Patterico's Pontifications

Hey, we can’t comment on it either, because nothing is showing up, just a big white space…

MD in Philly (227f9c) — 11/20/2009 @ 9:15 pm

It’s showing up in my browser. Try refreshing?

Patterico (64318f) — 11/20/2009 @ 9:16 pm

I’ve refreshed several times, restarted IE and started afresh more than once. Maybe news regarding the LA Times is being blocked at the Rockies or Mississippi river…

MD in Philly (227f9c) — 11/20/2009 @ 9:20 pm

Works fine for me in Firefox.

Stashiu3 (44da70) — 11/20/2009 @ 9:23 pm

Lazarus and Hiltzik are the Dog Trainer’s “business” columnists. Two more good reasons for the rag to go out of business.

MD in Philly, it works fine for me in Firefox.

Stu707 (0981d5) — 11/20/2009 @ 9:27 pm

Working fine in IE8 as well.

Stashiu3 (44da70) — 11/20/2009 @ 9:31 pm

Looks fake to me….

gahrie (2b00bd) — 11/20/2009 @ 9:31 pm

Works fine for me in IE, just a little choppy and skippy. But that probably has more to do with the fact that I have 51 browser tabs open in this window right now.

Have Blue (854a6e) — 11/20/2009 @ 9:34 pm

Thanks folks. I found it in FireFox, still not in IE. Might be my computer- recently had to do a system restore and don’t have all of the peripheral software back on. [In FireFox I was told I needed a plug in, donloaded it, and all worked. no such notices in IE. Assume just me unles other IE people mention it.]

Sorry for the diversion, thanks all, back to the show!!

MD in Philly (227f9c) — 11/20/2009 @ 9:35 pm

Fine in IE8 as well now, Thanks again.

MD in Philly (227f9c) — 11/20/2009 @ 9:44 pm

It came up a little slowly on my Commodore Vic 20.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi (a704ed) — 11/20/2009 @ 10:36 pm

They’re still just drug dealers even if it’s sort of legal. Even if it were totally legal legal legal they’d still just be drug dealers.

Just so we’re clear.

happyfeet (b919e7) — 11/20/2009 @ 11:59 pm

That was kind of stupid and pointless. Thanks LAT!!!!!

Gina (e5d2d5) — 11/21/2009 @ 12:49 am

If that was put out — as is — by the LAT, then it’s fake . . . somebody’s lame idea of ironic humor.

Icy Texan (e29241) — 11/21/2009 @ 1:27 am

Dude… so what happened to the pizza?

Mark Asread (76f39e) — 11/21/2009 @ 3:51 am

I heard you get the munchies …. and with respect to what happind to the pissa, they probably ate it

HeavenSent (01a566) — 11/21/2009 @ 5:56 am

“Pissa?” 🙂

GM Roper (6afe02) — 11/21/2009 @ 6:21 am

Works fine for me (IE8)

LA Times reporters being moronic is nothing new tho.

It’d be worth it if he put on a puppet show depicting circulation cratering and newsroom layoffs.

A bi-lingual one on the 85% outstanding murder warrants (in L.A.) for illegals could be comedy gold.

harkin (94a68e) — 11/21/2009 @ 6:34 am

I’m with gahrie. This doesn’t look like somebody who’s high, it looks like a nonsmoker’s stereotypical caricature of what pot smokers act and sound like.

Voice of Reason (9c39e0) — 11/21/2009 @ 6:58 am

Fake. They just don’t get why they aren’t making money.

Audacity (2fd5ad) — 11/21/2009 @ 7:20 am

Fake. That guy doesn’t smoke pot, banana peels maybe, but not devil weed, no way.

ropelight (962db0) — 11/21/2009 @ 7:27 am

Not bad.

Kind of a weed mixed with alcohol and coffee vibe to it.

It’s 7AM. Time to wake and bake.
Before my chronic pain sets in.

Marijuana should be free under the health care bill right?

I’m curious as to why in a country like Jamaica where there are areas where marijuana use is open and pervasive; murderous drug gangs still roam the streets.
I thought it’d be all mellow and Rastafari… I guess drug money is a buzz kill. Literally.

Oh well. Let ’em run the dispensaries.
They’ll be buying and selling out the back door and getting themselves shot and robbed…. not my problem.

SteveG (97b6b9) — 11/21/2009 @ 7:34 am

I think the people at the LA Times have bought into to the idea of “social justice as journalism” model, to such an extent that they no longer even have a clue as to why some one might buy a newspaper.

I left a message at the LA Times publisher’s office. I said, “You are supposed to be a NEWSPAPER, not a FICTIONPAPER, not a PROPAGANDAPAPER. Valid information has a real value, for which people are willing to pay; valid information has a positive value. Invalid information isn’t just worth nothing, it actually has a negative value; if you believe invalid information, and act upon it, things get worse and most likely, cost you and others a lot of money.

The above video and James Rainey and the rest of the LAT indicate they are operating under the assumption that content is fungible and that the truth and validity and relevance of that content makes no difference to their readers. They are probably talking about creating a new marketing campaign right now, that will improve their image with the public. I know that they are not talking about truth and falsehoods. I know they are not talking about the difference between information and opinion. I know they are not talking about creating a product that informs, educates and acts as a check upon government.

How can these people possibly be this stupid?

jack (e383ed) — 11/21/2009 @ 7:46 am

jack, they aren’t stupid, they simply worship at the alter of a false god.

ropelight (962db0) — 11/21/2009 @ 8:09 am

I thought Lazarus was kind of dad-geeky, but now I think he’s cool like a teenager.

I wonder if being perpetually embarrassing is enough to get a prescription for medical marijuana.

MayBee (a89276) — 11/21/2009 @ 8:16 am

More like he’s in desperate need of a frontal lobotomy. Is that supposed to be funny? It’s not even on a par with the old Cheech and Chong albums of yesteryear, and most of those were only funny if you were indeed stoned while listening to them. Just another clueless, navel – gazing arse from the LAT.

Dmac (a964d5) — 11/21/2009 @ 8:24 am

The sad thing is, Lazarus was a fairly decent consumer reporter at the SF Chronicle. He wrote about scams by telephone companies, credit card providers, and other stuff that was actually useful. Now he’s not even trying.

Either the Chronicle’s editors kept Lazarus on a tighter leash or he’s showing the ill effects of falling in with the wrong crowd.

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 11/21/2009 @ 8:32 am

#27, BBJF, said, “…or he’s showing the ill effects of falling in with the wrong crowd.”

Do some of your old pals say the same thing about you?

ropelight (962db0) — 11/21/2009 @ 9:06 am

Fake as fake can be. Even Sean Penn does a better “stoner” imitation. But it’s a caricature.

I’ve known smokers for more than 25 years, and have never encountered behavior such as Lazarus portrays.

Just another edition of “Reefer Madness”.

NavyspyII (df615d) — 11/21/2009 @ 9:16 am

SteveG, to my knowledge marijuana is illegal in Jamaica, thus gangs are running the streets because they want to keep their illegal business intact. Obviously, there are other reasons involved (perhaps a corrupt police department or not having the resources to fight use of drugs).

Why is the LA times doing this?
Simple. Remember Prop 8? Videos were all over YouTube mocking people are were pro-Prop 8 (meaning they were against gay marriage). Many of the videos were satirical in nature and shown as a service announcement. It was like Ashton Kutcher’s video for Obama, but with a bunch of people saying things like “If gays are allowed to marry we’ll all turn gay.” Nonsensical things. A bunch of people followed this format. It shows what the left does the best: they take the other sides argument, take it to the extreme or completely out of context essentially create a straw man (which Obama is famous for), and strike down that argument.

Examples:
1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYPVISQR9fY&feature=related

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bE-4Yko83xc

3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9T7ux8M4Go

4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSPxLyOVprM

5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F40LRG9wDWY&feature=related

You’ll notice video 1, 2, and 4 are basically the same. They repeated ridiculous arguments. Video 5 was a response to “A Storm is Gathering,” again it is satirical and makes fun of people who are against gay marriage. Video 2 is the same thing.

The left caricatures the right and creates straw men. They then tear down these arguments and claim that they are the elite and know-it-alls while all the rest are bigots.

Now, for the pot video. This guy is obviously for marijuana being legalized. He wants people to watch the video and say “That is a stereotype…not all stoners act like that.” His response will be “See! So if not all stoners act like that why don’t we legalize pot? People that are sick aren’t taking it to get high or be stoners, they are taking it because they are ailing.”

TheAudacity (2fd5ad) — 11/21/2009 @ 9:28 am

ropelight,
Do some of your old pals say the same thing about you?

Not to my face — they know I’d be delighted to hear it!

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 11/21/2009 @ 9:30 am

I vote for faked. But that’s the LAT ethos, isn’t it?

Today in the LAT: an article about the dangers of early screening for diseases, one criticizing the fee increases at UC, and an article criticizing the investigation of Ft. Hood by Lieberman as “opportunistic.”

Sigh.

Patricia (b05e7f) — 11/21/2009 @ 9:42 am

It really doesn’t matter if the video is fake or not – either way it’s just really embarrassing to watch.

An obviously educated white guy in a button down with sleeves casually rolled, a leather watch, and stylish frames and haircut, are not convincing me of anything other than I now see why Lazarus only had one acting role. The whole bit actually might have worked better without it being a video attempt, but rather as a light humorous piece in the paper.

Dana (e9ba20) — 11/21/2009 @ 9:52 am

Fake but accurate.

Official Internet Data Office (b3941f) — 11/21/2009 @ 10:03 am

#33: GMTA!!!

redc1c4 (fb8750) — 11/21/2009 @ 10:13 am

#32, Patricia, this is off-topic, but tangential to your comment.

It’s the content of those emails that’s got the Administration and by extension their media cronies in full panic mode.

I’ve been looking into Islam lately to try and understand Hasan, who he was and why he murdered unarmed soldiers when his job was helping them. Here’s what I have so far. Stick with me.

Major Hasan (SoA) was acting in full accordance with the religious obligations imposed on all Muslims, and that observation is right straight out of the most well established traditions of mainstream Islam. This is the key to understanding.

And, that’s exactly what has Obama, and the Army quaking in their boots. Obama understands, the Army brass are clueless. Covering up the real facts of Hasan’s motivation to mass murder is what’s behind all the idiot double talk about diversity, not rushing to judgment, and all the other silly hogwash.

Hasan murdered unarmed soldiers because he saw that as his responsibility as a Muslim.

Until he was ordered to Afghanistan, Islam allowed Hasan to live among infidels, “…to deceive them with smiles, yet all the while cursing them in his heart.” Although as his record shows, he was having a difficult time holding his temper while maintaining the deception.

The one thing Hasan couldn’t do was remain part of the infidel army while he was deployed to war against other Muslims. This is the point about which Hasan was seeking clarification from an Islamic authority: Could he, a non-combatant, go to a Muslim country wearing the infidel uniform and remain within the limitations of his religious obligations to Islam?

When the answer came back – NO! Major Hasan was caught between powerful forces: Islam and the US Army. He couldn’t serve two masters.

Hasan did everything he could to avoid deployment, including getting a lawyer to fight his orders to deploy, nothing worked. The Army failed to understand the position Hasan was in.

Western modes of thought simply do not grasp the obvious consequences of Muslim adherence to Islam’s clear expectations of behavior. Hasan was (SoA) a soldier of Allah. Jihad was his path, there was no way for him to remain a Muslim and to report for overseas duty to Afghanistan.

So, Hasan accepted his fate, put his affairs in order, took his weapons and went out to fight jihad against the infidel enemies of Islam. In his mind, and that of the faithful, Hasan understood unwavering jihad to be his religious obligation.

Please, anyone who reads this, I’m not defending Hasan or his bloodthirsty rampage, I’m trying to understand why he did it. Not in terms that make sense to Western minds, but why he did it according to what make sense to Muslims.

I want to know how Muslims think for what should be very obvious reasons: so we can see it coming the third time.

ropelight (962db0) — 11/21/2009 @ 11:07 am

For his execution, they should revive the protocols used for fighting the Moro’s a century ago:
Bullets dipped in pig-lard, body sewn into a sack soaked in same.

AD - RtR/OS! (444f28) — 11/21/2009 @ 11:31 am

ropelight,

I believe you are exactly correct and well said. While Major Hasan is solely responsible for his actions, his supervisors are directly to blame for the location. They knew he was a ticking bomb and rather than disarm it, they moved it to Fort Hood to save themselves at the expense of innocent soldiers. If Hasan had not been transferred, you know his targets would certainly have included those same incompetent and cowardly psychiatrists and senior physicians who refused to do their moral, ethical, and professional duty. The same ones who will now conduct what used to be called a “Forensic Autopsy” trying to determine the root causes of this tragedy. Think any of the blame is going to fall their way?

Stashiu3 (44da70) — 11/21/2009 @ 11:32 am

#37, AD, if it was up to me, we would start with KSM, video tape it and put it on the web. Next we go to Gitmo and get down to the work at hand.

ropelight (962db0) — 11/21/2009 @ 11:41 am

#38, Stasher3 said, ” If Hasan had not been transferred, you know his targets would certainly have included those same incompetent and cowardly psychiatrists and senior physicians who refused to do their moral, ethical, and professional duty.”

I see it as worse than you say. Had Hasan not been transferred he may have remained a thorn in the side of his superiors, but there’s no reason to conclude he would have started shooting. He may will have been content to remain in place as a disruptive influence, serve out his time, and go on his way.

As for your question, “no!” is my considered response. For the blame to reach Hasan’s superiors, it would also reach the flaming idiots who maintain that Islam is a religion of peace.

It isn’t, never was, never will be. Islam is Holy War, today, tomorrow, and for as long as it takes to gain absolute domination over all the world, both the land and the people. There is no other.

ropelight (962db0) — 11/21/2009 @ 12:18 pm

Point?

I dunno… to trivialize the discussion?

Not that the LA Times has trivialized itself or anything

SteveG (97b6b9) — 11/21/2009 @ 1:22 pm

ropelight 11:07am – Probably the best explanation I’ve yet read of the Ft. Hood shooter’s actions.

I would add one more point.

When these events occur, there is often a call to ‘not characterize all Muslims by the actions of the radicals.’

The problem is that the Ft. Hood killer wasn’t a radical. It is those who ignore aspects of the religion and live among the infidels in peace who are the radicals.

Yes, there are many different offshoots of the Muslim religion, but the Ft. Hood terrorist practiced wahhabism.

From this link.

Hasan’s imam Faizul Khan is no ordinary imam. He is on the Board of Directors of the ISNA, a radical Wahhabi outfit which “enforces extremist Wahhabi theological writ in America’s mosques.

This incident is an absolute FUBAR, and anyone who were alerted to the warnings and didn’t act should not work in government in any capacity again.

Apogee (e2dc9b) — 11/21/2009 @ 6:29 pm

I’m not sure why we’re suddenly talking about the Fort Hood shooter, but I’m game for that.

HE WAS INSANE.

Did his religion contribute to the killings? Sure! If he was a fundamentalist Christian, could he have done it? Of course! Orthodox Jew? Why not? Insert-your-non-abrahamic-faith-here? It happens every day!

Sometimes, people do things because they’re not in the right mind. Going off the deep end of a particular religion certainly doesn’t help, but he could have been part of any faith and done the exact same thing (although you’d have to replace Allah Akbar with your religion’s version of “god is great”)

Neil (eda4e7) — 11/21/2009 @ 8:19 pm

Yep Neil, those Baptist suicide bombers and Catholics aligning with Jews to fly planes into buildings are a problem alright. The beheadings by the Mormons should prove your point as well. They’re just following church doctrine, right? Which they recite just before their terrorist acts. What? That doesn’t happen? Even though you kept using exclamation points (which everyone knows means you’re undeniably correct), I would contend that when you say “I’m game for that” you should actually bring some game.

“Insane” has both a legal and medical definition. Hasan does not appear to meet either one. His behavior was goal-oriented, planned, and organized, with full knowledge of the potential consequences (witness his money transfers and giving away his possessions), and evil… not insane. His method of attack was consistent with the precepts of his faith as he understood them and the teachings by a large number of clerics who follow his particular faith. That faith is the only major religion in the world which teaches these things as a matter of doctrine. It is not the faith of Christians and Jews.

I know you’re a drive-by, but someone should point out your idiocy and it was my turn. Enjoy your weekend.

Stashiu3 (44da70) — 11/21/2009 @ 8:44 pm

Stashiu3 – Well said, and it speaks volumes that Neil doesn’t bother to include direct links to these diverse and dastardly deeds done due to doctrine directly dictated in Deuteronomy.

Neil’s analysis? I’d give him a D minus.

Apogee (e2dc9b) — 11/21/2009 @ 8:57 pm

Apogee, Neil is likely a 20-something atheist, kinda geeky, more comfortable with science and videogames than religion and girls. He has to trash all religions because they’re all scary.

How ’bout it Neil, did I come close? 😉

Stashiu3 (44da70) — 11/21/2009 @ 9:03 pm

They’re still just drug dealers even if it’s sort of legal. Even if it were totally legal legal legal they’d still just be drug dealers.

Just so we’re clear.

So are Peter Coors, August Busch IV, Jim Koch, etc..

Just so we’re clear.

Kolohe (5968d6) — 11/22/2009 @ 4:38 am

Pass the medical beer.

Alta Bob (239b48) — 11/22/2009 @ 8:10 am

#43, Neil said, “HE WAS INSANE.”

Yes and no. Yes, Major Hasan was insane judged by Western standards. His attack was incomprehensible given our concepts of right and wrong. Mass murder just isn’t the sort of thing normal people inflict on others.

But, it does occasionally happen, and when it does, we look for reasons why an otherwise rational person would do something so despicable. We search for a satisfactory explanation, “a grievance,” and if we can’t find one, we’re left to conclude the individual was obviously insane.

However, Major Hasan was a devout Muslim. His thinking and behavior was never subject to any conceptual framework other than one explicitly derived from the Koran. Islam isn’t the least bit ambiguous about the obligations of its adherents.

Hasan’s actions at Fort Hood are readily understood according to the precepts of Islam. Hasan wasn’t insane, he was a faithful Muslim acting exactly as his religion instructed. Hasan identified himself as a Soldier of Allah (SoA) and when he could no longer continue his “jihad of deception,” he embarked on a “jihad of the sword.”

Major Hasan wasn’t insane, he was doing what any faithful Muslim understands to be his obligation according to the highest authority of Islam, the Koran.

ropelight (502cb2) — 11/22/2009 @ 8:21 am

Nearly three-quarters-of-a-century after it was made illegal; half-a-century after it was proven to be practically harmless – why is it still a crime to possess and smoke marijuana?

Here is a list of ten famous people who died as a result of nicotine abuse:

Humphrey Bogart
Edward R. Murrow
Nat King Cole
George Harrison
John Huston
Noel Coward
Betty Grable
Walt Disney
Gary Cooper
Peter Jennings

Here is another list. Ten famous people who died from alcoholism:

Billie Holiday
Jack Kerouac
Truman Capote
Lorenz Hart
Veronica Lake
Bix Beiderbecke
Montgomery Clift
Dylan Thomas
John Barrymore
Errol Flynn

Now I’m going to ask you to name for me one celebrity who has died from too much grass.

Go on, I’m waiting. Is it a “gateway drug” as they never tire of reminding us? Yeah, it probably is. But so is Pabst Blue Ribbon. Let’s get a grip here.

http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY

[note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

Tom Degan (52f212) — 11/23/2009 @ 6:07 am

11/20/2009

L.A. Times Columnist Is Baked

50 Responses to “L.A. Times Columnist Is Baked”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out