Attn, DC Reasonoids: Happy Hour, Friday, January 11, 6.30PM

January 11, 2008

On Friday, January 11, starting at 6.30PM at The Big Hunt, the staff of reason is hosting a happy hour featuring drink and food specials. Things we'll be celebrating:

* The publication of our February issue, featuring Senior Editor Brian Doherty's cover story on "the Ron Paul Revolution," an interview with MTV's Kurt Loder on Internet freedom, Steve Earle's overly didactic ditties, the curse of legacy preferences in college admissions, the war on fornication, and much, much more.

* The full-time presence in the DC of Matt Welch, who will take over the print edition of reason with the April 2008 issue as Nick Gillespie takes over the reason.com and reason.tv sites.

* Senior Editor Kerry Howley's recent cover story about Mike Huckabee in Politics (formerly Campaigns & Elections) and her recent op-ed on Hillary Clinton in The New York Times.

* The presence of very special guest star Michael Shermer, editor of The Skeptic, columnist for Scientific American, and author of the brand-new book, The Mind of the Market: Compassionate Apes, Competitive Humans, and Other Tales from Evolutionary Economics.

So come on out on Friday and see if The Washington Post's recent description of reason's happy hours as "every Libertarian-as-Bacchus fantasy you've entertained" is more truthful than Janet Cooke's Pulitzer Prize-winning expose of "Jimmy's World."

reason happy hour

Friday, January 11

The Big Hunt

1345 Connecticut Avenue NW

Washington, DC

6.30PM-whenever the fun stops

Comments

Edward|1.6.08 @ 7:57PM|#

Ron Paul revolution? Revolution? Could this be a case of verbal deflation? I mean a loony old crank comes fifth in a primary, and it's a revolution? I can't wait for the upheaval. That's when the old fart falls of his chair.

<i>REASON </i> Commenter|1.6.08 @ 7:59PM|#

Are we getting a Fox Box roundtable debate of the serious Republican candidates live-blogging thread? Is there a feed? I don't have cable.

Edward|1.6.08 @ 8:02PM|#

Wait, you're using the fifth definition, right?

revolution

SYLLABICATION: rev·o·lu·tion
PRONUNCIATION: rv-lshn
NOUN: 1a. Orbital motion about a point, especially as distinguished from axial rotation: the planetary revolution about the sun. b. A turning or rotational motion about an axis. c. A single complete cycle of such orbital or axial motion. 2. The overthrow of one government and its replacement with another. 3. A sudden or momentous change in a situation: the revolution in computer technology. 4. Geology A time of major crustal deformation, when folds and faults are formed. 5. Loony-bin politics Your candidate gets a few votes and is treated with a modicum of respect by at least one mainstream journalist.

Guy Montag|1.6.08 @ 8:17PM|#

"the Ron Paul Revolution,"

[fist shaking] HEY YOU KIDS! GET OFF MY YARD!!!!

Guy Montag|1.6.08 @ 8:18PM|#

commentator,

try the foxnews.com website maybe? Not sure if they have a live feed.

|1.6.08 @ 8:19PM|#

I am glad to have found Ron Paul. He is a once in a life time, honest, for the people, by the people candidate for President. Check out www.ronpaullibrary.com
He is a doctor, a Congressman, and was a flight surgeon in the Air force. He is brilliant. He writes books on economics, and foreign policy.
He deserves respect for what he wants for the people of the United States and the world.. PEACE and Prosperity, honest friendship with other nations, free trade but entangling alliances with none.
He does not cater to special interest and huge corporations. He wants to appeal NAFTA, CAFTA and those sovereignty threatening organizational ideas of the so called "think tanks". Google Wikapedia and search CFR, Council of Foreign Relations.
Ron Paul is a real hero and worth every penny of my support. He speaks for so many of us "r-love-utionaries".

|1.6.08 @ 8:27PM|#

Jenger,

We know. This is Reason magazine. You know, the Libertarians? The guys who nominated Ron Paul for president in 1988? Does this ring a bell?

-jcr

Edward|1.6.08 @ 8:30PM|#

jenger

If you have Jesus...er, I mean Ron Paul..in your heart, you will be happy and at peace. God bless.

|1.6.08 @ 8:44PM|#

Just flipped over to FoxNews. They do look a little squooshed around that table, but there are at least two yards on each side of it where they could have put in the drop leaves or even sprung for a bigger table to get Dr. Paul, Duncan Hunter and half of the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders around it. In other words, space was not really an issue.

Grumpy asshole|1.6.08 @ 9:22PM|#

What a humorless, boring broad this Kerry Howley is. There are actually people who want to hang out with this pathetic crowd that dares to call one of its equally pathetic outings a "happy hour"?

|1.6.08 @ 9:26PM|#

I just watched the first hour of the FOX debate and flicked it off. Not one major issue was discussed in depth. Not one candidate strayed from his trusty quiver of "buzz clips". You might think Ron Paul's revolution pales in comparison to Huckabee's or Romney's turnout. But unlike the former two hacks, Paul's followers have not been bought and paid for. They are genuinely riled up and have already begun to guide the course of the debate. In case you didn't notice. The overwhelming majority of this country wants out of Iraq. And unless Ron's longshot bid translates to the party's nomination, we'll be swearing in a donkey next January.

|1.6.08 @ 9:27PM|#

"space was not really an issue."

What? Fox news lied? Say it ain't so!

-jcr

toddb|1.6.08 @ 9:43PM|#

Anyone hearing anything about RP's one-man forum tonight? Can't see it online yet and there seems to be some confusion about whether it will be available on CSPAN...

|1.6.08 @ 9:45PM|#

Wow. "The curse of legacy preferences in college admissions." Congratulations. I didn't think you had it in you. It's impossible for me to say it without sounding all snarky, but kudos, people. I've been following the libertarian movement for thirty years, and this is the first time I've heard a complaint from you guys about college admissions that didn't focus on the horrors of letting unqualified Negroes on campus. I applaud your progress. Seriously.
Now if you could just re-activate my subscription to Reason. You can't keep blaming Katrina and that nasty ol' statist Postal Service forever, you know.

<i>REASON</i> Commenter|1.6.08 @ 10:18PM|#

The folks at NRO really want to blow Mitt Romney.

|1.6.08 @ 10:27PM|#

After a county by county analysis in Iowa, a few things are clear. Ron Paul at 10% of the overall vote always beat Giuliani & Hunter in EVERY county.

Ron Paul won 2 delegates & they won none.

Huckabee only won 17 delegates. Huckabee won MOST counties & Romney a few. But what I bet you did not know was that Ron Paul came in second in a few counties, & actually WON Jefferson county. McCain & Thompson each at 13% of the overall vote did not win a single county. In fact I do not think McCain & Thompson came in second in ANY counties. Compared to them Ron Paul did well.

I also think Ron Paul has a shot at 3rd in NH. And that he will do better than 10% - maybe 15%. That should give him 3rd. McCain and Romney are too far ahead. Ron Paul has put much more effort into NH than he did in Iowa. I think he can beat Thompson, Huckabee, and Giuliani.

bob|1.6.08 @ 11:01PM|#

News Corporation's Stock Plummets as "Dump Fox News" e-mail Campaign Goes Viral

A chain of emails that began shortly after Fox News refused to allow Ron Paul to participate in a televised forum may have caused a significant drop in the price of stock for News Corporation, the parent company of Fox News. The e-mails encourage News Corp stockholders to sell all shares in protest of the controversial decision.

Not Really. Just a clip from an article at TheSpoof.com

But hey, it could happen...

<b>open tags?|1.6.08 @ 11:15PM|#

I love open tags!

bob|1.6.08 @ 11:20PM|#

/b
Sorry 'bout that..

Edward|1.6.08 @ 11:24PM|#

Ron Paul will come fifth in NH. Remember you heard it from me first.

Neu Mejican|1.7.08 @ 12:20AM|#

Everybody knows that Ron Paul is a racist. Calasically, "states rights" and ambivalence towards Lincoln have been ways to push for racist policy while pretending to do it from a disinterested perspective of respecting the law.

|1.7.08 @ 2:22AM|#

"Calasically, 'states rights' and ambivalence towards Lincoln have been ways to push for racist policy while pretending to do it from a disinterested perspective of respecting the law."

Or, you know, you could have principles about the role of states in a federal system and realize that Lincoln had good points and bad points like everyone else. Maybe.

Anatomically Correct Barbie|1.7.08 @ 10:23AM|#

Things we'll be celebrating:

...the war on fornication...

Will we be celebrating by having lots of sex?

|1.7.08 @ 8:39PM|#

Shermer is not a skeptic or a true scientist. He simply dismisses evidence that is contrary to the ideas that he dogmatically clings to.
Shermer refuses to even entertain the results of parapsychology studies. He is just as dogmatic as some creationists.

|1.7.08 @ 9:44PM|#

Do a happy hour in Baltimore some time and I'll stop by. I hate getting in and out of the Hell that is DC.

stuartl|1.7.08 @ 10:04PM|#

Shermer refuses to even entertain the results of parapsychology studies. He is just as dogmatic as some creationists.

Uh, no. He refuses to accept those studies that do not have good controls, methods, or cannot be duplicated. For some reason, every time parapsychology is put to rigorous testing it disappears. Ask Susan Blackmore.

Duckman|1.7.08 @ 11:56PM|#

It doesn't make sense for a racist to endorse policy that would free millions of blacks from our nation's jails. That's what Ron Paul does by endorsing an end to the drug war.

Personally, I believe that Ron Paul did not write those letters and was very negligent. Honestly, I think Ron Paul has shown a pattern of somewhat negligent behavior, which is unsettling for a person who would be President. I still prefer him to all of his terrible Republican opponents, but part of me would prefer to see him in the Senate, a body where one man can still wield alot of power.

|1.8.08 @ 2:41PM|#

I'd like to personally invite Edward to the Big Hunt this Friday. I'd love to either:

a) have a nice, civilized discussion about your political beliefs and how they fit into everyday life, compared to mine

OR

b) simply tell you you're wrong. We're using the 3rd definition, silly.

Fluffy|1.8.08 @ 2:41PM|#

OK, now that the TNR article is out, it is incumbent upon Paul to explicitly name the author of the pieces in question or name the persons actually in control of the newsletter [since he held a minority interest only]. There's just too much material there to gloss over.

He needs the name the person or person[s] involved, and they need to confirm what content was Paul's and what wasn't.

The rest of the article smearing Rockwell's people is beneath contempt, but Paul's statements on the newsletters to date have been revealed to be inadequate.

Guy Montag|1.9.08 @ 2:34PM|#

Is there a patio for smoking so I can light my cigars with Federal Reserve Notes while I skillfully avoid singeing the brim of my top hat?

PC|1.9.08 @ 4:03PM|#

Drinking sounds like a good idea. Here's to the REVOlution!...at least for the immediate future.

|1.9.08 @ 4:03PM|#

Shermer refuses to even entertain the results of parapsychology studies.

gball -

Tell your friends, The amazing Randi offers $1,000,000 for "under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event."

Go for it. You don't even have to give me a finders fee.

Jim Treacher|1.9.08 @ 5:01PM|#

I'm pretty sure the "Ron Paul Revolution" refers to the spinning pinwheels he has for eyes.

|1.9.08 @ 7:27PM|#

Nick, I think your stewardship of the magazine has been great. Despite the fact that you oversaw a bunch of non-voting, fake libertarian, pop-culture near-do-wells, the magazine has been worth my twenty bucks. Hopefully Matt can find it in him somewhere to uphold the mantle.

|1.10.08 @ 5:26AM|#

I am always impressed with the commitment libertarians have to free speech. You even let all those cretins post their moronic comments about you write up their at the top of this list.

I think I recognize some of those screen names as Clinton supporters at the "New Republic." I don't know how you people at Reason ever expect to get ahead or have a movie made about you until you follow their lead and fabricate, what was it, 27 of 41 stories?

You know the New Republic is probably already paying James Kirchick more than you can afford. But after they finally fired Steve Glass he disappeared into New York City with his law degree and wrote a minor novel. Maybe he could do a piece for you on Kames Kirchick.

|1.10.08 @ 1:24PM|#

Reason has a racist on its cover!!!

REASON IS A RACIST PUBLICATION!

No matter what the editorial staff says now, they knew full well that this man authored racist material 20 years ago when they put him on the cover.

Edward|1.10.08 @ 2:41PM|#

Fred

That's unfair. Reason didn't itself publish racist material but hoped to increase its subscriptions by appealing to Nazis. Very Ron Paul.

ed|1.10.08 @ 3:01PM|#

"Revolution" is a bit, er, hyperbolic, is it not? I think in order to have a successful one you need to have, like, a lot of people behind it. A guillotine is also a nice touch. Wouldn't this "revolution" be evident in that most perfect of lab experiments: a national election? Ron Paul just finished in single digits in a libertarian state. If that's the revolution, then the aristocrats will surely keep their heads.

|1.10.08 @ 3:13PM|#

Fred:

No matter what the editorial staff says now, they knew full well that this man Fred 20 years ago when they put him on the cover.

That's not true. It wasn't Dr Paul who authored the racist material. Also, his carrer in congress has been explicitly anti-racist and pro-individualist.
.

|1.10.08 @ 3:25PM|#

Edward:

I mean a loony old crank...

Your calling one as erudite and analytical as Ron Paul "loony" or a "crank" just confirms what we already know about you from your many sad little tantrums on this and other sites.

Edward|1.10.08 @ 5:16PM|#

Only die-hard neo-Nazi racists and mindless twits are standing by Ron Paul at this point. Okay, maybe blood relatives.

|1.11.08 @ 9:34AM|#

Ugh, that cover must be killing you.

ed|1.11.08 @ 9:44AM|#

joe, that cover is not an endorsement.
Reason does not endorse candidates.
(wink, wink, nod, nod)

|1.11.08 @ 9:46AM|#

I wonder how this is all playing back home? Let's face it, Paul won in 1996 because he had an R after his name, and the other guy was named Lefty and had a D.

Any polling of the primary yet? Has the good doctor even filed his papers?

ed|1.11.08 @ 10:12AM|#

He's filed them. The question is: Has he read them?

|1.11.08 @ 10:13AM|#

Well, yes and no...

SxCx|1.11.08 @ 10:34AM|#

If you guys like Ron Paul, I strongly suggest you look into the work of an obscure Austrian economist named Friedrich A. Hayek. He was a strong endorser of this concept called "spontaneous order". It's a bit complicated but stick with me, dudes...

|1.11.08 @ 10:55AM|#

I love reading reason magazine, in print and online... any chance you guys can make a tour stop in NYC?

Sje|1.11.08 @ 11:35AM|#

SxCx,

Obscure and Nobel-prize winning, that is?

Sje]|1.11.08 @ 11:37AM|#

Ed,

(Who seems to be implying that the big photo on the cover is an implicit endorsement.)

I dunno...

Didn't they big cover photos of Guliani and McCain last year?

Would you say they implicitly endorsed those candidates?

ed|1.11.08 @ 12:15PM|#

Didn't read those issues, but I'd bet the stories weren't complimentary. Reason has been behind Paul these many months now. Just not "officially."

SxCx|1.11.08 @ 12:49PM|#

Sje,

I think you're confusing him with another important influence on Ron Paul, Milton Fierdman.

|1.11.08 @ 4:38PM|#

SxCx

Hayek shared the 1974 Nobel Prize in Economics with Gunnar Myrdal (who was his polar opposite ideologically).

SxCx|1.11.08 @ 4:48PM|#

Wow, he's got a Wikipedia page? Looks like I'm not alone...

Guy Montag|1.15.08 @ 9:05AM|#

Anybody posting pictures from the gathering? Especially the awsome cigar lighting ritual!