![]()
“A psychopath? Mixed with human dirt.”
Cory “Human Dirt Psychopath” Gardner and North Korea’s Ten Greatest Insults
“A psychopath? Mixed with human dirt.”
Cory “Human Dirt Psychopath” Gardner and North Korea’s Ten Greatest Insults
North Korea’s branding of Cory Gardner as a “psychopath” and a “man mixed in with human dirt” is not just a boon for the Colorado senator, whose reputation as a foreign-policy hawk will no doubt be enhanced by the rogue nation’s decision to attack him. It’s also among the country’s ten best insults of all time, joining a memorable list shared below.
Gardner drifted onto North Korea’s radar after he called the country’s leader, Kim Jong-un, a “whack job” on MSNBC’s Morning Joe last week. In the days that followed, North Korea unleashed anti-Gardner invective UPI translates like so:
“On May 3, some [expletive] by the name of Cory Gardner, who sits on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, perpetrated wicked blasphemy against our supreme dignity during an interview with NBC…. For a psychopath like the [expletive] Gardner, to hurl evil accusations at our highest dignity is a serious problem…. That a man mixed in with human dirt like Gardner, who has lost basic judgment and body hair, could only spell misfortune for the United States.”
Good stuff — but hardly North Korea’s only example of crazy rhetoric. Here are nine more inspired examples. …
WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON???
So this silly bitch Jim Comey starts investigating Hillary Clinton for her shitty handling of emails back in summer 2016. Just before the election rolls into town, he decides to send a letter to Congress saying, “Oh shit, son, we got a pantload of new emails to look at!” Then three days before the election, he shrugs that shit off with “Eh, we just found some cat GIFs and pics of Anthony Weiner’s dick, which is sad but not illegal.” But it doesn’t matter — everyone thinks Hillary Clinton is the Baba Yaga of emails at this point. Trump wins the election.
Word spreads pretty quick that Trump may have some ties to Russia, whom we now suspect meddled in the election worse than Scooby and the gang meddled in the day-to-day business affairs of your average haunted amusement park. And by “some ties,” I mean everyone Trump has appointed, worked with, met, or looked at is probably a sleeper Russian agent who, when given the signal, will together form Mecha-Putin. So Comey heads up an investigation into the Trump/Russia ties, and along the way Sally Yates gets fired, and so does Preet Bharara — both of whom are looking into Team Trump’s connections to Russia. Well ain’t that a bitch?
Then in comes Trump out of the blue with the firing of Comey, claiming it was because of how he dealt with the emails months previously — something which Trump publicly praised Comey for at the time.
What in the merciful fuck is going on? Trump fired the guy investigating Russia’s interference with the election (which Trump won). And Trump gets to pick the replacement FBI director, who will take over the investigation. Trump firing Comey is like you shitting on your neighbor’s lawn, then having the ability to kick them out of their house for complaining you shit on their lawn. In fact, it’s like being able to fire the detective investigating your mass shitting spree across the entire country. Who the hell is OK with this? Sure, Comey seems as competent as a one-armed man in a clapping competition, but could there be any more suspect timing for canning him? Just days before, he asked for more funding for the investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election. Even villains in Disney movies would call this a little too on the nose. …
What Happens to the FBI’s Russia Investigation Now?
One way to derail an inquiry is to deprive it of resources.
About a week ago, FBI Director James Comey went before the Senate Intelligence Committee to testify on two FBI investigations: one of Hillary Clinton and her emails, and another of Russian meddling in the 2016 election and any connections the Trump campaign may have had to the Russians. The former investigation was conducted and closed amid much public scrutiny and controversy. The second, no less controversial investigation is ongoing, but Comey refused to go into it in detail. And this Tuesday, Comey was fired, having never wrapped up the second investigation.
So what happens to that still unfinished Russia investigation? “The short answer is that no one knows,” said Susan Hennessey, the managing editor of the Lawfare blog and a former intelligence community lawyer. (The FBI’s investigation runs parallel to at least two other investigations, one in the Senate and one in the House, looking into similar questions.) The signs, however, are not encouraging. The abrupt and strange way Comey was fired, as well as the lack of a nominee to replace him, “is a very political decision, and the message it sends seems to be to back off the investigation,” said Amy Zegart, the co-director for Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation and senior fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution.
If that’s the case, there are many ways the bureau could “back off” without actually looking like it has backed off or even stopped investigating Russian interference. According to the former FBI agent Clinton Watts, the limbs of the beheaded bureau will keep doing their work. “The investigative part is independent,” said Watts. But even if the work goes on, what will that work look like? “The investigation will go forward in the short run,” said Jack Goldsmith, a professor at Harvard Law School and an assistant attorney general under George W. Bush. “The question is how vigorous it will be.”
One factor that may determine the answer is money. According to multiple reports, which a spokeswoman from the Department of Justice denied, Comey had asked the department for more resources to pursue the Russia investigation right before he was fired. What happens to the FBI’s resources now? A new FBI director “can’t shut the investigation down,” said Watts, “but can decide how resources are allocated and how time is spent.” Eric Columbus served from 2009 to 2014 in the office of the deputy attorney general—a position now occupied by Rod Rosenstein, whose letter describing Comey’s handling of the Clinton email investigation was cited by Trump as the reason for Comey’s dismissal. Columbus said that though a new director would have the legal authority to shut the Russia investigation down, “the smarter ploy would be to slow walk it and starve it of resources and not have it be the focus of leadership. … You can investigate things forever and have it never go anywhere. If you want to kill something, the most effective way to kill it is to just have it on a slow simmer rather than a rolling boil.” …
Firing Comey won’t save Trump from the flames of the Russia scandal
Unless an independent prosecutor takes over the FBI investigation, the whiff of a cover-up will not go away
‘Public trust in institutions in Washington is at a low. Comey’s firing will only fuel the cynicism.’
“This is Nixonian” was the reaction of Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, to the news that President Trump had fired FBI director James Comey.
Casey, echoed by fellow Democrats, was referring to the infamous Saturday Night Massacre, when President Richard Nixon fired the special prosecutor and attorney general who were leading the Watergate investigation. The massacre did not derail the probe. It only fueled calls for Nixon’s impeachment.
We know that President Trump has a stunning ignorance of history. He recently flubbed the basics of the causes of the civil war and seemed to think the famous abolitionist Frederick Douglass was still alive and had “done an amazing job”. It’s certainly possible that President Trump doesn’t know the lessons of Watergate.
The most famous lesson is that the cover-up is always worse than the crime. …
America Isn’t Having a Constitutional Crisis
But Trump may have just made one more likely in the future.
When news broke that Donald Trump had fired James Comey, who was in the midst of investigating possible collusion between the Russian government and the president’s campaign, Brian Schatz knew just what to call it. “We are in a full-fledged constitutional crisis,” the Democratic senator wrote on Twitter. A host of Democratic lawmakers have since echoed Schatz’s dire warning.
Are they right? And how would Americans know if they were living through a constitutional crisis? In a 2009 paper defining the term, the legal scholars Sanford Levinson and Jack Balkin noted that Americans have long overused the phrase, which isn’t surprising in a country tested to its core by a failed constitution (the Articles of Confederation), civil war, economic depression, and two world wars. In recent years, “constitutional crises” have been spotted in everything from the disputed 2000 presidential election to the failure of Congress to increase pay for federal judges. (For the record, Levinson and Balkin consider the 2000 election a “constitutional showdown” rather than a crisis, and the complaint about judicial salaries a “plaintive cry.”) Well before the firing of James Comey, Trump’s business conflicts of interest and battle with the courts over his travel ban sparked chatter about a looming constitutional crisis.
“People generally use the term ‘constitutional crisis’ to describe periods when institutions of government are clearly in conflict,” Levinson and Balkin wrote. “But the mere existence of conflict, even profound conflict, cannot be the definition of crisis. … Conflict in a constitutional system is not a bug—it is a feature.”
Levinson and Balkin also make a distinction between “political” and “constitutional” crises, arguing that the Watergate scandal and the impeachment of Bill Clinton are best described as the former. Richard Nixon, for example, arguably had the authority to fire the Watergate special prosecutor and eventually complied with a Supreme Court order to hand over the Watergate tapes. “Nevertheless, it could easily have become a constitutional crisis at several points if Nixon had publicly stated (which he never did during his presidency) that he sought deliberately to go beyond his powers under the Constitution,” they explained. …
The Trump administration’s magic legislative wand will stop working at midnight
President Donald Trump, with the help of Congress, has been using a little-known legislative magic wand to repeal several regulations put in place under Barack Obama — but his authority to use it ends at midnight Wednesday. What happens then?
Dubbed the Congressional Review Act (CRA), the 1996 law permits Congress to review and effectively overrule regulations enacted within the past 60 congressional workdays. Before Trump took office, the law had been used once in 2001 to kill a Clinton-era regulation aimed at preventing workplace injuries.Since his inauguration, Trump has signed 14 disapproval resolutions passed by Congress.
Once the rule expires at midnight, Trump will have to rely on other legislative means to overturn Obama-era regulations.
“As opposed to destroying work done by a previous administration, President Trump will need to start constructing changes to the federal government,” said Mark Harkins, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Government Affairs Institute. “Any further changes to existing regulations will require patience to run through the standard regulatory process.” …
FBI refuses to disclose documents on Trump’s call to Russia to hack Clinton
FBI decision to withhold records suggests Trump’s provocative election year comments are being seen as relevant to its own ongoing investigation
‘I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,’ Trump said last July.
The US justice department is refusing to disclose FBI documents relating to Donald Trump’s highly contentious election year call on Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails.
Senior DoJ officials have declined to release the documents on grounds that such disclosure could “interfere with enforcement proceedings”. In a filing to a federal court in Washington DC, the DoJ states that “because of the existence of an active, ongoing investigation, the FBI anticipates that it will … withhold all records.”
The statement suggests that Trump’s provocative comment last July is being seen by the FBI as relevant to its own ongoing investigation.
In March, the then director of the FBI James Comey confirmed the existence of that investigation to a Congressional hearing. On Tuesday Comey was summarily sacked by Trump in a move that sent shockwaves across the capital and provoked widespread calls for an independent inquiry into allegations of collusion between Russia and Trump associates.
In his dismissal letter to Comey, Trump wrote: “I greatly appreciate you informing me, on three separate occasions, that I am not under investigation.” But the FBI’s refusal to hand over the documents implies that it believes Trump’s call on Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails was at least relevant to their ongoing inquiries. …
Two Dead Canaries in the Coal Mine
If you’re not worried about FBI Director James Comey getting fired, this man might change your mind.
If you’re inclined to downplay the termination of FBI Director James Comey, reasoning that he was a flawed leader, or that President Trump was legally entitled to fire him, or that many of the Democrats objecting to his termination previously criticized him, or that liberals are so freaked out by the president that their latest freakout cannot be taken seriously, a civil libertarian like me is unlikely to change your mind.
Long before Donald Trump decided to run for president, when Barack Obama had almost a full term left and Hillary Clinton seemed like his likeliest successor, I argued in “All the Infrastructure a Tyrant Would Need, Courtesy of Bush and Obama,” that “we’re counting on having angels in office and making ourselves vulnerable to devils. Bush and Obama have built infrastructure any devil would lust after.”
I listed the numerous policies and precedents that warranted great concern.
And yet, I wrote, “The American people have no idea who the president will be in 2017. Nor do we know who’ll sit on key Senate oversight committees, who will head the various national-security agencies, or whether the moral character of the people doing so, individually or in aggregate, will more closely resemble George Washington, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, John Yoo, or Vladimir Putin.” …
The dense thicket of lies around Obamacare repeal makes it hard to tell what’s happening
Go ask Alice.
Unknowns always exist in politics, but in the case of the Trump administration, that’s severely compounded by his habit of constantly lying. That’s especially true because the lying disease seems to be catching.
High-ranking administration officials regularly stand before the public and say things that plainly aren’t true. Increasingly, so do many of their leading allies in Congress. Not just in the sense that they make exaggerated or contestable claims about the likely impact of their policies — though they do that too — but in the sense that they aren’t even correctly stating what their policies are.
On the campaign trail, for example, Trump promised time and again that his administration would build the Keystone XL pipeline and do it with American steel. His actual executive orders do not require this. But even after his administration clarified that he wasn’t requiring the pipeline to be built with American steel, Trump stood before the cameras at an Environmental Protection Agency event and said, “If you want to buy pipelines in this country, you’re going to buy your steel here and you’re going to have it fabricated here.”
There’s no sneaky verbiage here or technical explanation of some sense in which this is accurate. Trump is just claiming to have ordered something he never ordered — just as how in the alternative universe of Trumpland, he held the best-attended inauguration in history and had the most productive first 100 days since FDR. …
THE SURPRISINGLY INTERESTING REASON CHICAGO IS CALLED THE “WINDY CITY”
On a particularly blustery February South Side day, it is easy to understand why the city of Chicago has the nickname of the “Windy City.” After all, it has one of the roughest winters of all major American cities and it does get pretty regular gusts. But, in truth, it actually isn’t all that windy, relatively speaking; in terms of average annual wind speeds, Chicago ranks as the 73rd windiest city out of 275 cities where data is collected from – behind other major cities like Cleveland, San Francisco, Boston and New York City. (This is not dissimilar to the fact that Seattle doesn’t actually get that much rain, ranking 44th among major cities in the United States on that front, with less rain than such cities as New York, Houston, and Boston.) So, why does Chicago have the reputation of being so windy and where did it get the nickname?
While the word “Chicago” has Native American origins, the origin of the “windy city” moniker seems to have more to do with infamous Chicago politics than weather patterns. …
Barack Obama says fighting climate change means reforming food—and cutting back on steak
Focus On Food
The fate of climate change involves food.
It was the clearest signal yet: Barack Obama intends to make food policy matters one of his core issues as he wades into retirement.
During an appearance at the Global Food Innovation Summit in Milano, Italy, the former US president sat down with his friend and former White House food policy czar Sam Kass to discuss the role food production plays in climate change. In addressing food-related issues, Obama is taking a page out of his wife’s book. Former US first lady Michelle Obama made school meals and healthy eating priorities during her time in the White House. Now it appears the powerful couple intend to continue actively discussing food choices and their impact on the planet as they begin their lives as private citizens.
“I think people naturally understand that big smokestacks have pollution in them and they understand air pollution, so they can easily make the connection between energy production and the idea of greenhouse gases,” Obama said. “People aren’t as familiar with the impact of cows and methane, unless you’re a farmer.” …
How Platforms Are Poisoning Conversations
Political discussions online are perceived as less respectful, less likely to be resolved, less civil and more angry than discussions in other forums.
A radiation sign is attached to a barrel containing radioactive water at the Asse nuclear waste disposal centre in a unused mine near the German village of Remlingen
When people think of technology, they often have two simultaneous but conflicting thoughts: it helps and it hurts. Pew Research Center has studied Americans’ technology habits for two decades, and throughout that time, the public has identified clear benefits and drawbacks. While people value technology’s openness and connectivity, they are weary of its distractions and capacity to mislead.
These concerns are particularly salient when it comes to politics. The rise of digital technology has coincided with unprecedented political polarization in this country. From think pieces to casual conversations, many feel technology exacerbates these divisions. They are left to wonder how tools meant to bring us closer together can sometimes drive us further apart.
But while the technology may be new, engagement online is often a reflection of political involvement more broadly. For instance, a recent Pew Research Center report showed that those who are politically engaged take active steps to interact with political material on social media. One-in-five of these political enthusiasts “often” discuss politics on these platforms, while more than half follow political candidates or figures. And while a notable proportion expresses misgivings about the tone of political discussions on social media, the politically engaged are more likely to think social media help bring new voices into the discussion and get people involved with issues that matter to them. All in all, more than a third say they like seeing lots of political content on their feeds. …
The Alt-Right’s Newest Ploy? Trolling With False Symbols
“Don’t feed the trolls” remains indispensable guidance for the internet, if only because trolls exist solely to get a reaction out of you. Ignore them and they lose all power. But the most fiendish trolls are evolving from weekend anglers who occasionally reel people in to Deadliest Catch-level professionals using bait so effective that people can’t seem to help biting.
These master baiters represent the so-called alt-right, the meme-fluent arm of American white nationalism. Even as their memes morph into militaristic propaganda, this loosely organized troll army inhabiting extremist corners of social media, 4chan, and Reddit has adopted a new tactic: claiming mundane objects like milk, the peace symbol, and the LGBTQ flag as symbols of white supremacy. Every reappropriation provides another reminder that a troll’s greatest strength lies in weaponizing your anger.
This goes beyond sowing irritation and confusion among “normies” and “snowflakes.” The alt-right is attempting to normalize itself and its ideas. If anybody who drinks milk might be a Nazi, the idea of someone being a Nazi starts looking more pedestrian. …
Accelerationism: how a fringe philosophy predicted the future we live in
The world is changing at dizzying speed – but for some thinkers, not fast enough. Is accelerationism a dangerous idea or does it speak to our troubled times?
Half a century ago, in the great hippie year of 1967, an acclaimed young American science fiction writer, Roger Zelazny, published his third novel. In many ways, Lord of Light was of its time, shaggy with imported Hindu mythology and cosmic dialogue. Yet there were also glints of something more forward-looking and political. One plot strand concerned a group of revolutionaries who wanted to take their society “to a higher level” by suddenly transforming its attitude to technology. Zelazny called them the Accelerationists.
He and the book are largely forgotten now. But as the more enduring sci-fi novelist JG Ballard said in 1971, “what the writers of modern science fiction invent today, you and I will do tomorrow”. Over the past five decades, and especially over the past few years, much of the world has got faster. Working patterns, political cycles, everyday technologies, communication habits and devices, the redevelopment of cities, the acquisition and disposal of possessions – all of these have accelerated. Meanwhile, over the same half century, almost entirely unnoticed by the media or mainstream academia, accelerationism has gradually solidified from a fictional device into an actual intellectual movement: a new way of thinking about the contemporary world and its potential.
Accelerationists argue that technology, particularly computer technology, and capitalism, particularly the most aggressive, global variety, should be massively sped up and intensified – either because this is the best way forward for humanity, or because there is no alternative. Accelerationists favour automation. They favour the further merging of the digital and the human. They often favour the deregulation of business, and drastically scaled-back government. They believe that people should stop deluding themselves that economic and technological progress can be controlled. They often believe that social and political upheaval has a value in itself.
Accelerationism, therefore, goes against conservatism, traditional socialism, social democracy, environmentalism, protectionism, populism, nationalism, localism and all the other ideologies that have sought to moderate or reverse the already hugely disruptive, seemingly runaway pace of change in the modern world. “Accelerationism is a political heresy,” write Robin Mackay and Armen Avanessian in their introduction to #Accelerate: The Accelerationist Reader, a sometimes baffling, sometimes exhilarating book, published in 2014, which remains the only proper guide to the movement in existence.
Like other heresies, accelerationism has had generations of adherents, declared or otherwise: passing its ideas on to each other, refining some and renouncing others, communicating with each other in a private language, coalescing around dominant figures, competing to make the faith’s next breakthrough, splitting into factions, burning out. There are, or have been, accelerationists from the United States, Canada, Britain, Germany, Italy and France. The movement has produced books, essays, journals, manifestos, blogs, social media battles – and cryptic, almost unclassifiable communiques combining dystopian fiction with a dizzying range of political, cultural and economic theory. …
DEGREE OF DIFFICULTY: Prepare to spend a while. It’s The Long Read.
This new species of dinosaur looks like Zuul from Ghostbusters
I AM BECOME ZUUL, DESTROYER OF SHINS
Skull of Zuul crurivastator.
If you’re a paleontologist naming a newly discovered species, it’s important to know your beloved critter’s place in the pecking order. Not all animals—or dinosaurs, even—were masters of their domain. Not everyone can be a Rex. Case in point: Zuul crurivastator, a short-snouted Late Cretaceous dinosaur whose new name translates to “destroyer of shins.”
Crurivastator is from the Ankylosauridae family of armored dinosaurs. But in addition to having the standard ankylosaurid knob of bone at the end of its 10-foot-long tail, this species also boasts rows and rows of sharp, menacing spikes.
“I’ve been working on ankylosaurs for years, and the spikes running all the way down Zuul’s tail were a fantastic surprise to me—like nothing I’ve ever seen in a North American ankylosaur,” Victoria Arbour, a member of the Royal Ontario Museum team that recently published its findings on the creature, said in a statement. “It was the size and shape of the tail club and tail spikes, combined with the shape of the horns and ornaments on the skull, that confirmed this skeleton was a new species of ankylosaur.” …
WHY CAN’T PEOPLE SMELL THEMSELVES?
Have you ever sat next to a woman on a bus who lost her sense of smell? Or, at least, you assume so as the eye-watering fragrance wafting from her perfume is so overpowering that the nausea it induces makes you appreciate the subtle scent of a dryer sheet… If so, you might wonder, what causes a person to become blind to their own smell?
Technically referred to as olfactory fatigue, olfactory habituation, or odor adaptation, being “nose-blind” might appear to be something of a defect, but the ability to have the scent of a specific fragrance (such as your own) dwindle over time is very beneficial. Imagine tip-toeing through the tulips, enjoying the lovely aroma around you along with your own equally lovely stench. If these smells didn’t diminish over time, you might miss the new smell of a cougar about to use you as a tasty meal. Or, perhaps you’re the hunter and are trying to pick up the scent of your prey. In these sorts of scenarios that our sweaty, hunter-gatherer ancestors with deodorantless armpits frequently found themselves in, scanning for new smells was much more useful than continuing to experience their own. The drawback is, of course, in more modern times perfume-Peggy doesn’t realize the overpowering nature of her cougar-scent…
But how does this work? …
Video Goodnesses
and not-so-goodnesses
and not-so-goodnesses
Reports say the former FBI Director requested more resources for the Russia inquiry just days before he was ousted.
THANKS to MSNBC and for making this program available on YouTube.
David Frum argues that Comey’s firing makes a probe more urgent than ever. Republicans in Congress have repeatedly shown that they will not hold President Trump accountable. And, the FBI is ill-equipped for a non-criminal investigation, with or without Comey as director. Only an independent investigation can pull together information from different agencies of government and transcend the partisan protection of the president.
When a headless body washed up in the calm waters of the Texas gulf coast, investigators began to unravel a crime that led first to a drug cartel assassin, then to a locked safe containing more than a kilo of cocaine, methamphetamine, a gold-plated pistol— and U.S. Border Patrol agent Joel Luna’s badge.
Tanya Gersh and the SPLC are suing a neo-Nazi leader for online-turned-real-world harassment. VICE News Tonight correspondent Elle Reeve travels to the resort town of Whitefish, Montana which unexpectedly became the battleground for this white nationalist controversy.
THANKS to HBO and VICE News for making this program available on YouTube.
Stephen takes a trip down memory lane to his last day as one of Jon Stewart’s correspondents in the breakroom circa 2005. Starring Samantha Bee, Rob Corddry, Ed Helms, John Oliver and Jon Stewart.
Jon’s ‘favorite’ field correspondent Samantha Bee recounts some of her most memorable pieces.
Trump didn’t get his letter to Comey right the first time. Or the second time. Or ever.
James Comey thought the breaking news story about his firing was a prank. Made ya look (for a new job)!
THANKS to CBS and The Late Show with Stephen Colbert for making this program available on YouTube.
The man you love to hate is out, while the man you hate-hate continues to “35-page dossier” all over our Constitution.
THANKS to TBS and Full Frontal with Samantha Bee for making this program available on YouTube.
THANKS to Comedy Central and The Daily Show with Trevor Noah for making this program available on YouTube.
Seth takes a closer look at President Trump’s sudden firing of FBI Director James Comey, the man investigating POTUS’s ties to Russia during the campaign.
Seth Meyers’ monologue from Wednesday, May 10.
THANKS to NBC and Late Night with Seth Meyers for making this program available on YouTube.
It turns out the Mad Max-type future is going to be loaded six-shooters, mustaches, and wide-brimmed hats.
Margaret Atwood, a great Canadian writer hiding a terrible secret.
Pizza Pizza has finally employed it’s first ever Italian employee. Miguel Rivas has the story.
THANKS to Comedy Network and The Beaverton for making this program available on YouTube.
There’s a spot over there.
Less than half of the rain that falls from a cloud makes it all the way to the ground – because a lot evaporates while falling or after landing in treetops.
A song about the second coffee transformation… This is why you should never have a second coffee.
Max enjoying his dinner. As you can see at the start he noticed the camera and debates eating. But then realised he is hungry.
The Daily Show correspondent prepares a turkey, pepperjack cheese, Chipotle melt. Also: the gross reason why he can never eat ketchup.
CAUTION: Some language may not be appropriate for work or children.
Me commentary on soccer (alright, football) players vs the referees.
FINALLY . . .
This Cannabis Retreat Will Make the Vacation Industry More Chill
An event held by Bud and Breakfast, a cannabis bed and breakfast in Colorado that plans to open locations in Venice Beach and San Diego
At a fine restaurant in Los Angeles, diners might encounter a sommelier who recommends a chardonnay with the fish or a cabernet sauvignon with the steak.
At a gourmet cannabis popup, the resident chef might serve a citrusy sativa (such as Pink Lemonade) with a citrus crudo or a heavier indica to make a person feel rooted before indulging in some wintery vegetables and lamb. It’s not about getting “high,” cannabis chef Lauren Unger says; it’s about becoming “elevated.”
In July, Unger will be curating meals at a five-day cannabis retreat called Cannabliss in Ojai, where attendees will receive a vaporizer with which to inhale different strains to complement each course. The event is a part of a burgeoning cannabis experience industry around Los Angeles — and this retreat is one of the most elaborate yet.
In the morning, breakfast will include sativa strains, which give attendees a boost in energy and concentration for a physical activity such as hiking or intense yoga. In the middle of the day, the itinerary includes a hybrid strain intended to inspire creativity for a workshop like writing or painting. And at night, attendees will get an indica to help them sleep before they return to their rooms. …
Ed. More tomorrow. Possibly. Maybe. Not?