A.M. Links: White House and House Republicans Commit To Talk About Shutdown and Debt Ceiling, Obama Administration a Threat to Press Freedom, Facebook Kills Privacy Setting

  • Credit: White HouseCredit: White HouseThe White House and House Republicans have committed to talking about ways to avoid a default on U.S. debt, the first concrete sign of a potential compromise since the government shut down 11 days ago. Russia's Finance Minister claims that U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke assured officials of other G20 economies that the standoff would end before October 17.
  • The Committee to Protect Journalists believes the Obama administration's aggressive prosecution of leaks and its efforts to control information are becoming a threat to press freedom and democracy. Journalists everywhere feel edgy and important.
  • President Obama yesterday signed into law a resolution providing continuing appropriations for death gratuities and survivor benefits for survivors of deceased military service members.
  • Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, known for his deep knowledge of U.S. defense spending and the defense industry, said on Thursday he was stepping down in December after four years in top Pentagon jobs.
  • Facebook is eliminating a privacy setting that allowed members to prevent themselves from appearing in search results. OMG WUT?!
  • The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday. A shirtless Russian President Vladimir Putin, who was also nominated, rode off into the sunset shaking his fist.

Follow Reason and Reason 24/7 on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.  You can also get the top stories mailed to you—sign up here. Have a news tip? Send it to us!

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.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ...U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke assured officials of other G20 economies that the standoff would end before October 17.

    So we only fearmonger on the domestic front.

  • Lord Humungus||

  • Bee Tagger||

    Are they also followers of FLOTUS on twitter?

  • gaijin||

    Sweeet! at that rate only 427K more weeks until all 30 million of those without insurance get what they have coming to them!

  • Ted S.||

    Er, I think you're off by a factor of several hundred.

  • Zeb||

    Yeah, it's only 588 weeks.

  • gaijin||

    d'oh! math before coffee.

  • Rich||

    Still, closer than the administration's estimate.

  • Snark Plissken||

    Facebook is eliminating a privacy setting that allowed members to prevent themselves from appearing in search results. OMG WUT?!

    Search results are public resource.

  • Too_Big_to_Fail||

    I work under the assumption that whatever I post anywhere online will be seen by my mother, boss, four priests and Zod.

    Love ya, mom!

  • UnCivilServant||

    Why does Zod care?

  • Stormy Dragon||

    Zod cares about all of his pitiful subjects, as long as they continue to kneel before him.

  • Swiss Servator, Kneel to Zug!||

    Zod? I'm doin' it wrong.

  • CE||

    As long as they don't see my browsing history!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ...the Obama administration's aggressive prosecution of leaks and its efforts to control information are becoming a threat to press freedom and democracy.

    Almost as much a threat as rampant Obama leg-humping by journalists.

  • AlexInCT||

    ^^^THIS^^^

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    President Obama yesterday signed into law a resolution providing continuing appropriations for death gratuities and survivor benefits for survivors of deceased military service members.

    So I guess the piecemeal solution is not off the table.

  • Mike M.||

    And for good measure he even sent that buffoon Chuck Bagel to Dover AFB for a "pay homage to the dead troops" photo op.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Isn't this the second one? I thought one went through to pay active-duty military personnel as well.

    No one calling out the president and Senate on this? It's piecemeal and it's negotiating. So they're lying even about that.

  • AlexInCT||

    "So they're lying even about that."

    When don't they? The days when I, in good faith assumed they were telling the truth till proven otherwise, ended just about as soon as Obama was crowned in that fake pantheon they build him after the 2008 election ProL.

  • Pro Libertate||

    It's not the lying. I've come to expect that sort of thing from government-branded government. It's people accepting it, no matter how blatant it is. Unreal. Really, it's pathological on the receiving end as much as it is on the lying end.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    No fair - now they can't use the "Republican nihilists hate dead soldiers meme!"

    Just like they lost the "Republicans hate cancer-stricken children seeking NIH treatment" meme and the "Republicans want to close down the DC government" meme.

    They've simply pivoted effortlessly to the "OMG those wicked Republicans are trying to make piecemeal solutions" meme.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    SHUT THE FUCK UP DONNY!

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Ohhh kayyy...thank your for that.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    a missed Lebowski reference...what has this blog come to?

  • Swiss Servator, Kneel to Zug!||

    It makes me mad enough to micturate on a carpet!

  • Cliché Bandit||

    Dude, it ties the room together.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Facebook is eliminating a privacy setting that allowed members to prevent themselves from appearing in search results. OMG WUT?!

    Don't like it? Don't use Facebook. Easy-Peasy.

  • robc||

    That is reason #5347 to not use Facebook.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I don't think I really understand why that's a reason.

  • Zeb||

    The main reason I don't use facebook is because I don't want to hate all of my real-life friends. I do maintain a fake account in case there is something I want to look at.

  • robc||

    I only have one who annoys me at that level and I only see him once a year.

    He is the reason I didnt use facebook between winter of 2012 and Jan 21, 2013.

  • AlexInCT||

    Santa Claus?

  • AlexInCT||

    Avoid social media: all it is is a way for people you never want to speak to to find you and for government to abuse you.

  • Live Free or Diet||

    Don't like it? Don't use Facebook. Easy-Peasy

    That was my solution.

  • CE||

    Never signed up for Facebook, never will.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Boat Full of ‘Lower Grade’ Weed Crashes Into Nude Beach

    The Inquisitr reports that the boat transporting thousands of pounds of marijuana from Mexico accidentally landed on the beach in Santa Cruz. The crew unloaded much of the cargo before disappearing from the scene. But to the local cops, who are accustomed to the high-potency pot peddled in southern California, the Mexican import was seriously lacking.

    “This is lower grade marijuana than we see in Santa Cruz,” a sheriff’s deputy said.
  • gaijin||

    This is lower grade marijuana than we see in Santa Cruz

    how can they tell?

  • KPres||

    They smoked some of it.

  • Zeb||

    If they have any experience at all with good weed, it's pretty easy to tell even if they aren't sampling. But they probably all have med pot cards anyway.

  • Ska||

    Brownish, no crystals, no orange fibers...

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    "We went down to the station house to do some quality testing. It was disappointing - we're posting a negative Yelp review."

  • ||

    Why in the world would anyone import ditchweed to California? The nude beach part I understand.

    There is some stunningly good product grown amidst the vineyards of the Santa Cruz Mountains.

  • Dead or In Jail||

    People still grow outdoors?

    I thought everyone just ran up huge electricity bills with their basement-grows.

  • ||

    In California? Why would you waste electricity that way?

  • ||

    the males of a species of marsupials will compete desperately for the attention of the females, mate frantically with them, and get so stressed out by the experience that they will die

    There is also discussion of the great fallacy of monkey sex studies

    More here

  • Brett L||

    There is also discussion of the great fallacy of monkey sex studies

    The monkeys were not unresponsive?

  • SugarFree||

    The low quality of monkey porn available skewed the results.

  • gaijin||

    The low quality of monkey porn available skewed the results.

    Things just haven't been the same since the condom laws have they?

  • SugarFree||

    And getting a condom on a monkey is no walk in the park, either. Even if you take them for a walk in the park beforehand.

  • Brett L||

    We tried demonstrating on a banana, but the monkeys just ate the condom and the banana.

  • SugarFree||

    +1 reservoir tip

  • PBR Streetgang||

    No ape-rape

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    This reminds me of high school.

  • DontShootMe||

    The monkeys playing the part of fellow students? Or teachers?

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    Being stressed out over bullshit with the opposite sex.

  • edcoast||

    I thought maybe it was the "mate frantically" part.

  • SugarFree||

    The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday.

    I give them two years before they start importing chemical weapons into Syria and bombing Libya.

  • Bee Tagger||

    The Committee to Protect Journalists believes the Obama administration's aggressive prosecution of leaks and its efforts to control information are becoming a threat to press freedom and democracy.

    "becoming???"

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Becoming in the same way that the girl you thought was hot at 2AM in the bar is becoming not so hot after the beer goggles start coming off.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The White House and House Republicans have committed to talking about ways to avoid a default on U.S. debt...

    Ways that don't include not issuing new debt, I assume.

  • Rich||

    WH: So, do you guys have any ideas about ways to avoid a default?

    House Repubs: Nope. You?

    WH: Nope. Well, time for lunch!

  • R C Dean||

    So, do you guys have any ideas about ways to avoid a default?

    Sure, no sweat. Just keep paying the debt service. No default. Geez, doesn't anybody here know how to play this game?

  • CE||

    Yeah, stop spending so much.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    Stop spending so much.

  • Ted S.||

    "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I'll save them the trouble of meeting:

    Pay it out of the incoming revenue, which is more than enough. "Problem" solved.

  • Zeb||

    People have really bought into the idea that reaching the debt limit equals default. I was listening to the radio last night and they had someone on who explained that there would be enough revenues coming in to service the debt, so default isn't really an immediate threat. And then they went on talking about it as if debt limit is automatic default.

  • Pro Libertate||

    There's actually no chance of default unless the government actually intends to default. The revenues are more than adequate to cover the amounts needed to service the debt. What could happen, though, is that other things don't get funded. Not a default.

    Amazing that this huge lie--and it's a titanic one--just gets repeated by both parties and the media.

  • JW||

    What could happen, though, is that other things don't get funded. Not a default.

    But, but, we HAVE to fund those things! Do you seriously expect us to knock a trillion dollars off the budget and go back to the dark days of 2007?

  • Rasilio||

    Well technically we would be defaulting on *SOMETHING* since we would have to cut total expenditures by around 40%.

    The only way to do that would be to default on some contracts, fortunately defaulting on those contracts would be nowhere near as problematic for the wider economy as defaulting on the debt

  • Zeb||

    Technically, I suppose. But even with contracts it's really not the same thing. The government can, quite appropriately, unilaterally dissolve its contracts. A legislature can't bind future legislatures. But the constitution does require that actual debts be paid.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Most federal spending is not in the form of legally binding contracts.

  • KDN||

    Entitlements are mandatory for a reason. Not even rethuglican teahadists are willing to force seniors and children to starve and die in the streets. Yet.

  • R C Dean||

    Entitlements are not "mandatory". Congress could repeal all entitlement programs this afternoon without breaking any laws or defaulting on any obligation.

  • R C Dean||

    Well technically we would be defaulting on *SOMETHING*

    No, technically, we wouldn't. Technically, the only thing the government CAN default on is the debt. Not funding a program is not a default (technically!)of any kind.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Right. I mean, that's been one of the concerns about Social Security, that the situation would get so out of hand that the government would unilaterally cut or even kill the program.

    Ditto state pension funds, though that may not be as clear on a state-by-state basis (state constitutions often acting as super-legislation).

  • CE||

    40%? The FedGov isn't borrowing that much. It's more like 20-25%, which would be a pretty painless cut.

  • CE||

    I looked it up on whitehouse dot gov slash omb.

    FY2014 spending is projected at 3.78 trillion. FY2014 revenues are projected at 3.03 trillion. So a 19.8 percent cut would do it, and not require any change in the debt ceiling law.

  • ||

    Is it IKEA furniture or a metal band?

    http://ikeaordeath.com/

  • Ted S.||

    Somebody posted that link last night, and as I said then, how about neither?

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    Can it be both?

  • Lord Humungus||

    Man Purse. Man Purse. MAN PURSE!

    Don’t laugh at the “man purse”—it’s now a $9 billion luxury business

    Once a source of mockery, over the past five years men’s handbags have seen sales grow at nearly twice the rate of the overall luxury industry. The man-bag market in Asia has doubled since 2008, with murses in the Middle East growing by two-thirds over the same period. The global market for men’s luxury bags will reach just under $9 billion this year, according to Euromonitor.
  • SugarFree||

    You've got to have somewhere to keep your manpons.

  • Live Free or Diet||

    You've got to have somewhere to keep your manpons.

    And your manty wipes.

  • Ted S.||

    Fools and their money are soon parted.

  • Bam!||

    How'd fools get $9 billion?

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    There are a lot of fools.

  • Brett L||

    $2/male on Earth isn't exactly a huge expenditure.

  • Ted S.||

    Nine million fools each willing to part with $1K?

    There are a lot of women who are willing to spend ridiculous sums on handbags. Accessorization and all that nonsense.

  • Bam!||

    But we know where foolish women get their money from: Their passive husbands.

  • Ted S.||

    The above should be read as saying that there are a lot of female fools as well, not just beta-male fools.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Fools and their money are soon parted.

    Only if the strap breaks.

  • Brett L||

    Have you never bought cheap Asian goods?

  • UnCivilServant||

    No, they all ended up costing a lot more than advertized.

  • Lady Bertrum||

    What qualifies as a man-purse? I know plenty of guys who carry backpacks, gym bags or messenger type bags. If you use a laptop or ipad for work you need something to carry it in. Those tiny swimmer bags (look like very small backpacks) are really popular in my area.

  • Bam!||

    Get a briefcase, Nancy-boy.

  • Lady Bertrum||

    "Briefcase" is for the 2%. Alice told me so.

  • Lord Humungus||

    WITH CAPS!

  • Live Free or Diet||

    What qualifies as a man-purse? I know plenty of guys who carry backpacks, gym bags or messenger type bags.

    I have a nice UHMWPE briefcase/laptop bag for work, and also a three day pack made out of the same stuff that I use when I travel or camp.

  • Aloysious||

    Let's make it all math-y.

    Foolz + moneyz = parted.

  • Zeb||

    "Man purse"

    Didn't that used to be called a brief case? Or perhaps an attache (with an accent) case?

  • CE||

    A brief case has a handle. A man purse has a should strap. Of course, so does a laptop bag, but that's clearly a one-purpose bag.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    "It's a satchel!"

  • UnCivilServant||

    It's a satchelcharge


    We're gonna do some demolitions.

  • lafe.long||

    "It's a satchel!"

    It's a Huntz Hall.

    Trivia: "In 1948, Hall was arrested for possession of marijuana, but his 1949 trial resulted in a hung jury."

  • Stormy Dragon||

  • Lady Bertrum||

    Man purse masquerading as briefcase for those insecure in their masculinity (plausible deniability). "Fuck, you. It's a briefcase, dumbass!"

    Next question: Muscle-T or manzier?

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Look, just put a large graphic of a skull and crossbones on the purse, with the skull wearing a pirate bandana.

  • Lady Bertrum||

    Or some boobies. A picture of a sexy girl with large boobies - same effect.

  • db||

    I say make it look like a big nutsack. Sorta like truknutz but bigger and slung over your shoulder.

  • Ted S.||

    Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, known for his deep knowledge of U.S. defense spending and the defense industry, said on Thursday he was stepping down in December after four years in top Pentagon jobs.

    He's making far more money from Two and a Half Men anyway.

  • DJF||

    “”””known for his deep knowledge of U.S. defense spending”””’

    So he is the one who has been flushing the money down the toilet.

  • Swiss Servator, Kneel to Zug!||

    That is too slow - think "bonfire".

  • Brett L||

    We're gonna need a bunch of frontloaders to shovel the money in fast enough.

  • Swiss Servator, Kneel to Zug!||

    Call the ACoE!

  • Brett L||

    Why, do you want a project screwed up, overbudget and behind?

  • Cdr Lytton||

    The Corps _is_ excellent at disposing of money.

  • Swiss Servator, Kneel to Zug!||

    Exactly!

  • Lord Humungus||

    some hometown news:

    Michigan janitor offers students $1 to beat up 4th-grader

    An official says a janitor contracted to work at a western Michigan school has been fired after she offered two students $1 to rough up a fellow fourth-grader who made disparaging remarks about her.

    Grand Rapids Public Schools spokesman John Helmholdt says the janitor was fired Monday after a bystander reported the offer.
  • Rich||

    A *dollar*?!

    Does she think fourth-graders are stupid?

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    It's a public school, so...

  • gaijin||

    An official says a janitor contracted...after she offered two students $1

    Another gender stereotype swept away.

  • Swiss Servator, Kneel to Zug!||

    *narrows gaze*

    Don't think I didn't see what you did there...

  • KPres||

    Hiring children as hit-men? Get this man a monocle!

  • Lord Humungus||

    Kidnapped Libyan prime minister pays the price for an Obama leak

    Leaks have consequences. Just ask Libyan Prime Minister Ali Zeidan, who was kidnapped in retaliation for allowing the United States to carry out a special operations raid in Tripoli that captured a senior al-Qaeda leader, Nazih Abdul-Hamed al-Ruqai, known as Abu Anas al-Libi.

    How did the kidnappers know that the prime minister had approved the raid? After all, his government denied any prior knowledge of the U.S. action. Simple: The Obama administration told them. A front-page story in the New York Times, “U.S. Officials Say Libya Approved Commando Raids,” reported that “After months of lobbying by American officials, the Libyans consented ‘some time ago’ — weeks or perhaps even months — to the United States operations.”
  • Mike M.||

    Whoopsy-daisy! It's going to be a little embarrassing for the administration if poor Zeidan ends up with his decapitated head placed backwards on his neck.

    When you make a deal with the devil, there's always hell to pay.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Some price to pay for political cover.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    "What's wrong, Barry, you never seen a head on a tortoise before?"

  • Ted S.||

    Obama can point to this and say that Snowden's leaks are going to kill people too. You just wait and see. :-(

  • KPres||

    Never talk to the world police.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    Is my country being detained?

    My country does not consent to searches.

  • robc||

    Walt Whitman's Song of Myself is the worst haiku ever written.

  • ||

    Vatican Misspells 'Jesus' on Papal Medals

    more

  • Cascadian Ephor Xenocles||

    Wouldn't spelling it with a J, as the article suggests, also be a misspelling in Latin?

    I bet that's what happened, actually. Probably typed Iesus but in a sans-serif font so the I looked like a lowercase L.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Do they use the old Latin alphabet? Or the new one? I mean, there is a "J" sound in Latin.

  • Cascadian Ephor Xenocles||

    I honestly don't know. Wiki suggests it would be spelled with an I in Latin.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Look, I want an answer, not a wiki possibility. Can some Catholic here e-mail the pope, please?

  • Brett L||

    Iesu(or Iesus) Narzarenus Rex Iudeorum.

  • Brett L||

    In the Greek of the original Bible Iesus, but the actual inscription (in Latin) was probably Iesu.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I know it was. I mean now. Does the Catholic church right now use the old Latin alphabet/spelling conventions or the new one?

  • Swiss Servator, Kneel to Zug!||

    I think INRI meant "Initiate Nail Removal Immediately"....or was it "I Need Rapid Intervention"?

  • Pro Libertate||

    Really, is this that hard of a question? "I" was used for "J" sounds. So it was Gaius Iulius Caesar. Actually, it was GAIVS IVLIVS CÆSAR.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Would it be the same now? Where's the Pope on this?

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    The article suggests that these could become "valuable collectors' items." Only four were sold - even if we add to that the recalled medals which are retained by sticky-fingered officials you'll still have a valuable item.

    It's still better than the Anglican Adulterous Bible:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_Bible

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    But the inscription is good if spelled properly - translated it means "Jesus therefore sees the tax collector, and since he sees by having mercy and by choosing, he says to him, follow me."

    This is the one clear example in the Bible where someone permanently gives up his career at the moment he decides to follow Jesus.

  • Swiss Servator, Kneel to Zug!||

    I thought a fisherman or two did as well...

  • gaijin||

    Ten people who knew how to rock a monocle (They mostly seem to be fictional characters or dead people. Like true libertarians?)

    Link to gallery Slideshow/source warning for all you haters.

  • ||

    here's another

    Also the late astronomer Sir Patrick Moore

  • ||

    and finally, monocles in film

  • gaijin||

    Excellent! Though Sir Patrick reminds me of Mr Magoo ;)

  • SweatingGin||

    Had to check to see if I showed up. I didn't.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Thank you for the warning. Will not be clicking.

  • Lord Humungus||

    George Will: When liberals became scolds

    The bullets of Nov. 22, 1963, altered the nation’s trajectory less by killing a president than by giving birth to a destructive narrative about America. Fittingly, the narrative was most injurious to the narrators. Their recasting of the tragedy in order to validate their curdled conception of the nation marked a ruinous turn for liberalism, beginning its decline from political dominance.

    Punitive liberalism preached the necessity of national repentance for a history of crimes and misdeeds that had produced a present so poisonous that it murdered a president. To be a liberal would mean being a scold. Liberalism would become the doctrine of grievance groups owed redress for cumulative inherited injuries inflicted by the nation’s tawdry history, toxic present and ominous future.
  • Ted S.||

    The bullets of Nov. 22, 1963,

    Is anybody else already sick of the 50th anniversary of Kennedy shit?

  • Restoras||

    Is anybody else already sick of the 50th anniversary of Kennedy shit?

    I like this better and yes.

  • robc||

    I hadnt heard anything about it, didnt even realize the anniversary was upcoming.

    And still, yes.

  • Cdr Lytton||

    Yes. Especially since it's overshadowing the 50th anniversary of Doctor Who (Nov. 23).

    Two more stories (Enemy of the World and The Web of Fear) have been found. Yay!

  • Reverend Mayhem||

    Punitive liberalism preached the necessity of national repentance for a history of crimes and misdeeds that had produced a present so poisonous that it murdered a president.

    That's an awful lot of alliteration, Jorge...

  • Lord Humungus||

    POWNED!

  • tarran||

    As you read the essay, imagine James Woods is reading it...

  • Zeb||

    I think Will hits the nail on the head with that. People are so attached to the evil right wing hating Kennedy narrative. Now I'm sure there were plenty of nasty right wingers who hated Kennedy. But the guy who shot him was a communist. If you're going to go all conspiracy theory, something involving Cuba seems a lot more likely.
    But I really don't care. I'm going to imagine that it happened just like in Illuminatus!.

  • Gray Ghost||

    My favorite dark horse CT for who could have wanted Kennedy dead is Madame Nhu. Hard to find a person with a better, recent motive for wanting JFK dead. I just don't think she had the connections to pull it off though. Castro getting tired of the poisoned wetsuit/exploding cigar shenanigans is another interesting one too.

  • ||

    I prefer the Red Dwarf theory

  • Zeb||

    That was a good one. I need to watch Red Dwarf again.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Ehh, I think Will's being a little overwrought here. As bad as the assassination of the Kennedys in the 60s were, their post hoc beatification is a far more obnoxious feature of those events.

    The fact is that progressivism has ALWAYS been about punitive retribution since Marx first puked out the idea of "class conflict." Rather than examine the effects of scale on communities, they lash out at the populist scapegoat of the month and promote wealth redistribution as a social panacea.

    At heart, progs are thieves, using the mechanisms of government and populist mobs to rob from people because they don't have the stones to do it themselves. They weren't upset about TARP, for instance, because we bailed out undeserving institutions that got themselves in hot water, they're mad because banks and crony capitalists will always be more efficient about stealing than they ever will.

  • SugarFree||

  • Brett L||

    I thought Mexicans were allowed. Is that just a Faux News talking point.

  • Rich||

    Don't try giving birth on the *hite House* lawn, lady!

  • Rich||

    Of course you know I meant *Shite House*.

  • Brett L||

    The Spite House lawn?

  • Warty||

    Night House, wooo-ooooooah
    Fighter of the Day House, wooo-ooooooah
    It's a master of karate
    And friendship for everyone

  • gaijin||

    If only she'd had access to free birth control.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    SunTrust Banks announced Thursday that it will pay nearly $1.2 billion in a series of agreements with government agencies and Fannie Mae over mortgage issues.

    The deals relate to alleged violations in the firm's loan origination, servicing and foreclosure practices, similar to agreements struck by a number of other large banks in the past few years.

    http://money.cnn.com/2013/10/1.....ahoo_quote

  • Lord Humungus||

    Grand Theft Auto V: A Formation in Nihilism

    Although GTA-V might be dismissed as only a video game, its implicit treatment of moral choices is relativistic and troubling precisely because it is so much more than a game, as most critics attest with their perfect praise. And unlike many other video games which also allow a player to engage in virtual killing and theft, GTA actually aspires to raise questions about morals and choice. This becomes really problematic when the context for exploring these questions is built up around the illusion of my freedom; a world where my will is complete and autonomous. Law is viewed as a constraint on my freedom. In GTA, each choice I make is independent and complete in itself: It is not affected by previous choices, and has no effect on any subsequent choices. This opportunity to “choose between good and evil,” even in a simulated environment, is easily mistaken for freedom, but in fact it is a parody of what freedom really is.
  • Lord Humungus||

    cont:

    True freedom, by contrast, consists not in being able to do whatever one pleases without judgment or consequence, but in being free to choose the good. Dominican professor of moral theology Servais Pinckaers describes this “freedom for excellence” in his 1995 book The Sources of Christian Ethics:

    The greatest freedom is God’s. He, being impeccable, is fully creative; his power has no interior limitations. The nearer man approaches to God through the moral progress that weakens his inclination to sin, the more he grows in full freedom, sharing in the divine freedom itself.

    According to Father Pinckaers, freedom is a process that involves growing in virtue, where each decision is connected with others, and where the law is important because it helps us internalize right and wrong. Choosing to sin, in this view, actually diminishes freedom because it draws us away from the source of freedom.
  • lafe.long||

    True freedom, by contrast, consists not in being able to do whatever one pleases without judgment or consequence, but in being free to choose the good.

    Horse shit.

  • gaijin||

    Exactly. "good" as defined by whom?

  • WTF||

    You're not free unless you're free to be wrong.

  • Cascadian Ephor Xenocles||

    You are free to choose between good and an evening with the pain monster.

  • R C Dean||

    being free to choose the good.

    Of course, you aren't free to choose the good unless you are equally free to choose the bad.

    You aren't free unless you are free to be wrong.

  • KPres||

    "True freedom, by contrast, consists not in being able to do whatever one pleases without judgment or consequence, but in being free to choose the good."

    Grand Theft Auto is a good game. People choose it. Where's the issue?

  • waffles||

    My favorite moment I had playing that game was stealing some soccer mom's european station wagon then driving it onto the beach and mowing down hippie campfires and drum circles while the character was on the phone with the psychologist describing how he felt depressed, alienated, and had been acting out.

    It was surreally good gameplay. I can buy the nihilism angle a bit. The characters in the game rarely have as much fun as me. They almost feel like real people being driven to ultraviolence by me, the invisible puppet master. I love it.

  • Restoras||

    Can you really do this in GTAV?

  • waffles||

    Yeah you can call your therapist and still do normal GTAV stuff while on the phone.

  • waffles||

    Err..in game therapist. Michael, on of the protagonists has a shrink.

  • Doctor Whom||

    True freedom, by contrast, consists not in being able to do whatever one pleases without judgment or consequence, but in being free to choose the good.

    Fuck off, slaver, and take your no-true-Scotsman fallacy with you.

  • Zeb||

    I'm not a big video game guy and I haven't played the new GTA. But from my small amount of experience of the older versions, it seems like you could choose to be good in the game and just drive around obeying traffic rules and not killing people or stealing their cars. Of course that wouldn't be much fun. Is there anything in the game that forces you to be a bad guy? When I've played I just ignored the plot and drove around and smashed into cops and acted silly, so it seems like you can play it however you want.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Without fully reading the article, I think he's missing the point entirely. Yes, you can point to the narrative structure in the game as promoting nihilism as virtuous (indeed, this is primarily why American Beauty is such a shitty movie), but there's an implicit assumption from him that video games should offer "choices." The fact is that very few games have that type of interactive experience, and the ones that do are typically very simplistic in their choice structure (good/evil, compassionate/joking/hostile) because the very format of a game does not allow for introspective decision-making.

    At heart, it's "just a video game," and quite honestly, most of the people playing it aren't all that concerned about the plotline of GTA V beyond banging hookers and racing the various cars.

  • Rasilio||

    "True freedom, by contrast, consists not in being able to do whatever one pleases without judgment or consequence"

    Correct, Freedom consists of being free to choose regardless of the consequences or judgement

  • Tony||

    Are consequences not constraints on choice?

    Am I equally free to choose to rob a liquor store with and without the threat of being thrown in jail?

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    Yes.

  • Zeb||

    If you go down that road, then there is no freedom and the only true choice you have is between options that don't matter.
    People obviously are free to choose to rob a liquor store. It happens all the time. All choices that are worth making have consequences.

  • R C Dean||

    Are consequences not constraints on choice?

    No, not really. They don't constrain your ability to make the choice itself. You're equally free to choose to rob the liquor store (or not) regardless of whether, after you make that choice, something else happens.

  • Rasilio||

    No, consequences are not constraints on choice. To argue that they are is to argue that falling to my death is a constraint on my choice to jump off the empire state building.

    Consequences are the RESULTS of your choices,of course not all potential consequences are guaranteed to occur so you could choose to rob that liquor store and get away with it but in making that choice you are choosing the risk of imprisonment.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    Ok... so I agree that technically consequences aren't constraints, but for humans they are indirectly constraints and libertarians agree with this idea any time they argue that higher business taxes will result in less business productivity.

    Or that Obamacare would lead to some companies deciding going over 50 employees is a bad idea.

    Sure - the additional taxes from Obamacare are just a consequence of expanding the business to that 51st person, but that the consequence exists will be a constraint on behavior.

  • ||

    it can't be bad, it's set in a holy place!

  • Ted S.||

    I got a 403 error, IFH.

  • ||

  • BigT||

    Both parties agree, vacationing federal workers to be paid for vacation.

    That's right. You can't get these people to agree on whether or not it's raining outside, but when it comes to their deep disdain for us suckers paying all the bills around here, a hot case of venereal bipartisanship breaks out all over the place.
    Over the weekend, the House held a vote and agreed—without a single exception—that when this government shutdown is all over, all these "non-essential" government bureaucrats who have been loafing around at home all this time will all be given back pay for work they did not perform.
  • Auric Demonocles||

    I won't be too upset by it... assuming that they take it out of their vacation/personal/sick time. Which means I will end up being upset.

  • Zeb||

    And yet they are still fucking complaining about what a terrible hardship this is. Does every federal employee just spend their whole paycheck every week?

  • Lord Humungus||

    Oops: Azerbaijan released election results before voting had even started

    Azerbaijan's big presidential election, held on Wednesday, was anticipated to be neither free nor fair. President Ilham Aliyev, who took over from his father 10 years ago, has stepped up intimidation of activists and journalists. Rights groups are complaining about free speech restrictions and one-sided state media coverage. The BBC's headline for its story on the election reads "The Pre-Determined President." So expectations were pretty low.

    Even still, one expects a certain ritual in these sorts of authoritarian elections, a fealty to at least the appearance of democracy, if not democracy itself. So it was a bit awkward when Azerbaijan's election authorities released vote results – a full day before voting had even started.
  • Jordan||

    They should hire some Democratic consultants.

  • BigT||

    They should thank their Democratic consultants.

    FIFY

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Just call them "poll results" and then brag about how accurate they were after the election.

  • Guillotined||

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    "But Obama won't let us drill here!" - Idiot right-wing douchebag.

    (Also, the US just became the world's #1 crude oil producer)

  • BigT||

    It's all due to production on private land, a-hole.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Bullshit. Another wingnut lie.

  • Swiss Servator, Kneel to Zug!||

    Citation re public lands please.

  • Biden's Scroteplugs||

    you mad weigs?

  • Zeb||

    So Buttplug = Weigel? Is that the new theory? Who is Tony supposed to be?

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Gillespie.

  • Mike M.||

    Yes, Shrike (now Palin's Buttplug) is Weigel, and Tony is none other than Paul Krugman.

    A few years back Krugman also used to frequently post under the name "Chad" at the same time that was posting as Tony, but I haven't seen him use Chad since Reason implemented registration.

  • Zeb||

    OK, that's an interesting theory.

  • Biden's Scroteplugs||

    I would have guessed Tony is SadBeard.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    The Obama administration announced today it is putting up nearly 38 million acres in the central Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas lease sales.

    "Expanding offshore oil and gas production is a key component of our comprehensive energy strategy to grow America's energy economy, and will help us continue to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and create jobs here at home," said Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.

    http://content.usatoday.com/co.....lf9yRDOTjs

  • SugarFree||

    CURRY SAUCE FOR CURRYWURST

    Ingredients:

    1 Tablespoon margarine or oil
    2 Tablespoons FINELY minced onion
    2-4 Tablespoons good quality curry powder
    1/2 to 1 Tablespoon SWEET Hungarian paprika
    2 cups good quality ketchup
    1 cup water

    Directions:

    Sauté the onion in the margarine or oil until it is transparent. Add curry powder and paprika to onions and quickly sauté just to bring out the flavor, then add the ketchup and water. Simmer uncovered until the sauce is the thickness you desire. Taste and adjust seasonings if desired. Serve over Bratwurst with an extra sprinkling of curry powder.

  • Lady Bertrum||

    Technically not sugar free with the use of 2 cups of ketchup.

  • Lady Bertrum||

    Consider replacing ketchup with tomato sauce.

  • SugarFree||

    I usually go with canned whole peeled tomatoes, mash them up and blend them after reducing.

  • Lady Bertrum||

    If you're a real purest jerk (and I am) don't use margarine. Butter is better. And, specify palm, olive or coconut oil.

  • trshmnstr||

    After switching to real butter a little while back, I have a hard time going back to margarine... there's something about it that's just "off"

  • Lady Bertrum||

    Real butter is better for you. Saturated fat is good for you.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRe9z32NZHY

  • Restoras||

    Margarine is an abomination.

  • Zeb||

    Or maybe tomato paste and a little brown sugar.

  • BigT||

    Do you have any idea how long it takes to go from leasing a tract to producing oil and gas? A few years, at least.

    Idiot!

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    That is one example, dumbass. Obama's BLM has been leasing federal land continuously since 2009.

  • WTF||

    BUSHPIGS!!!11!!!!CHRISTFAGS!!!!!!1one1!!!

  • KPres||

    Ahem...

    "On federal and Indian lands, as well as federally approved offshore drilling sites, oil production went up from 1.6 million barrels per day to 2 million barrels per day between fiscal years 2008 and 2010. But it dropped to 1.8 million barrels per day for the last fiscal year available"

    INOW, given the lag, it went up because of Bush, and down because of Obama.

    http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/04/.....index.html

  • Lord Humungus||

    PWNED!

  • Lady Bertrum||

    To PB- At this point, I'd like to call you a dip shit, but I'm going to refrain from doing so because I'm pretty sure you get sexual pleasure from anonymous insults over the interwebz - from either gender.

    I'm pretty sure you scurry from your cubicle into the men's bathroom and jerk off every time some one insults you. I'm also sure your co-workers know it and are disgusted.

  • WTF||

    I'm gonna dispel a few myths, a few rumors. First off, the retarded don't rule the night. They don't rule it. Nobody does. And they don't run in packs. And while they may not be as strong as apes, don't lock eyes with 'em, don't do it. Puts 'em on edge. They might go into berzerker mode; come at you like a whirling dervish, all fists and elbows. You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.

  • Restoras||

    German Chocolate, please!

  • Pro Libertate||

    Mmmm, German chocolate cake.

  • CE||

    Of course not. The undead rule the night.

  • Mike M.||

    Yep. In other words, Marion King Hubbert and the peak oil Chickle Littles were completely wrong.

    Geology, another area where the science apparently wasn't really settled.

  • Zeb||

    Higher prices enabling new drilling technology to get oil that we knew about but wasn't worth getting before helps a lot too. I find it absolutely amazing what they can do with drilling now.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Russia's Finance Minister claims that U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke assured officials of other G20 economies that the standoff would end before October 17.

    "You fucked up. You trusted us."

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    Also known as: FYTW.

  • Zeb||

    YFUYTU

  • Rich||

    A German scientist is developing a new way of testing prices by measuring brain waves.

    Hey, he should use brainwaves to determine the best minimum wage!

  • Bee Tagger||

    I can't figure this out, what will the price be for guilty pleasure items? 0 or infinity?

  • KPres||

    Müller, a neurobiologist, isn't criticizing working conditions at the multinational purveyor of hot beverages. Instead, what he means is that the Seattle-based company gives away millions of dollars a year out of pure ignorance. The reason? Starbucks isn't charging enough for its coffee.

    It's an almost obscene observation. Müller is convinced that customers would in fact be willing to dig even more deeply into their pockets for products for which Starbucks already charges upmarket prices.

    Muller, a neurobiologist, doesn't have a clue about how the price system works.

  • Ted S.||

    If you want to know how much people will pay for Starbucks (or anything), auction it off.

    Watch the politicians who grandstand about "price gouging" have screaming fits.

  • Zeb||

    That's a little tricky for something like cups of coffee where you need to find the point where you make the most selling lots of coffee, not the most anyone would pay for a cup of coffee.

    I think big, successful companies probably know what they are doing when it comes to setting prices.

  • KPres||

    My point is that prices are determined by competition, not demand alone. It doesn't matter what people are willing to pay. How much would people be willing to pay for food?

  • Lord Humungus||

    Shot allegedly fired at snake strikes person

    After 25 beers — maybe more, police say — a Springfield man fired a handgun from a vehicle, trying to hit a snake slithering across the street.

    Two shots hit the car’s roof, one struck a passenger’s head and a fourth shot actually made it across the street, court documents say.
  • Brett L||

    Jesus Christ. A dude that stupid should be beaten to death with his own pistol.

  • SugarFree||

    Two shots hit the car’s roof, one struck a passenger’s head and a fourth shot actually made it across the street

    I believe a police exam would grade that as a B+.

  • BigT||

    No, SF, he missed the dog! C-

  • SugarFree||

    He was trying to kill an animal that wasn't threatening to him in any way. That's got to count for something.

  • Gray Ghost||

    The Noble, OK police department should see if he wants a job.

    ...and a fourth shot actually made it across the street

    Considering he used a CZ-52, it made it across the street, through the neighbor's house, through his neighbor's house...

    Not to mention shooting a handgun inside a car is not the way to make friends, though it will ensure that your friends won't be hearing much for the next several hours. Christ, my ears hurt just reading what that idiot did.

  • Ted S.||

    25 beers? What the hell was his BAC?

  • Brett L||

    0.220. So probably Busch Light.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Probably drunk all day, since you could get to .220 with a 12 pack or less.

  • WTF||

    Another story that started with "Hold my beer, and watch this!"

  • Restoras||

    All good stories start with that.

  • Coeus||

    Marcotte truly oudtdoes herself today.

    For starters:

    I have a serious soft spot for Kanye West, not just because he’s a great artist, though that doesn’t hurt. I have a serious soft spot for people who, because they have little regard for social niceties or who have a compulsion to cut through the crap, end up being misunderstood. (Obviously, none of this excuses Kanye’s tendency to say misogynist things on his records, but is really more about the sort of social narratives that reframe times when he’s speaking sense as “crazy” or “stupid”.) It drives me batty, in fact, how people are so obsessed with tone policing that their outrage that West broke some unspoken social rules about projecting false modesty gets mistaken for believing what he said was wrong or crazy or whatever
  • Coeus||

    And then there's this:

    That said, I still found myself mildly annoyed at a couple of points. The whole “we do it to Lady Gaga, too” thing doesn’t fly with me. The original problem was that Kimmel’s team was trying to make West look ridiculous by taking his quotes out of context and putting them in the mouths of children. Whether you do it to a black man or to a woman, it still feels kind of wrong to me—I’m all for humor, but the “joke” in both cases seems to be about reinforcing an overall view that these people are ridiculous because they don’t adhere to the very strict and often deeply unfair standards for social conformity placed upon them, and here’s a white guy ready to spank them for it.

    Can't make fun of anybody but white men. We get it.

    . But this isn’t, at the end of the day, really about him. It’s a plea for people to be more original than trying to fit a non-idiot into the idiot box, because you know the rubes will buy it.

    Remember that the next time she talks about BOOSSSHHH!!!

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    because you know the rubes will buy it.

    God damnit, now I can't use rube anymore.

  • Zeb||

    No, Kanye West is ridiculous because he is an idiot who says stupid things and makes stupid music. I just don't get why so many people seem to think that he is some kind of great artist.

  • Coeus||

    Because he said he was, and according to marcotte, it's racist to think he's a loon.

  • Juice||

    Me neither. I was hanging out with an old friend after not seeing him for years and he wanted to watch SNL because Kanye West was going to be on it. He said, "At least he's a serious artist." I just thought, "Wow. I guess I never really knew you." Made me seriously question the friendship.

  • Zeb||

    Some people seem to mistake being a humorless, narcissistic douche with being a serious artist, I guess.

  • KPres||

    "I have a serious soft spot for Kanye West, not just because he’s a great artist"

    That's all you need to know about Amanda Marcotte.

  • RBS||

    In her world he's a great artist because he rubs the right people the wrong way.

  • KPres||

    I thought it was because he sucks and she's an idiot.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I bet she can't stand his music. But she feels she has to say that.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Kanye West?

    Kanye West, really?

    He's that gay fish, right?

    Does this have something to do with that bumpersticker abour bicycles?

  • Lord Humungus||

    Tennessee fencing coach stops robbery

    The instructor grabbed his épée, jumped out of the car and charged the suspects.

    According to WSMV.com, Scaramuzza had just finished practice, so he was still wearing his full fencing attire.

    "I charged toward them, holding my épée up high, and, you know, yelling at them," he said. "I kept yelling throughout the entire thing. They completely panicked and dropped everything they stole and really took off."
  • SweatingGin||

    His name is Scaramuzza! That's about a perfect fencing name.

    As a former fencer, this is awesome.

  • Rich||

    Will he do the fandango?

  • ||

    bismillah...

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Worst. Queen. Song. Ever.

  • Zeb||

    Well, you're no fun.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Is not.

  • Rasilio||

    Have you heard Fat Bottomed Girls?

  • Gray Ghost||

    Great ending, though I read the first sentence of the quote and immediately thought of this scene... Glad it turned out differently.

  • Dr. Frankenstien||

    Did he keep yelling at them "My name is Scaramuzza. You killed my father. Prepare to die."?

  • Aloysious||

    +1 riposte.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Fuck that. Sabers.

  • Swiss Servator, Kneel to Zug!||

    Aye, sabre is more fun.

  • Yar||

    I cannot believe that headline writer passed up "Tennessee Fencing Coach Foils Robbery."

  • Restoras||

    That's because the dumbass writer doesn't know what a foil is.

  • Brett L||

    This dog is awesome.

  • Rich||

    Yet another reason to own *cats*: they just *piss* there.

  • WTF||

    Of course it's a Dachshund. My miniature Dachshund once took a crap in my shoe. I found out when I slipped it on. Barefoot.

  • AlexInCT||

    That's one cool cat... Erm I mean doggy..

  • Lord Humungus||

    Lawsuits Put Damper On 'Thresh Your Own Grain'

    "It's actually kind of amazing what affluent suburbanites will pay to do," said Tom Halverston of the National Farmers Union. "The irony is, we were getting to the point where we couldn't even get illegal Mexicans to do this stuff."

    But the recent lawsuits could put an end to the practices, say industry experts.

    "I know my client assumed threshing would be perfectly safe," said Mark Robertson, attorney for Karl Frankenheimer, a Massachusetts man who suffered several puncture wounds at Apple Time Farms in Wakefield, N.H., when he stuck his buttocks into the thresher "as a gag."
  • Bam!||

    "It's actually kind of amazing what affluent suburbanites will pay to do," said Tom Halverston of the National Farmers Union. "The irony is, we were getting to the point where we couldn't even get illegal Mexicans to do this stuff."

    That's just inspired.

  • Brett L||

    when he stuck his buttocks into the thresher "as a gag."

    What the fuck? How stupid do you have to... oh wait, a Massachusetts man.

  • WTF||

    He assumed sticking his ass in a thresher would be perfectly safe? How the fuck does this idiot even feed himself?

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    "Hey Lena, hold my artisanal coffee and watch this!!"

  • Spoonman.||

    That is a gold-star find.

  • Nephilium||

    I think I preferred this tidbit at the end:

    "The last thing these small family farms need is another obstacle to success," said singer and Farm Aid co-founder John Mellencamp, who debuted his new tribute song, Rain On The Thresher, at the latest Farm Aid concert, which was attended by more than three dozen people at a parking lot in Muncie, Ind. The song includes the lyrics:

    Rain on the thresher, blood on the plow
    My pumpkins have gone mushy and I'm down to my last cow
    Son, I'm just sorry these stupid tourists keep threshing themselves, ow!

    His fellow Farm Aid founder Willie Nelson was unavailable for comment, having been arrested for threshing under the influence at a pro-farmer rally in Ashwaubenon, Wis.
  • Ted S.||

    Mellencamp would know about small family farms, wouldn't he?

  • pan fried wylie||

    which was attended by more than three dozen people at a parking lot in Muncie, Ind.

    "You bought a timeshare...in Muncie?"

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    I'd be more interested in hearing from the Women who READ Dinosaur Erotica.

  • SugarFree||

    I read both of those. There's money in them thar perverts.

  • ||

    "When the angry T-Rex corners the huntress in a box canyon, it seems more interested in her wet womanhood than in her flesh."

    Sashimi!

  • KPres||

    So this finally dispenses with the myth that size doesn't matter?

    Also...

    "I did some research and found that a subgenre called “monster erotica” was starting to get popular."

    Is this some kind of subconscious reaction on the part of women to the expanding population of "sensitive" men?

  • Coeus||

    Surprise, surprise, surprise

    Marissa Alexander was recently granted a new trial—but not everyone’s convinced that she will ever get a fair one. Alexander was sentenced to 20 years for firing a shot during an altercation with her husband, Rico Gray, who had twice previously been arrested for domestic abuse against Alexander.
    Some supporters might want a new trial and think justice can be served in that way. Why isn’t that the solution for you?

    I’m going to speak for myself on this one, and not for the campaign. In the first place, she had the right to protect herself; she had the right to stand her ground. We don’t think she should have been prosecuted in the first place. And when she was prosecuted, the evidence warranted the jury to come back with a not guilty verdict. But none of those things happened. We’re at the point now where I personally don’t believe that the justice system can actually deliver justice. It’s incumbent on the state to not go back to trial. Even if the jury instructions are given in a different way, the judge has already made the determination that she can’t rely on Stand Your Ground in a retrial. Self-defense is once again off the table.

    All that media lies backfired, didn't they?

  • Brett L||

    What the fuck? This was clearly not Castle Doctrine and the nature of the disputed facts called for a trial. They conveniently elide the part where SHE violated a no conduct order and physically assaulted him. (As is often the case in abusive relationships, both parties are crazy.)

  • Auric Demonocles||

    It's "stand your ground", not "advance your ground, after leaving to get a weapon and coming back".

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

  • Lord Humungus||

    this story will never let me down.

  • Rich||

    The first line is not too bad.

  • Mike M.||

    No Warty jokes yet?

  • SweatingGin||

    Instructions unclear, penis stuck in toaster.

  • SweatingGin||

    "911? Yes, it's me again. Yes, it's stuck again. A toaster. No, it's not plugged in."

  • Restoras||

    Quagmire?

  • WTF||

    Giggity!

  • Ska||

    Giggity.

  • Ska||

    Refreshest!!

  • Pro Libertate||

    I don't see how Battlestar Galactica can escape blame for this one.

  • Michael||

    I'll bet an Ikea assembly manual is to blame.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Micheal Yon - Afghanistan: A Bigger Monster

    Both the Afghan and US governments frequently behave irrationally, and some US decision-makers are looking for any excuse to drop Afghanistan. Psychologically, we are in a perfect position to negotiate, regardless of the security consequence.

    Without support, the Afghan economy will collapse.

    Following the economic collapse and without Coalition military support, the Afghan government will also collapse.

    If it remains vaguely intact, the Afghan “government” will be ineffective outside of Kabul. Kandahar City will be the Taliban capital. No international trade will occur in the south without Taliban approval.
  • Steve G||

    http://www.defensenews.com/art.....dyssey=nav|head

    “Why is America’s nondefense private sector largely silent on the topic of the Budget Control Act of 2011 and subsequent sequestration, particularly with respect to the Department of Defense? Is it because the effects, as yet, haven’t been as dire as predicted? Or perhaps it’s the perception that the Pentagon is indeed bloated, overpriced, and has too many employees, contractors and redundant functions, and thus is in need of a haircut?”

    Uh, is this a trick question?

  • Alice Bowie||

    THE REPUBLICAN PARTY has EVERYTHING to lose. And it looks like they lost it. Remember, being a CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN or TEA BAGGER or LIBERTARIAN is a LUXURY. One luxury that goes away quick once booted out of the middle class.

    The Conservatives, the racist, religious freaks, the tea baggers, and the libertarians ALL PUT TOGETHER along with a significant amount of white-male voters COULD NOT take OBAMA out of Office.

    The more people that lose their jobs and businesses, the less people to vote Republican or Tea Party. PERIOD.

    Romney lost because people that have lost their jobs, are afraid of losing their jobs, or experience salary stagnation and are not growing, are NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR SOMEONE that wants to get rid of UNEMPLOYMENT and other SAFETY NETS.

    The only way the Republicans/Tea Party/Libertarians can get more votes if more people leave the 98% and join the 2%. PERIOD.

    Some people are dumb and will vote against their own interests. But only while employed.

    Keep shipping the jobs out, keep lowering salaries and standards...MORE PEOPLE will vote LIBERAL.

  • Lord Humungus||

    needs more CAPS!

  • BigT||

    needs more CAPS

    one in the ass would do.

  • SugarFree||

    Needs more capitalization. You need to get back on your meds.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Needs [more] brackets.

  • BakedPenguin||

    [EMPIRE]

  • Pro Libertate||

    I say without irony that I miss Herc. He's my favorite, well, troll is the wrong word. Passionately insane person? I dunno, but whatever he was, I miss him.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    Yeah our campaign to get him elected pres was failed

  • CE||

    That's what I was thinking. What, did HERCULE's bracket key break?

  • tarran||

    Alice,

    your poorly-organized, incoherent thesis intrigues me.

    Tell me more.

  • Lady Bertrum||

    Perhaps she writes a newsletter you could subscribe to?

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    A couple more ranty paragraphs and Alice would start discussing the final solution for us Libertarians. I'm sure it involves a variation on Soylent Green.

  • Brett L||

    Brackets away from going full Hercule

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I like how your assumption is that Free Shit is in every single person's best interests. I don't consider it to be in my best interests, and neither do a lot of other people. Go peddle your false consciousness bullshit somewhere else.

  • Floridian||

    You mean like all the jobs created by progressives in Detroit? Ouch. But you are right. People do vote against their own self interest. Government is choking the jobs out of this country and people vote to expand it while complaining about every interaction with the government. *see black Americans voting for larger government while being over represented in prison facilities*

  • Restoras||

    I don't get it.

  • H. ReardEn||

    Corollary to argument: to insure that liberals win elections, support policies that promote unemployment.

  • Bardas Phocas||

    The only way the Republicans/Tea Party/Libertarians can get more votes if more people leave the 98% and join the 2%. PERIOD.

    PERCENTAGES! how the fuck do they work?
    QUESTION MARK.

  • KPres||

    LOL!

  • KPres||

    """The more people that lose their jobs and businesses, the less people to vote Republican or Tea Party. PERIOD."""

    Nothing creates jobs like the world's highest corporate tax rate. Come to think of it, that's probably why we have the world's highest corporate tax rate, because unemployed vote Democrat.

    Clearly the solution is to raise the minimum wage...

  • Fatty Bolger||

    So Democrats succeed by ruining the economy and expanding the welfare state?

    I don't know if you're right, but they've certainly been acting like it's true.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "The only way the Republicans/Tea Party/Libertarians can get more votes if more people leave the 98% and join the 2%. PERIOD."

    We need to eat more SPINACH.

  • waffles||

    Well, I'm either too stupid to vote in my best interest or living a life of luxury. That's not bad. I'll take it.

  • #||

    I think someone forgot their medication today for real.

  • Juice||

    ...and the libertarians...

    What makes you think libertarians were out voting for Mitt Romney?

  • Rich||

    Karl Denninger goes Galt

    I can no longer square my personal drive to succeed with what my success, and the taxes levied upon it, empowers in the form of harm to 99% of the people.

  • gaijin||

    I can't tell if he is losing his sh!t, has an overinflated sense of his importance, or is just trying to make a point...or all of the above?

  • Restoras||

    All of the above. He makes some good points now and then but also on occasion goes completely manic.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    He's been a hell of a lot better when he focused on actual government numbers and confirmable data rather than social or political commentary, where he tends to go off the rails. Even stating something that's perfectly obvious--that we've been building our economy on an expanded credit base and debt inflation for the last 30-40 years rather than legitimate capital production--has a lot more impact when his data is pulled directly from government reports and Fed charts which confirm it.

  • Restoras||

    Agreed.

  • R C Dean||

    Same here.

    I find his belief that health care is somehow exempted or immune from anti-trust laws bizarre. Its just completely wrong. And its not like the feds aren't willing to pursue an anti-trust case against a health care business, either, because they do, all the time.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Denninger lost his shit back in 2009 shorting banks as a Doom & Gloomer - then banks took off ti new highs with the stock market.

    All his minions were buying FAZ - a triple short financial ETF. It is down about 12,000% since March 09.

  • Fluffy||

    Well, when you first get the state to make shorting your stock illegal, and then get the state to selectively refrain from shutting down clearly insolvent institutions, and then get the state to hand you trillions of dollars at 0% interest, and then get the state to guarantee the debts of your counterparties so that you don't have to pay off the swap bets against those counterparties that you sold to others, and then get VARIOUS states to pretend that sovereign defaults aren't really defaults and don't trigger any of the swaps you sold...

    ...your stock goes up.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    The Fed discount window (source of those near 0% loans) still requires collateral and the loan period is 30 days maximum (maybe relaxed to 60 in the crisis).

    That is the way the fractional reserve system is designed. Someone shorting banks should know that and get the hell out of the way when the panic clears.

  • WTF||

    I'm gonna dispel a few myths, a few rumors. First off, the retarded don't rule the night. They don't rule it. Nobody does. And they don't run in packs. And while they may not be as strong as apes, don't lock eyes with 'em, don't do it. Puts 'em on edge. They might go into berzerker mode; come at you like a whirling dervish, all fists and elbows. You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.

  • Cascadian Ephor Xenocles||

    How is it possible for an asset to lose more than 100% of its value?

  • UnCivilServant||

    It becomes a liability, costing you money to dispose of (or keep) it.

  • Cascadian Ephor Xenocles||

    Fair enough.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    If you short at $2 and cover at $50 you lose well over 100%.

  • Cascadian Ephor Xenocles||

    The investment isn't made until you actually purchase the asset.

    1) You borrow a share of stock to short sell.
    2) You sell the share for $2. This puts $2 in your pocket.
    3) You guessed wrong, and the share price rises to $50. You buy a share for $50 to repay your debt. This is a net change of $-48, since you still had the $2 from the sale.

    Properly considered you invested $50 for a $2 return, a loss of $48, or 96% of your purchase price. All you did in the short sale was reverse the normal transaction order.

    Unless there is a disposal or hold cost as UCS mentions above, you set a hard limit on your losses when you purchase the asset. (I suppose the danger of a short sale is that you can't set that limit up front. What you get up front is a hard limit on your potential gain, since share price can't drop below zero.)

  • Restoras||

    Well Shriek? Where is your dazzling rebuttal?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    http://www.karldenninger.com/

    Denninger spoof site.

  • Restoras||

    Shut up, Shreik.

  • Guillotined||

  • The Late P Brooks||

    And, just because,

    No, fuck you, cut spending.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Indeed!

    There have been other debts, to be sure. There are always others, are there not? You seem to be one who knows the difficulties between spending and taxing. How seldom it works out. Yet we all keep trying, like fools.

  • Ted S.||

    IFH gets to laugh at Kiwis again:

    Shock for NZ woman who finds dead body in her camper van

    He said a woman from outside Central Otago was checking her caravan about 10.30am yesterday. It had been stored at a Cromwell caravan park.

    "It was the first time she'd checked it for over a year and upon entering the caravan, she found a scene of disarray and what appeared to be the remains of a male person on the floor."

    The caravan had been locked and was stored among hundreds of other stored caravans. It was still locked when she inspected it, he said. She alerted camp staff and police were called.
  • ||

    It's funnier if you read it to yourself in a Kiwi accent

  • UnCivilServant||

    I'm not even sure I can identify a new zealand accent.

  • ||

    They do things to innocent vowels that should be illegal

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORu5Rlna6Lg

  • BakedPenguin||

    Too bad kiwi dave isn't here anymore. We could have an antipodean flame war.

  • Rich||

    ‘Dutch sandwich’ grows as Google shifts €8.8bn to Bermuda

    I know some of us will be disappointed about the 'sandwich' part;
    but would someone *kindly* explain why Google saving its money makes it (more) evil?

  • Bam!||

    Because it's founders and executives overwhelmingly support politicians who favor higher taxes.

  • Ted S.||

    Because somebody has a big pile of money and dammit, that's just not fair!

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Common Core assignment: Remove two amendments from 'outdated' Bill of Rights

    The assignment made the assumption that the United States government has determined that the Bill of Rights “is outdated and may not remain in its current form any longer.”

    The children were to assume the persona of “experts on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights” in their aim to ensure that “the pursuit of happiness remains guarded in the 21st century,” despite the fact that the phrase "pursuit of happiness" exists in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

    Twitchy also hoped that one of these "experts" would realize the Constitution isn't amended by a "special committee."

    Lela Spears, the girl's mother, told the Digital Journal her daughter has not received any training in civics or government.

    "After she brought it home and explained her assignment to me, it made me question exactly what she was being taught. Where I can see a class using critical thinking skills to modernize the words, as to help them better understand the Amendments, giving an assignment to remove two then add two with little explanation as to why is upsetting," she said.
  • Rich||

    "I believe that, with the wording of the assignment, many children will think that the Bill of Rights is amended and can be changed by a “special” committee instead of an act of Congress"

    or Executive Order.

  • KPres||

    Remember, Common Core isn't about getting the right answer, it's about learning how to think like a slave.

  • Biden's Scroteplugs||

    easy peasy: remove 16 and 17.

  • Brett L||

    Bill of Rights usually denotes Amendments 1-10. I don't know about what Common Core thinks.

  • UnCivilServant||

    The common core doesn't think. That's part of the problem.

  • Juice||

    Don't you think 11 really has to go?

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    The correct answer. Hmm, let me change hats. Ah yes, the correct answer is all of them have to go!

  • Brett L||

    3 and 7. If they start enforcing 9 and 10.

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    I wonder what they added and what they took away. Oh wait, no I don't. I've heard NPR/seen MSNBC in the past 20 years so I have a pretty good idea where that teacher was trying to steer those kids.

    We be fucked.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Alright, so Amendment 2 is obviously the goal here, but what's the other one?

  • Ted S.||

    4A?

  • Fluffy||

    The key is "in its current form".

    They want kids to rewrite the 1st to exclude evil corporations and rich people.

  • Zeb||

    I would have thought 9th and 10th were the obvious targets. They are really good ideas, but they don't actually do much when you get right down to it. (not that that is what I would do).

  • VG Zaytsev||

    They've been ignored for 150+years so why acknowledge them now.

  • Zeb||

    Actually, if I had to choose, I'd do 2 and 3.
    Replace 2 with "People get to own, use and carry guns." So there is nothing to argue about and no unnecessary commas.

    Replace 3 with a real explicit right to privacy.

  • UnCivilServant||

    What about my swords, separs and axes?!

  • Zeb||

    I'm willing to do some work on the exact text. How about "Arms: you can have them"

  • Cliché Bandit||

    seriously, no one wants to start and oxford comma argument here?

  • Cdr Lytton||

    1st for Citizens United and kochportations?

  • Ted S.||

    I remove the 16th and the 19th. :-)

  • Brett L||

    I expect better reading comprehension from you of all people, Ted. The Bill of Rights is a specific subsection of Constitutional Amendments.

  • Ted S.||

    Surely you know I wasn't being serious. Didn't you see the smiley-face?

  • Brett L||

    What is this? Vaguebook? There's no place for emoticons in the srsbsns! of H&R commenting.

  • Robert S||

    Ahh the Jon Stewart defense.

  • Andrew S.||

    19 and not 17? C'mon, man.

  • Ted S.||

    You don't think the "Won't somebody think of the children?" demographic has been terrible for liberty?

  • Andrew S.||

    Yes, but that demographic has long been the territory of men as much as it is women.

  • robc||

    16th and 17th is the correct answer.

  • robc||

    but, yeah, dammit, bill of rights.

    Ummm...none of them?

  • Andrew S.||

    Remove them all, because the anti-federalists were right?

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    At least we have each other Andrew.

  • robc||

    The anti-federalist pushed for the BoR as the concession since the lost the fight over killing the Constitution entirely.

    So, while they WERE right, that doesnt seem the right solution.

  • Andrew S.||

    Remove them all, replace with a re-designed 9th, making it clear that any powers not expressly granted to the federal government are unavailable to them?

    I mean, it's clear that most of the BoR is a dead letter anyways.

  • #||

    It's pretty clear that most of the Constitution is a dead leter anyways.

  • Fluffy||

    I absolutely guarantee you that if some kid wrote an essay about how we should get rid of the right to not be subject to cruel and unusual punishment, their "educators" would shriek and jump around and declare that wasn't supposed to be part of the assignment.

  • Pro Libertate||

    It's not just Common Core, though that seems like a bad thing to me, too. It's just more indoctrination of kids.

    I am so thankful that my wife is able to homeschool my daughter.

  • KPres||

    If I had a kid, I wouldn't homeschool, I'd turn them into a subversive agent against the bullshit. Buy them a new bike every time they successfully challenge the idiocy that surrounds them, ground them every time they blindly follow orders. Something like that.

  • Coeus||

    I used to get smacked and grounded when I challenged school authority. Never slowed me down. As a result, I now feed on hate and stupidity. And now you know why I read feminist blogs.

  • Rasilio||

    While I am certain it is not intended to work this way I could easily use this as a springboard to make the kids think none of the amendments to the BOR can be discarded

  • DEG||

    In one of the threads yesterday (can't remember which, I was lurking because I was reading reason at work in between running tests), some folks were comparing medical marijuana laws between Texas and Massachusetts. A coworker sent me a link to a list of new laws banning things in Massachusetts. Entry number four is about towns in Massachusetts passing moratoriums on medical marijuana.

    http://www.boston.com/yourtown......html?pg=4

  • Protagoronus||

    What a (SET YELL) great (END YELL) great Krugman takedown takedown

  • Protagoronus||

    echo echo?

  • SugarFree||

    You me'd the link.

  • UnCivilServant||

    +1 self deprication.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Please fix link.

  • Protagoronus||

    ooops, sorry to steal your schtick Stevia: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....73956.html

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I saw Sadbeard go all sad about that today.

    But Sadbeard deserves whatever blistering pain he gets.

    And bonus points for Ferguson identifying these people are "cranks":

    "How does he essentially differ from the cranks who, before the Internet, had to vent their spleen by writing letters in green ink?

    "

  • creech||

    We've been warned. So, Alice, time to join the goosesteppers?

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Facebook is eliminating a privacy setting that allowed members to prevent themselves from appearing in search results."

    Barack Obama is invading everyone's Facebook privacy by way of the NSA, anyway. Why should Facebook be held to higher standard?

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/.....s/2887731/

    At least Facebook is letting you know. We didn't need a renegade Facebook employee to tell us this was happening.

  • Andrew S.||

    The New York Post, again proving there's no peak derp, gets dumber and dumber re: Snowden

    http://nypost.com/2013/10/11/r.....e-snowden/

  • DEG||

    I should have gone through the whole list before posting. Some towns in MA have banned public consumption of marijuana.

    http://www.boston.com/yourtown......html?pg=6

  • DEG||

    doh't! This was supposed to be in reply to my post up above.

  • Lord Humungus||

    don't worry, you're just channeling P. Brooks.

  • DEG||

    Which I used to do on the rare occasions I posted, and then I caved.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    "We have to fix our long term budget issues. Give us all your fucking money!"

  • Restoras||

    Funny, that wouldn't actually fix it, unless you are addressing the entire planet.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Denninger lost his shit back in 2009 shorting banks as a Doom & Gloomer - then banks took off ti new highs with the stock market.

    Must not be on the same Treasury mailing list as Buffett.

  • Coeus||

    Hate the shoutdown? Blame men.

    No matter your take on the debate over the shutdown and the debt ceiling, there’s one irrefutable fact: All of the major players in the negotiations are men. On the right, you’ve got Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), and House Majority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA). On the left, Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and President Barack Obama (D) himself.
    It’s cringe-worthy, on one hand, since one of the sticking points stopping Republicans from passing a funding bill has been the women’s reproductive health measures included in Obamacare. But on a deeper level, it also explains why the game of chicken happening over the nation’s economy is playing out the way it is.
    Stubbornness, narcissism, overconfidence — these are traits that have been cultivated in male leaders.
  • RBS||

    Stubbornness, narcissism, overconfidence

    I have never seen this trait in a woman. NEVER.

  • Lord Humungus||

    they are pure as the driven snow, never driven by greed or malice... nope, never.

  • creech||

    I can imagine the outcry if a CEO used these "differences" to explain why his company would continue to hire mostly men for executive positions. Suddenly the "men and women are the same" crowd would go nuts.

  • John||

    You don't have to imagine it. Remember when Larry Sumners had to nerve to point out the truth that men as a whole are more interested in science? They are still butt hurt over that.

  • Rasilio||

    Um, Nancy Pelosi?

  • pan fried wylie||

    That's a man, baby.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    There is a parade of people on the teevee this morning fretting about U S Govt "credibility" over the debt ceiling.

    Who the fuck actually believes our economic policy is credible, now?

  • Restoras||

    I don't even know what "government credibility" is supposed to mean, given the levels of debt and unfunded liabilities that have been racked up.

  • John||

    We literally have debts no honest man can pay. But a two week shutdown is totally going to destroy our credit rating.

  • Fluffy||

    I think we need to blow up the Chicken Man.

  • John||

    And his house too.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    I rarely watch, but I did this morning and saw the same thing. Maddening, isn't it? They go on and on about how not raising the debt ceiling is making us look bad, entirely ignoring that the ballooning debt itself is the far bigger threat to our credibility. I saw several segments on the "debt ceiling crisis" and the actual debt was not mentioned once.

  • Nazdrakke||

    Ever work with drug addicts? There are exceptions, but the majority of those who seek treatment are individuals who have exhausted all of their resources first. They can no longer beg, borrow, or steal their way to another fix and are forced to it, which is also why a lot of them relapse after a short period of putting life in order and the resources become available again.

    The political class are addicts but their high is power and the drug is the money required to obtain it. If I keep this in mind nearly everything they do or say is understandable, even when it's irrational.

  • John||

    I have known several people who worked in drug counseling. All of them say the same thing you are. As long as the addict is convinced he will get one more chance, he will rationalize continuing to use. It is only when they hit rock bottom and realize they have no more chances that they will change, if they are going to change.

  • Restoras||

    This is exactly right.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Which is ironic, because I've had people tell me they support the drug war because it makes drugs expensive, and that forces addicts to get help when they can't afford the drugs any more.

  • Zeb||

    Yeah, it's much better to completely ruin your life and waste all your resources and then go to some shitty court ordered rehab with a bunch of other fucked up junkies than to spend your life quietly getting high on a cheap, clean, supply of your favorite intoxicant.

  • UnCivilServant||

    The statistics say the drug war has caused a massive drop in street prices for all 'illegal' substances. Do they have sone secret counter-statistics, or just magical thinking?

  • Zeb||

    The statistics say the drug war has caused a massive drop in street prices for all 'illegal' substances

    What are you talking about? That's backwards.
    Though I suppose it depends somewhat on what you mean by "the drug war".

  • UnCivilServant||

    Early interdiction efforts caused an increase in prices and potential profits. The high profit incentives increased the number of suppliers and the supply capacity devoted the production. The market clearing price moved down, even with the risk of interdiction, resulting in a vastly expanded supply, low prices and still high profits from volume. It is pretty much the ultimate example of the laws of supply and demand, even showing the deadweight loss inflicted by the government.

  • Zeb||

    But prices are still enormously higher than they would be with fully legal production and distribution. Sure, many factors play a role, and drug traffickers will respond to economic incentives just like anyone else, but the black market premium is still enormous. This is especially true for hard drugs. If heroin or cocaine could be produced legally and not taxed at absurd rates, they would cost next to nothing.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Ironically, only because people know the product is out there and that there is a demand for it. Previously, the market penetration for these substances was based on their medicinal values rather than their recreational qualities. Had they stayed medicine, and the abuses not been given such great publicity by the drug war, there would be no ready market, and no vast distribution network. The very demonization of drugs were their advertisments.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    Maybe, but it's also human nature to look for intoxicants and things known for medicine turn into recreational drugs.

    WOD is still wrong - just saying that I don't know that I agree labelling drugs as evil made any meaningful difference in their use (maybe for certain drugs sure, but not for intoxicants overall).

  • Tony||

    The debt ceiling crisis is the potential for making come true the doomsday fantasies you believe about the debt itself.

    You guys don't propose useful ways of dealing with debt. You propose a vicious cycle of cutting government programs and spending, hindering economic growth and lowering revenues. And you don't propose raising any additional revenues, not one cent. Your concern about the debt is a joke.

  • Nazdrakke||

    You propose a vicious cycle of cutting government programs and spending, hindering economic growth

    THIS IS WHAT TONY ACTUALLY BELIEVES.

  • Tony||

    And pretty much all economists. Math is math.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Math is math.

    Funny how you can't actually execute it.

    If the debt was no big deal, you'd see the Dems calling for an end to the Second Liberty Bond Act, not crying to raise the debt ceiling. Funny how progs never confront this fact when it's brought up.

  • Tony||

    Debt may be a big deal, but not as big as you guys make it out to be (don't forget that I'm perfectly well aware that debt serves only one function for you guys--the excuse to cut down the welfare state).

    Since the debt ceiling serves only one function (leverage by psychopaths who think a willingness to severely hurt the economy is leverage), I don't see the downside of letting Treasury issue the debt it needs to in order to pay the bills racked up by Congress. Obviously going back to pre-WWI manner of Congress approving each debt issuance separately is untenable.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Debt may be a big deal, but not as big as you guys make it out to be (don't forget that I'm perfectly well aware that debt serves only one function for you guys--the excuse to cut down the welfare state).

    Yes, I realize you don't understand the impact of exponential functions and basic percentages. You don't need to reconfirm this.

    I don't see the downside of letting Treasury issue the debt it needs to in order to pay the bills racked up by Congress.

    Hmmm--how big is the executive branch, again?

  • Zeb||

    Obviously going back to pre-WWI manner of Congress approving each debt issuance separately is untenable.

    Obvious? Why? Why shouldn't congress have to figure out how to pay for the spending it authorizes?

  • KPres||

    "Debt may be a big deal, but not as big as you guys make it out to be"

    Service on the debt costs as much annually as MEDICAID! So I guess according to you we can simply repeal medicaid and it will be "no big deal", eh?

  • Rasilio||

    "Debt may be a big deal, but not as big as you guys make it out to be"

    Only if you restrict your thinking to federal debt held by the public. In that case it is only about $12 trillion and while large not really problematic in comparison to the size of our economy.

    The problem is that is not the only source of debt our government has, there is also all of the unfunded liabilities as well, unless you assume that we repudiate all or part of those benefits that have been promised you must include them in with the debt.

    There are also state and local debts and unfunded liabilities which must be accounted for as the taxes those levels of government must collect to meet their obligations effectively limit how much the federal government can collect in taxes.

    Add in all of that debt and you are looking at ~$25 Trillion.

    But then you cannot compare that to the size of the entire economy because the government cannot claim the entire economic output to pay it's obligations, you must compare that to the amount that the government can collect from all taxes, since 1970 total government revenues (Fed, State, Local combined) has bounced between 29 and 37 percent of GDP, this already ranks us somewhere in the middle of the OECD countries with the highest of the Euro welfare states running at 48%.

  • Rasilio||

    Even though there is no evidence that Americans would be willing to pay 40% of GDP in taxes let us assume that it represents an effective maximum level of taxation. And it is highly unlikely that we could achieve it without significant detremental impacts to economic growth as that represents a net 20% increase in tax revenues.

    That is the revenue that government has with which to pay back that $25 trillion, ~$6.8 trillion per year which gives us debt closing in on 4x revenues not an impossible ratio but given that we show no signs of being able to rein in spending at any level for the forseeable future that ratio will only grow and by 2025 be greater than 5x revenue and over 6x revenue by 2030

  • Zeb||

    OK, it is true that big cuts to government right now will slow economic growth in the near term by most measures. Of course that happens when the government has made itself a significant part of the economy. But that doesn't mean that that level of government spending is necessary to have a good economy. Tony is not entirely wrong about this, just very short sighted.

    It is just a fact that something has to happen with the debt eventually. And it is pretty much either inflation, default or big spending cuts to eliminate the need for further borrowing under normal circumstances.

  • KPres||

    Ummm....no. Pretty much every empirical study on the relationship between government expenditure and growth rates shows government slows growth.

    Here's this from a recent metastudy:

    " The most recent studies find a significant negative correlation: An increase in government size by 10 percentage points is associated with a 0.5 to 1 percent lower annual growth rate."

    http://marginalrevolution.com/.....rowth.html

    So shut the fuck up and go away you ignorant asshole.

  • KPres||

    "Math is math."

    You are a fucking dumbass. C, I and G are not independent variables. Increasing G decreases C & I, because where the fuck do you thing G gets it's money?

  • tarran||

    You guys don't propose useful ways of dealing with debt. You propose a vicious cycle of cutting government programs and spending, hindering economic growth and lowering revenues.

    ROFL!

    Because if the economy doesn't produce more shit that people don't want, it's the end of prosperity, right?

  • Tony||

    The economy is hardly booming. You cut out the demand represented by government spending, it will negatively affect growth. I don't know why that should be controversial.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    I don't know why that should be controversial.

    Probably because it's wrong.

  • KPres||

    Yeah, it's not like private consumption returned to pre-crisis level two years ago or anything...

    What a fucking idiot.

    The problem with this economy is on the investment side....

    "The economy remains moribund not because consumption spending has failed to recover and not because government spending has failed to increase, but because the true driver of economic growth—private investment—remains deeply depressed....Private investors, despite the full recovery of real consumer spending and the increase of real government spending for final goods and services, remain apprehensive about the future of new investments, especially new long-term investments."

    Couldn't be because of Obamacare, Frank-Dodd, the threat of increased taxes to pay back the debt, etc etc, could it?

  • KPres||

    Forgot the link: http://hnn.us/blog/141753

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    The economy is hardly booming

    Good--this is finally sinking in.

    You cut out the demand represented by government spending, it will negatively affect growth.

    Gee, and here I was told by shitlibs that capitalism is strangling this country. Who knew it was actually because the country was so dependant on exponential government spending?

  • tarran||

    And what will happen to all those resources that were used to make shit that people didn't want (which is why only the state would buy it), Tonykins?

    Would they lie unused forevermore, or would investors snap them up in fire sales and put them to uses that produce shit that people are actually willing to pay for?

    Last time I checked, I'm more prosperous when DVD players cost $20.00, not when they are unavailable, and the state has yet another Regiment equipped with M1 Abrams tanks.

  • Rasilio||

    Because the government produces almost nothing of value, sure yeah courts and roads, but even there only a small part of the spending on them is productive, the bulk of it is wasteful crony programs and prosecuting people for victimless crimes.

    The "productive" part of government spending is around 0.05%. The rest, must be forcibly extracted from the productive parts of the economy BEFORE the government can spend it meaning that if the government did not spend that money there would be almost no impact on the economy because the private sector would

  • KPres||

    "You cut out the demand represented by government spending"

    Then cut transfer payments.

  • R C Dean||

    The economy is hardly booming.

    In spite of the fact that we have borrowed trillions to jumpstart economic growth.

    You're this close, Tony. Borrowing and expanding government spending have led to an economy that is hardly booming, yes?

    To a sane person, this would be an indication that maybe borrowing and expanding government spending aren't necessary for a booming economy, and may even be a hindrance.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    You guys don't propose useful ways of dealing with debt

    We should start with the first rule of holes.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I constantly get picked on and my creditability questioned because I didn't call up to increase my credit card limit this year.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    I've actually seen progs argue that not raising the debt limit is like not paying the balance on what you already owe, rather than asking for more credit on a balance that's not being paid off.

    When you bring up the fact that the debt hasn't been paid down on an annual basis since 1957, they grow strangely silent.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Shutdown Theater: National Park has issued 20 tickets at Valley Forge since shutdown began

    “I just went for a run like I always do,” said John Bell, 56, a real estate broker who has run 100 marathons in his life, raising more than $100,000 for charity. “I’m a marathon runner. I’ve been going down to Valley Forge for probably 25 years. I had no idea the park was even closed.”

    Bell said he drove to the park Sunday morning and noticed that internal park roads were barricaded, much like they are at night after the park closes, so instead he drove to a remote parking lot off of state Route 23. He proceeded to run about five miles through the 3,500-acre park and returned to find a pair of park rangers in the parking lot.

    “When I came back my car was surrounded by two ranger vehicles with their lights flashing,” Bell said. “I felt like I was a terrorist.”

    Bell said the rangers asked him if he “watched the news” and told him the park was closed because the government is shut down.
    ...

    “They’re trying to make this shutdown something that it’s not,” Bell said. “(The rangers are) never around, but they’re here for something like this? They really don’t need to be doing this.”

    He has never encountered a ranger in the park before, he added.
  • Restoras||

    He has never encountered a ranger in the park before, he added

    Essential. Personnel.

  • Restoras||

    He has never encountered a ranger in the park before, he added

    Essential. Personnel.

  • John||

    As much as I love to blame all of this on Obama, and he as President deserves the ultimate blame, this goes deeper. I don't think all of this is Obama's orders. I think the Park Service just genuinely loathes the American public. I don't think they needed an order. They just like fucking with people.

  • Restoras||

    They are following orders. Orders come from somewhere.

  • John||

    Sure. But I think the Park Service itself would have given the orders even if Obama hadn't.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    And risk an angry phone call from the President or one of his flunkies, wanting to know why they are making him look like an asshole? I just don't see it.

  • Sevo||

    John|10.11.13 @ 10:30AM|#
    "Sure. But I think the Park Service itself would have given the orders even if Obama hadn't."

    And I think they wouldn't; so?
    Neither your nor my opinion matters; they work for the executive. If Obo wanted the parks open, all he'd have to do is say so.

  • Restoras||

    No way, John. I understand that you want to give them the benefit of the doubt and that's fine. But consider: they are agents of the state. The first order of business as an agent of the state is to protect your position in the heirarchy. How do you do that? By following orders. Not rocking the boat. Not challenging the authority that you are under. By obeying any and all orders regardless of legality.

    You are well schooled in history. You know this is true, is part of the human condition. Why do you think it so unlikely that they are doing what they have been told to do from thier senior commanders?

  • John||

    I am not giving them the benefit of the doubt Restoras. I am saying the opposite. The entire service seems to be rotten to the core. Sure, obama is responsible for this if for no other reason than he could stop it and doesn't. But even after Obama leaves office, the Park Service will still be there. And I think this sort of behavior is just who they are. This whole thing has convinced me even more that the whole service needs to go. Fuck them. They clearly hate the public and have no desire to serve them.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    I think the lengths they are going to to inconvenience people shows that the order came out of the White House. Think about it. You're a career bureaucrat, are you going to take a chance on creating an openly visible, newsworthy incident without authorization? They just don't do that unless it's been cleared by somebody higher up. Regardless, Obama could have put a stop to it all with a single phone call, and he hasn't, which means he approves.

  • John||

    Of course. obama could stop it right now. And he is responsible for it. But at the same time, the entire culture of the Park Service seems pretty fucked up. They are awfully happy to follow orders even though it is turning into a public relations disaster.

  • Restoras||

    The NPS is no more fucked up than any other lethally armed hierarchy that never faces any degree of accountability.

  • Cdr Lytton||

    Yeah, but usually those types fuck with people who can't fight back. The Park Stasi are fucking with WWII veterans, elderly tourists, guys training for marathons, and people picking up litter.

    They better hope this shutdown ends soon. The longer it goes on, the worse the Park Stasi look. The agency is either going to get broken up or they'll fuck with the wrong person and catch a couple rounds through the forehead.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Speaking as a bureaucrat. Without an order, it is always 'business as usual'. Bureaucracy is built to run on autopilot and continue to do the same thing until something forces a change of process.

  • R C Dean||

    I love how leaving a park open isn't essential, but closing it is.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    "A Mennonite couple that owns an art gallery in Iowa has filed suit against the state's Civil Rights Commission over being threatened with punitive action for refusing to host a same-sex wedding on their property.

    "Görtz Haus Gallery, a former church turned art gallery facility, filed a lawsuit Monday against the commission in Polk County District Court."

    http://www.christianpost.com/n.....on-106308/

    Iowa's "anti-discrimination" law expressly provides that the law "shall not be construed to allow marriage between persons of the same sex,
    in accordance with chapter 595." But chapter 595 was declared unconstitutional by the Iowa Supreme Court when it established a "right" to SSM. So the Iowa Civil Rights Commission says that the anti-discrimination law has been judicially rewritted to require private businesses to recognize SSM.

    So - *because of state-recognized SSM*, a law which formerly allowed private businesses to define marrige in the traditional way has effectively been amended to force private businesses to violate their conscientious beliefs - unless the courts themselves intervene to stop it. Who, oh who, could have forseen this?

    http://www.becketfund.org/wp-c.....plaint.pdf

  • robc||

    But that will never happen, just like the CRA will never be used to establish quotas.

  • John||

    And leftist embraced gay marriage because they are about equality and gay people not because they viewed it as a club to use in their culture war.

  • JW||

    Who, oh who, could have forseen this?

    Any mongoloid with the reasoning skills of a 4th grader.

    But, far be it from me to deny you your KULTUR WAR jerk-off material.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Uh, we keep hearing assurances that there's no connection between the "antidiscrimination" laws and govt recognition of SSM.

    But H&R is the only place where people give such assurances - I'd like to hear these assurances from the key players promoting SSM. When they guarantee that they'll leave private businesses alone, then I'll at least listen to their pleas not to obstruct their redefinition of marriage - because after all it doesn't affect anyone else!

  • Zeb||

    No one says that. Of course there is some connection as a practical matter. There is also a connection between legalizing weed and high taxes, stupid arbitrary DUI standards and crony capitalism. But I still favor legalization in whatever form we can get.

    What we do say is that the anti-discrimination laws are a separate issue. They are bad as applied to private businesses with or without gay marriage. Getting rid of gay marriage, or not recognizing it in the first place does not fix the problems with anti-discrimination laws that apply to private parties.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    The connection to which I refer is where state-recognized SSM is followed by increased hassling of private businesses.

    Except in New Mexico - which is in the unique position of not having a statewide policy on SSM, with different jurisdictions having different policies - the states where these cases arise are states which recognize SSM.

    The tour guide in Maryland who, on advice of counsel, closed his business rights after the voters approved SSM, would probably disagree with the "separate issue" thesis. As would the couple in this story - their statutory protection is ignored by the "Civil Rights Commission" after the state high court established SSM.

  • Zeb||

    So work to get rid of the anti-discrimination law. That's the problem, not gay marriage. They can't refuse to host a wedding for a mixed race couple either without being hassled by the state. Should we bring back anti-miscegenation laws as well?

  • robc||

    No the problem is state licensing of marriage.

    Work to get rid of it instead of making it worse by licensing more people.

  • JW||

    I'd say both. Stop licensing AND forced servitude.

  • JW||

    Uh, we keep hearing assurances that there's no connection between the "antidiscrimination" laws and govt recognition of SSM.

    That's the person in your head. Try reality.

    Now that we know that you support the concept of civil liberties only when there is no adverse consequence by the exercise of such, and only then, we can move on.

    Thanks for playing.

  • MJGreen||

    There is no "they." You shouldn't stop innocent gays from marrying because some other gays will be childish and use the state to get the venue they want. Just as the state shouldn't ban or more tightly regulate guns because some gun owners will use them for murder and theft.

  • robc||

    Gays can marry in every state of the union.

    They just cant get a license from the state in all of them.

    End marriage licensing and this problem is entirely solved.

    Well, end marriage licensing and the stupid fucking concept of public accommodation.

  • robc||

    Gays can marry in every state of the union.

    They just cant get a license from the state in all of them.

    End marriage licensing and this problem is entirely solved.

    Well, end marriage licensing and the stupid fucking concept of public accommodation.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    I actually wasn't conscious of preventing *any* gays from marrying, innocent or not. Even *Reason* seems to have stopped the "legalization" meme as it recognizes that same-sex couples are free to hold whatever ceremonies they want, and live together as husband and wife, I mean husband and husband, or wife and wife. Or for all practical purposes, husband, husband, husband, wife, wife and wife.

    The dispute is over state-issued SSM licenses and the accompanying cudgel against dissenters that such laws give.

  • Zeb||

    You know damn well that when people say "get married", 99% of the time they mean get their relationship recognized by the state.

    I know this is a somewhat obnoxious question, but I think it captures the point well. If less stat sanctioned marriage is good, then do you support the reintroduction of anti-miscegenation laws? You acknowledge that gay couples do in fact get married. So how do you justify treating one class of married people differently from another class? There are a good number of benefits of being married that have nothing to do with anti-discrimination stuff or free goodies. For example, why is it OK to protect one class of married people from being forced to testify against their spouses in court, but not another?

    As an ultimate goal, I agree with robc that it would be good if state licensing of marriage were eliminated. But you can't do that piecemeal without massive equal protection problems. Either the state recognizes marriage or it doesn't. And right now it does, and that is extremely unlikely to change any time soon.

  • R C Dean||

    You know damn well that when people say "get married", 99% of the time they mean get their relationship recognized by the state.

    I also know damn well thta when people say something is "illegal", they mean it is against some law. And there is no law on the books anywhere that outlaws gay marriage.

    I also know that you can't "legalize" something unless it is illegal. So, yes, the battle cry "legalize gay marriage" is fundamentally a lie.

    If you want "mandatory licensing of gay marriage", be honest about it.

  • Zeb||

    Did I say "legalize" or "gay marriage is illegal"? I don't spend a lot of time saying that gay marriage is illegal. If I do it is casual and lazy way of speaking. So you are right. What I mean is that if the sate is going to recognize marriage at all, then they need to recognize marriages among same sex couples as well.

  • Sevo||

    "The Committee to Protect Journalists believes the Obama administration's aggressive prosecution of leaks and its efforts to control information are becoming a threat to press freedom"...

    But he's so dreamy they really won't gripe and it must be BUUUUUUUSH who's making him do all that bad stuff.
    He really just wants to do good, see? 'Cause he cares about stuff!

  • The Late P Brooks||

    I saw several segments on the "debt ceiling crisis" and the actual debt was not mentioned once.

    Exactly. What do these people think raising the "debt ceiling" means, "We needz moar puppies!"?

  • ||

    I heard Media Matters's radio spot on this, indignant that people think that there's any relationship at all between debt ceiling and debt.

  • Tony||

    Why don't you explain what you think it means.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Raising the debt ceiling"? It means opening the parks for crippled children, Tony.

    Either that or making the world safe for pork barrel spending and useless federal employees with their disgustingly bloated benefits.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Someone should point out that just because Congress authorized spending doesn't mean you have to spend it all. How much of the spending is within the discretion of the Executive? Does anyone know?

  • UnCivilServant||

    I'm in a good mood, something positive came out of nigeria:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ente.....s-24467337

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    And they want to deposit those missing episodes in the BBC's safety-deposit box, they only need its account number.

  • Cdr Lytton||

    Both episodes along with a free trailer for The Enemy of the World are now available in iTunes.

  • UnCivilServant||

    But it's iTunes, so pretty much unavailable until the DVD release.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    But that will never happen, just like the CRA will never be used to establish quotas.

    At least they don't use Social Security Numbers as a national I D.

  • Mainer2||

    + 1 New Deal

  • Sevo||

    "Gun limits could lead to recalls of legislators"
    "Gun-rights advocates are ready to launch a recall attempt aimed at some of California's most vulnerable Democratic state lawmakers"
    Not to worry; they'll be replaced with a dem listing 2* less to port.
    http://www.sfgate.com/politics.....886126.php

  • UnCivilServant||

    This is why the legislature here (in NY) has killed every effort at recall or ballot initiative clauses.

  • ||

    Kickstarter project of the day

    Livestreaming the 2014 Race for Texas Governor

  • The Late P Brooks||

    You guys don't propose useful ways of dealing with debt.

    Pay it.

    Simple, see?

  • Tony||

    Oh, what taxes do you propose raising?

  • Ken Shultz||

    Fuck You, Cut Spending.

  • Fluffy||

    If we don't raise the debt ceiling, the only way to avoid a default would be to use incoming revenues to preferentially pay maturing debt and interest prior to making any other kind of payment.

    So it seems like not raising the debt ceiling would get rid of the debt...one way or the other.

    We'd either abrogate it or pay it.

    If we abrogate it, we won't be able to borrow any more. WIN!

    If we pay it, we have to cut some other kind of spending to do that. WIN!

    I see nothing but upside here.

  • Tony||

    Except the fact that national policy is being made not by the legislative process but by emergency measures taken in response to an entirely manufactured crisis--one that will almost certainly cause a global recession. Yeah, nothing but upside.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "one that will almost certainly cause a global recession"

    What a fear-mongering dipshit!

    Incidentally, if laying off government employees caused a recession, then that's a recession we need. Because unproductive government workers parasiting off of the productive labor of others is what a healthy economy is all about over the long term?!

    In Tony World, the Soviet system would have worked fine--if only they'd raised the debt ceiling.

  • tarran||

    Comrade, remember how gloriously well off we were when the factory made T-72's instead of tractors?

  • Ken Shultz||

    There are people out there who are better off when they get overpaid to do nothing.

    The rest of us should be after them with torches and pitchforks, perpetually.

    Items purchased by fat, bloated, overpaid, useless, dolts counts as GDP, too. Anybody that uses that fact as an excuse to argue for making the economy safer for the useless and overpaid is an idiot--and that's effectively what Tony is arguing.

    He's so fucking dumb.

  • KPres||

    "What a fear-mongering dipshit!"

    Tony is a progressive, which these days apparently means you go around parroting the talking points of rich bankers.

  • Fluffy||

    The House passing all revenue bills is part of the legislative process, Tony.

    In fact, it could be said to be the core of the legislative process.

  • Ken Shultz||

    But it's going to lead to global recession!

  • Tony||

    What's your point?

  • Restoras||

    To make you look stupid. Not that he needs too but he did succeed.

  • Ken Shultz||

    You talk about the House weighing in on spending like that's not their job.

    I'd say the point is that you're an ignoramus, Tony, but you've had your face rubbed in these facts more than once over the past week.

  • Sevo||

    Tony|10.11.13 @ 11:14AM|#
    ..."one that will almost certainly cause a global recession"

    OH, OH! Tony suddenly cares about the DEBT?!
    Fuck off, asshole; you said debt isn't an 'issue' a week or so ago when I mentioned it as one of Obama's disasters.

  • R C Dean||

    So it seems like not raising the debt ceiling would get rid of the debt

    Actually, it wouldn't. We would have to pay interest, but can continue rolling over the principal indefinitely.

  • tarran||

    Oh, what taxes do you propose raising?

    Sure Tony, repeal all subsidies on farming.

    We could also repeal all those subsidies given out by the Energy department for research on alternative energy and encouraging people to by Priuses (Prii?) and the like.

    SInce you argue that not giving is equal to taking, I'm sure you will agree that these constitute much higher taxes on the affected industries.

    Then we can move on. The U.S. govt gives a lot of money as grants and subsidies to do some pretty weird social engineering. Let's tax those guys by nto giving grants to them anymore.

    We probably should stop subsidizing the fossil fuel industry as well, don't you think?

  • Tony||

    Yes, though I do favor massive public investment in clean energy as what should be by far the number one priority of all governments. But that's unrelated to budgeting and more about saving the human species from extinction.

  • tarran||

    Wow!

    You poor dear. No wonder you are so panicky.

    You'll be thrilled to know that according to the IPCC, there is only a miniscule chance of humanity suffering any catastrophe if we don't switch to clean energy.

    What? Yes that's right. The real story may not be in the IPCC rowback on temperature ranges, or its cack-handed "explanations" for the stalling temperatures. It may in fact all be in this table. Be sure to look for yourself. Every single catastrophic scenario bar one has a rating of "Very unlikely" or "Exceptionally unlikely" and/or has "low confidence". The only disaster scenario that the IPCC consider at all likely in the possible lifetimes of many of us alive now is "Disappearance of Arctic summer sea ice", which itself has a 'likely' rating and liable to occur by mid century with medium confidence. As the litany of climate disasters go, that's it.

    So with this cheery news, would you agree that we should 'tax' the energy industry more by withdrawing subsidies to it?

  • KPres||

    The economic studies show global warming will be an economic BENEFIT for at least the next 70 years...and that's assuming the IPCC's laughable sensitivity figure, which are only about twice what all the recent studies have place it at.

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    Haha Tony do you even look at the statistics for countries trying to implement your wind/solar boon doggles? Germany's CO2 levels are going up as they build coal plants to cover the inconsistent and pitiful performance of all those fancy green energy money holes.

  • KPres||

    "saving the human species from extinction."

    Not even the most outrageous climate alarmist believes this. Only HuffPo readers are that dumb.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Can we stop responding to it? Even if you believe the person behind Tony is arguing honestly, it should be obvious that he rejects classical economics. Instead, he favors fantasies that government spending on useless pork and valueless (as in, producing zero value) employees is just as - if not more - vital to the economy as the people out there producing goods and services that people will pay (their own) money for.

    The government's Ditch Digging and Re-filling Project (DDiRP is shovel ready, motherfuckers!) is just as vital as people growing / raising food, building houses, designing smartphones, etc.

  • tarran||

    BP,

    I know Tony is arguing in bad faith. But the arguments he presents are common ones, and refuting them is a great way to sharpen our arguments and improve our reasoning.

    Also, I've noticed that if you are nice to it, its handler gets really pissed. :)

  • BakedPenguin||

    fair enough, tarran.

  • SugarFree||

    But the arguments he presents are common ones, and refuting them is a great way to sharpen our arguments and improve our reasoning.

    "I fuck my Fleshlight extra-hard each night in case I ever meet a real woman."

  • tarran||

    You're just pissed because you know in your heart of hearts the Fleshlight is a better lay than your mom!

  • John||

    What Tarran said. Shreek is just an angry retard who tries to troll but generally fucks up the talking points. Tony gets them right. They shouldn't be left not refuted.

  • Ken Shultz||

    He's just repeating talking points.

    He doesn't "believe" in anything except Obama.

    Incidentally, anybody else notice that Obama's approval rating has dropped to 37%? Well, it has...

    Expect Michelle to launch a charm offensive any minute now.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Don't threaten us with torture, please.

  • Restoras||

    Let the wookie win.

  • Rasilio||

    Speaking of which, has anyone seen the new Verizon ad with the African American family all dressed up as Star Wars characters?

    You'll never guess which character the black woman was dressed up as.

  • tarran||

    Expect Michelle to launch a charm offensive any minute now.

    NO! NOOO! NOOOOOOOO!

    I love Obama! He's awesome! He's doing a great job despite rethuglican racist opposition!

  • Mainer2||

    Incidentally, anybody else notice that Obama's approval rating has dropped to 37%? Well, it has...

    The Fox News report I heard on the radio this morning only mentioned that Congress has an 80% disapproval rating. They left out Obama's 37% approval.

  • Pro Libertate||

    It's interesting how much both parties and the president in particular are taking hits, yet IT'S ALL ABOUT THE REPUBLICAN DOOM.

  • #||

    He doesn't even understand modern keynsian thought either, never mind neo-classical. All he knows is the dumbed down version of Macroecon 102 that he heard somewhere and listed up for a moment because it said "government spend more money!" And he liked that part.

  • Ken Shultz||

    You're right that he doesn't understand Keynesian thought. As much as I disagree with them, Tony makes them look far stupider than they are.

    Tony doesn't understand Marxist thought either. He even makes them look stupid! Did you guys know that "creative destruction" came from Marxism? Tony doesn't know anything about it.

    Tony's an ignoramus whose only purpose here is to promote whatever Obama is doing. And, yeah, believe it or not? I think Tony makes Obama look dumber than he really is, too.

    The worst thing that he could do to us is if Tony actually became a libertarian and started arguing for our causes around the internet. He would make us look sooooooooo stupid.

  • KPres||

    "Tony doesn't understand Marxist thought either. He even makes them look stupid!"

    Tony is what Marx called a "vulgar communist".

  • The Late P Brooks||

    The National Park Service is part of the Department of the Interior. The head of this Cabinet-level arm of the government is appointed by the President, based on *her* willingness to carry out the preferred policies of the President. The idea that individual park supervisors would, nearly in unison, deem the "shutdown" as a call to aggressively pursue a policy of not just cutting available services but barricading park entrances and evicting visitors is not likely.

  • Sevo||

    You're too kind. It's laughable that she would do anything of the sort without the stated or obvious approval of Obama.
    She likes her job!

  • R C Dean||

    They are actually spending more to shut down these parks. On what planet do you spend more in response to a funding cut without direction and approval from on high?

  • The Late P Brooks||

    You cut out the demand represented by government spending, it will negatively affect growth.

    There's your trouble, right there. "GDP" is a number. It goes up. It goes down. Based on a formula concocted by government economists.

    GDP not same as Real Economic Growth. Stop fooling yourself. Paying "economists" to crunch numbers in the Dept of Ag basement does not increase crop production.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    If we don't raise the debt ceiling, the only way to avoid a default would be to use incoming revenues to preferentially pay maturing debt and interest prior to making any other kind of payment.

    I have no problem with that.

  • R C Dean||

    Let's not forget, debt service is the only spending that is specifically called out as a priority in the Constitution.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Also-

    It's nice to see the same people who believe the government is responsible for everything happening in the economy falling back on the argument, "We can't prioritize disbursements. Are you crazy, that would be really complicated and difficult."

  • Pro Libertate||

    Yes. They're capable of running an economy except whenever they actually get called out on failing to do the least little thing right.

  • anzablazer||

    When these Nit-Wit's signed the Patriot Act into full effect that was
    a Death Nail Driven straight into the American Constitution. Freedom of speech, owing a weapon, privacy, just about every
    part of the Constitution is under attack. There's nothing Patriotic
    about the Patriot Act. Unless you like being under Military control
    and Spied on. All we have is a Quasi Government being run by the NSA
    Fascist and Elitist Authoritarians that own the Banks and Corporations.

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