Links 11/30/15

NWCN

Wired (Furzy Mouse).

Bill Moyers

NYT. “[A] fresh-faced financier”?!

The Economist. “Why two big banks failed.” Fraud is never mentioned, as usual.

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, Telegraph

Yale Climate Connection

WSJ

Reuters

FT

Syraqistan

New Zealand Herald

Reuters

Moon of Alabama

(on question of bombing ISI)_ FT. “‘There are some people who have not quite got used to the idea that the party is in a different place,’ Mr Corbyn told the BBC’s The Andrew Marr Show, adding: ‘I am not going anywhere. I am enjoying every minute of it.'”

WSJ. Hils, Barry: Take a bow!

Another Word For It

Guardian

Robert Reich, Newsweek. Since Reich is a bit of a weathervane, I’m sensing a hardening elite consensus.

FT

McClatchy. “In Boise, Idaho, Iraqi refugee built a Middle Eastern restaurant.” Exactly as Somalis helped revitalize downtown Lewiston, Maine. I judged several Somalis at a speech tournament; they were excellent.

Black Injustice Tipping Point

 LRB. On Ta-Nahesi Coates.

WaPo

China?

Vineyard of the Saker

NYT

Big Brother Is Watching You Watch

WSJ. Tatel again!

Ars Technica

2016

HuffPo

LA Progressive

  McClatchy

NYT. Steve Israel: “You couldn’t get a better role model.” Say no more! Say no more!

WaPo

If Republicans win the presidency in 2016, they would then control nearly everything — the White House, the House, probably the Senate and certainly a majority of governorships.

Perhaps that would be enough to clean out the rot. I doubt it.

Yahoo News

WaPo

Christian Post

Gunz

Alternet

Syracuse Post-Standard (Bob).

Class Warfare

Chicago Tribune. Let’s remember this comment from Clive:

Increasingly, if you want to get and hang on to a middle class job, that job will involve dishonesty or exploitation of others in some way.

And that’s how those shares will be valued: Bezel futures. 

Project Syndicate

Ed Walker, Emptywheel

Conor Sen

Guardian

NYT. Perhaps unfairly, I’m reminded of .

Japan Times. Kawaii?

Nature

Marginal Revolution. I really don’t like the idea of economists working out how to incentivize people to eat insects. “It’s just an experiment!” Uh huh.

Antidote du jour ():

links albino moose

Albino moose spotted near Greenville, ME.

See yesterday’s Links and Antidote du Jour here.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
This entry was posted in Guest Post, Links on by .

About Lambert Strether

Readers, I have had a correspondent characterize my views as realistic cynical. Let me briefly explain them. I believe in universal programs that provide concrete material benefits, especially to the working class. Medicare for All is the prime example, but tuition-free college and a Post Office Bank also fall under this heading. So do a Jobs Guarantee and a Debt Jubilee. Clearly, neither liberal Democrats nor conservative Republicans can deliver on such programs, because the two are different flavors of neoliberalism (“Because markets”). I don’t much care about the “ism” that delivers the benefits, although whichever one does have to put common humanity first, as opposed to markets. Could be a second FDR saving capitalism, democratic socialism leashing and collaring it, or communism razing it. I don’t much care, as long as the benefits are delivered. To me, the key issue — and this is why Medicare for All is always first with me — is the tens of thousands of excess “deaths from despair,” as described by the Case-Deaton study, and other recent studies. That enormous body count makes Medicare for All, at the very least, a moral and strategic imperative. And that level of suffering and organic damage makes the concerns of identity politics — even the worthy fight to help the refugees Bush, Obama, and Clinton’s wars created — bright shiny objects by comparison. Hence my frustration with the news flow — currently in my view the swirling intersection of two, separate Shock Doctrine campaigns, one by the Administration, and the other by out-of-power liberals and their allies in the State and in the press — a news flow that constantly forces me to focus on matters that I regard as of secondary importance to the excess deaths. What kind of political economy is it that halts or even reverses the increases in life expectancy that civilized societies have achieved? I am also very hopeful that the continuing destruction of both party establishments will open the space for voices supporting programs similar to those I have listed; let’s call such voices “the left.” Volatility creates opportunity, especially if the Democrat establishment, which puts markets first and opposes all such programs, isn’t allowed to get back into the saddle. Eyes on the prize! I love the tactical level, and secretly love even the horse race, since I’ve been blogging about it daily for fourteen years, but everything I write has this perspective at the back of it.

219 comments

  1. Mark S.

    The mug shot of the Rome NY teen who accidentally shot his girlfriend’s baby is one of the most hauntingly sad images I’ve seen in a while.

    1. Jagger

      It is interesting that everyone agrees it was an accident, yet 18 year old Bartle is being charged with criminally negligent homicide, a felony. So not only will he have to live the rest of his life with the knowledge that he killed his girlfriend’s baby by accident but also go to prison with a felony. His life is now finished but the state and the prison system should be able to make some money off this tragedy. And browsing the comments, some are anticipating with glee his time in prison. What a warped society in so many ways.

            1. Jagger

              Guns are okay like slavery and aboriginal genocide.

              Just don’t act shocked to find guns around children. From the puritans to today, guns have always been guns and have always been around children. Guns are no more evil today than they were in the 1600s. Just a fact.

              Although I am curious how you compare guns with slavery and aboriginal genocide. I see no commonalities.

        1. polecat

          i think this case highlights the conundrum of a relatively small % of the population who are either inept, immature, or just plain psychopathic……with the majority of gun owners being very responsible, but as usual, the craven msm & gov has whip up hysteria amongst the plebs to keep them from realizing just how much they’re being screwed all ways to sunday!….but MORE gun regulation!!!!

            1. bob

              Half of these gun-nut dip-shits don’t realize that most troops on a “base” aren’t even armed. Why is that? To reduce accidental shooting?

              I think that they should get into much more gory detail about what they find after this. 12 ga vs 7 month old? In the same room?

              Horrible. Honestly. They say in the story that it hit the upper torso of the baby. What did they find? A leg?

              1. skippy

                Nor do they realize that after time at the firing range, all weapons are cleared, including a final formation exercise before transport which at end involves pulling the trigger.

                The one time I personally experienced a discharge in my group resulted in a unhappy experience for the individual, let alone the trust they had to win back after being shunned for a long period. It about as basic as it gets in individual and group responsibility, failure at this level does not denote good outcomes in other areas imo e.g. having to keep one eye pealed rather than concentrating on other tasks.

                Good Grief… I can only imagine everyone locked and loaded in a C-141 clambering around [no ammo issued till just before departure], tho I might be instructive if ammosexuals did bunch of training exercises in confined spaces. I await the data.

                Skippy… same sorts get done in the head about Taxes and AGW…. AGW can’t take my freedumbs away…. sigh…

                1. bob

                  “tho I might be instructive if ammosexuals did bunch of training exercises in confined spaces”

                  Wait, you mean there’s a point to storing the ammo and guns away from the people?

                  I posit they would end up starting a fire and lose more ammo to the fire than they would be able to put through a gun. Any gun.

                  Yes, even in a concrete box. They’ find a way…

                  We just need funding now. NRA?

              2. optimader

                I’m glad someone’s finally said it…
                I admit to checking back at this slow motion trainwreck thread with my mouth agog in disbelief. Close range shotgun discharge and 7 mnth old w/ no consequences for the shooters behavior -other than his apparently feeling really really sad about it (as inferred from picture)??? unfkingblievable.
                Apparently they posted the wrong picture in the article?

                1. bob

                  Maybe not a picture, but an accurate description of the scene might help. As it stands, the news story leads one to believe that there was a body. I’d bet not.

                  I looked for the scene in trainspotting where they shoot the cat at close range. Gone. Fucking PETA. Great scene, and probably very close to what happened here.

                  Demonstrating to people, with real flesh and bones, what ‘mistakes’ like this really look like could change a lot of minds, and at the very least might lead some to be more careful. Not sure how you do that *tastefully*.

          1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

            It’s like all those friendly fire casualties and police shootings.

            Maybe more training is the answer or maybe not…humans are humans.

      1. so

        You are so right. I don’t know how I could not kill myself after that. I hope him and the baby can both find peace. There but for the grace of god go I.

        1. Lambert Strether Post author

          This is absolutely not a “There but for the grace of God go I” question. He chose to bring a tool designed to kill, which he could not handle properly, into a home with a baby. That’s not the same as somebody being lucky enough to escape being “powerless over alchohol.”

          I mean, sheesh. Suppose the guy brought an electric power saw into the kitchen, turned it on, left it going, and then the saw sliced the baby’s arm off. Would we hearing this great steaming load of compassion? I doubt it very much.

          IMNSHO, many commenters are not defending the person, but the gun, and the gun owner.

          1. cwaltz

            The funny thing to me is our household is a household with several guns. It never crossed my mind or that of my husband that owning them wasn’t a responsibility. We have 4 kids. For us, that meant trigger locks, keeping them separate from ammo and locked up, teaching our children that guns aren’t toys, and making sure that when they were loaded was at a range and the gun was safely pointed away from anyone. Just casually leaving them around or cleaning them when little bodies might get hurt was never an option for my gun loving spouse.

      2. Lambert Strether Post author

        The “hasn’t he suffered enough” argument is generally applied to banksters who steal a lot of money; Greenspan, IIRC, bless his heart, called that “reputational damage” and thought it would deter banksters from stealing.

        It’s novel to see “hasn’t he suffered enough” applied to somebody who blew a baby’s head off, I grant.

        1. bob

          Lambert,

          Given the situation as described in the news report, your famous “pink mist” is probably a very accurate description of what happened.

    2. optimader

      After cleaning the weapon, Bartle loaded the shotgun and installed an accessory grip. The shotgun rested in his lap with the muzzle pointed in the baby’s direction.

      When he tried to stand up while still holding the weapon, the gun fired one shot — striking the baby.

      No, he fired one shot. One of those people with bad luck when it comes to thinking.

      1. cwaltz

        So much for those day long gun safety classes. Once your weapon is loaded, you’d figure you’d be a little more careful about where you point the damn thing.

        I will say this though there ought to be clear consequences, I’m not sure why this guy was charged when I’ve seen a multitude of similar sad stories where some kid was accidentally shot as the result of an irresponsible gun owner and no charges were brought forth(Which I personally think is wrong. If your gun is utilized by your kid to kill another kid you facilitated negligent homicide.)

        And for all of you opining that he’ll have a felony on his record, at least he HAS a future(and yes even with a, very common these days,prison record there will be opportunities for him to get a job and live a life)That child he accidentally killed won’t get to experience anything as the result of his negligence. *shakes head, not because I’m gleefully excited that someone will be incarcerated but because I am positively disgusted that knowing how much damage a gun can cause that someone was so reckless with something so dangerous.)

          1. Jagger

            Not everyone is an Einstein. Many people fall on the lower half of the intelligence spectrum. So is stupidity a crime when they have an accident? Whatever happened to sympathy or compassion or understanding for an accident? No, we must have vengence or almost as bad, contempt.

            The Amish have it right. When that man murdered all those amish kids, the Amish community showed up at the murderer’s funeral to comfort the murderer’s parents. That is the best of humanity. They set a high standard for us. Something for us to remember.

            I will get off my high horse now.

            1. Gio Bruno

              Is asking for punishment for egregious behavior with a lethal weapon vengeance? Would you be happy with highway patrol officers ignoring reckless high-speed driving (it can be lethal)?

              Certain behaviors are so obviously dangerous that even careless stupidity is punished severely. It reinforces the message. Handling a loaded gun carelessly in a room with other people in it falls into that category.

              1. Jagger

                highway patrol office

                He is not a trained officer of the state.

                Certain behaviors are so obviously dangerous that even careless stupidity is punished severely. It reinforces the message.

                An accident is an accident. BTW, what is your level of judgement at the age of 18? I cringe even today thinking of some of the things I did in my teens.

                Certain behaviors are so obviously dangerous that even careless stupidity is punished severely..

                He has already been punished severely by the results of the accident. But by all means send your message. As if it will actually prevent another accident by an 18 year old. 2 destroyed lives makes it all better.

                1. vidimi

                  should drunk drivers be exonerated because they feel really bad about smashing into a pedestrian or have they been criminally negligent?

            2. vidimi

              stupidity is not a crime but irresponsability can be criminal. i’m against incarceration as much as everyone, but i don’t think armchair jurors should be acquitting murderers, no matter their intent, based on a sad-looking mugshot.

              1. Jagger

                acquitting murderers

                To be a murderer, there must be intent. This was an accident. No more a murder than someone killed in a car accident.

                1. Oregoncharles

                  People do go to prison for car accidents – negligent homicide. I knew a woman whose father died in prison for that reason.

            3. cwaltz

              If you aren’t an Einstein than don’t get a weapon. If you get a weapon and it kills someone expect to be held responsible for that death. It’s really not that complicated. Even those on the lower end of the spectrum that are allowed to be without a guardian should be able to figure that out.

              I notice you said they showed up at the murderer’s funeral………I’m guessing it is really easy to have compassion when you already think that God will be meting out justice to the murderer(since he’s already gone.)

              My sympathies go out to the mother of this innocent and to the people who have lost all of the potential it’s life would have offered. There will be no “justice or vengeance” that will replace the hole in the universe where it’s life would have been were it not for the recklessness of this person. However, we, as a society, can ensure that people take guns, and the consequences of not treating them as the weapons they are, seriously by ensuring there are CONSEQUENCES, for being stupid around them.

              1. Jagger

                I would hate to see you and Cheney in a competition for “Iron Ass” of the year.

                I notice you said they showed up at the murderer’s funeral………I’m guessing it is really easy to have compassion when you already think that God will be meting out justice to the murderer(since he’s already gone.)

                I suspect they aren’t looking for vengence here or in another world but who knows.

                However, we, as a society, can ensure that people take guns, and the consequences of not treating them as the weapons they are, seriously by ensuring there are CONSEQUENCES, for being stupid around them.

                My ideal society would not inflict vengence for an unintentional accident. I guess we want different types of societies.

                1. cwaltz

                  If your society thinks oopsie I just killed another human being, “my bad ,” than yes, I guess we do want different types of societies.

                  Actions have consequences. In this case, the consequence is someone lost their life.

                  I suspect you reconsider who the “Iron Ass” is if you think that the fact that a 7 month old is dead is no big deal and that the person’s whose reckless behavior caused it should just be able to carry on with his life as if what he did was no biggie. It’s ironic that you would mention Cheney when it was HE that walked away with no consequences(which I definitely disagreed with) when he “accidentally shot” his friend.

                  1. Jagger

                    thinks oopsie I just killed another human being, “my bad ,”

                    Just because the legal system doesn’t get it’s bit of blood, doesn’t mean a person hasn’t been punished.

                    7 month old is dead is no big deal and that the person’s whose reckless behavior caused it should just be able to carry on with his life as if what he did was no biggie.

                    Responsibility for the death is the penalty. Imagine if you had to live the rest of your life knowing you had killed the 7 month old baby of your girlfriend. That knowledge is an immense suffering which can never be lifted. Take a minute and think about it. The guilt and pain will never go away until he is buried. He is already punished naturally for what was an unintentional accident. Punishment enough without hauling in the prison complex.

                    1. Plenue

                      I don’t care about people being punished so much as I care about a kid being dead. What use ‘justice’ to the dead?

                      The average number of deaths a year in the United States from guns is 10,000. That is so far above any other ‘civilized’ country it’s breathtaking. Something needs to fundamentally change.

                    2. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

                      A friend-or-foe sensor, for our soldiers,cops and gun-owners.

                      Someone needs to come up with a system and invent the necessary parts.

                      “I try to fire at her, but she is registered as a friend, and the gun won’t fire.”

                      But she later turns foe…rather quickly and the gun is no use for defense.

                      Luckily, that means ‘back to square one’ and even more luckily, there are other gun-less options, as plan B, they say.

              1. Jagger

                Thanks, Jagger. I agree and appreciate your compassionate comments.

                Thanks. Although you might want to read my “I am no Saint comment”…

            4. Lambert Strether Post author

              Since the ammosexuals won their culture war, we now have guns everywhere, including the home, where the non-Einsteins of this world do stupid things with them, including killing their children, in the home. That’s how Darwin works.

        1. optimader

          ding, ding and ding, Pointing a weapon at someone even if it is not loaded is my version of a mortal sin, no less a loaded one , no less discharging it accidentally, no less shooting someone in the process. Cue Dick Cheney. For this, he should have been arrested and charged with any of a number of offenses.

          I am wondering that if between the lines this Cretino, being in the act of installing a tactical grip, is contributing to the inclination to go w/ the felony charge? I’m thinking so..

          I’m guessing his (court appointed?) attorney will be able to plea bargain this down when the 15 sec of fame subsides, the DA scores a tic in the career conviction rate, and he isn’t on a long term NY State financed breakfast/lunch /dinner program. I am further guessing, other than some relatively modest time served this will have little impact on the potentialities of his life’s trajectory.

          The only real loser at the end of the day is the 7 month old who’s life was stupidly taken away. Everyone else gets to regroup.

            1. OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL

              Ka-ching. That’s why.
              I think I’ll just get in the habit of replying to every NC subject with that simple phrase: Ka-ching. Works for foreign policy, health care thievery, presidential politics, the climate situation, ongoing bank looting…everything.
              I think it really kicked into gear under Reagan, when the operative philosophy became “just give big business everything they want and it will all work out”. The very concept of the public good has disappeared from view, our supposed “representatives” are just the pre-sales technical crew for the latest schemes to boost shareholders while screwing everybody and everything else.

            2. Vatch

              Because people are put in jail for possessing some marijuana or for being unable to pay their traffic fines, right?

          1. sd

            A gun has one purpose. To kill. When you point a weapon in the direction of another person, your intent is to kill. Period, the end.

            If you do not intend to kill someone, then don’t point your weapon in their direction.

            A gun is not a f*cking toy.

        2. Jagger

          I will say this though there ought to be clear consequences

          So we send him to prison for an accident? For what-rehabilitation or vengence? Or just to transfer taxpayer money to the prison industrial complex?

          I would think the knowledge that he killed his girlfriends baby will weigh on his conscience for the rest of his life. That is a clear and pretty brutal consequence, yes?

          Unfortunately humans are not perfect. Accidents are part of the human existence and 18 year old males are particularly susceptible. Without intent, he made a tragic and stupid mistake and in addition to the weight on his conscience, he will face a steep and uphill battle to create a life whenever he gets out of prison. So I am sure we will have our vengence which he will pay for the rest of his life. But it is wrong. There was no intent, it was an accident.

          1. polecat

            Well….just multiply this young stupid by thousands of others, who probably learnt gun safety from our ever devolving popular culture!

          2. todde

            I think you may be.confusing stupid with careless and reckless.

            Not being able to figure out a.math problem isn’t an issue.

            The issue is how careless you are with a loaded gun. If you don’t give enough of a shit about the people around you while you clean and install a.new.grip on a.loaded gun then you are something else besides stupid.

              1. zapster

                I would add “arrogant” to that. He didn’t think *he* should have to think about such mundane things.

            1. Jagger

              I think you may be.confusing stupid with careless and reckless.

              Or possibly just poor judgement. Do you still remember some of the really, really stupid things you did at the age of 18? I do.

              1. todde

                I do.

                Amongst other things we used.to like to race cars. Until one of our friends slammed his car.into the vioduct right outside the liquor store my family owned.

                He was charged with negligent homicide.

                I myself have ben arrested on a felony charge and have looked at prison time for putting an ex-con theif in the hospital.

                We used to have a.saying for.peole who do ‘stupid’ things.

                ‘Play stupid games, win stupid prizes’

                1. cwaltz

                  I had a co worker in the Navy who spent a year in jail(allowed out for work) for drunk driving after he caused the death of a another co worker accidentally.

                  He and his friend went to a party and then he decided to try and drive home drunk. The car flipped over. The one guy died almost instantly. He left behind a wife and a new infant.

                  It was a stupid, stupid accident. It wasn’t malicious(they were friends) and still he was expected to pay for the consequences of his actions. I think he saw it as very small penance since his friend was no longer alive(I suspect this guy may experience something similar.)

                2. Jagger

                  I myself have ben arrested on a felony charge and have looked at prison time for putting an ex-con theif in the hospital.

                  Yes, everyone does some stupid things when they are kids. Fate determines who pays and who is lucky enough to mature and go on with a productive life.

                  Unfortunately, those that get caught get thrown into the maw of the machine and their life is never the same again.

                  1. todde

                    You are correct.

                    And that will be weighed against the fact that his actions caused the death of another human being.

              2. cwaltz

                Yep. I also recognize that having to deal with some of the consequences for my behaviors has made it incredibly important that I not repeat my mistakes. It also meant that as a parent, I taught my kids with the intent of helping them avoid those same mistakes.

                Consequences are hard. What you see as cruel, I see as part of the learning process.

          3. cwaltz

            Yes, we send him to prison for a very, very preventable accident and send a clear message that if you aren’t a responsible gun owner that there will be consequences.

            If you don’t want to be held accountable then you can always forgo buying a weapon.

            Easy, peasy.

            1. Jagger

              Yes, we send him to prison for a very, very preventable accident and send a clear message that if you aren’t a responsible gun owner that there will be consequences.

              Easy, peasy.

              Easy for you. I refuse to be part of the lynch mob.

              1. cwaltz

                I don’t recall mentioning I would kill him.

                I recall mentioning he should go to jail.

                It’s swell that you are all for a consequence free society where you can be as thoughtless as you like though, even if it means it costs someone else their lives. Myself? I prefer that we teach people that if they are going to own a weapon that they have responsibility to make sure it doesn’t maim or kill others.

                1. Jagger

                  It’s swell that you are all for a consequence free society where you can be as thoughtless as you like though, even if it means it costs someone else their lives.

                  I am no saint. I can be as vengeful as the next person. Let me at the bankers and you might be surprised. But just not in this particular case with an unintentional accident by an 18 year old. Personally, I like to see intent and maliciousness before bringing out the guillotine.

                  1. bdy1

                    Thought crimes I’m not so into. “Malice” and “intent” allow courts to inflict all kinds of inconsistent outcomes that, at the end of the day, are more a reflection of the judges’ and juries’ intent than the perps’.

                    It actually takes a shit-ton of self reflection to discern one’s own intent. Motives exist in complex contexts, and people use that complexity to construct all kinds of rational self delusions about why ‘c’ might have followed ‘a’ (see banking and financial derivatives).

                    Some accidents are not allowed. Like the kind that kill babies.

                    Dude modified a shotgun to better shoot people with before cleaning and loading it, all in the presence of an infant. He then pointed it at the baby and decided, reflexively, that was the best time to get his ass up and check out the fridge, or whatever.

                    Dead baby in those circumstances = likely negligent homicide. If the baby hadn’t been shot, the dude should still be on the hook for criminal negligence.

                    Sorry your life got screwed up, gun owner who accidentally killed a baby. We expected you to be more careful.

                    1. Jagger

                      Thought crimes I’m not so into.

                      To each their own. For me, intent would be a big factor in determining whether state punishment is required.

            2. Spring Texan

              Agree with Jagger. You are absolutely heartless. “Sending messages” is how we got so many people in prison and making money for the prison-industrial complex.

              1. cwaltz

                A 7 month old is DEAD and not coming back. What’s heartless is this idea that somehow or another that should not matter.

                It’s beyond ridiculous that people think that if they own a weapon that they have no responsibility to treat it AS A WEAPON.

                Quite frankly, I’m beyond tired of reading about another dead child because of the behavior of another irresponsible adult.

                1. todde

                  Is cwaltz heartless when he wants a CEO to face consequences because they operated their oil rig in a reckless or careless manner causing the deaths of 11 employees?

                  I am certain their intention wasn’t for 11 people to die so it’s all good, right?

                  I have empathy for the poor guy but the fact that he is facing consequences for being careless isn’t the hill I am.going to die on

                  1. Jagger

                    Is cwaltz heartless when he wants a CEO to face consequences because they operated their oil rig in a reckless or careless manner causing the deaths of 11 employees?

                    Wrong comparing a corporation to an individual. And in your example, corporation is intentionally shortcutting for gain at the risk of their employees. It is not an accident.

                    1. todde

                      And yes an oil rig explosion is an accident.

                      An unplanned occurrence based on prior actions with no malice and no intent to harm anyone, is by definition an accident.

              2. JTMcPhee

                Nonsense. So people that indulge themselves by zooming around in their cars and because “accident” kill someone and seem to be remorseful are to be excused? Maybe that applies to people who crash entire economies? To drone pilots that blow up wedding parties but have to drink and drug due to whatever residue of decency they have in them being affected because they “accidentally” put their warheads on the wrong foreheads?

                Jagger and Texan apparently like them some guns, and want to excuse with subtle argument one of the many, many, many, many episodes of “accidents where guns shoot somebody unintended or on accident.” The prisons are not full onaccounta “sending a message,” unless the message is “kicking downward” and keeping a large chunk of the population in its place and of course Reefer Madness, and as several have noted already, KA-CHING! into the accounts of the Prison Industrial Complex (including cops, courts and city coffers) that of course includes the several parts of the plutocracy that profit from all that.

                What Jagger is offering is not even “cheap grace” — just an excuse for carelessness that because of the very great harm that firearms can do, needs “socially” to be discouraged, every way possible. This is the “grace” that Jimmy Swaggart suckered people into giving him as a “Christian gesture,” after he was caught, repeatedly, with his pants down and his hand in the till. So he goes on preaching his messages of hate and intolerance and End Times, “graced” and “excused.” It’s not like the Gun Stupid doesn’t happen, over and over and over…

                (For what it’s worth, I sort of like guns too and have my little set, just don’t feel the need to spasmodically react to even the tiniest soupcon of “threat” to the idiot set of faux “rights” that People of the Gun claim to be entitled to.)

                1. Jagger

                  Jagger and Texan apparently like them some guns, and want to excuse with subtle argument one of the many, many, many, many episodes of “accidents where guns shoot somebody unintended or on accident.”

                  Wrong. Reread my arguments.

            3. Elliot

              This. If you aren’t responsible enough not to load a gun in the same room with an INFANT, then you aren’t responsible enough to have a gun. (So.. some laws need tuning..) … but if you DO load a gun in the same room as an infant, and you kill the infant because you are paying attention to the gun and your new grip, not what damage you might do with it to that infant, then you deserve a very heavy prison term.

              I’m from the back of the backwoods, my father was a marine DI, and almost everyone I know hunts.. and they would all be outraged and want this person to do time.

              If he shot off his *own* testicle, as a person in town did years ago, trying to quick draw, well, then he’d have his punishment for being stupid. But since he killed someone else, that deserves heavy punishment, as a deterrent to the other blockheads in his moiety…. that is how we tune up evolution, as a society.

          4. Lambert Strether Post author

            ” Accidents are part of the human existence”

            And so are statistics.

            Not hearing a lot of compassion for the baby, here, who won’t be feeling anything for the rest of its life.

            The scenario: A fool (a) buys a ___ , (b) doesn’t know how to handle it, (c) puts it in the same space with a baby, and as a result of (a), (b), and (c) the baby dies.

            I put it to readers that only where ____ is a gun would we be having this argument about whether the fool should suffer legal consequences at all.

            Suppose ___ were a bomb? Legal consequences, or no?

            Suppose ___ were poison? Legal consequences, or no?

            And so forth.

            As soon as you fill in the blanks with something other than a gun, you can see the absurdity of the “he’s suffered enough” argument. The double standard is very evident.

            Meaning we really aren’t talking compassion here. We’re talking guns, and gun ownership. Some will defend these at all costs, even falling into evident absurdities. I disagree.

      2. Peter Schitt

        Every time I hear of one of these incidents I am sad for a while but also glad that it brings the evil empire a tiny bit closer to its demise.

    3. newyorker

      That mug shot should be the dictionary entry for ‘remorse’. I feel sorry for the kid even if he’s a gun loving dope. The book should be thrown only at the truly malicious . I don’t think we are seeing that here. Eighteen years old…jeeze.

      1. tim s

        Agreed, assuming the book is what gets thrown.

        Punishment is appropriate, but not prison. How about 1000(s) hours community service, specifically related to gun safety. He may be an effective teacher. If he fails that, then let the consequences follow that so many want to see come down on him.

        I agree with a minority of the others here, that punishment should fit the intent, rather than simply be vengeance, more-or- less.

      2. Lambert Strether Post author

        Hmm. How is bringing a gun you don’t know how to use into a home with a child not “malicious”? I mean, it’s not like the guy brought a toaster oven he didn’t know how to use; a gun* is designed to kill, as this one did. It’s very presence is an act of malice. Suppose the guy bought a big can of arsenic into the house and left it on the kitchen table. To me, that’s malice. What else would it be?

        * Modulo the hairsplitting on birdshot, air guns, etc.

        1. Inverness

          Not surprising a teenager would feel okay bringing a gun in a house with the wingnut rhetoric you have in the USA. I agree this young man should face consequences. But just once, I would love to hear gun but lobbyist and their campaigning whores be charged with incitement to violence. There have been far too many casual references to the need to be armed everywhere, and that does affect everyday behaviour.

  2. James Levy

    Thank you for posting the Gwynne Dyer piece on Turkey and Russia. Dyer is a penetrating observer of the contemporary scene, an excellent military historian, and a veteran of the Canadian Navy who knows military affairs. He has become deeply cynical, too cynical in my opinion, but he rarely misses the deeper meaning behind events. And he has never taken his eye off the nuclear ball that is still the preeminent threat to human survival.

      1. Oregoncharles

        I don’t see him often; looks like I should start looking. Excellent, illuminating article.

        So feel free to Link him often.

  3. allan

    “Islamic State Entrenches in Libya WSJ. Hils, Barry: Take a bow!”

    Please let’s not forget the important contributions made by Samantha Power and Susan Rice.
    It takes a village to destroy a country.

    1. ChrisFromGeorgia

      And don’t forget a certain candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, what is her name again?

          1. Jim Haygood

            For more background color, consult my forthcoming book Bonfire of the Clintons: Induced-Draft Combustion of the Feral Rich.

            1. allan

              The Onion had Libya nailed As has so often been the case over the last 15 years, its informed snark provides better journalism than can be found in the MSM.

  4. griffen

    Just like the mountain, which gets climbed because it is there – bankers were willing to continue playing their game (long duration balance sheet supplied with shorter duration funding & equity) until it was far too late.

    Nevermind the highly suspect / rigged quarterly reporting or that FULD was ruthless while captaining the mighty Lehman ship. They really thought they knew best.

    “why would bankers destroy their own livelihoods?”

    1. JustAnObserver

      That Economist Buttonwood piece reads from beginning to end like an almost perfect description of Bill Black style accounting control fraud even up to the author/shill’s spinning it as “mistakes were made” or “whocoodanode?”.

  5. James Levy

    This quote from the equal opportunity article is critical:

    Economists of all stripes applauded the hollowing out of US industry on the absurd theory that the benefits to some outweighed the costs to society, assuming, of course, that there are economists who think about the interests of society beyond money.

    It would appear to me that Economists must be speaking of possible or potential people, rather than actual people, when they formulate these absurd theories. Somehow, when they think of the “good” generated by cheaper products, they assume that everyone in society buys that product and thereby enjoys that good, and the loss to the losers in terms of jobs and opportunities doesn’t really exist, or should be counted one “loser” at a time whereas the “gains” are counted as accruing to everyone. So 30,000 people losing their jobs and a couple of small cities having their tax base destroyed is offset by 3 million people getting cheaper washing machines (or, more likely from the way Economists seem to think, 310 million Americans potentially get cheaper washing machines). But how can the loss of employment and tax revenue be equivalent to some group of people paying $60 less for their washer? No one who has ever been unemployed and seen no end to it in sight or lived in a town where the mill closed down could ever think of those two things as equivalent. Is everyone who earns a Ph.D. in Economics that privileged, or that dumb, that they can’t see the difference?

    1. Romancing the Loan

      When I have these conversations with wealthy neoliberals they, no joke, accuse me of racism for wanting better jobs for people here more than I want to improve (if you consider a sweatshop better than subsistence farming, which I feel needs to be an individual decision on the part of the person faced with the choice but whatever) the lot of the third world countries we’ve previously done our best to ruin.

      They see themselves as “more evolved” “global” citizens. I suspect Americans will eventually see them as traitors.

      1. bdy1

        Surreal that one can actually go out and have a conversation with a “wealthy neoliberal.” I do it too, all the time. It feels like science fiction, but you can’t turn over a rock around here without finding one of those f*&#ers. Running with the wrong crowd, I guess.

      2. jrs

        I suspect that conversation is more often with people on the right, it’s the only ones I have really seen do it, however dis-likable sell out middle of the road liberals (who will vote for Hillary if she is nominated!) may be, it doesn’t tend to be their particular meme. As for the racism thing – the jobs and wealth lost here when they are are disproportionately lost by minorities in this country who have always been on the economic bottom anyway. Racism? Has the disappearance of the middle class been kind to say blacks in this country? No it has been devastating.

    2. cnchal

      Hoisted from a comment.

      . . . The neo-liberals, in whose eyes working people are animals (look at the conditions they impose in those foreign factories they set up) feel that they understand humanity better than the left or the traditional Tories, with their quaint ideas of human dignity and the sanctity of life, do. They see people as easily trained to accept mass incarceration, perpetual war, Big Brother and the Panopticon and a Hobbesian struggle for bare subsistence.

      Economists are the useless eaters, feasting at the policy table while the little people pay for it and pray a crumb falls near them.

      1. Nigelk

        A lot of useless eaters in this society. The economists are just the enablers and apologists for the true criminals, the bankers themselves.

        Produce a good or service that creates real jobs or GTFO

    3. fresno dan

      First, all that child labor over there only getting paid 3 cents a day, big screen TV’s should cost 5$ (and a washing machine should cost a dollar, and phone 69 cents) – the economists, because of their love of aggregates, never quite figure out the marginally lower price of the final price should be VASTLY, VASTLY lower, but it is not the purpose to lower prices – its to inflate profits to those at the top. Of course, you know that, so we are faced with a difficult question:
      Are economists REALLY that stupid (if we did a stupid regression, economists are theoretically SO stupid they should not know to NOT walk in front of speeding cars…)
      OR
      Are economists smart enough to figure out that other than JUSTIFYING billionaires making (i.e., stealing) ever more money, economists actually have no known utility??? Seriously, even a ””liberal”” (extra quote marks to denote SUPER DUPER IRONY) like Krugman makes statements that he can find no data of the ill effects from inequality.


      “I’ve been using the case of research on inequality and growth as an example of an issue where liberals need to be careful not to let wishful thinking drive their conclusions; it would fit perfectly with our world view if inequality were not just a bad thing but also bad for the economy, which is a reason to bend over backwards to avoid accepting that conclusion too easily. But what do we really know?”

      Because what we do, HEAVEN FORBID is we kill the great and powerful OZ…uh, I mean “growth” if we mess with the market.
      Funny thing is, there has actually been growth…for YEARS now. Of course, all the “benefits” (i.e., MONEY) goes only to people who already have most of the money. But somehow, the economy is set up that to get a penny to a poor person, you have to get a dollar to a rich one. And dagnabbit, society just taxes and taxes those poor rich people, who if only they had more money would eventually invest it, thereby insuring that those at the very bottom would have an itsy, bitsy teeny weeny weeny teeny itsy (did I say bitsy??) bit more….contingent upon the FED doing the right thing – which the FED never ever does so the poor actually won’t get their itsy (bitsy, etc.), cause otherwise it would DESTROY GROWTH….that makes everything so wonderful….

      Along those lines:

      Of course, it is in the interests of Saudi’s, oil firms, the military industrial complex not to even broach the idea of inequality as a cause of terrorism – and everybody knows they hate us for our freedom.
      Now, it may not be money that is causing the problem …………………………………………. its what they have to do keeping all the money for themselves that’s whats the cause of the problem…

      really, I don’t know why people think I’m cynical…

      1. tegnost

        “but it is not the purpose to lower prices – its to inflate profits to those at the top”
        so true….an inconvenient truth for those who see themselves saving the world through gmo’s and gigs

    4. bdy1

      I remember coming home from macro in 2004 and explaining to my wife what I had been taught that day: that every saved American job cost the American economy over $400,000.

      She says “It’s worth it.”

      duh.

    5. Oregoncharles

      What is more important to most people: their job, or the cost of cheap plastic items?

      You would think even an economist could understand that – but most of them have tenure in a job that can’t be outsourced. They think.

  6. abynormal

    Saudi Wake-up Call: many convenient deaths positioned Mohammad bin Salman…

    i seen this movie…the ending, weeeelllll “it is written”: “[to Prince Nasir Al-Subaai] But what do you need a financial advisor for? Twenty years ago you had the highest GNP in the world, now you’re tied with Albania. So, good job. Your second largest export is secondhand goods, followed closely by dates for which you lose five cents a pound. You know what the business world thinks of you? They think a hundred years ago you were living in tents out here in the desert chopping each other’s heads off and that’s exactly where you’ll be in another hundred years- so on behalf of my firm, yes, I accept your money…What are they thinking *hah*? What are they thinking? They’re thinking that it’s running out. It’s running out, and 90% of what’s left is in the Middle East. Look at the progression: Versailles, Suez, 1973, Gulf War 1, Gulf War 2. This is a fight to the death. So what are THEY thinking? Great! They’re thinking keep playing, keep buying yourself new toys, keep spending $50,000 a night on your hotel room, but don’t invest in your infrastructure… don’t build a real economy. So that when you finally wake up, they will have sucked you dry, and you will have squandered the greatest natural resource in history.”

  7. jgordon

    Best article I’ve read yet this month:

    The corporate state was never threatened by the liberal class’ myopic preoccupation with cultural diversity or the right wing’s championing of supposedly “Christian” values. This was anti-politics masquerading as politics. The culture wars did not challenge imperialism, neoliberalism and globalization. The dictates of the market, the primacy of corporate profit and the military-industrial complex remained sacrosanct. The mounting distress of the underclass was ignored or manipulated during the culture wars. Liberals who embraced cultural diversity did so within a neoliberal framework. Feminism, for example, became about placing individual women in positions of power—this is Hillary Clinton’s mantra—not about empowering poor, marginalized and oppressed women. Post-racial America became about a black president who, as Cornel West says, serves as “a black mascot for Wall Street.”

    As Chis alludes to in his article, I think the whole diversity push may be well intentioned, but is profoundly dangerous in the current climate. A corrupt and despised elite that’s promoting tolerance and multiculturalism ultimately deligitamizes those values among the economically and politically oppressed underclass. Thus the rise of Trump.

    1. James Levy

      I agree, but I don’t know what to do about it. Abandon the blacks to the redneck Republicans? Abandon women to the tender mercies of the right to life movement? If we had class solidarity, then we could come up with class-based remedies to the ills of neoliberal culture, politics, and economics, because “we’re all in this together.” But we don’t. Too many white working class people, as the article on neoliberal equal opportunity points out, are wallowing in self-pity, blaming those who used to be below them, not those who lord over them, for their plight. The mirror image of which is the self-pitying that one sees among educated blacks obsessed with race and racial theory and every real and perceived slight they can conjure. All this amounts to is a pissing contest of the “my oppression is worse than your oppression” variety. My guess is that no one wants to look up (literally and figuratively), see, and take on those at the top, because everyone perceives that to be hopeless, and deep down too many believe it to be ignoble because we have been brainwashed into believing that those above us are better than us and deserve what they have, so knocking them down a peg is just “jealousy” and not justice.

      1. Romancing the Loan

        I don’t see a big problem with delegitimization of diversity in general since the R’s are doing the same thing- their slate is less white and male (I know, I know, long way to go) than any time before while their positions are even further to the right. What it really did was make the Ds look appropriately dishonest for assuring their voters that their candidates must be liberal because they are black or women. That was a lesson that apparently many people needed to learn.

        I also don’t think refusing to play the game where the lower class is set against each other amounts to abandoning anyone. We all (for example) agree on reversing NAFTA. That is class-based, and a lower class R is just as likely to agree with you as a lower class D, but an upper class anything will be horrified. We need to build class solidarity, not wish it out of thin air, and the way to do that is to start with the stuff we as a class agree on, and show people there’s far more of it than we’re led to think. The day I heard Trump and Sanders both were openly for nationalized health care my heart grew three sizes.

          1. Steven D.

            Dark skin is a convenient surrogate for low income. Throwing away communities of color has been a hallmark of neoliberal rule.

            The shooter at the Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs was an economically marginalized white man. The rise of Trump coincides with declining real wages for the white working class.

            A full employment economy would lift up black and white. It also would ease white rage that expresses itself through extremist bigotry.

            1. jgordon

              Robert Lewis Dear identifies herself as a female. Just in the interest of accuracy, you should say that the shooter was an economically marginalized white woman.

              1. Vatch

                I wonder about that gender classification; is it a typo, or did someone deliberately alter it? Anyhow, it’s no longer possible to access the voter registration record for Robert Lewis Dear in Colorado. A search fails to show his name, and the Colorado Voters Info link returns 404.

                1. nippersdad

                  Judging from the pictures that I have seen of him, that would have to have been a typo. This is someone that is clearly making no effort to look in the least feminine.

                  If it were an issue, he would have shaved the full beard long ago.

                  1. jgordon

                    That’s an incredibly sexist comment. Who are you to decide for a woman what constitutes a feminine appearance. If this woman wants to go around wearing a beard, whether natural or artificial, that’s her business!

                    Male, female, or neither has totally to do with feelings and nothing at all to do with biological or social reality.

                    1. Oregoncharles

                      In my experience, which is now surprisingly extensive, transsexuals adopt the appearance, insofar as possible, of the sex they identify with, complete with cultural stereotypes.

                      Dear obviously didn’t do that; so either he’d abandoned the effort, or it was a typo – or a forgery.

            2. PhilK

              The rise of Trump coincides with declining real wages for the white working class.

              It seems to me that the Trump and Sanders campaigns, taken together as opposite sides of the same coin, are the Ghost Dance of what used to be the American middle class.

        1. Lambert Strether Post author

          “delegitimization of diversity” Well, I don’t think one can delegitimize diversity because it exists.

          What one can do, I think, is delegitimize identity politics as practiced by both parties.

          1. WanderingMind

            A thought on race/class. The racial system in North America predates the rise of capitalism in North America. Racial systems elsewhere have a persistence which seems to defy economics.

            So, lately it seems to me that it is possible for the racial system to survive an otherwise beneficial change in the economic system and vice versa.

            Therefore, we cannot focus only on one or the other.

            1. bdy1

              Good point. No chicken here, no egg.
              If the social justice crowd can recognize that the racial equality crowd can’t steal their thunder, and vice-versa, then maybe . . .

            2. Lambert Strether Post author

              I’m not sure about that (and granted, I need to do a lot more reading). IIRC, there was a twenty or thirty-year period when racism was invented as an ideology by slaveholders in the slave states, and the purchase and sale of slaves predated it (as it would be expected to do, since the slave trade started out small).

              By this I don’t mean that other ideologies supporting slavery didn’t exist (see the Bible). But I mean that racism as practiced in the American context was invented by Americans, and that the invention was close to, but after, the social relation.*

              On chicken and egg, however: I think we need a lot more multi-causal both/and, and a lot less linear either/or.

          2. cwaltz

            I think rather than delegitimizing that marginalizing would be a more accurate term.

            Identity can be important. Our experiences help make us who we are. However, the fact that I’m a female and so is so and so should not necessarily be the be all and end all of how I decide to vote. Policies matter. A record of how you treat issues other than those that have to do with things like gender, color or nationality is germane no matter how much the duopoly wants to dumb it down to just those things.

            1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

              Agreed that it should not be how one decides to vote.

              A senator/governor/congressperson should not be expected to carry the home state.

              The successful manipulator is one that can get people to vote based on identity.

              “You’re expected to carry the vegan vote.”

              “We count on you for the foreign legionnaire vote.”

              “All left-handers should be automatic in the bag for you, but we also like to see you help out with the ambidextrous.”

      2. Bene

        Whatever a person is willing to do to remove food from your table you must eventually be willing to do to remove food from his table. The predators must eventually be made the prey. It is the only thing they understand.

    2. Jagger

      Another good quote from the Hedges article:

      It is not that cultural diversity is bad. It isn’t. It is that cultural diversity when divorced from economic and political justice, from the empowerment of the oppressed, is elitist. And this is why these liberal values are being rejected by a disenfranchised white underclass. They are seen as serving the elites, and marginalized groups, at the expense of that underclass.

      1. jgordon

        Hedges nailed it. That’s exactly what I see among the poor whites (think trailer park) there I know. The elite liberals can self righteously pontificate about equality and tolerance all they like, and about the inevitable forward social progress of our society–but they’re living in lala land. On the ground people are desperate and distressed, and they’re looking around for people to string up. Whether it’s minorities or elites, there’s a growing mob that’s lusting for violence against someone. Trump is only the beginning.

        1. cwaltz

          Trump is a con man though and part of the problem. If I were the rich I’d start worrying because even though many of the poor whites are uneducated, they aren’t stupid. Eventually the mob will realize that the problem is the rich and connected(of which Trump is a member) have sold them out. Trump is whipping them up into a frenzy and if that violence is given a direction we may see American guillotines.

  8. Nik

    AEP’s shrill, insistent optimism is obscuring all of the assumptions built into the models and projections he refers to.

    We know renewable electricity tech. prices are down, sure, but do we know that they’ll stay down in the event of carbon pricing and increases in demand for the commodities used in their manufacture? These people talk about investments in energy efficiency all the time, with no mention of how their version of market-based energy efficiency initiatives gets around the economic rebound effect. And then there’s the discussion of storage, and the widespread assumption that the big break that will create a cheap, easy solution is just around the corner. It isn’t. Expensive batteries produced using intensive industrial processes aren’t going to clean themselves up over night. All of these assumptions reflect misunderstandings of both technological and economic development.

    I could go on. The other links have plenty of useful points of their own.

    1. DanB

      The central point of contention for me with the prose of Ambrose is his taken-for-granted premise that growth can continue. This belief is at the core of mainstream economic thinking and modernist mythology. We have a decadent, gluttonous hierarchical ideology- typically called neoliberalism- expropriating more and mortar from those who have less and less to be stolen, while simultaneously the natural resource base and earth systems that have supported endless growth are in decline and headed for collapse -either sudden or slow-motion. But all I’ve got is diagnosis, not solutions.

      1. Nik

        There’s no version of a low-carbon society that uses materials and energy in anything close to the “gluttonous” they’re used today. Any strategies that don’t place this reality front and center and talk seriously about what that looks like are wishful thinking.

    2. polecat

      it’s ALWAYS just 10 years down the road (new & improved energy source )…….Hey…Ambrose, the day YOU fly or drive on battery power alone, consistently, without the system failing, is the day i’ll give up my use of fossil fuels…[email protected]#king wanker!!!

      1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

        We are neo-Luddites, for we have been fooled by ‘innovation’ too many times.

        “I reach for my tin-foil hat whenever I hear the word, innovative.”

        1. polecat

          i would urge everyone to read John Michael Greer’s running fictional narrative “Retrotopia” on his blogsite, which challenges readers to question the idea of unlimited progress, to perhaps step back a bit and consider older, less odious and disruptive technologies as a way of treading lighter on the environment, while living in a saner world…….

    3. bdy1

      :

      “You pay taxes so they forget to kill you today.”

      What’s driving all the confused optimism, the “let’s assume sustained, full industrial capacity and work from there” rosy scenarios: the uncomfortable reality that when resource scarcities become real (rather than profit driven) guns decide. I’m far more afraid of death by violence than by thirst or starvation.

      The most potent Marxist critique is that the profit motive necessitates growth, ergo the existential exponential curve. We’ll be reacquainted with primitive accumulation in the worst kind of way.

  9. hemeantwell

    re the Williams’ review of Coates’ book, that Coates cited Melissa Harris-Perry as the “foremost public intellectual” is simply laughable. He takes years of mounting outrage and appoints a state apologist as caretaker. Here’s Bruce Dixon of Black Agenda Report:

    I’m a lifelong socialist, somebody who believes political mountains can and must be moved. But when proponents of reparations don’t even try to discuss what the needed political coalitions might look like, what sectors of society we need to win over to make reparations happen, or how many years or decades all this might take, are they acting like a political movement, or like something else? What kind of political movement advances no measures, discusses no plans, takes no responsibility for advancing its own just cause? The answer is that movements don’t behave like that at all. But brands do.
    Brands neither say what they mean, nor mean what they say. Brands are stories, brands are narratives contrived to get specific emotional reactions, to pull real or imagined memories, sights, smells or feelings from a target audience. To do this brands operate outside of and independent from fact and/or logic. Reparations is not a movement, it’s a brand.

    1. Lambert Strether Post author

      Branding vs. movement is brilliant, as one expects from BAR.

      You have to close the HTML A tag, otherwise the whole comment after the open A tag turns linky orange.

      Best way to see what needs to be done is select some text, click the Link button on the tool bar, paste the URL in the URL box, and click the Add Link button. Then you will see what the HTML should look like.

    2. fresno dan

      hemeantwell
      November 30, 2015 at 10:03 am

      That is some of the most critical thinking I have seen in a while – thanks for that!

      1. fresno dan

        “A centerpiece of the reparations brand is the study bill that Rep. John Conyers has introduced in every one of the last dozen Congresses except the 110th and 11th. In those two Congresses, Conyers, with four decades of seniority finally chaired the powerful House Judiciary Committee with the ability to move the study bill, or at least the discussion of reparations. If reparations was a movement instead of a brand, he would have done just that. But Conyers put the reparations study bill in his desk drawer until Republicans re-took the House and he no longer had that power. Safely back in the minority again in early 2011, he re-introduced the reparations study bill once more.”

        ====================
        Is it a wonder that people don’t vote? When the most reliable heuristic is that politicians do the opposite of what they profess to believe…

  10. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

    Chinese cash…US real estate market.

    Xi reforming the PLA…another 300,000 political positions in the PLA to be eliminated.

    Those with a good pension plan can go retire in the US.

    There is a category in the visa application for those with money.

    But I am not aware of a category for those who are kind or wise.

    “I am here on a kindness visa.”

  11. Jim

    “All this amounts to is a pissing contest of the “my oppression is worse than your oppression variety”

    This message itself becomes a means of upward mobility for those who are positioned to take advantage of such sentiment.

    Does the average person in Ferguson benefit from a struggle against white supremacy at the University of Missouri?

    1. Lambert Strether Post author

      Well, that depends on “benefit,” does it not? The obvious use case is that some family in Ferguson, Missouri. has a child going to the state University of Missouri. If as a consequence of the Mizzou protests, that child has to put with racist assholery, that’s surely a benefit (and even to the assholes). I don’t know how to conceptualize the larger system, but because benefits are diffuse doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

      1. Jim

        If one assumes, for the moment, that community life–rather than the more narrow dimension of labor– constitutes the foundation of subjectivity in black communities–is it appropriate that this particularistic community concept of white supremacy, as articulated, for example, by the leadership of Black Lives Matter, be expanded to the level of universal category of oppression?

        Who benefits the most by such a universalization–the leadership of Black Lives Matter or the citizens of Ferguson?

    2. James Levy

      No more than the blue collar Reagan Democrats did. But it made them feel better! Ah, what the great critic Robert Hughes used to deride as the “culture of therapeutics”. It will screw you every time.

    3. bdy1

      Some Mizzou students want their school’s leadership values, and policy decisions, to reflect their own values. That’s the profit here.

      As helpful as that “who gets ahead?” turning-over-rocks-CT-stuff is for Robert Anton Wilson and the Loose Change guys, it’s just blowing smoke when pointed at the dis-enfranchised (and no, it ain’t 1966 anymore – those privileged state university kids are walking tall into debt servitude, and know it)

    1. Danaë

      Fascinating animation. Very informative, despite an unfortunate lack of chronology. Though, still, excellent. Many thanks.

      1. optimader

        Danaë
        it is indeed, if you click on “theater screen” ( to the lefte of “full screen” you’ll see the chronology by year in the upper left corner. It gets clipped in full screen mode..

  12. Chauncey Gardiner

    Interesting that Robert Reich in the link from Newsweek is implicitly proposing U.S. involvement in Syria as fait accompli. “If We Must Go To War with ISIS”… has a certain tone of finality about it.

    Syria is a mess – a Gordian knot of parties inside and outside the region with conflicting ideological, religious, geopolitical, “security” and economic objectives. That some US policy makers believe they can cut that knot with “air power” or “boots on the ground” is specious thinking IMO, or perhaps worse. One need only consider what has occurred in Libya and Iraq.

    To quote George Orwell, “War against a foreign country only happens when the moneyed classes think they are going to profit from it.”

    All wars not in direct defense of US soil should be fully funded up front by a ‘no exemptions’ alternative minimum surtax on private incomes over one million dollars, corporate incomes over one billion dollars, and a one-tenth of one percent tax on all Wall Street transactions, with no exceptions for the Banks or other pseudo ‘market makers’. These tax rates would subsequently be adjusted depending upon the actual costs incurred in undertaking the war to guard against overly optimistic “misunderestimating” the costs of such a war; as was the case in the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

    Although I am opposed to such U.S. military action, if the DC-NYC elite do decide to proceed, everyone should be required to do their part, not just the average poor and lower middle class Americans who do most of the actual fighting, dying, and suffer physical and mental trauma and broken lives. Regardless of whether a military draft is reinstated as Reich proposes: Those who make the most money off these endless wars should be obliged to pay for them up front. (h/t Jesse’s Café Americain)

    1. andyb

      Let’s hope that the neocons have been checkmated by Putin. Otherwise, it could be game over with no winners. I’m reminded of the Einstein quote that “WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones”.

    2. Jim Haygood

      All wars not in direct defense of US soil should be … ILLEGAL.’

      Over T-giving I got a near-fatal overdose of cable TV news. Now it’s all terror, all the time. They’ve unearthed some moldy old neocon scarecrows from under their rocks to pump out the agitprop: ‘duh-grade Isis,’ ‘troops onna ground,’ ‘coalition of the wilting,’ etc.

      Boy soldier Robert Reich (he’s 4 ft 11 in) has just demonstrated the eternal truth that ‘there’s only one War Party.’

      1. optimader

        All wars not in direct defense of US soil should be … ILLEGAL.
        It would be such a simple constitutional amendment.

        Over T-giving I got a near-fatal overdose of cable TV news

        Probably less healthy that anything you ate or drank

        1. optimader

          BTW add a military draft, with eligible Congressional members and family out two generations at the head of the line. As Constitutional amendments, these would both hugely transform the US Mil posture in the World

        2. Jim Haygood

          What has happened to Cal Berkeley, once noted for its campus radicalism?

          1. In 2006, war advocate Robert Reich joined the faculty of UC Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy.

          2. In 2013, Janet Napolitano announced she would leave her post as Secretary of Homeland Security to become president of the University of California system.

          3. Bush admin torture lawyer John Yoo is currently the Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley.

          Is there a student chapter of the Schutzstaffel? Do you cross the stage in studded jackboots to receive your diploma from Frau Napolitano?

          1. Gio Bruno

            Well, UC Berkeley is still a hot-bed of radical thinking (though the student body is 10% foreign and 30% out-of-state). While Reich may see greater US involvement in Syria, his larger body of work is about Labor issues. If you visit his blog you’ll find some “radical” ideas. He was a leading voice in support of recent student protests (OWS) at UC campus.

            As for Yoo, he was a tenured Professor BEFORE joining GWB and the legal magicians that found an (illegal) route to torture. (Yoo is not held in high regard at Berkeley.) The Napolitano hire is absolutely indefensible.

            1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

              Too many of us, a labor advocate makes a more persuasive greater-foreign-involvement opinion-maker, just as being a socialist is likely to lend credibility to one’s supporting of the military.

    3. jrs

      There are no words for how evil I find this:

      “Sure, many children of the rich found means to stay out of harm’s way. But the draft at least spread responsibility and heightened the public’s sensitivity to the human costs of war.

      If we go into a ground war against ISIS, we should seriously consider reinstating the draft.”

      So the rich finding means to avoid it as they perhaps always will, but especially in a society as unequal and corrupt as the current U.S. (no banksters in prison remember), is hand-waved away. But the need to draft more and more of the shrinking middle class is defended (I use middle class loosely here to denote those who don’t much serve who aren’t rich – but really only poor rural people seem to serve the most). Obscene. He admits the rich don’t serve and wont’ serve, but doesn’t care, it’s all about dragging more and more of the non-rich into the net of war.

      And hightening this middle classes sensitivity to the human costs of war or whatever is deemed so important and yet studies say they have ALMOST NO INFLUENCE on policy, policy is made by the plutocrats, not them.

    4. jrs

      And left out the obvious, if we must go to war with ISIS, maybe we would be better off cooperating with Putin and Assad who also are no friends of ISIS.

  13. WanderingMind

    The Costs of Equal Opportunity in a Neoliberal Economy

    Something that Scott Fullwiler has pointed out applies here. In , starting at about 1:07:30, Fullwiler points out that it is the policy of the United States to make sure that there are at all times millions of people who are able and willing to work, looking for work, but who will not find jobs.

    The fact that “too many” people are finding jobs and the unemployment rate is falling, is one of the factors the Federal Reserve uses to determine its interest rate policy. When the Fed raises rates, their goal is to slow the economy, slowing job availability and therefore throwing more people out of work in order to avoid inflation.

    The idea that raising interest rates will accomplish this is open to question, but the policy goal of making sure that there are always millions of people who are guaranteed to be out of work is not.

    So, essentially, the policy of the United States is to operate a musical chairs economy. When you combine that with the history of white supremacy, it should come as no surprise that the “buffer stock” of the unemployed which Fullwiler talks about is concentrated among non-white people.

    The problem of high unemployment among non-white people and, increasingly among white people, is not an accident. It is policy. The resentment which Donald Trump and other demagogues take advantage of is justified, it is just that the object of that resentment which makes no sense, as pointed out in the article.

  14. JohnB

    Convincing criticism of Glenn Greenwald – who I’m mostly a fan of – here by Bill Blunden, at Counterpunch:

    Hits the target more strongly than Mark Ames criticisms, in my view.

    1. James Levy

      Greenwald may or may not be correct in his assertion about spies trying to thwart terrorism, but he has no cause to make such an assertion as he and we can have no way of knowing if it is true.

    2. vidimi

      just more from the palantir playbook. greenwald is a lawyer and, by writing in the la times, he is trying to reach a different audience than the one he normally writes to at the intercept, or when he did at salon. while i absolutely agree with the assertion that american spies don’t care about stopping terrorism – indeed, they would be harmed if they stopped all of it – i would still humour them by taking their claim at face value if i were making the argument against expansion of espionage powers in a centrist newspaper.

      don’t these people have real targets to go after?

      1. vidimi

        also, good job trying to bait greenwald into a response at the end. taking him off from time doing real journalism seems to be the goal.

  15. Daryl

    > Can Jeb Bush become a top Republican contender? Maybe… McClatchy

    Ah yes, the classsic underdog tale where the man from the political dynasty with the most money is jammed into the leading role against the party’s will. Godspeed Jeb.

    1. jrs

      Well being that the parties will seems to be even more horrendous than the prospect of another Bush (Trump, Carson, etc.) … it couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch?

    2. Bev

      Is that what Cfdtrade wishes, another Bush?

      from links above:
      For Democrats, it’s not just ‘demographics as destiny’ WaPo

      If Republicans win the presidency in 2016, they would then control nearly everything — the White House, the House, probably the Senate and certainly a majority of governorships.

      Perhaps that would be enough to clean out the rot. I doubt it.

  16. financial matters

    In the rush to militarize the response to climate change, I think it’s important to step back and emphasize the political process where people have a say in their fate. There seems to be a tendency for military force to come in with its own set of ideas that can reinforce the status quo rather than support more popular based political solutions.

    Kate Aronoff, communications coordinator for the New Economy Coalition , has some interesting thoughts on this in her recent Jacobin article.

    “Enhanced security measures mean that voices for an alternative path — one that might help us navigate through climate catastrophe and toward a more just, less violent world — will remain on the periphery at COP21, if they’re allowed to surface at all. Unsurprisingly, the same voices likely to be left out in December are also those most likely to push for the most comprehensive agreement — one that would demand the most from wealthy nations like France and the United States.”

    shows how military behemoths deal with instability: by forcibly protecting the elite and criminalizing the rest, especially if they speak out.

    The work of making sure any government pulls its full weight in taking on climate change will fall to the same movements that have forced the rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline, halted Shell’s Arctic drilling, and stopped coal-fired power plants and mining projects the world over.

    Tragedies like the one in Paris have paralyzed movements before — most notably when 9/11 bowled through the global justice movement of the 1990s.

    Decarbonizing the economy will require political will that doesn’t yet exist; letting either the attacks in Paris or the militarization following it fragment popular movements now will ensure it’s never built.

    COP21 remains an opportunity for climate movements, if dimmer and full of caveats. Reclaiming the right to democratic participation there — in spite of the French government’s best attempts — could define what peace against climate chaos really means”

    1. JTMcPhee

      fin Matt, if you have the interest and time, here’s a kind of scary strategic planning document from the very unelected DoD Defense Science Board:

      There’s some seemingly good collecting of the science on climate change, both as to provenance and possible futures. The dead meat of the plan is in the later chapters where, as you note, the military wants to ” militarize” the whole effing planet’s “responses” under, of course, our Imperial military’s wise and gentle hand…/s

      We are so very Fokked…

  17. JTMcPhee

    I have a friend who bethought himself to send a little inquiry to AZ-4th (R) Representative Paul Gosar DDS, regarding the Pope’s message on the idiocy of climate destruction, and here’s the reply:

    Dear Dr.**********,

    Thank you for ing me regarding the Pope’s address to Congress. I appreciate your thoughts on this issue and welcome the opportunity to respond.

    His Holiness Pope Francis is a good man and the leader of my church. As a proud Catholic, my decision not to attend his speech from the floor of the House of Representatives was not something I took lightly. Many believed, like I did, that this was an opportunity for the Pope to be one of the world’s great religious advocates and address the current intolerance of religious freedom. An opportunity to challenge governments to address the persecution and execution of Christians and religious minorities; to address the heinous and senseless murders committed by ISIS and other terrorist organizations. An opportunity to address the enslavement, belittlement, rape and desecration of Christian women and children; to address the condoned, subsidized, intentionally planned genocide of unborn children by Planned Parenthood and society; and finally, an opportunity for His Holiness to refocus our priorities on right from wrong.

    Rather than focusing on these critical issues plaguing the world and the United States, multiple media reports indicated that the Pope had decided to use much of his time in the United States advocating for new, job-killing environmental policies that seek to combat climate change. Pope Francis has a history of speaking like a Leftist on this issue and earlier this year even solicited help from embattled EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy when crafting an encyclical. The Pope spoke about climate change at length when appearing before the United Nations. Pope Francis continued his climate change advocacy during his trip in appearances at the White House and when speaking to audiences in Pennsylvania.

    The earth’s climate has been changing since God created it, with or without man. On that, we should all agree. In Pope Francis’ encyclical on the environment, he condemned anyone skeptical of the link between human activity and climate change and adopted the false science being proffered by the Left. If the Pope wants to devote his life to fighting climate change then he can do so during his personal time. But given all of the problems that we face today, many of which the Pope has a unique opportunity to address, I believe that the Pope utilizing his position in the Church to strongly advocate for new climate change policies is a misplaced priority.

    Whether it is the new ozone rule, the new Waters of the United States regulation or the new mandates for coal plants, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to churn out job-killing regulations that will ultimately cost our economy billions of dollars and result in the loss of millions of jobs. All of this destruction will occur, while providing little to no environmental benefit globally. I find it very troubling that Pope continues to work closely with the EPA to help push their misguided agenda. In fact, some of his appearances in Pennsylvania were used by the Left as a rallying point to advocate for the EPA’s new Clean Power Plan regulations.

    I was elected to represent the best interests of the people of the 4th Congressional District and I have both a moral obligation and leadership responsibility to call out leaders, regardless of their titles. While we may not always see eye to eye on every single issue, rest assured that I will always do what I believe in my heart to be right and in the best interest of my constituents. The EPA continues to push new mandates that are resulting in significant economic harm for the people I represent. I will not apologize for calling out leaders who advocate for this rogue agency’s misguided agenda.

    Again, I appreciate your thoughts and concerns. It is an honor to serve Arizona as part of its congressional delegation. Your suggestions are always welcome, and if ever I may be of assistance, please do not hesitate to me. To receive the latest legislative updates and news you can sign up for my e-newsletter at .
    Sincerely,
    (signed)
    Paul A. Gosar, D.D.S.
    Member of Congress
    PG/CB

    “given all of the problems that we face today, many of which the Pope has a unique opportunity to address,” … I wonder, does Rep. Gosar include corrupt politicians in “all the problems,” along with the self-destructive idiocy of way too many of the Pope’s (and other “religious leaders'”) flock?

    In case it’s not absolutely clear that it’s still the case that we has met the enemy, and they is US…

    1. Tertium Squid

      Of course, if he said, “Oh wow the Pope did say that I guess I’m gonna be a climate warrior now” people would freak out for a different reason.

      1. jrs

        Yes a politician that could not be bought by some slipped money from a polluter would be a freak show indeed.

    2. fresno dan

      Isn’t the Pope the infallible vicar of Christ – I mean, according to practicing Catholics who take their religion seriously?
      I would bet good money that if Jesus came down and said the same thing as the Pope, would you get the same response from this congressmen – Jesus is just impractical and doesn’t understand the market…

      1. James Levy

        Only and exclusively when he speaks ex cathedra on topics of morals and doctrine. He has to make a special statement and it can only be related to Canon Law. This happens very rarely.

  18. JEHR

    Re: Calder’s sculptural revolution. I was in New York recently and went to the Whitney and saw some of Calder’s works and watched some of his video ( ). Here’s a man enjoying his creations so much it can’t help but make you smile. The adult audience loved it too. His horse creations are magnifique!

  19. cripes

    Re: A Wealthy Governor and His Friends Are Remaking Illinois

    In Illinois’ case, Sam Zell, Ken Griffin and Bruce Rauner (with Rahm’s help) are doing the work of the Koch brothers by engineering the oligarch’s takeover of state government, as they have done in Wisconsin, Kansas, Michigan and elsewhere. They’re playing hard ball and taking no prisoners and throwing boatloads of money into the effort.

    Embedded in the article is a study by U of Chicago’s NORC research, the first examining policy preferences of the 0.1 (top one-tenth) percent vs. the general public. This expands upon work done in the well-known Princeton study of the top 10% policy preferences which legislators slavishly follow. The top .01%, as expected, by huge margins oppose minimum wages, social security guarantees, health care, etc., which the population favors by similar margins. A surprising result, despite their rhetoric, is that the oligarchs favor by 73% the government running deficits. Since they expect to be the primary beneficiaries, this is actually not that surprising.

    Worth the read.

    On the other hand, there is a small contingent of bankers and CEO’s that recognize and have begun to voice their opposition to Wall Street’s speculative casino that no longer even serves the function of capital formation for industry and economic growth. NC readers have known this for a long time.

    Among them the other Paul Ryan, of Hayfield Financial, supports Bernie Sanders largely because he openly advocates for breaking up the big five. Here he is on MSNBC.

    Apparently, there are more than one hundred Sanders donors in the financial industry, including about two dozen from Wall Street.

    Is there a rift developing in the upper echelons of finance where some are willing to put their careers at risk, and how many more are sitting on the sidelines waiting until the climate is favorable for them to openly declare opposition to financial fraud as a system?

  20. cripes

    Errata:

    I forget to add, apropos the “musical chairs” economy comments above, this gem:

    “The government in Washington ought to see to it that everyone who wants
    to work can find a job
    .”

    Percent of wealthy that favor – 19%
    Percent of general public – 68%

    To the get a jawb crowd, this means you can’t.

  21. optimader

    Lambert & Stamp

    Aspiring filmmakers Chris Stamp and Kit Lambert set out to find a subject for their underground movie, one that will reflect the way it feels to be young and dissatisfied in postwar London. This unlikely partnership of two men from vastly different backgrounds was inspired by the burgeoning youth culture of the early 1960s. Lambert and Stamp searched for months and finally found in a band called the High Numbers a rebellious restlessness that was just what they were looking for. Abandoning their plans to make a film, they instead decided to mentor and manage this group, which evolved into the iconic band known as the Who. The result was rock ‘n’ roll history. Written by Sundance Film Festival


    To bring some of the early Who songs to life I decided to buy some Rickenbacker 12 string guitars, as used on our very first single I CAN’T EXPLAIN…The problem was that I wasn’t used to the shape, weight or set up of these instruments. I’d forgotten that they are very delicate, lightly made. Indeed, my entire guitar-smashing reputation had been triggered when I was just 19 years old when one of them literally fell apart, as I was making the noises of war using back. I had decided there and then to smash it, making my very first statement on stage of art with an ”autodestructive” function…I think I thought that would be the end of the band, and me, and I would continue quietly at art college. In fact the guitar smashing ignited something in the audience and the word got out. In the first years of work with The Who in 1964 and 1965 I smashed about 7 Rickenbackers, but never another until 1989, and the one offered here is the only one to survive, even in pieces…One day on the 1989 tour…I got into a muddle with the guitar strap on one of my ready-to-play Rickenbacker 12 strings after a string break, and was trying to swap it when it fell to the ground and the neck was smashed. Here was another opportunity for autodestruction al la 1964! No longer 19 years old, and no longer at art college, I did my best. I tried to look angry, but I was merely flustered, and laughed about it later.
    I finished it off, and the pieces were gathered by my guitar technician. Later, I mounted the pieces as an installation, and that is on offer here. I will never smash another Rickenbacker again, and certainly never mount one as a trophy in this way…I am including here the other 12 string guitar from the same tour – both of these instruments were played many times during that anniversary tour…’

    1. Jeff N

      heh, I saw The Who in 1989 as a HS senior. I remember waiting in line real early in the morning for tickets at the local Sears.

  22. Jeff N

    re: “A Wealthy Governor…” Illinois resident here. Man, that article makes me even more depressed.

    “His goal, [Texas energy trader] Mr. Arnold wrote, was “to counterbalance these entrenched forces, on the right and the left, by providing policy solutions rooted in objectivity and solid analysis.”
    If that were true, he’d see that Wisconsin can’t create jobs for squat.

  23. gordon

    The article on refugee settlement in the US raises some questions. It seems to imply that refugees, having no other options, are bound to succeed: “Having been denied every other option available to them, he said, those who seek asylum are often more than ready to throw themselves headfirst into whatever opportunities they may be granted.”

    But then, in respect of Syrian refugees, the article says: ” Hailing from a country with relatively high education rates, Syrians are more likely than other immigrants to have high school, college and graduate degrees…Prior to the war, Syria had high levels of education, which shows in the population of Syrian immigrants residing in the U.S. now,… We don’t expect the profile of a Syrian refugee to be any different.”

    So, does that mean that the US intends to screen its refugee intake so as to exclude the uneducated and maybe also the sick and the old? What sort of refugees are they talking about? Would it be so surprising if the cream, so to speak, of the refugees are indeed likely to succeed not because they are refugees but because they’re educated, literate and ambitious?

    The example of a successful refugee discussed in the article is an Iraqi called Salam Bunyan. According to Wikipedia, “Since 2007, 203,321 Iraqi nationals have been referred, the USCIS interviewed 142,670 applicants, approved 119,202 for resettlement, and 84,902 have arrived in the US, a tiny fraction of those who wish to apply.[5][30][31]” I wonder how the choices are made.

    1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

      I wonder if. beside Syria, Libya also had high levels of education?

      Iraq pre-war?

      Ukrain pre-something,maybe pre-targeted?

      Is having high levels of education, for some regions of the world, an indicator of some future problem?

    2. jrs

      Hailing from a country with high education rates … where they can compete with Americans who can’t afford an education presumably.

      1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

        There are two ways to succeed.

        1. if you’re lucky, some serf-broker in your nation will H1B visa-transport you to your voluntary labor camp. Everything is voluntary. You exercise your freedom to earn everywhere-accpeted money your government can’t print.

        2. For those with no serf-brokers in their countries, you can voluntarily make your way to Germany, Sweden or beyond, as refugees or migrants (victims of non-violent neoliberalism as tragic as those victims of violence directed at their nations, don’t let them tell you otherwise. Yes, be proud that you are an economic migrant) to put your education to work.

        1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

          In any case, the serf-brokers and their clients, other beneficiaries, will make sure American workers finally learn to tolerate people from all over the world.

          “i will make sure you’re not a bigot no more.”

  24. ewmayer

    Several “or not…” ripostes to linked articles:

    o Re. “Chinese Cash Floods U.S. Real Estate Market | NYT” — | ZH

    o Re. “Refugees settle quickly and grow the economy, experts say | McClatchy” — So sorry, refugee influxes are invariably a huge economic drag: | Mish

    And for AEP’s latest delusionally optimistic Telegraph piece “COP-21 climate deal in Paris spells end of the fossil era ,” the “or not” pretty much writes itself. Hint to AEP: did any of the previous similarly-ballyhooed climate deals even make an appreciable dent in the trajectory of CO2 emissions? What a weenie.

    1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

      I wish they would leave the Chinese antique market.

      Just yesterday, some small Qing dynasty white jade buddha went for over $70K at a local auction.

      By contrast, one Tang dynasty silvered bronze mirror with lions and grapes, clearly showing Persian influence, showing little oxidation – the mirror being rubbed with some tin compound at the time of production (the technology is lost to us, or at least to me) – went for less than $800.

      I imagine some billionaire’s daughter (I was told the buyer was a she, but it could easily have been a boy) got the jade buddha to make sure she will be reincarnated with even more wealth.

      “I love this world and hope to come back with more toys.”

  25. allan

    More gunz:

    A 15-year-old Everett, WA -area boy accused of accidentally shooting his 11-year-old brother in the face Sunday told detectives he bought a handgun from a friend after he was wounded in a drive-by shooting in August, according to the Snohomish County Sheriff’s Office.

    I’m sure Wayne LaPierre has a perfectly sensible explanation.

Comments are closed.