Morning Links

Thursday, May 26th, 2011

Digg it |  reddit | |  Fark

93 Responses to “Morning Links”

  1. #1 |  omar | 


    “I can’t imagine any hobby as dangerous as the more ambitious mountain climbing being legal for if it’s not terribly expensive.”

    If that were coherent, I’d have to assume that you equate “dangerous” with “should be illegal.” Why is that?

    I didn’t read that as that mountain climbing should be illegal – rather that Nancy Lebovitz is surprised that it’s not illegal. Maybe I’m wrong.

  2. #2 |  Aresen | 

    @ Matt | May 26th, 2011 at 1:48 pm

    “delayed-trial executions”: I’m sure Scalia would find a justification for it.

    (And thanks for the link.)

  3. #3 |  albatross | 

    Dave #45:

    Yeah, to the extent anyone pays attention to the debate, it’s between “the Patriot Act should allow X and forbid Y” vs “the Patriot Act should allow X+epsilon and forbid Y-epsilon.” But look at all the scandals that have come out about abuses of the Patriot Act, FISA, and related rules. Nobody ever goes to prison or faces any kind of consequences (except the whistleblowers). This makes the precise details of the Patriot Act a lot less interesting. I mean, if it comes out next year that the FBI or DHS has been massively violating the limits put on its behavior by the Patriot Act, what do we imagine will happen as a result? Judging from past experience, what will happen is that nobody will face charges, nobody will lose their job, there won’t be any further investigation, no change in laws, budgets, or policies will result (unless they’re needed to ensure nobody goes to jail) and at most, the administration’s spokesman will have a couple days of taking questions about the scandal. We will then ignore the scandal, and go back to whatever illegal domestic spying was happening before.

    So long as the folks doing the domestic spying are in practice above the law, there’s not much profit in wrangling over fine details of the rules that they’re not obliged to worry about.

    And widespread domestic spying tends to make you above the law, since just about everyone has a few skeletons in their closet–whores, mistresses, gay love affairs, interestingly weird porno collections, drugs, mental illness, gambling, oddball kinks, shady friends/relatives, bribes and near-bribes taken, corruption, mishandling of classified documents, misuse of expense accounts, whatever. I have to guess that most people in positions of power have a lever or two that can be used on them, and a fair number have information that would be sufficient to wreck their lives and careers, or to get them sent to prison. (In some sense, the loss of stigma attached to homosexuality must be terribly annoying to the eavesdroppers. “Senator Frank, vote our way or we’ll out you to the world” just doesn’t seem like it has many teeth these days….)

    Fighting this fight seems worthwhile, but it’s mostly symbolic until the day that those laws actually get enforced against people who break them. And I have my doubts that this will happen anytime soon.

  4. #4 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    I am pro-Jew and very anti-Israel. Also anti-Hamas and anti-cancer and heart attacks.

  5. #5 |  Aresen | 

    Boyd Durkin | May 26th, 2011 at 3:40 pm

    ….Also … anti-cancer and heart attacks.

    Well, so am I, but I might make an exception for certain politicians.


  6. #6 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    The US tide of support for Israel is turning. First good sign I’ve seen in decades on the subject. Speculate away as to why.

  7. #7 |  omar | 

    Speculate away as to why.

    When the moon is in the Seventh House
    And Jupiter aligns with Mars
    Then peace will guide the planets
    And love will steer the stars

  8. #8 |  Dave Krueger | 

    albatross #52, I think you summed it up perfectly.

  9. #9 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #54 Boyd Durkin

    I am pro-Jew and very anti-Israel. Also anti-Hamas and anti-cancer and heart attacks.

    You make a good point. Being against anti-Israel isn’t the same as being a supporter of the other side (whomever that happens to be at any given time) anymore than being critical of Republicans means you must be Democrat. And I think a lot of people just don’t understand how someone can be anti-Israel and not be anti-Jew. It doesn’t fit into their neatly organized boxes which makes them suspicious that you might be trying to pull one over on them.

  10. #10 |  Matt | 

    Actually I don’t think Scalia wants more executions. He wants the men in prison. Pumping iron. Getting ripped. And if a judge should take a tour of prison conditions, and stray from the group, who knows what could happen if he bumps into one of those “fine specimens”….

  11. #11 |  treefroggy | 

    “Philosophers on drugs”. Aren’t they all.

  12. #12 |  freedomfan | 

    Regarding Scalia’s bogus concern about muscular prisoners being released: What the hell is his logic in bringing that up? It’s been pretty well established that prisons have lacked bodybuilding facilities for some time now, but what if they still had them? It’s not as though there is any law keeping prisoners out of the gym for some time before they are released so that they wouldn’t be so massive when back in society. If anything, releasing them early reduces their access to prison workout equipment and reduces their free time available to bulk up.

    If he is seriously concerned about “intimidating” prisoners hitting the streets, shouldn’t he want them out of prison – and away from prison weight rooms – as soon as possible?

  13. #13 |  Andrew Roth | 

    Re: #24:

    “OSHA would probably make them install safety rails and arrange for handicapped access to the summit.”

    No, it wouldn’t. That’s a canard worthy of John Stossel on an acid trip.

    First, public trails are only incidentally a workplace. Decisions regarding their specifications are normally left to the agencies responsible for maintaining them, usually the NPS, USFS or equivalent state agencies. Sure, litigious assholes sometimes succeed in pushing parks agencies around, but if OSHA is involved in trail oversight, show me the mission creep.

    Second, those whose work requires them to use public trails–park rangers, maintenance staff, contractors or guides–are fully aware that their jobs require them to be ablebodied, in better than average physical condition, and able to deal with hazards including aggressive and diseased wildlife, severe weather, trail washouts, and falling debris. It’s no disability wonderland.

    Third, the wheelchair-accessible trails that exist in national parks are usually limited to a handful of the most heavily trafficked areas, e.g. parts of the South Rim of the Grand Canyon and most of the Yosemite Valley floor. The Bright Angel Trail is not wheelchair accessible. There is no handrail up the face of El Capitan. I believe there is a rudimentary cable guiderail on one path up the back of Half Dome, but it’s mainly to keep hikers from getting lost on a huge plug of granite with few obvious landmarks. It’s probably cheaper than search and rescue teams, and it’s definitely worth the cost not to let inexperienced hikers get disoriented and die of exposure or cliff plunges. Those who consider that too great a public cost or infringement on individual responsibility are ass hats.

    Roughly speaking, the five percent or so of trail mileage that is used by more than 95% of park visitors is improved to the extent that you describe. Anyone who wants to get into the high country has to hoof it. And if Everest moved to the Sierras, it would damn well constitute high country.

  14. #14 |  Andrew Roth | 

    Re: #62:

    Chuck Colson has made a similar point: it’s folly to put a bunch of criminals into a dormitory with other criminals for years and expect them to be reformed when they’re released.

  15. #15 |  Aresen | 

    @ Andrew Roth | May 26th, 2011 at 6:25 pm

    Sorry to hear about your humor impairment.

  16. #16 |  Matt | 

    This blog is not accessible to the humor impaired? Where’s OSHA?

  17. #17 |  Bergman | 

    I used to have a fair amount of sympathy for both the Palestinians and Israelis…but the Israelis have been depleting that sympathy faster than the Palestinians. At the moment, I wouldn’t mind too much if Israel got taken out, as a nation they mostly have it coming.

    But I’m not anti-semitic. People who hate Palestinians and support Israel have pulled off a rather clever propaganda coup, and changed the meaning of the word semitic in common usage. You ever wonder what precise ethnicity a native Palestinian is? A hint: The anti-Palestinian, Pro-Israeli folks are just as anti-semitic as I am for holding the opposing view.

  18. #18 |  Rune | 

    Re: 500′ Bin Laden

    Too Sunni?

  19. #19 |  Kolohe | 

    500′ Bin Laden-
    That’s an awful lot of controlled demolitions. I didn’t think there was enough Semtex & C4 in the inventory. Way to go logistics folks!

    So sad. But really, what were the odds of that happening?

    Music Video-
    And not a single pizza was ordered that day.

  20. #20 |  Andrew Roth | 

    Re: #65 and #66:

    If that was a joke that I didn’t get, go ahead and call me a humorless ass. Fine. All I can say is that canards of that sort are routinely circulated in earnest in libertarian circles. That becomes a problem when the same people making legitimate, important critiques of Kafkaesque overreaches such as the one visited upon the Dollarhites also make patently nonsensical blanket statements about government never doing any good at all.

    Rand Paul is a prime example. God bless him for his honesty about the Patriot Act, but he has said things about the sanctity of the private sector that are fucking nuts. How the hell is it un-American to criticize foreign companies that kill and injure American workers thanks to their incompetence and recklessness? When Paul goes off like that, it is understandable that a lot of people decide that libertarians are a collection of corporate stooges and ideological nutcases.

    Similarly outlandish comments from doctrinaire libertarians are too numerous to catalog. So, no, a statement about OSHA requiring the installation of a wheelchair path to the top of a mountain where only the most experienced dare tread doesn’t exactly sound like satire in a libertarian forum. It sounds like the latest helping of earnest starve-the-beast malarkey. And I’ll be damned if I’ll be shamed into lightening up about something that is so easily misconstrued.

  21. #21 |  Andrew Roth | 

    If I sounded too strident in #70, let me just mention that Jack Conway, an unabashed slimeball, was a viable candidate against Rand Paul. Even in Kentucky Paul doesn’t have very much latitude to come across as a corporate shill or to give the impression that he’s trying to sell his constituents down the river in a quest for ideological purity. A creep like Conway could easily defeat him in 2016 if he makes a tone-deaf move on Social Security or Medicare. Attempting to trim other Federal services with a hatchet could backfire, too.

    My point is that if Paul wants to be reelected, he has to be careful not to go on the warpath against government services that actually work for his constituents. That advice applies to most other libertarian politicians and activists as well. It isn’t about selling out; it’s about choosing one’s battles, which, sadly, doesn’t seem to be a libertarian forte.

  22. #22 |  adam | 

    I think Israel shows a remarkable amount of restraint. If Mexicans were shooting rockets into houses, in Texas and California, we would annihilate northern Mexico.

  23. #23 |  Aresen | 

    @ Andrew Roth

    Yes, it was a joke. But it was half in earnest as well.

    In 40 years of libertarianism, I have seen far too many cases of what was considered “absurd libertarian alarmism” become the law of the land. (Mandatory seatbelt laws, abuses of asset forefeiture laws, teens becoming ‘sex offenders’ for having sex with classmates, and kids taken away by police for having pocket knives to name just a few examples.) What is an absurd joke today may well be official policy in 20 years.

    You reacted specifically to an absurd example, let me give you a real one: I am an avid horseback rider, as such, I have helped build and maintain trails in public parks. Due to agitation by “Disabled activists”, many of those trails have been leveled and hard-packed, rendering them unsuitable and unsafe for riders; in more than one case, horseback riders have been banned from the very trails they helped create “for the safety of pedestrians and handicapped.” Riders are now banned from most public beaches “for safety reasons.” Just an example of the “good things” governments do.

    Governments do good things – for some people and almost universally at the expense of others – cf your warning about not threatening social security or medicare. I will only point out that, should Rand Paul’s warnings on these issues go unheeded, a bankrupt USA will not be able to afford even the cut back versions he recommends. (Unless you are the sort of ‘libertarian’ who believes the US can continue deficit spending indefinitely.)

    You excorciate Paul for saying it was “un-American to criticize foreign companies that kill and injure American workers thanks to their incompetence and recklessness?” If you are talking about the recent Toyota fiasco – where grandstanding Congressmen tried, on the flimsiest of evidence, to pillory Toyota for imaginary defects that were NOT substatiated on investigation, then I would have to agree with the Senator in the sense that it is “un-American” (at least in the original sense of being fair) to condemn someone on hearsay and partisan allegations. If you are talking about something else, please provide your evidence in context.

  24. #24 |  Greg | 

    I think Israel shows a remarkable amount of restraint. If Mexicans were shooting rockets into houses, in Texas and California, we would annihilate northern Mexico.

    Let us follow that analogy for awhile with some more (but not all) of the story…

    If we were blockading Chihuahua, Sonora, and Baja Norte so the residents had to get essential supplies via illegal tunnels…

    If our soldiers safely ensconced in tanks and APCs routinely shot young boys for throwing rocks at their occupiers…(Not to mention unarmed reporters and human-rights NGO workers who attempt to report these abuses.)

    If our radicals were building unauthorized settlements in said Mexican states…

    If said radical settlers publicly decried that they were going to take Mexico for the white man, because an 1800+ year old religious text is somehow a legal real-estate document…

    If our government restricted naturalized Mexican-Americans’ rights and privileges by virtue of their origin and/or religion…

    If our government were just taking whatever parts of those Mexican states it saw fit for a fence…

    Which side is showing restraint again?

  25. #25 |  David Chesler | 

    I agree with Matt in the early posts — read the article, didn’t see any indication that Biden is being accused of anti-Semitism.

    And @Bergman (#67) that clever propaganda coup “was coined in 1879 by German journalist Wilhelm Marr in a pamphlet called, ‘The Victory of Germandom over Jewry’. Using ideas of race and nationalism, Marr argued that Jews had become the first major power in the West. He accused them of being liberals, a people without roots who had Judaized Germans beyond salvation. In 1879 Marr founded the ‘League for Anti-Semitism’.” (From Wikipedia, quoting Moshe Zimmermann, Wilhelm Marr: The Patriarch of Anti-Semitism.
    It’s one of those words whose meaning cannot be demonstrated from its etymology. Sorry, just isn’t so. There are plenty of other words that have acquired a well understood, precise meaning that is different from what they may have originally meant, or should logically mean.

  26. #26 |  Andrew Roth | 

    Re: #73:

    The “un-American” comment in question was one that Paul made in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon blowout. The context:

    Ken Salazar, May 2, 2010: “Our job basically is to keep the boot on the neck of British Petroleum.”

    Rand Paul, May 21, 2010: “What I don’t like from the president’s administration is this sort of, ‘I’ll put my boot heel on the throat of BP. I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business.”

    A project directed by a British company (BP) with a Swiss-incorporated major subcontractor (Transocean) was executed with such reckless disregard for workplace safety that eleven Americans were killed and the remaining workers on site narrowly escaped an inferno with their lives. In response, the Secretary of the Interior used strong language to indicate that he intended to make BP improve its safety practices so that Americans wouldn’t be killed by its recklessness in the future. Rand Paul reacted to the episode by complaining that officials with responsibility for regulating a sector that had recently suffered a mass casualty explosion weren’t showing enough deference to business interests. If he wasn’t a corporate shill, he certainly sounded like one.

    Let’s say that I kill eleven people when the gunpowder factory that I’m running in my apartment blows up. Is it un-American to promise to put a boot on my neck so that I’m not allowed to do anything of the sort again? Of course not. What BP did was tantamount to running a gunpowder factory in a residential building. Its drillers were scared to death of the subsurface conditions in which they were being forced to work, but their bosses didn’t care. There was nothing inherently immoral about their line of work, but they just didn’t care about making sure that they went about it in a safe place and manner.

    The question here isn’t one of hobbling businesses with needless red tape. It’s of making sure that businesses operate in a manner that doesn’t get people killed or maimed. Frankly, some private businesses are unwilling to regulate themselves to that end and need to be compelled not to endanger human life. I can’t imagine any nongovernmental mechanism for regulating such callous syndicates.

    Incidentally, Wikipedia reports that Transocean has a long history of incorporation in tax shelters where it has had no real operations, first in Delaware, then in the Cayman Islands and most recently in Switzerland. Regardless of the overall propriety or impropriety of tax evasion by means of paper incorporation, it sure as hell isn’t patriotic.

  27. #27 |  Andrew Roth | 

    Re: #73 on Social Security:

    My point wasn’t that no thought should be given to Social Security’s solvency. The trust fund is clearly facing a combined demographic and economic pinch. My point was that Paul (and other Republicans) shouldn’t propose anything foolish like privatization or abolition. Despite its flaws, SS is an unusually reliable pension scheme that keeps a lot of people from spending their old age in abject poverty. I have no doubt that with proper stewardship it will continue to provide a significant safety net for generations to come.

    The private alternatives that have been touted to replace SS are much, much riskier. Some are practically swindles that will inevitably cause decent but ignorant people to be beggared by investment advisors. I own stocks and have an IRA, and I’m a pretty savvy investor, but I’ve taken some haircuts. Less savvy investors lured into high-risk instruments have a huge risk of being wiped out.

    I have several relatives who would be well and truly screwed over if they weren’t vested in a pension such as Social Security. They’ve either pissed away their other retirement funds, in one case liquidating a 401(k), or sunk them into failing businesses. Waxing eloquent about individual financial freedom and responsibility in order to get people to move their retirement funds from a low-risk fund to higher-risk funds, as the GOP did under Bush II, is a pretty low move in my book.

    These pension matters help answer Libby’s question a few weeks ago about what libertarians propose doing for society’s fuck-ups. Time and time again, the answer is not a hell of a lot, which is one reason that I end up raining on the small-government parade. What should be done for the improvident or the easily swindled when they inevitably fall through the cracks? There are no panaceas, but Social Security is a good start, and the alternatives are pretty grim. In a dog-eat-dog world, somebody always ends up being the meat.

  28. #28 |  adam | 

    Radical settlers did take part of Mexico for the white man, part of it is called Texas.

  29. #29 |  Andrew Roth | 

    Re: #73 on horse trail closures: point well taken. What you’ve described is inappropriate. It’s bad policy that entirely disregards the interests of a major group of stakeholders, who invested sweat equity in public infrastructure that they can no longer use.

    One trail in Pennsylvania that I used to bike pretty often, the rail trail between Elizabethtown and Lebanon, has a dual-use section with packed gravel on one margin and loose dirt on the other. It isn’t very difficult or expensive to accommodate competing stakeholders as long as no one wages war on other factions.

    Regarding the other examples of slippery legal slopes that you provided, I’m with you on everything but seat belt laws. Your inclusion of seat belt laws on a list of unconscionable infringements on human liberty supports my thesis that libertarians marginalize themselves by calling attention to otherworldly hobbyhorses.

  30. #30 |  Leon Wolfeson | 

    @76: BP has more American share ownership than British. And mostly individuals in America, larger funds in Britain. Gotta keep that foot on Americans, you know.

  31. #31 |  db | 

    Intrade CEO dies while climbing Mt. Everest

    Did intrade have odds on this?

  32. #32 |  Dave Krueger | 

    Greg #74, That is a superb characterization. In fact, one of the best and most concise I’ve ever seen. I particularly like the item spelling out the authority under which the land is being taken:

    “If said radical settlers publicly decried that they were going to take Mexico for the white man, because an 1800+ year old religious text is somehow a legal real-estate document…”

  33. #33 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    If that was a joke that I didn’t get, go ahead and call me a humorless ass.

    No, Andrew Roth. I will not call you an ass. You need love and learning right now, not name calling. Let’s start with an easy one:
    1. Hitler’s favorite joke:
    Hitler: My dog has no nose.
    SS Guard: How does he smell, boss?
    Hitler: Terrible.

    Next lesson:
    2. What’s brown and sticky? A stick.

    Third and final lesson for today:
    3. What did one snowman say to the other? I smell carrots.

    I hope this has been helpful because these are all fucking hilarious.

    Screw it. Here’s another one:
    Why can’t Helen Keller drive? She’s a woman.

  34. #34 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    Andy Roth, why is Rand Paul an example of how nuts Libertarians are when Rand Paul is a Republican and Tea Party member? For the record, I don’t believe Rand Paul is actually nuts. I disagree with him on only a couple of issues, but I try not to classify disagreement as “nuts”.

    If our soldiers safely ensconced in tanks and APCs routinely shot young boys for throwing rocks at their occupiers…(Not to mention unarmed reporters and human-rights NGO workers who attempt to report these abuses.)

    To be fair, sometimes they crush them with their tanks. There’s your “restraint”, Adam: Rachel Corrie.

  35. #35 |  Greg | 

    Dave Krueger,

    Thanks. The phrasing is mine but the talking point itself is from at least the early 80s. Likely earlier.

    Radical settlers did take part of Mexico for the white man, part of it is called Texas.

    You are correct, but there’s a few rather notable differences. Texans of US and Mexican origin drove the Texas Revolution in 1836. Texas was as much a land grab by the US as it was a secession from Mexico.

    (Especially as Mexico only became independent from Spain about 15 years prior.)

    The US was hardly of one mind on the Mex-Am war started 10 years later. The Whigs (soon to become the Repubs) were furious about the body count and expense.

    Mexicans don’t refer to it as the Mexican-American War they refer to it as American Invasion of Mexico

    Oh yeah, unlike Israel, once the dust cleared we paid (not much) for the land as part of the peace deal.

    Lots more to it, but history is always messy.


    Thanks for remembering her name and circumstances…

  36. #36 |  gDavid | 

    As for the BigiLaden, liberals and greenies must realize that turkey just won’t take a raghead, but real bacon would. Bacon forever.

  37. #37 |  David Chesler | 

    Whose claim is based on an ancient religious text? I figure one gets land either by conquest or by possession. Over those 1800 years, whose claims were legitimate, by whatever standards you prefer? The Romans? The Ottomans? The League of Nations? (If you reject conquest, the Israelite claim over the Canaanites probably has to appeal to religious texts with less corroboration than the events of 1,940 years ago — anyone claiming to be the inheritors of the Canaanites, and do they have an unabandoned claims? And some scholars say that it was actually an internal takeover.)
    If you’re going by possession, do you count years? ’67 to now is a lot longer than ’48 to ’67.

  38. #38 |  Greg | 

    David Chesler,

    You and and I both know they had possession from well before 48.

    If you don’t know that you are just another troll.

  39. #39 |  David Chesler | 

    Greg, how far back to you want to claim it was Arab? All of the area was owned by the Ottomans, without much dispute to legitimacy, before WWI. (If you go by individual, not state, claims, consider that there were Jews living there continuously, with influxes of European Jews throughout the early 1900s.)
    If you’re going to undo all the partitioning and relocations the British liked, you’ve got to address Jewish claims in Arab lands from which they were expelled in those times (including some communities that pre-date Islam), and Hindu claims in Pakistan, and Moslem claims in India.
    Instead of name-calling, you might state the standards you’re using.

  40. #40 |  Andrew Roth | 

    Re: #84:

    Rand Paul is one of the most libertarian members of Congress today. He adheres much more closely to the Libertarian Party platform than to the GOP platform, especially on civil liberties. I wouldn’t go as far as to say that he’s a RINO, but his strain of Republicanism is one that the current base devotes a lot effort to purging from the party.

    As far as his Tea Party endorsement is concerned, I don’t know what the hell to make of a movement that started with Rick Santelli’s on-air rant about irresponsible borrowers, went apeshit over Sarah Palin, brought out hordes of entitlement beneficiaries to scream about the evils of socialism, and endorsed Rand Paul. The only common thread that I’ve seen is a bunch of pissed off voters who consider themselves Republicans. Some of the people behind the scenes are pretty devious and a lot of vicious elements have taken shelter under the big tent, but every indication I’ve seen is that the Tea Party’s platform is nebulous and the movement is too ad hoc and focused on immediate electoral victories to impose the litmus tests normally involved in partisan politics.

  41. #41 |  Andrew Roth | 

    Re: #80:

    The nationalities of a company’s stockholders don’t affect its country of incorporation. No matter how large a percentage of BP stock is owned by Americans, BP is a British company. It is not an American company, nor will it be one unless it incorporates in the US.

    BP’s stockholders were not Ken Salazar’s target; the losses that they incurred from lower share prices and canceled dividends were collateral damage. Salazar’s targets were the staff responsible for maintaining safety and environmental standards on BP’s American projects in accordance with American laws and regulations. Given that that BP’s reckless disregard for site safety had just killed eleven American workers and was causing an uncontrolled gusher to spew oil onto American beaches and bayous, subordinating environmental and safety oversight to the interests of shareholders would have been twisted, no matter how many American investors stood to lose money.

    The fact that I have willing adversaries in this debate doesn’t bear particularly good witness to the motives and ethics of the libertarian base. That’s a harsh assessment, but let me just say that I’ve voted for quite a few Libertarian Party and small-L libertarian candidates, so I’m a lot easier to win over than many people. Shilling for moneyed interests, whether real or perceived, doesn’t go over well with most voters.

    It’s just something to consider the next time a libertarian’s dark horse candidacy goes nowhere.

  42. #42 |  Andrew Roth | 

    Re: #83:

    I like the Helen Keller and Hitler jokes. The others don’t come close to my definition of fucking hilarious, but you can’t please everyone all the time.

    For a brief tangent, let me see if I get this straight: I go off the reservation and report back with some observations about how and why specific libertarian hobbyhorses backfire in flyover country; Aresen first insists that he was joking about Everest and I was too dense to get it, but then describes his real-life entanglements with disability activists over horse trails; I become the resident humor-impaired whipping boy, to be reeducated with a combination of scolding and off-color and Kindergarten-appropriate jokes. Did I miss something?

    FYI, I put in a good word for Gilbert Gottfried on this blog a few months ago and contributed to the Osama porn post, so it’s a stretch to argue that my MO is to appoint myself chief scold and arbiter of good taste in humor. In this case, however, I seem to have entered an intellectual Twilight Zone.

    I realize that I’ll inevitably end up in the firing line by acting as a de facto devil’s advocate, and I’m fine with that. I also have a thick enough skin to deal with people going overboard against me in an internet forum. In any event the standard fare on Agitator threads is head and shoulders more civil and intelligent than that on many blogs; I’m a regular commenter on one that devolves into fucktard battles every week. Still, it’s worth repeating that the dogmatism and poor logic that routinely surface around here are not, as a matter of course, a way to win friends and influence people. I’m just sayin’.

  43. #43 |  Breville Bov800xl Smart Oven Review | 

    Breville Bov800xl Smart Oven Review…

    […]Morning Links | The Agitator[…]…