Yet Another Democrat Laughs at Libertarians for Wanting to Legalize Pot

The Daily Caller has an interesting what-should-we-cut? forum featuring various political creatures. Before getting into the nitty-gritty of which federal department to axe, my eyes got stuck on this answer from the Democratic Droopy, Paul Begala:

The government of the United States of America is the greatest source for good in the world. The federal government freed the slaves, defeated the Nazis and integrated our schools. The federal government cured polio, built the interstate highways and put men on the moon. Oh, and the federal government — with Al Gore's leadership — really did create the Internet.

Libertarians, on the other hand, have given us pompous, turgid literature and plans to legalize drugs. Call me old school, but I believe in E Pluribus Unum, not Canis Canem Edit.

Tee-hee!

In related news, the Democratic talk-shop Think Progress has reacted to the candidacy of an anti-Drug War Republican like so–"Meet Republican Presidential Candidate Gary Johnson: Nullificationist Who Opposes Child Labor Laws."

Question for my liberal and progressive brothers and sisters who hate the Drug War as much as I do: How long you gonna sit there and take it?

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.

  • ||

    Why should we care what a guy who plays second fiddle to James Carville says.

  • juris imprudent||

    I would damn sure stand behind Carville too. Would you trust him with your back?

  • Amaroli ||

    Is it raining?

  • Yes, Carville spit||

  • ¢||

    my liberal and progressive brothers and sisters who hate the Drug War as much as I do

    Imaginary friend is imaginary.

  • Zeb||

    Sadly, I am afraid that that is mostly true. If you want pot decriminalized and aren't so sure it's a good idea for hard drugs, then no, you are not against the drug war in any meaningful way. As long as any popular drug is illegal, there will be piles of bodies somewhere.

  • ||

    Imaginary friend is imaginary.

    The lefties at firedoglake seem pretty real to me....and i am pretty sure Matt gets along with them splendidly.

    Plus Soros helped fund the legalize pot initiative in California.

    Note: Jane Hamsher is a the hottest 51 year old ever.

  • Joe R.||

    Jennifer Tilly and Rene Russo think you're wrong. And those are the two I came up with in 5 seconds. I'm sure there are thousands of other ones.

  • ||

    remember Moving Violation and the guy says Tilly is no rocket scientist...then she ends up being a rocket scientist.

    Good times.

  • SIV||

    Nigella Lawson is 51.

  • SIV||

    Nastassja Kinski is 51.

  • SIV||

    Lydia Lunch is 51.

  • SIV||

    My Eyes!!!!

    scratch Lydia
    Dear God she is hideous now.

    I'll stand by Nigella and Nasstassja.

  • ||

    Where's your site link at? You could do a sexy mature women in their underwear gallery.

    Just don't let Longtorso push his perverse Golden Girls pics into your collection.

  • AlmightyJB||

    You know you'd hit that. If for nothing else, the angry sex.

  • ||

    Too lazy to lookup how old Mimi Rogers is.

  • Charlie Sheen||

    Damn, Begala is a motherfucking-balls-to-the-walls-ass idiot.

  • ||

    It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that big government leftists love the War on Drugs. After all, it gives the almighty, all-powerful government the right to bust down our doors and seize our assets on a whim. Why would they every surrender that power?

  • Paul||

    When you control a nation's healthcare, you control a nation's people.

    You can't control a nation's healthcare without controlling what people put into their bodies.

    Modern progressivism and the war on drugs are 100% compatible.

    That is all.

  • Jeffersonian||

    ^^ This.

    Plus the Left shrinks in horror at the slightest whiff of federalism, lest you think states might lead the way here.

  • ||

    How long you gonna sit there and take it?

    Until there is only TEAM BLUE. That's how long.

  • ||

    Until there is only TEAM BLUE. That's how long.

    From November 2008 to November 2010 there was only TEAM BLUE.

    Consider your hypothesis falsified.

  • juris imprudent||

    The government of the United States of America is the greatest source for good in the world.

    I'll have some of what he's smoking.

  • ||

    "The government of the United States of America is the greatest source for good in the world."

    Just as GW Bush was the greatest hope for liberty in our lifetimes (according to Bush/GOP campaigners who wanted LP voters to jump ship, at least).

    I have another knee-slapper for you: How can you tell when a politician is lying?

  • BushPig Obama||

    We're spreading our good will throughout Afrika and the Mid-East and even Asia. I'm speaking now, so shut up!

  • KPres||

    Yep, look at what he brings up:

    1. Interstate highways - Um, the government owns a monopoly on the highway system. If this has been a good thing (has it? since when are traffic congestion, urban sprawl, and ...carbon emissions good things?), it's only because beforehand the government was doing it so poorly. It's not like there are private interstates to compare it to.

    2. School Integration - see above.

    3. Internet - Laughable. The internet was created by private ISPs, and it's popularity is based on private websites.

    4. Polio - Polio vaccine didn't eradicate polio, they just changed the definition of the disease so the number of reported "cases" would drop. The truth is that the rate of infection had already been falling since the turn of the century, and if they hadn't manipulated the statistics, it's rate of decrease would be linear up through today.

    4. Man on the moon - What is the practical benefit? It was essentially a military endeavor, in that it was meant to demoralize the Russians. I suppose it worked, but so what? It hasn't made anybody's life significantly better.

  • ||

    #4. Hey! Man! I enjoy my PanAm weekly flights to Luna.

    No wait...

  • KPres||

    The biggest benefit I've gotten was an REM song I like.

  • ||

    I like the freeze-dried ice cream. Reminds me of my ex.

  • Jeffersonian||

    I prefer my ice cream less bitter.

  • Zeb||

    Well, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin have done pretty well for themselves. And that other guy.

    As for interstates, people like them because they can drive places fast. Most people are really bad at seeing secondary effects of things like that and see no conflict between their hate of sprawl and pollution and the convenience of the interstate system.

  • KPres||

    No, no! All those things are the fault of evil automobile corporations!

  • KPres||

    And oil companies!

  • Michael Collins||

    Well, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin have done pretty well for themselves. And that other guy.

    That other guy as you call him is named Michael Collins. Asshole.

  • Zeb||

    (I knew that, it's a joke.)

  • ||

    Well I really love the cocktail named after you! Shit....sorry that was your brother Tom.

  • Otto||

    Well, he did get a Jethro Tull song named after him.

  • Really?||

    The Big Fella went to space?

  • sounds real good||

    The lovely Kate Collins, Michael Collins' daughter, who played Natalie on All My Children.

    http://www.robinc.org/Images/P.....hunter.jpg

  • Progressives ||

    The federal government cured polio,

    Libertarian liars will tell you it was Dr Jonas Salk, wholly funded by voluntary private charity.

  • Eryk Boston||

    If you want to get technical, there is no cure for polio once you get it aside from waiting for the body to kill the virus.

  • ||

    I agree that the U.S. is more good than not, especially when compared than most other nations, but that's the people of this country, not our government. I mean, come on.

    And, of course, crediting the government for the Internet is like crediting the government for the invention of the 747. And Al Gore's contribution is not much more than mine.

    Jesus. When did the Democrats fall so in love with government? Government as a tool for imposing their will on the rest of us, I get (despise, but get), but this fawning over it and refusal to acknowledge its dangers? WTF? What happened to the fear during the Bush years?

  • AlanS.||

    More good or less evil?

  • ||

    Less evil. That's the best we can hope for in any collective sense.

  • P B||

    What happened to the fear during the Bush years?....An election they won.

  • ||

    It's going to serve them right if the government that eventually seizes permanent, dictatorial power is a conservative one.

  • DNS||

    When did the Democrats fall so in love with government?

    Circa 1968 is when the unholy coitus of big government and Dems really reached full flavor.

    What happened to the fear during the Bush years?

    The Bush II years were a hibernate and regroup time. The orgasm of this union peaked with ObamaCare, as Dems, like unsuccessful sperm, were willing to die (politically) for this cause. We are in the "get me a ham sammich and I'll call you" phase.

  • ||

    Actually, the internet was invented by government employees. Al Gore's contribution was that he was alive when it was invented.

  • ||

    Who convinced these couple of saggy old white guys to strike such pathetic tough guy poses? Even hair bands like Poison look tougher than these two.

    It would be great entertainment to watch them get jacked by a real badass.

  • Paul Begala||

    I'm from Texas and a Democrat, I'm from Texas and a Democrat, I'm from Texas and a Democrat, I'm from Texas and a Democrat, I'm from Texas and a Democrat, I'm from Texas and a Democrat....

  • Trespassers W||

    Is Carville wearing mom jeans?

  • Jesse Walker||

    Libertarians, on the other hand, have given us pompous, turgid literature and plans to legalize drugs. Call me old school, but I believe in E Pluribus Unum, not Canis Canem Edit.

    Call me old school, but when I ding people for being pompous, I try to catch my breath before breaking out the Latin.

  • Warty||

    BEGALA DELENDA EST

  • tmp1701||

    Ceterum autem censeo, Begalem esse delendam.

  • juris imprudent||

    That's funny, despite the Latin I was thinking that he would've sounded more natural in German.

  • Publius Cannibius||

    Off to the galleys.

  • RandomGermanDude||

    Always picking on us. What did we ever do to you?

  • ||

    The 30 years war, Marx, WW2, schnauzers...

    Take your pick.

  • RandomGermanDude||

    Obivously the sarcasm detector would be a nice invention indeed.

    If had to pick it certainly would be the schnauzers - or garden gnomes. Sorry 'bout that.

  • R||

    You know who else sounded more natural in German...

  • Joe R.||

    Marlene Dietrich?

  • KPres||

    Nice.

  • Paul||

    I try to catch my breath before breaking out the Latin.

    Ixnay on Egalabay.

  • fish||

    I thought Paul Begala was leasing out his forehead so Soros minions could show Power Point presentations on it.

  • Warty||

    Have something pleasant for a change.

  • Tucker Carlson||

    Begala, you magnificent bastard, I read your book!

  • kbolino||

    I knew Erwin Rommel and you sir are no Erwin Rommel.

  • ||

    Perhaps we should commission a prayer to end Global Warming?

  • Windpower Proponent||

    Perhaps we should commission a prayer to end Global Warming?

    Done and done.

  • newshutz||

    Rommel's book was good military stuff, worthy of being a source for Patton. Though it was a combination of Infantry tactics and WWI memoir, the mobility, audacity, and inventiveness are all there.

    I seriously doubt Begala could write anything in the political realm that would be worthy enough to be used to level a bookcase with Rommel's book in it.

  • Anonymous||

    I despise these retarded "You know who else? THAT'S RIGHT" smears. Thomas Woods is also anti-war; does that make those of us with anti-war beliefs Lost Cause Confederate wackos?

  • fish||

    Pussy....why don't you just sign in as Paul Krugman.

  • KPres||

    No, no, the difference is Tom Woods is anti-war even if a Democrat is in the white house.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Who is Thomas Woods and what distinguishes him from the great mass of human idiots that I should care?

  • cynical||

    "I believe in E Pluribus Unum, not Canis Canem Edit"

    I believe in sic semper tyrannis, Paul.

  • Old Man with Candy||

    I believe in jus primae noctis, cyn.

  • Colin||

    +1

  • Bingo||

    The same Federal Government also committed genocide against the Indians, enabled slavery in non-slave states, enabled Jim Crow laws, championed "separate but equal" amenities for Blacks, pursued policies that helped bankers make risky investments with the risk being passed to the tax payer, prolonged a depression, interned the American citizens of Japanese descent, dropped nuclear bombs on civilians, brought us into questionable wars in Asia destroying the lives and futures of young Americans and Asians, created dependence on automobiles with subsidized highways, destroyed the future of millions with the War on Drugs, subsidized poverty with the War on Poverty, helped create the obesity epidemic by subsidizing and promoting the consumption of grains, created a vast military industrial complex and promoted militarism abroad... and some other stuff. See, I can cherry pick too!

    But really, awesome government, great job.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Good point, except the nuking of civilians. They were the bad guys so they deserved it.

  • SIV||

    No Indian "genocide" was committed by the US Government.

  • Zeb||

    Care to explain that one?

    I suppose you might define genocide as the total extermination of a race or ethnic group, in which case it is just attempted genocide.

  • tmp1701||

    That's up in the air. However, "ethnic cleansing" would be appropriate.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    But all that happened before the right people were in charge.

    The problem is not too much government control. We just need the right philosopher-kings to dominate our lives completely. Then all will be well.

  • ||

    helped create the obesity epidemic by subsidizing and promoting the consumption of grains

    The federal government controlled Syria circa 10,000 BC?

    Also why did it take so long for us to get fat....bread has been a staple of western civilization since before there was a western civilization....why are we getting fat now when we our diets are vastly more varied with more choice then they ever have been in the history of the universe?

  • Joel||

    The idea is that government corn subsidies combined with suger tariffs lead directly to the proliferation of corn syrup as a sweetener. Now, if you believe HFCS contributed to the obesity epidemic, then you believe that the government had a major role to play. Now, I don't see any empirical evidence for HFSC contributing to obesity, but there is the argument.

  • ||

    The recent demonetization of saturated fat and cholesterol, the replacement of SFAs with industrial vegetable and seed oils the idiotic food pyramid created by the McGovern committee, and the increase in sugar consumption and availability.

  • 9.5 Million Dead Soviets||

    "defeated the Nazis"

    Hey, fuck you, comrade.

  • ||

    With all due respect to those who died, the Soviets might not have had to fight the Germans at all if they hadn't teamed up with them in the first place.

    Also, the Soviets would've lost without American aid.

  • tmp1701||

    Oh, I'm not peddling the "Russia won on its own" myth, I'm not a histrionic Russian nationalist. However, when you consider that approximately 50 Soviet soldiers died for every American who died in Europe, it gives you a sense of who was doing the heavy lifting. As some smart historian said "The Soviets provided the blood, the British provided the time, and the Americans provided lots and lots of stuff."

    And whatever your thoughts on casualty ratios, a Soviet-Nazi war was damn near inevitable. Hitler's obsessions with lebensraum and Jewish Bolshevism pretty much guaranteed a showdown.

  • Terc||

    The Soviets employed tactics that seemed designed to maximize the casualty rate of their own soldiers. Didn't they clear mine fields by marching thru them? And how many lives did they expend taking Berlin? 600 thou is the figure I've heard. It's ghastly. It makes me loathe to give them a lot of credit.

  • tmp1701||

    Yes, but the fact that they pissed away their own men meant that the US never had to face the full force of the German military. Now, the US was very powerful relative to Germany, especially in industrial production. However, imagine what it would have been like to invade Normandy if the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS had 3 to 4 times as much manpower available and weren't torn up by 3 years of war.

    And if you're claiming that the US is a great force for good, you have to remember that the ultimate US strategy was to subsidize one barbaric asshole in his war against another barbaric asshole.

  • kbolino||

    "The Soviets would've lost without American aid"

    And vice versa. Like it or not, we needed them as much as they needed us.

  • ||

    Perhaps. Would've helped if they'd just said no to begin with. But that was crazy-ass Stalin's fault, of course.

  • Jim||

    I honestly think either one of us *could* have won without the other. The Russians lost Moscow to Napolean...and burned it to the ground on their way out. They'd have just retreated farther east (the plans were already in place, and some tank factories already up and running). It would have cost them another ocean of blood, but it's not out of the question.

    Likewise, we had way too much money, stuff, and people, to lose (unless we threw in the towel due to cost / benefit analysis). But again, we would have lost a shit-ton more soldiers. I think the only time we really faced the creme-de-la-creme was in the Bulge, and even then, they didn't have support or fuel.

    Even Stephen Ambrose, not known for Russia-boosting, admitted in an interview that ultimately, the vast, vast majority of wehrmacht soldiers died in the East.

  • ||

    Likewise, we had way too much money, stuff, and people, to lose (unless we threw in the towel due to cost / benefit analysis).

    FDR would have lost reelection and we would have had a shit pot more resources for a cost/benefit analysis once the economy was freed from his grasp.

  • ||

    Likewise, we had way too much money, stuff, and people, to lose (unless we threw in the towel due to cost / benefit analysis).

    At the end, we had nukes. We weren't going to lose, even if the Russians were Germany's staunch allies the whole war.

  • KPres||

    Nah, we got the bomb first. That's all that would have mattered in the end.

  • Zeb||

    But would we have got the bomb first if the Germans hadn't had to throw so many resources to the eastern front?

  • KPres||

    AFAIK, Hitler abruptly stopped researching for some inexplicable reason that nobody's figured out.

    Disclaimer - that comes from the History Channel, TIFWIW.

  • ||

    The germans were nowhere near a bomb and were actually going in the direction of nuclear reactors (which is why they wanted the deuterium from Norway.)

    Even if they had suddenly decided to devote resources to a nuclear bomb in 1942, they were several years behind the allies. They had not even achieved a successful reactor by the end of the war.

  • Zeb||

    OK, thanks. I was genuinely ignorant of the level of Germany's nuclear development.

  • Otto||

    Germany lost most of its atomic physicists to immigration, as many of them were Jewish. Hitler derided atomic physics as a "Jewish science."

  • ||

    "The Soviets would've lost without American aid"

    Bullshit. Germany would have ground itself and the Soviet Union to dust in the Russian winters in the Urals.

    And then we could have nuked the survivors from orbit.

  • ||

    Crazy thought:

    Maybe Stalin expected Hitler to turn on him, but figured that defeating the Nazis would be a good way to turn around and conquor the whole of Europe. If the US hadn't jumped in and raced all the way to Germany before the Soviets took it, they very well might not have stopped.

    As it is, they beat us to Berlin and took half of Europe behind the iron curtain.

    Perhaps Stalin merely didn't realize how hard it would be for the fucked up starving purge-crippled Soviet Army to defeat Hitler. It may have been his plan all along that he'd get half of Poland, and eventually the rest of Europe, and he was planning to betray Hitler eventually. He just let Hitler make the first move, so he could have the moral high ground an an alliance with the US and Britain.

    If Stalin had made the first move, it may have been US and the Germans against Stalin.

  • ||

    Ya know ... that would make a great basis for an alternate history novel. the one where Stalin stabs Hitler in the back instead of the other way around, and we all end up in an alliance with Hitler.

  • Harry Turtledove||

    I'm on it

  • ||

    Would that mean instead of the left defending the failed and disproved ideology of communism they would instead be defending the failed and disproved ideology of fascism?

    Would the GULAG be the new holocaust and the the deaths of millions of Jews be as dismissed and ignored as millions Stalin's victims are now?

  • CatoTheElder||

    Perhaps with Jewish Americans sent to concentration camps rather than Japanese Americans as well?

  • Sam Grove||

    But it would have exhausted Germany.

  • Hugh Akston||

    The government of the United States of America is the greatest source for good in the world.

    I'm sure the people that the US gov't has blown up, tortured, imprisoned for consensual crimes or crimes they didn't commit, spied on, assassinated, harassed, seized the assets of, run out of business, or deported would all totally agree.

    Or they should. After all, they have the privilege of sacrificing their lives for the greater good.

  • Greer||

    And the examples that he uses, we freed the slave and integrated the schools. Hey idiot, we had to free the slaves because we created and condoned slavery in the first place. If we didn't segregate the schools, we wouldn't have to integrate them.

  • Zeb||

    Good point. Changing horrible policy doesn't mean you are great and good. It just means you aren't completely immoral and corrupt.

  • KPres||

    By his logic, if I steal your car, then bring the tires back to you, you should praise me for giving you a free set of tires!

  • Robert||

    That's just how municipal gov'ts a few decades ago typically credited themselves with bringing cable TV to the people. What that meant is that they finally allowed an operator to lay cable.

  • Robert||

    And thinking people would just forget the March of Dimes and assume it was the US gov't re polio.

    But people who want to make the policy argument will simply credit gov't with having gotten rid of a bunch of bad policies, and then whatever bad policies remain are simply policies the gov't hasn't yet gotten around to eliminating -- ignoring the possibility that more bad is on the way, courtesy of gov't, or a particular gov't, or whatever.

  • ||

    The government of the United States of America is the greatest source for good in the world.

    The irony is this is almost an exact quote from Robert Kegan's 2003 neocon classic "Of Paradise and Power".

  • ||

    I'm sure the people that the US gov't has blown up, tortured, imprisoned for consensual crimes or crimes they didn't commit, spied on, assassinated, harassed, seized the assets of, run out of business, or deported would all totally agree.

    You do know of course that you have fallen into the trap.

    The point of him saying that was to label libertarians as anti-American.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    It's not anti-American to say those thing. Just anti-American government.

    The State != The Nation

  • ||

    It's not anti-American to say those thing. Just anti-American government.

    I know you aren't....I am simply saying that this could be a trap.

  • Trespassers W||

    If this be treason...

  • George Donnelly||

    A group of us are working on some non-pompous, non-turgid libertarian pamphlets on the most pressing issues of the day and we plan to hand them out this summer and fall. Check it out and get on board to hand these beautiful little slices of liberty out to the haters:

    http://indiegogo.com/commonsense

  • ||

    I thought that libertarians were so far lost in the political wilderness as to be unworthy of consideration.

  • Hugh Akston||

    We are, except when our secret power mongers totally wreck up the place.

  • cynical||

    No, we are the single most important force in politics today. Or something. I guess maybe we should be flattered?

  • ||

    I just wanna buy heroin out of a vending machine.

  • All for a one-ounce gold coin!||

  • R||

    That's a lot of heroin...

  • mad libertarian guy||

    The cognitive dissonance in the left is strong. We're simultaneously politically inconsequential and responsible for all of our country's ills via the Kochtopus.

  • ||

    I'm disappointed in Paul Begala. He's pretty funny on "The New Adventures of Old Christine."

  • Cytotoxic||

    Could someone please leave a quicky debunking of that 'government invented the internet' BS below for myself and everyone to read.

  • kbolino||

    First message sent across ARPANET: November 1969

    Albert Gore, Jr. first elected to political office: November 1976

  • kbolino||

    It is worth noting however that ARPANET was initially funded by the Department of Defense.

  • Ted S.||

    I find it fascinating that lefties think we need more government R&D, but a lot the good things governmnet R&D has given us (Arpanet becoming the Internet; GPS; satellites in general) came about from defense research, which the lefties hate.

  • Tony||

    But it proves that in theory government is capable of significant feats of innovation--sure it would be better if it were motivated by peace instead of war, but it does belie the standard libertarian complaint that the government can't do anything right because it's not motivated by magical market forces.

  • Jim||

    So they get one thing right, after fucking up 20 other things, and we're supposed to take that as "proof" that the state is neccessary and good? Shit man, I can throw darts blindly at a board all day long and eventually get a bullseye. That doesn't make me a champion dart player.

  • uuh||

    What was that movie recently about the Army researching telepathy or something? (it involved sheep). A fine example of the prudent ways the DoD spends taxpayer money that benefits society.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    But it proves that in theory government is capable of significant feats of innovation

    No, government is not capable of signficant feats of innovation, people are.

    There's no magic sky-god called "Government" that creates these things out of thin air.

  • crossofcrimson||

    "the standard libertarian complaint that the government can't do anything right"

    It's largely a matter of degrees. There are many completely legitimate functions of government (among the many that are not). What's up for debate is if it could be done without government or how well government actually would do it compared to private entities. Those are very different things.

  • alan||

    Which was developed first at the Rand Corporation before that project received ill gotten military contractor loot. Soon which the government banned commercial development of the internet for nearly twenty years.

  • alan||

    However, that is just one root in the developmental tree that deals with the packet routing design for digital transverse. Analog intranets between computers occurred as early as WW2. A fictionalized but fairly accurate version of which appeared in Cryptonomicon.

    Then you throw CERN into the mix, and be damn glad you did, given their policies concerning IP. The internet Gore envisioned would have about as many servers as there were television broadcast corporations for the first forty years of television history for the purposes of insuring extensive governmental gate keeping.

  • 0x90||

    And if you really want to break it down, the crux is just this: would a TCP/IP equivalent have materialized regardless? And the answer is: definitely. Not only because Vint Cerf types would still have been present in the absence of DARPA-based development, but also because there are only so many possible strategies for routing reliably over low-fi (i.e. Ma Bell) networks.

    Also, to believe that 'the government' invented it, and furthermore, that it possessed any notable forethought in doing so, is to cast it as being downright suicidal, for therein were planted the seeds of the most potent opportunity for destruction it should ever expect to face (neglecting, of course, its own inherently unstable nature).

    (and I believe you meant to reference ICANN, not CERN)

  • alan||

    ICANN came much later to the game of promoting an open architecture than did CERN.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.....89-2000.29

  • 0x90||

    Thanks, I see what you mean -- that's an interesting historical tidbit.

  • Robert||

    Do you really mean analog? I think you must be referring to non-packet xmission of digital data. Fidonet works non-packetwise, doesn't it? And there have been plenty of other network protocols for BBSs.

  • Robert||

    Did you mean analog in the sense that audio frequencies are supposed to be analogs of the numbers they represent? They're really not.

  • Robert||

    Silly me, sorry. You were referring to intranets as analogs of the Internet. I was reading that as...you know.

  • alan||

    I see how my wording could cause confusion there, my bad.

  • tmp1701||

    The government did indeed "invent" the internet, if you're talking about the early technology like DARPANET. "Internet" just means the communications network, which does not rely on fixed routes and is built to be adaptable. The idea was that if the wise old men screwed up and the nukes flew, the comm net would be highly adaptable to allow our military computers to keep communicating. That way we could "make the rubble bounce".

    As for the World Wide Web, by which I mean the use of the internet to build a commercial and information network? Private enterprise, baby.

  • fish||

    I'm not familiar with this program....does Begala play "Christine"?

  • MotherFucker AlGore||

    That's not BS. I became a billionaire by inventing the internet.

  • You dirty little sex-poodle||

  • A Serious Man||

    Really? I thought making AGW fashionable among liberals around the world made you wealthy. You know, with the documentary, the speaking tours, the book deals, etc.

  • alan||

    The government of the United States of America is the greatest source for good in the world . . .

    Don't read that while drinking. Trust me, you will spill your drink from laughing so hard.

    How can you tell when there is a Blue Team War or two going on? When you see democrats waving the red, white and blue with the shake and bake intensity of fans at ChefAid.

  • Banjos||

    I disagree Alan, you need a drink in order to read that, preferably of the "neat" kind.

  • ||

    Actually, Richard M. Nixon did more to create the Internet than any politician.

    For it is Nixon who signed the EO that greenlighted the Internet.

    Of course, the real creators of the Internet were Bolt, Beranek & Newman (BBN).

    "Oh, it's you, Newman." -- Jerry Seinfeld.

  • ||

    Of course, the real creators of the Internet were Bolt, Beranek & Newman (BBN).

    I give credit to whoever invented the telegraph.

    To deny that the telegraph was the internet without computers is to be intentionally dishonest.

    also don't give me shit about the internet being a network because that is factually not true. It resembles a communications tree not a net. The Internet we use today has very few actual loops in it.

  • ||

    I give credit to whoever invented the telegraph.

    Like most things, that's a messy question. Depends on how you define a telegraph. The first kind that was really practical for sending messages was designed by Carl Gauss and Bill Weber.

  • ||

    Like most things, that's a messy question.

    That is why I did not name names.

    But we are talking about government inventing the internet.

    Well without naming names no one would deny that that the free market invented the telegraph...and only an idiot would say that the internet is somehow novel from the telegraph.

    Simply put the free market invented the internet.

    Of course who cares who invented it.

    It is the free market that makes and maintains the internet that we use today....government's only visible responsibility is to try to censure and tax it.

  • Robert||

    only an idiot would say that the internet is somehow novel from the telegraph.


    Wow, would you be a tough patent examiner!

  • ||

    Wow, would you be a tough patent examiner!

    Was TCP/IP ever patented?

    Was Morse code?

  • Robert||

    There wouldn't be any benefit to the inventor from patenting a telegraphic code unless one code had greater utility than others. Ed Hughes, however, has sought to patent a new alphabet.

  • juris imprudent||

    You're one of those James Burke types, aren't you?

  • MWG||

    Begala remains just as big a douche as when I first saw him on Crossfire back in the mid 90s

  • Cartman||

    I think referring to Begala as a turd sandwich is much better.

  • Colin||

    How long you gonna sit there and take it?

    Socialism is far more important to them than anything else. It's the only issue they really care about.

  • alan||

    The interesting thing about the current surge of rhetoric coming from Democrats castigating libertarianism is how it follows in the footsteps of the last such surge which occurred just before they got butt raped in the 2010 elections. Are they doubling down on that same failed strategy of going after the fictional libertarian bogeyman instead of facing their all too real nemesis the Republicans head on? Begala is a party strategist so that appears to be the case. I just hope the Republicans who come in to even more power in 2012 are not as bad as I can imagine them to be.

  • Robert||

    You mean "doubling up", not "doubling down", unless you're suggesting they're doing it in return for a promise not to do it any more after that.

  • alan||

    I guess it is really a 'double or nothing.' The first time they bet on the strategy, they lost their asses. So they are going to try it again and either lose the little of what remains of their dignity, or win it all with an Obama second term, hoping it turns into Obama, Unbound instead of Obama, Lame Duck.

  • von Laue||

    Matt, you still talking to Ken Layne? Maybe he knows. I thought the only reason he got up in the morning was the hating of the libertarians for being libertariany, but maybe my meter's off, and also who really cares.

  • Dead Vietnamese Civilians||

    The government of the United States of America is the greatest source for good in the world.

    We'd respectfully disagree with Mr. Begala's assessment if we were still alive.

  • A Serious Man||

    Well to be fair, the reeducation camps and killing fields weren't exactly preferable either. I have many Vietnamese and Cambodian friends whose families came here as "Boat People" because the government let them immigrate here freely. So at least we tried to make up for it by welcoming them to the US.

  • Comment Critic||

    The comment thread on that Gary Johnson piece is just abysmal. Youtube comments hold no candle to the idiocy on display there.

    I especially like this one:

    Another laughable Reslug moron. Bring them on.

    Is "Reslug" a thing nowadays?

  • ||

    I wonder how many times something like this will have to happen before some libertarians give up on the ridiculous dream of "teaming up" with one of the "major" parties. They both fucking hate us with a fiery passion. Get over it.

  • Max||

    They're not the only ones who hate you, you fucking twit. I'm not aligned with either big party, and I loathe and detest you simple-minded libertoid asshole right-wing cultists. Go fuck yourself, moron.

  • MaxiePads New Hates||

    Maxie's I Hate List entries:

    672- Herself
    56- Libertoids
    99- Cultists
    543- Twits
    879- Parties
    533- Front-wheel alignments
    222- Things that are big

  • Emperor Wears no Clothes||

    Gotta say No. 533 is my favorite.

  • Ancap||

    LOL

  • Skip||

    Yes the Jesus Freaks in the Republican Party usually hate you guys, but they are a smaller number than you think. They just seem louder because they are afraid of gay people making out in front of them. The lefties hate you because you won't worship the government.

  • Max||

    I cant take it anymore. Im done with you wingnut cultists. this is my last post here.

  • Trespassers W||

    OK, who's spoofing Max?

  • Jeffersonian||

    Max is self-spoofing.

  • juris imprudent||

    this is my last post here.

    Shouldn't there be a (tm) on the end of that?

  • ||

    But, who is going to tell us all to, "go suck Ron Paul's cock"? I love that line, please don't go...

  • numeromancer||

    When you hear or read "...call me old school, but...", you should know that you're about to get a big bucket of stupid dumped over you.

  • Liberal progressive brother||

    Question for my liberal and progressive brothers and sisters who hate the Drug War as much as I do: How long you gonna sit there and take it?

    As long as it takes.

  • mr simple||

    And I’m all for incremental progress, if any is possible in the “Citizens United” era.

    So Bill Scher, whoever he is, is also an idiot. Did they get the stupidest people they could find for this survey?

  • mr simple||

    Sorry, Jamie Radtke and Ted DeHaven; I hadn't read that far yet. Also to anyone who gave an intelligent answer later in the piece.

  • Skip||

    Libertarians are beating those dumb fooks at Media Matters up intellectually and it is such a fun thing to see. You can tell all the lefties learned from history class is "Federal government: Good, States: Bad".

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Paul Begala is who the term "bullycide" was invented for.

  • ||

    KEYES: I know a lot of critics have said, “well, you know, it’s questionably constitutional.” What would you say to those critics?

    WTF?!?!

    The nullification movement wants to amend the constitution to allow states to nullify federal laws.

    How can a constitutional amendment be unconstitutional?

    Or is Keyes saying that a movement that wants to amend the constitution is unconstitutional?

    Is he saying amending the constitution is unconstitutional?

  • ||

    The government of the United States of America is the greatest source for good in the world.

    There is sucking the cock of authority and there is this. The first thing that came to my mind was Andrew Jackson telling Marshall to fuck off and trying to exterminate as many Indians as he could. Excuse me, "Indian removal."

    /sarcasm... some of them ingrates had the audacity to die on the trail of tears.

  • JB||

    Next time you see Begala in a car it would be amusing if you anonymously called the FBI and told them the man in the sedan with this license plate just offered to sell you a kilo of cocaine.

  • Nash||

    It amuses/terrifies me watching the hypocrite leftists backpedal and throw every social freedom under the bus in the name of wealth redistribution.

    It doesn't matter how badly they rape our freedoms. As long as we tax and spend they'll look the other way.

  • Matt||

    Given that pot was criminalized under FDR's watch, I'm guessing most Dems love seeing people hauled off to jail for using it.

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