UCLA Shooter Had 'Kill List,' Prince's Death an Overdose, Obama Warns Against 'Isolationism': P.M. Links

|

  • "The Sims"
    "The Sims," EA

    According to police, the man who killed a college professor and himself at University of California, Los Angeles, yesterday had a kill list that also contained the name of another person police found dead today in Minnesota. Police believe this other woman was dead before the shooter drove to UCLA, though they're not specifically saying whether they believe the gunman killed her, too, as yet.

  • House Speaker Paul Ryan says he will vote for Donald Trump.
  • The rumors about the circumstances of Prince's death are true: He died of an overdose of opioid painkillers. Expect more handwringing about an "epidemic."
  • One year after the passage of the USA Freedom Act, Yahoo is now able to publicly disclose previously having been administered three National Security Letters (NSLs) from the FBI. These are the letters that demand tech companies hand over communication data (but not content) from particular users and gags the companies so that they can't tell anybody about it.
  • President Barack Obama today told graduating members of the U.S. Air Force Academy not to be "isolationists," by which he no doubt meant the new, dumbed-down version that confuses it with not being "interventionists." The man responsible for permitting drone strikes that have killed children and civilians overseas did, however, warn against what happens when leaders "don't think through the consequences of all our actions."
  • German Chancellor Angela Merkel is begging the British citizenry to vote to remain in the European Union.
  • Gender fluidity comes to The Sims.
  • Ohio is planning to purge voters from the rolls if they haven't cast ballots since 2008.

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

NEXT: Workers Don't Need Government's Help to Earn Higher Wages

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. House Speaker Paul Ryan says he will vote for Donald Trump.

    SURPRISING TURN OF EVENTS

    1. Hello.

    2. OT: Florida Officer-of-the-Year is super into kid-porn; he got convicted and everything. I wonder how long he’ll last in GenPop?

      1. He has that ‘I’m gonna so kid porn hard tonight!’ look.

      2. But I thought photography is not a crime?!

      3. As a Floridian, no I’m not Florida man, I have proposed we change the state motto to, “Florida, You can’t make this shit up”.

        1. Just to be fair, as an Arkansan, I can unequivocally say there are plenty of dumbasses everywhere. You just have more TV stations and newspapers in Florida to cover them.

  2. Ohio is planning to purge voters from the rolls if they haven’t cast ballots since 2008.

    NO BANDWAGONERS

    1. GO PENS!

      1. I think I’d rather the Rangers have won the Stanley Cup than the goddamned Penguins again.

        I wonder if being a fan of the Philly teams is a form of masochism.

        1. I did my time living in Pittsburgh so just let me have this.

          1. Goddammit no. You Pittsburgh people have had all the titles. You don’t deserve any more until we win, like, 10 or so.

            1. Counterpoint: everyone in Philly is an asshole and you deserve your shitty sports teams.

              1. Is it possible for this to be true AND the Penguins never win anything again?

                “Jaded Caps Fan”

              2. I can’t disagree with the asshole part (though I moved away from there a decade ago). But we deserve titles, dammit! New York gets theirs, Boston gets theirs, Pittsburgh gets theirs. Washington doesn’t, but everyone’s happy about that.

                I just want one Super Bowl. One. Is that too much to ask?

                1. And one Stanley Cup and one NBA title to rub in the face of ESPN.

            2. Pittsburgh even won USA Today’s reader’s poll on the best place to have a cheesesteak sandwich in.

        2. Being a Philly fan isn’t a form of masochism, it is the definition of masochism. #bittertears

          1. “Beat me!” pleaded the masochist.
            “No!” said the sadist

            – Norman Mailer

    2. How ’bout aspersions? Can we still cast aspersions?

    3. Ohio is planning to purge voters from the rolls if they haven’t cast ballots since 2008.

      You know who else purged voters?

      1. Citrate of magnesia?

      2. Not some states I can name, even when you tell them you’ve moved.

    4. Hell,in Chicago people born in the 1800’s can still vote.

      1. But can they shoot?

    5. Chicago will make sure their votes are counted though.

  3. House Speaker Paul Ryan says he will vote for Donald Trump.

    And here I expected principles from a guy who’s been in Washington for 20+ years.

    1. You lie!

      1. Your comment- Fact-o-meter: zero Pinocchios

  4. German Chancellor Angela Merkel is begging the British citizenry to vote to remain in the European Union.

    You know who else wanted to bring Limeys into the fold?

    1. Anyone who has ever made a key lime pie?

    2. You know what other German Chancellor wanted to control Britain?

      1. Bismarck?

      2. ?lle of Sussex?

    3. Pirates?

    4. The Roman empire?

    5. Press gangs for the British Navy?

  5. Can someone explain to me how Trump University is any more of a scam than accredited colleges charging $160,000 for a gender studies degree?

    1. Trump U is not a safe space.

    2. Um…hmmm. Trump is a blowhard self-aggrandizing pimple on the rotund buttocks of America. Accredited colleges are bastions of all that is noble and good in the world, thus inspiring higher ideals that we all should strive for. So, they are distinct but not different. Accreditation, I think that’s the key here. Top men.

    3. School loans are the scam we perpetrate together.

      1. We owe it to our young people, and our young people owe it to us.

    4. Just asking that makes you a racist, cis-gendered HATER!

      But we already knew that.

    5. Can someone explain to me how Trump University is any more of a scam than accredited colleges charging $160,000 for a gender studies degree?

      This is Irish’s dog whistle for Black Studies. We see right through you, “Monahan.”

      1. Are you saying you heard that racist dog whistle?

        1. Woof.

        2. #blackdogsmatter

    6. A gender studies student is well-prepared for their chosen career of being a shrill, narrow-minded harpy and they are paid handsomely in self righteousness

    7. “charging $160,000 for a gender studies degree?”

      Kind of off your main topic, but…

      This is one of those things that the “free college” crowd has to answer for. If college were made “free” (e.g. at taxpayer expense), what kind of measures would be in place to ensure that people aren’t just wasting taxpayer money by getting a Ph.D in LGBTQAIWXYZ Studies? They usually don’t have an answer for this.

      1. “what kind of measures would be in place to ensure that people aren’t just wasting taxpayer money by getting a Ph.D in LGBTQAIWXYZ Studies?”

        I think you are missing the point. The purpose of “free” college is to allow students to postpone maturity as long as possible with as little personal cost as possible. A PhD in something useless is the whole point.

      2. If Bernie were to actually get the nomination, I think a good attack ad would be the video of that fat SJW shaking and screaming (jigglypuff?) with a simple, “Bernie Sanders wants you – the American Tax Payer – to pay for Xe to get a degree in Gender Studies.”

        I doubt a single Berntard has thought about the obvious restrictions on the curriculum if and when the government assumes 100% of the funding for a university. They cannot seem to put two and two together, despite being just graduated from an institution with those very same restrictions.

    8. “charging $160,000 for a gender studies degree?”

      Kind of off your main topic, but…

      This is one of those things that the “free college” crowd has to answer for. If college were made “free” (e.g. at taxpayer expense), what kind of measures would be in place to ensure that people aren’t just wasting taxpayer money by getting a Ph.D in LGBTQAIWXYZ Studies? They usually don’t have an answer for this.

  6. Vancouver homeless count reveals 10-year high

    The City of Vancouver’s most recent homeless count shows the highest number of people without a home in 10 years ?” despite the governing municipal party’s promise to end street homelessness by 2015.

      1. HARPER’S FAULT!

        And somehow, indirectly Bush.

    1. “despite the governing municipal party’s promise to end street homelessness by 2015.”

      Obo is gonna rid the world of nukes! He said so.

    2. Are 50% of the homeless female? yanno because it’s 2016….

  7. Did Prince fry his liver from the acetaminophen in the Percocet?

    1. He was rich enough to afford a doctor who would give him the good stuff, I’m sure.

    2. Fentanyl, apparently.

  8. Out of all the problems this country faces, and there are a lot of them, I wouldn’t place “isolationism” in the top 100.

  9. “German Chancellor Angela Merkel is begging the British citizenry to vote to remain in the European Union.”

    Remain in the EU and one day your great country can also arrest comedians at the behest of foreign dictators

    1. I like her threat that if you leave, you won’t be able to negotiate as well as lose access to a free market. Either your market is free or it isn’t. Being a member in a club shouldn’t affect that.

    2. ….and spend tens of billions of your hard-earned Euros to fund Greek government employee pensions.

  10. The rumors about the circumstances of Prince’s death are true: He died of an overdose of opioid painkillers.

    Fentanyl2nite.

    1. Classic! Martin Mull and Fred Willard at their best.

      1. JESUS GOD I LOVE THAT SHOW. GENIUS.

      2. Of course we don’t condone that alleged incident with an underage girl in Florida…

    2. Fentanyl2nite

      When you die, we’re going to examine your brain. Fentanyl from Fernwood? [claps]

      BTW, I have you scheduled for next week. Is Wednesday good?

  11. Ohio is planning to purge voters from the rolls if they haven’t cast ballots since 2008.

    This is why there are no libertarian women? May be getting my memes confused here…

    1. Anorexia comes to democracy.

      1. Don’t you mean bulimia?

        1. I guess so. I’m not sure because I’ve worked on the bingeing part my whole life — I haven’t gotten around to practicing the purge bit.

  12. “According to police, the man who killed a college professor and himself at University of California, Los Angeles, yesterday had a kill list that also contained the name of another person police found dead today in Minnesota. Police believe this other woman was dead before the shooter drove to UCLA, though they’re not specifically saying whether they believe the gunman killed her, too, as yet.”

    That would be one hell of a coincidence if he didn’t do it

    1. It was Ted Streleski.

  13. Gender fluidity comes to The Sims.

    I don’t know what I shall find more grating and obnoxious: the eventual self-congratulatory odes penned by the SJWs for this non-issue or the eventual stentorian jeremiads penned by the CJWs for this non-issue.

        1. See, this is why Ted S. is classy. He could have gone with the low-hanging fruit of The Room, but he took the time to reference classic cinema.

          1. Every time I watch that scene, I think of George Costanza imitating his mother. “George! You could fill Madison Square Garden!”

            There’s also no point in watching the movie after that scene.

          1. Poor Heoric Mulatto….

        2. Watched The Doorway to Hell with James Cagney the other night.

          1. You should watch Sinners Holiday too if you get the chance. Early Cagney *and* early Joan Blondell.

      1. If one were to identify as “gender fluid” could one receive cheap drinks on ladies night?

        1. No, but you get its level checked for free at the gas station.

        2. Are you aware if you’re buying them for yourself?

      2. Okay, I finally had to look-up this “term for made-up bullshit”. The official definition, i.e. the first one that pops up on a Google search, is “a gender which varies over time. A gender fluid person may at any time identify as male, female, neutrois, or any other non-binary identity, or some combination of identities.”

        How do feminists square this with the notion that gender is just a social construct?

        1. It’s a social construct when they’re mad, and an individual construct when they’re happy.

          1. But they’re always unhappy about something…

        2. They can’t. Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists (this is an actual thing) are the only ones with a consistent line on this. They think trans people are just nuts and hate transwomen for allegedly being men who invade female spaces.

          More traditional feminists are completely schizo on this issue. I saw someone on twitter the other day claim that transwomen are men “born with female brains.” This person’s bio said they’re a feminist, so I asked them how you can believe there’s such a thing as a female brain without destroying the feminist arguments about gender equality. After all, if male and female brains are different enough that it can change your gender identity, surely it could have other impacts which would mean men and women are too biologically different to ever achieve true equality.

          Feminists are very confused by this issue, except the radicals who hate trans people

          1. Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists

            Are they engaged in TERF battles?

            1. The only reason I became a nullo was to piss off the Nullo Exclusionary Radical Feminists (who I envied because of their super cool acronym).

              Seriously, given the constant agitation for full rights for new groups of deviants, I wonder if there is a way I can get in on the ground floor of the nullo movement.

          2. They think trans people are just nuts and hate transwomen for allegedly being men who invade female spaces.

            You know who else…

            Delicious to contemplate an uneasy alliance between Soconz and TERFs over this. Heh.

          3. They think trans people are just nuts and hate transwomen for allegedly being men who invade female spaces.

            More so than transmen who are just female traitors trying to grab some of that male privilege?

        3. Neutrois? Is that pronounced like a French word?

        4. Also, according to leftists whether you’re gay or not is determined by genetics but nothing else is determined by genetics. Therefore, there cannot possibly be natural differences between men and women. All differences are social constructs, except the differences related to who you want to bone which are completely genetic.

          So your genetics determines who you want to fuck, but has no further impact upon how you think. Not quite sure I agree with their logic.

          1. ^This. But (unless this has changed) it’s more gestational hormones (the mother’s genetics) rather than the genetics of her child.

            Leftists – those who demand that evolution by natural selection be taught in schools, and then doing everything in their power to deny and thwart it.

            1. But (unless this has changed) it’s more gestational hormones (the mother’s genetics) rather than the genetics of her child.

              This depends on the individual (surprise!). For men the strongest indicator by far is fraternal birth order. But it’s all wild speculation about conditions not known to exist and/or poorly understood/measured.

              1. There’s only like 25% twin concordance. It’s not directly genetics or hormones from mom

            2. it’s more gestational hormones (the mother’s genetics)

              Ruth, I always told you you’re too soft on that kid and LOOK AT HIM NOW.

              *heaves plate of spaghetti at wall*

      3. I want to share a beer with her father.

    1. You don’t have to read any of those, bro.

      1. That’s part of the game, Tonio.

        You click any and all links provided.

        1. Nuh-uh, I know what sickos you guys are…

        2. I hate you. /vaper

        3. But you’re GOING OF TOPIC!!!!!!

      1. No, THIS is how you play The Sims.

        1. I’d click that link but I’ve already got a bad case of the giggles. That one sends me over the edge, man.

  14. The Republican National Committee (RNC) on Thursday released classified nondisclosure agreements signed by a pair of Hillary Clinton’s State Department aides in which they promised to protect classified information.

    The release of the documents from Jacob Sullivan and Bryan Pagliano comes hours before Clinton is set to deliver a major national security address attacking presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, and appear to be designed to undercut her claims to be the most responsible steward of American power.

    Emphasis added. It would be great if she made that statement in public and was greeted with uproarious laughter and boos.

    1. We finally get an end to the charade that emails are classified by markings and not content. At least, hopefully.

  15. …Yahoo is now able to publicly disclose previously having been administered three National Security Letters (NSLs) from the FBI.

    Only three because, you know, no one uses Yahoo for anything.

    1. Didn’t Sarah Palin have a Yahoo! email account that was hacked?

      1. Yes, and the Dems criticized her roundly for using a private email for official business. Memory hole.

        1. I thought she was using it for party business, not Governor business.

    2. We used to until they turned their news page into People.

    3. Uses for yahoo:

      1) Fantasy Football

      That is all.

      1. Another use for Yahoo is the e-mail address I’ve had there since 1997 that’s used whenever I have to give my e-mail address to a person or site who I don’t actually want to contact me.

        1. ^This. My phone recently updated its software and somehow my Yahoo account got linked to it. Before killing the Yahoo Mail app off I noticed I had over 50,000 unread e-mails in the account.

          1. Yeah, and now the “upgraded” Yahoo Mail phone app logs you in automatically, so whoever has your phone can see all your emails. I deleted it.

    1. Why? The gorilla would just protect her.

    2. I, for one, applaud her commitment to academic rigor.

    3. When I originally heard the story that the prof was shot over grades, I was sure my Statics prof was at UCLA. That sonofabitch. Minus 1 point for every mistake. God help you if you dropped a minus sign early in a long problem. Also, he was OCD about starting on time. He nearly lost his shit the first day. And then about 10 minutes after class should have started, he started trolling. Fucker. I don’t wish him shot, but I do wish a painful STD on him.

  16. He died of an overdose of opioid painkillers. Expect more handwringing about an “epidemic.”

    Heroic Mulattos hardest hit.

    1. A famous musician dying of a overdose is ‘natural causes’ in my book.

      1. My favorite Prince song.

  17. The man responsible for permitting drone strikes that have killed children and civilians overseas did, however, warn against what happens when leaders “don’t think through the consequences of all our actions.”

    Well, he is an expert on not thinking through the consequences of his actions.

    1. Let’s re-invade Libya to bring order to the nation.

      1. It’s GOTTA work one of these times!

  18. Bank of America has been able to reduce a multi-billion dollar mortgage fraud penalty imposed by the Justice Department by giving millions of dollars to liberal groups approved by the Obama administration.

    Awesome. What was supposedly supposed to be a serious legal issue has been turned into just another classic, standard issue Chicago-style shakedown. What a bunch of punks.

    1. Nice balance sheet you have there. Be a shame if something bad happened to it.

    2. What scares me, seriously, is that they don’t even pretend anymore. When this kind of crap is out in the open, it’s a sign that we’ve lost, and the powerful and the government have won. The game is over. Of course, when Trump is considered by many to be the lesser of two evils, the game has been over for quite some time.

      1. Given two evils, one is bound to be the lesser. For example Hitler vs. Stalin. America chose one.

        1. Vote Johnson. The least of three evils!

        2. Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos?

          1. Dumb ass. You shoulda gone with Kang.

      2. straight up money laundering, is what this is.

        Signed off on, I note, by a federal judge.

        Yup. Its game over for America as anything other than a corrupt crony capitalist/socialist state. Rule of law, gone. The experiment in limited government, over.

    3. Jesus Christ.

    4. Um…wow. *shakes head* WOW

    5. Direct consumer relief, on the other hand, such as forgiving delinquent loans, earns the banks at best only $1 of credit for each dollar it spends.

      Not that I necessarily think debtors are entitled to relief, but the left needs to get pounded for this. They won’t, but they should.

  19. Facial recognition will soon end your anonymity

    A new app called FindFace, recently released in Russia, gives us a glimpse into what this future might look like. Made by two 20-something entrepreneurs, FindFace allows anybody to snap a photo of a passerby and discover their real name ?” already with 70% reliability.

    “Burqas! Get your burqas here!”

    1. Heinlein dealt with masks for anonymity in I Will Fear No Evil, though not because of cell cameras (which he didn’t foresee).

      1. Did he foresee the masks being made illegal?

        1. It’s not a mask, it’s a chemtrail inhalation barrier.

  20. Trump must have taken Paul Ryan out on his 3rd date…time to put out.

    1. I’m guessing Ryan got some internal polling on his primary race that made him realize that undercutting the presumptive Republican nominee was not playing well with Republican voters.

      God, but I hope he loses.

  21. How ingenious UCLA students used their belts and chairs to secure the doors during terrifying murder-suicide gun attack

    They thought they were going to get got, so it is hard to mock them, other than the fact that someone knew to Tweet and Instagram their creations.

    1. What was more terrifying was the small army that descended on campus, making innocent passers-by kneel on concrete, raise their hands and have their backpacks searched, when a few minutes’ investigation could have revealed that the threat was over.

      1. Los Angeles Strong!

    2. Tying power cables and stacking furniture is what passes for ingenious these days?

      We as a society truly are fucked.

  22. Speaking of Obama’s graduation address:

    F-16 crashes just minutes after performing flyover at the Academy

    Man, if that ain’t some kinda omen…

    1. Actually, perhaps scarier than that.

    2. Apparently a Blue Angel also went down in Tennessee today.

      Thanks Obama.

    1. Recep Tayyip Erdogan is doing this all wrong. He’s supposed to be the President of the country of Turkey, but instead he decided to adopt the looks and brains of a turkey.

    2. And this is the thanks they get for arresting German folks who insult that shitty Erdogan?

      When will Germans – nay, all countries – learn to stop APPEASING!

  23. Obama to airforce graduates: “Always remember to get out there and kill. Kill a lot. Kill often. After all, why the hell else did you go here?”

  24. Judging from the picture “gender fluid” means wearing funny clothes and haircuts.

    1. You have it down Pat.

      1. Nice.

    2. It means being a weirdo which is okay. Nothing wrong with being a weirdo.

      The problem is that these weirdos, like all modern weirdos, think they’re entitled to all sorts of shit by dint of being weirdos.

      1. all modern weirdos

        Nice band name.

      2. Yeah, that’s pretty much what I’ve been saying. I love weirdos. Most of my friends are weirdos. But being weird should be its own reward.

  25. “Global energy leaders look to nitty gritty of climate accord”
    […]
    “The United States and China both have signed but not yet ratified the climate accord.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/art…..959645.php

    IOWs, there is *NO* accord, just an agreement to keep talking, and just like every other climate ‘accord’.
    Hey, Ron! Try Harris Steak House while you’re here…

  26. Ohio is planning to purge voters from the rolls if they haven’t cast ballots since 2008.

    The Democrats are proud and no longer wish to keep their corruption closeted.

  27. President Barack Obama today told graduating members of the U.S. Air Force Academy not to be “isolationists,” by which he no doubt meant the new, dumbed-down version that confuses it with not being “interventionists.” The man responsible for permitting drone strikes that have killed children and civilians overseas did, however, warn against what happens when leaders “don’t think through the consequences of all our actions.”

    I’m tired of this guy’s okie-doke.

    1. Reminded me of this.

    2. The man responsible for permitting drone strikes

      Oh, if only he had read about it in the paper! If only the czar knew…

      Let’s try that again: The man who ordered targeted murders, including those of two American citizens, using drones…

  28. MacArthur Foundation Will Award $100 Million for Solution to a Global Problem

    Let’s comment-source this. My contribution (other than coming up with the idea, for which I expect to receive 67% of the prize), is to throw a bang into the foundation’s president.

    1. It did not place limits on what kind of problems should be addressed to be eligible for the award, which will be given every three years.

      Gentlemen, we have a project.

    2. Does it specify which global problem?

      (Number 3 will shock you.)

      1. This one weird trick for solving global problems.

    3. She looks like she could use it. Let us know how that goes.

    4. Crusty, we’ve had solutions to global problems like poverty and corruption for decades now. Why do you think that they are going to start listening now?

    1. [golf clap]

    2. Really? A hj for a dead gorilla?

      1. An unusual funeral rite, but probably not the strangest.

  29. Reuters Editorial = Rich People Can Have Money, But They Shouldn’t Have Opinions

    – implied = “…..opinions I DONT LIKE, natch; when they share my views? Why, they’re just dandy and enlightened”

  30. Are you paying attention Soave? THIS is how lynx are done – on time and beefy

    1. Lynch likes his links like Winston’s mom likes her men.

    2. Beefy? You’re giving Jesse a chubby.

    3. On time and beefy – just how I like my women!

      1. Okay, maybe that joke was too easy.

    4. Also with at least some attempt at funny alt-text. If today’s doesn’t quite reach the heights we’re used to from Shackford, it’s because he soars so high.

  31. German Chancellor Angela Merkel is begging the British citizenry to vote to remain in the European Union

    Ve know vat is better for you, English peasant! Now, sieg heil to ze great master race!

  32. Libertarians Are Loons

    “The only way for Gary Johnson to succeed is to leave his party behind….

    “…in the land of the freakish candidate, the merely refreshingly odd candidate is king. Johnson looks like a typical politician, with a typical politician haircut, and he exhibits no outwardly evident desire to surround himself with teenage sex workers….

    “…Johnson might be a squishy heretic who wants drivers to continue to obtain driver’s licenses. But he’s the closest thing this party has to a credible, mainstream advocate for its worldview. Johnson’s strong r?sum? and sane, non-Starchild-ish mien might even be enough to get him to 15 percent in the polls during this crazy election cycle…

    “Weld and Johnson walked together down the hotel concourse, headed for their first press conference as a united presidential ticket. They’d won the only real prize at stake in Orlando. No, not the hearts and minds of 1,000 diehard Libertarians. Weld and Johnson don’t need them?”these guys can get free media on their own, and they can get their funding from their rich Republican #NeverTrump pals and maybe even from the Kochs. The only thing they needed from this convention was the ballot access. With that in hand, Weld and Johnson can now leave Starchild, and the butterfly woman, and Darryl Perry’s popping veins, far behind.”

    1. And yet giving the middle finger to the Freedom of Information Act and peddling influence are seen as making you a serious candidate.

    2. I would’ve guessed Salon, although that article would’ve been about a former libertarian who’s now progressive talking about how terrible the party is.

    3. Um, Vermin Supreme is a registered Democrat, running as a Democrat. The author of that story might wish to get their head out of their own ass and try harder.

      1. I think he likes to switch it up. He ran as a Republican in 2008.

    4. Counterpoint: the Democrats chose Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to run their party.

      1. Jesus, dude. I know it’s Slate, but you don’t have to burn them like that. Devastating.

    5. The only way for Gary Johnson to succeed is to leave his party behind….

      One could say the same about Bernie Sander.

      1. Sorry, can’t spell Sanders without SS.

      2. Does Bernie even have a party? He’s not a Democrat, so its not that. Is he actually a member of the Socialist Party or the Communist Party?

        1. I think the “I” after his name in the senate means no. Or does the senate only acknowledge two parties and independents?

    6. This is about as true of the run of the mill delegate as was Ayn Rand’s contention that the LP were a bunch of hippies at the same time the hippy element was complaining about all of us delegates wearing suits and ties at the Los Angeles convention in 1979.

    7. And progressives smell.

      And ruin societies with their shitty, foul smelling policies and small penises and dry vaginas.

    8. Exactly. The media focusing on the weirdos at the convention is just a smoke screen to distract people from the fact that two moderate centrist governors just got on the ballot in 50 states, at a time when 45 percent of the voters are whining that there’s no third choice to Trump-Clinton.

    9. maybe even from the Kochs

      Wow, they’ve never had any association with the libertarian party before.

  33. I saw on the tweetscape that Stacey Dash said she fired a gun to stop an ex-boyfriend from raping her. But she also said something about the transgendered, so I don’t think we’ll get many progressives calling her rape into question. Sad!

    1. Stacy Dash is smoking hot so I won’t question her rape allegations or any uncouth statements about trannies.

      1. Of course it’s hard to tell if that’s serious, sarcastic, or satire.

  34. German Chancellor Angela Merkel is begging the British citizenry to vote to remain in the European Union.

    I can’t imagine that doing anything other that driving up the support for the Brexit camp. It was by Merkel’s explicit invitation that her “refugee” foederati have flooded the EU.

    1. This is the kind of thing that makes one think the EU needs Britain more than Britain needs the EU.

      1. All the talk of punishing them certainly gives that away.

  35. Is this the dawn of bake-me-a-cake libertarianism?

    “…Johnson and Weld at times seem to be working hard to push away one particularly homeless voting bloc that could ally with Libertarians this year: social conservatives. From their rhetoric to their policy proposals, the Libertarian nominees seem to be running against conservatives more than for liberty….

    “The dress-code libertarianism and bake-me-a-cake libertarianism Johnson has embraced isn’t libertarianism at all ?” it’s left-wing social engineering enforced at gunpoint. Coming from Johnson and Weld, it reeks of raw identity politics. The only consistent theme is that religious people are bad….

    “Maybe Weld and Johnson haven’t been paying attention since they left office, and that’s why they conflate “socially liberal” with libertarian. These days, it’s not the conservatives trying to use government to enforce their morality. The Obama administration is trying to compel nuns to provide contraception for their staff. The ACLU is suing to force Catholic hospitals to abort babies. Gary Johnson’s own state fined a Christian wedding photographer for refusing to participate in a gay wedding….

    “At the very moment when social conservatives would be most open to libertarianism, though, the libertarian nominees are running against conservatives.”

    1. The so-cons were never going to vote for Johnson anyway. Neither were the neocons. Running to the center and the disaffected Bernie backers makes the most sense.

      1. “The so-cons were never going to vote for Johnson anyway.”

        I think that’s what’s called a self-fulfilling prophecy.

  36. Ohio is planning to purge voters from the rolls if they haven’t cast ballots since 2008.

    Minnesota does it after only four years and is famous for having the nation’s highest voter turnout year after year after year.

    1. Leave the narrative alone, you meanie!

    2. Having a well-written policy is a lot different than having a whim based on a strategically-chosen year.

    3. We have same-day voter registration, though. Not sure if Ohio does as well.

      1. You also don’t need to provide any racist ID to get your ballot.

    4. Well Big Gay Al Franken wasn’t going to win without that big “turnout”.

    5. I think New York does it after four years, too.

  37. Expect more handwringing about an “epidemic.”

    Don’t have to wait. In the announcement of this finding, NBC news teased their story on the opiod addiction epidemic. Cue talking head doctor being interviewed in front of bookshelf: This is the worst addiction epidemic we have ever seen, by far!

    Really? Or is it maybe not in the top 10 addiction “epidemics” of the last 40 years?

    1. No, OD deaths from prescription painkillers really are way up.

      1. ODs aren’t the problem. Over-prescribing by pill-reliant docs is the problem.

  38. “According to police, the man who killed a college professor and himself at University of California, Los Angeles, yesterday had a kill list”

    I think we should keep the Second Amendment anyway.

    1. Ban kill lists. Problem solved. No one planning to commit murder will risk another year tacked onto their sentence for having a kill list.

      1. There’s a verb loophole, right? How about if we limit the list capacity?

        Mainly, I just wanna be sure my ‘woodchipper list’ is grandfathered in.

    2. Apparently the police prefer Chicago-style random killings.

      1. Chicago-style random killings

        They aren’t exactly random but I’ll cut you some slack since Chicago-style killings makes it sound like they were smothered in cheese.

  39. Occasional Reason contributor Brendan O’Neil has a good EU Referendum article in The Spectator. From the article, the (admittedly lesser) half of my favorite British comedy duo (Mitchell and Webb) decided to reinforce my “separate artist from beliefs or you will never like anything” policy:

    Former comedian turned Observer columnist David Mitchell (like Samson when he had his hair cut, every comic who becomes a broadsheet regular loses his funniness) thinks this referendum is ‘the worst thing Cameron has done to Britain’; it’s a ‘crime’, in fact. Why? Because ‘the issues? are complicated’ and it’s mad to make them the subject of a ‘random vote’ after ‘a frenzied few months’ of discussion. We’re ‘flattering the public’s estimation of its collective wisdom’, he says, when we should simply welcome ‘the intercession of a greater power: not God, but government’.

    1. Better than Peter Cook and Dudley Moore?

      1. Before my time.

        Also, The Holy Trinity of Nigel Hawthorne, Paul Eddington and Derek Fields stays at the Summit, but they didn’t do sketch comedy, so wouldn’t count them anyway.

    2. I have some fond memories of “A Bit of Fry and Laurie” myself.

      Dammit, I want some new Blackadder too.

    3. e’re ‘flattering the public’s estimation of its collective wisdom’, he says, when we should simply welcome ‘the intercession of a greater power: not God, but government’.

      BARF.

  40. I wasn’t around for AM Links, so maybe this was already covered:

    Thief Grabs Beauty Pageant Contestant’s Purse, Discovers Her Hidden ‘Talent’

    Grace, who was visiting Birmingham for a casting call she hoped might secure her a spot in the running for Miss Universe, was walking alone when a man approached her with one thing on his mind. Latching onto her handbag, the mugger assumed he would be more than capable of snatching the purse and taking off without incident. Unfortunately for him, the beauty queen was a secret expert in martial arts.

    In four-inch heels, the pageant model summoned her exceptional talent in Krav Maga…

    Not sure how someone’s a “secret expert in martial arts” though. It’s not like you can tell, unless they have their uniform on or something, but whatever.

    1. It’s the Star of David on the lapel.

    2. Too bad there’s no video.

      1. When the movie comes out, there will be.

    3. Props to her, but I wonder how much of this can be attributed to the girl’s expertise and how much to the fact that, whatever the feminists say, men are generally reluctant to hit a woman, even in self-defense. After all, she didn’t incapacitate the guy, merely “beat the confused mugger until he finally gave up and fled.” He was looking for an easy target, not to pick a fight. So she saved her purse, which is great, and luckily didn’t get her face smashed in by a scumbag.

    4. She was in a beauty pageant? I’m assuming she didn’t win.

    5. I’m a secret expert in almost everything.

      Too bad no one will ever know.

  41. Los Angeles, yesterday had a kill list

    You know who else has a ‘kill list’?

    1. Dave Weigel. What’s that? Wrong list you say?

    2. Honestly, two people isn’t much of a list.

      It’s more like a note.

      He had a kill note.

      1. “The last thing I’d want to do is hurt you, but it’s on the list!”

        Too soon?

      2. Yeah, but it wasn’t just a kill note. It was a kill -9 note

  42. I remember back when the bullshit broke out at Mizzou and the students at Homewood tried to jump onto that stupid train, and started writing demands to the administration. It was in the Sun, not sure if covered by Reason.

    As if Baltimore doesn’t have enough stupid going on already, gotta keep up, can’t fall behind on the stupid train.

    1. Wrong article, derp.

  43. As a follow-up comment to the “bake me a cake libertarianism” article:

    There have been many articles here and elsewhere on the lines of “the Trump nomination is the logical result of [something the author opposes].” So why can’t I make my own contribution to the genre, but with Johnson instead of Trump?

    The “don’t dare call us cosmotarians” have been promoting the following ideas in lockstep with the gay-lib movement:

    (a) The government must recognize same-sex unions as marriages, with all the benefits this entails

    (b) Failure to do (a) is the same as “banning gay marriage.”

    (c) Failure to do (a) is morally equivalent to banning interracial marriage.

    (d) Anyone who is against the gay lib movement is motivated by hatred of gay people.

    (e) This “hatred” is completely irrational.

    (f) It is also theocratic

    (g) Mentioning the fact that the sex-binary definition of marriage which has been held by every civilization, Christian and non-Christian, until a few years ago is just as irrational as justifying polygamy or whatever.

    (h) Every single proposal which, in the existing political situation, has *actually been proposed* to defend the freedom of association of bakers who don’t want to make gay cakes, is unworthy of support for one reason or another.

    In this sort of intellectual climate, can we be surprised that someone who shares the gay-lib goal of compulsory gay cakes gets the LP nomination?

    1. The only thing unsurprising here is your incessant, tedious concern trolling about it.

      1. To be a concern troll, I’d have to profess support for Johnson or the Libertarian Party, but I *don’t* support either of them.

        1. And they would keep getting married whether the government recognizes their ceremonies or not.

          1. Sigh. For the one millionth time: The libertarian position is/ should be that marriage is a religious act, and as such, the government has no business being involved. What government should do is enforced contract law, including domestic partnership laws. Any adult person should be free to sign a domestic partnership contract with whichever, and however many, other adults they choose.
            Nor should any libertarian support using force to violate other peoples’ freedom of association.
            The fact that GayJay has taken a different position is disappointing.

            1. I’ve been discussing what some people in the libertarian movement have been doing, not what they ought to be doing if they were purer.

              1. I know. The comment wasn’t directed at you, but to a theoretical convert reading the comments.

                1. They already know that libertarianism is about “Mexicans, pot and ass-sex.”

    2. What’s irrational about justifying polygamy?

      What’s a gay cake? I believe what Johnson has said (and I’m not saying I agree) is that bakers should have to sell cakes to gay people for their weddings if they are open to the general public, but that they can’t be forced to put “I love ass fucking” on the cake because it would be compelled speech. SO, is a gay cake any cake that gays want to buy, or does it need to have specifically gay content?

      1. Yes, Johnson made a big deal of saying that, when forcing bakers to make cakes, he wouldn’t require them to put any particular message on the cake.

        If you don’t like the shorthand “gay cake” I can use the long version – “laws requiring businesses to provide certain goods and services for same-sex wedding ceremonies as well as other events to which they may object, such as Hitler’s birthday celebrations,” or LRBPCGSSSWCAWAOETWTMOSUHBC for short.

        1. And the anti-marijuana crowd doesn’t want to prevent people from getting high, they only want to prevent them from using cannabis to do it, they’d still leave you free to drink whiskey, so what’s the big deal?

          1. Actually, marijuana/tobacco is where GayJay really produces the stick with which he can go fuck himself, IMO. The “I’m against sin taxes but we should legalize marijuana so we can tax it like tobacco.” stance, in combination with “gay cakes” convinces me that his libertarian credentials are just about as credible as Ted Cruz’s.

            1. I don’t want to hate one of the few avowed libertarians in politics, and the No True Scotsmen shtick among libertarians is pretty tiresome, but opposition to public accommodation laws like a low bar to clear.

              1. It’s also a good way to get smeared as a racist. An ideologically pure candidate would be lovely, but I’m not going to bitch too much about a somewhat plausible and pretty OK Libertarian candidate.

                1. I would have thought that saying Jewish bakers should be forced to make cakes for nazis is a good way to be smeared as a racist.

        2. I do think that freedom of association is as important as freedom of speech. But it’s still a real distinction.

          We’re all just waving our dicks in the wind here, though. Public accommodation laws aren’t going away, no matter how pure of a candidate the LP puts up.

          1. “Public accommodation laws aren’t going away”

            With the dope issue, libertarians aren’t sitting on their hands saying “so long as heroin is illegal, there’s no point calling for the legalization of marijuana.”

            Instead, I notice libertarians allying with the legalize-weed advocates, even if many of those same advocates are like, total *hypocrites,* man, because they don’t want meth in vending machines.

            So on the dope issue, libertarians can call for incremental reform.

            And when some Congressperson calls for making some *new* drug illegal, libertarians are willing to come out against such an idea, instead of saying “go ahead and make this illegal, too, I’m not getting involved in this petty culture war shit.”

            1. The analogy, of course, is extending the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (and state-level parallel legislation) from race into new areas like sexual orientation.

      2. What’s irrational about justifying polygamy?

        The irrationality is/was on the part of useful idiots who supported homosexuality and generally dismissed any discussion of polygamy when ‘redefining marriage’. The fact that we actually convict people for polygamy is and was frequently waved away as irrelevant while ‘forcing’ homosexuals to lie and check ‘single’ or ‘married’ on their income tax form was somehow relevant to miscegenation and/or tradition.

        1. That’s what’s irrational about not justifying polygamy at the same time as you are justifying gay marriage.

      3. Johnson is using the bogus “free speech but not free association” angle that a couple of courts came up with, if memory serves, to (a) force socons to bake cakes for gay weddings but (b) to not force non-socons to bake cakes that had offensive words on them.

        Its horseshit, of course, but if Johnson wants to split hairs to curry favor with people who will never vote for him in a million years, who am I to stop him? He has taken up the “cultural libertarian” angle that freedom of speech is sacred and holy, but freedom of association is basically worth nothing.

        1. I have known cake decorators. Cake decorators absolutely see their craft as an artistic, expressive endeavor.

          1. Very nice.

            So they’re like the whiskey distillers in my analogy…they’re OK, the marijuana bans won’t apply to *them.*

          2. “I knew cake decorators, and Governor, you’re no cake decorator.”

    3. Forget cakes. Which candidate will cut spending? Avoid foreign wars? Appoint justices who respect the Bill of Rights? Hint: it ain’t Trump-Clinton.

      1. It is E) None of the above.

        What do I win?

    4. Awwww…look at Eddie trying to sneak something in after five when he thinks he won’t be challenged on it.

      (a) The government must recognize same-sex unions as marriages, with all the benefits this entails, as long as it also recognizes “traditional” unions.

      So, the foundation of your argument is built upon a lie, an easily disproved mischaracterization. That, Eddie, is why nobody respects you here.

      1. That was the equal protection argument, though, wasn’t it? I’m not seeing the mischaracterization off the top of my head, Tonio. If I’m missing something, pls. spell it out for me.

        1. Tonio is special, don’t agitate him.

        2. It’s that Eddie left out the part Tonio bolded. I think he’s trying to differ the argument from just saying that government must be in the business of blessing marriages, rather than just equal protection.

          1. Avowed libertarians like the Reason staff were marching shoulder to shoulder with the gay lib crowd in the cause of “legalizing gay marriage” (or, as Reason at least belatedly corrected itself, “gay marriage recognition”).

            Now a test of the sincerity of the Tonios of the world is to ask what they’d do if a public official decided they’d stop handing out marriage licenses altogether. In such a case, I suppose, they’d support that official?

            1. “You said I support the government recognizing gay marriage. That’s a total lie. I said the government should either recognize gay marriage or produce nuclear power out of unicorn farts.”

      2. “as long as it also recognizes “traditional” unions.”

        So I suppose you’re insinuating that the government at some point will stop recognizing what you call “traditional unions,” or more accurately sex-binary unions.

        That is dishonest.

        1. Imbeciles like Tonio don’t even understand their own reasoning. Let me spell it out:

          “(1) The government should either recognize gay marriage or de-recognize sex-binary marriage
          “(2) The government is *not* de-recognizing sex-binary marriage

          “THEREFORE

          “(3) The government *must* recognize gay marriage!”

          Everyone is aware of the retard-logic by which you arrived at your conclusion, I’m simply showing the political consequences of pushing that crap in the public sphere.

          1. What political consequences? The loss of support of people who never have and never will support an ideology of liberty anyway? I’m tickled at the thought of you accusing others of hypocrisy and “retard-logic”. You’d endorse Joseph Stalin for president if he promised to shutter a few abortion clinics.

            1. Sure, and you’d endorse Adolf Hitler for President with Pol Pot for his Vice President.

              …I mean, so long as we’re making stuff up.

          2. eddie, I presume a dishonest piece of shit like you figures you just ‘scored a point’. AFAICT, you’ve simply repeated the argument from equal protection.

            1. No, I’ve shown that those who make that argument are, in fact, in favor of government-recognized same-sex marriage.

              Which I had thought was a noncontroversial point.

              But no, you’ll try to wriggle out of it by saying, “look, I gave the government the opportunity to de-recognize sex-binary marriage! And if they’d only done *that,* I wouldn’t have supported government recognition of same-sex marriage!”

              1. I don’t see how that is trying to wiggle out of anything. Stopping government recognition/registration of marriage is clearly not a popular thing and isn’t going to happen anytime soon, so equal protection should apply.
                It’s still only conditionally support for government recognized same sex marriage. Why would you think that a bunch of people who think government should do as little as possible would lie about that?

                1. The lie is Tonio’s suggestion that *I* was lying.

                  I stated correctly that many avowed libertarians were pushing for same-sex marriage recognition, marching shoulder to shoulder with the gay-libbers, and using pretty much the same arguments.

                  Tonio called it “a lie” and a “mischaracterization” because, gosh, if only the government would de-recognize *all* marriages, libertarians wouldn’t be supporting same-sex marriage recognition.

                  I was talking about what *actual* libertarians were doing in the *actual* world of politics, and supposedly describing their position is a lie because when they are shooting the shit in the online equivalent of late-night bull sessions, they say, “well, of course in Libertopia the government won’t take notice of whether you’re married or not.”

              2. Notorious UGCC|6.2.16 @ 8:20PM|#
                “No, I’ve shown that those who make that argument are, in fact, in favor of government-recognized same-sex marriage.”
                Which is, no surprise a lie or at best a half-truth.
                The support has to do with “equal protection”, which means that the gov’t must treat all equally.
                You knew that, but since you’re a dishonest piece of shit, you tried to distort the issue.

                “But no, you’ll try to wriggle out of it by saying, “look, I gave the government the opportunity to de-recognize sex-binary marriage! And if they’d only done *that,* I wouldn’t have supported government recognition of same-sex marriage!”
                Uh, what in hell are you hypothesizing? Do you EVER argue honestly?

                1. See, I’ve been discussing what a large number of libertarians have been doing on the plane of reality…and you’re calling that a lie because you think I should be ignoring reality like you do.

                  1. Notorious UGCC|6.2.16 @ 10:21PM|#
                    “See, I’ve been discussing what a large number of libertarians have been doing on the plane of reality…and you’re calling that a lie because you think I should be ignoring reality like you do.”

                    You’ve been inventing hypotheticals and assigning them to those who realize that you’re a fucking fantacist and liar; suffice to say, I checked with “reality” and they hadn’t heard from you. Your juvenile superstition is NOT reality. No, eddie, hardly anyone here is as dishonest and stupid as you, and your projections that others are as mendacious as you leads you to yet further stupidity.
                    Look, shitbag, your skydaddy fantasy is the stuff of 5 year-olds. You’re something beyond that and stupid enough to try to defend it. Hint: Defend it to 5 year olds; they’re as dumb as you and willing to go for your happy horseshit.
                    And they might even agree with you that gay people are ‘icky’!

      3. I’m not sure what’s wrong with that part. That’s pretty much the argument I’d make: if the government is going to be recognizing any marriages, it should recognize the marriages that exist in the real world, not use it as a social engineering tool.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.