Adidas Pays Schools to Switch Mascots, Prepares for End Times, Non-Religious Kids Are More Generous: A.M. Links


New at Reason: 

Brickbat: Laugh It Up, Fuzzball —By Charles Oliver

More Trouble for Jerry Brown's Rail BoondoggleConcealed report: Overruns, delays plague high-speed rail. —By Steven Greenhut

Movie Review: SpectreDaniel Craig back for now in an underwhelming Bond opus. —By Kurt Loder

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

NEXT: Friday Funnies: School Discipline

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

  1. Are baby boomers the worst? Discuss.

    You know who else was a baby boomer?

    1. Hello.

      Houston has a sparkling Mayor I see:

      “Annise Parker ?@AnniseParker 16h16 hours ago

      Annise Parker Retweeted Texan 4 Liberty

      No, actually I called you transphobes, but if the shoe fits…-A”

      We live in a time when you’re not allowed to have an opinion that deviates from The Narrative. It’s called a Dark Age.

      1. We don’t exist.

      2. One of the people who’s opinion on the ordinance was Lance Berkman. He is a former MBL player and Houston Astro. Lance is from Houston and well liked here.

        Lance did a commercial for the anti ordance group. It was done professionally and wasn’t a bunch of screaming hysteria. It did contain one line that asked people to vote against this ordinance that allows troubled men into women’s bathrooms. After the ordinance was defeated Mayor Parker publically attacked him and also went after his family and threw his wife and daughters into her vitriolic spew.

        She is a bitter scorned lesbian who is now threatening the citizens of Houston that this fight isn’t over. She is determined to pass this. She is hurling insults left and right and the liberal name calling is out front for all to see

        Ii’s amazing that we went from an open minded city who elected a lesbian mayor 9 times over an 18 years period to being a bunch of hayseed intollerant homophobe bigots overnight.

        1. This article from October shows Parker’s respectful, measured response to Berkman.

          “I’m afraid I must respectfully disagree with Mr. Berkman,” reads one post.

          No, just kidding.

          1. Admittedly, not nearly as bad as I was expecting.

        2. Her response will have a negative effect on people who were either apathetic on the issue, or on-the-fence about the issue, but I do not think she understands or cares about any of that.

      3. but if the shoe fits…-A

        God I wish irony was toxic.

      4. My favorite part of this whole stupid story is now the Bathroom Law’s supporters think this means Houston is some sort of pro-discrimination place where absolutely no other city, state, or federal law governs discrimination.

    2. Drone operators?

    3. I don’t do blue? And set up a Steve Smith joke like that?

    4. They’re not important enough to be the worst.

    5. Tim McVeigh?

  2. ‘Maybe if you practice coloring this turtle, it will help you with your parking’: Vigilante fights bad drivers with this hilarious note
    ‘Many three-year-olds have trouble staying within the lines. ‘Maybe if you practice coloring this turtle, it will help you with your parking, it says
    Driver Bill Caswell says his friend likes to leave the note on cars that have been poorly parked
    Caswell has provided a downloadable version of the color-me-in turtle should others decide to leave the note as well…..-note.html

    1. Someone around Norfolk has been putting “I Park Like An Idiot” bumper stickers on badly-parked cars. I admire their vigilante spirit, but the first one i saw was on a car driven by a tiny Asian woman, and that was an uncomfortable moment.

      1. Tiny Asian women are the world’s worst drivers by a wide margin.

        1. What about Prius drivers?

          1. Tiny Asian women drive giant SUVs, so their margins are wider.

      2. Key West, FL had a shop called the Rooster Store, to support the local feral roosters. They had “I (heart) COCKS” bumper stickers. I bought $20 worth.

    2. A note that says “don’t park like shit, asshole” work just as well. But if you want to be a passive aggressive pussy have at it.

  3. Gold fever! Rose McGowan proves she has the Midas touch when it comes to footwear as she steps out in blingy sneakers…..-York.html
    Hard to believe she was attractive at one time.

    1. That’s….. unfortunate

    2. Dear Hollywood, please stop melting the faces of the attractive women. Thank you.

    3. She’s come a long way since The Doom Generation. Down.

  4. Largest Police Union Cautions Quentin Tarantino: We’ve Got a Surprise Coming for You


    When asked if this was a threat, Pasco said no, at least not a physical threat. “Police officers protect people,” he says. “They don’t go out to hurt people.”

    I choked on my tea when I read that.

    1. *POW*


      *resumes wailing on helpless person on ground*

    2. “They don’t go out to hurt people.”

      They go out to collect an unwarranted amount of overtime. But, you know, since they’re out there already…

      1. My stepson’s cop-father a while back was bragging to me how he got paid double-time to do a presidential detail. He seemed perplexed when I failed to be impressed. Double-time to stand around and intimidate people. And people wonder why I hate cops.

        1. I see you have multiple reasons on many levels.

  5. 110) I’ve decided Halloween is my favorite American holiday. It’s not recognized by any state or local government?nobody gets a day off. It’s vaguely associated with the church feast day of All Saints Day, but not really clear if it’s a devilish counterpart to the church holiday or an early start to the celebration. It’s child-centered, not quite parent-approved (all that candy!) but adults may take part if they like with costumes, parties, or passing out the treats. Its traditions are organic and while there are elements that are universally recognized, many communities have specific local traditions. I don’t think there’s any other widely-celebrated holiday where the meaning and practice is so unmediated by governments, churches, and schools in favor of individuals, families, and neighborhoods, a true people’s holiday.

    1. It’s also Old Man’s favorite day.

      He gets to clean the van up.

    2. A lot of local governments do tell you when you are supposed to trick-or-treat and when you must stop.

      1. True. Round here one city declared Friday to be trick-or-treat day while another declared it to be Saturday. No idea if the cops were out there citing kids who went out on the wrong day.

        1. Renegade trick-or-treating

    3. and it’s the latest target for the SJWs and their pants-shitting over costumes that someone somewhere might maybe kinda sorta find offensive.

    4. I fully admit. If I ever get in a position of power the day of Halloween and the day after will be a free holiday for people below me. It’s my favorite holiday, and I want more people to be able to participate to the fullest.

      1. Am I the only one who read that as “and the day after will be a free holiday for people to blow me”?

        1. Wouldn’t be the first time people misinterpret my Halloween intentions. I got informed this Halloween that my cannibalistic skeleton display made every adult think of fellaitio.

          1. Is there anything more trusting than a gay cannibal?

          2. Leave it up until at least next Halloween, they won’t know WHAT to think.

          3. Many of us think of fellatio regardless of any Halloween display.

            Regardless of anything.

            Many of us just like thinking of fellatio.

        2. I also had to read twice. Then was disappointed.

        3. Every day is a free holiday to blow me.

    5. It’s my favorite, if only because of the imagination that it lets people show (from toddler to adult).

    6. Somewhere the Star Chamber of “Big Candy” are rubbing their collective hands together and cackling madly.

  6. Proposal would allow DC 16-year-olds to vote for president in 2016

    When Americans go to the polls to vote in 2016, there’s a chance that 16-year-olds in Washington, D.C. could also be casting their ballots. On Tuesday, three D.C. City Council members proposed lowering the federal voting age in D.C. from 18 to 16.

    Ward 6 Council member Charles Allan is the chief author behind the Youth Vote Amendment Act of 2015. He said Tuesday that there’s nothing in the 26th Amendment that forbids younger Americans from voting, and that the Constitution only ensures that those 18 or older have the right to vote.

    Council members David Grosso and Brianne Nadeau co-introduced the legislation.

    1. As long as they are been charged as adults, they should have the rights of adults.

      The age of consent in any state should be the age of the youngest person ever charged as an adult.

      1. but they’re not always charged as adults. Michael Brown comes to mind as one example. This idea is bullshit for its exclusion of consistency – if you’re going to treat 16 year olds as adults, then you have to be all in. This includes the drinking age, doing away with Cinderella driver’s licenses, and all the rest.

        1. Don’t look at me. When I say age of consent I mean just that. Sex, booze, cigarettes, driving, everything.

        2. Michael Brown? Huh?

          1. Michael Brown had a juvy record, did he not? He’s hardly the only one. I’m just pointing to the inconsistency of this idea. If you want 16-year olds to be adults, then they have to be all in – they can buy booze, smokes, have sex among themselves without fear of winding up on some registry, and so forth.

            1. Okay. It seems a little weird to use an example where he is most “famous” for an incident that happened when he was 19.

    2. Are children citizens? I rest my case.

    3. So the DC presidential vote might go from 95% blue to 96% blue?

    4. and I’m sure there is a companion piece that lowers the drinking age to 16, too, right? Hmmm. You mean they’re not really adults? Govt and consistency, like oil and water.

      1. I thought you were a kid until 26….

  7. Are baby boomers the worst? Discuss.

    Keep in mind, if you are a millennial you are under contractual obligation to wait for a poll to register your thoughts.

    1. Are baby boomers the worst? Discuss.

      Yes. As proof, I offer Forrest Gump.

    2. I though Nikki was the worst?

  8. is hoarding food and gold.

    I mean, they aren’t called, right? Is that the door over there? I’ll show myself out.

    1. Jonathan Johnson, the chairman of the board who is also running for Utah’s governor says the company has $10.9 million in gold and silver and a three-month food supply for each employee.

      In breaking news, the Mormon head of a company with a lot of Mormons on staff is doing Mormon-y stuff. Who could have guessed?

      1. $10.9 million in precious metals ain’t exactly Fort Knox.

    1. His point is actually correct. Fascist movements always rely on the young since old people tend to throw a hip out hurling Jews into ovens or beating immigrants with sticks.

  9. Kangaroo Farts Are a Problem

    Think cows are stinky? Kangaroos have potent farts too, suggests a new study that found that the marsupials release significant amounts of methane into the air.

    The discovery, reported in the Journal of Experimental Biology, negates a prior theory that kangaroos possessed “unique microbes” that heavily reduced methane production.

    “Kangaroos are not mysteriously low methane-producing creatures, but herbivores with an active methane-producing microbe community,” co-author Marcus Clauss from the University of Zurich said in a press release.

    He and his team are focused on the issue because methane is a known greenhouse gas that can contribute to climate change.

    1. This throws my plans for an all-kangaroo dinner party right out the window.

      1. Not if you switch them from being guests to main course

        1. There was a rumor here years back about Jack in the Box serving kangaroo in their burgers, but how good are they to eat?

          1. Not bad, i’ve heard.

          2. Delicious. They’re wild, not farmed, so the meat is gamey and lean. It should be done medium-rare; pat some olive oil onto it (at least, or marinade it), bung it on a hot grill, and enjoy.

            1. I’m sorry? Do what to it on a hot grill?

              The closest thing we have to a bung (cork that goes into a whiskey barrel) on this site is a butt-plug, and I don’t want him anywhere near my meat.

              1. “Bung” is argot for “place”, so rest assured your meat will be free of butt-plugs. Unless you decide that is the way you really like it. NTTAWWT.

              2. Don’t worry, shriek wouldn’t be interested anyway – he takes all his nutrients intravenously so that he never has to remove Barry O’s dick from his mouth.

            2. Interesting, I heard they were terrible.

              Not USDA approved for import though, so I’m not sure the Yanks over here will ever get to know unless we go to Aussieland ourselves.

              1. There are several places where one can purchase kangaroo meat. The infamous Jungle Jim’s in Ohio being just one.

                1. “The infamous Jungle Jim’s in Ohio being just one.”

                  That’s where I got mine. I’ve also gotten antelope, ostrich, elk, live eels, goat, camel, wild boar… All kinds of goodies.

                  Kangaroo is fucking delicious; you just have to be very careful not to dry it out since it has almost no fat of its own. Marinating it in olive oil helps. A lot of people seem to think it’s some kind of weird creature that would taste bizarre, but it’s just a grass-eating mammal. I doubt that anyone could tell the difference between kangaroo and really high-quality beef.

    2. Marcus Clauss from the University of Zurich


    3. Just restrain them so that some sort of methane collection would work.

      Project Tie Me Kangeroo Down, Fart.

  10. Let me repeat the analysis I gave yesterday to that religion study:

    Social ‘scientists’ are soft-on-crime lefties who lack empathy for victims, study finds.

    “For the altruism task, children participated in a version of the “Dictator Game,” in which they were given 10 stickers and provided an opportunity to share them with another unseen child. Altruism was measured by the average number of stickers shared.

    “For the moral sensitivity task, children watched short animations in which one character pushes or bumps another, either accidentally or purposefully. After seeing each situation, children were asked about how mean the behavior was and the amount of punishment the character deserved….

    “…children from households identifying as Christian and Muslim were significantly less likely than children from non-religious households to share their stickers. The negative relation between religiosity and altruism grew stronger with age; children with a longer experience of religion in the household were the least likely to share.

    “Children from religious households favored stronger punishments for anti-social behavior and judged such behavior more harshly than non-religious children. These results support previous studies of adults, which have found religiousness is linked with punitive attitudes toward interpersonal offenses.”

    1. And to repeat another comment I made yesterday:

      I read in the memoirs of Daisy Bates, the black civil rights leader, about an incident involving her father.

      Some white hooligans attacked her father and sprayed paint on him. When her father went to the sheriff, the sheriff shrugged it off as some good ol’ boys having a good time, and refused to prosecute.

      By the reasoning of these social “scientists,” the sheriff had greater empathy than if he’d prosecuted the criminals. If he’d been all “punitive,” that would have meant he really didn’t have empathy.

      1. That does sound like a particularly dumb experiment.

    2. It does seem that social scientists are really good at finding what they’re looking for.

    3. Perhaps the act of sharing, for religious children, is tied to an understanding of behavior and value judgments. Analyzing WHY they are flush with stickers while apparently other children aren’t. Analyzing the value of stickers in their hands versus the speculative value in others’ hands (he would value them and keep them while he who got them free might simply throw them away because they were unwanted and therefore of little value).

      I’m only playing devils advocate – I’m an atheist and really don’t know. But I have a very careful set of equations in terms of giving my wealth away. I think everyone should. But, of course, the message for these social scientists is it is “good” to give to others, even if it’s the equivalent of wading up $20 bills and throwing them out your car window. The double blind system of taking and distributing, the truncation of value systems of individuals because the Cult of Alms is all that matters. Using Force against peaceful and productive people because they won’t part with their wealth blindly, voluntarily, so the double blind system needs to be helped along by Top Men; that thoughtless use of broadcast Force to demand thoughtlessness.

      You gotta love Socialism.

  11. Are baby boomers the worst? Discuss.

    They aren’t the worst, but if the concept of privilege applies to anyone, it applies to them perfectly.

    1. Our whole existence is to make sure the anaconda is fed their pensions.

    2. Every generation is the worst.

  12. Live tapeworm pulled from California man’s brain

    Luis Ortiz was admitted to a hospital in Napa with what he called the worst headache of his life.

    In a brain scan, neurosurgeon Soren Singel discovered the larva of a tapeworm and told Mr Ortiz he had about 30 minutes to live.

    The tapeworm grew inside a cyst that cut off circulation and water flow to the rest of his brain.

    “I stood up and then I threw up,” said Mr Ortiz. “The doctor pulled it out and he said it was still wiggling, and I’m like ‘Ugh, that doesn’t sound too good.'”

    1. “told Mr Ortiz he had about 30 minutes to live”

      Damn, that’s a bad prognosis. Hardly even gives you time to get laid or drunk before expiring.

      1. I’m doing it wrong?

      2. Spend all of you time in bars and brothels, you can’t be too careful.

    2. Eww! /teenage girl

    3. Yeah, i remember that episode of House.

  13. WHAM! Another shot to the nutsack!

    Pennsylvania Police Officer, who tasered a guy 5 times and then shot him twice for good measure, while he was spazzing out on the ground, acquitted of killing him. With bonus, full sound and color video to make you too nauseous to eat breakfast!

    1. I saw a video story on that and was struck by the cops comment about “how hard this has been for me”. Fer crissakes, she killed a dude, but it’s all about how hard it has been for her?

      1. Over an expired inspection sticker no less. She killed a man in cold blood over a FUCKEN STICKER.

        1. Yeah, but it was his fault for not sharing that sticker.

        2. He wouldn’t share his sticker. He had no empathy!

        3. This is a point that I regularly make with cop apologists, there are going to be a certain percentage of LEOs that will be narcissistic sociopaths, I would speculate that there will probably in higher proportion of this personality type than there is in the general population, as narcissists would be attracted to positions of power (see: politicians). Even if it is a dead even proportion, it would seem that the number of incidents like this would be a function of the number of reasons that LEOs are forced to interact with the population. So reduce the number of reasons that LEOs have to interact with the population in contentious situations, reduce the number of fatal incidents. QED, bitches.

    2. Oops. Gilmore posted this yesterday, dammit. I coulda barfed up dinner instead.

    3. First, would.

      Second, he had a syringe and some alcohol in his system, so obviously he was a drunk-junkie who needed to be put down like the dying dog he obviously was. This officer is a hero, and I wish she was patrolling my town and keeping me safe.

      1. “Mearkle admitted it was your basic comply or die death”

        oh, the “basic” thing then. Case closed.

    4. Anti-nutpunch: Officer who beat a visitor to the jail while he was handcuffed, sentenced to 8 years in jail.

  14. E.C. councilman in jail facing murder charge wins second term

    East Chicago 3rd District Councilman Robert “Coop” Battle spent Election Day in the Lake County Jail pending a murder charge.

    He’s accused of shooting to death on Oct. 12 Reimundo Camarillo Jr., in the 4200 block of Euclid Avenue in East Chicago, according to court records.

    He also faces a federal drug charge stemming from a traffic stop in Porter County where police found 73.22 grams of marijuana and $100,700 in cash.

    Despite his pending legal battles that could take months if not years to sort out in the courts, Battle ran unopposed in Tuesday’s election.

    1. For clarity, East Chicago is in Indiana.

      1. Yeah, I was wondering about that.

        1. East Chicago is the buffer zone between Gary and Illinois, and yeah it’s a festering armpit as one would expect.

    2. Who would dare run against him?

  15. “If I were going to run against (Bill Clinton), would I win? Yeah,” Hillary Clinton told Jimmy Kimmel Thursday night.

    I’ve often had a curiosity about late night talk shows especially if they were worth staying up for. Then they started having politicians on regularly.

    1. What of she rubbed up against Bill Clinton?

      1. You’re just trying to bait me into saying I would hold it against her. But I won’t.

      2. Bill fell for that trick once, I doubt he’d do it again.

    2. She’s running on gun control. No way she beats a centrist Democrat.

    3. Bill and Hillary were out driving on a country road when they stopped to get gas. At the station, the attendant came out and said, “Hillary, it’s been so long since I’ve seen you!” She gave him a hug and they talked for a few minutes.

      When Bill and Hillary got back in the car, Bill said, “So what was that all about?”

      “Oh, that was an old boyfriend of mine from high school.”

      “Really? Just imagine,” Bill said, “if you’d married him instead of me, you’d be married to a gas station attendant today.”

      “No,” Hillary replied. “If I’d married him, he would’ve been president, and you would be working at the gas station.”

      1. Oddly, this joke was told to me by a German.

        1. “Und Eva said, ‘if I’d married Horst Wessel, he’d be Fuhrer and you’d still be a bum.”

      2. On the remote chance they’re still intimate, I’d say Bill is working at a gas station.

    4. Kimmel’s show has been all in on Hillary’s campaign. As if I needed another reason to dislike that giggling, guitar-playing hack.

    1. Taxi drivers accused of gratefully thanked for being Sydney ‘cocaine delivery service’

    2. I guess they were fans of Daredevil.

  16. …feminism needs more people who are wrong.


    1. It’s actually not as bad as it sounds. It’s basically an argument against censoring views outside of the mainstream and eating your own. The feminism movement would see a big benefit from allowing their members to dissent from the echo chamber, but they’d also lose a lot of their power without fear of being ostracized to keep people in line.

    2. As if Jezebel didn’t already exist….

    3. People they consider wrong, which means they could possibly be right.

      They’d probably only be right in binary cases, because, while there is only one way to be right, there is ? ways to be wrong.

  17. A new play mocking Donald Trump is big in Mexico.

    They call the republican presidential debates “plays” in Mexico?

    1. The Mexicans see right through us.

  18. Days of Desperation
    There’s a reason Bush, Kasich and other establishment Republicans aren’t gaining traction. Their conservatism no longer makes sense.

    Why isn’t the old-time conservative religion working to fire people up any more? Maybe the reason is that it’s really, really old. So old it’s decrepit. I can testify to this as a refugee from the collapse of movement conservatism a generation ago.

    True, the Republican Party itself lives on. Republicans dominates two of the three branches of the federal government, Congress?both House and Senate?and the Supreme Court. Below the federal level, the GOP is enjoying its greatest successes in generations. Today, Republicans enjoy total control of 60 percent of state legislatures and partial control of 76 percent. Only at the presidential level have the Democrats enjoyed a majority in recent electoral cycles.

    But no one is quite sure what the Republican Party’s vision is or should be any more?least of all those hapless “establishment” presidential candidates who are flailing away out on the trail. Today, the greatest obstacle to majority status for the Republican Party may not be demography. It may be a superannuated conservative ideology that is increasingly disconnected not only from the values of the larger society but from the values and interests of Republicans themselves.

    1. I’m not sure why, but lefties eat up explanations of Republicans that are written by people who know next to nothing about what’s important to actual Republicans.

      1. and lefties love to tell you how the party is dying, as though no one over a certain age ever votes Dem. They love the part about minorities, too, totally unaware of the implicit bigotry of their belief that “they” – whether black or hispanic or something else beside white – march and vote as one.

    2. They should turn to a fresh, new ideology. Like Progressivism!

  19. My Kid, the iPad Junkie

    We broke the news to my boy that we were banning the iPad for two days. … On day two, my son woke me up to inform me that I have ruined his life and then slammed the door. He was wearing all black. He wore all black, my daughter informed me, to show me that I had taken the color and fun out of the world.

    Hmm. And you know what playing video games leads to ….

    1. Blindness?

    2. Steam accomplishments?

    3. Carpal tunnel?

    4. The hidden levels and bonus points?

    5. Ranting in your bunker because your Xbox Live account was terminated.

    6. In my house, this behavior would lead to weeks or months of being grounded from electronics.

    7. “I said it. It’s an addiction, an honest-to-god addiction that had its grips on my son.”

      No it the fuck is NOT just stop it with this.

      1. neener, neener, neener, it’s an addiction! (Look at me NOT stopping!)

  20. The CBC should quit pretending to speak for Canadians and just switch to being The Trudeau Corporation.

    “Justin Trudeau begins his bold experiment in ‘government by cabinet'”

    I didn’t realize forced egalitarianism was a ‘bold experiment’.

    1. Can it nationalise Doonsbury and run it into the ground?

      1. Are you mistaking this for 1978?

        We’re talking about Trudeau, the son.

    1. “Labius minorus!”

  21. I’ve seen America’s future ? and it’s not Republican

    This Republican race to the political bottom is happening because America’s conservatives are losing the culture wars. The US is now beyond the electoral tipping point, driven by a new progressive majority in the electorate: racial minorities (black and Hispanic) plus single women, millennials (born between 1982 and 2000) and secular voters together formed 51% of the electorate in 2012; and will reach a politically critical 63% next year.

    And each of these groups is giving Clinton, or whoever emerges as the Democratic candidate for the 2016 White House race, at least a two-to-one advantage over a Republican party whose brand has been badly tarnished.

    The country today, particularly the bigger urban centres, is being dramatically remade by the hi-tech, internet, big data and energy revolutions. Just as important are the revolutions in migration, the family, gender roles and religion.

    1. Sort of hilarious, since if any ideology is going to die within the next century or two, it’s European secular socialism. They’ll either be exterminated as infidels by the right-wing zealots they imported to fluff up the welfare rolls and water down the Euro vote, or they’ll be exterminated by European right-wingers like Breivik who (probably correctly) see them not only as traitors, but as an existential threat to their civilization.

    2. never mind the 30+ Repub governors, the Congressional majorities that are not likely to flip, the state legislatures that lean right. And by all means, never mind the possibility that racial minorities and single women and millennials and even secular voters are not a political Borg.

      Funny how no one would say “all whites are politically alike” because that statement is so self-evidently stupid. But those same people have no problem saying exactly that about blacks, hispanics, women, gays, etc.

      1. Agreed. I have a law school buddy who’s Hispanic, republican (or maybe just conservative), and Christian Reformed, which is all just impossible heresy to the left.

        1. Your “buddy” clearly doesn’t exist.

    3. I can only imagine that this freak lives in an apartment which has had all the windows replaced with inward facing mirrors. He is obviously under the delusion that the entire world looks and thinks exactly like he does.

      1. The bubble is a comfy place.

    4. will reach a politically critical 63% next year

      Umm…no, it won’t….

  22. The police officer who committed suicide in Illinois had decades of complaints and suspensions on his record, on top of the embezzlement he was being accused of when he offed himself.

    FOX LAKE, Ill. (AP) ? An Illinois police officer who staged his suicide to make it look like he was murdered had a troubled job history, ranging from numerous suspensions to sexual harassment allegations to complaints that he intimidated an emergency dispatcher with guns, according to his personnel records.

    Despite a reputation as a respected youth mentor, Lt. Charles Joseph Gliniewicz also had problems off the job, including one incident in which a sheriff’s deputy found him passed out in his truck and took him home, only to have Gliniewicz report his truck stolen the next day, according to documents in the file.

    The records were released late Thursday by the Village of Fox Lake in response to a Freedom of Information request, after a day in which officials said Gliniewicz had sought out a hit man to kill a village administrator he feared would expose him as a thief, and may have planned to plant cocaine on the administrator to discredit her as a criminal

    I’m shocked this is now coming out after they don’t need to use his death to advance the WAR ON COPZ narrative. Shocked I say!

    1. He committed a crime against the state. That is unforgivable. The rest of it? Meh.

  23. A new study says kids from non-religious households are better at sharing.

    Because the others read to their kids about a post-scarcity bread-and-fish economy.

    1. Sharing what, the taxpayers money?

      And the religious have no reason to share with the non-religious since they are just going to burn in hell.

  24. “feminism needs more people who are wrong.”

    – Considering cloning Amanda Marcotte

    “Really, just a few of those and we should be golden. They’re like Concentrated Wrong, really”

    1. But we already have Amanda, ESB, and Jessica Valenti. Surely the concentrated wrong in the 3 of them is enough to sustain whatever we need.

    2. feminism needs more people who are wrong

      Really? I think it has plenty as it is…

  25. Adidas will pay schools to ditch their Native American mascots.

    Or else it’ll be all day i dream about suing (school districts). Or siouxing if you MUST be cute about it.

  26. “Due to low poll numbers, Chris Christie and Mike Huckabee will be relegated to the undercard debate”

    This was a *big* decision.

    1. Well, it will save them the money they’d otherwise spend reinforcing the floor of the debate hall.

    2. Fat shaming?

  27. I want to hear from Welch again about how importing Syrian Refugees is such a good idea

    Study: Middle Eastern refugees cost US $257,481 for family of four in first five years!…..n-Refugees

    1. $12,000 a year per capita?

      Thats a freaking bargain. What, you think bombing Syria is cheaper? Keeping air in an F35’s tires probably costs more.

      * not suggesting this is an either/or proposition, but the point is that these ‘costs’ are being created by policy that people willfully engage in. The EU will end up absorbing millions of people, and the US – at best – a few thousand. Moaning about per-capita costs as though these people are going to be living on the dole in refugee camps in perpetuity is moronic.

      1. How about a policy of not bombing Syria and not importing Syrian refugees

        1. That’s craaaazy talk.

        2. You’re free to play with Cytotoxic whenever you want

      2. What DLF said!!

        Moaning about per-capita costs as though these people are going to be living on the dole in refugee camps in perpetuity is moronic.

        Have you seen these people? That is exactly what is going to happen. Since when does living on the dole do anything but keep people on the dole? It is just going to turn Europe into the West Bank.

        1. In the US, anyway, many refugees that get some support initially do seem to manage to become productive members of society.

          1. They use welfare far more than natives and their children, as you might expect for a person having grown up supported by the welfare state also use welfare far more than any other “native” group.

            Here’s a brief video with good sources and good charts and whatnot. It also breaks the immigrants down by national origin, ethnicity, age, education et cetera. Any way you slice it, they’re more government dependent and more pro-welfare state.

            1. I suppose the question is whether the government should be taking in and supporting refugees at all. And if there is some sort of moral obligation to do so, can more be done to make them independent and assimilate well?

              Of course, with my preferred immigration policies, “refugee status” wouldn’t need to be a thing and people could come for whatever reason and individuals or charitable organizations could help them out in whatever way they see fit.

              1. And if there is some sort of moral obligation to do so

                Whatever moral obligation may or may not exist, what is clear is that there is no moral right to coerce others into supporting refugees. Insofar as refugees are supported with resouces, they ought to be freely given and sponsored directly by those citizens whom are so inclined. Even the existence of public schools and other “public services” that people take for granted, amounts to unjust subsidies.

                can more be done to make them independent and assimilate well?

                To not pay them to not assimilate and abolish public accommodation laws, allow people to do business with them, or not, based on merit and not their status as a protected class that expands at the expense of others.

                and individuals or charitable organizations could help them out in whatever way they see fit.

                I agree. Let them be sponsored, let individual sponsors invest in them and put their own credit on the line, so to speak. If immigrant groups X, Y or Z have trouble getting loans, or credit cards, or housing, then let their sponsors co-sign on those contracts until the immigrant has proven themselves and no co-singer is needed.

                There’s no need for accommodation laws, that is unless your trying to forcefully engineer a society to grow and develop in unnatural (non-market) ways that necessarily require more government policy to prop up.

                1. We’d quickly see better quality immigrants being selected for and low quality burdensome immigrants selected against.

      3. From the study:

        “Very heavy use of welfare programs by Middle Eastern refugees, and the fact that they have only 10.5 years of education on average, makes it likely that it will be many years, if ever, before this population will cease to be a net fiscal drain on public coffers ? using more in public services than they pay in taxes.

        It is worth adding that ORR often reports that most refugees are self-sufficient within five years. However, ORR defines “self-sufficiency” as not receiving cash welfare. A household is still considered “self-sufficient” even if it is using any number of non-cash programs such as food stamps, public housing, or Medicaid. ”

        Maybe a longer term proposition than some think.

  28. Jonah Goldberg: Fusionism, Sixty Years Later

    Who lost the libertarians?” It’s a question you hear a lot from conservatives of late. The reason should be obvious to anyone who has followed the conservative movement’s internecine intellectual frictions over the last decade ? or decades. Self-described libertarians are a minority, even among the ranks of people one could properly describe as libertarian. On many, or even most, contentious public-policy issues ? economics, gun rights, health care, free speech, regulation, constitutional interpretation ? most support for the libertarian position actually comes from people who describe themselves as conservatives. In other words, conservatives tend to be libertarian, but libertarians tend not to be conservative.

    But as a generalization, libertarians want to have their own identity, separate and distinct from that of conservatism. They’re a bit like the Canadians you meet abroad who go to almost obsessive lengths to show everyone that they aren’t American.

    1. Yeh. They’re annoying. Saw a few during my visits to Europe.

      Going up a ski lift that passed by homes, an interaction on how Europeans viewed North Americans went something like this:

      Italian women on her window sill as we moved passed her: “Guarda, ce sono Americani!’
      Me: “Siamo Canadese”
      Woman: “Bah. La stessa cosa!”

      And we accepted. Because.

      1. Can you translate to a language I understand?

        1. Look at the Americans
          – i’m canadian
          Meh, same thing

          1. Perfect!

          2. Canadians are just the junior varsity of Americans.

      2. What were you doing that was so obviously “American” to her?

    2. Gee, I wonder what about conservatism and the GOP in particular those childish libertarians object to? Real headscratcher.

      1. It is not the warmongering and incredibly high levels of spending and the insistence on fighting the culture war, I can tell you that much.

      2. The pickup trucks…. the banjo playing…. the moonshine drinking and jigg dancing?

        1. I thought those were the good parts.

        2. Banjos are seriously bizarre instruments…the bastard offspring of a snare drum and a mandolin.

      3. Goldberg is just prepping for the inevitable “Libertarians should suck it up and vote for the establishment GOP candidate” argument.

        1. Shut up, Lee. No one ever makes that argument. And if you remember anyone that ever did, you’re a goddamn liar.

          1. Conservatism is an ethereal thing rather than a political system. It has no written constitution to rely on in dark times. And while it is not free of ideas, it is, as a positional ideology, resistant to formulation in a simple, fixed credo. As such, it always stands at risk of being exploited by someone who yokes personal ambition to popular passion in the service of a movement that is conservative in name only. And if that happens, the time will come for libertarians to ask, “Who lost the conservatives?”

            I’m not arguing with Goldberg here other than to point out that conservatism is already exploited and a largely meaningless term within the context of the modern GOP. He’s bemoaning a future that exists today.

            1. Sorry, Lee. I thought you’d catch the smothering depth of my snark.

              1. Oh I did. I’m just pointing out that in going to the end of the article it seems Goldberg is trying to walk a fine line here. I’m not certain what his point is anymore.

                Although I think he betrays the inherent weakness in conservatism, that it does not have first principles.

                1. I’m not certain what his point is anymore.

                  I thought it was just me.

                2. Ah. But, yes, he is close to the scary truth. Both major parties are gross chimera of barely related interests, but Progressivism at least threads the Democrats together.

                3. Wait a minute, are you saying “Nuh uh!” doesn’t count as a principle?

                  1. It’s right in there with “Make America Great Again”

                4. Goldberg is a conservative with libertarian-leanings. In general, I think he understands how and why libertarians diverge from conservatives. So, I don’t have a problem with him trying to recruit them to vote for Team Red.

            2. I’ve always seen it as the Progressives do something, and then the Conservatives make sure that it never goes away.

    3. I have always thought Libertarians would be better served being in the Democratic orbit. I would rather have then trying to talk some sanity back into the Democratic Party’s economic policies than telling the Republicans the real key to success is to tell 75% of their supporters to go fuck themselves. Democrats are great on gay marriage and open borders for the most part and those are the only two issues most Libertarians consider non-negotiable anyway.

      1. those are the only two issues most Libertarians consider non-negotiable anyway

        Whine some more, John, we find it really attractive in a man.

        1. I didn’t say they were wrong. We all know gay marriage is the most important moral issue facing civilization since slavery. It has to be easier for Libertarians to hold their noses and put up with the Democrats on unimportant things like taxes, property rights and economic freedom than put up with the Republicans being wrong on the most important issue in perhaps the history of mankind.

          1. the most important issue in perhaps the history of mankind.


            1. Damn, I hadn’t thought of that. You may be onto something Juggler.

          2. That’s it John! Keep going! Don’t stop!

            1. You are so easy to troll it is almost not fun sometimes.

              1. Wait! Are you QUITTING on me?!?

          3. “We all know gay marriage is the most important moral issue facing civilization since slavery.”


            1. Do you really need to ask this? Yes. The answer is yes.

        2. and yet, you’re not pointing out where John is wrong, just throwing darts at him. That’s also a tactic that emanates from the left.

          Repubs are not going to embrace open borders but they are least rhetorically open the scaling back the welfare state. Dems are intransigent on both. Let’s see: a place where I can make headway vs. two brick wall issues. This seems not a tough choice.

          1. they are least rhetorically open the scaling back the welfare state

            They have proven time and time again that they are all about getting that spending under control.

            I am also comforted by the fact that the Republican candidate who is currently polling the highest has a plan to hire an additional ten-thousand federal agents, which is as libertarian-minded as it gets.

            1. the ones who were elected in House takeover of 2010 were very much about spending; the ones left from that time are now virtual outcasts, yet they are still Repubs. Who exactly are the Dems echoing their belief about spending?

              I didn’t say Repubs were all-in for cutting spending; I said they at least talk about it which opens the door. Dems want nothing to do with it.

              1. It is all talk.

                The conservatives lost me when, instead of embracing some, or any, libertarian-minded ideas, they decided to go all in on Trump and Carson and the culture war. It seems like that is what they want.

                1. they went in for Trump and Carson largely out of frustration at the behavior of the political class they elected. Those voters didn’t show up to support expansionist govt and more spending. If they believed in those things, they could left Congress to Dems. They would not have 30+ governorships.

                  1. Those voters didn’t show up to support expansionist govt and more spending.

                    No, they showed up as a response to Democratic policies, but I do not think they showed up to embrace Republican policies – the Republicans win by default.

            2. They have proven time and time again that they are all about getting that spending under control.

              They have proven time and time again that they’re hypocrites who mainly care about holding office in order to grift the lobbyist class. But the whole Trump/Carson thing may be an indicator that voters finally, perhaps confusing themselves with the private sector, expect results.

              If you can actually get a Congress that wants to achieve some policy goals in vaguely the right direction, then it might be worth trying to influence which policies those are. Until then, eh.

          2. It’s been explained to John many times why he is full of shit about what libertarians care about. It’s a waste of time. No words will break his fixation on fags humping each other . It consumes him, like Everest consumed Mallory.

            1. Well, if you go by what Reason publishes, it’s not a horrible conclusion. Gay Marriage and Open Borders.

          3. I figured it would insult everyone’s intelligence to explicitly point out where John is wrong. I guess I was too generous.

            I don’t think anyone here will deny that Republicans at least say some things that appeal to libertarians. And while many libertarians agree in a way on gay marriage with Democrats, the agreement is very superficial and the reasoning is a bit different. I can’t think of any Democrats who are very good on immigration from a principled libertarian “open borders” point of view.

            I think that what John is whining about is simply that some of us prefer principle to practical politics and are not willing to compromise for the sake of political strategy.

            1. politics pretty much IS compromise. If you constantly insist on the perfect, you get nowhere. That seems to make some here comfortable in that they can claim having had no involvement in the outcome. Yet, the outcome affects them, too.

              Look at your own words – even if it’s rhetoric, Repubs have some appeal. That seems like an opportunity to broaden the appeal. Anyone in DC who is even remotely associated with libertarianism is in the GOP. Not even a hint of the same from Dems.

              There is plenty to dislike about Repubs, especially the donor class and establishment wing. But there is also quite a bit of internal turmoil and opportunity for redefinition. You will not find that with the left. It would be interesting to have a parliamentary system like Western Europe wherein you could ally with like minds on some things while avoiding the binary aspect of partisanship. But that’s not where we are. Leaving libertarians where?

              1. Leaving libertarians arguing among themselves.

                You can call me cynical or defeatist if you want. I hold very little hope that things will turn very much in a direction we would like. So I will observe and say what I think and hope things don’t get too stupid. I’m not going to play the politics game. You just can’t win. People are going to do what they are going to do.

      2. Nope, Dems have the progs and communists running around their tent. We’d get excommunicated in a millisecond. Conservatives are willing to tolerate differences in opinions, so we’ve got a chance of convincing ya’ll.

        1. Let them get thrown out of power and they will be more accepting. Don’t worry. You will like your new home in the Prog work camps. They put you in the one next to the New Agers. It will be great.

          1. John, I don’t like progressives. There ideology is against everything I hold dear. I can’t convince them because they start from a completely different premise than I do. Conservatives on the other hand are sympathetic to the ‘just leave me the fuck alone’ ethos. I can convince even a social conservative that its better to just get the govs mitts off a moral issue than to hand that power to whoever is in office next.

            1. I am just giving you people a hard time. It is sarcasm. There is no hope anyone could talk sanity back into the Democrats.

              1. What do you mean, “you people”?

                1. John’s channeling his inner Perot.

                  1. No, he’s channeling his inner Tug Speedman.

              2. A few election cycles out of power can change a party’s tune pretty drastically. Dems were courting the libertarian vote back in 2004. They’ll do it again when it’s expedient.

        2. The Democrats were all about welcoming us back in 2004, but since they’ve been in power, we’re demonized and are probably one of the most criticized political groups (which makes no sense given how little power libertarians actually have). Republicans will be doing the same thing once they have the White House again. That’s just how it goes.

          1. If Hillary loses in 2016, all of your Prog friends will pretend to like you again and start pretending foreign wars and abuses of executive power are a big deal. And you will believe them because Libertarians are just cheap dates, especially for Progs. Libertarians and Progs are like Sharon Stone and her old pimp boyfriend Dexter Diamond in Casino. You always come back.

            1. Lester Diamond.

            2. I agree that they’ll start pretending to care about things like civil liberties and abuses of power again, but your accusations that i’ll believe them are misplaced. Both parties are run by fascist slavers with raging war-boners and I have yet to support either. I don’t plan to change that anytime in the foreseeable future.

              1. You won’t believe them, but some will. The reason staff will believe them.

            3. It’s hilarious that you don’t think it’s a perfect reversal when Republicans lose power.

          2. Lucy won’t pull the ball away this time. Kick it, Charlie Brown!

          3. The Democrats were all about welcoming us back in 2004.

            No, they weren’t. All the quasi-libertarians in or close to office were where they are now–in the GOP.

          4. Neither the Dems or the Republicans seem to like Libertarians lately. I think they noticed some slight but significant anti-establishment trends benefiting Libertarianism and have targeted the Libertarian ideology and name preemptively. 5 years ago you wouldn’t be called crazy or dangerous for identifying as a Libertarian, but that’s a growing trend, along with the absurd demonization of the Tea Party. That doesn’t happen by accident.

      3. you left out weed.

        1. Has anyone designed the “Pot, Mexians and Ass Sex” t-shirt yet?

          1. I tried, but it got me blacklisted from Cafe Press.

            1. Yeah? That’s rather dreary and humorless of them.

          2. you know…I am very disappointed that it has never shown up among those in the ads that appear here.

      4. In the same Goldberg article:

        In the last decade, Brink Lindsey, a scholar at the Cato Institute, tried to defenestrate conservative?libertarian fusionism in favor of what a headline writer at The New Republic dubbed “liberaltarianism.” Save at the margins, the uneuphonious effort failed, largely because the animosity that some libertarians hold for conservatism pales in comparison with the outright revulsion that progressives hold for any libertarianism distinguishable from libertinism. A house of anti-statists and statists is obviously one divided against itself, and cannot stand.

    4. In other words, conservatives tend to be libertarian

      Sure, Jonah. Whatever you say.

    5. Goldberg is a fuck.

      I was a reader of the National Review. Circa 2003, when the Republicans were ramming through Medicare Part D, this asshole wrote an article pretty much kicking the libertarians out of the party (i.e. the rickety card table set up just inside the front door was taken away). When the Republicans were fat and sassy back then, they felt they could just shove us aside. And then, when the shitty candidates they had gave way to the Enlightened One, and times were tougher, suddenly they were trying to sweet talk us back into the fold. Since we apparently didn’t flock back dutifully enough, they’re being patient with us and our errant ways. Thanks bunches.

      And the REALITY is these assholes need to realize that the Stosh and Stella crowd are going to be six feet under in about ten years. And being the conservative branch of the singular Fascist Party isn’t playing anymore. People are at least tacitly aware that the Ponzi Schemes are going to come crashing down. They’re aware that fighting perpetual war for perpetual peace is going to drain us. And the awareness that the Republican “conservatives” are doing NOTHING about it.

      In short, the average libertarian is socially liberal and fiscally conservative, pretty much the EXACT opposite of the average Republican I am aware of (that hasn’t resigned to work for think tanks etc). The closest is Paul and he’s got an impressive 2%.


      1. So, to my mind, libertarians are the last of the true conservatives, and the neo-conservatives simply inhabited what was the conservative branch of the Progressives. We libertarians were what conservatism was up to Roosevelt, who FOUGHT Roosevelt, that existed in the Goldwater era (perhaps imperfectly) of Republicanism. But has been going on for the last 45 years- the price fixer Nixon, the EPA Nixon, the “cut and spend and borrow” Reagan, the thousand points of light Bush I, the Medicare Part D Bush II.

        This brand of “conservatism” of the Republicans died when the Roosevelt Democrat Reagan was the cult leader of “republicanism”. WE CAST YOU OUT, Goldberg, from what “conservatism” is. You assholes perverted it into the socially conservative branch of the Singular Democratic/Progressive/Fascist Party.

        1. So, to my mind, libertarians are the last of the true conservatives

          I think this is what Goldberg was saying in this piece.

  29. University cuts Pledge of Allegiance from Veterans Day chapel because it makes some ‘uncomfortable’

    An evangelical university is removing the Pledge of Allegiance from its Veterans Day chapel service in response to complaints that patriotism has no place in worship.

    The “presentation of the colors,” in which a color guard presents or retires an American flag, has also been excised from the schedule.

    In a Wednesday email to Seattle Pacific University faculty members who are military veterans, obtained by The College Fix, Chaplain Bo Lim said “some people mentioned to me that they would be uncomfortable doing [the Pledge of Allegiance] within a Christian worship service.”

    1. Admit it, you read the headline and assumed it was Oberlin or another school like that.

    2. Good for them. Military spectacles have no business in a Christian worship service.

      1. Hayden’s Mass in Time of War?

        *ducks and runs from room*

      2. My thoughts as well. Besides the blind swearing of allegiance to a flag.

        1. A Pledge of Allegiance has no place in any supposedly free country.

    3. The “presentation of the colors,” in which a color guard presents or retires an American flag, has also been excised exorcised from the schedule.


      1. +1 The Power of Christ Compels You!

    4. The Pledge of Allegiance should make anybody uncomfortable. Fuck loyalty oaths.

      1. Last time I did the pledge was in high school. It was mandatory every morning.

        And then one day – I was in study hall – I just decided to stop. I actually had a seat by the flag. So everyone but me stood, turned, and looked at the flag and recited.

        A few days go by and one of friends, who sat by me, also stopped standing up. That was too much for the study hall monitor – an obese middle-aged lady. She came over and asked why we weren’t doing the pledge. I said something about being anti-war, while my friend just mumbled that he didn’t want to. She told him that was no excuse and he had to stand… but didn’t say anything to me other than to give me a strange look. So the next day my friend stood and recited. I never did again.

        and that’s the end of my story /old man

        1. Yeah, I did something like that back in high school, too. That was in the immediate post-9/11 days when everyone was falling over themselves to show how much they love freedom by doing things like reviving the morning pledge of allegiance, bombing Saddam, calling it treason to criticize Bush, etc. Seventeen-year-old me had had enough.

        2. I wish that I’d had the good sense and intestinal fortitude to do what you did at that age. However, when I was assigned the task of holding the flag for our morning pledge, I did occasionally mime jerking off with the flag pole/handle when the teacher wasn’t looking.

        3. How old are you people?

          When I was little, grammar school aged, they did the pledge every morning. After that, in junior high and high school, they just played it over the loudspeaker. People stood, or not, as they pleased.

          I’m pretty sure it went the same for my kids–several states over and years later.

          So what the hell?

  30. 200 Anti-Capitalist Protesters Descend on D.C.

    Make incomprehensible noises through their cheap plastic masks. Journalists make no attempt at any translation.

    1. ‘It’s like the I-raq and such…”

    2. Apparently this was the “Million Mask March”

      Its a thing in the UK. But then they do it all the time. They’ll probably smash up a muffin shop and call their campaign against capitalism won.

  31. Stupid Farmers thought agriculture was about raising crops and livestock.

    “Ithaca College Prof. at Cornell Lecture: Agriculture is ‘Capitalist Racialized Patriarchy'”


    1. Cornell people usually laugh at Ithaca College. This isn’t helping.

    2. Though an author of 12 books with titles such as Capitalist Patriarchy and the Case for Socialist Feminism and her memoir Manmade Breast Cancers, Eisenstein has never worked in or studied agriculture. The professor explained that she was speaking as part of a seminar series on women in agriculture by stating, “[m]y point here is you’re thinking agriculture and I’m thinking capitalist racialized patriarchy.”

      Eisenstein also declared that if war and climate change are extinguished, then there will be “room for revolutionary agriculture.”

      Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wgah’nagl fhtagn

    3. she prefers working with progressive people of color and “really wouldn’t care to have [Dr. Ben] Carson on my team”

      How surprising.

      I wonder what this woman was teaching before getting tenure and going off the rails.

    4. They are always oblivious to how inadvertently insulting they are.

      A science that is one of the cornerstones of civilization is the exclusive domain of old white men. That’s a lot like saying non-white people and women are incapable of understanding, appreciating, or participating in it.

  32. “Adidas will pay schools to ditch their Native American mascots.”

    Am I being shrill when I claim I will never buy Addidas?

    Not that I do. But this won’t help.

    1. Go fuck yourself, Adidas.

      1. I agree… $55 for a fucking pair of sweatpants when there’s a nearly identical pair right next to it for $10?

  33. “Hot take: feminism needs more people who are wrong.”

    Talk about bringing coals to Newcastle.

    1. Christmas in Ireland.

    2. *single tear of joy runs down cheek*

      1. Did you mean to place this comment under an Adidas/American Indian thread?

  34. I wonder if the Mahnomen (MN) Indians will take Adidas’ dirty money to switch to something else?

    Or is Adidas only giving money to dirty white schools who are using native american mascots?

    When Minnesoda was passing our prog law to ban native american nicknames it was funny watching them have to deal with the schools like Mahnomen that are on a reservation and liked their mascot names.

    I’m still disappointed though that some real indians didn’t bitch and say that Mahnomen native americans were denigrating them by calling themselves Indians.

    1. I still haven’t heard an explanation that isn’t delusional of why honoring a thing by making it your team name is so horrible.

      1. Smug, liberal, white guilt is the answer you are looking for.

        1. New team name – Go Smugs!

          1. The Washington Patriarchy!

      2. Adidas should pay the Buffalo Bills to choose another name that isn’t so patriarchocapitalist and hurtful to noble poor people.

        Is that how this works?

        1. or see gilmore posting.

    2. UNC/Pembroke — a part of the UNC system founded primarily to serve Indians. Known as the Braves. Years ago, told the NCAA to fuck itself over the name. It never dawns on progs that actual Indians find some pride in names like that.

      1. Not to mention, I think FSU pays the Seminoles for use of their name (who have publicly stated they’re perfectly happy with its use). If that’s the case, I don’t think they’ll be appreciative of Adidas’ “help”.

        1. The main body of the Seminole tribe never signed any treaties with the U.S. government and still consider themselves an independent country, except when it’s convenient for the purposes of casino establishment. They don’t give a fuck.

  35. Man, this is like the most emblematic global-warming libtard piece EVAH!!…..inion&_r=0

    Greedy corporations that CAUSED it and KNEW!!! Global calamities!! COVER-UPS!!! This fucking op-ed is the King Tut’s tomb of progderp.

    The best is this line from the FIRST SENTENCE:

    “Well before one hottest-year-ever was followed by yet another record-breaker, before Arctic ice vanished in real time and Pope Francis made a plea to save our troubled home, the world’s largest private oil company discovered that its chief product could cause global havoc.”

    I am pretty sure that it is recognized by everyone that Arctic ice mass has INCREASED (and now NASA has determined that Antarctic ice pack has, as well).

    And this:
    “It’s not surprising, given its army of first-rate scientists and engineers, that Exxon was aware as far back as the 1970s that carbon dioxide from oil and gas burning could have dire effects on the earth.”

    Hey, Mr Egan, here’s a sample of what scientists were saying in the 1970’s!…..14,00.html

    The title: Another Ice Age?
    Monday, June 24, 1974
    There goes your consensus?

    1. True believers never let facts get in the way of their faith.

    2. I’m actually fairly worried about all this. The greens have the power. If they can find a way to attack the oil companies from the courts (I believe they are trying to make a case that failing to predict the government regulating you out of business is equal to lying to investors) they could destroy the industry. Energy prices skyrocketing and smaller companies going under. They won’t be able to completely eliminate soon because to many people are used to having power, but if they get their foot in the door we’re fucked.

      1. I’m hoping Exxon recognizes that this is one of those fights you have to fight to the bitter end.

        The greens cannot be reasoned with. They will keep going until something stops them.

        1. Kind of like the anti-gunners….

      2. They won’t eliminate the power supply anymore than they have eliminated the tobacco supply. The end goal is to just get a big cut of the money like they did from the tobacco companies. We can set up an oil trust that will send hundreds of billions of dollars in “damage payments” to various governments and Prog NGOs to pay for their sins.

        1. The government bureaucrats may only want the money, but the true believers they use to get it want elimination. They are going to start demanding concessions in the same vein as banning smoking anywhere but the middle of the desert. It will probably be requirements that X% of energy comes from solar or wind and we will end up in the same boat as Australia and England.

          1. Simple – we cut off electricity and petrolium – but only to any and all environmentalists and their organizations. They can then feel free to attempt to live in the manner they want to force on others.

        2. The fact that they got the Tobacco companies to pay is still one largest farces in american history.

          1. although if they got a jury to convict Exon it would be an even bigger joke.

          2. Farce is one way to put it. Crime would be another.

            1. nothing but duly elected looters and thieves.

          3. Part of the settlement was to make Big Tobacco immune from tort lawsuits. So I guess from their point of view it may have been a fair trade.

            1. Another part of the settlement was that it be implemented over years so that the price of cigarettes did not go up so fast people stopped smoking causing the fund to go broke. No kidding.

          4. Yeh. Judges who side with people who chose to smoke of their own free will is truly disgusting.

            The tobacco industry may have had ‘subliminal’ and aggressive ads but they still didn’t put a gun to anyone’s head to force them to buy their products.

            Humans have vices and smoking is a vice they chose and enjoyed – until someone out it in their heads it wasn’t their fault.

            1. Everyone thought smoking was great for you because of the evil tobacco companies. What a fucking joke.

        3. If I was the president of Exxon – dick that I am – and was threatened with this kind of shit, I would say something to the effect: “Because of excessive government zeal to punish us, we will no longer be pumping or transporting oil. I apologize for the price increase you will see but honestly it is out of our hands. Please contact your representative if you want us to continue in business with providing you gasoline.”

          Of course I would be branded as an “Economic terrorist”.

          1. And garroted by a scrum of shareholders.

            1. Never mind, I need to read the comments more carefully.

          2. They could embargo for one day, and it would bury all of this shit for a generation.

  36. Labor Participation Rate Remains At 37 Year Low As 94.5 Million Remains Outside The Labor Force

    In another sign that the labor market slack, at least from the Fed’s perspective, is now reaching a peak, the Household survey reported that while the civilian labor force rose by over 300K in October, the number of people not in the labor force actually declined by 97K to 94.5MM (as those employed rose by 320K), following an exodus from the labor force of over half a million in September.

    Despite this headline improvement, however, the participation rate remained at 62.4%, same as the prior month, and at a level last seen in 1977.

    1. Shriek will be by to say something moronic about college students and retired people.

  37. “A new study says kids from non-religious households are better at sharing.”

    My study of progressives says that “sharing” is what they call it when they help themselves to other people’s stuff.

    I suspect religious kids may have a harder time not minding when other people steal their stuff–because religious kids have been taught that stealing is wrong.

    “Stealing” is what religious kids call it when other people help themselves to their stuff.

    1. Yes. It also means kids from religious households have a better developed sense of personal responsibility. No you can’t have my stuff, go and get your own.

    2. And, of course, there are a number of studies which show people with religious belief tend to be more generous and philanthropic than non-religious people.

      1. They’re definitely more charitable than progressives. From the progressive point of view, there’s no point in giving to charity (or doing anything for that matter) unless everyone else is forced to do so as well. That’s why they love to see things done by government, since government is force.

        1. Yeah, charity isn’t a progressive’s responsibility.

          It’s the responsibility of the government to tax rich people to help the poor.

          Charity is somebody else’s responsibility.

    3. This was my thought, too. Too often, at least in my area, “Sharing” is simply “My kid wants what your kid has, so I’m going to take it from your kid and give it to mine, because “sharing” is important.” We are highly religious in my family, but I am also (obviously) a staunch libertarian. Both of these inform how we raise our kids.

      I have 4 boys, and, for the older two, they know that they don’t NEED to share. If your brother has something you want, get over it. Go do something else. If your brother tries to take what you want, you don’t have to let him.

      My older two (4 and 6) now understand that a trade is better. You can’t take your brother’s crayon or toy, but you CAN offer him something else instead. They trade toys and barter with each other all the time. But they are not allowed to steal, even when some other parent calls it “sharing.”

  38. A local lefty bitches about the amount of innocents killed by our crazy foreign policy.

    Good right? Well yeah, except that he seems to only blame BOOOOOOSH!

    Fuck, seriously not even a peep about President Drone.

    1. This shit really burns me. The majority of civilian deaths in the Iraq war were by the “insurgents”. And many of then werent even Iraqi, and they were supported by Iran. It may have been a foolish gamble, but it was trying to rid the world of a ruthless dictatorship run by a man who had demonstrated the willingness to use chem weapons on his own people. What are we attempting to do in Syria? Or Afghanistan at this point? Or Libya?

    2. Dare I point out I feel the same way when a couple of older fellows that I worked with (both now retired) who complained to high heaven about lefties and giveaways and the rest, but could segue directly into their Social Security benefits, VA benefits, and triangulating their Cobra rights. May seem like a non-sequitur, but notion comes down to “it’s terrible when THEY do it, to be ignored or mildly approved if MY GUYS do it. Rank philosophical inconsistency in the matter of a few minutes can be mind boggling.

      1. COBRA rights? Those are entirely self-funded by the former-employee.

        1. Yes but mandated by government

  39. Two headlines which need no “story”

    Black grad student on hunger strike in Mo. after swastika drawn with human feces

    Apache leader who criticized Redskins is sorry for Halloween blackface costume

    The “meta” story is the same…. Identity Politics + Symbolism = Much Whine Ensues

    1. That picture of the apache guy with Sanders and Warren was pretty cool.

      Wait. What? That was some other indian gal and not Liz Warren? My bad. All them indians look the same to me.

    2. I guess the costume would have been perfectly fine without the darkening of the face though. So why is the wig (blackhair) ok?

      1. They do appropriate white hair…weaves.

  40. More evidence of the belief that firearms and ammunition have an evil life of their own.

    A new law in Minnesoda makes it illegal for felons to have ammunition.

    The law, an amendment to Minnesota’s gun regulations, creates a five-year mandatory-minimum sentence for felons with histories of violent crimes caught possessing bullets or other ammunition ? the same sentence the offenders would receive if they were caught with a firearm.

    The only thing I can do to keep from hurling is console myself that it was snuck into an omnibus public safety bill, so it isn’t like this passed all on its own.


    Mother of dead terrorist pulls out knife and threatens attack during fawning interview. You shouldn’t laugh but you can’t help it.

    Just follow the links to the video on Youtube. Reason hate Youtube links for some reason.

    1. No death cult here, nope.

      1. Cytoxic tells me letting her into the country will just make us more free.

        1. When they outnumber native Europeans, the Libertarian moment will have arrived.


      Methinks you have pissed off the server squirrels

      1. My God.

        1. The woman is celebrating the death of her child and encouraging the suicide/ murder of her remaining ones.

          These people are fucking worse than animals…

  42. Vox: Inequality isn’t just unfair ? it’s making people sick

    His findings are stunning. Marmot discovered that health and social status are often inextricably linked ? even when you control for income, education, and other risk factors. This is true if you look at countries or at cities, or even drill down to the level smaller communities. And the implication of this research is that high levels of inequality can, on their own, make people sick.

    Most famously, his Whitehall studies established a link between the relative rank of officers in the British civil service and their risk of disease and death. The higher an officer was ranked, the better his or her health. This was despite the fact that all civil servants were relatively well-off, with similar levels of education. Again, the stratification itself seemed to be the important factor.

    Marmot calls the link between health and status “the social gradient in health.” One possibility is that it’s all related to a sense of control in one’s life. People lower down in the social order feel like they have less control, which can lead to stress that then negatively impacts health.

    1. Or maybe people who are lower down in the social order are there because they don’t make the best decisions, and that includes decisions about their health. Oh, wait. Personal responsibility? Heresy! It’s because of inequality!

      1. People have a hard time understanding causality. Progs see all of these poor people with no money and think “these people are poor because they don’t have any money, so lets send them some of yours”. Of course that never works because the people are not poor because they don’t have money. They don’t have money because they are poor. Poverty is a moral condition not a monetary one.

        Conservatives do the same thing with drugs. They see all of these bums addicted to drugs and think “we should ban drugs so these people won’t be bums anymore”. And of course that never works. The people are not bums because they use drugs. They abuse drugs because they are bums. Taking the drugs away doesn’t make them any less of a bum.

        1. You have no idea how much shit I’ve gotten for saying that.

          1. That’s because you’re a shitlord, sarcasmic, like the rest of us.

        2. If giving people money without any connection to productive effort was all it took to make people rich, then “the 1%” would be composed primarily of lottery winners, A-list entertainers, trust-fund babies, and professional sports players.

          Oddly enough, that is not the case…

          1. The statistic that shows that best is that over 90% of professional athletes who have made more than $15 million in their careers ended up bankrupt. If money solved poverty, none of them would have.

            1. Professional athletes at least have the excuse that many of them have brain damage which fucks with their judgment.

              1. Not just the physical issues, but a lot of them don’t come from familes with a history of sound financial planning. I was friends with a guy in college who was able to make it into the NFL and stick around for a few seasons. He made good money, easily over $4m over his career. Dead broke two years after retiring. Between trying to live the “NFL lifestyle” and the fact he was supporting a couple dozen members of his extended family.

            2. It’s pretty simple: you don’t get rich by spending all your money. Give money to someone with a poor person’s mindset (spend it all!), and before long they will be poor again.

          2. Entertainment doesn’t have value?

            1. I didn’t say that. All of the things I listed obviously have value. They are by and large funded voluntarily, so they wouldn’t have money if people didn’t find them valuable.

              1. You implied it when you said “without any connection to productive effort.” I would agree that lottery winners and trust-fund babies got their fortunes without any productive effort, but I disagree about entertainers and professional sports players. They produce entertainment that people enjoy.

        3. After studying this generalization, I have come to the conclusion that it is, in fact, a generalization. No better or worse than one that a progressive would make.

          1. Some generalizations are true. If they weren’t, you could never make any conclusions beyond individual ones.

    2. The Social Justice types seem to have figured out that they’re making no “progress” trying to incoherently advocate for new law, so instead have turned to trying to apply existing laws (e.g. health, environmental, financial regulations) to try and push their same agenda.

      Yes, i know its the oldest game in the book, but between the “Suing Exxon for Climate “lies”” thing, and claiming “Inequality is a public health issue”…. it seems like the advocates are moving into more-tangible application of government force.

    3. Multiple possibilities. Being able to rise in status shows an ability to plan and judge risks that translate into a healthier lifestyle. Healthier people don’t have to take as much time off or spend days working at 50% when they could be working at 100%, so they are more likely to be promoted or chosen as a lead for high status social positions in aggregate. Our instinct make us like people who do not display signs of weakness like disabilities or ill health, so we are more willing to follow them leading to most leaders being healthier.
      That’s just some reasons I can think of off the top of my head where the ill health causes the lack of status instead of the other way around.

    4. The guy is named after a small furry rodent?

      1. Marmots aren’t that small as far as rodents go.

        1. They bark, too. I took my dog up to the top of Pecos baldy several years ago and he went nuts barking back at the loads of marmots up there.

          1. I used to live in the Colorado mountains and the damn things were everywhere. Obnoxious creatures.

  43. Reaching for Vigor, Jeb Bush Slips In Some Gentle Profanity

    “We’re Americans, damn it!” he shouted on Tuesday, admiring the national moxie at a barbecue in Rye, N.H.

    “A president has to roll up their damn sleeves and get to work,” he told voters in Raymond, N.H., hours later.

    “We’re going to win this damn thing,” he said the day before in Tampa, Fla. His prepared remarks had called for the drowsier “we will win this campaign.”

    When a Boston Globe reporter wrote on Twitter that Mr. Bush’s new slogan seemed to be “Damn, Jeb!” the campaign offered only a modest tweak.

    “Believe it’s ‘Jeb can fix it, damn it,'” said Tim Miller, Mr. Bush’s communications director.

    1. I loved the point that one of Mark Steyn’s readers raised. Jeb’s slogan is reminiscent of BBC pedophile Jimmy Saville’s slogan “Jim’ll fix it!”

      I predict the guys in England who love to spectate U.S. politics are having a good laugh about it.


    I don’t think Grand Jury proceedings should be secret much less it be a crime to release their contents. So, I have yet to figure out what Kane did wrong. Meanwhile, she is releasing all kinds of unprofessional and pornographic emails the dedicated public servants of Pennsylvania sent on official accounts. I am starting to like this woman.

    1. Taking people with her as she goes down.

    2. well here’s the real crime:

      After Kane took office, a special appointee concluded that the Sandusky case had not been dragged out for political reasons. But the inquiry unearthed a trove of office emails containing porn and jokes about women and minorities that many found offensive.

      Kane’s criticism of the Sandusky prosecution also triggered a bitter feud with investigators who handled the case, and in 2014, authorities say, she leaked confidential grand jury information to the Philadelphia Daily News in an attempt to show that two of them had bungled a corruption investigation.

      1. Maybe I am just cynical but I have a hard time believing she isn’t absolutely correct about the Sandusky investigation being dragged out for political reasons. Telling the truth has a bad way of making you enemies.

        1. I’ve been hearing a little bit about this woman. I was thinking, back when the whole Sandusky things winding up, there was – for about three days – a rumor that there was a pedophile/prostitution ring going on involving all sorts of powerful people in the state of Pennsylvania. I seem to remember the FBI was on the cusp of getting involved, And as quickly as it came, it all disappeared into a black hole. One could only have the feeling that it was closed tight by very powerful people. Not a single peep or followup did I ever see. As clean a “sweeping under the rug” as I’ve seen. I’m waiting to see if there’s any stuff on that whole thing that could be released. Seemed too clean and abrupt to not have a LOT of powerful people making very tangible threats to make the whole thing just dry up in an instant. And therefore probably entirely true.

    3. I think she’s probably a sociopathic asshole, but on the other hand, it’s nice that she’s outside of their tent pissing in.

  45. There’s nothing offensive about my team’s mascot, Sam the Scalper.

  46. Washington Post profile on Lisa Blatt, the attorney who is trying to trademark the Washington Redskins

    How, the team’s lawyers demanded in an 82-page brief that galloped across the Internet, could the federal Trademark Trial and Appeal Board strip the Redskins of their registrations because the moniker offends some Native Americans, but preserve registrations for Take Yo Panties Off clothing, Midget Man condoms,, Baked By a Negro cookies and scores of other companies?

    Blatt has argued 33 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court ? more than any other female litigator in the country. She won 32 of them.

    The smug, white, guilty internetters were mocking this brief, but if this women is responsible for it I would think it has a chance of success.

    1. Baked By a Negro cookies

      Now with extra chocolate

      1. And made with brown sugar.

        1. Is that why it tastes so sweet?

        2. I used to eat cookies like that, but I’d wake up three days later covered in my own waste.

          Oh, not that kind of brown sugar.

    2. Smug guilty white people are morons. The woman is absolutely right.

  47. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail,,,,,,,


    1. Let me guess, the underpowered 320i?

  48. So it seems that the Fraternal Order of Police is now threatening Quentin Tarantino over daring to question police officers

    In a veiled threat, the largest police union in the country says it has a “surprise” in store for Quentin Tarantino.

    Jim Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, would not go into any detail about what is being cooked up for the Hollywood director, but he did tell THR: “We’ll be opportunistic.”

    “Tarantino has made a good living out of violence and surprise,” says Pasco. “Our offices make a living trying to stop violence, but surprise is not out of the question.”

    The FOP, based in Washington, D.C., consists of more than 330,000 full-time, sworn officers. According to Pasco, the surprise in question is already “in the works,” and will be in addition to the standing boycott of Tarantino’s films, including his upcoming movie The Hateful Eight.

    “Something is in the works, but the element of surprise is the most important element,” says Pasco. “Something could happen anytime between now and [the premiere]. And a lot of it is going to be driven by Tarantino, who is nothing if not predictable.

  49. A new study says that atheists tend to be obsessed with proving that they are better than non-atheists, and are even willing to fund and site studies to prove it. Study further indicates that atheists also tend to be completely non-self-aware of this tendency, and how transparently passive-aggressive it is.

    1. Atheists are the metaphysical version of “I don’t even own a TV guy”.

    2. I’ve known some very nice atheists.

    3. Bullshit. Most atheists keep it to themselves. Saying that atheists are obsessed with proving they are better than non-atheists because the anti-religionist faction does so is like saying all Christians are obsessed with proselytizing because of door-knocking Jehovahs.

      1. Sarcasmic, AaronBonn is making fun of the authors of the study with poor methodology in the links not you.

        1. atheists also tend to be completely non-self-aware of this tendency,

      2. A great number of atheists, I suspect, are politically motivated rather than philosophical about their atheism: people who incorporate anti-religion into their worldview as a counterpoint to religious conservatives. It’s this sort of person who tends to proselytize atheism and gives the rest of us a bad rap. And then there’s the variety for whom atheism alone isn’t sufficiently anti-religious, and that only by incorporating a wide swath of political causes under the banner of atheism can atheism fully repudiate the sins of religion…

        1. I find that most vocal atheists tend to be quick to worship at the alter of Government.

          1. Which I like to point out and argue that makes them not atheists – fun.

            1. That’s why I call them anti-religionists, not atheists.

      3. You know who else didn’t want to admit that atheists are obsessed?

      4. Jehovahs

        Now I want to hit you with a rock.

      5. I AM AN ATHIEST, and I am effeminately better than Sugarfree.

        1. Fucking autocorrect..definitely*

    4. As an atheist, versus an Atheist, I have a fear of EVERY KIND OF SUPERSTITION and so religions proper are simply in line with every other philosophy that can output Statists – no need to attack them specifically. Atheists (large A) tend to be socialists, who are burdened (and have to burden others) with their own superstitions, and have to actively debate and cut down others’ beliefs because they are simply fighting over the control levers of Statist power. Simply, neither of us believe in ghosts and faeries, but they turn around and balm their angst with angelic Top Men while I have no desire to do so. And how many atheists (small a) there are out there is hard to know because they’re not making a nuisance of themselves, while Atheists – again – are fighting for that collectivist, fist-mailing legality.

  50. Are tech gurus becoming paranoiacs or is it really this bad?

    “They have made multiple runs at him.” Just let the implications of that sink in for a bit. If my source is to be believed (and I have found him both well-informed and completely trustworthy in the past) this was not a series of misunderstandings, it was a deliberately planned and persistent campaign to frame Linus and feed him to an outrage mob.

    I have to see it as an an attempt to smear and de-legitimize the Linux community (and, by extension, the entire open-source community) in order to render it politically pliable.

    One of our very own appears in the comments.

    1. Wow, that is scary. Raymond is not one to make something like this up or even publicize it lightly either.

    2. Smart guys. I hope that the folks at the conferences implement the advice given. Never be alone with a woman and record everything. Life won’t end if you’re a little paranoid, and it can save your career being ruined and your family harassed from not being careful enough.

      1. I’m curious whether two-party states would charge a victim of attempted defamation for publishing recordings he’d taken in secret.

        1. Even if they did, you’d still be better off than if you let the lynch mob eat you alive. Juries wouldn’t convict considering the circumstances, and the ‘victim’ wouldn’t want to go on trial and become the target of internet scorn instead of its conductor.
          Don’t be open about recording until it actually saves your ass, though. You better believe the SJWs will try to eat you alive to prevent other from doing the same.

          1. But that’s the problem, isn’t it? You can’t know at the outset whether your encounter will whip up the mob or fizzle out. So you have to choose between risking an expensive lawsuit or criminal charges and being drummed out of the community before you get a say. You’re sitting on exculpatory evidence waiting for the mob to overtake you or disappear.

            I guess the better option is to inform every interlocutor that you’re recording conversations for posterity. That might not be terribly eccentric in tech, but in business or elsewhere it’s bound to be off-putting.

            1. These things take off very quickly. You wait for the first article or blog post by someone with more than a thousand follower, then you release. You head it off before it hits mainstream, but you can show real harm that will make it easy to get off the hook.

              You don’t want to tell everyone that you are recording because that will make you a target. The folks willing to honey trap for the cause will be furious at you and they will find a way to cause shit in your life. The last thing these types want is it to become socially acceptable to record conversations with them. Beyond taking away power from them, it carries the implication that they were abusing the power in the first place.

              1. On the other hand: your honeypot suffers the ignominy of being wrung out in public, but you’re tied up in court over the recording. She has resort to an almost implacably sympathetic crowd of boosters, and you’re stuck financing your defense. In the end you’re just screwed over differently than she’d intended.

                I would prefer having the recording, but the deck is stacked against you regardless.

    3. Following through on some of those links I ran across this posting of one of the instances of sexual harassment in the tech industry:

      The Ubuntu Warty Theme

      I didn’t realize how bad it was until I realized that there was a Warty theme.

      1. It’s not TRULY Warty-themed – there’s no terror in the eyes of those models.

        1. And no mention of either dungeons or squats.

    4. Ugh. Why would something like that “de-legitimize” the open source community? If the software is good, it’s good.

  51. If you please, I have a legal question. I was ticketed for having my stereo too loud. But here’s the thing, it was in no way in violation of the city statute, which reads that it’s only a violation if people 50 feet away are unable to carry on a conversation. The fine is $180 and I now have a criminal record. So I plan to fight it. My question is this, the district court say i have to have an attorney. Where would a person go to find representation for something like this? Thanks in advance of your reply.

    1. Can you prove that there was no one within fifty feet engaging in a conversation? Because the cop will no doubt lie and say that there was. Then it is your word against theirs.

      1. And does the law require that an actual conversation be interrupted, or is it just a hypothetical conversation 50 feet away.

    2. You can contact the State Bar and they will find a proper attorney for you.

      Or check out the site Avvo. You can ask legal questions and get answers from lawyers, one who may be able to help you.

      1. Also free legal clinics are often available. For example my wife volunteers at one which is hosted at a local homeless shelter, and then she also works with a Hispanic community center.

        1. Ignore what I say below and take Lord Humungus’s advice. He’s got a way better suggestion than me.

    3. First, no you don’t have to have an attorney. They cannot prevent you from representing yourself. It’s just extremely advised to have one.

      I’d start with one of those defense firms that advertise on tv or radio. They’ve got a lot of experience in signaling to prosecutors that the fine isn’t worth the hassle of taking you to trial. Small fine collection relies on people not wanting to waste time on fighting them. A letter from even a fly by night attorney is not worth the money gained.

      If they can’t help you, look for charity lawyers. Not so you can use them, but so you can ask them for advice on what you should do next and where you should hire someone. They are actually out to help and would be willing to answer questions.

    4. Thanks, all.

      1. One last thing? I don’t think you’ll have a criminal record over this. Tickets are for infractions. An infraction isn’t even a misdemeanor. Generally speaking, not even professional organizations care about infractions. This is less than shoplifting or a public intoxication charge. Ask your lawyer about this, but I don’t think you’ll have a criminal record no matter what happens with this ticket.

        1. I don’t think he will have a record either, but this “Tickets are for infractions. An infraction isn’t even a misdemeanor” is dead wrong in my state.

          I was ticketed for failure to have a motorcycle license (because I didn’t bother to get the endorsement when I moved) and that is a class 3 misdemeanor here.

          I’m still not sure how or why it works that way, but it’s not the only misdemeanor that gets a ticket, according to the law in my state, for example, running a red light is also a misdemeanor.

    5. Next time, don’t have your music too loud.

      1. And get off of Old.Mexican’s lawn!

        1. And pull up your pants and put that baseball cap on the right way around.

  52. A new study says kids from non-religious households are better at sharing.

    I don’t know about that. During the time I spent in California, I found that kids of non-religious parents were better at wanting my child to share to them. Their parents showed befuddlement every time my wife told them that my kid’s things were his. I once told her to tell them “We’re not Communists.”

    1. Sharing is a nice thing to do. But lefties like to make the leap from there to assuming that therefore everyone must be forced to share at all times.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.