Category: News

PSA for Teabaggers Video

I saw this a year or two ago when it was originally released by whoever made it and speculated at the time that it might have been done by tea party people to make opposition to them look retarded (using something as low-maintenance as a beach as their chief example and then immediately going outside america for alleged illustration of “libertarianism”) but ive seen it used positively by a lot of people since then so i assume its intended to be real. which is… weird.

The description on youtube says “You should be forcibly moved to Somalia to live in your libertarian utopia.” um… why? Not exactly fair since the other side can’t say it back to the people who advocate bigger government since they can’t ask for them to be forcibly moved to a Communist utopia, as they’ve all crumbled and disappeared.

I like big government in a lot of areas and have never bought the libertarian line of people being “smart enough to make their own decisions” in every and all areas (hint: people are stupid and need guidance and rules) but it is stupidly insulting to imply that America’s government expansion is whats keeping us from being Somalia – or even that anything like Somalia is the logical conclusion of American libertarian policy. “Government isn’t the solution to our problems, it IS the problem and now you have cholera”… cuz.. libertarian.

Whenever i ask anyone to explain the logic behind it, they just get angry that i pointed out how much sense it doesnt make and since I don’t really care about the Tea Party as an issue or movement, I let them drop it, but anyone reading is welcome to explain this to me… Public land that everyone can enjoy paid by the public is equal to private benefits for individuals paid by the public, how? i could imagine teabaggers making an equally silly video – say, where they claim the government wants to do so much for you that they plan to have union workers wipe your ass for you or something. That’d be an okay satire on the fact that unions prevent individuals from doing things themselves (like shoveling a snowy street) so the union workers can do it. but would anyone actually claim that that is a legit argument the say the anti-teabaggers are passing around this video as if it made logical sense?

UPDATE: American brainwash still makes my default position want to be with the union thugs out protesting across the country but…dude… the Tea Party people are complaining about being forced to pay more for other peoples benefits while the union people are whining about having to pay slightly more of their own benefits…

UPDATE: the video above was shared with me on facebook and I posted this blog of my reaction to it in response.

My response is that it only sounds kind of confused if you think anyone anywhere, including the most vocal of libertarians is advocating that this country be run without government. the blog is confusing because it rejects instead of accepts the strawman fallacy that literally anyone with any presence, power or influence has ever said anything like what the video or your 2nd of the 3 comments says. It only sounds kind of confused if you think anyone anywhere, including the most vocal of libertarians is advocating that this country be run without government. the blog is confusing because it rejects instead of accepts the strawman fallacy that literally anyone with any presence, power or influence has ever said anything like what the video or your 2nd of the 3 comments says.

So I don’t defend the things I bitch about because I’m not bitching about libertarianism or progressivism or conservatives or liberals – I’m anti-fallacy whichever side it’s present on. So even though I disagree with some libertarian philosophy, that doesn’t make me advocate unfair attacks on it. That’s always a bad idea. attack stuff you disagree with based on whatever you disagree with – not by doing the equivalent of calling it’s mother a whore (although, to be fair: Libertarianism’s mother probably was a whore. they DO idolize Ayn Rand after all…).

The Government War on Cameras

Wtf is with people getting arrested for recording public servants in public places?

John Stossel summarized the sensible position well:

I believe in the right to privacy.

Yet I can think of someone who deserves very little privacy—a policeman making an arrest. Unfortunately, in some states it’s a crime to make a video of a policeman doing just that. People recording police have been threatened, detained, or arrested. Some were jailed overnight.

That’s wrong. Police work for the public, they’re paid with tax money, and most importantly, they have tremendous power. They’ve got the legal right to pull guns, detain us, lock us up and, in some cases, shoot us. The potential for abuse is great. So it’s a good thing that modern video cameras are now so commonplace. Any abuse of police power in a public place is likely to be recorded. Why should that be a crime in some states?

People can engage in public photography of public Federal buildings. Claiming otherwise is bullshit and that is exactly what happened in New York, resulting in a lawsuit that was settled by the Government issuing a proclamation noting that what the man was arrested for without merit and resulted in the lawsuit, was in no way legally improper.

Recording encounters with law enforcement and other public officials is different. Basically, you can and will be arrested for anything that an enforcement official doesn’t like. If you are willing to get arrested then unless you are violating your states wiretapping laws by recording someone without their consent – you have a good chance of getting your case ruled in your direction and maybe even making some change like the guy in this story did.

In 2009 Elijah Matheney of Pittsburgh was arrested for violating the wiretap law after using his cell phone to record an altercation between his friend and a police officer. Those charges also were dropped, and Matheney sued Allegheny County with help from the Pennsylvania ACLU. The suit was settled in July with a stipulation that the Allegheny County District Attorney’s Office inform local police chiefs that recording on-duty police officers is protected under state law. The Pennsylvania ACLU reached a similar settlement with the township of Spring City in 2008 after a man there was repeatedly arrested for recording police.

If the vagueness and inconsistent application of these statutes weren’t bad enough, there is also a clear double standard when it comes to the consequences of misunderstanding what the law requires. Citizens who do not know about wiretapping laws face arrest, felony charges, and jail time. Police and prosecutors who wrongly threaten, detain, arrest, and charge people based on a misinterpretation of these laws are rarely disciplined, much less subjected to civil liability or criminal charges. Police are protected by qualified immunity, which makes it difficult to win damages for an unlawful arrest. Prosecutors are protected by absolute immunity, which makes it nearly impossible.

Reason Magazine covered this war on cameras:

Who will watch the watchers? In a world of ubiquitous, hand-held digital cameras, that’s not an abstract philosophical question. Police everywhere are cracking down on citizens using cameras to capture breaking news and law enforcement in action.

In 2009, police arrested blogger and freelance photographer Antonio Musumeci on the steps of a New York federal courthouse. His alleged crime? Unauthorized photography on federal property.

Police cuffed and arrested Musumeci, ultimately issuing him a citation. With the help of the New York Civil Liberties Union, he forced a settlement in which the federal government agreed to issue a memo acknowledging that it is totally legal to film or photograph on federal property.

Although the legal right to film on federal property now seems to be firmly established, many other questions about public photography still remain and place journalists and citizens in harm’s way. Can you record a police encounter? Can you film on city or state property? What are a photographer’s rights in so-called public spaces?

These questions will remain unanswered until a case reaches the Supreme Court, says UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh, founder of the popular law blog The Volokh Conspiracy. Until then, it’s up to people to know their rights and test the limits of free speech, even at the risk of harassment and arrest.

Who will watch the watchers? All of us, it turns out, but only if we’re willing to fight for our rights.

Electric Water slowly (too slowly) gaining traction

More development on my favorite invention from the past decade at least: Water that has had electricity passed through it to become an all natural, drinkable disinfectant that is more effective than bleach.

The only downsides are that Electrolyzed water works best on smooth surfaces and slightly less well on others and the fact that it’s still way too expensive:

Researchers note that EO water performs best on smooth surfaces. Bassam Annous, a research microbiologist for the federal Agricultural Research Service, has found it does not work well ridding lettuce and apples of E. coli because the water-based solution cannot penetrate the minute crevices where the bacteria can lurk.

“This is not a silver bullet,” Hung said. “EO water is not perfect.”
Then there’s the price issue.

Viking Pure systems run from $12,000 to $15,000 for larger-scale units and $3,500 for its “mini” units. Though the cleaners cost little to produce, the upfront investment means it makes less sense for a household that goes through a bottle of bleach a year.

Also, it’s hard to get people to accept that it works since they’re used to chemical cleaners:

Deborah Stone, housekeeping manager for Carolina Designs rental agency at North Carolina’s Outer Banks, swears by it and said some of the biggest problems are convincing workers they can clean without suds.

“It’s very difficult for the cleaners to comprehend that because there is no smell and because there are no bubbles, they don’t get the sense that they’re actually cleaning,” Stone said. “You still have those die-hard people that want the suds and the pretty smell.”

This Exists: Rush Limbaugh now selling bottled tea

I… don’t know how I should feel about this. My gut reaction is to deride this some how but.. other than finding it too expensive ($2 a bottle), it looks fine for what it is. Political personality seeks to cash in on current political movement he agrees with by selling product tie-in. Sounds legit. it’s just… so… dude… Tea party Tea? Rush Limbaugh Tea?… ug….

My next reaction is guilt that I was predisposed to hate on this seemingly legit product rollout. In fact, I’m such a jerk that after being unable to find any holes in this on my own, I actually went searching for criticism of this new venture to spark alive whatever part of my brain was failing on this. So far I’ve only found similar “wow…this is silly” surprise commentary and over-the-top cynicism that rests entirely on the old Marxist meme of everything that earns a profit by definition cheats the consumer and/or anything right wing is nothing but wicked corporate greed. Yawn…

The conservative movement is primarily a means by which the wealth of rabid right-wingers is redistributed to celebrities. Sometimes the money comes from billionaires, who know exactly what they’re buying when they fund advocacy groups and think tanks, but the whole scheme is basically powered by regular right-wing folks who are kept riled up and angry enough to keep sending checks to frauds and buying books full of alarming lies.

Limbaugh is donating a percentage of the profits to a military charity, but isn’t misleading with his sales pitch. If you watch the video of his announcement on the show, he has no shame about this being a for-profit venture which just happens to have a charity component as opposed to the other way around. Bill O’Reilly, on the other hand makes no money on his endless streams of merch, donating 100% of the profits to charity.

So as long as the buyer isn’t being duped and as long as the product is of average (or better, one hopes) quality, then there’s really nothing wrong with this and haters have no valid argument against it beyond “this is silly”, which it totally is, but whatever. You’re gonna tell me Lady Gaga merch isn’t silly?

Selling overpriced versions of every-day products with celebrity branding is a fine American tradition that serves both the enthusiast/fanatic consumer and the economy. It is the business model behind every single celebrity perfume (Michael Jordan, Kim Kardashian, 50 cent, Britney Spears, Ashton Kutcher, Jessica Simpson, Tiger Woods – just to name a few). Stores can’t keep Justin Bieber nail polish on the shelves (I know. I’ve checked), and that is pretty much the epitome of the “what product does our fan base use that we can sell them by putting this name on?” marketing strategy.

Limbaugh plays this with a straight face, lacking any ironic or self deprecating tells that he realizes this is silly, leading me to believe he doesn’t, which is partly what makes me confused on how I should be feeling about this.

In contrast, Bill O’Reilly has admitted that he finds almost all of his Factor Gear products to be utterly ridiculous and often laughs when giving his sales pitches of them. That’s the way to do it… be self aware, be shameless about pushing it, and donate the proceeds to charity. It’s one of the reasons I own a “The Rain Stops Here” O’Reilly Factor umbrella (among other fine items. not kidding).

Limbaugh is doing parts of that here, so whatever. I approve. I won’t be buying any, but I approve.

Hefner was engaged to an Evil Succubus

It’s a surprise to no one that this 25-year-old model and aspiring singer had ulterior motives in marrying an 85-year-old millionaire, but the extent of the coldness goes ways beyond the old “i only want you cuz you’re rich and you only want me cuz i’m hot” tradition and crosses into territory that reads like an infomercial with an evil bitch for sale:

Not only did she call off the engagement the same day she released the first single off her debut album, and the same day she had a video posted and features on Funny or Die – but she was also cheating on Hugh with Dr. Phils son. Awesome. BUT WAIT – THERE’S MORE…. she was also shopping an interview to take place after she carried out her original break-up plan, which was to leave Hef literally at the alter, in dress and all, while cameras filmed the real-life staged drama.

Crystal Harris secretly planned to ditch the Playboy mogul at the altar in return for a $500,000 media deal, Page Six has learned. Harris was shopping for a big-bucks deal to tell all after she ditched hapless Hef in front of 300 guests at their wedding at the Playboy Mansion on Saturday, to be filmed for a Lifetime TV special.
A source told us, “Crystal wanted to ditch Hef at the altar. Her plan was to walk up the aisle and say she couldn’t go through with it. The wedding was to be filmed for a reality special, and her refusal to marry him would be a sensation.

Wow. Good thing she reconsidered, right? Good thing this heinous harpie had a Grinch moment at the last minute and realized what a horrible thing she was about to do and called off the sham wedding, right? Nah…

She was looking for a tie-in deal of around $500,000 for the exclusive ‘I ditched Hef at the altar’ interview. While there was interest, Crystal didn’t get an offer anywhere near half a million.”

So the only reason she didn’t walk down the aisle in a televised wedding just to tell everyone “jk. lol” was because she didn’t get enough money to do so… Without the cash, she was left with actually marrying the man or calling the whole thing off and picked the only logical choice. Jeeeezus…


Crystal shows off her engagement ring that Hef gave her on Dec. 24, 2010.

At least Playboy is getting publicity out of all this, as “Mrs Crystal Hefner” was set to be on the cover of the next issue, and…well, still is. Unfortunately for Playboy, monthly magazines get printed way in advance of their publication date. So Crystal is on the cover of the July issue as Mrs. Crystal Hefner.

Hugh Hefner tweeted this revision: “Recent events call for a special sticker on the July cover. Look for it on newsstands.” Playboy subscribers, however, won’t see a sticker on their copies since they have already been mailed out.

These are horrible actions regardless of the bubble-gum popcorn funky groovy goodtime context of celebrity gossip and nudie magazine publisher romance. I’m inclined to assess the situation in that Hefner was legit looking to wife this girl and she legit was looking to screw-over and embarrass him for money but even if this was all a publicity stunt on both sides, there is a clear villain that outta be labeled as such.

With Hooker betrayals and Howard heckler: Weiner Resigns

Liberal Superhero Anthony Weiner has announced he is resigning from congress because of the whole “it’s been revealed that he sends dick pics to girls he’s not married to on twitter and facebook” thing, giving a speech that sounded a lot more like a campaign speech than a resignation speech.

Weiner was a left wing rockstar in Congress, my own favorite congressman and would have almost certainly been elected mayor of New York in 2 years if this mess hadn’t been revealed and he went with his plans to run in that election (for which he had already raised $4.5 million in donations)

The speech was interrupted by a heckler that was allegedly a Howard Stern plant. This summary of how it went down is a good micro-transcript of it all:

Weiner kicks off resignation statement w/nostalgia, family reminiscences. He is you.

“I am here today to Resign.” -Anthony Weiner

”Yeah! Goodbye pervert!” -Heckler

“He is not with us” -Heckler

“Are you more than 7 inches?”-Heckler

This is after more nude photos were released as a domino effect of betrayal by the hookers Weiner talked to, releasing his private Facebook conversations where he, for example, talked about banging that chick in Nevada from behind so they could both watch the Daily Show and photo’s he sent to various ladies of him nude or partially nude, Myspace style, from places that included (facepalm), the congressional gym…

While I initially supported Weiner, as many did, when he was claiming it was a hack and then still even when he said it was a prank and then still again when he said he couldn’t be for sure that the picture wasn’t of him – I had to abandone ship once he switched tactic from “you guys are silly. this isn’t a big deal. lets move on” to a creepy level of dishonesty and passionate denial. The fact that he also hasn’t registered his car got me annoyed since financial hypocrisy, while less attention getting than alleged sexual hypocrisy, is a lot more meaningful. Dude, don’t be a vocal advocate for bigger government and higher taxes while cheating the government out of taxes yourself. Much like fellow “raise taxes for everyone but me” Democrat Charlie Rangel however, no one really seems to care about this point – especially when there are dick pictures to discuss.

The weirdest hooker-domino in this series has been porn “actress” Ginger Lee who did the old Gloria Alred Press Conference thing when throwing Weiner under the bus. On the surface it looks like he coached her on how to lie to the press to cover up for him – which is true and happened – however, she also asked for help lying so… wtf. In one email to Weiner, sent on Jan. she says “Just tell me what to do or say, this stuff is so far out of my league I can’t even pretend to know what to do” and Weiner responded, “I want you to make decisions that help you be healthy and sane. We need to be zen about this.”

Weirder still is that in her press conference she stressed that she avoided dirty talk with Weiner, as if she has a reputation of sexual purity she has to protect. Idk what that’s about, but whatever. Hopefully this goes mostly-away now that he’s resigning and he can hurry up and start working on his comeback. This is the right thing for him to do.

UPDATE: Allahpundit said it better than I on the weirdness of a pornstar stressing to make clear that she didn’t talk dirty to a guy on twitter:

I’m confounded by her claim that she didn’t reciprocate any of Weiner’s sexual overtures in their chats. She has no reputation to protect so there’s no obvious reason for her to lie, but she’s also been known to say — publicly — “I want to have sexual relations with Anthony Weiner” and “He can get buck wild anytime I’m around.” He finally noticed her and sent her an e-mail, which escalated into sexual come-ons, and her response was to … try to steer the conversation back around to the debt ceiling or something? Everyconversation? Huh. Behold the world’s most cerebral, politically focused former porn star.

Alan Colmes was unhappy about the resignation and I think this is a good clip despite the uploader inappropriately calling it a “meltdown” (slight passion in ones delivery is not a meltdown, guys).

Liveblogging the CNN Republican Primary Debate

Each new line is a new thought… Play the drinking game if you’re watching live too.



this tweet is obviously a joke, but it makes great sense. Government jobs should be like jury duty: everyone contributes but no one should want to. I like the thought of candidates saying “elect me and I will give myself less power than the current guy is giving himself”.

Bachman looks great (she doesn’t always). Gingrich looks creepy (he does always).

Bachmann answered a question about how she would repeal Obamacare with a 1 minute response saying Obamacare is bad. Romney is answering the question by answering the question (he will repeal Obamacare and replace it with a better program in addition to issuing a waver to all 50 states

Pawlenty is asked about a criticism he made of Romney just yesterday. Doesn’t answer.

Romney’s gotta lose the smirk. I remember it from 2008. When an opponent is making a scurrilous attack, dont smile at it unless it’s funny.


Santorum gets a bad rap, mostly cuz of the “he hatez teh gahys” smear, so I wanna defend him. but… c’mon dude. why are you up there? Couldn’t be president if he was still a senator. REALLY can’t be president when he lost his last re-election for senate by 18 points (in 06).

I’ve said it before but i’ll say it again: why wasn’t it McCain/Bachmann in 08? She’s answering mostly in soundbytes and is weak on substance so far but still comes off a lot better than Palin. I think it’s more than just the [lack of] accent.

Lol. Hermain Cain. You go, brother. oh, shit. that’s racist. cuz he’s black. I can’t explain why calling a black guy “brother” is racist, but I think the rule is “anything you say in regards to a person of color is or can be racist”. Oh well. I like hearing him add his spice into this. He has no chance of winning.

I got super bored with this and Facebooked for awhile. Pawlenty is talking now. Just said his family listens to Rush Limbaugh, which I think was an intentional name drop so Rush would play the clip on his radio show tomorrow. Smart move from a candidate who needs the publicity.


[COMMERCIAL BREAK]

Lol. Hermain Cain. He says “I studied” as “Ah Studded”.

Enouughhhhh with the “ah..al..alr…alri…alrigh…alright…” interruptions by John King 5 seconds into every single answer. Jesus. I get that there are time limits, even though there shouldn’t be. Lincoln and whoevertheotherguywas famously debated for hours and there was only 2 of them. I get that cable news isn’t about news so much as it’s a profitcenter for advertising dollars paying for news based entertainment, but come ON… give everyone an extra minute to give their shitty blowhard answers.

“Mr Speaker: Dancing with the Stars? or American Idol?”. Wtf CNN? this is pathetic. The last question before the break was to Santorum, asking “Conan or Leno”. He said “Probably Leno” but then botched the answer by throwing both under the bus saying that he doesn’t watch either. This is all a gimmick over what a news headline it was when Bill Clinton was asked at an MTV sponsored debate in the 90s “Boxers or Briefs?”. We get it. silly question to a person of power. teehee. 20 years later? These are stupid. CNN: the MTV of cable news except not as popular.


[COMMERCIAL BREAK]

Lots of boring stuff. I took a break again until — HAHA, oh wow. Ron Paul just said the First Amendment is the right for anyone to practice their “Christian” faith. oh geez…

This before-break “this or that” question is to Mr Cain: Deep Dish or Thin Crust? oh giggle giggle snicker teehee. Cain said in a deep authoritative voice “Deep. Dish”. eha..ehaaa……


[COMMERCIAL BREAK]

Romney says spicy wings are better than mild. This is a real question and answer in a real presidential debate…

Is Bachmann still in this debate?

Oh, next question to Bach. about New Hampshires same sex marriage law. she says it’s not the Presidents role to mess with state laws like that. right answer. good for her.

“Are you a George Bush republican, meaning a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between a man and woman or a Dick Cheney republican, meaning leave it to the states” – um…George Bush never instituted a constitutional amendment to define marriage. He mildly supported a theoretical amendment, what? once? in response to a question about it? lame misleading question.

Ron Paul touts the old “get the government out of marriage” line. dislike. government is in maraige for the kids.

Moderator from the audience asks Santorum if Romney is a big fake phony over switching from being Pro-choice to Pro-life 6 years ago. Romney fixes the smirk issue and has appropriate body posture. Santorum answers the question with class, talking about his own opinion on life instead of attacking Mitt.

Mitt says he’s firmly pro-life and will appoint Justices that will follow the constitution.

Bachmann: “I am 100% pro-life, I’ve given birth to 5 babies…” lol.

Romney says troops need to come back from Afghanistan ASAP and hand leadership over to “the Taliban military” as CNN cuts to a General in the audience giving the same “da Fukkk?” response everyone who heard it at home did until Romney quickly corrected, saying “excuse me – the Afghan government, to DEFEND from the Taliban”.

Ron Paul says he wouldn’t listen to the Generals on the ground in Afghanistan if he was president and would pull out no matter what.

-DEBATE ENDS-

An Obama supporter analyst after the debate keeps saying that Tim Pawlenty needed to “cut” him and “make him bleed”. “You need to cut them and make them bleed”. said it 3 times. geez. The dude is black. I wonder if a white guy who said that about Obama would be called racist…. hmmm

UPDATE: Conan recaps:

The Book of Mormon

Trey Parker and Matt Stone’s first Broadway show ‘The Book Of Mormon’ won nine Tony Awards Sunday night, including Best Musical. Watching the video below of the song I Believe with Andrew Rannells reminded me of days in Drama class where I’d make the same commentary on a Mormon classmate. I never sang them this well though:

Conservative Brent Bozell calls it a Atheist Mormon trashing musical, but, without having seen it, I’m willing to venture a guess that it is not that, but rather is a Musical made by Atheists that does some Mormon trashing.

If you saw the Mormon episode of Southpark, it is not hateful. i do not believe this musical will be “mormon trashing”. I believe it will be an extension of what the Southpark creators think about the religion (which i 100% agree with): that its theology is weird, its youth in history makes it even harder to believe than other religions, and that it advocates the best religion has to offer while producing some of the nicest most productive, happy and cheerful members of any religion on the planet and should get credit for that. i want to see it too. might fly out and do so. will see if im wrong.

I have no reason to believe it will be a smear job that furthers myths. I think it will be a good natured satire dont with friendly pokes based on experience with members of the religion, not myths and smears on it.

Synopsis:

The parody musical follows two young Mormon missionaries sent to Uganda to spread God’s word, only to find themselves in the most hellish situations imaginable. In the scene below, Elder Price (Andrew Rannells) has lost his faith and attempts to regain the courage to fight an evil warlord aiming to control the Ugandan people.

A song from the Southpark episode that was the precursor to the play: