New at Reason

Are we relying on the claims of government officials for substantiation here? With all due respect that isn't a whole lot better than relying on urban mythology.

|9.6.05 @ 4:24PM|#

Jeff, would references to Hannibal Lecter be ok, or is that just too obvious?

Matt Welch|9.6.05 @ 4:26PM|#

Winey -- Point taken! And sorry about the nickname....

Jeff P.|9.6.05 @ 4:27PM|#

Mediageek, as we speak horror writers are scrambling to do the first story about a serial killer who infiltrates NOLA under cover as a relief worker to kill people with impunity.

The Wine Commonsewer|9.6.05 @ 4:28PM|#

Lileks caught some flak for his French bashing (see Matt's link above) but actually, Lilkes' first reaction was to bash Objectivists and then link them to the dreaded French, thereby effectively bashing them again.

It was hilarious, on all counts and you all missed a grand opportunity to have some fun with the likes of Rand and Piekoff.

Maybe you're not alone though, it seems that most libertarian types are so caught up with Frog Bashing that they missed the obvious. Here is the complete Lileks quote:

Note anything about what sort of organizations are doing the hard work? I keep looking for the Objectivist Mutual Aid Society, but it never pops up. Last time I checked the French weren?t helping much, either ? odd. The one place in the country where their guys could read the signs, and they don?t bother to pitch in.

Now dude, that's funny.

|9.6.05 @ 4:29PM|#

Mediageek, as we speak horror writers are scrambling to do the first story about a serial killer who infiltrates NOLA under cover as a relief worker to kill people with impunity.

Hey... that's a GREAT idea!

The Wine Commonsewer|9.6.05 @ 4:34PM|#

Winey>/em> LOL. That's great. Jake and Wendy Whiner are my cousins. No wait, Jake and Wendy whiner are my kids.

Mrs TWC complains that I Wine Constantly
I got a tee shirt that says so, too. It has wine stains all over it. Someone paid hard cash for something I could have done for free.

The Wine Commonsewer|9.6.05 @ 4:36PM|#

And I can't tell the difference between the preview button and the post button. Must be the wine, gotta cut down, not 5:00 here anyway.

|9.6.05 @ 4:46PM|#

How about a story about a...lamp!

A scary lamp!

|9.6.05 @ 6:23PM|#

Don't know if the early tales of helicopters being shot at were an urban legend or not.

But someone was arrested Monday for allegedly shooting at one:

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBFIAAMADE.html

Phil|9.6.05 @ 6:56PM|#

Lileks is a fucking tool. I can't believe that I contributed in even a tiny way to the man's material well-being by buying the Regrettable Food and Interior Desecrations books.

Let's see . . . should libertarians, as a group, start up some sort of relief agency with no money, no history, no infrastructure, no staff and no reputation and expect it to take the lead in domestic disasters? Or should we contribute our money and volunteer hours to organizations with more than a hundred years of experience and history, and which have charters from Congress to do this kind of work?

Fucking tool. He pulls this shit EVERY FUCKING TIME. I don't see his ass down there clearing debris and collecting bodies, so I guess he just doesn't care.

Matt Welch|9.6.05 @ 7:03PM|#

Thanks, Charles!

|9.6.05 @ 7:58PM|#

Phil,
I haven't noticed any political parties specifically getting involved. But Lileks' is pretty damn funny, nonetheless, and his approach to the world usually has a Midwestern common sense/Minnesota nice approach that were other people to adopt a lot more would get done and in a sensible fashion.

In other words, if Lileks is a "tool," he's at least good for something. What would that make you? Useless, I'm afraid...

Besides, I don't mind someone taking a potshot or two at libertarians, even if I am one. I certainly think it would be a good idea for a group of the supposedly rugged individualists who ascribe to our views to roll into N.O. and start helping impose order and aiding those who need it... (Armed security for Red Cross workers, for instance...)

The Wine Commonsewer|9.7.05 @ 12:19AM|#

Phil, Lileks is funny as hell. The Objectivist crack was priceless. It's right up there with the Simpson's episode that included Ayn Rand's School For Tots. Didn't you ever hear that libertarians are known for letting people starve in the streets?

Me? I gave my money to the Salvation Army this time. Primarily because they were the only place in Gulf Coast Alabama where one could get a hot meal and a drink of clean water.

Phil|9.7.05 @ 8:23AM|#

rob, TWC, I've been reading Lileks a long, long time. He stopped being remotely useful right about the time he decided that there were hordes of Muslims parked outside the Mall of America waiting to eat his little daughter's heart and rape her corpse. His most frequently deployed tools anymore are:

1) The tu quoque fallacy.
2) The, "Look, I'm an X, but this bunch of X'es is wrong. " (Or its corollary, "Look, I believe Y, but these other people who believe Y are wrong.")
3) The kid! And the dog! Protect them, George W. Bush! Protect them from Iraq!
4) "Objectively pro-Saddam."

In other words, if Lileks is a "tool," he's at least good for something. What would that make you? Useless, I'm afraid...

Enjoy!

The Wine Commonsewer|9.7.05 @ 9:38AM|#

Not nice Phil, and I seem to recall you already used that bag-o-weenies gag (pun intended). I laughed anyway.

Reason Magazine

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices:

advertisements