A.M. Links: Clinton vs. Trump vs. Johnson, Zika in Florida, Stein Names Running Mate

|

  • State Department

    New poll: Hillary Clinton 42 percent, Donald Trump 38 percent, Gary Johnson 9 percent.

  • According to Donald Trump, the 2016 election is "rigged" in favor of Hillary Clinton.
  • Julian Assange says that Wikileaks has "a lot" of material related to Hillary Clinton and it will be released "in different batches."
  • Florida Gov. Rick Scott has called on the Centers for Disease Control to help battle Zika in the Sunshine State.
  • Green Party presidential hopeful Jill Stein has named Ajamu Baraka as her running mate.
  • "Just days ahead of the Olympic Games the waterways of Rio de Janeiro are as filthy as ever, contaminated with raw human sewage teeming with dangerous viruses and bacteria, according to a 16-month-long study commissioned by The Associated Press."

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

NEXT: Begun the War Between Jedis and Atheists Has, in Australia

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. New poll: Hillary Clinton 42 percent, Donald Trump 38 percent, Gary Johnson 9 percent.

    So close?

    1. I’m pretty sure that last number will not be reflected in the voting booth.

      Polls keep getting less reliable as the years go by.

      1. I can see Republicans who will eventually vote for Trump lying about it and naming Johnson instead. Not so much Democrats, and at least to go by the numbers, their margin with Stein is a lot lower.

    2. Hello.

  2. According to Donald Trump, the 2016 election is “rigged” in favor of Hillary Clinton.

    His personality and politics is doing the rigging this time.

    1. The man goes KFC over Popeyes.

      You destroyed your own campaign Trumpy.

    2. He’s setting the stage for his impending loss.

      1. Poisoning the well. Hasn’t this happened every election since 2000? ’04 was Diebold machines in Ohio, ’08 McCain claimed ACORN was committing fraud, ’12 was Bain Capital investment in some voting machine company that providing machines for Ohio.

        1. Don’t forget the nearly insurmountable ‘Idiots in Florida in ’00’.

          Because Florida Man is unable to use a voting form.

      2. People said that about him in the primaries and he won. Its a get out the vote strategem.

        1. Trump’s strategy is to let everybody in DC be content in the knowledge that he’s completely blown his chances until the 98% of the country that lives elsewhere deliver him a victory.

          1. Well, 40%.

  3. 207) Let’s say you lived in a minority neighborhood, and in the upcoming election you had a choice between two politicians. The first politician frequently visits your community, is close with many of the neighborhood’s leading citizens, and displays a genuine love for and interest in your people. Yet, the policies he would pass in office are terrible for your neighborhood’s families.

    The second politician has no interest in your neighborhood at all. He rarely visits, and when he does, his appearances are awkward and staged. He has no contact with the neighborhood’s important business and community leaders, and at best is indifferent to its regular citizens. When in office, he would pass no laws that would affect your community one way or the other.

    I think you see where I’m going with this. Despite his indifference, the second politician is obviously the one you should vote for. But in real life, this never, ever happens. It’s probably my lack, as I’m pretty much a crotchety person who feels no special need for validation from others, but I simply don’t understand why it’s always that first politician who has the advantage.

    1. Not race in this scenario? How can I decide?

    2. Sheesh, JATNAS — it’s obvious the first politician CARES!

    3. Human nature. We’re sometimes blind to things when they’re within the “community” or “family”

    4. It’s almost as though people voted according to their emotions.

    5. I simply don’t understand why it’s always that first politician who has the advantage

      A couple of reasons, really:

      1. The people who’ve interacted with the first politician think that he knows them and will look out for them personally without much regard to what he is actually likely to do;

      2. Some number of the people in (1) are actually correct: the politician will “look out” for them (= favor them) although usually in quid pro quo fashion;

      3. Most people vote for social, rather than ideological or even “pragmatic” (for certain definitions of pragmatic), reasons; they don’t want their friends and family to think they voted for the “wrong” person;

      4. A lot of people really, really do not understand causality–they see bad things happen, those bad things weren’t “intended” by the politicians, the connections between those bad things and government policies are indirect and complicated, and so the bad things continue happening while the people who set them up to happen get re-elected, or get thrown out in favor of a different group of people who will still largely do the same things the first group did;

      5. Last but perhaps most importantly, people have unrealistic expectations of government–whether it be of police, of regulations, of social welfare, etc., they want things that only they themselves can truly provide but believe someone else can give to them, esp. some hated “other” elsewhere who deserves to be punished anyway.

      1. Wow, thank you for a serious, thorough, and well-thought-through answer.

      2. Last but perhaps most importantly, people have unrealistic expectations of government-

        Listen, Obama’s going to pay my gas bill. Any day now. Hope.

      3. I’d like to expand on #4.

        When it comes to politics, the incentives are out of whack.

        I buy a car that is a POS, I’m stuck with it, I bear the cost. I have every incentive to be careful in my car shopping.

        If I vote for a shitty politician, what direct feedback do I get? none. I can believe their promises because I pay no direct price for being wrong.

        Said politician can promise the impossible, because at worst, they don’t get reelected.

        And politics gets worse. Not only do you not directly bear the cost of things, you can force others to bear the cost of things.

        1. And politics gets worse. Not only do you not directly bear the cost of things, you can force others to bear the cost of things.

          Externalizing cost is the very essence of politics.

        2. More succinctly:

          “The State is the great fiction through which everyone endeavours to live at the expense of everyone else.” – Bastiat

    6. That doesn’t just apply to minority neighborhoods – us White people are not served well by the first politician any better than anyone else.

      1. Good point. As kbolino points out, most voting is generally social signaling.

    7. People are going to have a lot more affinity for someone who actually gets out into their neighborhood and at least gives the impression that they give a damn about their problems.

      Think about the military, for instance–obviously you don’t want your superintendents or your commanders in your grill all the time, but the ones who make the effort to get into your shop, ask how you’re doing, do you need anything, what can I do to help, etc., on a semi-regular basis is going to have a lot more credibility than someone who hides behind their desk all their time, even if the latter is perfectly competent at their job.

  4. New poll: Hillary Clinton 42 percent, Donald Trump 38 percent, Gary Johnson 9 percent.

    Why choose the left nut or the right nut when you can have the Johnson?

      1. ‘furrows brow’

        1. *opens beer*

          1. *Swipes that from WTF* Yeehaw!

            1. Sonovabitch!

              1. Quick! Someone needs to MEME this immediately!

                I can smell the internet fire burning.

    1. That seems just a little too clever to put on my car’s bumper.

      1. How about:

        “Choice 2016: Get your nuts squeezed or your Johnson caressed.”

        1. Your nuts used as a speed bag or a desultory handjob.

          1. desultory handjob

            45 minutes, no lube, eye contact the entire time.

    2. You realize that makes Jill Stein the taint.

      1. Well, I taint voting for her pardner!

        1. You’re taint is green?

          1. WTF? — “YOUR”

    3. That is friggin’ awesome

  5. Two Men’s Quest for Florida’s Mysterious Skunk Ape

    They have, however, encountered the inexplicable. “Last time we were out ? I’m not kidding you ? we heard a female,” Conner says.

    Barton adds, “They want to get close to you is what we think, because they’re familiar with us. They have a great curiosity.”

    The “they” Conner and Barton refer to are skunk apes, Florida’s slender, hairy, and pungently scented seven-foot-tall version of the legendary Bigfoot, also known as Sasquatch. Conner claims he and his sister saw one as children when they were playing near the swamp in an area that later became a subdivision. The image of the huge creature loping along a line of banana trees and into the untamed forest has haunted him for decades.

    After watching the show Finding Bigfoot on Animal Planet four years ago, Conner got the itch (he considers the skunk ape and Bigfoot to be variations of the same species). He and Barton worked together in the IT department of a nearby company in Lakeland but didn’t know each other well. When Barton’s terminally ill wife of 38 years passed away, Conner became more than a co-worker. “I said, ‘Hey, man, you’re gonna need to stay busy, dude. Just find a big hobby.’ And that’s how it started,” Conner says.

    1. Leave Florida Man alone.

    2. A female Steve Smith? The mind reels.

    3. STEVE SMITH MORE THAN JUST HOBBY, BUDDY.

      1. STEVE SMITH CUDDLE RAPE IS WAY OF LIFE.

    4. STEVE SMITH’S FAMILY DOES HAVE RELATIVES IN FLORIDA. WE DON’T SPEAK OF THEM.

    5. “Last time we were out ? I’m not kidding you ? we heard a female,” Conner says.

      “That’s not what I heard,” Hillary says.

      1. Well, are you going to believe Hillary or your lying ears?

    6. Carl Hiaasen has been writing about Skink for years.

      1. Skink is not the Skunk Ape, he’s a virile version of Bob Graham in a universe where bob Graham also didn’t ever sell out.

    7. STORY ALL LIES!

      IF YOU HEAR STEVE SMITH IN WILD, YOU ARE ALREADY RAPED!

    8. I have a fondness for eccentrics like this. They are harmless and entertaining and add variety to life.

  6. Green Party presidential hopeful Jill Stein has named Ajamu Baraka as her running mate.

    Full name Ajamu Baraka Husseina Obamaa.

    1. Nickname – JarJar Obama.

      “Meesa thinka thata pretty shittya.”

  7. Slow-motion replays can distort criminal responsibility

    Slow-motion video replays of crimes shown in courtrooms may be distorting the outcomes of trials, according to a US study.
    Researchers found that slowing down footage of violent acts caused viewers to see greater intent to harm than when viewed at normal speed.
    Viewing a killing only in slow motion made a jury three times more likely to convict of first degree murder.
    The research has been published in the journal PNAS.
    The importance of video evidence in courtrooms has grown in tandem with its supply in recent years.
    As well as the mountains of smartphone recordings, CCTV also routinely captures assaults, robberies and even murders. Some police officers even wear on-body cameras.
    Courts all over the world are willing to accept these recordings in evidence and they are sometimes shown in slow motion, to help juries make up their minds about what really happened within the often chaotic environment of a crime scene.

    1. Talk about logical fallacy. Does the slow motion replay distort criminal intent or reveal it by removing the distortion created by real time video? It could be either way. This study seems to just assume it is removing the distortion because the results are different.

      1. The only thing I can come up with is that a slow motion playback might create the illusion of a methodical killing. But that could be offset by playing it back at full speed.

        1. Exactly this. When you see it in real time, maybe the whole thing is 2.5 seconds of crazy flailing. Slow it down and they can make it seem like there is all the time in the world to plan and make criminal intent-worthy decisions.

          Just pausing before firing a second shot can change manslaughter into premeditated murder. Or a blow to the head in a bar fight can transform into murder if there is a moment where there is no longer active defense and a second attack is initiated.

          Put it in slow motion and a simple 15 second bar brawl looks like a series of premeditated assaults instead of a flailing drunken attempt at a fight.

          Remember Rodney King? Remember how they slow-motion replayed every twitch of his body, every movement as an attempt to assault police? That’s what they are talking about.

          Adding seconds to brief intervals radically changes the context.

          And as anyone who watches TV crime infotainment news shows knows, juries suck at reasonable doubt. They often get a “feeling” about someone’s guilt or innocence and then back-fill with facts to support their decision. Slow motion video can provide this sinister context to move a juror to a presumption of guilt.

      2. I want it out of sports completely. In trying to fix the problems of human errors they’ve created a whole new set of problems.

        My biggest issue is this: The NFL has a massive info center in NYC for replays. That’s who the refs are in realtime contact with on a challenged play. Who are the people in the infocenter? Former refs? Video ‘experts’? What’s a ‘video expert’ and what qualifications does one need to do it professionally?
        Those calls are just opinions based on video evidence of a fast play slowed down to a still photograph.
        It’s going to turn into this: Did the pebble of leather on the nose of the football come in contact with the tip of the blade of grass, or did it contact the top of the soil that the grass is planted in?

        1. Plus, it slows the games down. The last thing NFL or MLB games need is something that takes *more* time.

        2. I agree with you. And I thought it was a good idea at first. The reality has been much different than advertised. It slows the game down and doesn’t result in that many improved calls. The worst part about it is that half the time the replay officials will still get the call wrong. Just call the game and learn to live with the occasional bad call.

          1. I think the worse effect is that it seems to have made the on field officiating worse, as they will be biased in favor of the call that could be reversed in replay, rather than one that cannot.

      3. This is part of why the “scientification” of criminal law is a mixed bag IMO. Just because you have clearer evidence does not mean you have clearer minds.

        1. There is so much bad science done in courtrooms. One of the least talked about but most important and awful Supreme Court cases in the last 50 years was Kumo Tire. In that case the Supreme Court basically got rid of any meaningful requirements for scientific reliability of evidence and left it up to the judge. It was all fun and games because the Court thought it was helping poor aggrieved plaintiffs in tort cases. No one ever mentioned or bothered to consider that prosecutors would take that lax rule and drive a truck over it and a lot of innocent defendants in the process.

      4. the distortion created by real time video

        How is slo-mo less of a distortion than real time? If I have to assume one is more distorted than the other, I would go with slo-mo, because its more artificial.

        Remember that kid who got shot in the park for having a toy gun? That video was released to the public in slo-mo, and as a result it obscured the speed with which it happened and made the cops look better. It made it look plausible that they had acted with deliberation and reasonableness, and could have actually made verbal commands that were disregarded.

        Real-time, you saw what it really was – they rolled up on him and gunned him down in about as much time as it takes to read about it.

    2. The study could also be said that showing tape at normal speed has an equal tendency to distort intent in favor of the defendant. But I think it would be the defense attorney’s job to explain that a slow motion analysis can’t reliably determine premeditation and planning.

      1. I wouldn’t say can’t. It all depends on the circumstances. I definitely can imagine circumstances where slow motion would show actions on the part of a defendant that are evidence of intent. How convincing that evidence is depends on the circumstances.

        I think it is wrong to say that slow motion is always valuable or never valuable. Every case is different.

        1. Absolutely.

          The problem is that jurors are people, and as such “impressions” matter as much as actual evidence.

          People judge other people by “taking the measure” of them. If you can plant the “he’s guilty” seed early in a trial, it is very difficult to overcome that presumption. Explaining it to a jury after the fact is probably pretty useless.

          It is like explaining the science behind bad lineups, false confessions, eye witness unreliability, etc. Explain all you want, but having a witness firmly declare someone guilty with certainty outweighs all of that, absent hard proof to the contrary.

    3. So if you speed it up and play Yakety-Sax, who does it favor then?

  8. Baraka, the founding executive director of the U.S. Human Rights Network, is known for his decades-long social-justice efforts

    “Social-justice efforts”?

    I have no idea what that means.

    1. Bigotry and spreading discrimination.

      1. Don’t forget – attempted strong arm robbery (via fines and extortion).

    2. Lots of pointing and shouting

    3. It means agitate for free shit and special privileges based on race and ethnicity.

    4. Of course you have no idea what that means. Are you an intellectual like he is? I didn’t think so.

      1. *** slowly turns away and furtively pulls finger from nostril ***

    5. Further sorting of humanity into categories which are then considered defining.

      1. And here I thought eugenics lost its cachet in the 40s.

        1. That was just a marketing problem.

          They keep repackaging it until they get it right.

    6. Sometimes I read in the paper about clergymen in African-American churches who broker truces between warring gangs or start sports leagues for inner-city youths who would otherwise be getting in trouble. That sounds like real “social-justice” work. How come those guys never run for office? I guess they’re too busy actually doing stuff.

      1. How come those guys never run for office? I guess they’re too busy actually doing stuff.

        Some of them do. They don’t usually last, and if they do, it’s often by forgetting whatever they knew when they weren’t politicians.

        1. Yeah, we need more Reverend Jacksons and Reverend Sharptons.

          Oh, wait…

    7. Social Justice is like being a judge who socializes. Over drinks.

  9. Police in New York hunt bandits who made off with pet bunny

    Police in New York City are searching for two men who broke into an unlocked apartment and made off with a pet bunny.

    In addition to the caged rabbit, police say the men took a bracelet and a passport from the Bronx residence.

    A surveillance photo shows the men walking down the sidewalk. One is carrying the cage.

    1. Put the bunny back in the box.

      1. Too late, the thieves already ate it for dinner.

        1. Hey! We’re not Venezuela yet!

      2. *** makes noise like carrot ***

      3. I am incredibly disappointed that nobody that replied to this got the reference. Shame on you people. Con Air is a masterpiece of American cinema.

        1. Never explain the reference. It looks desperate.

          But I got it, if that makes you feel any better.

    2. You know who else tried to rescue a Bunny with ransom money?

      1. Hugh Hefner? Oh, wait, that wasn’t “rescue”…

          1. Shut the fuck up, Donnie.

          2. That wasn’t ransom money, dude, that was his dirty undies. The whites.

            1. Geeve us ze money, Lebowzki!

    3. Hollywood’s vying for the movie rights

  10. Florida Gov. Rick Scott has called on the Centers for Disease Control to help battle Zika in the Sunshine State.

    QUARANTINE!

    1. Wouldn’t want any more shrunken heads in Florida.

    2. Look for dog fucking to increase.

  11. Clinton leads Trump by 1 in Utah

    Granted it’s 37-36 but still. Sad! By all means, Trump apologists, explain to me how he can win if he’s loosing Utah and is tied in Georgia.

    This is going to be a complete and utter disaster for the GOP.

    1. I think Johnson has a serious chance to take Utah.

      1. As weird as it is to say, the best bet may be for the Libertarian candidate to focus heavily on winning over Romney for his endorsement. He’s already got Glenn Beck, right? Get all them big Mormons to endorse and campaign for him. Winning a state in the electoral college would be pretty yuge.

        1. Especially if the election is close enough to then get thrown into the House.

        2. I agree. Instead of going out and poorly articulating his positions, GJ needs to bag some high profile endorsements.

          Plus, If I were Rommey, I’d do it just give Trump the middle finger.

    2. I think Johnson has a serious chance to take Utah.

      1. If she’s willing, Johnson can take her.

    3. It’s all them libertarian spoilers in Utah what done it.

    4. Man, if you think Trump apologia is bad now, get ready for the years of bitching about libertarians spoiling the election.

    5. This is going to be a complete and utter disaster for the GOP.

      Too early to say.

      Hillary has two assets: the DemOp media and the support of the social media moguls.

      She has two liabilities; her personality, and events between now the election, where bad news helps Trump.

      Its a tossup whether the media and social networking can drag her over the finish line in spite of her personality and, well, reality.

      1. But what if the other choice is literally a giant douche. Or as close an approximation as human biology will allow.

        Who knew that South Park was social commentary and psychic prediction?

      2. Her third problem is the tall blonde Australian in the Ecudoran embassy.

  12. Anyone having problems with the site this AM?

    1. The overnight was Hihnfected.

      1. Who forgot to spray for pests? Always hate it when they get in.

          1. Dude actually took at a shot at Hamster’s cookie recipe. I was all like, oh no didn’t.

            1. Her cookies taste like the hardtack we consumed during the War of Northern Aggression.

            2. WTF? Really?

              1. Michael Hihn|8.1.16 @ 11:16PM|#

                Hamster of Doom|8.1.16 @ 10:50PM|#
                Here, this is more appropriate.
                Best Fucking Cookies Ever

                Not really, but not as bad as your ignorance of health care

            3. WTF. He’s even dumber than I thought. The reason no one buys catastrophic only health care plans is because they are not legal! The closest you can get are HDHP with a 3/6k deductible.

            4. I also enjoyed the five (!) completely unsolicited potshots at Ron Paul in a Gary Johnson thread with zero previous mention of Ron Paul.

              1. Knowing THihnskin, Paul probably told him that he didn’t want to subscribe to the old bat’s newsletter and they guy’s been bitter about it ever since.

    2. Yes, posts take an oddly long time to show up after successful “submit”

    3. Yep, the squirrels are all up in my crotch every time I try to post.

      1. That’s nice, but the question was whether you were having any problems.

    4. me three / or four

    5. Second attempt:

      Yes.

      Comments delayed/eaten.

    6. Aye. I blame the Hihnfection too.

      1. I have contacted the Kochs and have asked them to add you to my bullying list

        1. +1 incredibly old man

          1. I am publicly calling on David and Charles Koch to permanently remove Citizen X’s commenting privileges. He does not believe in free speech, and he is a bully.

            1. (walks away shitting pants)
              (snickers)

  13. LADYBOYS AND GO-GO GIRLS FACE AXE
    Inside the seedy world of Thailand’s infamous brothels and sex bars as it faces the axe in crackdown

    The tourism sector accounts for about 10 percent of gross domestic product and sex worker groups said the minister’s vision of a prostitution-free Thailand would dent that.

    “The police presence already drives off a number of clients who come to relax or drink at bars,” said Surang Janyam, director of Service Workers in Group (SWING), which provides sex workers with free medical care and vocational training.

    “Wiping out this industry is guaranteed to make Thailand lose visitors and income.”

    Many sex workers come from the impoverished northeast and see selling their bodies as a way out of poverty.

    Prostitutes can earn up to 5,000 baht ($143.14) a night, nearly 20 times the minimum wage of 300 baht ($8.59) per day.

    1. Would. No, wouldn’t…no, would. I DON’T KNOW!!

      1. And you won’t until those hot pants come off.

        Think of it as Schroedinger’s Panties.

        1. You owe me a delicious cup of Aeropress-brewed coffee, PJ.

          1. Put it on my account. On account I ain’t never gonna pay you.

          2. Is a big dick on a ladyboy an asset or a liabilty?

            1. Go-Go Gadget mystery genitalia!

        2. Schroedinger’s Panties

          Nice band name.

        3. Schroedinger’s Panties

          That’s just awesome.

      2. I have a friend who has uh, extensively er, toured Cambodia and Thailand. When I stopped by his apartment after such a trip, he brought out his laptop.

        Him: “Check out this girl at this bar. Isn’t she hot?” Picture of a Thai hooker type.

        Me: “I guess so.” (not really my thing)

        Him: it’s a lady boy! *breaks out laughing*

        1. It’s all fun and games until he gets pulled aside with his laptop by CBP for a secondary.

        2. Visited my bro in Phuket.

          Oh my!! What I saw!!

    2. Country’s first female tourism minister promises to crack the whip on vice industry

      Kinky!

    3. which provides sex workers with free medical care and vocational training

      That’s, uh. Hmm.

  14. Ugly fruit and vegetables can now be sold in Quebec

    Previously, Quebec regulations barred stores from selling produce with abnormal physical characteristics. Minister of Agriculture Pierre Paradis said those rules aren’t relevant anymore, adding he thinks this change will better meet customer demand.

    “Everyone’s a winner,” Paradis said. “Businesses can diversify what they offer and farms will have the chance to sell a larger portion of their harvest.”

    Food policy expert and University of Guelph professor Sylvain Charlebois said North American grocery stores have spoiled consumers.

    1. Previously, Quebec regulations barred stores from selling produce with abnormal physical characteristics. Minister of Agriculture Pierre Paradis said those rules aren’t relevant anymore

      — except, of course, for produce that looks like genitalia or breasts.

      1. Presidential veggies ok now?

        http://tinyurl.com/hxb8wuh

    2. Barney Frank and James Brady hardest hit.

    1. I feel for the guy, but aren’t you supposed to get wise to this sort of thing when you’re dating in high school, before you’re an adult and it costs you the big bucks?

      1. I can see this guy as the perfect example of a gullible voter.

        “Candidate X promised A, B, C. I voted for X. Where’s the goodies?”

    1. There’s a reason why some of Bernie’s supporters are actually moving to Trump. Not many, but how looney do you have to be for a Bern supporter to say, “Uh, that’s just too far left for me.”

  15. Just days ahead of the Olympic Games the waterways of Rio de Janeiro are as filthy as ever, contaminated with raw human sewage teeming with dangerous viruses and bacteria…

    I’m beginning to suspect third worldish environments aren’t well suited for hosting the games.

    1. I’m beginning to think the Olympics should be put out of our misery.

    2. They are obviously best suited based on their superior ability to bribe the IOC.

    3. Third world governments tend to be corrupt and think nothing of paying exorbitant bribes to members of the IOC. They’re perfect places to host the Olympics.

      Hell, China managed to get a Winter Olympics in a place with no snow.

      1. The places that can’t afford it pay the most to get it.

  16. Dessert nachos, fried chicken and waffles Benedict make unhealthiest meals list

    Also among the watchdog group’s targeted meals this year is Jersey Mike’s Subs Giant Chipotle Cheese Steak, with cheese, peppers and onions, spicy chipotle mayo and 1,850 calories. That’s the equivalent of eating two Subway roast beef footlong subs. Making the cheesesteak a combo meal with a Pepsi and chips adds more than 600 additional calories.

    Or the Build Your Sampler at Applebee’s, which comes with between two and five appetizers and could reach 3,390 calories if you include Cheeseburger Egg Rolls, soft pretzels and beer cheese dip, a chicken quesadilla, Buffalo wings and spinach and artichoke dip.

    The “Xtreme Eating Awards” list is intended to raise awareness of the growing size, calorie and fat content of restaurant meals in an effort to combat obesity. More than one-third of U.S. adults and about 17 percent of children are considered obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    damn now I’m hungry.

    1. What a horrible thing to post… I’m on a diet and being temped to run out and rack up calories I won’t be burning is awful.

    2. 17 percent of children are considered obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

      I wonder what percentage of these children are also classified as “starving” by our Top Men?

      1. All of them. It doesn’t count unless you buy the food at an approved grocery store.

    3. They’ve never been to Guy’s American Kitchen and Bar, huh.

  17. You uptight whities can just sit down and shut up

    Leaders of BLM in Minnesoda (BLMM?) have told their white allies not to talk to the press when out protesting. No way they can talk about police use of force without tainting it with their White Privilege.

    “The majority of white allies seem comfortable with black leadership in the movement, and they are reminded to check their privilege when they become involved with the demonstrations,” said Nekima Levy-Pounds, president of the Minneapolis chapter of the NAACP. “It means we know that white privilege is a real phenomenon; it means they would be willing to take a secondary role and defer to black leadership.”

    1. Back of the bus and mind your mouth, crackers!

    2. At a recent public forum, a woman who was arrested in an Interstate 94 blockade three days after Castile’s death declined to talk to a reporter.

      “I can’t talk to the media,” she explained. “I’m a white person.”

      1. That chilled speech is a manifestation of white privilege.

    3. I would be shocked to learn that Black Lives Matter isn’t generally causing whites to dislike, mistrust or hate blacks more than if the organization didn’t exist. They are so extraordinarily counterproductive.

      1. Actually, racial divisiveness is their goal. That’s what riles up the base and gets out the vote for Democrats. Because the Rethuglikkkans are gonna put y’all back in chains!

        1. It’s absolutely frustrating to hear libertarians talk about how BLM is doing good work to draw attention to police brutality. Which is not what they’re doing at all. They’re drawing attention to the specter of evil white racists murdering innocent church going young black men who dindunuffin while they were getting their lives turned around.

          1. Roger that!^^

            Drawing attention to police misconduct is what they should be doing.

            /Just my white privilege speaking

    4. Why always the fucking hyphenated last names with activists?

    5. Time to Mau Mau the Flak Catchers.

      Tom Wolfe wrote the book in 1970. Some things never change.

    6. Now don’t get uppity and talk to the press.

    7. It means we know that white privilege is a real phenomenon un-falsifiable hypothesis

  18. Hillary Clinton bikini mural covered with niqab after public decency complaints

    Maribyrnong council took issue with the original mural, which depicted Clinton wearing a revealing swimsuit with $100 notes tucked into it. The council said residents complained about the piece, which was painted on to the side wall of a scooter shop in Footscray, 5km west of Melbourne.

    In a statement, the council said the mural contravened its gender equity policy.

    “We believe that this mural is offensive because of the depiction of a near-naked woman, not on the basis of disrespect to Hillary Clinton, and it is not in keeping with our stance on gender equity,” the council chief executive, Stephen Wall, said.

    1. Beautiful.

      Especially if the niqab washes off in the next rain.

    2. Next to his work, he painted the message: “If this Muslim woman offends u, u r a bigot, racist, sexist Islamophobe.”

      I think I’m in love.

    3. “our stance on gender equity,”

      So just paint Bill in a thong next to her.

    4. We believe that this mural is offensive because of the depiction of a near-naked woman,

      I wonder what a stroll around their town looking at publicly visible advertising would show.

    5. “We believe that this mural is offensive because of the depiction of a near-naked woman”

      Puritanz.

  19. Attacks take toll on French tourism

    In the week following the July 14th attack on the Riviera city’s Promenade des Anglais boulevard, arrivals by air slumped 8.8 percent compared to the same period in 2015, according to data from ForwardKeys which daily sifts more than 14 million air travel transactions.

    The sector has been struggling for months, not least since the November 13 attacks in and around Paris which claimed 130 lives.

    Between January and July 10 arrivals to France by air were down 5.8 percent, and down 11 percent to Paris.

    Flight reservations to France following the Nice attack were down 20 percent.

    France is the world’s top tourist destination and the tourism sector accounts for around nine percent of GDP.

    I still have the Somme, Verdun, and some other WW1 battlefield visits on my bucket list.

    1. France is an awesome country to visit. It is also quite big. The one upside of these animals rampaging around is that it creates some very good deals to be had.

    2. Good. The commies might not care about the lives of Frenchmen, but threatening the funding for their regime might make them wake up and try to stop islamism.

    3. France is the world’s top tourist destination

      I did not know that.

      1. Walt Disney World being number 2.

  20. Wisconsin GOP Circles Wagons for Ryan

    With an uphill primary race against House Speaker Paul Ryan in its final stretch, challenger Paul Nehlen is calling out the local GOP Establishment for trying to build a firewall to protect the incumbent.

    Party officials are nominally neutral in primaries, but Nehlen said the Wisconsin GOP has been anything but. The Nehlen campaign reports getting rebuffed in efforts to put signs and campaign materials in county GOP offices and having a presence at party events. He said pro-Nehlen comments have been removed from Republican Party Facebook pages.

    1. Circles Wagons for Ryan

      These masturbation euphemisms are getting pretty abstract.

  21. My wife, eyeing the sample ballot we got in the mail yesterday: “We can actually vote in the primary in August 30.” [there’s a libertarian party Senate primary]. “Who’s Augustus Invictus?”

    Oh, you sweet summer child.

    1. Ohhh. Shit. I guess I will vote. Fucking Florida, man.

  22. According to Donald Trump, the 2016 election is “rigged” in favor of Hillary Clinton.

    The election, like all national elections are skewed to the Democrats favor.

    1. The Democrats are also quite skilled at “discovering” extra votes in close races to steal elections. It’s pretty certain that Al Franken didn’t really win the senate race, for example.

    2. If the Republicans wanted to do one worthwhile thing this election, it would be to dedicate resources to proving widespread voter fraud.

    3. And here I thought the Democrats hate voter ID laws because they really do think asking for ID is racist. Just kidding, we all know why they oppose voter ID laws.

      1. They recognize how awful the govt run DMV is?

  23. Ha! My Hillary supporting MIL just unfriended me on facebook!

    She asked why the hell people thought accidentally setting up little private server was worse than all of Bush’s warmongering and the evil of Republicans in general.

    So I answered her question. I wish I kept a copy because it was a beautiful, succinct takedown of Hillary all centered around the server and it managed to cover her corruption, incompetence and warmongering. I finished with a statement to the effect she was unfit both to command troops and to hold any position of responsibility for other people’s stuff.

    I guess that was too much for her. Now my facebook feed won’t be full of the stupidest memes spewed out by the Hillary campaign; whatever shall I do?!?

    1. Have a celebratory drink?

      1. My wife is going to be pissed at me. Which is annoying since I’m not the one who sucks!

        I’m kind of sad that I spent 20 minutes writing it and now it’s lost.

        1. Here’s have a consolitory drink to follow the celibratory one.

          1. the celibratory one

            Beautiful typo, since it looks like tarran may have a some celibacy in his future.

        2. Maybe your wife can copy it and email it to you.

    2. I wish I kept a copy because it was a beautiful, succinct takedown of Hillary all centered around the server and it managed to cover her corruption, incompetence and warmongering.

      Maybe if you ask nicely the NSA will provide one.

    3. My celebratory thoughts and prayers are with you.

      1. The thing is I don’t hate my MIL. She is, however, a remarkably intolerant person. She asked the question to make people feel bad. She clearly didn’t want an honest answer. She wanted to signal that she was a goodthinkful person to her friends.

        It’s a loss for her; for example, I don’t think our wedding pictures are accessible to her anymore. I guess the joy of asking her echo chamber “why you haterz hate Hillary?” and getting silence in reply outweighs the joy from seeing wedding photos.

        For me, not so much.

        1. I had a “rousing” discussion with my MIL about FDR several years ago. I think she’s still annoyed.

          1. I captioned the recent US airstrikes in Syria that killed 73 women and children with, “How do you say ‘Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize’ in Arabic?”

            Didn’t go well.

            1. That’s awesome.

          2. I pissed off my grandmother big time by taking down LBJ and FDR while in high school. Two of my uncles tried to refute me (both liberal, one has two PhDs and 3 Masters, one a BA in history), and I wrecked their arguments enough that the Doctorate uncle only discusses things I have common ground on with him (and then argues with me against my dad), grandma and the other uncle don’t talk politics with me anymore. The most beautiful part is that because of my background (grew up UU with a bunch of folks that actually participated in Civil Rights marches, Freedom Buses, etc.) I have a far deeper understanding of the left than many people, and use the stated motivations of the church members to help move my points.

        2. One of my retarded colleagues seems to sincerely believe that Trump’s election to the Presidency would cause the outbreak of war between the United States, Russia, and Red China. His latest comment was that if such a conflcit were to occur, at least the Reds would be able to civilize America by forcibly disarming its citizenry.

          I have a strict policy of abstaining from any sort of political discussions with Europeans, but in that instance, I utterly lost my shit. I made the duplicitous cunt cry.

          1. I thought Trump was in Putin’s pocket?

            Hard to keep up.

          2. If Kerry and Clinton’s incompetent bumbling abroad hasn’t precipitated a third world war, I very much doubt Trump’s hamfisted, mouthbreathing huffing and puffing is going to do shit. Especially when his default position isn’t going to be brusque Reaganesque steadfastness but cutting quick deals to keep his profile up among Americans.

        3. Imagine that.

          She picked an old twat politician over her own daughter’s husband.

    4. I have had one friend do that to me. I have also been banned from the National Review comment boards again. Surprisingly, I was not banned for defending Trump this time. I was banned for pointing out to the local baboons there that a meaningful criminal ban on abortion would require conducting criminal investigations into women who had or claimed to have miscarriages. For the crime of pointing that out, I was deemed a “troll” by the gang of retards who have taken over that place and banned.

      1. National Review, these days, is a repository for retards that no one else wants. Though it remains a distinct brand of blowhard stupidity.

        1. The comment boards really are. And what is amazing is the moderators seem to have wanted to create such an environment. There are about a dozen or so real retards who call anyone who disagrees with them every name in the book and then dutifully report them to the mods and get them banned. Every board has trolls. That is the only board I am aware of outside of maybe DU where the mods have allowed the trolls to take over. It would be like Reason is Shreek, Tony and Tulpa had a direct line to the mods and could get anyone they wanted banned. I can’t believe they let their boards degenerate to that level. I seriously wonder if the higher ups no what is going on.

          1. Silly John. We’re all already Tulpa in here.

          2. Haven’t hung out on HuffPo recently, huh?

          3. This is absolutely fair, and I can’t imagine any woman having to go through that kind of trauma. One of my good friends would’ve had a middle sibling, but his mom miscarried, and she still sees a therapist occasionally for it 32 years later.

      2. I was banned for pointing out to the local baboons there that a meaningful criminal ban on abortion would require conducting criminal investigations into women who had or claimed to have miscarriages.

        That is not true. For example, the ban could only apply to the doctors. In which case, DIY abortions wouldnt be covered, so no need to investigate miscarriages.

        Sort of like how you can homebrew beer or wine, but if you try to go commercial, you better have proper licensing (possibly my worst analogy ever).

        1. We’ll just need common-sense coat-hanger control?

        2. Only the woman and the doctor attending her, if there is one, know the truth. A lot of doctors are pro choice. If you banned abortion, doctors would just do abortions and report them as miscarriages. Without investigating every miscarriage, I don’t see how you could stop that.

          Yes, you could “ban abortion”, but without taking some pretty drastic steps to enforce it, it would be just another law that is either meaningless or worse selectively enforced. Moreover, anyone with any sense who knows how governments work understands that where there is a law, the government will eventually get around to doing what is necessary to enforce it enough to make it meaningful, no matter how awful those methods are. The pro life people live in a fantasy land. I say that as someone who is very much pro life and anti abortion but understands what is involved in actually enforcing a law.

          1. Without investigating every miscarriage, I don’t see how you could stop that.

            Easily. The entire industry is coded and essentially centrally planned. There are no secrets when you’re billing a third party. The FDA was able to crack down on physicians overprescribing narcotics precisely because their business is an open book. The pro-life crowd understands this, which is why they want to go after providers rather than women.

          2. ENB chronicles alleged abuses in prosecuting slavery.

            Do these abuses mean we should legalize slavery?

            And consider the people who were falsely convicted of (post-natal) murder – lying witnesses, bogus “experts” – people have spent decades in prison for murders they didn’t commit.

            Likewise rape.

            As far as crimes being hard to prosecute – what about honor killing? The victims’ family will probably have concocted a cover story, perhaps involving the girl returning to the family’s homeland.

            Or killings by police – we’ve seen how difficult it is to get convictions – so I guess we either deny cops due process or legalize police killing altogether?

            Of course, you don’t see the obstacles in the above cases as insuperable, because you don’t think legalizing slavery, honor-killing, etc., as morally valid options. So instead of talking about a stark choice between legalization and trampling the Constituiton, you think we should do all we can to prosecute these crimes like other crimes.

            So the issue boils down to the moral status of abortion – is it just one of those things that we can either regulate or not regulate based on utilitarian considerations, or it a wrong in the same sense that slavery is a wrong, and legalizing it is unacceptable (and unconstitutional)?

            1. If you think making every woman who has a miscarriage answer to the police is a price worth paying, good for you. I do not. But you need to be honest about that and admit what you are advocating for instead of lying and pretending that a ban on abortion will only affect the evil abortionists, because it won’t.

              And banning slavery actually stopped slavery. Banning abortion is likely not going to stop abortion. The problem I have with the pro life movement is that they are just as dishonest as the drug prohibition movement. They assume that their ban is going to work and anyone who objects to it must just think the object of the ban is great.

              1. “And banning slavery actually stopped slavery.”

                You have got to be kidding me.

                I think it’s time you acknowledged that the laws against slavery are a failed experiment – unless you want the police harassing every honest employer, we need to repeal the laws against slavery. It’s just common sense.

                /sarc

                1. And it seems that anti-slavery activists and governments are less than fully knowledgeable or accurate in coming up with statistics on slavery

                  So since we obviously can’t trust the government to honestly and properly handle slavery, let’s just legalize it!

                  /sarc

                  1. It’s interesting that amid all these authoritative-sounding claims of how laws against abortion would be enforced, there are no actual examples of enforcement practices in countries where abortion is a crime – eg, the U.S. before the legalization movement, other countries, etc.

                    I’ll give you Romania, that helps with your case.

                    Other real-world examples?

          3. Without investigating every miscarriage, I don’t see how you could stop that.

            I really do think this is pants-pooping.

            Its the same mindset that believes having sex-specific bathrooms necessarily requires that every single person going to the bathroom have a genital exam on the way in, every time.

            1. Maybe they wouldn’t do that. If they don’t, then a ban on abortion is effectively meaningless. It would just mean that women who got abortions just told the authorities they had a miscarriage. Again, without investigating the claim, what is to stop from doctors doing abortions and then saying the woman had a miscarriage if anyone asks what is going on? Nothing, as far as I can see.

              And lets not forget, the health of the mother exception. If you don’t heavily regulate that, it is even easier to get around any ban because all an abortionist has to do is check the box saying the abortion is necessary for the health of the mother. Without a pretty serious set of checks and due process, any health of the mother exception to the ban makes the ban effectively meaningless.

              If you are okay with the ban being meaningless, fine. But don’t then turn around and tell me how horrible abortion is when you are unwilling to take the steps necessary to make your proposed ban meaningful.

              1. Maybe they wouldn’t do that.

                No maybe about it. They won’t.

                For starters, the cops won’t even know about 99% of miscarriages. They aren’t reportable, and in fact a medical provider reporting them would violate privacy laws.

                Second, most miscarriages happen before viability, when no abortion bans of any kind are allowed.

            2. Unless you give bright-line statutory guidelines, you’re putting it in the hands of whatever service does investigations.

        3. The problem is that the ONLY justification in a legal ban on abortion is a recognition that the fetus has human rights and therefore abortion is murder.

          If abortion is murder then ANY action which causes a miscarriage is a crime of some sort and all miscarriages must be investigated to determine if the death was natural or the result of criminal acts.

          So yes you could apply the FYTW principle and make any kind of abortion laws you wanted to make you feel good but the logical extension of the concept that the fetus possesses human rights carries the necessary correlate that miscarriages must be investigated for possible foul play just like any other death under uncertain circumstances.

      3. The same thing I suppose if there was an exception for rape or health of the mother.

    5. Dude, I hope that doesn’t have repurcussions with your wife!

      MILs hold a lot of power.

    6. Honestly Taran I would take your own advice and do not feed your MIL. I myself have gotten off FB. I like to spend my time doing more productive things.

    7. Don’t worry about losing the Hillary rant that you sent the MIL. You’ll be able to read it when it’s entered into evidence for your sedition trial after Hillary gets elected. The NSA will see to that if your MIL fails in her duty.

    8. worse than all of Bush’s warmongering

      So voting for Hillary? How does that make any sense?

  24. You misogynistic anti-Hillary people are so out of touch with reality. If you weren’t so stubborn and anti-science you’d recognize that Hillary is an exceptionally trustworthy and honest candidate. Certainly more so than Trump. It’s right there in the data. Cold hard, non-cherry picked data that does not include curious sampling omissions like only using Clinton’s political statements made since 2007.

    Somewhat related: Does DC ruin everyone that lives there? I saw this linked on my facebook by a college friend that was quite conservative during college. She became a journalist eventually getting the White House beat. Now she seems to be a progtard.

    1. Yes. The city needs to be purged, preferrably by being nuked from orbit, as it’s the only way to be sure.

      1. Todd Beamer was wrong?

    2. She became a journalist

      The only professions more certain to drain your mind of all sensibility would be that of ‘psychologist’ or ‘social worker’.

      1. It’s like wondering why a guy who became a priest got religious.

    3. No. Just everyone who works in the media or politics who lives there.

    4. If Trump could refrain from the retarded twitter wars and campaign on purging DC, he would win in a landslide. Don’t agree with everything here, but I liked this thought:

      … the public doesn’t want to swap a Democrat for a Republican, they want actual regime change, which would require firing people down to mid-level bureaucrats and major media outlets. Imagine a major news organization having to fire most of their reporters because they don’t know anyone who is in power in DC, and the people in power don’t like them and refuse to talk to them. Then you have an idea of the level of regime change required.

      http://www.neoreactionary.blogspot.co…..et-it.html

      1. Imagine a major news organization having to fire most of their reporters because they don’t know anyone who is in power in DC, and the people in power don’t like them and refuse to talk to them. Then you have an idea of the level of regime change required.

        And that would be utterly horrible because it’s not “within normal parameters”. Parameters we must stay within because… reasons. Like, NUCLEAR HOLOCAUST! And RUSSIAN HEGEMONY! ELEVENTYONE!!1! Also, somehow the candidate who’s going to make Teapot Dome and the Grant Administration look like child’s play is operating “within normal parameters”.

        What I will at least say is that I doubt Trump is going to effect real and lasting “regime change” as described. But the delusion of people who think that, if he does, it will be the literal end of the world is ridiculous. LBJ vs Goldwater, much?

    5. It made me even more jaded and skeptical, but then I had to move away after 7 years.

  25. The Politics of Solidarity: A Case for the American Solidarity Party

    We need a politics that can speak authentically in the language of love, keep all human beings from conception to natural death “fully amongst us” (as Raimond Gaita puts it in A Common Humanity), enliven our sense of a shared past and a shared future rooted in a common good, build bridges and not just walls, and properly recognize the significance of our particular identity-defining attachments and integrate them with the demands of universal human concern. This is what the ASP seeks to do.

    Certain questions must be addressed. First: Why should someone support a Christian Democratic party in a secular society? Wouldn’t such a party exclude non-Christians? And shouldn’t we frame our political arguments in terms that appeal to all of our fellow citizens, without reference to creed?

    While the ASP is shaped by a Christian worldview, it welcomes all people who find its vision for society compelling, even if they do not share in the same faith. And despite what John Rawls and other liberal political philosophers say, there is in fact no worldview-neutral standpoint; we cannot and should not leave our comprehensive religious, philosophical, and moral understandings at the door when we engage in political argument.

  26. Is The Student Loan Crisis Fact Or Fiction?

    Q: Roughly 43 million people today hold more than $1.3 trillion in student loan debt. And many are struggling to pay the money back. But you say Americans have been misled about the seriousness of the problem?

    A: I think what is most important is for people to understand that the common image of the student loan problem really misses the point. People have an image of a recent bachelor’s degree recipient who went to college for four years and is now 22-23 years old and is working at Starbucks. Those people are very rare.

    People who earn bachelor’s degrees, by and large, do fine.

    The problem is that we have a lot of people actually borrowing small amounts of money, going to college, not completing [a degree] or completing credentials that don’t have labor market value. They tend to be older. They tend to come from disadvantaged, middle-income families and they’re struggling. [But] not because they owe a lot of money.

    1. The key is the ratio of amount of debt to post-graduation earnings.

      If you are 30, have student loan debt, and arent a doctor, you probably did something wrong.

    2. On a case-by-case basis, it’s obviously not a crisis because the thing hasn’t fallen apart just yet. In another ten years, who knows where we’ll be. I’m certain a number of prestigious, high-dollar lib arts schools are going to be shuttering or massively transforming their business plans.

      But the fact is we’re encouraging a wealth-destroying mechanism by propping up hugely expensive makework schemes for a class of unproductive academics and administrators, and we’re yoking students to pay for it. Those future consumers and producers (those who graduate with moneymaking degrees, anyway) are mortgaging their futures to pay for this scam. The degrees are no doubt worth the debt in a purely arithmetical sense, but the larger macroeconomic effects, not to mention the moral implications, are another story entirely.

    3. Yeah, the biggest problem is not the ones who graduate with a degree and are working at Starbucks, it is the guy who went for 3 years and then had to drop out because he had a kid and needed to get a job immediately so now he’s sitting there with no degree and more than a years salary in debt he can’t discharge or even renegotiate downward.

      Next up after him is the guy who lost his factory job and went “back to school” to retrain into some other field dropping $50k on the 2 year certification course only to find out that the jobs in that field don’t pay enough to cover his bills (this one nearly happened to my wife, she decided she wanted to go to culinary school, it would have been $60k for the 2 year course at the end of which she would have been qualified to make $12 an hour working as an entry level chef with the eventual possibility of maybe earning $70k as a head chef 10 years down the road).

      3rd on the list are the ones who graduated with utterly useless degrees in crap like {insert adjective here} studies although honestly those guys deserve to be shit on anyway so I’m not really feeling sorry for them.

      1. And let’s be honest, that last guy probably isn’t ever going to pay back a red cent on those loans. So not only are a lot of people with massive student loan debt consigned to a life of leeching off taxpayers because their meager earnings will never pay off their loans, but their debt is further subsidized by the productive people who degreed in something worthwhile.

        1. that last guy probably isn’t ever going to pay back a red cent on those loans.

          When he qualifies for SocSec, they’ll withhold it from his welfare checks.

          So there’s that.

      2. I don’t mean to quibble here, but (a) do ALL culinary degrees cost $60k, and (b) is there no advantage to the $60k one versus the cheaper one? That just seems crazy. I guess, finally, do vocational loans qualify as federally subsidized?

        1. Not all no, but she was looking at the “very prestigious” Le Cordon Bleu and yeah there is an advantage to getting a degree there, when you graduate you get to work in high end fine dining establishments making $12 per hour and maybe someday hit $80 to 90k a year as the executive chef of such a restraunt. Alternatively you can pay $30k for a less prestigious degree where you only make $11 an hour working at TGI Fridays to start your career and you’ll max out making $60k a year as the head chef at a local sports bar.

          Either way no one who ever goes to culinary school will ever earn enough money in that field to justify the expense unless by some miracle they go on to become a top level celebrity chef and can start making more money by tv appearances and selling cookbooks than they ever did in a kitchen.

        2. Oh and yes, vocational loans are no different from any other student loan. As long as the school is properly accredited you can use Federally guaranteed student loans to go there. That said, Federally Guaranteed loans won’t pay for a $30k a year degree anywhere so you’re also looking at non guaranteed loans being in the picture too.

  27. Julian Assange says that Wikileaks has “a lot” of material related to Hillary Clinton and it will be released “in different batches.”

    And none of it will end Hilary’s ambitions. The woman could perform ritual human sacrifice during the debates and she will not lose her base.

    1. And the media would continue to ignore and when necessary excuse her malfeasance. Because TRUMP!!1!!

    2. It won’t keep her from getting a lot of votes. It might, however, keep her from winning. I would think the best is yet to come. Assange is pretty savvy about these things. I can’t believe he would have put his best stuff out first. Given his history and general astuteness about playing the media, my guess is he started with his weakest stuff and every new leak is going to be worse than the last.

      1. To the media, it will never be about her or what’s in the emails, it will be about the leakers — they are the problem.

      2. The Assanges have learned how to do this. Release a batch, wait for the reaction, see how what you still have in the can can make the reaction look bad, release some more, rinse and repeat.

        The problem that everyone has at this point is the Praetorian Guard of the DemOp Media running interference for Hillary, their own credibility and decency be damned.

      3. “my guess is he started with his weakest stuff and every new leak is going to be worse than the last.”

        No, he released the most pertinent data to the DNC. After the convention that info has little value in firing up Berniebots.

        I can’t wait for the next batch.

    3. I just don’t get the Hillbots driving around with Hillary bumper stickers. She’s a liar and a crook.

      I can see holding your nose and voting for her if you’re a leftist, especially given Trump as your potential nightmare, but those who drive around with Hillary bumper stickers are just gullible sheeple.

      1. Her ambition for power is as naked as Melania Trump in 1996. It’s so obvious and apparent. Her every move and word is choreographed for maximum electability and pretty much everyone knows it. That kind of person should be the last to wield the mighty pen and phone.

        1. If Trump does win the presidency, I want the first line of his acceptance speech to be:

          “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone.”

          Either that, or:

          “I’m the decider.”

          1. “Arrest the bitch!”

        2. That moment a couple months ago where she went off about Bernie supposedly “lying” about her environmental record was the most genuine moment of her entire campaign. She ended up sounding completely ridiculous, but at least it didn’t come off as having been run through a focus group first.

    4. The media’s take on this is hilarious. It’s all about Russia Russia Russia and little about the DNC railroading Sanders.

      Journolist Lives!

      1. Hilarious, and effective.

    5. If she were to kill the right sort of human in the human sacrifice, she’d probably be able to keep the Berniebots from defecting to Stein. E.g., a random stock broker, coal miner, oil field roustabout, or small business owner.

  28. Airplanes are more disgusting than you ever imagined

    “If someone ? seated in back of you [has a cold], you will get the germs,” Tierno says. Nandi recommends requesting a seat change if there are openings around you: “Changing a few rows may or may not make a difference, but if there’s availability, it’s worth asking,” he says. “You’re not going to offend anyone.”

    Unless, of course, that someone is of certain ethnicities or religions.

    1. “To be honest, I catch myself be racist every once in a while”

      Every 4 years or so?

    2. Jamie Kapp is a 19-year old artist. Her comic about white privilege has been featured on Buzzfeed, and has been used as an instructional tool in classrooms.

      *White* classrooms, no doubt.

      1. If there’s one age group who really gets how life works and whose wisdom should be heeded, it’s people who just graduated from high school.

  29. Nuts, by the truckload, make appetizing targets for thieves

    A cargo theft specialist describes the motivation behind a crime wave hitting California’s lucrative tree nut industry: “It’s not easy to track a nut.”
    It’s also not easy to immediately detect the criminals strategically robbing millions of dollars in nut cargo. But that’s what’s facing growers, the industry and authorities in California, where nut production brought in $9.3 billion in 2014.

    “It hit us right between the eyes,” said Roger Isom, CEO of the Western Agricultural Processors Association. “This is not anything we’ve really seen before … we’ve experienced 30 thefts in the last six months,” he said in April.

    1. It was beautiful. It was an even bigger money-maker than numbers, and Jimmy was in
      charge. Whenever we needed money, we’d rob the nut farmers. To us, it was better than Citibank.

    2. …nut cargo… “It hit us right between the eyes,” said Roger Isom

      Phrasing?

      1. Roger Isom is an alias for a man named Tobias Funke.

    3. Nuts by the Truckload = missed opportunity for a Squirrel Nut Zippers album name.

  30. The worst economic recovery since the Great Depression rolls on and on and on, with a dismal 1.2% economic growth in the second quarter, well below what the so-called “experts” were predicting.

    1. I wonder whether any notable deregulatory efforts have been made within the United States, even on a local level, in the last year. People forget that the state expands endlessly.

      1. Not much. The only good news has been the defeat of efforts in some states to stop fracking. That is not an improvement but just a rear guard action to keep things from getting worse.

        The worst part about this is that thanks to fracking, the country should be booming right now. The country just discovered trillions of dollars in natural resources and a method for ensuring cheap energy supplies for the next hundred years. That is the kind of thing historic booms are made of. Yet, we struggle along through stagflation in spite of that. It is just infuriating.

        1. American enterprises now bear such a thoroughly detrimental regulatory burden, tragically, that our economy can no longer produce recoveries of the sort it has in previous downturns.

          All hail the glory of government!

          1. It is just bad luck Thymirus. And racism because business won’t accept it that a black man is President.

            If you killed the regulatory state, the economy would boom and we could damn near afford the welfare state Progs claim to be so fond of.

        2. John, the fracking boom is a reason to hope for a Clinton win and a GOP Congress . Let’s face it: Democrat presidents are luckier than Republicans if a GOP Congress can keep them from doing really stupid shit.

          Bill Clinton enjoyed the most fortuitous combination of circumstances in US history: the peace dividend of the end of the Cold War plus the productivity boom from IT plus the nascent Internet plus monetary stability from the Volker Fed plus the short-term juice from the Greenspan Fed. Plus, he had a GOP Congress that kept him from getting a disasterous health care reform. Of course, Clinton had nothing to do with any of this other than the fact that he was very lucky.

          George Bush got 911. His dimwitted response involved the cost of a brand-new world war. Most of his dimwitted administration couldn’t see that a housing market bubble coupled with a government-designed mortgage finance system riddled with perverse incentives would crash the entire financial system. Those who did understand the problem were powerless to remedy the situtation with a Democrat Congress. Very unlucky.

          Obama got fracking. Even though he and just about every Democrat outside of Texas and Louisiana was against it, Obama got a GOP Congress before they had a chance to screw it up. Very lucky. Unfortunately for the economy and for us all, he didn’t get a GOP Congress in time to kill the PPACA.

          1. True for Clinton and Obama. Bush was stupid to pass Medicare part D and invade Iraq, not unlucky.

    2. If only we had done a bigger stimulus…

      – Krugabe

    3. But the economy’s so very much better than it was in 2008, or so that graphic my prog friends keep posting tells me.

    4. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast GDP growth of 2.6% rate in the last quarter

      Wow, big miss there. Good going, economists.

      The combination of abundant shale, smartphone/tech breakthroughs and (as Bailey mentioned a while back) all-time high worker productivity should be combining to skyrocket growth.

  31. Hillary is the mostest honestest politician ever.

    Look: all politicians lie sometimes. That includes Hillary Clinton. But as the chart on the right shows, Hillary is one of the most honest politicians on the national stage.

    1. Standard leftist goalpost shifting.

      Kevin Drum is beating the drum for straight-up corruption. You can’t trust the media at all anymore. The Republic is f***ed.

    2. You can’t argue with that.

    3. For what it’s worth, I think Clinton is more honest than Trump, in that she doesn’t lie completely arbitrarily about random pointless shit.

      But she’s dishonest in a more harmful way. She’s the Richard Nixon to his Alex Jones.

      1. I think Clinton is more honest than Trump, in that she doesn’t lie completely arbitrarily about random pointless shit.

        Citation needed, for two reasons.

        (a) She tells such gargantuan, consequential lies that nobody can be bothered with her routine lying about little things. In my experience, habitual liars lie a lot more than they “need” to.

        (b) With a media willing to cover for her most spectacular lies, who knows what little lies they also cover for.

    4. Not one Democrat in the top 2/3 of that graph. Does this show that the Washington Post has a bias to favor Democratic politicians, or are the Democrats to-a-man sinless paragons of virtue compared to the rest of mankind?

      1. Well let’s see–

        Geraghty . Running from snipers in the Balkans,
        Drum I’ll give you the Balkans thing. That was a lie.

        So, lie.

        Geraghty being “dead broke” upon leaving the White House
        .Drum The Clintons were in debt when they left the White House.

        In debt is not ‘dead broke’, so–lie.

        Geraghty “all my grandparents” immigrated to America,
        Drum Hillary’s great-grandparents were immigrants?she was off by a generation.

        Washington LOVES ‘misspoke’. Because that means the lie ‘just happened’. Lie

        Geraghty her tale of trying to join the Marines
        Drum Nobody knows if she ever tried to join the Marines, but there’s no evidence she didn’t.

        Mystery! Finally, something that not absolutely a lie!

        1. con’t

          Geraghty her claim she never received or sent any material that was classified on her private e-mail system
          Drum She didn’t knowingly send classified material on her private email system, and it’s hardly fair to judge her by the fact that some of her emails were retroactively classified.

          Yes. She did. The FBI made that abundantly clear when they let her skate. Lie

          Geraghty her claim to have started criticizing the Iraq War before Barack Obama did
          Drum And her statement about the Iraq War was strained (she was talking about criticism after Obama joined the Senate), but it’s typical political exaggeration, not a lie.

          Right back to misspeaking. Lie.

          The woman can’t speak without lying based on this–and her sycophants can’t stop themselves from lying to lie her lies away.

  32. Little Tommy Friedman gets all metaphory again

    The primary focus of Wall People is finding a president who will turn off the fan ? the violent winds of change that are now buffeting every family ? in their workplace, where machines are threatening white-collar and blue-collar jobs; in their neighborhoods, where so many more immigrants of different religions, races and cultures are moving in; and globally, where super-empowered angry people are now killing innocents with disturbing regularity. They want a wall to stop it all.

    Web People instinctively understand that Democrats and Republicans both built their platforms largely in response to the Industrial Revolution, the New Deal and the Cold War, but that today, a 21st-century party needs to build its platform in response to the accelerations in technology, globalization and climate change, which are the forces transforming the workplace, geopolitics and the very planet.

    And my favorite non-sequitur from teh article:

    Because the G.O.P. was out of the White House for the last eight years, the party’s base and leadership are the least understanding of the world in which we’re living.

    1. He is a scum bag. Easy for him to say when he has all that money and comfort.

      1. On the third day of the Revolution, when he is pulled out of his ginormous mansion and executed, I’m going to laugh my way through the day’s hard labor.

    2. Heh. This is what passes as enlightening writing and thinking at the NYT.

      Babble, babble, bibble, gobbily-bebble.

    3. So, the Islamonazis are going nutso again because Al Gore invented the Internet.

      Jesus fucking Christ, there’s a new one I’ve never heard before.

    4. I mean…I guess I agree with a lot of that premise. Until he tries to attach a party to his values, I think he’s laying out good values. The problem is the part about how the Democratic establishment is somehow right in line with the values that allowed us to get to a “web” world.

      The author wants us all to go “center-left” for the good of the economy, but right now center left means shitting on Uber and demanding that even the most incompetent human make $32,000 a year on a union job from which they can’t be fired, which is essentially the opposite of the 21st-century innovator he claims he wants.

    5. I like the way you can only understand the world from inside the massively filtered bubble of the White House.

      Tell us, Tom, since you’re not in the White House, and thus can’t possibly understand the world, why we should care what you think?

  33. Hillary is one of the most honest politicians on the national stage.

    As Carl the waiter says, in Casablanca:

    “Honest? Honest as the day is long.”

  34. Sorry if this ruins your day, but better get used to saying “President Hillary Clinton”.

    Trump is an a$$hole and is going to get wiped out.

    The alternative to Cheeto Jesus is a corrupt hag who is going to gut the 1st and 2nd amendment, not immediately, but in the long run, with a$$hole SCOTUS nominees who will rubber stamp government overreach in cases like Citizens United and Heller.

    1. *gallic shrug*

      A Hillary presidency has the potential to fragment the country even more. Probably a low chance but I see this as an opportunity for a state (or states) to secede – maybe not during her presidency but as a future event. I see the 2A being a flashpoint for some states, or even the rural population at large.

      The same, of course, could be said with the Trump presidency, but with some blue states refusing to follow the federal government.

      But maybe I’m just being hopeful.

  35. Couple Having Sex In Pubilc Park While Spectators Watch

    The scene features the couple in broad daylight beneath a tree, filmed from a rather unflattering angle while assuming the famous “missionary position.” In the distance is a woman pushing a baby stroller through the park, apparently oblivious to what was happening under the tree.

    1. Apparently, sexual content ? whether real or fake ? helps videos go viral.

      Never would have figured that.

      1. *1920s advertising firms furiously take notes*

    2. A video of a man and woman who appear to be having sexual intercourse in a public Berlin park has gone viral on the internet.

      Take that, ISIS.

  36. super-empowered angry people are now killing innocents with disturbing regularity.

    Que?

    1. I think they mean “super-woke”.

  37. Korryn Gaines: Mother holding five-year-old son shot dead by police during traffic violations arrest stand-off

    A mother who allegedly threatened police with a shotgun has been shot dead in the US during a raid over driving offences.

    Korryn Gaines’s five-year-old son was also shot in a limb during a stand-off with police at their home in Randallstown, Maryland.

    1. We already know that every law carries with it the possibility of being murdered by the police. Are we going to have to amend that to include the police trying to murder your children as well?

    2. The race of the officers who shot the mother, who was black, have not been released,

      How can we possibly know who was right and who was wrong without knowing the race of the cops? This is post-racial America.

      1. Seems I remember our military having stricter rules of engagement is Iraq and Afghanistan.

        1. No question they do. “Furtive movement” doesn’t justify shooting. If memory serves, even having a gun pointed at you doesn’t justify shooting. Essentially, I believe, our guys can’t take the first shot.

    3. Should police be able to shoot first?

      1. That five year old was asking for it.

    4. With a chart that shows frequency of the race of people shot by police making your average idiot who can’t understand a bar chart think blacks are shot much more than whites.

      I’m not saying it isn’t a useful data point, but I would never present the one without the other.

  38. The Shameless Commodification of Muslim Life at the DNC

    The Democrats remain at the very core, irrespective of flowery rhetoric, a war party, a party which has helped immunize the architects of the War on Terror, all while working tirelessly to diversify expanding military projects?to make their wars more inclusive, so that maybe next year during another one of their conventions you’ll be moved by another Muslim parent reliving the horror of their child’s sacrifice into voting for a politician invoking another bogeyman.

  39. Looks like the RUsskies are heating things up in Ukraine again.

    Groovus – if you’re around, be safe, mmmkay?

    1. Making hay while the sun shines. They know Obama wouldn’t shit if they rolled a division of tanks into Kiev. The next President may not be so accommodating.

  40. I i get paid over $86 per hour working from home with 3 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless.

    Heres what I’ve been doing:==>==> http://www.CareerPlus90.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.