Comments on: Morning Links

By: Andre Kenji

Andre Kenji — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 23:39:04 +0000

Trip

I use the metric system as a standard.

Michael

I´m not a science nerd. And I´ve never understood certain aspects of the so called English System.

By: Michael

Michael — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:23:24 +0000

Do they still not refer to the system in this country as the “English” system? I guess we did not win that part of the revolutionary war! Sorry, but scientific minds like consistency. That includes the use of the metric system. Why waste money replacing any signs at all? We seem to be putting up a lot of bilingual signs!

#20
big gubmit = metric?! You have got to be kidding! The science and medical fields are taught metric, too. I feel that continuing to use the English system is equating ignorance with the status quot.

#19 Andre
I convert in my head. Don’t need a calculator!

By: Trip Rogers

Trip Rogers — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 07:11:08 +0000

Andre – whenever I read anything that mentiones the Metric system I just ignore it and move on. The Metric system is favored by your big government, socialist types to better keep the masses in line. It was a big hit in Europe because people like being told what to do. In America if someone says back up a couple of Meters we can say fuck you, which is nice!

By: Andre Kenji

Andre Kenji — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 01:47:50 +0000

What sucks is having a system in the US and another in the rest of the world. I have to have a calculator everytime I see an American magazine or website….

By: Danno49

Danno49 — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 21:28:41 +0000

Classmates.com is the biggest piece of shit ‘premium’ site on the innernets. Facebook is everything it isn’t and should have been for having to pay to actually hook up with old friends. Except that it’s free.

Nope. That model will never work.

By: Boyd Durkin

Boyd Durkin — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 18:56:01 +0000

hey! What happened to all the hope?!

By: damaged justice

damaged justice — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 18:07:03 +0000

“Such as requiring random drug testing for anyone who receives any form of government assistance such as welfare, food stamps, EIC, etc.”

Corporate welfare queens first.

By: bob42

bob42 — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 17:57:53 +0000

Here in the nanny state of Texas, our social authoritarians in the lege excel in creating odorous cerebral flatulence in the form of legislation, and the right wingers love it.

Sec. 207.026. REQUIRED DRUG TESTING; DISQUALIFICATION FOR BENEFITS. (a) Each individual who files a claim for benefits under Chapter 208 or receives benefits under this subtitle must submit to drug testing as provided by this section.

A reader poll at that blog is running >90% approval of the measure, and some of the comments are even kinda of funny (in a sad sort of way.) Such as requiring random drug testing for anyone who receives any form of government assistance such as welfare, food stamps, EIC, etc. The notion that mandatory drug testing is an invasion of privacy is lost on these folks.

By: Obama’s Five Day Rule « Wintry Smile

Obama’s Five Day Rule « Wintry Smile — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 17:16:43 +0000

[...] being a venial sin). But Cato’s Jim Harper makes a compelling case to the contrary (h/t Radley Balko): It is easy to dismiss the five-day promise as an idea that would not have changed much anyway. [...]

By: Dave Krueger

Dave Krueger — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 17:04:57 +0000

In a world where law enforcement routinely violates liberties, makes up non-existent law, harasses, threatens, and assaults people who don’t show sufficient deference, uses violent military invasion and attack techniques on the flimsiest of excuses for non-violent offenders, I am not surprised in the least that government wants to dispense with rules that interfere with police prerogative when it comes to their treatment of those who have the good sense know that the cops are not their friends.

You can’t be “tough on crime” and not support the “troops in the front lines” who lay their lives on the line every day to keep us safe. After all, lawyers are the guys who get the bad guys off on a technicality. Everyone hates lawyers.

By: Dave Krueger

Dave Krueger — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:41:50 +0000

I suggest New York City use the DARE defense. “But that $540,000,000 was paid out because of the deeds of the old NYPD. The new NYPD is better. Just wait and see.”

By: Kristen

Kristen — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:35:38 +0000

Agreed, ClubMed…WTF was that?

By: Collin

Collin — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:34:37 +0000

“It’s a waste of money replacing the signs, but I hate the metric system and anything unAmerican!”

The metric system is the tool of the devil! My car gets forty rods to the hogshead and that’s the way I likes it.

By: ClubMedSux

ClubMedSux — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:46:03 +0000

Did they have an intern write that classmates.com story? Regardless of the subject matter, that was painful to read.

By: Pat

Pat — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:36:38 +0000

" Speaking of Obama disappointments, his administration is urging the Supreme Court to reverse a 1986 decision that prevents police from continuing to question defendants after they’ve requested a lawyer." Lying authoritarian thugs. Obama Militarizing Drug War Lies

By: Marty

Marty — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:19:24 +0000

re the nypd article

‘”It is important to note that most of the payouts are for incidents that arose in the past and are not reflective of current trends,” city Law Department spokeswoman Elizabeth Thomas said.’

she should’ve said, ‘because past behavior doesn’t ensure future results- we fixed that shit, baby!’

By: Don Lloyd

Don Lloyd — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:16:45 +0000

“It’s a waste of money replacing the signs, …”

I would almost always prefer the government to merely waste money instead of pursuing some economically destructive goal.

Replacing the signs seems likely to be the best government program to appear this year.

Regards, Don

By: Erin

Erin — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:15:43 +0000

Classmates.com was in trouble a while ago for sending emails claiming someone had registered on their site as a gimmick to draw others in, when the first person hadn’t really registered. I guess they just go through old yearbooks and pick out names… they picked badly this time.

By: dave smith

dave smith — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:41:21 +0000

From the Obama article:

“While President Barack Obama has reversed many policies of his Republican predecessor, George W. Bush, the defendants’ rights case is another stark example of the White House seeking to limit rather than expand rights.”

Here is journalistic bias at it finest. The author assumed that everywhere possible, GWB sought to limit individual freedom. While he did in many ways, that was not always the case.

Furthermore, the author assumed tha BHO would always seek to increase individual rights, especially where GWB curtailed them.

How biased and/or naive.

By: Bob

Bob — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:20:24 +0000

Could ‘Police Spokemen’ be more pitiable tools?