5 Great Gifts to Send Obama in Lieu of Cash Contributions

(Page 4 of 5)

4. Logo Crystal Ring Set NBA

As the president makes sure everyone knows, he's a big sports fan even if he's incapable of throwing out the first pitch at a baseball game or naming any living or dead members of his favorite team, the Chicago White Sox. Basketball is Obama's biggest sport and he recently told a Miami audience that his visit would be “incomplete if I did not congratulate the city of Miami for having the world champion Miami Heats here in town.” 

Sure, the Miami Heat logo ring set is relatively pricey — it costs $98.99 and adding an "s" to the team name will cost still more — but we're talking about a gift for the president here.

NEXT: Don't Let Gray Become the New Black

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I can't tell if this is a snark at Obama or SkyMall.

    We could always give the president the give of leisure, the kind of leisure that can only come with not having your golf game and vacations scrutinized by the rightwing media. Retirement. Or maybe vegetable of the month club.

  • PapayaSF||

    It's bi-directional snark.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Where's the slam on Romney?

  • Agammamon||

    Romney's not asking people to forgo gifts to family in order to donate to his campaign.

  • CockGobbla||

    I was thinking about giving him a $20 gift card to BestBuy.

  • deified||

    As a New Jerseyan himself, Dr. Gillespie, Ph.D., remembers that when Governor His Excellency James "Jimbo" Florio gave us a toilet paper tax, New Jerseyans used their native intellect and world renowned hospitality to decide to send the Lord Florio his Highness a significant amount of used toilet paper.

    reason magazine, let's make this happen.

  • Hoofddorp Haarlemmermeer||

    So we should send ostomy bags to the White House then?

  • ||

    Fuck the president. Roddick just aced Ferrer three times in a row at 140+ mph. And my fucking tennis lesson was canceled for this morning.

  • Hugh Akston||

    You like tennis? Listen, Epi, I want to apologize for all the times I used 'gay' as a pejorative. I imagine you found that very offensive.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Epi's not gay. His boyfriend is.

  • ||

    I'm the pitcher, not the catcher!

  • Hugh Akston||

    Don't you mean you serve and he returns?

  • ||

    Don't make me give you my backhand, Hugh.

    I predict Roddick will choke and lose to Ferrer. Because he always does. Hey, Andy, surprise me this time.

  • Ted S.||

    Some of us like seeing Roddick lose.

  • Randian||

    Wait, I thought that Epi actually was gay. NTTAWWT or anything, I just thought that was a fact.

  • ||

    I am the gayest monster since gay came to Gaytown.

  • Randian||

    "looks like somebody's a little BI-Curious!"

  • ||

    "I ain't no bi-curious. I'm a man's man!"

  • ||

    ...and Roddick loses. Of course. Well, at least Andy Murray is still in it.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Episiarch can't be gay. He's had plenty of opportunities to look at my junk in the HnR locker room, and he never has. Not once.

  • ||

    There might be another...small...reason for that, Hugh.

  • Tulpa the White||

    See, THIS is the kind of conversation Epi can contribute meaningful content to. If this were a locker room talk blog he would be the best poster ever.

  • ||

    If only I could provide the kind of moronic, delusional authority-fellating contrarian idiocy you contribute, Professor Pomeranian. Then I could convince myself I was some kind of magical internet hero who defends comment boards. You know, I envy you. The world you inhabit must be at least...interesting. Well, for you. For the rest of us, it's just fucking pathetic.

  • ||

    At least he is capable of contributing meaningful content. At least he has something to say besides "me disagree."

  • Len Bias||

    Wait, this all seems strictly aimed at the Obama administration. Better throw in a jab at Romney, lest anyone from MSNBC accuses you fo being a Republican.

  • CockGobbla||

    I don't get the criticism of Gillespie's attacks on Romney.

    For the sake of argument, let's say Romney is a better choice than Obama.

    But we all know Romney's concern first and foremost is to get elected. Principled concerns over how to run the government are secondary.

    Seeing as how that's the case, is it really a good idea to give Romney carte blanche in terms of uncritical political support, or is it better to hold his feet to the fire and force him to conform (at least in some way) to the limited government philosophy we want?

  • ||

    Let me explain it for you: all the TEAM RED HitUndRunpublican hacks are going to start shilling FULL ROMNIAC soon. This is just their initial grumblings. As the election grows closer, their whining about attacks on ROMNIAC will grow more and more shrill. As will their full court press attempts to convince libertarians to vote for him.

    You've been warned.

  • CockGobbla||

    I have interest in voting for Romney; I just have to see how he handles the pressures of the post-convention general election period.

    If, for example, he caves and goes full "100,000 troops in Tehran by 2015!", then fuck him.

  • Tulpa the White||

    If, for example, he caves and goes full "100,000 troops in Tehran by 2015!", then fuck him.

    You think Obama wouldn't if that were politically useful?

  • CockGobbla||

    No, but we can hope for this shitty presidency to be over 5 short months.

    I just don't want to get started on another shitty presidency that could theoretically last for 8 years.

  • CockGobbla||

    Well, 7 months, but November will feel pretty good when we send Obama his notice.

  • Len Bias||

    If Romney wins, he is very likely to be a one term president. Half the country is still considering voting for Obama again, despite a shitty economy. Already, no one likes Romney. After four years of a lackluster economy, he will be gone. Unless he can usher in an era of explosive economic growth and job creation (unlikely), no one will stomach voting for him again.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    After the last four years, it won't take much economic improvement to look good in comparison.

    IMO if Romney simply avoids stepping on his own feet and keeps us out of any wars for four years his chance of reelection will be very good.

  • ||

    I still gotta say, I just don't see that happening electoral-college-wise. Even if this election weren't bore pie with yawn sauce already, I cannot see it winnable for Millionaire Mutt-moving McMormon.

  • SIV||

    Bill Clinton is the only Democrat party president to get reelected since FDR. I don't see Obama pulling it off in this economy. Mitt has a good shot. All he needs is for the Midwestern union crackers "Reagan Democrats" to come through for him. CJ Roberts kinda fucked things up for Mittens though by legalizing the free healthcare.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Truman and Johnson got reelected too. You could say they were only elected once, but I don't think you can blame death in office on party affiliation.

    Of course, the GOP is alone in having a completely unelected president in Ford.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    So...not much chance, then?

  • VG Zaytsev||

    I just don't want to get started on another shitty presidency that could theoretically last for 8 years.

    That's inevitable.

  • Len Bias||

    I'm not voting for Romney. I just don't think the two are equally bad. It's not shrill to hold that opinion.

  • ||

    I apologize if I lumped you in with the HitUndRunpublicans, Len. But it doesn't make what I said any less true. Look at Tulpa the Wight. He's already shilling for ROMNIAC.

    Oh look, Roddick is 3 points away from choking, as usual. Oops, make that 2.

  • WWNGD?||

    Just so you know, any vote not for Romney is a vote for the Kenyancommie Obama. (/standard conservative response)

  • Tulpa the White||

    Wow, Epi, when I grow up I want to be as above the fray as you are.

    The mother of a fence sitter does not weep.

  • ||

    I thought when you grew up, you wanted to defend comment boards from glib commenters. Aren't you proud of what you've become, Professor Pomeranian?

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  • Tulpa the White||

    No, this is only my pupa stage.

  • Pip from the forge||

    Not that "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA" is not a devastating rebuttal.

  • Randian||

    I, for one, am not a fence-sitter. I have already decided who I want for President, and you have failed (consistently) to give me a good reason to change my mind.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Like Socrates said, it's impossible to change the mind of someone who doesn't listen.

  • Randian||

    I've listened to Republican apologists for about a decade, and they haven't said anything new other than "but that guy would be WORSE!" I heard it with Gore in 2000, with Kerry in 2004, with Obama in 2008, and again in 2012.

    It's the same argument over and over. "Just this one time, vote for Republicans. I swear they'll change!"

    It never happens.

    You may think it's open-minded to keep trying at a Lucy-held football; I think it's idiocy.

  • CockGobbla||

    "You may think it's open-minded to keep trying at a Lucy-held football"

    Steigerwald? Dude, have you seen her around?

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Yeah. I'm sick of voting for the R. I'll vote for Johnson this cycle. I don't give a fuck if that means Obama beats Romney. I just refuse to be kicked in the groin by another R.

    Besides, if you want candidates like Johnson to get traction, you have to start voting for them. It may be a "throw away" in the near term, but it will build toward long term success.

  • Tulpa the White||

    It may be a "throw away" in the near term, but it will build toward long term success.

    Getting 0.5% of the vote for 30 years hasn't built toward long term success. The first step toward building toward long term success would be to get the LP to stop behaving like a third-rate clown school. There are serious big-fish-in-small-pond issues going on with the LP leadership and have been for quite some time.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Besides, if you want candidates like Johnson to get traction, you have to start voting for them. It may be a "throw away" in the near term, but it will build toward long term success.

    It's not a throw away vote unless your state is decided by one vote.
    I'm voting for Johnson, unless polls show a tie between Romney and O in my state near election day. Which ain't gonna happen in CA.

  • J Freeman||

    That's why I never understand the argument "If you vote for 3rd party then you are voting for Obama" or whatever variation. One person voting for whomever is not going to give the election to any candidate, unless you are a Supreme Court Justice voting on the constitutionality of Obamacare.

  • Tulpa the White||

    If Gore or Kerry had been elected, we still would have had the wars and rampant spending of the Bush administration... plus Heller and CU going the other way. Plus god knows what else.

    And it's hard to imagine how McCain would have been any worse than BO.

    Do you disagree with any of those things?

    I used to think as you did, hence my vote for the LP in 2004 and 2008. But the past four years have taught me otherwise. The Dems, at least in their current configuration, must be stopped. If you want to hit the pavement and go door to door raising the rep of the LP to the point where they have a shot at winning, more power to you. Till then, stick with the GOP (which is being remade in the image of RP as we speak, anyway).

  • CockGobbla||

    "Randy: [jumps upright and plants his hands on the table] You don't care?! You really want a turd sandwich as your school mascot?! On your football helmets?! A turd?!

    Sharon: Well, hold on, Randy, I think a turd sandwich is a little better than them having a giant douche on their uniforms.

    Randy: You're crazy!! A d-a douche is at least clean!
    Sharon: It's sexist is what it is!

    Randy: You don't understand the issues, Sharon!

    Sharon: Are you calling me ignorant??

    Randy: You think the school mascot should be a turd sandwich? Well you're not exactly Einstein!

    Sharon: I am sick of you belittling my opinion, you son of a bitch! [picks up the casserole and chucks it at Randy, who ducks and looks back at her angrily. They both leave the table in opposite directions.]"

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Check back with me in 2016. In 2012, I refuse to sell out my convictions to a GOP that has no interest in my convictions.

  • Tulpa the White||

    The US as we know it may not exist in 2016 if BO gets reelected.

  • Randian||

    The US as we know it may not exist in 2016 if BO gets reelected.

    *eyeroll*

  • ||

    And it's hard to imagine how McCain would have been any worse than BO.

    Do you disagree with any of those things?

    Yeah, I do disagree about McCain. We'd be at war with Iran and perhaps half the rest of the world. That man spent too much time in a POW camp...he ain't all there.

    I will agree that the best way to obtain libertopia is to take over an existing party rather than shooting for a third. BUT...until people actually want freedom, there will be none. Need to convince the sheeple that their best interests lie in liberty.

  • T o n y||

    We would not have had Iraq under Gore and we wouldn't have had all the tax cuts so if your concern is either the deficit or not getting involved in a war based on lies, then you'd have been much better off. This is the essence of how Republicans win. The more they fuck up the more they coax people into blaming "the system" or government conceptually, and the more people like you just throw your hands up and stop looking at the evidence. Why would Gore have had the wars? Which neocons advise him?

  • ||

    $

  • Jough||

    Leon Panetta

  • Jim in Denver||

    Right, because Democrats have NEVER started a war nor spent more than the government received. And if you want to cite Clinton do so at the risk of sounding like the idiot we all know you are. Unauthorized cruise missile attacks and intra-governmental borrowing to hide the shortage of the "balanced budget".

  • T o n y||

    We would not have had Iraq under Gore and we wouldn't have had all the tax cuts so if your concern is either the deficit or not getting involved in a war based on lies, then you'd have been much better off. This is the essence of how Republicans win. The more they fuck up the more they coax people into blaming "the system" or government conceptually, and the more people like you just throw your hands up and stop looking at the evidence. Why would Gore have had the wars? Which neocons advise him?

  • Tulpa the White||

    You do realize that regime change in Iraq was originally a Clinton/Gore administration policy, and the majority of the Patriot Act was composed of a wish list from the Clinton/Gore DOJ going back to the mid-90s.

  • Jesse James Dean||

    Dont confuse team blue with facts

  • Nyarlathotep||

    CDN$

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Except that it may actually be true this time.

    Romney's a corrupt asshole but no way does he go to war ignoring Congress, appoint a pack of communists to the bureaucracy or get away with lying his ass off.

    If only because the media will snap out of their trance and attack the mean white guy that offed their messiah.

  • CockGobbla||

    When Bill Maher attacks Romney for doing the exact same things he allowed Obama to do, then, in fit of reluctant sympathy, I'll gladly donate my time and money to Romeny, 2016.

  • Len Bias||

    "If only because the media will snap out of their trance and attack the mean white guy that offed their messiah."

    The extent that the media and my leftie friends are willing to overlook Obama's authoritarian power grabs is frightening. One blamed his signing the NDAA on the GOP! All this in exchange for "universal" health coverage.

  • Len Bias||

    No, I never said Romney deserves carte blanche. I got no love for the guy, and have no intention of voting for him. And, I cringe almost daily when I hear him speak.

    It just gets tiring that whenever Reason writers give an opinion that might be construed as conservative or is also held by the GOP, they always bash Romney or the GOP for equal measure.

    Libertarians/Reasonoids are hated by the left, and always will be. Throwing in jabs at Romney for equal measure will never mean more acceptance from the left.

  • Metazoan||

    That's true. Look at Gillespie with Maddow. In her mind, HURR BUT RETHUGLICANZ WOULDA DID IT is actually a defense for fast and furious. And unless you qualify your Dem criticism with some extra GOP criticism, you are TEH GOP and therefore automatically lose.

    It's like all those people who respond to Obama criticism with "Bush did it!" Well, great, then they both suck, but how is it even relevant?

  • Tulpa the White||

    I don't think anyone here is looking for carte blanche for Romney. Just giving up the drumbeat of "Obamacare = Romneycare" and, you know, not defending Obama (like Gillespie originally did on the "Heats" gaffe).

    There are plenty of legitimately disgusting things about Romney to criticize, the only problem being that BO is just as bad on most of them.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

  • Tulpa the White||

    That wording implies Gillespie has Mittsticles in his mouth.

  • R||

    Only if your a fucking retard and/or have never heard of a meme.

  • R||

    GODDAMN YOU JOEZ LAW!

    *you're.

  • Killazontherun||

    Wait, this all seems strictly aimed at the Obama administration. Better throw in a jab at Romney, lest anyone from MSNBC accuses you fo being a Republican.

    I don't get the criticism of Gillespie's attacks on Romney.

    Basic rule of composition. You never take the pressure off the throat of the victim you have your hands wrapped around at any given time. Save it for your next essay. 'On the one hand . . but on the other' is the flaccid limp dick of essay writing. That is why Cathy Young always sucks.

    Hope that helps.

  • CockGobbla||

    "flaccid limp dick...Cathy Young"

    Thanks for the visual.

  • Killazontherun||

    Also, you have to be very careful about striking the middle. There is evil history here, called The Third Way.

    It usually goes like this -- 'Hey, you got your socialism in my peanut butter!' 'Well, you got your peanut butter in my socialism!'

    Ah, shit, no more peanut butter.

    And that is how markets usually die. Not the brunt force of communism, but through compromise.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    More like, "you got your nationalism in my socialism" "no, you got your socialism in my nationalism"

  • Killazontherun||

    I beg your pardon but I got it entirely right the first time. I meant for you to ask yourself why would I contrast an idea with a product and not an idea against another idea. Capitalism is the name we give to a normative economic function without there even being a need for an ideology behind it. Socialism is the opposite, the organizing idea comes before everything else. It is product that gets subdued in socialist systems, along with people who are affected by the systemic control of the later.

    What would Krugnuts's take on the disappearance of the peanut butter be? You didn't add enough socialism to the mix to make the peanut butter sustainable.

    Don't come around and kick sand on my perfectly constructed castle and think you are making design improvements. Ruiner.

  • Killazontherun||

    'the former' not the later. Sentence construction changed. I'm still in deep shock over the barbaric assault above and under the influence of smelling salt this time. Where did that old black woman disappear to and why isn't she fanning me? Does she want me to be all sweaty when my suitors come calling?

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    I'm sending Obama my copy of Hazlitt's Failure of the "New Economics". I've made notes in the margins, to help him understand the concepts.

  • Len Bias||

    Wow, that gesture will go down in history books as the time Keynesian economics was finally abandoned.

    Although, if Geithner or Bernanke gets ahold of it first, they may hide it from the president.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Pauly Krugman has sent his cat to assassinate EDG.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I don't get how those lawn aerator sandals haven't been banned by CPSC. Those things could be pretty damaging if you're a stumblebums.

  • Brandybuck||

    It's like they have miniature lawn darts welded to the soles...

  • Brutus||

    I'm getting him the Fast Furious DVD gift set. With a pre-order of FnF 6, you get a dead Mexican.

  • Tulpa the White||

    The problem with the LP is that they're too dogmatic. ie, if you don't support legalizing prostitution and heroin and getting rid of SS and Medicare, and legalizing anti-aircraft artillery on people's rooftops, etc, you're simply not welcome. Which means it's NEVER going to be an influence in politics unless everyone comes over to those views, which ain't happening anytime soon.

    Whereas the Tea Party (for all its warts) just focused on spending and taxes and has had huge influence. The LP needs to take a good hard look in the mirror and figure out why the TP was able to do so much in 2.5 years compared to their complete lack of accomplishments in in almost 40.

  • Brutus||

    There is something to this.

  • ||

    Holy shit, you're tedious, Tulpa the Wight.

    The one positive thing about this election is that I will find someone's tears yummy and sweet no matter who loses. Maybe they will be yours, Tulpy-poo.

  • Randian||

    but-for the philosophical ammunition provided by libertarians, there would be no Tea Party.

  • Tulpa the White||

    ...which has very little to do with my point. The LP has made zero contribution to libertarian philosophy other than to embarrass the brand.

  • Randian||

    Right. The Tea Party is a model of pride, what with its failure to support its intellectual godfather in favor of a prick named Santorum who said, basically, "I hate libertarians"

  • Tulpa the White||

    The TP didn't support Santorum; people who identified themselves as TPers did.

  • Randian||

    "Well, all true Scotsmen like haggis."

  • Tulpa the White||

    So anyone who says Bill Maher isn't libertarian, despite identifying himself as such, are playing No True Scotsman?

  • Randian||

    Don't be tiresome, Tulpa. The Tea Party abandoned Ron Paul in favor of Ricky Santorum. There is plenty of proof. The fact that it seems inconsistent with Tea Party principles tells you how much they adhere to the principles, not who is "truly" Tea Party.

  • Tulpa the White||

    The Tea Party abandoned Ron Paul in favor of Ricky Santorum. There is plenty of proof.

    So much proof that it doesn't need to be identified, apparently. The "proof" that anti-TP libertarians have cited over and over are the exit polls purporting to show who the Tea Party supports, when in reality they're just showing who people who want to latch on to the TP success support.

  • ||

    Since the Tea Party isn't a single organization, you have plenty of neoconservatives and Religious Right crusaders forming up and calling themselves part of the Tea Party movement. Doesn't mean shit.

    Not a single Tea Partier of the dozens I personally know ever gave Santorum a single thought. Not one. And every single supposed Tea Partier I've heard of endorsing Santorum was either a neoconservative warmonger or an quasi-theocratic cunt in his beliefs.

  • Randian||

    So they're either impotent or lying. not a great choice.

  • ||

    Or they're not actually part of that movement.

  • Tulpa the White||

    They've unseated GOP politicians supported by the establishment left and right. And those replacing them have been much better on the issues the TP was formed around. So they're neither.

    I think the LP/Cato people are just jealous because they've been so impotent for so long and here the TP drops in and elects Rand Paul et al within a couple of years.

  • ||

    The TP was hijacked by SoCons. I had a lot of hope in the beginning:

    1. Fiscal responsibility
    2. Limited government
    3. Adherence to the constitution

    Then Palin (et al.)realized she could twist it and ride the coattails. At that point it became about how god hates the gayz and the need to be in church on Sundy. Hence the Frothy surge.

    They made the mistake of not delineating what they stood for, so someone else did it for them.

    Now...FUCK the Tea Party.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Revisionist history FTL.

    Explain how the crown jewel of the TP, Rand Paul, is out there blocking synthetic MJ bans if your version of events is true.

  • ||

    Because RP was a product of the original movement. The Republicans didn't hop on board until after the 2010 election (IOWs, after they came to the realization that they might be the next in the cross-hairs).

    What is revisionist about that? Pre 2010 Team Red wouldn't touch the TP with a 20 foot pole.

  • Tulpa the White||

    TP only existed starting in spring 2009. Once it was clear they had a good thing going the GOP (except for the hardcore neocons) were jumping on the bandwagon, certainly by fall 2009, as a means of being seen fighting BO.

  • SIV||

    Damn that Sarah Palin with her SoCon support of jury nullification and her theocratic endorsement of marijuana decriminalization. She's probably one of those Godbot KULTUR WARRIORS who wants to repeal the commonsense ban on incandescent lightbulbs too!

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Yep, libertarians need to adapt the tactics of the fabian socialists. Slow evolutionary change, take what you can get today then come back for more tomorrow and above all else lie about your ultimate goals.

    The real problem that I see with libertarians is they're more interested in proselytizing than in changing government policy.

    And yeah I know in the super long run that will have the best results but I don't want to wait 1,000 years to start shrinking government.

  • Tulpa the White||

    There's also the difficulty that people in power WANT to go in the direction of socialism, since it gives them more power. So incremental change isn't hard for socialists.

    Incremental change with the people in power fighting you every inch of the way is going to be a bitch, so that strategy may not work. But I think you could take a pretty huge bite out of statism by running on a platform of liberty-friendly changes that the population would actually like, and treating the other topics gently if at all.

  • ||

    1) Some people with libertarian convictions don't give a fuck about the Libertarian Party.

    2) "legalizing anti-aircraft artillery on people's rooftops"

    Hoplophobic Scrotal Sacks' Herpa Derp Guidebook, Page 1. Don't lower yourself to the Brady level of debate.

  • Tulpa the White||

    There are people here who will insist the 2nd amendment requires 2). It may not be part of the LP platform, but you get the idea.

  • ||

    I get what you were trying to convey, but it's still silly.

  • KPres||

    No, its not that they're too radical, its that they don't defend incremental changes. Pragmatism just means you're in it for the long haul, it doesn't mean you're soft. Milton Friedman held every principle Murray Rothbard did, its just that Friedman knew when to make a strategic retreat. Both types are necessary, I guess.

    The problem with you Tulpa is you're a fake. You're not a pragmatist, you're the Team Red version of Shrike.

  • Tulpa the White||

    What's the practical difference between being "in it for the long haul" and just being perpetually ineffective?

  • KPres||

    No, its not that they're too radical, its that they don't defend incremental changes. Pragmatism just means you're in it for the long haul, it doesn't mean you're soft. Milton Friedman held every principle Murray Rothbard did, its just that Friedman knew when to make a strategic retreat. Both types are necessary, I guess.

    The problem with you Tulpa is you're a fake. You're not a pragmatist, you're the Team Red version of Shrike.

  • Tulpa the White||

    You're not a pragmatist, you're the Team Red version of Shrike.

    Or Team Blue, depending on which dogma I'm questioning. Like when I said gun owners should keep their guns in safes if they can afford one, and said Snickers' getting rid of the King Size was probably not part of a Michelle Obama plot.

    You need a scorecard to keep track of which party I'm partisan shilling for from day to day. Or, perhaps, you could just consider the merest possibility that I have consistent positions that I defend regardless of whose ox they gore.

  • PapayaSF||

    Tulpa is absolutely correct. Ideological purism is poison in democratic politics. No ideology can ever get everything they want.

    That's how we ended up in the semi-socialist, bankrupt mess we have now: people with largely socialists beliefs started calling themselves "progressives" and then "liberals" and worked within the Democratic Party. They never got everything they wanted, but it added up over time, and what was considered "radical" and "socialist" became normalized. Now, supporting Social Security and Medicare is "mainstream."

    Look at how much of the Socialist Party platform of 1928 is in place now. All that despite the fact that no Socialist ever got elected President, and only a few members of Congress.

    So which would you rather have? Ideological purity with single-digit/margin or error vote totals, or working with Republicans to get most of what you want over a few generations? (Not that I am necessarily voting for Romney.)

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Uh, am I the only one who didn't know Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes were getting a divorce? How is this not worthy of a Hit and Run post of its own? They're America's sweethearts, for fuck sake.

  • Hugh Akston||

    It would only be worth a post if Tom Cruise moved in with Rick Santorum.

  • ||

    They're only dating, Hugh. It's a little early for that kind of commitment.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Is Tulpa young enough for Tom Cruise to date on the sly?

  • Len Bias||

    They were?

    Tom Cruise was approaching Mel Gibson levels of crazy there for a while. I didn't know anyone took him seriously.

  • Randian||

    I tend to take people who make 700 million dollar movies seriously, if they are personally crazy.

  • Tulpa the White||

    He "makes" those movies in the sense that the people who actually make them benefit from having his name associated with the movie. The vast majority of the work and all the creative development is done by other people.

  • Randian||

    Yes, he must not have done any serious work to get to that point.

    Can you just leave something alone once in a while or do you have to violently wrong about everything?

    Read the facts: he's taken pay cuts on two of those movies in exchange for back-end percentages, and it's been extremely profitable for him and for the studios.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Dude, you're the one snarking at Len Bias for not taking a RichPerson seriously. Are you actively trying to play into Objectivist stereotypes now?

    I don't see how modifying a deal is supposed to make me take seriously a guy who donates millions of dollars a year to the CoS for the privilege of being mindfucked, followed around by chaperones, and generally made into a laughingstock.

    Of course what's ironic is that Cruise fits perfectly into the mold of the brainless artistes on the train that crashed in the tunnel in AS.

  • Randian||

    I don't think I said you had to respect him. I just said you had to take him "seriously". I'm talking about a business perspective. Look, Len said this:

    I didn't know anyone took him seriously.

    I would submit that if you were in the movie industry and you failed to take Tom Cruise "seriously", you would rightfully be out of a job. He may be a goofy nutcase, but he makes 700 million dollar movies.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Neither you, Len Bias, or I is in the movie industry. So I don't see how that point is relevant. You were claiming you take him seriously, and implying that people in general should too.

    Plus I'm sure the vast majority of people in Hollywood don't take him seriously either, they just use him as a source of a paycheck.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I mean, look at Brad Pitt. Quite similar career arcs, starting off as a pretty-boy actor and managing to keep his career going as a more mature man afterward. Or Leo Dicaprio.

    None of those people get the disrespect that Cruise does, because they don't have such obvious tomfoolery going on in their lives (or maybe because they don't jump on couches).

  • ||

    Just in time for his 50th, I understand.

  • ||

    Sorry, that should be a period. Not a comma.

  • Jerry on the road||

    You would understand too if you have seen the trailer to Rock of Ages.

  • ||

    Who?

  • Killazontherun||

    Who'll be the next lucky girl?

    Scarlett Johansson escapes Cruise’s clutches

    Freaks out Jen Garner

    Lock your doors. Run for your lives, bachelorettes of Hollywood, Tom is back on the prowl!

  • Randian||

    Mimi Rogers is 56 this year.
    Nicole Kidman is 45 this year.
    Katie Holmes is 34 this year.

    So who's 23 out there? There's your answer. I nominate Hayden Panettiere, because Heroes sucked.

  • ||

    It seems like Kidman anymore looks like if she gets any skinnier she's going to fall through her own ass and hang herself. She was smoking hot in To Die For, though. In fact, she was the one and only reason to see that movie.

  • CockGobbla||

    "Miscarrying" Cruise's hell-spawn took a lot out of her.

  • Killazontherun||

    Buck Henry's script was damn decent.

  • Killazontherun||

    She's got the sweetest pair of gams in Hollywood, but I'd make sure her ex-boyfriend didn't still have a thing for her if I was Cruise.

  • ||

    http://s16.postimage.org/fsy47p4gz/1155.jpg

    Polygamy might be a good change for Tom, if he'd be willing to take it up.

  • Killazontherun||

    Picked a fine week to take up the bongo drums.

  • ||

    I wonder what percentage of that shit is true?

    Anyway, the good part is that Katie is back on the market.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    Five Great Gifts to give Jug-Ears;

    1) A conscience

    2) A clue

    3) A copy of The Debate on the Constitution (two volumes, ISBN 978-0940450424 978-0940450646

    4) A map showing handy evacuation routes out of Washington.

    5) A bus ticket, one way, from Washington D.C. to Chicago.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Nah, he can still cause trouble in Chicago. St Helena's is where he belongs.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    Yeah, but from what I'm reading Chicago deserves him.

  • sloopyinca||

    Question: Is Obama such a narcissistic asshole that, if he loses in November, we can plan on seeing him run in 2016 again? Think about it: it's not like he's qualified to do anything productive.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Maybe he'll learn from the example of Newt 2012.

  • Hoofddorp Haarlemmermeer||

    To be an insufferable asshole? Or to get divorced and find himself a blond?

  • Len Bias||

    He might try, I just don't see him getting very far. If he loses in November, he will act like such a whiny, poor loser and people will still remember that come 2016.

    The Dems have got to be able to find someone more serviceable than him by the time 2016 rolls around.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Andrew Cuomo. Bank it.

  • Ice Nine||

    I'm thinking that his disconcerting resemblance to the Geico caveman might hurt him a bit.

  • Tulpa the White||

    People LOVE those cavemen.

    I'd prefer the Gecko though. Or that sweet chocolate covered cherry morsel Flo.

  • BakedPenguin||

    That Cro-Magnon look is common to politicians from that area.

  • ||

    Joe fucking Biden??

  • Tulpa the White||

    Romney would cream his pants.

  • Len Bias||

    Biden will be 74 by that time. Being old and clueless didn't help McCain much. The Dems would be better off running Obama again. Biden will be remembered as the the guy so bad even Obama wanted to throw him under the bus.

  • ||

    Don't discriminate 'cause he's old, man. He'll be 74 years young!

  • PapayaSF||

    If Obama loses, he'll have as much support for running again as Carter did. No chance of that happening.

  • hotsy totsy||

    If he WINS in 2012, watch Michelle Obama make a run for it in 2016.

  • Hoofddorp Haarlemmermeer||

    Michelle up against Hillary for the Dems in 2016... now that would be an ugly cat fight. Get out the octagon ring for that one.

  • Suellington||

    Um, who is that chick that married Bubba? She seems to have a bit of ambition in her.

  • PapayaSF||

    No way. She'll have the money and most of the power and influence she craves without the hassles.

  • sloopyinca||

    Personally, the only way I see Obama running in 2016 is if he's running for a third term...because, you know, America needs him for more than 8 years...and if we don't change the Constitution to allow him, we're just racists.

  • Len Bias||

    I sometimes worry he might declare some sort of emergency in say, October of this year and suspend the elections. He'll say we can't afford the instability that elections bring. I wouldn't put it past him.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Things may not be great, but the country isn't even near the stage where that could happen yet.

  • Len Bias||

    I agree. I don't think he would come close to getting away with something like that.

    Doesn't mean he's not the type of leader who's inclined to think that way.

  • Banjos||

    Remember when he tried to ban Fox News from the white house press pool? I wouldn't put it pass the crazy narcissistic bastard to at least try.

  • ||

    The probability of getting away with it and the probability of him trying it would be very different numbers. I will let you guess which one is larger.

  • Tulpa the White||

    People said that about Clinton in 2000 and Bush/Cheney in 2008 too. It never happens.

    If BO's as smart as he thinks he is, he realizes he needs to preserve his halo for the speech circuit like Bill did. He'll never pay for another meal in his life if he loses this election.

  • Len Bias||

    I laughed when people said that about Clinton in 2000 and Bush in 2008. Frankly, I think Clinton is enjoying his post-presidential career of being missed by everyone left or right and showing up Obama. Bush is just glad he's not being hated on 24/7.

    Obama is different. For the first three years, when people said he had dictatorial tendencies, I though they were nuts. It's not until the last 6 months or so I've seen it. You either see it or you don't, and I do. His threats to the Supreme Court that they had better uphold ObamaCare are not the ramblings of a man who believes in the rule of law or separation of powers.

    And authoritarian types get bored when out of power. They feel about as bored and useless as a retired Japanese salaryman. Hence, he won't go quietly when it's his time to leave. Again, I doubt he will become dictator for life or anything like that. But, I don't doubt he would if he could.

  • Tulpa the White||

    He's like the black president on "24" who was weak as fuck for most of the season until he snapped and decided to nuke everyone to show he was a tough guy.

  • juris imprudent||

    Fucking A - right out of the Demo-BDS-playbook: the President is going to suspend the election.

  • ||

    ...and if we don't change the Constitution to allow him, we're just racists.

    Why would it require a change to the Constitution? Shit being clearly written on that parchment hasn't stopped him from doing whatever he wanted before.

  • PapayaSF||

    Hey, they don't need to change the Constitution to give Obama a third term. All we need is for the Supreme Court to define his third term as a tax, and somehow get Congress to pass it.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    I think he'll just continue to be our Chastiser-in-Chief for the foreseeable future. Or as Michelle Malkin called him, the Nation’s Concern Troll.

  • Pip from the forge||

    It's a slow blog day, and the world's blog commentators are desperate to know: Why did you choose a minor Tolkien character for your pseudonym?

  • sloopyinca||

    Why did you choose an obviously gay one?*

    *NTTAWWT

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Along those same lines, what is the meaning of Pip from the forge?

    In kind, my handle is my initials (EDG) and I live in Long Beach, CA (reppin' LBC).

  • Ice Nine||

    I see. I'd think about choosing a minor Tolkien character for your pseudonym

  • Pip from the forge||

    I think Old Gaffer is still available.

  • Forlong The Fat||

    Pick a real man, dammit!

  • Pip from the forge||

    Tom Bombadil?*
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    *Not everyone in Middle Earth was man enough to pork Goldberry.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Minor characters, particularly ones not in the movie version, show that you're a true hardcore LOTR fanatic, not one of those poseurs who don't know the Scouring of the Shire ever happen'd.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • ||

    Grimli, son of Groin, friend of Legospaz. See? I'm real knowleguble when it come to lords of the ring trivia.

  • ||

    And who is this Sharkey person?

  • Pip from the forge||

    Little-known fact, Normie: Sharkey and Hutch were a pair of happy-go-lucky Hobbits who ran afoul of the law. Dildo tried to save them from Galdalf's kinky wrath, but...

  • Tulpa the White||

    You silly poseurs wouldn't know Sharkey from Saruman.

  • sloopyinca||

    Five great gifts for from Obama to America:

    1: The complete and unabridged records on Fast and Furious

    2: The overseas fund-raising records from his 2008 campaign

    3: The records on unwarranted wiretaps on Americans since his inauguration

    4: The unleaked records on his murderdrone program and a list of the names/ages/occupations of those killed

    5: His resignation

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Just finished a bottle of the kolsch. It's good. Thanks sl%p!

  • sloopyinca||

    Yeah? Cool.

    I'm making two batches this weekend. Doing the pale ale again and an ESB. We've really been going through some brew the past few weeks.

  • General Butt Naked||

    If he had any honor he'd resign Japanese-style.

  • ||

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKzXGTrfX-Y

    Like that would be better -- Obama versus Biden! To the death!

  • General Butt Naked||

    Wow, that was awesome.

    "You got a lotta guts, Oscar."

  • Pagan Priestess||

    OMG! You owe me a keyboard. That was fucking hilarious.

  • Pip from the forge||

    What's up with clothespins?
    They're not pins, and they're not clothes!

  • ||

    Hot water heater?

    Who needs to heat hot water?

  • General Butt Naked||

    And why do you drive on a parkway and park in a driveway?!!

  • Tulpa the White||

    Kenny Bania is the voice of my generation!

  • Pip from the forge||

    What's up with air conditioners?
    Air doesn't have hair!

  • Pip from the forge||

    Last night I shot an elephant in my pajamas.
    The cops tased me and killed my dog!

  • Pagan Priestess||

    The elephant had it coming. What was he thinking wearing your pajamas?

  • Archduke PantsFan||

    Happy Canada Day

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

  • sloopyinca||

    Fucking Juggalos are north of the border as well? God dammit. There goes escape plan #'s 4 and 11.

  • ||

    juggalos are the lamest ever and i think the fact that (some) in law enforcement consider them a "criminal gang" is ridiculous.

    on the few occasions, i have had to arrest a juggalo, they are always candy-ass little bitches.

    and completely brain-dead. here's a hint. if you are going to commit a broad daylight burglary, returning to the scene o' the crime just after the copz arrive (iow me) with your hands in yer pockets, a guilty ass look on yer face, and tons of physical evidence on yer person is stupid.

    juggalos. jeezus what a fucking farce

  • Pip from the forge||

    What's up with those TSA employees?
    Did McDonald's stop renigging?

  • Archduke PantsFan||

  • Pip from the forge||

    But because Canadians are plunked beside the U.S...

    ...witty American blognosticators refer to Canada as "America's Hat"!

    HarHarHar!

  • Pip from the forge||

    Tonight on my local over-the-air 60s kitsch channel:
    Star Trek
    Episode: Bread and Circuses
    (First Aired: Mar. 15, 1968)

    The Enterprise discovers the wreckage of a Federation vessel in orbit around an Earth-like planet where a gladiator-type empire continues to flourish.

    I don't know if I've seen this one, but it sounds familiar...
    Will Kirk battle an assortment of grotesque space aliens sporting
    dubious head-prosthetics, while, between rounds, bedding a green hottie in a bouffant hairdo? Will Kirk have to pass through the wreckage of a Federation TSA Security Checkpoint before he beams down? Will he remember to wear his belt this time?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Negative. The aliens in this one are verrrrry human, although Kirk does bed a hottie. SPOILER ALERT!

    Flavius: What do you call those?

    Spock: I call them ears.

  • ||

    is that the famous spock sings "bitter dregs" episode?

  • Pagan Priestess||

    No. The bitter dregs episode is "Plato's Stepchildren".

  • Tulpa the White||

    That was on MeTV too. Right before another unfunny episode of Svengoolie.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Economic micro-experiment shows that Marxism cannot work.

  • sloopyinca||

    OK, Banjos and I are trying to figure out the theme for our baby Nursery. She can't decide whether to go with a von Mises or Hayek theme, while I am torn between Alien (if it's a girl) or Predator (if it's a boy).

    Thoughts?

  • ||

    Predator, and hang real rifles, handguns, shotguns, and ammunition all over the walls and shit. Then invite Californian CPS over for a drink.

    Just fucking with you. Don't call CPS. But do the gun thing.

  • ||

    While I hate to be indecisive, you can't go wrong with either theme.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Do a fan-fic mash up with mucho cameos.

    And don't forget to get the spawn a steampunk Ron Paul mobile. Baby's love Ron Paul.

  • Pip from the forge||

    I have a thought. Who the fuck cares about your spawn?

    I keed!

    I'd I go with a chapter-by-chapter treatment of Mises's Human Action. Paint "Acting Man" right behind the cradle, "The Epistemological Problems of the Sciences of Human Action" next to the closet, "Economics and the Revolt Against Reason" on both sides of the door, and then skip to "Economics and the Essential Problems of Human Existence" for the rest of the room, because nobody has ever finished Human Action, and your baby might not kill you later if you show some restraint.

    Hope this helps!

  • Voros McCracken||

    Not sure on the decor, but here's some ideas to sing the tyke to sleep:

    Nursery Rhymes

  • Azathoth!!||

    Hellraiser--it works for a boy or a girl.

  • ||

    Hey, where did our new troll go? No mercy from the censors. Monday 8:00 AM...wiped clean.

    Too bad Mary went through all that trouble for a new IP only to get one weekend of fucking with us.

  • Pip from the forge||

    Free minds, censored blogs.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Start your own blog, Mary.

  • PapayaSF||

    Which new troll? You have to name names.

  • Hyperion||

    My gift to the big eared bafoon is to vote for Gary Johnson. The jackass had better not expect anything more from me. We are talking about one of the most dislikeable human beings that I have ever had knowledge of. Surely Genghis Kahn must have been a really nice guy compared to this POS.

  • Killazontherun||

    Fantastic essay by sometime Reason contributor William Anderson:

    http://krugman-in-wonderland.b.....-more.html

  • ||

    Interesting, thanks.

  • Hoofddorp Haarlemmermeer||

    Very good essay. Thanks for posting that link.

  • Tulpa the White||

    This SCOTUS decision will unleash the IRS in a way that will astound people, and one can bet that the powers that government seized with the passage of the Patriot Act and other such legislation will be put to use in new and oppressive ways. Furthermore, this decision will further unleash to power of federal prosecutors to criminalize just about anything they choose.

    Hate to break it to you guys, but the toothpaste's been out of the tube on that one for quite some time. The only thing that makes Roberts' decision questionable is the fact that the bill doesn't call the mandate a tax and supporters expressly stated it wasn't a tax. Social engineering through the taxing power was, unfortunately, already here and already mucking about.

  • Larry E||

    Our little skeevy wonder has the most asinine cult of personality in history. Imagine being a groupie for that puny little Mussolini for Morons!

  • Steve in MT||

    I am going to regift the fruitcake I got from last year. Maybe Obama could then regift it to some of his favorite supporters.

  • ||

    I was thinking someone could send the President some empty U-Haul boxes.

  • Hoofddorp Haarlemmermeer||

    Why don't we just get him a U-Haul gift certificate? That way he can get a truck and boxes.

  • RonRonDoRon||

    When I heard about the Wintour/Obama dinner raffle, I was wondering if the website would accept a contribution of -$1,000. In other words, I'd be willing to attend if they paid me enough.

  • Hoofddorp Haarlemmermeer||

    Hmm, like professional mourners at a funeral. I like it.

  • ||

    As the 2012 Election season gets fully underway in the summer months, POTUS will be spending even more time than http://www.lunettesporto.com/l.....c-3_8.html usual on airplanes, buses, low-speed trains, and stagecoaches as he tours the cities, towns and hamlets of this sweet land of liberty to meet and greet voters.

  • tee shirt pas cher||

    Either find a way to stop corporations from injecting money and power into the political process, or live with this (among other nasty results.)

    The only rights-oriented decisions that will favor individual liberty, freedom, etc. are going to either not involve the pockets of big business, or co-incidentally favor both liberty and corporations.

  • jason||

    Hope these five great gifts will help him to raise his publicity.

  • summermode||

    There are various posts in existence near this, I believe taking there reference could experience made this spot or article really informative. Practical goal expression this post is poor quality. Simply I can pronounce the fact that info provided here was unique, merely to really make it more near complete, supporting with former information will get been actually good. The points you have touched listed here are vital, thus Let me spot many of the information here to build this actually great for entirely the newbie’s here. Many thanks for this information. Actually helpful!chaussures air jordan homme

  • Ralph Wylie||

    I'm sending a receipt for the donation to the Romney campaign I made in Obama's name. It's the least I can do.

  • plcombs||

    Very clever and funny...how about a Gag Ball for Biden to wear until after November...

  • bopomtXQ||

    Make money using Google. Earn $375 per hour with your searching skills. You chose your working hours. Work in any time you want. For more info visit makecash25dotcomONLY

  • Nike air max womens||

    As the 2012 Election season gets fully underway in the summer months, POTUS will be spending even more time than usual on airplanes, buses, low-speed trains, and stagecoaches as he tours the cities, towns and hamlets of this sweet land of liberty to meet and greet voters.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement