Haley Barbour's Crimes Against Capitalism

Writing at The Daily Caller, Chris Moody reports that Mississippi governor and potential Republican presidential candidate Haley Barbour thinks farm subsidies should trump the free market:

The federal government doled out about $20 billion to farmers last year, including some with net worth in the millions. Barbour made a trip to Iowa this week where he said he could support some kind of cut in those subsidies, but in an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller, the seven-year governor said he’s in favor of keeping the Depression-era welfare programs going.

“Some of them are very important,” Barbour told TheDC when asked if he supported taxpayer subsidies for farmers. “What we want to have in the United States is abundant food at a responsibly low price. To do that, we have to have an appropriately large supply of agricultural products. When sales volumes are good, prices are reasonable, there shouldn’t be any farm subsidies. But for natural reasons, nature, or what other countries are doing in terms of how they’re handling their markets, sometimes it is appropriate to have farm subsidies.”

As The Washington Examiner’s Tim Carney points out, this isn’t the first time Barbour has rejected the free market in favor of crony capitalism:

He touts job growth down in Mississippi under his governing, and some of that is due to tort reform, but some of it is do to rank favoritism and special-interest deals more akin to Obama than Reagan -- for instance, subsidies for a biofuels plant.

Let’s add eminent domain abuse to that sorry list of Barbour’s misdeeds. As I noted in this column, Barbour vetoed a much-needed state law in May 2009 that would have prevented the use of eminent domain “for the purpose of taking or damaging privately owned real property for private development or for a private purpose; or for enhancement of tax revenue; or for transfer to a person, nongovernmental entity, public-private partnership, corporation or other business entity.” In other words, the law was specifically designed to prevent Mississippi from engaging in Kelo-style eminent domain takings where private property was seized from its rightful owner and then handed over to some politically-connected developer. As an explanation for this shameful betrayal of property rights, Gov. Barbour said it was necessary in order to lure corporations to the state. In fact, in his veto statement, Barbour admitted that if he hadn’t promised Toyota that he would use eminent domain to secure a piece of contested land for its Blue Springs facility, "Toyota would have broken off negotiations with us and chosen one of the other states competing with us for the project."

So there you have it. Haley Barbour supports farm subsidies, corporate welfare, and eminent domain abuse. Not exactly an attractive presidential platform.

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.

  • The Gobbler||

    "The federal government doled out about $20 billion to farmers last year, including some with net worth in the millions."

    This seems deliberately misleading as asset values and EBIDTA are not the same thing.

  • ||

    True, but welfare for millionaires is unseemly.

    If need be, they can convert assets to cash. Or get out of the business, if they can't generate positive cash flow.

  • Virginia||

    Or grow a crop that doesn't look the same flushed as eaten.

  • Tony||

    Once we unionize farm labor, subsidies will no longer be an issue.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Tony,

    Once we unionize farm labor, subsidies will no longer be an issue.


    On account of what?

  • Zeb||

    Presumably because no produce that requires manual labor will be produced in this country anymore.

  • Old Mexican||

    Hmm, yeah, that's possible - unionized anything turns to shit, and with farming gone, then what Tony says becomes true.

    Maybe Tony is on to something here... unwittingly, sure, but still, on to something!

  • John Tagliaferro||

    Once we nationalize farms, food will no longer be an issue.

  • Robert Mugabe||

    ^THIS

  • Trofim Lysenko||

    +1000

  • Uncle Joe||

    Can I get in a consulting gig here?

  • Scott||

    I think Tony has multiple personalities; he keeps saying "we."

    In any case, how would one unionize farm labor? Put a bunch of farms in the charge of one guy and have the old farmers form a union that works for him? Doesn't make sense. But then again, neither does anything else you suggest.

  • John Tagliaferro||

    Think Animal Farm, not co-op farm collective.

  • ||

    He's using the royal "we." Because he's a big ol' queen.

  • Two Large Queers||

    We are so not amused...

  • spur||

    Much of the farm labor in California is unionized:

    http://www.ufw.org/

  • Tony||

    It's a start. The real problem is with automation destroying farm jobs in the midwest.

  • Pip||

    Damn You Big Machinery!!!

  • Buggy Whip Maker||

    Damn you, Henry Ford!

  • Mensan||

    Damn you, Cyrus McCormick!

  • Ort||

    Damn those evil tractors! They destroyed the mule union.

  • Jeffersonian||

    Just think of the unemployment we'll reduce when we take away picks, shovels and rakes in favor of sharpened sticks.

  • Joe R.||

    We should outlaw automated machinery. That'll fix the unemployment problem! Businesses and factories would have to hire more workers. Also, get rid of computers so there will be more accounting jobs. Outlaw cars, too, so we can get our horse-drawn carriage manufacturers back to work.

  • ||

    Didn't the Soviets kill people for trying to unionize farms? I only have some vague memory, so I could be wrong.

  • Nikita K||

    We will bury you!

  • Corduroy||

    trollin', trollin', trollin', get those entries trollin'

  • ||

    Sounds like "Maw-Wide" time!

    Trollin' Trollin' Trollin'

    Keep postin', postin', postin',
    Though they're disapprovin',
    Keep them trollies postin' Maw-wide!
    Don't try to understand 'em,
    Just emote and blow at random,
    Soon we'll be getting high and laid.
    Enjoy my hearty ad hominem
    My statements all be dictum, be waiting at the end of my tirade.

    Move 'em on, head 'em up,
    Head 'em up, move 'em out,
    Move 'em on, head 'em out Maw-wide!
    Set 'em out, post 'em in
    Post 'em in, let 'em out,
    Cut 'em out, post 'em in Maw-wide.

    Trollin', Trollin', Trollin'
    Trollin', Trollin', Trollin'
    Trollin', Trollin', Trollin'
    Trollin', Trollin', Trollin'
    Maw-wide!

  • Old Mexican||

    You sure have too much time on your hands, Pro....

  • ||

    Wrote that long ago.

  • Colonel_Angus||

    I know this is a spoof but... Why would farmers need to unionize? Most farmers work for themselves (except in produce), and the government already fixes prices for them.

  • Hayley Mills||

    Not exactly an attractive presidential platform.

    At least he has name recognition.

  • -||

    "Sometimes it is appropriate to have farm subsidies.”

    That's Haley's M-O.

  • Old Mexican||

    Haley Barbour supports farm subsidies, corporate welfare, and eminent domain abuse. Not exactly an attractive presidential platform.


    Depends on who's your voting block... unfortunately.

    Why unfortunately? Because a great deal of Americans are enamoured of fascism to find the above unpalatable.

  • Ragin Cajun||

    Depends on who's your voting block... unfortunately.

    Especially if he is sniffing out his 2012 prospects...don't want to write off Iowa...

  • ||

    OK he supports farm subsidies, corporate welfare, and eminent domain abuse. I could be all wrong but I also suspect he supports warmongering overseas, prosecutorial and police immunity, the entire war on drugs, forfeiture, torture, etc etc. Is there anything at all to like about him?

  • DNS||

    Is there anything at all to like about him

    Besides those cherubic cheeks? Nothing at all.

  • ||

    Well, his southern accent is really strong; sort of makes him seem like a....a.....a shitkicker.

  • Humble Lee||

    The federal government doled out about $20 billion to farmers auto makers last year, including some with net worth in the millions.

  • Zeb||

    And you had some point?

  • John Tagliaferro||

    A negative net worth of millions made them sympathetic victims.

  • Ol' Liberal||

    "Haley Barbour supports farm subsidies, corporate welfare, and eminent domain abuse."

    --- in other words, yes, we think he has a decent (if not very great) chance in the Republican Primary.

  • Tea Party||

    We think not.

  • Jim||

    But...but...he has an (R) after his name, so he's in favor of less gummint!

    Socialists come in many stripes.

  • Mango Punch||

    Socialists Corporatists come in many stripes.
  • Jim||

    Correction accepted.

  • cynical||

    Is he a corporatist or a crony capitalist? There is a difference.

  • ||

    Here's what scares me: Whoever wins the GOP nomination is very likely to be the next president. Regardless of the candidate's capability, sanity, or experience.

    While there are several potential GOP candidates I could live with, there are any number that are pretty frightening.

  • Ragin Cajun||

    Who's worse...Barbour, or Huckabee?

  • Corduroy||

    My blood just curdled

  • ||

    Ignorant hillbilly whackjob preacher.

    Will the GOP nominee acknowledge the fact of evolution or do we get a ignorant doofus/pandering liar?

    Place your bet, ProLib.

  • ||

    I'll go so far as to say neither of them, but no idea yet who the nominee will be. I'm bearish on Palin, too.

  • DNS||

    Palin will not be the nominee. She will run though, if nothing else to attempt to influence the platform.

  • zoltan||

    Ron Paul doesn't acknowledge evolution as fact but I'll take him over anyone who does.

  • ||

    Although I question the thinking of anyone who is a Creationist, I will say that Paul's position on such things is irrelevant, since he doesn't want to use government to impose his beliefs on me. Which is one of the beautiful things about libertarianism--by taking the government out of our lives (mostly), it allows for a much greater diversity of ideas.

  • SIV||

    Sarah Palin didn't impose her SoCon beliefs on Alaska, and as governor she was in a position to do so.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    What SIV said. I doubt Palin would, either. Huckabee, on the other hand...

  • SIV||

    The hillbilly wackjob preacher has a track record of SoCon progressivism.
    I like the Huckster, provided he's interviewing B-list celebrities and playin' his guitar on some Fox News weekend programming I don't watch.

  • kinnath||

    Well, I'm still registered as a Republican since I went to caucus for Ron Paul. So I'll do what I can to stop Haley on your behalf.

    But, the real issue is going to be keeping the hardcore conservative Christians from putting someone like Huckabee in first place.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Hard to stop somebody from running, if they want to.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    It's obviously going to be a crowded field. Blood in the water, and all that.

  • SIV||

    Hardcore conservative Christians re-elect Ron Paul to Congress every two years. It's the squishy center-right ones you have to worry about.

  • DNS||

    Here's what scares me: Whoever wins the GOP nomination is very likely to be the next president. Regardless of the candidate's capability, sanity, or experience.

    You are much more intelligent than I am Pro Libertate, but I disagree with this. Even with the teacher's union kerfuffle, ObamaCare, and the economy, I contend that Obama cannot be beaten. Case in point, the electorate, overall has some type of welfare, be it social or crony. As Harry Reid said, "Americans love government." They say they don't, but look at the budget process. Republicans have promised to slash the budget, but it's a sham. Sure, symbolic stuff here and there, but every one of them has NIMD - Not In My District. And the the voters, overall will vote self-interest over principles every time. Didn't one of the posters lament that she couldn't find a job that paid what the public sector was paying and touted excellent benefits? Granted, she also said that if those benefits were to be cut some, she would accept it, but the point stands: Obama has increased the Federal workforce and people will not bite the hand that feeds them. I am convinced that we, as libertarians, have influenced the battle, and as a nation will lose the war.

    Obama has incumbency, money, the MSM, and race in his back pocket, not to mention an Army of Tonys that slaver to his every word. At the end of the day, when this country is convinced 26 year olds are children and people will rationalize progressive ideas and the eco-theology as indisputable face, and "ObamaCare isn't really that bad, it just needs to be tweaked," to the point of litotes, it's done. Over. Kaput.

    Any (R) that is put up against him will lose.

  • Scott||

    God I hope you're wrong.

  • ||

    I don't think so. He only got in as a cipher, which state he no longer holds. He also has self-slimed himself too publicly and too frequently to get it all off in time for 2012.

    Nah, he's out. The harder prediction is who will replace him. I'd like to name Johnson or someone like that as a dark horse, but this is really anyone's race to win. I doubt seriously that a religious right candidate will make it all the way, but that leaves a lot of other possibilities.

  • ||

    Bill the Cat, dude. Bill the Cat.

  • ||

    I heard he was dead.

  • ||

    Yes. Several times.

  • ||

    Wait a second. Could Bill the Cat be the cat of which Schrödinger spoke? Would being in a state of superposition be an advantage in American politics, or does it sound too intellectual?

  • Bill the Cat||

    Aaack!

  • Fatty Bolger||

    I think it's both! Ba-Dum-CH!

  • kinnath||

    I'm guessing that Hillary will start her campaing in late summer or early fall 2011.

  • ||

    She should run as a Republican.

  • kinnath||

    Running on a law-and-order, strong-national-defense platform. Add in compassionate conservatism, and she gets the PUMAs and the soccer moms.

    Brilliant!

  • ||

    She could also take credit for Bill Clinton's move to the right during his administration. Since she ran pretty heavily on her "experience" as First Lady last time around, that makes some sense.

    She's been a pretty inept SoS, so I'm not sure she's become any more qualified in the years since 2008. Which makes her perfect in this new era of voting for openly unqualified candidates.

  • DNS||

    She's been a pretty inept SoS

    True, and that actually surprises me. She is not particularly brilliant, but is regarded as ruthless.

    She would be too easy to beat, as she has had quite a few "3 A.M." situations lately, and those could easily haunt her. Her one saving grace is she has been in the shadows and letting others write her narrative.

  • kinnath||

    Regarding SoS, she just has to start saying that Obama is the reason that State couldn't respond properly to the current freedom movements in the Arab world. She just needs to make the years as SoS look like an on going set of frustrations of working with the dimwit in the oval office.

  • DNS||

    She just needs to make the years as SoS look like an on going set of frustrations of working with the dimwit in the oval office.

    Can't be done, as he is considered by the Lefties as the smartest, coolest, hip hop president we have ever had. It would also undercut her reputation as TheSmartestWomanInTheWorld©. If she is so tough, smart and effective, why couldn't she have convinced The One to follow her sagacious advice?

    Besides, she'll get race carded again.

  • kinnath||

    There are only two pools of voters to care about. The first pool covers the primaries and caucuses. The second pool covers the general elections. As ProL says below, she can cruise through the "republican" caucuses and primaries by appealing to republican women and by not scaring republican men. After that, she can control the center, drag in all the PUMAs, and not give a damn about the pansy liberal men and the blacks. The right side of the balance sheet will fall into place because they have no where to go.

  • kinnath||

    She could even make it the reason for jumping parties to take on Obama.

  • ||

    Exactly what I was thinking. She really should go on her knees up the steps to the RNC headquarters and sell herself as a reformed Republican.

    She could repudiate her past, play the old, dusty victim card, and explain how she learned conservatism from her experience fighting the crazy liberalism of the president. Whom she believes is a secret Muslim. Best of all, she's coming back to the party, as she was originally a Republican. They friggin' love that redemption/finding Jesus again stuff.

    Frankly, this is the only way she ever stands a chance at the White House.

  • kinnath||

    To be honest, this may be the most appealing scenario for 2012 that I have seen. Huckabee goes away, Palin goes away, Romney goes away. Etc.

  • kinnath||

    Imagine HRC saying "I learned my lesson on health care in the 90's. Obama was too stupid to pay attention.

  • Ragin Cajun||

    Dude, knock off this Hillary stuff. It's a little too frightening.

  • kinnath||

    ain't it ;-)

    Let's hope she doesn't have a staffer scraping libertarian websites for intel.

  • Mensan||

    Why have a staffer do it? There's already a whole section of the DHS responsible for that.

  • DNS||

    Imagine HRC saying "I learned my lesson on health care in the 90's. Obama was too stupid to pay attention.

    As she puts the screws even tighter on ObamaCare and makes it into HillaryCare. No dice. Hubris would prevent her from making such a declaration. Romney will not admit he blundered. Why would she, moreover, why would you believe her?

  • kinnath||

    Because HRC is a calculating cunt. Romney doesn't compare intelluctually.

  • kinnath||

    Anyone that can live with Bill for 40 years to pave the way to the white house will compromise anything to make it there.

  • kinnath||

    Does she "manufacture" some medical event that puts Bill in an institution for the duration of the election campaign?

  • Ragin Cajun||

    How 'bout something like priapism?

  • kinnath||

    I was thinking along the lines of a stroke, but over exertition could be a contributing factor.

  • ||

    I am convinced that this strategy will be, in fact, adopted by HRC. And, oddly, it won't be a fraud. She really will become a conservative.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    She really will become a conservative.

    Nah. Her lesbian girlfriend would kill her.

  • ||

    Kidnapped by Osama bin Laden and held for the entire campaign. Not really, of course, but my God, the brilliance of it all!

  • DNS||

    I doubt seriously that a religious right candidate will make it all the way, but that leaves a lot of other possibilities.

    I doubt that as well, but just think about this: all this horrible legislation and fiscal policies that this administration has rammed through, do you really think (R) are just going to shit can it? As Sudden laments down thread, Obama paid what amounts to lip service to Sudden's points. He continued almost all of Bush the Lesser's policies, even injecting some of them with bovine steroids. Obama has pretty much given a statist Republican a Federal wet dream, they just didn't have to do the dirty work. Again, my main point is the public forgets the slime very quickly in lieu of self interest. IF by some fluke Obama is indeed done, I would seriously fear his successor more.

  • ||

    Naturally, we're likely screwed either way. It's just possible that the GOP will be more focused on reforming government spending in a significant way, but I'll believe that when I see it.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Well they have been... oh, you said significant way. Yeah, we'll see.

  • ||

    Personality, policy, its all irrelevant in 2012.

    The only things that will matter:

    (1) The unemployment rate.

    (2) The inflation rate.

    (3) Possibly, a colossal foreign policy/national security fuckup, if it hits, say, in October, could be a tie breaker.

    If unemployment is down enough, and inflation is low enough, Obama wins. If they are too high, he loses.

  • kinnath||

    Letting all the air out of the ball really kills the moment.

  • ||

    I'm extremely doubtful that the economy will rebound sufficiently to save his sorry ass. Even if it does in 2012, the extended downturn will be remembered, and he and the Democratic Congress will largely take the fall.

    Problem is, if the GOP sees things this way, they'll get cocky and all Bushie again.

  • SIV||

    If the economy (particularly employment and inflation) are the same or worse (or even a little better) come 2012, anyone on the GOP ticket can beat Obama barring a strong 3rd independent candidate well to his right.

  • Democrats||

    barring a strong 3rd independent candidate well to his right.

    Hmmm....

  • Joe R.||

    Obama has incumbency, money, the MSM, and race in his back pocket, not to mention an Army of Tonys that slaver to his every word.

    This. I've been saying something similar for a while. I like Obama's odds to win again.

    And given that there is a potential for both houses of Congress to be Republican, I'd frankly rather have Obama win if his opponent is anyone other than Johnson or Paul.

    I feel dirty typing that.

  • ||

    The election is still almost 2 yrs away. Anything could happen. in 2007 everyone was saying Hillary would be the Dem. nominee.

    The GOP pool is scary--Palin, Huck, Romney, Gingrich. Maybe a Mitch Daniels or Gary Johnson could come from behind and surprise everyone.

  • DNS||

    Palin, Huck, Romney, Gingrich

    My point is made. None of these candidates can win. A supposed nitwit, a socialist evangelical, RomneyCare, and a scandal laden eco-theologist. Hmph!

    Maybe a Mitch Daniels or Gary Johnson could come from behind and surprise everyone.

    I would love to see Johnson nominated, but he cannot win. Same with Daniels. Besides, the (R) establishment types would not support them. Possibly Daniels. But The One has the telegenic edge and Daniels has the charisma of a lead balloon.

  • Pip||

    Chris Christie is losing weight again...

  • DNS||

    He has publicly stated that he will not run, and will continue to govern NJ. Say what you want about some of his conservative RINO-ish policies, but I take him at his word.

  • SIV||

    What's so scary about Palin? Her biggest political flaw is that educated women hate her.

  • Joe R.||

    If I had to listen to her voice any more often than I already do, I'd slit my wrists.

  • SIV||

    Her biggest political flaw is that educated women hate her.

    See what I mean?

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Too bad Paul Ryan isn't a bit older.

  • SIV||

    Scumbag statist fuck voted for TARP and the auto bailouts. He should be a Tea Party target, not a contender.

  • KPres||

    In all fairness, as far as gubmint handouts go, TARP shouldn't be your biggest concern. It was a loan, after all, and the total amount distributed is about what you pay for medicaid every two years.

  • ||

    Haley Barbour governs Mississippi, the most fucked up challenged state in the union.

    Yeah, I want him to be president. Maybe he can appoint Kwame Kilpatrick as Attorney General and Jenny McCarthy as head of the FDA.

  • Hugh Akston||

    What would she be wearing?

  • Corduroy||

    candy striper nurse attire

  • ||

    Sexy-nurse costume.

  • ||

    *tiny shaken fist*

  • ||

    Lab whore coat?

  • Warty||

    "I signed that bill. I signed a dozen agriculture bills. Everyone knows I'm a friend of the farmer. What I gotta do, start diddling livestock?"

    "We can't do that, Daddy. We might offend our constituency."

  • Corduroy||

    "Damn! We're in a tight spot!"

  • ||

    So there you have it. Haley Barbour supports farm subsidies, corporate welfare, and eminent domain abuse.

    And he really, really hates those meddlin' Duke boys.

  • Ragin Cajun||

    Except David.

  • ||

    Roscoe, arrest them Duke boys!

  • ||

    Atomic Hogg.

  • Tim||

    [plays Dixie on car horn]

  • ||

    Now, now, that's Georgia. Which, incidentally, elected Cooter to the House.

  • ||

    They all look the same to me.

  • ||

    Southern states or cooters?

  • ||

    Overweight redneck autocrats.

    I can tell cooters apart by looking at their shell markings and beak configurations.

  • Warty||

    Worse things could happen than having Pappy O'Daniel run for president against that clean mulatto boy. Think of the lulz.

  • ||

    I can't wait to see Obama's midget.

  • Ragin Cajun||

    Which one would be the Reee-form candidate?

  • Gary Coleman||

    Whatchu talkin' 'bout, wylie?

  • DNS||

    Didn't your wife pull the plug on you?

  • smalls||

  • smalls||

    My favorite part:

    Why black-on-black? Vehicles with dark interiors, Brown said, tend to hold their value better.


    He's just trying to be fiscally responsible.

  • Sudden||

    It's depressing when it gets to the point that I at least appreciate the honesty and candor rather than thinking that a candidate might do one good thing only to be let down when said candidate gets into office (See: Obama, Barack RE: War on Drugs/Terrorism/BCS System).

  • ||

  • db||

    Uh-fuh!

  • Gregory Smith||

    No subsidies for farmers, no subsidies for rail, no subsidies or oil, no subsidies for ethanol, NO SUBSIDIES FOR NOTHING!

    http://libertarians4freedom.blogspot.com/

  • Warty||

    NO SUBSIDIES FOR NO NOT DOUBLE UNNEGATIVES NO

  • ||

    Not that getting rid of subsidies would be a bad thing. In fact, it would be that thing that is the opposite of bad.

  • Dick Fitzwell||

    ...not bad???

  • ||

    Unbadalicious?

  • DNS||

    Don't forget to trademark that.

  • ||

    NO SUBSIDIES FOR NEOCONS WHO CALL THEMSELVES LIBERTRIANS

  • ||

    Libertrians? People who come from the planet Libertria?

    Libertarian is beginning to become meaningless. I say we take back liberal. It's not being used in the U.S. anymore, and it means more or less what we think it means everywhere else.

  • Warty||

    AINT NO LIBRULZ ALOUD IN MUH HAHSE

  • DNS||

    MNG has claimed "liberal" and sullies the name. Unless you are speaking to educated person, "classical liberal" tends to fly over their heads.

  • ||

    We'll have it back after a few more years of "progressives."

  • Wisconsin School Kid||

    You mean like Mozart and stuff?

  • ||

    I'm a Beethoven liberal.

  • Ragin Cajun||

    Going tone-deaf?

  • ||

    Okay, I'm a Bach liberal.

  • cynical||

    If MNG was cloned a hundred million times and represented the opposition, things wouldn't be half as shitty as they are now. Why don't you read Alternet for a while and then let's talk about MNG?

  • DNS||

    I have. Many times. He would throw his lot in with them quite easily.

  • DNS||

    NO SUBSIDIES FOR NOTHING!

    Who do you think subsidizes your blog prostitution? What is the cut you are giving to Reason to post your blog links, penny polisher? Irony, thy name is Smith.

  • ||

    Let's throw in:

    No subsidies for not working.

    No subsidies for not saving.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Come on, people. That's the most libertarian thing Greg has ever said in these comments.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Sorry, in keeping with the theme of the original post, that should have been "these here comments."

  • db||

    So. Awesome.

  • db||

    That was intended as a response to SF's Preacher link.

  • Dick Fitzwell||

    As a life long resident of MS, I would like to say that Haley Barbour's voice makes me want to take a 1/2" auger bit to my temple.

    Please, let's keep Haley out of the White House, huh?

  • Warty||

    Don't worry, he's letting me be in his brain trust.

  • Tim||

    I wish I was in the land of subsidized cotton,
    Old times there are not forgotten;
    Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.
    In Dixie Land where I was elected,
    Takin cash is not rejected,
    Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.

  • Old Mexican||

    :D :D

  • Jeffersonian||

    Yo, fuck Haley Barbour.

  • ||

    Well, Mitch Daniels is dead to me. I see he has caved to the Indiana unionistas and fleebaggers, and pulled the union reform bill there.

    He had potential, but I guess he saw the invites to the bien pensant cocktail parties drying up.

  • ||

    She really should go on her knees up the steps to the RNC headquarters and sell herself as a reformed Republican.

    She really should go on her knees up the steps to the RNC headquarters American Enterprise institute and sell herself as a reformed Republican neoconservative. And promise to invade Iran.

    What? Too soon?

  • ||

    Can a Beethoven liberal hear a dog whistle?

  • ||

    Like I said, I'm now a Bach liberal.

    The only appropriate response to hearing that someone is a Bach liberal is to say, "Ah, Bach."

  • Radar||

    It won't work.

  • ||

    I see he [Daniels] has caved to the Indiana unionistas and fleebaggers, and pulled the union reform bill there.

    *makes "shocked" face*

GET REASON MAGAZINE

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

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement