TheAgitator.com
Saturday Morning Links
Saturday, January 15th, 2011- The George Bluth budget plan.
- Sixth graders charged with “terroristic threats” for what appears to be a fake bomb map based on a video game.
- Cliff Kincaid: still an idiot.
- Former U.S. Attorney calls for civil rights investigation of Seattle police department.
- Here are two baby platypi.
- Oh, Michael Ramirez. You were so close to getting it right.
- Strange. Here’s another rape-y typo.
- Gift idea for that hard-to-buy-for Mississippi governor in your life.
- And you thought libertarians were being hypberpolic when we said the same logic behind the Four Loko ban would soon have regulators and Nanny Statists gunning for Irish coffee. Well . . . away we go.
The Four Loco/Irish Coffee story starts out, “The Food and Drug Administration can ban caffeinated alcoholic beverages such as Four Loko . . .” I know the FDA did ban caffeinated alcoholic beverages, but I’m curious as to under what authority. I thought alcohol was regulated by BATFE, and as far as caffeine, does the FDA also have the authority to regulate its presence in other drinks?
This is the correct “Ramirez” link, I believe:
http://cartoonbox.slate.com/hottopic/?image=5&topicid=479
You’re right; he had me till the end.
I’ve been following Michael Ramirez’ work since he was stinking up the pages of the Memphis Commercial Appeal. The next time he gets it right will be the first time.
‘…we’re going to take this kind of thing seriously, whether they’re joking or not.”
This is a commandment in the bureaucrats’ bible. .no wonder the US is getting the same dreariness as the pictures of the eastern bloc countries in the 60s.
Regarding rape-y typos…
When I was on hold the other day with a customer service machine, I swore the voice said to me, “You may experience violence while on hold.” I presume they MEANT silence… but it was a bit too close for comfort.
If I and my immediate group of friends are any indication, going after caffeinated alcohol would be a really good way of mobilizing the mothers-of-toddlers contingent against statism…
Here’s a link to an article about a particularly odious Seattle police publication called ‘The Guardian’ where police express their general disdain for minorities, oversight, the ACLU and anyone who gets in their way in general.
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/what-some-seattle-cops-think-the-problem-is/Content?oid=6266406
it’ll be interesting to see if the cocktail criminalization leads to more alcohol related injuries because the whiskey can’t be cut with soda, etc.
we joke about IOWA= idiots out walking around, but I’m not joking about this guy.
Wait a minute… is the objection to the Ramirez column that his drug use is mentioned?
I know that all the problems with the drug war and the demonizing of drugs. But the fact is, many drugs do have a detrimental impact on the user. Many drugs can exacerbate existing mental health issues. Our defense of individual rights must not wear blinders to the reality of the situation, which very well mean that in THIS PARTICULAR CASE, drugs had an impact on the actions of the user.
Beyond Irish Coffee, what about Red Bull/Vodka? I saw some interesting articles looking at the race and class implications of the ban on 4Loko and the government’s ignoring of Red Bull/Vodka. I think Radley touched on it here, no?
“Here are two baby platypi.”
Do you have any good recipes for them?
Iowa state Sen. Brian Schoenjahn (D-Arlington), keep your grubby statist mitts off my sambuca-expresso!
“Strange. Here’s another rape-y typo.”
When the chance of rape is 70%, that might be a good day to stay home and read a book or something.
The proper pluralization of platypus is platypodes, because the word is Greek based, not Latin.
Key there is “former” US Attorney calls for investigation. Getting religion way too late.
Is the objecting to the Ramirez cartoon that he mentioned “drug-using”?
On the alcohol + caffeine ban, what about cocktails with Coke?
I hope Obama checks the walls of the White House before he torches it for the insurance money.
Irish Coffee is the legal equivalent of a Class Ia illegal drug. Four Loko, OTOH, is a Class II illegal drug, or possible a Class V illegal drug.
However, if at any point your teenager is caught with Four Loko, it immediately becomes a Class III.
Hope this helps.
“Correction: I put the wrong letter after Schoenjahn’s name in my initial post. He is a Democrat.”
Correct correction:
Correction: I put the wrong letter after Schoenjahn’s name in my initial post. He is an idiot.
While there is a lot of disagreement over what the proper plural of platypus is, the word is of Greek origin, so if you’re going to go that route, the plural should be “platypodes”, not the pseudo-Latin “platypi”.
Well, that’s the weather report. And now for an update on the time: http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Rape_Clock
It is the laxity of American gun laws that cause sixth graders to be treated as if they were violent criminals. The United States is the worst country on the planet for its attitude toward guns and, not coincidentally, its laws on guns. That is not a statement I make lightly; I have actually inventoried all 195 countries on the planet. No other country is nearly as messed up in its thinking regarding guns than the United States (the Swiss believe in gun ownership as a deterrent to foreign invaders, not as a natural right of citizens). Due to the extreme danger that the widespread availability of guns poses, politicians are under intense pressure to do “something” to choke of the resultant violence. That something all too often includes state-sanctioned child abuse.
The reporting on the “bomb map” is nearly useless in illuminating the incident. Could they not get a copy of the map to provide for the article? Where and how was this map “discovered”? If the kids placed it somewhere where it would likely be found, then that might constitute a threat, but if the teacher was snooping through a desk or locker and found it among other papers then there is no overt threat.
And one of the five was arrested and charged with “felony terroristic threatening”, but saddling a kid with a felony conviction (if it really comes to that) for the rest of his life is just fine because “(t)he safety of children is our first priority”.
The problem with the Ramirez cartoon is it’s just wrong. It proposes that this person, who appears to be suffering from a mental disease that a) makes its victims extremely suggestible and b) causes them great difficulty with understanding metaphor, simile, allusion, all sorts of non-concrete language and thus makes them interpret what they hear very literally, that this person decided to shoot his Representative completely independently of the violent rhetoric that has been polluting the public discourse for years. It’s purest coincidence that major media figures have been making veiled and sometimes not-so-veiled references to using violence against politicians. That had nothing whatsoever to do with this nutcase’s decision to use violence against a politician.
Uh huh.
Dear Jeff Goldman,
Hyperbole does not an argument make.
Yours sincerely,
Logic
It’s purest coincidence that major media figures have been making veiled and sometimes not-so-veiled references to using violence against politicians. That had nothing whatsoever to do with this nutcase’s decision to use violence against a politician.
Uh huh.
Do you have any actual evidence that it did? Of course you don’t. The evidence so far suggests he avoided politics. Video games and TV have become more violent over the last 10-15 years, too. And we know he was a gamer. He also listened to violent music. Why wouldn’t you blame them instead?
Jeff Goldman –
Just so I have this right: Government officials vastly overreact to an alleged bomb threat, and you say the problem is that the government isn’t tough enough on guns?
Correction in Irish Coffee ban article: “Correction: I put the wrong letter after Schoenjahn’s name in my initial post. He is a Democrat.”
The irony of such a correction, as it makes no difference because R and D labels lead to the same result.
The Jeff Goldman post is hilarious, whoever did it.
“It is the laxity of American gun laws that cause sixth graders to be treated as if they were violent criminals.”
Freedom to own guns doesn’t cause child abuse, government does.
Jeff Goldman –
From your exhaustive inventory, what criteria did you use to measure comparative levels of “messed up thinking?”
@BSK (#9): There no evidence that drug use was a factor. None. There is no logical basis for asserting that it may be.
Random speculation = wanking
“Chance of rape today about 70%” is bad enough; note that it comes with “triple-team traffic”. Yikes! =:-O
@11
Platypus like a good swamp detritus sprinkled with freshwater shrimp and served cold
Good news, everyone!
Once you survive today’s rapings and the Triple Team Traffic, it’s all sunshine tomorrow!
Gift idea for that hard-to-buy-for Mississippi governor in your life.
I read that as “hard-to-buy Mississippi governor”. I thought they were fairly easy to buy.
(Just like the famous foot-in-mouth moment of the first Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago: “Chicago has the best police force money can buy.”
-
(The link is funny, too, BTW.)
Chance of Rape today: 70%
And there is a 90% chance of sodomy tomorrow.
The government overreacted to an alleged bomb threat largely because in our society we can never know who has access to guns and who does not, even when we are talking about children. While it is possible to kill humans utilizing a wide array of objects in one tries hard enough, the lethality of guns is vastly superior to that of any other object available to the general public. Thus, there is always the chance, albeit remote, that those children who make “threats” may actually follow through on their statements. The sensible solution would be to ban guns so that impetuous outbursts that children are prone to making, and some of which can be construed as a threat if one has a creative legal mind, can be recognized as not serious and dealt with as a normal part of raising a child. If the government was “tougher” on guns, then we wouldn’t need to be so jumpy about statement that can be construed as a threat.
OT (from http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/01/14/20110114gilbert-medical-marijuana-rules-locations-hours.html)
“Council members Jenn Daniels and Linda Abbott expressed a desire to be conservative with marijuana regulations as the state “settles in” with the new law.
“I don’t want to be known as the distribution point for medical marijuana,” Abbott said at Monday’s study session. “That’s not my idea of economic development.”"
When the hell did conservative come to mean restricting freedom for an arbitrary goal? Mother fuck…. Oh, and apparently weed can’t be delivered, so people who can’t drive themselves to one risk a friend or family member being charged with drug trafficking. Oh, and they can’t sell vaporizers, rolling papers, or bongs. Just weed, and only with a perscription and after registering with the state.
Baby steps, I suppose.
And Jeff doubles down on the stupidity. Jeff, your second assertion relies on the assumption that banning guns would mean that people couldn’t actually get guns. Or do you think it’s impossible to get drugs these days, too? Banning guns would just mean that the state would conduct raids for guns in addition to the ones already commonplace for drugs, four loko, barbering without a license, etc. If the government was “tougher” on guns, then the government would be “tougher” on guns. Taxes would go up, there would be a whole new federal agency with its own swat teams, and more people would be dead. On the other hand, if they were “less tough” on all the things that are simply arbitrary restrictions on personal freedom, maybe we could devote more resources to analyzing and dealing with actual threats.
The prohibition of drugs does make them much more difficult to get than it otherwise would be. But certainly drugs are widespread nonetheless. While cross country comparisons are always difficult to make because we have lots of factors changing at once, the experience of European countries shows that a gun ban can work. For instance, getting a gun in many European countries is pretty much impossible. At the same time, getting illegal drugs in those same countries is much easier and commonplace. That tells me that the fact that prohibition leads to an expansive and troublesome illegal drugs market does not mean that the same thing would happen under a gun prohibition.
EH, I was measuring actual gun laws in my inventory, not thinking, but I think that an inventory of thinking can be fascinating as well.
On blaming drug use for the shooting of Giffords – our only testimony on this front is that he stopped using pot a while ago. This from his buddy who did interviews shortly after the shooting. He says he started getting (really) weird when he quit pot.
No it doesn’t. At best, it makes it only slightly more difficult to get them. The massive profit margins caused by prohibition insure that sellers are very highly motivated to find the buyers.
@Jeff Goldman, gun prohibition disarms good people who aren’t a danger to others, and is thus a violation of the inherent right of all human beings to defend themselves. It’s like putting a chastity belt on all men because a few men are rapists. Dumb.
But you’re apparently ignorant of recent history, such as the scary-looking-gun ban of 1994, which caught gun rights advocates unprepared. Now that it has expired, many have drawn a line in the sand and dug in, refusing to comply with any new gun bans.