Ceasefire Hammered Out in Syria, Americans Support FBI vs. Apple, London Mayor Wants Out of European Union: P.M. Links


  • Syria
    Credit: Christiaan Triebert / photo on flickr

    Secretary of State John Kerry announced that the U.S., Russia, and other countries have agreed to a ceasefire in Syria. The agreement notably does not include ISIS or al-Qaeda.

  • A new poll from Pew shows 51 percent of Americans think that Apple should unlock deceased San Bernardino terrorist Syed Farook's phone to help the FBI. Of the remainder, 38 percent say they shouldn't and 11 percent don't know.
  • Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, however, is supporting Apple.
  • London Mayor Boris Johnson is supporting the idea (and upcoming vote) of Great Britain exiting the European Union.
  • Jason Brian Dalton, 45, has been charged with six counts of murder for his weekend shooting rampaging in Kalamazoo, Michigan.
  • Pressing political question: "Why is Ben Carson still running for president?"
  • Jeb Bush's extremely expensive presidential campaign was a miserable failure, but his consultants probably aren't even pretending to cry on the way to the bank.

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

NEXT: Tesla's Direct Sales Battle Comes to Connecticut

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

  1. The vile, despicable, lowlife scum on the left are truly something. Every time I think they can't sink any lower, they manage to pull it off and go even lower still.

    The ones who run Twitter are now engaging in a practice that some have dubbed "shadowbanning". They're basically compiling a Nixonian Enemies List of libertarians and conservatives, targeting those users, and disappearing their posts off the timelines of others. They've even started doing it to inoffensive guys with large numbers of followers, like IowaHawk and VodkaPundit.

    And yes, I know that Twitter can run their own site and services however the heck they want to. But if they had any balls they would be up front about it and just directly announce that their policy is "Leftists only, others please go away." Instead, the cowardly vermin are sneakily trying to disappear people in such a way that they often don't even realize it's happening to them (although it was absurd for them to think they would never be found out), while still of course getting the hits from the people being shadowbanned.

    1. You got banned from Twitter, huh.

      1. Who got banned from Twitter? And why is yours the first post here and yet from the positioning it looks almost as if you are replying to some other comment that I can't see?

        1. I still don't really understand how Twitter works.
          Are people who go on Twitter called Twits?

          /older than a millenial

          1. Here ya go!

            Press the Follow button to get Tweets from the users below.

            1. Not interested.

        2. You must have Domestic Dissident in your Greasonable filter. Amazingly, his 3-paragraph rant about Twatting or whatever squeaked in ahead of Eugene.

    2. IowaHawk and VodkaPundit are offensive precisely because they have large numbers of followers and are libertarians.

    3. Reason had a a whole blog post about this.

      I shorted Twitter this morning. Calendar spread. I'm just waiting for the shadowbanning news to go mainstream.

      1. Twitter runs on leftist and reporters (but I repeat myself). Shadow banning people they don't like shouldn't lose them too many members.

        1. Confidence in Jack Dorsey is already very low. For any CEO to permit something like this......

          VERY stupid for an unprofitable publicly traded company. It was on the market wire this morning.

          1. Hmmmm, maybe we are finally seeing the shakedown of internet companies. A lot of them have been running on hopes and dreams for a while. If Twitter actually sinks I could see something similar to the dot com bust all over again (take comment with knowledge that I was born in 1990, so my knowledge of said bust is all second hand).

            1. You don't see a Napster-type story emerging, where some kind of decentralised Twitter replica starts to emerge that no one can control?

              Think I'll go torrent some music now.

            2. The dot-com bust was from bubble that resulted from people investing in anything tech related without doing any research on the company, its business plan or its financials. Twitter has never articulated how they will make money, and has been pushing non-gaap measures of financial performance - which is usually accounting code for "We aren't making any money".

        2. Members? Members don't matter, and investors don't generally put much stock (heh) in political posturing.

      2. You didn't bet a troll before you did, you dick!

        Playa, for me, the point of you shorting stocks is so that I can see the pain in the trolls eyes. And you've robbed me of that.

        Jeez, Playa, be considerate and put the reason commenteriat ahead of your personal financial future!

        ... I'm only 90% kidding.

        1. The benefits continue. He's been scarce lately.

          But now nobody else will bet with me.

          1. I bet you I will go skiing next weekend. If I win, I go skiing. If you lose, I go skiing.

            1. I almost went to Mammoth on Thursday. I was too sleep deprived for a 6 hour drive in heavy snow, though. I regret that decision now.

              1. Why? Getting in a car accident is no fun, and neither is trying to do anything while sleep deprived.

                I need you to live so you can keep guiding my investment decisions. You already saved me a bundle when I unloaded out of risk equities several months ago based on your advice.

              2. I wish I had blown off work. It was too hot this weekend in the Sierras so even in the untracked tree lines in Huckleberry bowl the top layer was some manky sierra cement. Still had a blast.

          2. But now nobody else will bet with me.

            I will bet with you about anything if I do not have to pay up if I lose. That is the way it works, right?

            1. I bet you I will not bet with you. Wanna bet?

      3. $15 going to worthless

    4. I despise shadow banning. Either ban someone or don't. It's bullshit to do this crap where you don't realize you've been banned.

      1. What is this blank space above me?

        1. Just one of Tulpa's socks. Don't worry about it.

          1. First reasonable thing I think you've ever said.

      2. Isn't this the same sort of thing Reddit was accused of doing?

        1. Reddit was more explicit about it. Twitter and it's Minitru learned that lesson well and are keeping it mostly to shadow-banning and deverifying.

    5. This isnt sinking lower. That kind of thing is SOP for the left. When I heard that Sarkeesian was on their Ministry of Truth I knew this is exactly the kind of thing that would happen and that it would probably be the end of the twitter. I never liked 'em anyway.

      1. Let's go make our own Twitter! With blackjack! And hookers!

        1. What about the weed and Messican ass-sex?

          1. That's implied.

            It's also all mine. Back off.

            1. You've never banged any Mexicans. The rest is all true though.

              1. Hey, I banged that black guy who didn't speak English that one time. Isn't that enough?

                1. Technically, no. But it's enough for me.

            2. (frowny fishy face)

    6. Hello.

    7. To which, IowaHawk tweeted:

      "Twitter is a private firm & perfectly free to ban/shadowban me or anyone else. It's not like I'm asking them to bake me a gay wedding cake."


      "I'd actually be proud if Twitter was shadowbanning me, it's like being on the Nixon enemies list."

      1. The gay wedding cake thing is fucking brilliant. Collectivist 1A vs Individualist 1A smackdown.

    8. Red State did it first, banning Ron Paul supporting articles because they made faux conservatives like Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee and John McCain and Mitt Romney look bad.

      1. And that's really lame of them, but Red State is at least up front about having a specific political agenda (the name is kind of a clue). It would be pretty dumb to get upset about Democratic Underground or Daily Kos banning non-leftists; I mean you kind of have to expect that from them.

        Twitter on the other hand has never remotely marketed themselves as being a left-wing democratic party organ, but apparently they are now.

      2. The Washington Examiner will not keep up libertarian or anti-cop comments. I think they have given some of the comentariat the power to "report" posts, and after so many, it automatically gets rid of every post you've made. I think that's right paper. Might have been the post.

  2. Pressing political question: "Why is Ben Carson still running for president?"

    No one has a belt buckle big enough to tell him to stop.

    1. Dude talks hella slow - he started giving a concession speech last Tuesday, but he hasn't gotten to the part where he concedes yet.

    2. Telling an uppity black man to stop running for president would be offensive.

        1. But when he withdraws it will still be proof that Republicans are racist.

          1. Black conservatives can be used as Proof Of conservative racism, but never as Proof Against conservative racism. /the Left

  3. Jeb Bush's extremely expensive presidential campaign was a miserable failure, but his consultants probably aren't even pretending to cry on the way to the bank.

    Nor will he...it's never a politician's personal money.

    1. It's practically loose pocket change for the Wall Street billionaires who were supporting him.

  4. The agreement notably does not include ISIS or al-Qaeda.

    Ah, HA! Now we can kick the shit out of them!

    1. The agreement notably does not include ISIS or al-Qaeda.

      So... a cease-fire that will fail to even slow down any rate of fire?

    2. How about Al-Nusra?

      1. How about Al-Jazeera?

        1. How about Al-Gore?

  5. London Mayor Boris Johnson is supporting the idea (and upcoming vote) of Great Britain exiting the European Union.

    Next up: London leaving Great Britain.

    1. London calling... reverse the charges.


  6. Speaking of Apple and the terrorist,

    1. That was the thing from this morning - the news item was framed as "FBI vigorously denies password reset was unintentional goof by county worker". I couldn't figure out why the FBI would be so adamant that the password reset was a screw-up or that it wasn't done by them.

      1. I'll just leave this here.

  7. A new poll from Pew shows 51 percent of Americans think that Apple should unlock deceased San Bernardino terrorist Syed Farook's phone to help the FBI.

    Android users.

    1. Proof that at least 62% of amercans don't understand their rights and/or can't be bothered to understand what the issue is?

      1. Are you with the FBI or are you with the terrorists?

        1. Why can't it be both? I think they're on the same side on this issue.

      2. More like proof that 49% of Americans haven't been properly "educated" on the issue yet.

    2. 51 percent of Americans who have a landline and enjoy participating in polls think that Apple should unlock the phone.

      1. 51 percent of Americans who have a landline and enjoy participating in polls

        and were home at the time, and picked up the phone, and . . .

        Public opinion polling is a joke.

  8. One of the many benefits of state-provided news media is its strong commitment to impartiality.

    For example, CBC has a level-headed, unbiased analysis about how Slavic subhumans and Attila's offspring conspire to ruin Europe with hate, racism and greed.

    1. You know who else felt taken for granted by the Germans?

      1. Jurgen Klinnsman?

      2. Field Marshal Conrad von Hotzendorf?

      3. Ulysses S. Grant?

      4. Residents of Stalingrad?

      5. Gneiss. It's always taken for granite.

          1. We marble at your monumental wit.

            1. And your huge apatite.

          2. That's not very gneiss.

            1. When someone reuses words in a pun relay, i have to take anything they say with a grain of basalt.

      6. Stalin?

    2. Eastern Europe has a long history of experience with the Saracen. It is no surprise that they aren't as naive as their Western European brethren.

      1. I really doubt they are running of a deep knowledge of their history. Spain isn't rejecting the moors. They are just poorer and Soviet rule left behind a lot of social pathologies that manifest as xenophobia. They'll learn.

    3. "In both countries, the right-wing governments have rammed through laws emasculating the courts and handing control of publicly-funded media, including national television channels, to government loyalists."

      Translation: Poland didn't allow left-wing court packing, and Poland didn't like state-run TV being full-on left-leaning so they elected a government that is taking care of those issues.

      1. Nope, they were right. Hungary's government has been a scary fascist government for a while now. The guys in charge are close to Jobbik, a bunch of anti-semites.

    4. Slavic subhumans and Attila's offspring conspire to ruin Europe with hate, racism and greed

      I'm forwarding this to an Attila's offspring, who happens to be my partner.

      1. A good choice, Hungarians are some exceptionally handsome people.

  9. Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, however, is supporting Apple.

    Of course he is, they would be working together in their master plan to control us through virtual reality headwear.

    1. I think you're giving Facebook too much credit.

  10. Secretary of State John Kerry announced that the U.S., Russia, and other countries have agreed to a ceasefire in Syria.

    Give it a day.

    1. Just like we agreed to close Guantanamo.

    2. Ya I can pretty much hear them going at it right now

    3. Is Syria one of the "other countries?"

  11. Sadly, too many Americans believe FBI officials when they say they only want the information from this one phone. That is a lie, and even the FBI Director has said that law enforcement is in possession of hundreds of phones they cannot get into. Too many Americans are eager to trade their liberty for the promise (the hint) of security. We all know what Benjamin Franklin said about that . . .

    1. We have to make Murika great again, you muzzie apologist.

    2. They abuse every ounce of authority they've ever been granted. We are way past enough is enough.

    3. Yeah, but he said it like 100 years ago in Proto-Indo-European.

    4. Sadly, too many Americans believe FBI officials when they say they only want the information from this one phone.

      That's our fault, for not conveying our argument well enough and addressing their concerns with credible solutions.

      1. How much clearer can "It is literally impossible (because of the county workers initial password reset fuckup) for Apple to get into this one phone without the created technology being available to open any iPhone."?

        1. Yeah, but it's not like they're gonna use it after this!

  12. Pressing political question: "Why is Ben Carson still running for president?"

    Your racism and privilege is showing here, Shackford.

    1. Baby steps. At least he didn't ask "Why is Ben Carson still step and fetching for president?"

      Maybe our grandkids won't expect the black candidate to automatically be good at running.

  13. ""U.S., Russia, and other countries have agreed to a ceasefire in Syria. "

    'other countries', among which i suppose 'Syria' itself might be an important one.

    The pretense here is that the Superpowers seem to think that just because they stuck their dicks into the whole Syrian Civil War... that they now have the authority to declare the terms of it to the people on the ground.

    Doesn't really work that way.

    1. What about Isis? Or are they not a country? Or does the ceasefire only apply to areas outside of their control? What about the whole "people disagree on who is and who isn't Isis" thing?

      1. "It all depends on what the definition of ISIS is"
        - Bill Clinton

        this so-called 'ceasefire' is nothing except diplomatic signaling between US/Russia on how they're going to spin their respective roles

        there's nothing stopping Syria from bombing rebels and claiming they were Nusra/ISIS or whomever is still 'open season'

        "Bashar al-Zoubi, head of the political office of the Yarmouk Army, part of the rebel Free Syrian Army, said this would provide cover for President Bashar al-Assad and his Russian allies to continue to attack opposition-held territory where rebel and militant factions are tightly packed.

        "Russia and the regime will target the areas of the revolutionaries on the pretext of the Nusra Front's presence, and you know how mixed those areas are, and if this happens, the truce will collapse," he said."

    2. Seriously. Our bumbling administration doesn't have a clue what the hell is going on over there. They are still convinced that Assad is fighting off an army of Arab Thomas Jefferson's who are merely trying to bring individual liberty to their benighted land. BS. It is shithead vs shithead.

      1. Are they still operating human slaughterhouses over there? Last I heard the 'good rebels' were sacrificing people to allah and butchering them for food.

        At a dinner party a month or so ago I happen to meet a guy who used to be Hafed al-Assad's chauffeur. He told me that the old man was very well liked but that Bashar is universally despised. In spite of that he was very adamant that Bashar is the least worst they have.

      2. They are still convinced that Assad is fighting off an army of Arab Thomas Jefferson's who are merely trying to bring individual liberty to their benighted land.

        If this was true, they'd be supporting Assad.

    3. they stuck their dicks into the whole Syrian Civil War.


  14. News flash: Americans don't give a fuck about their privacy or security when it comes to government "protecting" them from scary Brown people.

    1. Funny, and all this time it's been the government I feel I need protecting from.

      1. You clearly want them to win then.

    2. Not just scary brown people, scary anti-government extremists, too. And sexters; they are the worst.

      1. Don't forget the hippies and their demon weed, man. Just waiting for an opportune moment to corrupt your daughter.

        1. Bitch set me up.

  15. "My best sense is that it was somebody who was having an issue at the time and for whatever reason they decided to do what they did."

    Now, that is some mighty fine forensics.

  16. "Jason Brian Dalton, 45, has been charged with six counts of murder for his weekend shooting rampaging in Kalamazoo, Michigan."

    And there will be ZERO questioning by the media into what prescription medications he was on ... or off. Instead, the focus will be on Uber and guns.

    1. Obviously the solution is better background checks for the background checkers.

      1. How many background checks would a background checker check if a background checker could check background checks?

        1. It's background checks all the way down!

    2. What about his Facebook page? Did he ever retweet anything Newt Gingrich ever said? Ever post a comment on the reddit MRA forum? Any pictures of him at a Ted Nugent concert?

      1. Betcha he was into twerking.

  17. Deficit has soared ahead of March 22 budget, [Canadian Finance Minister] Bill Morneau says

    The Liberal government is now forecasting larger than expected deficits for the next two years even before adding billions in promised spending in its first budget, which will be tabled on March 22.

    1. It's all Harper's fault.

  18. "Jeb Bush's extremely expensive presidential campaign was a miserable failure"

    Yet you still have @()#*!@($ morons in the press insisting that "money in politics" is the source of all Democracy's ills

    1. I got into an argument about this over the weekend with a lefty friend. He was "blah, blah, Citizens' United, end of the world..." and I pointed to Bush as yet another example of tons of money not making the slightest impact in a campaign. I followed with several other Initiatives in California over the past few years that had been defeated (or won) despite the opposing side spending a fortune more than the winning side.

      He actually answered "yeah, but there's a lot of elections you don't hear about that are completely dominated by money or the Koch brothers."

      It's always fun to be in an argument where the other person says the facts supporting him are a 'secret' that you don't know.

      1. "A lot of elections" which oddly he was unable to name even a single example of.

      2. "And prithee how do you hear about them?"

        1. Journolist?

      3. No, you see it is precisely the lack of evidence that PROVES the conspiracy.

      4. Who was it on here who said arguing with a progressive is like playing chess with a pigeon?

        1. Some speciesist genius.

        2. I said it specifically about Palin's Buttplug. That's what led to the bet.

          1. Was that you? I've adopted it. It's one of my favorite sayings, now.

        3. I think it was Suthenboy. Something about checkmate and shitting all over the board.

          1. Pft sorry obviously not Suthenboy

      5. Nixon's secret plan to end the war in Vietnam won him an election. I don't know what kind of commie you are that would disparage one of our presidents.

      6. "but there's a lot of elections you don't hear about that are completely dominated by money or the Koch brothers."

        They assert this without knowing because they prefer their imagination to the more-complex reality.

        Which is that the real "big money" in the last major campaigns (the 2014 congressional elections)? Came from the left. And lost.

      7. "It's always fun to be in an argument where the other person says the facts supporting him are a 'secret' that you don't know."

        Apparently we know people in common.

    2. I'm sure there were some huge spenders with spectacular losses before CU, but there have been such dramatic examples that money can't buy elections since it's passed. Even ignoring Trump, Bush had no chance; he may have done even worse without Trump in the race. He barely broke double digits in NH.

      But a lot of these idiots will continue pushing this idea.

      1. Of course. They aren't trying to get money out of elections, just their opponent's money.

      2. Ariana Huffington's ex-husband squandered a huge chunk of his family's fortune in a failed bid to get elected to the US Senate. She divorced him shortly afterwards.

        1. She also turned him gay, which I fully understand.

    1. I had no idea the fatwa was still active. That is so insane.

      1. They are still pissed about the siege of Jerusalem in 1099.

        1. I'm still pissed about the Siege of Jerusalem in 637.

    2. So these guy understand basic economics, but Sanders doesn't?

      1. When you base your career on not understanding a thing, it doesn't exactly incentivize you to learn.

    3. Just one more benefit of having a state-run media.

    4. And Obama thinks he can get peace with these nutcases. Riiight.

    5. These are guys who have never done anything to aggress on America or the rest of the west right?

  19. A new poll from Pew shows 51 percent of Americans think that Apple should unlock deceased San Bernardino terrorist Syed Farook's phone to help the FBI. Of the remainder, 38 percent say they shouldn't and 11 percent don't know.

    I'd *facedesk*, except I've probably lost more than a few IQ points as a result of having to do that constantly.

    1. Another new poll from not-Pew shows that 99% of Americans don't have the slightest fucking clue what it would take to unlock that phone and what doing so would entail.

    2. I hate to say it, but 38 percent is much higher than I expected. Personally, I know one person besides myself who cares at all about process.

      1. I'd like to see an age breakdown.

  20. Jeffrey Toobin is a fucking idiot.

    "The great Justices of the Supreme Court have always looked forward; their words both anticipated and helped shape the nation that the United States was becoming. Chief Justice John Marshall read the new Constitution to allow for a vibrant and progressive federal government. Louis Brandeis understood the need for that government to regulate an industrializing economy. Earl Warren saw that segregation was poison in the modern world. Scalia, in contrast, looked backward."

    I love leftists. Their narcissism is so extreme that they basically view 'forward looking' as synonymous with 'agrees with me.' Scalia disagreed with me therefore he was backwards looking! BTW, last I checked Scalia had a major impact on US gun laws and campaign finance laws. Doesn't that involve 'shaping the nation that the United States would become?'

    Oh, and why exactly is it noble and righteous and good for unelected judges to have the ability to 'shape' the course of a country of 300 million people? That strikes me as wildly authoritarian, but apparently Toobin has a rough time following his own train of thought to its logical conclusion.

    1. Toobin also has a rough time with facts:

      "The public wants diversity, not intolerance; more marriages and fewer executions; less money in politics, not more."

      The public wants diversity so badly that Black Lives Matter activists think it's totally okay for them to have No Whites Allowed meetings in public libraries. Meanwhile, American marriage rates are near all-time lows and the majority of Americans support the death penalty.

      He basically imagines all of America agrees with him even though the statistics are all opposed to the claims he's making.

      1. Those that disagree are either straight up racists (sorry, Irish) or victims of false consciousness.

      2. Stated vs revealed preferences.

    2. That strikes me as wildly authoritarian

      Well, you can't always get the people to willingly do the right thing. Progress!

      1. Your sarcasm is reactionary and counter-revolutionary and as such I believe you should be sent to a gulag posthaste! /Revolutionary Commandant Toobin

        1. I'm just waiting, I hope it's a nice gulag.

    3. Don't forget he makes up for it by being vile and immoral. Toobin is the guy who knocked up a close friend's college student daughter and then refused to admit paternity or pay any support until a court forced him. He wouldn't even take a DNA test.

      He is a first class scumbag.

      1. Oh my God.

        What a piece of shit. How did I not know this?

        1. I am not going to judge the guy for going for some college age tail. But you don't fuck your friends' wives or daughters. Do that, and you have self identified as a lowlife scum. And that is even before he refused to support her after he got her pregnant.

          1. She wasn't 'college aged,' she was older and attending law school. He got her pregnant when she was like 33 or 34.

            You'd think a 30 year old attorney would be a better judge of character than having sex with him.

            1. I thought she was younger. My mistake. Yeah, you would. But he was a media figure and I guess she thought that was cool. What a low life. He knew he had sex with her and that the kid was his. How do you lie like that?

            2. Irish, all women should be prone to making more sexual mistakes, not less.

              1. I'd like to apply to be a trustee for the "Crusty School For Wimmenz"?

            3. You'd think a 30 year old attorney would be a better judge of character than having sex with him.


              1. It must be the vague ethnicity that did it for her.

                1. I think it was the vast cool points he carried from being a critic for TV Guide.

            4. Irish, if it weren't for poor judge of character, some of us would never get laid.

            5. "You'd think a 30 year old attorney would be a better judge of character than having sex with him."

              I was just thinking the same thing. I don't think I will be hiring her.

          2. Was that pre-Obamacare, because we know Obamacare had to be passed so 30 year old law students could afford birth control.

        2. To be fair, I don't want his baby either.

      2. Huh, hate to say it, but another of Ann Coulter's one-liners confirmed.

    4. What irritates me is that this is really the same logic that justified eugenics and Soviet gulags and Mao's Great Leap Forward and so on. As terrible things happened, the leftists simply declared they were being sabotaged by reactionaries and that they couldn't possibly fail because history was on their side and they were oh-so-forward looking!

      I realize Toobin is a more moderate leftist than Chairman Mao, but it's amazing how frequently Marxist ideas make their way into contemporary left-wing thought.

      1. Srsly, dude? American leftists wish they could openly be communists. Not all, but many. And they seriously believe that shit would work "if only the right people were in charge."

        1. "if only the right people were in charge."

          Justice Kagan wrote her masters thesis on that very thing. She claims that having the wrong people in charge is why socialism failed to take firm root in America. These people can't be parodied.

        2. This is because of the mental models you have in your brain for how the world works, in particular economics.

          If your mental model thinks that planning and collective action are how things get done vs. emergent order (markets) then you instinctively reach for state planning.

          Its not totally insane: civilization came out of collective state planning for irrigation. And obviously, even pro-market people use planning (firms plan, for example.)

          It gets into trouble when they think these models will always work better than emergent spontaneous orders.

          A great example is the hatred for middle men. Imagine a government that purchases grain from the Ukraine to feed its people. It is buying the grain from traders. So, a smart person says "aha! if we just sent a government official to buy the grain directly we could save so much money!" Of course that's not how it works. Traders have local knowledge, and the profit motive, while the government official does not and instead spends most of his time in the local brother and casino being wined and dined by someone who sells him chaff instead of wheat and he says oh well. You get the idea.

          So this is how people with this kind of planning mental model think.

          Imagine now what such a person sees when they see 23 kinds of deodorant.

          Its not surprise that people like my mother, who would love to micro-manage each person she sees, also is left-wing. Nannying is merely a form of controlled planning.

      2. Twentieth Century totalitarians were also trying to socially engineer the Aryan man, or the New Soviet Man, or an entirely new revolutionary culture that would usher in utopia. Not everybody would cooperate in their social re-engineering since the totalitarian movements were predicated upon either a race-struggle or a class-struggle. Since the out-groups (not just Jews and aristocracy, but also kulak peasants and the middle-class bourgeoisie) stood in the way of utopia, and presumed guilty of crimes against the state anyway, social justice demanded that the class-enemies (or race-enemies) be eradicated.

        1. All of those things depended on the central fallacy that things would be better if everyone stopped working for their selfish interests and started working for the common good.

          Fascism and communism are the two sides of that sick coin. The age old appeal of "things could be better if we would all just set aside our selfishness and work together".

          Of course that never happens and even if it did, no one ever figure out what the common good is. And shortly after they realize this, is when the killing starts.

    5. I am always morbidly amazed at how Toobin and his ilk can be such die-hard proponents of both "living constitution" and "social contract" theory. Yet watch the gnashing of teeth and rending of garments if a financial institution unilaterally adjusted their interest rates under the learned theory of "shit's done changed, yo."

    6. Toobin is full of shit.

  21. The 'American people' are fucking stupid and don't care about others rights or understand tech,the E.U. is falling apart do to ,well,top men,Carson never had a chance and Kerry will sign anything ,he wants out.As for the rest,what ever.

  22. This is what SJWs actually think being a white man is like

    Now, me,I found that piece hilarious because of how inaccurate it was.It's so completely off base that it is just funny, but I think that the humor isn't supposed to come from being wildly off base-this is Poe's Law turf for me.



    Arriving five minutes after the posted closing time at my local Best Buy,I interrupt a female sales associate while she rings up someone else and deliver a nearly hour-long lecture on which Blu-Ray player is best for watching streaming HD video of college lacrosse games.She and her non-white customer listen patiently, nodding their heads meaningfully at some of my stronger points.Leaving without buying anything,I am offered membership in their Preferred Purchasers Discount Club and handed a complimentary bag of 80" flat-screen televisions.



    Spend two hours circling an elementary school at high speed while announcing,"I have a bomb" through a bullhorn. Asked to pull over by a police officer,I roll down my window and take a swipe at him with a machete.The officer immediately hands me a beer and asks if I think the Mets have a shot at a series win.We bond over our shared love of pornography and cargo shorts.Not once during this interaction am I shot to death.


    1. I can't tell if that's parodying SJWs or not. It's so ridiculous it almost seems like it's making fun of how they think white people act.

      1. It's McSweeney's. It's definitely a parody.

        1. One of my go-to sites.

    2. WTF? I wonder if through all of that, the writer even once thought about putting a space after periods.

      1. Put two spaces after periods, please.

        1. No. But one is nice.

        2. Put two spaces after periods, please.

          ^This. Pretty please, with sugar on top.

      2. Oh, that was me. Making it fit the character limit.

    3. McSweeny's is definitely a parody site. Now, it may be parody from a biased source, like what's going on now with The Onion and Hillary Clinton. But it's definitely parody.

    4. That may in fact be a parody of what SJWs *think*

      the whole millenial-attempt-at-social-justice-humor thing is always supposed to be "so facetious you're not sure what is intended"...and therefore its funny!

      Sort of like 'Cracked' and their whole 'OMG EVERYTHING IS RACIST' humor. Its funny because its stupid, even though they kinda-sorta-actually-think-its-true? Like, "The Crew of the Firefly Were the Bad Guys"

      they combine absurdism with their genuinely-overly-serious-and-smugness, and its a win-win from their POV

      1. I still haven't been able to find out: Was there a specific reason or incident that marks when 'Cracked' became super SJW? Did they hire a new editor, get bought by someone, what?

        It just seemed in the last 2 years that they went super proggie. The first articles I remembered involved Gamergate, but it may predate that.

        1. No idea. I used to read Cracked all the time, but I stopped when they started getting real politicky. It would have been one thing if they'd been even-handed, but it was pretty clearly SJW-themed.

          1. Oh, come now, Riven.

            "6 Ways the Tech Industry Treats Women like Shit (and why it's bullshit)" was a really neutral look at the tech industry. And the follow up, "6 Excuses That Male Nerds Make So They Don't Have to Cut off their own Dicks- and why they are hilariously Wrong" was even better!

            1. Hey, we came by a while back, but you weren't working. The bartender overserves. I like it.

              1. I ended up being let go of there a few months back. Managed to get a job through my school though- it's a totally an utter BS sit at a desck thing but it pays better than the old position so I can't complain. I'm glad I did it and I might do it again, but working at a restaurant did get to me after a bit.

                The place does have really good burgers.

                1. "it's a totally an utter BS sit at a desk thing"

                  You work with John?

                  1. Oh, Playa, I know you are setting me up for a joke about how John really works under the desk, wink wink, but I'm going to pass up the opportunity. I'm trying to grow as a person and shit.

            2. I'm convinced that you must actually help them come up with the titles for their articles. Those were so close to reality I wasn't sure if you were kidding.

        2. "Was there a specific reason or incident that marks when 'Cracked' became super SJW? Did they hire a new editor, get bought by someone, what?"

          HM pointed to "David Wong" as being the locus of everything fucking retarded about them.

          He here addresses the nature of their retardation in a Q&A session =

          Q: "'Why is your content so political all of a sudden? is it because your company is a big evil pile of fuck?"

          A: we've actually been writing about subjects like feminism in pop culture since early 2008, so your memories of a time when we wouldn't touch such a loaded subject must go back to the Bush administration -- an era when the first iPhones were hitting shelves and almost none of the current staff had even heard of the site...

          But more importantly, please remember that all content is political. If you write about pop culture and never write about, say, racial stereotypes in movies, then you're making a strong political statement (specifically, that racial stereotypes in movies aren't worth noticing or worrying about). Every word you fail to say conveys an opinion on some subject. "

          there's more, and it gets stupider.

          1. there's more, and it gets stupider.

            This absolutely needs to be the summation every time someone around here posts a link, or comments from another site, etc.

            1. I had a professor in college who said the Anglo Saxon Chronical could be summed up in the sentence "And then things got worse".

              Some day in the future a college professor will describe early 21st Century America as "and then things got stupider".

              1. "Some day in the future a college professor will describe late 20th Century America as "and then things got stupider"."

                My version.

          2. But more importantly, please remember that all content is political. If you write about pop culture and never write about, say, racial stereotypes in movies, then you're making a strong political statement (specifically, that racial stereotypes in movies aren't worth noticing or worrying about). Every word you fail to say conveys an opinion on some subject.

            "The personal is the political"

          3. Holy shit. That's Orwellian. "Not talking about something = GUILTY"

          4. What really sucks is that David Wong originally had a slightly conservative bent. Read some of the original articles from his original site, Pointless Waste of Time before it was acquired by Cracked and you'll see. There were some decent funny screeds there.

            I frequented the PWOT forums a lot, and it just started going downhill. David Wong slowly became more and more unhinged lefty. He was always kind of a blowhard know-it-all- Whether his view was right or left, he would tend to browbeat people as dishonest if they didn't agree with him. But I am not sure when he started full on embracing leftist tripe.

          5. "all content is political. If you write about pop culture and never write about, say, racial stereotypes in movies, then you're making a strong political statement"

            Remember when George W. BOOOOSH said, "you're either with us, or you're with the terrorists" and "progressives" lost their shit over it? Here's one of them using the same line, but swap "terrorists" with "racist oppressors".

        3. I found Cracked because Seanbaby used to write for them. Seanbaby won my eternal love with his site fatchicksinpartyhats.com

          1. Seanbaby's Man Comics were actually worth wading through the fever swamp of Cracked for. Absolutely hilarious.

    5. You realize that McSweeney's is a comedy site? This is like wondering if an Onion article really means it.

      1. No, I get its comedy Stormy. But it could be coming from two directions:

        1) It is from an SJW perspective, and this funny because it speaks to a core truth. It isn't accurate, obviously, but in their eyes it is only a slight exaggeration of the truth.

        2) It is a paradoy of SJWs, and makes fun of the them.

        The reason I'm curious is that I got linked to the McSweeny's article from a left wing site. So, either the site doesn't get that this makes fun of their point of view, or Mcsweeny's doesn't intend it to make fun of that point of view. It's not very important, but I am a little curious which it is.

        1. Speaking of comedy sites, I'm fucking done with The Onion. Forever. Fuck them.

          I can't remember who linked the Hilary Clinton "parody" the other day, but it was one of the most insulting things I've ever read. EVER.

          1. I was there at first too, but I am willing to forgive them because since the sale, they have had some anti-Hilary articles. Mostly, though, it's because comedy is hard: I'm willing to let it slide as a one-time misfire. Sometimes, it can be hard to know what is funny before you put it out there, and it's possible the writer of that piece is only friends with pro-Hilary people who are clutching their pearls over her defeat and think it's hilarious.

            They are definitely on a shorter leash, though. If they keep doing that type of article or returning to that joke after the poor feedback, then I'll drop 'em.

            tl;dr- For me, this thing is more of a really bad joke in a stand up's otherwise solid set than Michael Richards yelling the n-word.

            1. Lemme see if I can find it. It wasn't comedy. It was a pro-Hillary piece that was so fucking condescending, and they didn't even try to disguise it.

              1. http://www.theonion.com/articl.....tate-52367

                She's so INSPIRATIONAL!!!! Don't you idiots understand??????

                1. No, I saw it, I just am hoping it's a one-off and not a portent. Comedy writer misfire.Hey, I may be willfully ignorant, but I hope The Onion isn't quite dead yet. If it is, it's good while it lasted.

                2. It was awful. I banned them after that. Je Suis Reason is far more forgiving than me on this one.

        2. Meaning isn't intrinsic.

          A text doesn't have a "One True" single, definitive meaning; rather each reader will interpret it according to their particular context and arrive at what the text means to them.

          So why do you think it's funny? And if you think it's funny for a particular reason, who cares why some left wing website, or even the author thinks it's funny?

          1. what we really need is a poor-mans' Jaques Derrida to po-mo shit up around here.

            1. Two thirds of the comments on this sites are jokes based on references someone couldn't possibly understand unless they've been reading for 10 years, The shit around here's already been po-mo'd to the moon and back.

              1. Every word you fail to say conveys an opinion on some subject.

          2. I don't care; but it does make it EVEN more funny.

            Like, here's a sample comment from the site that linked it:

            Also: Yeah that piece on male privilege didn't make me laugh at all. I hate pieces like this that exaggerate the issue so much that it allows other men to say "well yeah I can clearly see how that would be privilege, but this is totally not my experience! I don't slurp oysters loudly in meetings!". It's pretending to explore your own privilege without exploring it AT ALL.

            They think that the exaggeration is based solely on the superficial details! Oh, you can't write these people!

          3. "Meaning isn't intrinsic"

            Yes it is that's how meaning works. Reality is not up for interpretation.

            1. Correct, reality isn't up for interpretation. But reality also has no meaning, it merely is. Meaning only exists within a particular person's mind, based on their subjective perceptions, memories, and personal inclinations. Not only is meaning up for interpretation, meaning IS necessarily interpretation.

              1. Nope. Words mean something. That's how language works.

                1. What does, say, "racist" mean? Particularly, does it mean the same thing when Tonio calls Irish racist as it does when Cracked.comcalls someone racist?

                2. Words contain shades of meaning, Cyto. That's why one adjective can change a sentence, and synonymous words get interchanged to convey different meanings. The underlying action or thing, however, may be the same, and the word exists to create a perception.


                  "He advanced aggressively."


                  "He advanced purposefully."

                  The first could be from a police report about an officer shooting, but the action the person took may have actually been the latter. Etc. The idea that words have set meanings is BS- they have a range of meanings. So, like, stupid still means something, but it has a range that varies slightly with context.

            2. That's another demerit from the Stalin Youth League for you. One more and you're Out.

  23. My brother-in-law made $7391 last month by waging jihad from his computer in just a few hours a day.

    1. That was supposed to be in response to Gilmore at 4:38.

    2. Oh yeah? Which Hit'n'Run poster is he?

        1. We're all Tulpa socks, Ted.

  24. Does Bernie have a mole at the Washington Post?
    Locked away in federal prison, Jeffrey Sterling is struggling to keep his demons at bay. The former CIA officer whose case came to signify the Obama administration's crackdown on leakers spends his days reading, tutoring fellow inmates and finishing a memoir, which he says he has to write by hand and mail home so his wife can type it.

    "There is no sugarcoating it for me," Sterling said. "I'm in prison."

    Sterling said he wants the public to know that he has "survived with my head held high." But he concedes that he feels low on some days. He was a CIA officer, helping run an operation to sabotage Iranian plans to design a nuclear weapon. Now he's Inmate No. 38338-044 in Englewood, Colo., taking classes on checking and saving accounts to help increase his chances of eventually being released to a halfway house.

    It is especially delicious that the dude is black. So when a black man leaks classified information, he goes to prison. Rules,however, don't apply to the white women.

    Reason won't take the link.

    1. Well, I was just over there and I've been assured that WaPo is in the tank for Hillary. And gawd, don't even go over there today, the commenters are even more retarded than normal.

      1. the commenters are even more retarded than normal.

        That is a bold statement.

        1. I guess all the sane ones, what few there are there, are still at work.

    2. Sterling must read H&R based on his use of the word "sugarcoating".

    3. Wait a second. The guy needs to take lessons on checking and savings accounts?

      1. He doesn't *need* what the classes are teaching.... But, if he attends the classes, the authorities check little boxes in his file that in the long run reduce his sentence.

      2. No, the educational credits count toward release whether you need them or not.

  25. A new poll from Pew shows 51 percent of Americans think that Apple should unlock deceased San Bernardino terrorist Syed Farook's phone to help the FBI. Of the remainder, 38 percent say they shouldn't and 11 percent don't know.

    Somehow not surprising.

    Yet one more reason why rights shouldn't be democratically decided.

    1. Yet another muzzie apologist who doesn't want to make Murika great again.

    2. I don't know why they even take these polls.

      1. For the lulz when they finally ask "Do you have Prince Albert in a can?"

        1. "Is your refrigerator running?"

          1. "Do you have your radio on?"

      2. Poll says 51% of Americans support this oppressive shit. It's a mandate, write up that bill!

        That's why.

    3. I'm surprised it's only 51 percent.

  26. So, I don't know if anyone has seen 538's "Perfect stump speeches" based on poll testing. I don't love everything that site does either, but these were pretty interesting:

    Dem Stump Speech

    Rep Stump Speech

    It's interestingly how softly libertarian the Rep stump speech is, especially on spending, where the speech basically does a version of, "No. Fuck you. Cut spending." So, apparently, a softly libertarian message on a number of economic issues polls quite well with Republicans and they like to hear it, they just don't vote for it. Which isn't per se new, but I think is where this weird divide on the whole "libertarian moment" comes from- voters are saying one thing and doing another and pollsters are going by what they say.

    The second thought I have is how incredibly economically illiterate the Dem stump speech is. Example:

    So here's something we can do to make America work for everyone: We can make sure that every student in this country has the opportunity to get a community college degree for free. And we can make sure that students who do take out loans can get the same low rates the banks get when they borrow money. Why should a student pay more to borrow money than Morgan Stanley?

    1. ^That's a big applause paragraph for a hypothetical Dem presidential candidate. I believe it would do well. And it is so utterly stupid that my brain breaks. The Democratic party has gone "living in the woods, covered in shit, eating locusts" crazy on economic issues.... Man, SS and Medicare blowing up the federal budget is really gonna kick that party in the dick.

    2. "Republicans say there's nothing government can do, as if government is some entity that rules us. But this is a democracy. Government is us. By us and for us. And creating the America we want is up to us."

      They 100% nailed the idiocy of the Democratic stump speech.

      1. The creepy "Forward" chant that the crowd does at the end is also a fun bit.

        And by fun, I mean holy shit its a strange combo of Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia that creeps me the fuck out.

        Look, I'll vote for Johnson... but I think that I can live with 4 years of Rubio more than whatever the Dems have on offer right now. That party needs to be in the wilderness for a while.

        1. Rubio wont be the nominee though.

          1. He has a better chance than Cruz, and Trump would lose in an H2H contest with either of Cruz or Rubio.

            1. The polls say otherwise.

              1. Not this one.


                It's not the link I wanted but close enough.

    3. Morgan Stanley has collateral and pays the money back.

      I don't think I'd loan money to anybody who doesn't understand that.

      1. Honestly, it's such a pussy way to make a point.

        Just say, "I don't believe that a student should pay more than Morgan Stanley to get a loan, and will change the law to reflect that belief!" Because, that's stupid, but it just means that you're stupid and reached a wrong conclusion, or are a populist demagogue, not that you are an ignorant fuck wit.

    4. From the Republican speech:

      "And this administration's confused and irresolute foreign policy has resulted in total incompetence on the question of Syrian refugees. Clearly the United States can't sit by and do nothing while families flee the savage violence of ISIS and the Assad regime. Many of our ancestors fled violence when they came to these shores ? think of persecuted religious minorities in the 1600s or Jews seeking refuge from Western Europe in the 1920s and '30s ? so we're not going to turn a blind eye to these people."

      This isn't nearly anti-Muslim enough for the Republican electorate.

      1. Yeah, although I think there may actually be a way to insert the word "Christian" in there and play up the prosecution of X-tian refugees in the ME in a way that pleases the R base.

      2. Yeah, that might be 538 projecting.

      1. Or "Hey, fuckers"?

        1. I like it. Imagine a meeting of H&R posters. Hey, how you doin, you rat fucking shitlord bastards!

          1. "Hey, wanna-be fuckers!"

            1. "Sup, bitches?"


      2. Using 'yinz' is a macro-aggression.

    1. I was waiting for that to happen, but seriously, what is this- the 70s?

      Are we going to go back to every interview aggressively sticking in the opposite gender pronoun?

      Deacon Jones believed in such equality

    2. I still use that when meeting with clients. One group I'm typically in, I'm the only guy, everyone else is female and I always say 'hey guys'.

      I'm getting away with microgressions, cause privilege! Bwahhahhaaahhhaa, take that SJWs!

    3. That poster is in a modernized version of the Roman alphabet. Rome was known for slavery, patriarchy, and imperialism. Why does the person who made the poster love slavery, patriarchy, and imperialism so much?

    4. But what if you say it in a really feminine way?

      1. Then we'll know you've finally come out.

    5. That's why I stick with "yo".

    6. I always greet my workforce with "What up, my niggaz?" It's funny because they're all illegal immigrant Albanian orphans who don't speak a word of English.

  27. Pressing political question: "Why is Ben Carson still running for president?"

    Why not? I'd run, too, if it gave me access to a national stage where I could spout my political views. Reason #2 is that in the year where anything can happen, it seems foolish to drop out until you have to.

    1. Plus he's finally got the spotlight on an issue that is very important - to him, personally, as well as the entire field of archaeology: how much grain could fit in a pyramid?

      1. You got it. Just like Christie is running for AG, Carson is running to be the head of the Dept of Agriculture.

    2. And if we ever build more pyramids, who else is going to make sure the proper grain storage specs are met?

  28. I don't follow bitcoin much so I was pleased to see it's doubled in value in the past few months.The day it starts to be seen as a safe haven, will be a very good day.

    1. It's slowly happening. Ethereum is also making a huge leap in value. MaidSafe will release a minimum viable product in the coming weeks. I need to buy up.

      1. "I need to buy up."

        A month or so past you refused a friendly bet here because you said you didn't have the extra money.

        What are you going to do now ?

        Invest $5 in these up and coming technologies?

        Be sure and spread your investments around so as to absorb your $1.25 loss in case one of them is a loser due to incompetent management.

        1. Probably more like $100, and this is a better use of money than indulging the trailer trash that infests this place. The real mystery is why you care.

    2. According to Ryan Cooper mentioned in the AM links...bitcoin was and is dead. State can declare victory. This was 2 months ago

    3. According to Ryan Cooper mentioned in the AM links...bitcoin was and is dead. State can declare victory. This was 2 months ago

  29. Bernie Sanders didn't earn a paycheck until he was 40.

    Don't try to tell me that kook isn't a complete loser. Furthermore, I would argue that he's not really earning a paycheck right now.

    1. There is a Forbes Article about that that came out about a month ago. The guy is a bum. He spent his entire adult life sponging off of people and ranting about socialism. He is the biggest loser ever to run for President in this country, and that includes Lyndon LaRouche. Loser is the only way to describe him.

      1. And he's almost ready to beat Hillary. I keep telling people he's a lame candidate, it's just how awful Hillary is that's making him look good.

        1. I don't think there is any way the media is dragging her sorry ass over the line. I don't care who the GOP nominates. She is just an awful candidate.

          1. Did you see that recent NYT article where they basically said it's impossible now for Bernie to win? They are tied at 51 delegates each and Bernie can't win? Seriously, the media will drag her ass over the line no matter what it takes.

            1. They will get her the nomination but not the Presidency.

            2. Oh come on. The voters of Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada have spoken. That's got to be at least half the population of the united states.

            3. In DemOp land, tied at 51 delegates with Hillary is a statistical loss.

            4. I think Clinton underestimated how bad it looks in the modern Democratic party to rely on the South to push you over the top. The Democrats have basically written off those whole states as inbred, idiot hicks- the only reason they don't say it is all the black voters in those states, who they don't respect either.

              There may actually be a boost for Bernie if Hilary's main support is perceived to be southern Dems.

          2. She is awful. Obmama is President because she was a bad candidate. I'm suprised that a)Other democrats didn't see this and jump in the race b) of those who did it's Sanders who is making a race of this and not one of the other two Democrats who did enter.

          3. Well, the one issue is that the Clinton's are trying to go back to their dirty tricks book, but it seems that the internet has made it much harder.

            Look at the backlash against Steinem. Look at this BS "English-Only" thing that is going to make Dorothy Huerrata piss away her good will. The Boomers are going to sacrifice themselves for Hilary, and even if she wins the nom, the Democratic party is going to have a nasty primary fight in 2018 and 2020 (yes, even if Hilary wins, there is going to be someone who runs to the left of her in 2020. Mark my words).

            It's like Christmas has come early, people. I was waiting for a good ol' Democratic party collapse, and it seems it may be finally happening. Hopefully, they will get their asses kicked for a while and remember what Clinton did in the 90s and eventually moderate.

          4. Given your past history of political predictions, this leaves me fairly confident Hillary can win.

            1. So when she doesn't, do you promise to never come on here again? Or if you do, change your name to "President Hillary"?

              And if Trump wins, maybe grow up and start to work on being less delusional?

              1. Oh Christ the irony....the lack of awareness...

                How President Romney's first term going John?

        2. And he's almost ready to beat Hillary

          This too, shall pass.

        3. No he's not. Hillary is going to crush him.

      2. Someone here, a few days ago, linked to a cartoon which shows Bernie Sanders and a supporter. The view is from the back of the two folks. Bernie Sanders has an arm, apparently around the supporter's back, but is actually dipping down so that Bernie can steal the supporter's wallet.

    2. So Bernie is your average millenial? No wonder they love him.

      Real life is going to be like that movie Stepbrothers from now on.

      1. At least they have boats and hoes.

          1. His supporters would take that seriously. I had one of them tell me today that he knows Fox lies about everything because Jon Stuart said so. They're retarded.

            1. I drove past a billboard advertising Olliver's show by "hilariously" using quotes of people who slammed him (Trump, etc.)

              One of them, though, was from the Wall Street Journal, saying that watching him made people dumber.... and people think this advertises for the program. This is what America has come from. Now, a version of this has existed on the right, but the left is also embracing it (or always had a part that embraced it that is getting louder and more numerous).

              I think, in some ways, the existence of Fox News is an affront to certain left wingers. If it exists, it's because the mainstream media isn't being liberal enough. We need even more partisan media until all conservative views are stamped out! That's why they aren't content with controlling the media- it's not absolute control and for some of them, that is a bridge too far.

          2. How about seeing him lick white dog shit?

            1. White means it's old, right? I'd rather it be fresh.

              1. Is it? I thought it had to do with diet...

              2. The old peanut butter dilemma. Creamy or crunchy.

        1. Just watching them drive their proggie parents into madness is enough for me.

      2. Should ask those white millenials since they have white privelege and born with a silver spoon in mouths why they need free college and free healthcare and 15 min wage

    3. I would argue that he's not really earning a paycheck right now.


  30. Chronologically significant female mammal calls out other whiny chronologically significant female. Not sure if either was poled recently (because I knew you assholes would ask that)


    1. Trust me when I say, there are far more embarrassing things in life than working at a restaurant, washing dishes, or serving burgers at a fast food window. And one of them, without one shred of doubt, is displaying your complete lack of work ethic in public by asking for handouts because you refuse to actually do work that at the ripe old age of 25 that you think is unworthy of your witty tweet creating time.

      You wanted to write memes? Darling, you just became one.

      I like her.

      1. Since it's probably not clear which one of the female mammals I like, I like the author of the article Mr. Lizard linked to.

        1. The author looks pretty sexy in the picture. I like her a lot.

          1. Icing on the cake.

            1. She apparently wrote a sex book as well


              Where has this woman been all of my life?

              1. Working hard as a waitress, apparently.

              2. Plus she doesn't have a potato nose like Talia Jane.

          2. She seems a little lean for you eh?

            *drops of branch and skitters under a rock*

    2. "You wanted to write memes? Darling, you just became one."


    3. It seems like a lifetime ago I sat in my sophomore year apartment crying about how I would never again be able to relate to Baba O'Riley or Scenes from an Italian Restaurant.

      This fucks up my narrative that there's no hope for the younger generation.

    4. I was offered a cocktail waitressing shift at my restaurant. Sure, it was on the worst night of the week. Sure, I had never made a drink before. But it would potentially be an extra $200 to $400 increase a week. I jumped at it.

      See? And people say a degree in English and Literature doesn't pay.

      BTW, this is a great article. Simple advice, spot on. Put in the hours, work hard, be a valued employee and voila the opportunities start to show up.

      1. Yep. I'm 32, and post-2008 I've had to work overnights for 12 bucks an hour, temp jobs for 14, landscaping for a little more, and cable pulling for 18 before I was able to land a position that led to my current decent job. And that's with an accounting degree.

  31. "Jeb Bush's extremely expensive presidential campaign was a miserable failure, but his consultants probably aren't even pretending to cry on the way to the bank."

    Ya know, if your agency can't pitch the damn product, maybe you needed to offer something other than an Edsel.

  32. The most accurate model of global warming has been updated by Dan Pangborn on his blog.

    Warmists ain't gonna like it. Sunspots and ocean oscillations explain 97%, CO2 at most the other 3%.

    The match [of the model during the period]1895-2012 has R2 = 0.9717 which means that 97% of average global temperature anomaly measurements are explained [by sunspots and ocean oscillations]. All factors not explicitly considered (such as unaccounted for residual (apparently random) variation in reported annual measured temperature anomalies, aerosols, CO2, other non-condensing ghg, volcanoes, ice change, etc.) must find room in that unexplained 3%. Note that a coefficient of determination, R2 = 0.9717 means a correlation coefficient of 0.9856.

    1. Not for nothing, but R2 has nothing to do with "explained" but only refers to model fitting, ie correlation.

      As we all know, correlation is not causation.

      All other factors considered, a better correlated model is a better model.

      1. Read the link. This model has only two major factors - and does NOT include CO2. What it shows is that you get a much better fit to the actual temperature data with this model than all those 103 others that rely on CO2 and some magical forcings.

        That's why I called it 'the most accurate model'. From this one can make predictions based on future sunspot data and that should provide some additional evidence of causation, provided it fits. We all know how well all the warmist models fit.

    2. Well, that is unexpected.

  33. Hey, Playa, is there any troll that you could goad into making another stock-based bet with you? One involving Twitter?

    I could use the schadenfreude, buddy.

    1. Speaking of the stock based bet, the troll didn't pay, correct?

      1. He's a still, uh, moving money around and, uh, not liquid.

        1. I laughed. Thankfully I wasn't drinking anything at that moment.

      2. He claims he has paid. I don't know how to prove he hasn't. Says he has email from Reason or something proving it.

    2. The twitter short is a long shot. Not extremely likely, but if it does play out, I'll clean up.

      My bet with CLVLY was a sure thing. In fact, it went up another 10% in the 3 weeks since the bet ended. I just need a sucker who is really bad with money on the other side of the table. Feel free to nominate anyone.

      1. Cytoxic. If ever there was someone who knows just enough about finance to be dangerous and combines that ignorance with a 12 year old's sense of smug certainty, it is him.

        1. That's hilarious. I got my money out of the stock market based on PM's advice, and am quite happy about it. I'd say you would be a good idiot to lose money to PM but the mental institute you're housed at probably doesn't let you handle money or sharp objects.

      2. Is someone suggesting that a website that lets you post some text that other people can receive might not be a multi-billion dollar concept?

        1. Paul, just because the business gives away its product and has no discernible method for creating cash flow doesn't mean it can't turn a profit.

          Saying otherwise is just racist, straight up.

          1. I have a business idea, but I don't want to broadcast it to the world lest someone steal it, so I'll post it here:

            A social networking template site.

            A site that provides tools to allow people to build their own social-networking concept via templates that can be heavily modified by the users. Essentially, the users can build a Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, Instagram type site, that allows SUB users to create THEIR own content. You pay a simple subscription fee based on the number of users you sign up-- that's the revenue model.

            Boom, where my check, bitches?

            1. That is a really great idea. I will go you one better, though sadly my idea won't get either of us rich. How about an open source version of your idea? Make a Linux version of facebook and twitter and let the commons improve it.

              1. Meta-social-networking. However you achieve it...

                You take a percentage of someone else's billion dollar idea, and when the fickle social-networking masses move onto the Next Big Thing, you're the platform for that too.

              2. Zuckerberg gonna put a contract out on you.

          2. Twitter actually has pretty good monetization. The problem is that they are hemorrhaging users. It doesn't matter how good your revenue per user is, if you ain't got users...

  34. Carson thinks his Christian Conservative creeds are going to help him eventually.

  35. First they said we needed more Female Marines....

    then they said, "and what's the deal w/ your tattoo policy?! SEXIST"

    ""A congresswoman from Maine says the U.S. Marine Corps should change tattoo rules she says unintentionally discriminate against female recruits.

    Democratic U.S. Rep. Chellie Pingree wants the rule changed so the Marine Corps can accept 20-year-old Kate Pimental. The Kennebunk woman has a tattoo just below her collarbone.

    Pingree says if a man had a tattoo in the same place, the Marines would accept him because he could cover it with a Marine-issued crew T-shirt. But the only T-shirt available to women in the Marines is a V-neck, which would expose the tattoo."

    I agree its fucking stupid. But for the love of god, must politicians intervene in everything?

    For the record =

    "Pimental's tattoo reads, "Let your smile change the world but never let the world change you.""

    Very gung-hoe

    1. We are entering the era of tattoo discrimination.

    2. "A congresswoman from Maine says the U.S. Marine Corps should change tattoo rules she says unintentionally discriminate against female recruits.

      Huh... because... more women than men have tattoos?

      1. No, because women haz to wear v-necks so you can see the goods.

        1. What are miniskirts, chopped liver?

    3. Very gung-hoe

      What you did there, I saw it.

      Old term for female marine == BAM.

      Broad Ass Marine.

      1. Sonofa - should've hit refresh, Boba.

    4. "Very gung-hoe"

      That thing you did. I see it.

    5. Pimental's tattoo reads, "Let your smile change the world but never let the world change you.

      Which is a nice complement to her "Devil Dogs" and "A Few Good Men" tattoos.

  36. Oregon = Sheriff who tried reasoning with Malheur occupiers now being targeted

    "The Oregon agency that licenses police officers has asked the state attorney general's office to investigate complaints about a local sheriff who met with some of the armed occupiers who seized a national wildlife preserve.

    The Department of Public Safety Standards and Training received more than a half-dozen complaints about Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer, who was elected to the politically conservative county neighboring Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Most filed complaints on the condition that their identities not be revealed.

    One whose name is public accused Palmer of supporting the occupiers and said law enforcement viewed him as a security leak during the nearly six-week-long standoff over federal land policy that ended Feb. 11."

    Seems to me that people sense that some law-enforcement personnel were actually sympathetic to the protesters, and want them all purged. NOT LOYAL TO THE STATE! What if he'd been ordered to kill them all!?

    1. Seems to me that people sense that some law-enforcement personnel were actually sympathetic to didn't want to butcher the protesters out of hand, and want them all purged.

    2. more than a half-dozen complaints

      MORE than 6?!? My God, won't anyone in power listen tothe people?? Why, it could 10, for all we know!

  37. France to Refugees = "You don't have to go home, but you can't stay here"

    As a compromise they offer attractive temporary residences in Shipping Containers.*

    (*pay no attention to the container ships waiting at the nearby ports)

      1. Those are the people they stole valuables from upon their arrival right?

          1. And Denmark in the modern day. They're stealing from the refugees.

    1. "You don't have to go home, but you can't stay here."

      So they're treating them just like family (after a long Thanksgiving weekend)!

    2. I am still waiting for Emma Watson to take up the invitation to go live in one of those camps.

      Man is she an annoying idiot.


        1. She was cute when she was 15. Sadly, she turned into a horse face. That jaw line is brutal.

          1. I am so casting the Expelliarmus curse on you right now.

            1. She cast the Ejacularimus spell on me more than once

              /not really (she's cute, but no cuter than what you can find on your average college campus every day of the week)

              1. She cast the Ejacularimus spell on me more than once

                Damn, I'm never going to be able to see any part of a Harry Potter movie from now on without thinking of that line. Good one.

              2. Did the recipient look anything like this after the spell hit?

                Would have made Harry Potter 6 and 7 a little less boring.

  38. A new poll from Pew shows 51 percent of Americans think that Apple should unlock deceased San Bernardino terrorist Syed Farook's phone to help the FBI.

    While the rest, I assume, are good people.

  39. Secretary of State John Kerry announced that the U.S., Russia, and other countries have agreed to a ceasefire in Syria. The agreement notably does not include ISIS or al-Qaeda.

    Sounds like one of those cease-fires where nobody actually ceases, you know, firing.

  40. Is kagan a socialist?

  41. From the CNN piece about Jason Brian Dalton:

    "The gun, a semi-automatic pistol, according to Getting, seems to match shell casings at the three shooting scenes, he said."


    Did you guys hear that?

    It was a "semi-automatic" pistol.

    When will we finally ban all of these assault weapons?

    1. No one *needs* more than a single action revolver!

      1. If it were a revolver, they wouldn't have pointed it out.

        But "semi-automatic"? OMG! It's an assault weapon!

        An assault weapon AND an Uber driver!!!

        We can't know whether an Uber driver is really safe because they don't belong to a union.

        And these semi-automatics are scary as hell!!!

        The only reasonable solution is to vote for Hillary.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.