Mitt Romney’s Lead Grows, Spicy Cheetos Are of the Devil, Dinosaur-Related Crimes: P.M. Links

  • Gallup’s daily tracking poll has Mitt Romney’s lead increasing over President Barack Obama. He’s now ahead by six points.  
  • Schools in California are banning Flamin’ Hot Cheetos because of the lack of nutritional value. They are also forbidding students from bringing the snacks to school. Bring on the schoolyard black markets!
  • The paleontologist at the center of a dispute over the origins of some dinosaur bones has been arrested and charged with illegally importing them.
  • New Smyrna Beach in Florida rejected a food truck proposal. Two local restaurants had asked for regulations to be amended to allow them, but apparently economic freedom may lead to “unintended consequences,” according to the mayor.
  • Vladimir Putin warns of terrorism risks as Russia plans to host major sports events like the 2014 Winter Olympics. And by “terrorism,” Putin means “disagreement,” as the Kremlin also arrested an opposition leader for “organizing disorder.”
  • The chemist at the center of Massachusetts’ drug lab scandal was engaging in personal contacts with a prosecutor whose evidence she was analyzing. Her husband was worried they were having an affair. The chemist’s admission of mishandling evidence jeopardizes 34,000 drug cases.
  • Larry King will be moderating a presidential debate open to third-party candidates.

Have a news tip for us? Send it to: 24_7@reason.com.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don’t forget to sign up for Reason’s daily AM/PM updates for more content

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.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    Big Bird costumes are popular this year.
    This is why people suck.

  • In Time Of War||

    And the folks wearing them won't even get paid $317K to do it. Suckers.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The paleontologist at the center of a dispute over the origins of some dinosaur bones has been arrested and charged with illegally importing them.

    Customs has seen Jurassic Park.

  • ||

    Sounds just like what the feds did to Pete Larson all over again.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    The NHL’s labour dispute has gone public.

    One day after tabling an offer designed to save a full 82-game season, the league took the unprecedented step of publishing it in full on its website on Wednesday.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Some players expressed cautious optimism in the wake of Tuesday’s proposal, but NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr was much less enthusiastic.

    Union members should get suspicious if union leadership is ever optimistic about a proposal.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr

    Unlike MLB and the NHL, the NFL Players Association was smart enough not to tie themselves to this asshat.

  • Ted S.||

    Does the proposal involve the resignation, drawing, and quartering of Gary Bettman? If not, I'm opposed to it.

  • Killazontherun||

    From the perspective of hindsight I would say Romney's mistake, in so much as he didn't put the opposition out of action, was not being arrogant and aloof enough. He came at it fighting hard, and he should not have. He should have treated the debate as a victory lap with the election already decided. Intentionally mistake Candy Crowley with Jan Crawford by referring to her as 'Jan' while having a puzzled look on his face that implied 'girl, you have put on some weight.' He should have intentionally got the questioners names wrong, turned his first minute of each question into a personal anecdote straight out of National Lampoon's Vacation trilogy, and then asked, 'what's the question again?' Followed by, 'ha! You got me there, champ!'

    Also, he should have been overly complementary of Obama. 'You see how the president pointedly added self preservation into his argument? He has a more nuanced understanding of gun rights advocacy that too many on the other side of the debate fundamentally lack.' And did that with every question. The womyns especially love to see sentiments being harmonized. It would have killed!

    In short, he should have came out behaving like a winner. People like that. Contrast yourself with an obvious loser and the contest is yours.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Also, he should have been overly complementary of Obama.

    "Gosh, he just tries so hard, doesn't he folks? Let's all give him a hand."

  • Sudden||

    If he had the brass cajones to drop that gem, he'd earn my vote.

  • Emmerson Biggins||

    I have no idea if that shit would work. Mass opinion dynamics mystify me. But it would be funny as hell.

  • Ted S.||

    Intentionally mistake Candy Crowley with Jan Crawford by referring to her as 'Jan'

    Mistake her with Jessica Savitch instead. :-)

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ...apparently economic freedom may lead to “unintended consequences,” according to the mayor.

    Unintended by whom?

  • T o n y||

    Libertarians taught me that bad consequences only matter if there is an agent behind them.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Matter to whom?

  • T o n y||

    Whomever they're happening to.

  • ||

    Existential Derp.

  • T o n y||

    It's the very crux of libertarianism's wrongness, if you ask me.

    Tax-funded government guns must be mobilized to protect people against human malefactors. But anything that's not a human agent--illness, poverty, and any number of other environmental factors with negative consequences--for some unintelligible reason cannot be dealt with in the same manner.

    Libertarianism's focus on human agency as the driver of meaningful consequences is erroneous and antiquated.

  • NeonCat||

    I'm pretty sure if it were possible to shoot poverty, someone would have done it.

  • Enough About Palin||

    Their shooting the poor like crazy in Chicago these days.

  • Enough About Palin||

    They're

  • Kwanzaa Cake||

    Dude, you totally killed that strawman dead! Dead I tells ya!

  • The Hammer||

    Was that...even a straw man? I don't know what that was, except I think Tony is having a stroke.

  • Emmerson Biggins||

    therefore, stealing is OK. Got it.

  • gaijin||

    maybe it's because human agency and human consequences have something in common...what would that be I wonder?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    People failing on their own initiative is preferable to people not being allowed to try for fear of introducing competition.

  • T o n y||

    Not when "failing" means "starving to death" and "people not being allowed" being a straw man.

  • Restoras||

    The starving to death of the past 100 years was a result of direct government action.

  • T o n y||

    I always thought it was a result of not getting enough food to live.

  • Restoras||

    Derp.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Or a result of able-bodied people not being given enough free food at taxpayer expense, without having to do more than do job searches down at the public library.

  • Enough About Palin||

    Derp X Derp

  • hotsy totsy||

    Yes, 27 million people in China starved to death in the Great Leap Forward as a direct consequence of their government's actions.

    They didn't get enough food because agents of the government, i.e. soldiers, took it from them, and killed them if they resisted.

  • hotsy totsy||

    By the way, this mass starvation was the largest in human history.

  • hotsy totsy||

    The amount of sheer stupidity in putting Mao's picture on Christmas decorations is staggering.

  • Gray Ghost||

    It's just another example of the lower staffers in this Administration (and party) not thinking and not nailing down the details. Like giving the Queen U.S. region DVDs as a gift of state. Like using imagery of Russian warships for a patriotic backdrop at the DNC. Like so many other penny ante fuckups these guys have done.

    I don't think it's malice so much as abject amateur hour.

  • some guy||

    Tony: "I always thought it was a result of not getting enough food to live."

    Ultimate cause, not proximate cause.

    Do you also blame the bullets for any injuries they cause?

  • The Hammer||

    Seriously, somebody get this poor man to a hospital. He's more incoherent than usual.

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    Yes, Tony. Walking into a post and breaking your nose is different from my hitting you in the face with a pipe wrench. Glad we could help. Now perhaps next you might learn how freedom is preferable to slavery.

    On second thought, let's not go too fast.

  • T o n y||

    How is it different, to my face? Same consequence. You're demonstrating my point. You don't care about outcomes, you care about punishing malefactors, and your concern is so proportionally skewed as to be practically Old Testament.

    If every day 10 noses were smashed by men with pipe wrenches, and 100 by unfortunately placed posts, libertarians would say public policy can only be made to address the former, smaller problem. Why?

  • ||

    Tony, did you hit your little head on a post recently?

  • Emmerson Biggins||

    one justifies use of force. the other doesn't.

  • T o n y||

    one justifies use of force. the other doesn't.

    What justifies it?

  • The Hammer||

    Actually, you can go ahead and beat the hell out of those posts all you want. They've got it coming.

  • hotsy totsy||

    It's also why you try to pay attention where you walk, and if you're stupid, you try real hard.

  • hotsy totsy||

    Like earthquakes and floods?

  • T o n y||

    Because you're basically moral busybodies minus a Jesus plus a John Galt.

  • Specail Sauce||

    Derp.

  • Restoras||

    and Herp.

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    Yes, because "moral busybodies" are people who want to let others govern their own lives without state interference.

    What fucked up dictionary do you use?

  • T o n y||

    Is that what you really want?

    Do I get to govern myself over to your house and take your shit?

  • Ken Shultz||

    You only read what's in your head, Tony!

    Read it again...

    "Yes, because "moral busybodies" are people who want to let others govern their own lives without state interference."

    He's saying we're NOT moral busybodies becasue we don't want to govern people's lives...

    You going over to his house and taking his shit? That's an example of YOU governing other people's lives...

    And how many times has that been rubbed in your face already. It's in the dozens now! You must be like 20 different people because there's no way one person could have the same train of thought blow up in their faces dozens of times over a period of years--and not learn anything from the experience.

  • NeonCat||

    Apparently he walks into posts a lot…

  • Restoras||

    That does explain his dimwittedness.

  • T o n y||

    I believe there is a fundamental flaw in libertarian thought when it comes to principles of force. I've learned plenty: I've learned that I continue to be correct.

    You do want to govern people's lives, far, far more than most people you accuse of being statists do. Your list of things people aren't allowed to do is much longer than mine. They aren't allowed access to most of what's generally considered the major aspects of modern civilization, since they're not allowed to pool resources beyond a certain scale.

    You have to go to a deeper level than the "adolescent in parents' basement" conception of freedom. "Live and let live" as you envision it has consequences.

  • ||

    You do want to govern people's lives, far, far more than most people you accuse of being statists do.

    Saying "you should be free to drink what you want, eat what you want, smoke what you want, have sex with whom you want" is MORE statist than soda bans, smoking bans, gay marriage bans, and cafeteria restrictions all put in place by mayors, governors, presidents, and legislatures?

    Did I miss the Opposite Day memo?

  • T o n y||

    generic Brand if those were the only concerns of libertarianism--if it were narrowly focused on personal liberty--that would be one thing, and I'd largely agree with you about everything. But when it tries to assert sweeping philosophical absolutes about what form of society people are allowed to have, it gets a little big for its britches.

  • ||

    if those were the only concerns of libertarianism--if it were narrowly focused on personal liberty--that would be one thing, and I'd largely agree with you about everything. But when it tries to assert sweeping philosophical absolutes about what form of society people are allowed to have, it gets a little big for its britches.

    So it's the economic freedom that we profess and want for all that turns you off? Because that's really the only other thing besides the personal liberty that you mentioned that we push for.

  • T o n y||

    Sure, what you're substituting the euphemism "economic freedom" for is what turns me off. I am a libertarian when it comes to social and nanny-state issues.

  • tarran||

    They aren't allowed access to most of what's generally considered the major aspects of modern civilization, since they're not allowed to pool resources beyond a certain scale.

    ROFL! OMG You are so stupid! I mean really dumb! I'll bet there are turkeys out there that can outthink you!

    You are free to persuade every human being on Earth to pool resources with you! You just can't point guns at them to make them!

  • T o n y||

    You are free to persuade every human being on Earth to pool resources with you! You just can't point guns at them to make them!

    Do I have to ask every single new child born if they want to opt in, or can we do it the easy way and let them opt out if they want to once they reach maturity?

    Nobody's pointing a gun at you to make you participate in your society. You are free to leave it and go somewhere else. You aren't free to get it without paying for it. Sorry. I thought we were all on the same page regarding theft.

  • tarran||

    Do I have to ask every single new child born if they want to opt in, or can we do it the easy way and let them opt out if they want to once they reach maturity

    Oh I'm sowwwy. Is asking pewmission befowe you take somefing too hawwd?

    I'm glad to see you have conceded that we aren't preventing people from working together in arbitrarily large groups. And moved to it's harder than you would like without threatening people.

  • T o n y||

    Asking permission from a infant isn't so much hard as impossible.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Child rapists all over the world delight as Tony makes their case for them.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Society isn't a consumer good; it's a term of convenience which refers to interactions between people. It's no more coherent to talk about "paying" for society than it is to talk about "paying" for the laws of gravity.

  • T o n y||

    Society isn't a consumer good; it's a term of convenience which refers to interactions between people. It's no more coherent to talk about "paying" for society than it is to talk about "paying" for the laws of gravity.

    If you want to get into a pointless discussion of semantics, fine. There can be very bad forms of societies nobody wants to support. Many modern forms, including the one you live in, have a certain composition of physical infrastructure and social services that exist to facilitate human welfare. That stuff costs money. It exists before you were born, and we can't very well tear it all down each time a new person is born as ask if he wants to pay to rebuild it again.

    Maybe the practical reality of new people being born into an existing form of society can't be reconciled with libertarian ethics. In that case it seems pretty clear which should be dumped, since we can't very well dump the other.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    "It exists before you were born, and we can't very well tear it all down each time a new person is born as ask if he wants to pay to rebuild it again."

    False dilemma. There are plenty of voluntary societies and arrangements -- profit seeking and otherwise -- which maintain continuity and use when faced with this problem. Setting and demanding payment unilaterally is the coward and brigand's way of settling disputes, and is far from the only way. People like you said that market systems and voluntary contracts wouldn't work, yet they organize the bulk of productive enterprises in successful communities.

    It is incumbent upon yourself to prove that your favored heap of physical infrastructure is materially different from those which have maintained continuity in the face of similar problems.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "It exists before you were born, and we can't very well tear it all down each time a new person is born as ask if he wants to pay to rebuild it again."

    That's what they said about slavery and Jim Crow.

    Nice to see which side you're really on, Tony!

  • tarran||

    Nobody's pointing a gun at you to make you participate in your society. You are free to leave it and go somewhere else. You aren't free to get it without paying for it. Sorry. I thought we were all on the same page regarding theft.

    Ah yes, the inverted Tonyworld, where a person who minds his own business is stealing, and the guy who takes other people's stuff without their permission is getting what he's owed.

    ROFL.

  • NeonCat||

    Tony said:
    Nobody's pointing a gun at you to make you participate in your society. You are free to leave it and go somewhere else.

    Well, Tony, you seem dissatisfied with the USA. Perhaps you should go to some other society where you would be happier. As we say in the South, Delta is ready when you are.

  • ||

    You are free to leave it and go somewhere else.

    Do svidanija bljad'.

  • ||

    I can opt out? Sweet, I didn't know it was so easy. Problem solved.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "I believe there is a fundamental flaw in libertarian thought when it comes to principles of force."

    Yeah, and it's been explained to you a hundred times...

    Forcing other people to do things against their will is wrong when criminals do it, and it's wrong when the government does it, too.

    You imagine some inconsistency in that statement--but it's all in your head. Government exists to protect our rights--from criminals, too! And when, instead, it infringes on our rights, that's called "injustice"...

    So, that's, what, now--for the 120th time?!

    "They aren't allowed access to most of what's generally considered the major aspects of modern civilization, since they're not allowed to pool resources beyond a certain scale."

    WTF are you talking about?!

    Aren't you the one that goes around claiming that corporations aren't people*?

    Yeah, people have a right to pool their OWN resources WILLINGLY--and libertarians defend that right. But that isn't what you're talking about! You're talking about using the government to force people to pool their resources against their will.

    And you've had the difference explained to you--dozens of times.

    *Despite being owned, managed, and staffed by people.

  • T o n y||

    Forcing other people to do things against their will is wrong when criminals do it, and it's wrong when the government does it, too.

    But this is contradictory. You can't prevent crime without using government force. Call it a tragic irony. I don't think it's that big of a deal. Government is gonna be there, and we are lucky to live in a time when it's in the innovative form of being responsive to the governed.

    Government exists to protect our rights--from criminals, too! And when, instead, it infringes on our rights, that's called "injustice"...

    You want to beg the question here. What are our rights? I think we have a right to government protection from preventable healthcare problems in addition to government protection from human malefactors. There's no fundamental moral distinction for using tax money to pay for one and not the other. This is point about an obsession with human agency I started with. Criminals are not the only bad things in the world worthy of being protected against socially.

    force people to pool their resources against their will.

    But in your society I have to pool my resources with yours to ensure protection against criminals. Why is that not equally "forced"? What if I wanted to steal your stuff, and thought I was morally entitled to do so? What makes you right?

  • gaijin||

    You want to beg the question here. What are our rights? There's this thing, its called the bill of rights. And a constitution...Funny I didn't see anything about healthcare in either...no matter what you thought.

  • T o n y||

    I don't see anything about capitalism in there either.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I don't see anything about capitalism in there either.

    You're correct. However, in the Declaration of Independence, they do mention, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. All of which are only possible under a free-market system.

    And as interesting it is, at times, to practice Socratic dialogue with the composite fiction that is Tony, he's outlived his usefulness. Tony needs to be retired and replaced with another personality for the purpose of practicing Libertarian/Pro-Freedom apologia.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "But this is contradictory. You can't prevent crime without using government force.

    1)Juries aren't the government. A jury of your "peers" means specifically that juries are not the government.

    A jury of your peers can deprive you of your liberty or property. Barack Obama and Congress are not a jury of my peers.

    2)You're the only person in the world, apparently, who can't tell the difference between a bankrobber and a cop arresting a bankrobber.

    I'll give you a hint: one of them is violating someone's rights, and the other is protecting someone's rights.

    Here's another hint: the government's job is to protect our rights.

    3) This has been explained to you a hundred times before.

  • T o n y||

    A jury of your peers can deprive you of your liberty or property.

    Do juries build prisons?

    You must make an exception to the general principle that people cannot collectively enforce their will in order to have the basic law and order you favor. If you can make an exception for that common purpose, why not others? Because you say so?

  • T o n y||

    Also, the right to a jury (is that a natural right btw?) requires conscripting people to do a job.

  • NeonCat||

    My God, he's seen through our Orwellian doublespeak, whereby our wanting to leave people alone to thrive (or fail) is actually our secret plan to control all of humanity.

    I can't speak for other people here, but if a bunch of people wanted to form their own commune on land they paid for, for instance, it wouldn't bother me a bit. It's your whole "I want you to pay for everyone else's medical care, food, etc." that we object to - we want your hand (and the hand of those like you) out of our pockets.

    Seriously, all the time you spend here, telling us what greedy schmucks we are… why aren't you out trying to convince those evil rich people or corporations, for instance, to fund those projects you care so much about? But no, you would be doing ACTUAL WORK when it is so much easier to sit there at your keyboard, patting yourself on the back for being morally superior to us because You CARE SO MUCH!

    And those consequences of "live and let live" have proven time and again to dramatically improve the living situation everywhere they've been tried. What a shame fools like you have been so successful in denigrating them in this former land of liberty.

  • T o n y||

    Actually, strong social welfare states have proven again and again to improve the human condition, and examples of successful libertarian societies are pretty nonexistent.

    So maybe we can expand our imaginations a little and say not only is it OK to pool resources to protect against property theft, it's OK to pool them to protect against illness too.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Actually, strong social welfare states have proven again and again to improve the human condition,

    That is, until the bureaucratic lifecycle kicks in and they degrade through the limits of human scale.

  • Calidissident||

    Tony, you got it backwards. Countries do not become wealthy and prosperous due to social welfare states. They become wealthy and prosperous, develop welfare states, continue to develop due to reasons unrelated to the welfare state, and then people like you credit the welfare state with the progress. Sweden is a textbook example. Sweden was not a poor, backwards nation that became prosperous due to socialism. They had one of the freest economies in the world, became one of the wealthiest nations on Earth, and then developed a social welfare state.

  • T o n y||

    You're absolutely right about that. Wealthy societies have tended to see it beneficial to develop welfare systems.

    Libertarians think that wealth should go to plutocrats instead.

  • Calidissident||

    Just because people perceive something to have a certain quality doesn't mean it actually as that quality. And your last sentence is nothing more than an idiotic strawman. It's absurd how liberals, who defend TARP, the Federal Reserve, the GM bailouts, Solyndra, the stimulus, etc have the nerve to accuse libertarians of supporting plutocrats.

  • T o n y||

    Your economic policy preferences result in plutocracy, whether you actually want it.

    Bush's TARP was a flagrantly plutocratic measure, but admittedly also a practical one. A practical measure to preserve the status quo, which was, thanks to economic policies you all wholeheartedly support, resembled plutocracy.

  • Calidissident||

    Your second paragraph is possibly the most absurd thing you've ever posted (though I feel like I reach that conclusion a lot when I read your posts). People, here we have Tony supporting an admittedly plutocratic policy, a policy that he admits preserves a plutocratic status quo, and then he blames it all on the plutocratic policies supposedly supported by libertarians. Projection much? What plutocratic policies that I supported caused this crisis? Let me guess, deregulation? There wasn't any, regulation increased every year, and there is nothing to indicate that more regulation would have prevented the downturn. Am I the one who supports the Federal Reserve, a central bank that benefits Wall Street and big corporations, giving them access to easy credit, inflating the money supply? Did I support GSE's buying and guaranteeing loans made by banks and other companies, reducing or eliminating the risk to those institutions? Did I support the implicit and explicit promises of bailouts if things turned south? Did I support the bailouts when things inevitably did turn to shit? The answer to all these questions is no, for me, and yes, for you. And yet you have the nerve to accuse me of being a plutocrat

  • Calidissident||

    Your assertions are completely baseless. Increasing government power does not decrease the power of plutocrats. It increases it. Plutocrats thrive by using government to their advantage. They love special privileges, like corporate welfare, competition-stifling regulations, etc that help them build and maintain their wealth and power. These are features of your preferred policies, not mine

  • Calidissident||

    No libertarian wants to prevent anyone from having access to anything. We just think no one has the right to force someone else to pay for that access

  • The Hammer||

    "Live and let live" as you envision it has consequences.

    Who was saying Tony wasn't a troll, yesterday? Are they reading this thread? Making obnoxious statements, responding to the replies with repeated straw men while ignoring any point they make and then declaring yourself the winner of the debate = Troll. It's pretty much Tony's smug, detached-from-reality M.O. He's just more obnoxious about it today because it's dawning on him that calling people racists while failing at everything for 4 years will not successfully get someone re-elected in this country.

  • T o n y||

    I tend to agree that calling people racists accomplishes no practical political goal.

  • NeonCat||

    That's what you consistently advocate, you're just too cowardly to be an honest thief. You want government to do your thieving for you.

  • ||

    Epi is correct. This piece of shit is nothing but a sock-puppet. No real entity could possibly hit every button like ass-clown does. It's too perfect. No one is this obtuse or disingenuous.

  • Restoras||

    I'm not so sure Francisco. I've met plenty of liberals who are exactly as dimwitted as T o n y, and spout their statist nonsense in exactly the same manner as he does.

  • ||

    Don't get me wrong. He certainly is entertaining and he does serve a purpose. He allows the rest of us to formulate rational arguments to his utter nonsense. But he's someone's alter-ego out having fun.

    It'd be cool if whoever it is would one day fess up.

  • Restoras||

    I think you are right. His inconsistent, incoherent blathering does make for a nice whet stone to sharpen libertarian arguements. And his dispositions do seem to always be conveniently oriented.

  • T o n y||

    Nobody has ever adequately responded to the basic critiques. And it's not like I'm the only one to make them. But it's not for lack of trying, it's because your worldview is fundamentally incoherent.

  • ||

    Translation: no one has ever been able to explain to Tony how libertarianism can be used to force other people to do what Tony wants them to do.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    There are plenty of critiques to be made of libertarianism, but incoherence is perhaps the weakest of them all. It is an especially weak criticism coming from someone who claims to base his political views on "expanding rights" without having a working definition of the term "rights".

    Most of the time when people say that one participant in a debate lacks the understanding or intelligence to continue in good faith, it's a bad faith attempt to claim victory -- but in your case, it's absolutely the case. You aren't participating in a debate; you are at best monologuing sophomorically and at worst wanking all over the comments section.

  • T o n y||

    Fine, I'll grab the single mote of debate-related substance from your post. My definition of a right: a moral or legal entitlement to have or obtain something or to act in a certain way. Actually it's the dictionary's definition, but I largely agree with it.

    Libertarianism's reliance on magic-based rights is just one point of several at which it breaks down.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    That's just question-begging.

    What makes something an "entitlement"? Is it a sense of legality? Should women in Islamic countries consider the legal prescriptions on their behavior a "right" to dress in a burkha?

    Is it the sense of permanence? Because permanence is the last thing to expect from government, as Social Security and Medicare recipients will soon find out?

    All that you are saying is that, regardless of content or character, you want government to make laws with "entitlements" (whatever those are) doled out to people, presumably in perpetuity. Not a terribly forward-thinking or intelligent philosophy, in my view -- and not terribly coherent, either.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    All that you are saying is that, regardless of content or character, you want government to make laws with "entitlements" (whatever those are) doled out to people, presumably in perpetuity.

    And one that's inevitably self-defeating anyway.

    Socialism, at its heart, has always been a eugenicist philosophy (Hitler merely taking it to its most extreme and violent conclusion)-- the system works great when it is practiced by societies that understand the limits of scale, share common cultural and racial bonds, and practice a liberal (not progressive) form of respect for individual rights within the framework of a shared community.

    Where these systems begin to unravel is when those societies begin taking in large numbers of migrants that do not share the same cultural values as their host, while attempting to scale their operations and entitlement-granting to ever greater numbers of people while maintaining the same high standards of service. The bureaucracies become more entrenched, innovation is stunted except where it feathers the nests of those well-established in the system, and ever-greater resources are required to keep up with the demand. Eventually, the infrastructure that served 5-15 million people very well begins to break down and social upheaval results (see the PIIGS).

    Scandanavian socialism works because it's practiced by Scandanavian socialists at a scale to which they can sustain it, not because socialism is the ideal system of government.

  • gaijin||

    Where do rights come from tony?

  • T o n y||

    Rights come from legal systems or social conventions.

    Any other idea of where they come from has been aptly described as "nonsense on stilts."

  • Calidissident||

    And thus the right to be free of Jews was invented in Germany in 1933

  • T o n y||

    Indeed it was. Did the claim that all rights claims are morally laudable enter this conversation at some point?

    Does that include a right to healthcare
    ???

  • Calidissident||

    Okay Tony, thanks for at least putting it out there. You heard it here first folks. Tony believes Nazis had a right to rid Germany and Europe of Jews. Real upstanding moral philosophy you got there Tony

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Rights come from legal systems or social conventions."

    Bullshit.

    If that was true, than blacks didn't have any rights in the south until the government said it was okay?

    Bullshit.

    Don't you know anything about Martin Luther King?

    He stood up for his rights no matter what social conventions were--no matter what the legal system said...

    You think Martin Luther King waited around for social conventions and the government to decide he had rights?

    You're being willfully ignorant.

    Again.

  • T o n y||

    MLK's historically important role was to alter social conventions and the legal system. It wasn't to deliver sacred truths unto us.

    The benefit of correctly seeing rights as conventions is that they can be altered as human morality and social consciousness evolve. A philosophy of natural rights, no matter which conveniently laudable examples you use, tends to etch things in stone. Not that such rights as were devised in the legal and social changes of the 20th century don't deserve to be etched in stone.

  • The Hammer||

    That's not the dictionary's definition at all, you fucking taint. The dictionary, correctly, does not use the word Entitlemen to define Right, because they are two distinct things.

  • Lord Humungus||

    as an ex-liberal, I've found libertarianism to be one of the most coherent philosophies I've come across.

  • T o n y||

    I think you're confusing coherence with simplicity.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Do we get to eat the contents of your fridge, Tony? After all, you don't care about property rights, seeing them as being too fussy for your tastes - and don't try to deny it; you just repeated your disdain for them in this very thread.

    So, do we get to come over and jump on your furniture, or not? After all, everything should be community property, according to you people.

  • T o n y||

    Which people? I'm perfectly fine with property rights, among other taxpayer-funded government-secured material entitlements.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "I'm perfectly fine with property rights, among other taxpayer-funded government-secured material entitlements.

    Tony's perfectly fine with property rights--and the government's responsibility to deprive your property rights whenever Tony sees fit.

    There's no point in arguing with the poster boy for Obama's personality cult victims. It's like arguing with a Moonie. You want to understand libertarians, Tony, you gotta learn how to think for yourself, first...

    you shouldn't be arguing with us yet. You should be talking to this guy:

    http://tinyurl.com/cqc2h5b

  • T o n y||

    I'll be long over Obama by the time he ends his second term. You guys will still think Ayn Rand--a bona fide cult leader--is the bee's knees. So who's really in the cult?

  • Ken Shultz||

    I make fun of Objectivists for acting like a cult all the time. It's a pretty common theme among libertarians--that's why so many of us call ourselves "libertarians" not "objectivists".

    There is another explanation for your stubborn refusal to understand that government unjustly inflicting it's will on individuals is wrong...

    Maybe you're a government employee? Maybe you're in a government employee union? Maybe you're so accustomed to thinking of yourself as entitled to other people's paychecks, that you just can't imagine that the government forcing other people to do things against their will is wrong?

    It's a problem I've written about before! It is a fact that people who've spent their lives working for the government have a hard time trying to find work doing something else! Because no one in their right mind would hire an ex-government union worker--after they've spent so many years feeling like they were entitled to everything from a paycheck to forcing other people to do whatever they want...

    Are you a government employee, Tony? 'cause that WOULD explain why you assume people are worthless on the open market. Most career government employees? ARE worthless on the open market! But if that's you, Tony? That's just you that's worthless--not the rest of us.

    If I had to find a job tomorrow, I wouldn't starve to death.

    You might, though. ...if you've been a government employee for a long time.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Tony's arguments constantly remind me of the Calvin and Hobbes "Bourgeois Buffoon" strip:

    Calvin:"I call this snowman 'Bourgeois Buffoon.' Can you believe Mom and Dad rejected my grant application to make these?"

    Hobbes:"Why should they pay for your work?"

    C:"I'm on the cutting edge of art! My work deserves public support!"

    H:"What if the public doesn't like your work?"

    C: "They aren't supposed to like it! This is avant-garde stuff--I'm criticizing the lowbrows who can't appreciate great art like this!"

    H:"But you'll take their money."

    C:"What do you want me to do, suffer?"

  • T o n y||

    I have never worked for government at any level. If you must know I work for a private corporation.

    Seems like you have a big problem with prejudicial thinking. As in, perhaps your political worldview emanates entirely from it.

    Most government employees do more useful work than most private sector employees. Making some guy money is a noble endeavor truly, but it's not any more noble than teaching children, putting out fires, or fighting foreign invaders.

  • Calidissident||

    That last paragraph is pure gold! This is when I sometimes think the people who accuse Tony of being a sockpuppet might actually be right. As if making some guy money is all private employees do. As if most government employees do one of the jobs he listed. Like how there are no teachers in private schools or no volunteer fire departments. And when was the last time the military fought off foreign invaders? The War of 1812?

  • Ken Shultz||

    As if government employees were firefighters, teachers...

    Incidentally, how many firefighters and teachers do we have working for the federal government?

  • Ken Shultz||

    *EDIT*

    "As if [all] government employees were firefighters, teachers..."

    Reason, about that preview button...

  • T o n y||

    So you're suggesting there's a nontrivial successful proportion of the private economic sector that concerns itself with things other than making some guy money? Let's not be silly: "job creator" is just a euphemism for "profit seeker."

    Volunteer firefighters, great. Let's make them all volunteers. Hope you have decent insurance. You may have to cover your neighbor's shit too.

  • Calidissident||

    Yes, Tony, that's exactly what I'm suggesting. For a couple reasons. One, a good portion of people work for nonprofits. More to the point, however, is the fact that you act like all workers do is produce gobs of money that their boss forces them to hand over to owners. That's not how the private economy works. Workers make money for their owners by producing goods and services that consumers want, goods and services that raise everyone's standard of living. And unlike you, I don't shiver and gag when I hear the word "profit"

    71% of firefighters in the US are volunteers. I don't know why you trivialize and dismiss them

  • The Hammer||

    Tony, Teachers, soldiers and firefighters put together make up less than half of the federal payroll. Bureaucrats, on the other hand...

  • T o n y||

    They count as bureaucrats. Which others do you object to? CDC scientists? CIA analysts? Press secretaries maybe? Is there a bureaucracy somewhere that is so pointless as to be worth chucking in favor of a check to billionaires they'll stuff in a tax shelter?

  • Calidissident||

    Welcome to Tonyworld, everyone, where taking less of someone's money equals giving them a check. Not to mention, it's hilarious how you simultaneously claim that the rich either don't pay taxes, or don't pay their fair sure, and then claim that any cut to government spending or revenue is a handout to the rich. And yes, most bureaucrats do produce less than money in a tax shelter would. How about virtually everyone at the Departments of Commerce, Labor, HHS, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, HUD, etc, the EPA, NLRB, NEA, NEH, PBS, NPR, etc., not to mention a ton of people involved in the military-industrial complex that needs to be majorly shrinked. These jobs aren't necessary and are a drag on the economy.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The chemist at the center of Massachusetts’ drug lab scandal was engaging in personal contacts with a prosecutor whose evidence she was analyzing.

    Priceless.

  • Tim||

    Workin' late at the lab, hun, don't wait up.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Those labs always have a cozy relationship with prosecutors. Might as well take it to the next step.

  • Tim||

    Crack is Whack.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I think "hugs not drugs" is more appropriate here.

  • JW||

    a prosecutor whose evidence she was analyzing

    Is that what the kids are calling it these days?

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    8 Delicious snacks for your little ones

  • Pound. Head. On. Desk.||

    "We know that the senses are what actually drive food choices," she says.

    Uh, no, we know that's not so. They act in reaction to what the body needs. When rats are altered to have dietary deficits, they alter their eating habits to make up for it. If they can't re-uptake salt, they go wild for salt water. If they can't release fat from the fat cells to feed the rest of the body between meals, they eat several times an hour.

  • A Serious Man||

    I got to say, the worst part about last night's debate is that today the Obama cultist are seriously arguing that Obama is a genius who deliberately tanked the first debate so he could set Mittens up for a fall in the second one.

  • Restoras||

    If Mittens wins the left is going to have a batshit-insane collective freakout that might, just might, involve a riot or two.

    Hilarious news clips and youtube videos to follow.

  • ||

    We can only hope.

  • ||

    No, if Obama loses it will just prove that we're all racist.

  • Sudden||

    And the resulting riot will be labeled a civil rights protest.

  • JW||

    At least the anti-war protests will come back.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    One of my Facebook friends was crowing about how Obama "posterized" Romney. I can't wait to see the reaction from him if his Kingpriest actually loses.

  • Coeus||

    Did some fucking idiot actually ask this last night?

    When asked what he would do as president to rectify the fact that women earn 72% of what men earn for the same jobs, Romney stumbled unbelievably.

    If so, I can see why he stumbled. It's the same as if someone asked him what he planed to do about the purple tentacle rape monster invasion.

  • Sudden||

    The purple tentacle rape monster already invaded. He was defeated by the unholy alliance of Warty and STEVE SMITH.

    It made Godzilla vs. Mothra look like a third grade name calling match.

  • The Craig||

    Mr. Romney, waitresses with large breasts earn more than those with smaller ones. What do you plan to do about that?

  • ||

    Mr. Romney, every time I climb up stairs, it tires me. What do you plan to do about gravity? Also, it makes big-titted waitresses' breasts droop. So something really needs to be done.

  • Coeus||

    See, all of those things are actually true. So they would have made better questions than the one that was actually asked.

  • Sudden||

    A proper response would be: "You answered your own question."

    To wit, 99% of the viewers, including the POTUS and moderator themselves, wouldn't have understood. But there might've been one guy in the audience laughing so hysterically that he would be escorted out and immediately tested for bath salts.

  • Sudden||

    Ann Coulter actually made me laugh the other day. I felt dirty and immediately showered, but the line was LULZ worthy:

    How can Democrats credibly claim there is some GOP war on women when it is the late Ted Kennedy who has the only confirmed kill in the war on women?

  • DanD||

    I am not ashamed to admit that while I certainly don't agree with everything Ann Coulter says, she has a fiendishly sharp wit. She throws people into fits. I enjoy reading some of her stuff.

  • rac3rx||

    Oh yeah, some dipshit asked the question. I find all of these so-called "wymyn's issues" questions to be as offensive and patronizing as all fresh hell.

    I have a vagina, but I am not my vagina.

  • The Craig||

    Do you really want Mitt Romney making health care decisions for you?

    Now shut up and take your birth control.

  • rac3rx||

    Only if it's "free".

  • ||

    "Why don't you sit down, dear, the men are talking."

    See, we need funnier candidates.

  • nicole||

    I have a vagina, but I am not my vagina.

    Ahem. We are here to collect your vagina for re-collectivization. You obviously don't want it. /wymynz

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    It's utter nonsense.

    The statistic referred to simply states that women on average earn 72% compared to men on the whole, NOT women in the same job at the same point in their careers (which would be the valid comparison).

    Of course, such comparisons have usually found the difference between genders to be between 90-95% for younger employees and virtually non-existent for older employees, rendering the issue all but moot.

    Saying that wouldn't win votes, but it would be true.

  • ||

    Sure, but if he had said that then all those undecided Jezzies would have immediately made up their minds for Obama.

  • Rights-Minimalist Autocrat||

    And in urban areas, young single women earn more than young single men.

    But you don't see them touting that statistic much.

  • Sudden||

    Or picking up the tab on dates.

  • Coeus||

    I actually saw a feminist "takedown" of that stat. They showed that it wasn't for the same job, it was because so many men were underemployed.

    And then they used that 77 cents stat in the next fucking paragraph.

  • hotsy totsy||

    Because the womens took their jerbs!

  • robc||

    Also in engineering and the sciences.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I was in the top 3 percent of both my undergrad and grad class, above all of the women in them. For my grad project I worked on the same project as a girl who had a GPA .5 lower than mine. We worked on the same project, I had higher grades, we had the same previous work experience, and she took 6.5 years to finish the program I did in 5. Guess which one of us got a ton of calls back to interview after submitting resumes?

  • R C Dean||

    When asked what he would do as president to rectify the fact that women earn 72% of what men earn for the same jobs, Candidate Dean answered "Not a damn thing."

    After a stunned silence, moderator Kandi Crowley broke the rules (again) by asking, in an outraged but totally non-partisan and unbiased tone of voice" "Mr. Dean, do you mean to tell us that you think women are worth less than men?"

    He responded. "Not at all. I think that women are just as capable as men in following their careers and negotiating their pay. I see no reason to treat women as second-class citizens who can't accomplish great things unless they have the help of the government. Tell me, Kandi (can I call you Kandi?), as a woman at the top of her profession: Were you incapable of succeeding without government help? Did you even get government help? I thought not."

  • Kwanzaa Cake||

    She did get help. ROADZ! INFRASTRUCTURZ!

  • Killazontherun||

    Obama: Can I get get a word in about my bank executive Grandma who sent me to the most elite private school in the state of Hawaii? She was totally dependent on government and damn proud of it!

  • VG Zaytsev||

    She hit the glass ceiling - as a vice president.

  • ||

    When Obama answered the question, the little "Approve-o-meter" started going into the plus side. As soon as Romney took the floor for his response, it spiked downwards.

    This, coupled with my recent Facebook post (followed by outraged responses) that women who do less work than me at the office (i.e. don't pick up the boxes of copy paper, don't fix the copier, don't clean out the fridge) but have the exact same job title and duties as me should not be complaining about equal pay, pretty much tells me that this is going to be another one of "those" issues where no amount of logic can penetrate the idiocy of the masses.

    My girlfriend (and even my roommate) said that she didn't think Obama raised taxes on the lower and middle class by increasing sin taxes, etc. because it only affects those who smoke, and when I used that same logic to say that he wants to raise income taxes on everyone but it will only affect you if you want to make more than $200,000 a year she didn't see the connection.

  • nicole||

    Haha, sorry, I can't believe you posted that to Facebook. I hope you realized what you were in for.

    And as to your last paragraph, those were the moments last night when I was most angry--when Obama was claiming he hadn't raised taxes on the middle class. I won't even get into the penaltax--the cigarette tax increase alone, which happened very early in his term, put the lie to that. Sorry, but fuck you, that's a middle-class tax increase.

    Even my commie dad hates sin taxes because he knows they hit the poor harder. That's part of what's so awful about young progressives today--they're so upper middle class, they think all this stuff is just gross and even if the poors do it it's okay to tax.

  • ||

    Well, apologies to my libertarian brothers and sisters, because I might be that asshole who says what he thinks unabashedly. I'll speak my mind and often feel that is the point of Facebook, Twitter, and living in general.

    A few of my choicest Facebook posts have managed to call out cops, public education, old people, and now (apparently) all women in the workforce.

  • Coeus||

    This, coupled with my recent Facebook post

    You sir, are bold. Oh, and I saw your post the other day about your kid having an adult intellect. I would like to proffer some advice:

    If he hasn't already internalized it yet, you've got to get him to understand that no one will ever take him seriously until he's older. No matter how correct he is. It just pisses most adults off. When they tell him to do something that's obviously stupid, he should just agree, and then not do it.

    If they ever invent time travel, I want to go back and scream this at my young self.

  • ||

    No kids that I know about. I think it might have been tarran (could be wrong) who was saying his kid figured out how hard med school would be at age 6 or something.

    If he hasn't already internalized it yet, you've got to get him to understand that no one will ever take him seriously until he's older. No matter how correct he is. It just pisses most adults off.

    I'm 25 and still receive this attitude from my "elders".

  • Coeus||

    Ahh. Ok. Nevermind then.

    I'm 25 and still receive this attitude from my "elders".

    I'm not much older, but I don't get that except from cops. There are advantages to prematurely aging (I look like I'm in my mid-to-late thirties). The other ones are buying beer when you're 19 and chicks with daddy issues.

  • RBS||

    Ha, I'm 30 and get them same thing. There is something about the Boomers and their parents that makes them incredibly resistant to change and very defensive if you even suggest something should change.

  • widget||

    When asked what he would do as president to rectify the fact that women live 5 years longer than men...

  • Sudden||

    Bring on the schoolyard black markets!

    Man, I remember the good ole days when schoolyard black markets were the place to get weed. Times, they are a-changing.

  • Gene||

    Not for the better.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Schools in California are banning Flamin’ Hot Cheetos because of the lack of nutritional value.

    No word on banning teachers who lack educational value.

  • Pound. Head. On. Desk.||

    28 grams of Flamin' Hot Cheetos has 11 grams of fat (including 1.5 grams of saturated fat), 250mg of sodium, 14 grams of carbs (including 1 gram of fiber), 2 grams of protein, plus a touch of vitamin A and iron.

    Take out the 13 grams of carbs and you'd have... well... cheese dust. Salt.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Pro Libertate||

    STOP! Go watch "The Sounds of Cylons." Now.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I'm not fucking kidding.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    That thing is FULL of spoilers. So Gaius knew Internal Affairs was onto him the whole time?

  • Pro Libertate||

    I assume everyone knows by now that it was all a dream of Bob Newhart's.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    That's how every series ends.

  • ||

    Yup. And that Rosebud was a sled.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Rosebud was a great character, much better than Starbuck. I sobbed like a little girl when she died.

  • ||

    The death of a sled is always slightly tragic, ProL.

  • Tim||

    Fuck Ron Moore for fucking the ending all up. It's like Leonardo spilling paint all over the Mona Lisa.

  • Pro Libertate||

    They should release a DVD set without the last season. Just pretend it got cancelled.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The whole series was crap. I HAVE SPOKEN.

    I don't know what everyone saw in it. (Other than the blond.)

  • Pro Libertate||

    What? The whole series? Come on, you didn't like the first season?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    WHERE WAS MUFFIT???

  • ||

    Who the hell do you think Baltar was based on? Idiot.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I loved how they had a Boxey in the first episode or so of the new series, then dropped him.

    Libertate's First Law of Television Science Fiction: No kids.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Why? The third season of BSG was fantastic.

    Shame about the cancellation, though -- would have been great to see an inspired fourth season of an already great show.

  • ||

    There was a fourth season, it just ended prematurely halfway through.

  • A Serious Man||

    Well there was the mutiny storyline, which was pretty awesome. Then it went down hill. So really, Seaon 4.75 was to blame.

  • ||

    I gave up when Starbuck went off the deep end. Just wrong.

  • Killazontherun||

    Speaking of spoilers, you can't imagine how pissed my family was (everyone, even mum has watched the first season) after I revealed Joffrey takes the black when he confronts his crises of conscience of being incest spawn.

    Mum called me up after watching the episode where Eddard was taken to the dungeon and asked if they were going to kill him. I countered with a, 'whom do you think is going to save him?' And I let her run wild with that misdirection. She called back the next day, 'you lied to me!'

  • Pro Libertate||

    Joffrey takes the black? I thought he was killed.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    It was Jon Snow in the Library with the Rope.

  • Killazontherun||

    I should have put a spoiler warning in there. Sorry.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I've read most of the books, but I haven't seen the second season. Are we talking some major deviations then?

  • Killazontherun||

    Spoiler Alert -- those who haven't read the past the second book should not read on --

    ?noitairav emosewa na neeb ehav ton taht dluow tub, ylimaf elohw ym, daed foJ gniK tnaw ohw elpoep htiw gniwecrs tsuj m'I

  • Pro Libertate||

    I thought that was being foreshadowed before he [SPOILER REDACTED].

  • A Serious Man||

    They should have used that as the epilogue for the finale.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Or the music, instead of "All Along the Watchtower."

  • robc||

    Im not sure if that shows reasons I should have watched BG2 or why I didnt.

  • ||

    Hey Warty, do you ride the bus in Ohio?

    Bus driver upper-cuts chick who gets bitchy to him.

  • ||

  • ||

    IT'S BEEN POSTED ALREADY.

  • ||

    Not in this specific thread it hasn't, butterface.

  • ||

    Listen, JJ, I don't need your lip. Not until later tonight, that is. We still on?

  • Marshall Gill||

    Don't you mean "buttface"?

  • Coeus||

    Don't you mean "buttface"?

    No, he just has a thing for Epi's hot body.

  • Coeus||

    Have some feminist commentary on the issue.

    But I can’t help but wonder how that same scenario would have played out and how we would have responded to it, if Shidea was not a 25 year old Black woman.

    If Shidea was a white, 25 year old man, would Artis have badgered him about paying his fare? Maybe not, because drunk, young white men are funny and non threatening. And sure, his embarrassing fumbles might have still been recorded, but we would have only joked about what a great day he must have had prior to boarding the bus. No harm no foul.

    This is what people who use the word "privilege" actually believe.

  • Restoras||

    If Shidea was a white, 25-year old male, he'd have a fucking normal name.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    A name like Cody.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Or Jayden.

  • Coeus||

    Or Apple.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    "drunk, young white men are funny and non threatening."

    Uh, OK.

  • nicole||

    Jinx!

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    "drunk, young white men are funny and non threatening."

    To whom?

    St. Patrick's Day is only slightly lower than Kristallnacht on the 'Minority Fear Scale'

    Jus' sayin'

  • Killazontherun||

    Yeah, but that's an Irish thing. In what world are they considered white? Do you have to purchase an Antarctica on the upside globe to get directions?

  • ||

    That's the stupidest fucking thing I've ever read read all day.

    He wouldn't have asked her to pay her fare if she was a white male?! Do they really believe that we (white men) just waltz through life never paying a penny for anything? That the entire existence of money is just some plot that is only enacted against women and minorities?

    Holy fucking shit.

  • Coeus||

    Not only do they believe it, they fucking teach it at colleges now.

  • ||

    I'm still puzzling over this line:

    Maybe not, because drunk, young white men are funny and non threatening

  • nicole||

    Hey, we weren't the only ones puzzled! From the comments: "If anything they are more dangerous because they sometimes believe that they can be invincible to trouble due to their privilege."

  • ||

    "If anything they are more annoying because they sometimes believe that they can be Daniel Tosh due to their inebriation."

  • Coeus||

    Hehe. I saw that. Everyone else feels invincible from the alcohol. But, see, whit guys biology is different. They just walk around drunk on their own privilege.

  • nicole||

    They just walk around drunk on their own privilege.

    That was pretty awesome, Coeus. So you're saying you're so privileged (I mean, assuming you're white and a man), you don't even have to pay to get drunk? Shit, we really are getting screwed.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    We get free medicinal whiskey covered by insurance through a mandate in the health-care bill. You're not against men's health, are you?

  • Coeus||

    So you're saying you're so privileged (I mean, assuming you're white and a man),you don't even have to pay to get drunk?

    Well, yes. Most white guys only get a slight buzz. But I'm also tall.

  • nicole||

    Well goddamnit, on top of it all I'm 5'2".

  • Coeus||

    Well goddamnit, on top of it all I'm 5'2".

    Tell you what, I'll trade you my race and height for your sexual selector status....

    But I'm keeping the penis. I love that thing.

  • nicole||

    Actually being short is mostly awesome, at least as a chick. But you can have my sexual selector status in exchange for upper arm strength.

  • Coeus||

    But you can have my sexual selector status in exchange for upper arm strength.

    No deal. It would interfere with my penis enjoyment. I beat that thing like it owes me money.

  • nicole||

    But you won't need that anymore with your new status!

    This is why men and women can never truly come together...

  • Coeus||

    But you won't need that anymore with your new status!

    I don't need it... It just takes the edge off.

  • Art Vandelay||

    Wait, I thought we were all rapists?

    Now I am confused.

  • Whahappan?||

    It's like they think that Eddie Murphy SNL sketch was a documentary.

  • Azathoth!!||

    They do.

  • nicole||

    because drunk, young white men are funny and non threatening

    Um...

  • ||

    I'd say that great minds think alike, nicole, but that's impossible because my minds thinkifies using privilege and yours thinkifies using your vajayjay.

  • nicole||

    Actually it's my vajayjay that does the thinkifyin'. Isn't it? I'm confused, but I know I shouldn't listen to your mansplanation.

  • ||

    I'm confused, but I know I shouldn't listen to your mansplanation.

    You're probably having your period. That's the only mansplanation I can think of.

  • nicole||

    Silly man, that's when the ladies are most sure of their opinions!

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Proud Vagina-Americans don't need to put up with your mansplaining, Episiarch.

  • nicole||

    I realized last night how much opposition research we really do when I complained to my BFF (female) that the Twitters were flipping out about how Romney was "mansplaining" to the woman who asked him about the pay equity thing, and she didn't actually know what mansplaining was. I'm like...you don't read enough Jezebel I guess...WHAT?!?

  • ||

    It pains me sometimes that I actually know what "mansplation" and "othering" mean. It's like knowing the lyrics to Nickelback song.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    "Cisgender" was my breaking point. When I explained what the term meant and why it was necessary to my horrified wife, it was then that I knew what kind of monster I'd become.

  • nicole||

    Well, to be fair, I'm not so sure I do know what "mansplain" actually means...

    "Othering" I get. But as my boyfriend said after I told him about microaggressions, "Shit, you mean people don't think of themselves and other people in exactly the same way?!?" I.e., it's real, I just don't care.

  • ||

    Epi, please reassure us that you don't actually know the lyrics to a Nickleback song.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    All Epi knows is ball... and good...

  • ||

    ...and rape

  • ||

    I...I...I know the chorus of "Something in Your Mouth". I...don't have an excuse. I'm going to go slam my head in a car door now.

  • nicole||

    How is that seriously the name of a Nickelback song? I really don't want to go look up the lyrics to see how they made that not dirty.

  • ||

    It's dirty.

    Look, Spinal Tap did "Sex Farm" and "Bitch School", so I think Nickelback can get away with allusions to blowjobs.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I perfer "Put It in Yo Mouth".

  • nicole||

    Seriously. I looked up that Nickelback shit and it seems unpossibly terrible. Fortunately I had this one stuck in my head since the title came up anyway.

  • ||

    The song was obviously specifically written to be a strip club song for the girls to dance to. I have heard from Vancouverites that Nickelback's lead singer is a known regular fixture in that city's strip club circuit (Nickelback is Canadian).

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    And unlike Nickleback, Akinyele is not a mean ol' othering heteronormative!

    What do ya choose to lick,
    Pussy or dick?
    People through out the world,
    Man it's your pick.

    See, there's a choice. Akinyele: Jezebel Aprroved*!

    *If they weren't hypocritical, pearl-clutching prudes.

  • ||

    Of course I do. And when bitches gonna act like men, I'm'a treat chu like man.

  • Gray Ghost||

    She certainly took the uppercut like a man. I'd still be knocked out if that was me. Not her. After a few seconds, she went right back to trying to claw the driver's eyes out.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Gallup’s daily tracking poll has Mitt Romney’s lead increasing over President Barack Obama.

    This may actually teach future campaigns a lesson about the dangers of managing expectations and defining your opponent too far from reality.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    One of Romney's big lies at the most contentious part of the debate was "Oil production is down 14 percent this year on federal land."

    The truth - From 2009-11, the Obama years, oil production rose two of three years, for a net increase of 10.6 percent.

    http://www.politifact.com/trut.....ercent-ye/

    This one has wingnuts in a frenzy.

  • Sudden||

    Sub
    Human
    Is
    Kleptocratic
    Entity

  • Pro Libertate||

    You're missing an 'r'.

  • Sudden||

    I realized that after posting. The obvious retard being missed was my ultimately Joe'z Law.

  • Sudden||

    *ultimate.

    Fuck. Not a good spelling day for Sudden.

  • Pro Libertate||

    "Rapist" starts with an 'r'.

  • Sudden||

    Being in the company of STEVE SMITH and Warty is too good for him.

    Warty is too good for him. Just stop a moment and contemplate the ramifications of that.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Well, "Redneck" begins with an 'r', but I think you'd piss him off if you used that one.

  • Bobarian||

    So does Rectum.

  • Enough About Palin||

    As does "ratfucker"

  • Drake||

    Shreek - Your own link confirms Romney's statement.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    You expect him to actually read the things he posts?

  • DJF||

    He said 2011 and it did go down 14% in 2011

  • Mr. FIFY||

    All this time, shrike, and you're still a cunt. One would think you would have learned your lesson by now.

  • Lord Humungus||

    he never learns... it's a sockpuppet.

  • ||

    Oh, and D/FW residents, take note: beware of the animal molester!

    http://dallas.craigslist.org/f.....24215.html

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    What does the Stig's urine taste like?

  • $park¥||

    One of the things I may never understand is the buying or making of liquor to let it just sit around and get old.

  • B.P.||

    Novelty. History. I've had the pleasure of drinking several pre-prohibition bourbons. I'm glad someone let them sit around for me.

  • Kwanzaa Cake||

    I somehow doubt that Macallan 0 would be as good as Macallan 12.

  • $park¥||

    Does it matter which is better if you never drink it?

  • Ted S.||

    So you drink Beaujolais nouveau? Philistine.

  • ||

    organizing disorder

    Awesome. Inspired, even.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Disordering organization.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    It sounds more poetic in Russian.

  • ||

    Pushkin approves.

  • $park¥||

    Hot or not?

    Given what we can see, I'm gonna go with NOT. I may revise my opinion if she stood up.

  • Sudden||

    Is she Free-to Lay?

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Hey-o!

    /Ed McMahon

  • Generic Stranger||

    When I first saw that photo I thought "hot". But after further study, her frog-like face and lack of muscle tone imply that she does in fact love Cheetos just a little to much.

    John might like her, though.

  • ||

    Dude, just look at her hands. The one towards the camera is like a ham.

  • Generic Stranger||

    I wrote it off as a perspective problem at first, but yeah, definitely hammy.

  • ||

    Moons Over My Hammy.

  • Tim||

    Larry King, that has low budget written all over it.

    Welcome to the Larry King Presidential Debate. Our first caller is Jim from Kansas with a question for Mitt ROmney. Go ahead Jim.

    (feedback noise)

    Are you there Jim?

    (Talking in background; "Not now I'm on the phone, no not pepperoni.."

    Jim you're on with Mitt Romney.

    (disconnect)

    Well Jim isn't ready we're going to Phyllis in New York with a question to Prseident Obama:

    (Confused elderly voice) Hello? Hello?

    Go ahead Phyllis.

    Hello, HELLO?

    (feedback noise)

  • Pro Libertate||

    I have a cunning plan. Howard Stern, debate moderator.

  • Pro Libertate||

    "I saw this Mormon chick. Jesus she was hot. You ever fuck a Mormon chick, Mitt? I bet they get dirty."

  • robc||

    You ever fuck a Mormon chick, Mitt?

    One, that we know of.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Stern would have fun with that. He's really perfect for this election.

  • Restoras||

    That would be EPIC.

  • Pro Libertate||

    "So, Mr. President, I assume you get some massive tail as the first black president. Well, the second, right? Anyway, how do you get it? Does the Secret Service just bring you some whores, or do you secretly go out to bars?"

  • Sudden||

    I bet he uses the name Ron Mexico when picking up chicks.

  • ||

    Sleazy Martinez.

  • rac3rx||

    Shifty Perez.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    I've been saying that from the beginning.

  • Pro Libertate||

    You're fucking brilliant, then.

  • ||

    Not really. He's the obvious moderator to anyone who isn't functionally retarded like you. And your mom.

  • Sudden||

    Adam Carolla would be acceptable too.

    He would go into his exceedingly long rants thereby denying these frauds the ability to peddle their bullshit.

  • Sudden||

    Not to mention that the frequent references to carpentry might prove for once and all that Obama is not Jebus reincarnate.

  • ||

    "Well, I am familiar with carpentry and I don't know who my father is. So, am I the messiah? I don't know, I could be, I'm not ruling it out."

  • Drake||

    That I would watch.

    After each question he would tell both candidates why they are wrong in a hilarious way.

  • Drake||

    I'm talking about Carolla not Stern.

    Stern would just interrupt to talk about how awesome he is.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Yeah, but he'd have the audience for the town hall format be all porn stars.

  • JW||

    Stuttering John would ask all the audience questions.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Nice enhancement. Is Hank the Angry Drunk Dwarf still around?

  • Sudden||

    "Well, Adam, you didn't build that"

    "I'm sorry mr president, but you're full of shit. I can show you the receipt from the home depot I got the equipment from. And no, I didn't pick up any of your DREAM Act community college Mexicans because I can't stand their fucking ranchero music. Anyway, I patched all the drywall myself, that's right, all that fucking drywall I punched out after watching your buddy Joe cackle like Peg Bundy watching the fucking view in the last debate. Look, I know you think joint compound is just your dealer's house from back at your Columbia days, before you arrested him for supporting "terrorists" and all that, but those of us who actually fucking work for a living and don't have the patience to hire some overpriced hipster or listen to the 94.7 La Raza all day in the background while six guys sit on my fucking lawn eating El Pollo Loco on their siesta, we know what some simple fix it shit is. Yeah, sure Mitt doesn't know either because he's so fucking rich that he doesn't hire people to fix things, he commissions fortune 500 companies to build entire palaces, but at least when they're done he'll go up to the plebes and say "Nice fucing job, you guys built that exactly as I contracted for".

  • Sudden||

    The only time that anyone voting for you ever says "band" and "saw" in a sentence is when they're talking about that shitty indie rock band that they saw last week but no longer thinks is cool. But joke's on you buddy, those same little shits with their entitlement mongering and phoney intellectualism no longer think you're cool either. So fuck you.

    Now Mitt, I know say you're pro life and all. But seriously, you know about that whole 47%, eventhough I'm gonna go ahead and take a guess that your numbers are a bit low, I'd actually peg the number of worthless shits in this world somewhere north of 80%, but I digress. Given that there is so much trash, isn't it worth considering that maybe letting these leechy fucks off their offspring might in the long run be a net benefit? I mean, the fucking media already says you've declared war on women, why not throw children into the mix too? Flip the fucking tables on them man, be the villain, you'll still win. Just look at the fucking dump this country has turned into. And trust me on that, I drive to pacoima all the time to meet with my fucking accountant.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Let's see, Stern, with an audience full of porn stars, asking the candidates about the sleaziest sex they ever had, or Adam Carolla being long-winded.

  • Sudden||

    The fact that you have any interest in hearing about Mitt Romney or Barack Obama's sexual proclivities is disturbing.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I don't per se, I just enjoy the idea of them being forced to answer questions like that. Humiliations galore.

  • Gray Ghost||

    +1, would rant again.

    I love the joint compound crack, especially after recently having patched up some drywall of my own.

  • db||

    There needs to be a last minute switch to a "guest moderator" for this to be done right. Totally catch those assholes off guard.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    Bob Schieffer will be replaced by Craig Ferguson's Talking Gay Robot Skeleton.

  • NeonCat||

    Geoff Peterson is the gay robot skeleton's name. And he would be a terrific moderator.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    If it's open to third party candidate then I assume only third party candidates will attend. And all the questions will be from Larry's ex-wives.

  • $park¥||

    The chemist's admission of mishandling evidence jeopardizes 34,000 drug cases.

    The collective is terrified by the thought of that many drug kingpins being set free all at once.

  • Rich||

    However, think of the JOBS this creates!

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    !First

  • Marshall Gill||

    Epic fail, Dok

  • ||

    Epic misunderstanding of geekspeak, Gill.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    Not sure if this was what Hamilton was referring to, but I thought it would be funny to misplace the !, effectively making it mean Not First.

    And this wasn't so far down when I posted. Darn you libertarians posting wherever you want!

  • Jerry on the road||

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Nice, I was waiting for that.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    The thing about Taiwanese TV is, they can show Obama being in a dunking chair and they won't even realize they're being insensitive.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    ROAD HOUSE!

    The 1989 action hit "Road House" still makes the rounds on TV quite often, be it on AMC or one of the premium cable channels.

    And that is bad news for one of the movie’s stars, Kelly Lynch, and worse news for her husband, writer and producer Mitch Glazer. Lynch, who played the love interest of Patrick Swayze in the film, revealed that every time the movie pops up on cable that Bill Murray or one of his brothers calls Glazer.
  • Pro Libertate||

    What do they say?

  • Brett L||

    "Ask them to walk, but be nice. I want you to be nice until its time not to be nice."

  • ||

    You got a skinny little runt named Dalton working here?

  • db||

    Bill Murray is hilarious.

  • Pro Libertate||

    He grows more powerful each year. He may be a demigod soon.

  • Rasilio||

    Is it wrong that in this case I'm just a little sad the terrorists didn't succeed...

    http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012.....?hpt=hp_t1

  • Jerry on the road||

    I wonder if they helped get him a visa as well, just so they can meet targets for entrapment.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Movin' On Up? That May Depend On Your Last Name

    So Clark and some fellow researchers checked results in other countries. They looked at records of elite status — top colleges, listings of doctors and lawyers. They checked how often certain names showed up in these places compared with how common they were in the general population. Then they checked how that comparison changed over time to see how names were moving in and out of elite positions.

    They checked in England, Sweden, the United States, India, China, Japan and Chile.

    "And astonishingly, there's no more mobility in Sweden on these measures than there is in South America," says Clark. "And that America looks just like England, looks just like Sweden."

    And, even more astonishingly, the numbers were the same in the Middle Ages as they are today.

    It's worth pointing out that Clark is talking about relative social position, not overall living conditions or income. Still, what he's claiming is huge: That is, if you come from a common background, your chance of making it into the elite is the same in the United States as it is in South America, no matter when you were born.
  • robc||

    All the black dudes named Washington and Jefferson have it made.

  • robc||

    Also explains the wealth of both Warren and Jimmy.

  • Sidd Finch||

    not sure if serious

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Gallup’s daily tracking poll has Mitt Romney’s lead increasing over President Barack Obama. He’s now ahead by six points."

    But that's unpossible!

    The networks told me so.

  • ||

    Schools in California are banning Flamin’ Hot Cheetos because of the lack of nutritional value.

    Salt and carbohydrates are nutrients.

    In fact they are both pretty fundamental ones.

  • ||

    Fats are also fundamental as well as proteins.

    Both are in Cheetos.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Schools in California are banning Flamin’ Hot Cheetos because of the lack of nutritional value."

    They're serving mashed potatoes in the cafeteria instead.

  • Bobarian||

    They're Flamin' Hot mashed potatoes.

  • A Serious Man||

    O. J. Simpson allegedly trying to sell the hypothetical murder knife he used to kill Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman for $5 million.

    Granted the source is the Natioanl Enquirer, but nevertheless that seems like something he'd try to do.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    75% of funds will go towards finding the real killer.

  • Brett L||

    He's searched every golf course in America, now he needs funding to take his search world-wide.

  • Generic Stranger||

    Well, right now he's searching the inside of a federal prison in Nevada, so it might take him a while to get around to searching internationally.

  • A Serious Man||

    Kim Jong Un's wife has disappeared from public view.

    Speculation is that she is either pregnant or has fallen out of favor with the regime.

  • db||

  • A Serious Man||

    Do you have any idea how fucking busy he is?!

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    Romney's 'binders full of women’ gaffe, and why women should be furious

    As New Yorker blogger Amy Davidson put it: “One got the sense of Mitt Romney coming from a place where women were generally in the other room, waiting to be invited in only when the moment – or the visibility of the job – called for it.” The Boston Globe quickly noted that there were no female partners at Bain Capital when Romney was chief executive officer.

    Stop telling women how they should feel!

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Watch the Jezzies work themselves into a lather over "retouched" Victorias' Secret models:

    http://jezebel.com/5951863/whe...../gallery/1

    Looking at the pictures (SFW), I can't say there's a heterosexual male on the planet who would say "ew! would not fuck" based on the original photographs for any of the lovely ladies pictured.

  • OldMexican||

    One of the retouched photos is of a model that had her W retouched into nothingness. What do photographers have against vaginas, anyway?

  • Bobarian||

    Haven't looked at the photos but unless they "retouched" a penis out of the photo, I believe you are correct.

  • Restoras||

    As near as I can tell the re-toucing involved was entirely for making a cleaner, sleeker catalog, not turning an ugly, fat woman into a svelte, beautiful one.

    The Jezzies are just bitter, angry females that don't want anyone to be beautiful, enjoy beauty, or strive for a better physique.

    Truly, disgusting creatures that wouldn't find happiness even if everyone was fat, ugly, and lazy.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Yep. I wouldn't have noticed the vast majority of the retouches unless someone pointed them out to me.

  • Thane of Whiterun||

    And the Jezzies are redundant. I cringed reading "unretouched originals" 37 thousand times.

  • nicole||

    Those were really boring ones. I like it when they find a real fuckup, like someone's head being bigger than her hips.

    The only "legit" photoshopping that weirds me out about the VS catalog is the armpits though. These examples aren't good ones for that, but in a lot of photos, they get rid of any shadow at all, as if, I don't know...women don't have armpits? It's just...a contour of the body...

  • Thane of Whiterun||

    Hey, I would never screw a chick with armpits.

    I find all my wimmenz on doubleamputeedate.com (I hope that's not actually a thing...).

  • Killazontherun||

    Those are filtering retouches done to save imperfect shots with lighting problems, not to do redo ugly women. Goddamn, jezzies bring the stupid.

  • Thane of Whiterun||

    They even straightened the horizon in one photo.

    Bastards! Pigs!

  • Proprietist||

    Hey, is Reason messed up for anyone else in Firefox? I have a huge gap between the header and the start of the articles, with the left sidebar pushing the articles down. It's ugly and annoying.

  • Pro Libertate||

    No issues. Which version are you using?

  • Proprietist||

    Ah crap...I mean Internet Explorer, not Firefox. DOH!

  • Pro Libertate||

    Ah. There's your problem, then.

  • Proprietist||

    But they should still fix it.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I don't think Microsoft cares anymore.

  • Generic Stranger||

    Seems fine to me.

  • A Serious Man||

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

  • A Serious Man||

    Even if all the plumbing has been rerouted accordingly?

  • Proprietist||

    Only a few of those don't look like dudes. I'll pass.

  • A Serious Man||

    Just being facetious.

  • Sidd Finch||

  • Knarf Black||

    But Takis are still okay, right?

  • OldMexican||

    New Smyrna Beach in Florida rejected a food truck proposal. Two local restaurants had asked for regulations to be amended to allow them, but apparently economic freedom may lead to "unintended consequences," according to the mayor.

    Yeah, like competition and consumer choice and other icky, yucky things. Ugh!

  • OldMexican||

    Schools in California are banning Flamin’ Hot Cheetos because of the lack of nutritional value.

    The regular kind is a survival food, I gather...

    They are also forbidding students from bringing the snacks to school.

    Oh, they're just begging for it, isn't it?

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Guess Who Said It?

    "What's notably absent from all the discourse around ultrasounds and abortion: The voices of women who have had an ultrasound before an abortion[...] what that's like is left completely out of the conversation. Ryan's bean story was like having a discussion about legalized divorce and remembering how happy you were on your wedding day while quietly excluding divorced people from the conversation."

    What I like about feminists is just how evangelical they are about getting us all to see the misery in the world afflicting white upper middle class wymyn.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    "to accuse them, by implication, of being unreasonable and unable to perceive reality"

    Gosh, Amanda, I bet you perceive that implication a lot - which just proves how sexist people are, I guess.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Tony,

    Actually, strong social welfare states have proven again and again to improve the human condition

    When I read foolish things like the above, I am quickly reminded of the time Oprah was in Denmark and shown just how poor these "happy" people lived. There's a very good reason why some IKEA showrooms look like furbished closets.

    and examples of successful libertarian societies are pretty nonexistent.

    Unless you happen to live in a deserted island, pretty much most societies start libertarian or are already libertarian. What happens is that there's always the unwelcomed, obnoxious and harassing "guest" you call (with a very sick and creepy sense of humor) "government." But other than that...

    So maybe we can expand our imaginations a little and say not only is it OK to pool resources to protect against property theft, it's OK to pool them to protect against illness too.

    I only know that to protect yourself from illness, you should not go into ANY pool whatsoever.

  • Slithery D||

    Bah, you should go in as many pools as you can as early in life as possible. I did, and never got sick in two year long vacations to Iraq and Afghanistan.

  • OldMexican||

    But this is contradictory. You can't prevent crime without using government force.

    This is a silly perfunctory contradiction. You can at least stop the crime YOU are going to commit, without resorting to government-sponsored force.

    Call it a tragic irony.

    Something is tragic, all right...

    Government is gonna be there,

    Which pretty much obviates the sales pitch you presented previously. We don't really need it, it is just there.

    You want to beg the question here. What are our rights?

    Mine are those that you can't take. Try it and see...

    I think we have a right to government protection from preventable healthcare problems

    You mean government can be your condom? Get out!

    There's no fundamental moral distinction for using tax money to pay for one and not the other.

    You're absolutely right! Finally, you said something that is rational and logical!

    BOTH are equally immoral. That is correct. No distinction.

  • T o n y||

    You can at least stop the crime YOU are going to commit, without resorting to government-sponsored force.

    No shit? Let's just try this little anarchotopia experiment and see how many people choose to respect unenforced property rights.

    I can't help but notice you're building your fence on my side of the property line. Who drew the line? Mr. Smith and Mrs. Wesson, perhaps? I can't wait to try out your parlor game!

  • OldMexican||

    The paleontologist at the center of a dispute over the origins of some dinosaur bones has been arrested and charged with illegally importing them.

    Bringing them into the country in a doggie bag was probably not a good idea after all...

  • OldMexican||

    Couple Burns Through $12 Million Dollars in 8 Years

    * Popcorn factory worker Eric Peoples and wife Cassandra won the multimillion dollar payout in 2004.
    * Sued the makers of a toxic butter flavouring after he developed lung disease.
    * The couple paid $3.9 million to build a mansion in Carthage, Missouri (a town of 10,000 where median house prices are around $85,000.00)
    * Eight years later, they have filed for bankruptcy, claiming the residence and 10.5 acres of land are now worth just $700,000

    Gary North says:
    "This is a reminder: poverty is a way of life. Money cannot always get you out of poverty if your way of life does not change. If money just makes it easier for you to waste your life, it does you no good."

  • ||

    reminds me of vili fualaau. got TONS of money in selling movie rights (he and marykay letourneau are folk heroes in france - where it's not "rape rape" either), and other interview deals. and within a couple of years from that? broke. again.

    ended up suing the PD for not protecting him from his rapist. (y;know, the one he is now MARRIED TO?). oh, the irony.

    he lost

  • Ken Shultz||

    George Best was the highest paid athlete in the world back in the '60s. He played soccer for Man United...

    Anyway, shortly after he retired, he ended up in bankruptcy court. On the steps of the courthouse, a reporter asked him where all the money went, and he replied (paraphrased):

    "I spent most of it chasing women, on sports cars, and buying drinks for my friends, and the rest of it? I just squandered."

    Ha!

    Yeah, George! If you don't spend it on women, sports cars, or buying drinks for your friends in the pub? Then it's just wasted money--no wonder he lost it all!

    Ended up starting a bar with what he had left in Hermosa Beach called "Besties". I thought that was pretty smart, anyway... If you're gonna throw all that money away at a bar, you might as well own the damn thing.

  • Ken Shultz||

  • ant1sthenes||

    It will be a glorious day if we ever convince proglodytes that income is something that is heavily affected by class, not something that defines it.

  • Killazontherun||

    Wasserman-Schultz, you'll always be good for the lulz.

    Crap, wont embed -- google 'youtube Obama Rep. Schultz on The NDAA and Secret Kill List'.

  • Thane of Whiterun||

    I don't know how he could even stand to be in the same room as her.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    If Planned Parenthood performed mammograms (as Obama mistakenly asserted), they would be in violation of federal law:

    http://www.lifenews.com/2012/1.....g-the-law/

  • ||

    Larry King will be moderating a presidential debate open to third-party candidates.

    I'm guessing that will be a debate boycotted by Obama and Romney due to "scheduling difficulties".

  • Drake||

    Why would Obama want to be destroyed from the left by a Greenie - and Romney destroyed from the right by Johnson?

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