Ireland Votes on Gay Marriage, Trouble for Duggar Family, a Nungesser Accuser Speaks: P.M. Links

|

Follow Reason on Twitter, and like us on Facebook. You can also get the top stories mailed to you—sign up here.

NEXT: The Libertarian Moment is Everywhere Around Us (Increasing Social Tolerance Edition)

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. Ireland could become the first country to legalize gay marriage by popular referendum.

    Patrick Fitzgerald and Gerald Fitzpatrick?

    1. Don’t forget Harris!

    2. Helllllo.

      “Josh Duggar in hot water over molestation scandal.”

      Not to go all tu quoque, but I’ll go tu quoque because I like writing tu quoque, yet Hillary slips away and trudges along.

      Funny that.

      1. Josh Duggar’s molestation scandal also occurred when he was 14 and he’s now 27 and married with kids.

        I have a difficult time getting myself worked up over a 14 year old behaving inappropriately when there’s no evidence he’s done anything wrong since he reached the age of majority.

        1. Meh. Fuck him. I’d feel bad for him if he wasn’t a judgmental ass about everyone else while ignoring that gigantic plank in his eye.

          Also, they didn’t report it to the cops. I’m fine with that part. They did report it to a cop friend who they knew would cover it up. That same cop friend is now doing five decades in prison for kiddie porn (manufacture). That part’s… interesting.

          1. Good point. He does work for the Family Research Council, so it’s not like he has a problem judging other people for their sex acts.

            Still, he was 14 and I have seen no evidence he’s done anything since. Don’t think him being a dick in later life means I should pretend to be outraged by a teenager who probably hasn’t done anything like this in over a decade now.

            1. Other than that…1 out of 19 is not a bad average!

              1. If a pitcher had a .052 batting average against he would be in the hall of fame! FIRST BALLOT!

        2. Yes. Someone explained to a 14 year old how very wrong what he was doing was, and he appears to have stopped. That’s not exactly the same as a serial predator. Wrong, yes. Should it destroy his adult life? No.

          1. Oh, they’ll try.

          2. The father went to the cops over it. That doesn’t sound like the type of behavior that it was a quick explanation and everything was hunky-dory.

            1. The timeline clearly shows he had a repeat problem.

              1. REPEAT OFFENDER!

                Like the Patriots.

          3. Sure. And the same someone explained to his victims that an apology was all the justice they needed.

            This is gross.

          4. I have strong doubts that he stopped.

            1. Yeah. Ugh.

        3. When you dedicate your life to battling the evil gays and telling everyone how unfit they are to be parents and how they’re destroying family values, I think the fact that you molested children is pretty noteworthy.

          Also, the way the family reacted to the whole situation is shameful.

          1. sure, but a 14 year old molesting children means what? he was a child. can children molest other children?

            I’ve known 14 year olds that were all kinds of assholes- but it doesn’t impact them as adults (unless I say, that dude was ALWAYS an asshole.)

            1. “sure, but a 14 year old molesting children means what? he was a child. can children molest other children?”

              Uh, yeah? And some of his victims were pretty young, it’s not like he just inappropriately fondled a girl his own age.

              1. he was a 14 year old in a notoriously sexually repressive home.

                I’m not excusing the behavior… well, maybe a bit. not all 14 year olds are created equal.

                1. It might make it understandable in some sense, it doesn’t justify it. I do blame his parents more than him given their reaction to it.

                  Furthermore, you’re missing the point that Duggar has no right to not be judged for his past sexual acts given that he’s dedicated his life to opposing people for their own infinitely less harmful sexual acts.

                2. I wonder if the wife is a pig in bed or if she’s mechanical.

                  You know these Christian types.

                  1. Is pig derogatory or complimentary? Mechanical too. A pig fucker might start to get ideas.

        4. I have a difficult time getting myself worked up over a 14 year old behaving inappropriately when there’s no evidence he’s done anything wrong since he reached the age of majority.

          First of all, 14 is old enough to know not to molest your little sisters.

          Second, I’m a lot more worked up about the parents anyway, who obviously didn’t give a shit what happened to four of their daughters (or more).

          1. what were they supposed to do? “Please lock my child up for touching my other children inappropriately. By the way, can we somehow make him register for life as a sex offender?”

            1. They could have sent him away permanently to school, to stay with relatives, friends, etc. His sisters were allegedly repeatedly victimized and thus not safe from him.

              1. I agree. The parents deserve criticism. I just think there are a lot of fucked up kids who grow out of whatever problems they have and with no evidence he’s done anything as an actual adult, we shouldn’t behave as if Josh Duggar himself is somehow monstrous because of his actions at 14.

                If a 25 year old did this, lock him up. If a 14 year old does it, then absolutely he should be removed from a situation where he’s around young girls and his parents were negligent in failing to do that (although I believe they did send him away to some sort of work farm at some point – not sure of the time frame).

                I just think outrage at a 27 year old because of behavior at 14 is completely irrational unless you have reason to suspect that behavior is ongoing.

              2. Yeah. I doubt I could have called the cops on him if he was mine, but at a minimum he wouldn’t have lived in that house with his sisters anymore. Of course, I wouldn’t have had 19 kids to provide cannon fodder for Jesus’s armies in the Apocalypse, so what do I know.

                1. I wouldn’t have 19 kids for anything. If that’s what a god demands of me I say he is no god of mine and I will call for open rebellion!

              3. They could have sent him away permanently to school, to stay with relatives

                Could you please take this kid who molests little girls?

                1. Send him to a gay uncle’s house.

          2. Yes it is old enough to know that which is why he deserved to be punished when he was 14.

            However, I’m not going to pretend I’m super disgusted with a 27 year old man because of his bad behavior half a lifetime ago.

      2. Um, who the hell is Josh Duggar?

        1. My best guess from the buzz is something about a reality show for prolific Christfags. I don’t care enough to look it up.

    3. That joke sounds familiar:

      https://reason.com/blog/2015/05…..nt_5316127

      1. It sure does

    4. It was that Hozier video what did it.

  2. Police shot two unarmed black men who stole beer from a grocery store.

    Naturally.

    1. Stealing beer is like stealing livestock.

      1. You mean, it depends on the brand?

    2. They stole Natty Light?

      1. is that WHY he shot them?

        1. Call me old fashioned, but I don’t think folks should get shot for having bad taste.

          1. I don’t either, but it would give a window into his state of mind.

      2. Olympia. It’s the water.

        1. Winner!

  3. The Wall Street Journal on “the trigger happy generation.”

    Not much happiness involved.

    1. I figured it was an article on cops.

  4. a major clean water regulation that would restore the federal government’s authority to limit pollution

    So, the Carbon Tax?

  5. ..but Jezebel scored an interview with a different accuser.

    Ms. Young is ready to crawl all over this one’s ass with microscope, too?

    1. Hey, man, can you work on your metaphors a little?

      1. Yes, but I probably won’t.

        1. Never metaphor you didn’t like, eh?

          1. You say that and yet I’m the one who gets crap.

    2. This narrative is entirely false. At the time, Emma and I were friendly; however, we were never friends.

      I hate to say it, but friendly is all it takes. This woman can thank Sulkowicz and “Jackie” for the doubt people have in her claims.

  6. Here is a proper link for the Connecticut thing.

    1. I read that link and I’m calling that the ‘coeds won’t get laid’ thingie.
      WIH would any guy chance getting entangled with those sorts of issues when the waitress at the beer bar isn’t going to school?

      1. What I have never understood is why this stuff should be associated with the school *at all*.

      2. Snobbery. If they are gonna get laid with *sniff*normals*sniff*, why are they at a college in first place?

        Also, opportunity – you have to go all the way off campus, when these women are right here and willing and totally not crazy and won’t screw you over later, right?

      3. Because for the most part, the standards won’t be enforced. Just a few unlucky saps here and there will get nailed.

  7. Connecticut state Senate approves affirmative consent standard for colleges.

    Think you have the wrong link there.

  8. Each time Obama signs an executive order I picture him doing this after:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVq0gVS96w0

  9. WHERE’S MY SAFE SPACE?

    Lotsa hostility towards Canadians here. I can feel it. It oozes through the screen.

    1. to be fair, you’ve been asking for it by how you’re dressed.

      1. And what exactly is wrong with my attire?

        http://bit.ly/1ITYFS6

        1. sorry, I didn’t mean how you were dressed. I meant Drake and Degrassi… that’s why.

  10. “Cathy Young debunked one of the Paul Nungesser accusers who talked to Jezebel, but Jezebel scored an interview with a different accuser.”

    And this accuser’s story is that Paul Nungesser hugged her for three seconds when he was drunk and then totally took no for an answer when she pushed him away.

    This totally proves he committed that violent anal rape he’s accused of.

    1. This one’s story is far more believable than all the others. If it is true then she should be angry at all the liars rather than backing them up.

      Of course, as you said, it is far less serious of an accusation and would never be a national news story.

      1. This story paints this dude as a drunk creep- but not a rapist. Also, can you be a victim of someone being a drunk creep at you?

        1. Literally all this story means even if it’s true (and it seems very plausible since this is the sort of shit drunk college guys do all the time) is that this girl should be pissed at Paul and call him a creep to her friends. It’s not criminal, it’s not rape, it’s not close to rape, she is not a ‘survivor’ of sexual assault because a dude was creepy.

          He hugged her for three seconds. That’s light years from rape. That would be like if someone stole a quarter off my counter and I used that as character evidence when I accused him of robbing a bank.

          1. I mean, the dude’s German. You know how they are about respecting other people’s boundaries.

            1. wait… were any of these “victims” jews?!

            2. She was Poland, he was a Blitzkrieg. For three seconds.

              1. And now she’s calling in the Polish Cavalry.

                1. My handle demands I remind people that Polish Cavalry was totally badass, trashed 4th Panzer Division on the first day of the war, never charged tanks with lances, and (in the guise of 10th Brigade of Polish 1st Armoured Division) fought in 1940 France, 1944 Normandy and Netherlands and 1945 Germany.

                  1. Hey now, yer fuckin up my joke!

                    But you are absolutely correct, the Polish Cav got a bad rep, and this is the basis for Pollock jokes.

                    The French used much stupider tactics, including trying to refight WWI (Maginot Line) and really deserved to be the proper brunt of such jokes.

                    1. The Maginot line gets a bit of a bad rap. It was meant to be only part of their defense, with a mobile force behind it. But budget cuts left an inadequate mobile force, so the French had little to counter the Germans when they went around the Line.

                    2. The French and British had the forces to beat Germany. The french heavy tanks were superior to German armor. They just didn’t know how to use them.

                    3. Also they put them into wrong place, parceled them out so they couldn’t be used when needed and failed to provide sufficient air cover.

                      Alistair Horne’s France 1940: To Lose a Battle is a brilliant study of the campaign.

          2. Assault is a crime, its just that this a pretty petty one and the type that almost never becomes a criminal matter.

            And yes, if true, she was a victim even if its not in the same universe as a rape victim. There are various levels of victimization. If you have a quarter stolen you are still a victim of an incredibly petty theft that you would never bother to call the police about.

            1. is hugging someone assault? even creepy hugging? even if you stop when they stay, “seriously, stop.”

              1. The incident happened my junior year at Columbia, when Paul followed me upstairs at a party, came into a room with me uninvited, closed the door behind us, and grabbed me. I politely said, “Hey, no, come on, let’s go back downstairs.” He didn’t listen. He held me close to him as I said no, and continued to pull me against him. I pushed him off and left the room quickly. I told a few friends and my boyfriend at the time how creepy and weird it was. I tried to find excuses for his behavior. I did a decent job of pushing it out of my mind.

                Again, if true, he didn’t just give her a creepy hug.

                1. Then we read that passage differently. That describes, exactly, what a creepy hug is.

                2. If you wiggled your butt going up the stairs, that might be misinterpreted. Post pictures of your butt or GTFO.

                3. I told a few friends and my boyfriend at the time how creepy and weird it was.

                  Interesting–and the boyfriend didn’t immediately go after Paul and say, “You do that again and you’ll go back to Germany with a few less teeth”?

                  She’s either exaggerating like these other rape-hoaxers or she had the biggest pussy of a boyfriend imaginable.

            2. I said she’s not a ‘survivor’ not that she’s not a ‘victim.’ She’s a victim of an incredibly petty crime in the same way that if a girl slapped me unprovoked I’m technically the victim of assault. If I wrote a fucking blog post about being horribly violated by that, people would laugh at me.

              1. I agree with you Irish, I was responding to Spencer with the victim part instead of writing two posts.

                It’s a little less petty than a slap to the face, but basically what you said. If she had actually reported it when it happened instead of when goaded into doing so a year later then it would be reasonable for Columbia to have told him to stay away from her but that’s about it.

                But following someone into a room uninvited, closing the door and restraining someone until they have physically extricate yourself isn’t just a creepy hug and is incredibly shitty behavior.

                We’ll probably never know if it is true because of all the lies.

                1. We’ll probably never know if it is true because of all the lies.

                  I’m going to go with lies, because at this point the guy’s been exonerated four times, one of which was a dude who said Paul grabbed his cock, and Nungesser’s shown a remarkable ability to produce evidence that shows these people are full of shit.

                  This one is staying anonymous for right now because she probably knows there’s texts or emails that show she’s lying her ass off, and if her name emerges she’s going to have to prove what she’s saying.

    2. And this accuser’s story is that Paul Nungesser hugged her for three seconds when he was drunk and then totally took no for an answer when she pushed him away.

      This totally proves he committed that violent anal rape he’s accused of.

      Reading about all the lives Nungesser’s transgressions have harmed, one can’t help but be reminded of Yeats’ meditation on the end of the world in “The Second Coming”: “What rough beast, its hour come round at last / Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?”

      1. I laughed audibly.

    3. According to the anonymous person writing it, she is the one who left. I still think it’s a bit much to call an unwanted embrace “sexual assault”.

      1. I guess battery is better, though different state laws muddle them up sometimes.

  11. “Does the punishment fit the crime? Given the seeming epidemic of this happening not only here but in our country, it makes you pause and wonder what’s going on.”

    Nice sentiment, but is that really “the punishment” for “the crime”?

  12. President Obama will announce executive action aimed at water regulation.

    Libertarian Moment!

    1. So the government is regulating the water (pollution), the air (carbon!), the wind (alternative energy/wind turbines), and fire (global warming). I think we can all go home now.

      1. But I like Earth, Wind & Fire!

    2. I would be the most benevolent dictator ever…

  13. What are you gonna do?

    http://twitchy.com/2015/05/21/…..or-photos/

    1. I can’t figure out why that is a big deal.

      1. It’s just kind of juvenile, and is a weird attack anyway. “So what is the Republican plan when our badly-written Democrat law fails, huh? Huh??”

  14. THAT ONION LINK GOES NOWHERE ROBBY

    1. That’s strike two.

    2. The Onion: “College Allowing Students Individual Commencement Speakers To Make Ceremony Acceptable For All.”

      Yup, he SugarFreed the link! Here for the article, which is nice but (except for a bit near the end) misses the mark – they don’t want just not to be offended by hearing stuff, they don’t want bad stuff to be heard by anyone.

    1. Of course you’d post a bestiality video.

      1. What a cool mechanical pig.

    2. I thought that was going to go all Jurassic Bark on us for a minute…

  15. TRIGGER WARNING: Marcotte attempts to take down Cathy Young’s reporting on Columbia

    Apparently questioning any of Sulkowicz’s story means you’re the rape equivalent of a 9/11 Troofer.

    Enjoy, Irish.

    1. FIRE ISN’T HOT ENOUGH TO MELT STEEL BEDPOSTS

        1. And Dick Cheney!

          /high five.

        2. If so, I’d hate to be the guy who got sloppy 6 millionths (assuming the sex ratio of World Jewry is close to 1:1).

    2. does that mean you think she was raped by the government?

    3. Really, the most disappointing thing about her article is where she says she’d love to psychoanalyze Cathy Young’s reasons for being a rape denialist but declines to do so.

      Man, that would have been hilarious to read.

    4. The signs, with their Red Pill-style sexual hang-ups and condescending anti-feminism are self-refuting: You can immediately picture the misogynist malcontent who hung them, no doubt furious that pretty women he believes beneath him (“little”) are allowed to say no to him.

      I don’t think Marcotte knows what “refuting” means.

      1. Yes but her crystal clear prose totally makes up for it.

      2. Signs can have hang-ups? Ugh.

        1. I hang all of my signs. Adhesive pulls paint off of the walls.

          1. I hang all of my signs. Adhesive pulls paint off of the walls.

            *BOOOOOOOOOOOOO*

      3. I’m refuting myself right now.

    5. Jesus Christ, some of Marcotte’s commenters make her look rational:


      Auntie Alias phil ? an hour ago

      There was exactly one investigation: by the university. Emma decided not to go through with pursuing a criminal complaint.

      ? ?
      ?
      Reply
      ?
      Share ?

      Avatar

      Clarence Whorley Auntie Alias ? 10 minutes ago

      The police investigated, found no crime was committed

      ? ?
      ?
      Reply
      ?
      Share ?

      ?

      ?


      Avatar

      Auntie Alias Clarence Whorley ? 7 minutes ago

      Citation needed that isn’t from Cathy Young, Breitbart, Reason, or any other right-wing/misogynist site.

      ? ?
      ?
      Reply
      ?
      Share ?

      1. It’s Rawstory. Rawstory has the crazies group of commenters I’ve ever encountered. They’re literally in favor of murdering rich people, as they’ve made clear on several threads over there.

        1. But they use Disqus, so feel free to stop by and argue. I do, sometimes.

    1. “Are you saying that I put an abnormal brain into a seven and a half foot long, fifty-four inch wide GORILLA?”

      1. No, he said he got a brain from Dr. Abigail Normal. You remember her, the one that taught physics at Columbia.

  16. “[…]but Jezebel scored an interview with a different accuser.[…]”

    Whose testimony is a LONG way from convincing; at worst, he asked, she said no, and she walked off. The HORROR!

    1. Jezebel means “do not bother reading”, as a heuristic.

      So far, it hasn’t led me wrong.

    2. He HUGGED her for three seconds!!! YES, THE HORROR!

    3. The Jezebel in the Bible ended up being killed and fed to dogs. Just sayin’.

  17. Clinton got now-classified Benghazi info on private email

    The information was not classified at the time the email was sent but was upgraded from “unclassified” to “secret” on Friday at the request of the FBI, according to State Department officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the decision. Officials who received the email have been informed that the 23 words are now classified as “secret” and that they should take appropriate measures to protect it in any files they may have

    even if those files are stored on private servers.

  18. Cathy Young debunked one of the Paul Nungesser accusers who talked to Jezebel, but Jezebel scored an interview with a different accuser.

    Crunch Debunk all you want! We’ll make more (accusers)!

      1. You know who else was heiled?

  19. Where’s the nut punch?

  20. New Haven Pizza May Be the Best in America

    To make sure I wasn’t insane if I wound up dubbing New Haven pizza the best (and possibly worth another trip in the near future), I brought a pie all the way back to New York for a roundtable judgment by four die-hard “Dollar Slice”-ers. After some heavy persuasion to join me in possibly committing blasphemy and a quick oven reheat, we sank our teeth into the greasy goodness. The reaction was unanimous: “OHHHHHH.” Several more of these foodgasm moans soundtracked the remainder of our meal. And by the end, with shame plastered across all of our faces, we all agreed this had possibly been the best pizza we’ve ever had.

    1. Judging by the irregular circular shape (suggesting hand pressed with fresh dough) and the burnt marks (suggesting properly cooked), it looks like a mighty fine pizza.

      1. It is very good.

    2. DEEEEEEEEEP DIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHH

    3. WTF is a “dollar slice”? That is not something that exists in NYC, that’s for sure.

  21. And we thought refusing to serve gay marriage pizza was bad.
    Jewelry store sign prompts same-sex couple to ask for refund

    A same-sex couple from St. John’s is upset after discovering the jewelry store that sold them their engagement rings has posted a sign that seems to oppose same-sex marriage ? but one of the store’s owners says he’s allowed to post his religious beliefs.

    The lesbian couple ordered the custom-made rings, liked how they were treated at the jewelry store and recommended the store to their friends. One of them went there to order a ring for his girlfriend and found a distressing sign: “The sanctity of marriage is under attack. Let’s keep marriage between a man and a woman.”

    The couple went to the store the following day, and asked about the sign.

    “They just said that that’s their beliefs, and they think they can put up whatever they want. I just said it was very disrespectful, it’s very unprofessional and I wanted a refund,” White said.

    “I have no issues with them believing in what they believe in. I think everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. But I don’t think they should put their personal beliefs inside their business.”

    [The store owner] said the finished rings are ready to be picked up; White and Renouf just have to pay the balance.

    1. I don’t even…

      *sigh*

    2. But I don’t think they should put their personal beliefs inside their business

      I hate vision and mission statements as well.

    3. “I have no issues with them believing in what they believe in. I think everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. But I don’t think they should put their personal beliefs inside their business.”

      “..which is why I no longer shop at stores that support Pride Week.”

      No?

      1. When the Chik-fil-A thing went down the majority of my coworkers marched over to eat fried chicken to support the war against homos warring on Christians for warring on homos or whatever was going on.

        Somehow in the course of this one of my coworkers started tirading about how as a homosexual I do all of my DIY shopping at Home Depot because they support the gay agenda. She was CERTAIN.

        She had no idea what to do when I said “Why would I do that when the local ACE is on my way home from work?”

        I get not wanting to spend money with a company that doesn’t want your business, and if people want to put the effort in…great…I guess, but it seems exhausting.

        1. Exactly. And I can get being pissed at the sign, but you are happy with product, you put money in, they put the work in… Just get the thing, tell them they’re wrong if you can’t keep it bottled and don’t deal with them! You don’t have to fucking posture on everything!

          This, BTW, was front page national news for our (partly tax-funded) national broadcaster. Don’t know if it had the top story position, like “17 year old refuses to follow school dress code” did last week. And then Rufus wonders why Canada is treated like a joke…

          1. And then Rufus wonders why Canada is treated like a joke…

            Yes, it is much better to have endless stories of police brutality, riots, corruption, and overseas adventures on our front pages.

        2. It would take something quite egregious and sustained for me to stop patronizing a company because of politics, unless switching to a competitor didn’t inconvenience me.

          1. I think in this case, if I had seen the sign before entering the store the first time, it would have been very easy to look elsewhere. But yeah it’s a different story if it’s a business I patronize regularly.

            1. Who fucking cares about the niceties of some tradesmen’s philosophies? Does anybody actually mean to patronise only those businesses operated by people who line up perfectly with them on every abstruse point of philosophy? And how can a person find any meaningful quantity of businesses run by people who agree with one about every philosophical question? I guess if you’re a braindead bigot who gets his whole belief system readimade from somebody else and never actually rubs two thoughts together on his own, it would be possible to match up with a FEW “likeminded” businessmen, but certainly not enough to get by. And for anybody who actually ever thinks anything through, there’s probably going to be nobody who agrees sufficiently. I don’t even know what to think about this distinction between saying and thinking something. It’s the saying that’s offensive and not the thought behind it? This claim is nearly unbelievable. If true, it’s fucking crasy.

              1. For what it’s worth, I can imagine some political views which would discourage me from patronising some businessman, but these would all fall in the category of those that carry rabid exhortations to violence, and I don’t see how I would feel differently if the person held dearly to such beliefs but didn’t speak them aloud except at certain hours of the day. Well, he might strike me as a more wretched and offensive being all round, but I don’t see how it could impact my feeling about him holding to a dangerously vicious and poisonous philosophy. This thing is more like some weird Victorian fretting over a social impropriety than anything real.

        3. Isn’t there an app that scans a barcode and displays whether the manufacturer is ideologically kosher?

          1. It wouldn’t surprise me. It’s also foolish.

            The guy I was dating around the time of the Stoli kerfluffle worked in sourcing and he talked about how laughable trying to maintain ideological purity was with the products you purchased and merchants you frequent. Most larger companies are pumping money to politicians on the left and right.

            As a kid I remember the list of boycotts in the American Family Association newsletter and it was almost impossible to avoid anything owned by Johnson & Johnson (with their satanist logo), or Disney and its subsidiaries (for not hating homosexuals actively enough).

        4. “[…]Somehow in the course of this one of my coworkers started tirading about how as a homosexual I do all of my DIY shopping at Home Depot because they support the gay agenda[…]”

          Jesse, have you ruined a ‘traditional marriage’ today? If not, why not?

  22. From New Zealand:

    Test drive mishap of note

    Soggy end to Invercargill test drive

    When an Invercargill car salesman was waiting anxiously for his car to be returned, he had no idea it was stuck in the ocean at Oreti Beach.

    Regent Car Court salesman Jared Bekhuis said a potential customer and his two friends took a $15,000 Ford Falcon XR6 for a 15-minute test drive on Tuesday. But he began to feel uneasy as 15 minutes ticked past, and called a few of his colleagues.

    “They told me not to worry about it until it had been more than an hour.”

    About two hours after the trio had driven off the lot, Bekhuis received a call from a fellow salesperson.

    “She said ‘Jared, your Falcon’s at the beach.’ I said `yeah right ‘and laughed it off as a prank, ‘cos we do that a bit here. But it turns out she was right.”

    The link has more, as well as photos.

    1. Racing stripes and four doors is a juxtaposition. Not too bad as a cop car.

    2. “David Sutton, who said he was driving, explained the incident by saying “I got stuck.””

      Well, yeah, that too.

  23. “Police shot two unarmed black men who stole beer from a grocery store.”

    C’mon, Robby, there’s a little more to the story you are leaving out. According to the article you cited, the officer who pursued these two men on his own claims to have been assaulted by them with skateboards. The article also indicates that they were violent to the associates who confronted them to recover the booze. What would you have done?

    1. how about NOT shoot them?

      1. Yes, of course.

        Still, he has a point = Reason has been consistent about highlighting and covering police misconduct in depth for years.

        The magazine doesn’t need to exaggerate cases, or mislead by omission, in order to remain on top of this beat.

        There were a few incidents in the recent past, in 2014, between the Eric Garner and Michael Brown incidents, where “cop hits person” stories were being trolled and sensationalized, which didn’t do anything to really add any depth or understanding to the problem. It was just trolling for “cop violence” of any kind, and pretending it was all equally unjustified.

        That’s a mistake. By turning every single story into “Racist excessive force”, it exposes the magazine as being desperate to pump that plot. Balko never needed to resort to that sort of shit. And Balko is the one who really deserves the most credit for giving this magazine credibility on this angle.

        1. the question is, does one need background to explain excessive force is excessive force is excessive?

          No, probably not.

          1. We’re in a weird place right now vis-?-vis cops and race. On the one hand, cops are out of control. On the other, blacks do, in fact, commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime. So they are going to get shot more or, at least, as often as whites. Some number of those will be in self-defense or for some other justifiable reason.

            That said, maybe it’s good for all of us if the outcry against the black shootings continues, whether the shootings are justified or not, since maybe that will do something nothing else has so far–make the cops think twice about pulling the trigger.

          2. I think it good journalistic practice and integrity to inform the readers thoroughly of all pertinent facts so that they can draw their own conclusions. In this case, the cop alleges they were assaulting him with a skateboard, which is definitely relevant to the story at large.

            1. In this case, the cop alleges they were assaulting him with a skateboard, which is definitely relevant to the story at large.

              Yes; it’s relevant that a cop is alleging it, and not a bystander watching the situation.

            2. Relevant, except a cop should not be responding to a skateboard attack with bullets.

              1. Yeah kids with skateboards are harmless

                the point was not to draw a “good shoot”/”bad shoot” conclusion based on limited evidence.

                the point was that the story should be presented *with* the limited evidence rather than try and make it seem “worse” by purposely omitting details. (or misleadingly suggesting they were shot for “petty theft” rather than taking a swing at the po po)

          3. I don’t understand your question.

            “Excessive force” isn’t ‘excessive’ in a vacuum.

            Its excessive relative to the threat a person faces.

            There’s a clear difference between, say, the Walter Scott shooting, where a cop *wasn’t even at risk*, and decided to shoot a guy for ‘fleeing’…

            …and someone who fires in ostensible self defense, as this cop is at least claiming.

            You wouldn’t know the difference between the two based on the way Robby decided to sell that headline.

            Its dishonest, and isn’t helpful to the cause of preventing actual police misconduct. I would argue its counter-productive by exposing the magazine to charges of sensationalism.

        2. Balko never needed to resort to that sort of shit.

          He sort of did with Peyton Strickland killing. The SWAT team was executing a warrant on a fugitive armed robber and some incompetent cop thought the battering ram impact was a gunshot and shot through the door, killing the armed robber.

          Apprehending violent fugitives is one of those things a SWAT team might be appropriate for. The cop (who lost his job and any future career in law enforcement) panicked. The wealthy and politically-connected family collected $2.5 million for the loss of their criminal spawn.

          No wrong door raid, no non-violent drug offenders, no innocent bystanders, no intentional lethal violence by the cop, relatively appropriate use of a SWAT team at the right address.

          1. How did Balko misrepresent what actually happened?

            While I get your point that the example probably didn’t rise to the same level of egregiousness as other cases he’d covered….

            … the key point there was “shoot through a door”

            Which no cop should ever do even if there IS live gunfire coming from ‘somewhere’. “Being able to identify your target” is a fundamental requirement for any cop firing their weapon.

            1. How did Balko misrepresent what actually happened?

              The use of a SWAT team wasn’t excessive. The incident is described as a “botched raid” but it wasn’t the wrong house and they weren’t after a non-violent defender.

              The individual cop made a poor decision and shouldn’t have been on the force to begin with. He and the police force were uncharacteristically held fully accountable He was fired and indicted (though not prosecuted) for murder 2. $multi-million settlements were paid.

              There was no “nut punch” to this case.

              Balko never would have covered this if the career criminal was from a lower social class.

        3. The line says right there that they’d stole beer from the grocery. Why is additional exposition necessary in a brief summary line for a link? What kind of dope could somehow conclude, with no further description than that, that the shooting were unjustified? As folks that had robbed some place (unless one somehow holds that groceries, at least with regards to beers, enjoy diminished property rights compared to other folks), they are already well over the line into sociopathic territory, so any honest person who reads this line ought to be if anything biassed in favour of the police here. I don’t see how you can take this line as biassed against them, except perhaps in its strange discrimination of the “race” of the thieves. It’s hard to see any reason why it’d be mentioned except in order to suggest a racial bias, either that black folk is more likely to become violent beer thiefs or that the police are out to waste Negroes. Either is kind of beyond the pale, but the former seems less likely. Still… I see “race” pointed out all the time in news articles where I can’t see any flipping reason why it’s relevant nor any meaningful bias anybody could infer from it, so it may be holy innocent.

  24. “Police shot two unarmed black men who stole beer from a grocery store.”

    BOOYAH!

  25. Student Sues Texas College After Being Told Gun Rights Sign Needs ‘Special Permission’

    The lawsuit challenges Blinn’s policy of restricting speech to a tiny “Free Speech Area,” as well as the process that led the college to take over a month to approve a palm-sized card Sanders wanted to hand out to students explaining their Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights.

    1. Do people go into education for reasons OTHER THAN controlling people?

      1. Some of us have other reasons.

    2. Blinn College requires that student organizations request permission a month in advance and gain approval from four administrators for any on- or off-campus expressive activity.

      Oh, FFS! 8-( How can this shit be legal?

      1. expressive activity

        Madonna would have like totally hated that college.

  26. From Miss “don’t call me a friend of Mattress Girl, we were just friendly:”

    “The incident happened my junior year at Columbia, when Paul followed me upstairs at a party, came into a room with me uninvited, closed the door behind us, and grabbed me. I politely said, “Hey, no, come on, let’s go back downstairs.” He didn’t listen. He held me close to him as I said no, and continued to pull me against him. I pushed him off and left the room quickly.”

    Ah, horror beyond description!

    “‘Mine enemy was strong, my poor self weak,
    And far the weaker with so strong a fear:
    My bloody judge forbade my tongue to speak;
    No rightful plea might plead for justice there:
    His scarlet lust came evidence to swear
    That my poor beauty had purloin’d his eyes;
    And when the judge is robb’d the prisoner dies.[‘]…

    “Even here she sheathed in her harmless breast
    A harmful knife, that thence her soul unsheathed:
    That blow did that it from the deep unrest
    Of that polluted prison where it breathed:
    Her contrite sighs unto the clouds bequeath’d
    Her winged sprite, and through her wounds doth fly
    Life’s lasting date from cancell’d destiny.”

    1. Kristallnot?

  27. The Duggar pervert kid reminded me of this sordid story. It’s worth a read.

    1. Yes and no. He paid a steep price.

      I remember that being discussed here a while back.

  28. Is marriage of three gay guys okay?

    Can a mother marry her daughter and form a lesbian marriage?

    May a father marry his two sons and create a loving bond of marriage?

    If not, why not?

    1. Of course it’s okay. Why the fuck do you care, pervert?

      1. think of the inbred voters. because it’s the illegality that prevents incestuous marriages!

        1. I just like that cousin marriage is mostly illegal in states that have a reputation for it.

          1. Legal in 7 of 11 of the former-Confederate states. If’n ya can catch her!

          2. That’s because something has to happen a bunch of times before somebody goes, “Ya know, there oughta be a law ‘gainst that sort a behavior.”

    2. as long as they are all consenting adults, sure.

      Anything else is a moral judgment- and we should leave those out of legislation.

    3. As long as they are consenting adults, yes. But you’ve already been told that the other billion times you’ve asked.

    4. Do you have that series of questions on a .txt file on your desktop for easy cut ‘n pasting in every thread that even tangentially mentions gay marriage or have you memorized them

      This is a serious question; I am genuinely curious.

      1. Even more retarded than asking the same rhetorical question over and over, is repeatedly ignoring the answers and asking again, as though through mere repetition it will begin to make more sense.

        1. You mean his “Wisdom of Repugnance” argument didn’t ‘getcha’?

      2. Nah he’s changed it up a few times. I guess he thinks about incest a lot.

    5. Same guy, 3 months ago

      “AlgerHiss|2015/02/26 14:06:25|#5116622~new~

      May 3 gay males create a marriage?

      May 4 straight females form a marriage?

      May a father marry his son?

      May a mother marry her two daughters?

      If not, why not?

      My reasons why this is a stupid fucking question still applies, here

    6. Jesse posted this some time ago.

      1. Take note, Reason staff. This is what a quality hat tip looks like.

    7. No, because somebody will end up raped.

  29. Does Christina Hoff Sommers need a safe space?

    No, because she’s not emotionally 12.

  30. “President Obama will announce executive action aimed at water regulation.”

    STILLSUITS FOR ALL

    1. I think you just solved California Drought Crisis.

      1. And launched a great new industry, stillsuit manufacture. Now all we need to do is genetically engineer and release some giant sandworms in California.

        1. Gene-etical engineering? In CALIFORNIA?!

          Sir, you go too far. May thy knife chip and shatter!

          1. No, no, we’ll take on all the uncleanness of the genetic modifications here, have the worms ritually purified by a high priestess, then ship them to California.

  31. Meet Steve Kerbel, Libertarian Presidential Candidate

    Hmm… I hadn’t heard of Outright Libertarians before.

    Outright Libertarians is an association of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and other self-identified “queer” (LGBTQ) Libertarian Party activists and supporters. We welcome anyone who believes in individual liberty and personal responsibility, and who wishes to actively promote Libertarianism to all those who love differently.

    1. Kerbel says that he hates discrimination, but also hates the thought of the government telling people what they can and can’t do regarding themselves and their property. He described the RFRA as “band aid” legislation, meant to soften the ills of previous bad legislation as opposed to fixing the issue at its core. On this issue, Kerbel says he would like to return to the Bill of Rights standard, which allowed for freedom for all, as opposed to passing legislation clearly designed to placate certain citizens over others.

      That’s pretty much exactly how I feel.

      1. That’s pretty much exactly how I feel.

        RAYCISS!!1!11!!!

        /Bo Cara Retard

  32. Police shot two unarmed black men who stole beer from a grocery store.

    He was black!??!?! That changes everything!!!! *rabble rabble rabble*

    1. Actually, the salient variable is the brand of beer stolen. Say, if it were something like Natty Light, then I’d say it was an attempted mercy killing.

        1. That just looks terrible. I don’t even have to taste it.

          1. It is hard to remember what the worst beer i’ve ever consumed is… because trauma-repression, and all that….

            ..but I’d have to go with “Week-old-Genessee-Cream-Ale” which a famous bar in Westchester, NY would sell on Thursday nights to underage kids for $0.25 per 6oz plastic cup.

            (*also, $0.50 ‘woo-woos’ and ‘kamakazis’, which were kool-aid mixed with some kind of watered downvodka/grain alcohol)

            The beer came from kegs from the previous Thursday night, which were down to the last dregs, then thrown behind the bar with the last 15% still in there, left to sit in the hot, dank weather…festering and molding …. to be later served to children who robbed the family change drawer to hang out in this sleaze pit on a thursday night

            It was pretty awesome actually, but the beer routinely made people vomit before they ever caught a buzz.

            1. Genessee Cream Ale is a good candidate for worst beer ever, and it doesn’t even have to be a week old and warm. Also: Rainier and Olympia. They are horrible.

              1. I.have a can.of Olympia beer, canned sometime.in the 1970s, passed down from my Dad, may he rest in peace. I intend to pass on to my firstborn, and so on in perpetuity.

              2. I have a fond place in my heart for GCA. My dad drank it when I was a kid, so it was the first beer I ever drank.

                1. We once were out looking for beer in college. My friends parents had a place about 45 minutes from State College where we would shoot, party, and drink. We forgot to buy beer in town, so we ended up driving to a couple of beer distributors looking for something we could afford. Strangely, they were out of everything but Genny Cream Ale. We asked the clerk what he had left, and received the answer “Genny, Genny Light, and Genny Cream Ale.” We asked if he had certain beers and received.only the refrain, repeated a few.times, “Genny, Genny Light, and Genny Cream Ale.”

              3. Genessee Cream Ale is a good candidate for worst beer ever

                As a Rochester native I have to narrow my eyes. It’s not great but it’s better than, say, Budweiser.

  33. BURN, SENATE-STYLE: POLITICO’s Manu Raju reports that LINDSEY GRAHAM offered this assessment today about RAND PAUL’s much-publicized filibuster. “When Rand speaks, nobody listens,” Graham said. “I didn’t listen.” Added Graham: “It would be like me speaking about eye surgery. I don’t know much about it. And I don’t think he understands the threats our country faces. So I don’t go down and give lectures on eye surgery for a reason.”

    Lindsey Graham is such an asshole.

    1. Look, I’m no asshole, but I know assholes. . .Sen. Graham.

      1. I’m no proctologist, but I know an asshole when I see one.

    1. This means that the Globetrotters will come out with emotion their next game and once again deny the Generals their long overdue win

  34. “The incident happened my junior year at Columbia, when Paul followed me upstairs at a party, came into a room with me uninvited, closed the door behind us, and grabbed me. I politely said, “Hey, no, come on, let’s go back downstairs.” He didn’t listen. He held me close to him as I said no, and continued to pull me against him. I pushed him off and left the room quickly.””

    This is the “incident” which the person not-dragging-a-mattress around seems to insist *proves* that Nusswhatshisname is a RAPIST

  35. Janet and I want to affirm our support for the Duggar family.

    Janet and I love Jim Bob and Michelle and their entire family. They are no more perfect a family than any family, but their Christian witness is not marred in our eyes because following Christ is not a declaration of our perfection, but of HIS perfection. It is precisely because we are all sinners that we need His grace and His forgiveness. We have been blessed to receive God’s love and we would do no less than to extend our love and support for our friends. In fact, it is such times as this, when real friends show up and stand up. Today, Janet and I want to show up and stand up for our friends. Let others run from them. We will run to them with our support

    -Mike Huckabee

    He must be desperate.

    1. He’s only running to refresh the speaking engagement invitations.

      1. Exactly. For some people, a presidential run is just a marketing campaign for the future self-help book-sales.

    2. “Jim Bob”
      I’m gonna stop you right there, Mike.

  36. Behold the derp:

    A non-guide for non-white lesbians to deal with microagressions from their white partners

    Example of microagression:

    7. Your latest primary partner posts all the appropriate anti-racist stuff, does tremendous amounts of social justice activism and schools other white people on how they’re bad allies and gentrifiers. But they often forget that they’re also gentrifiers. They often speak over the voices of people of color on topics of racism and oppression and gentrification so that everyone knows/hears/sees how anti-racist they are.

    The whole piece is super derpy and racist.

    1. Oh look, autostraddle. I will not be giving them any clicks.

      1. What’s autostraddle?

        1. The unbiased wikipedia version:

          Autostraddle.com is an independently owned online magazine for women who are lesbian, bisexual, or “otherwise inclined.” The website features content that covers LGBT and Feminist news, politics, opinion, culture, arts and entertainment as well as lifestyle content such as DIY crafting, sex, relationships, fashion, food and technology.

          It’s a lesbian news and opinion blog that manages to be exactly what the Hit&Republicans; imagine all lesbian thought is.

          1. Seriously, if a politician ever saw it, the gay rights movement may be set back 20 years.

            It’s all the worst tendencies of gender studies classes and overly political college lgbt orgs thrown into one website. Most of the writers are either students or people who have just graduated with at least a minor in women’s studied and now work for nonprofit orgs

            How did you girst encounter it, jesse?

            1. How did you first encounter it, jesse?

              I think a blogger I used to read linked it a fair bit, and as he drifted in that direction I got tired of his shit and stopped reading him. I can’t remember which one it was now.

              1. I keep thinking this is just a trend that will pass. Like hashtagging random words on sites that aren’t twitter.

                1. Only on the second date.

                2. Not taking the U-haul on a second date is giving before it was against it.

              1. No WRX or BRZ bro’-barus, just lesbarus

          2. They also really treasure that independent thing, and keep bitching that other gay sites cater too much to corporate advertising. Lastly, they kinda hate gay men.

            It’s very quietly one of the derpiest places on the web.

            1. Lastly, they kinda hate gay men.

              oh yeah, spend some time around lesbians. There’s some intergay hate in that couldron…

              1. “There’s some intergay hate in that couldron…”

                Is it because straight chics like gay men better than sapphic women?

                My lesbian friends get along great with my gay friends, so I’ve never witnessed this cauldron of gayte.

            2. What’s the website by that Melissa Mcewan nutcase?

              Found it!

              It’s called Shakesville and man is that woman crazy.

              Here’s this idiot claiming GAME OF THRONES OMG RAPE CULTURE.

              Last night’s episode of Game of Thrones ended with Sansa Stark being married to Ramsay Bolton, who established her virginity before raping her and commanding his torture victim Reek (nee Theon Greyjoy) to watch. The scene was filmed so that the rape happens out of view; instead, the camera focuses in on Reek’s quivering face, as he watches a young woman, with whom he was raised as a virtual sibling, being raped by a man who has intensely tortured and sexually mutilated him.

              Because of the way it’s filmed, the entire rape is framed as just another terrible thing Ramsay is doing to Reek. It is his reaction we see. There is no close-up of Sansa’s face. We only hear her being raped. (The captions on the scene merely read: “Sansa cries.”)

              In other words: Hey, if you guys are going to rape a girl, at least let us watch!

              If they’d focused on Sansa crying as she was raped, this person would have written the same article and just would have some other reason to whine. They’re such disingenuous liars.

              1. Shakesville used to be bad but not as bad as autostraddle, but I don’t know how the two compare now.

                1. Where are they uh, where are they coming up with the names for these sites?

              2. This isn’t really the case with that particular quote, but: I think a lot of people who bitch about the content of movies and TV shows don’t grasp the difference between depicting something and condoning something.

    2. In other words, your friend does a whole lot of posturing but doesn’t actually help solve the problems they claim to be so worried about, and then they let the mask slip.

      Actually, I can see how that could be considered a microagression. No one likes to see own faults reflected back to them in the actions of others.

      1. “‘No one likes to see own faults reflected back to them in the actions of others.””

        I could have just said, “this”.

    3. I love how “micro-aggression” is basically, “Act Just Like Me, only while-White”

      It is a uncomfortable truth that most people, when they encounter a mirror version of themselves, tend to recoil in disgust.

      Because we see our own behaviors and don’t want to reconcile why they’re somehow so unappealing in others…but yet not in ourselves. Or are they?

    4. Your latest primary partner posts all the appropriate anti-racist stuff, does tremendous amounts of social justice activism

      That is just a sign that I need to head for the hills.

  37. Note to Reason:

    If you post Buzzfeed links, I will not click on them, Sam I Am.

    1. What, Buzzfeed and Jezebel are NOT part of your daily reading? Inconceivable.

      I suspect Robby is taunting the people who accuse him of yearning to be published by these particular institutions

  38. THEY’RE GOING TO CIRCUMCISE THAT KID!

    More at 11.

  39. Regarding the affirmative consent laws, Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie gave a perfect example of where the laws will take you with their “Pre-coital Agreement” skit. Link: http://s1181.photobucket.com/u…..t.mp4.html

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.