President Carter Has Brain Cancer, Grand Jury Declines to Indict N.J. Police, Bug Infestation Hits Burning Man Site: P.M. Links

|

  • Says he's "at ease."
    Credit: Mark Turner

    Cancer in former President Jimmy Carter's liver has also been spotted in his brain. He began radiation therapy today.

  • A grand jury has decided not to indict two New Jersey police officers who opened fire and killed a suspect who threatened them by … stepping out of his car with his hands raised in surrender.
  • Birthright citizenship is the latest subject of debate among presidential candidates, even though they realistically won't be able to implement any changes should they be elected, no matter what people think about "anchor babies."
  • The site for the impending Burning Man festival is infested with swarms of stinkbugs, but organizers are hoping they'll be gone by the end of the month when crowds show up.
  • Greek Prime Minister Alex Tsipras is stepping down just months after being elected and agreeing to cutbacks in order to secure another bailout.
  • An Oklahoma state senator has pleaded guilty to stealing $1.8 million from the Better Business Bureau in Tulsa, where he worked, and filing false federal tax returns. He also resigned from his seat.
  • Investigators are going to recommend vehicular manslaughter charges against Caitlyn Jenner over her role in a deadly car crash in Malibu. 

New at Reason.com:

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

NEXT: Hyperloop Project Inches Closer to Becoming a Real Thing

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. Investigators are going to recommend vehicular manslaughter charges against Caitlyn Jenner over her role in a deadly car crash in Malibu.

    Prison could make her regret transitioning.

    1. Hello.

      OH MY GOD WHAT WILL THE PC WORLD THINK OF CAITLYN NOW?!?

      1. S/he is a Republican, you know.

    2. Maybe that was the whole reasoning for it.

      1. Even I’m not that cynical.

    3. We’re going to hear non-stop about treatment of trans in prison now. Even though there is no way they’ll put a celebrity like Jenner somewhere dangerous.

      1. Nah, Jenner came out of the closet as a Republican. Jenner’s treatment in prison won’t matter to the usual suspects.

      2. We already do on OITNB.

        1. I’m typically pretty good with acronyms, but this one completely eludes me.

          1. Orange is the New Black

    4. Will they send him/her to a woman’s prison?

      1. The activist that heckled Obama demanded that all transgender people be released from prison. So there’s that.

        1. Can’t they build some one hundred person prison in the middle of Alaska and send all the trans there? It’s not like these guys are common, and the nasty environment for yard time ought to keep the non-mentally ill out.

      2. I suspect some type of house arrest, if that.

        1. For manslaughter? I’d be surprised.

          1. Things are different for the famous, wealthy, and connected. Plus they’d have to deal with the shrieking SJWs, and no one wants that.

          2. its vehicular manslaughter for a car accident in which she wasnt drunk or high. there may be some mitigating details we dont know about but it reeks of bullshit atm.

      3. Will they send him/her to a woman’s prison?

        Har, har, Drake, that’s a real knee-slapper. Almost as funny as “gays can marry…people of the opposite sex like everyone else.”

        1. Actually, that’s an excellent question. Seriously, what prison would they/could they send a pre-op trannie like Brucelyn to? What about post-op?

          1. I would assume, in the blind eyes of the state, that pre-op gets you put in the male population and post-op gets you put in the female population.

          2. Until recently, the answer would obviously be that Jenner would go to a men’s prison. If you were to ask the authors of the AP stylebook or OITNB, then clearly she goes to a women’s prison. But I guess, in Tonio’s world, the suggestion that this might be a contentious issue is trolling.

    5. Joe Rogan covers it pretty well.

      1. Joe Rogan’s standup is fucking genius.

        1. So is his overhand right!

          1. Here’s his bit on that tiger that escaped its enclosure at the San Francisco Zoo a few years back and attacked the kids that had been throwing shit at it:

            http://www.dailymotion.com/vid…..er_animals

            (use discretion at work)

    6. MANslaughter? Really?

      1. Seriously.

        That’s insensitive.

        It should be ‘Transgenderslaughter’.

        1. The victim was a woman. So, womanslaughter or personslaughter would be more accurate.

          1. Stop gendering the victim. What if they are gender fluid?

            1. Exactly.

              “It-slaughter”.

        2. Cis-PatriarchSlaughter…

      2. Mxslaughter

    7. Hmm, interesting. From what I could tell of the accident details, the Prius driver was primarily responsible for the accident.

      1. Maybe the Prius driver was also charged? But since the Prius driver is not a millionaire Olympic transvstite tv celebrity it’s not newsworthy?

    8. Maybe that’s why she transitioned?

      She knew she was going to jail and is trying to get sent to a womens prison instead of a mens prison

  2. The site for the impending Burning Man festival is infested with swarms of stinkbugs, but organizers are hoping they’ll be gone by the end of the month when crowds show up.

    Oh man. Too easy.

    1. is infested with swarms of stinkbugs

      But enough about BLM!?

    2. They write themselves, don’t they.

    3. God: Noah! Thy shalt build thyself an ark, measuring 300 cubits in length.
      McClure: 300 cubits… give or take.
      God: Exactly 300! And thou shalt taketh two of every creature.
      McClure: (writing it down) Two creatures.
      God: Two of every creature!
      McClure: Even stink beetles?
      God: Especially stink beetles!

    4. I’m going and I’m going to be extra super commando ready this year.

      1. No underwear?

        1. There really isn’t much of a purpose to underwear on the playa.

      2. Bring lots of Benadryl. The insect population at Pennsic was super freaky this year. I imagine it will be the same at Burning Man.

        1. I don’t think these are particularly bitey, more like annoying.

          1. It was the ants that got me. There were lots of annoying critters, but the ants were REALLY out and about, not staying properly underground and those fuckers don’t need to bite me to make me need the Benadryls.

  3. Greek Prime Minister Alex Tsipras is stepping down just months after being elected and agreeing to cutbacks in order to secure another bailout.

    The Greeks won’t abide austerity in any form?

    1. Damned if they do, damned if they don’t.

    2. I suspect that soon enough, it won’t be up to them… My spidey senses are tingling..

    3. Considering the nature of their economy pre-bailout…is that a surprise?

  4. You have to watch the bitch slap the judge gives a DOJ lawyer in the video Popehat cites in this article. It’s hilarious.

    1. The legal terminology is “bench slap,” but yeah, that was nice.

      1. How about “wood chip”?

    2. Popehat seems to see this as a welcome relief from the tendency of federal judges to ignore prosecutorial misconduct.

      Of course, in this case, the prosecutorial misconduct involved a leak meant to embarrass the judges and influence their decision. So of course the judges are going to be pissed.

      I’m waiting for the judges to be pissed when a leak is aimed only at a defendant, not at the judges themselves.

      1. It’s that troublemaker (I mean that in a good way) Kozinski again. He just can’t let the staus be quo.

      2. Oh, they did that (overturn convictions based on prosecutorial misconduct online),

        Of course, the were convictions of cops, so your larger point stands that they only seem to care when the misconduct inconveniences a member of the Cop-Industrial Complex.

  5. Jimmy Carter is history’s greatest monster.

    1. Huh – I always had Godzilla as #1. Different strokes, I guess…

    2. He should retire to Monster Island. Which is really more of a peninsula.

      1. He should retire to Ape Island. Or what about Candy Apple Island? It has apes, but they’re not so big.

    3. Jimmy Carter is history’s greatest monster

      Over Reagan?

      1. Over Reagan or Bush 2?

      2. Over FDR?

  6. Cancer in former President Jimmy Carter’s liver has also been spotted in his brain. He began radiation therapy today.

    Frankly, he’s lived long enough.

    1. I really don’t think that’s very nice. Seriously.

      1. If you think that’s not nice, wait until you hear his Jimmy Carter nickname. You thought his ‘block insane yomamma’ was bad……

        1. “Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”

      2. If I really wanted to be a dick, I’d wish 444 days of agony on him.

        Give him his sweet release and let him go to the big peanut farm in the sky.

      3. I’m with Notorious.

        Metastasizing cancer is a Very Bad Thing. Very few deserve it, and Jimmy isn’t on that list.

        1. I’m gonna go the opposite direction of MM on this one. I’m glad to live in a country where a 90 year old can fight his ass off trying to beat metastasized cancer, and that the government can’t do anything to stop him.

          1. He’s on a different health care plan than you… Your results may vary..

          2. For the elite classes, that will always be the case…

        2. Agreed. I think most here would agree that Carter was an abysmal President and many of his policies were disastrous, but being inept isn’t a reason to want someone to suffer from the kinds of cancer he has. It’s a horrible way to go, and the treatment isn’t much better. I wish him luck in his fight.

  7. Reason H&R J sub D Memorial Fantasy Football League 2015

    Due to Ken’s schedule I have been promoted to acting commissioner for this year’s league.

    If you participated previously and have not joined back up yet please check your spam folders as apparently the Yahoo emails can get filtered there.

    We may have an open spot so if anybody is interested in joining please email me at the address in my handle.

    1. Ken’s schedule of drinking poolside?

      1. What’s the recipe for a Poolside, sounds refreshing.

    2. Id there is an opening I’m interested

  8. The site for the impending Burning Man festival is infested with swarms of stinkbugs, but organizers are hoping they’ll be gone by the end of the month when crowds show up.

    Just play some Slayer. Hippies hate Slayer.

    1. +1 raining blood

  9. Birthright citizenship is the latest subject of debate among presidential candidates…

    I don’t understand the problem they have. If you’re born in this country, you most likely will grow up in this country. You won’t be bringing cultural baggage. You will be assimilated. Isn’t that the argument?

      1. I tried to subscribe to your newsletter at the email provided, but it keeps bouncing. Please direct my subscription to spongebob@mailinator.com.

    1. It’s the parents that are the problem.

      1. Do we have numbers on how many illegals the anchorbabymaking costs American purity? Can it really account for that much that we’re willing to put our citizenship in the hands of bureaucrats?

        1. If there are 11,000,000 illegals present in America, and they each have 2 anchor babies children, it will cost 2.5 billion to educate them before they drop out in 10th grade…

          Don’t call it “welfare” because everone gets it!!!!!

      2. At the rate he’s going, Trump will be calling for TRUMP-brand Dickensian orphanariums within the week. How else are we going to get enough ICE agents to patrol the border if we don’t sweep up the most terrific Mexican young people and brainwash them to Make America Strong Again!

    2. For one thing, once the baby is born then the parents, siblings, and all the others in the family get to stay in the country or a way to enter the country. That is why they are called anchor babies.

      1. Be that as it may, the sins of an American’s foreign-born parents cannot be visited upon him. This I declare to you.

        1. I’m pretty separating a small child from his parents would be a harsher punishment than keeping him America, at least if we’re talking about Mexico. Maybe if we were talking ISIS territory, the calculus would be different.

          In practice, kids don’t really have much in the way of citizenship anyway until they reach their majority.

      2. Then stop “chain immigration”. That should in fact be easy to do.

        1. In the case of the infant what do you do? Put him up for adoption?

          1. You could always send him to be reared in Mexico, and once he’s learned all those filthy Mexican traits, watch him walk back across the border with that valid birth certificate and run for president. At the very least, you’ll make him pay taxes to the U.S. no matter where he lives.

            1. You could always send him to be reared in Mexico,

              Which is what happens ALL THE TIME. I had a friend who defended illegals in deportation proceedings. The “My baby is an American Citizen” defense never worked for parents. They would be welcome to give the kid to a citizen relative or take the baby home with them. This, of course, assumes they were taken to deportation proceedings, which was rare.

              1. Yeah, that was my understanding too. It is not uncommon for parents of US citizens to be deported.

                1. Much of the debate surrounding immigration is fact-free. Listen to the birthers or the geniuses who think Ted Cruz is a naturalized citizen. Of course they would believe that all parents of “anchor babies” are automatically given citizenship and a five figure monthly stipend. Oh, and the Mexican government has an elaborate program for selecting which citizens will be sent abroad to collect benefits and send that money back as remittances. If you ask for evidence to back these claims, then you’re for AMNESTY!

          2. I would allow the parents and the kid to stay, and I would not give any preference to any of their relatives if they wanted to come along.

      3. The kid has to be 21 before he or she can sponsor family members to get into the country. Simply have a kid with citizenship doesn’t mean you can’t get deported.

        1. Never bring facts to a scream fight.

      4. New plan: the Anchor Babies get to stay in the Southwestern US, but the family has to stand just across the border attached to the child by a long rope (like a literal anchor) until the child in 21 ?it would be cruel to separate them, after all ? which will be replaced with high-tech fiberoptic wire (allowing for better communication) as prices drop…

    3. Don’t know if this is just an urban legend, but don’t wealthy, Chinese women come to the US just to have a child and then return to their homeland for some unknown, future nefarious purpose? Disturbing if it’s true, and the fact is most countries don’t have birthright citizenship. But I suppose it’s moot since it would be impossible to change here.

      1. Someone should disguise themselves as a chinaman and infiltrate PF Changs. If they pull it off, they’re sure to find out when the invasion is planned.

        1. Lacist.

          1. Also… “an Asian-themed US casual dining restaurant chain owned and operated by Centerbridge Partners and headquartered in Scottsdale, Arizona.”

            Gah dam Arizonians! Arways tear down my shity wahl!

            1. Hey! At least they don’t shoot people in the dick!

              1. Michael: How about we send him to Transylvania?

                Pete: Nah, he’d probably see it as something to brag about someday to his little vampire buddies.

                Henrietta: If we’re gonna send him somewhere it should be the most horrible, most miserable place on Earth.

                [Pause] All: Scottsdale.

                1. Apache Junction, maybe, but not Scottsdale.

        2. Just make sure you don’t shoot anyone in the dick.

      2. unknown, future nefarious purpose?

        You mean trying to game residency requirements for in-state tuition at public flagship universities?

        I’d be more concerned about all the Saudi women coming here for birthin’ babies, honestly.

        1. Never heard the reason why they do this (IF they really do this), so I assumed it was for a sinister reason because that makes a more interesting story. Think about it, one of them can become President someday and surrender our whole country to China!

          1. +1 Manchurian candidate

        2. I’d be more concerned about all the Saudi women coming here for birthin’ babies, honestly

          Interesting. Link?

          I would like to think it’s so their own daughters won’t be chattel like then. But I doubt it.

          1. Interesting. Link?

            That observation is based from my own experience working at a university that is eligible to accept King Abdullah Scholarship program students.

            Google only gives me links to the Chinese phenomenon.

        1. Trigger warning: Breitbart.

          It was the first google hit.

        2. Oh, come on. That’s just the plot from, Weeds, isn’t it?

      3. Don’t know if this is just an urban legend, but don’t wealthy, Chinese women come to the US just to have a child

        Absolutely. Its a well-known and profitable business on the West Coast. Concierge anchor babies.

        and then return to their homeland for some unknown, future nefarious purpose?

        Couldn’t say.

        1. “Concierge anchor babies.”

          It doesn’t really make sense to use the term anchor babies here. These are generally wealthy women who enter the country legally, have the kid and return home. If they want to use the kid to get permanent residency legally, they have to wait till they’re 21.

      4. “and the fact is most countries don’t have birthright citizenship.”

        This is true worldwide, but nearly every country in the Americas does.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli

    4. My wife used to be a Doula – (Labor Coach). She had more than one client that were of Indian (India’s) descent coming from Dubai, that spent thousand of dollars just to have their kid born here in the US. Make that of what you will.

      1. A Turkish relative (wife of one of my first cousins) did it. In her case, though, she wanted the best obstetrics possible and could pay for it (her dad is some sort of construction magnate and they are ungodly rich).

        I don’t think the U.S. is in danger of being swamped by the pampered princesses of the middle east’s elite.

    5. So, what are they going to do, amend the Constitution? Or will they just reclass citizenship as a tax?

      1. Interestingly enough, it’s not really that clear in the 14th amendment. It took a single interpretation in the majority opinion of a 5-4 SCOTUS decision within the past 50 years to make it ‘law’.

        Get a good enough case all the way to the Supreme Court, and perhaps the reach of the 14th amendment could be redefined. I don’t think it would need a new constitutional amendment.

        Is there any other country on Earth that gives you automatic citizenship just because the mother was temporarily in the country, and neither parent was a citizen?

        1. Out of 190 countries, 33 offer birthright citizenship. Of those 33, the only two developed nations that do are the USA and Canada. Make of that what you will…

        2. Is there any other country on Earth that gives you automatic citizenship just because the mother was temporarily in the country, and neither parent was a citizen?

          The vast majority of the Western Hemisphere, actually.

        3. Is there any other country on Earth that gives you automatic citizenship just because the mother was temporarily in the country, and neither parent was a citizen?

          Are you suggesting that our policies should be judged by whether other countries have those same policies? Do you like the implications that would have for gun control and health care?

          1. Are you suggesting that our policies should be judged by whether other countries have those same policies? Do you like the implications that would have for gun control and health care?

            No, just curious, actually. I truly didn’t know if any other country had birthright citizenship, but knew others in our brilliant commentariat would — and indeed Antilles and Heroic Mulatto had the facts.

            I have very little interest in the “If Timmy jumped off the Empire State Building, would you as well?” school of political thought.

            1. No, just curious, actually. I truly didn’t know if any other country had birthright citizenship, but knew others in our brilliant commentariat would — and indeed Antilles and Heroic Mulatto had the facts.

              I have very little interest in the “If Timmy jumped off the Empire State Building, would you as well?” school of political thought.

              I apologize for misinterpreting you, then.

        4. I agree C. Anacreon: the current view of birthright citizenship was not intended by the authors of the 14th Amendment, and they SAID as much, at the time. The “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” phrase in the actual Amendment text is important, but has been pretty much ignored and thwarted by modern jurisprudence. The point of that phrase was to award birthright citizenship to people who were born here, but were not presumed to be subjects of (loyal to) a foreign power. That clearly includes U.S.-born babies of U.S. citizens, but also can include children born to citizens of U.S. territories, babies born at foreign U.S. embassies to U.S. citizens, U.S. born babies born to “stateless” people who have come to the U.S., and, as originally intended, U.S.-born children of freed-slaves, to name just a few categories. Native Americans, who are citizens of tribal nations, were NOT originally seen as eligible for 14th Amendment birthright citizenship, even if their mothers birthed them off the reservation and on uncontested U.S. soil. Congress had to (and did) pass Federal legislation to deal with U.S. citizenship for Native Americans. The U.S.-born babies of tourists, long-term residents of the U.S. who do not seek U.S. citizenship, and “illegals” were never considered to be eligible for birthright citizenship until the Supreme Court said so, waving hands and blowing smoke into the mirrors, fairly recently in our history.

          1. We are wrong to rely on a mis-reading of the 14th Amendment that continues to be propagated because of the legal tradition of “Stare Decicis.” If we really want to legitimize the current practice of birthright citizenship, Congress should either pass explicit legislation authorizing it (which Congress can do under its naturalization powers), or, even better, amend the Constitution to make that policy the law of the land.

          2. Illegal immigrants are most definitely subject to US jurisdiction.

            If by “fairly recently” you mean 1898 or 1844 then yeah, I guess.

            “Throughout the history of the United States, the dominant legal principle governing citizenship has been jus soli?the principle that birth within the territorial limits of the United States confers automatic citizenship, excluding slaves before the American Civil War.[8][9][10] Although there was no actual definition of citizenship in United States law until after the Civil War,[11] it was generally accepted that anyone born in the United States was automatically a citizen.[12][13] This applicability of jus soli, via the common law inherited in the United States from England, was upheld in an 1844 New York state case, Lynch v. Clarke, in which it was held that a woman born in New York City, of alien parents temporarily sojourning there, was a U.S. citizen.[14]”

            (From the wiki page on US vs. Wong Kim Ark)

            If these decisions were reached even in times of tremendous xenophobia and racism like the 1800s, I seriously doubt the other side holds water.

            Please cite this claim:

            “I agree C. Anacreon: the current view of birthright citizenship was not intended by the authors of the 14th Amendment, and they SAID as much, at the time.”

        5. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

          Seems like one of the clearest, most straightforward parts of the constitution to me. Unless you have diplomatic immunity, you are subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Illegal immigrants are also clearly subject to US jurisdiction as they are frequently arrested and deported and stuff. “Born” and “in” are pretty unambiguous. Where is it in any way unclear or ambiguous?

        6. US vs. Wong Kim Ark happened in 1898, and was a 6-2 decision. And it partially based its opinion on court cases from 1844 and 1812.

    6. Yeah… but their parents ALWAYS vote ass…

  10. It couldn’t have happened to a better goober.

    1. Having watched my mother (slowly) die of cancer, I would never wish that fate on anyone. As much as I despise Jimmy Carter this news gives me no joy. If it did then that would make me a Progressive.

      1. ^^this

        1. Yup. You wouldn’t wish cancer on your worst enemy. It really sucks.

          (signed)
          One Who Knows….

      2. Watched a friend, same age as me, die of brain cancer. They removed a tumor which had an obvious effect on his behavior. It was pretty grim.

  11. Investigators are going to recommend vehicular manslaughter charges against Caitlyn Jenner over her role in a deadly car crash in Malibu.

    Will the patriarchy never stop? I can’t even. SMDH.

    1. He did it as a dude, though.

      1. So then they’re charging Bruce Jenner for his role, right? Or Caitlyn Jenner as played by Bruce? I need to consult my Chicago Manual of Style.

        1. Wait, that’s it. Bruce Jenner, who committed the crime, is no more. Case dismissed!

          1. I thought it ws he nevr really existed.

            1. Like the vowels in your comment?

      2. So he’s just being a pro-active prison bitch then.

  12. So although I didn’t explicitly state it, beach volleyball is of course out of bounds of Accomplished Female Athletes of Eastern and Central Europe series, for same reason as tennis, figure skating and artistic gymnastics. Regular volleyball is not, however, so today I present Ivana Nesovic, member of Serbian female volleyball team, who currently plays in Greece professionally, and her team just won the cup fifth year in a row.
    Couple shots from her career in Serbia.
    Glamor shots from Greece.

    1. Argentinians are volleyball’s goddesses. Their uniforms are…. nice.

        1. Holy sweet science!

  13. The site for the impending Burning Man festival is infested with swarms of stinkbugs, but organizers are hoping they’ll be gone by the end of the month when crowds show up.

    One whiff of the hippies and those stinkbugs are outa there.

    1. Hippy to Stinkbug = “Ewwwwww!!! Actual Nature!”

  14. The HORROR!
    Uber contract with some drivers drivers who were convicted of a crime more than 7 years ago!
    “DA: major flaws in Uber background checks allow criminal drivers”
    http://www.sfgate.com/business…..453865.php

    A month or so ago, the concern-trolls were whining that Apple didn’t want cons on the job site of its new headquarters. Now they’re whining that Uber might.
    Do we detect the lefty predilection toward hypocrisy here?

    1. Isn’t 7 years the standard background check?

    2. This is a travesty! Because I’m sure every ‘real’ taxi driver out there has a perfect and spotless record. I’m sure we’d hear about it if they didn’t…

    3. Wait, isn’t it a civil-rights violation to ask about criminal history, according to the EEOC?

      Can’t these idiots get their talking points straight?

      1. The point is for these people to stoke their smug. Once they’re awash in smug, they won’t care if there is a worthwhile rebuttal out there.

        1. Also, the DA hasn’t been getting much ink recently.

  15. Ooh, I see Sheldon Richman has an article up. 🙂

    1. I went over there, but it isn’t even fun to hate on. At this point, Richman is basically just writing for click bait. I don’t think even Heroic Mulatto responding will make that worth it.

      1. The only thing Richman does for Reason is get clicks and utterly ruin their foreign policy credentials.

        1. ” utterly ruin their foreign policy credentials.”

          The sad thing is I don’t think they realize it

          1. Well, to be fair, no one ever thought Reason had any credentials.

          2. The funniest thing is, if they had both Richman and a more warhawk guy who was equally insane it probably balance out. I mean, I can’t expect Reason to actually hire a good foreign policy correspondent, that would be asking for too much. Get a realist or something.

        2. Rest of staff has the same FP view as he does. This is a magazine that had exactly one guy maybe broach an idea that invading a country because they got rid of a corrupt criminal is a not a libertarian-approved response, and he no longer works here (Zenon Evans). Everyone else was all “Ukraine is different than Iraq, because reasons!”
          But Richman can get the clicks, though latest article I think tries too hard.

          1. I don’t think the others are as bad as him. Richman actually hates the US. The rest are just naive.

            1. And he hates Israel more than the US.

              1. yeah that too

          2. Reason’s foreign policy writing is consistently terrible since the only people who really write about other countries are Dahlmia and Richman, who are both pretty much universally hated.

            They’re also completely predictable in a way that makes me think they don’t actually know what they’re talking about and just apply the same arguments regardless of what’s actually going on. So Israel is always at fault for Richman and also every problem can be solved with more immigration per Dahlmia.

            1. Well it’s blatantly obvious that both of them form their opinions based on their biases, then cherry-pick all the evidence they can find. Reason could probably get away with this if they had more diversity of opinion when it comes to foreign policy but with just those two talking it comes off as the utterly insane musings of a stoned IR student who read too much on neo-colonialism that day.

              1. As a general proposition, why should Reason, a publication ostensibly devoted to free minds and free markets, genuflect to diversity?

                1. It helps in the sense that, if you’re producing garbage foreign policy articles, it at least makes it look like you’re attempting to actually have a debate and reason out complex problems. Richman and Dalmia are entirely driven by their own biases and are utterly incapable of even attempting to look at a situation objectively. Regardless of the actual context, Richman always follows the same, utterly inconsistent narrative: America is the aggressive power, the aggressive actions of other nations are never to be held to the same standard, implicit trust in the statements of foreign governments for no reason other than they challenge U.S. interest (and this, by the way, is how Richman utterly ruins the libertarian label. He refuses to hold foreign governments to any kind of libertarian standard in order to carve out his narrative),nationalism is terrible except for when its people Richman likes, like Palestinians, in which case he’ll post your flag on his page.

                  A more diverse foreign policy range would at least show an attempt at thought. Richman and Dalmia’s work really only highlights Reason’s utter intellectual bankruptcy when it comes to foreign policy.

                  1. If you want a TL;DR version: If Reason is actually devoted to ‘free minds’ then they’d cut Richman out. Because he does not have a free mind, he has a mind enslaved to a specific narrative that is an absolute lie when contrasted to reality. A ‘free mind’ does not constitute a delusional or dishonest one, as these are the only two possibilities for Richman’s behaviour.

                    1. “If Reason is actually devoted to ‘free minds’ then they’d cut Richman out.”

                      ^^^yep

                      he’s a one-trick pony who’s one trick was never very interesting. And through all of his intellectual pretensions and claim to philosophical purity, he isn’t either very smart, or have any coherent foreign-policy insight.

                    2. claim to philosophical purity

                      Purity? From the man who penned the essay “Nationalism is a Poison” yet maintains a webpage that looks like an internet Palestinian Flag Museum?

                    3. ” Because he does not have a free mind”

                      at best, he has the kind of mind you get free with purchase of a Max Blumenthal book.

          3. Rest of staff has the same FP view as he does

            Didn’t used to be that way. Back in the day, we had Harsyani, Moynihan, Zaxxon, and John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt to counter Richman. Unfortunately, they seem to have been consciously purged during the past, say 3 years.

            Not that I always agreed with the above either, but a damn shame.

            1. I think reason still posts Harsanyi’s column, usually Friday afternoon. I liked Moynihan too.

              1. Was it ever confirmed that Moynihan is a vampire? Because he looks like a vampire.

          4. Aside from Richman (who I don’t recall if he did or not, I rarely read his articles), who defended Russia’s invasion of Ukraine?

            1. Richman

              Yet another manufactured crisis ? costing over 2,000 lives. It could be brought to a speedy end if Barack Obama would give the word.

              Tucille

              And while the near-unanimous results of Crimea’s vote to join Russia seem a tad…dubious, even granting the limited options offered, it’s highly likely that the region, with historical ties to Russia, would have voted to realign its borders even if the voting had been conducted by more rigorous standards.

              1. “Yet another manufactured crisis ? costing over 2,000 lives. It could be brought to a speedy end if Barack Obama would give the word.”

                This is amazing. Richman lives in a parallel universe.

              2. Sullum

                Russia, which controlled Crimea from 1783 until Nikita Khrushchev arbitrarily assigned it to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic in 1954, could argue that reversing the transfer upholds the principle of state sovereignty, even as it respects democracy and the right to self-determination. We like all of those things, right?

                Doherty

                Walt’s argument is based on the notion that Russia is not in fact an expansionist power getting out of control, but one spiraling downward fighting for continued relevance and influence
                ….
                Our brave Ukrainian supposed allies gave an interesting sign of how devoted they are to American notions of freedom this week, by arresting a journalist for encouraging draft dodging.

                1. And congratulations Reason, your shitty website has convinced me to finally put Adblock on, because I’m sick of having to wait five minutes for my computer to stop dying every time I search your shitty site.

                  Feeney

                  . Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty states that an attack on a member state in Europe or North America would constitute an attack on each member and that such an attack would be met with assistance that could include military force for the attacked party from other NATO members.

                  As Logan points out, this sort of alliance made sense in the wake of the end of World War II, but that there is no risk today of Moscow dominating Europe today:

                  In the context of “German Aryans must not have fallen to Russia then but fuck Slavic subhumans, they can be enslaved at will.”
                  Krayewski

                  It has effectively been under Russian control since the beginning of the month, when pro-Russian but unmarked soldiers positioned themselves across the region

                  It’s OK to say “Russians invaded.” Ron Paul will forgive you.

                  1. Now compare that to Evans

                    War is foggy and Russia has deliberately obscured facts about its assault on Ukrainian lives and independence for months in order to make it all the foggier. None of this is to say that any other nation must come to Ukraine’s defense, but it is wrong to pretend that today’s border crossing is not part of a Russian invasion.

    2. I hated him before it was cool.

  16. So I haven’t been around for the Canadians complaining about the elections. What’s everyone’s plans for voting? Because as of right now I feel like I should just skip the damn thing. Convince me it’s actually worth it.

    1. Can you cast a write-in vote?

      Write in “None of the above” or some such.

    2. It was mostly Cytotoxic having a hissy fit about how C-51 is the WORST THING FOR LIBERTIES EVER, and how NDP isn’t so bad and Harper will just implement NDP policies. And Rufus giving me condolences on my riding, which is the lair of Hedy Fry and her 22 year-long winning streak.
      I may throw my vote on our Libertarian candidate, if I can trust LP not to be complete assholes. They did allow Lauren Southern back in as a candidate, but fuck those guys for even considering dropping her. Oh no, she went to Slut Walk in Vancouver and held the sign that said “There is no rape culture in the West.”
      Of course it’s possible NDP might be able to overtake Hedy this time, as her vote share is shrinking, and she’s 74 years old, and as useless as a sentient creature can be. No chance that Conservatives can do anything, but better Fry than a Commie.

      1. Nickel Belt’s my current riding, so any chance of anything but NDP/Liberal is unlikely. They have actual Marxist-Leninist party members run here but never a libertarian.

      2. They did allow Lauren Southern back in as a candidate, but fuck those guys for even considering dropping her. Oh no, she went to Slut Walk in Vancouver and held the sign that said “There is no rape culture in the West.”

        Lauren Southern is the greatest thing to happen to Canadian politics since Thomas Mulcair’s lizard overlords taught him what a meatapes smile is supposed to look like.

        “We obey,” whispered Mulcair with the sibilant tones native to his kind. “One day, all shall rise from the depths of the hollow earth and drive the meatapes before our fangs and claws.”

        1. To be fair to Mulcair, he’s had to step up as party leader after a guy who was basically elevated to the level of a saint when he died. Jack Layton’s sudden death has changed him into the progressive/leftist messiah who would have saved them all from Harper. Some get really, really touchy if you point out Layton’s backdoor deals.

        2. Thomas Mulcair’s lizard overlords

          David Rockefeller gets involved in Canuck politics now?

        3. What’s insane is that woman is only 19! And yet she has more poise, courage, brains and style than any MP, or possibly a whole crapload of them put together.

          The fact that party wanted to boot her because she upset SJW, people who think “Libertarian” is fun little way to say “Nazi,” makes me go, “fuck it, I’ll take a tax cut.”

            1. Holy shit! That’s truly amazing.

      3. Hedy Fry

        You mean “Hedley”.

        1. Damn you! Damn you to hell!

      4. It’s HEDLEY!

    3. I don’t know if I have the balls to spoil the ballot.

      It’s slim pickings for sure.

      In any event, Harper wins by default because the other two are just not my bag.

      1. Harper’s in the scenario where I know who he is and I know how he acts. The Tories have their obvious corruption and idiotic policies, but they’ve at least been predictable. Trudeau is one of the idealist morons who has absolutely no idea what he’s doing and is likely to be an utter disaster. Mulcair is the typical petty, clueless NDP member with a few positives in regards to challenging certain Tory policies. May is equally clueless, and her party is made up of some of the craziest people on the Canadian political spectrum. Harper ends up ‘winning by default’ only because he’s terrible in a way I’m used to.

        1. Pretty much this.

          My apolitical wife can’t even digest Trudeau. She grows suspicious of people vulnerable to gaffes followed by apologies.

          He needs to unbutton his shirt more.

        2. I’m honestly pulling for Harper because of relentless media campaign against him.
          “old man yells at journos, don’t vote Harper” is pushing me over the edge.

      2. It’s slim pickings for sure.

        That’s Slim Pickens!!

        /enough Blazing Saddles references in this subthread for today

        1. No such thing!

        2. +1 H-bomb rodeo

    4. No one worth voting for here in s/w Ontario, no libertarian candidate on the ballot.

      If it wasn’t for their unending support for the war on drugs I would likely vote conservative, I just can’t bring myself to vote for someone who would have me jailed for my interest in cannabis.

      No mater how reasonable they may appear on the economic front, it ain’t enough to overlook how bad they are on liberty… bill c-51, the omnibus crime bill and so on.

  17. Someone found this hilarious crazy woman who is running for president.

    Via internet sleuthing, I discovered her FEC filings and they are wonderful.

    I think my favorite part is that she wants the FCC to send a carbon copy to, in her words,

    Copy: US Congress, RNC, DNC, GOP, Media, et al

    What’s the best part of this: That she wants a copy sent to Congress generally, but with no specification of who, the fact that she thinks you can send a letter just to the ‘media,’ or the fact that she has ‘et al’ on the end of it, which appears to mean she wants this letter to go to everybody on Earth.

    1. Mary Stack is running for president?

      /barf

      1. You take that back!

        Mary Stack is not hilarious.

    2. Business People, Astronauts, Academics, Underwater Welders, et al

      1. Even I know it was Heroic!

        C’man Irish!

    3. “Help me to save our endangered world and our precious and endangered White Christian European Descent Race now facing Race Extinction within One Hundred Years by making me your US President!”

      This follows a section where she explains she is mostly Puerto Rican, and only recently Catholic (I assume prior to that she was vaguely Santer?a)

      1. Maybe she’s a Catholic, or maybe she’s Catholic only in the same sense that she’s a “NATIONAL SECURITY WITNESS IN A WORLDWIDE BLACK OPS TECHNOLOGY GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION CASE”

      2. (I assume prior to that she was vaguely Santer?a)

        is that the feminine variation of ‘Santorum’?

        1. Its the Latin version of Caribbean Voodoo

      3. I think she wrote that she was partially of Puerto Rican/Spanish descent. There are white Latin Americans, and I don’t see why they’re any less capable of being white supremacists than any other group of white people.

    4. And here’s an actual report she sent to the FEC:

      I AM A NATIONAL SECURITY WITNESS IN A WORLDWIDE BLACK OPS TECHNOLOGY GOVERNMENT
      CORRUPTION CASE AND THE STEP-DAUGHTER OF A FORMER US SECRET SERVICE AGENT TO PRESIDENT
      LYNDON BAYNES JOHNSON AT THE WHITE HOUSE. GOOD GOVERNMENT AND I ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE
      PROPER TREATMENT OF ITS US CITIZENRY. OUR COUNTRY’S FOUNDING WHITE CHRISTIAN EUROPEAN
      DESCENT RACE IS FACING EMASCULATION-DISENFRANCHISEMENT-RACE EXTINaiON WORLDWIDE DUE IN
      PART TO BEING DENIED LIFE EXTENSION WHILE MINORITIES FLOOD OUR COUNTRIES. AND ALL PERSONS ARE
      SUBJECT TO CRIME-TERRORISM-WARS-NATURAL CATASTROPHIES-DISABILITY-POVERTY-FAILINQ HEALTH.
      ILLEGAL MINORITIES ARE GIVEN PATHWAYS TO CITIZENSHIP ACCESSING AND ENDANGERING OUR
      SOCIOECONOMIC ENTITLEMENTS FACING MASSIVE CUTS HARMING OUR US BORN CITIZENRY-LAWFUL ENTRY
      NATIONALIZED US CITIZENS/RESIDENTS ET AL INCLUDING OUR SIXTY MILLION RETIRING BABY BOOMERS. THE
      ELDERLY, THE DISABLED, AND THE INDIGENT DESPERATELY DEPEND ON WELFARE AND FOOD STAMPS, SOCIAL
      SECURITY, MEDICAID AND MEDICARE. WE MUST MAINTAIN RESPONSIBLE CONTINUITY OF PREVIOUS
      GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF ALL GOVERNMENT TO PRINT THE NEEDED MONIES
      AND PAY OFF OUR NATIONAL DEBT WHILE THE POPULATION HISTORICALLY PAYS A FAIR CONTRIBUTORY RATE
      OF TAXATION WHICH SHOULD NEVER EXCEED TEN PERCENT ANNUAL INCOME.

      1. MY PROGRAMS ARE SUPPORTED BY US CONGRESS, US
        ARMY GEN. RETIRED TOMMY FRANKS, FORMER DNC CHAIRMAN HOWARD DEAN, FORMER RNC CHAIRMANS
        KEN MEHLMAN & MIKE DUNCAN, FORMER USAG HON JANET RENO & JOHN ASHSCROFT, US TREASURY
        SECRETARIES, FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIR(S), AND OTHERS. SUPPORT SILVIA STAGG FOR PRESIDENTI

        Remember: This is an FEC filing in which she’s apparently telling random FEC employees who will read this that they should vote for her.

        1. 2012-2014 until we get there! Where ever there is!

        2. I fail to see how her platform differs from Donald Trump’s.

      2. I’m not one to suggest that a person should summarily be placed into a mental institution, but… yeah.

    5. I used to work with schizophrenics. That poor woman needs some help.

      1. Damn, if true, this really pushes the old hot/crazy matrix calculation into areas of high-performance computing…

        1. The calculation seems really simple to me.

          1. Slav-hispanic combo? I have to go into some serious counting before I can make a decision.

            If she only had 25 pounds more, or a picture with dead bunny, I’d know which side she falls on!

          2. Yeah, this sounds like reference point; a hard limit at the edge of the matrix.

    6. She misspelled gmail in her filing. That’s impressive.

  18. Cancer in former President Jimmy Carter’s liver has also been spotted in his brain.

    Well, that explains a lot.

    (I dislike that man.)

    1. I hope you don’t dislike me

      1. I love everyone who posts on Reason. Even the trolls. Trolls are people too.

        Nobody on Reason has been a net negative to the human race as Mr. Carter has been.

        1. Then you must hate Reagan, GWHB, Clinton, W, and Hussein Obama even more as they have been more of a negative to the human race than the peanut farmer.

          1. Crimes of omission can have as bad an effect as crimes committed. And Carter’s omissions were monumental – some set the stage for problems we’re still dealing with.

      1. I don’t like to judge, but much of India seems to flirt with third worldism

        1. Especially North India. North India, especially the northeastern most provinces (Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, etc.), are some of the most crowded and poor places in the country. All of the problems poverty brings: poor education, lack of sanitation, etc. are present. However, in this particular case, the variable seems to be the city’s 33 percent Muslim minority. Not that Hindus have entirely clean hands when it comes to such things.

        2. Flirt? Over 500 million people in India do not have access to a toilet. This doesn’t mean simply that they don’t have indoor plumbing, they don’t have access to a toilet anywhere in their community, period. It is SOP to defecate in the ‘yard’ around your domicile, which as you might suspect leads to a lot of disease problems.

          I often think of this whenever I hear people moan about the levels of abject ‘poverty’ we have in the USA.

      1. “Death before dishonor.”

        1. Definitely a good day to die!

          /inappropriate

  19. We must jail sex offenders forever because of high and frightening recidivism rates!

    The real rate of sex offender recidivism is complicated and difficult to calculate, but it’s nowhere near 80 percent. In fact, people convicted of sex offenses re-offend at a lower rate than any other class of crimes. The Ellmans point to a meta-study of 8,000 sex offenders which found that even among high-risk offenders, 20 percent had committed another sex crime within five years, and 32 percent had within 15. Of the high-risk offenders who had gone 16 years without re-offending (about two thirds of them), the study found no example of one of them committing another crime. Among low risk offenders, the risk is minimal. “About 97.5% of the low-risk offenders were offense-free after five years; about 95% were still offense-free after 15 years,” the Ellmans write.

    Oh.

    1. Why do you hate the children?

      Oh wait, it’s Nicole. Of course she hates children.

    2. I saw the source article the other day. It expands a bit upon that last point:

      About 97.5% % of the low-risk offenders were offense-free after five years; about 95% were still offense-free after 15 years. Some context can help here. About 3% of felons with no known history of sex offenses commit one within 4.5 years of their release. Of course, they’re not on the sex offender registry after release even though the chance of their committing a sex offense is the same or higher than the chance of a new sex offense by a either a low-risk offender, or a high-risk sex offender who has been offense free for fifteen years.

      1. Even better. Thanks.

  20. Worst day for the DOW in 2015 @16,990 -358

    1. The absurd bubble couldn’t last forever.

    2. Ruh roh. I’m not looking.

      1. Eh. I came out ahead today.

        1. My investment strategy is not looking at the daily numbers. It’s the only way to dollar cost average effectively.

          1. I have short term and long term. I pretty much leave the long term stuff alone.

            1. Is your primary job investing? It seems like to do it properly you need to put a lot of time into research to invest short term.

              1. No, but I do some very detailed research in a specialized pharmaceutical/biotech field, and that’s where most of my active investing is.

              2. My investment strategy is to look and wait for really shitty days for companies that I think can weather the outcome (Ford and BP are two great successes).

                Then stay long term.

  21. Those NJ cops didn’t want to end up like this guy

    According to Boackle, the detective spoke to Janard Cunningham, who was sitting the car. The detective decided to call for backup so that he could continue his robbery investigation while another officer handled the traffic stop.

    While he was calling for backup, Cunningham allegedly exited the car and became aggressive, approaching the detective and repeatedly questioned why he’d been pulled over, the union chief said. The detective considered using force but thought better of it and continued his call when Cunningham hit him, Boackle said.

    Cunningham is accused of then “pistol whipping” the officer with his own service weapon, Boackle said.

    Also-

    Police Chief A.C. Roper sees the episode ? as well as the reaction, including celebratory and vitriolic comments posted online alongside images of the wounded officer ? as symptomatic of a larger problem, in which some don’t respect law enforcement.

    “The nobility and integrity of policing has been challenged,” Roper said. “As a profession, we have allowed popular culture to draft a narrative which is contrary to the amazing work that so many officers are doing everyday across this nation.”

    1. Scott Greenfield and Popehat both wrote about how much BS the police chief’s reaction is.

    2. Yeah, amazing work, like assaulting and kidnapping people who haven’t harmed anyone! GO COPS!

  22. Those poor, poor cops. Why don’t the peasants respect kowtow in terror to them?

  23. Lesson = There’s a right way, and a wrong way to try to convince people not to kill themselves.

    1. If you attend the University of Hawaii and are still depressed enough to kill yourself, you probably should.

      1. Spoken like someone who didn’t grow up in Hawaii.

        1. Touche. I haven’t seen the seedy underbelly.

          1. If you’ve ever had to do a fire walk to defend your sisters honor… You might be a red neck Hawaiian.

  24. Wow I didnt even know he was still alive.

    http://www.Total-Privacy.tk

    1. Then you must not know the he and Lou Reed are spending a lot of time in the recording studio lately. Expect big things.

    2. Jeez Anon-Bot, you’re almost as bad as Mike M.

  25. Dow down 2%? I’m not going to jump off the roof, just yet.

    1. It surprises me–probably shouldn’t–how much of a big deal the press makes over triple-digit movements in points. Kinda silly when the Dow is in the 16,000-17,000 range. It’s a silly index to follow, anyway.

    1. I guess it’s really only an issue because he accepted a scholarship that Oprah gives out based partly on the color of the applicant’s skin?

      1. Or maybe his momma is trying to cover up the one time she went black, but decided to come back?

        1. Yeah, reading the story earlier, that was in the back of my mind. I knew a married couple, both very blond, who had what was obviously a mixed race child. The mother kept dyeing the boy’s hair blond, but to no avail. She worked in a magistrate’s office and the lad’s real father was a black state trooper. The marriage didn’t last long after.

          1. state trooper.

            Unforgivable.

          2. You’ve heard of “the long arm of the law”? Maybe that’s not the only part of the law that’s long.

      2. Just imagine how much more successful he would’ve been if he’d stayed white.

      3. He routinely did media interviews speaking on behalf of the entire black-race and their deep feelings re: Ferguson.

        He also specifically claimed his pappy was a black man who left his family (when his birth certificate says its a white man in jail), and he was beaten as a child for being Black in a white-dominated world

        I don’t begrudge the guy the right to adopt whatever identity he wants. But I find it hard for people like him to lecture about ‘White Privilege‘ while actively misrepresenting his own background and trying to gin up some kind of fake-narrative of “oppression”.

        There’s also the little issue of him being a seeming scam-artist who’s got a trail of dubious “Charity Fundraising Efforts” with zero actual audit for what happened with raised funds.

        1. He also specifically claimed his pappy was a black man who left his family (when his birth certificate says its a white man in jail), and he was beaten as a child for being Black in a white-dominated world

          Like I said, there are witnesses saying the beating happened as described, it’s just that other witnesses and the police report disagree.

          Could the cops have covered that shit up? I guess, but the resulting lawsuit would have been a motherfucking windfall. Sue the school and the attackers and the local police department for their part in the cover up of a racist assault? Oh, yes please.

      4. Theft by fraud.

    2. My question is about the alleged beating. The report says no gang beating occurred, multiple witnesses say no gang beating occurred, but then there are other witnesses who say it was a gang beating and he was hospitalized with serious injuries.

      This should be easy to prove, right? Why doesn’t king release information proving it occurred as he said? There have to be pictures or something, right?

      And is he alleging that the police department in his community purposefully falsified a report to cover up a gang beating? Because that’s a major accusation and we should know if cops down there are doing that shit.

      1. He doesn’t need to literally be beaten for him to be assaulted. Perhaps he was ‘pummeled’ by disapproving looks from people with negative thoughts. That’s literally the same as assault and how dare you dismiss the ordeal this poor guy has been through!

    3. This morning the Daily Caller reported that black conservative group Black Conservatives Fund PAC has offered to donate $25,000 to Black Lives Matter if King can prove that his father is black or if he agrees to a DNA test.

      Epic trolling.

      I really want a time machine so I can go back to the 60s and blow their minds with this shit. And Internet porn.

      1. If you did, Al Gore would tell you that he had already conceived of internet porn after he had invented the internet.

      2. I really want a time machine so I can go back to the 60s and blow their minds with this shit. And Internet porn.

        The 60s, the 50s, the 20s, the Old West… go back and blow their minds with the twisted and disgusting lengths we will torture their ethos and causes.

        This should be No. 2 in ‘1,000 Ways to Fuck With Time Before You Die’ right behind Killing Hitler.

        1. I will also let them know that schoolchildren will be taught that John F. Kennedy and hippies are responsible for every bit of cultural and political progress made during the decade.

  26. A grand jury has decided not to indict two New Jersey police officers who opened fire and killed a suspect who threatened them by ? stepping out of his car with his hands raised in surrender.

    Of course not. Cops can’t murder people in the same way that non-white minorities can’t be racist.

    Prosecutors say Days fired seven shots and Worley fired once. The shooting lasted approximately 2 seconds and Reid was hit in the chest and left arm, according to prosecutors. Days is black, Worley is white and Reid was black.

    Well that certainly clears things up. This makes an all important difference in the forensics, motivations and circumstances. Because as we all know, white killers are more killery and black victims are more victimy. Good journalism.

    1. If the cop who shot seven times is black, it will be tougher to whip up the rioters.

      Which doesn’t mean the shooting was justified, I wasn’t there.

      The grand jury, however, looked into it and found no crime. Of course we’re supposed to assume grand juries are corrupt and stupid, etc. etc. when they don’t make the “right” decision.

      1. Not corrupt… but definitely the other one.

        1. How do we know this?

          1. Not smart enough to get out of jury duty.

            1. If smart people avoid jury duty, who is left?

    2. I wouldn’t at all be surprised if proglodytes soon begin decrying the marksmanship achievement gap.

  27. Random facebook derp: regarding the possibility that the pedestrian plaza in Times Square will be shut down over the topless woman, some idiot adds, “We should be talking about closing down the rest of Broadway to traffic.”

    I… I really don’t know if this guy is saying that the entirety of Broadway should be converted to pedestrian space or not. I don’t know if I want to find out.

    1. Looks like that’s exactly what he’s saying.

      Then again, I know people who think all of Midtown should be closed to vehicular traffic except for cabs and public transportation.

    2. There’s no congestion in NYC. I don’t see what the problem is.

      1. You only have congestion because of car. Fewer car streets – fewer cars – less congestion. SCIENCE!

        Also Jane Jacobs Sprawl Density Livable Sustainable! Begone foul Four-Stroke Satan!

    3. The NY Post is going on one of its patented crusades to return cars to Times Square, as if it was tolerable back then.

      Me, I think it’s pretty reasonable to suggest that areas where gazillions of pedestrians congregate ought to be pedestrianized. In the old days, you had to walk in the street because there was no room for everyone on the sidewalks.

  28. OT: I’m dealing with an attorney who thinks it’s fun to waste my time. I am going to get a default judgment against her client because she’s not only wasting my time but acting in bad faith. I just sent her email telling to her to submit a settlement offer in writing or else. She then gave 2 phone numbers that are disconnected and apparently the number on her website doesn’t work either. So the 4th number worked and the conversation went like this:

    RBS: Do you have an offer?
    Her: Well, kind of, but I have to see what my client want to do.
    RBS: So, no.
    Her: Can I call you back?
    RBS: You have ten minutes

    1. For the record, I do not enjoy holding other attorneys in default but I have been pretty generous with the extra time to file an answer.

      1. When was the complaint served?

        Did you memorialize the extension to file a responsive pleading?

        What is the gravamen of your client’s claim(s)?

        Have you had any experience dealing with the defendant’s counsel?

        Did she meet the 10 minute deadline you imposed?

        How often have you had to deal with a defaulted party seeking to set aside a default?

        Don’t mind me, I’m just a naturally full of questions – but not nosy.

    2. Carly Rae Jepsen is an attorney?

    3. OT: I’m dealing with an attorney–

      It’s the P.M. Links, so there’s no such thing as OT. It’s basically a free for all here.

      RBS: You have ten minutes

      It’s been 10 minutes, did you get your call back?

      1. Of course not. Oh well. Sucks for her client though.

        1. “Good Morning, Ms. Attorney. I’m Sue Yursorriaz from Channel 4 News, and ….”

  29. The site for the impending Burning Man festival is infested with swarms of stinkbugs, but organizers are hoping they’ll be gone by the end of the month when crowds the human stinkbugs show up.

    1. The Burning Man episode of the Malcom in the Middle is great.

      1. Watching it on Netflix as we speak. So far, so good.

  30. A crash.

    Over the weekend, the events were covered by the newspapers across the United States. On October 28, “Black Monday”,[12] more investors facing margin calls decided to get out of the market, and the slide continued with a record loss in the Dow for the day of 38.33 points, or 13%.

    The next day, “Black Tuesday”, October 29, 1929, about 16 million shares traded as the panic selling reached its crescendo. Some stocks actually had no buyers at any price that day (“air pockets”). The Dow lost an additional 30 points, or 12 percent,[13][14][15] amid rumors that U.S. President Herbert Hoover would not veto the pending Smoot?Hawley Tariff Act.[16] The volume of stocks traded on October 29, 1929 was a record that was not broken for nearly 40 years.[14]

    On October 29, William C. Durant joined with members of the Rockefeller family and other financial giants to buy large quantities of stocks to demonstrate to the public their confidence in the market, but their efforts failed to stop the large decline in prices. Due to the massive volume of stocks traded that day, the ticker did not stop running until about 7:45 p.m. that evening. The market had lost over $30 billion in the space of two days which included $14 billion on October 29 alone.[17]

    1. Interestingly, Black Monday in 1987 didn’t really have much economic effect, not like other market crashes. And that was a 23% sing-day drop here and much worse in some other countries.

      1. Because it was incredibly short lived, and the fed didn’t purchase 900 trillion in securities to prop it back up.

        1. It amazes me that people take all of this smoke and mirrors seriously. It;s not just delaying the inevitable; I think it’s going to ensure an even more terrible crash. And with interest rates being shit, along with some trepidation about real estate as an investment, not to mention the huge percentage of retirement dollars in stock. . .we’re in for really bad times if a major crash occurs. The whole scam will be exposed.

          1. Trepidation about real estate as an investment?

            1. With a new bubble going? Of course. Getting in and out during the bubble, sure, but how much are you going to risk longer term knowing we’re going to see another bubble burst?

              1. Oh. You mean Buying a SFR as a personal residence and calling it an investment. Personal residences aren’t assets, they are liabililities, therefore they are not investments.

                On the other hand, multi-family and apartment buildings are a great asset class to buy right now. And if the real estate market as a whole takes a dip, I would recommend buying multi-family/apartments. I’ll be gobbling up all that I can.

                1. I agree. I was talking about for average investors who, at best, have a residential money-sucker and maybe a single rental property.

  31. Sheffield Lawyer Busted For Hypnotizing Clients Into Sex Acts Has Officially Resigned

    Hypnosis can’t make someone do something they don’t want to do, right? I’m like 80% sure that I read that somewhere.

    1. Yeah, this is like being poisoned by homeopathic remedies!

    2. You didn’t read that, you were hypnotized into believing it.

    3. “”Hypnosis can’t make someone do something they don’t want to do, right?”

      Most people enjoy sex.

      Its just they’d prefer it to be with Someone Hot and Famous rather than “you”.

    4. Lawyers aren’t supposed to screw their clients* – hypnotized or not.

      *except metaphorically

  32. I don’t understand the Carter hate.

    In the grand scheme of things, how was Carter a worse president than 90% of the other people we’ve had? A lot of the things that fucked up the economy under Carter (price controls, for example) were actually implemented by Nixon and Carter repealed them when it became obvious what a catastrophe they were. He also deregulated trucking and is responsible for the craft beer renaissance.

    1. Yeah, Carter, in the end was merely mediocre. Which unfortunately now means “didn’t do enough”. Given the modern context, I’ll take Mediocre over Effective every time.

    2. I think people have a bigger problem with his positions since his presidency than with his mediocrity as president.

      I don’t hate him, but he’s not my favorite politician by a long shot, either.

      1. If Carter were to be recycled today, he’d probably be more like Bernie Sanders.

      2. For me, and this is pretty much how I feel about all politicians, it’s he’s out of office so shut the fuck up already.

        1. But how would we know what politicians really believed?

    3. I think it’ an age thing, my father and his friends (late 60’s early 70’s) hate Carter with a vitriol normally reserved for card cheats and puppy fuckers. I think they were at the exact right age that the dismal economy really affected them.

      1. It’s also one of the reasons Reagan is revered by many who were adults during that time. The change was pretty dramatic–almost instant in the foreign policy arena and fairly quickly with the economy. Not that it was all Reagan, of course, or even mostly him, but he gets a lot of the credit and Carter a lot of the blame.

    4. I think it’s because Carter ended up as a symbol of “managed decline” on this end of Atlantic, as “winter of discontent” was in UK. He came across as a mealy-mouthed hand wringer who couldn’t see any way to make things better, only less bad. Then you get Reagan (or Thatcher) saying “no, wait, fuck that, YOU are the one screwing up, not the rest of the country” and doing much better.

      1. “only less bad.”

        Really? I think his foreign policy is widely considered to have made things worse by people who actually look at the consequences of his “achievements”. (like getting someone to sign a treaty is a success in and of itself, even if they get assassinated because of it)

        1. Oh, yes, what I mean is, his goal was to make the slope of decline lower. Not that he even succeded at that – fuck, Camp David was forged by two actual statesmen (Sadat and Begin), he mostly was around to hold their hands and demonstrate that Egypt has switched sides for real.

      2. He wasn’t a horrible president in the grand scheme of things, but he was the wrong guy at the wrong time. He was essentially a moderate Democrat at a time when the New Left had just taken over his party–the shitlib Boomers who wanted to make the US feel guilty about everything in its history and kill off the post-WW2 culture of civic Americanism, but still somehow expected the country to remain prosperous economically while they tore it apart culturally. He didn’t know how to manage the geo-political and geo-economic changes affecting the country, and essentially conceded the narrative that the US was on the decline as a result. That’s not someone who’s going to give the impression of strength, which most Americans outside the Boomer hippies were looking for at the time.

        Reagan’s greatest accomplishment, to be honest, was reviving the “America, Fuck Yeah!” ethos of the early-mid 20th Century and riding that to two terms in office.

        1. Nothing underlined the difference between Carter and Reagan, geo-politically, more than the Iranians returning the embassy hostages on the day Reagan took office.

          1. Reagan also had the balls to fire the air traffic controllers and to decontrol oil on the domestic front.

            I intensely disliked Carter at the time because he froze my salary while prices were going up by around 15% per year and was the living embodiment of American malaise. More recently, I’ve mellowed regarding Carter after seeing just how bad presidents could be with Read My Lips Bush, The Meaning of Is Clinton, Compassionate Conservative Bush, and Hope’n’Change Obama. To Carter’s credit, he leadership brought about legalization of homebrewing and deregulation of trucking and air travel.

    5. Carter allowed innocent Americans to be held hostage by a hostile power for 444 days.

      I know that in an age where nobody give a shit about anything except drugs, Twitter, selfies, and gay butt sex it probably seems laughable that people would actually care about fellow Americans that they never ever met, but believe it or not, back then people still had some pride about such things. I know, it’s shocking.

      1. To be fair, our fear of Soviet response colored our behavior quite a bit. I always thought one of the reasons the rescue fiasco was authorized was that the Russians had just invaded Afghanistan.

      2. Whine harder. WHINE, YOKEL, WHINE

      3. I know that in an age where nobody give a shit about anything except drugs, Twitter, selfies, and gay butt sex it probably seems laughable that people would actually care about fellow Americans that they never ever met, but believe it or not, back then people still had some pride about such things. I know, it’s shocking.

        I could not possibly have written a paragraph explaining why I hate you that would have been more instructive than this pile of bullshit you just posted.

        Mike M’s father in 1977:

        I know that in an age where nobody gives a shit about anything except cocaine, disco, The Gong Show, The Love Boat, and gay butt sex (some things are popular in all generations) it probably seems laughable that people would actually care about fellow Americans that they’ve never met, but believe it or not, back in Korea people still had some pride about such things.

        1. Too many faggoty words, Nancy boy. WRITE, COSMO, WRITE

          1. NEEDS MOAR BITCHING ABOUT DC COCKTAIL PARTIEZZZZ!!!

          2. NEEDS MOAR BITCHING ABOUT DC COCKTAIL PARTIEZZZZ!!!

        2. This is the generation who collectively flipped its shit over a half-decade ended central African civil war, a bunch of Nigerian nutbags and an African lion. Collectively pretending to give a shit for social recognition is more common than ever.

          Oh, but no one did that in Mike M’s day, I’m sure. *Stuffs away Ayatollah and Free Tibet shirts*

    6. At a point where America really needed a leader (post-Vietnam, economy in the toilet, Soviets in A’stan, Teheran embassy over-run, etc) he just kinda looked down at his shoes, kicked a dirt clod, and mumbled.

      1. A particular sore point with me was how Carter said, in reference to the planned Holocaust museum, that we would never again stand by while genocide was being committed – when the Khmer Rouge were doing exactly that.

        1. I don’t have much of an opinion about Carter as a person (though policies can be debated)

          Though i always thought this was funny.

          Good Diplomacy? = Does not mean what you think it means.

          Those people shaking hands? Will both be murdered by citizens of their own respective countries in the next few years.

          1. Carter’s “attack rabbit” incident was cosmic comedy ne plus ultima

            1. “Carter’s “attack rabbit” incident “

              I was too young. I remember carter on TV and i thought he sounded dull and indecisive. My mom was southern, but he sounded straight up goofy Georgian.

              Reagan was the first president I was actually cognizant of. Partly because people had strong opinions about him +/-, and because the Cold War was something very prominent in people’s consciousness, and he was going to “do something about it” in a way no prior president seemed willing.

          2. *my bad. Rabin, not Begin, was assassinated. meh. still, the point’s basically the same. leaders can’t do deals that citizens won’t accept.

          3. Well, Sadat was assassinated by Muslim Brotherhood, so yeah, when your opponents are fucking religious assholes that can’t be compromised with, you might get shot if you piss them off. Especially if at the same time you say “Fuck pan-Arabism, maybe we should take care of Egypt.”

            Have I mentioned I think Sadat is the greates Arab statesman since the actual Caliphate? Not a nice person, but damn, he actually did do the “long-term plan to deshittify your country’s situation” thing better than most. Takes a talent to turn defeat on the battlefield into strategic victory!

            1. “Sadat was assassinated by Muslim Brotherhood”

              Actually…. it was the “The Egyptian Islamic Group“…collaborating with “Egyptian Islamic Jihad”. The former eventually became a normal political party, while the latter went on to merge with Al Qaeda.

              “While the assassination of the Egyptian president Anwar Sadat in 1981 is generally thought to have been carried out by another Islamist group, Egyptian Islamic Jihad, some have suggested al-Gamaa was responsible for or at least related to the assassination. In 2003 the imprisoned leadership of the group renounced bloodshed, and a series of high-ranking members have since been released by Egyptian authorities…”

              You have to remember that muslim political parties were basically banned in Egypt, but that multiple different groups flourished underground in a kind of shadow-political system.

              The idea that the “Muslim brotherhood” are some kind of regional super-baddies is generally mistaken – they’re actually the less extremist of the islamic political groups, and have been relatively sane (as far as i know) compared to say, Hamas/Hezbollah or groups that have openly advocated terrorism.

              Read “The Looming Tower“… its basically a backgrounder on Al Q, but squeezes in a very good history of middle-east politics and islamic terrorism (vs palestinian nationalist terrorism)

        2. I will admit that my opinion of Carter has a strong personal facet. I was in the Marines during most of his term in office and it was exasperating to train so hard just to end up warming the bench while so much was happening around the world.

    7. Fucker brought back select service registration and no one has yet to repeal it.

    8. My hate for Carter is no greater than for any other president.

    9. Have you ever heard, “You can’t buy gas today because of the last digit of your license plate”?

      That was Jimmy Carter.

  33. Carter was one of the “least worst” President of my adult life.

  34. Black Monday in 1987 didn’t really have much economic effect

    I remember Buffett coming out and saying, (more or less) “It’s just a number. All the people, all the machines, all the inventory… everything is still there. Everybody’s going to show up for work tomorrow, and the real economy will be okay.”
    That was ten. Who knows what sort of gibberish he’d spout, now?

    1. He got his, and now he wants to make sure no one else ever does. Fuck you.

      What’s crazy is that we lived through that, saw the odd disconnect between Wall Street and Main Street, yet hear all the time today that a bull market means GREATEST ECONOMY EVER, when that’s a very big lie.

      1. Well, we hear that all the time because Shriek is here to make that claim over and over and over.

        1. He’s just repeating a very foolish leftwing talking point.

  35. My investment strategy is to look and wait for really shitty days for companies that I think can weather the outcome (Ford and BP are two great successes).
    .
    Yes. I used to troll the “52 week low” list. Northrop was my big winner. I did pretty well with GE, as much as I dislike Immelt.
    I should go back to doing that.

    1. I’ve done the same thing. Only to find that the 52 week low was just a point on the ride down…

      1. *cough*GulfMark*cough*

  36. Suuure the fed is going to raise rates. What with the runaway economy and bubbles appearing everywhere!

    http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/20…..fears.html

    1. The S&P 500 fell 2.1 percent to 2035, wiping out what was left of its 2015 gains, and the 10-year Treasury yield was around 2.07 percent.

      Shrike! Does your ass hurt?

  37. Well, I’m on day 4 of on campus interviews… I’ve never had interviewers spend so little time on my resume. For most, there is a cursory rundown of my history followed by “what do you want to ask us?” Some of this may be because of the 20 minute limit, but I find the format of 5 minutes about the candidate and 15 minutes of “do you have any more questions for us?” to be a bit off-putting.

    I thought it may be that my credentials weren’t there, but it has been made increasingly clear that the issue isn’t that I’m unqualified (3 offers and 2 callbacks so far). Is this just a law school hiring thing?

    Whenever I was interviewing engineering intern candidates at my old job, the “what do you want to ask us” was a throw away in the last 5 minutes, in case they had some sort of required accommodations or questions about the hiring process. It certainly threw me for a loop when interviewers have asked me that question with 2/3 of the interview left to go.

    /naive law student

    1. People almost universally think “interviews” are supposed to be about Companies asking questions, and then interviewees “answering them correctly”

      Instead, its about prospective employees having a brief chance to present a self-sales-pitch

      It never even crossed my mind until i was given the job of interviewing 50 prospective applicants for our very-fast-growing company. *also – at least 1 of the people i hired was probably going to be working directly for me.

      I stopped caring about what their resume said, and would just go, “what on this piece of paper should I care about, as relates to what I need?” The implication wasn’t “tell me about the paper-claims”, but rather, “what do you think i want? how much have you thought about this.”

      As far as the questions, i dont know what law firms look for, but being aggressive about your interest in personal advancement is generally a good sign. “how much flexibility should i expect”, “what kind of deals/cases make up your workload” “how many partners came from within the firm, vs. poached?” “what kind of churn do you get? (how long do hires last)” “why do you present a better opportunity for me than (competing firm)”
      etc.

      The most important thing to convince an interviewer is that you want THEIR job. (not the HR person, but you want to be their boss. …that you see your time as valuable and that you don’t want to waste it for some bullshit firm that’s going to make you do pointless busy work)

      1. One question that amazed me how candidates seemed to never expect it…..

        “I get you want A job. Why do you want THIS job”

        The people i hired were the ones who knew some few details about the company, what we did, how fast we were growing, and who our clients were. They said,

        “I’d rather kick ass at a place where I can get promoted fast and do interesting stuff, rather than get some bullshit low-level job at McKinsey or PwC and end up never moving beyond my cubicle for 4 years”

        Their interest in specific subject matter we dealt with, and their interest in the type of workplace environment we presented were sincere. They knew what other companies were like, and they didn’t like THAT, they liked THIS. They wanted to get experience in specific skills and subject matter that they thought would be valuable in the longer term.

        If you can find ways to communicate this quickly to your prospects, they’ll make you offers.

        1. “I get you want A job. Why do you want THIS job”

          An excellent question. After finding myself unemployed for the first time in 29 years, then slowly getting back into the workforce, I found that I really didn’t want any of the jobs I was applying for, I just needed A job. Once I finally hit THE job I wanted, I nailed that mofo.

        2. Also, asking questions to impress the employer is only a part of it. You should also be trying to discern if they’re the right fit for you.

      2. People almost universally think “interviews” are supposed to be about Companies asking questions, and then interviewees “answering them correctly”

        This is exactly how we hired at [insert tech company here]. A senior coworker and I would tag-team an interviewee with questions that were either technical in nature or based off of their resume. Half of our shtick was trying to bounce them off of their canned responses to see whether they could actually think on their feet, or whether they were just hacks.

        I certainly use the open forum to my advantage. I really like some of the questions that you propose, and I’ll probably steal a couple for tomorrow. The questions I ask are generally about what sort of development they would expect out of me/how will they develop my talents, information about the work environment/work-life balance, and information about opportunities to relocate (because my wife and I are seriously considering moving after I graduate).

        It’s amazing how much you can get a partner at a law firm to (mildly) trash their own firm if you just sit there in silence and make them fill the gaps (to a certain extent. silence can kill you if not well timed).

        1. A senior coworker and I would tag-team an interviewee

          Phrasing…

          1. Did somebody say “Tag Team”?

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffCEr327W44

  38. Anyone else watch O’Reilly last night completely make up a SCOTUS case to defend birthright citizenship?

    1. No, but I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night!

  39. I haven’t been a fan of Jimmy Carter since he re-instituted draft registration back when I was in high school. Fuck that guy.

    -jcr

    1. I never had to register having been to young when it was discontinued and then already enlisted when it was brought back.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.