Morning Links

Thursday, August 11th, 2011
Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

27 Responses to “Morning Links”

  1. #1 |  WWJGD | 

    I wonder how many of those NYT searches came from Armond White film reviews.

  2. #2 |  Jim March | 

    Badgers? We don’t need no STEENKIN’ BADGERS!!!

  3. #3 |  Cyto | 

    Badger, badger, mushroom…

  4. #4 |  hamburglar007 | 

    That’s no badger, it’s chupacabra himself.

  5. #5 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    If only there was a way of betting on police abuse cases and the legal system and politicians protected the cops.

    I’m glad badgers are finally getting respect.

  6. #6 |  Mattocracy | 

    Two great links with the Tea Party guy in Fullerton and antiwar.com. Great examples of how non-homogeneous these organizations are and why you can’t generalize the political beliefs of people.

  7. #7 |  Just Plain Brian | 

    Bob McKinley, one of the three Fullerton councilmen targeted for political extinction, says the recall is really about something else.

    as Ayn Rand said of Barry Goldwater,

    “If he advocates the right political principles for the wrong metaphysical reasons, the contradiction is his problem, not ours.”

  8. #8 |  SJE | 

    The Massachusetts law under which the videographer is being charged is meant to stop organized crime. What do you do when the organized crime wears a badge?

  9. #9 |  FridayNext | 

    Slightly off topic, but that link to the recall of the councilmen reminded me of Radley’s link a week or so back to the goings on in Quartzite, Arizona. I checked back and the latest development is that the police chief (still in charge because of a state of emergency) just placed OVER HALF of the police force on administrative leave for a vote of no-confidence and sending a letter of complaint to a state board of police something-or-others.

    Anyone else following this? I have found only short links with parts of the story.

    That place is insane and will hopefully Arizona will soon become the new Florida.

  10. #10 |  Goober | 

    These “XXX with mange” cases are really getting annoying. It all sums up with one simple statement:

    Animals that we are used to seeing with hair look really, really wierd when they lose all their hair. Alien, even.

    Therefore, if you see a hairless animal that looks really wierd, lets take a deep breath and refrain from assuming that it is an alien or a chupacabra or a Montauk Monster and maybe just assume it is a badger with mange.

    Google “bear with mange” and see if you would assume that the thing you see in the image is a bear if you saw it.

    Google “hairless cat” for goodness sake and tell me that looks anything like the cat that Blofeld pets in the Bond movies.

    THe juvenile bigfoot story from last year turned out to be a mangy, hairless bear. The montauk monster was a racoon.

    Animals without their hair look wierd. Can we just stop with the sensationalism now?

  11. #11 |  Randy | 

    Damn you Jim March!

    I was gonna make that exact same post. Even down to typing in the word “STEENKIN’”. lol

  12. #12 |  Windy | 

    My comment on the Fullerton piece:
    Note the (not so) subtle attempt by the politicians (with the willing aid of the media) to put this into the (illusory) left/right political arena and take the focus off the fact those cops deliberately beat man to death. Don’t let them entice you into that side track. The Tea Party participants in this fight are fighting back against the police state in the right (non-violent) way it should be fought. So if you are not a part of getting those who enable, encourage and utilize the police state out of public offices at EVERY level of government, then you are part of the problem.

  13. #13 |  PeeDub | 

    It’s probably not a *honey* badger though. Those are pretty badass.

  14. #14 |  Highway | 

    “I know the last hundred times we found a shaved, emaciated animal it wasn’t a Chupacabra, but this time we’re really got one!!!!

  15. #15 |  Michael Chaney | 

    “The anti-war movement” *chuckle* I think you mean the “anti-Bush movement”. It never was about any wars, as most of us knew at the time…

  16. #16 |  nicrivera | 

    Michael Chaney,

    I sometimes liken the anti-war movement to the Tea Party movement. There were many sincere people in the anti-war movement who opposed the Iraq War just as there are many sincere people in the Tea Party movement.

    Unfortunately, both movements were infiltrated by partisan hacks who were anything but sincere and served as source of continual embarassments for their respective movement. Sadly, it’s often the activists who scream the loudest and carry the most offensive signs (i.e. “Bush is Hilter”, “Obama is Hitler” who garner the most headlines and give the rest of the public the false impression that handful of partisan dirtbags represent the entire movement.

    I certainly appreciate what antiwar.com has done. Most of the people there are libertarians, but they’ve gone to great lengths to reach out to liberals and conservatives alike. And hopefully with organizations like antiwar.com, Reason.com, the RT network, and the Ron Paul movement, we can get rid of the tired notion that all politics boils down to liberal sversus conservatives or Democrats versus Republicans.

  17. #17 |  Yizmo Gizmo | 

    “Animals without their hair look wierd. Can we just stop with the sensationalism now?”

    I happen to think hairless ‘kitties’ look strange, almost grotesque.
    Which brings us back to “the anti-Bush movement.”

  18. #18 |  Michael | 

    I think that slate article might have just aped last week’s Cracked http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-things-i-cant-believe-websites-are-still-doing/

  19. #19 |  Maggie McNeill | 

    #9: Kelly James was in Quartzite yesterday following up on her July 21st article about the goings-on: http://sincerelykellyjames.wordpress.com/2011/07/21/a-tale-of-americana-part-i-jennifer-jones/

    She told me she was going to call me when she got back today, but I haven’t heard from her yet; she did say the follow-up was about half written, but she’s not a fast writer so it may be another week or two before she posts it.

  20. #20 |  croaker | 

    @16 Not to mention all the water-carriers who call Tea Party neo-nazis and fascist. Not to mention terrorist.

  21. #21 |  SJE | 

    #13: certainly not a honey badger. It would have killed and eaten the car. So badass.

  22. #22 |  c andrew | 

    @YG #17,

    May I say, karma wise, +20?

  23. #23 |  freedomfan | 

    A little off-topic, but I thought some might be interested in this headline for something I saw on “soft news” tonight: Parking Cop Accepts Celebrity Autograph as Bribe.

  24. #24 |  freedomfan | 

    SJE,

    The Massachusetts law under which the videographer is being charged is meant to stop organized crime. What do you do when the organized crime wears a badge?

    In cases like this one, they are the most organized crime. That law is another instance of legislation that actually impedes the goal it was allegedly passed to advance. That’s why it’s never okay to pass laws based on the good intentions promoted by its sponsors; what matters is what authority the law gives to the state and the presumption should be that the state will abuse that authority, not that it will exercise good judgement and restraint in applying authority as intended. The various designed-to-let-politicians-preen-for-the-camera laws named after children deserve special scrutiny in this light…

  25. #25 |  Aresen | 

    I was amused by some of the commenters on the antiwar link who basically said “Yeah, the libertarians are right, but we don’t want to associate ourselves with a bunch of capitalists.”

  26. #26 |  Andrew Roth | 

    Re: #16: spot on.

    I’d also love to see Tea Party franchises putting pressure on out-of-control police forces and their elected enablers. That would make the Tea Party a legitimate, bona fide political organization rather than an assembly of the crazy, the malicious and the self-centered.

    The very premise behind the movement’s acronym, short for “Taxed Enough Already,” is inconsistent with self-government when applied to the dogmatic extent that the allegedly “small government” elements of the movement demand. A great many in that faction have no principles whatsoever; they’ve gotten theirs (usually from Uncle Sam) and now want to screw everyone else. If they sink their country in the process, so be it. That level of popular greed, both resulting from and aggravating the nearly total collapse of the sense of commonwealth in the United States, causes societies to disintegrate in a hurry.

    We have a serious problem with partisan dogmatism in this country, or, as I like to think of it, political cultism. Windy in #12 is absolutely correct that partisan appeals make great red herrings to distract from vital accountability measures and reforms. Although I’m pissing in the libertarian punch bowl again, I might add that a large, prominent part of the libertarian movement is every bit as much a part of this problem as the Republican and Democratic parties. Shallow, facile talking points to the effect of “private sector good government bad” lead to bad policy and scare important allies away by making libertarians look either like starry-eyed fools or enablers of a rogue’s gallery of private-sector crooks.

    To put it another way, many voters put up with substantial police brutality and other needless carnage when the alternative is a gang of ideologues indiscriminately throwing wrenches into the works of their government.

  27. #27 |  Andrew Roth | 

    Whither the anti-war movement? A good place to start is by looking at Obama’s base. He has assembled a mindboggling rabble of useful idiots, cult followers, and craven partisan hangers-on. These people wouldn’t dare challenge their Dear Leader for pursuing failed wars in more or less the same incompetent, stubborn fashion as his evil predecessor. The same mentality explains the lack of pressure from the left over civil liberties and related matters, e.g. Glenn Greenwald becoming a pariah in some lefty circles for holding Obama to the same (generally leftist) standard as W on civil rights and liberties.

    The misleading thing is that the fire is dying in the movement’s belly at a time when popular opposition to the wars is steady or rising. This is because the people who really had the fire in the belly were often true-believing Hopey Changey herd animals. It was in spite of these creeps that I voted for Obama. They disturbed me. They were embarrassing company for reputable, sane war opponents and Obama supporters, but they were damned good organizers.

    What Obama needs now is a primary challenge. So did Bush II in 2004. It’s a sign of political degeneration that primary challenges are apparently considered beyond the pale, akin to treason. Primary challenges send an appropriate message to shitty politicians: don’t expect your party’s undying support and gratitude for being a fuck-up. If Carter deserved one in effect for a hamfisted response to Iran and stagflation, Obama really deserves one. His recklessness and malice are an order of magnitude greater than Carter’s.

    I really, truly hope the Republicans don’t nominate a slimy Elmer Gantry con artist this time around. Their field is currently swarming with such vermin. I do not want to be forced to vote for Obama again.

Leave a Reply