AdamSmith

Did this yesterday...

(Pardon my schadenfreude.) Not the Post -- the Times! The Washington Times suspends Rand Paul's columns By HADAS GOLD | 11/6/13 8:08 AM ESTpolitico.com The Washington Times announced on Tuesday it has suspended Sen. Rand Paul's weekly columns after instances of plagiarism. “We expect our columnists to submit original work and to properly attribute material, and we appreciate that the senator and his staff have taken responsibility for an oversight in one column,” Times Editor John Solomon said in the Washington Times. The Kentucky Republican has come under fire in the past few weeks after various news outlets, starting with MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, found multiple instances of plagiarism in Paul's speeches and columns. The Washington Times said it will add a correction note to Paul's September column in which the senator failed to attribute a passage to The Week. On Tuesday, Paul's senior adviser said the material was staff given to the senator were not properly sourced and that they would be now using a new system. “In the thousands of speeches and op-eds Sen. Paul has produced, he has always presented his own ideas, opinions and conclusions. Sen. Paul also relies on a large number of staff and advisers to provide supporting facts and anecdotes — some of which were not clearly sourced or vetted properly,” Paul senior adviser Doug Stafford said in a statement. “Footnotes presenting supporting facts were not always used.” The conservative paper seemed to part ways amicably with the senator, keeping the door open to future columns. “We also appreciate the original insights he has shared with our readers over the last few months and look forward to future contributions from Sen. Paul and any other members of Congress who take the time to help educate our readers,” Solomon said. http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/11/the-washington-times-suspends-rand-pauls-columns-176852.html?hp=l7

http://riotwire.com/cartoon/rob-fords-city-hall-guide-to-drugs/

Agree. When your best excuse for doing crack is "Well I must have been all liquored up..."!

The key word, right? And the old "There was only that one time and I had an excuse then anyway" -- the dead giveaway that a person is far from beginning to deal honestly with his problems.

Why Terry McAuliffe barely won By JAMES HOHMANN | 11/6/13 1:06 AM EST politico.com How the heck did that happen? Most public polls leading up to Election Day had Democrat Terry McAuliffe coasting to victory, some by double digits, in the Virginia governor’s race. Instead he squeaked by, beating Republican Ken Cuccinelli by less than 3 percentage points. The much-closer-than-expected outcome blunts the narrative that this was a clean win for Democrats going into 2014 and guarantees an intense blame game among Republicans about what might have put Cuccinelli over the top. Based on a review of returns, exit polls and conversations with operatives, here are six takeaways from the surprise election of the night: Obamacare almost killed McAuliffe. The main news stories of the last two weeks of the race were about the botched rollout of the health exchanges and troubling revelations about people getting kicked off their health plans. Cuccinelli called the off-year election a referendum on Obamacare at every stop during the final days. “Despite being outspent by an unprecedented $15 million, this race came down to the wire because of Obamacare,” Cuccinelli said in his concession speech Tuesday night. When President Barack Obama crossed the Potomac for McAuliffe on Sunday, he glaringly avoided even mentioning his signature accomplishment — trying instead to link Cuccinelli with the federal government shutdown. Exit polls show a majority of voters — 53 percent — opposed the law. Among them, 81 percent voted for Cuccinelli and 8 percent voted for Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis. McAuliffe won overwhelmingly among the 46 percent who support the health care overhaul. Cuccinelli actually won independents by 9 percentage points, 47 percent to 38 percent, according to exit polls conducted for a group of media organizations. They made up about one-third of the electorate. “Obamacare helped close the gap,” said Richmond-based strategist Chris Jankowski, the president of the Republican State Leadership Committee. Cuccinelli might have won if he had more money. Even before Cuccinelli delivered his concession speech, the candidate’s close allies were beginning to blame outside groups for not helping out more. McAuliffe outraised Cuccinelli by almost $15 million, and he used the cash advantage to pummel him on the airwaves. A lack of resources forced the Republican to go dark in the D.C. media market during the final two weeks. The Republican National Committee spent about $3 million on Virginia this year, compared to $9 million in the 2009 governor’s race. The Chamber of Commerce spent $1 million boosting McDonnell in 2009 and none this time. “If the Republicans would have rallied around the nominee instead of refusing to support Cuccinelli, he would have won,” said a GOP source involved in the race. A constellation of liberal interest groups, meanwhile, poured money in as McAuliffe’s lead grew in the public polling. They wanted to claim credit for their particular issues, whether the environment or abortion. Mike Bloomberg’s super PAC spent $2 million in the final two weeks on ads boosting gun control, for example. The Republican Governors Association spent $8.3 million for Cuccinelli, compared to $5.2 million four years ago, to try making up for the fundraising disparity. But much of that money came earlier in the summer, and the RGA eventually stopped pouring cash into what looked like a losing campaign. Cuccinelli personally was not a great fundraiser. Removing direct contributions from outside groups, McAuliffe raised $28 million to Cuccinelli’s $11.7 million. RNC spokeswoman Kirsten Kukowski defended the committee, saying that it has to make hard choices about how to spend limited resources. “The RNC spent millions of dollars to fund the ground game efforts in both New Jersey and Virginia, working in coordination with both campaigns to identify and turn out voters,” she said. It was a base election. McAuliffe declared in his victory speech that “a historic number of Republicans” supported him. But that’s just not how it happened. The Democrat won only 4 percent of self-identified Republicans, according to exit polling. His key was getting more of his people to the polls — 37 percent of voters self-identified as Democrats and 32 percent self-identified as Republican. In the exit polling, 28 percent of voters supported the tea party movement and another 28 percent were neutral. Virtually all the rest who oppose the tea party backed McAuliffe. The partisan outcome wasn’t for lack of trying. During the campaign, the former Democratic National Committee chairman embraced one of the main attacks against him — that he is a wheeler-dealer — and tried to flip it into an asset, calling himself a problem solver in a period of paralysis. And, after his win, McAuliffe pledged to reach out to Republicans in the statehouse. The gender gap mirrored the presidential. Exit polls showed McAuliffe won women by only 9 points, the same margin Obama won them by in the presidential election last year. The Washington Post poll last week had put McAuliffe ahead among women by an astonishing 24 points. This raises questions about whether women are starting to tune out “war on women” messaging and whether apocalyptic suggestions that Cuccinelli would try to ban common forms of birth control were effective at driving women to the polls who might not typically vote in an off-year. Cuccinelli is a true-believer social conservative, who has spent his career battling abortion and trying to limit divorce. After avoiding social issues the first half of the year, he began defending himself and touting his anti-abortion bona fides in the final weeks as he tried to galvanize his base. The margin will embolden both sides of the abortion issue to claim victories of sorts. The Susan B. Anthony List, which spent $870,000 for Cuccinelli through a Virginia affiliate, noted that McAuliffe ran more than 5,600 spots on the abortion issue alone. “This election shows that it is imperative for pro-lifers to be on offense in 2014 against the distortions and extremism of the left,” said SBA President Marjorie Dannenfelser. NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue said the attacks worked: “Ken Cuccinelli tried to mislead voters by downplaying his extreme social agenda, but ultimately, he couldn’t hide from his long record of attacking women’s reproductive health.” Obama himself was a mixed bag. A 54 percent majority of those voting Tuesday disapproved of Obama’s job performance, according to the exit polling. But 30 percent of those who “somewhat disapproved” of Obama nonetheless voted for McAuliffe. And despite the widespread criticism directed at Republicans for the government shutdown, an equal number of voters pinned the closure on Obama vs. congressional Republicans. The president’s approval rating has slipped in the wake of the Obamacare fiasco and other scandals of his fifth year in office, and his trip to Virginia Sunday probably motivated some independents and Republicans to back Cuccinelli, but he still has deep appeal with the Democratic base. Whether blacks would show up without Obama on the ballot was a big concern for the McAuliffe campaign, and they used the trips of Bill Clinton and the president to push turnout specifically among this community. African-Americans made up 20 percent of the electorate, according to exit polls, on par with the presidential race as a share of the electorate and up from 16 percent in the 2009 governor’s race. Since McAuliffe won 90 percent of the black vote, a 4 percent drop-off in the share of the electorate could have proved fatal. The black vote helped Virginia Democrats break a four-decade streak — electing a governor of the same party as the sitting president for the first time since 1973. The shutdown still hurt Republicans. Though an equal number in the exit polls blamed Obama as blamed congressional Republicans, analysts in both parties agree that the shutdown galvanized Democratic intensity and helped give them the turnout advantage. Republicans had a 4- to 5-point advantage on the generic ballot through the spring and summer, but internal GOP polling showed a flip during the shutdown. Likely voters preferred “Democrats” by 6 points on the generic ballot in their final polling. “The shutdown demoralized a chunk of the Republican base and really energized a chunk of the Democratic base,” said GOP pollster Wes Anderson, a partner at OnMessage Inc. “Terry McAuliffe had not found any way to energize the Democratic base prior to the shutdown.” http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/terry-mcauliffe-virginia-governor-2013-elections-99441.html#ixzz2jsWr56a0

What superstitious flapdoodle. I prefer to put my faith in the proven science of phrenology. Learn the fake science of reading faces with these phrenology diagrams 12345 ...8 If you had lived in a time and place where phrenology was a popularly accepted science, would you have been considered a paragon of virtue or would the lumps on your head cast you as a jealous, avaricious lout? It's both fascinating and disturbing to look through the diagrams from old phrenology texts. These come from Vaught’s Practical Character Reader, published by Louis Allen Vaught in 1902. Although phrenology was at the height of its popularity during the first half of the 19th century, it enjoyed a bit of resurgence in the early 20th century, thanks in part to attempts to develop a criminal anthropology and misinterpretations of evolutionary theory. There are more than a few hints of ethnic preferences in these diagrams. The Public Domain Review has more diagrams from Vaught’s Practical Character Reader, but Google Books has the entire book available online, with instructions on how to identify an honest face and a deceitful ear. From the preface: The purpose of this book is to acquaint all with the elements of human nature and enable them to read these elements in all men, women and children in all countries. At least fifty thousand careful examinations have been made to prove the truthfulness of the nature and location of these elements. More than a million observations have been made to confirm the examinations. Therefore, it is given the world to be depended upon. Taken in its entirety it is absolutely reliable. Its facts can be completely demonstrated by all who will take the unprejudiced pains to do so. It is ready for use. It is practical. Use it. Anyone care to take a crack at applying phrenology to Vaught? There's a picture of him on the cover of his book. Phrenology Diagrams from Vaught’s Practical Character Reader (1902) [The Public Domain Review via The Presurfer] http://io9.com/learn-the-fake-science-of-reading-faces-with-these-phre-543463950

What I Learned as a Porn Tagger A lot of laws, like mandatory condoms, may have unexpected side effects By Heather Smith Sept. 18, 2013 Time.com I got the job from a friend who couldn’t handle the sight of so many naked women. “I thought,” she said, “that my lady parts were unique and special.” She looked out the window and sighed a little. “They are not.” The job was to watch porn. The office was a Bay Area dotcom, circa 2008. My assignment was to tag each actor in these videos by attributes (hair color, breast size) and tag each sex act. That way, a subscriber could easily search our database and filter out everything but, say, group sex featuring brunettes. Then I would identify the actors by name, so that they could be sorted into a searchable database that would show our compliance with what are known as “2257 reporting requirements,” a part of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, to ensure that no performers in these clips were under the age of 18. Sometimes identifying the actors was easy. They would say their names at the beginning of a video (“Hi, I’m Tammy Jenkins, this is Mark Jones, and you’re watching A Simple Tale of Butts VIII!”). Sometimes I would find myself staring into a writhing spaghetti pile of women, all more or less the same hue of tan, the same shade of blondness and the same shape of bosom, and I would try to pretend that I was plucky and I could do this: I was Nancy Drew in The Case of the Indeterminate Orgy. Other times, I was confronted with complete enigmas, like the performer who was nothing but a penis poking out of a pink bunny suit. When that occurred, I would call over my supervisor, a somewhat bitter man who had been doing this so long that he could identify most of the 20 or so men who worked regularly in straight porn by crotch shot alone. This was bargain-basement porn, sex carried out by people who were doing two shoots a day, four or five days a week, often on what appeared to be the same sofa, which remained a mute witness to their exertions, stabbed with gold high heels, but never punctured. None of the performers were paid much — between $150 and $300 a shoot. I knew this because I had access to their contracts. My career as a porn tagger didn’t last long. I was slow, because I had secretly begun listening to radio documentaries instead of the porn audio. Also, my supervisor criticized me for cataloging performers as having real boobs when to him they were clearly fake. I was embarrassed: to me they had jiggled plausibly. When the job ended, I was relieved. I’ve been thinking of that job again amid reports that several porn actors — first two, then three, with rumors of a possible fourth — have tested positive for HIV. The news has heightened an ongoing debate over whether porn actors should be, or even could be, forced to use condoms. A law that would mandate condom use in any pornographic film made in the state of California, AB-640, died last week in the state senate. But L.A. County successfully passed a similar law, Measure B, last November. Pornography is work that deserves to be safe. Like nursing, boxing and other bodily-fluid-intensive jobs, that safety is going to be complicated. What I do know from my brief time in the industry is that a lot of the laws that get proposed to make porn safer have unexpected side effects — some of which are just as bad as the original problem. Take condom use. Condoms are already the standard in one fairly substantial sector of the porn industry: gay porn. But the last time a porn actor tested positive for HIV, in 2010, he told the Los Angeles Times he believed he had caught the virus on a gay porn shoot where condoms were used. Porn sex can go on for an hour at a time, and everything is more transmissible, even with protection. In gay porn, condoms are common but testing is rare. By contrast, actors working in straight porn get tested for HIV and other STDs every few weeks, as part of voluntary industry standards. If condom use were mandatory, such standards could fall by the wayside. Or consider the elaborate databases people like me helped to create in order to protect against underage pornography. The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act reporting requirements seem to have done a good job of keeping people under 18 out of the porn industry, but they have done so by compromising the personal information of every person over the age of 18 who has ever worked in porn, or erotic modeling, no matter how briefly. Even as a contract worker with no background check, I had access to the addresses, Social Security numbers, real names and unflattering ID photos of every porn actor or actress that I identified. I could have used their information to commit credit-card fraud. It’s always easy — and it plays well on camera — to call for a simple new law. But the creation of low-cost health clinics with staff members who are trained to work with sex performers would probably do much more to protect people’s safety and privacy. That’s harder than just passing legislation, but we’re far more likely to help porn performers if we treat them less as victims in need of protection and more as workers with a stake — and an interest — in their own safety. Smith was a Knight Science Journalism fellow at MIT. She is currently at work on a book about insects, humans and the various misunderstandings that arise between them. She wrote this for Zocalo Public Square. Read more: Heather Smith: Porn-Industry Laws May Have Unexpected Side Effects | TIME.com http://ideas.time.com/2013/09/18/what-i-learned-from-meta-tagging-porn/#ixzz2jsJCeatg

Seems pretty thin-skinned for a politician. Inept too? Good! Plagiarism charges test Paul’s 2016 run By Mario Trujillo - 11/05/13 07:55 PM EST thehill.com Sen. Rand Paul’s readiness for a presidential run in 2016 is being put to the test by the plagiarism charges swirling around him. In an attempt to quiet the controversy, the Kentucky Republican’s office on Tuesday said the vetting process for his speeches would be changed so that “supporting facts and anecdotes” are clearly sourced. But Paul’s handling of the controversy has raised broader questions about whether he’s ready for the intense media scrutiny that a run for the White House entails. The senator maintains he is being unfairly targeted, and has made several terse remarks when asked about the charges. On Tuesday, Paul said his writings would now resemble academic papers “if it will make people leave me the hell alone.” Over the weekend, Paul suggested he’d like to challenge his accusers to a duel. GOP strategists agree that plagiarism incident is nowhere near disqualifying for 2016, but cautioned it is just a preview of the pressure he’d face in 2016. “He just got a taste of what the presidential primary campaign trail is like and the scrutiny that everything you do and say will be under,” said GOP strategist Ford O’Connell. “So he is going to have to tighten up how he does things.” BuzzFeed and other media outlets have found numerous instances over the last week in which sections of Paul’s speeches and book lifted text from other articles without credit. Paul partly blamed the errors on his hectic schedule, saying sometimes he has to read and approve speeches and articles 20 minutes in advance. “We write something every week for The Washington Times, and I literally am riding around in a car in between things trying to figure out if I can approve it,” Paul told The New York Times. Paul said he could not guarantee more instances of plagiarism are not out there. O’Connell said Paul’s camp should stop everything and begin an internal audit of his past writings and speeches. The senator should be able to easily recover if there is not much else to find, he said. But if he allows the charges to fester, he warned, they could become a major roadblock to his presidential aspirations. “Imagine if he doesn’t address this and we find out later this is very deep. Imagine the jokes in the 2016 debate,” O’Connell said. “He could literally be laughed off the stage.” Another GOP strategist noted that potential opponents of Paul in 2016 — like Hillary Clinton and Chris Christie — would have large opposition research operations to comb through his record. Assuming there are no bombshells, O’Connell recommended Paul’s office try to release all past mistakes at once. More revelations could leave people questioning his leadership — and his ability to manage a large-scale political campaign. “That in and of itself is a misdeed, but this goes not only to your credibility, but how you might manage a larger operation,” O’Connell said. GOP strategist Matt Mackowiak said all of Paul’s writings and speeches are going to be under the microscope from now on. “One of the bigger issues is that this will follow him throughout 2016, and every speech will be checked by online sources and other campaigns for plagiarism to keep the narrative going and weaken him politically,” Mackowiak said. “This is more of a staff issue than a candidate issue, but the word plagiarism connotes dishonesty and can impact how voters view your character,” he said. Paul himself noted the demands on his schedule likely led to the mistakes, and admitted that his office is likely taking on more than it should. “We need to get stuff earlier, but it’s hard,” Paul said. Paul’s senior adviser, Doug Stafford, issued a statement saying citations for speeches will now be available upon request from reporters, and that the office will be more rigorous in its vetting. Stafford said Paul relies on a large staff to “provide supporting facts and anecdotes” to his speeches. Some of those were not cited properly, Stafford said. “Adherence to a new approval process implemented by Sen. Paul will ensure proper citation and accountability in all collaborative works going forward,” he said. The controversy started when MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow first pointed out that a few lines from a speech Paul gave in which he summarized the movie “Gattaca” resembled the movie’s Wikipedia entry. BuzzFeed then reported that three pages of his 2013 book, Government Bullies, had been largely lifted from two conservative think tank reports. Paul acknowledged the book’s citation error. The new policy from Paul’s office only came after BuzzFeed on Monday found that portions of an op-ed written by Paul in September resembled lines from a report a week earlier in The Week about mandatory minimum drug sentencing. Strategists predict the incident will blow over, and say Paul remains a strong contender for the White House. “If he allows this to fester, with his 2016 aspiration, it could become a roadblock. Right now it is just a bump in the road,” O’Connell said. Read more: http://thehill.com//thehill.com/189366-plagiarism-charges-test-paul%E2%80%99s-readiness-for-2016#ixzz2jsB7fnkD Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

The kind attached to a male still above ground?

Hah! Like when Capote stumbled snockered onto Carson's set. Johnny asked, "Have you been drinking?" In reply Truman slurred out, "...You mean lately?"

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/rand-paul-plagiarism-accusations-99362.html?hp=r1

The 9 Different Types Of Penises There Are Feb. 28, 2013By Ted Pillow The Chode(Spelling Note: I’m going with the OED/Merriam-Webster spelling of “chode” rather than Random House’s designation of “choad” for snobby grammatical reasons.) Jaguar PS / Shutterstock.com Perhaps the most unfairly maligned and cruelly taunted of all penises, the Chode is often defined as a “penis that is wider than it is long.” While certainly within the realm of anatomic possibility, that’s a rather rare occurrence, and the term “chode” has more commonly been used to describe any penis that’s rather portly and which generally resembles Danny DeVito’s body. Although the Chode is widely ridiculed for its overweight appearance, studies have shown that many women find penis width more important than length. Unfortunately, that doesn’t change the fact that your dick is just a pair of glasses and a balding horseshoe away from trading verbal barbs with Seinfeld and Elaine. The Slim Jim Spazzgirl555 The inverse of the Chode, the Slim Jim (aka the #2 Pencil) is tall and thin, regal and intellectual, and most likely not very enjoyable for your partner. While the Slim Jim appears more physically fit than the Chode, it is actually less desirable and has been described as “bookish” and “aloof,” and has led many to question, “Are you sure it’s in my vagina? Because I’m pretty sure it’s not my vagina.” Mr. Snuffleupagus Sesame Street The wooly mammoth of wiener, Mr. Snuffleupagus is an ancient relic more likely to be found under thick layers of Arctic ice than in the living, breathing flesh. A truly endangered species nearly rendered extinct due to the increased hygienic and grooming standards of modern society, Mr. Snuffleupagus was particularly dominant in 70s and early 80s pornographic film. Shaggily hirsute and most likely quite pungent, Mr. Snuffleupagus is not missed by those who came in contact with it, many of whom were never even able to determine where the penis ended and the scrotum began. The Sad Wizard Shutterstock Ah, the Sad Wizard… truly the most mysterious of all penises. Enshrouded in a droopy robe of enigmatic foreskin, the Sad Wizard often defies categorization: Is it erect or flaccid? Big or small? Disdainful or bemused? Seriously, what the shit is going down there? We’re never sure — all of these secrets and more are hidden under the Sad Wizard’s skin trench coat. s_bukley / Shutterstock.com The Channing TatumSimply put, a Channing Tatum is the most dreamy, gorgeous, and resplendent dong around. First of all, this thing is chiseled, with a seemingly astray 6-pack of muscles halfway up its imposing shaft. As if that wasn’t enough, the head is simply to die for: scrubbed pink skin, high-set cheekbones (don’t ask), and a come-hither look that promises, “Yeah girl, I’m tough — but not too tough to love you.” Did I mention it can dance? The Robitussin genesha_isis The only penis to be stamped with a warning from the Surgeon General (“SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Robitussin Penises may be hazardous to your health.”), Robitussins should be considered highly contagious and avoided at all costs. Named because they appear to be in dire need of a dose of cherry-flavored Robitussin, they are generally discolored, feverish, and, in some cases, actually capable of coughing. The Leaning Tower of Penis Shutterstock Known for its cockeyed slant, the Leaning Tower of Penis always looks like it’s battling a strong gale on a windy day. Notoriously difficult to make eye contact with or comfortably navigate, the Leaning Tower of Penis can make life challenging due to its penchant for inadvertently poking innocent bystanders at geometrically improbable angles, but is useful for various other jobs like prying open paint cans or scratching that hard-to-reach spot on your back. The Owen Wilson’s Nose s_bukley / Shutterstock.com While sturdy, prominent, and charmingly Roman Catholic, the Owen Wilson’s Nose won’t win any beauty pageants. It certainly gets the job done — in fact, it’s been found in close proximity to a great deal of beautiful women — but it’s homely to the point of distraction, leading many to wonder, “Why doesn’t he get that thing fixed?” as well as “How does it curve like that? Is that a dent? It looks like it got kicked by a horse…” Hulk Hogan’s Bicep s_bukley / Shutterstock.com Take a close look at Hulk Hogan’s bicep: note the skin tone that could be most accurately described as “Movie Theater Hot Dog Orange,” the veiny gristle, the rubbery texture, the preponderance of odd lumps and saggy protuberances. It almost looks like some kind of hideous prosthetic, doesn’t it? Unfortunately, years of anabolic steroids, excessive tanning, and strenuous flexing have rendered Hogan’s muscles fluorescent and freakish; even more unfortunately, a Hulk Hogan Bicep penis shares all of those same off-putting qualities, as well as the implacable impression of hazardous toxicity. Hulk Hogan Biceps are hard to miss because they are generally (and inexplicably) three shades tanner than the rest of the accompanying groin area. The overworked cranks of many porn stars fall into this category due to years of skin-stretching boners and vigorous sexual intercourse. http://thoughtcatalog.com/tedpillow/2013/02/the-9-different-types-of-penises-there-are/

Pretty good...!

As long as we're at it...

No joke. I had forgotten he said this.

This might be a good time to scold -- everyone here has had your Hep A and B vaccines, right?

hito, these doctors were employees of the Defense Department or CIA. I don't think that Blue Cross reimburses for torture. At least not yet.