More Troops to Iraq, EPA Wants to Regulate Airplane Emissions, Wales Passes Ban on E-Cigarettes: P.M. Links

|

planetc1
  • More than 450 U.S. troops will reportedly join the more than 3,000 already in Iraq to combat ISIS.
  • The Environmental Protection Agency claims it has the authority to regulate carbon emissions made by airplanes, because of global warming.
  • The New York Times is committed to making the Marco Rubio crime spree story happen.
  • Pope Francis has approved a new department in the Vatican that would investigate bishops accused of covering up child sex scandals.
  • Police in Switzerland seized computer data from FIFA headquarters as part of an ongoing investigation into the association football governing body.
  • The government of Wales has approved a wide-reaching ban on the use of e-cigarettes in public and semi-public places.
  • NBC's Bob Costas is not pleased ESPN awarded Caitlyn Jenner the Arthur Ashe Courage Award, calling it a "tabloid ploy."

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

NEXT: NPR Repeats False Claim Bernie Sanders is Israeli Citizen, Got it From Facebook

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. At least it’s not 7:01

        1. Do you mean 1901?

          1. No, 1701 would be 5:01 p.m., of course. I already suggested 1901 as the alternate to 7:01.

          2. 1911?

            1. That sounds like a threat.

              1. That’s not a threat.

                2510 is a threat. Yardbeast.com/yardbeast-2510-wood-chipper

                  1. One other point that I think needs especial attention: if you want to get a message direct to the DOJ ? leave a comment at Reason.

                    Boom.

    2. I can only imagine how much time you wasted refreshing.

      1. Maybe that’s the game.. each refresh is no different than a click right?

      2. I only come to Hit & Run on the half hour. It just happened to pay off today.

      3. Was it really wasted?

        1. If you live in a log cabin and stare at the wall all day, I suppose not.

          1. Some people are willing to make sacrifices to be first.

            1. It’s not that difficult. I simply come to reason.com at around 4:30 or 5:00, and if I see that they’ve posted Links, I’ll look them over, see if any of them pique my interest, if so copy and paste (using italics tags) the one I like and then think up a hopefully amusing comment on it and then type that in and then preview it and proofread it and make any changes necessary and then post. Whether it happens to be the first comment doesn’t really enter my thought process. I just do it to connect with people and so that no one else can post first.

              1. *** snorts ***

                Right. Next you’ll be telling us Warty is human.

              2. You are using a script. If you want proof meet me on the green park bench at 2100. I will be wearing a yellow trench coat and no other garments.

                1. no other garments

                  Go on…

                2. I was an attractive lad. I was always getting invites to the park by trenchcoated individuals. You’ll need to do better than tempt me with proof of something I would already know.

                  1. Soo.. Candy?

      4. Way back in the late 1990s, Opera had an automatic refresh… I’m sure there’s extension to give Firefox, Chrome, and Safari that feature.

        On the other hand, you could use an IFTTT action to notify you when things go up.

        1. And there’s an RSS feed, so you don’t have to constantly refresh the page.

    3. Stop complaining. You got your links before bedtime. Gave you a chance to get an extra game of shuffleboard in before dinner.

      1. Or watch the replays of Bobby Wood chipping one in against Germany.

        1. Chipping you say

          1. Wood you care to elaborate?

            1. Frankly, chipping is giving too little credit, he practically shot from the street

              1. He still shredded the defense.

                1. Chipping you say

                  He still shredded the defense.

                  Interesting

                  /US attorney for the Southern District of New York

        2. “Wood chipping” ? Clever boy!

          1. “Wood chipping” ?

            Occasionally when the ball is up against the collar on the fringe.

          2. It’s a wedge issue, depends on the bunker..

    4. Hello.

      Isn’t there a Department of Lateness?

      5 isn’t 7:01.

      1. Meatball

  1. The New York Times is committed to making the Marco Rubio crime spree story happen.

    If this is the lawlessness they’re going to bring I say we don’t open our doors to the Cubans.

    1. The comments on that article amazed even my jaded self. That is some insanely lemming like behaviour in those NYT comments.

  2. The Environmental Protection Agency claims it has the authority to regulate carbon emissions made by airplanes, because of global warming.

    But… but Leo DiCaprio uses planes to spread the message!

    1. Worked through lunch today and swore you said “Leo uses plain spread on his bagel.”

      Time to eat, I guess… with a coffee.

      1. Leo oozes plantain seeds during massages.

    1. You need a smartwatch, old man.

      1. Everyone’s an old man to you!

        1. No, there are also old women.

          1. Not libertarian ones.

  3. These links have no bullet points!!

    (throws plate of food on the floor, insists its Time For Judge Wapner, starts freaking out)

    1. It’s triggering my OCD!

    2. bullet points!!

      I’m triggered!

    3. if i could make one of the bullet points slightly off i would

      1. Now I just feel unsafe.

    4. Well-done, Gilmore.

    5. These links have no bullet points!!

      WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!?!?!?!?!

  4. NBC’s Bob Costas is not pleased ESPN awarded Caitlyn Jenner the Arthur Ashe Courage Award, calling it a “tabloid ploy.”

    For once, I agree with Costas.

    1. I saw this last night, and I was horrified that I agreed with him.

      1. That’s because you all want to secretly do her…him….it. Whatever.

      2. Now I wholeheartedly support the award going to her. I refuse to agree with that idiot.

    2. I know, weird, isn’t it? Courage, honor, integrity. . .all words that have profoundly different words in the modern era.

    3. Costas finding fault with something someone did for Caitlyn Jenner is a tabloid ploy.

      I wonder what he said about a certain someone’s peace prize.

      1. Al Gore?

      2. WE’RE BEING MONITORED.

      3. Yasser Arafat?

    4. You realize that Arthur Ashe died of AIDS contracted from a blood transfusion at a time when AIDS patients were diseased pariahs, right? I’m from Virginia and I’m old so I know about Arthur Ashe and fighting segregation and all that, for which I totally respect him. What most (straight) people don’t know is that Ashe was also a hero for de-stigmatizing AIDS and HIV.

      1. I realize that and think Ashe is one of the good guys of the 20th Century. And I still agree with Costas.

      2. I actually thought Jenner was a good choice for that reason, Tonio.

      3. Isn’t Costas saying that Ashe was courageous and Cait Jenner is not?

        1. Yes. And he was a thousand times more so than Jenner. I am really not understanding what Niki and Tonio are saying here.

          1. Even my favorite gay prog site agrees with Costas in the comments.

          2. I don’t understand why we would not call Caitlyn Jenner “courageous.” It may be far safer for her to come out than it is for the average trans person, but it is still a huge public risk. Something scary. And you can make a fair argument that by doing it very publicly she is helping destigmatize the issue for your average trans person.

            1. And you can make a fair argument that by doing it very publicly she is helping destigmatize the issue for your average trans person.

              This does appear to be what’s happening (though I live in the hermetically sealed political bubble of the pacific NW, where saying you’re a Republican would be considered more subversive than being trans, but national coverage seems to suggest she has a lot of support). I have to say I’m a bit surprised; I’d originally assumed that her association with the Kardashians would cause the announcement to *hurt* trans acceptance, figuring people would just associate it with something crazy people do.

              1. I think it it is great that the majority have not openly claimed she is crazy.

              2. Maybe Jenner is getting the award for being a republican.

                1. +1 actual risk

                  (to be fair, if Jenner was in a different industry I could see there being a risk to coming out. But she lives and works in Hollywood, not Alabama)

            2. She is going to profit from coming out, which is why I would not consider it courageous. I think it is great she is going to destigmatize trans issues, but there is a lot of money involved and that is going to lessen the courage of the issue.

              Also, it does help that the national media are vehemently on her side.

              1. Also, it does help that the national media are vehemently on her side.

                Pretty much the only people opposed to the transition are radfems like Gender Trender and a few SoCon outlets. I can see that it would be scary, but 1) it’s not like this hasn’t been speculated on for many months, as far back as when the Jenners’ marriage fell apart. So the actual announcement was pretty anticlimactic; and 2) no one of any real influence that opposes it is being taken seriously by the public at large. “Courage” is something that involves going beyond your limitations in the face of real adversity. The only adversity Caitlyn’s facing for the foreseeable future is trying to rebuild her shitty relationship with her older kids and dealing with that little vehicular manslaughter issue from a few months ago.

            3. “she is helping destigmatize the issue for your average trans person.”

              Its just as significant as when Magic Johnson came out as gay

            4. What risk?

              1. “What am I, chopped liver?” – Renee Richards

      4. He had an elegant stroke.

          1. It’s weird. My one-hand backhand is better than my forehand. Self-taught too.

            Then again, I’m a lefty. We’re messed up that way.

            1. I switched to two hand because the slice I can put on it fucks up the righties.

      5. Where from in Va.? I’m a native Virginian also and, yes, Ashe is hero. Total class act on all fronts.

        1. Short Pump for life!

          1. Short Pump for about a year!

      6. I believe the same thing happened to Isaac Asimov, and they kept it quiet at the time because of the stigma (even though he got it from a transfusion. . .I think, anyway).

        1. That’s what I recall, yes.

        2. Didn’t know that. That sucks.

        3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I….._and_death

          Learned something new.

  5. Not that anybody cares (or ought to), but this is Dweebston. I’ve been tired of the old handle for a good long while but never bothered updating it, and I figured that if something goes tits up re: posting here, having an email addy visible might not be a bad thing. At least, I hope I would make the list.

    Anyway, every time I try to preview a post now it takes me to a nearly blank page with nothing but an html link to my address. What did I do wrong?

    1. It’s the DOJ spyware

    2. That’s what happens when you have an email linked in your handle. It’s one of the many “charms” of Hit and Run.

      1. cmd+a, cmd+x.

      2. It won’t do that if you have a url linked instead. The glitch is just emails.

          1. I think you can also check the “keep me logged in” box and should be ok. I have my email address posted and have forever. I’ve not had a single problem on the multiple devices I post from.

    3. At least, I hope I would make the list.

      I thought that after 7:01, we were trying to avoid the list.

      1. That’s what I meant. I’m jealous that the DoJ ignored my acerbic posts, and I want them to have a direct line.

        1. A sort of legal ‘come at me bro’?

    4. Dweeby, thanks for sticking with us. We, at least the happy few of us, will come through this.

      1. You almost lost me. No edit button and a glitchy preview button? Dealbreaker.

    5. You changed your handle in this day and age and it has nothing to do with either a) Virginia Postrel hating us or b) some sort of wood chipper?

  6. The new Reason links, late, and no bullet* points.

    *Not actual bullets, I am of course referring to a typographical symbol or glyph used to introduce items in a list.

    1. You know who else maintains lists? (and uses real bullets I may add).

      1. These cleancut, wholesome young people?

      2. *adjusts the bugged flower vase* Not us, because we are all upstanding citizens who would never resort to violence or threats.

      3. Not Schindler?

    2. The DOJ was probably vetting the links.

  7. Trigger warning: CCP organ, awkward translation

    ‘Lewd’ WWII show under fire

    A TV drama portraying the War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression (1937-45) has courted controversy recently after a scene in which a woman hides a grenade in her crotch to kill Japanese soldiers went viral online.

    The 58-episode show, Yi Qi Da Guizi(Fight the Devils Together), which began broadcasting on a Sichuan-based channel on May 7, has been pulled off the air and “will receive modification,” the entertainment portal of Netease reported on Tuesday, quoting sources from within China’s top film and TV watchdog.

    Ge’s character then says, “Some xiaoriben (a slur for Japanese people), want to touch my crotch. How can I let them? That place only belongs to you.” When her boyfriend put his hand under her dress, he finds a grenade, which Ge’s character then detonates, killing everyone in the cell.

    A number of TV drama and films about the war against Japanese aggression have come in for criticism recently because of bizarre scenes, including scenes featuring heroes tearing enemies apart with their bare hands or taking down a Japanese fighter plane with a stone.

    1. bizarre scenes, including scenes featuring heroes tearing enemies apart with their bare hands or taking down a Japanese fighter plane with a stone

      Seems legit

      – Vladimir Putin

    2. But has it got anything comparable to this?

        1. That guy is Gillespie’s Indian half brother.

    3. A number of TV drama and films about the war against Japanese aggression have come in for criticism recently because of bizarre scenes, including scenes featuring heroes tearing enemies apart with their bare hands or taking down a Japanese fighter plane with a stone.

      Yeah, and that’s totally understandable since those media producers have grown up listening to how their parents or grandparents were brutalized by the Japanese during the 1930’s and 1940’s.

  8. The government of Wales has approved a wide-reaching ban on the use of e-cigarettes in public and semi-public places.

    Common sense legislation right there!

    1. Calgary will be regulating e-cigs like normal cigs. Time for incognito vaping..

      1. Stealth vaping is the key.

        They cannot stop what they don’t know is happening.

        I vape wherever I please, and no one knows a damn thing.

        1. As with underage drinking, we are on the cusp of a teen butt-vaping epidemic.

          1. Remember kids: always butt-vape with tampons.

    2. Well, it is Wales. /Scottish payback

  9. The government of Wales has approved a wide-reaching ban on the use of e-cigarettes in public and semi-public places.

    Does my mouth count as a public space?

    (*Go ahead, try to make a joke out of that.)

    1. Depends. Are you Epi’s mom?

      1. I’ll give you both 1000 internets

  10. The New York Times is committed to making the Marco Rubio crime spree story happen.

    Just don’t call him “Baby Face”.

    1. Now remember folks: Jesus saves. George Nelson withdraws!

      1. Jesus saves, Espo scores on the rebound.

  11. Pope Francis has approved a new department in the Vatican that would investigate bishops accused of covering up child sex scandals.

    I want THAT job. Talk about getting paid to sit around and do nothing.

    1. I looked up ‘you’re a towel.’

      Not nice.

      /peels onion.

        1. Yes. Tears too!

  12. Police in Switzerland seized computer data from FIFA headquarters as part of an ongoing investigation into the association football governing body.

    They waited for a reason to seize the data? Way to be gay, Switzerland.

    1. “Reason” and “seizing data”.

      Hmm… there’s a joke here.

    2. Way to be gay, Switzerland

      Wearing this? I think not. Although you can’t ever tell with euros.

      1. Yeah. I mean, what is that, a beret?

      2. “Although you can’t ever tell with euros.”

        Pastels are the key. Now, if that was a raspberry beret..

    1. “your toaster has stopped responding”

      STOP | WAIT

      1. Abort, Ignore, Retry, Fail?

      2. Toaster kernel panic..

  13. Hello, there, Reason staff! If you comply with that oppressive demand – you know the one I mean – then this song is for you:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeO3Kgp4JTg

    1. Why, that’s what I always think of when you post, Eddie.

      1. “It’s just like a real one, only smaller.”

        1. How would you know, having never even seen one?

  14. Don’t miss this bit of Twitter embarrassment. Michael Cannon, one of PPACA’s biggest challengers, effortlessly shames this FDR-fellator.

    1. Sick burn.

    2. I got blocked by that clown for disagreeing with him (and ESB too!). I’m sure Cannon’s block is in the offing.

  15. Of course I finally give in and post in the other thread and then you assholes put up the PM links.

    This is the guy who wrote the Huffington Post open letter to Jerry Seinfeld.

    Who is more insufferable: This guy or Jazz Shaw?

    1. Shaw. At least the HuffPo writers acknowledge that they love the state and think everyone must think as they do. Shaw claims to be a small government conservative while slurping on statist cock all day.

    2. I think it’s the douche posting right below me whose initials are B.P. But Jazz Shaw is a close second.

    3. It’s close, but I’m going with the HuffPo author. Shaw authored for PJmedia at one point I think and I’ve found articles on there before I’ve enjoyed, so he wins by losing only slightly less.

      Also, my favorite retweet and comment:

      MWR ? ?@nowhere_nh 3h3 hours ago
      @DavidJohnGarth @Beefsteak101 @AceofSpadesHQ : Why would he wear that shirt and risk offending people with eyesight?

  16. Lindsey Graham promises to have ‘a rotating first lady’ if elected president

    Graham talks with a patron during a campaign stop at a New Hampshire diner. (Photo: Jim Cole/AP)

    If Republican presidential hopeful Lindsey Graham is elected president, the unmarried South Carolina senator says he will have a “rotating first lady.”

    “Well, I’ve got a sister,” Graham told the Daily Mail Online. “She could play that role if necessary.”

    It hasn’t been necessary in a long time. Assuming Graham doesn’t get hitched before his inauguration, the 59-year-old would be the first bachelor in the White House since Woodrow Wilson, whose first wife, Ellen Wilson, died in 1914, a year into his term. (Wilson remarried the following year.)

    Yahoo News

    1. Cowgirl, then reverse cowgirl, then…

      1. Rotating… on a spit!

          1. Please like anyone believes Graham would have an MMF threeway.

            1. Lucky Pierre Lindsey..

    2. Well well well. Look what got dragged in on the bottom of my shoes.

      1. What? Have you been busy purging H&R of non-conformists?

      2. Playa, you probably know already, but just in case, Mary used your handle on Bloomberg.

      3. There are commenters that make me wish I had subpoena power.

    3. “She could play that role if necessary.”

      Roleplay you say?

    4. “Well, I’ve got a sister,” Graham told the Daily Mail Online. “She could play that role if necessary.”

      Way to not fall into the old Southern stereotypes, there, ol’ Lindsey…

    5. “Assuming Graham doesn’t get hitched before his inauguration,”

      I think that is a pretty safe assumption.

  17. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-33085012

    Two Rikers prison guards charged in federal court after they beat an inmate to death. Locals refused to prosecute.

    1. I’m confused by the lack of information in the article about what the New York authorities did. Was there even any attempt to give a legitimate explanation for refusing to bring charges, besides not wanting cops/guards held to the same standard as the little people?

    2. Manhattan US Attorney Preet Bharara said when announcing the charges that “Rikers inmates, although walled off from the rest of society, are not walled off from the protections of our constitution”.

      So Mr. Bharara has read that musty old document. I wonder whether he’s investigated that little paragraph early in the Bill of Rights pertaining to speech and the freedom thereof.

      1. That’s what I get for not reading closely. Didn’t realize it was the same ADA.

        1. That is the DA. The…HAIC, you will (and you won’t).

      2. Shut your whore mouth, commode. The US Constitution doesn’t provide any protections for speech based on badthink, only for thoughts and actions based on rightthink! I, for one, love Big Brother. I hear the chocolate ration may be increased, but don’t mention my name…

        1. *obviously* impolite speech isn’t protected. Why would we want that? It’s meant to protect polite discourse. Obviously.

  18. “More than 450 U.S. troops will reportedly join the more than 3,000 already in Iraq to combat ISIS.”

    Combat? Ha ha ha. No, silly, that’s a mistake right there. “Training and Equipping Iraqi Forces” is the preferred nomenclature. ‘Combat’ implies we’re at war. Which we’re not.

    “‘Contradicting what his top military adviser said just a day earlier, President Obama personally assured U.S. soldiers Wednesday that he will not send them into ground combat against terrorists in Iraq and Syria, the latest example of the president’s direct involvement in setting the rules for the new war.

    “As your commander in chief, I will not commit you and the rest of our armed forces to fighting another ground war in Iraq,” Mr. Obama told about 1,200 troops at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, home of the U.S. Central Command. “The American forces that have been deployed to Iraq do not and will not have a combat mission.””

    He has also very-recently celebrated his Semantic Victory over reality, noting that he has presided over the first Memorial Day Without War* in living memory.

    (*provided you define war as anything not involving bombs, drones, refueling saudi bombers, or sending SOCOM teams all over the place to assassinate people)

    1. Somehow they’re training Iraqis while keeping their boots off the ground? I seem to recall “no boots on the ground” being a pretty big deal at the time.

      1. They’re all gurus capable of levitating.

        Next question?

  19. More than 450 U.S. troops will reportedly join the more than 3,000 already in Iraq

    Those are consultants!

    1. On the bright side it shouldn’t take long to train Iraqi troops how to hand their weapons over to Islamo-fascists.

      1. Why would they want them? They already got all they need from Obama via Libya.

        1. It has been a tradition since 2005 or so.

          1. BUSHPIG!!!!

            Come on Shreek, suck that Obama cock.

    2. They are not involved in a kinetic action Brooks.

      1. Whether you are pro-War against ISIS, anti-War against ISIS, or even muddled between whether anyone else should fight ISIS and we should generally support them…or not….

        …the one thing almost everyone would agree is fucking stupid and the worst decision of all would be to send troops overseas, put them in a position where their deaths would give great PR advantages to ISIS, but insist that they shouldn’t be doing any fighting

        i.e. = “no matter what you do, don’t kill the enemy!”

        its using personnel as political props to say you’re “doing something” while doing everything you can to ensure that “something” doesn’t actually turn into any actual results that might have political risks or create a problem abroad which could come back to bite you in the ass.

        basically – shit or get off the pot. There’s no reason to deploy *anyone* unless the people being deployed have a mandate to kill the living fuck out of the people causing the problem.

        The “Iraqis” fighting ISIS *don’t want to fight ISIS* as long as there is even a whiff of a possibility that the Americans and Iranians will do it for them.

        Which is probably the main reason we’re getting involved= not to ‘degrade or destroy’ ISIS, but to simply keep a lid on the conflict until someone else takes responsibility for this mess.

    3. NOT to be confused with this story:

      450 Dead Babies Found in Athenian Well Sheds Light on Ancient Greeks

      http://www.newsweek.com/discov…..ety-341681

      Spoiler Alert: It was the bacterial meningitis

      1. wow, I should totally remember not to throw babies in wells anymore. They might get sick!

      2. Did they yell “This IS…SPARTA!” before throwing each one down there?

      3. Made me think of Dunphy by mentioning meningitis. I smiled.

      4. If only they had access to quality, affordable healthcare.. when will they learn..

    4. Remember, consultants prolong the problem.

  20. Today is ‘Tax Freedom Day’ Fraser Institute says

    For Canuckistanis, that is.

    Today, June 10, is the day when the typical Canadian family stops working to pay the tax man, and starts working to pay themselves.

    Free at last!

  21. Cripes even Cartoon producers are out of ideas. In addition to Duck Tales, the PowerPuff Girls and Reboot are getting…rebooted, and they both sound/look awful like everything else on at lest CN (I don’t think ReBoot will be on CN but whatever). So glad to grow up in the ’90s/early aughts when things were good.

    http://www.cartoonbrew.com/voi…..14006.html

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/trendin…..-1.3104830

    1. They better not touch my beloved Samurai Jack.

      They fucked up Teen Titans

      1. The guys behind Teen Titans Go! explicitly said they never watched the show. While chuckling about how they never watched the show. *Rage intensifies*

        SJ was great but its ending was not. Same with Reboot. With Reboot I’d rather they just redubbed Bob’s voice during S3 with the correct voice actor.

    2. Clearly you have not discovered the joy that is Rick and Morty on Adult Swim. Season Two in just a few short weeks. Season One can be viewed for free on many sites throughout the intragoogles.

    3. Once again let me be the first to openly celebrate the return of the great Launchpad McQuack

    4. Are you fucking retarded? Cartoons from the 70s and 80s were superior in every way to that shit you grew up with.

      Herculoids? GI Joe? He-Man? Smurfs?

      I,scoff at your 90s garbage.

      1. Jesus.

        TMNT?!?! Thundarr? Thunder Cats? VOLTRON?

        Then backward to the 70s and Fat Albert? the Hair Bear Bunch? Josie and The Pussycats?

        Oh man, I miss good cartoons.

        1. Ariel, Ookla, Ride!
          Followed by Flash Gordon

          NBC was really dominant there for a while.

          Battle of the Planets
          Star Blazers (Space Cruiser Yamato) – Fucking Wave Fucking Motion Fucking Gun

        1. So fucking awesome!

          Now if you’ll excuse me, I have an episode of Laff-A-Lympics to watch.

      2. BAHAHAHAHAHAHA Thanks for that list of poorly animated badly written crap. Makes me even more thankful to be a ’90s kid. God the 70s and early-mid ’80s blew. TMNT in the ’80s sucked shit. TMNT in the ’00s was awesome.

        1. With all due respect, you are out of your fucking mind.

          The seventies through eighties was the last great age of great cartoons. Plus we had the luxury of having parents that didn’t bubble-wrap us, so we were exposed to Tom and Jerry, Woody Woodpecker and many other violent reruns your generation mostly missed out on.

          1. Grape Ape was in the late 70s.

          2. Hey, now, fair is fair, I grew up in the 90s too and watched plenty of Tom & Jerry et al.

            We even had Speedy Gonzalez! Nobody under 20 has even heard of him, I imagine.

            Although I’d argue Cytotoxic is overlooking the true 90s gems like Animaniacs and Tiny Toons…

            1. Slowpoke Rodriguez was 10x the character Speedy Gonzalez was.

            2. Although I’d argue Cytotoxic is overlooking the true 90s gems like Animaniacs and Tiny Toons…

              Nope. Those were the true gems though oddly I didn’t watch them that match. That’s because the true true gems were ReBoot and Batman: The Animated Series.

          3. The seventies through eighties was the last great age of great cartoons.

            If by ‘great’ you mean ‘brainless and crappily animated’. There was nothing great about those cartoons you were just really really stupid and bereft of good taste.

            Tom and Jerry and Woody are exactly what I’m talking about. Stupid and pointless and dull. “Oh he got hit on dah head agun ARF ARF ARF”. Let me guess you also like Batman with Adam West? Thank God they banned lead from gasoline. The mental effects are clear and frightening.

        2. Cowabunga dude

        3. I am shocked. SHOCKED! to learn that Cyto has horrible taste in cartoons!

          1. I am shocked SHOCKED that Reasoners are nostalgic for the pigshit they thought was good but actually sucked 40 years ago. See also ‘Star Trek’.

          2. Cyto is a good dude. Cytotoxic is otherwise.

            Not judging you, but I try to never disgrace Cyto’s handle by using it for the other.

            1. Nostalgia-holics AND peacenazis all in one thread oh joy.

              1. PEAS-NAZIS MUST DIE

        4. Maybe they number decades differently in Canada?

          1. Well of course. We use the obviously superior metric system.

            1. What? The Imperial foot is one light nanosecond to two significant dIgits. You don’t get much more fundamental than that.

              1. But converting by simply moving the decimal point is way better.

            2. Is there anything you’re not incredibly opinionated on? At all?

              1. Canada sending troops to battle ISIS…

                1. Actually I’m fairly opinionated on that. I am fairly against it. There is just no place for ground troops, or serious trustworthy allies for them aside from the Kurds.

                  What am I not opinionated on…um…I’ll be back to that later.

        5. Maybe they number decades differently in Canada?

  22. I loath Graham as much as anyone on here. I have to admit the first lady idea is awesome. He could do it like the bachelor. Over eight episodes every January and February, he could pick a new first lady for the following year. That would be awesome.

    Now of course Lindsey is likely as queer as a three dollar bill. NTTAWWT. That just means drag queens, I mean transgendered, can enter too. Graham may have provided the most compelling reason to vote for a candidate I have ever seen.

    1. Holy shit, Agile, don’t share your stash with John, you don’t know what might happen!

      1. I mean, think of Archie Bunker and Timothy Leary having a love child.

        1. Would read.

        2. You say that like it is a bad thing.

          1. This is why we belong together, John.

            1. We do Niki.

              1. A professional editor hooking up with a man of John’s legendary typographical repute. I’m not sure whether this ends in happy compromises on the use of commas or with John’s blackberry stylus protruding from his eye socket.

                1. “A professional editor hooking up with a man of John’s legendary typographical repute. I’m not sure whether this ends in happy compromises on the use of commas or with John’s blackberry stylus protruding from his eye socket.”

                  Oh man, this sounds like a sitcom for the ages. The characters played by John and Nicole could be named John Spelling and Nicole Spelling and the show would be called “Spelling Errors.”

                  1. Who do you see cast in these roles?

                    Would it be on HBO or broadcast? What I mean to ask is, boobs or no boobs?

                    1. What kind of stupid-ass question is that?

                    2. HBO. Tits and regular decapitations.

                    3. And “dragons”… eventually..

    2. No, he’ll just overcompensate and trot through a rotating cast of supermodel beards. Which would also be cool.

    3. What did I read the other day????

      Graham is so deep in the closet he should be running for president of Narnia.

      (Sorry, no H/T. Can’t remember who posted that.)

    4. America’s Next Top Nag

  23. Jennifer Lopez sued for ‘tarnishing women’s honor’ after raunchy Morocco gig sparks outrage

    Should J-Lo and her promoter face legal consequences from the lawsuit (very unlikely but possible), she could face up to two years in prison, putting her upcoming Las Vegas residency at risk.

    Not a huge fan of her music, but I find J-Lo extremely attractive.

    1. Not a huge fan of her music, but I find J-Lo extremely attractive.

      Duuuuhhh…

    2. … did not go down well in Morocco

      You know who else didn’t go down well in Morocco?

      1. William S. Burroughs intransigent house-servant, Kiki?

        1. +1 Interzone

      2. L. Ron Hubbard and the Sea Org?

      3. Ilsa Lund?

      4. Sailors trying to escape from the pirates?

      5. Bob Hope?

      6. Beru and Owen Lars?

    3. The horrible thing is that she was an interesting, if not great, actress. I could watch Out of Sight-era Lopez all day.

      And then she started singing and moonlighting in awful romcoms. The world is going to hell.

  24. Even the satirical magazine Krokodil, under Soviet rule, was able to criticize local party bosses:

    “Although political satire was dangerous during much of the Soviet period, Krokodil was given considerable license to lampoon political figures and events. Typical and safe topics for lampooning in the Soviet era were the lack of initiative and imagination promoted by the style of an average Soviet middle-bureaucrat, and the problems produced by drinking on the job by Soviet workers.”

    Just lay off the leaders at the top, and they were able to get away with it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krokodil

    Well, what do you think of a regime which won’t even allow you to criticize the local Party bosses?

    Will Reason staffers stand for it, or are they just…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeO3Kgp4JTg

  25. Mother Jones claims that ZEDE supporters admit the concept is imperiled without elaborating or quoting anyone. Thoughts?

    http://www.motherjones.com/moj…..easteading

    1. Wishful thinking on his part. There’s mounting opposition, but that would be expected. The tricky part with the ZEDEs isn’t establishing them, it’s whether they survive the next few transitions of power in the country.

      1. That’s what I thought. “Let my just project my hopes into this article right here”.

        I think the ZEDEs can easily survive those transitions if they don’t compromise. This will be easier with the ‘security forces’ they are allowed to have. China respects Hong Kong more or less even though they could pillage them at any time.

        1. Except they’ve got 5 years, tops, before having to deal with a mildly-to-highly hostile government looking to play politics. Honk Kong had 100.

          I’m being pessimistic. That way I’ll either be right or pleasantly surprised.

  26. Hi all of you stupid blowhards!

    Long time lurker (2008ish) who decided to ‘get official’ since you’ve gotten the attention of [REDACTED] because of the comments about [REDACTED}.

    Now you’ve graduated to “Blowhards of interest”.

    1. I’m kinda surprised they needed a subpoena to get names. I assumed they were all on file.

      1. Parallel construction, Fd’A.

      2. The query of the NSA database would take 16 months to complete.

    2. You know who else was lurking and thought we were “Blowhards of interest”?

      1. PB?

      2. Osama bin Laden circa 1992?

        (DISCLAIMER: although no person with an IQ above room temperature could interpret this as a threat, I wholly and unreservedly disavow any implied or explicit threats that could be construed from this post)

      3. The US Attorney General for Southern New York?

    3. Blowhards of interest

      Nice band name.

    4. “Long time lurker (2008ish) who decided to ‘get official’ since you’ve gotten the attention of [REDACTED] because of the comments about [REDACTED}.”

      You’d best keep your mouth shut as this is a topic we don’t discuss since 6/8/2015 at 7:01.

      1. We’re not supposed to talk about [REDACTED]?

        Shit, since I just created my account today, I have no way of knowing something that was mentioned on 6/8/2015 at 7:01!

        Can we come up with a cool name for them? Reason Six? Deep Dish 6? Dirty Half-Dozen?

        1. ignominious Basterds..

      2. Stop mentioning the war!

  27. After Classmates Found A Dead Teen’s Brain On A Field Trip, His Family Sued New York City

    The New York State Court of Appeals decided on Wednesday that coroners have no obligation to tell you whether they removed your loved one’s brain during an autopsy

    and stored it in a jar in public with his name on it.

    1. This one’s from someone named Abby.

      1. +1 EyeGor..

        1. At least they didn’t throw it in a hole in the ground.

    2. O, Lord, preserve the medical examiner and his family in excellent health, and if they should happen to die, then let them be buried with all their body parts intact, and to not under any circumstances permit their brains to be stuck in jars marked with their names, where the said brains can be mockingly and improperly be made into footballs for the entertainment of the local high-school football teams.

      1. And preserve the medical examiner, and all public officials in New York, in all health for many years, and do not let them under any circumstances catch any diseases from the prostitutes they (theoretically, that is) frequent, and certainly do not let them catch syphilis or HIV or ghonorrea or other sexually transmitted diseases, and may they fuck only healthy camels and avoid any form of infection, amen.

        1. That’s so sweet!

          I’m sure if they read those prayers, they’d be touched and grateful to you.

        1. I see you, baby, shaking that asterisk…

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0I5Heo8Qds

    3. Man, wait till they see the brain room. They’re gonna go batshit.

      Though it’s mostly chunks of brain there are quite a few whole brains.

      But I’m pissed that our school didn’t get the morgue field trip.

  28. the one thing almost everyone would agree is fucking stupid and the worst decision of all would be to send troops overseas, put them in a position where their deaths would give great PR advantages to ISIS, but insist that they shouldn’t be doing any fighting

    Well, yeah. As a practicality, it would never work, but I would rather see for real American mercenary brigades paid in gold by the Iraqi Oil Ministry actively waging a ground war than the half-assed clusterfuck tar baby we will undoubtedly wind up with.

    1. The weird thing is that Iraq is pumping more oil than ever despite ISIS controlling a chunk of the country. Your idea has merit.

  29. USA! USA!
    Team USA defeats the reigning World Cup champion, Germany.

    1. But if there were no Italians involved who screamed “GOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAL”?

      1. It’s the Argies who say that. The Italians just sing arias poorly.

    2. Rolling through Europe like 1944.

  30. NSFW: Miley Cyrus: Singer Discusses Coming Out as Bisexual to Her Mother as a Teen in Paper Interview

    She recalls confessing to her mother, at age 14, that she had romantic feelings toward women. “I remember telling her I admire women in a different way. And she asked me what that meant. And I said, I love them. I love them like I love boys,” she says. “And it was so hard for her to understand. She didn’t want me to be judged and she didn’t want me to go to hell. But she believes in me more than she believes in any god. I just asked for her to accept me. And she has.” These days, Cyrus only wants to grant others the same clemency.

    Uninteresting.

    1. I do not wish for Miley to burn in hell. Do not.

      1. Do you mean Would not? And by that do you mean Would?

    2. Miley Cyrus got her ass beat by Joan of Arc:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQx1sqPHTrk

    3. I always told my nieces that Hannah Montana was a raging slut

  31. For once, I can sincerely say, let’s get away from controversial issues and go to this…

    “Nearly one hundred forty years ago in 1879?in a time far removed from our own in many ways?the United States Supreme Court decided Reynolds v. United States, holding that criminal laws banning polygamous marriages did not violate the U.S. Constitution. That decision, infamously laden with contentious and arguably offensive language by modern sensibilities but also affirming traditional marriage norms long taken for granted in the Western tradition, has generated discussion and controversy ever since. That decision also remains good law.

    1. Fast forward to the present: in just a few weeks, when the Court hands down what will no doubt be a long anticipated and highly contentious decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, 1 the Court will answer whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license marriages for same-sex couples. While many believe the Court is poised to answer that question affirmatively, assuming it will, it is far less clear how expansive or limited the decision’s holding will be or what implications will flow from its rationale. At oral argument, Justice Alito pressed the petitioners as to the logical implications of a holding in favor of same-sex marriage, asking, “Suppose we rule in your favor in this case and then, after that, a group consisting of two men and two women apply for a marriage license. Would there be any ground for denying them?” 2 In other words, would a holding in favor of a constitutional right to same-sex marriage inevitably require recognition of a constitutional right to polygamous marriage as well?”

      http://law.emory.edu/elj/conte…..eword.html

      1. I can honestly say that I’d be up for a certain type of group marriage. Would not necessarily have to be sexual with more than one person, but for the purposes of rearing children, sharing property, and just generally being around people that I love, yeah, I’d be down with that.

      2. What’s magic about the number “2”, anyway?

          1. Wow, I can’t remember the last time I heard that song

        1. It’s the smallest prime number?

          1. That would be ‘1’.

          2. It’s the only even prime number.

        2. I have my sights set on petitioning the courts for the first zero-person marriage. Let’s end discrimination against non-persons once and for all!

      3. I am not qualified to tell other people who and in what manner they can associate with others, and neither is the pope or the supreme court.

        Also, I make all of the decisions about who and in what manner I associate with others. Changing that is simply not up for discussion.

      4. I think the better question is a marriage between a policeman and a police dog going to be OK? After all, police dogs have more rights than ordinary human citizens.

    2. the United States Supreme Court decided Reynolds v. United States, holding that criminal laws banning polygamous marriages did not violate the U.S. Constitution.

      Because no SCOTUS decision was ever wrong or made for political purposes.

      /Filburn

      1. Scott, Slaughter-House, Lochner, Miller, Kelo, NFIB, Filburn.. float the boat..

    3. “also affirming traditional marriage norms long taken for granted in the Western tradition”

      Someone get word to Abraham and Solomon that they are non-traditional radicals.

  32. Reinvade Iraq – must find Saddam’s nuclear bomb

    Also tax and regulate farts.
    The stinkier the more tax you pay.

  33. Drudge picks up on 7:01, linking to Bloomberg.

    1. Cannot get the shit back into the horse…

    2. Check the box for NPR as well. The softy-soft NPR progs (who, in their defense, apparently lack the deep insight that progressivism is not a political philosophy advocating peace, charity, and classical music) are 80% opposed to the harassment.

      Which now exhausts my annual quota for pleasant surprises. It’s all terrible news from here on out, folks.

  34. My classmate’s step-aunt makes $61 hour on the internet . She has been fired from work for nine months but last month her pay check was $12801 just working on the internet for a few hours. try this out.
    GO TO THE SITE TEC NEXT TAB FOR MORE INFO AND HELP
    ????? http://www.workweb40.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.