Does This Look Like a Party Serious About Spending Cuts?

As noted on Reason 24/7, several conservatives in the House have been removed from seats on the House Budget and House Financial Services Committees. From Roll Call:

Reps. David Schweikert of Arizona and Walter Jones of North Carolina were booted from the Financial Services Committee. Reps. Justin Amash of Michigan and Tim Huelskamp of Kansas were removed from the Budget Committee.

According to a source, Schweikert was told that he was ousted in part because his “votes were not in lockstep with leadership.”

…All of the lawmakers other than Jones were rebellious right-wingers. Huelskamp and Amash, for instance, both voted against the budget proposed by Budget Chairman Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin in committee and on the floor, because it did not cut spending fast enough. They also voted against the current continuing resolution that is funding the government through the end of March.

In addition to voting against the last continuing resolution of the budget-less fiscal year 2012, Amash, Huelskamp, Jones and Schweikert all voted against the Budget Control Act last summer that raised the debt ceiling and help set the scene of the upcoming fiscal cliff.

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.

  • Sevo||

    "Does This Look Like a Party Serious About Spending Cuts?"

    No. No, it doesn't.

  • John C. Randolph||

    ..and in fact, it hasn't since the Goldwater campaign.

    -jcr

  • Bam!||

    Which, it should be noted, got its ass handed to it.

  • The Derider||

    It would look more like a party serious about budget cuts if you used one of the many pictures of John Boehner crying.

  • ||

    Is that what you look like when you look in the mirror and realize how short you are?

  • ||

    What are the odds on our old pal joe here being Robert Reich or Bob Costas?

  • ||

    None. Those guys are actually successful.

  • Mike M.||

    The Orange Pussy really is a totally worthless piece of garbage. Almost as much of one as you are; that's how awful he is, and that isn't easy to pull off.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "It would look more like a party serious about budget cuts if you used one of the many pictures of John Boehner crying."

    He cries when he gets into the Speaker's chair, but when he squanders my money on TARP or a bloated budget, he doesn't shed a tear.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Amash, Huelskamp, Jones and Schweikert all voted against the Budget Control Act last summer

    Then they voted against the only real cuts since Clinton's 1993 spending cuts.

    Why are reps who vote against spending cuts lauded here? Because they voted against the increase in the debt ceiling at the same time?

  • Cytotoxic||

    The Clinton cuts? You mean the ones that came out of the GOP Congress?

    Letting the wholly insufficient be the ally of the good is no good.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    No. Bubba cut $500 billion (over 10 yrs) in spending in 1993 without a single GOP vote.

    Get down, bitch!

  • Cytotoxic||

    Um. What? Where are these magical spending cuts? Why is spending largely flat over the Bubba reign? What fucking drugs are you on?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Here, read it yourself.

    http://business.highbeam.com/2.....ng-federal

    Spending was flat because entitlements are on auto-increase due to demographics. Clinton cut discretionary spending.

    Contrast to your Bushpigs.

  • iggy||

    If Clinton cut spending, then good for him! Of course this still proves what a massive hypocrite he is for sticking up for Obama's massive spending. More importantly, it shows him to be pure evil since he apparently understood the negative aspects of a deficit in 1993 but is stumping for a president who steadfastly refuses to cut anything.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Bullshit. There is no "massive spending" increase under Obama.

    It has remained where he found it -- in the $3.5 trillion (per annum) area.

    The CBO confirms - $3.54 trillion in spending before Obama was sworn in.

  • iggy||

    You're an idiot. The reason the CBO says that is a budgetary trick. They claim 2009 as an entire year of Bush spending, when in fact spending increased by hundreds of billions of dollars after Obama took over.

    Secondly, you apparently don't know how our system of government works. Spending is handled by Congress. The last two years of Bush's administration, the Democrats controlled the purse strings. So your point is stupid regardless since that year is still spending which was passed by a Democratic congress.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Yeah, let's have this conversation again.

    Jesus shrike don't you have a presidential ball licking to attend to. Fuck man, you better get there before Dear Leader takes a shower or you ain't gonna get no Cocoa Pebbles with your milk.

  • iggy||

    Shrike is also totally misrepresenting why the GOP voted against that omnibus Clinton bill. They voted against it because it contained tax increases that they didn't like. This is why massive omnibus bills are bad. They let partisan morons attack the opposition for positions they never took.

  • General Butt Naked||

    No shrike is fucking with you. He knows you'll waste your time busting his obviously bogus claims and it gets him off. No one can be that wrong and take themselves so seriously at the same time without being a prank-puppet.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Then Reason Mag are also idiots:

    Consider George W. Bush's eight horrendous years: The budget grew 89 percent—from $1.86 trillion to $3.52 trillion.

    http://reason.com/archives/201.....-cut-gover

    Fuck you. You lose.

  • iggy||

    I know I shouldn't. But I just can't quit you.

    He's using the same CBO numbers. That's why you're coming to the same conclusions. Regardless, you haven't bothered with my point that his last spending bills were passed by Democratic congress. You'll never explain how you can claim it's the fault of 'Bushpigs' when the Democrats in Congress were in favor of virtually all his spending. I know you can't imagine a world where bipartisan stupidity got us into this mess since you're so wrapped up in your weird little world...but come on. It's like you're not even trying with this one.

  • Calidissident||

    Not to mention that temporary measures like the stimulus were passed by BHO, and there hasn't been any reduction in spending as they ended. Same thing with the wars ending. The baseline should have been reduced, but it hasn't

  • ||

    There is no "massive spending" increase under Obama.

    Fuck you, you lying cunt!

    Bush raised the debt by $5.36T in 8 years (1st qtr 01 [5.77T]-1st qtr 09 [11.13T])

    Obama raised the debt $5.17T in 4 years (1st qtr 09 [11.13T] - Present [16.3T])

    Spending table

    Debt Clock

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    You are an idiot. Obama presided over a $5 trillion debt increase DUE TO BUSH PROGRAMS!

    (except for the Obama stimulus of $787 billion - all on him).

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Programs which BO was powerless to stop, I take it?

    He did manage to shut down the DC school voucher program somehow.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    And of course, BO voted for most Bush spending when he was in the Senate.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    The vast majority of Big Gov Bush was passed in 2001-04 before Obama was in the Senate.

    Medicare Part D, the Iraq War, NCLB, TSA and Faterhland Security, and the other Bushillisomo programs.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    With the exception of NCLB, BO has attempted to expand and/or extend each of those spending sinkholes. And much of the stimulus seed was dumped into the gravel pit of the public school system.

  • Ted S.||

    I thought he voted present.

  • ||

    So I guess Obama, on 20 Jan 09, made it his highest priority to eliminate the Boooooooooooooooosh spending increases?

    You are a fucking disingenuous cunt.

    Fuck off and die in a fire you fucking fuck! Obama = Boooosh

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    No he didn't. Obama failed in rolling back the Bushpig Big Gov monster.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Second Term Bush also failed to roll back the Bushpig monster, too. Yet you don't make excuses for him.

  • ||

    failed? So he tried but was stymied by the evil repugs?

  • PapayaSF||

    DUE TO BUSH PROGRAMS!

    Funny how Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, unemployment insurance, etc. all become Republican once the bills come due.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    You are an idiot. Obama presided over a $5 trillion debt increase DUE TO BUSH PROGRAMS!

    Programs that could have been repealed in his first term of office.

    Go back to sucking Obama's cock, shreik. I've already made you look like a total moron just by citing the OMB data. Skull-fucking you with your Precious' own data on a repeated basis has gotten boring.

  • Sernylan||

    "Contrast to your Bushpigs."

    Who in the hell ever claimed them as our "Bushpigs™" anyway, peckersnot?

  • KPres||

    You idiot. The '93 budget deal was renegotiated in 1995. Where the fuck were you?

  • ||

    Democratic Party orthodoxy clealry states that Clinton can only be credited with the perceived good things of the 90s. All the bad things in retrospect were the doings of evil Republicans.

  • PapayaSF||

    'Twas ever thus. Also, as noted above, Democrats get credit for programs, but the deficits they run are always the fault of Republicans.

  • The Derider||

    If Obama's fer it, they're agin' it.

  • ||

    Oh look, a repulsive partisan is complaining about other repulsive partisans. What a pathetic fuck you are, joe.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Replace joe with Tulpa and look down.

  • JW||

    Those Dem balls aren't going to lick themselves, you know.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider| 12.3.12 @ 7:34PM |#
    "If Obama's fer it, they're agin' it."{

    If Obama's for it, anyone with sense enough to pour piss out of a boot is against it.
    So we'll excuse you.

  • The Derider||

    You're a repulsive partisan but you're also on Episiarch's team so no worries!

  • JW||

    Hey ho joe, whadya know?

    Do you know how many impoverished 3rd worlders died for your vote today?

  • ||

    Sorry that we're not Team-loving partisan snot-rags like you. Now get back under the Presidential desk where you belong.

  • ||

    Yes, joe, we are all on TEAM JOE IS A COMPLETE DOUCHEBAG AND IS REALLY REALLY SHORT. Go TEAM!

  • Almanian.||

    I'm Almanian, and I approve this message.

  • R C Dean||

    Is there a t-shirt? Because if there is, I'll buy one.

  • PapayaSF||

    If Obama's fer it, they're agin' it.

    And if Obama reverses himself on cutting the deficit, government transparency, less war, and closing Guantanamo, his principled supporters all abandon him, right?

  • Zuul mothafucka Zuul||

    Did the Budget Control Act actually cut spending, as in total federal expenditures being less one year than the year before?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Yes, half of it is in defense and the GOP wants to renege on that budget bill.

    http://articles.latimes.com/20.....s-20110801

  • Sevo||

    Palin's Buttplug| 12.3.12 @ 7:48PM |#
    "Yes, half of it is in defense and the GOP wants to renege on that budget bill."

    Yeah, diphsit, shame on them. They're not gonna support a $0.02 budget cut.
    Did you mention all the entitlement budget cuts the Dems are supporting? Uh, did you? Hey, knock, knock! Anyone there?

  • ||

    Yes, after the horrific battle of 2011 over the debt ceiling increase, the GOP actually won a deal that makes net spending cuts. By some kind of fantastic miracle, and mostly by acting crazy and threatening to crash the entire economy.

    And now they don't actually want to do it.
    Fucking useless pussies.

  • Calidissident||

    Because the cuts are meaningless bullshit posturing that the establishment pretends are a Very Serious Solution to a big problem?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    I agree with you. Why won't the GOP stand up now for cutting SS/Medicare benefits in half starting Jan 2013?

    Why do we need two center left parties?

    Why won't the GOP put a knife in their # 1 demo - the elderly?

    Why not?

    The GOP is fucking useless - that is why.

  • Sevo||

    Palin's Buttplug| 12.3.12 @ 8:02PM |#
    "The GOP is fucking useless - that is why."

    Yeah, dipshit, it's all the fault of repubs! And BOOOSH!
    Not that your fave Obozo has anything to do with it, right?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Well, which party will actually fight the $1.5 trillion elderly entitlement society?

    The Dems? Laughable.

    That leaves the GOP.

    Yeah. Sure.

    Dream on.

  • ||

    So you're basically admitting they're BOTH ineffectual fuckwads. Nice.

  • Sevo||

    Palin's Buttplug| 12.3.12 @ 8:19PM |#
    "Well, which party will actually fight the $1.5 trillion elderly entitlement society?"

    This from a TEAM BLUE cheerleader.
    Jeeze, dipshit, did you give up hope of your fave Obozo doing anything? Now you're hoping someone can save you from your actions?

  • ||

    Uh, neither party is going to fight the entitlement society.

    Your boy thinks he can pay for it by soaking the rich though.

  • ||

    Neither one, which is why the New Deal effectively doomed the country to the same collapse that the USSR experienced 20 years ago.

    Two different kinds of socialism. Ours just took a bit longer to blow up in our faces.

    The Democrats should be forced to admit that the New Deal was a huge mistake that has done possibly irreparable damage the the nations fiscal condition and to the character of the American people. You've raised generations of useless dependent fucktards who couldn't wipe their own asses if mommy government wasn't there with a check for the toilet paper. All they know about life is how to mooch. All they know how to do is how to huddle together in bands of bitchy whiney interest groups and lobby for more free shit.

    Congratulations. You've destroyed America. Hope you're happy.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Congratulations. You've destroyed America. Hope you're happy."

    We'll still be around. Sort of like how Rome used to be the world's superpower, though. Rome is still around. Tourists go there from all over the world to see the ruins of how things used to be back when Rome still mattered.

    We have monuments, too, in DC. And we'll always have our memories.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Rome would be like Nineveh, Ctesiphon, and a dozen other deserted fallen imperial capitals if it weren't for the papacy.

  • JeremyR||

    Because they wanted bigger cuts?

  • ||

    They voted against the retarded deal that was effectively a giant cave, as we now see.

    I predeicted the day that happened that we would be in this situation today.
    It was instantly clear, before the ink was even dry that the Bi-partisan commission would not find a deal and that the whole thing was set up to give the post-election lame-duck congress the chance to repeal all the cuts and kick the can down the road a tiny bit further.

  • ||

    "Does This Look Like a Party Serious About Spending Cuts?"

    No, it doesn't. I know serious, and GOP, you are not serious.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    It looks like a party that was serious about spending cuts in 2011 when those people were put on those committees.

    What happened between then and now? Oh yes. The great libertarian chastisement of the GOP. Now they're turning left and there's jack-all you can do about it.

  • Cytotoxic||

    AAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    You know Tulpa your bitch tears almost make up for the Liberal ones I didn't get after Obama won re-election. Please continue your asinine whining. So much amusement.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    I've long known it's impossible to bring you down, Cyto, so long as the drones are flying and the Mooslims are getting incinerated by the dozen.

  • Cytotoxic||

    "Gah...Uhh... can't come up with a real counterpoint....MURDERDRONEZ!"

  • Tulpa Doom||

    For me to have a counterpoint would require you to have a point in the first place. Glib insults are an inpenetrable defense against counterarguments, I have to admit.

  • Cytotoxic||

    I've long known it's impossible to bring you down, Cyto, so long as the drones are flying and the Mooslims are getting incinerated by the dozen.

    Glib insults are an inpenetrable defense against counterarguments, I have to admit.

  • Randian||

    That'll be at least seven people you've labeled as glib when they have your number.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Yeah he really had my number. That argument was just massively compelling.

    What was his argument again?

  • Cytotoxic||

    See my comment IMMEDIATELY below.

    Never having to say sorry = Mea Tulpa

  • Cytotoxic||

    It looks like a party that was serious about spending cuts in 2011

    Which is totally why they had Boehner in charge and Romney as the establishment pick. So serious.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    That Ron Paul guy just wasn't hard enough on our social agenda. He may have been good on spending, but he just didn't hate gays enough, and we all know that in order to get the bank account in order, we have to sufficiently marginalize gays and pot smokers via Big Government, or it just isn't possible.

    /republitard

  • iggy||

    Yeah, the libertarians were steadfastly in the Republicans corner up until 2011. I remember how much libertarians loved the Bush administration.

    Wait a minute...

  • ||

    Well that's a non-sequitur complaint.

  • Randian||

    Right. It's our fault you're a back of spineless limpdicks. Go on and get in your Two Minutes Hate.

  • ||

    republitard

    I'll have to remember this one. Thanks.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Ah yes, it's all the libertarians' fault.

    Were I you, I wouldn't be concerned about the libertarians ruining your election, but the 5-6% of independent voters the GOP simply couldn't get because they are the party of ass backwards social politics.

  • XM||

    Huh? Romney won the independent vote in a number of states. In some states, Romney would have lost in some state even if all of the eligible voters picked him over Obama.

    One day, libertarians will discover that the GOP's "social backwardness" didn't cost them any elections. Gay marriage and drug legalization is still not the decisive issue among non white voters. Meanwhile many Republicans who backed Romney supported those measures. And RP was pro life and traditional marriage. Oops.

    The GOP is a perennial racist boogeyman to the left because they're supposed to make scary cuts on minorities and the disadvantaged. All you need a handful of Republicans even semi serious about cuts, and that's enough to color the entire party.

    Libertarians are conditioned to be such equal opportunity hater of two party system that they can't seem to admit that one of them lost after adapting some of its philosophy. "Oh but they weren't REALLY libertarian" is irrelevant. If wannabe Libertarian-lites got trounced......

    What's the libertarian plan to reach out the non white voters, who still reliably "conservative" in terms of their social order, patriarchy sense of patriotism, and government spending? Nothing. They'll project on their wishes onto the GOP and wag their fingers when they fail after

  • iggy||

    On the bright side, when this whole economic house of cards blows to pieces, we might end up making cuts out of sheer necessity! So...that's always good.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    XM is quickly becoming my fave poster.

    Keep up the good work, man. I'm getting tired of fighting the good fight alone.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Well, he's a fellow republican telling you what you want to hear, of course you like it. It'd be like shrike claiming that derider is the only one around here who gets it. Big surprise.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    The difference is, people respond to shrike and derider and Tony with counterarguments. Whereas my arguments just get ignored by the usuals, probably because they've lost too many arguments to me.

    And don't give me the line about how people just ignore me because I'm "dishonest" or "mean" or "lack social skills" or "smell funny". The same is true of the others but people still rush to play their games.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    How can people smell each other via the Internet?

    Jus' askin'

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Someone said my poop smells like dog breath on the other thread. Or maybe it was the other way around.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Considering dogs eat shit, isn't that just saying your shit smells like shit? Which, is a reasonable enough assumption.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    Also your mother dresses you funny.

  • Robert||

    AFAICT, around here "social skills" consist of not raising certain issues.

  • ||

    XM is quickly becoming my fave poster.

    That's because you both suck Republican dick.

    What's the libertarian plan to reach out the non white voters, who still reliably "conservative" in terms of their social order, patriarchy sense of patriotism, and government spending? Nothing.

    Correct. Because we stand on principle rather than surrender our assholes for the dick that can provide the most votes.

    You are both disgusting.

  • ||

    for = to

    Bartender...another round.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "for = to"

    Whatever.

    It's all dative.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Correct. Because we stand on principle rather than surrender our assholes for the dick that can provide the most votes.

    Funny, I didn't see any concern over vandalism/theft of service from the Reason writers or most of the commenters on that thread about the people putting up anti-drone posters over paid ads on NYC subways.

    From what I can tell, y'all stand on principle when it's easy to do so, just like the rest of humanity. When it's your enemy's ox getting gored you point and laugh.

  • Randian||

    It was a long time poster who brought that up and others agreed with his POV, you lying limpdick.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Are you referring to joe/Derider?

  • Randian||

    No. Are you even bothering to check your facts before you act like a total prick?

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Which long time poster are you talking about? Are they in the witness protection program or something?

    I see three people posting somewhat in that direction before Derider and I appear in the thread. And none of the responses to those posters are terribly supportive.

  • Randian||

    Liar. What the fuck were Rasilio and Tonio talking about? You are a megalomaniac.

  • ||

    From what I can tell, y'all stand on principle when it's easy to do so...

    Spoken like a true Republican.

    Not everyone is you.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Indeed, the projection is with Tulpa.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    I never claimed to stand on principle above all else. I'm a utilitarian.

    So are you guys, but you don't like to admit it.

  • Randian||

    Nope. You lied about that thread and you won't cop to it.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    No I didn't. Neither of those comments were decrying the vandalism inherent in the act Reason was praising.

  • Cytotoxic||

    You are ever a poignant warning against utilitarianism Tulpa.

  • Randian||

    Bullshit. Yes they were and yes you did.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Just like Ron Paul supports amnesty and doesn't want to end birthright citizenship?

  • Randian||

    What? That wasn't the argument and you know it.

    Lying sack of shit.

  • John C. Randolph||

    one of them lost after adapting some of its philosophy.

    When did that ever happen?

    -jcr

  • Robert||

    When one philosophy is 20 lashes every day, and your philosophy is none, if someone changes from the former to 19 lashes daily, that is adopting some of your philosophy, whether you recognize it as such or not. And if the voters reject the 19 lashes in favor of the 20, what makes you think they'd be interested in 0?

  • np||

    And RP was pro life and traditional marriage. Oops.

    sigh.. dunno why this is brought up so many times. RP wants the Federal government out of the abortion debate and the Federal government out of marriage. Hell, with marriage he's even more radical than either side, in true libertarian fashion, by *personally* wanting to get the government out of marriage--even traditional marriage--altogether!

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Why did he vote for the partial birth abortion ban and said he would have voted for DOMA if he were in Congress in 1996?

  • ||

    Who cares? He said many times that he didn't think it was the role of the federal government to be involved in marriage and opposed the FMA.

  • np||

    I don't have enough info on the abortion issue, but he clearly stated why he supports DOMA: because it prevents the Fed from interfering with state defined marriage. Of course many supporters (and detractors) thought of it as reinforcing traditional marriage, BUT it also applies to any marriage, including gay, if a state sanctions it.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    You can't avoid the marriage issue at the federal level as long as you have special immigration opportunities for spouses of citizens.

  • robc||

    You can't avoid the marriage issue at the federal level as long as you have special immigration opportunities for spouses of citizens.

    With reasonably open borders, that issue goes away.

  • Randian||

    Tulpa doesn't believe in reasonably open borders, so he'll just mew at you some more.

  • robc||

    Tulpa doesn't believe in reasonably open borders

    Im well aware. I was taunting.

  • Randian||

    Well you may fire when ready, Gridley.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    With reasonably open borders, that issue goes away.

    Which Ron Paul doesn't support either...

  • Randian||

    Citation?

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Either you know next to nothing of Ron Paul or you're just trying to harass me as usual.

  • Randian||

    Citation? If it is that easy, you should be able to make me look stupid. Go ahead.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    I'm not encouraging this behavior. If anyone here is unaware of RP's stance on open boarders I'll have to forfeit their support.

  • Randian||

    Right. So instead of taking a few minutes to understand the nuance of Ron Paul's position, you'd rather apologize for the GOP some more.

    Go read something. This is embarrassing.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Where in the nuance does RP disavow spousal visas?

  • Randian||

    Tulpa, you're getting played by a rhetorical expert. Read Paul's statements on the subject and get back to me with quotes.

    Amateur.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Too bad the rhetorical expertise is spent plaintively asking for citations in the middle of the night on a minor blog in the backwaters of the net, rather than getting out there implementing the libertarian plan to fix the country.

    Get some sleep, Randian. You need to conserve your silver tongue to fight the statists who operate by day.

  • Randian||

    It's not me I'm talking about, you idiot. It's Ron Paul.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Umm, no, and I don't think RP supporters are the best judges of his rhetorical skill in the first place. Loving eyes can never see.

    He's OK at firing up an audience that already agrees with him, but forgettable by a neutral audience, and awful at winning over a hostile one. And it's the last two situations where a rhetorician is proved.

  • Randian||

    He said, not having looked up anything Ron Paul had to say about immigration.

    You get dumber as you get more partisan.

    I'm not even that big a Paul fan, you screaming dipshit.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    I know what RP says about immigration. Reason has flerking headlines lamenting RP's stance on immigration. I'm not going to play citation gopher games.

    Surprised to hear you're not a big RP fan since you consider him a rhetorical expert. I've never seen anyone claim that who wasn't blinded by Paulophilia.

  • Randian||

    Still not going to look it up, eh?

    Big surprise. A pig revels in the mud. Tulpa revels in ignorance.

    Go on being a Dem Lite stooge, Tulpa.

  • Randian||

    Cite to the record where Ron Paul doesn't support reasonably open borders.

    Cite it, Tulpa. Go on. cite it

  • entropy||

    "reasonably" open borders are meaningless.

    As soon as you chuck "reasonably" in there, it just means whatever anyone wants it to mean.

  • Robert||

    When Dr. Paul ran for president in 1988, he said things that would reasonably be construed as opposing free immigration. Then he tried to justify it by saying that if all the land on the border were privatized, border crossing would be trespassing unless the landlord permitted it.

  • Calidissident||

    Republicans are NOT wanna be libertarian-lites. Conservatism is not watered down libertarianism

  • Ghetto Slovak Goatherder||

    You misrepresented RP on gay marriage.

  • Cytotoxic||

    One day, libertarians will discover that the GOP's "social backwardness" didn't cost them any elections.

    Except for Akin, Mourdock, etc. Probably Romney.

    You. Lost. The. Culture. War. Fucking deal with it and submit to freedom.

  • Drake||

    XM - I was able to ignore the social stupidity of the GOP for a lot of years. It was actions exactly like the linked articles in this post that drove me from the party.

    There are lots of fiscal conservatives in the party - who are used and discarded by the party leadership. The leadership is nothing but worthless milk-toast moderate wimps.

    I left because of the Bushes and Boehners fiscal stupidity.

  • Ted S.||

    Huh? Romney won the independent vote in a number of states.

    Zero is a number. (Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if he won the independent vote in states like Utah that he won by a huge margin. But that extra couple percent of independent votes sure could have helped in Ohio and Florida among others.)

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Romney won independents by a margin of 5% nationwide.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    It's not the libertarians' fault, but that goes both ways. Bending over backwards to get the cosmos on board won't accomplish what they need.

  • ||

    No one has asked them to do that.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Except virtually every Reason writer/videoer weighing in in the days after the election on how Romney lost because he didn't push the Reason position on abortion, gay marraige, and immigration.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Hey, the country isn't on board with hating Mexicans or gays. So sorry, the country left you behind. You can cry about it or join the 21st century like Canada's Conservative Party did. They have since met with reasonable electoral success.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    The country isn't on board with cutting Medicare or Social Security either, but oddly Reason didn't bring that up. What's the Conservative Party's position on socialized medicine, Cyto?

  • Cytotoxic||

    It's shitty. The country is ready to allow private competition, but the CPC is stupid and this is irrelevant.

    Yes, the country is artarded on SoSec. The GOP has a lot of work trying to sell entitlement reform, which it can't do as long as it focuses on KULTR WAR or sell as long as it is rightfully seen as anti-gay/immigrant.

  • Randian||

    What's the GOP position on Medicare, Tulpa? How about Part D?

  • JeremyR||

    It is, but a lot of those people vote Democrat anyway.

    Have you seen the polling on immigration in particular? It's not even close, like gay marriage is.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    The only thing any libertarian is asking of the GOP is that it conform to ITS OWN FUCKING SMALL GOVERNMENT RHETORIC.

    I don't give a shit whether Republican X loves or hates *insert social issue here*. It's not my concern. My only concern is whether Republican X is active in trying to use government to force that love or hate concerning *insert social issue here* on me.

    No one is asking republicans to start loving abortion or drug use or prostitution; libertarians are only asking them to stop using government to enforce their social agenda.

    And as long as Republicans are enthusiastic participants in their efforts to use government to enforce their personal belief systems concerning *insert social issue here* they can continue to go fuck themselves.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    No one is asking republicans to start loving abortion or drug use or prostitution; libertarians are only asking them to stop using government to enforce their social agenda.

    Democrats are just as bad wrt drugs and prostitution. No meaningful restriction on abortion has been passed in decades.

  • JW||

    The great libertarian chastisement

    Ah yes, the all powerful, all controlling Libertarian Guild.

    Where's my solid gold decoder ring, motherfucker?

  • ||

    What happened between then and now? Oh yes. The great libertarian chastisement of the GOP.

    Seriously?
    Libertarians voted for Romney in greater numbers than the last four Republican presidents.

    What happened between now and then is that the Free Shit Army reasserted it's electoral supremacy.

  • waaminn||

    Man I lol'd really hard on that one dude.

    www.IPMask.tk

  • Ken Shultz||

    Until the Republicans in the House get rid of John Boehner, we'll always know that they're not really serious about cutting our out of control spending.

  • Sevo||

    Somewhat related:
    "Calif. Democrats ponder their new power"
    The predators are wondering which prey should be eaten first.
    http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/.....085864.php
    Oh, and the out-of-focus face in the foreground is an SF stand-up comic who decided his career could be made more worthless by becoming a politico. The face is truly as ugly as it appears; he's gotten as many face-fixes as that hag Pelosi.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Can I get some good news out of California?

    For pity's sake.

    Tell me something good happened somewhere.

    Anywhere in California.

    The Democrat supermajority in Sacramento, this is one time when I expect the reality to be worse than the anticipation. And the anticipation is really bad.

  • Sevo||

    "Tell me something good happened somewhere.
    Anywhere in California."

    My business in CA, carefully, legally, (and 'immorally') structured to avoid every tax liability possible, has grown quite a bit this year, and is currently putting bread, potatoes and rice on the table of suppliers on three continents. And the suppliers seem to be prospering also.
    Does that count?

  • ||

    Yes Sevo, yes it does. I salute you sir.

  • Sevo||

    Thank you. And the clients seem to be prospering also.

  • Ken Shultz||

    That is good news...

    Illegitimi non carborundum!

  • Mike L Toris||

    structured to avoid every tax liability possible

    This is outrageous and an insult to businesses and individuals who pay their fair share.

  • Ken Shultz||

    If I didn't know you were kidding...

  • Jordan||

    You mad bro?*

    *Not sure if serious...

  • Sevo||

    "This is outrageous and an insult to businesses and individuals who pay their fair share."

    Yeah, well, fuck 'em.

  • ||

    +1 stickin it to da man

  • PapayaSF||

    Tell me something good happened somewhere.
    Anywhere in California.

    My girlfriend thinks last weekend, which we mostly spent in bed, was great.

    Admittedly that doesn't change the trajectory of California's plunge toward doom, but it was really good from my point of view.

  • ||

    sloopy & Banjos had a spawn.

  • DK||

    As depressing as the Democrats' responses in that article are, the Republican response is equally fucked up.

    Assembly Republican Leader Connie Conway, R-Tulare, noted that despite the losses, millions of people statewide still voted for Republican candidates and Republicans' priorities of safe communities and good public education remain.

    Really? Those are the priorities? No, FUCS! [No, Fuck U, Cut Spending]

  • Sevo||

    DK| 12.3.12 @ 8:33PM |#
    "As depressing as the Democrats' responses in that article are, the Republican response is equally fucked up."

    See the article about the DC Libertarian candidate; CA is probably a real possibility for libertarian gains.
    The CA repubs are, properly, marginalized. That quote you picked is fairly representative, disregarding the socons fighting rear-guard actions on gays and immigrants; they're out there on the beach with the brooms working on the tide.
    So those who are disgusted with the Dem's allegiance to the unions and the resultant fiscal abyss have little other choice.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    If they're equally disgusted by the GOP wanting border control and opposition to gay marriage, and by the Dems smooching unions and spending the state into oblivion, why the fuck are they holding their nose over the latter and voting Dem by gigantic margins?

    Methinks they don't mind the Dem sins as much as you think.

  • Randian||

    Then give up Tulpa. Ostracize libertarians further and go cry more when you lose again and again

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Libertarians have shown ourselves to be electoral crabgrass. There are way more votes to be gotten by promising free shit to the masses, without having to be pestered with consistency or bellyaching about what one of your advisors from 8 years ago said about some random government program.

  • Randian||

    Good. Go be the big government liberal we all know you are, and leave us alone. We don't need a party that exiles us for disagreeing. You can run along and be a Tory bootlicker now.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    We don't need a party that exiles us for disagreeing.

    Ironic. There is an American political party that demands an ideological loyalty oath, but it's not the GOP or the Dems. Guess which one it is.

    And I'm no loyal GOPer. I'm probably done with voting at all for the time being if things go the way they look to be going.

  • robc||

    Ironic.

    Not at all. Unless you are Alanis.

    The oath is to JOIN the party, if you disagree, you dont get exiled, because you were never in to start.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    What if you change your mind after joining?

  • robc||

    What if you change your mind after joining?

    Oaths are for people whose minds are made up. Dont join if you dont mean it.

  • robc||

    I dont see how it is any different than a wedding vow or any other contractual obligation.

  • Randian||

    You're no GOPer, but you'll defend them to the end for exiling libertarians.

  • Randian||

    I see one party that tolerated Bob Barr, Gary Johnson and Ron Paul, despite serious disagreements among them.

    I see another send its strongest intellectuals into the wilderness to appease Big Government fuckfaces like Paul Ryan.

  • robc||

    Is the goal to win elections or to fix the country? If its the latter, then promising free shit isnt gonna help. If the former, then fuck off.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    There are two ways to fix the country:

    1. Win elections, or at least be an influential part of a governing coalition.

    2. Work from the ground up by appealing to large masses of people on a low level.

    Those who voted LP or didn't vote in 2012 in general have foresworn #1.

    #2 is seriously friggin hard, and the LP has shown absolutely no ability to do it over the past 40 years of their existence. A necessary first step is to stop screaming heretic at anyone who doesn't agree with every jot and tittle of one's personal variant of libertarian ideology, and they haven't made that one yet.

  • robc||

    #1 doesnt work unless the governing coalition wants to move in the right direction.

    Joining a group moving backwards (even if they are moving backwards slower than the other guys) doesnt work.

    This story is the perfect example of it. Amash wanted #1, but look at what happens, the coalition says "no, nevermind, we dont want your help".

    Its a two fucking way street.

    #2 is hard, but if the GOP isnt willing to move TOWARDS libertarians, its the only way.

    Nominating Ron Paul in 2008 (fuck 2012, 2008 was his year) would have been a good start for them.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Amash wanted #1, but look at what happens, the coalition says "no, nevermind, we dont want your help".

    Because the coalition is changing direction in response to electoral realities. Amash and those like him are the buggy whip manufacturers of the GOP coalition.

  • robc||

    electoral realities

    This is why I told you and them to fuck off.

    It isnt about what it takes to win elections, its about what it takes to fix the country.

    Amash is on the side of right. That is all that matters.

    For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

  • Tulpa Doom||

    It isnt about what it takes to win elections, its about what it takes to fix the country.

    How exactly do you propose to fix the country without winning elections? By being on the side of right? Pious bilge, that. Might doesn't make right, but right without might is worth shite.

  • robc||

    You are an idiot Tulpa. You really thing Rand Paul, for example, is doomed? His power is growing in KY, for example, as he hand picks candidates. Something that McConnell used to do in this state but cant anymore (Paul's election being the perfect example of his failure).

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Oh, so now winning elections is important? Rand Paul is not going to fix the country where he is now. It's better to have him in the Senate than not, but the ability to recruit someone to run for the house in a very safe red state district is a far cry from what's needed.

    2106 is a long time away, and his chances of not stepping on the wrong toes between now and then, as the GOP turns hard to port, are not promising. He might hold on to his senate seat but he's just as likely to get primaried.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Thomas Massie's GOP predecessor (who was retiring in 2012) won the previous two elections in the 4th district with 63% and 69% of the vote, respectively.

  • robc||

    Yes, but Massie beat GOP insiders in the primary.

    And go back further, that seat was D very recently. Extremely blue dog D, but D.

  • robc||

    Just to be extra clear, Paul's power is about the PRIMARY not the GENERAL. Quoting voting numbers in the general doesnt matter. Of course, whoever won the GOP primary in KY-4 was going to win.

    But Massie wasnt the pick of the state GOP.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Did the state GOP oppose Massie?

  • Tulpa Doom||

    1998-2004, after having been R since 1967.

  • Randian||

    And yet you defend it.

    Go away, Republican concern troll.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Who the hell made you boss around here? You go away.

  • Randian||

    You're defending the GOP kicking out libertarian friendly candidates. You're the Team Red concern troll.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    They didn't kick them out, they demoted them. And I'm not defending anyone, just explaining reality. Boner is a scumbag, always has been, but to some extent he was our scumbag for a while.

    And now the arrogant strategy of voting for gridlock is backfiring big time on the libertarians who advocated for it. Like the ants in the ant farm it takes a good shake by the real powers that be for you to realize you're not in charge of this pile of sand.

  • Randian||

    We never thought we were in charge. Little Dem lite fucksticks like you are.

  • Randian||

    What did they get demoted for , Tulpa?

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Amash and those like him are the buggy whip manufacturers of the GOP coalition.

    Or they're the cutting edge of the future.

  • entropy||

    Country is FUBAR, cannot be fixed.

    You want a decent country, you're going to have to build a new one.

  • Sernylan||

    "There are way more votes to be gotten by promising free shit to the masses,"

    Yeah,..."free shit" managed to get a whopping ~27.5% (*yawn) of elegable voters to run to the polls and vote for The One.

  • Randian||

    Free shit is an excuse for the republicans to embrace their Big Government yearnings.

  • Sernylan||

    They are opposite sides of the same coin, a useless, useless coin

  • Cytotoxic||

    One the one hand, the GOP is the only hope for libertarians BUT don't you dare chastise the republicans for being unprincipled slugs because they're just responding to electoral changes (which they seem to fail to succeed at anyway). It's as if Tulpa has one predetermined answer in mind.

    And I say this as someone who is in favor of a hostile takeover of the GOP.

  • Randian||

    I know. Tulpa needs to pick one or the other. Either it's ok for there to be dissenting libertarian voices in the GOP or it's not.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    That's because the dims look like them.

  • wef||

    repube frauds and con artists, gamers, georgewillist suckups and nro reglio-nationalist liars-for-the-cause, and so on, et cetera, et cetera...

    The republican party must be destroyed.

  • iggy||

    This is so badly written that I thought it was spam at first. Then I noticed there's no link. Now I'm confused.

  • Sevo||

    No it isn't. wef is a brain-dead TEAM BLUE cheerleader. Dumb as dirt.

  • wef||

    sevo the subtle

  • Sevo||

    wef| 12.3.12 @ 8:46PM |#
    "sevo the subtle"

    wef the brain-dead.
    Please tell us how the repubs are causing the budget problems in CA again; I love that story.
    Aren't you wanted in several jurisdictions for impersonating a rational being?

  • iggy||

    Sevo, you seriously haven't heard that bizarre Democrat apologia? There are entire left wing websites dedicated to the idea that Republicans are the reason California is in trouble. I mean, Reagan was their governor once! How can you have Reagan be your governor without his evil Republican ways infecting your budget and bankrupting you 40 years later?

    It's just basic logic, really.

  • wef||

    iggy and sevo the repube-apologist tag team

  • Sevo||

    wef| 12.3.12 @ 9:08PM |#
    "iggy and sevo the repube-apologist tag team"
    You steaming sack of shit, did you read the first post in the thread?
    When did you find out that rocks were smarter than you? Or have you figgered it out yet?

  • wef||

    figgering is your forte, evidently

    iggy/sevo is offended by anti-repube-ism

    that's the bottom line

  • Sevo||

    wef| 12.3.12 @ 9:17PM |#
    "iggy/sevo is offended by anti-repube-ism"
    Sorry, asshole; the offense it caused by abysmal stupidity. That would be *you*.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Are you gonna argue with a second sock puppet that you're not now, nor have you ever been, a Bush fan.

    Good luck with that Se-"Bush Fanatic"-vo!

    Yar.

  • ||

    Dude don't engage it, this is pretty obvious trolling.

  • Sevo||

    A Serious Man| 12.3.12 @ 9:20PM |#
    "Dude don't engage it, this is pretty obvious trolling."
    wef has been pasting "The republican party must be destroyed" crap since, oh at least a year ago.
    It could be trolling, depending on how you define that, but some folks here haven't seen the TEAM cheer leading.
    wef might be a troll. wef is definitely an ignoramus.

  • iggy||

    http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/.....kill-jobs/

    This is my all time favorite Paul Krugman moment, and it involves Democratic California apologia. First he claims that Jerry Brown is secretly pro-austerity. Then he claims that we need to fix our economy by hiring more teachers. He then swings into Krugaction and makes the absurd argument that California pensions are minimally responsible for the crisis. He finishes everything up by quoting Upton Sinclair and arguing that taxes cause economic growth. You know, despite the fact that California's taxes are the highest in the country.

    Truly a magnificent performance by the Prince of Krug and one not likely to be forgotten.

  • General Butt Naked||

    We've basically carried out a massive unethical human experiment in Europe and to some extent in the United States on the effects of spending cuts. And guess what: they destroy jobs, which says that reversing those spending cuts would bring those jobs back.

    Wow, the disconnect with reality is complete.

    Jesus.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    a massive unethical human experiment

    For some reason I'm picturing Krugabe as a Teacher in the Milgram experiment, shocking his "Learner" to the point of burning Yale to the ground.

    If I were a conspiracy theorist, I would note that the psych community suddenly became concerned with "unethical human experiments" after Milgram's and Zimbardo's experiments revealed how succeptible humans are to the influence of authority and power relationships.

  • General Butt Naked||

    I could totally see Krugnuts getting kicks from making people shock each other.

    Fuckin' sicko.

  • Robert||

    Akll Milgram's experiments showed was how naive psychology experimenters are.

  • Almanian.||

    swings into Krugaction

    What costume would Krug Man wear? A nylon onesie with academic leather patches on the elbows?

  • General Butt Naked||

    Don't forget the humanities professor turtleneck.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    What costume would Krug Man wear?

    You definitely need a cat pouch on the chest for starters.

  • Sevo||

    "quoting Upton Sinclair and arguing that taxes cause economic growth."
    I didn't read the link, just cause I'm gonna eat dinner.
    But the lefty fave Swedish Prize econ guy quotes the whacko Upton Sinclair for evidence?
    Hey, wef! We found someone as dumb as you!

  • Sernylan||

    wef|12.3.12 @ 8:46PM|#

    sevo the subtle

    wef the intoxicated?

  • Sevo||

    Pretty sure wef is perfectly capable of posting such idiocy absent any chem 'enhancement' at all.
    wef's posts, stone-cold sober, are indistinguishable from hamster squeaks.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Well it's not like the Democrats are trying to balance the budget either.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Obama has been trying to scale back some of the excesses of the Bush administration but has been thwarted by the republicans in congress.

  • Ken Shultz||

    There are people in this very thread who will tell you that Clinton wanted to balance the budget, but Gingrich shut the government down to stop him.

    They're willfully retarded.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    everyone knows Clinton didn't even want to *be* President.

  • Sevo||

    Hillary sure did.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Depeche Mode would be better.

  • ||

    Obama has been trying to scale back some of the excesses of the Bush administration but has been thwarted by the republicans in congress.

    Very funny.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    Sad Manning face in the house

  • ||

    Jason Whitlock's logic: I know one thing, Whitney Houston would still be alive today if she didn't have access to cocaine. (If only there was some law against cocaine possession.) ----Had to be said. Where's reason defending gun rights?

  • Tulpa Doom||

    They covered that earlier. The only threat Bob Costas can pose to the American people and their rights is that he'll put them to sleep with his boring commentary.

  • Mike L Toris||

    A sportscaster wouldn't HAVE to talk about guns during a football game if presidential candidates talked about them during debates.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Let me know when Bobby C talks about Fast and Furious during the intro to Faith Hill.

  • Almanian.||

    That dumbfuck better SHUT UP while Faith Hill's on. He can suck dick before or after - not during.

    Thanks.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Fuck Faith Hill and the awful hardhouse-wannabe version of the intro song they have now. Bring back Pink.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Speaking of guns, did you see that pistol packin' grannie on wpxi (I linked the video on the bowles thread next).

    She's freakin' awesome.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    No, I'm busy with my Brett Keisel fleshlight.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Doesn't the beard chafe?

  • Tulpa Doom||

    If you comb in enough peanut butter it just tickles a bit.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    uhm is it like this?

  • General Butt Naked||

    I'm thinking, but I don't know. They gave 'em away at the gate and there ain't no way I'm paying $150 to see a goddamn game.

    How long have you been sitting on that link, waiting for the perfect moment?

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    It haunts me mercilessly.

  • Sernylan||

    What in the hell did I just watch?

    This comment sums it up about right....

    "go home internet, you're drunk..."

  • General Butt Naked||

    A sportscaster wouldn't HAVE to talk about guns during a football game if presidential candidates talked about them during debates.

    He didn't talk about guns, he talked about some dumbass that killed his girlfriend and blamed it on guns.

    Talking about guns is having a 3 hour AK47 vs AR15 debate.

  • Sevo||

    Mike L Toris| 12.3.12 @ 9:44PM |#
    "A sportscaster wouldn't HAVE to talk about guns during a football game if presidential candidates talked about them during debates."

    Uh, Mike, give us a hint. Otherwise the question is: Sarc? Or stupidity?

  • Killazontherun||

    Someone let the goddamned amateurs in.

  • Sevo||

    Do amateurs have to be stupid?

  • OldMexican||

    According to a source, Schweikert was told that he was ousted in part because his "votes were not in lockstep with leadership."
  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    WAIT
    this Nostradamus prediction about Gangnam Style and the end of the world is a fabrication?
    ON MY INTERNET????

    NO

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Gangnam Style for Perverts.

    I absolutely approve of this.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    I've posted that before. I approve.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Like the best bag of Skittles ever.

  • Sevo||

    Cute post-adolescent oriental gals wiggling ass.
    I'm sure someone can find a reason to dislike that. I can't.

  • General Butt Naked||

    That's better than the original, which is nothing more than an Asian Macarena. Like jeeze man, turn it off already.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Asian Macarena?

    It's more like Asian LMFAO.

  • Randian||

    Didn't Brett L take the Giants tonight? Bwa ha ha.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    He did. And my strategy of assuming that the NFC East teams will all fuck up just enough to keep the division close till the end succeeded.

  • Randian||

    He's going to be so pissed in the morning.

    And along the lines of your comment, remember when the Eagles were the bogus Super Bowl front runners at the beginning of the season....again?!

    Good times.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    They are the exception to my rule. They will only keep the division close via pulling out a miracle win against whoever is leading the division at the moment to play spoiler.

  • Ted S.||

    Amazingly enough, I'm leading the picks pool I'm in by a full three games.

  • Sernylan||

    When DIY tax sheltering goes bad. Comming to an America near you...

    I'm assuming that the reason the charges weren’t listed is because they haven’t decided what limp dick excuse to seize that money will pass muster with their lawyers.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Palin's Buttwipe,

    Obama failed in rolling back the Bushpig Big Gov monster.


    Spending is bad. Got it.

    Now all that's left to do is wait for Shriek to tell everybody that spending is a good thing except when the Bushpigs do it.

    Oh, and that there's no inflation.

  • Cytotoxic||

    WINGNUTZ

  • Killazontherun||

    This is just the best conspiracy related article I have read in a long while.

    http://www.salon.com/2012/12/0.....nick_deak/

    A few years later, in 1971, New York’s top Mafia don, Joseph Colombo, was gunned down at an Italian-American pride rally by a 24-year-old African-American paranoid-schizophrenic, who was killed seconds later by someone in the crowd.

    The Colombo assassination made headlines for months, and although everyone from the police chief down assumed mob involvement, the hit was never solved. Assassin Jerome Johnson was a black neo-Nazi as well as a practiced marksman and member of the NRA. He also thought he was God. The night before murdering Colombo, he arrived by bus from Cambridge, Mass., carrying a caged monkey. No one ever figured out whom Johnson visited in Cambridge, how he got his money, or why he had the monkey.

  • Killazontherun||

    cont.

    http://media.salon.com/2012/12.....gshot3.jpg

    Lois Lang spoke to police and doctors on the day of her own arrival by bus. As during subsequent interviews with psychiatrists, she was incapable of offering more than sketchy and incoherent autobiographical information. She was hospitalized for eight years before a judge finally declared her fit to stand trial in 1993. The prosecution team found the case very odd — the D.A. reportedly still thinks about it — but didn’t spend much time delving into the motivations of the madwoman. Lang has been in Bedford Hills federal prison ever since. Her longtime attorney is deceased. She has grown a beard like a billy goat and ignores all interview requests

  • Killazontherun||

    Noticed, Robert Plant sports that same beard these days.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    I saw John Paul Jones with Jimmy Page and Plant on Letterman, and I thought wasn't he a recluse now? But that's John Deacon of Queen who's gone into hiding.

  • Killazontherun||

    Jones has the more reticent personality of the Zep members, and you could see Plant's sly smile when he and Page took the 2nd and 3rd seats. Jones was impressive though, he handled Letterman pretty smartly. Plus, the least aged of the three, easily.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    Reticent - It's a bass player thing.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Jones has the more reticent personality of the Zep members"

    He was always barely in the band.

    He's afraid if he says the wrong thing, they're gonna replace him with a Moroccan sintir player. ...or maybe someone Plant met in Mali.

    He's lucky they still have his phone number.

  • JeremyR||

    While that's true to an extent, he seems to be the odd man out, he's the most talented (living) member musically.

    There are a lot of guitarists as good as Page. Very few bassists are as good as he is.

  • Ken Shultz||

    How good page is isn't a function of his technical skill.

    It's the way he grooves. He grooves better than some of the blues pioneers he used to emulate. That isn't a technical thing. That comes from somewhere in his soul.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtEAp-Rybl0

    A lot of people can play what he plays, but when they do, it doesn't sound like that.

    Alex Lifeson can't play like that.

  • db||

    Without Bohnham, it's just not Zep.

  • Raston Bot||

    "Hey! I know how to make the GOP even smaller and less relevant... let's ostracize the fiscal conservatives!!"

  • ||

    Clearly, the GOP has learned their lesson. The only way to win is to be the party of moochers. They just appeal to different categories of moochers.

  • Drake||

    It isn't called the stupid party for nothing.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    I think you have an inflated perception of the importance of fiscal conservatives in America in 2012.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

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

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

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement