White House Correspondent Helen Thomas Dead at 92; Here’s What Her Controversial Late Career Can Teach Us About Journalism

She told me that Bill Clinton was the absolute worst. |||Helen Thomas, who was the White House correspondent for United Press International from John F. Kennedy to Bill Clinton, then continued on for other organizations through to Barack Obama until advising Jews to go back to Germany and Poland, is dead at 92. Read the UPI obit here.

I have an unabashedly soft spot for Thomas due to working and drinking with her in Prague 19 years ago. After the 2010 controversy, I wrote a piece examining what it can tell us about the transition from "objective" to opinion journalism. A sample from that:

The longer someone is submerged in what they and their organizations regard as traditional "straight" reporting, the more gruesome the results are when the gloves come off. As Thomas herself reportedly said in a 2002 speech, "I censored myself for 50 years.... Now I wake up and ask myself, 'Who do I hate today?'"

Straight reporters have been taught for six decades to submerge or even smother their political and philosophical views in the workplace. Like all varieties of censorship, this process creates resentment and distortion. Whatever it is that you feel prevented from saying, you will be more likely to scream once given the chance. This is why, for example, some of the most politically opinionated people you'll ever meet are newspaper reporters a couple drinks in out yakking with their colleagues.

Degrading the quality of that discussion still further is the likelihood that the partisanship-averse journos haven't bothered to construct their own self-conscious political philosophy, beyond identifying Bad Guys and wanting to Fix Problems. Show me the world's most intractable problems–the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the inability to produce mass amounts of energy without negatively impacting the environment, the search for a beer that tastes great and is less filling–and I'll show you reporters in bars having conversations worthy of the Alex Jones show. It's not that they're all Helen Thomases–she is truly one of a kind–but that in the absence of subjecting their own beliefs to journalistic rigor, they are more likely than many would expect to quietly nurture beliefs that outsiders would find surprisingly slanted and even extreme. 

For these and other reasons, when straight reporters transition to opinion journalism, one of the first things to go is the "journalism" part of it.

Whole thing here. RIP, combat-boots lady!

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.

  • John||

    Fuck them. They are always political, but the politics always go one way. And I wish they would shout what they are rather than pretending they are neutral all the while choosing which stories to cover and how to cover them for the specific purpose of furthering their bias.

    An Helen Thomas was the worst sort of nasty Anti-Semite. If she had said about blacks what she said about Jews, she would die totally unmourned and unnoticed.

  • robc||

    I think journalism would be more balanced politically if the pretense of neutrality didnt exist.

    Much like in the 19th century where there were competing philosophical papers in towns.

    Or like MSNBC and FoxNews.

  • Hash Brown||

    Same.

  • Tony||

    Conservatives are always bitching that liberals have shut them out of journalism and academia. One wonders why you don't simply apply your self-proclaimed superior ingenuity and beat those dirty liberals at getting the jobs. Even if you posit a conspiracy, you are admitting that liberals have beaten you.

    Of course it can't be the case that the types of people who go into journalism and academia, smart people, tend to be liberals, because what's called conservatism these days is fucking dumb, a near-religious dogma with no attachment to facts and reality, which prefers inventing massive conspiracy theories to facing the possibility that you might be wrong about something.

  • ||

    In my time at university the people who annoyed me most were left-wingers with all their 'ums' and 'likes" feigning intelligence. Sure, there were articulate ones, but no more so than "conservatives." Thanks for that pompous, presumptuous useless comment.

  • Tony||

    You're welcome.

  • Tony||

    And let me add "like a screaming red-faced toddler who lost his binkie."

  • ΘJΘʃ de águila||

    You think JFK was bangin' her?

  • William of Purple||

    some things are better left unthought.

  • Irish||

    I've noticed a tendency for leftists to use more pretentious vocabulary than conservatives, while saying things that are no more intelligent or interesting.

    Intelligence doesn't come from big words, it comes from the thoughts you're expressing. Too many liberals think that expressing little thoughts with large words makes you intelligent.

    See: Obama, Barack

  • Virginian||

    Isn't it cute how he seems to think that academia is a market institution where all that matters is your ability, and not a political institution where groupthink and being the right sort of people is much more important then competence.

  • Tony||

    You'll be having the sour grapes, then?

  • sgs||

    And you'll be the one failing to rebut him, choosing instead to insult him?

  • sgs||

    That's how you know tony realizes he's going nowhere, he stops with even the stupid pretense of restating his already defeated premise and just tosses insults, before turning tail and running until the next time he thinks we forgot he made a fool of himself.

    So, the good news ism his presence in this thread is nearly at an end.

  • Tony||

    All that would be required to defeat me is for you to pony up some evidence that there is institutional bias in hiring in academia and journalism. I claim that liberals tend to gravitate toward these fields, while others, who not being liberals adhere to some simplistic dogma of one form or another, aren't as suited.

  • Sevo||

    Tony| 7.20.13 @ 9:28PM |#
    "All that would be required to defeat me is for you to pony up some evidence that there is institutional bias in hiring in academia and journalism."

    Shithead, according you your lights, that's extremely easy to prove; Asshole lefties like you presume that a statistical bias proves intent. Ipso facto, those careers are biased.
    Now, as mentioned below, your presumption of what qualifies as 'journalism' is warped by your employment. Equally, your definition of 'success' in academia.
    So you've posed a challenge followed by an easily disproven claim.
    IOWs, you've once again proven yourself to be an ignoramus, shithead.

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    "All that would be required to defeat me is for you to pony up some evidence that there is institutional bias in hiring in academia and journalism."

    You're not even a good liberal, you dumb fuck. The Chronicle of Higher Ed did a long piece by a "die hard, life long liberal and academic" in which he detailed the bias in hiring and lamented that academics always pit their liberal "intellectuals" against the likes of Glen Beck, while ignoring Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Charles Murray, and hundreds of other right-wing intellectuals.

    There have been about a dozen other articles on the same subject. If you can't find them I'll get one of my 6th grade students to show you how to use a search engine.

    The evidence is overwhelming, and includes the firing of liberal academics who turn conservative. You don't see it because you've been too busy sucking Helen Thomas' cock while she reads Mein Kampf.

    Politics aside, does it ever bother you that you're suck a fucking coward? Probably not.

  • Saneman||

    It's ridiculous to claim superiority because of the major you had in school, especially if you were a liberal arts major. The fact is that many many liberal arts majors (myself included) did so because they were unable to cut it in more difficult fields (ie engineering). Do not delude yourself. Anybody, regardless of their background or political affiliation, who is claiming superiority because of their college major is just a jack off in my opinion.

  • C. Anacreon||

    Or that the people in "academia," with their tenure and self-proclaimed "courage" of espousing the exact same beliefs as the rest of their colleagues, are somehow more intelligent than those of us who are physicians, attorneys, engineers and entrepreneurs (who've actually had to make it in the real world.) I know that self-described academics think that everyone except the left are knuckle-dragging mouth-breathers, but I'd like to see well most of them would survive in a truly competitive environment.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Tony is a fucking English major in a room full of engineers, mathematicians, statisticians, and computer scientists. English. Amanda Marcotte graduated with honors in that same major.

    Credentialism is stupid in any case, but a damned English major should really know better than to apply it in a situation where his credentials don't mean shit and ours do.

  • Tony||

    Ah, but the context here is generally discussions of abstract political philosophy. Liberal arts grads, having learned how to think, are better suited to these matters. Engineers and computer scientists seem to be able to get through schooling without having to learn how to think critically about complex issues involving human beings. They are most certainly not more qualified to talk about how societies should be run.

  • Sevo||

    Tony| 7.20.13 @ 9:26PM |#
    "Ah, but the context here is generally discussions of abstract political philosophy. Liberal arts grads, having learned how to think, are better suited to these matters."

    Now that is FUNNY, shithead.

  • ||

    Engineers and computer scientists seem to be able to get through schooling without having to learn how to think critically about complex issues involving human beings.

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Liberal arts grads, having learned how to think, are better suited to these matters.

    That is the funniest thing I've heard all day.

    Sure, Tony, you and Amanda Marcotte are the ones who really have your thinking caps on. Uh huh...

  • Irish||

    Liberal arts grads, having learned how to think, are better suited to these matters.

    This may have been true when liberal arts was strenuous and required actual work, talent and intellect.

    I double majored in political science and economics, Tony. Neither of those majors struck me as very hard. I didn't have to work that hard to graduate from either program.

    I was originally going to major in English though, so I took several English classes my Freshman year. I got A's in all of them with no effort. I sometimes wouldn't even bother going to class because I knew I could ace any test they were going to give me. English was a joke compared to my majors, and my majors weren't hard. Trying to claim that a fucking English major allows you to 'learn how to think' is ridiculous.

  • ||

    This may have been true when liberal arts was strenuous and required actual work, talent and intellect.

    When was that? Must have been before 83, because it was certainly a joke then.

  • Irish||

    I was thinking around 1941.

  • PH2050||

    Me, my brother, and the rest of our friends in engineering and sciences laugh at dumbfucks like Tony who think that piece of paper is worth more than wiping your ass. Let's talk about what it usually is, a pat on the back from instructors for being good little parrots.

    I would say let the liberal arts and polisci grads continue to demonstrate their vaunted superiority since they've been doing so well thus far but since the only thing they seem good at is increasing total human suffering on this planet I feel they must not be allowed the option.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Let's talk about what it usually is, a pat on the back from instructors for being good little parrots.

    When I started college I would write my papers for my humanities classes from my ideological perspective and couldn't get an A to save my life. After I started writing like a dedicated Marxist I've never gotten less than an A-.

    I figure that I'll use my good grades to make a lot of money, thereby subversively using my professor's ideological biases to succeed in a manner that they would find abhorrent.

  • PH2050||

    "I figure that I'll use my good grades to make a lot of money, thereby subversively using my professor's ideological biases to succeed in a manner that they would find abhorrent."

    Haha! I fucking love it!

    You're dead on about the difference between various courses and I have a recent example. My brother can attend a top petroleum and mining engineering school yet submit a project about thorium MSRs that blows away his instructors and generates a stir, in a positive way, stimulating discussion and such. Compare that with the class you basically had to lie in to get a passing grade. It's ridiculous.

  • Saneman||

    I was an English major, and while I'll admit I didn't really work that hard in college, there were definitely some assignments that were difficult. Critical analysis of Faulkner, Shakespeare, Twain, Orwell, Joyce, etc can be an immensely challenging experience if you are putting in the work to understand the historical context. I don't think it would be wise for people to discount the importance in comprehending the work of some of our greatest authors. Our history cannot be written in numbers. Well, some would probably disagree.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Hate to break this to you. But, it was only difficult because you CHOSE to do the extra work.

  • General Butt Naked||

    People that have "hard" majors can take liberal arts classes, but a liberal arts major could never take my classes. Hell, they couldn't take the classes I took my freshman year.

    You can't pontificate and ass kiss your way to an A in differential equations.

  • Sevo||

    "You can't pontificate and ass kiss your way to an A in differential equations."

    When Skeptical Inquirer wasn't dominated by Paul Kurtz claims of "KORPORASHUNZ", it dealt with subjects such as how feminist 'other ways of knowing' related to such facts as airplanes flying. I'm pretty sure that shithead's plane won't get off the ground, regardless of claims of 'learning how to think'.
    In fact, I'm certain that shithead's claims are more correctly rendered as 'learning how to believe'.
    Shithead, your religion is obsolete; it died in 1989.

  • PH2050||

    "You can't pontificate and ass kiss your way to an A in differential equations."

    Haha, I'm stealing this.

  • ||

    Major History; Minor political science myself.

    So much for Tony's assertion.

    Dumb.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Bullshit. In my experience you're less likely to find a liberal arts major capable of forming a structured argument than a STEM major. In college, I recall being able to palm arguments that I knew were seriously flawed by liberal arts professors because they matched their political views. I'd get my ass handed to me by a math or science professor for trying to pull that.

  • ||

    Tony is a fucking English major in a room full of engineers, mathematicians, statisticians, and computer scientists.

    English major? Why not just major in poverty?

  • hotsy totsy||

    If you're a physician, attorney, engineer or especially an entrepreneur, you HAVE to have actual results in your job.

    If you're a physician, you damn well better heal people, not just have the approval and admiration of other physicians.

  • sgs||

    "One wonders why you don't simply apply your self-proclaimed superior ingenuity and beat those dirty liberals at getting the jobs. "

    Then one is an idiot.

  • ||

    ...the types of people who go into journalism and academia, smart people...

    LOL!

    Even the journalists I like I generally wouldn't describe as overly smart people - certainly no more so than most. Even using the metric of academic achievement, an undergrad in journalism is about as rigorous a degree as womyn's studies, and that's all you need to advance in the field until your alma mater gives you that well-earned honorary doctorate 50 years later.

    And have you ever heard the adage, those who can't do teach? Actually, you probably haven't. Your nasty little green monster probably noticed that all of the hyper-intelligent whizkids in college turned into fatcat capitalist robber barons though. You were just too busy grasping for a "market failure" or making excuses for confiscating their self-evidently ill-gotten wealth to ever seriously consider why.

  • ||

    conservatism these days is fucking dumb, a near-religious dogma with no attachment to facts and reality, which prefers inventing massive conspiracy theories to facing the possibility that you might be wrong about something.

    What's funny about this statement is that it is no less true for so-called liberals, but you will never admit that and will continue on in your blind belief that only people that think exactly like you on everything know the right path for all 300M people living in this country.

  • C. Anacreon||

    Also, liberals' power relies on the votes of people who haven't even heard of 99% of issues, who vote an automatic 'D' without even knowing why. Say what you will about the conservatives, but at least many of them spend their time viewing and listening to programs about issues, whether or not you believe those programs are fair or balanced. Liberal radio and TV programs have audiences approaching zero, as their voters typically are too busy watching celebrity gossip.

  • Sevo||

    Tony| 7.20.13 @ 5:36PM |#
    "Conservatives are always bitching that liberals have shut them out of journalism and academia. One wonders why you don't simply apply your self-proclaimed superior ingenuity and beat those dirty liberals at getting the jobs"

    Yeah, shithead, tell that to that oh, so, successful Keith Olbermann, now trying to find out if he knows the NL from the AL. Or maybe all those fools (oops; 'folks') who worked at Current TV.
    Oh, that's right, you're editor of the wildly successful "Upper West Side Dog Walkers Daily"! I'm sure your print rag will last all of another year or so.
    And, yes the 'academicians' who are 'successful' are those like that hag Napolitano who have learned to work the public teat well.
    Proud of yourself, are you shithead? You're a pathetic excuse for a moral agent.

  • StinkEye||

    "Conservatives are always bitching that liberals have shut them out of journalism and academia...Even if you posit a conspiracy, you are admitting that liberals have beaten you."

    Most of the bitching that I hear on the right about them is that the lefts tenured academia political hacks and journalists mealy mouthed puff writers can actually draw a paycheck... And as for "Journalists", what solemn pride must be theirs, having moronified public discourse so much from their coveted E.R. Murrow days. As for "beaten", oddly enough, the right holds neither the lock nor key in regards to academia/journalism, yet the conservative ideology soldiers on and grows, without the need to be foisted and re-affirmed 24/7 in schools and on the boob tube on the young and impressionable (lest they become preoccupied or distracted) , it requires little energy at all....

    "... fucking dumb, a near-religious dogma with no attachment to facts and reality, ..."

    "Fucking dumb near religious dogma is a glass house in which no lefty should cast stone. What, with the church of "watermelon" environmentalism, AGW, "fur is murder", white privilege, socialism/communism, racial/social/economic "justice", it's a fever swamp of arcane, guilt-ridden dogma over there on the left, and nothing to be proud of... let alone crow about.

  • RightNut||

    Tony
    You know what really stifled human innovation? The Black Death. You know what would have prevented the Black Death? Big government building a sanitation infrastructure or funding research and education about sanitation.

    THIS IS WHAT TONY ACTUALLY BELIEVES!

  • John C. Randolph||

    Conservatives are always bitching that liberals have shut them out of journalism and academia.

    Not exactly. It's more like journalism and academia are cesspools of incompetence, full of shitheads like you who imagine themselves to be superior, despite their utter lack of actual accomplishments.

    -jcr

  • Free Society||

    Liberals winning the contest of 'most educated idiot' doesn't prove much. Which liberal policies are based on fact and reality? Is it the welfare state? Gun control? Progressive taxation? Endless government borrowing? Central planning? Unlimited government?

    Please Tony, share the empirically irrefutable glory of your genius.

  • RP_||

    Well said. Bobby Jindal said the GOP needs to stop being the stupid party.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    "One wonders why you don't simply apply your self-proclaimed superior ingenuity and beat those dirty liberals at getting the jobs."

    Well, they did. It's called Fox News. And it kicks the pants off of the other cable networks. And you whinge about it on an ongoing basis.

  • RP_||

    I'm trying to understand why there is such a burning hate for education in the GOP. Since George Bush, we have heard insults of "liberal college professor, snobs(for the president wanting kids to go to college), northeastern ivy-league elites,etc...Romney railed against the president for spending too much time at Harvard.

  • ||

    Derp da derp da tiddly terp.

  • John C. Randolph||

    I'm trying to understand why there is such a burning hate for education in the GOP.

    You seem to be conflating left-wing indoctrination with education.

    -jcr

  • ||

    One wonders why you don't simply apply your self-proclaimed superior ingenuity and beat those dirty liberals at getting the jobs.

    Because they don't pay enough.

  • CE||

    Kiss up to the holy Presidency long enough, and any sins are forgiven.

  • Dibbler||

    Fuck your soft spot, she never should have been allowed to live so long.

  • Ted S.||

    Fuck your soft spot

    Are you saying Welch's soft spot is like a G-spot?

  • Xenocles||

    More like the top of a newborn's head. Wait, what are we talking about?

  • Zeb||

    WHo's supposed to be in charge of how long people get to live, now?

  • Almanian!||

    DEATH PANLZ!!!

  • MJGreen||

    Adolf Hitler.

    Joseph Stalin.

    Mao Zedong.

    Helen Thomas.

  • XM||

    She didn't kill as many people though.

  • Acosmist||

    Rachel Carson has 'em all beat.

  • C. Anacreon||

    At least she died via a painful, rusty, silent spring piercing her thorax.

  • TheSpiteHouse||

    It's so wrong that I laughed at this.

  • A Serious Man||

    Straight reporters have been taught for six decades to submerge or even smother their political and philosophical views in the workplace. Like all varieties of censorship, this process creates resentment and distortion. Whatever it is that you feel prevented from saying, you will be more likely to scream once given the chance. This is why, for example, some of the most politically opinionated people you'll ever meet are newspaper reporters a couple drinks in out yakking with their colleagues.

    That's a fair point. I think it would be better for reporters to just state their bias plainly while maintaining some objectivity.

  • Finrod||

    The problem is, the bias is so ingrained that they don't even realize that they are biased. (See: Pauline Kael.)

  • Irish||

    I didn't have that much of a problem with Kael's comments. Here's what she actually said:

    ‘I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don’t know. They’re outside my ken. But sometimes when I’m in a theater I can feel them.’

    Maybe this is just because I'd say something like this in a sarcastic manner, but I always took this in two ways:

    1. She is acknowledging the bias of the East coast elite, something most leftists aren't even willing to admit; and

    2. The whole 'sometimes when I'm in a theater I can feel them' part makes me think she was being self-deprecating and a bit sarcastic.

  • PapayaSF||

    I agree with #1, but as for #2, no, I think she was just being honest. It's common for liberals to say things that others will hear and think "Oh, she must be joking," but it's often not the case. I briefly dated a woman who claimed she would leave the country if Santorum or Romney were elected President. I could see what she meant about Santorum, but Romney, the Leave It to Beaver RINO? Nope, she was dead serious. She could see no real difference between the two.

    She stopped dating me when I declined to support a return of the Fairness Doctrine, because I didn't believe the government should (or could) "fairly" regulate political speech. She was quite smart but saw no serious potential problems with such a policy.

  • ||

    "She was quite smart but saw no serious potential problems with such a policy."

    I am puzzled by your use of the word 'smart'.

  • PapayaSF||

    Trust me, she was smart. Psychologists are never stupid, but ideology can make even smart people stupid about some things.

  • Libertarius||

    Your estimation of psychology is naively generous. Psychology is today in the stage of a pre-science, a handful of theories and assertions (some much worse than others) which cannot be validated, like pre-Newtonian physics.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Bernie Goldberg did a very good job of explaining that in his book, "Bias".

    -jcr

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Straight reporters have been taught for six decades to submerge or even smother their political and philosophical views in the workplace.

    MSNBC has thrown those shackles off. I'm not sure the results can be considered an improvement.

  • ||

    "For these and other reasons, when straight reporters transition to opinion journalism, one of the first things to go is the "journalism" part of it."

    That sound about right?

  • A Serious Man||

    That might explain why they are last in the ratings.

  • Hawk Spitui||

    Actually, they probably are. Just imagine how awful they'd be if they tried to play it straight. It'd be like Weird Al Yankovic trying to be Mick Jagger. If they didn't have their bias, they'd have nuthin'.

  • Finrod||

    Actually, Weird Al's band has proven very adept at playing a large variety of musical styles. A more apt analogy would be say AC/DC trying to be Pink Floyd.

  • Careless||

    Yeah, it's hard to think of a worse example he could have picked. There's no one whose band plays a wider variety of music types than Weird Al.

  • robc||

    the search for a beer that tastes great and is less filling

    Berliner Weiss.
    English Mild.
    Gose*.
    Gueuze**.

    Do I need to go on? That was an easy one.

    *YMMV as far as tastes great.

    **Ditto the previous footnote, only more so. But you are wrong if you dont like them, unlike with Gose, which is acceptable.

  • SugarFree||

    Country Boy has been making a Gose. I pronounce it delicious.

  • William of Purple||

    Salzburger Stiegl Radler Grapefruit Beer
    Stiegl Radler is half Stiegl Goldbrau Lager and half grapefruit juice made with purely natural flavours. What makes Radlers so popular is its sophisticated perfectly rounded fruity taste. Light and refreshing at only 75 calories per half pint and only 2.5% alc/vol. Enjoy the purity of Stiegl with the purity of grapefruit juice.

  • ||

    Session versions of beers can suck but I like all-day IPA from Founders. Also pretty much any blonde isn't going to be too filling, just find one that you like.

  • Sudden||

    Fellow reasonoids, I have returned from a long hiatus that was the result of busy with a new job (although still busy with it), a divorce, and a liberating trip over to Europe. While in Europe, I visited Belgium and greatly enjoyed my time at the Cantillon Brewery. Lou Pepe Gueuze is simply epic, drank bottles of that shit everyday I was there.

    Also for the scotch whisky fans, I highly recommend a trip to Islay during the Fei Ile at the end of May.

  • PapayaSF||

    Welcome back.

  • Ted S.||

    I didn't even notice you were missing. :-p

  • Nazdrakke||

    You know who else had people develop a soft spot for them after drinking and working with?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    There's a mattwelch.com now?

  • Matt Welch||

    Long-existing, long-dormant website.

  • SIV||

    Home of the Kerry-tarian back in '04

    Matt Welch: Kerry

  • ||

    The COSMO looms larege!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Shouldn't Prognosis have been Praguenosis?

  • Irish||

  • ||

    The Kochs are paying Zimmerman's legal bills? And people are eating that up?

    So the fascist left is trying to turn the Zimmerman case into a cause to demonize the concept of self-defense and capitalism. Things are getting ugly.

    The hardest part of defeating slavery is getting past the slaves who wear their chains with pride.

  • Generic Stranger||

    So the fascist left is trying to turn the Zimmerman case into a cause to demonize the concept of self-defense and capitalism.

    Don't forget little things like Due Process, Right to a Fair Trial, Impartial Juries, and Double Jeopardy. You know, just the cornerstones of a just and fair society.

  • StinkEye||

    Justice and fair society are arbitrary concepts, part and parcel to our "Living Document" constitution... That's how they roll in organized grievance mongering...

  • Boisfeuras||

    The hardest part of defeating slavery is getting past the slaves who wear their chains with pride.

    "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
    - Goethe

  • hotsy totsy||

    Like they're really gonna boycott Seagram's.

  • William of Purple||

    She was still alive?

  • William of Purple||

  • Irish||

    "I could be Helen Thomas in 35 years..."

  • Almanian!||

    +35

  • Sudden||

    Y'know who else wanted the Jews to go back from whence they came?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    John of Patmos?

  • William of Purple||

    Moses?

  • MJGreen||

    Lincoln?

  • Xenocles||

    The Canaanites?

  • ||

    Like, every power in world history?

  • C. Anacreon||

    Zionists?

  • Live Free or Diet||

    "I could be Helen Thomas in 35 years..."

    Ho Lee Kau.

  • Rich||

    "Mr. President, in honor of Helen, will you answer just a few *serious* questions?"

  • A Serious Man||

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    Damn, she was just as ugly when she was young.

  • PapayaSF||

    You can't be serious. She went from being homely to being scary, Lillian Hellman ugly.

  • Ted S.||

    Every word she writes is a lie, including "and" and "the".

    --Mary McCarthy (Kevin's sister) on Lillian Hellman.

  • PapayaSF||

    One of the all-time greatest put-downs. Hellman started a suit against her and Dick Cavett and PBS, but before it was resolved Hellman died and the heirs pulled the plug on it.

  • Almanian!||

    The "news" about her was always...about her. I can't think of one thing I ever read that she said or wrote, other than her screed about Jews a couple years ago that finally exposed her Inner Ogre.

    All inside baseball (oh, wait, it's Welch - it all makes sense now), much ado about cocktail parties. Who gives a shit? Only the inside dealers.

    I dont't care she died - we all do eventually. But on the whole I'm leaning toward "happy" at her demise rather than "sad".

    Fuck you, Helen Thomas, you self-important, useless bitch. May you reside with the Devil himself into perpetuity.

  • Irish||

    Wow. People seem weirdly pissed at Helen Thomas.

    I don't like her, and I think the claims that she was anti-semetic have some merit, but the vitriol seems a little over the top.

  • Sudden||

    Methinks it simply discontent with the larger machine that is Washington D.C. Mordoor, and all the orcs that populate it's establishment.

  • Hash Brown||

    Our quasi-fascist culture of celebrity is what pisses me off. It's at its most sickening when a politician dies, but it's nearly as bad when a journalist (so-called) dies.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I think the claims that she was anti-semetic have some merit

    "Congress, the White House and Hollywood, Wall Street are owned by Zionists. No question, in my opinion."

    --Helen Thomas, December 2, 2010

    "I know where you're leading with this. You know damn well the power [Jews] have...It's real power when you own the White House, when you own these other places in terms of your political persuasion. Of course they have power. You don't deny that. You're Jewish, aren't you?"

    --Helen Thomas (speaking to David Hochman), March 2011

    If she hadn't made her career by 57 years of sucking Democrat cock, she would have been treated the same way as a Holocaust denier who blogs on Stormfront.

    She was a vile, nasty little woman who viewed the White House journalist pool as her own little queendom, and she actively suppressed dissent against those administrations she favored.

    I'm glad she is now burning in Hell; damned to suffer pain, humiliation, and abuse for at least a 1,000 yugas (about 4.32 billion years).

  • Finrod||

    You said that much better than I could.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    If she hadn't made her career by 57 years of sucking Democrat cock, she would have been treated the same way as a Holocaust denier who blogs on Stormfront.

    She was a vile, nasty little woman who viewed the White House journalist pool as her own little queendom, and she actively suppressed dissent against those administrations she favored.

    Spot on.

  • ||

    She was a miserable anti-semite. Figures Obama in all his ideological glory would fete her.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    She was a vile, nasty little woman who viewed the White House journalist pool as her own little queendom, and she actively suppressed dissent against those administrations she favored.

    *Golf clap*

    I have nothing to add.

  • John C. Randolph||

    People seem weirdly pissed at Helen Thomas.

    What's weird about despising the despicable?

    -jcr

  • Tejicano||

    "May you reside with the Devil himself into perpetuity."

    Have you seen a photo of her? Jeez - combined with her festering, pustulent heart and that ugly-to-her-soul visage I ponder why you hate the devil so much?

  • William of Purple||

    Underzog is in mourning, I gather.

  • William of Purple||


    Bill Maher
    ‏@billmaher
    Hey everybody, a little space for GZim in this difficult time. After all, there's nothing more unnerving than being watched and followed.
  • Sudden||

    Pretty much sucks that the DoJ is blocking him from getting his gun back so far. He needs it now more than ever.

  • Irish||

    He can buy a new one. I'm sure the millions of dollars he's about to win from NBC should cover the purchase.

  • ΘJΘʃ de águila||

    EriKKK Holder: "Not if we lynch him first!"

  • StinkEye||

    "..After all, there's nothing more unnerving than being watched and followed.."

    By the NSA? The DOJ? The FBI? The IRS? Oberstrumbannfurer Bloomberg's' NYPD? SWAT?... oh, you mean by the neighborhood watch guy, you degenerate, hypocritical pussy... goddamn you suck Maher, every single time you unsnap your useless cock holster...

    /Tough break on Letterman...

  • John||

    http://themattwalshblog.com/20.....-basement/

    I had to post this bit of stupid. Read the letter the guy got from the liberal parent. I thought the atheist pare ta on here would like to know that the desire to tea h your kids how to think mAkes you a religious fundamentalist. Welcome to the club guys.

  • Rich||

    My son was very gifted so we gave him all the tools to succeed academically. This meant we didn’t turn him into slave labor and we certainly didn’t tell him he needed to go work behind a cash register. He concentrated on his school work, and we did our job as parents and financially supported him.

    Seems like the kid has quite the gift for using the folks.

  • General Butt Naked||

    I'd love to know what his degree is in.

  • PH2050||

    I'd bet my monocle is isn't in any STEM fields.

  • PH2050||

    Fuck typos, they don't exist in the presence of grain alcohol.

  • ||

    That's the spirits!

  • Lord at War||

    +190

  • General Butt Naked||

    3) It’s easy to mock a “30 year old who lives with is parents.” My son is almost 29 and he’s been home with us since he graduated. Unfortunately the job market isn’t the greatest (maybe you hadn’t heard) and I’m not going to let him starve on the street. He has a college education, it’s pointless for him to be out working in a retail store or some other menial job. I will be here for him until he is able to get the job he deserves.

    Oh wow.

  • Irish||

    When did he graduate? Yeah, how can anyone in today's job market be expected to find a job in 6 years?

  • C. Anacreon||

    It's not just any job, it's the "job he deserves." Probably Vice-President of Apple.

  • John C. Randolph||

    I first went to work at Apple back in 2002, and I'm about to wrap up my third job there at the end of the month. I've met eight of Apple's senior VPs over the years, and those guys work harder than most people can imagine.

    That 30 year old we're talking about wouldn't make it through the interview to be a groundskeeper at Apple.

    -jcr

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    He has a college education, it’s pointless for him to be out working in a retail store or some other menial job. I will be here for him until he is able to get the job he deserves.

    God forbid he makes a job for himself by being an entrepreneur.

  • Irish||

    It's also fucking stupid that he'd rather sit at home than get experience in a work environment. If an employer sees that this guy has been out of work for years, asks why, and gets a response "I didn't want to work a job that was beneath me," I can say with certainty that he won't get the job.

    On the other hand, if an employer asks 'why were you waiting tables when you have a college degree,' and the response is 'The labor market was rough but I wanted to work until I got a job more suited to my skills,' I think his odds of getting the job will be much better.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Indeed. It's sad that his parents are enabling him in this way. It makes me think he is either a pot-head who can't control his stonerdom or an Aspie with crippling social anxiety.

    Any other situation would be too terrible to bear thinking that it actually exists in this world.

  • AuH20||

    Jesus, just get out there and volunteer. I had to do that for a while to gain experience. It sucked, but at least it was something on my resume.

  • PapayaSF||

    I agree, but in his (partial) defense, several times in my earlier life I was turned down for jobs (or even a promotion in a restaurant one summer) because I was "over-qualified," which meant "we don't want to train you and then see you go college or to a better job."

  • hotsy totsy||

    He has a college education, it’s pointless for him to be out working in a retail store or some other menial job.

    Unless of course he has to pay bills like everyone else.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    It’s easy to mock a “30 year old who lives with is parents.”

    It really is.

  • Sudden||

    Circumstances matter. I'm 30 and recently shacked up with folks short term after going through a divorce. Successfully employed and have been for over 8 years. But the week after I separated from my wife in March, I started a new job (was previously telecommuting with my company of 8 years) located in Downtown L.A., a hellish commute, but the rents in DTLA are just as hellish. On top of that, I had to housesit for my folks for a month while they traveled immediately after my separation, then I traveled for a month myself (was rather lucky that my new employer honored that). Now I'm back and grinding away at work, but I'm not really in much a rush to leave the nest because free rent is great. I now call my dad Section 8.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Sounds more like an extended visit than "living with your parents" to me. Unless you're planning on staying for a long time...

  • Sudden||

    Meh, probably wait it out until November since that's the chepaest rental market time. Plus, my folks are gone all the time so I end up having to watch the house three months out of the year anyhow. Doubleplus benefit is that I get a sweet kitchen and pool and yard I'd never be able to afford in SoCal on my current salary and savings.

  • TheSpiteHouse||

    You also get a pass due to living on the coasts.

  • ||

    These parents are fucking him over. He needs experience. It's an unfortunate catch-22, I understand, but as Irish said, if employers see you sat around until you found work rather than showed initiative and bit the bullet they're likely not going to take you. It points to character but it seems like kids today don't believe that has merit.

    Apparently, just showing up is good enough because we're all gonna see how brilliant they are. Go dry the fucking dishes, you and that degree, chump.

    I know I look at that on resumes. "What have you been doing for the last three years?" is a natural question to ask.

  • AuH20||

    Seriously, go volunteer with Catholic Charities. You get some good experience and help real people out. Or like, I dunno, a fucking ESL literacy group. There are places that you can get experience. They won't pay you, but at least you'll have something on your resume.

  • AuH20||

    I mean, I'm 24, and the job market is fucking brutal for people my age... but seriously, fuck this kid. You're 5 years older than me and too good to even get part time work?

    On the other hand, I am also tired of employers who judge you for not having worked for 4 months. I've been lucky, but I know people my age who have tried their ass off, and are now being judged by employers for being out of work for 5 months, and it turns into a vicious cycle.

  • ||

    Employers will (should anyway) know when you've been off legitimately and when you're being a lazy dick.

  • AuH20||

    I think the big problem is that the shitty economy has allowed employers to be very picky. They'll take a 40 something year old with experience over a 20-something with none. Which I get... but the problem is, they start saying to those 20-somethings "Why haven't you worked in 6 months you lazy fuck?" when the reason they haven't worked is due to crowding out by people older and more experienced than them. I mean, only 4 in 10 of people under 30 currently have full time jobs. Basically, the U.S. has turned into Europe wrt youth employment, only no one talks about it or seems remotely concerned.

    Now, obviously things like minimum wage and the new health law ain't helping... but I think few people understand how brutal it is out there for young people. And the argument that "They deserve it for supporting Obama" to me doesn't hold much water. Now that I'm off a college campus, the support for Obama exists, but its shallow at best. A lot of people I meet support him in a vague "I think he's a good guy who's doing his best" but the cock-sucking mostly is on uni campuses. And this NSA thing has pissed a lot of young people off. So, I think the idea that "the youth" support Obama is a bit overblown. Its a mile wide but an inch deep.

  • Virginian||

    Oh, but it's so funny watching Obama voters complain about the job market. I always throw shit at them, endlessly and ceaselessly. I have made people insanely angry for trolling them over their Obama support.

    Fuck them. That business owner who got down below 49 employees by firing all the Obama voters has the right idea.

  • AuH20||

    Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. I just think people don't get that for every young Obama-bot, there are 10 vague supporters (who shouldn't support him) who exist. Let me put it this way: I voted for Obama in 08 (because fuck McCain and Barr) but purposefully split my ticket and voted Republican for Senate (I voted Libertarian in Congress because it was a safe R district). My hope was for gridlock... which happened in '10. I didn't think he'd be a good Pres... just better than McCain (I.... may have been wrong about that? McCain is fucking asshat and still is, so it's not like I had good choices. In retrospect, I shoulda gone with the Green party or something)

  • Virginian||

    You were wrong. McCain versus Pelosi Congress would have been better than Obama with both houses of Congress backing him to the hilt.

    From a liberty perspective, Obama's time with the full power of government behind him will go down alongside FDRs and LBJs massive legislative "triumphs".

  • AuH20||

    I did fuck up, but what was the good choice in 08? Barr wasn't a libertarian. In retrospect, I should have gone with the American Constitution Party.

  • AuH20||

    This, on the other hand, was the first guy I ever voted for in '06

    I also voted for Lieberman, because Ned Lamont is and was a fucking asshat.

  • Cytotoxic||

    I didn't think he'd be a good Pres... just better than McCain (I.... may have been wrong about that?

    Yes you certainly fucking were. And if you can't see that crystal clear today and don't hate yourself for that decision then you are not as smart as GoldWater.

  • Virginian||

    Gonna call bullshit on this though for real dude. Not being able to find work is different from not being able to find a job.

    I'm also 24, and I tend to move from job to job because I get bored or pissed off. In between real long term stuff, I work security, wait tables, etc.

    If all else fails, go stand in parking lot of Home Depot with the Mexicans. You'll get work that way.

  • AuH20||

    I hear your point man, but I think you discount lack of skills. I'm damn lucky, because having never waited tables or gained construction skills, I'd be screwed otherwise. Basically, insomnia is saving my ass. I will work any night shift that comes up, and its paying my rent. But as far as technical skills... I don't have them, sadly.

  • ||

    But as far as technical skills... I don't have them, sadly.

    That's why programming is great; it can be acquired through self-study and there's enough demand for (competent) programmers that many employers are willing to overlook the lack of a (relevant) degree. It is (mostly) pure logic, so Aspies and others not high on social graces can turn their "differently abled" state into a gainful activity (I'm not saying that you are in that category).

  • TheSpiteHouse||

    True. Also, temp agencies had been decent to me until I found a good job.

  • ||

    Deserves? I think I see where the problem is.

  • PH2050||

    Holy shit dude that is a fucked up video linked to your name.

    Can't tell if serious or trolling...

  • Sevo||

    "I thought the atheist pare ta on here would like to know that the desire to tea h your kids how to think mAkes you a religious fundamentalist"

    Is this shreek's kid?

  • John||

    No my damn phone. It should say that I thought the atheist parents on here would like to know that teaching your kid how to think...

    Damn fat thumbs

  • William of Purple||

    how the hell do you follow threads on a phone?

  • TheSpiteHouse||

    Possibly via the Reason™ app.

  • MJGreen||

    Wow, hard to believe that email is real. Someone actually thinks it's a good idea to praise their son's upbringing and talents, and admit that the son is unemployed at 29?

    Jesus, 29 and living at home?

  • ||

    I don't know why it's seen as a bad thing to live at home provided you work and pull your weight. And if you're really smart - save your money.

  • AuH20||

    I think that we may switch to more multi-generational homes due to the financial crises and government pensions being broke. Not good or bad, but interesting and a change to our social dynamics.

  • Cdr Lytton||

    I think that we may switchreturn to more multi-generational homes

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    That's how it is in most of Latin America. Frankly, it's probably how it would be if welfare for old people were not so generous in the US; many Americans have no regard for their parents and have no problem carting them off to a nursing home for little reason or simply letting them coast on their SS checks. It consistently shocks people when they learn that I invited my mother to live with us last year when my dad died; I'm not sure why it should, though.

    /getoffmylawn

  • ||

    many Americans have no regard for their parents and have no problem carting them off to a nursing home for little reason or simply letting them coast on their SS checks

    I like to joke with my mom that I'll have her put in a nursing home if she stops being useful.

  • PH2050||

    "Mom, you may want to rethink what you just said to me. You're getting on in years and if you aren't capable of living alone at some point do you want to come live with me or do you want me to put you in a nursing home called Shady Acres? Your choice."

  • William of Purple||

    Warner Bros. Announces Batman and Superman to Clash in Man of Steel Sequel

  • Cytotoxic||

    Superhero movies are just totally going back to shit. The Avengers sequels are the last good that's gonna come of this brief renaissance.

  • Virginian||

    They're going to do The Dark Knight Returns?

    So that means old badass Batman.

    Sam Elliot.

  • TheSpiteHouse||

    I'd also consider Bruce Willis.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    I'm calling bullshit on TOR. No way Warner Bros. would be stupid to give away the Dark Knight Returns just when they finally managed to resurrect the Superman franchise. There is still plenty of money to squeeze out of fans with villains not named Lex Luthor.

  • TheSpiteHouse||

    BRAINIAC, Darkseid, The Parasite, Metallo, Bizarro. Those are also good Supes villains.

  • TheSpiteHouse||

    The Ultra-Humanite or Terra-Man would be largely dependent on how good or bad the adaptation is.

    By the way, I want to see a proper Doom Patrol or Sandman film. Watchmen showed me the light.

  • Cytotoxic||

    OT: Here is a very uplifting article about the proliferation of free economic zones.

  • Sevo||

    Cyto,
    Attachment not attached.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Dammit dammit! Fucking HR needs to fire someone because I can't post the link!

    Look up seasteading -- news ctrl-f 'Caymanian Compass' and it should highlight.

  • ||

  • Cytotoxic||

    But...how...? Why does the site mess with me? Whatever I'm just glad you got it. You should repost in the next weekend thread sometime tomorrow.

  • Xenocles||

    Variations of "HelenThomasNudePics" would make good passwords, mostly since they would be phrases that most people would be loath to type.

  • William of Purple||

    RULE 34

  • Xenocles||

    I think the citation of Rule 34 demonstrates the principle, since it fits better and better as the pornography grows more shocking and unspeakable.

  • TheSpiteHouse||

  • PH2050||

    Visiting that site was one of the worst decisions in my life.

    I still wake up in cold sweats sometimes.

  • Cytotoxic||

    One the outside I'm half crying half laughing. One the inside, I'm all dead.

  • PH2050||

    I take it SF has that effect on all humans.

  • Sudden||

    Stop hacking my shit

  • Stormy Dragon||

  • William of Purple||

    How can a socialist be worth 50 million when so many have so little?
    what an ass hat.

  • ||

    Some people consider that a logical fallacy. Just because you're a millionaire and espouse socialist ideals doesn't mean you can't be socialist or that socialism is bad.

    Me? I think he's a jack ass. I'd like to see how much he gives back.

  • ||

    Just because you're a millionaire and espouse socialist ideals doesn't mean you can't be socialist or that socialism is bad.

    It does, however, make you a giant fucking hypocrite.

  • PapayaSF||

    Also, there are many stories of how awful a boss he was when he was at Mother Jones. So yes, big hypocrite.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Links? Quotes?

  • ||

    I remember reading something about that back in the day.

  • PapayaSF||

  • PH2050||

    That was an interesting read. I usually only get to check out that magazine at my friend's house. Thank you.

  • ΘJΘʃ de águila||

    Well, it just might mean socialism is bad when the rich dude backs the idea of guys with guns plundering his working-class neighbor's hard-earned stash.

  • ||

    "How can a socialist be worth 50 million when so many have so little?"

    Socialism is the rationalization of thieves masquerading as a political/economic policy. Nothing unusual here.

  • MJGreen||

    Prediction: Kathleen Glynn will get at least half of Moore's wealth, and Moore will loudly complain about how his ex-wife took HIS money.

    Though apparently she was a producer of his movies, so this could go any number of ways.

  • Sevo||

    "Documentary filmmaker Michael Moore"

    How long has this person been writing 'news'?
    "Propagandist" doesn't begin with a "D"

  • ||

    He's no documentarian that's for sure.

  • PapayaSF||

    There's no rule that documentaries have to be fair or accurate.

  • Sevo||

    Yeah, but they ought to 'document' something other than a fictional plot.

  • PapayaSF||

    True. A more accurate term might be "Not entirely fiction."

  • VG Zaytsev||

    The couple otherwise has no children.

    Other than what?

  • ||

    Other than one he ate, I guess.

  • ΘJΘʃ de águila||

    YUM, YUM, SOCIALIST CONSUMES THE YOUNG.

  • C. Anacreon||

    Looking at the picture of the two of them, I'd bet if you cut her hair, and she put on a ball cap and glasses, you couldn't tell the two apart.

  • PapayaSF||

    Her tits are slightly larger.

    She is going to hate it when he shows up in public with a slimmer date.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Eh. He may be an asshole for other reasons, but divorce sucks. Hope there weren't kids involved; that gets... messy.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Does it make me a terrible human being if I hope their divorce is as belligerent as possible?

  • ||

    The public's perception of honesty/ethics of journalists is quite low. The same poll data that shows the high ranking for cops shows the ranking for journalists to be quite low.

    Only 24% ranks them high/very high (58% for cops) and those #'s have trended down a bit since the late 70's when the ranking was 33% (probably because of Walter Cronkite. Everybody loved him)

    21% rank them low and 9% rank them very low
    Compare to cops where 7% rank them low and 3% rank them very low.

    That's 3 times as many people rank journalists in the abysmal category.

    In the late 70's, those #'s were 3% and 2% respectively.

    ThAT is a huge shift. We've gone from 5% of the populace ranking them low to very low to a staggering 30% of the populace who now rank them thusly.

    Journalists have taken a BIG hit in people's perception of their honesty and ethics, whether justified or not.

  • ||

    My policy when talking to journalists is to tape record my conversation with them, so if they twist my words, or blatantly lie, I have proof positive of same. This is a pretty good policy imo in dealing with journalists (and cops). The tape recorder does not lie

    It seems to be universally true that when lay media reports on a subject I am well versed in (like firearms), they get TONS of stuff wrong. This leads me to suspect the same is true in almost any subject, since it would be pretty coincidental that the only stuff they get wrong is the stuff I just happen to have a deep understanding of (same topics being pretty limited. )

    How much of this is attributable to sloppiness and how much is attributable to their agenda is an open question. I mean look at the coverage of the Zimmerman trial and how many of them STILL erroneously report that the trial hinged on "stand your ground" laws which is obviously false to anybody who has followed the trial

  • ΘJΘʃ de águila||

    If they twist your words, dunphy, you are as fucked as are "civilians". Nobody reads or hears about the corrections.

  • ||

    Probably true. It's like "I got the tape and it shows what I really said" and they're "Yea, but who is going to publish THAT"

    Well, at least we have the intertoobs

  • PH2050||

    Dammit, and here I was agreeing with you about the CopCam(tm) idea and what you basically just called it worthless.

    We could have made zillions.

  • Lord at War||

    This is a pretty good policy imo in dealing with journalists (and cops).

    Except, when I reached in my pocket for my phone, the stupid pig shot me.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    He has a college education, it’s pointless for him to be out working in a retail store or some other menial job. I will be here for him until he is able to get the job he deserves.

    Settle in and make yourself comfortable, Dad.

    This reminds me-

    Some idiot actress (Sela Ward?) was on Bloomberg yesterday babbling about some "financial management awareness" website for kids. Aside from her infuriating use of the term "empower" and multiple variants thereof about twenty-eight times in ninety seconds, she kept saying the site teaches kids how to manage their money. By donating it to charity, something something, "gifting it' to themselves, blah blah blah, assorted other incoherence.

    At no time, on this show supposedly designed specifically to cover the day to day mechanics of financial investment, did she make any mention of investing for future return; nor did any of the hosts. It made me sad.

  • General Butt Naked||

    I would say make your kids work for their money and save for the things they want, but that's what my parents did and I'm terrible with money.

  • SweatingGin||

    Jeff Tucker had an interesting article a while back: Give the Gift of Capitalist Understanding.

    I kind of like that idea.

  • ||

    I'm a huge proponent of introducing a basic finance course as early as 12 years-old. Get the kids understanding concepts of finance early. It blows my mind how clueless they are on key strategies for financial wealth and independence.

    For example, they'll babble about needing to tax dividends, interest, capital gains. I had to explain to one kid, with stick people and all, why doing so destroys their own chance at wealth.

    You're not killing the rich with that, you're killing your own financial future.

    His eyes open wide.

    Same during my time at the investment firm and bank. People are primarily unaware.

  • AuH20||

    I'm taking macroecon this semester and microecon next semester for my teaching competency.

    Yes, I get that being a teacher is a horrible idea, but I'm getting my masters in Ed. 2 reasons: You need it to teach private school; and I'd actually like to consult on education policy, because the US's educational system is a fucking joke. Seriously, I HATE how many people I encounter who are intellectually uncurious, how many look at education as checking a box. You have a brain- use it! I want to fix that, in whatever way I can.

  • AuH20||

    And I get going into education is a terrible idea. But, on the other hand... education needs people like me, who realize its broken, and realize sucking more statist cock won't fix it. If anything, we need to acknowledge that different people have different learning styles, and segregate much younger based on that.

    Basically, I finally admitted at 24 that I shouldn't put off a plan I've had forever just because I'm not 28. I will be a damn good social studies teacher. And maybe, one day, I'll work with someone to fix the educational system as a whole (more charters, less one-size-fits-all)

  • Acosmist||

    You seem smart, so I give you less time than usual before you realize how mistaken you are. What's broken with the educational system isn't what you think it is.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Gotta agree with Acosmist. Please reconsider getting a Masters in Ed; you're hobbling yourself with debt to work in a field that isn't rewarding. If you've volunteered for many places, you might find it more beneficial to apply to business schools and hype that part of your resume.

    Getting a CPA is not difficult, either if you can hack the tedium of it.

  • PH2050||

    Hold on, Goldwater said he was looking at employment in a private institution. Is that not a worthwhile pursuit?

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Not if you're crippled by debt and barely paying rent.

    Education is a noble pursuit, but getting yourself deeper into insolvency is not.

  • PH2050||

    I see your point. I guess I just assumed instructors at private schools earned enough to offset that debt and it sucks to see that they don't. My public education sucked and if my debauched and dead soul could "feel", it would feel pity for the chil'run

  • ||

    You're seeing them on full display regarding Zimmerman.

    Fuck, even Howard Stern has jumped on it regurgitating all the crap that's been explained or debunked already.

  • PapayaSF||

    I don't care what she said, because she's one of the most beautiful women alive.

  • ||

    Which is exactly, if I may assume and surmise for a moment given their rhetoric, Obama and his ilk want.

  • AuH20||

    As far as I can tell, Irish, Virginian, and I are the youngest Reasonoids. I am the only one who doesn't identify by point of origin.

    There is that kid from Chicago who pops in sometimes. He's like 17. Good on him

  • Hyperion||

    Snappers!

  • ||

    I'm around the same age as you guys. Early-to-mid 20s, right?

  • ||

    That is, between 20-25.

  • Sudden||

    I was once in the young generation of reasoners. Started in 2007 back when I was a fresh faced 24 year old. My how the years (and Epi) have increased my disillusionment.

  • Jordan||

    I think I started around the same time, and I'm a year younger than you.

  • ||

    I'm 25 right now, with any luck I won't get any older.

  • Sevo||

    darius404| 7.20.13 @ 8:45PM |#
    "I'm 25 right now, with any luck I won't get any older."

    Hey! I just turned on the way-back machine and I'm 20 again!
    If anybody wants one of them, well, I only made one and I'M NOT SELLING IT!
    HAAAA, HAAAA, HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

  • Cytotoxic||

    Don't even joke. I obsess over getting older.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    ...with any luck I won't get any older.

    Growing old sucks but beats the alternative.

  • C. Anacreon||

    I can't get any older now that angels want to wear my red shoes.

  • ||

    What, did a house fall on you?

  • ||

    I started in my late 20's around that time too.

    Now I'm 32 and I've seen things. Things no human should ever see.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    I am 36.

  • Irish||

    As far as I can tell, Irish, Virginian, and I are the youngest Reasonoids. I am the only one who doesn't identify by point of origin.

    Isn't Auric in college? I thought he was the youngest person who posts here.

  • ||

    Being in college doesn't necessarily indicate age. When I started college I didn't do very well and ended up sitting out for a few years, so I'm still a few semesters away from graduation.

  • Calidissident||

    I'm 20, so I'm probably close to it

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Auric is in his late 20s, I think. Graduated with an MS in engineering, IIRC.

    You people make me feel old, dammit!

    *goes back to corner with Suthenboy, Sevo and the other old farts*

  • Cytotoxic||

    I'm as young as Irish.

  • ||

    Yes, yes, you are the only ones I can feel old next to at 26.

  • Lord at War||

    I was almost 40 when I started reading Reason.com. That was 2003...

    Damn, I guess I am old.

    Translation for you younguns...

    OMG! LOL! I am SO, like, OLD, or something!

  • Hyperion||

    Just a thought on the conversation about kids with college degrees being unemployed and the economy being so bad.

    The economy is bad, in a lot of places. That is true. But there is a solution. Move to where there are jobs available in your field. If there are no jobs available in your field anywhere on earth, obviously you fucked up and need to start over, with a different career in mind.

  • AuH20||

    Yeah. I'm looking at Texas, as my state is just... depressing. Let me put it this way- My girlfriend doesn't have a kid. That is actually notable among under 30 women in this state. It is a state where dreams go to die. Don't move to New Mexico kids.

  • Hyperion||

    I was looking at TX when I got a really good offer in Murland. Looking back, although I really like this job, and the compensation is very good, I am not sure that I would make the same decision again, because, Maryland...

    But TX and MD/DC area are definitely 2 of the best job markets right now. Problem with MD is that real estate is outrageous, which is why I will never buy real estate here. And when I retire, I won't be living here.

  • Cytotoxic||

    General inquiry/plea: I don't give too many specifics on the net but I am a biochemist/microbiologist/my username is Cytotoxic so figure it out. Where is my work in demand? GET ME A JOB.

  • PH2050||

    Are you interested in the field of biomedical engineering, specifically, implants? I graduate soon and plan to live off of my brother, who will be mining asteroids, while we devise augmentations to allow the rise (and subsequent flight from this planet) of the ubermensch.

    It's either that or attending http://jsnn.ncat.uncg.edu/

  • ||

    Or Quebec. No one in their right mind should consider Quebec for a 'better' life. The few outsiders who are here are temporarily relocated here by their companies and so tolerate all the stupidity. Love when actors say "they will move to Canada" whenever a Republican in power. I haven't seen one come yet; and they most certainly wouldn't come here to Mississippi North.

  • ||

    There are no opportunities here basically unless you manage to work for the government or a big corporation.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Absolutely. I had to move 12 time zones away to find the first job in my field of expertise, and it was the best decision I made in my life.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Completely agree, and what's more it builds character.

    What? I can say that; I'm old!

    But seriously, there isn't anything better for a young guy than to get out and *do something*. Don't let your life go stale, ever. Join the military if you have to; teach English in Chile -- do something and have fun with it! You'd be surprised where you end up.

  • CE||

    Sounds like a lot of weak excuses for some nasty things she said.

  • William of Purple||

    Oh shut up

    The chances of a shark swallowing someone whole on land are “none,” said Mr. Burgess. The chances of such an attack in the water are slim to none.
  • PapayaSF||

    Coming soon, the sequel: Bride of Sharknado.

  • William of Purple||

    So hooded sweaters are political speech now?

  • PapayaSF||

    Anything can count as political speech when leftists do it, just as anything can count as hate speech when rightists or libertarians do it.

  • ||

    Yes, the hood-rat / thug is a hero in the age of Obama. Appropriate.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    It's hardly the first time that hood-wearing people were considered heroes by Democrats.

  • PH2050||

    Zing!

    Nice one.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Yo, screw that nazi bitch.

    -jcr

  • Sevo||

    Sleazy propaganda masquerading as 'news':
    "Something in President Barack Obama's voice caught Gregory C. Ellison's ear. It was fleeting, subtle, and easy to miss — unless you're a black man, too."
    Yes, AP ran that as 'news'; they seem incapable of shame.
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/pol.....676654.php

  • General Butt Naked||

    "In between his personal reflections on what it feels like to be an African-American man, and the history of pain and his strategic plan, there was what I call a very pregnant pause," says Ellison, a theology professor in Atlanta.

    "If I ever have an opportunity to talk to President Obama, I would ask him what was he searching in his soul during that pregnant pause?"

    Cue barfman.

    Jesus, that article was about the sickliest sweet pile of manure that this cynic has ever read. Getting told by ivy league educated rich people how fucking oppressed they are is getting real fucking old real fucking quick. I sincerely doubt that any old lady has seen Dear Leader approaching and clutched her purse; unless she's senile and was hallucinating an actual non-noodly man.

    Fuck these people. Really, fuck them with a rusty spoon.

  • Sevo||

    GBN,
    I really don't care about the treacle; it's expected in fawning 'interviews' of the chosen one. Hagiography is pretty much the chosen literature of the left.
    What irks me is the presumption this is 'news'; it's nothing of the sort.

  • PH2050||

    The fact that there are progressives who crow about "Paulbots" and the like while engaging in the most insipid form of celebrity worship is very unsettling.

  • ||

    Getting told by ivy league educated rich people how fucking oppressed they are is getting real fucking old real fucking quick.

    A million times this.

  • PH2050||

    "says Ellison, a theology professor"

    LOL

  • Cdr Lytton||

    I sincerely doubt that any old lady has seen Dear Leader approaching and clutched her purse; unless she's senile and was hallucinating an actual non-noodly man.

    Clutching your purse or wallet around O or just about any pol is completely rational.

  • Generic Stranger||

    So, what would have happened if Zimmerman hadn't shot Martin?

    Well, now we know.

    According to complaint affidavits filed by homicide detectives, Molina saw a young man use a key to scratch his silver Pontiac Grand Prix in the early evening of Sept. 25 as the teens were walking on a sidewalk on Trowbridge Drive.

    Molina got into his car, drove to where the teenagers were and parked at the curb in the 4100 block of Trowbridge Drive to confront the boys about the vandalism. The affidavits state Molina identified himself as a police officer and was acting in his capacity as a police officer even though he was not in uniform. Sometime during the confrontation, Molina asked a bystander to call 911.

    While Molina was talking, Gonzalez "struck the victim on the face and then grabbed his legs and threw him to the concrete. (Gonzalez) then got on top of the victim and continued to punch him in the face," the document states.

    Police said that Molina was knocked unconscious when his head hit the ground, and that Gonzalez continued the assault despite Molina's being unable to defend himself. Gonzalez ran off when witnesses went to help Molina, who was taken by ambulance to a hospital in critical condition.

    But being punched in the face and having your head beat into the concrete isn't fatal!111! /progtard

  • PapayaSF||

    Sorry, but Hispanic-Hispanic violence isn't useful to the political narrative that the administration and the media want to promote.

  • Careless||

    I'm sorry, the correct answer involved "white on white" violence

  • ||

    Will you take "white hispanic on white hispanic", or is that only partial credit?

  • ||

    If piranhas kill a black man, does it make them racist?

  • KPres||

    Only if they're white piranhas.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    "They'll take a 40 something year old with experience over a 20-something with none."

    You're delusional. It's the exact opposite.

  • ||

    Depends on the industry, but it's been my experience as well that you're a whole lot better off with career experience than youth. When you can get a person with 10-15 years experience for the same price as a rookie who will need to learn on the job, you would have to be absolutely retarded not to go for the sure bet.

  • ||

    That's a great refutation of his anecdotal evidence.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    "Let me put it this way: I voted for Obama in 08"

    As I said

  • Archduke Trousersenthusiast||

    People are still talking about Zimmerman?
    Here's a Canadian Rock Song of the Night

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    It takes more than supporting Israel's right to exist to be a Zionist, even if you're not using as a euphemism for something else (you're not, are you?)

  • Sevo||

    "(you're not, are you?)"
    EvH, I believe you'd found the range and the target.

  • Sevo||

    Oops. My mistake. Murkin is a selective racist; the Jews aren't on his list.

  • Irish||

    Isn't every racist a selective racist? Racism pretty much implies that you select certain races for your hatred.

    Unless you're H.P. Lovecraft. That guy fucking hated everyone.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Lovecraft made racism creepily fun!

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    The only races he seemed to respect were, I think, cats and ghouls.

  • Irish||

    The only races he seemed to respect were, I think, cats and ghouls.

    He really liked British protestants. That might actually be it.

    Lovecraft made racism creepily fun!

    Some of his horribly racist stories are hilarious because of how out of place it is. The Street is possibly the funniest thing I've ever read. It's about a wonderful town of upright, WASP gentleman, a utopia heretofore unseen in human history. Then the Russian immigrants come and ruin it with their Bolshevik terrorism.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Unless I miss my guess, the "Russian immigrants" in the story were Jewish. Then the street, IIRC, eats the immigrants up in good Lovecraftian fashion.

    After publishing that story, he married a Jewish woman, but for some strange reason it didn't work out:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L.....d_New_York

  • Irish||

    Then the street, IIRC, eats the immigrants up in good Lovecraftian fashion.

    You would be correct!

    For without warning, in one of the small hours beyond midnight, all the ravages of the years and the storms and the worms came to a tremendous climax; and after the crash there was nothing left standing in The Street save two ancient chimneys and part of a stout brick wall. Nor did anything that had been alive come alive from the ruins.

    The Russian anarchists inexplicably get crushed by their houses on the day they were planning to blow up America.

    It is simultaneously the worst horror story and the best comedy story of all time.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    A close second is "It's the Great Pumpkin, H.P. Lovecraft!"

    http://www.strangehorizons.com.....in-f.shtml

  • Sevo||

    "Unless you're H.P. Lovecraft. That guy fucking hated everyone."
    At the risk of Godwinning the thread, Hitler was an ecumenical racist; anyone who didn't qualify as "Aryan" was gonna get it in the end.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Is that really true, though? Blacks and Jews sure, but wasn't the original plan to have Slavs and Russians as slave labor and winnow their numbers through attrition?

    IIRC there was also a good amount of the other "white" races that were to be held as client races (e.g., Latins and the English).

  • Sevo||

    The Immaculate Trouser| 7.20.13 @ 10:00PM |#
    "Is that really true, though? Blacks and Jews sure, but wasn't the original plan to have Slavs and Russians as slave labor and winnow their numbers through attrition?"

    Absolutely! He hated them all and would use the population most available for slave labor before they died or he killed them.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    I bet dinner parties with Tojo got pretty awkward...

    Russians and others definitely had a longer track to extinction than the Jews though; that murderous SOB wiped out 2/3rds of the Jewish population in Europe in the space of less than a decade.

    The fact that there was not a worldwide libertarian movement after WWII proves just how lacking humanity is as a species.

  • Sevo||

    The Immaculate Trouser| 7.20.13 @ 10:14PM |#
    "I bet dinner parties with Tojo got pretty awkward..."

    Well, Tojo never got there, but they would have been; He despised the Japanese as much as the Slavs.

  • PH2050||

    Dark Gods like White Slaves, apparently.

  • Cytotoxic||

    American doesn't know what he's talking about news at 6.

  • ||

    Well no, he's right in this instance. Look down to my next post.

  • ||

    It takes more than supporting Israel's right to exist to be a Zionist

    According to my Israel-born Hebrew professor, that is exactly what Zionism is: the belief that Israel has a right to exist as a nation.

    From the Wiki:

    Zionism is a form of nationalism of Jews and Jewish culture that supports a Jewish nation state in the territory defined as the Land of Israel.[1] Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority in their own nation, and to be liberated from antisemitic discrimination, exclusion, and persecution that had historically occurred in the diaspora.

    The only thing missing from his conception is the "opposes assimilation" part.

  • ||

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Some guy in German in the 30s wanted the jews to go away, to their own nation state. Until the war turning against Germany made that impossible.

  • Calidissident||

    "My problem with her is that her position, like hat of all communists, is to deport the Jewish population back to Germany. This isn't anti-semtism per se, as she also wants to flood America with immigrants."

    What? That is one of the stupidest things you've ever posted, and that's saying something. How does the fact that "she also wants to flood America with immigrants" disprove that she's anti-Semitic? If anything, wouldn't it be the other way around? She thought other groups of people should be allowed to move here, but Jews should get deported. How is that not anti-Semitic?

  • Irish||

    Based pm that post, I think that American thinks that 'semitic' means 'of or pertaining to immigrants.'

    He's not very good with the English language.

  • Calidissident||

    To be fair, it's stupid that "anti-Semitic" is used to denote anti-Jewish sentiment, when there are many groups besides Jews that are Semitic. Some of the most "anti-Semitic" (as the term is commonly used) societies today are composed mostly of Semites. Helen Thomas herself was a Semite. But I don't think that's what American was talking about

  • Calidissident||

    "So she's not anti-Semitic in that she
    doesn't have a specific hatred for Jews because they are Jews the way other anti-Semites do."

    Seriously? This post doesn't even deserve a response

  • ||

    This post doesn't even deserve a response

    /facepalm

  • Calidissident||

    I gave him a response he didn't deserve. Are you going to hang it over my head forever? Would that make you happy?

    *Breaks down and runs away*

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Really, I don't like accusations of racism on either side of the immigration debate.

    And the Supreme Court says Arab and Jews aren't white, at least not for the purpose of key civil-rights legislation:

    http://www.jta.org/1987/05/20/.....ights-laws

  • Calidissident||

    I believe they are considered white by the Census though

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Why is it often assumed as a starting point for discussion that Zionism is ipso facto bad?

    The Holocaust was fucking awful, and it happened in almost every nation in continental Europe -- including a huge number of nations in which the Jews were historically protected. Even in nations where it didn't happen, like Switzerland and the US, restrictive controls on immigration (the type of controls you favor) made it impossible for Jews to help their coreligionists out of the no-win scenario of living under regimes like the Nazi government and other groups favorable to the destruction of the Jewish people. (Indeed, many such groups existed in interwar Mandatory Palestine).

    Perhaps the placement of that state could have been better, but the fact of the matter is that there were legitimate grounds for Jews to want a state of their own that they could defend and where they could freely immigrate.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    How did you infer that from my comments? Preferably the only basis for a state would be rights-based; i.e., its ability to protect the rights of the population in a certain geographical region. That is more than sufficient in most cases; nationalist Hungarian communists and Austrian fascists were not deserving of the "right" to lord over their fellows when the Austro-Hungarian monarchy was a far better guarantor of rights than what they managed historically. A state should only exist where it can do better at protecting rights than its predecessors or its current sovereign -- some nationalist movements qualify; others don't.

    Zionism is a special case because, after WWII, it was a proven fact that the other world states were not sufficient to guarantee their rights in a hostile world.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Have the Mexicans, Blacks, and Arabs you want to import in the amnesty and immigration surge shown themselves worthy of ruling over us and respecting our rights?

    Some of them certainly have. Frederick Douglass would have been a far better voter and leader than, say, Upton Sinclair. A sensible naturalization and voting system would ensure that only such individuals -- regardless of race -- would be able to make decisions on behalf of the commonweal.

    I have no problem with liberal nationalism; I consider myself a liberal nationalist. If you want to be a racist, fine. Once that interferes with the rights of someone else -- once your Czech decides to kill someone for the "right" to set up a uniquely Czech Communist hellscape -- we start having problems.

  • Irish||

    Have the Mexicans, Blacks, and Arabs you want to import in the amnesty and immigration surge shown themselves worthy of ruling over us and respecting our rights?

    Ibn Khaldun, Martin Luther King, Jr., Ibn Averroes, Frederick Douglass, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Octavio Paz, and Abu Al-Ghazali all had some interesting ideas. I'd rather have any of them involved in our political system than most of the current shitheads we've got.

    Given that white people in South Carolina gave us Lindsey Graham, I don't think race matters all that much when it comes to getting quality political figures.

  • Irish||

    Irish - You are aware that MLK believed in race preferences, slave reparations, forced integration, gun control, and socialism?

    You singled out one of the 8 guys I listed and then brought up a few things I disagree with him about.

    I'm sure I'd disagree with all of the people I listed about something. I'm not as socially conservative as Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell, for example. That doesn't change the fact that they're far superior to the current ruling class that has mostly been elected by the wonderful white people that you love so much.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Given that white people in South Carolina gave us Lindsey Graham...

    And worse, thos fucking Irish retards inflicted the Kenedys and Fauxcohauntus on us.

  • Calidissident||

    Please tell me, what is the American ethnicity?

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    South Africa shows the danger of having a small population ruling over a servile, nonvoting mass.

    Hong Kong shows the benefit of benign neglect and prosperity in keeping a mass from agitating.

    S Africa's government was extremely stable. That wasn't its problem.

    S Africa's problem was that it was not a boring (i.e., a legitimate) government -- had S Africa maintained property restrictions on voting (as was the case in other colonies) without respect to race, and had it not undertaken the insanity of its other measures to control and subdivide the races, in all likelihood there would have been no boycotts, mixed-race Africans and Asians (which were ~30% of the S African population) would have supported the government (as they did prior to Apartheid), and Africans would have been split on class grounds and there would have been a healthy integrationist faction endeavoring to situate themselves in the S African upper class.

    Any Burkean could have forseen the S African disaster based on its radical and un-conservative racial politics -- ideological governments are almost always terrible.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    You know what else Hong Kong had that America and South Africa don't?

    I have no idea. Please enlighten us. Hong Kong was effectively ruled by whites or westernized natives from its inception despite massive amounts of immigration.

    I would also cite Botswana, pre-Apartheid S Africa, and to a very limited extent the Ivory Coast as point in favor of my proposition. In the case of all of these nations as well as Hong Kong, certain anti-democratic features made them stable political environments and good places to invest in. In the case of Hong Kong and Botswana, they found a way to manage the difficulties of immigration and an uneducated, penniless population. S Africa, through a series of terrible policies, did not -- mostly because they completely closed off all avenues of success for blacks and really pissed off countries around the rest of the world that they were depending on for trade and to maintain a modern military.

    Oh, well.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Quick addendum: I do think that a state for white Africans may very well be appropriate in the near future, if things go on as they have been in S Africa. I hope that we never see something like what happened in Rhodesia -- or worse -- happen again in my lifetime, and it is possible that separate states might be an appropriate way to avoid such bloodshed and deprivation. Although I'd greatly prefer for politics and race relations in S Africa to stabilize, the fact of the matter is that things have only been as good as they are now due to the efforts of Nelson Mandela and some of the former leaders of the S African state.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    You're on crack if you think that the white American populace in either of the Americas is imperiled. As far as the Ivory Coast goes, that right there is an example of what happens when your government democratizes and becomes unstable.

    Finally, neither Botswana's wealth nor that of Hong Kong is evenly distributed -- but both are miles away better than where they started. The average wage in Botswana is now comparable to Mexico; that is to say, a landlocked nation with almost no high school graduates or wealth, and college graduates numbering in the low double digits is now nearly on the level of a middle-income country. Botswana was one of the poorest countries *in Africa*, if not the poorest. That's impressive. Lastly, Botswana's white population is much larger as a percentage of population than, say, Jews in the US and has been accommodated both by the government and population as a whole. It's hard to read "race war" into what has been one of Africa's most dramatic success stories.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Here are the average IQs that Richard Lynn gave in 2002 for different Asian countries. I put in White and Black America for comparison:

    106 South Korea
    105 Japan
    103 White America
    100 China
    96 Vietnam
    89 Cambodia
    86 Philippines
    85 Black America
    81 India

    Here are the average temperatures at their capitals in January in Celsius, using the average highs (from weather.com):

    1 C: South Korea
    1 C: China
    9 C: Japan
    19 C: Vietnam
    21 C: India
    30 C: Philippines
    31 C: Cambodia

    Roughly the same pattern. India and China do better, but that is not surprising: they are large countries with northern capitals. The Philippines is above Cambodia, but their temperatures, like their IQs, are close together.

    So we have two kinds of Asians:

    Temperate zone Asians: high IQs (100-109): China, Japan, South Korea
    Tropical zone Asians: low IQs (80-99): India, Philippines, Cambodia, Vietnam

    For comparison, whites come from the temperate zone, as do North Africans, while blacks come from the tropics.
  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Therefore when Asians come to America we expect to see the Japanese, Koreans and Chinese rise to the top, doing as well as or better than whites. But Filipinos, Indians and Cambodians should all do markedly worse, getting stuck somewhere close to the level of blacks. They just do not have what it takes to succeed in a modern, technological society. The Vietnamese, though, should rise to somewhere between blacks and whites.

    So how well do they do in America?

    Here are the personal median incomes (from the 2000 US Census):

    $26,000 Japan
    $26,000 India
    $23,640 White America
    $23,000 Philippines
    $20,000 China
    $16,300 Black America
    $16,300 South Korea
    $16,000 Vietnam
    $16,000 Cambodia

    Japan, China and Cambodia are roughly where we expect them to be, but the others are way off. Koreans should be at the top – instead they are $300 from the bottom. Indians should be at the bottom, but instead they are tied for the top.
  • Heroic Mulatto||

    You could reasonably argue that the Vietnamese and Koreans, unlike most of the Chinese, Japanese and blacks, have not been in America long enough to rise to their “natural” positions. But then what about Indians and Filipinos? They should have never passed the Chinese, not even in a hundred years, not if average IQ is what counts most in America. But they did.

    Either Lynn’s IQs are way wrong or they are not the main cause of Asian American success and failure. Or both.

    In short: American. is an idiot who doesn't understand anything about human psychometrics and is being played like a sucker by the Human Bio-Perversity flim-flam men.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    By that measure the same can be said of Japanese immigrants, who were selected among the brightest of their peers by Meiji-era functionaries to immigrate to the US -- who nonetheless perform only slightly better than their Chinese and white counterparts.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Here's another problem with American's thesis: the wealthy in India has changed dramatically since the British arrival and Christianization. Christianized Indians have a much higher levels of education, IQ, and wealth than their peers in their respective castes.

    Yet Christianity does not seem to be hereditary...

  • Irish||

    I like that American is now admitting that there are wide variances in the IQs of Asian groups, but doesn't take the next step and consider that there may also be wide IQ variances among Mexican and black populations, a fact that makes his racist beliefs completely absurd.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Computer ownership follows wealth, not the other way around.

    In India, wealth tended to follow Christianization moreso than the other way around -- outside of Goa, most of the Indian elite was either Muslim or Hindu until fairly recently.

    Poor =/= unintelligent

    Meiji government policy was to control immigration to select for poorer Japanese who were intelligent, so as to provide a "model" group of immigrants from which to potentially cultivate political support abroad as well as to remove potential agitants.

  • KPres||

    ""Christianized Indians have a much higher levels of education, IQ, and wealth than their peers in their respective castes.

    Yet Christianity does not seem to be hereditary...""

    But IQ does seem to be hereditary, up to 80%.

    Maybe the higher IQ Indians were the ones that converted to Christianity. Maybe they were the ones that were smart enough to see which way the wind was blowing.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    The Indians who immigrate to America are the pick of the litter, the really smart and wealthy ones.

    Bullshit. You obviously have never heard of the word "incentive". If they were the wealthy ones, they would have no reason to disrupt their lives and income and moves half away around the word. God, you are stupid.

    They are not at all representative of the Indian mass, which, as measured by Lynn, has a markedly lower IQ.

    You realize Lynn's data set is flawed, don't you? He has committed academic fraud again and again. And you believe it, because you're a sucker.

    Dumbass.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Educate yourself, look up the real evidence that most Indian immigrants are rich and educated, instead of using simple argument by assertion. You can have your own opinions, but you can't have your own facts.

    Did you miss all the sources I referenced, motherfucker? Or is "real evidence" only evidence that you agree with. In every single argument you haven't provided one iota of evidence to support your claims.

    By the way, how are you doing with that paper on the epigenetic markers of Human IQ, I linked for you a few days ago? Any questions or anything you're not sure about? I'll be glad to explain it to you.

    And no, the burden is not on me to show a source to prove that Indian immigrants are smart.

    HA HA HA!

    Projection, thy name is American*!

    *You aren't intelligent enough, nor well-read enough, to appreciate the reference, that was for the other folks in the thread.

  • KPres||

    "If they were the wealthy ones, they would have no reason to disrupt their lives and income and moves half away around the word. God, you are stupid."

    He said the really smart and wealthy ones. You have a point about the wealthy, but what about the high IQ/low wealth crowd? They'd have immense incentive to emigrate.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    The Indians who immigrate to America are the pick of the litter, the really smart and wealthy ones. They are not at all representative of the Indian mass, which, as measured by Lynn, has a markedly lower IQ. If only the smartest, richest Mexicans immigrated, they would have high incomes too.

    I'd like some kind of evidence to support your contention that the smartest, richest Indians are immigrating to the US. Because, it't intuitive to me that the richest people anywhere don't immigrate except in the case of extremely destructive war because they are at the top of the social structure. The people that do immigrate are generally less wealthy but ambitious and that applies equally to Mexicans and Indians.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • ||

    It would be nice if more people had at least a passing understanding of how IQ is calculated.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    By Zeus, how I wish I could see the hot tears of impotent rage flowing down American.'s chubby, neckbeared, and homely face!

    One of these days, the cognitive dissonance between his unearned sense of entitlement and superiority and reality will be too great and he will snap.

    I can't wait until he commits suicide.

  • ||

    Race (Ir)realists are so desperate and pathetic that they have to commit academic fraud!

    Well this really isn't fair to them. They're obviously of low IQ and simply don't understand the subjects they claim to be experts on. It's rather pathetic, really.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    simply don't understand the subjects they claim to be experts on

    Indeed. None of them are evolutionary geneticists, for example. (Though Lynn's estranged daddy was a professor of genetics. Maybe he has a subconscious desire to run the discipline of genetics to the ground with his pseudoscience just because daddy didn't love him?)

    But honestly, I have to ask what the fuck goes on in European universities when I see this:

    The datum that Lynn and Vanhanen used for the lowest IQ estimate, Equatorial Guinea, was the mean IQ of a group of Spanish children in a home for the developmentally disabled in Spain.[47]

    If I pulled shit even half as audacious as that in one of my papers, my review committee would have me swinging from the gallows (metaphorically!) by the end of the day.

  • ||

    In the last study with the WISC-R in Africa that Lynn (and Vanhanen) reported to substantiate their claim of low IQ among Africans, the IQ of a small sample 10–14 year-old childrenwasfoundtobe around60 (Lynn& Vanhanen, 2002). However, the use of this sample is an error. The average IQ of the people of Equatorial Guinea is based on a lengthy book chapter (Fernández-Ballesteros et al., 1997). Although this chapter reports research conducted among members of an illiterate tribe in Equatorial Guinea, the WISC-R was not administered to these Africans. The forty-eight children, to whom the WISC (not the WISC-R) was administered, were from Spain, not from Equatorial Guinea. Clearly, Lynn (and Vanhanen) made a mistake in using this sample to estimate average IQ of Africans.[5]

    5 The chapter clearly indicates that this study with 48 subjects was conducted in Spain. The mean IQ is mentioned two times, the first time as follows: “A similar design was used in our second experiment with forty-eight subjects, 10 to 14-year-olds, attending a school for handicapped children (63.025 IQ mean) ”(Fernández-Ballesteros et al., 1997, p. 253). In a later part of the chapter, the text clearly states that half of the subjects were diagnosed as having brain organic disorders. The lead author (R. Fernández-Ballesteros, personal communication, May 29th, 2007) indeed indicated to us that this sample was Spanish

    Holy shit. "[M]ade a mistake" indeed.

  • ||

    I wouldn't have believed this if I hadn't just read and copied it.

  • Irish||

    That is one of the funniest things I've ever seen.

    In a later part of the chapter, the text clearly states that half of the subjects were diagnosed as having brain organic disorders.

    Wow, that is some solid science.

  • Sidd Finch||

    simply don't understand the subjects they claim to be experts on

    Indeed. None of them are evolutionary geneticists, for example.

    LOL at this shit.

  • Calidissident||

    American just got owned

  • Sidd Finch||

    American just got owned

    American vs. Igon Value? That's like the stoppable force vs. the movable object.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    What does that have to do with the fact that in the above cite, Gladwell is merely reporting on Lynn's, et al. academic fraud?

  • Sidd Finch||

    What does Lynn's "academic fraud" have to do with evidence of genetically caused race differences in IQ? Did NE Asians start doing averagish on tests since I went to get this Guinness?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    What tests are you referring to? Ones outside Lynn's flawed data set, I hope? And again, does this "evidence of genetically caused race differences in IQ" take into account epigenetic factors?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    All right. It's 2:00 here, I'm going to bed.

  • Sidd Finch||

    All the tests.

    Um, Lysenkoism epigenetics needs to prove something before I give a shit.

  • Sidd Finch||

    HM is like whoaaa!

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    When and where did I ever state that there are no differences between groups of people?

    God forbid, I point out the latest research on epigenetic factors on phenotypic expression; so Science-ophobic of me!

  • Sidd Finch||

    It should be emphasised that this variant could not be used as any sort of test or predictor of intelligence, at either the group or individual level. The value of this finding is that it may point to specific biological processes which are worthy of further study.

    I would never ever accuse you of cherry picking evidence.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I would never ever accuse you of cherry picking evidence.

    Well, that's good, because if you did in this discussion, you'd be wrong and look like a fool.

    The paper was in reference to a debate American. and I had a few days ago concerning IQ. The point of citing the paper was that while IQ is highly inheritable (about 70 percent), its expression is also highly dependent (about 60 percent, according to researchers like Irving Gottesman) on epigenetic factors, like nutrition. American, of course, was ignorant of such environmental factors on the expression of IQ and their implications on his argument.

    So now you should understand why that boilerplate is at the end of the study; epigenetics is at the bleeding edge of current research.

    If you're interested in learning more about the subject of epigenetics, and what neuroscience says about it, as it relates to IQ and education, I recommend Eric Jensen's Teaching with Poverty in Mind:What Being Poor Does to Kids' Brains and What Schools Can Do about It. Jensen gets a little hippy-dippy at times, but overall, he presents a compelling argument.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Yes, I'm well aware of epigenetics. You can't mention intelligence without some hippy screaming about yellow mice.

    In a landmark study, he and his colleagues at the University of Virginia examined many sets of twin children, both affluent and poor. In the affluent, IQ heritability was high. But in the poor children, they found very little evidence for a genetic component to intelligence; in other words, its heritability was near zero. Thus, a poor environment can swamp genetic influences.

    This is stupid. Heritability is defined as the portion of phenotypic variance due to genotypic variance. If you increase things that contribute to phenotype, fucking obviously that ratio decreases.

    With all this hullabaloo about teaching evolution, it's ridiculous that the basic principles of the neo-Darwinian synthesis are foreign to people who really should have fully internalized them.

  • ||

    This is stupid. Heritability is defined as the portion of phenotypic variance due to genotypic variance. If you increase things that contribute to phenotype, fucking obviously that ratio decreases.

    Congratulations, you've successfully paraphrased their results! It's good to know that you think agreeing with their conclusion proves they don't know what they're talking about.

    Have a nice night, Lil' Merkin.

  • Sidd Finch||

    This has been known for over 100 years. There's absolutely nothing "landmark" about their study.

    Let me rephrase their findings. "If you feed rams all day every day, the size of their horns more closely resembles their parents than if you barely feed them at all."

    Fucking Landmark

  • Sidd Finch||

    Landmark Study: All else equal, when demand decreases prices will be lower.

    Sidd Finch: No shit. That's the first day of Econ 101.

    Darius, Super Genius: Congratulations, you've successfully paraphrased their results!

  • Sidd Finch||

    There's a point in that video where David Sloan Wilson points out that environmentalists are always trying to move the bar up.

    Here we have HM saying that heredetarians need to disprove epigentics, even though that field has offered nothing to disprove!

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Race (Ir)realists are so desperate and pathetic that they have to commit academic fraud!

    Besides that, IQ is a bullshit metric anyway.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I agree to a point, VG. Most people overestimate the accuracy and utility of the psychometric instruments we currently possess. As for the existence of a g-factor, I am currently agnostic. A singular g might exist, multiple gs might exist, or g might not exist. I think the jury is still out on that one. However, if a g-factor can be definitively proven, I believe that it will be possible to develop a psychometric that is accurate enough to measure an IQ.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    I lean towards the idea that multiple Gs exist and that what is loosely called intelligence is multiple ways. In any case, IQ mostly measures the degree of assimilation into academic culture.

    Drop a high IQ phd into the Amazon rain forest and he would quickly perish. His type of intelligence is worthless in that environment. While the natives that thrive there would score in the 70s on our IQ tests.

    The average IQ of people in the US has been increasing for many decades, (while the actual people are become ever dumber) to the point that the average person in the US would have an IQ in the low 80s by modern standards.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    to the point that the average person in the US in 1900 would have an IQ in the low 80s by modern standards.

  • PH2050||

    You're referring to the "Flynn Effect", yes?

    Wasn't Flynn himself baffled? Our predecessors of 100 years ago being idiots doesn't really fit reality.

  • KPres||

    "Drop a high IQ phd into the Amazon rain forest and he would quickly perish."

    Sure if you just drop him sight unseen. But give him a little adjustment time and he'll be ruling the natives.

  • Sevo||

    American.| 7.20.13 @ 10:11PM |#
    "People who use the Holocaust as an argument for amnesty-immigration surge are like those who use it as an argument for bombing any country that they decide is "the next Hitler.""

    Uh, stupid assertions by racists are, well, pretty much stupid assertions by racists and not worthy of more than lining the bottom of the canary cage.
    To be clear, that is a STUPID ASSERTION BUT A RACIST. That would be you, Murkin.

  • ||

    Of course you don't.

  • Sevo||

    Ya know, murkin, ya make up definitions for words you can kind of 'prove' most anything.
    Actually what you 'prove' is that your a sleazy racist who is dishonest besides.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Israel isn't the USA - the policies which might make sense for one country might not make sense for the other.

  • Irish||

    In the case of Israel, they're surrounded by nations that actually want to see them destroyed. If we were at war with Mexico I wouldn't think immigration is a good idea.

    Of course, we aren't at war with Mexico and Mexico's president has never claimed we have no right to exist or threatened to nuke us. The situations are in no way similar.

  • Hyperion||

    We aren't at war with Mexico. But we have helped turn their country into a war zone with the WOD.

    That being said, they are pretty much no threat at all to us, but we are a huge threat to them, and pretty much every other nation on earth. At least to their peasants. We tend to give their leaders big bags of money and kill their citizens with either the WOD or war on terror as the excuse.

    I guess the good news is that we are trying to make things fair by killing our own citizens, and their pets, with the new militarized police state.

  • Cytotoxic||

    we are a huge threat to them, and pretty much every other nation on earth

    Fevered delusions: not just for American!

  • Sevo||

    "Fevered delusions: not just for American!"

    OK, I'll go for a bit of hyperbole, but look at it this way:
    It is 2013. An American citizen has asked for political asylum in Russia to avoid prosecution but the US federal government, and that citizen is seen as a hero by something like 50% of the US population.
    What the US was, prior to, oh, Vietnam, is not what it is.

  • Sevo||

    "like THEY favor"

    That brush you've got in your hand? It's several miles too wide.

  • Irish||

    That article you link to is from the hyper reputable World Net Daily and it's 11 years old. It's so old that the link to the poll they cite no longer exists.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Who are "the Mexicans", anyways?

    The PRI-dominated Mexican government which has maintained a peaceful border with the US for ~80 years?

    The Mexicans who have populated parts of the US since before the English landed on Plymouth, and who have been active participants in our republic after that point as well? "New Mexico" and "El Paso" didn't get their names because they were filled with whites, after all. (For that matter, the first Texan VP -- and author of the Texan Constitution -- was a Mexican.)

    Mexicans have been an integral part of US history since the 19th century and our westward expansion, and have been active participants in that expansion as often as not.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Yes, and many Palestinians have been integrated into Israel -- Israeli Arabs, Bedouins, and the Druze are all an integral part of the Jewish state, and will likely continue being so (they are ~1/5th of the population). They should be dealt with in a different manner from the Palestinians living in the Palestinian Territories.

  • Irish||

    You regularly post links to hufpo and slate and I never question their validity. Seriously you think they just made up that poll out of thin air?

    When do I post links to HuffPo or Slate, except to mock them?

    No, I don't think they made the poll up out of thin air. That doesn't change the fact that it's 11 years old, and therefore you can't assume a poll from over a decade ago has any validity now.

    Tell me, what was the approval rating of the Iraq War in 2003? What is it today? That should tell you why a decade old poll is essentially worthless.

  • Calidissident||

    And what are the numbers for the same question for Mexican-Americans? Or do you pretend they don't exist, because "they're not real 'muricans!"

  • Anonymous Coward||

    It's not like Mexicans have an irredentist claim to a part of our country or anything.

    Then the Messicans sound as though they want to challenge the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. I respond that if they want the land back, repay the U.S. the $15 million (adjusted to $300 million) price for Alta California, Nuevo Mexico, and Texas. Then we'll be all settled up.

  • ||

    It's not to agree with American, but if the libertarian position on immigration is borne from the natural rights argument that freedom of mobility is a human right (which is the argument I always hear in favor of it here in the US), then infringing on it because of geo-political consequences is wrong. Period. You're not doing anything different than those who argue that immigration should be restricted in the US due to the economic consequences. You either have a right to free movement or you don't.

  • Calidissident||

    That's true for natural rights libertarians, but not all libertarians believe in natural rights (though most do in some form), and of course if we're talking the general population, that's a completely different story

  • ||

    Of course. The commentariat seems to skew deontological though.

  • Calidissident||

    Keep in mind though that that's not true for the person who they were arguing against

  • ||

    All I'm saying is that the suggestion that immigration controls are an appropriate policy would normally be met with a thunderous chorus of "WHY DO YOU HATE TEH BROWN PEOPLE?!?!?!?!", with all arguments cast aside as nothing more than a thin veneer for racism. I'm surprised to see an argument from practicality taken seriously in the case of Israel.

  • Irish||

    I'm surprised to see an argument from practicality taken seriously in the case of Israel.

    I'm not as consistent as some libertarians. I think there are clearly instances where rights have to be infringed in order to survive. During war time, when you face a legitimate existential threat, sometimes rights have to be impeded in order for the people to survive.

    In the case of Israel, they could literally be wiped off the Earth if they allowed the sort of immigration that I'd like to have for America.

    That might mean I fail the purity test, but survival must come before anything else. Rights are of very little value if everyone is dead.

  • ||

    I understand that argument, and I'm not entirely unsympathetic to it. And it may be that Israel is a unique case. I'm just surprised it wasn't met with a lot of hostility, because the same angle is played by American immigration restrictionists and is never treated as being worth serious discussion. Shit, I've had my ass roasted on here before for suggesting it's a legitimate function of government to screen for communicable disease among migrants.

  • Sevo||

    PM| 7.20.13 @ 11:07PM |#
    "It's not to agree with American, but if the libertarian position on immigration is borne from the natural rights...."

    Not sure how I see how this relates to Murkin's garbage. Hint?

  • ||

    Not sure how I see how this relates to Murkin's garbage. Hint?

    Only that if immigration is a natural right, restrictions in one country are no more justifiable than another. Hence the "It's not to agree with American..." I just didn't want anybody to think I was defending him by pointing out the inconsistency.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Rights do not mean 'constant'. Dangerously infectious people can be quarantined. Countries that defend themselves should not allow immigration from another. Governments have an obligation to take those actions to defend their citizens' rights. The blame goes to the initiator of force (Palestine or M. tuberculosis).

  • ||

    Like I said, I'm not unsympathetic to the argument that the right of movement is not absolute (I've frequently made the argument as it regards terrorists and communicable disease), it just doesn't seem like it's a lot more persuasive vis-a-vis, say, workaday Palestinians who want to work in Israel vs workaday Mexicans who want to work in America, except that I guess the libertarian stereotype of Joolio the ass-busting pool boy is more comforting than Achmed the bricklayer who may be wearing a suicide vest.

  • Sevo||

    American.| 7.20.13 @ 9:45PM |#
    "What word did I make up? Are you talking about "cosmotarianism?"
    Yes, yes I am.

    "Cosmotarianism can be most accurately described as what you guys believe."
    So you admit making it up and that sort of leaves you as the butt of your own joke.
    Way to GO, murkin!

  • Sevo||

    American.| 7.20.13 @ 10:21PM |#
    "I didn't make up the word, and I'm far from the only person to use it."

    So you found someone else as stupid and you, and I'm supposed to find that valuable?
    Get lost, asshole.

  • Rich||

    Filner to deliver keynote address at benefit for sexual assault victims

    You can't fool *me*, Michael. That's from The Onion.

  • Calidissident||

    Well he does have first hand experience with sexual assault victims ...

  • William of Purple||

    Way to let American shit all over this thread.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Eh, the topic of discussion is mildly interesting rather than the usual shit about phrenology and such.

    It's an open question as to which forms of government preserve liberty best. If you want to argue that states based on ethnicity are best, then have at it (though personally I'm not convinced outside of certain corner cases like Zionism).

  • ||

    Most of Europe is actually very tribal that way as well. America is relatively unique as a proposition nation.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    The success of the US over places like Europe is one reason that I prefer propositional republics to pretty much anything else out there ATM.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    I would have to disagree. No nation is 100% the one or the other; arguably ethnostates like France have propositional characteristics to them and the US obviously has certain aspects of ethnicity tied into their conceptions of liberty, particularly from the Anglo tradition and drawing from some very ideological and idealized imagery from the Roman Republic and such.

    Besides, Spain and Latin America are all European or European colonized states; I don't see how that makes a difference in the context of what bothers most immigration restrictionists. Hell, if anything most "race realists" prefer immigration from non-European Asiatic nations.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Tough shit you don't get to decide and you don't have a right to a JC-America. By the way secularism is taking over IN SPITE of immigration.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Most nations in Africa were only peripherally colonized; generally speaking very few were acculturated to the degree of, say, India or Indonesia. Certainly none of those nations experienced the enormous amounts of European immigration that Latin America has. It's simply misleading to characterize the US as "Western" and Latin America as not; in all meaningful senses every part of Latin America is highly Europeanized and very little of their culture derives from Mesoamerica, outside of some parts of the Yucatan and some uncivilized tribes.

    With that in mind, I guess we should expect you to bring the cake to the next meeting of La Raza...

  • VG Zaytsev||

    How many modern multi-ethnic states that have created their own borders* can you name?

    There are very few and none anywhere close to America's scale.

    *As opposed to having legacy borders created by European colonial powers or multinational empires.

  • ||

    I'd way rather share a country with people who all agree on some basic first principles than an entire country full of assholes who think entirely differently than I do but share my race or ethnicity. American is a case in point.

  • AlmightyJB||

    OT: Another wise Latino woman.

    http://www.humanevents.com/201.....ankruptcy/

  • William of Purple||

    Glen Perkins teaches the Indians a lesson


    Glen Perkins ‏@glen_perkins
    It's Glen RT @Indians: #MNTwins and Scott Perkins hold on for a 3-2 win for the second straight night.
  • Generic Stranger||

    So he massacred them and sent them to the reservation?

  • William of Purple||

    basically.

  • JeremyR||

    I don't think journalists ever were impartial. They always reported the news according to their biases - look at all the apologists for communism in the press, for instance. Walter Duranty for instance.

    Journalists have always been political, since the first days of journalism. Maybe briefly it seemed like they were unbiased, the days of Walter Cronkite and such but only if you were very naive. They were just more subtle about it.

    Now that subtlety is gone

  • Sevo||

    "Maybe briefly it seemed like they were unbiased, the days of Walter Cronkite and such but only if you were very naive. "

    There were three networks; the were closely monitored but the government. Chronkite did nothing to overturn the apple cart and he was everybody's (lying) grandad.
    In case it's not clear, I despised the asshole.

  • A Serious Man||

    What are your thoughts about Edward R. Murrow?

  • StinkEye||

    "..Now that subtlety is gone.."

    As well as the last shred of their collective dignity...

  • Fluffy||

    Ah, but the context here is generally discussions of abstract political philosophy. Liberal arts grads, having learned how to think, are better suited to these matters. Engineers and computer scientists seem to be able to get through schooling without having to learn how to think critically about complex issues involving human beings.

    This is what Peter Keating would say to Howard Roark, if they ever sat down to have a conversation on this topic.

    Proving once again that if you just live long enough, every Ayn Rand caricature is proven to be a flawless real life characterization.

    Always remember, gentlemen, that this is the real class struggle, and always has been. There are people who deal directly with the world - and there are people who can't do that, and focus their energy on relationships instead. And the guilty conscience of the latter group leads them to postulate (more and more desperately and aggressively as time marches on) that what they do is "real" knowledge, and what the group they live on does is mean, unsophisticated, simplistic, ill-bred. It's all right there, if you just want to look for it.

  • Tony||

    Being rational isn't that difficult, but for some reason seems to be for many people, even well educated people. Proportion your belief to evidence. Be willing to discard beliefs that don't measure up. Libertarians universally struggle with this very simple concept because they care more about their dogma than they do about how the world actually works. Nothing you believe with respect to economic policy works, has worked, or can work. But I suppose it's not fair. This is a self-selected group. The truest of the believers.

  • RightNut||

    Tony
    You know what really stifled human innovation? The Black Death. You know what would have prevented the Black Death? Big government building a sanitation infrastructure or funding research and education about sanitation.

    Yup, totally willing to discard beliefs that don't measure up, eh tony?

  • Fluffy||

    You seem to have mistaken me for a utilitarian.

    I happen to believe that social systems marked by liberty will attain good statistical outcomes, but that's entirely incidental.

    I would still favor liberty if it left you naked and starving in the dirt.

    What is the purpose of "economic policy", Tony? You have to answer that question first, before any other question can reasonably be discussed.

    You should be aware by now that I have nothing but contempt for your Rawlsian gambits. I've never communicated anything to you that would suggest otherwise.

  • triclops||

    Not to be a pedant, but isn't anyone who isn't omniscient biased? The whole argument about journalists trying to be, or at least trying to be seen as being unbiased strikes me as farcial. Like saying,"Yes, I may be biased, but those others are biased-biased!"

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