Obama Claims DHS Shutdown Would Hurt Economy, Administration Fights to Revive Immigration Order, Russian Government Accused of Ukraine Invasion Plan: P.M. Links
-
Monty Python With funding for the inept and authoritarian Department of Homeland Security set to run out on Friday, the president predicts economic catastrophe if the country doesn't cough up cash. Because of unemployed border guards roaming the streets with palms out, of course.
- The Obama administration battles in court a federal judge's ruling against the president's waiver of deportations for illegal immigrants.
- Several Republican governors with presidental ambitions find their hopes threatened by budget crunches at home.
- Britain's long-entrenched two-ish party political system is poised to become a six party contest, with no group drawing the support of more than a third of the population. A diversity of voice and opinion? Hmmm…
- The Russian government not only is directly tied to the fighting in Ukraine, but had a formal strategy for the incursion in place ahead of time, reports independent Russian newspaper Novaya Gazeta (let's see how that newspaper is doing a week from now).
- Michigan excels again—this time, in outright theft by police departments under the color of civil asset forfeiture.
- The U.S. real estate market still sputters along.
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily updates for more content.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Michigan excels again?this time, in outright theft by police departments under the color of civil asset forfeiture.
Look, do you want the WoD funded or not?
WTF!?!
Blanked twice in one day!
You musta got bad news from the Doc? Your body is rejecting the implants, right?
This what I get for restarting a domain controller at 4:30.
So are you still master of your domain?
Sounds sexy.
50 Shades of Fist. I'd read that.
No.
...(let's see how that newspaper is doing a week from now).
The journalists who bailed from Russia Today can get work there.
In russia the news reports you!
Putin will crush this paper.
In Soviet Russia, paper fold Japanese people into bird.
So how long before the housing bubble that was not allowed to fully pops again?
So how long before the housing bubble that was not allowed to fully pop, pops again?
TIWWNAEB!!!
1-2 years tops for that and equity, corporate bond, junk bond, and student loan bubbles to pop.
That will be fun.
I am glad I have already purchased my post-apocalyptic spikey shoulder pads before they get marked up.
I'm trying to envision how those look with a monocle and top hat. I'm just not seeing it.
Hopefully August of 2016, which is when I figure I can get out of mine. Will hopefully be in a zero debt position with some cash for the great crash. Although not seeing it in Houston. A friend listed his house on Friday and showed it four times this weekend.
Houston:
http://www.city-journal.org/2014/24_3_houston.html
Well, were in a slow down now. Lots of layoffs. And the housing market which was going fucking insane over the last few years has slowed down. Oil will go back up again though, and our economy is far more diverse than it used to be.
Several Republican governors with presidental ambitions find their hopes threatened by budget crunches at home.
Time to beg for more federal grants. (Or maybe fewer federal mandates.)
This is their chance to show they really believe in limited government.
(OK, I'll stop laughing now.)
The sad thing is that if Walker or one of these other hopefuls actually did really go at their budget and have real cuts it would make them even more attractive to most voters.
I like Walker trying to whack $300M from the university system budget. Outside of professors, I don't think anyone is all that sympathetic to those guys.
It's only 2.5% of their budget. How many companies had to cut twice that, or even more, during the recession?
Fuck these people.
How many individuals had to cut 10 times that during the recession? Double fuck these people.
I was just reading about Bruce Rauner, here in Illinois, planning on cutting a billion dollars out of our state Medicare fund.
I'm pretty sure it's just a show, but it would be nice. We're about seven billion dollars in the hole, still. Even 1/7th of that would be a good start.
Although, he COULD start cutting state employee salaries and firing state police officers. That would be an even BETTER start.
Britain's long-entrenched two-ish party political system is poised to become a six party contest, with no group drawing the support of more than a third of the population. A diversity of voice and opinion? Hmmm...
They all seem really freaked out by success of UKIP in the polls. I think they are runnin third now.
All of their parties typically stand to the left of our most left- so it doesn't really matter, does it?
UKIP would definitely be to the right of the Dems.
Which makes the diversity of opinion line in the Links naively amusing.
If you think the American media is going after say Scott Walker, it is nothing compared to UKIP. Open derision. And any rank and file member that says racist anything, you will see it at the top of the Guardian and Telegraph web sites the next day.
Silent Cal engaging in some cultural appropriation.
URL blocked. Site Category: Tasteless.
Tasteless?!
Well, it isn't my website, just somebody's tumblr with old-timey pictures and such.
I just found it funny that AT&T decided to put that down as a filter category. I have no idea what that site is.
This just proves we need net neutrality! How DARE AT&T judge something as tasteless!
A diversity of voice and opinion?
Just means you're going to get crazies instead of just assholes.
let's not count out the crazy-asshole voter block.
Also known as 'Congress'.
You're forgetting Tony and Bo.
They could be congressmen?
I wouldn't put anything past the American voter.
http://phet.colorado.edu/en/si.....lar-system
So, I've been playing around with the Phet Orbital Simulator.
It occurs to me how difficult it is to arrange a close-proximity, orbital system with such sensitive dependence on initial conditions.
Our outer solar system is sufficiently spread out so that non-chaotic motion seems sufficiently likely under such conditions.
But our inner solar system is fairly close together. I have set up orbital models that seemed to go on forever and ever. However, eventually the system broke down and the planets started colliding with each other or with the Sun.
It makes your wonder about how high the improbability of a life-friendly, terrestrial planet ever forming.
Our Solar System is probably a very highly simplified version of what occurred in the infancy of the system.
It hindsight, it makes sense that that there are only 4 inner planets. That's probably the maximum number of planets that can exist in a stable, orbital environment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceres_(dwarf_planet)
Ceres is the closest thing we have to 5th inner planet.
Not surprisingly, it's a part of the asteroid belt. The orbital dynamics between Mars and Jupiter are so turbulent as to prevent the stable accretion of another inner planet.
How much time before you go full mad scientist, gain access to the CERN collider and destroy everything?
I tried the same and I had the same trouble which made me think of computer climate models.
It hindsight, it makes sense that that there are only 4 inner planets. That's probably the maximum number of planets that can exist in a stable, orbital environment.
This would seem to be undergirded by the current moon origin theory, right?
Do we know of any rocky planets in other solar systems that formed inward and migrated out?
I read on article last summer about that subject, it suggested that a future catastrophe may occur because with the way the periods of Mercury's and Jupiter's orbits interact, Mercury is being steadily pulled out of its orbit. If it pulled all the way that may cause a complete relalignment of the inner planets, if not a catastrophic collision or two.
So something like this maybe?
http://youtu.be/lsV500W4BHU
The New York Times on laptops in 1985.
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/202703/
That is funny.
I think people might like a real keyboard instead of the things that pass for input devices on their IpHones.
I.don't know, I find.them.to.be alright.
Who would deign to look at something other than the NYT, sniff?
That's not the first time they got something so spectacularly wrong and it won't be the last. Luddites gotta luddite.
You want to see something truly disturbing about the human race, read the comments there. It's horrifying.
Oh dear...
The keyboard on that 80s Toshiba is amazing. Someone needs to bring that shit back.
Britain's long-entrenched two-ish party political system is poised to become a six party contest
I wonder why: Lobbying sting: Jack Straw and Malcolm Rifkind suspended from their parties.
That was awesome. I rarely get excited about the politics over here. But that was a sweet sting. Many happy returns.
Progressive weenie Hamilton Nolan of Gawker getting tough again.
What's your playlist?
Here is your playlist: the sound of silence. Here is your playlist: the blood pounding in your throbbing head as you gasp for breath. Here is your playlist: the faintest echo of a droplet of sweat hitting the concrete floor in the empty warehouse where you have gone to escape from humanity and do burpees. Plop. Dig it.
Some people seem to be under the mistaken impression that working out requires musical accompaniment. Why do they believe this? Because they are escapists. They perceive music to be a mental escape from the immediate pain of the situation in which they find themselves. They seek refuge. They don't want to be here now. They don't want to be out of breath, quivering, muscles aching, gut seizing, on the edge of heat stroke. They want to be somewhere else. They want to be in Beyonceville.
YEAH BRO. Now let's redistribute some fucking wealth.
Here is your playlist: the sound of silence.
Well it's an alright song but I've never thought of Simon & Garfunkel as workout music.
On a more serious note, what the fuck did I just read?
He writes about inequality and about how he is a good liberal...and working out.
Thanks - now I don't have to click that. Well, I wasn't going to anyway.
Navel gazing?
Of all the species of tuffgais that I hate, the anti-tuffgai tuffgais might be the worst. Oh, and he wants me to stop doing curls, too.
1) 400 whole pounds??? How could anyone lift such a heavy weight? Hamilton Nolan must be incredibly strong. 2) Someone has never heard of injury preventive exercises.
I guess this would fall into injury preventative exercises, but if you build up one area, say your backs, shoulders and triceps, and never build up other areas, say your biceps, you are likely going to get injured.
Beyond that, not only is 400 lbs not very much to dead lift, since when is dead lifting the end all be all of lifting?
Is there any subject the assholes at Gawker can't ruin?
Elbow pain is tremendously annoying, and curls help treat and prevent it. Same for reverse curls and the forearms. Beyond that, a lot of people like having big biceps. Who the hell is he to look down on them? $10 says this guy has been training for less than 4 years and has always been the strongest guy at his gym.
But you'll never find a 700 pound deadlifter who isn't ungodly strong in all other sorts of ways. It's as close as you can get to an all-in-one universal test of strength.
*Often* help treat or prevent it.
I have always been naturally really good at dead lifting. Even in period when I don't work out, like now, I could do over 400lbs. It is the one area of strength I seem to have naturally.
Did you grow up on a farm? People who grew up doing useful work are naturally good at lifting things off the ground. Shane Hamman, who was a US Olympic weightlifter a few years back, grew up on a watermelon farm and is reputed to have deadlifted 500 pounds the first time he lifted weights as a high school freshman.
No on one, but around them. And yes did a lot of manual work.
My grandfather never lifted a weight in his life. In his late 60s he could use a pitch fork and flip pond bales of hay up onto a trailer. Picking one up is one thing, but doing it with a pitch fork was just awesome to behold. A lifetime of work gives an amazing amount of strength.
Old Man Strength doesn't really exist, it's just a shorthand for having done a lot of work in a life. And not surprisingly, pitchfork tossing is an event in highland games.
Sheaf toss
I chatted a little while back with a guy who did a sports science PhD. His thesis was that the kinetic chain from power lifting requires such core strength that no other core workouts are needed for pro athletes. Something like that.
I don't know how you'd go about proving such a thing, but I believe it. Show me a guy who can deadlift 700 and power clean 400 (i.e., an NFL defensive lineman), and I'll show you a guy with incredibly thick rectus abdominus and erector spinae muscles.
Didn't we have a guy like that around here? Dopey or druggie or something. Real tuffgai with a drop dead gorgeous wife and years of experience kicking the stuffing out of bad guys. No, I remember, it was dumpy.
"That baby dead, big boy."
If I murdered Hamilton Nolan for writing this sentence, no jury on Earth would convict me.
In most civilized countries they would declare me king.
"Mistah Nolan, he dead."
God these people are douche bags.
Here's an instructional that's much worse than many other instructional, but at least it's been Gawkerified. ALL CAPS BRO
Jesus, I hate when assholes like the things I like.
They ruin everything.
Some people will tell you to look straight ahead as you squat. Some will tell you to look at a point five or ten feet in front of you on the ground. I'll tell you where you should be looking when you squat: into your soul. Into the depths of the fire inside, where pain and promise are one. Look into the place where hardcoreness resides. Gaze into the mirror: you should have a knitted brow, an expression of determination bordering on homicidal anger. You should look ready to snap. This may be because the weak muscles that stabilize your spine are, in fact, ready to snap. No matter. People will think you look tough. You're already winning the secret respect of the curl boys, and you haven't even done a god damn thing yet. Pretty sweet deal, for you. Now, stay tight. Make your chest big. Allow your lower back to form a pleasing arch.
LOL
Oh, that makes it very clear.
Empty warehouse? Is that what he call's Mom's basement?
So I GIS'ed Hamilton Nolan to see what kind of physique is produced by such high-intensity navel gazing, and it led me to this, which I had to share:
http://thirdtierreality.blogsp.....ilton.html
You're fucking with me.
He stole David Byrne's big suit!
L.A. County's small-theater community speaks out on proposed wage hike
Pretty interesting when you have a sizable proportion of union members speaking out against a minimum wage. I wonder how many of them believe these economic concerns don't also apply to other jobs?
Those other jobs are at huge korporashuns, so of course they don't apply!
Many McGill Education Students Cannot Calculate an Average
Not exactly a large sample, of course, but the claim is weak and it supports my biases, so whatever.
PJ O'Rourke's comment about education majors holds true.
Canada's top university.
But hey. WE'RE NOT AMERICAN!
The problem is in the phrasing of the question. If the test said "Jean-Pierre scored 14 goals his rookie season, 13 goals the next season, and 22 goals the third season. How many goals a season does he average?" They would have gotten it right 100% of the time.
That's, like, half, right?
-education major
The comments include a link to this little gem:
http://icecube.wisc.edu/~omurchadha/1749697.pdf
The author, MS and EDD, claims to have invented integral calculus in 1994.
What is truly amazing is that this was published in a peer-reviewed journal in a science-related field (Diabetes Care, "the flagship research publications of the American Diabetes Association").
How is it possible that a peer reviewer would let a colleague publish a paper that would expose her to ridicule? Particularly, since what she did was, in fact, clever assuming she was unaware of the fact that Newton and Liebniz discovered the methods centuries before her.
Even more amazing is the fact that the article has been cited in hundreds of papers and appears on the website of the National Institutes of Health.
Breaking news: Bob Hope was an agent of the Illuminati and the British Monarchy, and "ringleader" of a "global MK-Ultra Mind Control front org," which included USO performers such as Marilyn Monroe as "monarch slaves." WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!!
[Pulls out roll of Heavy Duty Tinfoil, tears off sheet, passes to Switzy.]
*snaps fingers, gestures for a goodly sheet*
Because FYTW.
And because you had $11,000, a paid-off car, and a paid-off house made it worthwhile.
Then-FEC Chairman Michael E. Toner said the rules "totally exempt individuals who engage in political activity on the Internet from the restrictions of the campaign finance laws. The exemption for individual Internet activity in the final rules is categorical and unqualified," The Washington Post reported, adding that the rules "granted media exemptions to bloggers and other activists using the Web to allow them to praise and criticize politicians, just as newspapers can, without fear of federal interference."
However, what was unanimous consent almost a decade ago has since split the commission along partisan lines.
Last October Democrats on the commission proposed new regulations for Internet-based campaigning after a 3-3 vote left the agency divided over whether an anti-Obama campaign violated FEC rules when it posted two videos on YouTube, without reporting its finances or adding a disclosure to the ads.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/02.....ch-online/
This is very scary shit. We really are holding onto freedom of speech by a narrow margin.
CU-Boulder Settles Title IX Lawsuit with Male Student
It makes you wonder why due process was instituted in the first place. I mean, what were those crazy old white guys thinking?
It does warm my heart to see conservatives (not saying you Suthenboy) start to love due process. And all it took was for it to start being revoked regarding white males.
Man Bo you can sure fuck a strawman up.
Better.
Breaking news: New Urbanist yuppietopia not magically devoid of prejudice
"Yuppietopia" quips aside, IDGAF how they want to live; it's just funny to see the likes of NPR try to come to grips with it.
I am surprised there was even a single black person living there.
So the other day, out of incredible masochism and boredom, I decided to watch an episode of that "Beyond Scared Straight" show (on Netflix).
This episode involved a program in Florida. There was especially one kid, with anger management and bullying issues. He wanted to be a cop. And he wanted to be a member of the SWAT team. And of course, the officers involved in the scared straight program were trying to encourage him to do so.
I wasn't impressed. Or surprised.
Oh, and the officers' idea of how to motivate the kids not to be criminals was to have the inmates threaten to rape them if they went to jail.
Is that the one where the guy's blocking the door?
I... think? I don't remember. I've blocked parts out of my memory due to sheer stupidity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bK6IC3sjwWo
That's not the same episode.
Some day you'll believe me when I say the octopodes are coming for you!
My wife tells me that octopi are not of this earth. They are the pets of aliens who visited earth long ago and they either ran off from their masters or got lost and left behind.
She's not into Scientology is she? That sounds like something they would honestly claim.
I find corvid and octopus intelligence really interesting, and weird, which I guess is what makes it interesting.
Octopodes walking on land freaks me right out though.
They sure the hell taste good, I'll give them that.
Needz moar alien flesh.
If humans disappeared off the face of the earth, I'd guarantee you that octopi would be the species to replace us as the dominant intelligent lifeform (except maybe other primates). They're crazy smart for cephalopods.
I wonder how it killed the crab. Did it engulf it and suffocate it?
I dunno, it probably used this monstrous thing.
Don't do it, people. Think of yourselves. Just say no.
Don't do what?
Is it safe?
Very much not safe.
Here's a selfie I really want to see.
http://seattle.cbslocal.com/20.....OA.twitter
Kalama, Wash. (CBS SEATTLE/AP) ? An Oregon man posing for a selfie was struck and killed by an Amtrak train as he and woman posed for the photo on railroad tracks amid a Tacoma-to-Portland trip.
Good grief. So his narcissism was fatal.
Does this mean the Secret Service is going to tackle Obama next time he raises the selfie stick?
Trigger warning: Vice
These Volunteers Give Handjobs to the Severely Disabled
Hand Angel, an NGO whose main service is giving handjobs to the severely disabled
Oh noes, does congress know about this? Oh wait, they're not in the US, they might be safe.
Tales from the Derp
2 weeks ago, I had a chat with an Army recruiter. The pins on his collar had 2 chevrons, so I asked if he was a corporal. He said he was a sergeant. So then I said the pins had only 2 chevrons. He says "god damn it, I bought the wrong pins."
In my head, I heard the voice of Flounder from Animal House: Oh boy, is this going to be great!
I've gone to a few of the practice PT things. It's weird to be with a bunch of 18 year olds, but I was surprised to see how well I could keep up with them. I impressed them and the sergeants by doing many pull-ups. Derpy is slow but strong. 3 of the sergeants immediately broke out the chewing tobacco and spit bottles after PT. Army Strong, Army Chew!
Still working on the running. I ran 6.2 mph today for 1.5 miles. I need to be able to run 7.1 mph for 1 mile for the initial PT test. Have lost 22 pounds since January 5th without giving up beer.
My brother warned me I'd meet a lot of jerks in the Army, but if the guys I do PT with are a good sample, I think I'll be fine. Kind of aggressive and immature, but so am I.
One of the sergeants told a story about a private who showed up drunk for PT. The master sergeant said to the staff sergeant "he's drunk- take care of it." So the staff sergeant says to the private "OK, you have 2 choices- we can take you to the MP station and give you a breathalyzer, which you will fail and then you get kicked out of the Army, or we can smoke the shit out of you after PT." Private picks door #2. He threw up 7 or 8 times, and nothing else happened. Sounds reasonable to me.
Go Warrant
Dear god, run, RUN away from the army. Go with the chair force and have nice creature comforts, just expect a lot of shit from the army & navy. Go Marine and have street cred but put up with being called a jarhead and have actual danger potentially thrown your way. Go navy and get nice costal assignments, but put up with sailor jokes. Still, back away from the army. You have been warned!
It was a freer time, a rawer time.
Running Free
Not according to the state legislature of California.
Backwards Satanic Lyrics
Obama is a complete economic moron so any claim, comment or prediction he makes involving economics can quite properly be summarily dismissed out of hand.
Been listening to this all day. Nostalgic.
My current favorite band. Been trying to get the wife to go to Tokyo to see them in April, but it doesn't seem like it will happen.
Possibly because of Almanian's good will, I have gotten many calls from recruiters over the past month. Here is a rushed transcript of one of the funnier ones:
Him: Hello, how are you?
Me: I'd complain, but who'd listen?
Him: Well, I'll listen, but I do charge $350 an hour.
Me: Hmm, I can't afford that. I just have to keep it bottled up then.
Him: No, no! I don't want you to use anger management techniques from the Middle East.
Later, he told me about his first job doing irrigation in Saudi Arabia. He said there's a kind of lizard (called dabb) they eat there and that people will stop their cars in the desert if they see one so they can grab it.
Still later, he asked me about my feelings about work. I said work is something which I stoically endure. He said it's important to like your job. I said some people clean toilets for a living and I refuse to believe they enjoy that. He said he knew cleaning ladies in college who cleaned toilets and liked their job because they liked talking to the students.
As I said. The idea that people MUST enjoy their jobs is strange to me.
The lizard in question:
http://english.alarabiya.net/e.....Saudi.html
I told Adria that people might consider that an overblown thing to say. She had, after all, been at a tech conference with 2,000 bystanders.
"Sure," she replied. "And those people would probably be white and they would probably be male."
"Somebody getting fired is pretty bad," I said. "I know you didn't call for him to be fired, but you must have felt pretty bad."
"Not too bad," she said. She thought more and shook her head decisively. "He's a white male. I'm a black Jewish female. He was saying things that could be inferred as offensive to me, sitting in front of him. I do have empathy for him, but it only goes so far. If he had Down's syndrome and he accidently pushed someone off a subway, that would be different? I've seen things where people are like, 'Adria didn't know what she was doing by tweeting it.' Yes, I did."
What a truly vile and nasty bully. Words cannot express the degree of loathing I have for her.
Oh shit I am so so so happy she hasn't found another job. Words cannot express how glad I am. She is truly a wretch.
I'm not convinced this isn't a parody.
She was in PR. Given how she's reacted in the years since, it pretty much proves that she doesn't really belong in that line of work, because she wasn't very good at it.
So... murder by retard is more excusable than making a private joke to your friend.
Fuck this black Jewish woman.
http://www.theguardian.com/fil.....cars-white
Others were quick to notice the faux pas, with the Guardian's Peter Bradshaw drily noting "the last thing with David Oyelowo could have gone better." Observers added that something about it segment was simply "not right", especially after Harris then asked Oyelowo to sit down again. That request prompted New York Times music critic Jon Caramanica to scold Harris: "Don't tell him to sit down, man."
Harris also asked actor Octavia Spencer to look after a box of fake Oscar envelopes as part of a recurring gag, but also told her: "No snacks!" Spencer's surprised, seemingly displeased reaction and the arguably condescending tone of the crack angered viewers, who found it disrespectful.
Janet Mock of MSNBC took particular issue with the joke directed toward Spencer, writing: "It is not fun to check in with a black woman only in the context of her performing a duty for you," and: "It is not 'reaching' to point out that the dynamic [between] a white host (NPH) treating a black actress (Octavia Spencer) like the Oscars help."
So I guess a white person telling a black person to do anything is racist?
And isn't complaining about a gay gay's sense of humor homophobic?
Isn't complaining about a gay *guy's* sense of humor homophobic?
The U.S. real estate market still sputters along.
Except in recession proof DC where high rise condos are springing up everywhere.
my friend's aunt makes $62 an hour on the computer . She has been laid off for five months but last month her pay was $14934 just working on the computer for a few hours. Visit this site.........
????? http://www.work-mill.com
Hello.
They're really much more worried about what might happen if people realize the DHS aren't necessary to people's security.
Obumbles is completely full of shit, as usual.
Only a small fraction of the HS personnel are not considered 'essential'. The janitors and mail room personnel will stay home, that is all.
He is incapable of telling the truth. That motherfucker would lie if the truth served him better.
Tundra, I can't believe that you are making light of this catastrophe.
Do you really want a horde of Friendly Manitobans descending on our fair state? They would take up all the ice time and pretty soon vinegar would be on the condiments bar for their filthy french fries!
that would take people caring.
Nobody really cared when the government shut down a couple of years back, but they still managed to spin that into utter disaster.
Nice. Thanks.
I wish Walker had had the foresight to realize it was a trick question, and given them a blow-off answer.
Is it me, or is NR yet another site that's gone to tablet-optimized web design?
Hey Scott (or your team) {or maybe even Rand and his team} the correct answer is:
Who can really know what is in the heart of another person. I don't claim to be able to read someone's mind or peer into his or her heart.
We can only see and judge the decisions other people make and the actions they take.
Barack Obama has given us much to see and much to complain about.
Also, Cooke is becoming a new, favorite author of mine.
If I were Walker, I'd have been more responsive. I'd say something like, "One of the revolutionary advances of the US Constitution is its prohibition of any religious test as a qualification for public office. So, you have posed a really pointless and stupid question. Next question, please."
Did you see his take down of MSNBC this morning?
Cooke is currently the best thing on National Review post-Mark Steyn.
Goldberg's alright, but he can be a little dull and pretentious. The best writer on NR might be Williamson, but he ruins his legitimate writing ability by ranting about fucking everything to the extent that all of his articles read the same.
I read some of Williamson's theater reviews in The New Criterion (unfortunately, most of them are behind a paywall so you can only read the most recent one) and they are very, very good. He had a hilarious article about a Shakespeare play that took place in a park where a bunch of hipster progs changed the play to incorporate the characters from Sesame Street.
If he showed more diversity in his National Review articles, I wouldn't feel like he was wasting his talent on socially conservative whining.
That too!
I was referring to the fact that now my typos and grammatical errors are forever etched for posterity to laugh at.
Uffda!
For a second I thought he had written TIWWNAEW!!!
That Is Why We Need Another Elizabeth Warren
They were. I mean, who takes a train?
http://thenextweb.com/shareabl.....d-running/
Who wouldn't want one of these?
My answer would have been "I don't know and I don't care". then when pushed it would have been "well go ask him". Then if they said "well he says he is one", I would have said "well don't you believe him?" As soon as they said yes, I would have said "then why are you asking me?"
"'I try not to question the president's motives as being a good American or a bad American," Paul continued. "I've challenged his policies. I've disagreed with him completely on the war in Libya. I blame him and Hillary [Clinton] for something that made us less safe because of the war in Libya. But I don't question whether or not he was well-intentioned."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/l.....es-america
It has, and it's terrible. When everyone bitched about the differences between mobile and desktop site functionality, why did the design studios (I'm assuming this is the product of a few design studios) decide that the best solution would be to make the full sites ape the mobile ones? It's atrocious.
That's my least-favorite design trend in the last 15 years, even worse than Nike ruining half of the NCAA football jerseys.
How can it be just you? Looks like they did it recently. It sucks. I can't wait for this tablet/e-zine fad to pass.
First, Walker strikes me as too craven to bring up the religious test clause, the socons he's courting might misinterpret him to mean that an atheist could be President or something.
Second, Presidents often opine on social and cultural matters of the day, and the bizarre need to question Obama's faith is one of those. Why can't the guy just give a straight answer to these questions?
I think Walkers answer was good, saying that this is not something that most Americans even care about, and I don't know.
Whatever Walker is doing, it must be right, because he has the media shitting their pants. It's hilarious.
I don't know much about the guy and as it stands now, Rand Paul has my vote.
And not the least reason for that is he will destroy Hillary in the general.
I think it's the concussions that crush their creativity.
NHL coaches are total systems guys. They will ask a player to play out of position or sacrifice for the system. That's why everyone seems to play a similar style with some variations.
See it in soccer a lot.
I can't stand when coaches do that.
I like Larionov's reasoning for it as well: ex-grinder coaches at the junior/AHL level micromanaging play habits out of good old fashioned fear of losing their jobs.
They should have gone to Olympic sized ice a long time ago.
Would you talk like this in any normal conversation? I think most people with no political ax to grind would find that to be an oddly evasive and (dare I say it) pedantic way to converse.
"I don't know and I don't care".
I try to explain to junior engineers that they only need to memorize two answers to deal with any question that comes up at work.
I don't know
I don't care
The Socratic method is now oddly evasive and pedantic.
Me: Some people think PB is a Democrat pretending to be a classical liberal, what do you think?
John: I don't know and I don't care.
Me: Well, you hear everyone on here debating it, you don't have any opinion?
John: go ask him
Me: Well, he says he's a classical liberal.
John: well don't you believe him?
Me: No, I don't. Do you ?
John: then why are you asking me?
Wouldn't that seem like an odd exchange?
No. most people would find it refreshing and honest. I don't know if he is a Christian. I have never met Obama. And I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would ask me if I thought he was because I was running for President.
There is nothing evasive about saying "I don't know" to a speculative and idiotic question. Moreover, "I don't care" is the proper answer anyway. Who cares if he isn't? Is not being a Christian now disqualify you from public life? What does him not being one have to do with anything?
I talk like that to people who want to waste my time with trivial bullshit that is none of my business. But if that person wants to ask me about college football, or which Bowie album is better, I will be glad to engage in polite conversation.
It is atrocious, but it is the future.
Oh, and it's not the product of a few design studios. Marketers are advising everyone to make every site mobile-first.
There's only like 12 dudes up there, how are they gonna force a menu change?
Murlanders use malt vinegar with fries.
What godforsaken hellhole do you hail from where vinegar on fries is considered outlandish?
Why, that's interesting, because I've specifically been told that answering questions with questions here is a pedantic tendency of mine.
I love vinegar on fries!
Indeed. Fries (a.k.a. chips) are best with vinegar and salt.
Funny. That's what we had last night!
Vinegar on fries is awesome.
I like him a bunch.
Really? Most people would find that hypothetical discussion between you and I 'refreshing and honest?'
I mean, try that out with some people and see.
So you are saying Bo that you think Obama's claim to be a Christian is analogous to Shreek's claim to be a classical liberal.
Do you know Obama personally?
Christ you're an annoying little shitstain. Go fuck your mother.
I mean, it seems a bit habitual. The evolution thing, the Guiliani thing and now this. And here he is doing it when asked about his abortion stance.
http://www.jsonline.com/multim.....9361679001
Let me see if I have this right. You stated an opinion. Then you made a conjecture based on that opinion. And now you're blaming a politician for not reacting to your conjecture in a manner you agree with. That about it?
Bo: what answer would you have given, if you were in Walker's place?
I happen to agree with his take.
Why do you care so much about what Walker's opinion of Obama's religious beliefs are? Why on earth would that be relevant to anything? And more importantly, how is Scott Walker supposed to know whether Obama is a Christian?
Not answering a question that you have no basis on which to answer is not being evasive. It is being honest.
I mean, try that out with some people and see.
I think approaching people in real life and asking them questions apropos of nothing about "Palin's Buttplug" would go very wrong, very fast.
yup, now I remember that.
Well intentioned is a good way to put it. it doesn't say what those intentions actually are, just that they are good.
You're the one who seems to think go ask him is some how an answer to these things.
This is the kind of way people talk when they are scared to say. It's like when they asked Clarence Thomas what he thought about Roe during his nomination and he said he never thought about it. It's incredible that he never thought about this case, he was just trying not to answer because his answer was going to be used against him. That might be clever or necessary, but it's not courageous, honest or refreshing.
Well, that clears that up. I hope this trend reverses itself in the future.
So if someone asked Obama during his campaign with McCain "Sir, some people think Senator McCain sold his country out in that VC prison, what do you think?" his answer should be "I don't know, go ask him."
Or, "Sir, some people are saying Sarah Palin's child is really her daughter's child, what do you think about that?" "I don't know, go ask her?"
Yeah, there's that...
He understands the media is the enemy, and that the one thing he cannot do is provide sound bites for SNL and the Daily Show to make him into a figure of mockery and turn out the low information voters.
Obama is a moron. I am far smarter than he is. But he sounds smart, and he appeals to media sensibilities, and they cover up the gaffes he does have.
Don't know about hockey but in soccer it can often be rather effective. Of course the best coaches can tune their system to the players available.
Since when is not being a Christian the same thing as not being a traitor?
Either you are a massive bigot or you are grasping for straws. Saying "I don't think John McCain is a traitor" is not the same thing as commenting on someone you have never met's religious beliefs. The first is assuming they are not a criminal. The second is assuming you can read their minds.
You ain't Socrates.
Nor in a position of authority relative to his students like Socrates.
Stop being a devils advocate and post what you think.
GODDAMMIT MAD SCIENTIST
Do you even have a college degree?
I think you went off the rails early in this comment...
So if you were talking Bowie with someone and they said, hey, do you think Bowie is really gay? you'd seriously say 'I don't know, why don't you go ask him?'
I find most people to be less guarded and willing to give answers to questions like that rather...casually.
No Bo, it is the way people talk when they are asked a stupid question that they have no business answering. It was a stupid question that Walker was smart to avoid.
With Old Bay
"Since when is not being a Christian the same thing as not being a traitor?"
Uh, apart from the usual struggle with how analogies work, I'll say they're both pretty important things politically John. No President I can think of has ever refused to say he's a Christian, and I seriously doubt a non-Christian could be elected today, much less in our past.
I don't disagree.
My government employee relatives certainly complained.
But this list of 'stupid questions' is getting pretty long with Walker. Evolution, were Rudy's comments proper, do you think Obama is a Christian, are you for a post 20 week abortion ban...When someone running for office keeps not answering these I start to think he's just not very deft or he's afraid to make something even remotely like a definitive answer.
Again, if you were talking like that about PB I think people would be like 'what's wrong with you today?'
Uh, apart from the usual struggle with how analogies work,
LOL You are the densest person on here. They are not analogous. I can assume anyone I meet has never betrayed their country. Since I can't look into someone's heart, I am in no position to say what their religious beliefs are. And my opinion on such a matter is meaningless.
You don't think there's a Republican out there who, I don't know, could sound smart and therefore could give answers to these questions?
As a neutral fan sure, but winning is more important when its a team you support.
But the coach's job is to win games, not showcase players.
Bo you are the worst and most transparent concern troll I have ever seen. The media asked Walker these idiotic questions in hopes he would either attack a fellow Republican and look defensive or agree and give them a reason to paint him as an extremist. Walker is smarter than that and just won't play. You are only angry because you are on the other side and are pissed he didn't fall for it.
Then it's the media's fault for asking stupid questions.
They can make the list of stupid questions even longer. "Do you like turkey or chicken?" "What is your favorite color?" "Wristwatch: leather band or metal links?" "Would you send Robert Duvall to stop a comet headed for the planet?"
I would have said what I would say about anyone asking me if anyone else was a Christian: I know he says he is and I have no real reason to doubt him on that, I do know that for myself I strive very hard to be a Christian, I don't always live up to it but I try. I think that while I disagree with his policies, often from my understanding of what my Christian faith is, that impugning a man's faith because I disagree with him is something this country could use a lot less of.
Shouldn't you run back to your 'how much ya bench' conversation above? It'll require your total focus I imagine.
To be clear, Bo not John.
You're missing the point here. The media is not neutral, they're not equally trying to expose all politicians. They are, for the most part, ideologically and culturally leftist. They are trying to hurt Walker by luring him into a soundbite they can play over and over.
He is refusing to play their game. Reagan was the same way, but he was able to rip off zingers and mock his critics. Here he's using both of them at once.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZMafGzDJdo
It's a media game. It's not about who's right or who wins long form debates. It's not about white papers or committee meetings. It is about who makes more laughable gaffes that can be run through the minds of low information voters by the media machine.
The way for a Republican to win that game is to refuse to play.
http://reason.com/blog/2015/02.....nt_5109754
"Whatever Walker is doing, it must be right, because he has the media shitting their pants."
I think this is one of the worst tendencies among politics today, this idea of 'if it makes my enemies angry it must be good, if my enemies think its important it must be not.' With all due respect it doesn't strike me as very mature in terms of any movement.
http://reason.com/blog/2015/02.....nt_5109754
Nah, he doesn't want to miss your cross burning.
You should entertain that refusing to play the game can itself be a politically harmful ploy, because you can come off surly, evasive or unable to think on your feet. This is what happened to Sarah Palin. She said some dumb things, they were magnified by an unfriendly press, but then she made her real mistake: she pulled out of any responses, and people took that for her being afraid of the media.
John, the way any analogy works is that the specific examples are not equivalent, they are supposed to be indicating the same principle.
But in this case you compound your mistake in that the examples here are actually pretty comparable. You can't look into someone's heart that was held in a VC prison and assume they didn't sell their country out.
I would have said what I would say about anyone asking me if anyone else was a Christian: I know he says he is and I have no real reason to doubt him on that
Story next day: "Asked about whether President Obama is a Christian, Walker cagily replied that "I know he says he is...", prompting speculation that this was a dog whistle to the fundamentalist wing of his party to indicate he believes Obama is secretly a Muslim Marxist traitor to our nation..."
See, you don't know what went on in that prison because you were not there. And likewise you can't know what is in Obama's head and heart regarding religion.
But there's a simple decency where, unless you have good reason, you don't question people on things like that. It's a decency that's lacking in our politics too much, and Walker could not rise to address that.
To me personally, I don't consider the question "Is Bowie gay?" trivial or none of my business. I'l gladly have that conversation. If someone asked me about the religion of the POTUS I would say it's trivial bullshit that's none of my business. Because I don't give a fuck about the President and his religion doesn't interest me.
bo,
one of the indisputable truths about communication is that it is contextual. If someone asks me about Bowie in a casual conversation, then what I say does not matter, regardless of how honest I want to be. But if someone asks me as potential presidential candidate what I think, different kettle of fish because the person asking is not looking for an answer, he/she is looking for a gotcha.
That's why you add the other part of my comment and then you can show you were selectively quoted.
Look at Rand's comments above, they weren't taken and used against him like that, because Rand's clever in a way that I don't think Walker is (maybe I'm wrong and he'll prove that to me).
Old bay goes on everything.
Incidentally, Cooke needs to come over to the libertarian dark side since National Review's readers don't seem to appreciate him. They constantly bitch whenever he fails to toe the required Republican Party line.
Exactly. Proving me right. Thanks for conceding the point by typing exactly what I said in a slightly different way. Stay classy Bo.
Bah. That could get boring too.
I doubt Walker doesn't give a f*ck about the President because he talks about him quite a lot. If he's going to talk about Obama and be involved in national politics he's going to get asked about big political squabbles like 'is Obama a secret Muslim or a Christian like he claims'.
Right, just like Mitt was able to show that "binders full of women" was not a gaffe by putting it in context.
Bo, you're an ass, but you're not a low information voter. LIVs do not care about context. They don't read transcripts. They watch Daily Show clips their progtard friends post on Facebook and vote accordingly.
That's why you add the other part of my comment and then you can show you were selectively quoted.
and this is why groups like Bozell's media outfit are necessary - because the back end of your quote would not make the alphabet soup networks or the major dailies or any outlet not called Fox or talk radio.
You see, I'm the jerk.
I like how you throw your little curse out there and then are like 'oh, I didn't mean to hit you John'
I swear I saw it on cheesecake once in Murriland.
I thought Old Bay was a deodorant?
Walker is not dealing with mature people, he is dealing with reporters and leftists.
Being a continuous contrarian for absolutely no other reason than doing so is not a great sign of maturity, Bo.
Also, I'm not getting any great joy out of watching the media go hysterical over Walker because they're my enemies, it's just so pathetic that it's funny.
Of course, that's the only possible explanation why someone might find this pattern of 'I don't know' from Walker less than redeeming of him.
I am posting what I think.
BTW, it is Virginian here who was defending the Socratic method. I think it's a bit strange in the context of the questions Walker was asked.
They put it in beer, I'm not kidding. I mean a brewery put it in beer.
Wow, is it classy to cut my quote off like you did there?
Now wait a minute, I don't know what a LIV is, but if they're liberals then they surely hate Rand Paul too (I bet more than they hate Walker, Walker's a convenient opposite of them on every issue, they love that polarization, Paul confounds them by transcending the 'Big Two' mentality and coming off more liberal than them on many issues while also more conservative than Walker on some). But they're not taking Paul's comments and turning them on him like they are Walker. And I think we know why: Paul's were a much better response. He satisfies his base, doesn't give his enemies much to attack him with, and elevates the discourse a bit.
I'm not a continuous contrarian, I just come from a left-liberal strain of libertarianism and so I honestly disagree with what a lot of the conservatives and right-leaning libertarians here might say. I'm more than happy to agree with people when I actually do.
tell you what, Bo: is the media going to ask Hillary or Lizzie or Biden or even Obama about Farrakhan's verbal diarrhea of the day? No, they're not. And they shouldn't. This nonsensical tactic of every GOPer being responsible for what one Repub says more stupid that it is transparent.
Given that there's been a rather big controversy over people thinking Obama is a secret Muslim I don't think the question posed to Walker is in the same place as 'what is your favorite color' or the Robert Duvall one.
Damn, you mean you can change the meaning of what someone is saying by some judicious editing?
Don't worry, I'll print a retraction on page A27 in about four days.
Well, sure he elevates the conversation! My god man, Paul has a degree from a college!
Kid, they hate the biggest threat to them, whoever it is at the time. When McCain was bashing other Republicans, they loved him. They loved him throughout the Bush administration. Then he ran against their favorite, and they destroyed him.
Oh, and LIVs are low information voters.
Farrakhan is not the equivalent of Rudy.
But should they ask Dems the same type of questions? Absolutely. I'm sure most of them would mangle the answers to them.
I'm betting the most uncomfortable and interesting answers in the 2016 election will be the ones posed to whoever the Dem nominee is of 'do you agree with President Obama's policy of _____?'
MD from Duke, one of the finest colleges in the country. It's an accomplishment he can be proud of.
But you can say that about any question posed to someone with a camera rolling. If you're going to be in the kitchen, you have to be able to deal with some heat.
It's what they do.
You see, the Democrat Party is even more beholden to certain persons than the GOP is. The GOP was able to walk away from what was an admittedly popular GOP figure at one time, W Bush, without upsetting nearly any major faction of their base. But Obama was sold in part on his personal characteristics to big parts of the Dem base, and watching the Dem candidates try to distance themselves from his failed Presidency while trying not to upset a very invested faction of that base is going to be priceless.
doesn't matter, Bo. This sort of thing applies when some right-wing preacher goes off the rails - all the Repubs are expected to condemn him. Louie gets a pass.
Asking Obama's policies is not the same as asking about the statements of someone not in the running.
you ARE being contrarian and for no good reason. It's feb 2015. We're a year away form debates and primaries and all that shit. The media, meanwhile, is trying to eliminate the field, especially the ones who scare them, like Walker or Paul. It's why we have questions like this and about evolution and the vaccine thing.
I'm not a continuous contrarian
You are.
Also, there is no damn such thing as a leftist libertarian. That is an oxymoron is what that is. Leftists believe that the collective trumps the rights of individuals. There is nothing libertarian, or liberal about that.
You want a bigger, more powerful, and intrusive government, you know damn well that will reduce personal liberty, not increase it.
See, I don't think they ever came to hate McCain. They just were really, really excited about Obama.
And I think it had less to do with bare partisanship than it did with this excitement about 'making history' and being able to report that history.
I'd have been very, very curious to see how the media would have covered a Gore-McCain contest in 2000, it would be the best test of how partisan the media is, because they found McCain to be a witty and fun figure to cover, and Gore had zero charisma. I don't think the answer to that is obvious...
No wareagle, I honestly think his answers are suspect. It's not contrarianism.
To some degree your campaign has to point that stuff out too.
OK, this was wittily played sir.
sure, you deal with heat when it's appropriate to do so. But when someone asks a stupid question, you politely refuse to bite. Rubio did the same thing with a Florida tv station, even asking when the media would question Dems about Biden's next gaffe. Good for him and I am hardly a Marco guy.
Then you're an idiot.
Here's the preference hierarchy:
Democrat who is from an "oppressed" groupwhite male Democratliberal Republicanconservative Republican
They would have shilled endlessly for Gore. They only liked McCain because they hated Bush more.
There was plenty of hate in 2008.
In 2008 the Obamatons not only called McCain a racist, they even called Bill Clinton a racist.
The attacks on Clinton were coming so fast that he had to say, "I am not a racist."
There are a lot of criticisms that I could level at McCain and Clinton. Racism is not one of them.
your campaign pointing it out is a defensive move. Whatever impact was to be made has been made and you're left to look like you're whining. This is where Reagan shined - he very rarely gave the media something to bang him over the head with. Sounds like Walker and some others are getting smart about dealing with the press.
why are they suspect? Walker does not owe anyone conjecture about things someone else said. And this is always a one-way street, which is THE point. Dems never have to answer for the stupidity of one of their own. You think someone will be asked if it's okay that Bill Clinton hung out with a pederast? Of course, not.
Then you really are a moron.
You understand what I'm saying?
The media is part of the game, and they have a side. The rules are different for Republicans and Democrats, and Walker is acting accordingly.
There is no answer you can give that they won't edit or cut or "paraphrase" until it means what they want it to mean.
The winning move is not to play that game.
Bloody Limey.
*hork*
Them's fightin' words mate!
/Ocker
Nice. Is that Bill O'Reilly behind the counter?
Mrs Clinton, have you been able to orgasm with your husband since he had that blowjob in the Oral Office?
He did.
He gave them the perfect answer - he invited them to give him evidence, which evidence will be Rev'm Wright's association with Obama. The media fell for that hard. It's hilarious.
Tow the lion.
Wholly shit Bo is a mendacious fuck.
Bo, why don't you give up this walker bullshit and back to what you know best, blood libeling teh jooooos?