Glenn Garvin TV Reviews

Sharks and Snarks: A Bland Cuban Documentary and Unfunny Noir Parody Inspire Shrugs

Don't expect a whole lot from Tiburones: Sharks of Cuba or The Spoils Before Dying.


"Tiburones: Sharks of Cuba," Discovery Channel

Within weeks of the Obama administration's announcement last December that it would resume diplomatic relations with Cuba, the Internet nearly sank under the weight of new pages urging everybody to "see it now before it changes." Because, apparently, a poverty-ridden, one-party police state teeming with cheap hookers and expensive mojitos would quickly be vulgarized by an influx of American tourists once U.S. travel restrictions eased.

The new fascination with all things Cuban (except, of course, its boorish political prisoners, still ignored in polite progressive society) has now been officially enshrined in American popular culture with the inclusion of Tiburones: Sharks Of Cuba in the Discovery Channel's venerable Shark Week programming. You will know the trend has run its course and become unhip when the Syfy network announces production on Sharknado 4: Fidel Bites.

The point of the documentary, says its narrator, is "to see if Cuba really is a hotbed of monster sharks." This is not, as you might suspect, an ironic Cold War reference to the Castro brothers, but to the 70-year-old tale of El Monstruo (The Monster), a great white shark who in the waning days of World War II haunted the waters off Cojimar, a Cuban fishing village a few miles west of Havana.

When local fishermen got tired of having their catches decimated by El Monstruo, they went out hunting him in a small boat, which he promptly chewed a big hunk off of, just like the great white in Jaws. Though this might might sound like a bit of delusionary, pre-revolutionary false-consciousness, the fishermen eventually harpooned El Monstruo and hauled him ashore (where he checked in at 21 feet in length and 7,000 pounds) to be properly photographed. Thus was born ichthyologist porn, rumored to be the subject of next year's Shark Week lead documentary.

This all sounds promising, but Tiburones mostly turns out to be all hype and no hook as it follows a joint expedition of American and Cuban scientists as they observe and electronically tag some sharks in the waters surrounding the island. They see plenty, but they're mostly an undersized and rather mellow lot. Cuban divers even swim up to the sharks, grab their fins, and massage their bellies, which the sharks seem to regard as amusing, at least until tags are punched through their fins, and even then they simply swim away, miffed rather than vengeful.

Tiburones has its moments, particularly in its gorgeous underwater photography of sharks gliding silently and inscrutably around the coral reefs in Cuba's blue waters. It's also plenty entertaining to listen to the inane commentary of American environmentalists along for the trip.

"It's pristine!" gasps one as the boat moves along the Cuban coastline. "It's beautiful, like the Florida Keys was 80, 100 years ago, before all the people," of whom maybe a million or so would be in Cuba making unsightly clutter if the Castro regime hadn't sent them scrambling aboard inner tubes in hope of floating to Florida.

But all's well that ends well. One of the Cuban scientists in Tiburones says enough sharks were tagged that his government can now collect "the data that is necessary for sustainable management and use of sharks" and embark on the island's first National Plan of Action for Sharks. If previous national programs on the production of milk and sugarcane are any indication, Cuba should be shark-free in a year or two.

Unlike those in Tiburones, the laughs in IFC's The Spoils Before Dying are intentional, but only slightly less sporadic. This three-hour miniseries (it airs on three consecutive nights) from Will Farrell and some of his Saturday Night Live buddies is a send-up of 1950s film-noir that more closely resembles another classic Hollywood product: an overinflated boob job.

The first Spoils project, 2014's The Spoils Of Babylon, lampooned TV miniseries of the 1980s. This one takes on hard-bitten 1950s detective flicks. (The pentimenti of Howard Hawks' The Big Sleep and Orson Welles' Touch of Evil are particularly prominent.)

Michael Kenneth Williams (who played memorably murderous gangsters in both Boardwalk Empire and The Wire) plays Rock Banyon, a scuffling jazz pianist being framed for the murder of his singer girlfriend Fresno Foxglove (SNL's Maya Rudolph). He flees to Mexico to team up with another of his former singers, Delores O'Dell (SNL's Kristin Wiig). You soon can't tell the double- and triple-crosses without a scorecard.

The bad jokes, however, are unmistakable, and should you miss one while looking around for something sharp to jab in your eye, fear not: It will be beaten like the world's biggest and deadest horse. A Mexican gangster with a Transylvanian accent is pretty funny the first time he speaks; by the 10th, not so much. And a jump-jazz number with lyrics consisting of nothing but "give me some booze and pills" goes from ironic to homicidal in record time.

The funniest notes in Spoils are inevitably struck in the background, particularly in its opening credits, which include screen credits for "inner-ear collages" and "Bastille-o-Vision" cameras. Then there's the framing story, with Farrell as novelist-turned-director Eric Jonrosh (think of Welles in his lard-bucket "sell no wine before its time" incarnation), introducing Spoils as his long-lost masterpiece of "post-post-post-modern neo-French fake-ism." What do you bet that turns up on a Wellesley course syllabus this fall?

Tiburones: Sharks Of Cuba. Discovery Channel, Tuesday, July 7. 10 p.m. EDT.

The Spoils Before Dying. IFC, Wednesday, July 8. 9 p.m. EDT.

NEXT: Reason Weekly Contest: Give Greece a New Slogan

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “the Internet nearly sank under the weight of new pages urging everybody to “see it now before it changes.” Because, apparently, a poverty-ridden, one-party police state teeming with cheap hookers and expensive mojitos would quickly be vulgarized”

    I urge these evil fuckers to eat shit and jump into a woodchipper.

  2. Excellent snark, Glenn, throughout.

    This kind of mockery we could use more of. The one thing the lefty/proggies hate more than anything is being mocked.

    1. Excellent snark, Glenn,


    2. This kind of mockery we could use more of. The one thing the lefty/proggies hate more than anything is being mocked.

      Mark Steyn has been on the “forget politics and start battling for the cultural ground” train and has agitated like hell for a conservative/libertarian version of Daily Show/Real Time/This Week.

      I posit that Glenn should be the lead writer for such a program with stuff like this. I, however, am uniquely qualified to host it.

      1. The problem here is that conservatives aren’t funny.

        1. I’m not a conservative, but a libertarian, and I’ve been told I have a pleasant humor about me.

          there’s even a podcast where I demonstrate my milquetoast comedic chops

          1. Your views on immigration aren’t libertarian.

            1. Your views on foreign policy aren’t libertarian.

        2. Meanwhile, everyone laughs at Canadian chickenhawks…

          1. You mean the ones going around promoting that standing armies go around bothering people and sacrificing lives of those who serve……while never serving themselves?

            1. And proclaiming that the reason he doesn’t serve is because he’s too smart and society is best served by the exercising of his intellect.

              1. I don’t care about ‘society’, I care about me. I am best served by 1) not joining the army though I toyed with the idea and 2) the army and the rest of the government actively acting against threats to my individual rights, like AQ.

                Face it: you only whip out this insipid shit and the meaningless/irrelevant ‘chickenhawk’ buzzword or make retarded statements like ‘you lust for US intervention’ because you can’t lay a finger on my arguments. Pwnd, almost without fail.

        3. I would argue that Mark Steyn is pretty funny. Steyn literally wrote the book on Broadway criticism, He’s a somewhat well respected broadway critic.

  3. The Spoils Of Babylon seemed promising, but I could not get through more than a few minutes, and I am their target audience (white, college-educated, smug, superior, easily amused).

    The first season of Danger 5 (recommended in this very chatroom by the esteemed Epi) is so much better at the parody game, with a far smaller budget and lesser-known cast.

    1. Parody doesn’t need a budget. SCTV did amazing stuff on a shoestring, including John Candy as an awesome Orson Wells. You need writers who understand the material, and actors who won’t let their egos get in front of it.
      Danger 5 is totally awesome at what it does, and, despite no budget, they went out of their way to make it look right to their inspiration (men’s magazines of 50s and early 60s), including color palette and hair. Plus, really good cast with awesome chemistry. And Ilsa…mraaaawr….

      1. Pan, don’t make me get my sit-down gun.

    2. Spoils was great fun. You should give it another chance, I “besweech you”.

      P.S. The gif linked to your handle does in fact make me chuckle sensibly.

  4. …from Will Farrell and some of his Saturday Night Live buddies is a send-up of 1950s film-noir…

    Steve Martin did it first.

    Will Farrell, you are still unfunny. (except for Stranger Than Fiction, which was really well written)

    1. Dammit, I was thinking Dead Men Don’t Wear Plaid!

      That having been said:

      A Mexican gangster with a Transylvanian accent is pretty funny the first time he speaks; by the 10th, not so much.

      It’s been done before: Bela Lugosi played a Latin American businessman in Broadminded. Back in 1931.

      1. I was wondering if you had seen DMDWP.

        That answers that.

      2. I still think Moroni in Johnny Dangerously does one of the most timeless “Stupid Gangster Villains” ever

        His “arbitrary ethnicity” is kind of what sells the mega-stupid. He’s mexican/hindu/cypriot or something, faking an italian accent so badly that it becomes its own meta-joke.

        1. Oh man, Moroni was hilarious, and helped get through the day sometimes at my prior job. My old boss was an Egyptian tyrant who would mangle the English language and looked just like him, with phrases like “play it by the ears” and “make it work like a stopclock”.
          Fucking bastiches!

          1. Fargin’ bastiches, if you please.

            1. Jew fargin icehole!

    2. Will Farrell, you are still unfunny.

      Stewie Griffin agrees.

      1. Family Guy also still unfunny.

    3. And Will Farrell was pretty much the straight man in that film (which I love). He was touching enough, but the least funny actor in it.

      1. I can only thank that movie for one reason: introducing me to Wreckless Eric.

  5. OT – The New York Times has an article about

    “…a pilot program that was organized by the Charter Oak Cultural Center in Hartford and the Hartford Police Department. The 12-week program brought together about 20 middle-school boys, most of them black or Hispanic, and six police officers for classes at the center this spring, one on how to rap and the other on how to play the guitar. The program will continue through the summer and expand in the fall to up to 60 boys and 15 officers. (Organizers decided on classes just for boys, because they are more likely to have confrontations with officers.)…

    “After 10 weeks of classes, the boys and the officers joined the cultural center’s other music students for its annual spring concert….

    “”Actually, it was more stressful performing than being out on the road,” Officer Sposito said.

    “As the rap performance began, three officers stood stiffly behind the boys, feet spread wide, grinning, hands on their belts. By the time the rap was finished, they had joined in the chorus and were smiling broadly, clapping to the beat.”…..&smtyp=cur

    1. Good god, its Cop Rock, 2020.

    2. Of course they were smiling – the overtime just paid for Summer vacation.

  6. Ah, Saturday Night Live. Driving jokes not only into the ground, but through the mantle and into the core, for forty years. My fellow tail-end baby-boomers soooo love that show. Me, not so much. The various alumni have produced maybe a handful of watchable films (Ghostbusters, Beverly Hills Cop. Anybody got any others?). For the most part, I don’t find a connection to the show to be a recommendation.

    1. I remember John Candy’s films tended to be good, in particular is Uncle Buck.

      1. Uncle Buck is very good. I particularly like the hatchet scene. In addition to the ones already mentioned, Groundhog Day is excellent. Not great, but decent: The Coneheads.

        1. ++Groundhog Day

      2. Pretty sure that Candy wasn’t an SNL cast member, although I could be wrong.

    2. Blues Brothers is awesome. Lots of people love Animal House (Belushi). Wayne’s World and first Austin Powers movie are quite funny.

      1. I agree with your choice. Eddie Murphy made some fantastic movies, as did Akryod. Chevy Chase was in some funny movies, and Ferrell made some good ones as well. Tommy Boy is funny. There are a lot. There is also a whole heap of shit.

        1. Oh! How could I forget Groundhog Day; it’s a classic.

        2. The only time I’ve ever really enjoyed Will Ferrell was in Elf.

          1. Elf is great. It is not easy to make a low-brow, funny movie. I think Farrell was able to do it successfully in the first Anchorman, and in Step Brothers.


            2. Step Brothers also has John C Reilly, who is always awesome, imo. I’m not sure I would’ve even liked the movie if he hadn’t been in it.

              1. Step Brothers also has John C Reilly

                And Richard Jenkins. The character actors, or ancillary characters, in comedies such as Step Brothers have to kill it, and Jenkins surely does.

                One of my favorite scenes (nsfw for potty talk).

            3. I forgot Anchorman. That was pretty good (though not as good as Elf).

              1. Only because of Paul Rudd and David Koechner, noted Chiefs/Royals fans.

                Pretty much the funny bone is unique to Kansas City sports fans. When you watch Lin Elliot miss three field goals you have to develop a sense of humor.

      2. Blues Brothers hit it out of the park. The concept sounds lame and forced, but the way they did it happened to be awesome.

        1. If I had heard that some SNL people were doing a movie with lots of celebrity appearances, musical numbers, and explosions, I would have laid odds that it would suck.

          But it was very, very good. It’s like lightning striking twice in the same place – unlikely but really impressive.

    3. Animal House? Caddyshack?

      1. Were they really directly out of SNL? They just happened to have a couple of guys from SNL in them. I don’t think SNL when I watch those.

        1. Since the original question listed Beverly Hills Cop and Ghostbusters, I figured it was movies with SNL alumni in it, not movies that came out of a SNL skit.

          1. Okey-dokey.

      2. Never seen Animal House. Caddyshack was…a letdown.

        1941 had a pretty good score.

        Would Three Amigos count? I like that one.

        1. Wait, what? Caddyshack is a no…. and Los Tres Amigos es un ‘si!”? Que?

          Kids these days…..

          1. Bill Murray was annoying, Chevy Chase was unfunny, the story was bland and cliched, the gopher was poorly animated, the jokes were dated and dumb, Ted Knight’s comedic talents were wasted. The only amusing character in the movie was Rodney Dangerfield.

            The Kenny Loggins theme song was good.

    4. All of Adam Sandler’s stuff is totally awesome.

        1. I don’t understand all the h8, m8.

        2. Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 420/360noscopeyoloswag

        3. The guy in the middle looks kinda like Curley from the Three Stooges.

        4. Ugh. British ‘people’.

        1. “You would really just have to be a stick-in-the-mud to not have a good time with these funny guys.”


          “That’s right, Jay. This movie was like being on vacation with a bunch of old buddies. And when Adam Sandler comes around, you know it’s the height of the movie season.”


      1. *Barf*

      2. Will Ferrel: Barely watchable
        Adam Sandler: Avoid at all costs
        Norm MacDonald: Return to the box office and demand my money back.

        … Hobbit

    5. Fletch Iⅈ

    6. I thought Joe Dirt was pretty funny as well. In a retarded sort of way.

    7. I liked The Ladies Man.

      *ducks and runs*

    8. It’s Pat

  7. Cuba/Castro Brothers=Good

    Dukes of Hazard=Bad

    United States, you now officially suck. You are a joke.

    1. They should make a Dukes parody called The Dics of Cuba.

      1. + Daisy Dukes…..en-photos/

    1. Ellen Pao has the midas touch.

      1. Except feces instead of gold.

    2. Ha ha ha ha! To funny when a prog in charge let’s their authoritarian claws poke out too far and poke other progs standing in the ranks. Especially when the progs in the ranks can take their ball and go home.

    3. Can Reddit please just die?

      1. It’s as dead as slashdot to me. The Internet is better than cable because I don’t even have to flip past channels that have gone to shit.

      2. I’ve never been there. Am I missing anything?

        1. No, and I’ve barely been there. It’s 4chan without even the previous past glory and hilarity 4chan could once boast of many years ago.

  8. It’s so much easier to talk about how much better Cuba’s system is–when the dissidents are all locked up and everyone else is too scared to speak out.

    There’s probably a lesson for the progressives in there somewhere. A terrifying, frightening lesson.

    1. Wait until they find out if Iran has free health.

      It’ll be the same crap.

      Dissidents, shmissidents.

    2. Nobody’s dying to get into Cuba.

    1. Quick – remove all Mexican flags from public buildings – that should help the situation!

    2. And I suppose a fence was going to keep him there?

      If it saves just one life…

      1. No fence necessary. Nor any of those eyescans, DNA or fingerprints. On the first, or second or third deportation just crop his ears and brand him on the forehead.

        1. Or just put him in jail instead of living out your violent fantasies at taxpayer expense.

          1. …living out your violent fantasies at taxpayer expense.

            Irony, motherfucker! Do you speak it?!

            1. It’s different when I want drone bombings of AQ. That’s to protect my individual rights.

              1. It’s different when…

                People keep saying this.

                It’s never different.

    3. Do you have a credible source to link to? Like ‘Not Breitbart’?

      1. Your bias is showing. And as it says in the link I posted, this is being reported by the local ABC affiliate.

        1. Then link to ABC instead of Breittard. Having standards is not ‘bias’. Some hilarious irony on your part.

          1. It’s not “having standards” to simply dismiss everything that a large news site publishes. That’s just a version of an ad hominem argument. It’s smarter to judge individual items individually, regardless of who reports them.

            I didn’t link directly to the ABC reference because it was just a tweet. The Breitbart piece linked to the tweet and had the rest of the story (as far as is known at this point).

    4. Using ‘immigrant kills person’ as an argument for more border control is just as retarded as using mass shootings for gun control. There’s every bit as much positive correlation between guns and crime as there is between immigration and crime: zero. (Possibly negative).

  9. I bet the Greeks can still afford their P.M. links…

    1. “Just spot me some P.M. links, man, you know I’m good for it, after I win big at the next horse race I will totally be able to repay you!”

      1. “You got any P.M. Lynx? Man, I got these cheesburgers, man. Man, I’ll suck yo dick, man!”

    2. The 4th is TOMORROW!

      What about us foreigners?

      1. Consider PM links absence a belated Canada Day recognition.

        1. Now please start a war somewhere and draft Cytotoxic and we’ll be even.

          1. Cyto already explained why he would receive a medical exemption from military conscription. While I vehemently disagree with the man on some issues I don’t fault people for medical conditions beyond their control.

            1. That’s right. My body is teh suck.

              1. So long as you can operate a joystick, you can fly a murder drone. Even if your life is not put at risk, I think your hawkishness may be tempered by having the blood on your own hands.

                1. Tempered? You do not know me well!

                  1. Spoken like a man whose never taken a life.

      2. Well last year on the 4th at the Irish bar across the street I listened to mariachi music on the jukebox all night. Still better than having to listen to Celine Dion.

        1. Now, now. No need to be rude.

          1. Beiber, Celine Dion, the “maybe” chick.

            Please stop ruining music Canada.

            1. On the other hand there is Lightfoot and Alanis. It balances out, that is what I am saying.

              1. The Guess Who have a few good songs.

              2. I don’t know about Alanis, the only thing I liked of hers is the My Humps parody, but there’s also Neil Young, Oscar Peterson, and Leonard Cohen

            2. Please stop ruining music Canada.

              Oh FFS… Skinny Puppy, Images in Vogue, Grapes of Wrath, 54-40, Jane Siberry, Silverstein, Handful of Snowdrops, Frontline Assembly, Plasterscene Replicas… just off the top of my head.

              Yeah I grew up on the border.

              1. Seems no one understands snark.

                Surprised at the lack of mentions for Rush, Neil Young, Deadmau5, and Leonard Cohen.

                1. Yeah, I like Deadmau5, also Arcade Fire

                  1. Yeah, I was like “one of those things is not like the other”. As in, WTF is a “Deadmau5”?

                    /Gen X-er

                2. Martha and the Muffins!

              2. Saw 54/40 at liberty lunch in Austin maybe ’90i don’t know. They were great. Never heard of them before or since. They opened for Bob mould and left him sounding like a loud open mic night.

                1. I love Bob Mould/Husker Du… I can see “loud” being the operative word there…. Out of the bands I listed, 54-40 is the only one I don’t have in my iTunes but for some reason the name stuck in my head all these years.

        2. Better than being all by yourself

  10. The Federalist wrote a post about Thomas Paine and one of the comments is the following:

    “Thomas Paine was just another smug, irritating Brit, like Piers Morgan or John Oliver.”

    Yes, the author of Common Sense, The Age of Reason, and The Rights of Man is really no different than Piers Morgan, a man best known for a phone hacking scandal.


    1. I thought he was best known for having a nutjob named Alex Jones on his teevee show?

      I did enjoy his interview with “Ice-T” where the rapper explicitly states that personal firearm ownership is to guard against government and government agents.

    2. Based on its origin, I suspect it’s all due to the fact that, as Theodore Roosevelt pointed out, Paine was a “filthy, little atheist“.

      1. “In the very beginning of the correspondence Mr. Roosevelt acknowledged that Paine was a Deist, not an Atheist; but he stubbornly persisted in the exactness otherwise of his characterization of Paine.”

        Just because Teddy Roosevelt criticizes you unfairly doesn’t make you some kind of saint. It just makes Teddy Roosevelt a dick, which we already knew to be true from other evidence.

        1. Oh, and please note that accusation of atheism was heatedly denied by Paine’s supporters…it’s almost as if back in those days, calling someone an atheist was a serious slur.

          So Paine wasn’t an atheist, he was a bleever who happened to disagree with Christianity and penned many anti-Christian remarks which atheists enjoy quoting. So a certain kind of atheist – the kind that is pissed off at a totally nonexistent Christian God – will forgive Paine’s Sky-Daddy beliefs because of his Christian-bashing.

          1. it’s almost as if back in those days, calling someone an atheist was a serious slur.

            Well, yes, it could get you imprisoned.

            So Paine wasn’t an atheist, he was a bleever who happened to disagree with Christianity and penned many anti-Christian remarks which atheists enjoy quoting. So a certain kind of atheist – the kind that is pissed off at a totally nonexistent Christian God – will forgive Paine’s Sky-Daddy beliefs because of his Christian-bashing.

            He didn’t like organized religion, yes, but Paine never denied the existence of a deity. I defy you to find one place where he did.

            1. “Paine never denied the existence of a deity. I defy you to find one place where he did.”

              Holy crap, I thought you were among the more intelligent commenters, yet you don’t get that I’m saying Paine *wasn’t* an atheist?

              The Eddie in your head sure seems like an asshole, and you can tell him that from me.

              1. I don’t know why such hostility is warranted. Seriously. What’s your deal today?

                1. I thought that you said I called Paine an atheist, after I said the opposite.

                  I hope you’ll forgive me – I’ve had some experience of saying one thing, and commenters claiming I’d said something totally different – and loading me with insults because my real-world remarks didn’t conform to what the voices in their heads assured me they said.

                  Now, if I got all worked up I apologize. I hope you’ll realize it didn’t come out of the blue. Sorry about all that.

                    1. OK, then, so basically Paine was a Deist and his opponents were Christians…while I care deeply about which of them won, I don’t see any philosophical reason why the atheists should care about the outcome of the battle…unless the atheists see Paine as one of theirs, a compliment which Paine would refuse indignantly.

                    2. Beats me. The point of my link was that it’s funny that Roosevelt had an epistolary exchange which centered around a debate over Paine’s grooming habits.

                    3. That part is outside my expertise.

                      But note that Robespierre was impeccably dressed and bathed. And Marat bathed a *lot.* So maybe sloppy dressing and bathing isn’t all that bad.

                    4. Note to federal officials: I’m not suggesting that stabbing Marat while he was in his bath was OK.

                      Best to wait until he’s out of the bath, then feed him into a woodchipper.

    3. Yeah, it’s unfair to Paine to compare him to Piers Morgan.

      It’s unfair to compare *Bill Clinton* to Piers Morgan.

      Piers Morgan, for all I’ve heard, is a major dick who wants Americans to be as disarmed and helpless as the Brits.

      But let’s not go overboard in the Paine love.

      Remember that Paine Praised the French Revolution, pooh-poohing Burke’s concerns that the Revolution would upend society and end in a military tyranny. Then the revolutionaries put Paine in prison and he got out of it alive only because of Robespierre’s beheading.

      So he was basically a sort of left-libertarian with a blind spot where his progressive allies were concerned.

      Good thing libertarians don’t do *that* anymore.

      1. His contemporaries were also frequently annoyed by his appealing to the sensibilities of the Octadecacentennials.

        1. Perhaps it should be Decennocticentennials.

      2. “Remember that Paine Praised the French Revolution, pooh-poohing Burke’s concerns that the Revolution would upend society and end in a military tyranny. Then the revolutionaries put Paine in prison and he got out of it alive only because of Robespierre’s beheading.”

        Paine was also outraged that the American Revolution didn’t result in the freeing of the slaves.

        He had a blind spot where the French Revolution was concerned but the French Revolution would have gone exactly as it had with or without Paine. The American Revolution, on the other hand, was helped immensely by the popularity of Common Sense, and if the Founders had listened to Paine re: slavery we would have avoided a bit of unpleasantness 80 or so years later.

        Paine was a great man who was sometimes wrong. I hardly think he was the only one.

        1. And in fact, Paine pissed off the actual crazies within the French Revolution so much they threw him in prison and were planning to execute him. So even though it took him longer to notice the problems brewing, once the revolutionaries were planning to cut his head off I’d say he’d found himself on the right side of history.

          Plus, Jefferson also supported the French Revolution initially and began to recoil from that support right around the time of Paine. So should we not acknowledge Jefferson’s brilliance due to his support for the French Revolution and his ownership of slaves?

          1. I cheerfully praise Paine for supporting the American Revolution, for acknowledging God, for opposing slavery….

            not so much for defending the French Revolution against Burke’s prophetic attacks (IIRC Burke was against slavery too; he certainly was an American sympathizer in the American Revolution), or for attacking Christianity.

            Jefferson isn’t honored today for his slaving or his French Revolutionizing, but in spite of same…he defended basic principles like, oh for example, “the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.”

  11. Comcast patched my line. I don’t understand Comcast hate. When I was a Verizon DSL customer, a fix would’ve required me to block off a whole day. Comcast gave me a two hour window, the tech showed up in the window, and he was done quick.

    Allagash Curieux is the beer for tonight.

    1. Good choice on beer.

      As for Comcast, I’ve heard their customer service support phone line is a nightmare and that’s been the primary complaint concerning them. The only other criticisms I’ve heard were NN supporters frothing about Comcast opposing the FCC ruling.

      My beer for the day/night is The Bruery Beret and then Black Market Brewing Rasberry Berlinerweiss.

      I like sours if you couldn’t tell.

      1. I just discovered Berliner Wie?e. White Birch Brewing in NH makes one and it is tasty.

        Flying Dog has a tart cherry beer. Supertramp. It’s pretty good.

        I hear sour beers are becoming popular now.

        Some Bruery beers are coming into Massachusetts now. I have a barrel aged stout from Bruery somewhere in my beer cabinet from a Massachusetts beer run.

        1. Sours do seem to be gaining traction among the masses as I’m seeing more and more breweries going that route. Though it can be a challenge because the wild yeasts and bacterias that are used in sour production are more difficult to sanitize and so you risk infection of other regular production batches. For that reason, The Bruery just opened up a second brewing facility to do all of their sour brewing.

          Also, my preference for sours is partly a function of climate. I find sours to be a very quenching beer choice during hot temperatures, which I get more than I’d like in SoCal. Were I resident of Mass, I imagine I’d drink a lot of stouts during the winter months.

          1. My preferences are for stouts (both Irish and Russian Imperial), porters, and wheat beers (preferably of the German variety) regardless of season.

            I mention Massachusetts not because I live there but because the beer selection is far better in Massachusetts than New Hampshire, where I currently live. Sellers of beer in New Hampshire are only allowed to sell beers on a State Liquor Commission approved list. Live Free or Die!

      2. NN supporters frothing about Comcast opposing the FCC ruling

        Which is funny because Comcast execs are huge huge Democrat supporters and funders.

        1. Don’t confuse Net Neutrality supporters with the facts.

  12. OT: isn’t there an app one of the commenters developed to read and comment on Reason? I’ve had it with the iPhone app.

    1. I know of plugins for Chrome and Firefox (full disclosure: I don’t use them because I’m slightly old school about commenting, but not to the point of eschewing threading). reasonable and fascr are two. I don’t know of any apps.

      1. I would be lost without reasonable. The HTML shortcuts and the comment history are gold.

      2. Ah, right. It was Fascr know that you say it. I recalled it being an app, not a plug-in. Sigh, one day perhaps…

    2. I’ve never understood the use of various apps and plugins for reason commenting. I simply dictate what needs to be said to my brightest orphans who transcribe it into internet ether.

      Also provides a viable line of defense against lawyers from the Justice Derpartment, as I can prove definitively that I’ve never once typed any of the phrases credited to me.

    3. firefox add-on version of Reasonable

      requires Grease Monkey. works like a charm

  13. Don’t tell the SoCons about this, they’ll think it confirms their gay-bashing, Islamophobic prejudices.

    “Aina Khan, a London solicitor who specialises in sharia, told Frances Gibb, legal editor of The Times, that there are now as many as 100,000 sharia marriages in the UK….

    “A previous report by the charity AURAT which helps victims of so-called “honour” based violence found that two-thirds of sharia marriages were polygamous….

    “There are fears that the growth in use of sharia is creating a parallel legal system within the Muslim community in this country. [the UK].”…../57941.htm

    1. The Western world a generation henceforth (if not less) will be limited to a choice between prog groupthink tyranny and Islamic sharia tyranny. Neither are favorable to markets nor free minds. The great question for some libertarians is, given the limited barely-lesser-than two evils choice, which do you choose?

      1. I’m not a libertarian, but I would volunteer the answer “dying in the last ditch.”

        1. The question assumes death fighting is not an option. I usually say “Islamist” with the caveat that I will quickly be executed for my substance abuse issues.

          1. To be fair, most regimes through history have been fairly oppressive but people have been able to live with them, or if not, they get killed. I’d love to have a few extra decades to dick around, but if I’m cut down before then, why not on behalf of some worthy cause?

            1. I turn 33 in August and am therefore convinced I only have one year left on this rock.

              All of the greatest men die at 33.

              1. OK, you win the testosterone contest.

                1. I figured that’d get you to concede, though you probably place Jesus as the most important man on that list. Mine is Derrick Thomas.

                  1. Ooooookay, then…let me just walk away kind of quickly…

              2. I turn 33 in August and am therefore convinced I only have one year left on this rock.

                I, too, was convinced that 33 was going to be the year of my last act. When I was 33 I hiked down and back the Bass Trail in the Grand Canyon and bought the house that I’m currently living in.

                I’m 61 and counting. Age is a number, not a state of mind.

                … Hobbit

      2. I choose to ignore your bullshit fearmongering and false dicohotomies. Only idiots think Sharia law is seriously coming to North America or Europe.

        1. Sharia isn’t coming to North America at any time soon, but Europe I suggest is a different matter due to their twin scourges of low native birthrates and high Muslim immigration. For the forseeable future, North America is largely immune, though I wouldn’t be shocked if the high feelings of disaffection with the cultural progressive order and the lack of an animating identity/ethos gains increasing adherents in the States.

          1. There are no Sharia Ghettoes in Europe either they are a right-wing urban legend. Even the progenitor of this myth (2006), a Mr. Daniel Pipes, admitted as much.

            1. Is there officially recognized Sharia law in any of these places yet? No. Are there entire districts within European cities where there are non-state actors roving around and enforcing sharia law penalties upon their co-residents and even families in the form of honor killings, roaming sobriety/female modesty enforcers, and dissidents? Yes. Are there significant and growing minorities that have a stated preference for Sharia as the law of the land? Yes. Are there native and indigenous populations in Europe that are reproducing at below replacement levels while Muslim layabouts siphon increasing welfare money, study and spew Sharia rhetoric, and reproduce at levels well above replacement? Yes.

              It’ll never cease to amaze me how you can see dragons that need be slain all across the world while you’d readily import them the few remaining holdouts for genuine human freedom.

              1. Are there entire districts within European cities where there are non-state actors roving around and enforcing sharia law penalties upon their co-residents and even families in the form of honor killings, roaming sobriety/female modesty enforcers, and dissidents? Yes.

                I literally just explained to you that’s bullshit.

                you’d readily import them the few remaining holdouts for genuine human freedom.

                The freedom to ‘import’ them is part of that genuine human freedom.

                The ‘immigration-acolypse’ is truly the right’s version of global warming, you just can’t decide whether it is Sharia or Mexicans that we should be more afraid of. Either way, when it never happens (and it never does) you’ll continue to just make stuff up.

                1. Why don’t we settle this scientifically. We just take Cytotoxic, place him in various neighborhoods around Europe with an easel and big pad of paper, and have him draw pictures of Mohammed eating a ham sandwich.

                  1. Great idea as long as you’re paying. But I have to be honest: you’re wasting your money. Pipes already went there:

                    Pipes now says he was mistaken. In 2013, after traveling to several listed Paris neighborhoods and mainly immigrant and Muslim areas of five other European cities, he wrote: “For a visiting American, these areas are very mild, even dull. We who know the Bronx and Detroit expect urban hell in Europe, too, but there things look fine ? hardly beautiful, but buildings are intact, greenery abounds, and order prevails. ? Having this first-hand experience, I regret having called these areas no-go zones,” he wrote.


                2. When Cytotoxic is the voice of Reason, this comment section has truly reached Blaze-worthy status.

                  Let’s make decisions based on collectivizations of various large groups!!! THAT’S libertarian, of course!

              2. I think Europeans will put a stop to this process long before it “takes over”. It won’t be pretty, either.

                1. I’d put my money on a prog/Islamist alliance doing the “won’t be pretty” stuff to the PEGIDAs of Europe rather than the other way around.

                  1. At which point the otherwise apathetic majority will rise up and say “enough of this shit”.

                  2. You should throw some Ebola in there for maximum pants-shitting.

                  3. You should throw some Ebola in there for the pants-shitting money shot.

              3. “Are there native and indigenous populations in Europe that are reproducing at below replacement levels while Muslim layabouts siphon increasing welfare money, study and spew Sharia rhetoric, and reproduce at levels well above replacement? Yes.”

                Oh my goodness, it’s Yellow-Peril-ism not even thinly veiled that goes basically unchallenged here. The cancer is basically stage four.

      3. Yeah, dystopian as it sounds I have the training, equipment, and ammo to end up dead behind a sandbagged berm, knee-deep in spent casings, with a couple hundred of their dead spread out in front of that berm after their last human wave finally gets past whoever I had armed to cover the flanks.

        I doubt it will be the progs themselves.

      4. No, once it becomes clear how ordinary non-Muslim Westerners are boned by the other two (and usually in collusion), they’ll probably have fascism too.


  15. The F-35 failed in a test dogfight against the F-16.…..g-problems

    1. canned retort = “The F-35 is not designed to dogfight and no opposing aircraft will ever get within dogfighting distance”

      1. NO ALTERNATIVES /area idiot

        1. its a more-fair point than you give credit for. its not exculpatory however.

          the fact is that we could designed and fielded something more practical, more applicable to current demands, in less time for far less money, but for the godawful way the Pentagon does everything.

          IOW, its not about the plane… its about the system that brought the plane into being for such an absurd amount of money over such an absurd amount of time.

          The empire st building was constructed in the depths of the depression in record time, and by all measures was built to exceptional quality.

          The @#()* ‘freedom tower’ is a horrific POS that took billions of dollars and over a decade to build, and they’re not even done making it more expensive and less-useful

          Basically, as far as i’m concerned, both the F-35 and 1 World Trade are just means to an end= shoveling money into the bottomless pit of cronyism.

          1. its a more-fair point than you give credit for. its not exculpatory however.

            Its less of a fair point when you consider that not long ago, the AF brass and contracters were swearing (in 2003) that . . .

            The plane would be “a single-pilot, survivable, first-day-of-the-war combat fighter with a precision, all-weather strike capability that uses a wide variety of air-to-surface and air-to-air weapons?and that defends itself in a dogfight.”

   when-is-the-f-35-not-a- dogfighter-when-it-s-convenient-2fb1f233f42

            1. They’ve been moving the goalposts for this AC once they realized that they couldn’t make it do all the things they wanted it to do for all three services.

              Which is fine – you start out with lofty goals and when you hit technology limits you make decisions on what to pare out.

              Their main problem is that the VTOL capability the Marines want puts design constraints on the airframe that are reducing the capabilities of the AC for the missions the Navy and AF want it for.

              The Navy needs a stealthy all-purpose fighter/attack that can carry more than 2 bombs internally and can do decent in dogfighting (in extremis), the AF needs a fighter that can do most of what the F-22 does, if not as well, at half the cost.

              What we’re getting is a decent, stealthy Harrier replacement and an AC that is not going to do what the Navy and AF want.

              1. perhaps my earlier comment should be revised to =

                “we could have built 2 different planes in far less time, for far less money, that would have been far more suited to their intended use…”

              2. Turning capability is less of a factor when you can employ a missile and kill a guy across the turn circle. If the F-35, or the F-16 for that matter, ever needs to go to the gun, things have gone really bad.

                You’ve given up turning performance for superior avionics, weapon employment capabilities and survivability.

                When’s the last time an F-16 had to use the gun in self defense?

                1. Didn’t they say the same thing about the F-4? Granted, AAMs were shittier then, but then they say history doesn’t repeat…it rhymes.

                  1. Didn’t they say the same thing about the F-4? Granted, AAMs were shittier then, but then they say history doesn’t repeat…it rhymes.

                    Yessssss but . . .

                    That was more due to hubris than anything else.

                    Modern AA missiles can (potentially) see the heat coming off the *front* of an aircraft, can see the heat of the exhaust from a wide angle (the Vietnam era missiles usually needed a view straight down the exhaust to the combustion zone) and can be fired from ‘off-boresight’ (from a decently wide cone in front of the attacking aircraft).

                    Not too much longer and they’ll be able to be launched at targets in the *rear*.

                    Of course, soon we’ll have ship and shore mounted lasers so the ability to jink and change aspect will become important again to prevent those lasers from dwelling on any one spot for long enough to penetrate.

                    So, dogfighting isn’t very important *now*, but in 15 years?

                  2. Didn’t they say the same thing about the F-4? Granted, AAMs were shittier then…

                    Funny, I just had this discussion a couple of months ago with my best friend (an F-15 pilot). He agrees. The missiles are orders of magnitude better and we really are where they thought they were in the 60s.

                    Not that I would advocate for no gun, it’s just not very damned likely it’ll ever be used. The B-1 doesn’t drop dumb bombs anymore…but it can.

                2. Here’s the deal – you’re not wrong but . . .

                  The F-35 was sold as being able to hold its own in a dogfight – and the AF has been claiming it could hold its own in a dogfight, until its become obvious that it can’t. Now they say it was never intended to.

                  And that’s fine. As you transition from paper to real world, you often have to give up on having the capabilities that the paper said you would. You can even still end up with a functional (if not great) piece of equipment – look at the Stryker.

                  But, the way the AF is going about this is to *cover up* the F-35’s departure from what was promised at the beginning. They’ve not been honest about having to pare back capabilities or about what the VTOL capabilities does to the other versions.

                  Because this aircraft was sold on it being a three service craft when most everyone said it would have been better to design a ‘low-end’ fighter for the Navy and AF and a separate Harrier replacement for the MC.

                  Though, admittedly, if that had happened, its likely the Marines would not have gotten their Harrier replacement.

                  And while the AF may not need the F-35 to be able to dogfight up close, the *Navy* needs a genuine multi-role aircraft – including the ability to be able to go toe-to-toe with any 4th gen fighter and come out on top.

                  So, the F-35 seems to meet the needs of the Marines, is too expensive for its place in the AF, and is a marginal (at best) replacement for the Super Hornet.

                  1. Fair nuff assessment.

                    BUT, it’s not like this is news to anyone but the public. I was briefed on the anticipated less than stellar turning performance of the F-35 (driven by weight) in 05. There were Navy guys in the room. It’s not like the AF kept this a secret and sprung it on the Navy after development was complete. They were part of the decision. And that decision was that they were willing to accept the decreased turning performance as they’d be made up for in other areas.

                    Prior to the F-22, the F-16 was, by far, the best close-in dogfighting machine in the world. That said, F-15s beat them all the time in close. Hell, there have even been documented cases where they’ve been beaten by Hornets flown by Navy guys (not often, however).

                    The navy has been flying inferior “dogfighting” aircraft since the Tomcat, which was an absolute wallowing pig. It’s a good thing there is more to ACM than turning performance. You play to your strengths and avoid situations where you’re weaker.

    2. OH, that’s old news. Why you keep bringing up old shit?

      Plus, like, the F-35 is totally not a fighter anyway, if the pilot gets within knife-fighting range he’s done something wrong, and the AF (and Navy) don’t really need it to be a fighter (even though its going to fill the majority of squadrons in both services) and it can too do all the things the A-1 can so we need to get rid of the A-10 right now!

      The AF brass and contractors are jumping through flaming hoops (while talking out both sides of their mouths) to justify this AC – not even the V-22 got this much hand-waving and look-over-there-ing to cover its development problems.

      All-in-all, it looks like the F-35 will be a credible *Harrier* replacement – and the Navy and AF will just have to deal with it being a mediocre Super Hornet replacement and a not very inexpensive ‘low’ for the AF’s ‘high-low’ mix – 98 mil unit cost for the F-35 vs 150 mil unit cost for the F-22.

      1. I brought it up because it was in the NP front. Can the USG please just buy a less advanced fighter for less money? Are the Chinese and Russian really going to win the next war if some of their planes are more advanced? The Germans had jet fighters no one else did and they did’t win.

        1. I was being sarcastic.

          1. Sorry.

          2. Sorry.

  16. The Racoons creator wants to bring his old show back, hopefully with less heavy-handed environmentalist and anti-capitalism bullshit. God so many cartoon remakes, and they all look bad.…..iginal-run

  17. “Just hours after Oregon officials announced that Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweetcakes by Melissa, would be fined $135,000 for their refusal to bake a cake for a lesbian wedding, Aaron Klein had a message for government officials: He has no plans of backing down.

    “He wants to silence anyone who opposes his point of view,” Klein told TheBlaze, speaking specifically about Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian, who has spearheaded the case against the couple. “Unfortunately, he’s doing this with the wrong Christian, because I fight back.”

    “Klein also delivered a message to Americans and business leaders about why he believes that his case is monumentally important.

    “”For years, we’ve heard same-sex marriage will not affect anybody,” he said. “I’m here firsthand to tell everyone in America that it has already impacted people. Christians, get ready to take a stand. Get ready for civil disobedience.””…..christian/

    1. He’s so fucking stupid he’d rather take a swipe at gay marriage (under the entirely wrong pretense that his troubles are a result of it) than just unite people behind his cause. Typical SoContard.

      1. Hmmm…I was under the impression that he was fined because he wouldn’t provide cakes for…wait for it…a gay wedding.

        Just because he connects the dots doesn’t give libertarians an excuse to turn their backs on him when he literally faces fines for exercising his religion.

        Oh, and Cytotoxic, aren’t you the infanticide guy?

        1. He got charged under a law that has nothing to do with gay marriage. Don’t worry Eddie, I’ll stand for him and his right to be stupid.

          I’d rather be the infanticide guy than a fucking Catholic. Why do you keep bringing that up? It’s not going to deflect from how stupid your arguments are.

          1. “nothing to do with gay marriage”

            Do you remember that *Simpson’s* episode where Homer had a bucket stuck to his head with very narrow eyeholes, and he wrecked his car, then said defensively that it had “nothing to do with the bucket?”

            1. “Legal experts and advocates for religious freedom are concerned about how the Supreme Court’s sweeping ruling legalizing same-sex marriage across the country will impact churches, and religious colleges and universities.

              “During a panel discussion hosted by The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, on Tuesday, Attorney Gene Schaerr said the decision could impact tax statuses, accreditations and employment decisions.

              “”The opinion launches a bunch of grenades that are still in the air,” he said.

              “He pointed to an exchange Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, arguing on behalf of the couples, had with Justice Samuel Alito during April’s oral arguments in the case. When Alito asked Verrilli if the court’s holding that a college was not entitled to tax-exempt status if it opposed interracial marriage would apply to a university or college if it opposed same-sex marriage, Verrilli said “it’s certainly going to be an issue. i don’t deny that.””


            2. Do you remember having an actual piece of evidence for your claim? No? Maybe you should RTFA.

              1. The article where the Solicitor General of the United States admitted that, in a regime of gay marriage, a school or college could endanger its nonprofit status if it forbids fornication and adultery…unless of course it makes an exception for same-sex couples with government marriage licenses – in other words, unless they recognize the “right to same-sex marriage” as announced by the Supreme Court?

                1. Way to move the goalposts. We’re talking about private business transactions here, not tax law.

                  1. Uh, I would suppose that a college taking in students would amount to the equivalent of a business transaction. And to slap a tax on that college because it forbids fornication and adultery – as those terms have been interpreted for thousands of years – is absolutely an illustration of the trend I was noting, and the Solicitor General reluctantly acknowledged this problem in oral argument.

                    1. I am opposed to tax law being used for social engineering – either tax them all or tax none of them.

                    2. I know that y’all are all libertarians…I’m just pointing out that the SSM crown aren’t libertarian, as indicated by the fact during the argument of the same-sex marriage case – a case which supposedly has nothing to do with private business transactions – the Solicitor General of the U.S. admitted that colleges which defend traditional marriage are subject to being slapped with higher taxes.

                      Bear in mind that the *Bob Jones* case – where the IRS jacked up the taxes of schools if they limited interracial relationships – was not based on any statute, but simply on the IRS’s regulations, which the Supreme Court upheld because fairness.

                      So to extend the *Bob Jones* precedent into the same-sex marriage field would not necessarily need a new statute, just a concurrence between the IRS and the Courts that it’s OK to punish private colleges from banning fornication and adultery, as traditionally defined.

                    3. just pointing out that the SSM *crowd*

          2. He got charged under a law that has nothing to do with gay marriage.

            This. We can defend this guy simply via “freedom of association” without having to drag marriage into it at all.

            1. Except that he didn’t refuse to bake the cake because the customers were gay; he refused to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding. Had they asked him to bake a Mardis Gras king cake presumably he would have done so. Unless, of course, he was anti-Catholic.

              1. And if he refused to serve Catholics, the answer would be to go to another baker, and leave a bad Yelp review for the anti-Catholic baker.

                There, problem solved – no need to call the cops.

                1. The test case would be for a non-gay same-sex couple who want to get married “for tax/inheritance/visitation rights” reasons. If he would bake a cake for them, then he’s only worried about the icky gays. If he refuses because his religious beliefs forbid him to participate in same-sex marriages, then it’s about the activity, not the proclivities of his potential customers.

                  1. Do you know any examples of fundy Sky-Daddy bleevers who are against gay couples but totally OK with same-sex couples trying to get same-sex marriage benefits?

                    If not, why even bring it up?

                    1. He is being charged with discriminating against people who are homosexuals. I argue that he was not discriminating against people, but against a ceremony with which he disagreed. I don’t think he broke the law. If someone wanted a cake for a N. B. Forrest birthday celebration, and he refused because he didn’t agree with celebrating Forrest’s b-day, I don’t automatically jump to the conclusion that he refuses to serve Southrons.

                    2. Yes, I totally agree, and I thank you for sparing me the need to provide a similar analogy (“OMG you think gays are like *Klansmen*?!?!??!”).

      2. than just unite people behind his cause.

        If people can’t get behind his cause, to not be fucking sued, because of what he happens to be saying, then they’ll never get behind it. It’s about freedom of speech, but you can’t see that because you’re so blinded by your hatred of socons.

        1. Lots of dumb people will get hung up on his stupid comments about SSM. I don’t like it but I am right.

    2. Eddie, if someone refuses to serve a Catholic and they sue, will you be littering so many discussion boards with deep moral objections? Because religion has and is a more protected category under anti-discrimination laws than sexual orientation.

      1. What are you babbling about this time? When did I ever call for anyone in the private sector to be coerced into serving Catholics?

        Oh, right, I never said any such thing, but the Catholics in your head said it, which for you amounts to the same thing, I suppose.

      2. “religion has and is a more protected category under anti-discrimination laws than sexual orientation”

        And what wonderful results this has led to! Clothing retailers can’t tell employees what to wear – because religious freedom – while meanwhile orders of nuns are threatened with crippling fines for filing the wrong form to get out from under the contraceptive mandate.

        And both results are advocated by the Obama administration. Almost as if coercing private business was more important than keeping the government out of religious matters.

        1. And the administration acknowledges that the Little Sisters of the Poor are entitled to the exemption, they just say that they’ve filed the wrong form.

          So if the administration gets its way, the Little Sisters of the Poor will be slapped with huge fines because they won’t provide contraception to their employees – while all the time the administration acknowledges that they have conscientious objections to this – because they filled in form A rather than form B.

  18. I’m guessing that the PM Links has been postponed because Fist will not put down the firecrackers long enough to write the first post.

    1. ‘ya know what I need now? A string of about 16k firecrackers. Three times up and down the sidewalk.


    Gays have a sense of entitlement? They might be arrogant noxious assholes? Never.

    1. Yeah, one of the things you learn from living around a lot of them is that gays can be just as obnoxious and slovenly and uncultured as any straight person.

      1. Those are the fabuless gays.

    2. The park deliberately does not provide garbage cans but gays are the noxious assholes.

    3. “The new park doesn’t have traditional trash cans, only recycling stations”

      This isn’t the gays fault.

      Its just an example of how fucking stupid San Francisco is.

      “”No trash cans! Because then people won’t litter! oh, but we need ‘recycling’. Because the environment. And those won’t attract homeless people to poach from them….. and because its like a community thing? we should only allow special politically connected volunteer charity groups handle ‘clean up’ of events….””

      “Revolutionary Green owner Teresa Bradley sums it up: “It’s a complicated political mess.” …What’s more, Bradley says scavengers looking for goods to recycle go through the trash, creating an even bigger mess.”

      “There’s an entitlement problem here and people think they can just trash the park,” she says. “We need to encourage people to pack out their own trash and cite them if they don’t. People leave Slip N Slides and couches behind for crying out loud. People should respect their city. There should be more police enforcement

      Its a simple case of Liberal Good Intentions resulting in exactly the shit they always do= huge amounts of money wasted, and a bigger mess than if they’d done nothing, and resorting to punishment when their stupid incentives system fails.

      Because just putting regular trash cans out is too simple.

  20. I hope this isn’t it for the weekend. Will we at least get a Baily Lineament “Feds something something now this industry is something” post?

    1. I like food. And food articles, too, I suppose.

  21. I’ll just leave this here…I may re-post it when more people are awake. It’s a fitting way to celebrate July 4th (/sarc).

    Florida judge restricts speech on the sidewalks around the court:

    “Demonstrations or dissemination of materials that degrade or call into question the integrity of the Court or any of its judges (e.g., claiming the Courts, Court personnel or judges are “corrupt,” biased, dishonest, partial, or prejudiced), thereby tending to influence individuals appearing before the Courts, including jurors, witnesses, and litigants, shall be prohibited on the Duval County Courthouse grounds”…..sidewalks/

    1. I can think of various responses…

      Like carrying banners reading “What Do I Think of Duval County Justice? I Can’t Complain” or “Duval County judges are pure-hearted, incorruptible, and their personal hygiene is above reproach.”

      Protesting the censorship itself, like with placards reading “the Duval County judges are [redacted] and [redacted]” or “Censorship is bad – (by court order, this sentiment does not apply to criticism of Duval County judges)”

      1. Or, you know, just a banner advertising woodchippers.

      2. “If only there were a thousand of each Duval County Justice!”

  22. The Indiana ACLU on the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Part One:

    “The timing of this legislation is all important to understanding its intent: the bill was introduced as a backlash reaction to achieving marriage equality for same-sex couples in Indiana,”…”We are deeply disappointed that the governor and state lawmakers have been tone-deaf to the cries of legions of Hoosiers–including businesses, convention leaders, faith communities and more than 10,000 people who signed petitions against the bill–who say they don’t want this harmful legislation to impair the reputation of our state and harm our ability to attract the best and brightest to Indiana.”…

    1. The Indiana ACLU on the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Part Two:

      “Indianapolis ? A state law that went into effect on July 1 that results in banning some sex offenders from attending religious worship violates both the state’s newly enacted Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, claim two men who filed suit against county officials yesterday.

      “The lawsuit, brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana on behalf of John Doe 1 of Allen County and John Doe 2 of Elkhart County, challenges Indiana Code ? 35-42-4-14, which prevents “serious sex offenders” from attending religious worship when the place of worship is “school property,” even though school is not in session during the time services occur. The men wish to attend church services without fear of being arrested, because church attendance and group prayer are essential to their ability to worship in a meaningful way.

      “”An absolute ban on attending religious worship substantially burdens plaintiffs’ exercise of religion under the recently enacted RFRA, and violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,” said ACLU of Indiana Legal Director Ken Falk. “The law, which is broadly drawn, is not the least restrictive means of furthering the government’s interest here.””…..nstitution

  23. Man mocks alligators, jumps in water and is killed by alligators

    Orange County Justice of the Peace Rodney Price told CNN affiliate KFDM that Woodward ignored verbal warnings and a posted “No Swimming Alligators” sign and seemed to mock the deadly creatures before going in the water.

    “He removed his shirt, removed his billfold … someone shouted a warning and he said ‘blank the alligators’ and jumped in to the water and almost immediately yelled for help,” Price said.

    1. That man is a hero. Even through his handicap he realized that his mere existence was holding back the upward progress of humanity and so selflessly auto-darwinated.

      The average IQ of the human race has been increased.

    2. Wait, the sign said “No Swimming Alligators”? Well, doesn’t that mean that the water should be safe because there are no alligators swimming around there?

      1. It was punctuation what killed him!

  24. Happy British Thanksgiving, Reasonoids!

  25. O.T. Here’s a big happy 4th of July “fuck you” to Governor Maggie “Skeletor” Hassan(-Smith D, N.H.) for holding up evaluation of, and promising to veto, the Alaska/Vermont-style concealed carry bill that cleared the legislature.

    It makes my skin crawl to think of that tinpot opportunist being a Senator.

  26. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ??????

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.