FBI Believes Self-Driving Cars May Be Used As ‘Lethal Weapons’

volvo self driving 640x426
Most people would put self-driving cars in their vision of the future and many companies are currently working to make that a reality, even companies like Google, which isn’t a conventional car manufacturer. Google recently showed off its self-driving car prototype but no one knows when it will actually hit the roads. The FBI isn’t too excited though. In a restricted report the FBI believes that self-driving cars may be used as “lethal weapons.”

The Guardian obtained this unclassified but restricted report which predicts that such vehicles “will have a high impact on transforming what both law enforcement and its adversaries can operationally do with a car.”

The report has a section called Multitasking which reads that “bad actors” will be able to conduct tasks that require taking eyes off the road or using both hands easily since the car would drive itself. A chilling scenario could involve suspects shooting at their pursuers while the car makes the getaway on its own.

Self-driving cars are programmed to obey the rules of the road but the FBI fears that criminals might override these safety features. The report also talks about the possibility of these vehicles being used as self-driving bombs by terrorists.

But its not all doom and gloom. FBI does note in the report that these cars will help reduce the number of road accidents as they essentially eliminate the human factor of distraction or poor judgement that often leads to accidents. The FBI believes that Congress will approve use of self-driving cars for the public in the next five to seven years.

FBI Believes Self-Driving Cars May Be Used As ‘Lethal Weapons’

, original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.

Campaign To 'Draft Manchin' For 2016 Presidential Race Drawing Attention

Is Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) contemplating a run for president?

Politico seems to think maybe. Its morning Huddle email newsletter on Wednesday pointed out that even though Manchin has not yet visited primary states like Iowa or New Hampshire, there are Twitter accounts popping up that indicate maybe he should: @NH4JoeManchin and @Iowa4JoeManchin. The Des Moines Register flagged the latter feed last week, and there’s also a nationally-focused @DraftJoeManchin account.

The Wall Street Journal mentioned Manchin as a “would-be” 2016 candidate last week as well.

Manchin has said he would back Hillary Clinton, should she run for president again. The first-term senator has become known for bucking his party on key issues, including carbon emissions limits for coal-fired power plants delaying some parts of the health care reform law.

His spokesman told The Charleston Gazette back in April that he’s “leaving all his options open for 2016, and will continue to look for the best way to bring common sense to Washington.”

So far, Manchin himself has brushed off the suggestion that he jump in.

It’s very flattering,” Manchin told Politico this week. “The bottom line is people are searching for somebody who’s willing to fix things rather than talk about them … It’s something I haven’t given an awful lot of thought about.”

He added, however, that the issue is “low on the totem pole” for now.

Impulse Buyer? A Food Label Designer Shares The Tricks Of The Trade

Joanne Camas

2014-07-16-6a00d83451cb0369e201a511e1ffdb970c.jpg
Art and commerce collide powerfully in the grocery store, and half the time we’re not even aware of the mix. Product labels go a long way to selling products, and they aim to catch our attention and interest instantly. Colors, wording, psychology, design, “feel” — they all have their place in persuading us to purchase a particular product.

So what’s involved in designing product labels and creating a brand image? We caught up with designer Ashley Flanagan, who has worked on a number of successful food and drink campaigns. She told us how she finds her inspiration, how bottle size and shelf position influence product design, and which iconic brands will outlive us all.

What’s your thought process when you’re designing a food or drink label?

My first thought is to design something that stands out. All the aisles and aisles of products are pretty overwhelming. I find that trends have a lot to do with retail packaging, and there is a lot of piggybacking on other brans. It tends to be sort of a rat race. If you can find a sweet spot, where you are the first to be doing something in your category, then it’s a big win. There is a balance between being “out-there ” and doing the right thing for the brand. Trying to find that balance is the most important part to a successful design.

SEE MORE: 15 Food That Are Better Frozen

What messages do you want to convey in a label?

We start with a brand strategy and establish a hierarchy. Some brands want to be more in-your-face than others. The most important thing is that your label communicates well. Anyone can design a pretty package, but there has to be a story there, and of course appetite appeal, shelf presence, and so on. All these things add up to a successful package. Oh, and of course the product has to be good.

Do you eat or drink the item to get the real, er, flavor of it?

Yes! When we were working on Evolution Fresh, the whole Hornall Anderson team started juicing for weeks. Everyone was into it, and it was a lot of fun.

You have to really believe in your product in order to brand it successfully, I think. It’s really important to live and breath it from beginning to end. You want to put yourself in the shoes of the audience, make choices that they would, and mimic a lifestyle that they would. That is when the final product really shines on shelf. Our core team for Evolution is still talking about how amazing the experience was, a product we loved and were able to visualize the way we intended.

What’s the label that you’re happiest with?

I would have to say the Quaker Oats rebrand was one of the most satisfying projects. The brand has such a history and is so iconic that it’s a challenge when facing a rebrand that you don’t want to lose sight of it. When the brand was finally approved we all were so thrilled. It was a long process that myself and the whole team pushed to keep simple and true. When designing the iconic cylinder package, I fought hard to keep it simple and to just be a version of the logo. We went through months and months of design, and ultimately came back to the very first one.

Any designs you admire and wish you’d done?

Anything by Pearlfisher. They do extraordinary work, and keep pushing the bar. I love their use of bold colors, and you can tell there is a huge sense of trust between them and their clients. Most clients I’ve worked with would be scared to take such bold risks with packaging. They’re doing something definitely right. And I admire that tremendously.

SEE MORE: The 25 Best Coffee Shops in America

Do you consider shelf placement, bottle size, etc., when designing?

The placement of the package is a huge consideration. When designing a bottle you have to think whether the package is going to be sitting in a refrigerator, which means the bottom will most likely be cut off, or really low on the shelf. When concepting package designs, we always show a shelf set, and use our new package against what’s already on the shelf. You want it to stand out and make a huge impact. Brand blocking is the most important to do that. My favorite is when packages “connect” on shelf. They are designed to fit together and live on their own.

Oh, yes. That’s a huge thing to consider when designing. You want to keep in mind that trends change all the time, and that you want to design a package that will stand the test of time. Anyone can just mimic a certain style to make it look good, but if there is no idea behind it then it fails. It’s a big struggle with designers. You want to create something ownable yet you are bombarded by so much of what’s out there. Trends are engrained in our minds, even if we don’t realize we’re doing it. I find myself overcoming this by trying to push apart the design and see how many different ways it could look and feel. Then ultimately I will pull different ideas from all of those and end up with something I like.

Is there a classic food label that you don’t think will ever change, like Heinz, perhaps?

I feel there are classic companies that always try too hard to keep their brands current, and there are companies that don’t have to at all. In my experience consumers tend to stick with the classic brand that is most proud of who they are. These days especially with a younger generation they will see right through a company that is trying too hard. People want a brand that they believe in, and that will grow with them. They also want a brand to fit into their lifestyle. Coca-Cola is a great example of just that.

More from Epicurious:
12 Amazing Hot Dog Topping Ideas
America’s Best Pizza Places
America’s Best Burgers
The 10 Best Tacos in America

Police Summoned After Reporter Crashes Scott Brown Campaign Event

WASHINGTON — A reporter says his repeated attempts to ask Scott Brown about the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby ruling led to him being questioned by a police officer.

Paul Lewis, a reporter for The Guardian, published an account Wednesday of his efforts to discuss the decision with Brown, the former Republican senator from Massachusetts who is now looking to unseat Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.). Lewis decided to try his luck at two of Brown’s campaign stops in New Hampshire, but quickly learned that Brown was in no mood to talk to the press.

“Just a few miles from a town named Freedom … I was expelled from two consecutive Brown campaign events, banned from asking him questions and, when I declined to abide by those terms, questioned by an officer of the law,” Lewis wrote.

Lewis first showed up at a diner where Brown had stopped as part of a statewide tour. He introduced himself to Brown and asked if he could pose some questions. Brown asked what the questions would be about, but retreated for the bathroom when Lewis mentioned the Hobby Lobby case.

Lewis learned of a second campaign stop Brown would be making hours later at Hobbs Tavern and Brewing Company in West Ossipee, and decided to show up there, too. A staffer told Lewis he could observe the event but would not be permitted to ask questions. Lewis said he did not agree to those terms and was promptly kicked out.

Several minutes later, a police officer showed up to question him, Lewis wrote:

None of the parties disputed the facts of the case. I was the journalist. My job was to ask questions. The man holed up inside the tavern was Scott Brown, a would-be senator who didn’t want to answer. I was eventually asked to leave. I left.

Officer Valley mulled over the situation before delivering his summary judgment. “There’s no crime,” he said. “No issue here at all.”

Rob Finneron, the owner of Hobbs Tavern and Brewing Company, told The Huffington Post he called the police after Lewis refused to leave despite being told the event was private.

“Mr. Brown was having a private gathering in my establishment. The reporter wouldn’t let anyone else really get a chance to talk and because he wasn’t an invited guest, I asked him to leave,” Finneron said.

Finneron added that Lewis was warned the police would be called if he did not leave. Lewis was “argumentative and indignant” and proceeded to interrupt a conversation Brown was having with someone else, Finneron said. The reporter did not leave until he saw that Finneron was, in fact, on the phone with police.

Finneron agreed that when the police officer arrived, he did not find an issue.

A spokesman at The Guardian did not immediately return a request for comment about Finneron’s account.

The Hobby Lobby ruling, stating that for-profit, closely held corporations do not have to cover contraception in their health plans if they morally object to it, is a complicated issue for Brown, who has been cast as anti-women by Shaheen. Brown’s campaign has insisted that he supports women’s health care and their access to contraception, while stating that Obamacare “threatens” people’s freedoms.

A NBC/Marist poll released Wednesday found Shaheen leading Brown, 50 percent to 42 percent, with just 6 percent of respondents undecided. Other surveys have also found Shaheen comfortably ahead.

Interview With Author Lindsey Palmer on 'Pretty In Ink'

2014-07-15-prettyinink.jpg

Lindsey Palmer’s debut novel, Pretty in Ink, will appeal to anyone who has ever wondered what really goes on behind the doors of their favorite glossy magazines. Having spent nearly a decade working in the magazine industry, Palmer writes about a world she knows well. Pretty in Ink is also about so much more. It’s about navigating the pitfalls of life while staying optimistic about the future. This is the perfect book to take to the beach and Palmer is definitely an author to watch. In our interview she explores the role of workplace in our lives, how channeling a character brought her clarity in life and on the page, and the intricacies of her writing process.

Tell us the story behind the story. How did Pretty in Ink come to be?

I worked for seven years at women’s magazines (Glamour, Redbook, and Self), and I always suspected this world would make an interesting setting for a novel. Task a bunch of ambitious New York women with producing a product that’s supposed to be fun but not frothy, edgy but not offensive, unique but not niche, opinionated but not political, inclusive but not bland — oh, and that will sell — and the resulting atmosphere can be fresh and vibrant at the best of times, or frantic and volatile at the worst. It’s a setting custom-made for conflict. What a perfect backdrop for a page-turner, I thought.

A backdrop is one thing, but a novel needs a gripping story, too. When 2008’s economic meltdown hit the magazine industry like a wrecking ball, I felt I’d found that story — one that was quite different from The Devil Wears Prada and other novels set in publishing’s glory days. In my Pretty in Ink, the editor-in-chief gets fired on Page 1, setting in motion the kind of upheaval that’ll be familiar to anyone who’s collected a paycheck (or tried to) in the past 5 years.

Pretty in Ink‘s plot is a version of what I — and nearly everyone working in the industry — have lived through: With hopes of reviving a slumping brand, a new boss is brought in to revamp the magazine, and usually the staff, too. My strategy for surviving such scary chaos was often to pretend I was a character in a novel: What a curious conflict, I’d think, pretending I was taking vicarious pleasure in a protagonist’s troubles instead of living my own life, I wonder what will happen next! Eventually, I started taking notes — and those notes grew to become this novel.

What was the most challenging aspect of writing PRETTY IN INK?

I always wanted Pretty in Ink‘s narration to be a joint venture — I figured the best way to get at multiple perspectives and the story’s shades of gray was to hear from a variety of voices. That said, my first draft assigned a new narrator to each new chapter, which made for a very large and unwieldy cast of characters. My agent, Joelle Delbourgo, wisely advised that I pare down the cast and limit the number of narrators. This ultimately made for a sharper, richer story, but the revisions were quite a challenge: I had to figure out who were the most essential characters, and which pieces of the story made the most sense for each narrator to take on.

What is the message you want readers to take away from your book?

There’s not necessarily a moral to the story, but what I do hope readers take away from the book is a closer consideration of the role of work and the workplace in our lives. Workplaces are worlds unto themselves, with their own rules (both official and unofficial), social codes, vibes, and hierarchies. And the people who populate these worlds have such a range of relationships to them — some see their jobs as merely a means to pay the bills, and others hinge their whole identities on them.

There’s no correct attitude to have towards your workplace and your coworkers, of course, but for most of us, these are the places where, and the people with whom, we’ll be spending the majority of our waking hours for most of our adult lives. For that reason alone, it seems worth it to me to think about what that place and those people mean to us, and how we do or don’t survive or thrive in these settings. Offices are frequently depicted on-screen (i.e. in Parks and Recreation, Veep, and The Office), but more rarely on the page. Even if my readers have never picked up a women’s magazine let alone worked as an editor creating one, I hope they’ll be able to relate to some of the work scenarios depicted in the book and, as a result, put some renewed thought into the role that workplaces and coworkers play in our lives.

Describe your writing schedule. Do you outline? Any habits?

On the delicious and rare day that I can devote to writing, I’ll walk to this wonderful spot in my neighborhood called Kos Kaffe, where the coffee is strong and the music is pleasant but not intrusive. I’ll spend about half of my time actually writing, plus a chunk of time idling through a thesaurus, another chunk of time eavesdropping on others’ conversations, and way too much time scrolling through cooking blogs and the non-newsy parts of nytimes.com. In other words, I don’t stay super-focused, but still I generally get down five to ten pages of not-terrible writing in a sitting. Then I’ll get antsy or my laptop power will die, whichever comes first. I’ll follow this pattern for a few days, and then I’ll backtrack on those pages and begin tinkering.

I tend to write about topics that have been plaguing me in one way or another, so without quite meaning to, before I sit down to write I end up working through ideas and developing characters and scenes in a haphazard, daydream-y kind of way. So while I have some sense of where I’m headed with a story, I don’t create anything as formal as an outline. However, my editing process is much more structured and intentional. I write a draft, editing as I go along, and then I rewrite the whole thing again and again, probably three or four times. Writing for me is about one-fifth writing and four-fifths editing and revision.

What books are on your nightstand? What are you currently reading?

I’m on the verge of finishing a school year — I recently made a career change and now teach high school English — so my recent reading has mainly been A.P. Literature essays and short stories by my Creative Writing students. Oh, and also Meg Wolitzer’s The Interestings, which I devoured. My to-read pile is currently not on my nightstand but rather tucked away in my suitcase, and will soon join me on vacation to Greece (!). I’m psyched to bring along Emma Straub’s The Vacationers — I adored her previous novel, Laura Lamont’s Life in Pictures; I’ve also packed Maggie Shipstead’s Astonish Me — I read her Seating Arrangements in one sitting–and Emily Gould’s Friendship — I find it’s a unique (and perhaps narcissistic) kind of pleasure to read novels whose protagonists are my exact age.

Which authors inspire you?

I mentioned Emma Straub above, who’s a new-ish favorite. She writes with grace and insight and makes me laugh out loud — plus, her book events feature warm chocolate-chip cookies, and I can’t argue with that.

Mona Simpson is another all-star on my team of favorite authors. Reading her debut, Anywhere But Here, was like discovering an entirely new way that language could be used, and her other books are just as gorgeous and moving. I always read her work at half speed because every word is so elegantly chosen, and every clause is gold.

I could name a hundred other contemporary authors I love, but instead I’ll suggest that you friend me Goodreads and then you can see if our tastes align. In terms of old-school pros, my favorites are Jane Austen and Edith Wharton. I’m a sucker for wit and social satire.

What have you learned from this experience?

A million things. But the most surprising one might be my huge admiration for publicists (shout-out to Kensington’s Vida Engstrand!). Writing is one thing, but getting people to 1. find out about what you’ve written, and 2. care enough to check it out, is an entirely different thing, and quite difficult and daunting. People who have mastered this art have my utmost respect and awe.

What is your advice for aspiring writers?

Read. Read more. Read even more. I’ve found that the best way to become a better writer is to expose myself to models of beautiful, fantastic, mind-blowing writing. If you don’t read much (as some aspiring writers have admitted to me that they don’t), then you should watch less TV, or join a book club, or move to New York so you can commute by subway, or make some other change that allows you to read more. It’s like filling your toolbox with the right tools. Besides, it’s a wonderful thing to support other writers.

What is the best piece of advice you have ever been given?

Just sit your butt down and write. Inspiration is fantastic but unreliable, whereas a commitment to the daily grind is completely within your control. In other words, treat writing like a job. Just like any other job, some days are great and other days are a struggle, but the point is showing up and maintaining the rhythm of a regular practice. I’ve heard this advice from many, but it’s never rung more true than during this past year when I began teaching: With 5 classes a day to plan and teach and 150 students’ papers to grade, I didn’t have a lot of free time for my own writing. So I couldn’t be precious about it; instead, I had to grab the hour or two here or there and just sit down and do it.

What are you working on now?

I’m putting the finishing touches on my next novel, If We Lived Here, which will be published next April. It’s the story of a 30-something New York couple planning to move in together for the first time. They’re in love and optimistic, but then a lot goes very wrong very fast, which forces them to examine what it really means to commit–to each other, to a home, and to a life that feels right for them.

Joan Didion famously explained that she writes “entirely to find out what I’m thinking, what I’m looking at, what I see and what it means. What I want and what I fear.” Why do you write?

That sounds about right to me — I mean, who am I to question to the great Joan Didion? But to add my own two cents, I suppose I write to explore, to work things through, and to better understand this strange, funny, nonsensical world we all live in. When I find myself oddly obsessed by a particular issue, or group of people, or scenario, unable to shake it from my thoughts, then I know it’s something I better start writing about. That instinct feels as fundamental to me as sleeping when I’m tired and eating when I’m hungry.

Lindsey J. Palmer worked as a professional writer and editor in the magazine industry for seven years, most recently as Features Editor at Self, and previously at Redbook and Glamour. A graduate of the University of Pennsylvania, she earned a Master of Arts in English Education from Teachers College, Columbia University, and currently teaches 12th grade English, A.P. Literature, and Creative Writing at NEST+m in Manhattan. Lindsey lives in Brooklyn. For more information on Lindsey, visit her website.

2014-07-15-LindseyPalmer.jpg

Psychologists Prescribing Medication Is a Bad Idea

The state of Illinois has now joined the states of New Mexico and Louisiana in allowing clinical psychologists the right to prescribe psychotropic medications. This new privilege comes with the requirement that psychologists take extra training to become familiar with the basics of the chemistry of the brain and how medications act to produce their affects. Ostensibly, this training gives them all the knowledge they need to determine the need for medication, prescribe them, and monitor their effects. However, the mere prescription of medication is only a part of what a psychiatrist does in the successful treatment of mentally ill patients. Giving psychologists the privilege of prescribing medications and pretending that this can obviate the need for more psychiatrists is a foolish idea.

Ironically, it is psychologists themselves who have so successfully educated the public to the fact that mild and moderate mental illnesses generally don’t require treatment with medications. Perhaps the best example is major depression. The well-known work of psychologist, Irving Kirsch, suggests that antidepressants are no better than placebo in mild to moderate depression. Indeed, their benefits are suspect even in severe forms of the illness.

Nor can it be assumed that adding an antidepressant to psychotherapy would make all the difference for a lot of patients. There is some evidence that combining medication with psychotherapy can be useful in some patients. However, several studies have found the benefits of combined to be equivocal.

The psychiatric literature itself notes that a significant number of patients, from 30 to 50 percent, who suffer depression do not respond to a single antidepressant. This improves only slightly after several more antidepressants are tried. It is when depression is severe, antidepressants fail, and the addition of psychotherapy provides no further relief, that the full range of knowledge of skills of the psychiatrist is so critical.

Quite justifiably, psychologists have prided themselves in their holistic approach to patients. They recognize that each individual has thoughts, feelings, and ways of seeing the world. People are social and spiritual beings. Often, mistaken ideas about the world and themselves get people into psychological trouble. Psychologists have a great deal to offer their patients in exploring these problems. However, while having similar appreciation of the complexity of human beings, psychiatrists are also trained to understand the enormous complexities and interactions of the brain and the body. Psychiatrists understand that various deficiencies and abnormalities in the body can contribute to mental illness, and that the correction of these problems are often necessary to achieve remission from psychiatric illness.

In some cases, the correction of low thyroid levels, or the augmentation of an antidepressant with the form of thyroid hormone called T3 can bring remission from depression. Vitamin B12 deficiencies are surprisingly common, particularly among the elderly. These deficiencies can be due to diet, or may be the result of stomach conditions or medications. Until the deficiency is corrected, a person with depression is unlikely to improve. In some individuals, the vitamin folic acid is not metabolized properly, and the addition of the Methyl-folate form of the vitamin helps restore emotional stability. In many cases it is necessary to augment antidepressants with biological treatments or secondary medications. These measures require medical management and cannot be performed by psychologist, including those who have had some extra training in how drugs work.

There are also a wide variety of medical conditions that can mimic or exacerbate major depression, including autoimmune disorders, neurological disorders, malignancies, infections, heavy metal poisoning, liver diseases, blood disorders, adverse effects of non-psychiatric medications, and many others. It is often the psychiatrist who recognizes that what was assumed to be a psychiatric illness is in fact an untreated medical problem. It is very unlikely that a psychologist, even one with extra training, would diagnose these problems.

Psychiatrists are often criticized for a reductionist approach to mental illness. We are accused of “throwing pills” while ignoring the social, cognitive and spiritual aspects of our patients. However, the use of medications by psychologists with only rudimentary understanding of physiology, pathophysiology, and pharmacology is another form of reductionism that should be soundly criticized.

Simply stated, psychologists do not need medications to treat the majority of the patients they see, whereas a simple medication will not be enough for many if not most of those who don’t respond to psychotherapy. The shortage of psychiatrists and the lack of access to competent mental health care is a serious problem, particularly in rural areas of America. However, the solution to the shortage is to train more psychiatrists and make practice in underserved areas more attractive. It serves no purpose to dilute the practice of psychiatry with ill-prepared surrogates.

This Is The Soccer-Themed 'Ferris Bueller's Day Off' Parody We Deserve

If you find yourself lying in bed with a serious case of World Cup withdrawal, and are thinking of playing hooky until you recover: we’ve got the video for you.

Chicago Fire striker and 2013 Major League Soccer MVP Mike Magee — who happens to be in the running for “Best MLS Player” at tonight’s ESPY awards — stars in a “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” parody, above, that’s tailor made for soccer fans.

In addition to several Chicago Fire coaches and players, the video has some pretty great cameos by American footballers: Sydney LeRoux of the U.S. Women’s National Team plays a sultry Sloane, teeammate and goalkeeper Hope Solo looks like she’s having a blast as the revenge-seeking Joanie Bueller, and U.S. Men’s National Team defender Omar Gonzalez is a practically flawless Cameron. French soccer legend and MLS player Thierry Henry, former USMNT coach Bruce Arena, USMNT midfielder Michael Bradley and comedian Judah Friedlander have some great blink-and-you’ll-miss-them cameos, too.

The video was a joint effort by the Chicago Fire, MLS, and Kick TV, a YouTube offshoot of MLS digital. Magee shot his scenes in the pre-season and earlier this spring in Chicago, New York and Los Angeles, according to the Fire.

Coming just days after the World Cup final, the video is also a conveniently-timed plug for the MLS, which is no doubt looking to hold on to some of last month’s record-setting soccer viewership.

Want more Magee than you get above? Watch the extended cut on YouTube

These Brands Want Girls to Care About STEM

The latest trend of empowerment marketing has inundated us with positive messages for women. But some brands aren’t letting their message end with a campaign spot. Armed with statistics that girls are likely to be less interested in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) after the early years of their education (and that only 24 percent of STEM employees are women) some brands have decided to try and do something about that.

Man Arrested After Breaking Into Kennedy Compound To Look For Katy Perry

A 53-year-old man was arrested after breaking into the Kennedy Compound in Barnstable, Massachusetts. Police said the man, identified as James M. Lacroix, told them he was “looking for Katy Perry.”

Barnstable police responded to a call on Tuesday, July 15, evening from Edward Kennedy Jr., who was in Connecticut when he phoned home to check on his son 16-year-old son and Lacroix answered.

When officers arrived at the residence, they found Lacroix sitting on a couch reading a book. According to police, the Mashpee, Massachusetts, resident told officers he was at the home to see Katy Perry and John F. Kennedy, adding that he had a gift to give the singer.

Kennedy’s teenage son told police he encountered Lacroix upon arriving at the home and assumed he was a friend of the family. The young man said the two had an “extensive and interesting” conversation before he left to go to a friend’s house.

Lacroix, who officers say may have been suffering from “longstanding psychological issues,” said he entered through an unlocked door. Lacroix was arrested and charged with breaking and entering; his arraignment at the Barnstable District Court is on July 16.

Perry, currently touring as part of her Prismatic World Tour, was performing at the Bell Centre in Montreal at the time of Lacroix’s arrest.

House Hears Arguments On Lawsuit Against President Obama

WASHINGTON — A key House committee heard arguments Wednesday about whether to push ahead with a lawsuit brought by Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) against President Barack Obama, amid complaints from Democrats that the suit is a political stunt.

“This lawsuit is preposterous,” said Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the House Rules Committee, which will vote next week on whether to send the resolution calling for the suit to the House floor. “It is a political exercise that, if history is our guide, will have little chance of surviving in the courts.”

But Republicans contended that Obama has been acting in an imperial manner and taking the law into his own hands, and that it was up to the House to reign him in. Boehner’s suit would allege that Obama has trespassed on Congress’ power by delaying various parts of the Affordable Care Act.

“Under President Obama, the executive branch has increasingly gone beyond the constraints of the constitution,” said Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), the chairman of the committee. “Rather than faithfully execute the laws as the Constitution requires, the president has instead selectively enforced the law in some instances, ignoring the law in other instances and in a few cases changed the law altogether, all without going through the required constitutional lawmaking exercise.”

Democrats found a great deal of irony in the fact that Boehner wants to go to court to speed up the Affordable Care Act, a law that he and his fellow Republicans have battled for years to delay.

“The Republican House voted to delay it or repeal it at least 50 times, said it was the worst piece of legislation in the history of the republic,” Slaughter said. “They shut down the government to try to stop it. Now they’re trying to speed it up.”

One witness who testified before the committee, Simon Lazarus, agreed that the contradiction would not be lost on judges.

“The propensity of members of the judiciary, including the Supreme Court, to view with skepticism the question of whether they should take jurisdiction over such a lawsuit, is likely to be enhanced by a perception that the last thing in the world that some of the proponents of this lawsuit really want would be to see faithful execution of the Affordable Care Act,” said Lazarus, a lawyer at the Constitutional Accountability Center in Washington.

Still, Jonathan Turley, a professor at George Washington University Law School and another of the GOP’s witnesses, said that the motivations of the parties are less important than what the actions actually are. Turley backed the GOP position that Obama is acting like a monarch.

“Some of President Obama’s statements come strikingly close to assertions by King James I that he could apply ‘natural reason’ to the alteration, and even the suspension, of federal laws,” Turley said. “There may be good reasons for such changes. However, this is not a question of what to do, but how should such changes be made, and more importantly, who should make them?”

With the White House and lawmakers at loggerheads, Turley said the courts are the logical place to seek resolution.

“Rather than continue this unresolved and worsening controversy over the separation of powers, the House is seeking authority to bring the matter to the courts,” Turley said. “That is precisely where such lingering questions should be resolved.”

The Republicans’ case was undercut somewhat by one of their witnesses, Elizabeth Price Foley, a law professor at Florida International University who earlier this year wrote a column for The Daily Caller entitled “Why not even Congress can sue the administration over unconstitutional executive actions.” Foley said on Wednesday that opponents of the lawsuit have taken parts of her column out of context.

Democrats argued that the real motivation behind the suit, which has also attracted criticism from conservatives, is to mollify some of the more radical members of the party who would like to impeach Obama.

“This lawsuit is clearly being used to appease members of the Republican Party who will not rest until President Obama is charged with articles of impeachment. This is a partisan political stunt timed to peak in the House of Representatives in November, right as the midterm elections are happening,” Slaughter said. “The House majority is suing the president simply for doing his job.”

One of the experts who testified on Wednesday, Walter Dellinger, a constitutional lawyer who served in the Clinton administration, said that Congress has plenty of power to rein in Obama, if it actually wanted to do so. However, he noted, in this case the two chambers of Congress are in disagreement, with the Senate backing the White House’s steps to tweak the Affordable Care Act.

“We have ample authority in Congress, if the whole Congress will use it,” Dellinger said, adding that if Congress is unhappy that President Obama is delaying parts of the ACA — much the same way President George W. Bush delayed parts of the Medicare prescription law — it could pass new legislation denying the White House flexibility in implementing the health care law.

Slaughter suggested that running to the courts when Congress was stuck was tantamount to embracing a more European form of government.

“That’s how they do it in Europe, particularly in France,” Slaughter said. “Now, why do you suppose that the majority party wants to turn our legal system into the French system? It seems to us that our 200-plus years of what we’ve been doing has worked very well for us.”

Most Americans seem to agree with Slaughter and her fellow Democrats, saying in polls that the suit is a waste of time.

Dellinger mentioned a specific reason the case could be pointless: The delays to the ACA that Obama has implemented are scheduled to end before the Supreme Court would be likely to rule, should it take the case.

“Unless there were extreme expedition, this case would not get before the Supreme Court this term, this term that begins the first Monday in October. So it would be before the court in the following term,” Dellinger said. “I assume it would have been dismissed as moot.”

Michael McAuliff covers Congress and politics for The Huffington Post. Talk to him on Facebook.