MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Saudi Robot Gets Citizenship, Best JFK Files Withheld From Trump Dump, Cruelty in Mississippi Justice System: A.M. Links

  • At the urging of national intelligence officials, President Trump decided not to release certain federal files related to the assassination of John F. Kennedy. The National Archives is allowed to publish about 2,800 files, "but about 300 additional records—the ones historians were most interested in seeing—will stay secret for now," reports The Washington Post.
  • A Mississippi judge is banning a mother from seeing her new baby until she squares unpaid court fees. ("Even in the annals of 'oppressive things done to poor people due to unpaid court fees,' this story seems particularly monstrous," comments Radley Balko.)
  • Saudi Arabia has granted citizenship to a robot named Sophia.
  • Here's a fun, offline-until-now old profile of longtime New Republic Literary Editor (and alleged serial sexual-harasser) Leon Wieseltier that involves him wearing a coke spoon around his neck and playing intellectual gigolo to old Hollywood ladies.
  • George Bush Sr. continues to collect allegations of ass grabbing.

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

Photo Credit: CHINE NOUVELLE/SIPA/Newscom

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.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Another Causal Friday at Reason.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Causal Friday? Like, involving time travel?

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    ENB plans to visit her great-grandmother and warn her about Michael Hihn.

  • Brandybuck||

    More like Friday being the cause d'etre of everything bad that happens on Saturday.

  • ||

    Hello.

    It is indeed monstrous.

    Over a fucken court fee?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Picture, if you will, President Trump speaking on the phone with Colin Kaepernick's agent. "He knew what he was getting into," the president's voice barks through the speakerphone with zero deference to the agent's sobs. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton is at a podium with a wad of fresh cash in her pantsuit pocket screaming at the audience that Donald Trump's election should be tossed out because of his being in the pocket of Russian interests. Next pane widens out to see she is speaking at the annual meeting of the Conglomerate of Russian Uranium Importers/Exporters. Someone in the back yells out in broken English, "In Russia, clunkers cash you!"

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    [I couldn't think up a new one so enjoy that repeat.]

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    George Bush Sr. continues to collect allegations of ass grabbing.

    As long as we're not defining down assault.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    He is clearly a rapist according to Citizen X.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Your logic and sense of proportion are what make you such a respected thinker, shreek.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    A clearapist?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Butt is psychologically an analrapist.

  • ||

    As long as we're not defining down assault.

    Look, you try losing your nose sometime or have the "You've got something on your shirt." trick go terribly wrong just. one. time. Then get back to us.

  • Jimbo||

    Hey, Bush signed the ADA (Americans for Disabled Ass), so he should get a little something. Amirite?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    A Mississippi judge is banning a mother from seeing her new baby until she squares unpaid court fees.

    He's hoping the child will imprint on the state.

  • JFree||

    That's funny

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    You know the goal is accomplished when the child starts pecking on the state meal.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    State seal, damnit.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Why no one uses the secret edit button is beyond me.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Because only Reason employees, like you, have access to it.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Imagine all the other secret buttons those Reason employees have.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I had a state meal once... once.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Saudi Arabia has granted citizenship to a robot named Sophia.

    Way to bury the lede, ENB (which is in fact the headline of the article): A robot that once said it would 'destroy humans' just became the first robot citizen

  • Bee Tagger||

    Until it tweets that sentiment, I'm not too worried.

  • ||

    Will they let her drive a car?

  • Libertarian||

    Will it be forced to cover its face?

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Will it be allowed to Hajj?

  • juris imprudent||

    Ha, just wait for Sophia to grab the whip and start lashing the Saudi men.

  • Jimbo||

    For free? I pay extra for that.

  • lap83||

    so it's an environmentalist robot

  • Bee Tagger||

    Saudi Arabia has granted citizenship to a robot named Sophia.

    Instead of just wondering if my fellow citizens love their country, now I have to wonder if my fellow citizens are capable of loving their country.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    At the urging of national intelligence officials, President Trump decided not to release certain federal files related to the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

    I guess he and the deep state are no longer feuding.

  • Libertarian||

    I'm continually disapointed in Trump's deal making ability.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    If by "deal making" you mean stiffing his creditors he has still got it.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Then there's deal making like enforcing American immigration law and getting huge reductions in illegal immigration across the US border, getting a ceasefire in Syria, getting China to put pressure on North Korea, getting Congress to enact some tax reform, etc.

    Aw, Butt and your TDS.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    ICE and the DEA are stomping around more - I give you that.

    Not very libertarian at all though.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    ICE duties rounding up illegals are very constitutional and what Americans want.

    DEA duties are mostly based on unconstitutional drug laws and on their way out, as long as people dont fall for the propaganda that there is an opioid crisis.

    So some Libertarian ways and some not.

    Butt's got TDS ♫

  • Eek Barba Durkle||

    There is nothing Libertarian about a state telling people where they can and cannot live, travel and work.

    There is no difference in 'border control' and the drug war (and gun control, and militarization of police etc etc) It's all the same myopic cowardice.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    If they are not citizens of that country, sure there is a Libertarian interest in keeping borders secure. Just like enforcing property rights is Libertarian.

    The myopic cowardice is following socialist dogma and hoping socialism works this time in the USA.

  • Zeb||

    No, there is a pragmatic and utilitarian interest in keeping borders secure. There is nothing libertarian about using force to prevent people from peacefully traveling from one place to another.

    Perhaps tightly controlled borders are necessary to maintaining any semblance of liberty (I'm not convinced, but it's possible I guess). But that would be a compromise of principle, not an application of it.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Libertarianism is partly about property rights and national defense.

    You are assuming people are peacefully traveling from outside the USA into the USA.

    Some of those illegals do not want to assimilate into American culture but want to change.

    Doesn't sound like peace to me.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Real question. The overarching prevention of people from certain country denies me some aspect of my own property rights. That is, I am not allowed to bring them to my house and allow them to be there. In this way the federal trumps an individuals property rights. What is your opinion of that?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    BestUsedCarSales|10.27.17 @ 1:15PM|#
    Real question. The overarching prevention of people from certain country denies me some aspect of my own property rights. That is, I am not allowed to bring them to my house and allow them to be there. In this way the federal trumps an individuals property rights. What is your opinion of that?


    See, YOUR property rights do not trump everyone else's. Its why eminent domain is in the Constitution. You don't get to harm everyone else's property rights because YOU hypothetically want a million illegals to live on your land.

    Even eminent domain should be used in rare circumstances and after Due Process allows you reasonable compensation.

    The common defense is an enumerated power of the federal government and that includes defense of of sovereign borders.

    If you want a non-American to be on you land, obtain a visa for that person but YOU are responsible for that person skipping out and not leaving the USA. This would actually end more of this open borders nonsense.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    See, YOUR property rights do not trump everyone else's. Its why eminent domain is in the Constitution. You don't get to harm everyone else's property rights because YOU hypothetically want a million illegals to live on your land.

    So it is not a right in any sense? It is trumped if people disagree with you? Because you are saying that other people's property rights trump mine.

    Imagine that I bought land on the border and I wanted people to come on in and visit from Canada freely. In what way is this going on other people's property rights?

    Also do you believe that public property is a type of conglomerated property right?

    The common defense is an enumerated power of the federal government and that includes defense of of sovereign borders.

    I agree, but falling back on saying it's the law is not a meaningful moral or philosophical argument. That just is.

  • Zeb||

    ICE duties rounding up illegals are very constitutional and what Americans want.

    I didn't realize there were degrees of constitutionality.

    Deporting illegal immigrants is certainly constitutional. However, they way in which they go about it is not always so.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    There is constitutional and unconstitutional.

    In the case of rounding up illegals, its constitutional and the majority of Americans approve of it.

    As with a recent example of ICE agents entering a home without a warrant, that is a violation of the 4th Amendment and should not be tolerated.

    In the case of domestic surveillance, its unconstitutional and the majority of Americans don't approve of it yet the government still does it.

  • Sevo||

    Palin's Buttplug|10.27.17 @ 9:22AM|#
    "If by "deal making" you mean stiffing his creditors he has still got it."

    Ever pay off your bet, turd?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Saudi Arabia has granted citizenship to a robot named Sophia.

    She's programed to not go into public unattended.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Not without an abaya she doesn't.

  • Libertarian||

    Saudi Arabia has granted citizenship to a robot named Sophia.

    I see a future where computer-immigrants will be imported in pieces and then assembled here, much like cars are to avoid costly import duties.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Let's see....a German brain, a French tongue, African penis, Russian balls, Brazilian ass....am I missing anything?

  • ||

    Tierra del Fuegan webbed feet, Laplander palate

  • Eek Barba Durkle||

    You're going to want to spring for the white privilege. I know, I know, nobody wants to fall for the upsell, but you're gonna want that protection if you find yourself confronted by the cisheteronormative patriarchy.

  • Mike Laursen||

    I got her one piece at a time / And she didn't cost me a dime / You'll know my ro-boy when I come through your town...

  • Citizen X - #6||

  • ||

    I dug a little beyond WaPo about Judge John Shirley.

    One of the reasons he claimed why he did this monstrous thing was because:

    "After the women were arrested, the officer listed the child as "abandoned" because the mother had been detained. The baby's grandmother arrived to take the child soon after, but the officer still requested the mother and child appear in Pearl Youth Court."

    See? The cops detain the mother and the child suddenly becomes abandoned! Over a...traffic violation!

    A crystal clear case of how law enforcement fosters distrust among the poor.

    Beyond, this Shirley lacks compassion and decency. To take a mother away from her child for 14 months in this story is beyond the pale.

    And the prick is standing by his asshole decision:

    http://bit.ly/2yOK5yb

  • cgr2727||

    Surely he must be joking...

  • ||

    /narrows gaze.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Well, is he a prick, or is he an asshole? He's actively making the world a shittier place, but he's also fucking somebody, so it's hard to tell.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Some sort of retractable sphincter penis?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    That, or a urethral fistula.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Maybe he's actually a prick and a pussy? Then he'd be like one of those hyena psuedopenises.

  • Eidde||

    Looks like Reason buried the lede:

    "A judge resigned Wednesday and the city of Pearl voted to close its youth court after city leaders learned the judge had kept a mother from seeing her child for over a year, due to unpaid court fees."

  • Hail Rataxes||

    I dug a little beyond WaPo about Judge John Shirley.

    Yeah, so that's why the detail you posted was in Balko's WaPo coverage.

    Fuck off to the other site where your stupidity is appreciated.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Trump Is the GOP Mainstream

    http://www.nationalreview.com/.....as-shifted

    The last remnants of libertarianism are dying in the GOP.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    I mean that's not saying much.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Trump is doing Libertarian things in office. The GOP is not and will probably never be very Libertarian.

    Even Rand Paul is not a Libertarian, so you are just as clueless about the GOP as most lefties.

    Since the Democratic Party is imploding and will cease to be a force anymore, that is a great opportunity for the two-legged race to be Republicans vs. Libertarians in the future. Libertarians would set themselves apart from Republicans because Libertarians would be for social freedoms not matter what Jesus wants and fiscally limiting of government while republicans still raise the debt ceiling.

  • Mike Laursen||

    But the Republican Party is imploding, too. And the Libertarian Party has been a purity debate society rather than a political party ever since it adopted The Pledge.

  • Eidde||

    "Libertarians would be for social freedoms not matter what Jesus wants"

    You mean like Gary Johnson and his compulsory cakes?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Gary Johnson is not the best example of a Libertarian. The buttsex thing really warps what he thinks Libertarianism is. That and the weed has probably taken its toll on his brain.

    Good point tho on the lack of freedom of association.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Since when do you believe in freedom of association? You're shitting all over it upthread because "citizenship."

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Entering property of the USA is not freedom of association because its illegal and unsupported by the constitution. Americans have the constitutionally protected right to associate or not associate with whomever they choose. The Civil Rights Act, which stomps on other people's rights, makes it illegal for people to refuse to bake a gay cake. The CRA should be repealed as it is unconstitutional..

    Socialists like you rail on property rights and freedom of association all the time. You just support using useful idiots to vote the Constitution into oblivion.

  • EscherEnigma||

    Americans have the constitutionally protected right to associate or not associate with whomever they choose
    Unless you're an employer who wants to associate with an illegal immigrant, right?

    Even if we ignore all the other reasons your version of Freedom of Association doesn't work, you should at least acknowledge that "whomever they choose" only applies to other Americans, and that the federal government can willy-nilly restrict the right to associate with any non-American it wants.

  • Memory Hole||

    Re: Mississippi Judge

    Stop, no, don't, you must not help the poor women. Giving anything to poor people kills their souls. She has to suffer to grow. The judge was right to turn the screws. She'll appreciate not being tortured when the torture stops.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Alright, which one of you guys broke Memory Hole?

  • colorblindkid||

    "Saudi Arabia has granted citizenship to a robot named Sophia."

    That robot has more rights than an actual woman named Sophia would.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Alabama Bill Would Eliminate Marriage Licenses, Nullify Federal Control in Practice
    Finally getting the supposed least progressive state out of the state sanctioned marriage business.

  • Aloysious||

    I don't think this guy is making the point he thinks he is making, but whatever.

    Democrats used to campaign on class — and win. It's time to do it again.

    The reason the Democratic Party lost the last presidential election is simple.

    Or so a lot of Democrats seem to think.

    In the end, says one school of thought, it was all about race. As the influential journalist Ta-Nehisi Coates asserted in a recent Atlantic magazine cover story, "whiteness brought us Donald Trump."

    Trump, Coates pointed out, won whites of all genders, all ages, all incomes and all levels of educational attainment. "And so," Coates concluded, "it will not suffice to say that Trump is a white man like all the others who rose to become president. He must be called by his rightful honorific — 'America's first white president.'"
  • Citizen X - #6||

    Congratulations to Ta-Nehisi Coates - the competition is fierce, but he definitely has a contender for Dumbest Thing Written in 2017.

  • Aloysious||

    The author, Andrew Romano, after quoting TNC, goes on to make the point that D's need to make economic arguments to win elections, among other things, and quotes Harry Truman. I'm having a hard time imagining HT as a modern day Democrat.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    You don't become a Democrat if you understand economics, so watching Ds try to make economic arguments should be fairly entertaining.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    True, but other than Rand, what Republican understands economics?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Well, you generally don't become a Republican if you understand economics, either. Economics is properly the study of human choices - it's descriptive, not prescriptive. The business of politics is ignoring, denying, or manipulating human choice (it's nothing BUT prescriptive action) so economic knowledge is of very limited utility to a politician.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    It takes an increasingly rare type of i-don't-care-what-you-do as-long-as-it's-not-on-my-lawn curmudgeon to both identify with the GOP and possess economic understanding. Whatever Rand Paul has of that is certainly inherited from his dad.

  • ||

    ...it's descriptive, not prescriptive.

    That's why Keynes became such a rock star. He promised pols that they could fiddle with Economic Lever A, and achieve Economic Benefit X. That they were actually in control of their nation's economy.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Same with Krugman - he leveraged some legitimately solid, Nobel-winning work on an obscure branch of macroeconomics into a cushy gig telling powerful people that they are right to do what they were going to do anyway.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Here's a fun, offline-until-now old profile of longtime New Republic Literary Editor (and alleged serial sexual-harasser) Leon Wieseltier that involves him wearing a coke spoon around his neck and playing intellectual gigolo to old Hollywood ladies.

    From the link: Wieseltier might be the Jewish, heterosexual answer to Oscar Wilde. "Why don't you take it a step further," he suggests, "and call me the 'Oscar very Wilde'?"

    I'd never heard of this guy before, but for that line alone, i hate him. Jesus Christ.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Probably a safe bet to assume there is absolutely no relation to Olivia Wilde?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Educate yourself, girl. Her real name is Olivia Cockburn, though she did take her stage name from the unrelated Oscar.

  • Sevo||

    "SF looks to Oakland as it plans to regulate recreational pot sales"
    [...]
    "As the Board of Supervisors looks to approve a complex set of ordinances to regulate the sale of recreational marijuana next year, its members are turning to Oakland as a model, saying they want to uphold the same social justice credos that inspired the East Bay city's equity permit program."
    http://www.sfchronicle.com/pol.....310095.php

    (eyes closed, fingertips to forehead)
    I foresee someone's brother-in-law getting a prime location...

  • creech||

    What the hell did Bill O'Reilly do that caused him to make a (reportedly) $32 million settlement of a sexual harassment charge? $32 million????

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    An ass grab with some strategically positioned fingers. Citizen X calls it the bear claw.

  • Domestic Dissident||

    Catalonia's regional parliament formally declares independence from Spain in an overwhelming 70-10 vote, and I think the shit is really about to hit the fan over there.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Congrats to the Catalans. Let's hope there is no bloodshed. The only amusing thing will be seeing all the liberals arguing against self-determination and watching their heads smoke from all the cognitive dissonance. Ah, who am I kidding, there will be no cognitive dissonance.

  • Domestic Dissident||

    Shortly after, the Spanish senate voted 214-47 to invoke Article 155 of the Spanish constitution, which apparently gives the Prime Minister a lot of latitude to suppress the revolt, take full control of the region, and arrest the rebels.

    Yes, we should all hope for the best, but this looks like a serious crisis in the making, as Rajoy clearly has no intention of letting them walk away peacefully.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    You know who else had a lot of latitude, suppressed the revolt, took control of a region, and arrested the rebels?

  • creech||

    George Washington against the Whiskey rebels?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Nice try but all the rebels went home before George Washington's army arrived. No region was really controlled by federal forces and the 20 or so people arrested were later acquitted or pardoned.

  • ||

    The article said that only 47% of "potential voters" actually cast ballots.

    With apathy like that, the fire might need more kindling before it can blaze into crisis.

  • Domestic Dissident||

    Only one-third of American colonists supported declaring independence and breaking away from mother England in the late 18th century. Another third remained loyal, and the last third didn't really give a shit and was content to go with the ultimate winner either way.

  • ||

    I've seen that breakdown, too. You trust the polls that determined those numbers?

    Regardless, would the Revolution have come off like it did without the efforts of Sam Adams?

    Catalonia may need a Boston Massacre-type event to get your crisis going.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    All the poll results are in Spanish, so I cannot understand them.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Ole!

  • Brandybuck||

    George Bush Sr. continues to collect allegations of ass grabbing.


    Attention must be deflected away from Weinstein!!!

  • Azathoth!!||

    From Weinstein? I thought we were deflecting attention from DNC and Clinton collusion with the Russians. Aren't we trying to make this as unspoken of as Rotherham?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    War vets need some hand action too.

    Bush Sr was shot down over the Pacific in WWII and was luckily picked up by a US submarine.

    I think the biggest issue is that people in power think they can do anything and there are no real consequences.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online