in mind that a lot of them really idealize the already idealized culture of the 50’s*

              And liberals idealize the 60s, when everyone was doped to the gills on hallucinogens 24/7, there were race riots in every major city, politicians were assassinated routinely and everything went to hell in a handbasket.

    3. Is this becoming more libertarian? On some issues, yes, on other issues, no.

      So when looked at holistically, wouldn’t that be a “yes”?

      1. At any rate, I’ll gladly take progress in some areas over no progress at all.

      2. On net, it depends. Could be a yes or a no.

  7. “President Barack Obama will nominate Ash Carter to be his new secretary of defense this morning.”

    Must be because he thinks ISIS is a freshman level threat.

    1. Interesting that he’s pulling someone out of the Hoover Institution which is generally a conservative place.

      1. It’s almost like he is setting Repubs/Conservatives up as being responsible for defense. Why would that be?

  8. Florida will grant equal representation to the Satanic Temple in this year’s religious-themed holiday displays at the state capitol. The Satanic Temple’s display will reportedly feature “an angel falling into a pit of fire.”

    All glory to Morgoth.

    1. The group that runs this part of the Capitol is pretty well-known for taking a very literal interpretation of the separation of church and state. They approved a Pastafarian holiday display last year. One of the few bright spots in my soon-to-be former state’s governance.

      1. I won’t believe it until they allow a statue to Demogorgon. Everyone always feels free to discriminate against the Chaotic Evil.

        1. When they get around to filling out the proper forms, they can have a display.

          It’s the chaos, not the evil, that’s causing them problems.

          1. That and every time they try to file, some Paladin with a +5 Holy Sword jumps up and smites them.

            1. ‘smite’ I love seeing that word in all its forms.

              1. Smitten with “smite”?

                1. ‘Smite’ smote me!

        2. I’ll believe it when they allow replicas of the Emperor of Mankind and the Golden Throne, The Omnissiah and Chaos Undivided.

      2. soon-to-be former state’s

        I take it you got the job and the gf agreed on the move. Congrats.

        1. Thanks. I end my old job a week from today and start my new one the following Monday. So peak freak out should occur about wednesday of next week.

          1. You’re going to miss the crazy.

            1. Pro L can send him a python by mail.

              1. There’s already a python pipeline to Houston from Miami. Literally, a pipeline full of snakes.

            2. I’ve lived in Houston before. There will be plenty for me.

      3. That is it Brett. If there is one thing I won’t cotton it’s deserters. I will file a motion to make sure none of our sweet sweet meth is allowed to be sent to Texas. Let’s see how productive you are with amphetamine free blood.

        1. You’ve got it all wrong. I’m going to work at a chemical plant so I can divert supplies to start a branch chain.

          1. Huh. Didn’t know Florida had franchises.

            1. Oh, sure. They’ll let anyone vote.

          2. I’m going to work at a chemical plant

            Oh crap, that’s not methamphetamine! It’s methylamine!

          3. Well that’s different. Can you get me some fresh Mexican adrenal glands while you are there?

        2. Yeah, right, Florida Man, like they don’t have meth in Texas. How did you think they got Brett to move there in the first place?

          1. Yes, but is it sunshine state artesian meth?

            1. Artesian meth? You have aquifers full of amphetamines?

              1. You don’t?

              2. You don’t?

    2. Will Morbid Angel be there?

    3. Wait, what’s their logic in showing an angel being cast out of Heaven in to Hell? That seems like a diorama a Christian would put up. All it needs is St. Michael putting his foot on the evil angel’s neck.

    4. Grand Moff, when I read your
      “All glory to Morgoth!”

      I immediately wanted to reply with
      “Blood and souls for my lord Arioch!”

      But then I read hamilton’s comment about Demogorgon and Swiss Servator’s about the Holy Avenger and thought
      “Vecna Lives!” was good too.

      Any preference?

      1. I know this guy who claims to have a map to the fabled Head of Vecna, he’s selling it for just 10 gold

  9. Vagina kayak artist arrested in Japan

    Megumi Igarashi, who calls herself Rokude Nashiko?offensive slang which loosely translates as “reprobate child”?was arrested in July for trying to raise funds online to pay for the construction of a kayak, using a 3D printer, inspired by her genitals.

    She was released days later following a legal appeal and after thousands of people signed a petition demanding her freedom.

    But on Wednesday, Igarashi was re-arrested on suspicion of sending a link “that shows her plan to create a boat using three-dimensional obscene data to a large number of people,” a Tokyo police spokeswoman told AFP.

    1. The little woman in the boat?

    2. It’s stories like this that make me hesitant to call the U.S. a “police state.”

      1. I thought Japan was one of our spawned satellite states.

    3. She forgot to pixelate it.

    4. Japan is fucking weird. I just can’t make sense of their laws about obscenity. Tentacle rape is OK. Conspiracy to make a labia-boat is a crime.

      1. related: 5 Things Nobody Tells You About Living in Japan

        Don’t get me wrong — there are some daffy game shows in Japan, and there is definitely erotic programming on late night TV, but the country isn’t full of shamelessly sex-crazed lunatics who have stopped trying to measure the immensity of the shits they no longer give.

        “So what about those infamous vending machines that sell used panties?” you might ask. Well, they do exist, but they were outlawed nearly 20 years ago. You can still find one from time to time, but they are illegal as fuck and usually hidden in sex stores or fetish clubs, and not in a bus station next to the Mr. Pibb machine.

        1. Mr. Pibb

          Sick fucks.

      2. What is weird is their horror of pubes. I remember going to the local video store to rent something for the kids and there was an entire wall pr0n right next to all the other videos.

        All the covers had lots of tits and girls with spooge all over their faces. But never any beavers.

    5. The important question is whether the Kayak is tentacle proof

  10. The federal civil rights investigation into the chokehold death of Eric Garner could present a new complication for Loretta E. Lynch’s nomination as attorney general…

    She doesn’t want to come off looking like she’s heading a… lynch mob.

    1. It’s all online these days, so it would probably end up as an eLynch.

      1. #Lynch?

  11. House Republicans have voted to repudiate President Obama’s unilateral executive actions on immigration.

    Is this more or less forceful than the toothless censure Charlie Rangel got?

  12. In light if recent events, random genius reflects on her own racism

    1. I’m here to ask you, fellow fishes, to wake up and smell the water.


      1. I like how she actually took the time to make a pie chart of the race/ethnicity of her facebook friends. Who does that?

        1. Really. As if Facebook doesn’t do that automagically.

        2. Race-obsessed people who claim to be the tolerant ones.

        3. Guys, I’m a liberal white lady who uses phrases like “microaggressions” and “intersectional feminism.” I live in a large, racially diverse city. I know what the phrase “Columbusing” is about. I make works of theatre that address a number of issues, some of which directly explore racial tensions and the black experience in this country. I was pissed when NPR canceled Michel Martin’s “Tell Me More.” I say shit like, “You’re following Baratunde Thurston on Twitter, right?”

          And my numbers were actually WORSE than the national average.

          I’m betting that this is a pattern which holds across the board.

          1. The sign of a non-racist would be you have no idea of the racial composition of online friends because you don’t care about what their skin melanin levels are.

            Kinda like one of the newer coworkers on my team who was startled to find that he was working with Prolefeed, spent years lurking here and reading our comments.

            It was sort of like being an extremely minor celebrity with a fan club of one.

  13. har.

    ‘Made in France’ sex toys set to stimulate economy

    Co-founders S?bastien Lecca and St?phane Turc plan instead to offer adventurous French consumers erotic goods from more than a dozen French companies, designed with imagination and crafted with care in France, with a French market in mind.

    “We all know about Chinese, American, German sex toy makers. The goal of Plaisir de France is to raise awareness of the talents of French sex toy producers,” Lecca told The Local on Wednesday.

    1. “German sex toy makers”


      1. Ach, mein Gott!

        1. All I can think of, reflecting back on the time I lived in Rhineland-Pfalz, is that a German sex toy would probably look very steampunkish…ugh.

      2. Swiss Servator? If you were in a German scheisse video, you… you’d tell me, right?

          1. I think the answer is “of course, poopykins”

        1. Hi IFH.

          So, Phillip Hughes. I mean, wow, in a bad way.

          1. Hey RavNat. Wow indeed. I’m a bit surprised at how upset I am. Partly I think it’s because he was a lovable country guy and it’s a shocking freak accident, but you know I think I feel a bit guilty too. Like everyone else I love a nasty bastard fast bowler trying to intimidate a batsman (and watching the batsman stand up to it), and the occasional injury seems just part of the game. Until now.

            Gotta laugh at the comments below on our killer wildlife. Given the choice between facing a killer snake or a first-rate bowler, I’d pick the snake

            1. I didn’t know much about him: I follow scores rather than names from this distance (and, I learned to my shock, he was born two years before I left Oz – I AM getting old.). But, yeah, it was the great nowhere to somewhere story. And, of course, the strange thing is he was playing an attacking stroke not cowering in fear.

              Wildlife fears: reminds of the OS tourists who used to come to Queensland. They would be all in fear of sharks & jellyfish. Then they would lie in the sun all day without any skin protection followed by a quick dip when the red flags were flying.

              But yeah, I’ve never been real scared of wildlife but spent a lot of my pre-teen years cowering in fear from fast bowlers.

              1. Oh so very true… saw an English singer whose first trip here was a fiasco because he got to Sydney, drank a few beers while jetlagged, passed out on the beach and woke up severely burnt and with sunstroke

                Are there any amateur teams near you or can you only watch it online?

                1. There’s a cricket club in my city but they play in a park and are watched by friends & family mainly. Plus, no vested interest on my part so hard to give up the time.

                  But, I do watch on-line at times (depending on time zones). Realized I’m still an afficionado when I watched part of a Shield match which was being webcast by a single static camera on the grandstand roof with no commentary or replay.

                  1. My God that is devotion.

                    If you’re looking for something to listen to, may I suggest The Duckworth Lewis Method (Neil from the Divine Comedy and Thomas from Pugwash singing about what is, for Irishmen, the love that dare not speak its name). Third Man off the second album is my favourite – an ELO-esque meditation on mediocrity

                    1. Thanks for the tip!

                      I should point out that I watched for about 20 minutes until the end of an innings then went to bed.

                      I did, however, make sure I watched all of the last session of both the 3rd & 5th Ashes tests last summer. Crushing the poms never gets old regardless of where you live.

            2. Given the choice between facing a killer snake or a first-rate bowler, I’d pick the snake

              Isn’t facing killer smakes just another tuesday?

      3. But what about Swiss Sex Toy makers? Overbuilt and overpriced?

        1. …and precisely on time for all meetings.


          … not that I would know.

    2. Does a French-made vibrator say “Don’t shoot, I surrender” and go limp at the point of climax?

      1. French made vibrator will also die if washed.

  14. Prepare for an avalanche of bullshit.

    If Eric Garner Were White

    To imagine how Fox News would be reacting right now had Garner been white, rural, and facing the feds, you need only imagine how it would have reacted had a BLM agent shot Bundy dead.

    But Fox and the rest of the pro-Tea Party right aren’t reacting that way. Yes, some conservative pundits?noting the video that shows Garner being choked to death?have condemned the grand jury’s decision not to indict the police officer who killed him. Rand Paul has denounced the high cigarette taxes that Garner flouted.

    da fuq?

    1. it gets better:

      (Later on that evening, FoxNews.com made its top story, you guessed it, Benghazi. As of Thursday morning, the Garner decision leads the site.) There was virtually nothing about the grand-jury decision on the websites of National Review or The Weekly Standard. (Since this piece was written, National Review has posted some prominent coverage.)

      One prominent conservative who did mention the case was Charles Krauthammer, who called the grand jury’s decision “incomprehensible”

      1. So, a major news organization covering other issues of importance is racist?

    2. #blacklivesmatter

    3. It’s very easy to “beat” your opponents when you blame them for actions they haven’t taken in a situation that never existed.

    4. If Eric Garner Were White

      The liberal media would completely ignore his death, like they did when Kelly Thomas was killed?

      1. Can’t be reminded of that enough.

      2. Or the way they ignored the Dillon Taylor shooting, or the shooting of the homeless guy camping in New Mexico? Like those white guys?

      3. That would be a good guess.

    5. These people get their news from CNN or The Daily Show. They’re completely ignorant of all the white people who’ve been killed or brutalized by cops. If you asked them who Kelly Thomas is they would probably respond either a country music singer or a senator from Oklahoma.

    6. He lists several to-be-sures where the right did in fact cover the Garner case, but of course it’s Not Enough.

      Only the outrage of the Left is genuine and anti-racist.

      1. Basically, his biggest problem is this:

        Sarah Palin did not post anything about it on her Facebook page.

        Seriously. Why does this guy have a job, again?

        1. The left’s continuing obsession with Palin is pretty funny. They are the only people keeping even a little bit relevant.

          1. She seems to be cashing in on it too. Just like Coulter… the Left ignored those two, they would fade away.

          2. Them and Alaskan conservatives. She was apparently pretty instrumental in dethroning Parnell.

    7. Rand Paul talked about the Garner case, and the left excoriated him for it.

      1. The left claims a monopoly on race issues, and they will protect themselves fiercely from being co-opted.

      2. Senator Rand Paul ?@SenRandPaul 5m5 minutes ago In memory of #EricGarner


    1. How do those booster rockets work with respect to the fuel? Are they liquid fuel and it is pumped into the combustion chamber or are they solid fuel?

      1. Most boosters are solid fuel rockets. But that looks suspiciously like three of the same engine on that thing…

      2. IIRC they are liquid but have pumps between them so that the outer ones burn two thirds of their fuel and pump the last third (approximately, it may be 4/5 and 1/5, I didn’t do any math here) into the central rocket so they can jettison the outer two rockets and still have a bunch of fuel in the center while burning all of the nozzles wide open during the early ascent. I know the SpaceX Heavy is meant to do that. They are Delta IV rockets in essence.

        Whoops. Wikipedia says they just throttle down the central rocket to conserve fuel. So the interpumping is what the SpaceX Falcon Heavy would bring new to the table.

        1. Cool, thanks Brett L.

      1. Glad that I’m not the only one who recalls that program.

        It came in handy when the Fithp invaded the Earth.

        1. Thank you!

          I’ve been trying to remember who the elephant people were.

    2. To be sure, we’ve been launch unmanned rockets all over the place. There were no people on this vehicle nor are there going to be for some time.

      What bothers me is that Dragon is likely going to be ready–in reality if not officially–to fly men into orbit next year. But I have a feeling NASA is going to play games with the certification process to make sure it doesn’t beat Orion with a manned launch.

  15. The Cost of Amnesty
    President Obama touts the economic benefits of immigration, but the rising price of the Earned Income Tax Credit and Additional Child Tax Credit alone could be dizzying.

    Here’s one indicator, courtesy of the Center for Immigration Studies. About 14.5 percent of the native-born population of the United States earns little enough to qualify for the EITC. Almost twice as great a portion of the total immigrant population, 29.7 percent, qualifies. But the specific immigrant groups most likely to benefit from the president’s action earn even less. Fifty-three percent of Mexican-born immigrants, 55 percent of Honduran-born immigrants, and 57 percent of Guatemalan-born immigrants earn little enough to qualify for the EITC. About half the migrants from these communities in the United States are present illegally, and they dominate the numbers among the newly legalized. Almost 87 percent of those who have received deferred action under the president’s 2012 action come either from Mexico or Central America. Everything points to a huge surge in EITC eligibility following this year’s executive action.

  16. Florida will grant equal representation to the Satanic Temple in this year’s religious-themed holiday displays at the state capitol.

    Satan… Santa… What’s next, Santana? I draw the line there, although…

    Carlos… Carols… MIND BLOWN.

    1. (sings) “Got a Black Magic Christmas…”

  17. Satanic Temple display approved for state Capitol

    TALLAHASSEE ? A year after rejecting it as “grossly offensive during the holiday season,” state officials have approved a diorama of a falling angel as a holiday display in the state Capitol’s ground-floor rotunda.

    A spokesman for the Department of Management Services, which reviews and approves proposed displays, announced the decision in an email received after 5 p.m. Wednesday.

    Shine on, you crazy diamond.


      1. We don’t need to suck from the teat of “officially-sanctioned” links, Fist. Power to the people!

        1. In Libertopia every link will be privatized.

        2. This is private property. Get out.

  18. Oh noes! Miss BumBum runner up hospitalized after tragic plastic surgery mishap.

    1. Shocker. Was it ass implants.

      1. A 27-year-old Brazilian reality TV star who was runner-up in a best-buttocks competition has been hospitalized with complications from a cosmetic procedure she underwent a few weeks ago to enlarge her thighs.

        “Mind the gap.”

        1. Enlarge her THIGHS???? As Yogi Berra would say, “Only in America!”

            1. Nobody goes there anymore, it’s too crowded.

    1. What is, it would be self-indulgent only sorta mildly amusing pretentious shit?

  19. It’s always the end of the world.

    and I feel fine.

    Global warming’s year of destruction: 2014?s terrifying and pivotal climate events are impossible to ignore

    The talks are also coming at the end of a year that, as the World Meteorological Organization announced on Wednesday, is on track to be one of the hottest ? and quite possibly the hottest ? on record. This year, said WMO secretary-general Michel Jarraud, was “consistent with what we expect from a changing climate,” one in which “record-breaking heat combined with torrential rainfall and floods destroyed livelihoods and ruined lives.”

    Significantly, the WMO also reported record-high temperatures in the oceans, which absorb over 90 percent of the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. It was another blow against deniers who claim global warming has “paused”: “The provisional information for 2014 means that 14 of the 15 warmest years on record have all occurred in the 21st century,” Jarraud said in a statement. “There is no standstill in global warming.”

    1. Looking at the actual data, 2014 was fairly mild on all metrics, middle of the road if you will.

    2. The provisional information for 2014 means that 14 of the 15 warmest years on record have all occurred in the 21st century

      Which, assuming it’s true, still doesn’t say anything about a pause occurring or not…

      1. It tells me they are working with a tiny data set. Just during human history there were much warmer years during the medieval optimum and earlier warm periods.

        1. Well, the bigger data sets didn’t support their policy diktats.

        2. Flawed data set, more like.

          In the financial world, analysts are accustomed to supposed models/systems of the stock market that are highly tuned to historic data and which fail out of sample. With this example very much in mind, one of my very first challenges to the paleoclimate community was to demonstrate out-of-sample validity of the multiproxy reconstructions (mentioning Moberg et al 2005; Mann et al 1998-99) by bringing their inputs up-to-date. Because the Mann and other reconstructions ended in 1980, I observed that the records could be readily updated and confirm whether the linear combination of proxies in the various steps of, for example, the Mann reconstruction were valid measures of temperature out-of-sample …

          The new results of Salzer et al 2014 (though not candid on the topic) fully demonstrate this point in respect to Sheep Mountain. In the warm 1990s and 2000s, the proxy not only doesn’t respond linearly to higher temperatures, it actually goes the wrong way. This will result in very negative RE values for MBH-style reconstructions from its AD1000 and AD1400 networks when brought up to date, further demonstrating these networks have no real “skill” out of sample.

          1. The way paleoclimatologists reconstruct past climate is to take samples of proxies (such as stuff embedded in river sediments or ocean bottoms, ice layers in greenland, tree rings) that are affected by the climate of a specific year, and using the periods where these proxies overlap the temperature/precipitation/wind records taken in the last 150 years or so, and coming up with a function that takes the proxy values as inputs and spits out the measured parameters as an output. That overlapping period used to produce the function (or model if you will) is called the “in sample” period.

            Then, the climatologists feed in values from the more distant past to come up with a guess as to what temperatures or precipitation etc. were prior to people making and recording accurate observations of those parameters.

            These guesses are then used to argue that current temperatures are high to an unprecedented degree.

            1. This is, however a way to test these models. Because time marches on, and meteorologists continue to record observations, these functions to generate climactic parameters from proxy values can be tested by comparing their calculations to the actual observations made after the model was created. The period where there are observations that were not used in the original ‘in sample’ period is called the ‘out of sample’ period. And as Steve McIntyre shows, the proxies that were deemed in the 80’s and 90’s as being very, very representative of temperature have not been doing so well.

              Which implies that they happened to randomly correlate with temperature for a time and not actually have a causal relationship with it.

              And if that’s the case, then they are not really able to tell us anything specific about temps or precipitation in the distant past.

              1. Are you suggesting they should use some sort of validation set? What are you, a science-denier?!

              2. Yes, recordsets from the past that don’t forecast probably don’t hindcast.

  20. Warren Buffett is Ready for Hillary, as the tax-dodging, rent-seeking billionaire gave the maximum individual donation of $25,000 allowed to “Ready for Hillary” last quarter.

    “Hillary is going to win, yeah,” he said at Fortune’s Most Powerful Women Summit in October. “I will bet money on it. And I don’t do that easily.”

    I’m pretty sure she’s running. I should probably bet on it now too while the payoff is still decent.

      1. /drops cigarette from lips.

        What planet are these people on?

        She’s a ‘loving wife’ and ‘fights for her country’?

        1. Well, yessss! A woman who defends her philandering husband by blaming a “vast conspiracy” is a loving wife, by definition.

        2. Just like that TV show…Madame Secretary!

      2. Yeah, remember the time she came under fire when she got out of a plane?

        1. +1 Bosnian sniper

          That was the safest deployment I had – if that is her “fighting for her country” then I must have multiple Medals of Honor.

          1. Stolen Valor!

    1. “I will bet money on it. And I don’t do that easily.”

      It’s really just an investment.

      1. -1 Keystone XL pipeline
        +1 Union Pacific railroad

  21. Just in time for Christmas: Homewares on the theme of self-loathing

    1. thanks for posting.

      i prefer the garden gnome massacre as alt-gift:

      or the battle garden gnomes:

  22. Baptists paid $183 million for four months of illegal immigrant childcare

    Federal officials paid Baptist Children and Family Services nearly $183 million to help care for 2,400 unaccompanied illegal immigrant children for four months earlier this year at military facilities in Oklahoma and Texas, according to documents made public Wednesday by Judicial Watch.

    “The cost to the American taxpayer was $86,846.34 per illegal alien child at Ft. Sill [in Oklahoma], for a total to $104,215,608 for 1,200 UACs from June 12 to October 18,” Judicial Watch said. “The bill also included $2,648,800 in compensation for 30 members of the BCFS ‘Incident Management Team,’ for a total to $88,293 per IMT member for the four-month period.”


    2. Its the same as all the other so-called charities who get paid to handle immigrants.

      It should be fraud to call yourself a charity if you get your money from the taxpayer.

    3. Working the system like a bunch of welfare queens.

    4. Ya know, if we weren’t already drowning under two or three new scandals every day, this would be a scandal. More so if the President’s name were “Bush.”

    5. Since my wife is a Baptist, I looked into BCFS after reading about this. Their website only mentions the word Baptist once, in the title. No other references are made to Baptists, the Bible, or Christianity in general.

      So while I do not hesitate to pile on the Baptists, this is simply a trick in the name.

      1. No other references are made to Baptists, the Bible, or Christianity in general.


    1. From the people who brought you “joblock” and “funemployment.”

    2. “Dr. Larry Bumpass, an emeritus professor of sociology”

      Huh, huh, Bumpass, huh huh.

      Huh-huh huh, huh-huh huh, huh-huh huh, huh-huh huh, huh-huh huh, huh-huh huh, huh-huh huh.

      Bumpass, huh huh.

      Huh huh huh.

      1. Bumpass. You’re welcome. Happy Friday.

  23. Woman whose noisy love-making left neighbours fuming and led to 30 visits from the police (as well as an ASBO and TWO prison sentences) doesn’t regret a thing


    1. ‘If you get to a point where the bed’s banging on the wall, you’re not going to stop, are you?’ she laughs.


      1. Look at the picture — they knocked the plaster right off the wall!

    2. Are you sure that is a woman? I thought it was grumpy cat.

    3. Uhg! Don’t click!

      Whatever you are imagining, it’s better.

      1. ASBO is the hint that she’s probably British. As we all know, look at your own risk.

      2. Maybe the screaming was the guy begging to be let go?

    4. Why would any neighbors complain about that?

  24. Is Mitt Romney planning to run for president again in 2016? Members of his inner circle seem to think he will.

    Third time’s the charm. If only that were true of Root and alt-text.

  25. The Benghazi Report
    An ongoing intelligence failure

    For many of those who had been following the story closely, the report was bizarre and troubling. Key events were left out. Important figures were never mentioned. Well-known controversies were elided. Congressional testimony on controversial issues was mischaracterized. The authoritative tone of the conclusions was undermined by the notable gaps in evidence presented to support them.

    “If this was a high school paper, I would give it an F,” says John Tiegen, a former CIA officer who fought on the ground that night in Benghazi and lived through many of the events the report purports to describe. “There are so many mistakes it’s hard to know where to begin. How can an official government report get so many things wrong?”

    It’s a good question. Representative Tom Rooney, a Florida Republican who serves on the committee that produced the report, disputes the premise.

    “I don’t think this is the official government report. It’s Mike Rogers’s report,” says Rooney. “The members of his own committee don’t even agree with it.”

    1. One of the most blatantly obvious bipartisan coverups in history.

      There were illegal “black ops” activities going on there, and the powers that be can never acknowledge that.

      That’s why all the bureaucrats who know the details about it are being forced to take monthly polygraphs so the politicians feel safe knowing they haven’t leaked any of the details.

    1. Dust storms… killer kangaroos, poisonous frogs, and chaotic koalas… the paradise of Australia.

      1. You forgot the crocs, the dingos, the snakes and spiders, the sharks, the explosive trees and wildfires that spawn fliery tornados…

        1. we could go on and on… but enough of my sex life.

        2. Irukandji jellyfish

      2. When I was in Honolulu back in May, I got to drink a few beers w/ an Australian couple. Very friendly folks, they drank me under the table. Anywho, I asked them about the outback and other parts of Australia since I have not been there and the husband basically said that if I visit Australia, don’t go to the outback because almost every animal there can kill you. And if I go to the beach, watch out for sharks and box jellyfish. Yay, Australia.

        1. Oh yeah, I forgot about the jeyllyfish, thanks.

        2. Australia is a bit like Canada in that it is effectively much smaller than it looks on the map. Most of the land area we call “Canada” is an empty great north wilderness. The area where people actually live is not that big. If you took away the wilderness, Canada would look more like Chile, a long thin country, than what it does. Australia is the same way only most of its land is an empty desert. Few Australians live outside or even travel outside the Southeast corner of the country, which is bigger than you would think but only about a fourth of the land mass.

          1. Pretty much what the Australian guy said about living in Australia, John. He had traveled to Perth only once, but he flew, of course. And he felt bad for the folks who lived up in Darwin because as he said, “That’s the tip of fuckin’ nowhere, mate.”

            1. I watched a show one time on cable about driving across the outback. It was a bit of an expedition, even though the roads were decent. The problem is that it is so remote that if you breakdown, even on the road, you will likely die before anyone finds you. So to do it safely, you have to do it in two four wheel drive vehicles with at least one with a winch in case you get stuck and supplies to be able to survive a few days in case both break down.

              1. Enough talk, I’m in!

                1. Florida Man, I want to drive across Canada some day. Canada doesn’t have the interstate system we do. There are some long and remote roads up there.

                  1. Sounds lovely. I use to meander through the blue hills and smokeys when I was young and fearless, camping by the roadside, out on my own. It was a great way to get away from civilization for a while.

                  2. You might find this interesting – it’s a show about outback Aborigines’ improvisational mechanics

                  3. It depends how far of the Trans-Canada highway you get. It stays pretty close to most of civilization.

                    1. far “off”

          2. Saw a recent graphic in the Net (about a week ago) that laid Greenland and Russia over Africa. I always knew flat maps exaggerated Greenland, but I didn’t realize how much — Russia surprised me as well.

            1. Russia is just so wide east to west. The Trans Siberian Railroad passes through like 12 time zones or something crazy like that.

              1. If you look at a map with the north pole at the center and projecting the world outward, you will see that Russia isn’t exactly huge. Russia covers so many time zones, because it is so far north. You go far enough north an each stride east or west covers a timezone 😉

                1. Still pretty damn huge. It’s near half the size of Africa.

              2. Years ago I watched a documentary on someone who traveled along the Trans Siberian Railroad – based on the amount of drinking that went on, I think I would need a liver transplant.

            2. Yeah, that’s because the Mercator protection is a RAYCISS conspiracy to destroy black kids’ self-esteem, donchano?

            3. OK, here’s an easy linky to see what I was talking about.


              1. Yeah I posted this a couple of weeks back in the AM links. It wasn’t popular among those who commented who seemed to dismiss it.

                1. The thing is that a mercator projection is made to navigate with. As a navagation tool, it works fine. The maps were never made to teach you relative sizes of things. As Zeb points out, that is what globes are for.

                2. Well, dismiss the racist conspiracy part.

          3. Few Australians live outside or even travel outside the Southeast corner of the country, which is bigger than you would think but only about a fourth of the land mass.

            Only if you have a generous definition of “Southeast corner.” More accurately, about 80% of Australians live within 100 miles of the coast and most of those 80% live on the east coast. But that would be the east coast from Melbourne to Cairns, not just the southeast corner.

            1. The coast from Adelaide to Melbourne to Sydney to Brisbane is where nearly all of the population lives. That looks like the Southeast Corner of the country to me.

              1. For Australians, a generous southeast would include Melbourne to Sydney.

                But, yeah, depends on how you define things.

              2. You are both right. Raven Nation is using it in the Australian sense, which refers to a much smaller area of the country.

                Another way to think about it is to consider the fact that 60% of the population lives in cities with more than a million people, which I think is one of, if not the highest, urbanization rate in the world. Or that we live on the coastal fringe right around the country

                1. Yeah, that’s a good point. Global urbanization rates here:


                  Australia is 18 but the list includes city-states and some islands. If you look at “regular’ countries (yeah, nebulous term), then close to Top 10.

  26. A public hospital cafe ?supervisor, whose female manager asked her at a work Christmas party if she would join in a threesome with another female, has won compensation for sexual harassment.


    1. They paid her for her embarrassment and humiliation? That used to be part of going to work. Still is in many places.

    2. I thought we were supposed to get affirmative consent not try the drunk-her-up and seduce method?

      1. I guess when it comes to three way lesbian sex, there’s just no right way of doing it.

        1. I can’t imagine a wrong way of doing it.

          1. Three women in one room? There’s always a power faction.

  27. anybody watch the Peter Pan special last night? The chick that played Peter had me all confused.

    1. No. I was listening to a hockey game.

    2. No; but go on ….

    3. Is the character usually played by a woman?

      1. Somebody here posted a link earlier this week about some SJW-type whining about how Peter Pan is always played by a woman and how this is supposedly monstrously sexist.

        1. I find it INCREDIBLY SEXIST that male characters are almost invariably played by men, and female characters are almost invariably played by women.

        2. They’ll be coming for Bart Simpson next.

        1. I’ve never watched any production of Peter Pan in any incarnation that I can recall, but I’m fairly certain I wouldn’t be able to see anything but a woman pretending to be a boy. I can suspend disbelief only so far.

          1. So you think a dude running around with tights, fairy’s, and sprinkling glitter on everything is more analogous to that of a typical boy’s childhood than that of a girls? Do continue.

            1. Not a typical boys childhood, just someone obsessed with posting first.

          2. I think that at the time of the early productions, no one thought that children could act well enough. And for musical versions, it is hard to find a boy with the necessary vocal range. Then it sort of became a tradition to have women as Peter Pan.

          3. Most pre-teen boys in cartoons are adult women too.

            1. Don’t have a cow, man!

          4. Sandy Duncan and later Kathy Rigby are the most well known actors who played hte character. I have never heard of a male actor playing it.

            The problem is that no adolescent boy has the vocal chops to do the part and no adult male can look the part and very few can sing at the range the part demands. So diminutive pixieish females, who both look the part and can sing part, like Duncan are really the only option.

            1. Out of all the world, there are no child actors/singers who aren’t up to the task? I can’t believe that.

              1. It is true. Their voices are not mature enough. Singing is a real skill that takes years to perfect.

            2. Sandy Duncan and later Kathy Rigby

              Um, WHAT? Mary Martin or GTFO.

              1. Yes. Mary Martin. I stand aside to your superior Broadway knowledge.

                1. My homosexuality and my love of musical theater is entirely coincidental, I swear!

                  1. There is nothing wrong with Broadway. Even straight men like some of it. They just can’t admit it.

    4. You mean Brian Williams daughter?

      1. yeah she’s a smokeshow.

    5. She has a glass eye, so her gaze causes confusion. You know, like an umber hulk.

    6. It wasn’t Mary Martin, but it was a perfectly cromulent entertainment.

    1. almost 2015. Just in time. Shoes as well.

      Also, another one that no one mentions from the movie, but I always thought was cool, weather prediction down to the minute. Been using that for almost a year. And it’s almost always accurate.

      1. I just want that instant drying jacket.

        1. If you download skymotion, you won’t need it.

  28. I don’t really understand the Eric Garner protestors. As I understand it, the media that keeps saying he was selling loosies doesn’t note that he wasn’t selling them at the time (which means it would be just as accurate to report that Eric Garner was a 6-year old child since Eric Garner was in fact at one time 6 years old) and therefore the cops hassling him was essentially part of the “stop and frisk” program – at any time the cops are allowed to stop and frisk anybody walking down the street for no reason whatsoever, no probable cause, no reasonable suspicion – and resisting this mind-bogglingly un-Constitutional, un-American, inhuman violation of your right to be free to go about your business is enough to get you arrested and/or dead. If New Yorkers shrug their shoulders at living in a police state like this, why the hell are they upset at somebody dying for objecting to the police state? Why haven’t we been seeing riots over the very existence of the “stop and frisk” program or the courts stepping in to shut that sort of shit down hard?

    1. We don’t see it because middle class and upper class white people are not subjected to it. As an upper middle class white person, I go entire calendar years without any interaction with cops. So most white voters have no idea how bad it is for poor whites and minorities of any class.

      1. Ditto. And I wonder how many of the protesters have actually had interactions, either good or bad, with police officers on a regular basis?

    2. Why haven’t we been seeing riots over the very existence of the “stop and frisk” program or the courts stepping in to shut that sort of shit down hard?

      Um… the courts DID shut it down. IIRC, Bloomberg got it overturned. It was a HUGE issue in the last couple years. Now De Blasio has cut stop ‘n’ frisk like 80%. The idea that New Yorkers “shrug their shoulders” at this is simply not true.

  29. Six months ago I lost my job and after that I was fortunate enough to stumble upon a great website which literally saved me. I started working for them online and in a short time after I’ve started averaging 15k a month… The best thing was that cause I am not that computer savvy all I needed was some basic typing skills and internet access to start… This is where to start…
    ?????? http://www.payinsider.com

  30. I was thinking about the Gardner case this morning. There is a deeper issue involved than just cigarette laws. I often said that the criminal justice system is made up of three kinds of people, real sociopath criminals, people who have made one mistake and committed a crime but learn from it and leave the system after serving their time, and people who are in the system because they have poor impulse control, judgement and just don’t function well in a structured society but are not dangerous to anyone but themselves. Garner was clearly of the third type. The guy had an arrest record but it was all for selling cigarettes. He was a complete mess of a person with all kinds of health problems and clearly was a guy who for whatever reason didn’t navigate well through life. There is no indication he was violent or any kind of a danger to anyone.

    It used to be people like Gardner blunder through life on the fringes of society. Today, thanks to the Progressive regulatory state, guys like Gardner spend their entire lives in and out of the criminal justice system and being harassed by cops because they just can’t measure up to the tidy standards of behavior upper class white progs expect of them. And sometimes, they end up dead at the hands of the cops or because of some neglectful or sadistic prison guard as a result.

    1. The people who passed the cigarette laws in New York City were no doubt upper middle and upper class white progs who consider themselves the most tolerant people on earth. Yet, for all of their tolerance they could not and cannot tolerate a guy like Garnder selling cigarettes on the street or living any kind of life that didn’t adhere to what they consider to be responsible behavior. You want to know what killed Gardner other than the cop who strangled him? Progressive white intolerance for who he was.

      1. “Look, if we don’t collect those exorbitant cigarette taxes, how can we spread the wealth around? You can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.

        And besides, you shouldn’t be smoking those cigarettes anyway, you naughty boy.”

        1. I live around and work with well meaning upper middle and upper class white liberals. None of the ones I know are the kind of nasty fascists that you find in the media and in politics. They are well meaning people who really want to do the right thing and are convinced liberal policies are the way to do that.

          They nearly all have a few things in common. First, almost none of them have ever been poor or been around actual poor people. They all have spent their lives around people just like them. So they have no idea how the rest of the country actually thinks and acts.

          Second, they are all very responsible hard working people who follow the rules and fit in well in organizations and in society as a whole. And since they don’t know many people outside of their class, they have no idea that following rules might come so naturally to some people.

          As a result of this, they are completely unaware of how oppressive these sorts of laws are on poor people. Worse still, since they follow the rules, they have no idea how much they get over and are not really subject to them.

          1. And since they’ve never lived in poor neighborhoods they have no idea how brutal police can be while enforcing their nanny state dreams. And since the media only highlights cases of cops killing black men, they’ll never see the larger problem and just assume its because society is so racist.

            1. You are exactly right.

              I am an upper-middle class white guy but I was raised in a lower-middle class neighborhood on the fringe of the ghetto.

              I find it much easier to talk to the upper-middle class black guy in the office (who grew up on the fringe of the ghetto) than I can the upper-middle class white people who have been upper-middle class their entire lives.

              Everybody talks about how great class mobility is, but only upwards. The ones moving down are bitter and blame everyone but themselves, and the ones not moving at all are sort of clueless about how the others think.

        2. Its like cellphone use while driving bans. My neighbors all think that is a good idea. I think it is nothing but an excuse for cops to pick on black and poor people. What my neighbors don’t understand because they follow the rules and I do understand because I don’t is that none of us respectable white people are really subject to those laws. I drive around talking on my phone in the car all of the time, sometimes right in front of cops. But as a respectable looking white person, I have never been pulled over once for it. If I were black or poor, no way would that be true. White liberals just don’t get that.

          1. I think these laws are designed to discriminate against people who don’t have good enough cars to include Bluetooth – Or are too stupid to sync their phone to the car.

            I’ll sync to a rental car if I’m going to drive it far.

          2. Why don’t poor people just use the hands free Bluetooth option in their Mercedes?

            1. Funny how many people I see in NJ driving their new high-end cars holding a smartphone against their ears.

              My 2-year-old smartphone is synced to my 6-year-old Mazda.

              1. I am one of those people. My car has blue tooth. I am just too stupid and lazy to set it up. And its German so the system is completely over engineered and the process of setting it up long and detailed.

      2. I don’t even understand the “loosies” as illegal thing. If I buy a pack of cigarettes in NYC, then sell you individual cigs for a dollar each, I have ALREADY paid the taxes when I BOUGHT THE PACK. A real solution would be stores being able to sell individual cigarettes, sometimes people can’t afford a pack, and have a dollar and want a cig.

        1. If bars could sell them one at a time, they could give away the alcohol and still make a profit.

        2. With loosies, can the state source the origin of the cigarettes – whether they were bought in NYC or in Virginia? There is no bar code or serial number on a loosie, so how would they know if the cigarette was smuggled?

          1. “We could use the microimprinting technology that we should use for each individual round of ammunition and use it on cigarettes! A tiny tax stamp on each coffin nail!”

        3. There used to be a loosie machine in a local bar. Back in the 90s you could put a quarter in and get a single cigarette. It was genius for those people who just wanted a cigarette when they were drinking. They got a bunch of shit for it in the late 90s and the smoking ban in town finally killed it.

        4. I don’t even understand the “loosies” as illegal thing.

          Because there is no depth that the state will not sink to in its quest for ever more revenue and power.

        5. A real solution would be stores being able to sell individual cigarettes, sometimes people can’t afford a pack, and have a dollar and want a cig.

          I have a friend who buys loosies all the time at a bodega in a nice Queens neighborhood. Cops only shake down bodogas in bad neighborhoods.

    2. Garner was clearly of the third type.

      I really doubt that. The guy was earning a living. He made a conscious choice to break the law. I don’t know if that is evidence of poor impulse control.

      I often make a conscious choice to speed on the highway. I weigh the risk vs reward and arrive at that decision, and don’t believe that has any bearing on my impulse control.

      For whatever reason, I see Garner’s act as one of civil disobedience. Kind of like Gandhi deciding to make salt in violation of British laws granting the State the monopoly over salt.

      1. I saw yet another interview with a black protester who claimed “black men are terrified of cops.” I find that hard to believe, based on the belligerent or resistant attitude shown by Brown and Garner. Look, we’d all like to spit in the eye of the Nazis but I doubt anything good comes to any individual who resists arrest. Obey the officer’s instructions, keep your mouth shut, and call your lawyer at the first opportunity. I was once run off by a copy for taking photos of a train from public property. He had no right to do it, but my day would have been ruined if I resisted on the spot. A wrote a letter to the transit authority, they agreed I was within my rights, and they promised to tell all their cops that photography was permitted from public property.

        1. I fall in to the same category as you, in that I would comply and then take post hoc process. But it takes a lot of courage to say “No”, and I admire people like that.

          I know someone who did that and got thrown in jail. What he did was right, and from HIS perspective, rational. I simply lack the courage to do what he did. I will admit that.

          1. Should Schlinder have just capped the first Nazi he saw or operated as he did?
            Not hard to answer. By same token, one can really admire the Warsaw resistance rather than taking death lying down.

        2. I find that hard to believe, based on the belligerent or resistant attitude shown by Brown and Garner.

          You can be both afraid of something and finally get fed up by it at the same time. The cops pick at people that are already afraid of the them and when they snap the cops imprison or kill them, reinforcing the fear they want the rest of the population to feel in order to keep them in line.

          1. Terror can produce multiple reactions, including fight or flight responses.

          2. That too. That is what infuriates me about people who support stop and frisk like Heather McDonald. Heather McDonald is a respectable looking white woman. I bet she has never gotten so much as a traffic ticket and like every other respectable white person rarely if ever interacts with the cops. So it is easy for her to say stop and frisk is a great idea. She is not subjected to it. I would love to see her or anyone else not subjected to it spend one day on the streets of New York being treated like young black men are treated and see what she thinks then.

            If DeBlasio were anything but retarded and a fascist and actually cared about ending the policy, he would tell the police to start applying it to white people like McDonald. That policy would end almost immediately and never return.

            1. Stop and frisk was largely ended by De Blasio. He is a retarded fascist (his newest campaign is to ban horse carriage rides) but once in a while the interestes of SJW’s aligns with that of freedom lovers.

        3. You hear about the ones that may not be afraid, or may not be afraid enough, because bad stuff happens to them. That doesn’t preclude that a large contingent of black men are afraid of cops and go along with the bull shit because of it.

          1. I hate to side with the likes of Heather McDonald but it also doesn’t preclude the possibility that a majority are in fact not at all “afraid” of them and in fact welcome police presence in certain crime-ridden neighborhoods. We don’t hear that side of the story in the news at all.

        4. call your lawyer

          Everyone’s got a lawyer on retainer, right?

      2. Doubtful. Why was he making a living selling cigarettes? Likely because he is one of those people who didn’t do well in school, didn’t do well in a nine to five job and didn’t have any other options.

        You do something like that because you are on the fringes of society. And you end up on the fringes because you for whatever reason don’t fit in. All the Prog regulatory state does is criminalize those on the fringes.

    3. And if Eric Garner was a criminal, then all of us are criminals, which I guess is the whole point of a police state, like that Ayn Rand character said.

      What adult among us in this country can honestly say that he has never broken the speed limit, or rolled through a stop sign without coming to a complete stop, or jaywalked?

    4. Guys like Gardner also used to be able to disappear.

      Move to another state. Start using another name. Get some crummy job, or a succession of crummy jobs. This allowed a certain number of them to move into the lower middle class just by Brownian motion.

      But improvements in record-keeping and communications have made it more and more difficult to disappear like this. The modern regulatory state considers it absolutely critical that it be impossible for you to walk away from your cigarette hustling arrest record or your lack of a high school diploma or your unpaid child support obligations. And there are good reasons to not let people walk away from any of those things – but in total, they eliminate one of the chief unsung causes of the former dynamism of American life, namely that our sheer size allowed geographic mobility to aid social mobility by creating a permanent internal frontier.

      1. Yes. And conservatives are just as responsible for that as the progs are. It is impossible to start over in this country. Once you get an arrest record or even a bad debt sometimes, you are fucked. It follows you everywhere.

        There may have been good reasons to pass those laws, but the second order effects have made them into very bad things.

        1. Exactly.

          It’s no accident that the entire plot of Les Miserables turns on Jean Valjean’s decision to throw away his parole papers.

  31. Jack Dunphy defends the cops who killed Garner.



    1. and it was he who grabbed Garner in what has often been described as a “chokehold,” which has been erroneously attributed as the cause of Garner’s death (the medical examiner described it as a contributing factor).

      If it was a contributing factor, was he responsible for, say, 50% of what the medical examiner called a “homicide”?

      Even if the “contribution” was 5%, the cop deserved to be indicted.

      1. What standard would this guy demand we apply if it had been the cop who died following the struggle?

        1. To paraphrase Orwell, all animals are equal, but pigs are more equal than others.

      2. Why is chokehold in quotes? I wrassled for decades. That was a hold around the neck. From the position of the blade of his forearm, I’m going to say it was a trach choke and not blood choke. Choke + hold = chokehold. No qualifying quotes.

        I don’t know who Jack Dunphy is but his work is now suspect.

          1. well then, in light of these new developments, fuck that asshole.

    2. “what has often been described as a “chokehold,” which has been erroneously attributed as the cause of Garner’s death (the medical examiner described it as a contributing factor)”

      The bullet may have been a contributing factor in the victim’s death, your honor, but I think the rapid loss of blood was the main cause.

      1. Didn’t the cops actually use that one in one of these cases? Can’t remember which one, but I could’ve sworn that that excuse, or something like it, has been used before.

        1. That’s definitely a Dunphy (our dunphy) argument.

    3. Another National Review contributor denounced the killing. Nut graf:

      “I don’t think race had anything to do with what happened between Eric Garner and the police. I intend to keep an open mind until we learn all the evidence the grand jury relied on. And I continue to believe the NYPD is the best police force there is. But I also know, as good cops know, that there is a difference between resisting arrest by not cooperating, as Garner was doing in Staten Island, and resisting arrest by violent assaults and threats of harm, as Michael Brown did in Ferguson. Police deserve a very wide berth in responding to the latter, but less of one with the former. I thus cannot in good conscience say there was insufficient probable cause to indict Officer Pantaleo for involuntary manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide.”


    4. Keep in mind that this is the piece of shit our troll dunphy named himself after.

      1. I thought it was the same guy.

        1. It might be, but they claim to be from different places and Jack Dunphy seems to be able to write a coherent sentence, no matter how evil the ideas that the sentence is being used to express.

    5. “It’s unfortunate that NYPD officers have been pressed into service as enforcers for the nanny state that New York City has become, but don’t put a law on the books if you don’t want the cops to enforce it, and don’t ask them to enforce it if you’re not willing to accept the fact that violence will sometimes occur when people resist that enforcement.”

      This would be a bit more credible if the cops weren’t so gung-ho. It would be one thing if they said, “sir, I’m ticketing you for selling untaxed cigarettes,” but another thing to tackle the guy and develop the cop equivalent of raging erections in their micropenises.

      1. Which is the natural result of such laws, of course – the supporters of such laws *want* zealous enforcement and the people who join the police to enforce such laws are the kind of zealots they’re looking for.

      2. It bears repeating that, as far as I can tell, he wasn’t approached for selling loose cigarettes. He had none on him. He came to the cops attention for breaking up a fight. I have yet to hear why they tried to detain him in the first place. The cigarettes thing is a red herring, of sorts, though it highlights a real problem.

        1. That is the other thing about this case. If you watch the video, the cops are complete idiotic assholes (no surprise I know). The cops are obviously poorly trained and completely not suited for the job of being a police officer.

          The cop defenders are right that Garner was loud and confrontational and totally immature and obnoxious. What the cop defenders fail to mention, however, is that the cops were just as bad as Gardner. The entire incident is nothing but a vulgar wrestling match between a bunch of animals.

          The problem here is not Garner. There will always be people like Garner and dealing with them is why we hire cops. The problem is that the cops are just as bad or worse. The cops in that video are nothing but aggressive vulgar piece of shit thugs who had no idea how to do anything but administer violence and escalate the situation.

          New York might as well have hired Garner to be a cop. He couldn’t have done any worse of a job and would have no doubt worked for a lot less money.

          1. Their incompetence surprised me. It’s a perfect “what not to do” case study.

          2. There will always be people like Garner and dealing with them is why we hire cops.

            I have yet to hear why the cops needed to deal with him, though. It sounds to me like he did something good, and then they started harassing him. He was rightly pissed off. He got emotional in that situation, like a lot of people would. Nothing I’ve seen suggest he was being a vulgar animal.

            1. He got emotional and confrontational. We at least used to pay cops to deal with confrontational and emotional people without just beating the shit out of them or killing them. That is my point.

              The point is not what you think of Garner’s behavior. The point is that even if you side with the cop defenders and think he was out of control, that doesn’t change the fact that the cops were just as bad. And that is a much bigger problem than anything Garner did.

          3. Garner was loud and confrontational and totally immature and obnoxious.

            I’m not seeing it. He is making his case emphatically to be left alone and for the cops to stop harassing him. I see nothing in the video that leads me to think he is immature or obnoxious, nor was he overly loud or confrontational. What parts did you see that makes you say that he was?

            1. That is not my point. If you think Garner acted fine, good for you. The point is that the cops managed to escalate the situation and seemed to have no ability or interest in doing everything else.

              He is making his case emphatically to be left alone and for the cops to stop harassing him.

              My yelling and screaming and antagonizing the cops. Garner sure as hell didn’t handle the situation well.

              I don’t like most cops either. But you are fucking delusional if you think it is a good idea or exhibits any kind of good judgement to start yelling and fucking with the cops or really anyone like Garner did.

              The point is that Garner acting that way is what we pay cops to deal with. And instead of dealing with it and calming the situation down, the Cops reacted even more poorly than Garner did. Since we pay and allegedly train cops, they ought to act better than people like Garner. Instead, they are just like them or worse.

              1. I don’t like most cops either. But you are fucking delusional if you think it is a good idea or exhibits any kind of good judgement to start yelling and fucking with the cops or really anyone like Garner did.

                I don’t think I said anything in my post about whether or not it was a good idea to yell at cops. So no, I am not delusional. I was making a comment about you saying that he was loud, confrontational, immature and obnoxious. I saw none of those things in the video and asked what parts you saw would lead you to say he was.

      3. The law demands arrest not ticketing.

    6. I couldn’t even finish that it made me so angry.

  32. Rookie NYPD officer who shot Akai Gurley in Brooklyn stairwell was texting union rep as victim lay dying

    In the six and a half minutes after Peter Liang discharged a single bullet that struck Gurley, 28, he and his partner couldn’t be reached, sources told the Daily News. And instead of calling for help for the dying man, Liang was texting his union representative. What’s more, the sources said, the pair of officers weren’t supposed to be patrolling the stairways of the Pink Houses that night.

    1. Police Union: “We did it all for the rookie!”

      1. I laughed. I guess it’s lump coal in my stocking this year.

    2. Fuck. I’d really like some good news this morning…

        1. Actually that’s a little shitty; now other people shopping at Walmart can’t buy their kids bikes.

          Why didn’t the Hell’s Angels place a bulk order instead? This wasn’t an impulse purchase but something they planned ahead to do. So why not be considerate to the other shoppers in your planning?

          Also, the next time someone says nothing good comes of the drug trade, I am pointing them to this article – it gave a bunch of kids a good Christmas.

          1. Are you gonna tell them no?

            1. If I am the manager of Walmart, and someone – and I don’t care if it’s the Hells Angels, the DEA, or the Vienna Boys Choir – comes in and asks to purchase my entire stock of a particular item, I will smile, thank them, and call over as many staff members as I can to help them carry everything out of the store.

              Then I will run to my desk, call the distribution center and order a special shipment to replace what was sold.

              And then use the extra bonus money from the sale to buy Christmas cookies for my staff. 😉

              1. This Walmart. They’ll have every single one of those bikes replaced within a day.

    3. I think this case is going to be the breakout case.

      They can claim Garner was combative and non-cooperative.

      This case a guy was going peacably about his business and was shot without warning by a trigger-happy and panicky cop. There is no way to paint Gurley as deserving of his fate. He lived in a crummy apartment complex and was using the stairs rather than the elevator.

      Moreover it’s not a black vs white issue either. If the cop had time to ascertain the race of the man, he also would have time to ascertain that he wasn’t in any danger.

      1. I doubt it. They will fire this one guy and the department will walk away from it under the “one bad apple” defense. That’s will be what happens in Cleveland as well.

        They both might even be indicted, but I don’t think either will create a real reform movement or do any time.

        1. If they don’t do time, it will be because they convince a jury they were following their training. And that will spawn a reform movement.

          I think the zeitgeist is such that it’s pretty much inevitable that one of the many murders cops commit in the near future that would have disappeared without a trace a decade ago will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

          And I just have a vibe that this particular shooting is that piece of straw.

          1. And that will spawn a reform movement.

            So what? What will come of it? More training? More government to supervise itself?

            The problem is that there are just too many laws for the cops to enforce. Unless there is a whole-scale repeal of thousands of bullshit laws, nothing will change. And I don’t see that happening. Ever.

            1. More government to supervise itself?

              In the short term, perhaps, but when that fails to work, we could see a very radical reform movement succeeding. I’m not sure what reform would occur and Winston Churchill’s dictum that the Americans can be trusted to do the right thing once they’ve exhausted the various wrong things to do will apply.

              I do think that the days of juries automatically giving cops a pass are numbered. The bill of rights might be expanded. Or perhaps private prosecutions will be legalized for LEO defendants (!). Who knows?

        2. Agreed. Gurley is not going to be the breakout case, precisely because it looks like an accident and even the police aren’t really defending it. I mean, if it wasn’t Aiyana Stanley-Jones, it won’t be Akai Gurley. It’s too easy to brush this one away as “just a tragic accident”, since everybody agrees there was no intent to kill Gurley. It’s the ones where the police loudly insist that they were justified that cause the real outrage.

      2. I suspect this one won’t get much media coverage, since the media can’t play the racial angle.

    4. Also, this tidbit:

      “One bullet flew out and apparently ricocheted into the chest of Gurley”

      Damn that bullet! Who know those things could just fly away?

      1. Damn that bullet! Who know those things could just fly away?

        “See why we limit the number of bullets you can carry? keeping them corralled is like herding cats, and it only takes one escaping to cause mayhem!” – NY state legislator

    5. This kid’s gonna go far.

    1. Gawker is worse than Hitler. At least Hitler jokes are still relevant and funny 70 years after his death. Gawker jokes go out of style the second they are written.

  33. The trial of a Sydney man charged with importing 400 kilograms of cocaine on a yacht in 2010 has been aborted after Australian Federal Police denied on oath the existence of certain video footage ? only for it to be found on their own website.


    1. Without RTA, I’m going to guess the street value was estimated at $6.4 billion USD.

    2. “It was not so much that he lied as that there was no truth to tell.”
      –E. Hemingway, “The Snows of Kilimanjaro”

  34. Nazis always show up sooner or later:


    WASHINGTON ? Nothing unifies Washington like the Nazis, even if it takes a while.

    After 15 years of largely rejected complaints to the federal bureaucracy, the House of Representatives voted 420-0 Tuesday to deny federal benefits to Nazi suspects after learning that many were receiving Social Security checks.

    Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/201…..rylink=cpy

    1. What’s a bill of attainder again?

      At least Werner Klemperer & John Banner are both dead so they won’t be hurt by this.

    2. I’d have a lot more respect for them if they voted to deny benefits to themselves until they start working for the people again.

  35. I started with my online business I earn $38 every 45 minutes. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it out.
    For information check this site. ????? http://www.jobsfish.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.