New Zealand Has Pizza Delivery Drones

But thanks to overregulation, America doesn't.


We live in an exciting world. Sooner than you think, stuff you order online will be delivered all but instantly, cars will navigate without a driver, and everything from homes to shopping carts will be plugged in to the internet.

The latest entity to nudge humanity along that path is not a tech behemoth or a university research team but, of all things, a pizza company. In New Zealand, Domino's has started to test the delivery of food to customers via a drone called DomiCopter. "It doesn't add up to deliver a two kilogram package in a two-ton vehicle," Scott Bush, a general manager for Domino's Pizza Enterprises, which is independent of the U.S. chain and operates in seven countries, told CNN Money last August. "In Auckland, we have such massive traffic congestion it just makes sense to take to the airways."

A Domino's customer who orders a pizza and requests drone delivery will receive a notification on his smartphone when the order is approaching. The customer will then go outside and hit the "accept" button on the Domino's app, thus allowing the drone to lower the food via a tether. Once the package is released, the drone pulls the tether up and flies back to the Domino's store.

Pretty cool, right? If tests prove successful, the company plans to extend the model to Australia, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Japan, and Germany.

It's not alone. The online retail giant Amazon is testing similar technology for its Prime Air delivery service in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands. If all goes according to plan, customers in these countries will be able to receive packages in 30 minutes via drone-like "Octocopters." The drones' 20-mile-radius limit means that residents of big cities near Amazon distribution sites may be the only ones eligible for the service at first.

Drone delivery is just the beginning. In August, the U.K.-based Delphi Automotive announced that it will launch a fleet of six automated taxis in Singapore in 2017. During the testing phase, a driver will be present in case of problems and the vehicles will be equipped with a steering wheel and pedals for their human understudies. The plan is to completely eliminate drivers, steering wheels, and pedals by 2019 and to expand the fleet to 50 taxis that can be hailed with the touch of a smartphone.

These innovations have one unfortunate thing in common: At least for now, they're only going to benefit consumers outside the United States.

When forward-thinking companies engage in global innovation arbitrage, America isn't always a winner. "Capital moves like quicksilver around the globe today as investors and entrepreneurs look for more hospitable tax and regulatory environments," the Mercatus Center's Adam Thierer explained in a blog post at The Technology Liberation Front. "The same is increasingly true for innovation. Innovators can, and increasingly will, move to those countries and continents that provide a legal and regulatory environment more hospitable to entrepreneurial activity."

Regulatory uncertainty (when innovators can't be sure what the rules will look like in the coming months and years) and regulatory burdens (when the rules that do get handed down make operations and compliance significantly more costly) create powerful incentives for people to exercise their right to take their businesses to countries where the legal regime is friendlier.

U.S.-based companies such as Amazon have moved their drone research offshore to escape the risk-averse regulators at the Federal Aviation Administration. Ignoring pleas from innovators and consumers, the agency has banned the use of commercial drones under many circumstances and imposed inane regulations—like requiring that a drone operator be within sight of the device at all times unless granted a waiver—on the rest.

Meanwhile, whereas the U.S. won't allow companies to experiment with disruptive technologies without first getting permission from the government, the U.K.'s leaders have communicated loud and clear that that country is open for business—not just for drones, but for driverless cars and other technologies.

The U.K.'s Department of Business, Innovation & Skills even published a report called Unlocking the Sharing Economy, which promises not to make the same regulatory mistakes that other countries have. "The U.K. is embracing new, disruptive business models and challenger businesses that increase competition and offer new product and experiences for consumers," the authors write. "Where other countries and cities are closing down consumer choice, and limiting people's freedom to make better use of their possessions, we are embracing it."

If missing out on pizza-delivery drones and driver-free cars doesn't seem like a big deal to you, think about the tremendous cost in lives, money, and well-being that accrue when regulation-wary innovators decide to stay out of more vital industries, such as health care.

That's effectively what has happened with Google. During a 2014 interview with businessman Vinod Khosla, co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page were asked whether Google was interested in venturing into that sphere. "Health is just so heavily regulated, it's just a painful business to be in," Brin responded. "Even though we do have some health projects…I think the regulatory burden in the U.S. is so high that I think it would dissuade a lot of entrepreneurs." Added Page: "I do worry, you know, we kind of regulate ourselves out of some really great possibilities."

The most visible and infuriating example of this global innovation arbitrage is the exit from the U.S. of the Google-backed startup 23andMe, maker of mail-order DNA-testing kits that allow people to learn about their own personal genetics, ancestry, and predisposition to various diseases. After being ordered by the Food and Drug Administration to stop offering certain services out of fear that consumers may not understand the difference between being predisposed to a particular disease and actually having it, the company decided to open up shop in the United Kingdom. British consumers will enjoy the benefits. Americans, on the other hand—having been protected by the government against their will—are left with fewer choices and less information.

No one can anticipate what innovation will bring. But we know for sure that if the U.S. government fails to create a more hospitable environment, other countries will be more than happy to invite our innovators to their shores.

If we want to bring the revolutionary technological progress we've seen in other fields, such as information technology, into spheres like health care, American lawmakers need to embrace permissionless innovation. To help them do that, Thierer has come up with a 10-point checklist that would help spur the development of dynamic new products and sectors—and to keep them here, where Americans can benefit.

The list includes making permissionless innovation the default policy position, so that industry doesn't have to wait for government to hand down rules before it can begin experimenting; removing many of the unnecessary regulatory barriers that are already in place; protecting technology providers from onerous liability for third-party uses of their services or platforms; and pushing for more industry self-regulation.

The U.S. is increasingly seeing groundbreaking technologies move to other countries more welcoming to innovators than we are. Even worse, it's likely that many potential innovations never see the light of day at all because of rampant overregulation. It's time to give innovation back to the innovators and set the U.S. up to win the game of global innovation arbitrage.

NEXT: Stop Sharing News That Trans Teen Suicides Spiked Post-Election—It's Not Just Wrong, But Dangerous to LGBT Youth

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. Our incoming CIC claims he will cut regs dramatically.

    I predict drone delivered pizza in the US inside two years.

    1. But it will be racist and fascist pizza if it is delivered by drones enabled by the evil Trump. Veronica won’t like that pizza.

      1. I was craving some fascist pizza last night. The wife wouldn’t stop talking about it because she was craving some as well.

        I have to make my own if I want true thin crust with extra fascism. Sunday is a good day for that.

        1. Thin crust pizza is from Naples. The real fascists are from Northern Italy and eat real fascist thick crust pizza.

          1. This

            And don’t get me started on deep dish.

            1. *narrows Chicago area gaze*

              1. If your gaze is narrowed, you can’t actually see the extent of the deep dish.

                Which of course is NOT pizza.

                1. I was busy last week. Was there an election? Hillary won right? That is what you smugly assured me. And since you are so fucking brilliant and not a complete dumb ass, that is what happened right? It was a landslide right?

                  You did assure me that Trump not just wasn’t going to win but “couldn’t win”. Hey, you are a brilliant guy. You are a scientist. No complete fucking dumb ass who is wrong about nearly everything.

                  So you were right of course.

                  1. Up until eight in evening you would have sworn up and down that Clinton will get it, even if a nailbiter, just like the rest of us. I hope you continue being right, though, and he’s not a complete wet turd.

                    1. I would not have sworn that. I always said I thought Trump had a good chance of winning. And I don’t have a problem with the people who thought Clinton might win. It is the idiots like this one who claimed that Trump couldn’t win, who deserve to have their faces rubbed in it.

                    2. I never thought he couldn’t win. You can go back to Monday night before the election and see that I put money on a Trump victory. There’s just too many dumbass White people in this country who think Barack Obama is the reason for their shitty job. They’re going to get there’s soon– having their kids shipped off to fight in some bullshit war that Republican warmongers talk Donald Trump into in between his inspections of his golf courses. Sucks for them. Trust me, they’ll probably blame liberals when their kids come back in flag draped boxes.

                    3. If only you had so much clairvoyance when it came to your mortgage..

                  2. How many foreign operatives did you capture last week? Oh yeah, now I remember. Zero. You spent your time posting on Reason while collecting a paycheck mulcted at gunpoint from the rest of us.

                  3. Not everyone here thought you were nuts. I won about $230 in bets on Trump.

                    However, they were 2:1 and 3:1 bets. One was an even-money bet that he’d get 239 electoral votes (238 1/2 was the over-under with an even moneyline on the over.)

                    I still don’t like Trump. I think he’ll be mediocre from a liberty standpoint; certainly not as good as Coolidge or Cleveland and probably not as good as Reagan, Carter, Kennedy, or Eisenhower, but not as bad as Johnson or Nixon and almost certainly not as bad as Obama, Bush II, FDR, or Wilson. And there’s no way he will be as bad as Hillary would be.

                    Trump has said so many contradictory things that it’s impossible to know what he’ll actually do. However some of the signs are encouraging on global warming, energy policy, and regulation. The signs in foreign policy aren’t encouraging.

                    1. I told a few of my clients and co-workers it would be a close election and come down to PA. The next day I was on site, they were in amazement at how I could know that. They said he had no chance! My comment was ‘Stop using CNN as your only source of news. In fact, stop watching CNN.’

                2. I’ve got my FIRST check total of $4800 for a week. Working from home saves money in several ways.I love this. I’ve recently started taking the steps to build my freelance Job career so that I can work from home. here is i started… https://goo.gl/52ubga

              2. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do… http://www.Trends88.com

                1. Ooh, smart bot.

          2. Italian Tomato Pie is a precursor to Pizza, but pizza was born in New York when Italian immigrants modified it to appeal to the tastes of their non-italian neghbors, resulting in a superior product and eventually what we know as Pizza today. That got imported to Italy by GIs during the second world war, cross-pollinating the tomato pie with some of the advancements made in the new world.

            1. That’s not accurate.

            2. This is consistent with my experience when I lived in Rome back in 1964. You couldn’t find good pizza there. It was just crust with tomato sauce and cheese on it. Pizza Hut made better pizza in Texas than I ever found in Rome back then. And I ate a lot of pizza in Rome because I was a kid and it was cheap. In Naples they made a thin crust pizza with a tangy tomato sauce and cheese, but I doubt one could find a Neapolitan pizza that would satisfy a New York pizza connoisseur today.

        2. I have my dough all ready made for today,thin crust with olive oil,onions,peppers ,roasted garlic ,basil leafs and 4 cheeses.I’ll be more of a white pizza. Beer is cold and no yard work today.

          1. White “pizza” is just open-face grilled cheese sandwich.

          2. No meat?

            *Puts Adans in basket of deplorables*

            1. Hey,I’m a rare beef eater,back off.

              1. Back peddling will get you nowhere.

      2. It’ll be culturally inappropriate pizza; thick soggy pizza with pineapple instead of a thin crisp pizza without pineapple.

        “When you’re cooking a country’s dish for other people, including ones who have never tried the original dish before, you’re also representing the meaning of the dish as well as its culture,” , says Tony Soprano, a student from Rome. “So if people not from that heritage take food, modify it and serve it as ‘authentic,’ it is appropriative.”

        1. So if WHITE people not from that heritage take food, modify it and serve it as ‘authentic,’ it is appropriative.”

          Only white people are guilty of that. When say black people in the Caribbean borrow parts of the East Indian spice pallet for their food, that is wonderful diversity.

        2. What does ‘serve it as authentic’ mean? The words you use after you cook something determines if you are committing a moral crime?

          He had a decent point right up to ‘appropriative’. Who gives a shit how someone else cooks their pizza? I will cook my pizza the way I like it and Tony can go fuck himself.

          Also, a loaf of bread with some pizza sauce and a sprinkle of cheese on it is not pizza.

          1. It was, how you say? A joke.

          2. I had to reread that line. Obviously it was a type and should have been appropriate.

          3. I had to reread that line. Obviously it was a type and should have been appropriate.

          4. Tony… Soprano.. HBO tv series…

        3. tomayto, tomahto!

          1. potayto, potahto! Let’s call the whole thing hoff, dahlink.

        4. Tony Soprano? Perhaps this kid is a troll?

          1. “If you wanna appropriate our culture, ya gotta let us dip our beaks.”

      3. All Italian pizza is true fascist pizza, as it’s all white pizza. Italians don’t put marinara on pizza, that’s a Murikan thing.

        1. Wikipedia begs to differ.

          1. So does Associazione Vera Pizza Napoletana. They also say that “pizza was invented in New York” thing is utter bullshit.

            1. Of course they would say that.

              1. They’re right.

    2. As long as it is thin crust. Otherwise it is just a bread bomb waiting to happen.

      1. Bread bomb… I don’t know about those, but I do recall the US inventing a powdered explosive for use by partisans. It was shipped blending with pancake mix, and safe to cook up and eat as such if need be to prove to the occupying powers that it was just pancake mix. Prepared differently, it was usable as a bomb.

        1. You must be referring to RDX.

      2. I prefer the brick oven style crust myself, but thin is ok. I hate the marinara covered cake they call thick crust.

      3. At the risk of being kicked out of the club or being put on a list, my favorite pizza is garlicky focaccia with a couple of paper-thin slices of tomato, onion, and green pepper and a little sprinkle of mozzarella. 90% bread.

    3. Wouldn’t the pizza be cold by the time it got here from new Zealand?

      1. OMG! Yours is the best post EVER! However, I think the real problem would be with that aerial refueling over the broad expanses of the Pacific. Question. Can they refuel battery powered drones?

        1. Recharge, not refuel and yes but it requires fuel in the charger craft as the batteries aren’t up to snuff yet for ocean crossings. Regulations currently limit everything but whale oil for the fuel so you’ll want Japanese ‘pizza’.

  2. I am all for innovation and freedom. They are very good things. What is not so good and in fact a little sad is that reason seems convinced the way to sell these things is through the wonders of uber, driverless cars and drones.

    First, Uber is a company. There is nothing magical or important about it. What is important is that people should be free to sell their services to whomever and however they want. Uber is just an expression of that freedom.

    Second, driverless cars are likely to reduce our privacy and freedom. The greatest contributor to personal freedom in human history is the affordable car.Cars allow us to travel virtually anywhere we like whenever we like with virtual anonymity. Yet, reason, because it seems to only employ urban hipsters with leftist cultural sensibilities like deRugy, seems obsessed with the idea of taking that control and anonymity away from us in the name of safety and technology.

    Third, drones are nice and interesting. But they are not that big of a marginal improvement over what we have. Moreover, they are an enormous threat to our privacy.

    It is not that these things are bad, though driverless cars could end up being very bad if we are not lucky, it is that even if they are good, selling freedom based on the wonders of uber, drones and driverless cars is not likely to convince many people outside of the small population of urban hipsters in the world.

    1. Once driverless cars reach a certain point, I expect there to be attempts to create laws that would make them mandatory. The software running the cars will of course be proprietary (no source code available to users), and this will mean that users won’t be able to do anything about the security flaws and privacy-invading anti-features that will inevitably be present in the software; people will be completely dependent upon the businesses that develop the software. Governments and corporations will work together to screw everyone over, just like AT&T does now.

      1. That is exactly right. And even though he backed down from it a bit after receiving a ton of abuse in the comments, Ron Bailey thinks making them mandatory is a great idea. I honestly don’t know what goes through these people’s heads sometimes.

        1. It is signaling, plain and simple. Who needs principles when you have cocktail parties?

          What they don’t get is how invigorating and liberating it is not to give half of a shit what other people think of you.

          1. No kidding. Whatever you think of people like the folks over at Breitbart or someone like Ann Coulter or Milo Yianopolous or whatever his name is, those people have more balls and are more subversive than the reason staff is in their biggest Libertarians wet dreams. The reason staff is totally unaware of how similar and conformist they all are. They all buy into the same cultural norms. They all eat responsibly, exercise, drive a sensible car if they own one and take public transportation whenever possible. Their idea of a deep disagreement is one of them thinking Lou Reed was more important than Iggy Pop and others thinking the opposite.

            Think about it. There is not a single gun nut on the staff. There is not a single car person. There is not a single hunter. Hell, I don’t think there is anyone who listens to unfashionable music. Even their token gay, Scott Shackford, is boring. You get the feeling Shackford just wants to settle down with a respectable husband, adopt a few kids and move to the burbs to be a stay at home dad driving a minivan. NTTAAWWT but even the token gay guy is really just like the rest o them.

            1. Very funny and with much truth. If the Reason staff had balls, they’d be seizing on Trump’s win and the disruption to get some libertarian ideas implemented. But instead it’s a lot of whining and articles about trivialities.

            2. Good thing they have Stossel. He’s a genuine American Badass!

            3. Your comment may be the most devastating critique of the Reason staff ever commented.

        2. Driving in Maryland for a while is starting to make me believe they should be mandatory.

          1. So, the way I see it developing is a switch to return the car to manual. Cities and densely packed highways will have laws making it illegal to be in manual mode unless there is an emergency.
            But once you get out on the open road, you’ll be able to switch to manual.

        3. Ron Bailey thinks making them mandatory is a great idea. I honestly don’t know what goes through these people’s heads sometimes.

          Bailey is, despite his libertarian leanings on some issues, a technocratic transhumanist. He sees technological innovation as inherently beneficial and doesn’t understand why anyone wouldn’t want it. His goal is the propagation of that technology whether you want it or not. It’s the same deal with his mandatory vaccines argument. He wants to hold people who don’t get vaccines legally accountable for any disease they spread, but if he goes into work with a cold he can’t be held responsible. It’s about imposing his technological solutions on everyone, and then hoping that that his technological utopia emerges to extend his life before he dies. He’s been entirely transparent about this.

          1. That is a very good description of him. How any otherwise intelligent person could believe such nonsense is a mystery to me. But that is what Bailey believes and he is quite smug about it.

            1. How any otherwise intelligent person could believe such nonsense is a mystery to me.

              It’s his religion. Everyone’s religious beliefs look ridiculous to outsiders. Since religious beliefs seek to answer fundamental questions (in the case of technocratic transhumanism: “what is the ideal life?” and “can life be eternal?”), whenever you find an answer you believe to be true all other answers that are opposed begin to look like nonsense.

          2. I’m with Bailey and Thiel on the technical stuff. I don’t know, Bailey does not seem like some sort of control freak to me, at all. Then you have guys like Diamandis who are just too pie in the sky.

            Technology is the key to a brighter future, if you can get government out of the way. But the luddites and Malthusians are always among us. They eventually lose.

            All you have to do is go to any blog in the intertoobz and mention words like ‘radical life extension’ and the luddites will come, not crawling, but flying and pouncing out of the rocks they’ve been hiding under and start up a hysterical freak out. ‘God don’t want us to live forever!’. ‘But over-population! We’ll kill the planet, there’s too many people now!’. ‘Who wants to live longer? What would you do, you’d just be bored!’. I hate these fucking people as much as I do leftists and bureaucrats, seriously, pizz.the.fuck off and go extinct already, luddites.

            1. Technology gives up comfort but it doesn’t necessarily give us freedom. If it did, someone in a gilded cage would be more free than someone not in a cage but poor. I don’t have anything against technology, but I think it is foolish to think it will always enhance our freedom.

              1. It would always enhance our future if not for government assholes coming up with ways to use it in nefarious or just downright evil ways, or just trying to use it to ensure more cronyism.

            2. I don’t know, Bailey does not seem like some sort of control freak to me, at all

              Because Bailey has the decency to wrap his control freak tendencies in actual arguments, rather than trying to impose them on you and accuse you of being backwards. The vaccine arguments he puts forward are a good example again. He makes a utilitarian and scientific arguments as to why you should be held legally responsible for any disease you spread if you don’t vaccinate. The problem is his arguments are often extremely weak and are clearly built around the premise that, regardless of whether you want this technology in your life or not, he wants you to have it imposed on you. Bailey tries to convince you that that imposition is really for the good of us all, and there’s no way you shouldn’t want it.

              1. Bailey has the decency to wrap his control freak tendencies in actual arguments

                He’s a bioethicist. That’s what they do. Just be fortunate he doesn’t argue for the morality of infanticide and animal fucking.

      2. Second, driverless cars are likely to reduce our privacy and freedom.

        Says the DHS agent. The irony, it burns.

        1. Tell us more about the coming Hillary administration.

        2. I figured you were one of the Soros trolls and would disappear after the election. I honestly didn’t think anyone could be a stupid you actually seem to be. You had to be a troll. But damn, you really are that stupid. It is remarkable.

          1. What a brilliant and well-reasoned argument from DHS. No wonder our country is so safe.

            1. You really are that stupid. What else is there to say other thank you for not depriving me of the pleasure of your stupidity? You were so sure Trump couldn’t win. You are smart. You know so much.

              Your tears are lovely. They really are.

              1. If we’re lucky, Trump will figure out quickly what an absolute waste of our money it is to have paid DHS agents spending their work hours surfing the web. I don’t think he’s smart enough to shut your agency down completely, but at least he can cut out the useless fat.

          2. (((Renegade))) smells like Tulpa to me.

            1. Thought he was OMWC

              1. I always thought the “I’ll actively pretend I’m a child molester haha” thing was never haha at all. All the things you can pretend to be if you want, and you pretend to fuck kids?


                1. But their little hands make your cock look so big!

                  1. It’s Mary or whatever the demented leftist troll has been stalking this board for years. It will slowly lose its mind until it finally gets banned.

                    1. Our crack DHS agent at work.

                      I expect that ISIS will have control of DC with guys like him on our front line.

                    2. Take your meds Mary.

                    3. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could downvote its comments in some sort of decent commenting systems?

    2. “I am all for innovation and freedom. They are very good things. What is not so good and in fact a little sad is that reason seems convinced the way to sell these things is through the wonders of uber, driverless cars and drones.”

      Innovation and freedom are all about the internet of things, John. It’s about big data and everything connected. You’re reading the wrong blog, the Reason staff are not the really cool kid liberal wonks. They’re amateurs at this cocktail party stuff. Cosmotarians, lol.

      1. The internet of things is a very dumb idea. Not that we should ban it, but it won’t work out well. People will learn their lesson about it eventually.

        1. Well, having all of your data down to your DNA available on the web for everyone to peruse is not going to be too popular for libertarians, or most people. But pie in the sky liberals don’t have any self awareness, so they don’t realize that their cool ideas are not actually so cool.

        2. IoT just needs better security.

          1. And free and open source software. It’s hard to trust the software if you and others can’t review the source code and modify it, especially with a surveillance-happy government like the US government.

      2. Think about it, what is “the internet of things” except something out of a central planner’s vivid wet dream? How anyone who claimed to care about freedom and privacy and reject central planning could think hooking up everything they own to the internet is a good idea is beyond me.

        1. So far it seems to be mostly about handing over as much of your data as possible to the government via some combination of Microsoft, Apple, and Google. What could possibly go wrong.

        2. It also sounds like a joke people are taking seriously: “My endtable reminds me when it’s in need of a good dusting. My bed says ‘Time to flip the mattress!’ And if my can opener hasn’t been used in three days, it sends me a text alert!”

          1. It really does.

          2. “And you still haven’t rated the job I did on that can of tuna last week!”

    3. Not to mention hackers hijacking the software and aiming you and that driverless car into the nearest brick wall, or flying your paid for pizza right to their front door.

      1. Pizza delivery drone hacker….

        I bet the nanny staters will issue “shoot to kill” orders for these evil people…

  3. Delivering a Domino’s Pizza by drone!!!!

    And some people wonder why drones get shot at..

    1. You can get a pizza delivered in all but the smallest American towns in less than 30 minutes most nights and certainly no more than an hour on the busiest nights and for less than $20. So what exactly is the marginal benefit to this? Like driverless cars, delivery drones are an answer to a question no one was asking. If you couldn’t get things delivered or have our own cars, both would be a miracle. But we can get things delivered and we do own our own cars. So both things are a novelty in most situations.

      Reason writers claim to love the market but they all seem to have skipped the day in micro economics class where the professor discussed marginal decision making.

      1. I assume there will be restrictions on where you can fly these things, plus what weather conditions they can operate in. I know you can’t fly drones on my street due to a runway nearby.

        Also if it crashes in your backyard do you get to keep the drone and the pizza?

        I am betting this will have a very limited market once the “new” wears off.

        1. No one ever seems to consider weather conditions. If the temperature is above 60, its not raining and winds are under 20 mph, you can have your pizza delivered to you 5 minutes faster. Wow, that is a miracle of modern technology right there.

        2. Also if it crashes in your backyard do you get to keep the drone and the pizza?

          I dunno, but the moment a drone crashes into a person, it will be the end of drones in America.

          Same with driverless cars.

      2. The advantage for drones will be for intermittent services. It’s too expensive to keep a driver on hand to deliver an emergency EpiPen, but a drone in a cabinet could serve the same purpose at a much lower overhead cost.

        1. I think the person needing an emergency epipen would likely be willing to pay the cost of the driver. Moreover, if it is an emergency, it has to get there in all weathers, something a drone can’t do.

          And you don’t need to pay the full cost of a driver. That is why there is delivery services.

          1. I think you underestimate the pricing pressures and overestimate delivery service availability, particularly in rural areas.

            The technology is in its infancy, but I expect it will find a home in the market. But as with most things, it will probably be something nobody foresaw.

            1. I think you greatly over estimate the number of instances where someone will need an item like an Epi Pen ASAP but will be in a place where a drone can get there faster than an ambulance driver. Moreover, drones are not free. Ones that could travel fast enough to make it significantly quicker than an ambulance would be quite expensive.

              This technology will have uses, but they will likely be niche uses. Unless you are a pervert who likes peaking into windows, drones will not be transformative technology, just useful technology under the right circumstances.

              1. Ambulance – $200K capital?
                Driver – $75K annual loaded?

                Drone – $10K to 20K capital

                There’s a pretty significant differential there. I’m thinking someone will find a purpose for it.

                1. And ambulance does more than deliver an epi pen. Does the drone plan to deliver medics and transport patients to the hospital? Drones are not replacing ambulances. They would at best replace them for a few sets of specific functions. So you can’t compare the cost of an ambulance to a drone and deem the drone an improvement.

              2. I think you are too pessimistic when it comes to technology, John. It’s not about pizza deliveries, it’s about 10 years from now when drones and driverless cars etc have been “in the wild” and the transformative possibilities of this technology. A cell phone in 1996 was a convenient way to receive phone calls while away from home or office. It was big, clunky, power draining, and only made phone calls. Twenty years forward, my iPhone is my record collection, my library, my television, my computer, my recording studio, and occasionally I call my parents using the phone function.

                The point of these articles is that technology has the power to radically transform culture and society, if government doesn’t strangle it in the crib.

                1. I know that is the point of these articles. My point is that driverless cars and drones are not good examples of such technology. A drone is not the same thing as a cell phone. The ability to reach virtually anyone in the world at any time without being tied to a land line is a huge marginal improvement over what we had. That is why cell phones are everywhere and really are transformative technology.

                  Not all technology is transformative. It is only transformative if it offers a huge gain over what we already have. And neither drones nor driverless cars fit that description. In fact, if driverless cars turnout to be transformative, it will be because they are made mandatory and take away an enormous amount of our freedom and privacy. And I don’t think that would be a good transformation.

                  1. I expect driverless (or more appropriately self-driving) vehicles to make an impact in the freight business first. The rules concerning CDLs limit hours and make drivers expensive. Additionally, the driver can be a liability as they are prone to errors, sickness, sleepiness, etc… It’s only a matter of time before a distribution/freight company starts adopting them as a way of curtailing costs and minimizing risk.

                    Commercial planes are already effectively driverless. The pilots are just there for backup.

                    Everything is, of course, predicated on the government allowing it to proceed.

                    1. It’s only a matter of time before a distribution/freight company starts adopting them as a way of curtailing costs and minimizing risk.

                      That will happen the moment someone figures out a way to make network security, foolproof. As it is, no freight company is going to put its entire rolling stock subject to the winds of network security. A driverless freight truck is a hijacker’s dream. Get into the their system and you know exactly which trucks have the stuff worth stealing and you don’t need a gun or even to leave your warehouse. You just have the trucks deliver the goods to your door.

                      And that doesn’t even account for the endless blackmail possibilities. There is already a good living to be made kidnapping people’s digital files and holding them for ransom. Imagine being able to hold an entire fleet of cargo trucks for ransom. How much money would a freight carrier pay to get their trucks back before they would even consider risking calling the cops much less refusing the demand? A whole lot.

            2. But as with most things, it will probably be something nobody foresaw.

              I predict that one use of drones will be shadowing your kids – takes helicopter parenting to a whole new level.

        2. Here’s something related and very cool. Using drones to deliver blood and plasma to remote villages in Rwanda.

          1. That is great for Rwanda. And these things have their uses, just not quite what the hipsters at reason think they will.

      3. So what exactly is the marginal benefit to this?

        Drones don’t take a salary. Labor is the biggest cost in any restaurant. You don’t know what a margin is if you can’t get this. Also, fewer cars on the road is a fantastic thing, lower chances of people getting hurt in accidents, lower traffic for everyone to contend with, lower emissions (smog), etc.

        You’re just being awful at economics and all your ideas about driverless cars and drones are bad. You sound like a 1950’s era car commercial about “freedom” to sit in the parking lot everyone calls “traffic” which is something automation will put an end to. The driverless revolution will happen in fleet vehicles first, and it will be widespread. Your desire to speed constantly and disobey all traffic laws will be a moot point because so many fleet vehicles will essentially force you to the limit, and it will be glorious as human safety on the road skyrockets.

        It doesn’t matter. No matter your whining, innovation will press on and your neo-luddism will end up a relic as you stare at the sky yelling at the drones, an old withered curmudgeon.

        1. Drones don’t take a salary. Labor is the biggest cost in any restaurant. You don’t know what a margin is if you can’t get this. Also, fewer cars on the road is a fantastic thing, lower chances of people getting hurt in accidents, lower traffic for everyone to contend with, lower emissions (smog), etc.

          They are not free either. You can basically get any food you want delivered to your door through grub hub for very little marginal cost. The cost of getting food delivered to your door is barely above the cost of buying it in store, the marginal benefit to the customer is close to zero. Yeah, it might increase the profit margins for businesses, but from your end it won’t make any difference. It won’t change anything. So, this is in no way a transformative technology. You are being awful at economics. You don’t understand marginal decision making. Stop accusing people of not understanding economics when you clearly know just enough to be dangerous about it yourself.

          1. You can basically get any food you want delivered to your door through grub hub for very little marginal cost.

            Perhaps in suburban DC where the government drones (of the other sort) live. But it must be like that everywhere else as well, right? We can get imitation pizza delivered… and that’s it.

            1. Then move to a new shack, you fucking half wit.

              The company’s online and mobile ordering platforms allow diners to order directly from more than 45,000 takeout restaurants in over 1,100 U.S. cities and London.


              You really are unteachable. Angry and ignorant is no way to go through life son.

              1. If you look at a map of delivery availability, excluding pseudo-pizza like Papa John or Domino’s, it looks like the blue portion of the electoral map. Bubble, anyone?

        2. You sound like a 1950’s era car commercial about “freedom” to sit in the parking lot everyone calls “traffic” which is something automation will put an end to. The driverless revolution will happen in fleet vehicles first, and it will be widespread. Your desire to speed constantly and disobey all traffic laws will be a moot point because so many fleet vehicles will essentially force you to the limit, and it will be glorious as human safety on the road skyrockets.

          Human safety on the road has skyrocketed. Driving is incredibly safe right now. My chances of ever being injured let alone killed in an auto accident in my lifetime are quite small. So, again, the marginal benefit of self driving cars is quite small. And since when is safety a reason to take away people’s rights and safety? We could lock everyone in prison but the fact that they would be safer wouldn’t make it any less appalling of an idea, you half wit.

          Meanwhile. you have managed to convince yourself giving up your freedom to drive how you want to drive and be trusted with the consequences of that is somehow making you more free. You are saying nothing except “freedom is slavery”. If everyone went on the dole, they would be free from the horrors of unemployment. Would you think that would make us more free?

  4. Domino’s by drone. Because even we’re ashamed to be seen with our pizza.

    1. That isn’t fair. Dominos has greatly improved the quality of their pizza. It actually is pretty good these days.

      1. Perhaps — I had it like 6 months ago, but I had been studying all day for my Corporations exam so I was too tired to remember anything about it.

        I just don’t understand why anyone would go to a Domino’s/Pizza Hut/Papa John’s if they have a halfway-decent family pizzeria in the area.

        1. There are huge swaths of the country that don’t have decent family pizzerias. Every try to get good pizza in the South or far west? Forget it. Why anyone living in Boston or New York or about anywhere in New Jersey would go to the corporate places is beyond me. But other places, the corporate places are a Godsend.

          1. “Every try to get good pizza in the South or far west? Forget it.”

            That’s no shit. I don’t understand it. We have loads of Eyetalianos in this area. What the hell is that?

            My wife has found the old Shakey’s pizza recipes online. I will be making some today.

            1. +1 Mojo Potatoes

              1. We still have a Shakeys in Upland

                1. When I was a kid, you got a free little pizza on your birthday at Shakey’s, so we always went every year until I was eight or so. I don’t think I’ve been to a Shakey’s since. I do have fond memories of my birthday pizzas, though as this was the only restaurant pizza I had ever had up to that point (pizza wasn’t very widespread in the late 60s, there certainly was nothing like Domino’s) it was probably pretty bad by modern standards.

                  1. A little pizza with a birthday candle stuck in a marshmallow, right?

        2. Family pizzerias where I grew up (upstate NY) were abysmal. Dominos really was the best that was available, at least until gentrification brought better options to some hipster neighborhoods.

          1. Upstate New York pizza was horrific.

            1. And I mean “real” upstate – not cultural NYC Albany-type upstate. Rochester, Buffalo upstate – which is culturally midwest & therefore subject to the same shitty pizza culture as Chicago.

              1. Upstate is the 518 area code only! Well, only the southern half; the northern half insists on calling itself the North Country. 😉

                (I’m in the Hudson Valley or the Catskills, take your pick; I’m not Upstate.)

      2. I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s pretty good, but it has improved. They go a touch too heavy with the garlic butter for my tastes.

  5. https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/249117/#respond

    David Simon is a dedicated communist. Yet, reason has often played footsie with him and written any number of fawning fluff pieces about his Libertarian credentials.

    1. Commies hate fascists and vice versa because they’re competing for the same followers.

      1. This is true. Shirer (I believe) noted Nazis saying that it was much easier to get commies on board with Nazis than other political affiliations.

    2. I am not familiar with the guy but there seems to be a lot of that going around. A lot of people talk about being libertarians one minute and the next they vomit some authoritarian drivel. The tendency is to call themselves something something half-respectable to keep from openly admitting what they really are. Most of the time they choose the word libertarian when they really either have contempt for or no idea what that actually means.

      I predict at least four years worth of barbs being shot at a lot of the Reason staff as payback for the horseshit they have published over the last 6 months. They really went beyond the pale.

      1. And we shouldn’t have to wait long to start. Trump should name his choice to replace Scalia in the coming weeks. When that person turns out to be someone you can trust to protect the 1st and 2nd Amendments, the reason staff can forever be remembered as doing everything they could to keep that from happening.

        1. Thanks John. That is exactly right but seeing it spelled out like that pisses me off. This exacerbates my hangover.

          I need ibuprofen and some hair of the dog.

          1. Hillary made it clear she was going to appoint a justice who would vote to overturn Heller, McDonald and Citizens’ United. And since all three were five four decisions with Scalia voting in the majority, she would have been in a position to do just that had she been elected. Never once did reason seem concerned about that while they were losing their shit over Trump saying bad things about Mexicans and Muslims. It was just pathetic. Suderman, Dalmia, Welch, Doherty, and Gillespie in particular were beyond the pale.

            1. I don’t remember Welch being guilty of that, but the rest…yeah. It was really stunning. A candidate swore to mount a likely successful full frontal assault on liberty and they just ignored that so they could foam at the mouth over the guy who was going to tear down their playhouse. The cosmo cocktail party joke isnt a joke. Principles shminciples.

        2. Trump has already come out for nationwide concealed carry, for heaven’s sake. Reason should be pushing that with the equivalent of a Drudge siren. But have they even mentioned it?

      2. They are libertarians for themselves,you,not so much.

        1. Freedom for me, not for thee.

        2. The Doherty article defending Weld was the low point. A bunch of urban hipsters who have likely never owned a gun or even know anyone who has were now lecturing those of us who do about how the 2nd Amendment isn’t really important when compared to “the overall size of government” whatever that mans.

          1. Even Will Wilkenson – half a prog himself – points out that the size of government is sort of a red-herring… when the real thing people should be opposed to are the ways the government – at ANY size – restricts freedoms.

            He argues that people should be *less* focused on pure-fiscal, generic arguments about “smaller govt”, and more focused on reducing its powers in specific areas of life.

            He makes this case in the context of an argument saying, “stop trying to kill the welfare state – convince people that ‘reduced economic regulations’ will make the welfare state *affordable* and sustainable”

            I don’t necessarily agree with his goal, but he’s surely fucking right that a “smaller/cheaper” govt that still thinks it has the right to interfere in every area of life is surely no better than a Big One that is at least limited.

      3. It’s this whole left libertarian thing. That’s not actually a real thing as you cannot be a libertarian and be against free markets.

        1. I agree. What is frustrating is that they realize that about the right. Reason would never give a fawning piece to a white supremacist or some crazy evangelical who wanted a theocracy but was against the drug war or maybe supported the 2nd Amendment. They cannot, however, apply that same reasoning to the left. Their cultural blind spots are too big. So somehow being against economic freedom and that most fundamental freedom of being able to earn a living as you are able to and choose to do so becomes an elective freedom. It is nice if you support it but if you support the culture war stuff on drugs and gay sex and such, you are still acceptable where people who do accept economic freedom but reject the culture war stuff are not.

          1. People who refer to themselves as ‘liberals’ are suffering from some very serious delusions. And some of these people are business owners. They have to be missing some sort of gene that actually warns a normal person before going swimming with alligators. They think voting for Bernie is a great idea, even though they really don’t know why. So we elect Bernie who installs crushing new regulations on small businesses and his business owner supporters just wake up one day to the realization that they’ve been taxed and regulated out of their livelihood. Then they blame right wing extremists for their woes and decide that Bernie just wasn’t progressive enough.

            There’s something wrong with them, really. Why would anyone vote for leftists? What good have this group ever done, anywhere, at any time in history?

          2. Soave has been a little too enthusiastic about how “hey liberals, now that you’re out of power, you can argue for constitutional restrictions and the rule of law like us libertarians!”

            And the part he of course leaves out is “…until you get into power, and then all bets are off again.” The ‘Liberaltarian’ alliance has never had much momentum to me. Look at police reform and how liberals and BLM royally fucked up any chance of reform by turning it into an obsession over their pet issues. They completely delegitimized any chance of meaningful reform so they could just scream about racism over and over again. Liberals are starting to become really ineffectual because of the amount of crazy they have going on right now. Throwing yourself into that lot doesn’t exactly seem like the best strategic maneuver.

            1. BLM did so much damage to the cause of holding police accountable. And reason has fallen right in line with them.

    3. Anyone who’s against the drug war gets the libertarian tag now (see: Bill Maher)

      I remember a pre-Weld world where “libertarian” had meaning.

  6. Delivery drones? But who will I yell at when they inevitably fuck up my order? Doing it over the phone doesn’t have the same sense of gratification…I’m an asshole.

    1. It’s going to ruin the porn industry as well

      1. I’m far too dense this morning to understand why. Explanation?

        1. Lee is going to pay for a drone to bang him, so he will not need porn.

          It’s so obvious.

          1. Crusty gets it

            1. ‘I’d like to order a Cote De Pablo drone please.’

          2. As long as the drone looks similar to *Adriana Chechik I’d be completely on board with that.

            *she reminds me of a woman I knew during my early twenties. A girl who deservedly earned the nickname Jawbone. Good times.

    2. There is much wisdom in this and it doesnt just apply to the drive through:


      When I order food in a restaurant I order exactly what I want. I never know what I am going to get and I know that is what is going to happen so whatever it is I just eat it.

  7. The real reason the Kiwis did this first – nobody wants to be out of eyeball range of a TV when the All Blacks are playing. Just ain’t the same listening on a car radio.

  8. O.T.:

    Time to watch the Sunday shows for the first time in years. I need to store some of those Prog tears for the winter (Progs don’t go out and riot when it’s cold, it makes their piggies hurt)

    1. +1 unoccupied Wall Street.

  9. and everything from homes to shopping carts will be plugged in to the internet.

    That’s not exciting; that’s a privacy and security nightmare. Just recently, the IoT was used in a giant DDoS attack. I expect all the software on these devices to be proprietary and the source code won’t be accessible to or modifiable by the users, which makes it all untrustworthy. And the government will likely take full advantage of all the insecurity and privacy-violating anti-features, so that’s another thing to look forward to.

    1. I can’t believe I missed that one. Connecting those things to the internet offers very little marginal value. Do I really need my refrigerator to tell me my milk is out of date when I can just look at the damn thing myself? And in return for that, I now give up any privacy I have over what is in there and put an essential part of the modern lifestyle subject to the whims of internet security.

      To paraphrase Orwell, hooking your refrigerator to the internet is an idea so stupid only an intellectual could believe it. Veronica is just not that bright. I am sorry but she really isn’t.

      1. Can you point to where de Rugy was promoting refrigerators with internet connections? Or even the IoT in specific?

        1. We live in an exciting world. Sooner than you think, stuff you order online will be delivered all but instantly, cars will navigate without a driver, and everything from homes to shopping carts will be plugged in to the internet.

          Do refrigerators not fit into the set that includes “everything from homes to shopping carts”? You can now buy a refrigerator that is hooked into the internet.

          Moreover, the arguments against hooking your refrigerator into the internet apply even more so to hooking your home to the internet. You can’t turn the thermostat down yourself or shut your lights off and too achieve that you are willing to make your entire home vulnerable to hacking and monitoring by he government or whoever else wants to look?

          DeRugy is a ding bat.

          1. John. I know it’s going to fun fun around here when you start drinking early. =D
            Kidding aside, If you own a phone you have already given up a lot of your privacy.
            Also. I have a severe crush on DeRugy.
            YOU TAKE THAT BACK !!!! D=

            1. You are right I have. But I don’t see how that makes giving up more any less of a bad idea. In fact since I have less privacy to lose, it makes it an even worse idea.

              And I can sympathize with having a crush on DeRugy. She is cute in her own Gaulic way. But still…

              1. Honestly. I.m old school. I like to operate my own machinery/devices.
                Then there’s this guy. =D


          2. everything from homes to shopping carts will be plugged in to the internet.

            I missed that. However, I don’t necessarily see it as an endorsement of all things connected. I would like to think that she is simply trying to present the optimistic viewpoint.

            1. ” However, I don’t necessarily see it as an endorsement of all things connected”

              Seriously? Just because you missed it and can’t admit John was right? I don’t like John being right either, but sometimes he is.

              1. When the Amazon Echo came out, my wife’s instantaneous reaction was, “Not in OUR house!” This from a women who loves technology and computer-related gadgetry. Early adopter of just about everything.

        2. Do you think he actually read the article?

          1. Yes I did. Did you? Apparently not if you somehow think DeRugy isn’t embracing the “internet of things”.

            1. Honestly, John, most here probably won’t care about, “The Internet of Things,” as you call it, until both their FemBots* and DudeBots are also hooked up, Skynet-style, 24-7, 365. And if you fiddle with them..trying to turn off the WiFi. *KABOOM*!

              *I still remember Suderman on, “Stossel,” talking up FemBots….folks, if your are going to try and sell Walking Talking Fleshlights, pick someone just a *LITTLE* less creepy and the poster child for Desperate Nerd to advocate for them.

              **Speaking of, has anyone seen or heard from Suderman? We know Shikha still got a pulse…

              1. I haven’t at all. I starting to think they had to put him in some kind of inpatient care facility to keep him from harming himself. He had really lost his mind over Trump.

                And yeah, not the guy you want selling your fembot. What is interesting is that McArdle is not some raving beauty but you would have thought she could have done better than Suderman. Beltway journalists are some very maladjusted and strange people.

                1. I’ve read articles by Suderman and McArdle, and watched both of them argue with people.

                  My hat’s off to him. He married far, far beyond his station.

                  1. Situations like that are often temporary.

      2. Most of the IoT devices currently out there are IP surveillance cameras.

        The main appeal of putting those online was the ability for the owner to monitor them from anywhere.

  10. I wonder, what would a pizza made with dough that used water from all the tears that were shed this week.

    1. Too salty

    2. Pop weighed in. While less insufferable, he was mightily selective. And then ended with a non-sequitur ‘we are Rome’. As if the demarcation point is Trump. One can easily argue a duo of mediocrity began it with Bush and Obama.

      1. As a Spurs fan since the age of seven in 1982, I am beside myself about Pop’s stupid comments.

        This isn’t the first time he’s weighed in with liberal bullshit. In 2010, the Suns and Spurs were set to play a playoff series right about the time Arizona passed the immigration law. The Suns asked the NBA for permission to play in their “LOS SUNS” jerseys as a means of protesting the law, and they got it. Popovich was asked about it, and he replied approvingly. He used the phrase “knee-jerk” in response.

        Hey Pop; we’ve been talking about border security since the 90’s. You may not like the law. You might be for open borders. But passing a law in 2010 after decades discussing that issue is not “knee-jerk”.

        I’ve had it. And Duncan just retired. Ginobili and Parker won’t be far behind. Yes, I’m going to miss out on several excellent years of Kawhi Leonard, who I admire a lot, but fuck Pop. Looks like I’m going to watch basketball the way I watch all other sports now – just whatever game happens to be on. I have no favorite teams anymore.

        What I don’t understand about leftist coaches is how they apparently don’t understand that the traits a successful athlete has – hard work, discipline, determination, delayed gratification, losing with grace – are ALL at odds with the aims of the American left. Earning your place in an extremely competitive field such as professional sports really ought to inform your political views, but I guess it doesn’t.

        1. I still like Kwai Leonard but other than him my reasons for liking the Spurs have mostly retired.

          1. I still get mad remembering that the Pacers drafted Leonard and traded him to the Spurs for George friggin’ Hill


            1. And the Pacers are a good organization. What were they thinking.

              1. In fairness, who knew Leonard was going to become what he is now? His defensive gifts were obvious, but he wasn’t exactly a go-to guy in college. His 3-point shot was wonky. His handles aren’t all that great now; they were even worse as a rookie.

                No one understood that the guy was fiercely determined to improve himself. He’s extremely coachable and the ultimate gym rat. Most guys, even the best of them, don’t broaden their base of skills to the extent Leonard has once they get into the NBA.

            2. Leonard is also still a sore spot for us Rockets fans, who passed on him one spot earlier to draft the illustrious Lesser Morris Twin, who was later given away for a second rounder. Another allegedly intelligent franchise who missed the Leonard train.

        2. Well put. Robinson and Duncan were pure class and the Spurs as a whole.

          Thoroughly disappointed in his selective comments. Not well thought out at all.

  11. What happens if you ask for mushroom and don’t get it? Does the drone come back with an apology?

    1. According to Lee and Crusty, any grievance you have can be resolved by hate-fucking the drone.

      1. That sounds painful.

    2. They send a Dalek.

      1. DALEK SUPREME: “You must de-li-ver pi-zza to the hu-mans. You must es-tab-lish good re-la-tions with the cus-to-mers if you want good tips.”

        OTHER DALEKS: “In-gra-ci-ate! In-gra-ci-ate! In-gra-ci-ate!”

          1. you had it phonetically correct.

    3. You eat it and order from someone else next time.

  12. Let’s check in with that bastion of legal marijuana, Colorado!

    Police officers now have the power to temporarily ban people from public spaces, and they’re starting to use it. The new policy was announced last Wednesday, Aug. 31. If a person is observed doing “drug-related” things, a police officer can issue them a notice saying they can’t come back to a particular park or public area for 90 days.

    No arrest or conviction is necessary, leading the American Civil Liberties Union to call this a “backwards approach,” that ignores due process.

    Feel that liberal love.

    1. That shit isnt going to fly.

    2. Indeed, Dooms Over my Hammy….

      GADS! I miss Denny’s, there’s not a one in UKR **breaks down sobbing**

      Ahem, anyway. This is very much a case of, “Watch what you ask for, because you may just get it.”

      The gov here is like either the “Literal Genie” or a “Jerkass Genie” Oh yes, they will agree to give you what you wish for, but in ways, in one’s shortsightedness, that the wishee didn’t quite expect…

      For example, you ask Literal Genie for a HOT GIRLFREIND! **PAMPH!** There you go, an attractive girl, except she has a 105 degree fever from a lethal case of ebola, which you find out AFTER you kiss her.

      Now, the Jerkass Genie, yes, he’ll also give you a HOT GIRLFRIEND! Except when you take her and start making sweet sweet love to her, she either bursts violently into flames, taking you with her, or, even worse, her “Lotus of Pulchritude” starts secreting napalm as love juice whilst she’s riding you like a Robby Horse.

      This “legal” MJ legistation is exactly the same type of thing. Just how badly is one getting burned…..

    3. f a person is observed doing “drug-related” things

      Like eating snacks.. in a park?

      1. Drop those twinkies and stand up slowly.

    4. You want in on a little secret? That law will be used almost exclusively on the homelesses. They will get the warning, and then a week or two later will be arrested for trespassing.
      That’s how Denver deals with the homelesses, by trying to arrest them all.

      1. That’s one of the best-kept secrets in Progressivelandia – they fucking hate poor people. Makes you wonder just how impenetrable that echo chamber really was.

        Despite this unmitigated bullshit, I recognized people clapping for HanCOCK’s Denver Day Works speech. And marching up 16th against the hate of bigoted corporate interests abusing their fellow soul-travelers .

        Fucking people.

  13. “The Irish Independent reports that Senator Aodh?n O’Riord?in gave an impassioned speech on Thursday that lambasted his government for already trying to cozy up to President Elect Trump.

    “America has just elected a fascist and the best thing that the good people in Ireland can do is to ring him up and ask him, is it OK to still bring the shamrock on Saint Patrick’s Day?” he said. “I am embarrassed by the reaction of the Irish government to what has happened in America. I can’t believe the reaction from An Taoiseach [basically the Prime Minister] and from the government….

    “…”We are at an ugly international crossroads. What’s happening in Britain is appalling. What’s happening across Europe is appalling. It has echoes from the 1930s. And America, the most powerful country in the world, has just elected a fascist!””

    1. There they go, throwing that word around again with no understanding of its meaning.

      As has been pointed out repeatedly around here, the more things Trump does to further freedom the louder and more absurd the shrieking will be.

    2. Raw Story is almost as badly designed as Breitbart.

  14. New Zealand also has an earthquake. Coincidence? Think again.

  15. New Zealand also has an earthquake. Coincidence? Think again.

    1. Too many leftists fleeing to there will not only ruin it and them hate Americans, but it could tip over.

      1. NZ immigration officials make sure that new arrivals are evenly distributed to the north and south islands. No worries, mate.

  16. Donald Trump Is a Racist
    Here’s why many Americans don’t see him that way.

    “…if racist is to be a decisive and disqualifying label then we need to have consensus on its meaning?my understanding of what it is to be a racist must be the same as everybody else’s. What happened Tuesday tells me that it’s not….

    “When racism first came to be examined as a social problem, starting in the 1920s, the term referred to something plain to see: an explicit ideology of domination, as expressed by individuals. By the 1960s, though, this old-school, overt *racism* seemed in decline and the term was broadened to include more subtle agents of discrimination, exploitation, and inequality….

    “In the past few decades, scholars have stretched the boundaries of the term even further. Now we understand that people, too, can be racist in subtle, systematic ways….You and I are racist, essentially, in ways we’re not consciously aware of….

    “…This puts the literature at odds with a public understanding of prejudice as the product of malicious feelings, the source of hate crimes, and an ingredient of classic racist ideology….

    “…Labeling Trump didn’t work, because there is no common ground in America when it comes to what those labels mean….”

    1. Danny trips over the fact that expanding the definition of a word to include everything means the word loses meaning and remains completely unaware.

      Bravo Danny.

    2. I made the mistake of flipping by PTI last Thursday. They were talking about the Detroit Pistons coach going on some rant about how triggered his players were over Trump winning. Mike Wilbon goes on this rant about how that was okay because most NBA players are black and Trump has made the election really personal for black people because of the things he has said about them. I would have given anything if someone would have asked Wilbon “what things did Trump say that black are taking so personally?”. It would have been priceless watching Wilbon sit there with his thumb up is ass unable to give any examples, because while Trump’s statements about Mexicans and Muslims are well documented, I can’t recall him ever saying anything about black people and I guarantee you nether can Wilbon. Saying Trump is racist is just what idiots like Wilbon do.

      1. He said black neighborhoods need law and order, he’s for stop and frisk…he’s a Republican…he angered other Democratic constituencies…he’s like Theodore Bilbo.

        1. And a majority of black people think the same thing about their neighborhoods and support stop and frisk. Are they race traitors I guess?

        2. So… he’s just like noted racist Michael Bloomberg.

      2. I mentioned upthread that I had started to watch the Sunday shows for the first time in years. It didn’t take me long to remember why I stopped.

        ABC started with Steffy grilling Rudy Guiliani for fifteen minutes, asking him if Mr. Trump was going to keep drowning puppies now that he’s going to be President (or more seriously, the grilling was about his holdings and what Trump was going to do with them, as if Rudy is the man who would know).

        Then it was Keith Ellison, who received 15 minutes of Steffy asking what he was going to do to try to stop Trump’s drowning of puppies. I’d say he was setting up tee balls for Mr. Ellison to smack around, but that would be insulting to six-year olds who actually play tee-ball.

        Then to the reacharound (oops, the panel discussion), with Van Jones saying ‘racist, racist, racist’ and Katrina Vanden Heuvel (or whatever) saying the Dems lost because they didn’t Prog hard enough, and Bill Kristol still NeverTrumping, and Mary Matlin saying, now now, Trump isn’t REALLY going to keep drowning puppies.”

        I turned it off before Thomas Friedman came on, even though there’s a chance his head would completely explode, which would be entertaining (although I had Krugman in the pool).

        1. I can’t believe they are treating Van Jones as a serious person. He is a complete nut. Having him on is no different than Fox News hiring David Duke.

        2. The only Sunday show worth a damn was MacLaughlin. RIP

          1. This, FTR I haven’t watched one since the 90s.

        3. To paraphrase Yuri Bezmenov – once you brainwash people into being useful idiots you are stuck with them forever. They cant learn, are incapable of changing. Your comment Simon contains a list of some of the worst useful idiots we have.

          1. The way I see things right now is that the useful idiots throwing their baby tantrums in the streets are just that. Emotionally and mentally stunted youths acting like toddlers. However, the instigators behind all this, they have a much more sinister plan. They want mass unrest and violent mobs in the streets in the hope that someone will attack the wrong racist whitey and get their self shot. This is just the American version of Mao’s useful idiot mobs. The left are pure evil, has always been pure evil.

        4. Some people are saying Keith Ellison will be the next head of the DNC. I’m sure Republicans are hoping for that.

    3. “I’m going to keep accusing people of being sub-conscious racists and hope that will convince them that my political ideals are worthwhile.”

      There’s nothing like someone lecturing you on “who you really are” to make you think they’re full of shit.

  17. It’s frustrating trying to pin down these innovation-haters on the precautionary principle (don’t do anything the first time). Their first answer is because evil greedy corporashunz will kill people and laugh all the way to the bank. Point out that killing people is a good way to be sued into oblivion and ask how that can be profitable, and they blame corrupt judges and government, and make vague statements about getting away with it. You can never get anything more concrete than that; it’s all wiggly from then on. If you dare mention that crony corruption is a natural feature of coercive government, or that corruption requires two parties — government being the other one — and that’s because government has been taken over by the corrupt businessmen (never businesswomen) and the evil right wing neo nazi fascist capitalists. They may even blame it all on capitalism, and if you point out Venezuela, they blame it on capitalist interference; if you point out the USSR, that was killed by outside interference too; if you point out Cuba, that was fine until the evil capitalists opened them up and now it will be ruined by evil capitalists.

    I am sometimes a bit slow. I learned where “Utopia” came from (Thomas More, Henry VOOO’s advisor and then enemy), and it did not mean “good” but “isolated”, and it sounds like an awful place to live — a proggie dream of no innovation, no freedom, no friendships, no humanity. All for the state. Gave me the shudders.

    1. Imagine if Obamacare had been subject to the precautionary principle.

    2. …if you point out Venezuela, they blame it on capitalist interference

      ?Guerra econ?mica!

  18. As drones become more prevalent, I’d expect surveillance to become all pervasive.

    Never mind autonomous cars, patrolling roads is going to become cheap and easy. The biggest barrier to surveillance was always the lack of technology and its prohibitive cost. Once that drops below a certain level, yeah, they’re gonna track my phone calls and emails–because they can. My ability to ride my bike how I want on twisty mountain back-roads due to it being cost prohibitive for them to monitor those roads is over.

    There must be something like the opposite of an intellectual Luddite. If it’s wrong to be suspicious of new technology just because it’s new, then it must be wrong to be supportive of it just because it’s new technology, too.

    And if wanting the government to interfere with the adoption of a new technology is wrong from a libertarian perspective, then supporting government facilitation of a new technology that requires facilitation by the government in order to be adopted isn’t entirely libertarian either.

    1. That is a great point Ken. We don’t need speed traps anymore or worry about tracking everyone’s movement because the eye in the sky will never sleep. That is pretty fucking terrifying when you think of it. Frankly, I am fine paying a little more for my pizza or driving to get it myself if the cost of getting the pizzacopter to bring it to me is all encompassing surveillance and law enforcement with the resulting fines and punishment for every infraction of the law.

      We do need a word for people like DeRugy and Ron Bailey who are incapable of ever seeing any downside to technology. They would happily walk into slavery if the invitation to do so came wrapped in a neat new gadget.

      1. And we already do have a word for people like you who cannot see any upside to new technology, and want to ban it for everybody. The precautionary principle gets its support from you, and I am happy to know you will have no more long term affect than the original Luddites did. You will just drive it underground, as all statists and deniers do, where you will have even less say in how it works and who uses it.

        1. Where do I not see any upside to technology? Further, where have I ever said it should be banned? Nowhere that I can see or remember.

          Meanwhile, do you understand the downside to technology? And is there any claim about technology you won’t believe? Stop projecting your inability to understand anything but one side of the issue onto everyone who does.

      2. “We do need a word for people like DeRugy and Ron Bailey who are incapable of ever seeing any downside to technology.”

        In this case, we may be talking about ignoring people’s rights, too.

        Who said people have a right to fly drones over my property?

        The legitimate purpose of government is to protect my rights, and both the FAA and local government use the law and various ordinances to protect my rights from those who would disregard them with aircraft. Airspace for jumbo jets taking off and landing is restricted so the noise doesn’t interfere with other people’s quiet enjoyment of their property.

      3. I am not a lawyer, but I sometimes play one on TV.

        U.S. vs. Causby affirmed that people own the airspace immediately above their property–but the altitude wasn’t infinite.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ United_States_v._Causby

        Sounds about right to me. People should be free to do as they please so long as they don’t violate anybody’s rights. You got a flight path above my property at an appropriate altitude that doesn’t interfere with the quiet enjoyment of my property, then you should be free to use that flight path.

        If drones need to fly at lower altitudes, then maybe they should restrict their flight paths to public streets.

        Respecting other people’s rights is a pain in the ass, and I’m not sorry about that. Violating other people’s rights is a crime and the government facilitating violating people’s rights is an injustice. “Up yours!” to everybody that thinks getting a pizza delivered faster justifies violating my rights.

        1. I’m absolutely not a lawyer, but Cuius est solum, eius est usque ad coelum et ad infernos has been a common law principle for 400-700 years.

        2. Sure, but if my done is 500 feet above my property, with a good camera one could easily see and record actions of others, which even though technically legal, would be seen by most people as a violation of privacy.

          If you extend this idea of owning airspace to the government, then their drones could always be directly above a street, a park, or other governmental property and still invade the privacy of any citizen at any time.

    2. I think suspicion is fine. And I definitely think suspicion when it comes to government adoption is warranted. However, these things are coming whether anyone likes it or not. It’s best to discuss the positives and negatives ahead of time. Healthy debate is necessary.

      Whatcha got ain’t nothin new. This country’s hard on people, you can’t stop what’s coming, it ain’t all waiting on you. That’s vanity.

      1. My plan is to shroud my body inside a Faraday cage.

        1. ^^….too easy….

        2. I never figured you for the cuckold type. NTTAWWT of course. Just a surprise.

      2. “These things are coming whether anyone likes it or not.”

        It appears that the express purpose of the government regulation people are calling for is to get people’s property rights out of the way.

        The government facilitation of violating everybody’s property rights doesn’t need to come if people don’t want it.

        Maybe you’ve heard something about this recently–it turns out we have a democracy after all!

        The elites may have slid an individual mandate or two past us, but I’m not convinced our rights will be road kill for the common good forever more. That’s just a progressive stance on public policy–and it is not universally accepted.

    3. Neal Stephenson had an interesting SciFi story; Diamond Dust? or something. You buy camera dust by the pound, and the little tiny things float in the air, they are so small, and communicate with each other to coordinate taking pictures and broadcasting the results. Never mind whether it’s plausible or not; what fascinated me about they story was the idea that the rich and powerful had far more to lose from lack of privacy, and I think he was right.

      If everyone can be spied upon, who is the world more likely to watch, you or the rich and powerful? Your neighbors may be curious about you. Police may be curious about certain roads or certain people. But the rich and powerful are the ones who will attract far more viewers than anyone else.

      Remember when Cheney had that energy meeting and would not release the list of attendees? Problem solved! They had far more to lose than mere nosy neighbors.

      David Brin had a book, Transparency I think (loaned it to a lawyer, never got it back). Imagine that everyone wears several cameras which are always on and streaming to the cloud, except possibly at home. They provide wrap around coverage. Physical crooks have the most to lose — someone mugs you, not only do your cameras pick it up, but so do the cameras worn nearby, and there would be apps to track specific people from camera to camera, back and forward in time, to find where the perp came from and where he is now. Same thing would happen to those Cheney meeting attendees.

      1. Voyeurism is a powerful force, but watching the rich and powerful isn’t the primary draw.

        I’m talking about a force so powerful, it manipulates our genetic code.

        I’m talking about a force so powerful, it sells products as diverse as cars, beer, and aftershave.

        I’m talking about a force so powerful, the rich and powerful invested hundreds of billions of dollars in the technology and infrastructure necessary to distribute pictures of it all over the world.

        I’m talking about pussy.

        People want to see it, they want to see it in action, and they don’t care whether it’s rich and powerful pussy or the girl next door–they just want to see it. Pussy, tits, ass, they want to see it. They want to look through people’s windows and see them in their birthday suits, they want to see jail bait in their swim suits on YouTube and on TV.

        Half the reason the rich and powerful are interesting is because there tends to be a lot of grade A pussy around.

    4. With the loss of all the revenue from traffic tickets, DWI’s etc I fully expect the implementation of a mileage tax. Imagine the numbers of chaff employed by police departments, courts, drug treatment, and probation depts. What the fuck are we going to do with all those people? Personally I vote woodchippers but we all know that isnt going to happen.

  19. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/artic…..n-SNL.html

    All of my Prog friends are fawning all over this on DERPBOOK this morning. Am I just not getting the joke, because I don’t even see the connection much less think it is clever, funny or moving.

    1. It’s signaling. That’s all that counts.

    2. The joke is saying “Kate McKinnon foregoes comedy in SNL open by playing ‘Hallelujah'” – I thought SNL gave up comedy long ago.

      1. It is a song about getting divorced. I guess they are sad now that they understand America is really not that into them.

        1. She’s lamenting that she can’t do the Shrill-Bot character anymore. It would be in really poor taste, otherwise. That’s four years worth of guaranteed employment flushed down the loo. And it quite possibly could have been eight. Hell, even Will Farrell will do his BOOOSH character if you pay him in Pop Rocks and Coke.

          1. I think that is in really poor taste. Leonard Cohen died. And the song is a lament about a failed relationship and the real misery and heartbreak than comes with such. So she is using a platform that is remembering the death of a beloved artist by singing his most famous song which is about the real tragedy and heartbreak that happens when relationships end and hijacking it to bitch and moan about her not being able to do her Hillary impersonation anymore.

            That is pretty bad taste.

    3. Chappelle:

      ‘Don’t forget all the things that are going on. Shootings. What do you think about that? All these shootings the last year. The worst mass shootings in the history of the United States,’ he said.

      ‘Pulse nightclub which she said ISIS did. Turned out that wasn’t exactly what happened.

      If that is what happened, then ISIS is scarier than I thought, because they have very deep cover operatives. “Going out deep for this one, I might have to get a Grindr account…”.

      ‘What happened was he pledged allegiance to ISIS before he did what he did. Which is not the same as being in ISIS, you know what I mean?

      ‘Like I was going to have sex with a girl, right before I did I screamed out “Wu-Tang”. That doesn’t mean I’m in the Wu-Tang clan.’

      This isn’t pretending to talk about politics as a setup to say funny things. It’s pretending to say funny things so that you can talk about politics.

      1. ‘Don’t forget all the things that are going on. Shootings. What do you think about that?’


        Wait, I mean…

        Where’s the part that I’m supposed to laugh? Someone nudge me when I’m supposed to laugh.

      2. I get it that humor is one of the best ways to cope with tragedy and I’m not “outraged” about his bit. It’s just that Chappelle is a funny guy and these lines weren’t funny. The jokes really seem more like afterthoughts. He just wanted to say some really dark shit.

        1. He just wanted to say some really dark shit.


    4. If you can’t understand why Donald Trump being elected is the end of the world, then you can’t understand why that’s interesting.

      To everyone else, it’s like inviting people over for Thanksgiving, but instead of eating the turkey, they take it out in the backyard, hold a funeral for it, bury it, and then weep like it was their mom who just died.

    5. That is some naked racism that would make Bull Connor blush, Dave. And the bullshit…it is impossible to immerse yourself in that and not drown. It is no mystery why hollywood fruitloops spout such dumbfuckery. One day around those people and I would be a gibbering nutcase myself.

    6. “I told the truth, but it all went wrong.”

      Yeah, fuck you, SNL.

  20. It’s just another pie in the sky scheme anyway.

    1. OMG, why didn’t someone think of that joke earlier?

      1. I did, the last time they posted a story about pizza drones.

    2. Like the moon in your eye?

    3. What will you do when drones start posting before you, Fist of Flesh & Blood? Even you have to sleep sometime; autonomous drones can uplink directly to the board itself. And F5 you to their circuits content.

      Which reminds me, shall I have a drone deliver you another prostate? I can see yours from our balcony in UKR. It’s like watching the mutation scene from, “AKIRA.”

      1. Fist is Skynet so not worried.

      2. My prostate is fine. It bends to my will. It is virtually prostrate before me.

  21. Am I the only one who envisions competing fast food franchise drones crashing into each other, dropping bubbling hot cheese onto unsuspecting pedestrians and smearing windscreens with greasy french fries?

    1. You’re not the only one…Michael Bay is thinking the exact same thing.

      1. Wouldn’t be the worst thing he ever made.

  22. the ornery teenager has awoken, must go now and listen to snarky retorts without losing temper.

      1. *rolls eyes*

        …as if…

  23. OT: flight deal website helps people keep their promises…


    Donald J. Trump is the next President of the United States.
    As promised, we have created this MEGA POST deal of one-way flights from the USA to the rest of the world departing within the next month.

    We have only included very good deals, therefore some US cities do not have many options or may not even be listed at all.
    The destinations are to countries where starting a new life is feasible, i.e., no Caribbean or Pacific islands.
    We have not included Canada or Mexico as destinations as they border the US.

    We will continue to update this post as we find more routes.
    West Coast cities will be added soon.

    1. Has anyone actually left yet? Just one person?

    1. Out of all the Fox talking heads, I like her the best. She’s too conservatard for my taste, but I still think she’s better than the rest. And just think, she can now be the most hated evil white racist woman, ever.

      1. She would be excellent at it, actually. Used to listen to her radio show in The States. Think of a MEAN GIRL Tony Snow, basically. Or a tall, mean, Dana Perino who can throw a verbal Emma Peel judo chop with reckless abandon. She’s spent years blasting the likes of Gibbs, Carney, and Earnest (gads, doesn’t sound like the sleaziest law firm?)

        1. I don’t know why she would do it. Going out and spinning idiocy of Trump and everyone around him seems like a horrible job.

          1. Opportunities to troll the media on a daily basis don’t often come along, Monte Crusto.. Imagine, say, if you were Press Sexcretary for Almanian! and SMOD….

            Besides, you are assuming the Troomp will be an unmitigated disaster; I’m no longer entirely convinced of that, and a Troomp Administration is slowly starting to grow on me somewhat. Seriously, how many times have people in these threads over the last many years have wished for a non-politician to really shake things up, or at the very least do things in such an unconventional way?

            Here you go. Wish answered. Unfortunately, you got a Literal Genie to answer the wish…

            1. The Press Secretary has to spin everything. Trump will make plenty of mistakes, and say stupid things, because that’s what he does. It’s a thankless job for anyone, especially if there is a hostile press, which there will be.

              And it’s not just Trump she would have to spin – it’s Rudy, and Newt, Christie, and the rest of those goons. Ugh.

              1. Trump will make plenty of mistakes, and say stupid things, because that’s what he does.

                And that’s unique to him how, exactly? As for the other bozos, Rudy we won’t here much from, Newt has already state he has absolutely no interest in a Staff job (he’s more of a head of an agency kind of wonky guy at this point), and Christ Christie, The Corpulent Jesus? That fat fuck is more toxic than The Toxic Avenger himself. The will stick him in the FedGov version of a broom closet (a VERY large closet) were he won’t be in the public.. Tall task, since he’s so hard to miss….

                1. Just wait until Trump talks about the 57 states and you’ll see how it’s unique to him.

                  1. Just wait until Trump talks about the 57 states and you’ll see how it’s unique to him.

                    It’s like none of you have ever heard of guys like Reagan (THEY STILL BITCH ABOUT HIM!), Bush the Elder (Wimp, He barfed in a guy’s lap!), Bush The Shrub (Gee, where should I start?)

                    If they are feeling especially nostalgic, they’ll almost literally dig up Nixon…

                    Troomp is no different, really. He’s no more crass than Bubba, to be perfectly honest.

                2. It’s a thankless job no matter who is president, and it would be worse with Trump, that’s all. She has money and success, so I don’t know why she would want to subject herself to the task.

              2. Dude, Trump is going to look like a silver-tonged devil after Obumbles. Don Quixote comes to mind as well.

              3. it’s Rudy, and Newt, Christie, and the rest of those goons

                Christie seems to be on his way out 🙁

                (Sad because -1 lulz)

                1. It’s just that they decided that feeding him was not in the budget. Also, anyone not living in NJ will hate the guy.

            2. If he’s going with conservative media types as Press Sec, I vote for Dana Loesch.

    2. Would

      1. They seem to find a lot of hot right-wing blondes on Fox, but my current fave is the little blonde with glasses from the Greg Gutfield show, Kat Timpf of the National Review.

  24. White extremism to blame!”

    Good gawd, don’t actually read that. Here’s the gist of it, all you need to know:

    The real reason Donald Trump got elected? We have a white extremism problem

    Wait, what is this extremism? Why, it’s anything I don’t agree with!

    Keep it up, lefties, keep it up.

    1. Dude, the klan has enough members to fill a large high school gymnasium. White extremism has thousands of supporters. That’s all you need to know.

      1. When I lived in the suburbs there was a local White Pride Radio station I used to like listening to on the long drive home every now and again. I bet half their audience is bemused Puerto Ricans.

      2. It sounds like the Democrats’ new platform is to blame whitey and put a Muslim in charge of things at the DNC. Why that’s a brilliant plan that is sure not to blow up in your stupid faces, Democrats, please proceed.

  25. FYI, aside from being a cheap DYI substitute for a genetic test your doctor might want to charge you an arm and a leg for (which has been banned, as the article says, to protect their interests), or as a test of genetic relatedness that you might want to run (don’t know how prices compare to standard services), that 23andMe and Ancestry shit is pretty much useless. Their tests are so cheap because their business model is not based on providing that service to the ostensible consumer; it is, as they explain it to investors, based on getting a large portion of the public to hand over their genomes and then to sell that information to whoever might want it.
    People who are thinking of becoming sperm donors should also know that anonymous donation is now essentially impossible. Your children will be able to find you, through a combination of the limited profile the bank shared with their parents and the information in Ancestry and 23andMe. You don’t even have to participate; any relative who does so has made that choice for you.
    The genome is pretty scary because it’s an identifier whose custody you’re not fully in control of. It is inexorably linked to your relatives, who can do whatever they want with theirs, and that affects you. God’s little monkey wrench in the neat Platonic ideal of a society of individuals.

    1. 23andMe is insanely narrow in the scope of what it actually gives to the customer.

      It’s silly crap like “23% Neanderthal” and “likes caffeine” and “unlikely sprinter”.

      They may get into legal trouble if they start in with “40% chance of developing prostate cancer by age 50,” but I would be more apt to try it out if it went into considerably more detail.

      Their tests are so cheap because their business model is not based on providing that service to the ostensible consumer; it is, as they explain it to investors, based on getting a large portion of the public to hand over their genomes and then to sell that information to whoever might want it.

      Are they selling the sequences or sticking the actual biological material in a -80 freezer for future processing? Because if the tests are super cheap then the sequences may not be very reliable.

      1. They may get into legal trouble if they start in with “40% chance of developing prostate cancer by age 50,” but I would be more apt to try it out if it went into considerably more detail.

        They absolutely would, because now, they have jumped from a diagnostic test to actual practicing of clinical medicine, which, trust you me, opens a practitioner up to spectacular liability and lawsuits (imagine if some gal cuts her tits off, yet still ends up with a wicked case of endometrial cancer that the sequence suggested at much lower confidence interval). To do so, even absent a licencing scheme, the liability insurance they would have to carry would be staggering.

        1. After I posted that, I started reading more into it (because that’s the right way to internet).

          Apparently there is a very real chance of some fairly nasty errors. Obviously more so if they happen to hit just the wrong SNP.

          But of course third parties have started making their own personalized genomic analysis software that you can plug your sequence into to get more info.

          1. More information is fine, but eventually, someone is going to have to determine a clinical DX. Whoever is ultimately determining that is on the hook for the liability. And I can guaran-damn-tee you if it’s the patient who does do, and they fuck it up (which the vast majority will), they will try to blame and sue everyone in sight, except the person staring back at them in the mirror.

            I’ve survived two lawsuits, PP, in the USA (refused to settle, since I didn’t do anything wrong in either case – won both cases in bench trials); I know of what speak of vindictive patients who blame every one else for shit that goes wrong, when it’s their own health they themselves ultimately screwed up through poor choices, or they lost at the genetic cards they were dealt, tried to fix it themselves and made it worse, and want someone else to take the fall.

    2. I hope someone actually releases one of the tricorder type devices that you can use to test all your vitals and blood tests at home. If someone had something like that they could hone their diet and supplement intake on a real time basis to achieve optimal results. I know big medicine hates this idea, but as always, they will eventually lose.

      1. “…hone their diet and supplement intake on a real time basis to achieve optimal results.”

        *pours another shot*

        I am way ahead of you.

        1. I started with the devil’s dish water about an hour ago, so you’re ahead of me by at least an hour. But I can catch up, I’m a come from behind drinker!

          1. So you’re a butt-chugger?

      2. I had high hopes Elizabeth Holmes was on to something like that but it turns out she’s just a bad girl who really needs a spanking.

  26. Post election meltdown continues, as it affects New Zealand.

    And, there is “proof” that it is all due to Trump:

    [Schellhamer] told the Herald he had heard gunshots echo through the streets of his usually peaceful neighbour every night since the election.

    He believed the shots were fired by “Trump supporters celebrating and I guess as a form of intimidation against others”.

    1. Funny how the violence is only taking place in liberal bastions, isn’t it?

      1. Performed exclusively by lefties.

        Yep. They are the same everywhere all the time.

      2. Conservatives, Libertarians, and Middle Class yes in general have something else to do. Almost ANYTHING else.

    2. Indian-New Zealand doctor and former Young New Zealander of the Year Divya Dhar said she and a visiting Kiwi friend were waiting at a San Francisco train station on Thursday evening when she felt a “sharp shove from behind” by a passerby.

      “And then I see the guy turn around and he had a knife in his hand. He’s flailing it around and saying things like f*** n***** n***** f***.”

      Dhar’s friend, Vinny Lohan, tried approach the man, who was a curly-haired Caucasian in his mid-30s wearing a white T-shirt and blue jeans and walking with a bike, but Dhar stopped him.

      Yeah, all those racist knife-waving trump supporters in San Fran. I can totally see that.

      Or maybe he was an aspiring rapper.

  27. The reason staff is totally unaware of how similar and conformist they all are

    And I predict a future of moderated comments. Thier surprise of the Trumpslide just goes to show how they have actual chosen to live in a stupid bubble. You reprobates, deplorables, thin crust pizza eaters (true pizza), (read: the commentariat) are a pretty savvy, if argumentative bunch. And you’re not going to brook their stupidity. So evevtually the staff is gonna get tired of being shoved in the stupid closet and will change the comment rules. It’ll probably be Robby trial ballooning something moronically oxymoronish like this being a safe place for libertarians.

    1. Not a single fucling gun nut. There this was a real libertarian site, there’d be an article how to get your machine gun license.

    2. I hope you are wrong. We will see.

      1. The eventual clash between the cosmos and yokels draweth nigh. I’m trying to invent a word for that great conflict, but I’m coming up empty.

        Seriously though, they have to know that people come here for the comments.

        1. Sticking to your principles isnt cool, but in the end you are in better company. I hope they don’t have to learn that the hard way.

          If they start censoring their hits will drop off like mad.

    3. They can’t keep a 2000 post thread from wanging their server for three days. If they try and implement moderation, it’ll be ready for President Malia in 2032.

  28. Robotics is the new interwebz. This is going to be revolutionary. I won’t clean my house. I won’t mow my yard. I can accomplish productive work while traveling (well, not me, but people). No more pro drivers. No more pilots (thank Christ…arrogant bastards). No more pimply faced kid dicking my burger for $15/hr. Companies will have lower overhead, prices come down, economy stimulated. And I’m sure I’m just scratching the surface.

    And yes, inhibiting it via regulation just means that someone else will benefit from the innovation phase. It’s coming. There is no stopping it. The only question is who gets in on the ground floor and really profits from it.

    1. The only question is who gets in on the ground floor and really profits from it.

      Whoever guess right on whom to bribe.

      1. The sad reality of living in the US.

    2. Robotics is not the same thing as drones. Drones are a form of robotics. Robotics can be the future without drones being the future. And while driverless vehicles will be great for things like mines and driving farm machinery, there value to the average person will be much less. For them to work, they have to be networked and if they are networked, they are only as safe as their network security is good.

      P Brooks nailed it. Driverless cars are an answer to a question few people were asking.

      1. Robotics is just part of the brave new future. 3D printing, AI, and nanotech are all huge game changers.

    3. The luddites, Malthusians, and other assorted doom mongers would like a word with you.

      1. They are actually attempting it right now.

        What of the smithies Mr Ford?

        1. What about the buggy whip makers? Why doesn’t anyone think of them!

  29. Breaking news from CNN: Donald Trump has just announced that in order to forestall even any appearance of conflicts of interest, so long as he’s President all of Trump Enterprises will be run from a private server in the Oval Office bathroom.

    1. CNN: ‘Isn’t having this private server illegal? It’s never been done before! Lock him up!’.

  30. I just watched Stephannoplus. Nice dustup between Van Jones and Mary Matalin. Jones started yapping about the “Trump Whitelash” and Matalin jumped his shit. Devolved rapidly into, “I’m not a race-baiter, you’re a race-baiter!” “Nuh-uh! You are!”.

    Van Jones is married to a white woman. What could be more racially inclusive than that?

    1. Van Jones is married to a white woman. What could be more racially inclusive than that?

      My marriage?

    2. Van Jones is married to a white woman. What could be more racially inclusive than that?

      Matalin is married to a lizard.

      1. Mr. Lizard to the White phone!

  31. I’m not a “capital ‘M’ machinist” but I can run a lathe and a mill, and make simple parts as I need them. I’ll let you in on a little secret; running a lathe is boring as shit. It’s mildly hypnotic, as well. I find it hard to stay focused. Throwing your piece away when it’s almost done because you zoned out and turned your flange down to nothing sucks.

    Robotic multi-axis machines are awesome. Way more efficient and productive than a bunch of hung over bikers, but I don’t think you’ll ever eliminate everybody. And for some jobs; prototyping or short production runs, you’ll still need a guy to turn the screws.

    1. I always wanted to have a lathe.

      A friend of mine bought one about 20 years ago. It was a chinese made model. All of the measures on it were marked in inches but the threads were for metric. It took him a couple of days of cursing to figure that out.

  32. The latest entity to nudge humanity along that path is not a tech behemoth or a university research team but, of all things, a pizza company.

    Guess what, Veronica; I have more faith in an icky profit-seeking business enterprise to make a rational decision about the utility of this technology than some university research team.

  33. I have more faith in some crackpot in his garage who hates mowing his lawn and decides to build a self-driving mower than the entire engineering army at General Motors.

  34. There was some talk upthread disparaging the Reason staff for their squishiness. I would like to add this in just for the record:

    “I was wrong. I saw I was wrong and I have changed my position.”

    Standing up straight, looking people in the eye and saying that is not an easy thing to do. Most people are incapable of doing it. Anyone who does certainly gets my respect. Elizabeth Nolan Brown did just that and she deserves credit.

    1. What were they wrong about? Forgive me, I’m not tracking.

      1. Everything. They are wrong about everything.

      2. I think he’s referencing the fact that she initially passed on a very-credulous claim that Transgender-Teenagers were committing suicide en masse following the Trump victory.

        Rather than just pretending she’d never actually claimed that*, she later wrote a piece explaining how she sought confirmation, and realized that everyone involved was passing along completely baseless rumors. She didn’t exactly apologize for repeating bullshit-claims, but she did actually have the guts to call a falsehood false.

        (*all other media that have reported these claims have basically decided to pretend to “keep investigating” rather than issue a correction)

        Or he could be talking about something else, i dont know.

  35. Does anyone know when the final election results will come in. There are two states still outstanding.

    1. What difference, at this point, does it make?

    2. How long does it take to produce a van full of “uncounted” ballots?

  36. This election has exposed so much hypocrisy, it’s staggering.

    Poor black people, living primarily in the inner cities, voting for Democrats despite a multi-decade history of destroying their communities? Well, the black voters have other concerns, you don’t understand, and it’s racist of you to suggest they vote any other way.

    Poor white people, living primarily in rural areas, voting for Republicans despite a multi-decade history of destroying their communities (allegedly, anyway)? Well those voters are just a bunch of racists, sexists, and homo-/transphobes who should be shamed into voting the other way!

    Libertarians, pointing out that economic policies that harm individuals should not be endorsed, regardless of the party or candidates that originate them? Totally not vindicated or proven right, no sirree. Doubling down on failure is the best policy!

    1. Actually, rural white people voting Republican is a fairly new trend. Most rural people are pro-trade unions.

      1. WTF?

        Look at county election maps from past elections.

      2. WTF?

        Look at county election maps from past elections.

  37. Finally! There is a great way how you can work online from your home using your computer and earn in the same time… Only basic internet knowledge needed and fast internet connection… Earn as much as $3000 a week.

    >>>>> http://www.NetNote70.com

  38. Senator Rand Paul Tells America to Get Ready: We’re About to Reverse the Obama Era!

    I have a prediction to make this morning. I think we’re going to spend the first month passing repeal of Obama regulations and they will be signed by Trump. So I think there will be a half a dozen regulations repealed in the first week of Congress and this is something I’m excited to do because most of these regulations haven’t been written by Congress. I think they’re unconstitutional because they’ve been ? they’re ? basically the executive is legislating and that was never the intention of the founding fathers. So I think you’re going to find that we’re going to repeal half dozen or more regulations in the first week of Congress and i’m excited about it. I think the regulations have been killing our jobs and making us less competitive for the world.

    1. Progressives need to have a come to Jesus moment and decide whether the welfare state or the regulatory state is more important. They have spent decades trying to get both ponies despite them being incompatible with each other.

      The welfare state requires a thriving market economy to generate tax revenues. You can’t smother that economy in the crib if you expect to keep paying for “free” education, healthcare, etc.

      1. But progressive ideology dictates that you can do exactly that and a lot of other fairy tale stuff, like having very large immigration flows while at the same time putting all the new immigrants on government benefits. Of course, that is insane, but nothing matters to progressives except for their feelz. If it feelz good, it must be right, so it has to work. And they’ll NEVER admit they are wrong about anything. It will always be that they just didn’t do enough of what they were doing because mean obstructionist right wing nuts won’t let them. Don’t you know that if they want to ruin the economy for 350 million Americans, we owe it to them to let them do it because otherwise their feelz might get hurt?

  39. I think the regulations have been killing our jobs and making us less competitive for the world.

    Those were the wrong kinds of jobs. They needed killing.

    1. And that’s ultimately what this is about. They’ve been telling millions of people to go fuck themselves and now wonder why they’ve been losing elections.

      See my point above. The completely and utterly fail to realize their own talking points can be applied against them.

    2. And that’s ultimately what this is about. They’ve been telling millions of people to go fuck themselves and now wonder why they’ve been losing elections.

      See my point above. The completely and utterly fail to realize their own talking points can be applied against them.

      1. +1 squirrel stew

  40. OT: “I’d like to take this opportunity to apologize… to absolutely nobody!”

    Feckin’ brilliant post fight Conor McGregor. Let me know if youse need an Irish to English translation.


    1. *no spoilers. I need to go watch that now. I hope it didn’t suck.

  41. Hearing a lot of “who really needs a self-driving car?”.

    – Minors no longer will need to get picked up or dropped off by their parents, the car can do it for them.
    – Retirement homes are usually the only solution for old people who lose their license, whatever the reason. Now they can continue to live independently for at least a little bit longer.
    – Long road trips where the car drives itself overnight would be a big benefit for people travelling on a budget.
    – All the alternatives to privately owned cars (Bus/Taxi/Uber) are expensive largely due to the human labor costs. Even for people who can’t afford their own vehicle, self driving-whatevers will cut down on travel costs.

    Then there’s indirect benefits too:

    – You could build private toll-roads exclusively for self-driving vehicles and forego much of the expense associated with human-driver safety measures. You could build the equivalent of a two-lane rural road and let traffic drive on it at 150km/h, at much closer following distances than would be considered safe.
    – Every industry with human drivers could save on labour costs: transportation obviously, but mining, warehouses, construction, would all become cheaper as well.

    1. It isn’t just about self-driving cars, either. Increased standards of living come from greater productivity.

      What if we didn’t have to pay truck drivers?

      I don’t deny the benefits of driverless cars, and I think anyone who wants to use one should be free to do so.

      I also think that everyone who doesn’t want to use them should be free not to use them–for qualitative reasons or any other reason–and I’m not sure my freedom of choice is likely to continue on the same roads with driverless cars.

      There are an awful lot of people out there who are making the case that it’s worth it if people like me are no longer allowed to ride motorcycles because of the benefits of driverless cars–to the rest of society. Those people can all go fuck themselves.

      I’m not here for the benefit of society, and my rights do not exist for society’s convenience.

      1. Yes, it should be by choice. Keep the collective statistics and central planners out of it. If a small number of drivers are excellant drivers to where riding in a driverless car could actually increase their risk of a fatal crash, they shouldn’t be forced to accept that risk just because the overall numbers that include bad drivers say driverless is better. I also shouldn’t have to pay for technology I neither want nor need. I wouldn’t even want one that did not have a manual override.

      2. There are an awful lot of people out there who are making the case that it’s worth it if people like me are no longer allowed to ride motorcycles because of the benefits of driverless cars–to the rest of society. Those people can all go fuck themselves.

        Can you give an example of anyone (not a troll) here saying that? No one is saying that. In fact, the technology is being developed (and pretty much has to be) so that driverless and driven cars can exist on the road simultaneously.

        The only ones saying they’ll be mandatory are those who love to drive and are looking for ways to vilify the technology. Same with those crying privacy concerns. Could it happen? Maybe. WIll it? Seriously doubt it. Hell you can still ride a horse or a bicycle on a public road. Old shit seldom just disappears. It goes away naturally, on its own.

        Should we stifel all new technology because it “could” be used for evil? Your fears, while they do serve to point out precautions that should be taken, are a huge stretch.

        They are not KUMMING 4 YOUR CARZ!

        1. For me, owning a car has always been equal to freedom. I always loved the open road and the feeling of being able to go anywhere I wanted. It just felt like freedom. Today, I’m not so excited about it as I was once. The amount of stupid fucking terrible drivers on the road in Maryland is just ridiculous. Everyday I nearly see or am nearly involved in an accident and it’s only because I’m paying a lot of attention that it hasn’t happened to me. There’s been some very near misses. A couple of weeks ago some stupid cunt in an SUV just blew right through a stop sign and the only reason I was able to avoid her smashing right into me was that I was able to get completely over in the opposite lane. If there would have been a car in the other lane coming towards me, I would have been hit.

          Driving is also very expensive because of the increasing costs of licensing, insurance, and taxes. It’s almost not even worth it anymore. If I just lived in a city where I could walk to where I need to go and take safe public transport (that doesn’t exist in Baltimore), I would be fine with that.

          1. I’m the same. I used to take pride in my driving. Now I’d rather do something, anything, else. Yuuuge waste of time, IMHO.

            But, if it’s done right, you’ll keep your autonomy.

            1. We won’t keep our autonomy if we can’t drive, you statist prick. I get it, you hate to drive. Go buy a robot car and have fun with it. But keep your fucking filthy ignorant paws off the rest our freedom.

        2. “Can you give an example of anyone (not a troll) here saying that?

          Can you give an example of me saying anyone here is saying that?

          For a tremendous number of people out there, making the case for doing something is the case for using the government to force it to happen.

          The people who do so consciously are called “progressives”, but there are plenty of other people out there who think like that subconsciously.

          Utilitarianism has always had a problem accounting for qualitative preferences, and this is a subject where qualitative preferences are a big consideration. If someone’s going to put up a list of upsides, don’t be surprised if I mention that the upsides aren’t the only consideration. There’s also the question of whether we’re going to ignore our right to make choices for ourselves, and I have a qualitative preference for freedom.

          1. Fair enough. But, as I said earlier, the technology is being developed such that you will still have the choice to ride your death machine.

            Not giving you a choice isn’t even being debated, as far as I can tell. The developers ARE taking your wishes into consideration.

            1. Do you not know what google is? Do you not know how to use it? Do you just like being stupid and refuse to use it?

              Have another example of exactly what we are talking about that you refuse to see.


            2. Even if what you are saying were true, if self-driving cars were able to avoid accidents, that would mean other drivers would still be causing some accidents.

              The fact is that in reality people in driverless cars are unlikely to tolerate regular drivers as a risk to their safety for very long–certainly not just because they want people to be free to make choices for themselves on principle.

              There’s nothing about libertarianism that says I have to applaud a technology that by its very design is intended to take away my autonomy in the name of safety.

              Safety is actually a qualitative value. People think of it as being a universal preference, but it isn’t. It may be true that everyone wants more safety OTBE than less, but what about when the choice is between more safety or something else?

              I choose to do things that compromise my safety in exchange for fun all the time.

              Who are these designers to impose their qualitative preference for safety on me?

          2. Well said Ken.

        3. “The only ones saying they’ll be mandatory are those who love to drive and are looking for ways to vilify the technology.

          Not only is that not true on this topic, it isn’t true on any other topic I can think of either.

          Go write a comment at Ars Technica or any other science/technology website saying that you’re against forcing people to participate in something like this–just to preserve their right to make choices for themselves–and they’ll treat you like a climate change denier.


          Have you ever read Bailey talking about vaccination participation?

          The general disposition of society, presently, is that no one should be free to do anything that might have a net negative impact on someone else. . . . which is preposterous since everything we do or don’t do negatively impacts someone else in some way.

          1. It is also about the cult of safety. Driving is amazingly safe. But somehow it is being painted as some kind of unacceptablly dangerous activity because it involves some risk. We have gone from “be responsible for the harm your actions cause” to “you can’t put anyone at risk or the government can ban you from doing it in the name of safety “.

        4. Elon Musk has said that is what he wants. That is the stated goal of the builders of these things. Why wouldn’t they want the government to force you to buy their product?


      3. This is yet another topic where the fact that the government controls something that should be private leads to people fighting over the rules applying on public property.

        This is like sex-ed in schools, or opening days/hours in state-run liquor stores.

      4. The only way I’d ever own a self-driving car is if I could instantly turn it back into a human-driven car by doing something like hitting one of the pedals or moving the steering wheel… Kind of like how the cruise control automatically shuts off if you tap the brake pedal.

        If a carjacker tries to accost me while I’m stopped, I want to be able to speed away. If I’m driving and there’s some hazard that the AI doesn’t see but I do, I want to be able to take control and avoid it.

    2. To some degree, chalk it up to Johntrarianism.

  42. Did anyone see SNL? I don’t watch that junk but apparently they felt it was necessary to go all unhinged too.

    This is not humour or comedy. It’s political advocacy masking as comedy.

    1. We need to revitalize the term “pants-shitters”.

      1. Make Pants-shitting Great Again

        1. I think that’s been accomplished.

      2. Revitalize? It’s only been a year since Bataclan.

    2. Haven’t watched it in more than 20 years. Because biased political hackery is just not that funny. The last time I watched it, Will Ferrell was there and they were talking about Dubyah’s axis of evil and one of those Koreas. At that point, it was already in deep decline.

    3. I’m watching right now. Seriously pathetic. More pathetic than I had anticipated.

    4. I just watched it. I haven’t really watched SNL in years, but I have seen the odd headline about the show so I know it has ventured pretty far into the bias political humour realm… but wow, it was basically an hour of pant shitting about Trump and idolizing Clinton.

      It wasn’t even funny. It was just a bunch of political agenda driven sketches with a couple lame jokes here and there. I wouldn’t even mind the politicizing of the show but they cannot bring themselves to make any jokes that might make fun of their own leftist political idles.

  43. OT, but has anyone here who’s into gaming, played Tyranny? I thought I would buy it on release, but I’m sort of on the fence about it. A new party based RPG would be nice, but I’m not overly impressed with what I’m seeing.

    1. One of my “Steam Friends” is playing it. I only have two – one is Agamannon (sp?) and I forgot who the other one is.

      1. Just noticed, I think HM owns it. HM, you still here? How’s Tyranny?

    2. My son has been playing that and he rates it very highly. There is a lot of story to it.

    3. Can’t help you, but I do want to thank you for reminding me it existed, I had totally forgotten it was coming out.

      I usually like Obsidian games so I’ll almost definitely check it out myself.

  44. So, this is going to be it? One megathread from the crack of dawn, that you have to sort through hundreds of John comments just to get to the halfway point?

    C’mon Reason. Time for a new post. It would be nice to talk about something besides drones, pizzas and driverless cars.

    1. Let’s talk about sex, baby. Let’s talk about you and me. Let’s talk about all the good things, and the bad things that may be. Let’s talk about sex.

    2. Wha’dya want abortion or homosexual cakes?

    3. Sundays are always slow, posts-wise.

    4. We could talk about the Reason writers, instead of the subjects they write about.

  45. Mmm. 64 slices of American Derp



    Bill Maher sorry for crying wolf on McCain and Romney. Hilarious!

    1. Amazing how they’re unable to just say ‘ I was wrong’.

      1. ‘I was wrong’ is not a thing in leftese.

    2. He’s so rational! Rational, intelligent atheist ? but I repeat myself, amirite?

  46. Celebrities on Trump:

    Springsteen: I wrote Badlands for Trump.
    Mellencamp: I will sing ‘I was born with a small dick’ for Trump.

      1. I left a comment. Tee-hee!

  47. Facebook to blame?

    Really, HuffPo, Derpbook is to blame for Trump being elected? Ya’ll running out of material?

    1. Isn’t that the same Facebook which had a bias issue exposed earlier in the year?

      Looks like they put robots in charge now.

  48. Seen everywhere as of late:

    “misogyny, racism, Islamophobia and xenophobia”

    Any guesses as to how long before the first time we see this shortened to an acronym? If we haven’t already, I mean.

    1. The MRIX community?

    2. Shixer


  49. Democrats Screwed up

    “Democrats adopted a strategy of inclusiveness that excluded a hefty share of Americans and consigned many to a basket of deplorables” who aren’t all deplorable. Some are hurt. Some are confused.”

    And you learned absolutely nothing, did you, Bruni? So now all Americans who do not agree with you are not deplorable, but only hurt and confused? Is Hillary still like a piece of Salmon on plate with cucumber and dill, you fucking no talent hack? Go fuck yourself.

    1. strategy of inclusiveness

      *rolls eyes*

  50. By “pizza”, we’re talking “pedo-rape”, right?

    that aside….

    I do think its sort of funny how you have half of america acting like it should be “totally obvious” that Trump is a racist, and Hillary was some sort of Racially-Super-Cool Dalai Lama* figure…

    …. when the latter is in fact one of the people MOST single-handedly responsible for selling America a set of policies which put millions of young black people in jail and destroyed countless lives/families/communities.

    All the same proggies that were flagging this point during the primaries seem to have developed a convenient case of amnesia.

    1. Dalai Lama

      He ran a gas station down in St. Louis, I think.

    2. Progs must believe that all their opponents are evil or stupid or flawed in some other way. It feeds their desire for moral superiority and justifies their efforts to coerce other people.

      Often, this requires them to believe contradictory things or adopt opposite beliefs at the drop of a hat.

    3. Oh, with the Lama reference…. i meant to flag a reminder that “racism” isn’t exactly an American invention, and that the essence of the conflict between Tibet and Han China is as racial as it is political…. and the Eminient Lama himself actually takes a dim view of the benefits of mass-immigration

      1. If Tibet ran their own affairs you can bet they’d be every bit as racist as every other country in that region.

        1. The American style of black-white racism seems to have never had nearly the level of self-assuredness of intra-Asian racism.

  51. Just made the first pot of chili for the fall and wow, spicy wonder! My sinuses are all cleared up and I’m grabbing another beer to put out the fire in my mouth, holy shit. Life without spicy food would not be life at all.

    1. The stomach cramps are to die for!

      Ugh I ordered fried rice with “single spice” the other day (there are 3 levels) and I got this red-colored mess that was inedible. Spice freaks are SMDH.

    2. I’ve made taco chili and white chili so far this week. Om nom nom. I’ve got the stuff for green chile too, but that seemed like taking a theme too far.

      Soon, green chile. Soon.

      (Yay fall!)

  52. 62


    Prog leaps out of car at news of Trump victory; demands to be run over and asks people if they speak German.


    1. That’s not TARD so much as actual lunacy, I think.

  53. Local rag, suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome, suddenly discovers the left’s hunger for ‘family values’!:

    “Family-friendly march through Golden Gate Park protests Trump”

    The articles have been all (anti)Turmp, all the time since Wednesday morning, keeping us abreast of the number of celebrities leaving for Canada (n=0, AFAICT), the number of ‘Trump-induced’ nastiness on BART (n=1, highly suspicious), the number of people frightened ’cause Trump (n=whole bunches of whinny bastards).
    Not raining today, ’cause Trump. Rain likely later in the week, ’cause Trump, ‘9ers losing again (not yet, but they will) ’cause Trump, golf scores higher on muni courses, ’cause Trump….

  54. OT: Behold the underside of an iceberg

    You’ll never in a million years guess what gets invoked in the article.

    1. Young, fat Kate Winslet’s tits ?

    2. You’re both right.

      Justin Burton, an assistant professor at Emory University who has studied the physics of flipping icebergs, says that the phenomenon is occurring more frequently now due to climate change.

      What might have helped would be some accompanying data, but as we all know: Science Is Assertion By Experts Now.

      1. He does give an explanation of why global warming would increase the phenomenon, which you edited out.

        1. There’s at least 50 people here who could conjure a plausible explanation for why this occurs more frequently; that’s not what data is. If a so-called football scientist said that there were more pass plays now because there were more possessions than in the past, it’s a plausible explanation. Showing this on paper supports the explanation.

        2. Papist Penguin Plot !

      1. Ted’S, you are also correct. Climate Change is Hitler, fat-girl tits, Trump, H&R socks, Chipotle, the Cleveland Browns, and the Skeltal War all rolled into one.

  55. Is it bad to enjoy watching anti-Trump rioters get whooped by the police?

    1. I’m wonder how the media would be framing anti-Hillary protests had the election gone the other way.

      1. Anti-Hillary protests? Ha.

        The Left and their enablers in the media warned constantly about riots from the country bumpkins should Trump lose. It never, never would have happened. Remember for all the fear about the Tea Party, the thing that was most common to their public demonstrations was not violence, but cleaning up after themselves.

        But the superior Left (who of course are far too civilized and would never riot themselves over the election results!) were sure convinced the Trump supporters would. Look at this cover of The Week magazine from two weeks ago, with the rioting, gun-toting, drooling rural whites exactly as the liberal elite picture them — but a picture that never would have happened.

      2. We know. Tea party members were called terrorists and their rallies were “chilling”.

        1. To be fair, a lot of white people were rioting all over America in 2008 when a black man was elected president.

          1. I can’t find any reference to that; got a cite?

            1. I think someone’s sarcasm detector needs recalibrating.

              1. OK, but it sure was delivered straight…
                (looks at ground, kicks pebble)

    2. Perhaps they’ll have a dedicated holographic channel like in thx-1138.

  56. Know what’s really a travesty? How flippant our culture is with throwing heavy words like racism and misogyny around.

    People think they’re so god damned smart hurling this around without much thought.

    1. It’s not a travesty. It’s going to rob those words of any impact.

      1. Nah, in Prog-lish, all words have the same meaning.

        They mean ‘Obey obey obey’…or… ‘shut up and give me your wallet’ (depending on context)

    2. Well, there’s no other reason you could disagree with them.

    3. Two months ago 98% of the USA had never heard the word misogyny and would have had no idea what it meant.

      Perhaps a gynecologic infection?

  57. I don’t want fucking drones flying around everywhere.

  58. All the alternatives to privately owned cars (Bus/Taxi/Uber) are expensive largely due to the human labor costs. Even for people who can’t afford their own vehicle, self driving-whatevers will cut down on travel costs.

    Right. Because the additional up front cost of a “self driving” car will be negligible.

    You people are nuts.

    1. Cab driver salary is about $32,000/year. Even if a self-driving taxi costs twice as much to build as the regular kind, it’s still paying for itself in less than a year.

      1. If salary is only 32k/year, I don’t think a self-driving car would reduce cab fare all that much.

      2. You’re skipping all the road-based infrastructure needed to ‘”help” self-driving cars help themselves.

        Simply repainting lines on the road – all over every street in america – to make them ‘visible’ to self-driving cars… or adding RFID to road signs and traffic lights, so they can “see” those too, …. is in the many many many billions of dollars. never mind the upkeep.

        Whether its self-driving vehicles or ev’s, people never fully account for the transition costs, or think-through the changes to external infrastructure which themselves build in massive ongoing legacy costs.

        1. There’s cars on the road today that already drive themselves without this assistance.

          So is the article talking about a necessary step to having self-driving cars at all, or just something the authors think would improve safety even further?

          1. So is the article talking about…

            Do you need something translated from English to “obtuse”?

            1. I’m sorry, I read the article, and what it says conflicts with what I’ve read before.

              Clearly if the road infrastructure needs to be partially-redone in order to support “self-driving” cars, then it’s a much shittier proposition.

              But Google and Tesla already have vehicles that do some/all of the required driving without specially adapted roads. So I’m missing something.

  59. Bill Maher sorry for crying wolf on McCain and Romney. Hilarious!


    Guess what, Bill- that Trump guy, he’s not the wolf, either.

    1. No, no. This time he’s sure.

  60. Look at this cover of The Week magazine from two weeks ago, with the rioting, gun-toting, drooling rural whites exactly as the liberal elite picture them — but a picture that never would have happened.

    They got somebody from Mad Magazine to draw that, too. How appropriate.

  61. There’s been way too much derp for me to handle this week.

    1. You better punch a new hole in your belt, because the feast isn’t over.

      1. I remember reading about the Cultural Revolution in China. And you wonder if it could happen over here and this week was a confirmation that it indeed could happen here.

  62. And now for something completely different: Crabs dealing with the housing market. No Keynes or Krugman necessary.

    1. God the limos must have been lined up around the block for that celebrity wankfest.

      1. President Elect Trump (God that sounds weird) was supposed to go, but the secret service tried to talk him out of it. Perhaps they succeeded.

        1. LOL I’m guessing Hillary had other plans.

      2. Blame the government. MMA was only recently legalized in New York, so this was the first event. If it had been going on for years, the celebrity novelty would have worn off.

        1. Yeah, I can’t imagine half those idiots giving a shit about the actual event.

    2. ‘I take cum-goo on the face and rub it in. Been doing it since 1979 and it’s better than any anti-aging agent out there!’

    3. Male Clinton voters skew young, so probably more like 45 seconds.

    1. The comments.

      They’re sane.

      So rare. We need all the allies we can get.

    2. No fan of CNN, but if you read the article, that’s not remotely what they’re doing. In fact CNN reporters were sharing the video in question through their own social media accounts. They got pissed that NowThis was more successful in driving traffic to its own social media.

    1. Not to mention that this particular individual didn’t notice the last two presidents? During the last sixteen years that he has apparently been paying attention to this, he hasn’t noticed that the executive branch is a massive threat to civil liberties? A group of dudes saw this coming 250 years ago and this brilliant blogger didn’t notice it while it was happening?

      We have to confront it because of several distinct baskets of concerns about Trump:

      his rejection of mainstream foreign and defense policy thinking on matters as basic as the American commitment to traditional allies.

      Yes. You have all been extremely helpful. Thanks so much for your… Uhh… Service.

      If this were trolling, I’d award the guy a couple extra points for using the term “basket.” But it’s not. So fuck him with a pineapple.

      1. The author (Wikipedia):

        Wittes was born in 1969 in Boston, Massachusetts and graduated from Oberlin College in 1990.
        There may or may not be a rational adult that matches these criteria.

        Wittes brings a non-lawyer’s perspective to legal journalism, which has been his primary pursuit.
        Sounds legit.

    2. Cut them some slack.. for the last 8 years these willfully deluded morons inside their impenetrable thought bubbles had been constantly reassured that the gop was all but dead and buried, and that progressive democrats were destine to rule over the nation like a thousand year reich..

  63. On our little San Francisco bedroom-community suburb site on NextDoor, the community bulletin-board social media site for neighborhoods, the following was posted today. Looks like we’ll be seeing a lot of this for awhile. Ironic how much hate someone spews towards people who don’t vote like her, automatically assuming any vandal must be the result of the election:

    Is This What Our Town Looks Like Post-Trump?
    We put up a Black Lives Matter sign on our property last year that was defaced with a Sharpie. This year a new sign was stolen, along with one on the back supporting Standing Rock, ‘Water is Life’.

    A police report was filed, but little can be done against such cowardly behavior without a witness.

    Is this an escalation due to the hate speech that is now a new norm? Is this the new America? We certainly hope not.

    Another neighbor replied, citing the thousands of hate acts by Trump supporters in our area that somehow have escaped the notice of local media, who would bend over backwards to report the slightest slight:

    I am sorry you have had these experiences. I know many who have had horrific experiences all over the Bay Area. I support you in every way and am here should you need anything. I will make a concerted effort to keep an eye out as we all hopefully will.

    1. the thousands of hate acts by Trump supporters in our area that somehow have escaped the notice of local media


    2. It’s Peter Thiel, roaming in the darkest night, lynching black people and thrashing signs.

    3. I just saw a band of men dressed in Brown shirts and Trump masks going around smashing and blowing things up good.


    4. Sounds like they need a neighborhood watch.

  64. They’ve found the culprits in Trump’s election – or rather the lack of culprits the disenfranchisement of convicted felons –

    “Donald Trump won the presidential election on Tuesday as millions of people were prevented from voting this year by rules that root back to the Civil War and were made to maintain white male political dominance.

    “About 6.1 million people who were convicted of breaking laws could not cast ballots because of policies that keep felons off voter rolls, according to justice reform organization The Sentencing Project. And according to the most recent numbers from Florida, Wisconsin and Michigan, which is still counting, Hillary Clinton lost by a margin smaller than those banned from voting ? many of whom are poor or black or both, which are groups that tend to vote Democrat.”

    1. As to Florida, ten years ago the a federal appeals court threw cold water on the OMG RACISM argument

      “The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, has held that Floridas felon disenfranchisement law does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or the Voting Rights Act….

      “Florida first enacted such {felon disenfranchisement} laws in its 1836 and 1845 Constitutions. Because the right to vote for African-Americans did not exist at that time, [Florida was a slave state] they could not have been the target of the laws, making those Constitutions laws non-racial.”

    2. Fair, unbalanced reporting from PBS on the unending chain of racism from the beginnings of our country until today. No wonder every single president has been a Republican.

      1. er “fair and balanced”

    3. rules that root back to the Civil War and were made to maintain white male political dominance.

      Notice how the “male” just slips out when they write “white”. As unjustifiable as the claim that restrictions on felon voting is racist are, claiming that they are intended to discriminate against women is even more ludicrous.

      1. I don’t think they’re saying the laws were discriminatory.

        I think frogs just have a knee-jerk reaction that, when talking about political dominance, you automatically say white male. ‘Cause fuck whitey. And men are rapists.

        1. Ugh. *discriminatory towards women

      2. Women are hardest hit by these laws, because they lose access to their husbands and sons.

    4. Yeah, because convicted felons would otherwise vote at near 100% rates.

      1. And all be voting for Hillary fucking Clinton.

        I bet a lot of convicts in currently doing time wept openly in cell blocks across America, when they heard there would be no Madam President this year.

  65. Just spoke to a financial friend who was in NY in the same hotel as Clinton’s staff. He went through security right in front of Podesta.

    Saw the Clinton campaign go from high fives and Madri Gras to hung over, ready for death.

    Speaking of security, he said the Secret Service had the complete opposite reaction.

    1. Yeah, because they know that Hillary has a history of treating the help like shit.

    2. Strange, since Hillary continues getting SS protection regardless of the results of the election due to being an ex-president’s spouse.

      1. Imagine getting the short straw for that detail.

      2. Just saying.

        He also said Podesta is a creepy looking dude in person.

      3. Might be slightly different levels of protection between a sitting president and a washed-up has-been of a futureless hag of a first lady. Just maybe.

  66. OT:

    Puttin on the Ritz with the original politically incorrect lyrics, which were about the black hired help going up to Harlem and voguing on their night off. From the 1930 movie.

    1. That’s ripped off from Young Frankenstein.

  67. I just saw a Trump supporter kick a baby carriage down and begin grabbing the mother’s pussy while licking a lollipop.


    1. The Dingo ate my baby

    1. The selfie vids are the best. It’s hard to believe that ham tears and fainting couches are an actual thing.

      1. And getting hysterical about potential Trump deportations completely oblivious to the current presidents actual record setting deportations.

    2. Anna Sarkissian’s screeds scream ‘grab my pussy.’

  68. New Zealand Has Pizza Delivery Drones But thanks to overregulation, America doesn’t.

    Remember thalidomide?

    1. Well played..

      *golf clap*

      1. Flipper clap

  69. Thomas Friedman, our favorite philosopher-king, tries to brain the election.

    “This is a moral 9/11,” Friedman declared. “Only 9/11 was done from us on the outside and we did this to ourselves.”

    Meanwhile, Maher knows just how to fix the Democrats. It turns out their biggest problem is they’re just too smart and decent.


    1. They can sure milk a tantrum.

    2. Just a “moral 9/11,” Friedman? Only 3,000 people died that day. Why not a “moral Holocaust” or a “moral Cambodian Killing Fields” or a “moral Rwanda”? I mean, if you’re going to pull out the mass murder analogies, you should go whole-hog.

    3. “This is a moral 9/11,” Friedman declared. “Only 9/11 was done from us on the outside and we did this to ourselves.”


      I have it on good authority that 9/11 was an inside job.

      1. I have it on good authority that 9/11 was an inside job.

        You forgot to add the /sarc.

        I hope.

  70. America just elected a farting T Rex, according to the Leslie Knope character of Parks and Recreation.


    I always thought that in this election, Clinton was Tracy Flick, Trump was Tammy Metzler, and the football player was every other candidate.


        1. I never get tired of that

    1. “Then I started crying. So I had some hot chocolate, and my close friend (Ann) rubbed my back for a while”

      And I’m guessing that it doesn’t really go in a fun direction from there…

      1. I’ll go ahead and imagine otherwise.

    2. If you were to perform an autopsy on these people what would you find in their heads? Shit or mud?

  71. More, more!

    “…Whereas the 2012 campaign centered on a big argument over government and the economy, Campaign 2016 presented the occasion for a grand argument between a vision of an evolving America that embraces pluralism, tolerance, inclusion, and cultural change ? and one that is standing athwart those changes.

    “Trump crudely but shrewdly positioned himself as that latter vision’s champion, through an explicit embrace of intolerance, bigotry, ethno-nationalism, and white identity politics….

    “But what is undeniable for now is that in too many battleground states, enormous numbers of white voters either did embrace Trump’s bigotry and intolerance, or were not sufficiently alienated by those traits for it to make a difference, or simply found Clinton’s spirited rebuke of them to be insufficiently compelling or inspiring or relevant.”

    1. I’m bloated from all the salty tears. I’m starting to find this tiresome. I’m going to go play Civ V.


  72. “…or simply found Clinton’s spirited rebuke of them to be insufficiently compelling or inspiring or relevant.”

    The woman is an odious example of the politically-connected elite; smug and self-righteous to the point of sublime ignorance toward those whom she sees as lesser beings.
    She was also a loser regardless of what Comey did; if he had pushed for prosecution, it would be even more plain that the elite protect the elite. Since he didn’t it was only slightly less obvious. She’s a felon and should be in jail and only her slimebag sycophants claim otherwise; many who voted (or didn’t, as it were) are convinced of that.
    Trump isn’t my first choice for POTUS; for all his faults, Johnson takes that spot. But he’s far better than that hag.

    1. “The woman is an odious example of the politically-connected elite; smug and self-righteous to the point of sublime ignorance toward those whom she sees as lesser beings.”

      Hey Sevo. I know I have trolled you in the past about your Atheism. I fuck with the people I like.
      If you, and Eddie could dial down the Atheists, and Christians that you know. It would be much appreciated.
      If there are Muslims reading this, dial that shit down as well.
      And Fuck the Buddhists. Nobody needs your self martyr bull shit. Dial it down.

      1. “Dial down the…Christians that you know”

        In what sense?

      2. “If you, and Eddie could dial down the Atheists, and Christians that you know. It would be much appreciated.”

        Jimmy, I suggest you take a stroll back through time. I have NEVER started a debate on religion; only responded to bullshit claims and dishonest ‘argument’..
        I’ll be happy to ‘dial it back’ no bullshit claims, no calling bullshit claims.

          1. Keep it up, eddy. The world needs bullshit.

              1. Keep it up, shit bag, keep it up.

      3. Apparently the Daoists are free to party it up though.

        1. Oh I seem to have to learn how to piss off those cock suckers as well =D

          1. Linking to the Beatles’ “All You Need Is Love” = “pissed off”?

  73. “Forget Canada, Air New Zealand is offering election-sick Americans $399 one-way tickets”

    Does it make me a bad person to hope there are NO return tickets available?

    1. “When the Yanks send people to New Zealand they’re not sending their best. Some of them, I suppose, are good people – like soldiers and makers of blockbuster films. But they’re also sending their hipsters, their gender studies professors, their activists for bizarre causes, their rioters, and that crowd.”

      1. “makers of blockbuster films”

        So…rapists? You just called all Americans rapists.

    2. Note: escape to New Zealand after the tsunami disaster is cleared up.

  74. It’s paywalled against me but how do you fight this mendacity? Do you just let it run its course?

    US hate crimes spread anxiety in wake of Trump win: Reports of racist incidents after a campaign that tapped into white anger

    1. All you need to know about that piece of shit paper is that dope Chrystia Freeland was editor there.


    2. I think we’ve learned that more than half of the voting public either dismisses it entirely or reads media that combats that narrative with another narrative of violence perpetrated against Trump supporters, so I don’t think it matters.
      Those want to believe it believe it, and those who are predisposed to dismiss it dismiss it, and that’s how we end up with this jackass as our president.

      Former commenter Epi was right!

      1. It’s quite a bit more complex than that. Still, I’m sharpening my axe waiting for the radio to tell me to go all Hutu on your Tutsi ass, cuck.

    3. I don’t think they know what “white anger” really looks like. It often comes with a funny facial hair.

  75. The bylines show the local rag has been scouring news sources all over the US hoping to gin-up some ‘hate crime’ spike and what they end up with is a ‘balanced’ article with 10 anti-Trump thugs and one (supposedly) Trump-supporting loud-mouth saying things that aren’t nice to someone. Even that “balance” shows they are desperate for content.
    Our very own Suell is in there trying to make that clear, but other than that, it will become urban legend, just like Reagan ’emptied the insane asylums’, ‘the environment is not healthy’, and so forth.

  76. More pants-shitting from CA Dems

    California needs protection from the “dystopian worldview” of President-elect Donald Trump, a leader of the state’s Democratic Party said Friday.

    Eric Bauman, chairman of the Los Angeles County Democratic Party, called on Gov. Jerry Brown and legislative leaders to lead an effort on statutes and constitutional amendments to “safeguard” the state from any effort by Trump to roll back existing federal policies on healthcare, immigration and climate change.

    “Several months ago, I facetiously called on Governor Brown to build a wall around California to keep Donald Trump out,” Bauman wrote in a statement on Friday night. “Today, on a more serious note, I sincerely call on Governor Brown and our Legislature to build a metaphorical legal wall to keep our residents safe from the grim and cynical vision that Donald Trump has laid out for America.”

    1. The statements by Bauman, who is running to become chairman of the California Democratic Party next year, follow concerns raised by legislative leaders shortly after Tuesday’s surprise Trump victory. On Thursday, Brown issued a more cautious statement that nonetheless promised to fight any effort to limit California’s climate change policies.

      Bauman offered a more pointed reaction.

      “The election of Donald Trump ushers in one of darkest eras in our nation’s modern political history,” he wrote. “Many across the state and country are frightened, and they are right to feel that way.”


    2. Perhaps a constitutional amendment that the federal government only has those powers delegated to it, and the states and the people have the rest.

    3. Aside from saying crude things, I want to know SPECIFICALLY what ‘grim and cynical’ vision has he laid out where policy is concerned? Is there a ‘Deport Muslims Now’ edict I’m unaware of? Or a ‘it’s grab pussy season’?

      The Seahawks are annoying.

      1. he said make American great again. That’s obviously white supremacist code for let’s drag black teenage trannies behind trucks

      2. he said make American great again. That’s obviously white supremacist code for let’s drag black teenage trannies behind trucks

    4. “…called on Gov. Jerry Brown and legislative leaders to lead an effort on statutes and constitutional amendments to “safeguard” the state from any effort by Trump to roll back existing federal policies on healthcare, immigration and climate change.”

      It’s quite obvious from the page-8 articles in the paper-paper that the CA elite is shaking in their boots. This morning, one of the ‘sports writers’ was whining about how the chillunz are going to be paddling to school ’cause Trump.
      You have to remember that Obo and that hag drew very large amounts of money out of CA, and that money didn’t go to those scumbags for shits and giggles; ‘Tom Steyer and Elon Musk most effected!’
      There are many ‘industries’ here existing on the federal taxpayer dole, which allows them to deal with CA taxes and regs and remain in business. Pelosi is the source of pork spread far afield in the Golden State, and moonbeam is absolutely betting on it for his choo-choo.
      If Trump does no more than cut that hair-shirt whiner off at the knees, he’ll be a hero in my book.

    5. I sincerely call on [lawmakers] to build a metaphorical legal wall

      As opposed to an actual one? Okay…

  77. Amusing- even Team Blue is saying they’re shitting themselves


  78. I just rewatched Van Jones’ emotional outburst on CNN.

    I think my fave is when he says, ‘we teach our kids to do their homework’.

    Wtf? Like, I mean, the Iraq and such wtf?

    1. The pain is real! seems to be his only point. Is their pain justified? And even it is, is their violent reaction excusable? He’s a slimy POS more interested in “teaching” unbelievers than having the adult conversation he claims he wants.

      1. Didn’t he resign in disgrace in 2009 about something? No one seems to be bringing that up.

        My liberal sister is utterly distraught. ‘Not my liberalism all this’ she said. That’s because she has principles and is actually intelligent and not a shrill brain-dead buffoon. I reckon there are plenty of old liberals who have just about been gutted by all this.

    2. Dont’cha know? The +1% of the white vote that Trump won compared to Romney is a “whitelash,” man.

      1. And that’s just percentage-wise. With the weak turnout, Trump’s “whitelash” was hundreds of thousands of actual votes less than Romney’s “devastating defeat”.

  79. The Media freaking out.
    Women, and girly men curled up in the fetal position crying.
    Hillary supporters rioting in the streets with BLM.
    People smashing their TV’s
    46.9% of eligible voters not even voting.

    What is best in life ?



  80. Norm MacDonald lampooning the Clintons on SNL.



    1. My brother sent me that today, and Normie was mean. That would never happen today. SNL has been neutered comedy refusing to insult those in power…until this past week.

      1. Sorry for the repeat, but the SF hipster crowd prides itself on ‘edgy’ humor; been Bush jokes for the last 8 years. Prolly change now.

        1. It’s before their time. Which is a great shame for a Hipster. =D

      2. You know, after watching this I realized what pure political satire humour is supposed to be. Norm and Miller were simply the best at it. They completely blow Jon Stewart and John Oliver out of the water. For starters, they’re far less smug and irreverent.

        1. Norm was mean, which is how to best treat those in power. One of their best sketches was the “Mastermind” sketch they did lampooning Reagan, which is the sort of thing that only comes from being hostile toward a powerful person.

          1. Did you link that right?

    2. ‘The president’s a murderer. You didn’t know that?’

      Fucken legend.

  81. If I’m supposed to live with slave driving socialists and commies and treat them with decency, what about racists? Racism is just as disgusting as statist ideology to me, but I have join the mob to attack one and listen to the pain of the other? If I can be friends with a statist, statists can be friends with racists.

    1. I couldn’t bear to watch much of this ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFTe0HugLIs ) but there was a young woman who looked like she might be near-eastern (semetic?) yelling about the ‘rednecks’ with no knowledge of the irony of HER bigotry.

      1. “I couldn’t bear to watch much of this…”

        No worries, that’s why I’m here.

      2. Check it in a bit. Back to work for me.

        1. There are still good kids out there. =)

        2. Jimmy, that won’t go to the folks I (we; wife and me) know in SF. Wife just got tossed from NextDoor for pointing out that we do have a new president and that’s the way our political system works, regardless of your whining about losing; ‘Out with you, bitch!’.
          We have lost ‘friends’ for the crime of pointing out that single payer is a disaster, that teachers should be subject to firing; the horrible acts of stating an opinion backed with evidence.
          Suell manages to stay on SFGate, which is voter-moderated; I’ve been tossed often enough it’s not worth inventing ways around the blocks; fuck ’em.
          That corrupt POS Willie Brown writes for the local rag and his column this morning went on about how the Ds missed that a very large portion of the voters is really fed up with the smug politically-connected elite. And then followed up with an item about he, Tom Steyer, Gavin Newsom and various other lefties got together at Sam’s Grill to welcome the election of the hag, only to be disappointed. And, with no hint of irony, he claimed it was still ‘their golf club’.
          IOWs, they didn’t lie well enough.
          In SF, you select with whom you choose to be open and honest.

          1. Thanks Sevo. It’s part of my part to combat the scourge of progressivism here. It’s pretty much insurmountable, but worth a small bit of my time to try. I try to be as absolutely careful there as I can. Very easy and to get comments deleted.

            1. Suell, your comments are clear and well phrased to avoid getting tossed. Mine, not so much.
              Keep on keepin’ on.

    2. You have eaten to many edibles. Drink some rum to bring you back down. =D

  82. ‘Member when dumb celebrities were all shilling for Devil Wears Pantsuit? I *’member*.


    1. Lord that was ugly.


      Wha happened?

      1. Oh, that T-shirt is clever

        it’s tIMe
        to look WITHin
        for a HERo

        Get it – I’m with her!

        Embedded in the opposite sentiment.

  83. Could you imagine Hillary as a designated survivor? WHAT A FUCKEN WASTE.

  84. Thank you, YouTube sidebar, for this.

    Young Turks learn Trump won.


    1. Yep. Fuck the Young Turks.

      1. I did not know that Ben Mankiewicz was one of them. I only knew him as the host of TCM.

    2. The woman in the video said at one point: “People who voted against their best interests tonight”

      Fuck off twit.

      1. Yup. Same thing they said after the 2014 midterms.

        1. “I can’t believe she dumped me for a loser like that… just goes to show, she doesn’t even know what’s good for her own self.”

          D party needs to update their logo, and put a big white knight riding that donkey.

      2. Was it Anna Sarkissian?

        Anna Sarkissian screeds are a scream for someone to gran her pussy.

        1. The woman doesn’t look like the pictures I found of Anna Sarkissian.

          Though isn’t Sarkissian an Armenian last name? If so, what’s she doing on Young Turks?

          1. Anna Kasparian.

            Anita Sarkeesian is another lefty twit. She complains about pretty girls in video games.

            1. Ah yeah. All these idiot progs are starting to sound and look alike.

            2. She also complains about Trump.

              Video with commentary by Sargon of Akkad. Because you never go full Sarkeesian.

          2. I’m pretty sure Kasparian’s the Young Turk’s equity hire so Cenk can go “Hey look, you don’t need to ask me about my Armenian genocide denial! I hire Armenians!”

            Of course naming his organization after the group that committed said genocide doesn’t help.

            1. The Proglodytes do like their tokens.

  85. My local news is reporting now that Trump’s transition team is full of racists and homophobes. I’m scared.

    1. The internet tells me his team is full of RINOs and Establishmentarians. Same thing or split the difference?

      1. The funny thing is they’re serious. Their straight news readers are literally calling his team racists and homophobes.

  86. One of my favorite Team Blue asshats speaks on The Day After:


    1. “When Van Jones did his whitelash speech even Jeff Lord was speechless. He was just looking at him like “Oh shit… The man makes a good point.” Even a jackass like Jeff Lord couldn’t deny that the truth of that statement. I think he thought “Oh my God… Black people deserve human dignity too. I was so wrong.” It only lasted about two minutes but still.?”

      These people. I’ve lost words. They probably really do see the sky as any color but blue.

      1. other than blue.

      2. “These people.”
        Mortiscrum showed up here last week and I think a week or two earlier. Like Hihn, s/he was here to enlighten all of us who had somehow not thought of how it only required this or that to make O-care work! We just aren’t as smart as those who are certain that it just takes the new Soviet man and all will be right!

    1. The election butthurt is just epic.

    2. What I find interesting are the frequent uses of the words white, uneducated, redneck, working class, etc.

      These people hold over half of their countrymen in contempt and are racist as hell yet don’t understand why they lost.

  87. The Football Men are sure putting on an Exciting spectacle!

  88. I think its amazing how the “white working class voters” who represented 34% of the people who supported Obama in 2012…

    …. somehow all became “racists” when they decided not to vote for a white woman in 2016

    somehow the same people who were all about hope and change and progress 4 years ago were swept up in an invisible tidal wave of misogyny and bigotry

    1. They’re only good people when they vote for Team Blue. Geez, Gilmore. Didn’t you know that?

    2. They struggled valiantly for 8 years to suppress their racism, but this year it just bubbled forth.

    3. No, see, that’s why it’s so much worse: they voted Obama in spite of their racism, but they voted Trump because of it.

  89. When you need pants-shitting done right, call Ezra Klein:


  90. Bathos from Sally Kohn

    Sally Kohn ? @sallykohn
    Republicans are planning to repeal Obamacare just when half the country desperately needs insurance that covers trauma counseling.

    1. I hadn’t seen that but I linked an op-ed before the election where some pathetic POS lacking a dick claimed it was wonderful to elect a criminal since she didn’t have a dick, either.
      From the ST Chron, no surprise.

  91. Is there an on topic any more?
    Just finished “Fleet at Flood Tide” (Hornfischer). Recent release, and cites many sources I’ve read, both good (Frank: data!) and otherwise (Rhodes: opinion.). There is some hand-wringing over the use of the nukes, and some totally false 20-20 hindsight (‘After the capture of the Marianas, it was commentary’), but he can offer no more humanitarian alternative; the bombs (both of them) were required to prompt Hirohito to act. No other action open to the Allies would have done so.
    To examine what I hope are the best alternative arguments, Amazon just got an order for “Prompt and Utter Destruction: Truman and the Use of Atomic Bombs against Japan” and “The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb “.
    Given that they were both published a good bit before Frank’s definitive “Downfall”, I doubt there is new data there. But if you are to argue…..

    1. It would have taken a long time and would have been expensive, but a total naval blockade of Japan might have been just as good of an idea as the nukes were. Japan has no resources of its own. A 10 year blockade would have had them back to their feudal past. Prob would have resulted in the starvation of many more Japanese than the nukes actually blew up. A benefit of that is we might could have kept the nukes secret, possibly staving off proliferation.

      1. “It would have taken a long time and would have been expensive, but a total naval blockade of Japan might have been just as good of an idea as the nukes were”

        I’m not one to shed tears for aggressors, but it’s pretty much a given in ANY authoritarian polity that the army eats first. And last, after the entire civilian population has starved.
        Again, I’ve yet to see ANY alternative more ‘humanitarian’ than to poop a couple of nukes.

        1. I wasn’t necessarily looking at it from a humanitarian perspective.If we never drop the nukes on japan, then the rest of the world doesn’t know we have then and the soviets wouldn’t have been so desperate to develop their own. America might have remained the only nuclear power for a longer period of time. Maybe that helps them win the cold war earlier. Maybe it just means that america nukes Moscow and Stalingrad in the fifties instead.

          1. Suggest:
            “Stalin and the Bomb”
            “Heisenbergs War”
            “Post War”
            Stalin was not bright enough to understand the power involved, but he understood from Klaus Fuchs and his advisors that this was serious business. As a tin-pot dictator (‘upper volta with missiles’) with a slave population, he must and would have a bomb.

      2. A benefit of that is we might could have kept the nukes secret, possibly staving off proliferation.

        Nope; spies would have given them to the Soviets anyway.

    2. also, I really like hornfischer. The last stand of the tin can sailors, a book on the battle off samara island is one of my favorite books. Neptune’s Inferno, about the naval battle off Guadalcanal was also well done. I didn’t know he had a new book out. I’ll have to get a copy.

    3. Sailor suit schoolgirls charging USMC with pikes. Ama divers with limpet mines. Thank fucking God for Fat Man and Little Boy. An invasion of mainland Japan would’ve made the Battle of Berlin look like a rugby match.

      Throughout the war the Japanese people demonstrated such a ferocity and resolve that after defeat, we should always favor them as our closest ally.

      1. I read that during the occupation, they found caves full of swords, bows and arrows, and bamboo spears.

        I don’t think the Japanese had any plans to surrender.

        1. “I read that during the occupation, they found caves full of swords, bows and arrows, and bamboo spears.”

          Several sources make it clear that the Atusagi pilots were ready to ‘avenge’ the loss, and it took one of Hirohito’s brothers to get the propellers removed. You can imagine how the US military would have responded if the surrender process were interrupted by some brain-dead Jap pilot.
          Hornfisher mentions stores of primitive weapons; the Japs ought to celebrate 8/9 as a deliverance.
          But those books are on order and deserve a read.

  92. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    …….. http://www.jobmax6.com



    1. Well, he and P. J. O’Rourke both dropped tremendously in my estimation due to this election….

      1. P.J. has been on a sort of downward arc since stating (was it is talk at the Palace Hotel?) that having a female child changed his entire out-look.

        1. Sounds like low testosterone….

    2. How nice. I’ll send him a nice sandwich made from a crow, a shoe, and a hat.

    3. Wtf was the point of that?

      But it did sound and come off as the usual ‘I’ms show shmartz ans youz alls stopped’ liberal smugness.

      Celebrity and NYT. A potent mix of condescension.

  94. “Crowds disrupt traffic in San Francisco following another day of protests”
    There will be broken windows, there will be graffiti, there will be claims that “Trump made me do it!”

    1. Trump is the Not Me of urban violence.

  95. Trump protester tries to steal sign; gets maced:

    Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

  96. OFFS!

    “Report: Trump was unfamiliar with the scope of the president’s job when meeting Obama”

    Yeah, he had to ask a Chi-town community activist what a president does!

    1. Don’t worry! Obama is going to mentor him like no other incoming president has been mentored before.

    1. RATIONAL. Not unhinged emotionalist fear-mongering. Not religiulous! No. Rational, objective, wise.

  97. “The world’s shining light of democracy has gone dark.”

    Way to be neutral, MSM.

    1. Those white girls crying while Van Jones claims this election was a whitelash must be Trumpets crying tears of victory, right?

  98. What have you mammals been getting on about all day?

    BTW saw my first Bucaneer home game win ever today, thanks Jay Cutler

  99. Don’t like George Soros? Congrats, the BBC says you’re an anti-Semite


    1. Do these people actually write rather than forcing us to sit through videos and waste our time and bandwidth? It’s much quicker to read, and not everybody has unlimited bandwidth.

  100. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.