Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

People are complicated. Love is not.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

They traffic in fear. it is their only currency. if we are fearful, they are winning.

The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.

It’s the corruption, stupid.

Russian mouthpiece, go fuck yourself.

In my day, never was longer.

Not all heroes wear capes.

“More of this”, i said to the dog.

Our job is not to persuade republicans but to defeat them.

You don’t get rid of your umbrella while it’s still raining.

The revolution will be supervised.

Let us savor the impending downfall of lawless scoundrels who richly deserve the trouble barreling their way.

The worst democrat is better than the best republican.

JFC, are there no editors left at that goddamn rag?

Usually wrong but never in doubt

Perhaps you mistook them for somebody who gives a damn.

I’d try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

A sufficient plurality of insane, greedy people can tank any democratic system ever devised, apparently.

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

I see no possible difficulties whatsoever with this fool-proof plan.

You are here: Home / Pet Blogging / Dog Blogging / Open Thread

Reader Interactions

98Comments

  1. 1.

    Comrade Mary

    I’m not going to make the obvious “Was there a leak?” joke, because that would be an affront to Max’s dignity.

  6. 6.

    Stooleo

    For those of you who have Netflix and are gluttons for punishment, Atlas Shrugged (The Movie!) is now available for streaming.

  7. 7.

    Ben Franklin

    Greenwald’s been focusing on Congressional races. Curiously. Democratic and Progressive Not a Libertarian, in the bunch.

    http://www.salon.com/2012/03/29/3_congressional_challengers_very_worth_supporting/singleton/

    The search was not restricted by party affiliation or any considerations other than quality of positions, independence and viability. From that process, three candidates emerged who I really believe are worth highlighting and supporting: Norman Solomon in California, Franke Wilmer in Montana and Cecil Bothwell in North Carolina.

  8. 8.

    Mnemosyne

    Picking my new bike up tomorrow. Super excited, but nervous that it’s going to rain. (It wasn’t supposed to, but clouds rolled in this morning.)

  11. 11.

    wrb

    Martin might have lived if he had been equipped with a totebag.

    At least that is what I gathered from the giddy fellers doing the radiothon pitch
    on my public radio station this morning.
    __
    First one guy said that the public radio gear wasn’t just good
    looking, but the things were status symbols,
    __
    “Someone sees you with one of these water bottles and think,’whoh.’
    “Yea or you whip out your membership card to get a discount.and people ‘There is a good person.'”
    “Yea, they gave to public radio.”
    “Or you’re walking in a dangerous neighborhood and they see your public radio gear and they are like ‘whoh- that person has a whole community behind them.”
    “They’ll think twice.”

  12. 12.

    Tonal Crow

    As I said about the ACA mandate, via Krugman and Reagan’s (!) Solicitor General:

    Is requiring that people pay a tax that finances health coverage O.K., while requiring that they purchase insurance is unconstitutional? It’s hard to see why — and it’s not just those of us without legal training who find the distinction strange. Here’s what Charles Fried — who was Ronald Reagan’s solicitor general — said in a recent interview with The Washington Post: “I’ve never understood why regulating by making people go buy something is somehow more intrusive than regulating by making them pay taxes and then giving it to them.”

  13. 13.

    jimPortlandOR

    Max is truly a magnificent dog. Dobbies usually make me nervous, but he doesn’t look mean at all.

    Do you rent him out for weekends with ‘friends’?

  14. 14.

    curiousleo

    More Republicans in NC have said they’re against the anti-gay amendment on the ballot May 8. Mostly these are pro-business GOP types — their public statements are a good thing. That said, polling continues to show that people don’t know what the amendment really does but would support it. When they learn that it outlaws civil unions, too, a majority are against it. There is hope but only if we get the word out SOON.

    ActBlue moneybomb so we can get the word out:

    https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/ncmoneybomb?refcode=thermometer

  16. 16.

    Ben Franklin

    @Tonal Crow:

    In both cases the federal government uses its power to take money from us in exchange for some kind of provision

    Any examples? Auto insurance? You can’t force people to drive, but if they drive they must be financially responsible and buy insurance?

  18. 18.

    Mnemosyne

    @Tonal Crow:

    It occurred to me yesterday when we were talking about car taxes that the state of California currently requires me to pay a private company in order to get my car registered with the state. California requires a smog check every X number of years — right now, because my car is 14 years old, it’s every other year, but the state doesn’t have smog check facilities. You have to go to a privately-owned business and pay them to check your car. Without that certificate, you cannot legally drive in California.

    So isn’t this essentially the same thing — the state requiring that I give money to a private company? If the PPACA is voided, shouldn’t California have to stop requiring smog checks unless the smog check facility is owned and operated by the state?

  20. 20.

    the fugitive uterus

    btw, are there archives going back to when John was a republican? just curious

  23. 23.

    Steeplejack

    @Tonal Crow:

    Interesting that Krugman’s column, which was posted sometime late last night, already has 854 comments. (And comments have been closed.) That’s way more than usual. It gives me hope that more people are watching this issue and how the Supreme Court (mis?)handles it.

  24. 24.

    peach flavored shampoo

    That said, polling continues to show that people don’t know what the amendment really does but would support it.

    Welcome to your Typical American Voter(TM) circa 2012. I wonder if Tony Scalia is from NC…

  25. 25.

    Tonal Crow

    @Ben Franklin:

    @Tonal Crow: In both cases the federal government uses its power to take money from us in exchange for some kind of provision

    Any examples? Auto insurance? You can’t force people to drive, but if they drive they must be financially responsible and buy insurance?

    Auto insurance is not quite the same, because government does not require you to drive, and the insurance requirement is impose by states, not by the federal government. However, Medicare taxes are very, very close. You must pay the tax (mandate), but you decide how to obtain the benefits, whether via a fee-for-service plan, an HMO, etc. There is no substantive difference between that and a requirement to pay the same amount directly to the fee-for-service plan, HMO, etc.

    Also too, Republicans want to privatize Social Security, which would then redirect the (mandatory!) SS tax into a — wait for it — private account administered by a private brokerage and probably invested in mostly private securities!

  26. 26.

    kindness

    I see that picture and see it as Max saying ‘You may now approach the ball and throw it.’

  27. 27.

    rea

    @Tonal Crow: “Is requiring that people pay a tax that finances health coverage O.K., while requiring that they purchase insurance is unconstitutional? It’s hard to see why”

    Who thinks taxing people to pay for agricultural price supports is unconstitutional? How does that differ, as a practical matter, from making everyone buy broccoli?

  28. 28.

    curiousleo

    @peach flavored shampoo: It’s really more just the strategy of far-right to make shoddy legislation. This particular dreck was passed at the very last hour the NC leg. was in session.

    It is so broad that one conservative that recently came out against the amendment said to the anti-gay marriage folks “vote against this amendment or NC will be the best place for activists to make their federal case to legalize gay marriage.”

    But that doesn’t stop the Christian Taliban. One member of same recently said that if this doesn’t pass the next thing we’ll have is marriage to dogs and ice cream. Srsly. Ice cream was his example.

    https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/ncmoneybomb?refcode=thermometer

  29. 29.

    Tonal Crow

    @Mnemosyne: As with state auto insurance mandates, that’s a state mandate. State legislatures have general jurisdiction, meaning that they can pass any statute they want and it’ll be upheld as long as it doesn’t violate any negative right (e.g., 1st Amendment). Congress has enumerated jurisdiction, meaning that every statute must first be rooted in some enumerated power (e.g., Commerce Clause, Tax-and-Spend Clause), and then additionally musn’t violate any negative right.

  32. 32.

    Mouse Tolliver

    If you weren’t already convinced that the Kony 2012 guys were a bunch of televangelist clowns, this video should change your mind.

    Invisible Children’s “Director of Ideology” (WTF?) jokes about stealing $900k of a $1 million grant while pretending to be drunk. You can hear other IC grifters laughing their asses off in the background. This was apparently taped one week after the earthquake in Haiti, and the joke comes at Haiti’s expense. He ends the video with a snide crack about Africa “coming up in the world.”

  33. 33.

    Tonal Crow

    @rea:

    rea Says: @Tonal Crow: “Is requiring that people pay a tax that finances health coverage O.K., while requiring that they purchase insurance is unconstitutional? It’s hard to see why”

    Who thinks taxing people to pay for agricultural price supports is unconstitutional? How does that differ, as a practical matter, from making everyone buy broccoli?

    Right. The only real differences are (1) the money flow; (2) that the buyer must decide where to buy the broccoli; and (3) that the buyer must document her broccoli purchase. (1) has no imaginable constitutional significance (and is already nearly a universal requirement re: preparation of income tax returns: nearly everyone uses private software or a service). (2) is actually an additional freedom that the subsidy-taxpayer doesn’t have; and (3) is no different from the requirement to file income tax returns.

  34. 34.

    Roger Moore

    @Mnemosyne:

    So isn’t this essentially the same thing—the state requiring that I give money to a private company?

    But it’s the state, not the feds. There are some things that the state can do that the federal government can’t. Similarly, the state government can force you to buy auto insurance as a condition of driving, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the federal government can force you to buy health insurance.

  35. 35.

    Mnemosyne

    @Punchy:

    Not making any promises about the high heels, but I will compromise and wear closed-toe shoes.

    It really is a ridiculously fun bike to ride. I think I sounded like that pig in the Geico commercial the first time I did a test ride.

  36. 36.

    eemom

    @Tonal Crow:

    There was an interesting line of questioning by Breyer of pig Clement about how the federal government COULD issue vehicle-related mandates if it wanted to, as owning/driving a car surely involves interstate commerce.

    Breyer’s questioning of Clement was awesome in general — his voice fairly dripped with incredulous contempt.

    Of course, that got ZERO attention anywhere in the cacophany of bullshit “reporting” that has regaled us all week.

  37. 37.

    Roger Moore

    @rea:

    Who thinks taxing people to pay for agricultural price supports is unconstitutional? How does that differ, as a practical matter, from making everyone buy broccoli?

    You assume incorrectly that the radical right wing of the Court would object to that interpretation. I’m sure they’d be happy to end agricultural subsidies, Medicare, Social Security, and pretty much every other program created since the Hoover administration.

  38. 38.

    Mnemosyne

    @Tonal Crow:
    @Roger Moore:

    Hmm. So the state has the jurisdiction to require you to pay money to a private company to do state business but the federal government doesn’t. That’s weird at first glance, but I think you guys are probably right.

  41. 41.

    Tonal Crow

    @eemom:

    There was an interesting line of questioning by Breyer of pig Clement about how the federal government COULD issue vehicle-related mandates if it wanted to, as owning/driving a car surely involves interstate commerce.

    Sure, but that’s different from a requirement to buy a car.

  42. 42.

    geg6

    @the fugitive uterus:

    Yes, there are. I haven’t gone back into them much over the years, but Doug J. is positively awesome in the few posts I read. I started coming here right after Cole’s conversion, so I wasn’t in on the whole thing myself. But I did read the thread where he came out, so to speak. I believe you can go back to 2005 or so and you should be on the right track.

    If you look at the top of the page where it has the box for recent posts, you’ll see the archives link there.

  43. 43.

    Tonal Crow

    @Mnemosyne:

    Hmm. So the state has the jurisdiction to require you to pay money to a private company to do state business but the federal government doesn’t. That’s weird at first glance, but I think you guys are probably right.

    That’s not exactly what I’m saying. I’m saying that there’s no question a state can do this if it doesn’t violate some negative right. For the federal government, you have first to locate an enumerated power supporting the mandate. My argument is that the ACA mandate is firmly rooted in the Tax-and-Spend Clause (Art.I s.8 cl.1). The Commerce Clause is a sideshow. ETA: I don’t know why so much argument has been made on the Commerce Clause. Maybe because the words “tax” and “spend” have become radioactive in Washington?

  44. 44.

    eemom

    @Tonal Crow:

    However, Medicare taxes are very, very close. You must pay the tax (mandate), but you decide how to obtain the benefits, whether via a fee-for-service plan, an HMO, etc. There is no substantive difference between that and a requirement to pay the same amount directly to the fee-for-service plan, HMO, etc.

    This is one of the many reasons the ZOMG they’re gonna strike it down hysteria is misplaced. EVERY path to unconstitutionality knocks out a pillar of existing law that causes the entire edifice to come crashing down.

  45. 45.

    geg6

    @Tonal Crow:

    The problem with all these arguments framed by the auto insurance mandates is the fact that no one HAS to drive or own a car. However, everyone will eventually be required to use medical services of one type or another. I see health care as a unique market, unlike pretty much any other. Which would be reason enough for federal regulation and control, as far as I can tell.

  46. 46.

    BGK

    @Marcellus Shale, Public Dick:

    i’m only going to be a democrat until tonight’s supermega drawing. i am enjoying my last few hours as a liberal.

    Feh. Stop #2 after the post-winnings morning-show klown kavalkade would be the Bentley dealer, and before leaving the lot the new car would be plastered with Obama 2012 bumper stickers.

    Also too, could software developers once in a while consider that someone has to support what they write? I spent the morning chasing application database permissions hilarity because one of them added a new stored procedure with the same name as an existing one, but in a new schema whose name was only one letter different than the existing one. And they wonder why I won’t let them out of their dev-environment playpen.

  47. 47.

    eemom

    @Tonal Crow:

    Damn, you seem to know your shit. Where have you been all week while Cole and DougJ have been doing the full frontal Toobin?

  48. 48.

    Tonal Crow

    @geg6:

    The problem with all these arguments framed by the auto insurance mandates is the fact that no one HAS to drive or own a car. However, everyone will eventually be required to use medical services of one type or another. I see health care as a unique market, unlike pretty much any other. Which would be reason enough for federal regulation and control, as far as I can tell.

    I think that’s what Kennedy was getting at with his riff on the person who elects not to buy insurance and the effect that has on the risk pool.

  52. 52.

    Tonal Crow

    @eemom:

    @Tonal Crow: Damn, you seem to know your shit. Where have you been all week while Cole and DougJ have been doing the full frontal Toobin?

    Thanks. I’ve been here, but it’s easy for one or two comments to get lost in 300-comment threads. ‘Course, Krugman’s work has rather helped boost the public credibility of the tax-and-spend argument.

  55. 55.

    BillinGlendaleCA

    @Mnemosyne:
    Not supposed to rain til the evening, at least that’s what Fritz said. In LA, our weather is so boring we have a commedian doing the weather.

  56. 56.

    catclub

    @Tonal Crow: “The Commerce Clause is a sideshow. ETA: I don’t know why so much argument has been made on the Commerce Clause. Maybe because the words “tax” and “spend” have become radioactive in Washington?”

    It was extremely unfortunate that the tax penalty provision was not just called a tax. It will be administered by the IRS. I have hopes there is a brief that does push this aspect.

    Predicting all possible legal attack modes on the ACA would have sent the whole bill into never-never land.

  58. 58.

    Comrade Dread

    @peach flavored shampoo: And the powers that be like this system and have no plans on changing it.

    Which is why lots of folks express support for progressive or populist policies, but tend to be against laws that bring those policies about.

  59. 59.

    Mnemosyne

    @Marcellus Shale, Public Dick:

    Sorry, no, I’m afraid my office is going to be the one quitting en masse on Monday like we were working at Starbucks.

    People magazine just did a big article on lottery winners (my co-worker buys all of the glossy gossip rags) and the secret seems to be to buy one or two things that you’ve always wanted and then give the rest to charity. That way, when relatives come out of the woodwork to sponge off you, you can say, “Oh, sorry, it’s going towards improving healthcare worldwide, so I won’t be able to finance your Amway franchise.”

  60. 60.

    ThatLeftTurnInABQ

    @curiousleo:

    Srsly. Ice cream was his example.

     
    Regular or waffle cone? It makes a difference.
     
    Come to think of it, he ought to be worried. I can think of some men I know whose wives would leave them for ice cream, if that sort of thing were legal.

  61. 61.

    Tonal Crow

    @catclub:

    t was extremely unfortunate that the tax penalty provision was not just called a tax.

    I’m not sure it would have made much legal difference. I have never heard of a requirement that Congress identify the powers in which a statute is rooted. Nor have I ever heard of a requirement that, if it does identify such powers, it’s limited to arguing only those powers upon judicial review. ETA: indeed, I’ve read at least some precedent holding the opposite, though I’ll be GOPed if I can remember citations just now.

    …I have hopes there is a brief that does push this aspect.

    Me too. I really should read at least the SG’s brief. Maybe this weekend.

  62. 62.

    Mnemosyne

    @catclub:

    I’m hoping to commute to work on it at least a couple of days a week like I did on my old bike (I only live 3 miles from work, so I feel a little silly in my car every morning).

    The power of the Trek Cocoa is such that WaterGirl tried one out after I raved about it and ended up buying one for herself. Hopefully that’s working out! :-)

  63. 63.

    catclub

    @Tonal Crow: I wish that one of the lawyers had told Scalia that the conrnhusker kickback is not actually in the bill, so he should be good to go on approving its constitutionality.

  64. 64.

    chopper

    @geg6:

    right. this is a market where you not acting has an effect on the rest. given that, and as backers of the law have pointed out that the regulations on the industry don’t work without the mandate, it seems that the general concept of Raich should apply regarding the commerce clause, that is that as fat tony put it “Congress may regulate noneconomic intrastate activities only where the failure to do so “could … undercut” its regulation of interstate commerce”.

    of course the nimrods on the right side of the court are going to argue severability, that despite the briefs from the insurance companies stating that their business models go to shit if these regulations aren’t coupled with a mandate, everything would be fine without it.

  65. 65.

    chopper

    @Mnemosyne:

    i just find it insane how big this jackpot is getting. at this rate, a single winner would be richer than mitt romney.

  68. 68.

    Joel

    Apropos of nothing, but TDS has been very disappointing in their Martin/Zimmerman coverage. Sometimes there’s no place for the snarky “both sides” media bashing, and sometimes you have to sack up and make a stand. Frankly, I feel like Stewart gets a little too comfortable going “Alexandra Pelosi” with his choice of “liberal” targets (so to speak). Anyone who reads TNC knows what I’m referring to.

    On the flipside, he looked totally uncomfortable doing it, but Colbert threw Charles Murray’s white supremacist shit right in his face. Sucked the air right out of the room. It was wonderful.

  69. 69.

    ThatLeftTurnInABQ

    @chopper:

    at this rate, a single winner would be richer than mitt romney.

     
    Has anybody seen Newt Gingrich lately?

  72. 72.

    geg6

    @Joel:

    I’m not sure why anyone watches TDS. He jumped the shark a couple of years ago as far as I’m concerned with his stupid Rally To Celebrate Jon Stewart’s Righteousness. Colbert is and always was far, far, far superior and the only thing I can rap him for is being sucker enough to participate in the Rally to Celebrate Jon Stewart’s Righteousness.

  73. 73.

    Basilisc

    Here’s Switzerland’s former Health Secretary, as quoted in today’s NYT Economix blog:

    “We will not let people suffer and die when they need health care. The Swiss believe that in return, individuals owe it to society to make provision ahead of time for their health care when they fall seriously ill. At that point, they may not have enough money to pay for it. So we consider the health-insurance mandate to be a form of socially responsible civic conduct. In Switzerland, ‘individual freedom’ does not mean that you should be free to live irresponsibly and freeload from others, as you would put it.”

    When exactly did we get to the point where a majority of the US Supreme Court thinks “socially responsible civic conduct” is unconstitutional?

    And why, after three g.d. years, can’t anyone in the Obama administration or any Democrat in the House or Senate make the case for the individual mandate as accurately and succinctly?

  74. 74.

    Steeplejack

    @Marcellus Shale, Public Dick:

    Just saw that the Megamillions estimate for tonight is up to $640 million, which I think is the highest it has ever been. (It will undoubtedly go up.) The cash payout is $462 million, which would be close to $290 million after taxes (depending on where you live).

    That is practically unimaginable. I could take care of everyone I know and still have money left over to fund Planned Parenthood and put out a contract on Dick Cheney mount an impeachment campaign against Clarence Thomas.

  76. 76.

    burnspbesq

    @Steeplejack:

    It’s an interesting thought experiment: if you suddenly become part of the 0.1 Percent, how long does it take for the money to change you?

  77. 77.

    Marcellus Shale, Public Dick

    @Mnemosyne:

    i imagine some hurt feelings are inevitable, but i am sure i would stop at some point and think, are these really the friends and relatives i want to give all my money away for?

    i am guessing the best thing to do is lay real low, maybe take a long trip, perhaps set up a vacation residence somewhere, whilst people get used to the idea that they don’t deserve instant wealth any more than the person who won it.

  78. 78.

    geg6

    @burnspbesq:

    Do you think it really does? I mean, I think for some people it does. But I have a couple of friends who have “hit the jackpot” of life, one of them through a big lottery win. Neither of them have changed, essentially, as people. Still nice, still down to earth, and still my friends. Just a lot wealthier.

  79. 79.

    Mnemosyne

    @Basilisc:

    When exactly did we get to the point where a majority of the US Supreme Court thinks “socially responsible civic conduct” is unconstitutional?

    Around the time that they decided that the city of DC can’t ban handguns just because hundreds of people are murdered with handguns there every year, because the individual’s freedom to own a handgun is more important than the community’s desire to reduce gun crime.

    I’m pretty sure that “socially responsible civic conduct” goes against everything Americans believe in about individual freedom and individual responsibility. We don’t really “do” collective action here.

  80. 80.

    burnspbesq

    @geg6:

    Everybody’s different. I’d like to think that I wouldn’t change materially, but who knows? I wouldn’t mind finding out, that’s for sure.

  81. 81.

    burnspbesq

    @catclub:

    It was extremely unfortunate that the tax penalty provision was not just called a tax.

    Ever heard of Grover Norquist?

  83. 83.

    Steeplejack

    @burnspbesq:

    I guess you try to minimize the effect–if you’re interested in doing that.

    I don’t have an urge to live in some Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous fantasy. I pretty much like my actual life, but it would be great to have it financially secure and to have some extra money to spend on travel and some goodies.

    At $290 million, I would probably keep less than 10 percent and give the rest away to family, friends and charity. And it would be important to me to do that at the outset, rather than holding the reins and dribbling it out so that people were constantly coming at me with their hands out. (Which they would be anyway, of course. “Dude, I was your best friend in second grade!”)

    In contrast, I secretly suspect that my brother the doctor and business mini-mogul is more the type who could convince himself that, yes, a Learjet would be a good and wise investment.

    (As usual when this topic comes up, I am appalled to realize how much thouht I have apparently given to this.)

  84. 84.

    Culture of Truth

    I’d like to think I’d keep a bit and set up a charitable trust or foundation with the rest. This would have the added benefit of telling everyone to go apply there since it’s out of my hands.

  85. 85.

    curiousleo

    @Culture of Truth:

    I’d like to think I’d keep a bit and set up a charitable trust or foundation with the rest. This would have the added benefit of telling everyone to go apply there since it’s out of my hands

    That would be my plan, too. Keep some so my immediate family could have food/housing/health insurance/etc and set up a trust for charitable giving aimed at education, quality daycare, at risk youth, mental health care, poverty fighting programs.

  86. 86.

    chopper

    @Culture of Truth:

    yeh. i’m not a ‘fantasize about the lottery’ sort, but with that kind of loot i’d do the same. there’s some serious public schools you could help fix with the better part of 300 million.

  87. 87.

    Steeplejack

    What a mess:

    LOS ANGELES — On a 911 call to the Pasadena police Saturday night, the caller said two young black men had put a gun in his face and had stolen his backpack.
    __
    When officers responded to the scene, they shot Kendrec McDade, a 19-year-old black man from the nearby city of Azusa, who died of his injuries at a local hospital.
    __
    But on Wednesday, the Pasadena police announced that they had arrested the man who made the 911 call, Oscar Carrillo, on suspicion of involuntary manslaughter, because he lied to the police about the suspect being armed.
    __
    Lt. Phlunte Riddle said the police now believe that neither Mr. McDade nor his 17-year-old companion was armed. But when officers saw Mr. McDade reach for his waistband, she said, they believed that he was armed and that “their lives were in jeopardy.”
    __
    [. . .]
    __
    Lieutenant Riddle said Mr. McDade was running from the officers when they saw him reach for his waistband. Believing he was armed, both officers discharged their weapons from “very close proximity.”

  88. 88.

    S. cerevisiae

    Yeah, it’s fun to dream. If I hit the big jackpot the first one I’d call is an old friend who is now a bigwig in a major investment firm. He knows money and I trust him. He could set up the needed trusts, then I’m on the beach in Costa Rica.

  89. 89.

    Steeplejack

    @S. cerevisiae:

    He knows money and I trust him. He could set up the needed trusts, then I’m he’s on the beach in Costa Rica.

    Wait, what? But he was such a nice guy in college!

  90. 90.

    lol chikinburd

    Meanwhile in Wisconsin, Federal district court just struck down two major parts of Act 10, namely the ban on automatic withholding of union dues and (much bigger) the annual recertification requirement for public sector unions.

  91. 91.

    burnspbesq

    @Steeplejack:

    We’ve all heard of “suicide by cop,” but I think this is the first case of “homicide by cop” that I’ve heard of.

  92. 92.

    Mnemosyne

    @Steeplejack:

    Yep, it’s getting big play out here. From the media reports, it sounds as though the guy thought the cops wouldn’t respond to his 911 call unless he claimed the robbers had guns, so he did. And, sadly, he was probably right — with budget cuts, the cops aren’t going to show up for a robbery call unless there’s an armed suspect running loose.

  94. 94.

    Steeplejack

    @Steeplejack:

    Too late to edit: The guy being shot in the back is not in that Times story, and now I can’t find the place where I (perhaps erroneously) thought I read that. Mea culpa.

  95. 95.

    Mnemosyne

    @Steeplejack:

    It’s the same old story we’ve seen so many times — guy’s hand was near his waistband, cop thought he was going for a gun, guy gets shot multiple times.

    In this particular case, though, the cops were primed to think the suspects had a gun by the victim’s 911 call, so it wasn’t a completely out-of-the-blue assumption on the cop’s part that he was dealing with an armed suspect. That’s why the 911 caller is being charged with manslaughter.

  96. 96.

    Steeplejack

    @Mnemosyne:

    Yeah, I get all that. I just have a gut reaction to the now apparently standard police practice of unleashing a whole clip no matter what the circumstances. Whatever happened to one or two shots and “Yeah, I think I winged him”? You know, like on TV. (Actually, they don’t even do that any more on TV.)

  98. 98.

    gogol's wife

    I guess this is OT by now, but I can’t get over Max’s matching brown pec-spots. They are just divine.

Comments are closed.