The Clinton Foundation and the Secretary of State, Transgender Bathroom Controversy, Pot on College Campuses: A.M. Links

|

New at Reason:

Brickbat: You Know Who Didn't Like His Policies Criticized? 

By Charles Oliver

There's Nothing Mysterious About the Market

The mystery is why we keep letting government get in the way. By John Stossel

Denver's Unconstitutional Harassment of Jury Nullification Activists

The city treats handing out pamphlets near a courthouse as a crime. By Jacob Sullum

Ten Years After Katrina, New Orleans Charter Schools Have Made Improvements

New Orleans students have learned more and they are better-prepared for college and careers than they were before the city's education reform. By Savannah Robinson

Liberland: A New Nation Founded on 'Love and Freedom'

Can a country formed on limited government attain international legitimacy? By Anthony L. Fisher

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

Advertisement

NEXT: We Don't Need 'Decades of Research' to Know Vaping Is Safer Than Smoking

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. “High” rates of pot smoking at American college campuses (har har).

    I don’t get it.

    1. Hello.

      “Jeb Bush says he’s ready to fight Donald Trump.”

      Ooo. How retro.

      Very well. Choose your weapon.

    2. Huh? *wipes cheetos dust from shirt and keyboard*

    3. goddamnit I swear to god I didn’t see this.

      1. I thought you were mocking me. And since we know mockery is the highest form of flattery…

        1. I thought that was cuckolding.

    4. I don’t get it.

      Weed explain it to you, but we’re high

  2. “Fury over ‘Slave Tetris’ game in which players squeeze as many Africans as they can into a ship’s hold”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..-hold.html

    Welp, there goes my pitch for ‘Minecraft: Auschwitz’ . . .

    1. Ha. Where can I play?

      They should have the same game but with orphans. For libertarians.

      1. Perhaps with a sweat shop instead of a slave ship? Whoever’s orphans churn out the most Nikes wins the game?

    2. Africaans would be cool though, right?

    3. Those quoted tweets. Wow.

      1. This is trolling done right.

    4. There was an early aughts game called ‘Die, Digger, Die’ or something like that. Based on the idea that getting Aussie soldiers killed at Gallipoli got Churchill, Kemal Ataturk and a bunch of generals promotions, the game gave points for leading your diggers into death. Blow em up. March them off cliffs. Into the sea. Into machine guns. All good ways to get them Diggers dead.

      1. It got Churchill fired.

      2. I loved the movie Gallipoli as much as the next person, but people really should get more info about the battle. Overall, there is no question it was a stupid move. But, everyone thinks that it was some English officer cold-bloodedly ordering brave Aussie men to die for nothing.
        It was primarily the incompetence of Col John Antill and Brigadier General Frederic Hughes (both Aussies) that led to the continued useless waves. In addition, the attack at the Nek was diversion for a New Zealand attack NOT a British one. In fact, the Royal Welsh Fusiliers suffered heavy casualties trying to support the Aussies once they were aware of the fighting.
        The Brits were most definitely “not drinking tea on the beach”.

        1. I think a lot of it had to do with simple ignorance about the sheer scale needed, of everything, for a successful amphibious invasion.

          Amazingly, this lesson had to be learned, again, in WWII. Only this time with Canadians, not Aussies.

          1. The Canadians actually foresaw the problems, but were too polite to say anything.

  3. Idris Elba ‘too street’ to play James Bond, writer says

    (CNN)The writer of the new James Bond novel “Trigger Mortis” has set off a firestorm with a remark about Idris Elba.

    Anthony Horowitz recently told the Daily Mail that he believes Elba is “probably a bit too ‘street’ for Bond. Is it a question of being suave? Yeah.”

    Elba has long been touted as the fans’ choice to become the first black Bond.

    For some, the reference to Elba as “too street” was code for “too black.”

    “Between The World and Me” author Ta-Nehisi Coates tweeted that Hororwitz should “Just be honest and say ‘James Bond’s being white is important to me’ and be done with it.”

    1. Too street? Has Horowitz not heard the guy speak? HE HAS A BRITISH ACCENT.

      1. But apparently it’s not an upper class British accent.

      2. No no, he meant “street” like in The Streets.

      3. Yeah, but it’s a weird sort of neo-Cockney patois. Still, he’s affected an American accent in other roles, so I have little doubt he’d be able to speak in received English.

        I say he’d make a great Bond.

      4. I guess he thinks he really sounds like Stringer Bell.

        1. That role is one of the reasons I think he would make a good Bond. Bond should have a dangerous edge to him. He is after all “licensed to kill”.

          1. That is one reason Connery made a great Bond and also Craig. He can play the sophisticate, but underneath there is an edge he has, that I think was missing from Moore and Brosnan. Dalton had the edge, but didn’t have the suave to go with it.

            BTW: For those who are against Elba, remember that Bond had NO Scottish connection until Connery played Bond in Dr. No. Then Fleming retconned a Scottish connection.

            1. That’s why I like Daniel Craig’s Bond the best; dude’s a borderline sociopath.

              1. Yeah, he’s great and he’s not exactly a debonair blue blood. I think Elba will be great.

            2. I though Brosnan would be too prissy when he was picked but I thought he did great.

              1. I though Brosnan would be too prissy when he was picked but I thought he did great.

                While not all the Bond movies have been great, I honestly can’t think of any actor who hasn’t played the role well. Even George Lazenby contributed to the role. Myself, I grew up with Roger Moore as james Bond.

                1. I’ve liked them all, except Roger Moore.

                  A lot of that is probably the weakness of the scripts and productions, IMO, but I just could never buy him as being the least bit dangerous.

            3. Dalton is a criminally underrated Bond, IMO. I love what they’ve done with the rebooted series. A black Bond seems gratuitously PC in the current social and political climate, but there’s no reason it couldn’t work with a good actor.

          2. The reason I don’t like Daniel Craig is because he just looks like he has a dangerous edge to him. It’s a cliche that the criminal masterminds always come up with some elaborate way to try to kill Bond rather than just shoot him in the back of the head and be done with it, but you don’t just shoot Bond in the back of the head. That wouldn’t be sporting and it wouldn’t give you a chance to test your wits against his. Bond, after all, would never just shoot you in the back of the head. The criminal masterminds, deep down, admire and respect Bond more than they fear him. Bond is the Most Interesting Man In The World. The ladies all want to get with him, the men all want to be him – even the criminal masterminds all secretly wish they were Bond. Craig just comes across to me as too scary, somebody you would just shoot in the back of the head as soon as you got the chance because he’s too dangerous to mess around with. Samuel L. Jackson would make a terrible James Bond, Denzel Washington is what you want. He’s The Fonz, not Chuck Norris. I have no idea who the hell Idra Ellis is. I vaguely remember the guy from “The Office” but I haven’t seen any of the other movies he’s been in.

            1. Samuel L. Jackson would make a terrible James Bond

              “Bond, motherfucker! James Bond!”

              Denzel Washington

              He’s a phenomenal actor, but I’ve never heard him affect an English accent in any of his roles. In any case, he’s probably a little too old by now ot play Bond.

              1. I didn’t mean literally Jackson or Washington, just the type. Bond is a cool, classy guy first of all and a guy that can kill you 6 different ways before you hit the ground second. Like I say, I have no idea who Idris Elba is so I don’t know, but calling him ‘street’ isn’t necessarily code for ‘black’, it’s just suggesting he maybe doesn’t come across as properly suave and sophisticated and debonair and elegant enough to be Bond. The guy is an actor, though, if he’s good enough he can act the part. And maybe Ben Affleck will make a perfect Batman, too.

              2. Denzel Washington and Tom Hanks are deadlocked for the title of Most Overrated Actor, IMO. And an American actor ever playing Bond is just a bridge too far.

            2. I had never thought it that way. You are dead on correct. There was something about Craig that didn’t work as James Bond. I could never figure it out. It is totally that he is more dangerous than cool. Craig is the perfect special forces killer. He is not James Bond.

              1. It wasn’t helped by the initial scene in Craig’s first Bond movie (Casino Royale?) where he snuffs the guy in the black and white scene. The ‘vibe’ was very clearly that of an executioner.

                1. That’s what I actually liked about Craig’s Bond. The book Bond was a former Royal Navy Commander, and Fleming implies he was somewhat of a commando. Bond is exactly like Craig’s Bond, sophisticated and smooth, but able to hit an internal switch and go deadly. The only thing I would like better is if Craig could play the smooth part better, he’s a little more rough around the edges than Connery or Dalton.

              2. Craig is the perfect special forces killer. He is not James Bond.

                I think this depends on your exposure to Bond. The early movies definitely have a cool playboy feel that, IMO, the books don’t exactly have the same flair for.

                IMO, ‘too street’ is a phenomenal description. IMO, Elba can do playboy-type charisma, but not well. And I don’t have a problem with him being black, but as big/physical as Elba is, I don’t think he’d fit the role. Very much the same way I’d describe Eastwood or Neeson as too gritty or serious to play Shaft.

      1. Well, he did break the code. Sneaky writer thought he could get away with ‘street’ thinking black folks don’t know what skreet he be talkin’ ’bout. Ain’t no jive-ass honkey gettin’ that one past ol’ Taneesha. Sheee-it, mofo done fuck up what I be sayin’. Taneesha be the gotdamn skreet. Noamsayin’?

    2. In other news, George Clooney deemed too “posh” for Action Jackson reboot.

      1. Carl Weathers is classy as fuck!

        1. “We’re just a couple of adults, gettin’ their stew on.”

    3. A black James Bond? Personally I don’t like it when they decide to change a character’s race. I mean isn’t that part of his character? Could you cast Tom Hanks to play say Martin Luther King? or maybe Jackie Chan to play Luke Skywalker in the new Star Wars?

      Maybe it will work with James Bond because he’s been cast by so many different actors. I don’t know.

      1. They already cast an Irishman.

        1. They most certainly did not. After Timothy Dalton there was a long absence of Bond films until Daniel Craig took the role in 2006.

          1. License to Kill, Timothy Dalton, 1989

            Goldeneye, Pierce Brosnan, 1995

            Tomorrow Never Dies, 1997

            The World is Not Enough, 1999

            Die Another Day, 2002

            Casino Royale, Daniel Craig, 2006

            1. I don’t think you quite understand. There were no Bond films between 1989 and 2006, and no Irish actor playing the role during that time.

              Actually though, I did like Goldeneye. The rest of the Brosnan era was trash. Die Another Day is downright embarrassment, even in comparison to the likes of Moonraker.

              1. I figured you were going for something like that but I decided to be obnoxious rather than simply asking the question.

          2. Heh, I liked Pierce Brosnan. He was a great James Bond, before he actually ever played the role. I didn’t much like the his actual James Bond movies however. Those were some of the shittiest scripts imaginable.

          3. Fuck that. Pierce Brosnan was a great James Bond. Maybe second only to Sean Connery. The scripts after Goldeneye sucked and Die Another Day might be the worst Bond movie, but none of that is his fault. The Daniel Craig movies are awful too, for other reasons. Like, he’s a pussy now. So, why not be another race? Why not be a woman for that matter? “James” can be a woman’s name?

            1. Heh, just remake any of the Bond movies based around a space weapon with a black woman in the role of 007 and slate it for a Hugo…

      2. Jackie Chan to play Luke Skywalker in the new Star Wars

        Actually, that would be awesome, if Jackie wasn’t way too old.

        1. Mark Hamill ain’t exactly a spring chicken either.

    4. What fans? Fans of Elba?”

      Because I’ll bet you cash money that an anonymous poll would show than next to no fans want James Bond turned black.

      Talk about fucking ‘cultural appropriation’.

  4. Trio Of Cops Decline Suspect’s Sex Acts Offer
    Woman, 24, sought free pass following DUI, narcotics bust

    In a bid to dodge DUI and drug charges, a 24-year-old Floridian allegedly offered to perform sex acts upon three separate cops, solicitations that were rejected and resulted in bribery charges being filed against the woman.

    According to cops, Arielle Engert was pulled over at 2:48 AM yesterday when her car was spotted weaving on a Clearwater street.

    Engert was subsequently arrested after failing a series of field sobriety tests and registering a blood alcohol content at twice the legal limit.

    1. Cops must be gay.

      1. Did you see the pic? That’s a man, baby.

    2. The first comment is pure class.

      1. Judge Irish accepted her offer. Rule of Man!

  5. Jeb Bush says he’s ready to fight Donald Trump.

    I assume Trump will insist on this being a pay-per-view event.

    1. The bad thing is that if Bush takes the lead in knocking down Trump, when Trump trips on his own fat mouth and falls down the stairs everybody is going to want to give Bush credit for pushing Trump down the stairs. I don’t think Bush is clever enough to realize that Trump is going to fall at some point and you would be better off making it look like you’re the one who knocked him down so you’ve got to pick the exact right time to get into position, I think Bush is actually going after Trump as a matter of principle, but it would be nice to think that Bush maybe jumped the gun and went after Trump a little early, that Trump is still strong enough to take down Bush before he flops over on his fat head. Not that the GOP won’t just pick some stuffed suit even worse than Bush, but please dear god have mercy no more Bushes.

  6. A transgender student’s request to use the girl’s bathroom has ignited controversy.

    Smokin’ in the girl’s room!

    1. Just build another bathroom. It is simple, people.

      1. No, it’s not. How will *former* transgender students be handled?

      2. It has been so obvious for so long that South Park did an episode on it, like, five years ago.

      3. “Just build another bathroom. It is simple, people.”

        You didn’t read the article. The student has been using a single Unisex bathroom for the last year. He now wants to use the female bathroom because he’s feeling excluded.

    2. That bloody wad of toilet paper clogging the drain gave him away.

    3. The radio ads against the Houston bathroom choice initiative are crazy. “As a wiman who hopes to become pregnant one day, I beg you to keep men out of women’s restrooms.” I shit you not. I listened agog to it when I heard it the first time. Pure hysteria. /no sexist

      1. Wait…which part might make you barren? For research purposes…

        1. You’ll be surprised to find they were light on specifics.

          1. Dammit.

        2. I think maybe she fears getting pregnant from a toilet seat.

          1. + 1 tractor seat

      2. Ha:

        An unidentified woman claims she’s afraid to have a baby in Houston because the ordinance lets men use women’s restrooms.

        “That is filthy, that is disgusting, and that is unsafe,” the woman says.

        She goes on to say she speaks for all moms. Yet, she acknowledges she isn’t a mom. She isn’t even pregnant. She simply hopes “one day” to have a kid.

  7. Go ahead, admit you’re a racist

    No one is ever a racist, judging by the parade of apologies from celebrities, politicians and even police officers caught acting in apparently racially offensive ways. But here’s a thought: What if a white person called out for such behavior instead said, “What I did was racist, and there’s no other excuse. I was wrong.”

    Is the American public ready for that? Has any public figure ever successfully made such an admission?

    “I’d be relieved if anyone would admit that, but I’m not holding my breath,” says Brit Bennett, an African-American journalist and author who writes about race. “People get more upset at being called a racist than the injustice of racism.”

    1. “People get more upset at being called a racist than the injustice of racism.”

      So they shouldn’t get upset at the injustice of being falsely accused of racism. QED!

      1. ‘Racist’ is the n-word for White people.

    2. So they make the term equal to baby killer and then are surprised no public figure is willing to martyr themselves by claiming the term. So sorry people won’t burn there careers to the ground so you can get your five minute hate on.

    3. Bah. Suck my dick.

      I use those words and make vulgar jokes with my friends (well, the ones who haven’t turned soft and all corporate over time) all the time and none of us are racist in our souls. I don’t give a rat’s ass what people on the left think; especially when they project.

      They can suck my dick too.

    4. What if a white person called out for such behavior instead said, “What I did was racist, and there’s no other excuse. I was wrong.”

      What if a black person admitted it’s racist to assume only white people are racist and also admitted that the murders in Virginia were the direct result of a racist black man?

      Did I just blow your mind?

      1. Mind…blown…

      2. your question would result in the other party sputtering about something moronically stupid, while the white person who admitted to racist behavior would be a pariah. Paula Deen, of all people, comes to mind for having had the temerity to use a certain word long long ago when she worked in a bank that was robbed by a person from a specific ethnic group.

      3. I’ll await the popular slew of these admissions with bated breath.

    5. I wonder what examples of racism they are thinking of? I’m guessing they are thinking mostly of people saying mean or poorly considered things involving race. A distinction really needs to be made between racism and casual bigotry or racist sounding speech. It has become too common to label a person as a racist for things they have said rather than actual actions or beliefs.

        1. Yeah. Ditto.

          So racist.

      1. Good guess. The example in question was Kelly Osbourne saying the following on The View:

        “If you kick every Latino out of this country, then who is going to be cleaning your toilet, Donald Trump?”

        And then took to Twitter to say:

        I will not apologize for being a racist as I am NOT.

        1. Sounds like an observation that in southern California most menial jobs are done by latinos who are often immigrants. Which isn’t really racist or bigoted, just a somewhat naive observation stated in a slightly funny way.

        2. Well in fairness to Kelly Osbourne I don’t think she’s racist. She’s just an idiot.

      2. Zeb, is there something you’d like to confess?

        /Thalmor Justiciar

        1. I identify as Sentinelese.

      3. This is exactly the sort of excuse a racist would make, racist.

      4. And distinction between racism and common discrimination, leaning on stereotypes, rush to judgment, etc.

    6. “Stealing is in the nigger’s blood”.

      I had a boss who used to say that fairly frequently. Because of his naked racism and all the vile things he used to blather on about I finally got where I couldn’t stand the sight of the guy or the sound of his voice. I eventually left the job precisely for that reason.

      Positing that all white people are racist is saying exactly the same thing as my old boss. (He finally got a chance to make the world a better place)
      It is amazing to me that they don’t realize how racist the things they say are. The lack of self-awareness is breathtaking. They are just as repellant and bigoted as my old boss; assigning original sin to some group based solely on their ethnicity.

      Assholes.

      1. Man, that’s blatant. Blatant enough that I don’t even think my Dad’s Marge Schott stories are that bad (my dad was head ground keeper for the Reds for a few years in the late 80s, and apparently she was super racist and mean, although all I can remember about her is Schottzie scared me and she gave me Double Bubble). My dad’s assistant manager for the grounds team left because she was blatantly racist (basically passed him up for my dad since my dad is white), but the guy liked my dad enough that he ended up his boss at his next job.

    7. Go ahead, admit you’re a racist

      You first.

  8. Is social media “ruining politics”?

    Flip that around.

      1. Whoa, where’s the rest of your handle?

        1. Too hard to handle?

        2. You want the truth? You can’t…

          [dons sunglasses]

          …handle the truth.

        3. I have…nothing at the moment. So I am going minimalist.

          *sips latte, takes a drag off a clove cigarette*

  9. Huffpost: Hillary Clinton’s Emails Illustrate The Difficulties Of Achieving Work-Life Balance

    Hillary Clinton has long been a champion of policies to facilitate work-life balance, particularly for women. Yet as secretary of state, members of her staff reported feeling stressed and found it difficult to take time off.

    Part of the trove of State Department emails released late Monday show staffers discussing the breakneck pace of their work and imploring each other to take days off.

    In one 2009 email sent to top Clinton aide Huma Abedin but directed to Clinton, Anne-Marie Slaughter urged Clinton to begin her Christmas vacation a few days early, on Dec. 21. “I would urge you to — for your own sake. The pace is absolutely killing and you deserve it,” she wrote.

    Slaughter added that if Clinton decided to take that day off, other staffers “would feel much freer to do so.”

    1. Clintons, they’re just like people!

      1. Who do you want taking that 3AM email?

        1. +1 [Redacted]

    2. Yes, that’s the controversy. That some of the most powerful people in the world are being asked to work hard for 4-8 years before parlaying that power into guaranteed life of comfort and relative wealth.

      Replace Secretary of State with CEO of ExxonMobil and send it back to HuffPost for comment.

      1. Or better yet, the recently maligned Amazon.com.

    3. members of her staff reported feeling stressed

      I imagine being on her staff was pretty damn stressful. Even half retarded back bench congressmen act like spoiled children.

    4. Excusing the inexcusable.

      Face it bitches, she aint gonna be president.

    5. This is consistent with what I’ve said before. HuffPo and other progtard outlets are going to zero in on the innocuous emails in an attempt to humanize Hillary and make it look like the nasty teathugliKKKanz are just out to smear her by airing her private conversations.

  10. Wrestling Legend Jimmy ‘Superfly’ Snuka Charged in Cold Case Killing of Brooklyn Girlfriend

    Legendary professional wrestler Jimmy “Superfly” Snuka has been charged in the killing of his former girlfriend, a New York City native, more than 30 years ago, authorities said Tuesday.

    Snuka was indicted by a grand jury on third-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter charges in the 1983 death of Nancy Argentino, of Brooklyn. He was arrested Tuesday morning at his home in New Jersey and was expected to post $100,000 bail following his arraignment.

    1. He probably never would have charged is he kept his mouth shut following the initial investigation.

      1. It’s not like he can’t just smack the judge with a folding chair, jump up on the jury box rail and flex menacingly at them and then run out of the courtroom vowing to return next month for a steel cage grudge match.

  11. Will Siberia be home to the first cloned woolly mammoth? Russian scientists set up new laboratory to resurrect extinct giants

    North-Eastern Federal University in Yakutsk has set up an ancient DNA lab
    It has launched a project for the revival of the mammoth and other animals
    Researchers hope the laboratory will allow them to get good quality samples from the frozen carcasses that are occasionally found in Siberia

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci…..iants.html

  12. Excuse me, I’ve got some-fin in my lip! The incredible moment a SHARK swims up to a group of divers for help because it has a lure stuck in its mouth

    A Port Jackson shark approaches a group of divers seeking help
    Fishing lure was hanging of the shark’s mouth when it swam up to them
    While one diver held the shark by its fin another delicately cut the bait
    The shark swam away with the hook still caught in its mouth
    Baiting hooks are likely to dissolve before causing permanent damage

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..y-Bay.html

  13. Pregnant Woman Plans On Having ‘Dolphin-Assisted’ Water Birth In Ocean

    A pregnant woman is planning on having “dolphin-assisted” water birth in the ocean, despite experts warning of the possible dangers.

    Spiritual healer Dorina Rosin and her partner Maika Suneagle are appearing in the documentary Extraordinary Births to chronicle the woman’s journey of giving birth in the sea with a dolphin as a midwife, as reported by The Daily Mail. Experts say the plan poses the risk of other local marine life, like a great white shark, showing up in the water.

    The couple run a healing retreat and view nature as a healing power. The pair says they believe their baby will be able to speak “dolphin.”

    1. Hopefully they will all be eaten.

    2. The pair says they believe their baby will be able to speak “dolphin.”

      Only if they feed their baby with dolphin milk.

    3. …and the dolphins raped them all to death.

      THE END.

      1. Do we really know what role dolphins had in teh conception?

    4. Aren’t dolphins basically the STEVE SMITH of the sea

      1. Yes, and like STEVE SMITH they have a large, S-shaped penis.

        1. Why am I imagining an evil version of Finding Nemo or The Little Mermaid?

          1. The Aquatic Rapeape Theory.

    5. That’s not quite over-the-top enough for The Onion but that’s some funny shit right there, reminds me of some of Doug Kenney. I’m going to have to find out who wrote that piece and see if their other stuff is as smart as that. Damn I miss the old NatLamp.

  14. Controversial ‘cash cow’ speed cameras could save more than 21,000 lives if they were rolled out across the United States, study finds

    Study analysed 25-35mph residential roads and school zones with cameras
    Found that drivers were 39% less likely to have a severe or fatal crash
    Motorists also 59% less likely to be travelling more than 10mph above limit
    Radar-triggered cameras are so controversial they are banned in 13 states
    Washington, D.C., ‘has collected $477m in speed camera fines since 2001’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..finds.html
    Anything to save lives! Anything!

    1. Far be it for me to criticize the brilliant reporters at the Daily Mail, but here’s the study’s methodology:

      The IIHS study examined the cameras in Montgomery County, Maryland, the northern suburb of Washington, D.C.

      Compared to 25-35 mph roads in nearby Virginia without cameras, drivers in the speed camera zones were 39 percent less likely to have a severe or fatal crash ? with most of that due to the corridor strategy. Drivers were 59 percent less likely to be traveling 10 mph or more above the limit compared to unguarded roads.

      So they studied one county and compared that one county to the average fatalities per capita in the state of Virginia. Moreover, the one county they chose was Montgomery County, Maryland, in which 30% of residents have postgraduate degrees and there’s a median family income of almost $100,000 a year.

      So they chose one of the best educated and richest counties and compared its traffic fatalities to a nearby state, saw that there were fewer of them, and determined this was entirely because of red light cameras. Never mind that it’s very possible that people in this rich and well-educated county might be less likely to die in traffic fatalities due to self-selection – we’ll just pretend confounding variables don’t exist.

    2. Far be it for me to criticize the brilliant reporters at the Daily Mail, but here’s the study’s methodology:

      The IIHS study examined the cameras in Montgomery County, Maryland, the northern suburb of Washington, D.C.

      Compared to 25-35 mph roads in nearby Virginia without cameras, drivers in the speed camera zones were 39 percent less likely to have a severe or fatal crash ? with most of that due to the corridor strategy. Drivers were 59 percent less likely to be traveling 10 mph or more above the limit compared to unguarded roads.

      So they studied one county and compared that one county to the average fatalities per capita in the state of Virginia. Moreover, the one county they chose was Montgomery County, Maryland, in which 30% of residents have postgraduate degrees and there’s a median family income of almost $100,000 a year.

      So they chose one of the best educated and richest counties and compared its traffic fatalities to a nearby state, saw that there were fewer of them, and determined this was entirely because of red light cameras. Never mind that it’s very possible that people in this rich and well-educated county might be less likely to die in traffic fatalities due to self-selection – we’ll just pretend confounding variables don’t exist.

      1. Wow. I guess sometimes correlation doesn’t even imply correlation.

  15. The Secret of “Strategy Beers”

    At the first Autopilot board meetings, the brothers overloaded members with slides and statistics showing every facet of the company. “We were trying to tell the life story of the company every quarter, and it just wasn’t working,” Sharkey said.

    Trying a different tactic, the brothers instituted ‘strategy beers,’ where they’d take board members out for a drink individually to fill them in on complicated issues and to ask for advice.

    “The strategy beers really set the tone,” Mike Sharkey said. Now, their board meetings are full of advice from members, he said, exactly the thing the young company needs.

    1. Makes sense. People are a lot better at giving suggestions if they have a couple days to digest the information before being asked their opinion.

      1. And also less inhibited when drunk. If the company had any balls they’d institute Mycelium Mondays.

  16. Shocking moment mother pulled a GUN on teens for threatening her son, 15, in the park… and later admits: ‘I would have used it’
    Tracy Leeser and husband Don showed up to the park after they said son Brett texted them saying he was going to be attacked and asking for help
    The mother is seen on a video of the incident screaming ‘Get the f*** away from my kid, you motherf*****’
    Leeser pulled the gun out from under her shorts after one of the teens said ‘Your son’s gonna get your a** beat right now’
    ‘You wanna beat my a**’ she said, pointing the gun at the teen, ‘Beat my a** motherf*****, I dare you’
    Leeser said she brought the gun to defend herself and that she had no intention of using it
    Video was uploaded to YouTube by Tyrelle Ware, 15, one of the teens she pointed the gun at
    Ware’s brother Terrence and another teen, both 18, were also present
    Police have yet to make any arrests regarding the incident

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..d-son.html

    A dozen BB bullets were fired into the Leesers’ front window last Saturday, three days after the confrontation at the park.

    DM morons. To them everything that comes out of a barrel is a bullet. Still, I wonder who would do that and why. What a puzzler.

    1. Leeser said she brought the gun to defend herself and that she had no intention of using it

      Interesting. Presumably it wasn’t loaded, and was brought along purely for brandishing. Which actually seems to have worked.

  17. “High” rates of pot smoking at American college campuses (har har).

    What’s this Har har I’ve been hearing so much about? The morning news said it’s like salvia but 1000 times worse.

  18. Victoria Justice parades her slim bikini body as she puts on affectionate display with shirtless beau Pierson Fode during Hawaii getaway

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..awaii.html
    Damn. I lust her so bad.

    1. Dude, she’s too young for me, and even I’m too young for you.

      1. I never said I want to sit down with her and chat about current events.

        1. Oh, well carry on then…

      2. The rule is 1/2 your age plus 7, just in case you needed a reminder.

        1. She’s a tad older than I thought (22). I guess I’m in the clear (28). I’m still too young for sarcasmic though…

          1. Not by that rule you’re not. Just because I talk the talk of a crusty geezer doesn’t mean I fart dust.

            1. I’m just busting your balls, old man.

        2. The rule is 1/2 your age plus 7

          Half plus seven, you say?

        3. I turn 46 in a month. You mean I am stuck stalking 30 year olds?

          Why bother!

    2. His tatts are just as douchey as the last time this pair was highlighted here. At least the ocean washes off the greasiness.

      1. Tattoos? Are you sure? It looks like some kind of infection of the lymph system to me.

        1. some kind of infection

          I don’t doubt it with these two.

        2. Looks like a cheat sheet from a chemistry class in the first one.

          Holy shit people are stupid.

    3. Victoria Justice is one of the best names I’ve ever heard

  19. Saw one of these on the drive home yesterday. Thought I was hallucinating. Thing went around a corner at such an angle that I thought it was going to topple over.
    http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4wa5NDO6knY/hqdefault.jpg
    It’s called a SNYDER, and it’s a 3 wheeled Chinese vehicle that carries four people but is classified as a motorcycle. What a piece of junk.

  20. The Clinton Foundation didn’t respond to a request for comment Tuesday on the emails

    WDATPDIM?

  21. Hillary Clinton’s emails reveal involvement of the Clinton Foundation in State Department policy.

    You don’t say.

    1. How else are they supposed to monetize foreign policy?

      1. Uh, the old fashioned way? By selling secrets directly to the Chinese maybe?

        1. Come on! That probably involves cash, offshore accounts, all kinds of trying to hide the money and never getting to use it.

          The Clintons figured out how to turn foreign policy into hundreds of $ millions of clean money in their accounts – free and clear.

          1. A government business-partnership, for the greater good!

        2. You don’t sell secrets to the Chinese, you sell them a licensing agreement that allows them to look at (but not copy) the documents for 30 days. After that, they gotta pay to renew the license if they want to continue looking at the documents or pay extra for the all new and improved Secrets 2.0.

  22. Is social media “ruining politics”?

    We all know it was social media that caused the great caning incident of 1851.

  23. Spot the Not: less sung heroes

    1. This entomologist proved that malaria is spread by mosquitos, which helped prevent many deaths during the construction of the Panama Canal.

    2. This security guard predicted 9/11 and held evacuation drills years in advance. He died on 9/11 after he went back in to make sure everyone from his floor was out.

    3. This Australian blood donor has saved 2 million lives because he produces a rare antibody.

    4. This agronomist is credited with saving 1 billion people from starvation by improving crop yields.

    5. This Soviet satellite officer prevented World War 3 by determining that the missile launch warnings he got were false alarms.

    6. This Navy intelligence officer determined the location of the Japanese fleet, which allowed the US to it. He asked that he not receive a medal in order to avoid angering a rival.

    1. …3?

      Oh, and ALL HAIL NORM BORLAUG!

    2. I thought #3 was an American woman, not an Australian man.

    3. 1 is the Not. I based that character on Walter Reed, but he was not an entomologist.
      The rest in order are Rick Rescorla, James Harrison, Norman Borlaug, Stanislav Petrov, and Joseph Rochefort.

      Here is the video of Rick’s story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9jUEp_l7cE

      Petrov never got any reward for his actions. His friends took up a collection and gave him some money which he used to buy a vacuum cleaner. The vacuum broke a short time later.

  24. You know who else recovered from a rough ride…

    European shares recover from rough ride

    European stock markets recovered from a rough start to the week on Wednesday, rising almost 1 percent as traders pointed to intervention in China that helped calm wobbly markets and hopes for more central bank action.

    European equities have suffered a bruising end to the summer, down more than 2 percent since the end of August and down more than 10 percent since the end of July, but brokers and investors say there is still value in high-yielding blue-chip stocks at a time of central bank bond-buying in the euro zone.

    1. Baltimore cops?

      1. *applause*

        Take a bow for that one.

  25. “High” rates of pot smoking at American college campuses (har har).

    I don’t get it.

    1. Damn it. Sorry, Fist. I swear I didn’t see your post.

      I’ll show myself out.

      1. Here, take this Scarlet Letter “F” and wear it.

  26. A transgender student’s request to use the girl’s bathroom has ignited controversy.

    Huckabee’s on to this guy.

    1. Is Huck taking a wide stance?

  27. oops…

    Clinton Told Aide to Send Classified Info to Personal Email Address

    On the same day that the “hacktivist” group WikiLeaks posted tens of thousands of classified State Department communications online, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told a top deputy to send now-classified information to her personal email address, newly released emails reveal.

    “Here’s my personal email,” Clinton told former Sen. George Mitchell, then Clinton’s special envoy for Middle East peace. “Pls use this for reply.”

    Mitchell responded with details of discussions with Italian foreign minister Franco Frattini. Most of the contents of the email, released by the State Department on Monday night, are redacted pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act exemption designed to protect classified national security information.

    She’s old – just doesn’t understand that new fangled email thang.

    1. She should play the part of the old senile dope like mobsters used to do in court.

  28. Clinton email markings changed to hide classified info

    According to recent congressional testimony, at least one of the lawyers in the office where the changes were made is Catherine “Kate” Duval, who was at the IRS during the Lois Lerner e-mail scandal and now handles the release of documents to the Benghazi select committee. Duval once worked for the same firm as Clinton’s private attorney David Kendall.

    Oops.

    1. PHAKE SKANDULL!!!!1!11one!!

  29. President Obama, Commute Sharanda Jones’ Sentence

    Sharanda Jones is currently serving a sentence of life without the possibility of parole at Carswell Federal Prison in Texas. Life without the possibility of parole is the second-harshest sentence our justice system can mete out, short only of the death penalty, and that not by much. What, you might ask yourself, did Sharanda Jones do to merit this sentence?

    She was convicted of a single, non-violent drug offense involving crack cocaine. This conviction stemmed from her first ever arrest, and she was not even caught with crack in her possession.

    If the above two paragraphs do not shock you, then you haven’t spent enough time in the criminal justice system to know how often violent crimes ? including intentional homicides ? are not punished with life sentences, much less life without parole. It is actually difficult, in many state court systems in particular, to get sentenced to LWP, even for repeat violent offender.

    1. avgjo ? a day ago
      If this sort of sentence were uniformly applied, I wouldn’t have a problem with it (of course, I’m a big believer in the death penalty for most drug crimes). The problem, as you said, is that this sentence is often NOT meted out for violent crimes*; q.v. the low sentences baby-killers get.

      *I refuse to say ‘more serious crimes’, since drugs are a great cause of the societal rot; that’s precisely why I believe death should be the penalty for most crimes. Mere possession should be 20 years hard labor. If these laws existed AND WERE CONSISTENTLY applied, you’d see the drug problem start to dry up.
      ?Share ?

      Fortunately most of the comments do not resemble this one. I wonder if this person is just trolling, as this is a tad extreme.

  30. A transgender student’s request to use the girl’s bathroom has ignited controversy.

    This is misleading. It seems that the student already uses the girl’s bathrooms. The issue here is the girl’s locker room. 150 girls walked out of school in protest. But, you know, who gives a shit about how those girls feel, there’s the feelings of a single former boy to consider.

    Post-male privilege, if you will.

    1. All those high school girls are just heteronormative privileged bigots.

      1. If teenage girls can choose who they shower with, this whole country will be lost.

        1. Well, at least part of our future will go down the drain.

    2. Thank you. I am sorry, but I have zero patience for this shit. I have no problem with cross dressing. Clothes are a social construct. I have no problem with people who derive sexual pleasure from pretending they are the opposite sex. We all have our kinks. This horseshit of people thinking the rest of the world should participate in their fantasy life has got to stop. Those girls do not owe him pretending he is a girl.

      1. John, you still don’t get it.

        He She *is* a girl.

        1. His DNA says otherwise. Sorry but the world is not subjective. It is objective. And you objectively are whatever your genes say you are. If you want to pretend to be otherwise, have fun. You just can’t expect anyone else to participate if they don’t want to do so.

          1. Look, John, you are a bigot if you don’t acknowledge that if I think I’m a dog, I am in fact a dog. Or Napoleon, whatever.

            1. My cat identifies as a German Shepherd. I am planning on suing the local dog park for not letting him play there.

          2. +23 Science

      2. ^^THIS^^
        The fucking world doesn’t owe anyone shit. If someone born a male honestly believes they are (or should have been) female, fine. Believe whatever the hell you want. But the rest of the world can only judge you on what is physically observable. It is NOT incumbent upon the world to change the entire structure of gender separation because of a handful of people. The individual rights of a trans person don’t take precedence over the individual rights of millions of other people to change clothes in private only with members of the same sex.

        1. Preach it brother!!

      3. This is the next Kulturkampf! The gay issue is pretty much over in this country so we need a new battle between the Progressives, and the Socons. They’ll paint this as the next civil rights battle, so the Progressives can get their righteous outrage on.

        We’ll have a good decade at least of this nonsense to distract voters from their real problems.

        1. The progressives want to be the new SoCons, and soon enough they will be.

        2. Yes. I think it is finally going to be a bridge too far. Even the liberals I know roll their eyes at this. I can’t believe so many self described Libertarians are buying into it. First, Libertarians usually claim to be rational and scientific. There is not a single bit of scientific evidence supporting the claim that someone can be mentally one sex but physically another or even any objective definition of what the hell that even means. Second, Libertarians usually claim to adhere to the nonaggression principle and to object to government coercion. Yet, somehow they have convinced themselves that the government telling people they must accept this if they want to go to a public school or building or that the taxpayers must pay for building special bathrooms is the right thing.

          Reason has on multiple occasions endorsed the idea of just building lots of separate unisex bathrooms as a solution to this as if there is no such thing as opportunity cost and money grows on trees as long as it is spent in pursuit of some culture war goal.

        3. I just don’t get the blind spot that some Libertarians have on these sorts of issues. The very same people who rightfully see the ADA as a massive waste of money are totally okay with advocating that the government and schools build a bunch of special bathrooms to accommodate these people or forcing everyone who objects to suck it up. Somehow it is a total waste of money and an imposition to build wheelchair ramps at post offices but an absolute necessity to build unisex bathrooms in schools even though the ones they have work just fine.

        4. The gay issue is pretty much over in this country so we need a new battle between the Progressives, and the Socons.

          Wait, it’s over? What about LGBTQWERTY (but not P)?

          I thought it’s like Roe v. Wade, the Civil War, CRA, and 2nd Am. where we continue to abuse each other with it, legally and otherwise, until the collapse of the Empire?

          1. Mad.casual,

            The majority of the country still doesn’t support gay marriage but they are willing to live with it and are as much as anything tired of hearing about it. I think most people are under the impression that even if they disagree with gay marriage, the issue is settled and we can at least move on and stop talking about it. For this reason, I really don’t think the country is in much of a mood to start a new civil rights crusade for cross dressers or to start enforcing public accommodation laws on anyone who objects to gay marriage.

            Gay marriage was sold largely on the claim that gays just wanted to get married like everyone else and live in peace. And rightly or wrongly most people associate the trans issues with gay issues. I really think the left is making a mistake immediately picking up on this issue and going all in on public accommodation laws for gay couples. Not only does the country not support it, a good many people who were either neutral or soft supporters of gay marriage are going to feel like they were lied to in the gay marriage debate and feel like nothing is ever going to satisfy the gay rights movement. This is going to create a backlash if they are not careful.

            1. I’m with you on this one. Not only has Reason endorsed the unisex washrooms without any regard for opportunity cost they (or their writers) routinely and even rather vocally side with (e.g.) the DOJ when the DOJ tells a private employer like Saks Fifth Ave. that they had to accommodate a transwoman or else.

              I was just baffled by the statement that the ‘gay issue is pretty much over’ when it’s *literally* the L.G.B.*T* community. I think it may be a knee jerk or survival reflex that my consciousness goes through whenever it gets comes across anything resembling, “Welp, time to flush *that* issue down the memory hole.”

              You say they will feel like they were lied to. They *should* because they *were*.

      4. This horseshit of people thinking the rest of the world should participate in their fantasy life has got to stop.

        I think transgender is a real thing but even I have my limits. I think high school is too early to push your agenda like this.

        1. Can a person can be so certain about their gender, or even their sexuality, a few years after they have reached puberty? I have no doubt that for some it is obvious, but that age range seems like the least ideal time to make such a definitive decision.

        2. It is a real thing, it’s a delusion along the lines of body dysmorphic disorder, the belief that you are physically different from what you actually are. Except transgender is the only form of it (so far) where society is expected to go along with and facilitate the delusion.

          1. ‘A disorder’!?!? Facts are TRANSPHOBIC

          2. People also believe that their body parts don’t belong to them, to the point of wanting to amputate perfectly usable limbs and organs [see: Body integrity identity disorder].

            Should we be required to facilitate this delusion, typically at taxpayer’s expense — or should this be realized as a mental illness, which is more or less defined as when someone’s mental processes are not synched up with reality? And, if you think people who want to lop off their legs because the identify as a person without those legs, then how can you say no to the person who identifies as a koala bear?

            1. not synched up with reality

              I don’t think the science is settled – like John was mentioning yesterday, maybe there is such a thing as a “female brain in a man’s body”. Until then I’m not calling it a “mental illness”. OTOH I don’t think society needs to reshape itself around the demands of a tiny minority either (just like ADA mentioned above).

              1. To believe that there is such a thing as a “female brain” in a male body, I think requires believing in a level of dualism that borders on the super natural. Our brains are part of our bodies. They are effected by our level of health, our hormones and everything else that happens in our body.

                That study in Slate basically said that testosterone has all of these profound effects on the brain. Now that I think about it more, that study doesn’t really support the idea of transgender. People who claim to be transgender are in male or female bodies. So they are not getting the hormones from the sex they claim to be. So how do they have a “female brain”?

                To believe they do, you almost have to believe in a soul, that there is this identity or sense of gender that operates completely independent of our bodies. Sure everything about my body is male but there is this other thing I have called gender that is totally independent of that. That is pretty close to endorsing dualism. And without some kind of detailed physical explanation of what that means and how such a physical state could exist, it absolutely is dualism. It is no different than saying “I am a female soul who was mistakenly put in a male body”.

          3. It is a real thing, it’s a delusion

            I think it has to be one or the other, unless by “real thing” you mean “really believed, even though delusional”.

      5. Those girls do not owe him pretending he is a girl.

        No one does. This actually happened to me a couple weeks ago in the lobby of our office building. Two women, one *very poorly* identified as a trans… person was consulting her female friend which restroom she… it was going to use on the way to the Men’s room. Like twelve year olds, whispering, glancing around and over their shoulders.

        It didn’t bug me one iota that there was a “woman” in the men’s room. I was way more offended at the poor impersonation of a man, the absolutely basally retarded level of why there is/was a question/discussion, and the astoundingly childish attempt to ‘put one over on me’. It was all I could do to keep from screaming, “WTF! You’re not fooling anyone!”

        Not *quite* as bad as a business owner making restrooms freely available to the public and people just deciding to urinate in the bushes out back or business owner putting six toilets, two urinals, and four sinks in the restrooms and someone opting to urinate in the sinks, but certainly along those lines.

    3. He is not a former boy.

  31. http://therightscoop.com/ted-c…..-him-over/

    Ted Cruz is often awesome. It is funny to compare this response, which is highly reasonable yet devastating to the snark filled personal attacks that pass for “winning the debate” on the left.

    Sir I told you I’m not going cross-examined. Let’s step back for a second and look at this with some historical perspective. Thirty to forty years ago there were a group of political liberal and scientists who said we were facing global cooling. They said we were headed toward a global ice age and the solution to global cooling was increased was massive government control of the economy, the energy sector, and every aspect of our lives. Then the data disproved it. It was not in fact correct that we were seeing global cooling. So that was kind of a problem. Then many of these same political liberals, and many of these same scientists they then latched on to a new theory, it’s called global warming. And the new theory of global warming interestingly enough, the solution was the exact same as the solution had been for global cooling. It was massive government control of the economy, the energy sector, and every aspect of our lives. But then the problem became the data and evidence didn’t back up global warming. In particular if you look at the satellite data.

    1. Listen I am the son of two scientists and mathematicians. It is the essence of science to look to the evidence. In the last eighteen years there has been no meaningful recorded warming according to the satellite data. So all of a sudden all these political liberals, the evidence and data didn’t back them up. So then the theory changed to a third version, it’s just been in the last few years when the theory magically transformed into climate change. And climate change from the perspective of a political liberal who wants government power climate change is the perfect pseudo-scientific theory. Why is that? Because it can never be disproven. Whether it’s hotter or colder, whether is wetter or drier the climate is always changing. Now you asked a question, ‘do you believe in climate change?’. Of course! From the dawn of time the climate has been changing. Until the end of time the climate will change.

    2. And yet interestingly enough the political liberals, their solution to climate change is exactly the same as it was to global cooling and global warming. Massive government control of the economy, energy sector, and our lives. And when you start to see politicians who propose the exact same solution to every problem regardless of the facts or the data you start to think these are politicians who just want power over our lives. You know what I’m interested in? I’m interested in the single moms who are working here who are struggling to feed their families and are seeing their electric bills skyrocketing because these political liberals are driving up their electric bills, driving up their energy bills, making it harder and harder to provide for their kids. We need to follow the facts and data and not just give power to a bunch of out of touch elites in Washington over our lives.”

    3. Since when did people on the left actually listen to what someone has to say? You don’t judge a person’s statements on the merit of the statements. You judge the person. He’s a Republican. That’s all the left needs to know. That means he’s a science denier who is being paid by Big Oil to spread anti-science propaganda because he wants the world to end. Duh. All reality-based people know this.

    4. Ted Cruz is often awesome.

      You’ve gone too far.

      Before you respond, take a few seconds and think about that horrible Simpsons impressions video he made.

      1. Okay, maybe sometimes awesome or awesome unless it involves impressions.

    5. That reminded me of why I liked Ted Cruz a few years ago. His foreign policy positions in the past couple of years have been so repellent that I had forgotten.

      1. What positions do you find so repellent?

        1. The ones that are guaranteed to keep the US embroiled in perpetual war.

  32. Hillary Clinton’s emails reveal involvement of the Clinton Foundation in State Department policy.

    She might be lucky enough to do have done so many improper things that none of them latch on.

    1. Gambling in Casablanca? I am shocked I tell you.

      Yeah, Algeria gave three hundred thousand or whatever it was to the Clinton Foundation for Haitian earthquake relief out of the goodness of their souls.

  33. From Hidden in Plain Sight: What Really Caused the World’s Worst Financial Crisis and Why It Could Happen Again
    By Peter Wallison

    p. 132-133
    …The new goals appear to have been a bridge too far. HUD seemed unaware of, or at least unsympathetic to, the problem of finding creditworthy borrowers in in low-income or minority communities. Not only were the GSEs required to find borrowers there – at the same ratre they were found in the market as a whole – but the borrowers now h ad to be buyers of homes and not just existing LMI homeowners who were refinancing. Although the purpose of the afffordable-housing goals was to make the GSEs stretch to reach the goals, HUD had both increased the quota and substantially narrowed the kinds of loans that would qualify. Because of this, the quality of the loans acquired by the GSEs deteriorated even further between 2005 and 2007 than they had in the past…

    Requiring subgoals that gave credit only forloans that were used to buy new homes – rather than just loans that represented refinancing – was a material new burden, and communications within and outside the GSEs before and after the new requirements were instituted, confirm this….However, the fundamental change in the burden that HUD instituted in 2004 accounts fully for the sharp deteroriation in mortage quality that the authors saw in the GSE’s data between 2005 and 2007….

    1. p. 166
      When the new affordable-housing goals were finally announced, just before the 2000 election, they contained dramatic increases and drove Fannie and Freddie into a new and far more challenging era. As Barry Zigas, then a senior vice president at Fannie, told a housing group, “Our mission goals are really like CRA on steroids.”

      …In a December 2000 memorandum, a Fannie staffer noted that the line between prime and subprime was disappearing. “[A]s Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are expanding approvals through automated underwriting, the distinction between prime and subprime is increasingly difficult to articulate”. This objservation recalls the HUD statement, made in connection with the 2000 afffordable-housing goal increase, that “[a]s the GSEs become more comfortable with subprime lending, the line between what today is considered a subprime loan vers a prime loan will likely deteroriate, making expansion by the GSEs look like an increase in the prime market.”

      HUD recognizes that, to lead the mortgage industry over time, the GSEs will have to stretch to reach certain goals and close the gap between the secondary mortgage market and the primary mortgage market [that is, reach parity in loan purchases between the LMI market and the regular market].

      1. We force banks to give loans to people who can’t pay them back and then wonder why our banking system crashes. Really, who could have foreseen such a thing? It is just bad luck.

        1. It didn’t take a genius to see that’s the crux of the mess.

          All those documentaries and investigative reports only focused on what unscrupulous bankers/agents were doing never ONCE disclosing the role of the government in this.

          What they were doing was in response to a directive from top men.

          1. And they never once talked about how the people who got the loans were just as responsible. Basically, the government forced the banks to go out and let a bunch of poor people get involved in real estate speculation. A few years ago I watched a book talk on CSPAN by this New York Times reporter who had written a book about the housing crash. He of course was all about how all of these poor people were taken advantage of by the evil banks. He gave an example of what he meant. There was some Salvadoran family in suburban Virginia who had started out in some $50,000 condo and then flipped it for like a quarter of a million and ended up in with a half a million dollar mortgage on a house. They of course defaulted. These people were victims? They sure as hell were not victims when they were making a two hundred thousand dollars on that first condo. And they certainly were not sharing any of that money with me or anyone else. Yet, this guy wants me to believe they are victims and I and the rest of the taxpayers owe it to them to bail their asses out because their real estate investment finally didn’t pan out.

            1. you loaned me money and I didn’t pay you back. you fucked me.

            2. Ha. I remember a story on a local news station about an elderly black couple that bought a $150,000 house even though SS was their only form of income. The payments equalled about 80% of their monthly income, so they celebrated buying their first house by buying a new car. Now, this is some local news channel and I’m certain they sensationalized the story, but damn. Just, damn.

          2. Dammit it is all about the greed!! Bankers are only in it for the money. That is why the gave so many loans to people who couldn’t pay them back and then they would have to short sell or foreclose and end up owning homes that they could only sell for pennies on the dollar…………

            Oops. NEVER MIND!

            1. in reality it made more sense to make a bad real estate loan and be left holding the property and sell it at a loss than to get sued by Barack Obama and ACORN for not making bad loans and pay them millions and have nothing at all to show for it.

              1. Oh I agree. There is alot of uncertainty in giving bad loans, but once the govt sets its sights on someone, there will be blood.

                1. Get tax payers to guaruntee that loan and banks X, Y and Z won’t give a shit who they loan to, they can use the attached guarantee to turn around and sell the subprime loan. This provides an incentive to give out as many loans as possible, regardless of creditworthiness. The resulting bubble wasn’t just an unintended consequence, it was the only conceivable consequence.

      2. a Fannie staffer noted that the line between prime and subprime was disappearing.

        Equality, finally! Don’t we all feel better knowing how equal it’s all becoming?

    2. (it is claimed) that the GSEs bought large numbers of subprime mortgages for market share or because these loans were highly profitable. If that were true, Fannie and Freddie would have exceeded the goals by wide margins. That they cleared these hurdles with little to spare in most years – and missed them occasionally – is strong evidence that they were dragged along by HUD’s remoseless pressure.

      1. GSE Affordable Housing Goals:
        Politicized Credit Allocation (PDF)

        As flexible lending expands the volume and risk characteristics increases markedly, yet these loans were still called prime. HUD acknowledged as much in a 2000 rule making.
        ?”As the GSEs become more comfortable with subprime lending, the line between what today is considered a subprime loan versus a prime loan will likely deteriorate, making expansion by the GSEs look more like an increase in the prime market. Since . . . one could define a prime loan as one that the GSEs will purchase, the difference between the prime and subprime markets will become less clear. This melding of markets could occur even if many of the underlying characteristics of subprime borrowers and the market’s (i.e., non-GSE participants) evaluation of the risks posed by these borrowers remain unchanged.”

        1. THE FINANCIAL CRISIS INQUIRY REPORT (PDF)
          …In March 2003, as Fannie prepared for new increases in the AH goals, its
          staff prepared a presentation, perhaps for HUD or for policy defense in public
          forums. The apparent purpose was to show that the goals should not be increased
          signifi cantly in 2004. Slide 5 stated:
          In 2002, Fannie Mae exceeded all our goals for the 9th straight year. But it was probably
          the most challenging environment we’ve ever faced. Meeting the goals required heroic
          4th quarter eff orts on the part of many across the company. Vacations were cancelled.
          Th e midnight oil burned. Moreover, the challenge freaked out the business side of
          the house. Especially because the tenseness around meeting the goals meant that we
          considered not doing deals?not fulfi lling our liquidity function?and did deals at
          risks and prices we would not have otherwise done.

          1. Same source:
            By September 2004, it was becoming clear that continuing increases in the AH goals were having a major adverse effect on Fannie’s profitability. In a memorandum to Brian Graham (another Fannie official), Paul Weech, Director of Market Research and Policy Development, wrote: “Meeting the goals in difficult markets imposes signifi cant costs on the Company and potentially causes market distorting behaviors. In 1998, 2002, and 2003 especially, the Company has had to pursue certain transactions as much for housing goals attainment as for the economics of the transaction.”…

            1. You are just blaming poor people Johnny. Why do you hate poor people?

              1. Too fatty. I prefer leaner meat.

  34. Rand Paul says Kim Davis’ refusal to grant a marriage license to a gay couple is “part of the American way.”

    I guess this is one way to get your campaign back into the news cycle.

    1. You’re telling me pointlessly sparring with Donald Trump didn’t work? I’m typing in my shocked font.

      1. You can’t help laughing at some of the commenters here who thought that Rand trying to start a slapfight with Trump “could only help his campaign!” Because he’s principled and stuff, and that may just resonate!!”

    2. Actually this kind of pisses me off. I was not a big fan of having judges arbitrarily change the definition of marriage. I agree with most here that it should be a private contract between any number of consenting adults. However, as long as marriage is regulated by the govt then it should have to follow its own rules. And since SCOTUS is de facto the final word on it, a govt employee does not have the right to refuse a marriage certificate to a gay couple.
      Obviously freedom of association should apply in ALL private transactions. But govt employees, acting on behalf of the govt, don’t get to decide.

      1. So if a Wisconsin judge refused to obey the Fugitive Slave Act and remit a slave captured in Wisconsin to his owner… Both aides can be right. It is the American way to put conscience before the law. It is also probably wrong in this case to do so.

        1. HEY EVERYONE LOOK WHO’S EQUATING A MARRIAGE LICENSE WITH SLAVERY.

          But yeah the best way for her to put her conscience before the law is to resign. Her objection is having her name affixed to the blessed pieces a paper that all couples – INCLUDING YOU I BET – pine for. Resign and show you how much you’re willing to sacrifice for your faith.

          1. HEY EVERYONE LOOK WHO’S EQUATING A MARRIAGE LICENSE WITH SLAVERY.

            Someone who’s married?

  35. Hundreds of migrants protest at Budapest station, want to go to Germany

    Chaos this week at the station in the Hungarian capital has become the latest symbol of Europe’s migration crisis, the continent’s worst since the Balkan wars of the 1990s.

    More than 2,000 migrants, including families with children, were waiting in the square at the station while Hungarians with IDs and foreigners with valid passports could board the trains.

    Hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing war and economic migrants escaping poverty have been arriving in Europe, on rickety boats across the Mediterranean and over land across the Balkan peninsula.

    Nearly all reach the EU on its southern or eastern outskirts and then press on for the richer and more generous countries further north and west, ignoring EU rules which require them to wait for processing in the country where they first arrive.

    Welcome to the land of sauerkraut, sausage, and schuhplattler.

    1. Europe is fucked.

      Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch.

    2. Nearly all reach the EU on its southern or eastern outskirts and then press on for the richer and more generous countries further north and west,

      Living under a less “generous” government is looking pretty good right now. Perhaps if the Eastern European governments maintain a certain level of stagnation they won’t necessarily drown in a noxious mixture of 3rd world culture and their own white guilt.

      1. The Eastern European countries don’t want ’em either.

        1. Of course they don’t. I’m saying that the only thing sparing them such a fate is their economic mediocrity, as compared to Western Europe. According to the multicult, every person in the world has some kind of right to partake in the property and productivity of Western Europeans.

  36. Jeb Bush says he’s ready to fight Donald Trump.

    Our well-known slimy troll refused to answer my question yesterday as to whether he’s standing by his proclamation that Jeb is going to win the nomination, which I assume means he’s chickening out.

    I’m pretty sure it ain’t going to happen, even with all the money in the world. His support, which was already meager to begin with, has been cut in half now. It seems to me like people despise him, which doesn’t surprise me much because he comes off as pretty unpleasant.

    1. Fuck you.

      Jeb is a Bush. Bush is the GOP by another name. Jeb will be the last one standing against T.Rump.

      1. So are you or aren’t you in fact boldly standing by your proclamation? Because it kind of sounds to me like you’re trying to play it both ways like a weasel.

    2. So you are telling me that Trump is going to win the nomination, right? Jeb has about as much chance against Trump as Micheal Cerra has of beating up the Klitschko brothers.

      1. It will be a war of attrition. Jeb will be the last GOPer standing. You will vote for Jeb and talk about how great he is come November 2016.

        JEB 2016! for John.

        I will vote for the libertarian.

        1. I can’t speak for everyone else who still tries to stick up for Team Red, but I swore an oath that I will NOT vote for Jeb Bush. I don’t give a fuck if Bernie Sanders, Cankles, or Joseph Stalin himself wins the Democratic nomination. I will not participate in the creation of a family dynasty. Of course the Dems had no problem with the Kennedys or apparently with the Clintions.

          1. ^This.

            I won’t vote Jeb under any circumstances. Even if he proves to be the perfect candidate I still wouldn’t vote for him.

            The political class needs to go.

            1. No one but the people on his payroll, in his family, or who think they are going to get some kind of favor if he is elected, will vote for him. Jeb has no base of support. The establishment is so desperate they are talking about dusting Romney off and having him run. That is because they realize Jeb has no chance. People on here think he does because he would be the only candidate in the GOP that lives in their heads.

        2. So now, Hillary is a libertarian. Can this troll get any dumber?

          1. When you’re a professional liar, you professionally lie. It’s what you do.

  37. Paging Crusty Juggler:

    UK national sperm bank has just nine donors

    It is now planning a recruitment drive, with chief executive Laura Witjens saying that appealing to male pride may be an effective way to boost donations.

    She has suggested a new campaign featuring a cartoon superhero, echoing a successful strategy in Denmark.

    A change in UK law in 2005, removing anonymity for sperm donors, is thought to have led to a drop in volunteers.

    Ms Witjens said she hoped adopting the “superman” message would help, but it could still take five years before the national sperm bank had enough donors.

    1. A change in UK law in 2005, removing anonymity for sperm donors, is thought to have led to a drop in volunteers.

      No! Really?

      1. Seriously, who do they think would want to donate with the possibility of child support or several years down the road a young adult with issues showing up on your doorstep demanding a relationship. The twenty buck isn’t worth it.

        1. Is it $20.00 per “donation”? I could make a living.

    2. UK national sperm bank has just nine donors

      Hasn’t it historically been the case that there’s only about 9 bloodlines in the UK anyway?

      1. If you are referring to the nobility/royals, you would be correct…

        1. Well, they all live in castles over there, don’t they?

    3. The idea of me walking into a place to jack off into a bottle and to hand over to someone at the desk is waaayyyy out of my league.

      1. Depends on the pay. As usual, this is a government-created problem for the market to fix.

        1. Not unless a hot nurse comes in with me.

      2. Get a load of Rufus over here.

        1. I see what you did there.

    4. Maybe Laura should provide manual assistance as an incentive.

  38. ‘Aggressive’ donkey captured after running loose in Mt. Juliet

    Mt. Juliet police were on the lookout for an unusual suspect Tuesday night: an aggressive donkey named Clarence.

    The department took to Twitter to warn residents about the donkey around 8:50 p.m. They said it’s on the loose from a farm at West Division and Main streets.

    “Donkeys are generally calm. However, the owner stated that it was extremely aggressive due to it being breeding season, and there is a female donkey on the farm,” Lt. Tyler Chandler told News 2.

    1. I eagerly await the update, where the donkey made a furtive move and died in a hail of bullets.

    1. How is this guy not in porn? I’m sure he could find plenty of takers in that realm.

      1. Apparently it interferes with his ability to do things and so he hasn’t been able to work.

        1. Is there such thing as penis reduction surgery? That is a real deformity. No woman could have sex with him and not find it excruciating if not downright dangerous.

          1. Is there such thing as penis reduction surgery?

            There is, for the first time ever as of earlier this year. We covered this one already a couple day ago.

          2. Steve Martin surgery. (When he decided to become white.)

    2. “A doctor there said the main part of his willy was just over 6 inches long and the rest was extra skin.”

  39. West Point professor resigns after calling legal scholars ‘lawful targets’

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015…..tcmp=hpbt3

    “In the article, he said legal scholars who criticize U.S. tactics in the war on terror . . . should be considered enemy combatants and charged with treason.”

    1. I would love to teach at West Point. And I can guarantee them I will never write anything that stupid. It is a classic case of allowing cleverness to make you stupid. If you are clever enough, you can make a convoluted and reasonable sounding argument for anything. The danger of smart and clever people is that they fall in love with their cleverness and start believing really stupid things.

      1. The danger of smart and clever people is that they fall in love with their cleverness and start believing really stupid things.

        John, I agree with this statement. However, this is also one of the reasons why Ted Cruz, and so many others in government, are not awesome.

        1. He can be awesome. Cruz is a very smart guy. I honestly don’t get the hate directed against him. He seems to be an actual committed small government Constitutionalist. The only real issue Libertarians should have with him is that he would not buy into the idea of substantive rights that would restrain the states. I understand their disagreement over that. That said, I would take a restrained federal government that functioned the way the Constitution intended it at the price of having to slug it out in the various states over privacy and substantive rights over what we have in a heart beat. The federal government is real threat to our liberty. The states are too, but they are less so since they are not going to bankrupt the country and you can easily leave a state and go to another. The ability of people to vote with their feet greatly limits the amount of real oppression states can engage in. The feds have no such limits and can bankrupt the country to boot.

      2. Maybe he’s just an attention whore who was finally in an environment where he could spout off a bunch of brainless jingo bullshit, and people would lap it right up. Too clever by half, maybe.

      3. He must have read too much Tom Kratman.

      4. If you are clever enough, you can make a convoluted and reasonable sounding argument for anything.

        Sounds like SCOTUS material, to me.

  40. Britney Coop-de-boop-er

    Black America’s ‘gaslight’ nightmare: The psychological warfare being waged against Black Lives Matter
    Black Lives Matter has been demonized following the unrelated murder of a police officer. Here’s why

    Like many Americans, I watched horrified last week as news unfolded of Vester Lee Flanagan’s cold-blooded execution of a newscaster and a cameraman in Virginia. Then, just two short days later, the news that Shannon J. Miles, a Black man with a previously documented history of mental illness, had executed Deputy Goforth made my heart stop.

    These killings of white people are tragic and inexcusable. That should be said without equivocation. But after I affirmed this same fact to my old friend, I asked him, “What would make you think I think otherwise?” That same night on CNN, I watched Dr. Marc Lamont Hill debate the Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke, also an African American man. The chief was there to affirm remarks made by Harris County Sheriff Ron Hickman about how “anti-cop” rhetoric from the Black Lives Matter Movement had led to the killing of Deputy Goforth. Sheriff Clarke pointed to the killing of Officers Liu and Ramos in New York last year and the killing of Deputy Goforth, proclaiming it a “pattern.”

    1. The Shame of Rutgers.

    2. I like how the comments are pointing out that the author quite obviously doesn’t understand what the word gaslighting means.

    3. YES, I was looking forward to this article all week!

      Black Lives Matter has been demonized following the unrelated murder of a police office

      I sure am glad people like Britney Cooper never demonize people based on unrelated murders.

      Black people, of every station, live everyday just one police encounter from the grave. Looking back over my encounters with police, it’s truly a wonder that I’m still in the land of the living.
      Am I supposed to be grateful for that? Are we supposed to be grateful each and every time the police don’t kill us?

      There is a way that white people in particular treat Black people, as though we should be grateful to them

      Oh Britney. You have the self-awareness of a tree stump.

    4. These killings of white people are tragic and inexcusable. That should be said without equivocation.

      Your obsession with racializing the issue is the equivocation.

  41. # Hillary Clinton’s emails reveal involvement of the Clinton Foundation in State Department policy.



    In my view this is what people should be scrutinizing. Compared to this sort of conflict of interest, the location of her mailbox is just a distraction.
    If Jamie Dimon were to be shown to have engaged in this level of conflict of interest and self dealing, there would be cabinet members fistfighting in the Oval Office over who gets to run the inquisition.

  42. 5 things you should know before biting into that marijuana munchie
    Marijuana edibles are big business but they can be problematic. Here’s why

    But edibles can be problematic. People unfamiliar with them can get way too messed up?witness Maureen Dowd and her infamous marijuana candy bar episode, or, more tragically, the case of the college student who leapt to his death after consuming them.

    Part of the problem is simple ignorance on the part of na?ve edibles users, but even the most sophisticated cannabis aficionados don’t know that much about how and why they work.

    Here, with a tip of the hat to The Cannabist, are five reasons it’s hard to be sure what you’re getting into when you bite into that marijuana munchie.

    1. I hope whoever turned the word “problematic” into a SJW meme gets hit by an asteroid.

      1. Talk to Pro L’ and Auric…..that can be made to happen, for a price.

    2. Just reading this gives me the munchies.

  43. Welcome to Quantitative Tightening as $12 Trillion Reserves Fall

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/…..erves-fall

  44. No Brianna Wu, Samus Aran is not a trans

    You had thought you were playing as a man all this time, but you couldn’t have been more mistaken. You found in that moment that you had been controlling one of the most badass women in all the cosmos, one that would go down in history as one of the most heroic women in video games.

    That reveal changed a lot. She became a fan favorite of men and women alike, and let young girls know that being a warrior was more than a valid option. Who could possibly have a problem with such a strong female character?

    1. Oh god, we’re in for a mutated iteration of every important historical figure was either secretly gay or black aren’t we. Morons.

    1. tax excess body weight

      Isn’t that Obamacare’s future destiny?

      1. Isn’t that Obamacare’s future destiny?

        I have little trouble envisioning armed government functionaries going door to door with fat calipers.

        1. “Sir, I just needs to check inside your love handles.”

        2. If they start doing that, I’m going to invest in a clinic that specializes in finding that people who are obese have uncurable, hard to treat “diseases”, since you know that the SJW crowd wouldn’t let the government tax those who have no way to control their weight (like the poor guy I went to K-12 with who literally had a glandular disease, and was healthy as hell, he could run me down easily, did 7 minute miles no problem, but couldn’t ever get within 50 lbs of skinny).

    2. “How many slices of pie have I had? Oh well…”

  45. Paranoid history of the GOP: How conspiracy theories poisoned the Republican Party

    But, of course, there was nothing reality-based about Reagan’s “critique” of liberalism. Contrary to Reagan’s fantasizing, the FDR-LBJ welfare state worked?it produced the largest middle class in world history, with broadly shared prosperity that’s never been equaled since. No one even remembers Reagan’s failed promise to balance the budget, based on his supply-side tax cuts that exploded the federal debt, while launching the sustained rise of the 1 percent into the economic stratosphere, as the rest of America has endured decades of wage stagnation, and downsized dreams.

    At the time, Matt Yglesias pointed out that the 1980 election ” looks like a very typical election” in terms of Douglas Hibbs’ famous “bread and peace” electoral model. So the real story was about how Ronald Reagan became the Republican nominee?and that was very much a story about how he managed to mobilize the conspiracy-minded GOP base to secure the nomination.

    In short, conspiracism was never anywhere near being excommunicated from the conservative movement or the GOP. It was, however, generally kept in line, which is why sanitized stories like Rauch, Buckley and Maddow’s can plausibly be told.

    1. No one remembers that the Democrats controlled the House during Reagan’s entire administration or that Reagan was excoriated in the media for vetoing budgets and shutting down the government in an attempt to curb spending. They also don’t remember that actual revenues under Reagan exceeded the projected revenues under the previous tax rates. Reagan cut taxes and the economy grew so much the government still made more total tax revenue. Yet somehow, those tax cuts were “irresponsible” because Congress managed to spend all of that extra money and then some.

      It should also be pointed out that while Reagan did build up the defense budget, real defense spending peaked in 1986. After Reykjavik and when the Cold War cooled off, Reagan started to cut back on defense. Of course, that fact is forgotten because everyone knows Reagan was a war monger (who somehow went 8 years in office without getting the US into a war) who just wanted to starve poor people and spend money on defense.

      If these people didn’t have lies, they would have nothing at all.

    2. the FDR-LBJ welfare state worked?it produced the largest middle class in world history,

      I’m going to need to see some evidence of this correlation.

      1. I think it’s funny that when they want to attack capitalism they claim that there’s been no wage growth for the middle class since like 1970 (which isn’t true) and when they want to write paean’s to the glory of the welfare state, welfare programs that began around 1970 are responsible for the rise of the middle class.

        1. Yeah, it’s really comical in this instance. This author is reaching like crazy. Attributing the prosperity of the middle class to FDR is standard BS, but trying to include LBJ’s programs in the mid-60s? As you say, the same people say that that is when things started to go downhill.

      2. There is no evidence of that. Poverty rates dropped at a very steady rate from around 25% in 1945 to around 13% in 1966. They have remained pretty close to 13%, going up or down around that number depending on the business cycle, ever since. The middle class was expanded by the post World War II boom. The size of it stopped expanding in 1966 and it hasn’t budged since.

        The enactment of the Great Society correlates with the closing of the middle class not the creation of it. Of course correlation does not necessarily mean causation. But it doesn’t rule it out either. The question of did the Great Society create the middle class has an objective and indisputable answer; it didn’t. The real question is did it stop the creation of a larger middle class.

        The Great Society succeeded in making poor people materially better off than they were. It also, at least if you believe the correlation, cut off the opportunity for them to move up into the middle class. It is almost as if they designed it to make poor people dependent, comfortable but less of a threat to move up into the middle class. But they would never have done that, right?

        1. There is no evidence of that. Poverty rates dropped at a very steady rate from around 25% in 1945 to around 13% in 1966. They have remained pretty close to 13%, going up or down around that number depending on the business cycle, ever since

          Aren’t poverty rates relative though, so this still wouldn’t tell us what happened to income for that group. For example, that 13% could have gotten richer since 1966, but remained poor relative to the rest of the country and the poverty rate would have remained unchanged.

          1. The are relative over time but they are not relative like a bell curve. There is no rule that says the lowest whatever percent of the population are in “poverty”. Poverty for this purpose is defined by how much money a family makes. There is no hard limit to how many people in a given economy can make more than that.

            They adjust it for inflation but they don’t adjust it for the overall march of technology and standard of living. It is based on inflation adjusted income not how well you actually live. So, someone living in poverty today is “rich” by the standards of a hundred years ago in that they have more food, better shelter and a variety of gadgets.

            So in that sense, no one is in “poverty” today when compared to the past. At the same time, the figure does have meaning. It tells you how many people in your economy of basically just getting by. It may be that “just getting by” isn’t what it used to be and is a lot better now than then but they are still just getting by.

          2. The bottom line is that in 1945, about a quarter of the population fit that description and by 1966 only 13% did. That is an amazing accomplishment in such a short time. For whatever reason it stopped. Now maybe we just got to the point that the figure can’t go any lower. Eventually you get to the point that the only people remaining in poverty are the ones born there or have personal issues or bad luck such that they or someone else in similar circumstances will always be there. Or, it may also be that the Great Society did things like create dependence and other social rots that prevented economic growth from lifting more people out of where they were. My guess is that it is some of both.

            1. The main reason the poverty rate dropped? Europe destroyed its industrial capacity during WWII and even with the Marshall Plan took years to recover, which gave the US essentially monopoly status on the production of many consumer goods. That’s the real key reason the economy boomed, and one of the reasons for the downturn that occurred right after WWII ended.

              1. If that were true, the post war boom would have been driven by exports and the US didn’t really export that much during those years.

                The post war boom was driven by the end of the New Deal. The New Deal extended the Great Depression. The US is floundering along in the late 1930s and along comes World War II. World War II did a couple of things it stopped production of most consumer goods for several year and it created this enormous incentive to save via war bonds.

                So you get four years of pentup demand for consumer goods and enormous savings rates. Meanwhile, the Republicans took Congress in 1946 and forced Truman to end the war time control economy and effectively gutted most of the remaining New Deal economic control. This created a perfect storm for economic growth. You had all of this pent up demand, people had large amounts of savings to spend and the economy had been released from the dreary war time socialism and just for a little extra everyone was wildly optimistic after winning the war.

                1. effectively gutted most of the remaining New Deal economic control.

                  that’s in dispute. the specter of those awful programs still haunt us.

                  1. Not really Free Society. The only thing left over from the New Deal today is Social Security. Every other thing associated with it was either ended up ending or being completely gutted. Even the National Labor Relations Act was completely rewritten in the 1950s and is nothing like it was when it was created.

                    The programs that are killing our economy today were created in the 60s and 70s not by the New Deal. Things like OSHA and the EPA and the EEOC and the FDA and all the rest of the alphabet soup of the regulatory state are not New Deal programs.

                    Don’t get me wrong. The New Deal was horrible. In fact, it was more horrible than even what we have today. Its legacy, however, lies in the precedent it set not in the continuation of its actual policies, because other than Social Security those policies are long gone.

                    1. Even the National Labor Relations Act was completely rewritten in the 1950s and is nothing like it was when it was created.

                      No, it’s very recognizable. It still violates free association by granting unions legal monopolies of unionization within a shop, it still forces employers to deal with that union nearly exclusively, it still provides the statutory basis for forcing workers to join a union and pay dues as a condition of employment.

                      Its legacy, however, lies in the precedent it set not in the continuation of its actual policies, because other than Social Security those policies are long gone.

                      Of course there’s the SSA as you mentioned but also the TVA, FDIC, SEC, FCIC/RMA, Fair Labor Standards Act, Rural Utilities Service and some others I’m sure I’m forgetting. There’s also the problem of all of the regulations that have arisen from these aforementioned agencies and laws, as well as related laws like the abandonment of the gold standard and as you mentioned. The legal precedents that have given rise to yet more statutes and regulations like those that saw raisin crops seized, et cetera.

                      The New Deal still haunts us in no small way, both in precedent and statute.

                    2. TVA, FDIC, SEC, FCIC/RMA, Fair Labor Standards Act, are all small potatoes when compared to things like the EPA and the EEOC.

                      The New Deal Haunts us sure. But that is because its effects are mostly indirect in the form of all of the bad things that resulted once the Supreme Court said the federal government could regulate anything in the name of “interstate commerce”. Really, the New Deal Supreme Court is what haunts us not the New Deal.

                    3. TVA, FDIC, SEC, FCIC/RMA, Fair Labor Standards Act, are all small potatoes when compared to things like the EPA and the EEOC.

                      And? Does the EPA’s existence make the New Deal programs somehow less of a burden or less of an injustice?

                      Supreme Court said the federal government could regulate anything in the name of “interstate commerce”. Really, the New Deal Supreme Court is what haunts us not the New Deal.

                      This is a chicken before the egg dispute. The New Deal got mostly passed without any real judicial support. And once the SCOTUS started striking down laws and provisions, Roosevelt stacked the Court in his favor with some additional Supreme Court Justices to make sure it would by-and-large remain law. The precedents were custom built to make the New Deal stick. The precedents are effectively part of the New Deal. And what a deal it’s been.

              2. That is what created the post war boom, not anything that happened in Europe. It should also be noted that the UK didn’t have post war booms until the 1950s, while Germany and Japan did. The reason is the fucking UK labor party kept rationing and war time control over the economy until the mid 50s.

      3. the FDR-LBJ welfare state worked?it produced the largest middle class in world history,completely halted the heretofore 1% per year decrease in the rate of poverty

      4. How does a welfare state create a middle class, again?

    3. there was nothing reality-based about Reagan’s “critique” of liberalism

      Sigh.

      At the time, Matt Yglesias pointed out that the 1980 election ” looks like a very typical election” in terms of Douglas Hibbs’ famous “bread and peace” electoral model.

      …”At the time”? Meaning 1980? Was Yglesias even alive then? I’ll be charitable and assume there is some reference point that is outside of the quote (I’m not charitable enough to visit Salon to check).

      Still, these fucking “writers.”

    1. Isn’t there a law against wasting police resources? I’m pretty sure they’ve used it before on people like the bride he faked a kidnapping to get out of a wedding and the family claiming their son was trapped in a weather balloon.

    2. “Gun-toters Blacks who are truly law-abiding and mentally competent have nothing whatsoever to worry about. Their conversations with law enforcement will be brief and professional,” he added. “As for those who are dangerous and have something to hide which would not withstand the scrutiny of a background check or permitting process Terry stop, they should expect to face some tough questions as a result of these 911 calls. And that makes us all safer.”

    3. “Am I being detained?”

      “Am I free to go?”

  46. Is social media “ruining politics”?

    Politics ruins social media.

  47. Screaming passengers threatened to smash windows of Eurostar after being trapped in dark and sweltering carriages FIVE HOURS after migrants climbed on train roof
    Migrants climbed on to the roof of a London-bound Eurostar train in Calais
    Up to four trains were delayed for several hours to allow their removal
    Passengers had to to sit in pitch-black, 35C carriages for up to five hours
    Many struggled to remain calm as they couldn’t contact Eurostar staff

    1. Migrants climbed on to the roof of a London-bound Eurostar train in Calais

      Hang a nice heavy pipe horizontally a few inches above the top of the train just about where it reaches top speed.

      Problem solved.

      1. Hang a nice heavy pipe horizontally a few inches above the top of the train just about where it reaches top speed.

        Not sure you even need the pipe. Have fun hanging on at 100 mph.

        Along the current route of the Eurostar service, line speeds are 300 kilometres per hour (186 mph) except within the Channel Tunnel, where a reduced speed of 160 kilometres per hour (100 mph) applies for safety reasons.

  48. Is social media “ruining politics”?

    We had such a good thing going before myspace!

  49. Only 6 % of college students smoke weed daily? Seems kind of low.

    1. “Daily” is the key. They run through that Friday night quarter bag by Tuesday.

      1. Then Thursday afternoon you’re scraping out your bowl to make a resin ball.

      2. I guess I was better at making it last than most.

        1. Moochers and bogarters, Zeb. Like what’s wrong in Venezuela.

          1. My thought exactly. A quality quarter-ounce should last even a devoted smoker at least a week. If memory serves, and the quality wasn’t as good back in the day.

            And no, I didn’t share except with my roommate. I learned the hard way.

    2. If you have a certain kind of mind, smoking it in moderation can make you very productive studying. It slows your thinking down and clears your head of distractions and allows you to focus. At the same time, it gets your mind to make connections it wouldn’t ordinarily make, which sometimes is bad but sometimes is very good. You just have to go back over your work when you are sober.

      Or so I have heard.

    1. The Bieliebers vs the SJW’s? Count me in…from a distance…where I do not need details…

    2. Careful Lena, feminists have nothing on hormone driven fangirls. They’ll tear your heart out and give it to Justin for a valentine.

    1. She has dead eyes…but who notices that?

      Also – Jaime Chung… +1

    2. Michelle Trachtenberg for the win!

      1. When I was young, for reasons I can’t recall (probably no reason at all), my brothers would tease me that I liked Trachtenberg on whatever that show was. Then she disappeared for a while and came back as an adult and… well, I’d say they look foolish in retrospect.

    3. A list? More like a Where Are They Now? reunion of late 90’s and early 00’s chicks, most of whom have not been treated nicely by Father Time. Jordana Brewster is still hot.

  50. So it goes like this. Six months ago I was hit with a $3000 water bill at my daycare. I was flabbergasted as was the landlord. Eventually we traced back where the problem to a public works employee. No need for details.

    Long story short, there’s no question he’s at fault but I decided it was partly our fault as we *should* have been more aware of what he had done. Chalk it up to a learning experience.

    With that, I approached the city and offered a reasonable case for us to split the bill given the circumstances. The bureaucrat told me he’d open the file and pass it on.

    Yadda, yadda, five months later, they never got a reply. Not even a blank letter signed ‘Fuck you’. Nothing.

    But remember folks. Government is our *partner* when it suits them.

    1. So you’re still on the hook? That sucks.

      1. Yup. Paying for it through my rent. Half way done.

        Sucks big time.

        It’s situations like this you realize a small business owner ( or even home owner) have little or zero power. Democracy my ass.

        1. I did some municipal code research on a water bill issue – clients were in Detroit area, had a rental property with six units, and got charged almost 6K for a water bill. Turns out the city water dudes had undercharged for ages, hooked up an appropriate meter, then slammed the charge all on one big bill. Client ended up going after the city for some of the difference. I also looked at Public Service Commission, I think the city had a bit of immunity but the statute of limitations came into play there. Not technically my client as I was a research attorney for the attorney who did the representation.

          1. Interesting.

        2. You just need to pay your fair share, Kulak.

    2. The bureaucrat told me he’d open the file and pass it on.

      Hahahahaha, oh Rufus.

      1. I heard him turn the shredder on in the background.

        1. “Did anyone else hear that lighter being flicked on?”

    3. Wait wait wait. A libertarian owns a daycare?

      You are among friends, here. You can call it a Monocole Polishing Camp, we wont judge you. In fact, Almanian will likely send you business…

      1. SHHHH!

  51. Justice Scalia explains why Kim Davis should issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples or find a new job

    [I]n my view the choice for the judge who believes the death penalty to be immoral is resignation, rather than simply ignoring duly enacted, constitutional laws and sabotaging death penalty cases. He has, after all, taken an oath to apply the laws and has been given no power to supplant them with rules of his own. Of course if he feels strongly enough he can go beyond mere resignation and lead a political campaign to abolish the death penalty”and if that fails, lead a revolution. But rewrite the laws he cannot do.

    Davis is in a similar position. Her official position obligates her to take part in the state’s licensing and recognition of marriages. Insofar as the state’s definition of an acceptable marriage differs from her own, Davis is obligated to follow the state’s rule so long as she maintains her current office.

    1. Sounds about right. If you don’t want to do the job, quit.

    2. “He has, after all, taken an oath to apply the laws and has been given no power to supplant them with rules of his own. Of course if he feels strongly enough he can go beyond mere resignation and lead a political campaign to abolish the death penalty”and if that fails, lead a revolution. But rewrite the laws he cannot do.”

      Bullshit! – John Roberts

    1. Three of my fetishes in one link? I shall be in bunk.

      1. Also, flatulence shaming has to stop.

        1. look, people should be able to say, think, or do whatever they want, whenever they want and not have to worry about being publically ridiculed or shamed for those things…. unless of course they are conservative or libertarian and are proud to be straight, white, or male. If all three…. ooooh they are LITERALLY worse than Hitler!

          But if you want to be a morbidly obese transgender, transracial, transpecies, female, black dolphin (when you were born a Hispanic male)… well, by golly, you should be that and no one should say anything bad about it, or else they are a fat shaming transphobic, misogynistic racist speciesist, and Republican!

          1. You forgot Christian. Christians are also worse than Hitler.

  52. Of all the barbarian warrior-themed short films starring the 1986 Cleveland Browns and Tiny Tim, this one has to be included in any conversation of which is the best.

  53. China’s army is looking to cut costs. So now they are firing artillery shells off of mounds of dirt with small explosives instead of shooting them out of cannons. I suppose they already tried having some slob whack the backs of the shells with a hammer.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CO9VAQR-X2Q

    1. Isn’t this a tactic for a 3rd world guerrilla army, not the largest army in the world?

      1. I’m pretty sure the PLA started as a 3rd world guerrilla army. They’re just getting back to their roots.

        But I’m told we should be afraid of China. So very, very afraid.

    2. I know I’m just an ignorant layman, but at 1:19 they show a mortar round with the letters ‘TNT’ stenciled on it. Why does the Chinese Army have ammo with English labels?

      1. The CIA, probably.

      2. Obviously a product of ACME inc.

    3. Half way through and still haven’t seen one fired and hit the target without a cutaway.

      That is edited bullshit. A barrel has a purpose. Without it that purpose isn’t served.

  54. Because Mourning Lynx needs MOAR WEENUR

    Anthony Weiner Slams Donald Trump’s Attacks on Wife as ‘Absurd’ and ‘Outrageous’

    In the feud between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin, embattled former Rep. Anthony Weiner ? Abedin’s husband ? is stepping into the line of fire.

    In a radio show appearance Monday, Weiner called Trump’s suggestion that Abedin may have shared state secrets with him both “wrong” and “outrageous.”

    1. Anthony Weiner is very trustworthy, and his past mistakes in no way reflect badly upon Huma.

  55. My first Army portrait:
    http://platedlizard.blogspot.c…..gi-me.html

    I think it will be fun to compare it with what I’ll look like after boot camp.

    some victory music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0IX0srz0w8

    1. Next: Post Office Wanted poster

    2. You already look like every SF and every other sooper special friends I ever ran into in Afghanistan.

    3. No wonder you are single.

  56. DOOOOOOM!!

    Blood moon has some expecting end of the world

    There will be blood in September — literally, according to the Internet postings of end-times believers.

    The night of September 27-28 will bring a “blood moon.” To skywatchers, it simply refers to the copper color the moon takes on during an eclipse, but to some Christian ministers, the fourth and final eclipse in a tetrad — four consecutive total lunar eclipses, each separated by six lunar months — fulfills biblical prophecy of the apocalypse. (The first three in the series took place April 15, 2014; October 8, 2014; and April 4, 2015.)

    In promotion for his 2013 book “Four Blood Moons,” Christian minister John Hagee claimed that the tetrad was a sign of the end.

    “The coming four blood moons points to a world-shaking event that will happen between April 2014 and October 2015,” he said.

    1. In my churchgoing teenage years, i used to love reading Revelations because it was just so damn weird. I don’t recall anything about “tetrads” or “six months between eclipses.”

      1. No really. THIS time its true. I promise! God told me.

        Maybe they need to refine their eschatology. In mine, before Ragnarok, there will be the Fimbelwinter (3 years of non-stop record cold with no relief). Pretty clear cut. Until then, just keep on keeping on.

        Someone needs to tell these Xtian nutbars to have drink and relax.

      1. [checks ammo supplies]

        Yeah, bring it on, bitchez!

  57. Massive manhunt ongoing in Chicagoland for suspects who killed a police officer.

    Meanwhile…

    Peter Nickeas ?@PeterNickeas 2h2 hours ago
    Shootings: 4 dead, 12 wounded, Tuesday afternoon into Wednesday morning. #chicago

    1. Well, Fox Lake is a 95% white suburb with a low poverty rate whereas the people shot in Chicago were probably all from the ghetto, so you can’t expect the media to care about 4 poor dead black people from the city when there’s a dead white cop from a suburb to worry about.

      1. I’m not blaming the media.

        But next time the cops are so curious about why people hate them…this could be a hint.

    2. And the CPD is out in force combing the….HAHAHAHAHAHA. Sorry, couldn’t finish that without busting up.

      1. Combing the desert?

        “We ain’t found shit!”

      2. So, what’s the over/under on when the police riot breaks out?

  58. Welfare Use by Immigrant and Native Households

    In 2012, 51 percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) reported that they used at least one welfare program during the year, compared to 30 percent of native households. Welfare in this study includes Medicaid and cash, food, and housing programs.

    Welfare use is high for both new arrivals and well-established immigrants. Of households headed by immigrants who have been in the country for more than two decades, 48 percent access welfare.

    No single program explains immigrants’ higher overall welfare use. For example, not counting subsidized school lunch, welfare use is still 46 percent for immigrants and 28 percent for natives. Not counting Medicaid, welfare use is 44 percent for immigrants and 26 percent for natives.

    1. Those numbers support the idea of a single program being responsible for the extra use of welfare. They are literally showing that the common programs are being used at identical rates, which means there must be an outlier program that they are using much more than natives.

      1. hard to say:

        Many immigrants struggle to support their children, and a large share of welfare is received on behalf of U.S.-born children. However, even immigrant households without children have significantly higher welfare use than native households without children ? 30 percent vs. 20 percent.

        The welfare system is designed to help low-income workers, especially those with children, and this describes many immigrant households. In 2012, 51 percent of immigrant households with one or more workers accessed one or more welfare programs, as did 28 percent of working native households.

        The large share of immigrants with low levels of education and resulting low incomes partly explains their high use rates. In 2012, 76 percent of households headed by an immigrant who had not graduated high school used one or more welfare programs, as did 63 percent of households headed by an immigrant with only a high school education.

        The high rates of immigrant welfare use are not entirely explained by their lower education levels. Households headed by college-educated immigrants have significantly higher welfare use than households headed by college-educated natives ? 26 percent vs. 13 percent.

        1. So… when Reason repeatedly says that immigrants don’t use more welfare than natives, they are either lying or looking at a different set of stats or maybe just interpreting them differently?

          1. Vaguely recall that Reason was comparing low-income citizens to low-income immigrants. Which seems less illuminating to me than looking at immigrants as a whole v. citizens as a whole.

    2. Interesting. I wonder what proportion of those surveyed were illegal immigrants.

  59. Social media ruins everything. It’s not limited to just politics.

    1. like your mom?

      1. Yes, my mom also ruins everything. Good point.

        1. Also, your mom is not limited to just politics, if you know what i mean.

          1. Another excellent point. Although dabbling in politics from time to time, she is also an active member in a number of non-political charity organizations, a frequent church-attendee, and a dedicated teacher.

            All of which she has ruined, however, as discussed above.

            1. *kicks pebble down the road*

  60. “High” rates of pot smoking at American college campuses (har har).”

    They should get rid of the financial aid stipulation that anyone busted for a marijuana offense is a) not eligible for financial aid, b) must start paying back what financial aid they’ve already had.

    Get rid of it because it’s racist. Get rid of it because keeping kids out of college for marijuana busts is stupid. Get rid of it because it plays well with millennials. Get rid of it because not tryin’ it at least once in college is like never having drank too much beer in college.

    But get rid of it.

    1. Get rid of it because if our current president of the United States, who has for six and a half years enforced this draconian law, has admitted to doing it himself. Had he been only slightly less fortunate in his life, one poorly timed patrol by a police officer or a particularly uptight RA in college, he’d be just another unemployable college dropout with a criminal record, unable to get financial aid, decent housing, etc., and be in and out of menial jobs and prison for his entire life.

      Fucking hypocrite.

      1. I’ve seen people say we need to keep that policy in place because it keeps more people like him from becoming president.

        1. The fact that Obama used to smoke pot is one of the LEAST problematic things about him, from a libertarian standpoint.

          1. Agreed. That would be, in my opinion, either launching a war against the will of Congress or assassinating American citizens without trial.

            On the issue of marijuana, however, (and he is not alone among politicians in this; see, e.g., our previous president), he is despicably hypocritical.

        2. When Obama got elected, I took some consolation in the facts that he currently smoked cigarettes and had used marijuana regularly in the past. As far as I was concerned, they were the only biographical details that suggested that his regime would be not be outrageously radical. If Obama were the radical, doctrinaire leftist that the rest of his biography suggested, he wouldn’t have allowed himself to be distracted by such pleasures. Trotsky didn’t smoke pot.

          1. You forgot that Obama was also trying to channel how “kewl” he was

      2. He is a hypocrite.

        He genuinely wants to use the coercive power of the state to scare college kids away from using marijuana, too–especially if they’re minorities, I’m sure.

        Being progressive is about using the coercive power of the state to improve the lot of favored minorities, and the drug war and that financial aid policy are all part of that.

        If someone could show that policy was, in fact, racist, that it keeps black kids out of college at much higher rates than whites, Obama wouldn’t seek to get rid of the policy either…

        Obama would compensate by trying to throw more white kids off of financial aid, too. He’s progressive like that.

        1. Exactly. Progtards aren’t interested in live and let live. It’s about power and punishing enemies. To them, this draconian policy isn’t bad because it’s draconian; it’s bad because it’s disproportionately applied against minorities. If it were disproportionately applied against whites, or evenly applied, they would not care.

      3. he’d be just another unemployable college dropout with a criminal record, unable to get financial aid, decent housing, etc.

        Wait, this is an argument against penalizing people for smoking pot?

    2. They should get rid of the financial aid stipulation that anyone busted for a marijuana offense is a) not eligible for financial aid, b) must start paying back what financial aid they’ve already had.

      Get rid of it when Ken Shultz will pay for it out of his own pocket… or, just get rid of Gov’t financial aid for college, period

  61. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/…..-nervously

    Microsoft, with support from Apple, Amazon, Google, is going toe-to-toe with the DOJ to protect privacy rights. And money. So, that’s cool.

  62. http://fox4kc.com/2015/09/02/t…..un-selfie/

    Teen kills himself while taking gun selfie

    freedom loving selfie nuts are ruining this country

    1. Evolution in action

      1. I feel bad for the family, but with that level of stupidity it was bound to happen

    2. Selfie Insanity! When are going to develop the will to institute common sense selfie control?

    3. freedom loving selfie nuts are ruining this country

      The cousin told police they found the gun earlier in the day. They’re investigating.

      How many lives have to be lost before we finally close the “found a gun lying around” loophole?

      1. When you outlaw finding a gun lying around, only outlaws will find guns lying around!

  63. I heard a radio report yesterday about a migrant camp in Greece. The Greeks were complaining about the stench of urine and BO coming from the place. Perhaps the people of Europe ought think about why so many people are fleeing to them from the Middle East. Perhaps they could send their armies to stop the war that is causing the refugee crisis.

    The radio host said the story was proof of how we need orderly immigration because herpa derpa.

    These days, I think it would just be easier to charge admission. Better for the host country to get the money than the smugglers.

    1. Cytoxic was on here last night claiming the Europeans were lucky to get those refugees and will be more free in 20 years because of them.

      Europe needs to understand that thanks to Fracking and a the public’s general weariness with interventionism, the Middle East is increasingly not the US’s problem. The US is going to be energy independent if it isn’t already. That means we can survive a price shock to oil. Yes our economy will be hurt by the increase in price, but it will be equally helped by the more money we make selling oil. When you are importing your oil and the price goes up, that means more wealth leaving your economy. When you are producing your own and the world price goes up, that extra cost is just reshuffling wealth around your economy. The US interests in the middle east get smaller every year.

      Meanwhile, not only does Europe still import oil from the Middle East, but also they are connected by land to it and will suffer the refugee waves if the place goes to worse shit than it already is. The US doesn’t have either problem. So Europe better start being Europe again. The post war holiday from reality is ending.

      1. But fracking hurts Mother Gaia, John. We have to stop it so we can all have windmills and solar!!!

    2. The Greeks were complaining about the stench of urine and BO coming from the place.

      When the Greeks complain about your hygiene . . . .

  64. A transgender student’s request to use the girl’s bathroom has ignited controversy.

    Assuming he’s pre-op, should girls be forced to gaze upon his johnson? I read a comment somewhere else that suggested the school put a port-a-potty out back and label it Transgender.

    1. should girls be forced to gaze upon his johnson

      Of course not. They can use the men’s restroom . . . oh, wait.

    2. Assuming he’s pre-op, should girls be forced to gaze upon his johnson?

      Forced in person, forbade by phone would be the most sensible arrangement.

      I think SJW bonus points are awarded if we somehow force the girls to shame the penis and the gender as a hole while revering his choice to renounce his gender.

      1. “as a hole”…I see what you did there. *yells for a Swiss narrows gaze

        1. Honestly, I feel that John deserves a hat tip as well.

    3. There’s already a unisex bathroom, but HE doesn’t want to use it because he feels excluded.

      Fuck, I felt excluded as hell not being able to go into the girls locker room when I was a teen but nobody felt sorry for me.

  65. I make up to $90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $40h to $86h? Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link… Try it, you won’t regret it!……

    http://www.HomeJobs90.Com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.