Comments

OK I'm trying to respond to almost_uptown, I appreciate (I swear I'm being totally honest here) your fair-mindedness in this reply. So many times people back up with their arguments with "Everybody knows that. . . " and they don't really know why they believe what they believe. You obviously are giving it honest thought. John Lott who did that study is known for being pro-gun but he had made a career of studying gun crime and the effects of guns in a serious way. It's tricky because everybody has an agenda in these types of studies. I don't doubt that you can bring up studies that reach other conclusions. That's the trick; to figure out which studies reach the most reliable and valid (actually measuring what they are intending to measure) results. Most of the time (myself included) people find the studies that reach results they agree with more compelling. Also, yep I was a staffer in the House then went to work for a lobbying firm. I was there from 1998-2003. I got to live through the crazy guy shooting up the Capital guards (I was on Cannon 5 when it happened), the sniper stuff, Chandra Levy and 9/11. Fun times, but DC was still an awesome place to live on balance. I lived on 5th and E NE which was nice but if you went to 6th street you had to be very careful. When I started working at the firm my bosses reaction to where I was living at that time was, "You have to move right away!" He had two friends murdered within 2 or 3 blocks of my house on separate occasions. One was beaten to death by a group of people. Had he been armed he may have had a fighting chance. The other was shot to death in front of his car, presumably as part of a car-jacking. He never had a chance, they just walked up and shot him with automatics. The gun ban did nothing to keep those out of their hands. I realize this is anecdotal so not really proof of anything. But I can honestly say I'd never felt the need or desire to carry a gun until I lived on the Hill thanks to these cases.

Well one is a system and one is not a system. It is inarguably true that the Justice System is flawed but it the best system we've got. A lynch mob has no system.

OK, badideajeans I think you are putting forth an honest argument about poverty causing crime but I think you are over simplifying it a wee bit. Just a quibble. Since you've covered a crime beat you must know that there are some predators out there in the poor communities. Are guys that shoot through a door because the person won't hand over a cell phone scared? http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/294962/murders-don-t-count-rich-lowry I agree that poverty is a setting for crime but it's not THE cause of it. The problem is much larger and cultural. It may not be persuasive in this forum but illegitmacy rates in poor communities are many times higher than more affluent ones. Because of this, there is little to no support system for people that familes used to provide. You are right that this is a class thing more than a race thing but it's especially damaging to African Americans. "According to a 2005 FBI report, blacks accounted for 13 percent of the population and 49 percent of all homicide victims. In 93 percent of the cases, the killer was black. Half of the victims were ages 17 to 29. That works out to 4,000 murders of young blacks in one year, overwhelmingly at the hands of other blacks." I'm not saying it's their fault but the culture of poor communities has lead to a vicious cycle that makes it very hard to alleviate the poverty that is a national tragedy in my opinion. I don't have an answer on how to fix that culture. Unfortunately, cases like Martin only serve to obscure the fact that there is a real epidemic of young black people being murderd and they are not being murdered by racist neighborhood watches or minute men but by each other. Racialist entrepreneurs like Sharpton and Jesse Jackson just make things worse. Everyday murders are ignored then one comes along like this that fits their agenda and Whammo! national story $$$$$$$$$

I just pulled out a few quotes from the summary but if you read through it, they point out how they gathered their statistics and that they did regression analysis and lots of things to control for outliers and unrelated factors. They didn't just look at laws and compare them to crime rates. They looked at over 50,000 cases of gun crimes and "almost " gun crimes. As for suicides correlating with gun prevalence: Are you really trying to suggest that the gun is causing people to kill themselves? I think you've shown that your thinking is more sophisticated than than. Guns do make it easier to be successful in committing suicide, but that is not a cause of the suicide. And having lived in DC during the gun ban years I can say the stats are no comfort when you know of two random murders within a block your house walking from your car at midnight. I grew up in Alabama where guns are all over the place and never felt unsafe despite living in the "bad" neighborhoods. But living in a fairly posh neighborhood on Capitol Hill I had to be very alert if I strayed 2 blocks from my house. Also, the gun ban didn't help too much during the whole sniper episode and I lived within walking distance of one of the shootings.

That's fine as long as that mob actually knows the guy is guilty and his level of culpability. The courts are the only place we have that's set up to get to the bottom of the FACTS.

Here's a summary of a study on gun crime vs gun stopping of crime. http://www.largo.org/Lott.html "adopting shall-issue laws, states reduced murders by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%. If those states that did not permit concealed handguns in 1992 had permitted them back then, citizens might have been spared approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and 12,000 robberies. " "For example, in counties with populations of more than 200,000 people, concealed handgun laws produced an average drop in murder rates of more than 13%. The half of the counties with the highest rape rates saw that crime drop by more than 7%." " More than 300,000 concealed- handgun licenses were issued between October 1, 1987 and December 31, 1945, but only five violent crimes involving permitted pistols were committed in this period. And none of these resulted in fatalities. That's of 1% misuse rate for permitted pistols in an eight year period or LESS than 1/1000 of 1% misuse rate per year." "The nearly 50,000 observations in our data set allow us to control for a range of factors that have never been accounted for in any previous study of crime, let alone any previous gun-control study"

Well, all you've shown almost_uptown is that guns have the ability to kill people. These look like a lot of correlation without causation examples. Are US suicide rates substantially higher than countries with strong gun control laws? Honest question. I don't know what the gun situation is in Russia but I suspect they have higher rates of suicide. Japan also has historically high suicide rates and you know they have strong gun control. Those are cultural issues not a mechanical fact of the gun's presence. Also, there are those reports as bananarama pointed out that Martin was kicking Zimmerman's ass when he got shot. That needs to be fleshed out. Also, Zimmerman had a history of being "overzealous" in his neighborhood watch enthusiasm. There are assholes out there. He wasn't a minute man or member of a malitia. He was a hot-head.

Duly noted: I guess their sneaky trick worked. Fair play to ya.

When there is a threat or promotion of violence it stops being about speech and he could be prosecuted for it. It's not far from putting a contract on someone. There is a Black Panther Party dude being prosecuted right now for the bounty they put on Zimmerman.

All of the points made by Gabe are basically correct but it's not really Elaine (you can't be serious) McClaine's responsibility to call bullshit on Spike Lee for things that are not really about her. She's just saying he was nice to her and she accepted that he was sorry for any injurer to her. Why does she have to comment on how Spike Lee is a racist asshole that willy nilly endangers people when he was just nice to her? Also, the facts of the original case have not all come to light yet so I think it's premature to say this is definitely an example of some rampant race war against black youth. Black kids get killed way too often by people other than racist assholes like Zimmerman (who is hispanic btw). We would do well to figure out how we can change our culture so that poor kids don't get caught up in crime. But that is a different issue. No evidence that Martin was up to criminal activity when he was killed, he did not deserve what happened to him obviously. Zimmerman most likely should go to jail for what he did but he's got a story too, self defense, probably bullshit. But I think there's lots of hyperventilation about this tragedy on all sides that needs to chill the fuck out.

I feel your pain. When I lived in Korea all my American friends loved the KPop and it IS pretty inescapable. I sort of made peace with Miss A and a few. However, I saw a great Korean band in Busan that played basically Irish inflected punk music. There were some western expat bands there too. I can't remember the name of the club, in was in the Gwan go li beach area but they have live bands all the time. The only landmark I can give you is that it is close to where the Turkish kabab truck sets up. A friend that's been in Korea for 4 years or so told me there's a pretty thriving scene there in Busan and in Seoul too if you know where to look.

I'm not proud of myself but, "How many boogas we talkin' 'bout" cracked me up for serious. Mostly, because booger is the funniest word in all languages ever.

I gotta say I'm a little bit surprised everyone is so mad a Laurie for giving Andrea shit for not doing shit. I understand the whole, "The men don't need you" being annoying. But really, it's not (at least to me) a matter of "women's work" and "men's work" so much as work. Andrea has been just sitting on her arse on the RV. She isn't worth a shit as a lookout. All she's done is shoot one of their own people 'cause she was so jazzed to show she was one of the guys. Somebody's gotta skin the chickens and wash the clothes. The dudes should be pitching in on that too (I'm looking at you Dale!) but at least they're going off on dipshit missions and not sitting on their asses all day. I'm not sure about Dale and T-Dog though, what have they been doing to help out?

Twin Peaks would be really fun. It's been so long that I'm sure I've forgotten even a lot of the big stuff. My friend and I watched the pilot, series and movie in sequence on VHS back like 1999 in the space of about 2 weeks. Even watching in a marathon it was difficult and awesome to try and keep track of all the threads. I remember thinking during the pilot, "I should takes notes. . . nah, that's just a bit TOO nerdy." By the end I was wishing I did.

On top of that I think the second season of Loofah is only 4 episodes. Also, a bit of a let down from season 1. The 2nd Sherlock is possibly even better than the first season but still only 3. Downton Abbey is pretty solid if the rankings keep up though. There's tons of ins and outs and what-have-yous with the huge and brilliant cast. I'm really enjoying Justified so far as well. Not sure if those are up on Netflix though. Shadow Line would be pretty great to talk about but they made it pretty effin clear there weren't gonna be but those 6 episodes. Does anyone know anything about what happened with Misfits? It felt like there should be a second season but I never found one and it's been quite a while. . .

I don't know if I'm proud or ambarassed that I knew it was Girl's Generation before I read the words next to that picture. So confused! I always kinda like 2Any1 better, less text-book attractive but somehow compellingly hot in their weirdoness.

Yeh, isn't that just milk?

You have to factor in getting married when you're like 17 or whatever. Only way to get laid for a good Mormon.

Ding Ding Ding! Winner Winner Chicken Dinner!!!!

That's right! Romney loves America! and he believes America is so great that it can get it's Americaness back and be the best America in all the America of the American America. I paraphrase but that's pretty much it. Wooptidooo we've got Moon Unit Newt to make Romneybot look good. Ugh, hell in a hand basket, get used to it.

I discovered muse at the Norehbongs in Korea. They are on every karaoke machine over there.

Those damn toe shoes are the WORST!!! They make me a little nostalgic for crocs!! Crocs should be as bad as it gets!!! Dangit!!!!!!

Dang! April 1 is so far away!! While some good stuff is on TV these days (Justified) it just feels like kind of a lull right now. CANNOT wait for GoT! I've read all the books but it's been just long enough for the show to surprise me on little things I've forgotten. And, no spoilers, but if y'all who have not read the books think it's been good just wait till they get into the real meat of the stories. Season 1 was like a prologue.

I was wondering if anyone here knew he was a pretty out of the closet conservative. He's on a bunch of think tank boards and does a lot of high dollar public speaking. He does some guest spots on a few podcasts I listen to. He comes across as pretty square and totally fine with be square. Pretty laid back in general. I still can't stand to watch that damn show though.

Oh, also check out Christopher Walken or someone doing a very good Walken impression reading Where the Wild Things Are. It is awesome!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKNaYlzssbc

I had NOT seen this! Wooohooo!

"Hey Soderbergh, put your dick back in your pants! Everyones know you're circumcised!"

I'll fess up (partially) to the ad-hominem against Wilson. I just can't stand that guy. But he did on many occasions express his displeasure with the impediments the Constitution put in his way. He was probably the first major brick paving the road to the "living Constitution" which I really do not like. Ron Paul, I am NOT a fan. See my earlier comments. He's given me the creeps since the late 90s when I worked in the House of Reps. His staffers always call him, "Dr. Paul" and act like he's some kind of Platonic Philosopher King. Ugh I've taken up too much space to relitigate Reagan. But . . . Gov't growth flattened during his term. The only time that has happened since FDR. The New Deal put us on the trajectory we're on and nobody (including Reagan) has done much about it.

OK fair enough. I was mostly reacting because I'm really getting tired of arguing with people that assume if you disagree with them, you are either stupid, evil or taking all your cues from Foxnews. I find it a particular vice of liberals and people of the left, to assume that they are not ideological but just practical. Obama is one of these. I am biased, I am NOT objective. Nobody is. We've got to allow room for others to honestly come by differing opinions. I do NOT in any way accuse you of this partymarty. You have more than proved you're thinking things through. I fully recognize and acknowledge that that is not what you were doing. I'll admit I haven't read your whole response, I will I promise. I just want to address a couple things (hopefully) briefly. I think of myself as a small C conservative. Really, more of a classical liberal. I look to the Founding Fathers, and especially, the Federalist papers as the main source of political philosophy. I only used Reagan as an example of why should anyone who does not share his ideology have to concede his greatness? I am NOT a lover of TR!!!! I am generally in favor of trust busting but he was on balance terrible in his whole Progressive 3rd Party mode. As for Obama's pragmatism, see my response to Ryan Alarie. The whole no TV things is really not that big a deal. I don't understand why that seems to bug people. I just can't afford one, but the practical effect is that I don't watch cable news of any kind. Also, I find the Foxnews website to be kinda shitty. I love love love TV, I wouldn't be reading this blog otherwise. I apologize for accusing you of nastyness.

I'm coming back after writing this whole thing, I don't want it to sound quite so contentious. I really do respect your arguments Ryan Alarie. You make some good points, of course I disagree with most of them but I'm just having fun arguing, I don't mean to attack you personally in any way. I'm willing to recognize that the Obama didn't have carte blanche for his first two years. However, I do take issue with the "moderate accomplishments." The auto bailouts are technically illegal, the money Obama used was appropriated to bail out banks. But that sort of thing goes on all the time so I'll give him a qualified pass there. But that was NOT a moderate move. He bullied the auto companies into giving a huge portion of control/ownership to his buddies, the labor unions. The management can't negotiate on equal terms anymore. Also, the Obama has staffed the NLRB with his friends from BIg Labor. Again, that's to be expected and within his prerogative, but that is NOT a moderate move. They basically stopped a factory being built in South Carolina only because it was a right to work state. Only when Boeing caved and gave the unions in Wash. State concessions were they able to open the facilities. Obama's admin. chose labor unions over jobs. That's not moderate. When BP spilled all that oil, Obama's admin shut down all drilling and refused to lift the ban even after studies showed that it was not necessary. He extra-legally made BP pay out something like $20 BIllion. He's not authorized by law to do that. He couldn't wait for the courts and the process already in place. That is not moderate. The Keystone Pipeline. Private sector unions want it. They've rerouted where it would go through Nebraska in response to concerns. Environmental studies do not show it to be risky. It would create thousands of jobs. A Canadian company is paying for it, no US taxpayer money. It's been out there for 3 years waiting for Obama to "decide." Some public sector unions and environmental groups opposed to any kinds of fossil fuels are against it. So Obama basically kills it. Overland pipelines spill much less frequently than tankers on the ocean. Because Obama is passing on the pipeline, Canada will now sell that oil to China which will be shipped in tankers on the ocean where China will burn it without any of the controls we have here. Also, because we are not buying oil from our friend Canada we will have to continue to buy oil from the middle east, Africa, and South America which will have to be shipped on tankers. That is not moderate. I don't have much confidence in either Newt or Romney either but they are not saying the Gov't can't do anything. Newt's record is not really one of a bare bones libertarian nor is Romney's. He pushed for universal healthcare in Mass. and even had an individual mandate. I would like to see more push from the GOP to level the playing field in business and stop corporate welfare. Obama hasn't done that. He's pretty much used Gov't spending/influence to reward his friends (GE, Solyndra, Public Unions, Enviro groups) and punish his enemies (BP, South Carolina, Arizona, etc.) He's as much or more in bed with Big Business than the Republicans. Also, even if Obama gets reelected (his chances right now are fairly good) he will not have control of Congress. The seats that are up in the Senate do not favor the Dems this time around, especially with all the retirements (Dodd, Ben Nelson). It's likely the GOP will control both houses with a bit of a chance the Dems will hold onto the Senate by one or two members.

So am I not giving Obama enough credit for all his accomplishments or am I not blaming the GOP enough him keeping him from accomplishing anything? Tails you win, Heads I lose.

I don't have a TV because I've been living abroad for the last couple years and living fairly nomadically since about 2005. TV's are big and heavy and don't fit in a backpack very well. I'm in grad school now so somewhat settled but broke. I watch tons of TV shows, no Netflix or Hulu. I don't even have internet at home. I'm at work right now. Basically I hate paying bills. I pay as I go on my phone even. So anyway, I just download movies and TV shows to watch later. News programs are just too much effin' trouble to try and watch that way. So I just read a bunch of different news magazines, National Review mostly, sometime Weekly Standard, and I'll check in at The Nation or MSNBC from time to time to see what the other side is saying. Right now I'm working my way through some BBC history documentaries, The Ascent of Man and A History of Britain. Great stuff. But I watch all the Thursday shows and dumb stuff too. I'm psyched about Justified starting up again.

OK well done coffeenow, I'm not being sarcastic I promise. I respect that you are backing up your argument. I'll see where I part company (or not) with you. 1. Bailout, ugly, agreed. Probably necessary. 2. Did NOT save the auto industry. There were procedures in place already (bankruptcy) to deal the situation. The money he used to bail them out was NOT appropriated for that purpose. The money was to cover bad loans made by banks. He basically used TARP as a slush fund for his own prerogatives (i.e. rewarding friends and punishing enemies). 3. Healthcare - Becoming more expensive, individual mandate is unconstitutional. If you're a political friend of Obama or someone in his administration you are exempt from the rules. (the Waivers = Cronyism). 4. Projecting weakness to our enemies and insulting our allies. Iran is not friendlier towards us. Russia has taken a Soviet turn. We turned our backs on the Iranian democracy movement to avoid offending the mullahs. We are negotiating with the Taliban. Our precipitous pull out of Iraq emboldened Maliki to purge his rivals by killing them. Israel is ever more paranoid because they don't think the US cares if they exist. I suspect they are behind the Iranian nuclear scientist getting blown up. 5. He killed Bin Laden! Yes, Obama deserves all of the credit he has gotten for this success. I too found it gross when people celebrated like they won the Superbowl. I think it would have probably been smart to sit on the info for a bit while they exploited the intel gathered at his home but that's a minor thing and I don't really hold it against Obama. 6. Qadafi had to go. Obama sat on his hands for too long, could have knocked Qadafi out really quickly at the beginning. Got dragged into it by France. However, it worked out OK in the end for the most part. But, the people in charge now may not be any better. Again, not Obama's fault. 7. DOJ, Oh my God. I don't have a problem with prosecuting insider trading or how they may have done it. However, DOJ dropped a case it had already won on voter intimidation. Announced it would not enforce the law when it didn't like it. Files lawsuits against states for trying to enforce federal laws it won't enforce. Fast and Furious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am sick of the racist code argument, it's bullshit, you guys are better than that.

Leave it to the "progressive" to get nasty. Look partymarty just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm not thinking for myself. I don't even have a TV dude! I read from a variety of sources around the net, I do not follow Foxnews. You have every right to be proud of Obama if you are a "Progressive" as you seem to identify. I am not a fan of progressivism therefore, not a big fan of Obama. You know why he's accomplished more than any Progressive in the past 50 years? There has not been a progressive president in the last 50 years. You know why? America is not a Progressive country. I like the idea of healthcare for everybody, I just don't think unconstitutional mandates forcing people to buy a product just for the privilege of being alive is the way to go about it. I tend to like free market approaches. It comes down to what you think is more important. Do you want more security or more freedom? There's tradeoff and the government DOES have a role to play. I'm not a libertarian. You're not going to list Obama's accomplishments? Why not? I don't really see an argument you are making other than, "Everybody knows Obama has accomplished a lot." Well, I'm not convinced by your non argument. Anyway, why should I have to give Obama credit for being a great progressive if I disagree with Progressivism? When are you progressives gonna give Ronald Reagan credit for being a great conservative president? Seriously, why should I expect you to? I'll give FDR credit for winning WWII. There's lot's of scholarship and argument about whether he prolonged or ended the Great Depression. Woodrow Wilson, Progressive #1, was a racist, Constitution hating totalitarian wannabe whose wife ran the show for most of his term anyway. Teddy Roosevelt was an adventurist on foreign conflicts but good on wildlife conservation (when he wasn't killing wild game) and probably the National Parks system. I like his trust-busting thrusting. So let me know if you come up with an argument. I think disappointment is a pretty rational response to politics. We've got the best system in the world, but with so many competing interests it is impossible for any one side to get everything they want. Read Federalist #10 it is brilliant.

It's funny kinbote, I have a feeling I disagree with you on pretty much everything political but on Ron Paul I couldn't agree more. The guy is NOT a serious person. He's full of weird paranoia and his answer to current problems with Iran is, "We should not have supported the Shah 40 years ago." Ideological consistency is nice if you're stoned in your dorm room at 2:00 am but it is not a part of the real world.

I think you hit the real crux of the whole thing Gabe when you said, " Not only has his entire first term been dedicated towards winning a second term," Since the "Teddy Roosevelt" speech pretty much every initiative/action the Admin has taken has been to lure the GOP into fighting on their terms, which has worked pretty well. It's not about governing so much as getting reelected. That's what sitting Presidents, of course. I just find it infuriating because it might work. Obama cannot run on his record so he's changing the subject. If 2012 is about Obama's record in office he loses, if 2012 is about Bain Capital and Romney's tax returns Obama wins.

OK as someone who does not particularly like Obama, I can say, this is only slightly annoying. Any time a pol is in a room with people he knows agree with him he's likely to chill and goof around a bit. That's fine. But basically his argument is, "C'mon, I know shit is fucked up, and I'm not really gonna do anything different to fix it but hey, at least I'm not an uncool asshole like every one of the GOP dicks!" Honestly, besides blaming one half of Congress for not accomplishing anything he wanted when he had two years of not needing the GOP, in which he got pretty much everything he wanted or actually what Senate and House Dem leaders wanted since he just left it all up to them, (long aside I know) Obama has nothing to offer. I mean really, you guys that like him so much, at this point is it really that you think he is a great, or even good, President or that you just really hate all the Republicans? There's a lot to hate there I fully admit. So now I'm going to gleefully remind all of you that Obama has continued and in some cases expanded upon those "overreaching" anti-terror policies. More drone attacks, rendition is a live and well, Guantanimo is still open, etc. In fact, the only reason Obama has not put more people in Gitmo is that we just blow them up (and whoever else is around) from far away. I actually don't have a problem with this stuff but, you know, nya nya nuh na na.

Sycophants is a bit off sides there but whatever. I disagree with Gabe a lot and I don't really want to put words in his mouth but I'm guessing that part of why he spends so much time complaining about how Gervais is a dick is because many of us really liked Gervais a lot in the past and we feel somewhat betrayed by him going off the rails so much now. Granted we should have way less emotional investment in something that really doesn't affect us but this whole blog is about inordinate emotional attachment to trivial things. Also a lot of fun.

I'd have to go with Chris O'Dowd. What has Ayoade done that will get him attention? I'm not being snarky I want to see it!!! I loved Submarine and was then blown away when his name came up in the end credits.

Ugh, as I my post was loading I read down the comment thread and saw that my exact point had already been made. Dang! I was mostly thinking of Ashby movies though.