Administration to Unilaterally Extend Overtime Pay, Senator Wants TSA Report Declassified, Political Shakeup in Turkey: P.M. Links

|

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

NEXT: A major victory for executive power at the Supreme Court

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. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I but really D-Vt.) took 41 percent in a Wisconsin straw poll, holding Hillary Clinton to 49 percent.

    Lack of options, Wisconsin?

    1. Hello.

      I like bananas but don’t like banana flavored candy.

      Why?

      1. What about banana milkshakes?

        1. Nope.

          Although I’m lactose (and progressive) intolerant.

          1. I prefer fake banana milkshakes to the real thing.

            1. I heard that your milkshakes bring all the boys to the yard. Is that true?

      2. Bananas do a poor job of imitating the flavour of banana candy, that’s why!

      3. I like bananas but not if they are overly ripe. Nice and yellow is fine, but once they start to get brown, no thank you. I think banana candy tastes more like brown bananas. Or nothing like bananas at all. I dunno, it’s been a while since I tried any.

        1. Banana candy has this taste that reminds me of yeasty booze. Particularly Korean ??? (makkoli).

          1. I get that banana flavor in certain Belgian farmhouse ales.

            1. That’s from the yeast, I’ll bet. There’s a duBoeuf strain that makes all their wines have that same aroma and flavor.

          2. Huh, I would have pegged you as a connoisseur of dongdongju, Jesse.

            My mother in law forced me to drink several big bowls of makkoli the time I broke out in hives after eating some bundaegi (grilled silk work larvae).

            1. I didn’t mind the taste of bundaegi, but the smell was too…earthy for my preference.

            2. He’s a connoisseur of dongdongju

        2. If you’re making ice cream with bananas, they have to be damn near rotten. Straight from the Ben and Jerry’s ice cream cookbook.

          1. Yes, that and banana bread. And put them in the freezer to make them easier to mash. Learned that from Alton Brown.

          2. Also banana bread. There should be more brown than yellow on the skin.

            1. Just how I like my women.

              *looks around*

              What?!

              1. I would hope so – but I imagine there’s an internet group for people who are into women suffering kidney failure.

      4. What about banana hammocks?

      5. Maybe it’s the shape of the banana you really like?

        /NTTAWWT

      6. Banana Runts are great. Do they still make those?

        1. Yes. I got them at a candy store in a terminal at SFO the other week.

          1. Got a cunning bunch of runts, did you?

            1. Ah, that reminds me. I need to respond to your email. I was without internet for the week.

      7. Because that’s what real men feel. (I agree) More seriously, the esthers that they use to make banana flavoring are simplified and concentrated in flavorings and overwhelm my taste buds.

        1. Do you prefer your banana flavoring made with Esther Williams, or Esther Rolle?

          1. Another valuable grammar and spelling contribution by Ted S

            1. Thank you for the hat-tip.

          2. Hey, Ted, does anal retentive get a hyphen?

            1. I wouldn’t know. I’m not anal retentive.

        2. My local gourmet grocery store sells 30 some odd Jelly Belly flavors individually. The esthers are really hit and miss. The really good ones: green apple, pomegranate, and pear. The others are meh, but I’d eat them if they were in front of me.

          1. meh c. esther

          2. You don’t need that many Jelly Belly flavors.

            1. At least 29 of those are taking food straight out of the mouths of orphans!

              1. I agree, the reckless ambition of 29 redundant flavors constitutes theft.. and sedition..

          3. “The really good ones: green apple, pomegranate, and pear.”

            They are neither Fair Trade, nor Cruelty Free… #GoBack2Monsanto Koch-sucker!

      8. I read that as banana flavored gravy. Because you’re Canadian.

        1. They got strange ideas about food in America’s Hat.

        2. I think some of you are mean just for the sake of it.

          /looks at Bobarian and Sudden.

          1. Psst – cast a much, much wider gaze.

      9. It’s probably due to the difference in taste between real bananas and artificial banana flavor.

        1. There’s always ‘yellow’ flavor:

          http://bit.ly/1KRkX6a

    2. Why bother with straw polls. Team Blue, the alleged party of the little guy, relies quite heavily on Super-Delegates to select the candidate.

      1. The teachers are going for Hillary! no matter what.
        Dem women are going Hillary! no matter what.
        Wall Street Dems are going Hillary! no mater what.
        The unions might split, but a plurality are going Hillary! no matter what.
        The Dem lobbyists, flacks, and hacks know which side their bread is buttered, and most will go Hillary! no matter what.

        That pretty well wraps up the super-delegates for Hillary!.

      1. “Reason.com, a leading libertarian website whose clever writing is eclipsed only by the blowhard stupidity of its commenting peanut gallery.”

        1. We certainly are blowhards. As for stupidity, well, Shriek and all his sockpuppets post here.

        2. I read that and was surprised to learn that Ken White is PB.

          1. Ken dislikes us in the same way Virginia Postrel dislikes us. He’s far too smart to be PB. Then again, Ralph Wiggum is far too smart to be PB.

            1. PB is one of Tulpa’s myriad socks.

              1. I repeat my statement.

            2. Funny you shout mention that, Andy. I was reading Ken’s article and was struck by the Postrel-like, bite-the-hand-that-feeds-you nature of the article. Yeah, some of those comments were over the top, though not anywhere close to actual, credible threats, methinks. Intimidation, anyone?

              Now, as far as Popehat goes, the commenters are generally favorable towards him and probably drive a measurable percentage of his traffic. You’re welcome, Ken. I also understand his frustration at the bad publicity, the substance of which will surely be spun out of all recognition. As we achieve a higher profile in public discourse, so will we be subject to greater scrutiny.

              1. bite-the-hand-that-feeds-you nature of the article tone of that sentence

        3. I was smart enough not to become a lawyer, Ken. Can you say the same?

          People who served as federal prosecutors should be careful where they aim those stones.

      2. That’s scary. I wonder how the comments even came to their attention? Did some busybody call it in, or did the NSA scoop them up? I wish that was a sarcastic question, but it is very serious.

        1. Save it for the DoJ Board of Inquiry, prisoner.

        2. Srsly, LP, you don’t think we are monitored by both our proggie enemies and by government? We are “”anti-government”” after all.

      3. Christ on a fucking crutch. This would be hilariously absurd if it wasn’t so utterly terrifying.

        But I guess that’s the point. Cunts.

      4. Well that’s sort of terrifying. Merely participating on a forum that is being scanned by federal predators is pretty damn dangerous. Who wants a tall glass of chilled speech?

        1. I always thought the NSA snooping and the tyranny of the government would affect other people. It’s crazy for something like to happen so close to home.

          Freedom is truly dead

          1. In the past when I bitch about the government, even still in my mind I’d draw a line around governments like Pinochet or some SE Asian dictatorship. I thought to myself, well the US isn’t that evil. I truly accept that I was wrong on that point.

            I’m fucking terrified of the US federal government. It’s a purpose built life destruction machine and it would enslave, kidnap or kill every one of us the moment such an action would be perceived of as legitimate. I really don’t think it will be long before any criticism of federales becomes verboten, either legally or through harassment by law enforcement agencies.

  2. The leaked report on the TSA’s inability to detect guns and bombs at airports really needs to be declassified so we can all admire the agency’s epic fail…

    But the terrorists will know we’re vulnerable!

  3. “By administrative rule”

    What is this? I’ve never heard of it before…

    1. Only progs can understand it.

    2. It’s also known as the FYTW Clause.

    3. “L’etat c’est moi, bitchez.” —The Sun King, Barack Obama.

    4. It’s something Democrats decry while Team Red is in charge but do it themselves when they’re in charge. You know, like everything else.

      1. More and more unilateral executive moves, less and less protest about it from the other branches. I’ve seen this movie and don’t like how it ends.

          1. Hindenburg.

              1. Sakrament des B?ffels.

          2. He was in one of the early remakes, yes.

  4. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration wants to stick a breathalyzer in everybody’s car. Yes, really.

    Next up: electric fence collar!

  5. The leaked report on the TSA’s inability to detect guns and bombs at airports really needs to be declassified so we can all admire the agency’s epic fail, says Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.).

    “Kochthugligans and sequester to blame.” -NYT

  6. The leaked report on the TSA’s inability to detect guns and bombs at airports really needs to be declassified so we can all admire the agency’s epic fail, says Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)

    Ben Sasse, be careful or you’re going to get tasered and cuffed next time you fly out of Washington DC.

    1. Silly you, Senators don’t fly commercial.

      1. Please… How else would they have a wide stance in MSP?

        1. I’m actually a little sad I didn’t track down the appropriate bathroom and take a selife when I was there recently.

          1. I visited the bathroom in 2007.

            1. Is there a plaque or something?

              I had no idea how the toe-tapping/wide-stance thing worked until I saw an x-tube video about it a few months ago. I was so confused by the news coverage.

  7. “The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration wants to stick a breathalyzer in everybody’s car. Yes, really.”

    I wonder if, after a night of brussels sprouts, I could shut the car down.

    1. Well, I figure I can drive a classic car everywhere for the rest of my life.

      1. Just try and find one after Cash for Clunkers … “Your Tax Dollars at Work!”

  8. The country is replacing explicit capital controls introduced after the 2008 crash with a 39 percent exit tax.

    But will their currency still be wool sweater based?

    1. It’ll be 3 Bjorks to the dollar.

      1. Bjorks give us many clues into Human Behavior.

      2. It’ll be 3 Bjorks to the dollar.

        If the currency drops low enough, you will see a new tourism revolving around an activity called “bjorking”. This activity will be similar to “borking”, but will be more physical in nature.

    2. The important question is “will they tank their economy and make it uber-cheap to visit?”

      1. I got my Greece vacation planned. I’m just waiting for them to go back on the Drachma!

        1. Good thinking. Wonder what it’d cost to rent an apartment over there?

          1. I’m assuming the black market will operate in dollars. Or ouzo. Either way it’s a win.

        2. If anywhere interesting’s economy collapses before I get my savings back up to international travel levels I will be quite cross.

          I wonder if there’s a disaster tourism forum someplace. Maybe a travel agency or something.

          1. You better work on that savings quickly. Spain is gonna be accelerating towards fiscal armageddon in a matter of days.

            1. I dunno, I’m kind of intimidated by how attractive Spaniards are. If there economy collapses I’ll put a moratorium on my spending moratorium. It would be incredibly lame of me to not even try.

          2. I thought you were running a disaster tourism forum. Here.

            1. I go to ONE tropical paradise during a cyclone…

      2. A lot of Icelanders don’t want more tourism. The place has become popular enough since the 2008 crisis that the natives think it’s getting overrun.

        1. Except tourism is the vast majority of their business. I didn’t notice any of the proprietors of the stores and restaurants on Laugavegur having a problem with it last time I was there (which was last year).

          1. My understanding is that the people making money directly off of tourism obviously want more; the others are more uncertain. Who wants to live in a tourist trap?

            1. Anyone who decides to live in downtown Reykjavik?

          2. Oh… That’s about the time they started introducing legislation regarding the worship of Elves, isn’t it?

            Tell me, Epi, are you a big man – roomy?

            Or are you a slender androgynous type of fellow with slightly pointed ears?

            Do you play ping pong in Seattle parks?

            /asking to further common knowledge

            1. To put it simply, Chuck: I smell terrific.

      3. Nah, the uber ride there will still cost a goddamned fortune.

      4. Jesse just wants to hunt for and bag Haf??r J?l?us Bj?rnsson.

        1. Yeah, Jesse. Uh, “Jesse” does. Yeah. Yeah, that’s the ticket.

          1. Whatever, dude. I’ll let you cuddle with him occasionally.

            1. I think there is enough of him to go around.

            2. YOU WILL LET ME HAVE HIM WHENEVER I WANT

              1. Let?

                When did this new affirmative consent Warty emerge? There is no surer sign of the end times.

                1. I don’t think “affirmative consent” means jesse consents to Warty man-loving a third party. At least, not usually.

              2. I was going to say “you’re going to have to wrestle my champion, Haf??r if you want him” but then realized it amounts to the same thing.

                1. No one puts Haf??r in a headlock!

                  1. According to H&R lore, you’d try, “Iron Jaw” Nikki.

                2. Fear not Jesse, I’ll go Oberyn Martell on Warty to defend the chastity of the Mountain/Mounting

                3. Fear not Jesse, I’ll go Oberyn Martell on Warty to defend the chastity of the Mountain/Mounting

                  1. Warty and I are just negotiating here. By the end of the thread there’ll be a Jesse/Haf??r/Warty threeway and everyone will feel like a winner, except maybe Haf??r, but you know those Europeans, they’re up for watever.

                    Related: Why We’re Suspending the “Run Warren Run” Campaign

                    1. Related: Why We’re Suspending the “Run Warren Run” Campaign

                      Two things: I still remain convinced that Lizzie enters eventually. No one wants Clinton and no democrat wants a cishetero white man. Also, I may be moving soon and per the details of the wager, relocation nullifies the original terms.

                    2. I’ll have to pull my copy from the safe. Was this part of subsection B?

    3. Um, their currency is rotten-fish-based. Read some L?xness, dude.

      1. I don’t speak Hopelandic.

        1. This is why there are no Icelandic libertarians.

      2. Enjoyed Paradise Reclaimed have Independent People on the “to read” list.

        1. Independent People is a hell of a book. Damn.

    4. I’m reminded of a chapter of the “Hitchhikers Guide” in which a planet is described that requires you to get receipt for each of your, um, “bathroom trips”. If your mass upon arriving is greater that when leaving, they extract the appropriate “pounds of flesh”.

      Do I get the point?

    5. Will global warming force Iceland to change its name?

      1. We already have a Greenland.

      2. I would consider investing in real estate in a place called Slushland.

  9. Get your money out of Iceland while you can! The country is replacing explicit capital controls introduced after the 2008 crash with a 39 percent exit tax. How many gold coins can you stuff into your shoes?

    Iceland is a whole lot dumber than I thought it was.

  10. The technology includes a steering wheel-mounted breathalyser and an engine start button that detects blood alcohol level via an infrared light. If the system detects the driver is over the limit it will refuse to start the car.

    What could *possibly* go wrong?

    1. Nothing, if you’re an authoritarian.

    2. If it saves just one child’s life….

    3. They’ve left out position-change monitoring of the driver. This is all for naught.

      1. That is deliberate, otherwise they would lose their rationalization for DUI checkpoints.

    4. It’s a regulation that can finally bring the cab companies and Uber together.

    5. the “limit” is what is important. The morning after you have a few drinks is a common time for a fail reading, which would not allow you to start the car.

    6. I certainly hope this comes to pass. I’ll already be marketing a $29.95 device which will allow anyone to defeat it.

      Rent Seeking FTW!

    7. Think of it as job creation for all those innovators who will manufacture co2-puffing devices.

  11. By administrative rule, the Obama administration plans to double the salary threshold, from $23,660 to as much as $52,000, below which workers must be paid overtime. That should get business expansion going, right?

    I give up. I’m finally convinced that Team Blue absolutely wants the economy to fail, and fail hard, so they can get their socialist wet dreams enacted.

    1. I posted that overtime salary story in the links nearly a month ago by the way. I kind of feel like I should get a hat tip.

    2. If Obama isn’t going to have a positive legacy from passing Obamacare, maybe he’s decided to have the most negative possible legacy instead? Infamy instead of fame? Because he seems absolutely dedicated to fucking the economy as hard as he possibly can. Maybe the economy hurt him terribly years ago?

      “You think I suck? Oh yeah? Well, I’m going to suck so hard I’m going to make Jimmy Carter look like Grover Cleveland in comparison! Take that!”

      1. That’s kind of what happened to Hilter according to Albert Speer.

        Speer wrote that once Hitler realized the war was lost, he wanted to make Germans suffer in fire for having failed him and themselves.

        1. I could easily see that level of megalomania from Obama. Easily. Because at the end of the day, it’s always about him.

      2. One small hole in that argument though (I think). He keeps telling everyone how great the economy is and how he saved it. So why does he want to kill it?

        Obama is really making me thirsty.

        1. Didn’t see the game; apart from the result, was it a good game?

          1. Couldn’t have been any less competitive than the Germany game.

          2. You talking about the Champions League?

            Yeah, it was a good game. Juve put up a good fight and were somewhat unlucky on two calls but all in all Barcelona were deserved champions.

            1. Thanks.

  12. Directive 11: Obama’s secret Islamist plan.

    Behind the rise of ISIS, the Libyan Civil War, the unrest in Egypt, Yemen and across the region may be a single classified document.

    That document is Presidential Study Directive 11.

    You can download Presidential Study Directive 10 on “Preventing Mass Atrocities” from the White House website, but as of yet no one has been able to properly pry number 11 out of Obama Inc…

    What little we know about the resulting classified 18-page report is that it used euphemisms to call for aiding Islamist takeovers in parts of the Middle East. Four countries were targeted. Of those four, we only know for certain that Egypt and Yemen were on the list. But we do know for certain the outcome…

    According to a New York Times story, Obama’s Directive 11 agenda appeared to resemble Che or Castro as he “pressed his advisers to study popular uprisings in Latin America, Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia to determine which ones worked and which did not.”

    The story also noted that he “is drawn to Indonesia, where he spent several years as a child, which ousted its longtime leader, Suharto, in 1998.”

  13. Gun Story #2 – read this, go home, clean your gun, and check your ammo stockpile.

    Bernie Sanders is right: It’s time for democratic socialism

    Thus, democratic socialism would fully abolish the signature feature of all labor markets: the coercion of labor through the threat of starvation.

    LOL. Democratic socialism replaces “No work, no food” to “No work, yes food”.

    Nations like Denmark have a lower per-capita GDP than the U.S. due to a collective choice to work less.

    78 Danish cents to the 1 US Dollar! Discrimination!

    This is not as extreme as it sounds. You’ll still be able to own a computer, clothes, and a home under democratic socialism. But private property that is plainly negative to society, such as extraction rights in buried carbon, will have to be eventually extinguished if the human race is going to survive. The point is that common human welfare is more important than an absolute right to ownership.

    I’m sure he snickered and thought of guns, but left it out while typing this derp.

    1. private property that is plainly negative to society

      Like your fugly eyeglasses, Senator?

    2. “No work, no food” to “No work, yes food”.

      Nope, they replace it with “yes work, no food”.

    3. Will this be National Democratic Socialism?

    4. I’m confused. Why wouldn’t they just call it “national socialism”?

    5. It always pleases me to imagine people like the author of that piece ending up like NKVD chiefs Nikoli Yezhov and Lavrentiy Beria: betrayed by their own cult leaders and literally dragged kicking and wailing to the courtyard to receive a bullet behind the ear.

      If things have to go to shit like that at least the architects will be destroyed along with it.

    6. Property rights would be subordinated to the general welfare of the polity, as just one concern among many. Those that do not harm society can stay, while those that do will be curtailed or abolished.

      Who decides what property rights harm society? (rhetorical…)

      1. Fuck the polity. And fuck this twat.

    7. The point is that common human welfare is more important than an absolute right to ownership.

      Oh, FFS. You can’t have common human welfare without right to ownership!

    8. You’ll still be able to own a computer, clothes, and a home under democratic socialism.

      Whew! Thanks, master!

    9. Holy shit:

      “Without the threat of penury and starvation, why would anyone spend their working lives in a capitalist’s factory or coal mine?”

      Great plan! Let’s make it so no one ever mines coal or works in a factory. I can see this having no negative consequences.

      1. Also, he actually quotes Jacobin magazine at the end of the article.

        Fucking Jacobin. This guy is an actual commie.

    10. I’m sure he snickered and thought of guns

      He’s actually better than 99% of Dems on 2A stuff.

      1. I was actually talking about the author, not the New Democrat Messiah.

    11. The point is that common human welfare is more important than an absolute right to ownership.

      It’s been remarked on before how Marx intended for the state to replace religion as the core social component that bound communities together. This is just another example of how socialists/Marxists equate government with religion without an ounce of understanding as to the proper function of either in high-trust communities. It’s not an accident that Bernie’s sounding like a horrifying mishmash of secular Marxist and tent revival preacher.

  14. When there’s somethin’ dumb…in your neighborhood
    Who ya gonna call?
    DERPBUSTERS!

    More gems from rationalwiki

    On Reason magazine:

    The comments section on Reason’s “Hit and Run” rivals Yahoo! News for being the worst hive of scum and villiany on the Internet, and provides plenty of evidence to conclude that Web 2.0 with its “anyone can comment on anything” model perhaps isn’t such a good idea.

    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Reason

    1. I’ll take that as a compliment.

    2. That’s all lone wacko.

    3. Ah, Rational Wiki. At least their page on Jack Chick is funny. Introduced me to a great Cthulhu parody of his work. But man, is there a lot of derp there.

    4. Well done, people. rationalwiki is part of the Ph*ryngula collective, right?

    5. The HnR comments section is just about the only one I can tolerate.

    6. From a wiki? They think feel they have the moral high ground???

    7. the worst hive of scum and villiany on the Internet

      H&R! H&R! H&R!

    8. Got a chance to read that.

      I for one feel…honored.

  15. …the Obama administration plans to double the salary threshold, from $23,660 to as much as $52,000, below which workers must be paid overtime.

    Unions must be exempt, as they have the unique ability to negotiate contracts that benefit both parties.

  16. By administrative rule, the Obama administration plans to double the salary threshold, from $23,660 to as much as $52,000

    Where does this even come from? Do they just get a bunch of people sitting around in a big circle and ask “So, what do we feel like sticking our fingers in this week? I think it’s Frank’s turn to decide…”?

    1. “My isiot brother-in-law makes $48000 a year and had to work 42 hours one week and didn’t get OT! Can you believe it?!

      1. Wait, will the internet sites that you can get $76 an hour by working only a few hours of week and my payzcheck last week was $4,000 have to start paying OT?

    2. They’re channelling Herbert Hoover.

  17. Turkey’s authoritarian president received a whack to the noggin when voters stripped his Justice and Development Party of its parliamentary majority.

    Why do Turks hate Justice?

    Why do Turks hate Development?

  18. “By administrative rule, the Obama administration plans to double the salary threshold, from $23,660 to as much as $52,000, below which workers must be paid overtime. That should get business expansion going, right?”

    Business expansion is not something they understand practically or in the abstract (e.g. conditions necessary for a decision to expand). All they understand is a means to an end; a zero sum calculation whereby they ‘see’ their income/salary increase but completely blind or oblivious to what can happen around it (e.g. less hours, no expansion etc.).

    Business expansion is something that just magically happens no matter how much burden they put on it via ‘administrative’ policies.

    In other words, they’re a bunch of pseudo-commies.

    1. They’re working hard to drop the “pseudo”

  19. Commonly used and unregulated internet discussions and videos about guns and ammo could be closed down under rules proposed by the State Department

    State is demanding that anyone who puts technical details about arms and ammo on the web first get the OK from the federal government ? or face a fine of up to $1 million and 20 years in jail

    Well, if you can’t ban guns, ban talking about ’em.

    1. You can talk about them. Just not to dirty foreigners.

      1. Oh thanks, Nikki! We really needed someone to tell us what Tulpa would say on this topic!

      2. Does that mean we’re going to have to kick out Rufus?

      3. Does that mean we’re going to have to kick out Rufus?

        1. Or at least the dirty squirrels?

        2. Canadians are not real foreigners.

          1. Rufus certainly is dirty, though.

            1. If you mean dirty in my mind, then guilty as charged!

              That’s right Tonio, we’re fake foreigners!

    2. I though DD already won this fight.

      1. Brand new rule allegedly about “export.”

        1. Oh wait, my bad, it’s not a new rule. No, no, they’re just clarifying the old rule. To mean…what it always meant…

          1. huh. I could swear the courst told State they had no leg to stand on.

            1. Well that’s why you clarify the rule…

    3. What about discussions of the technical aspects of guns that the State Dept sold to Syrian rebels that wound up in the hands of ISIS?

  20. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration wants to stick a breathalyzer in everybody’s car.

    Secret Service agents hardest hit.

    1. I had one in my vehicle for three years.

      I almost went to jail because the windshield wiper fluid set it off.

      I think it is a wonderful idea.

      1. Why were you drinking windshield wiper fluid?

        1. Because it’s sterile, and he likes the taste!

          1. Thank you, it is much like urine in a way.

        2. Because the fluid in the windshield washer reservoir was vodka.

  21. Prime Minister Stephen Harper agrees to G7 ‘decarbonization’ by 2100

    Prime Minister Stephen Harper has agreed to a G7 commitment to deep cuts in carbon emissions by 2050 ? with an eventual stop in the use of fossil fuels by the end of the century.

    Good luck with that.

    1. 2100?

      In other words, Harper kicked the can really hard down the road.

    2. I like Harper better when he is a denier pissing off progs.

    3. What could possibly go wrong? It would be like someone in 1930 dictating how things should be done today.

    4. So we’ll all become silicon-based life forms?

    5. Carbon DIOXIDE, mother fuckers.

  22. OT: Group of homeowners decry ‘eastern bloc’ style housing, demand everyone build houses based on a ‘character’ that THEY want to impose.

    Irony of ‘Stalinism’ utterly lost.

    But more than one person who slammed the legislation, claiming it wouldn’t do enough to halt out-of-character development, said the council will determine whether Seattle remains a garden city or acquires a bland, Stalinist cityscape.

    “Stop this city from looking like an Eastern Bloc city,” said Imogen Love, of Ballard.

    http://www.seattletimes.com/se…..cityscape/

    1. I think the “garden city” is going the way of the dodo considering that every fucking empty lot or fallow plot in the city (at least in downtown, SLU, Belltown, Queen Anne, Capitol Hill, and First Hill) is being turned into a highrise because of our insane construction boom right now.

      Hey, cities change. Can you believe that?

    2. Councilmembers Kshama Sawant and Nick Licata, who dropped in on the committee for the hearing, also expressed support,

      *snickers*

      1. Sawant (socialist) and Licata (fabianist) want to see more Social Realist art around the city.

  23. Obama: ‘We don’t yet have a complete strategy’ against ISIS

    WARNING: Audio auto start

    Obama said the Pentagon has yet to submit a “finalized” plan “because it requires commitments on the part of the Iraqis as well about how recruitment takes place, how that training takes place. The details of that are not yet worked out.”

    No plan survives contact with the enemy, Mr. President.

    1. Complete strategy?

      Did he have a strategy to begin with?

      An unnecessary adjective once removed that shows the truth.

      1. “Then, we’re going to *lock and load*.”

    2. Wow. Wow. Wow. And since the DOJ is apparently monitoring us (yoo-hoo I’m Canadian you can’t touch me!) all I will say is this is one ‘special’ President you got there.

  24. Mental giants at work!

    Typically libertarians argue that people should be free to do whatever they like as long as it doesn’t hurt others. While this idea may seem very simple at first glance, the problem is that what “hurts” people and what doesn’t is very nuanced. For instance, it is common for libertarians to oppose laws which reduce air pollution even though the latter can have a severe impact on the health of others, even if it is assumed that global warming is a gummint conspiracy to justify raising our taxes; more so than many direct acts of violence. It is also common for them to oppose laws mandating car drivers to wear seatbelts, even though seeing a person die as the result of not wearing one can have a major psychological effect on onlookers. Similarly, they may oppose anti-smoking campaigns as an unwarranted intrusion on personal liberty, while ignoring the financial burden imposed by smoking-related illnesses on both private insurance and taxpayer-funded health care.

    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Libertarian#Simple.3F

    1. even though seeing a person die as the result of not wearing one can have a major psychological effect on onlookers

      This is one of my favorite statist arguments of all time.

      1. This is why a society of wusses is so dangerous.

      2. For instance, it is common for libertarians to oppose laws which reduce air pollution even though the latter can have a severe impact on the health of others, even if it is assumed that global warming is a gummint conspiracy to justify raising our taxes…

        Hmm… I seem to recall a scholar who had something to say on situations like air pollution. Richard Coats? Randall Cutts? Nevermind, I must be mistaken, there aren’t any libertarian theories on how to deal with air pollution. If we had our way, every city would be like Shanghai.

        1. crap, this was supposed to go under the Derpmeister’s post.

          But I like your post, too, Nikki.

      3. Oh my god, those poor mental children.

      4. It is truly a wonder to behold. There’s got to be a name for it. The PTSD Externality Effect?

        1. I call it “the dad argument” because my dad makes it. That probably wouldn’t work as well for others.

      5. Some people have a negative psychological effect when they see a transsexual. Clearly we should make it illegal for transsexuals to be out of the closet based on their potential to upset people.

        1. Externalities are magical that way.

        2. What about people who are the worst? They have a tremendous negative psychological effect.

      6. This is the first time I’ve ever seen such an argument. That’s a very special kind of idiocy.

    2. Why do you hate yourself so?

      (their article on Cato is equally as horrible)

    3. For instance, it is common for libertarians to oppose laws which reduce air pollution even though the latter can have a severe impact on the health of others

      I’m not sure that is true.

      1. Are you calling *rationalwiki* a LIAR?!

        1. Liar, irredeemably stupid…take your pick.

    4. Again, let us point out that Ayn Rand gave herself lung cancer and then took Medicare payments without blinking an eye. (footnote)

      If The Onion was ever to make a wiki site…

  25. Important follow-up to a weekend story (from Irish? maybe Serious? sorry bros):

    I wonder at some assumptions that you seem to make; I question the degree to which you elevate your race and gender as if they are the most salient features of your artistic identity; and I do not see any reason to think that your poems will cause anyone to pay less attention to verse written by poets with different racial or gender identities.

    1. I would love to ask that guy why he doesn’t just kill himself. As long as he lives he is taking a job and wealth from the higher gender and races. And if he kills himself, there is no danger of him changing his mind and writing more poetry and taking up space from them. If he killed himself he would no longer be a problem.

      1. I guess you have to figure out the perfect balancing act of getting a job that is good enough for you to be a net taxpayer, thus subsidizing folks via the state, but bad enough that you don’t feel like you’re taking their jobs. Sounds like a challenge.

        1. Ooh, ooh! Run for public office!

    2. I for one am glad that someone is finally taking on white male poets.

      1. I believe playa posted this a few months ago, but these…poets…are not much better.

        1. Am I the only one thinking “Nice rack” about the one in the flower dress?

          And, “selling OUR bodies”??? I don’t recall Anheuser-Busch putting you in any ads..

          1. Since these threads are being watched you are probably going to have to testify in court about whether or not you really thought she had a nice rack.

            And no, you are not the only one thinking that.

            1. “Do you swear or affirm that the testimony-”
              “I’m sorry-“firm” what?”

        2. You’d think a poet in the comments would, um, have a better way to phrase this than they way they did:

          Thank you all! On behalf of all four of us, our poetry coach, and our one additional MALE MEMBER, we are overwhelmingly happy with the response to this piece. Thank you thank you for the support!

          1. our one additional MALE MEMBER

            So, that’s how they roll? They limit themselves to one dick? Is this a time-share deal, or something along those lines?

        3. Pul off the visard that Poets maske in, you shall disclose their reproch, bewray their vanitie, loth their wantonnesse, lament their follie, and perceiue their sharpe sayings to be placed as Pearles in Dunghils, fresh pictures on rotten walles, chaste Matrons apparel on common Curtesans…

          Poetrie and pyping, haue allwaies bene so vnited togither, that til the time of Melanippides were Poets hyerlings. But marke I pray you, how they are now both abused… We haue infinite Poets, and Pipers, and suche peeuish cattel among vs in Englande, that liue by merrie begging, mainteyned by almes, and priuily encroch vppon euerie mans purse.

    3. Wasn’t me and from the read of it, thank God I didn’t sully my weekend with it.

    4. The rap bit at the end is too tortured, though. I think that was meant to tell us more about the author than the topic. Maybe I just missed the point.

      1. I disagree; I think it’s a great point. Anyone who thinks there aren’t a lot of black voice in contemporary poetry is insanely wrong. If anyone is marginalized in that cultural sphere, it’s white dudes.

        1. I see. I guess that makes sense. I’ve never considered rap to be poetry, or rock ‘n roll for that matter, but it’s probably a form thing.

    5. That was me. Also, I’d love for this ‘White male poet’ to tell me of anything he’s ever actually written. I have a sneaking suspicion he’s published maybe 3 poems of low quality in shitty poetry journals and calls himself a poet largely out of an inflated sense of ego.

      1. What group would he be signaling? I can’t think of anyone who would be impressed by someone who refers to himself as a poet. What’s the threshold at which you can define yourself by your activity, anyway? I usually stop at occupation; anything else remains a verb.

        1. “What group would he be signaling?”

          Seriously? You can’t imagine some hipster neckbeard gazing up at some cute barista from beneath his hornrimmed glasses and saying “I’m sorry. I can’t talk now. I’m composing my poetry” before assuring himself that she was totally impressed by his devotion to his art?

          1. Irish, are you sure you should be revealing your secrets to seduction like that?

  26. “Sen. Bernie Sanders (I but really D-Vt.) took 41 percent in a Wisconsin straw poll, holding Hillary Clinton to 49 percent.”

    There are people who interpret this as signs of “strength in diversity”.

    I fully encourage them.

  27. And finally, what does rationalwiki think of John Stossel?

    If you can believe it, Stossel was actually once an upstanding advocacy journalist in his early career on 20/20, exposing corruption and fraud in both the public and private sectors. In 1998, Stossel also hosted a prime time special, The Power of Belief, challenging quack, New Age, and supernatural claims. That special also featured interviews with magician-turned-skeptic James Randi.[4] Since his conversion to libertarianism, however, he mostly deals in Reaganism, global warming denialism, and general fact distortion.[5] Unfortunately, due to his frequent criticism of various forms of woo, he has suckered other skeptics into appearing with him to promote his laissez-faire bullshit and denialism.

    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/J…..ite_note-5

    1. Yes, that scares them. Good.

      1. Rationalwiki is not so rational.

    2. Stossel was actually once an upstanding advocacy journalist in his early career on 20/20, exposing corruption and fraud in both the public and private sectors. In 1998, Stossel also hosted a prime time special, The Power of Belief, challenging quack, New Age, and supernatural claims.

      He’s still doing that.

    3. So, John Stossel (1998): “I’m skeptical” = good, but, John Stossel (2015): “I’m skeptical” = bad?

      Make up your minds, assholes!!

      1. “Skeptical” when agreeing with us on everything = good
        “Skeptical” when not agreeing with us on everything = bad

        1. “Well, he’s certainly not a principal!”

    4. Rationalwiki is full of expressions like “Buttload” and adjectives like “bullshit”

      It doesn’t seem like the writings of “Rational” people so much as pretentious college kids.

      i.e. being biased is one thing, but being unprofessionally biased is just sloppy

      1. Reality-based rationality!

      2. being unprofessionally biased is just sloppy

        Hey, now-the “Smartest Guys In The Room” don’t have to apologize! Not to you, or anyone else!!

      3. Rationalwiki is full of expressions like “Buttload” and adjectives like “bullshit”

        Well, so is Nick’s.

      4. Hipster think they’re soooo rational. I mean, like, they roll their eyes when they debate and such like the I-raq.

    5. They should rename their site to emotionalwiki

    6. Reaganism. That’s even better than denialism.

  28. “Get your money out of Iceland while you can!”

    Haven’t capital controls been proven again and again to simply accelerate capital flight?

    Where or when has it ever worked? because there are still always legal ways to liquidate your domestic assets and buy things elsewhere.

    1. How do you say “Hawala” in Icelandic?

      1. hawala

        true story =

        I have previously recounted my epic tale of being laid-over in iceland on their national holiday, “Beer Day”.

        When we wandered into the first bar, and had no idea why the entire country was drunk, we were given a brief explanatory lecture by 2 huge blonde guys as they shoved the first of 100 beers into our hands.

        These 2 guys also became our impromptu tour guides, who proceeded to drag us from one location to another over the course of the next 16 hours, getting increasingly, dangerously intoxicated.

        I asked the guy’s names at the beginning, and it sounded something like the Swedish-Chef, “hergleburglederglesheefeendeefeen”. I asked if there was an English translation, and the guy pondered, “Yes. ‘Weapon of God‘” So i called him “Lethal Weapon”. His buddy was just called Karl, or something. The evening ended* when I passed out on stage while performing “Hound Dog” with a country-music band.

        (*for me)

        1. LOL. That was really funny.

          Lethal Weapon is a really funny nickname.

  29. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration wants to stick a breathalyzer in everybody’s car. Yes, really.

    But the slippery slope argument is a fallacy.

    1. But they say they want it to be an OPTION! It’s totally not going to become mandatory!

      1. Pilot-test it in NHTSA vehicles.

      2. And it would never keep records that would later be accessed by the cops. Never. The NTSA respects your privacy too much for that to happen.

      3. Why would anyone actually opt in to that?

        1. Two reasons. People will do it on cars they buy for their teenagers and the insurance companies will no doubt charge the living shit out of you if you don’t do it.

    2. Why not just stream all sorts of data straight to the NSA and law enforcement? Location, mental and physical state, anything said in the vehicle, etc.

      1. They already have that. They want to extend it to your breath.

          1. Do I really have to answer this one?

          2. Well, chopped and digested liver, sometimes, yes.

        1. Why not sample DNA while they at it?

          1. *taking notes*

            I’ll send this up the flagpole at the next meeting!

            There are no wrong answers here, Pro L.

          2. Hey, my apartment complex recently started a DNA testing program for dog poop. Don’t joke about that shit.

          3. “You’ll feel a prick.”

            1. What is “Least favorite line to hear in Warty’s dungeon”?

  30. So how does affirmative consent affect art (and no, I’m not talking about Sulkowicz)?

    The period I study, modernism, is flush with women characters who complicate the “no means no” approach to defining sexual violence. For example, Anna in Jean Rhys’s Voyage in the Dark naively enters into a relationship with an older man; after having a falling out with him and losing her job, she meets another man ostensibly to do his nails. When he confesses, “Oh, don’t worry about the manicure [?] I only wanted to talk to you,” she does not protest. Saying no would not change the situation, so she limits her participation in the discussion: “When he touched me I knew that he was quite sure I would. I thought, ‘All right then, I will.'” Is this Anna’s “folly,” to use Eliot’s language, or is this rape? And why was this never asked in a graduate seminar?

    1. why was this never asked in a graduate seminar?

      Indeed, isn’t that very question a form of rape?

    2. complicate the “no means no” approach to defining sexual violence

      Gosh, maybe sexual situations are just a little more nuanced than the narrative allows?

    3. No one is mentioning, mostly because journalists don’t know enough to understand what is going on, that affirmative consent turns rape into a general intent crime. Traditionally, rape is a specific intent crime. That means the person has to intend to rape and mistake of fact regarding consent was a defense. After consent does away with all of that. With affirmative consent, two people can be going at it and the woman suddenly decide she doesn’t want to do it but not say anything and just lay there and if the guy goes ahead and has sex with her he is guilty of rape. You can be guilty of rape even though you reasonably thought the person was consenting.

      1. So you’re saying the affirmative consent standard is necessary to bring rape in line with the rest of the contemporary mens-rea-free legal climate?

        1. I suppose you could say that. But it makes up for it by effectively ending the right to demand proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Again, these issues are just technical enough that journalists are not bright enough to understand them. So it never gets explained to the public.

    4. ‘All right then, I will.'” Is this Anna’s “folly,” to use Eliot’s language, or is this rape? And why was this never asked in a graduate seminar?

      Uhhhhhhh.

  31. Um, guys? According to Popehat… we’re being watched here in the comments.

    1. Nothing to hide, eggs, omelets, etc.

    2. Hmm. It appears I won’t be eligible for the inevitable taxpayer funded settlement. 🙁

    3. Did he call us blowhards?

      US?!

      1. Just the stupid blowhards.

      2. Not just us, but you Rufus… you.

        1. /takes Super Man stance.

    4. “DOJ is targeting Reason.com, a leading libertarian website whose clever writing is eclipsed only by the blowhard stupidity of its commenting peanut gallery.

      Why are the government using its vast power to identify these obnoxious asshats, and not the other tens of thousands who plague the internet?”

      I like to think its my good-looks.

      1. I think they really come for the recipes.

      2. “Why are the government using its vast power to identify these obnoxious asshats, and not the other tens of thousands who plague the internet?”

        Because the thing petty tyrants hate the most is being mocked.

        And “obnoxious asshats”?!

        I RESEMBLE THAT REMARK!

        1. “Obnoxious asshat” would make an excellent handle.

      3. Ken White, whoever he is, is an idiot.

        1. Ken White is a national treasure, despite his distaste for us. He might be the best advocate for first amendment absolutism anywhere.

          And the @Popehat twitter account is always great.

        2. You’re kidding, right?

          1. Was he kidding when he said everyone who posts on here is an idiot?

        3. Take heart, John, he may not have been talking about YOU. I know he wasn’t talking about me.

          *looks around nervously*

          right? Right guys?

          1. Of course he was talking about me. The entire universe does revolve around me doesn’t it?

            1. More likely everybody knows what an idiot you are? :-p

              /sarcasm

        4. Ken White is awesome and you should bite your tongue and apologize.

          1. I won’t. He writes some decent things. But if he thinks Reason’s articles are that cleverly written and really has that low of an opinion of the people who comment here, he is not that bright. I am sorry he is just not.

            I am not as easily impressed as you people are.

            1. Yea, the comments are far better than the blog posts.

            2. I kinda agree with John.

              The thing about this place is the comments are wildly varied and nuanced going from utter idiocy to sublime intelligence. It’s what makes us the superior commenting race. The sheer collection of personalities and experiences is nothing like I’ve seen anywhere.

              If he can’t see that – assuming he only glosses over it with an elitist eye – then screw him with the Pope’s Hat.

              1. Like I said, assuming he’s serious.

              2. The thing about this place is the comments are wildly varied and nuanced going from utter idiocy to sublime intelligence. It’s what makes us the superior commenting race.

                Agree with this assessment. There’s nothing worse than a stuffy, staid commenting forum where everyone comes off sounding like an overeducated fop.

                I’d rather be in a place where the comments run the full gamut as opposed to the filtered, selected and heavily moderated fare.

            3. What do you mean “you people”?

            4. The articles are nice.

              The comments (and the commenters) are what makes me come back.

              1. Which one of us do you secretly have a major crush on Riven?

                1. Gasp! They’ve found me out!

                  If I had a crush, it wouldn’t be secret–I can promise you that. I’m notoriously a spastic flirt when I actually have skin in the game.

                2. I have to confess….

              2. I read come to Reason for the pictures.

                1. GILMORE = “I came to Reason for the waters”
                  Claude Raines = “The Waters?! GILMORE, Reason is in the desert!”
                  GILMORE = “I was misinformed”

        5. I suspect his vehement denunciations of the commentariat here are partly tongue-in-cheek (and partly true! we should be proud)

          unlike, say, Robby Soave’s denunciation of speech he opposes that is clearly NOT OKAY, …Ken @ popehat regularly goes to the mat in defense of free speech.

          I think in the context of the piece, you get a better feel for the satirical tone

          “If, like most of us, you’re a lawyer with lawyer-friends and “a swarm of asshole lawbloggers” (Yes, I have such a swarm, and I’m KING BEE!) willing to stand at your back to defend your right to use silly hyperbole in criticizing government officials, it probably doesn’t matter at all.

          Or maybe you’re nice people. You use the internet to check email, which allows you to serve customers in a better fashion. You never comment on matters of public concern. Your email signature reads:

          HAVE A BLESSED DAY!

          But some of you aren’t. You may have opinions, even strong opinions, but you’re lower forms of life, maggots, pukes, nothing but grabasstic pieces of amphibian shit.”

          Or, maybe he actually thinks H&R is full of mouthbreating TEAM RED Kulturwarriors who want to jump in their pickup trucks and save REAL AMERICA from faggy book lurnin’ types like him.

          Either interpretation is possible

          1. I am betting on t he latter.

            1. Based on a longer track record than that one post, I’m betting on the former.

              1. Note that PopeHat moderates its comments.

                Their comment base is a cesspool too, they just get deleted.

    5. L?se-majest?- not just for oriental monarchs anymore!

        1. Treason Magazine !

          1. Drink! (hemlock)

    6. Huh, and the thread in question has been locked down. Too bad for the DOJ. The rudest comment about the judge was made by a Canadian.

    7. At least they’re trying to get a subpoena and not just using the NSA.

      1. At least they’re trying to get a subpoena and not just in additional to using the NSA

        FIFY

    8. Well that’s unsettling

    9. Yeah, I’d really like to know how that threat came to their attention….

      1. Meant to say thread, not threat.

        1. “Ah-HA!!”

      2. More to the point, did Bo call it in or did it, did it get flagged by some bot or NSA program, or are there people getting paid to just monitor sites like this for thoughtcrime?

        1. people getting paid to just monitor sites like this for thoughtcrime?

          That’s just crazy talk. They monitor sites like this for human trafficking.

          1. Warty, that florist van that’s been across the street for the last six months may indeed be based on our entirely fictional accounts of your proclivities. Sorry, buddy!

            1. There was a fed ex van across the street from my house every night for a few months. Funny how in this day and age, that kind of thing actually makes you nervous.

      3. crazy mary is still out there.

        i would not put “swatting” past her.

        she’s fucking obsessed.

        1. I forgot about Mary. Yeah, that wouldn’t surprise me whatsoever.

        2. Wow, she is a one-person (physically, at least) echo chamber of hate.

      4. It honestly would not shock me if PB/Tulpa/Bo/etc. did it.

        (the above is not to start a witch hunt. But assuming we’re not being watched in an NSA style, somebody has to have called this to their attention. We’re not THAT popular.)

        1. I can’t remember what thread it was, and don’t have time right now to search, but hilariously enough, Tulpa once spent an entire thread, after he was told to go kill himself for being such a sockpuppeting loser, trying to insinuate that he could bring “the authorities” in over being told to go kill himself. I’m not joking. He really did that. In between whining about it.

          So, just some info for your speculations.

          1. It is Tulpa’s world. We just live in it.

            1. The only power that fucking idiot has is over the poor freshmen who are too stupid to realize what an asshole he is and drop his Calc 1 class. Fuck him.

              1. Is he really a college professor? That’s…sad.

      5. Me too. I’m guessing (hoping) that an angry, spurned commenter (tulpa/bo/mary stack) tipped them off.

        The only other alternative is that yes, in fact the administration is so afraid of us that we are on a watch list.

        1. Someone tipped them off. Likely one of the crazy stalkers.

        2. It’s worth noting that we’ve seen our share of obvious agents provocateur here over the years. “Let’s all talk about our plans to kill the police!” and so forth.

    10. Is it the position of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York that a reasonable reader would conclude that “Rhywun” is in league with the Dark Ones,

      Rhywun is in league with the Dark Ones.

      1. That’s racist.

        1. And factually inaccurate. Everyone knows Rhywun is in league with the Octaroon Ones.

    11. Ok, guys, serious discussion time…

      Does this shit have a chilling effect?

      1. Yes. It’s legitimately scary.

      2. Maybe this is the sort of black swan event needed for us to finally be given an edit button?

        1. Or a sarcasm font?

      3. Without a doubt.

        I mean, we’ve dealt with something like that before, when that lawyer sued Reason for us in the comments discussing whether or not he engaged in fornication with sheep. But this is scary.

        1. This is scary, because these people can have you killed. That dipshit lawyer was just a gadfly who might have cost Reason some money.

      4. Does the Pope wear a hat?

        1. Does the Pope shit in the woods?

          1. Does the Pope shit in his hat?

            1. Does a bear teach infallibly?

      5. Yes. I would really like to hurl a bunch of stupid, harmless invective at these people. But nah. I’ll just bitch IRL instead.

      6. Abso-fucking-lutely.

      7. Islamic Jihad could learn a thing or two from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.

    12. This would probably explain why Agammamon was looking for a lawyer in some of the other threads.

      1. I don’t believe he had any posts in that thread that would be targeted for incendiary rhetoric.

        1. Arguably, he/she had the MOST incendiary rhetoric.

        2. One of his was specifically called out in the Popehat article.

          1. I revisited the thread and searched for his name. The comment mentioned in the popehat article has been deleted.

            1. I noticed that too.

        3. Popehat quoted him.

      2. He asked croaker to get in touch in last night’s thread.

      3. He left this in the Popehat thread:

        Hello all ? I’m the ‘Agammamon’ from the article.

        “leading libertarian website whose clever writing is eclipsed only by the blowhard stupidity of its commenting peanut gallery.”

        Yeah, that pretty much describes us ? the comments section of most any place is a cesspit and I’m one of the dwellers in the Reason.com comment sewer.

        I don’t really have anything to say for myself ? my conduct in the cited thread was poor and below the standards I imagined I set for myself and, really, should be considered an embarrassment to libertarians in general.

        But, since its out and here, I would appreciate any help anyone could provide ? even if its a contact for a decent federal lawyer in New York.

        If this gets past the Grand Jury, it could be a difficult road for me as I live a long way from New York.

        1. Holy crap. Shit got real.

          Agammamon, if you’re reading this and this BS continues roll along and threaten your freedom and livelihood, consider myself ready, willing, and able to donate to your legal defense fund. This is downright chilling.

          1. Seconded.

          2. Yeah, I’ll second that.

            And while the comment was crass, there is a lot worse out there on the internet. If that comment is an embarrassment to libertarians then the entirety of the internet is an embarrassment to humanity in general.

            People say stupid emotional things, especially online. Agammamon shouldn’t be too hard on himself. We’ve all been there.

          3. Well, that comment just got zapped. Interesting.

          4. Um, did the blockquote from the Popehat comment section just disappear?

              1. The squirrels just ate mine.

                Thanks Obama.

          5. Did we just have a post deleted?

            1. I guess we’re not supposed to talk about this…

          6. Well, this certainly isn’t creepy AT ALL.

            1. Over/under on when this thread gets locked down?

              1. I hate to say this but if I put my “sky is falling” lawyer hat on and we assume Reason is subject to a gag order, I’d be telling them that some douchecanoe AUSA might be willing to argue that, by not shutting down the comments, they were in effect facilitating them.

                I won’t go over/under because that would make it a certainty (just a function of when) but I will say 50% chance this is locked when we all congregate in the morning.

            2. I would say something about how something is something even though something is available from something but I’m afraid the post will get deleted.

            3. OK, 5 comments (including one from Agammamon) linking to either the popehat article or this very thread just got deleted from the overtime pay article….

          7. I’ll be glad to help disembowel that cunt judge with you. I’ll meet you at the top of the Washington Monument at noon on July 4th. You bring a machete and the judge, I’ll bring a bowl to collect her innards. I’ll be wearing my full dress Marine uniform and an Obama mask. Don’t forget your getaway helicopter like the last time!

            1. Agammamon, change of plans. I’m going deep-sea fishing with LeBron James, Pope Francis, and Vladmir Putin that day. Fly out with the judge in your Cessna and parachute onto our dinghy. We’ll be just west of St George’s Island. We’ll use the old bag for shark bait.

              1. I don’t think that helps.

      4. Oh fuck. That’s right. Southern District of New York.

    13. Why did the comment section of a relatively small magazine end up on some government lawyer’s desk?

      1. Why not? When you wanna knock heads together, you gonna go to a pro-government, pro authority website?

        1. Just think: Some government stooge is getting paid to read Agile Cyborg.

          1. How many times has STEVE SMITH been investigated?

          2. Although he probably reads SugarFree on his downtime. In his bunk.

          3. “Some government stooge is getting paid to read Agile Cyborg.”

            Somewhere, in the basement of the NSA, the files of “Operation Agile Cyborg” were being shredded

            1. And, the ones who read it were openly weeping every day they showed up for work.

    14. I’m also a little pissed that we’re hearing about this from Popehat and not from Reason itself. But maybe there is some good reason (oops) for that. Popehat doesn’t say who gave them the subpoena, after all….

      1. Popehat has the most likely answer:

        Of course, Reason and “Rhywun” may be under a gag order asserted on the “because I said so” non-existent authority of a wet-behind-the-ears mutton-headed Assistant United States Attorney, for whom a special place should be reserved in Hell, so don’t expect answers.

        1. And: “I understand that Reason, on advice of counsel, may not be able to comment on these questions.

        2. I agree with this. Note again that thread has been locked. I’m guessing that freedom of speech blah blah, you don’t talk about real, ongoing and pressing legal matters that aren’t yet resolved.

    15. Did anyone really not assume we were? Some asshole at DOJ is being paid a shit load of stolen money to become intimately familiar with Big Lebowski and O Brother Where Art Thou quotes and the attractiveness of women of varying thickness.

      1. I joked about it. I sort of guessed that deep in some NSA server there was a few lines on me that no one would ever bother to look at (and I’m being serious on that). But to see action being taken…yikes.

    16. Ok, I’ll be firrst to ask, we gonna set up a legal fund for our fellow commenters? I’ll throw in a few bucks.

      1. Indeed.

        I also think we should all get together and do some sort of of “I am Spartacus” act of solidarity.

      2. We absolutely should. I’ll contribute too.

      3. I’m willing to do a GoFundMe, but I have no idea how it works, so I’ll do some investigating tonight.

    17. Are we really that bad? Well, I know all of you are. But I like to think of myself as a foulmouthed weeping clown. With, like, razor abs and a huge cock. And, like, a pony made of diamonds.

      1. And, like, a pony made of diamonds.

        Because you’re rich?

        1. I’m rackin’ my brain trying to think of a name for that diamond pony I bought. I was gonna call it “piss-for-brains” in honor of you, but that just feels immature. Maybe…”Butt Stallion”? Nah, that’s even worse. I’ll give it some more thought.

    18. Does this mean the edit button will not be arriving in time for xmas???

      1. Nope, but a “your comment is awaiting moderation” flag just might be.

    19. According to Nick, we are not supposed to discuss it.

      1. Discuss what? (wink)

      2. It’s the first rule of reason commenting

  32. Britain’s hardest grafter

    Even reality television has its limits, and the BBC?that vaunted public trust?may have found them last week, after advertising for contestants for “Britain’s Hardest Grafter.” The five-part series, which is set to air on BBC2, will pit 25 underpaid young people against each other to win the equivalent of a year’s living wage?roughly ?15,500?in a competition that the British press and angry viewers have already called “Hunger Games-style,” “degrading and exploitative,” and “poverty porn.” The show has contestants performing different kinds of blue-collar work to prove they’re the most productive grafter. (That’s British slang for “hard worker.”)

    The horror.

    1. Oh, yes, UK… Show us your work ethic. Please.

      *Prediction: The Scot wins it.

    2. I thought graft meant theft?

      1. “Working is theft. Not giving is taking. Etc.”

  33. Mike Rowe’s Stellar Reply to Letter Writer Calling His Work Ethic Movement ‘Right-Wing Propaganda’

    Everyday on the news, liberal pundits and politicians portray the wealthy as greedy, while conservative pundits and politicians portray the poor as lazy. Democrats have become so good at denouncing greed, Republicans now defend it. And Republicans are so good at condemning laziness, Democrats are now denying it even exists. It’s a never ending dance that gets more contorted by the day.

    I really like Mike.

    1. Sometimes I dream
      That he is me
      You’ve got to see that’s how I dream to be
      I dream I move
      I dream I groove
      Like Mike
      If I could be like Mike

    2. I do, too. I’m curious about the commenter, especially in regards to the Britain’s Hardest Grafter pearl-clutching. Does he just go around bitching about people working and having it broadcast?

    3. Wow, so even the idea of work is now a right-wing conspiracy. The left has been more brazen and retarded at the same time.

      1. Hey, hey, hey… we just need to check our job-privilege. Apparently, drawing a paycheck makes us too haughty.

        I would say what their plan is to put us in our place, but I ain’t giving them any ideas.

  34. Preet Bahara is a very handsome man.

  35. OK, everyone please take a seat. Welcome to Reason Commenter Sensitivity Training, a mandatory course made possible by the US Department of Justice and sheep-fucker lawyer Arthur Volk.

    Now, what do we know about judges and prosecutors?

    That’s right- they’re lawyers who work for the government. And what else does that mean? Anyone? Anyone?

    Right, they’re vain, brainless, thin-skinned thugs. So when you insult them, you must be very, very careful that they don’t perceive it as a threat or use it as an excuse to sue you.

    The smart thing to do is to be as absurd as possible. Instead of wishing for an evil prosecutor or judge to be shot, wish for them to be crushed by a truckload of Jersey Shore talking pens. Instead of wishing for them to be thrown in a woodchipper, wish for them to be raped to death by poison dart frogs.

    The more insane your curse is, the easier it is to defend it as hyperbole.

    Thank you. Are there any questions? If not, please make sure your name is on the sign-in sheet before you leave.

    1. Am I allowed to wish for the Reason standard death by scaphism? Or by the pear of anguish? What about the brazen bull?

      1. Archaic torture devices are good, although it’s best to “seal the deal” with a reference to pop culture or the animal kingdom.

    2. wish for them to be raped to death by poison dart frogs.

      I knew I shouldn’t have told anyone what I wished for last time I blew out the candles on my birthday cake. Now it’ll never come true

      /kicks rocks

      1. Oh, I think that’s a violation of the Birthday Wish Act of 1973. Expect a visit any day now.

    3. Right, they’re vain, brainless, thin-skinned thugs. So when you insult them, you must be very, very careful that they don’t perceive it as a threat or use it as an excuse to sue you.

      Well, is it “acceptable” to wish natural calamity on this judge? Like contracting a particularly agonizing and untreatable form of anal cancer? Or having a stroke which leaves him in excruciating pain while totally unable to move, communicate, or do anything other than lay still and silent, trapped in his own Hell?

    4. I hope they drown in a pool of poutine gravy while choking on the cheese curds.

  36. I want to thank whomever recommended “The Power Broker” by Robt A Caro. It reads like a blueprint for the Obama admin.

    Actually, fuck you to whomever recommended this book – every time I read another 50 pages I get so angry I might have a heart attack.

  37. Ok, this thread is now looking like vermin have been eating away at the comments.

  38. Just so you vent your spleen a at Reason approved target, here is extremely low hanging fruit.

    You may fire (a lot) when ready.

    1. That is not only the stupidest article (the 5 most dangerous guns in America are the categories of all guns in America: pistols, rifles, shotguns, etc… duh), but it’s a retread. Saw essentially the same article a few months ago.

  39. Not for nuthin, but I sure hope the organization i donate money to puts my money where their mouth is on this freedom stuff and shows maximum spine in the near future.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.