A.M. Links: Obamacare "Good Faith" Exceptions Announced, US May Take Further Military Action in South Sudan, Silk Road Owner Says Feds Seized Millions in Bitcoin

  • Credit: White HouseCredit: White HouseToday is the deadline to sign up for Obamacare, but a senior Obama administration official stated that a "good faith" exception will be given to those who try to sign up but fail. No word on how they'll verify that such an effort was made.
  • President Obama told Congress on Sunday that he may take further military action to protect Americans trying to evacuate violence-plagued South Sudan.
  • Conservatives are bellyaching that the Obama administration is too soft and that the U.S. is losing its influence around the world.
  • The president is getting some "sleep and sun" during a two-week vacation in Hawaii, presumably having muttered "I hate this job" the whole nine-hour flight there.
  • Ross Ulbricht, the internet “pirate” accused of running the notorious illegal-drug-peddling web site Silk Road, claims that the feds seized $33.6 million worth of the encrypted virtual currency Bitcoin from him. 
  • Members of the Russian punk band Pussy Riot have been released from prison as part of an amnesty bill, but they dismiss it as a PR stunt to prep for the Sochi Winter Olympics.

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||

    Salutations.

  • ||

    Hello.

  • Aloysious||

    Greetings on this fine morning.

  • Spoonman.||

    I'm dealing with some real bullshit this morning, personally.

    Work-related, not my personal life. Also, not my fault and everybody knows it.

  • JW||

    Remember to take your enemies down with you.

  • ||

    Greetings Fist. But breaking your own rules to regain your throne is unbecoming.

  • Ted S.||

    At least he didn't say "Nyello".

  • ||

    Herb Tarlek!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    These rules aren't mine (even though I made them up) they are the internet's and they certainly don't say you can't post first with something like that, just that it won't count as a true first. Anyway, with this light holiday crowd, a true first today is a hollow victory. Which I have below since I also posted a true first.

  • ||

    I bow to your logic, as opulent in splendor as your magnificence.

  • Mike M.||

    Happy Festivus!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Begin the Airing of Grievances.

  • UnCivilServant||

    I hate everyone who spews the word "festivus". It gets on my nerves just from the sound of it.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Remind me not to take you on my trip to Rome after I build my time machine.

  • MJGreen||

    I got a lot of problems with you people!

  • Protagoronus||

    Making the aluminum pole took resources that could have been used to make or polish monocles.

  • Protagoronus||

    Firefly ended too soon.

    Fist is too first.

    No one delivers ice cream to my house weekly.

  • Mike M.||

    It drives me nuts when people feel compelled to always be first on the morning links!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Hear, hear.

  • Brett L||

    My wife has gone completely nuts on cleaning the house for our hosting of Christmas dinner. Which my mother has volunteered herself to make without allowing for negotiation or compromise.

    Cleaning the kitchen and the bathrooms, I get. Trying to not make the family room look like someone blew up a giant diaper bag, I get. Spending two hours scrubbing an oven back to better than factory condition? Especially since a year ago it was MY oven, and she made a perfectly healthy new grandbaby. I don't get. Nor her insistence on stressing herself to the redline about this shit.

    Also, the fact that I am apparently an evil for suggesting that we just set my family to cleaning if she wants a clean house annoys me.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    The Ohio State defense stinks!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The president is getting some "sleep and sun" during a two-week vacation in Hawaii...

    "Michelle, did you forget to pack my mom jeans?"

  • ||

    I ain't yo momma, Barry. Now git before I slap you silly like I did last night.

  • DontShootMe||

    Soon thereafter, the 3rd C-17 "scrambled" out of Andrews AFB that morning, carrying "classified" cargo, and headed for Hawaii.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ...but a senior Obama administration official stated that a "good faith" exception will be given to those who try to sign up but fail.

    Obamacare seems to be not so much the law of the land as the suggestion of the land.

  • Rich||

    This.

    First the "favored organization" exceptions, then the "hardship" exceptions, now the "good faith" exceptions. What will the administration call the *next* ones?

  • Jordan||

    The null pointer exceptions. Well, they've probably had a million of those already, given the state of the website.

  • DontShootMe||

    +1 tinyint

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Eventually they're going to have to call it surrender.

  • Rich||

    GOOD FAITH surrender!

  • Ted S.||

    The rule of law exceptions

  • Mike M.||

    Some animals are more equal than others.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Remember, it's only treason when you want to to do it legislatively and have it apply to everyone.

  • eyeroller||

    Pass a million laws, only enforce them when you want to. Also known as "tyranny."

  • wareagle||

    for the first time in his life, Barack Obama is being held accountable. And he has no idea what to do. It is epic incompetence that makes the Carter years look like the model of efficiency.

  • Ted S.||

    But he's so articulate and well-groomed!

  • VG Zaytsev||

    And only speaks with a negro dialect when he wants to.

  • BigT||

    ^^THIS^^

    He has never had a position of accountability. 'Present', organizing, campaigning, 'Bush!' are merely ways to avoid responsibility.

  • ||

    wareagle. Really?

    Because, I thought it was all Bush's fault.

  • Ted S.||

    It's all Stephen Harper's fault.

  • ||

    Him too!

  • Atanarjuat||

    Or the Heritage Foundation. After all, they authored ObamaHeritageCare.

  • Brett L||

    Best sabotage operation ever executed.

  • wareagle||

    Obama's election, the first one, is Bush's fault. Barry's performance on the job, however, is all his.

  • 2ndClassProle||

    Biden: Brown Hornet, Brown Hornet. What are we going to do? What are we going to do?

    Obama: We have to save the P-E-O-P-L-E!!!!!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    You think what the commoners are saying is penetrating the presidential awesomeness bubble?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    No word on how they'll verify that such an effort was made.

    The IRS will scan their returns for mentions of "tea" or "party" and all the others will be exempt.

  • UnCivilServant||

    The poor bastards who work for the party warehouse are screwed.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    What about Tetley?

  • UnCivilServant||

    Those teabaggers are dead to me.

    They let themselves be bought out by Tata.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    The tea partiers should change the names of their groups to progressive this or that. It'll paralyze the IRS thugs and they just may be able to scam some money out of socialists.

  • ||

    Members of the Russian punk band Pussy Riot have been released from prison as part of an amnesty bill, but they dismiss it as a PR stunt to prep for the Sochi Winter Olympics.

    As long as they don't let those damn Greanpeace hippies go.

  • Agammamon||

    Let them go - just give 'em a little tea and polonium first.

  • Swiss Servator, Pikes Forward!||

    Dioxin and Borscht

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ...presumably having muttered "I hate this job" the whole nine-hour flight there.

    Nothing like riding a taxpayer-funded, luxury private jet to remind you it's not all that bad.

  • ||

    What's his carbon foot print?

    Surprised he didn't give a speech about global warming from l'avion.

  • Ted S.||

    From the "not a nut punch at all" files:

    Man nearly late to his own wedding -- because he's saving a surfer's life

    The drama started at about 2.30pm when a French tourist went for a surf opposite the Chalet.

    At about the same time, a motorised kontiki fishing line was launched from the beach.

    The 25-year-old boardrider was hooked by the hand as the line was towed out through the surf break, and he was dragged out to sea.

    Mr Cairns had been staying at the Chalet and had gone for a swim before going back to get dressed for his wedding to fiancee Joy Williams.

    “I had just got to the beach from my swim when I heard screaming out in the surf and saw the surfer being dragged out.

    “Other people started to look at him too, so I reacted,” Mr Cairns said.

    He alerted bystanders and got one of them to call 111 for help.

    “I got another man to join me. We swam out about 150 metres to get to him.”

    Mr Cairns said he still did not know at that stage exactly what was wrong.

    “But the guy kept on screaming, and he was holding a hand up. When I got closer I could see he was hooked up in the fishing line, and he was trying to show it to me.”
  • ||

    What the hell is a motorized kontiki fishing line?

  • Ted S.||

    How to fish with a kontiki

    Kontikis traditionally came in the form of a very small pontoon-type boat, raft-like structure, kite or inflated object designed to be taken offshore by the wind (in offshore wind conditions). In more recent years however, electric kontikis have been developed, powered by 30-46lb (13-16kg) thrust Mercury electric motors running off 12-volt gel-cell batteries outputting between 16 and 22 amps. These allow a craft to run out to nearly two kilometres offshore in optimum conditions, but they can be programmed to run shorter distances if necessary.

    Roll that beautiful bean footage

  • ||

    Seems like the guy running the kontiki should've been paying more attention.

  • wwhorton||

    ...so, a trap for surfers, essentially?

  • UnCivilServant||

    No, surfers are just bycatch. They're usually thrown back.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    When I used to surf, I hated it when some guy would cast a line right out where we were swimming. Made me wish I had carried a knife.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    "And you didn't even think to call to warn me you would be late!"

  • CatoTheElder||

    If the bride-to-be bitched about his being late after learning this story, the groom-to-be should have the sense to save his own life as well.

  • ||

    "...a senior Obama administration official stated that a "good faith" exception will be given to those who try to sign up but fail..."

    Good faith.

    Gee. Thanks.

    "Listen, tell you what we (/points to pals) gonna do for you. Because we feel bad for taking your possessions we'll give you this coupon, see, for a free espresso anytime between now and 15 minutes. At which point, our good will gesture will expire."

    Yes, you may read in Fat Tony's voice.

  • R C Dean||

    A "good faith" exception is pretty much a full-on delay of the individual mandate.

    But they can't do it in so many syllables, or they'll have to admit failure.

    So: within 90 days, every delay the Repubs asked for (and were branded traitors for), they got pretty much for free.

    Of course, completely independently, they gave away the store on the new budget bill.

    Republicans: snatching defeat from the jaws of victory since, I dunno, frikkin' forever.

  • CatoTheElder||

    It strikes me how Obama was willing to shut down the federal government and default on the national debt to prevent exactly this outcome. Team Blue was adamant that ObamaCare move Forward™ and refused to negotiate.

    The whole shutdown thing got pinned on Republicans even though they were willing to negotiate. For some reason, that is the widely accepted narrative despite the plain facts.

  • sarcasmic||

    Obama commutes eight sentences, while Putin pardons two hundred.

  • Jordan||

    "AM I NOT MERCIFUL?!"

  • 2ndClassProle||

    I call it love. I am their father, the people are my children and I shall hold them to my bosom and embrace them tightly...

    /Commodus

  • ||

    And I will love him and hug him and squeeze him and call him George. -Abominable Snowman

  • Swiss Servator, Pikes Forward!||

    "The greatest joy for a man is to defeat his enemies, to drive them before him, to take from them all they possess, to see those they love in tears, to ride their horses, and to hold their wives and daughters in his arms."

    G. Khan

  • Entropy Void||

    ... and to hear the lamentations of their women!

  • 2ndClassProle||

    ... and the gods shall cry for their suffering!

  • ||

    One of them Deval Patrick's cousin.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Is that true?

  • Auric Demonocles||

    That's what I heard on the radio the other day.

  • ||

    Yes, Deval Patrick's cousin is a member of Pussy Riot.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    You going next week?

  • ||

    No, actually I am going on vacation for a couple of weeks. (I'll actually miss the first playoff game also as it happens, on which subject you should email me if interested.) I did properly thank our resident Bills fans here at the office though.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    You gonna miss it even if they get the bye?

    I've so far been successful getting divisional round games via the presale (and have a 50% success rate on AFCCG), but it would be nice not to have to worry about it...

  • ||

    50% chance depending on the timing, and I need to commit before knowing since I'll be away. Not good odds.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Well, if you need to transfer some playoff tickets off your hands I could probably help with that.

  • ||

    Yup. Reported on conservative Boston radio. I don't believe the Globe would touch this.

    http://www.boston.com/politica.....story.html

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    So seven pardons/commutations were cover.

  • CatoTheElder||

    Sounds about right.

  • Rich||

    Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has offered a rare apology to the families of those killed in an attack on a military hospital earlier this month.

    [They] acknowledged "our mistake and guilt" and offered to pay blood money.

    See, AQ isn't *all* bad.

  • Ted S.||

    They should have just droned the place.

  • Atanarjuat||

    I wonder if Obama apologized to the families of those blown up at that wedding, assuming they have any living family members anymore.

  • Jordan||

    He hasn't heard about it on the news yet.

  • ||

    Drones make apologies unnecessary. Apologies are passe now.

  • BigT||

    Drones mean Never having to say you're sorry. Ali McGraw approves.

  • Doctor Whom||

    Obama's drones only ever kill terrorists. Yes, someone actually told me that.

  • Ted S.||

    Then why hasn't Peter King been droned to death?

  • UnCivilServant||

    You become a terrorist by being targetted by the drones, and carry the title for as long as the missile is in flight. We making more terrorists all the time!

  • ||

    That "someone" being the Obama Administration.

  • Agammamon||

    Yes he did, then he droned them.

    SIGNATURE STRIKE BITCHES!

  • R C Dean||

    [They] acknowledged "our mistake and guilt" and offered to pay blood money.

    MAking them better people than any pubsec union in these United States.

  • Aloysious||

    No word on how they'll verify that such an effort was made.

    Let me guess; we'll have to take it on faith?

  • Rich||

    ***cough***NSA***cough***

  • Ted S.||

    Government employees will help people navigate their way through the effort.

  • ||

  • BigT||

    "omorrow, the White House will celebrate Diwali, the festival of lights, for the fifth time since President Obama took office. This year, First Lady Michelle Obama will provide remarks and light the diya, or lamp."

  • R C Dean||

    And how, under our modern interpretation, is this not an "establishment of religion" on par with putting the Ten Commandments on the lawn?

  • tarran||

    If you perform all religious ceremonies, you aren't really establishing a religion, are you? ;)

  • R C Dean||

    What Christian ceremonies have the Obama's performed?

    Not just attended, mind you, but actively participated in?

  • tarran||

    What Christian ceremonies have the Obama's performed?

    He's been killing Mussulmen in the Holy Land! What more do you want?

  • ||

    It's funny, because it's true.

  • Aloysious||

    *wipes away tear*

    You guys have made me feel so much better!

  • Aloysious||

    ...aaaaand upthread Fist was first with my own comment.

    dammit.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Yeah, but what can ya do.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Conservatives are bellyaching that the Obama administration is too soft and that the U.S. is losing its influence around the world.

    We can turn that around by sending a crack commando squad to Russia to snatch Snowden, and hang him publicly on the Mall.

    His Iron Fisted Vengefulness can spring the trap, attired in top hat and tails.

  • ||

    If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them.....

  • 2ndClassProle||

    +1 A-team!

  • BigT||

    Seal Team 6!

  • UnCivilServant||

    Aww, I got the B-Team.

  • seguin||

    If you're the B-Team, what's the C-Team like?

  • Agammamon||

    Sorry, the A-Team is busy fixing the exchanges.

  • Brett L||

    Please. No way is Obama going to be able to employ anybody named the "A-Team".

  • 2ndClassProle||

    Dream Team?

  • Rasilio||

    If they are so worried all they need to do is miss a interest payment on the Debt to remind the rest of the world how much they need us.

    Remember, if you owe the bank $17 million dollars you have a problem, if you owe the bank 17 Trillion dollars it is the bank who has the problem

  • R C Dean||

    And if they miss an interest payment, the market for the trillion in new Treasuries they need to issue every year, and who knows how many trillions they need to reissue every year, will vaporize.

    Owing the bank a shitload of money only gives you leverage if you don't need any more loans from the bank.

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    I wonder why the feds are propping up the price of Bitcoin?

  • UnCivilServant||

    They plan to pay down the debt with seized bitcoins.

  • Atanarjuat||

    They plan to pay down the debt raise spending with seized bitcoins.

    fixed

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    Winner

  • Tim||

    The deficit is going all digital.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    a senior Obama administration official stated that a "good faith" exception will be given to those who try to sign up but fail.

    "Faith based" initiatives?

    I blame BOOOOOSH!

  • PRX||

    a senior Obama administration official stated that a "good faith" exception will be given to those who try to sign up but fail.

    what happens if I tried to sign up and Obama failed?

  • Tim||

    A friend's army medic son in law just got deployed to Kenya where he (claims at least he) is doing combat ops with various SF units. Nice to know we got another secret invasion going on.

  • Mike M.||

    We're paving the way for Obama to eventually go over there to rule next, assuming that he actually agrees to vacate the U.S. presidency peacefully.

  • John||

    I have no doubt. And I love how the media never asked just what those soldiers who were injured this weekend were doing in the Sudan. The government said they were on a rescue mission and the Black Jesus would never lie.

  • Tim||

    "Paul Ryan Defends Military Benefits Cuts "
    We love our soldiers, but not as much as our Defense contractors.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    what happens if I tried to sign up and Obama failed?

    Your lack of faith has been duly noted.

    By the IRS.

  • Entropy Void||

  • John||

    Just like the Jews who had their shops burned on Crystalnacht did not have their property rights' violated. You have no rights against the mob, just the government.

    Of course the mob determining what can and cannot be said tends to have a pretty large effect on who runs the government.

  • BigT||

    A&E is hardly a mob.

    Apart from commentators imaginations, no one has acted beyond their right to do so in the DD controversy.

  • John||

    A&E isn't a mob. The millions of idiots who honestly believe anyone who disagrees with them has no right to make an honest living are the mob.

    A&E is just bowing to the mob. Saying bowing to the mob is the rational economic move is just making a factual assertion, which may or may not be true. But even if it is, that doesn't make the mob anything other than what it is.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    A&E is just bowing to the mob.

    That "mob" being the viewership of their sister stations Bravo (the station that "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" ran, if you remember) and LOGO (a the GLBT version of BET). A perfectly rational business decision from their point of view.

  • John||

    A perfectly rational business decision from their point of view.

    Okay. Which part of Saying bowing to the mob is the rational economic move is just making a factual assertion, which may or may not be true. But even if it is, that doesn't make the mob anything other than what it is. did you not understand?

    I get it. A&E can do what they want. But that is completely besides the point. The point is are we going to stand around and think it is a good thing or support the idea that mobs of Progs can make it economically impossible for any media outlet to employ anyone who utters a dissenting view?

  • BakedPenguin||

    Jonathan Rauch had an interesting point in The Kindly Inquisitors. Allowing actual hateful speech was useful, because it allowed non-involved people to examine the speech and decide for themselves that the opinions expressed were not valid.

    tl;dr: Sunlight can be a very good disinfectant.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    The point is are we going to stand around and think it is a good thing or support the idea that mobs of Progs can make it economically impossible for any media outlet to employ anyone who utters a dissenting view?

    I agree with you. What I was trying to say is that if A&E's sister stations weren't LGBT specialized interest stations, the threat of boycott wouldn't have been so strong.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Yes, I'm sure all teh gays will stop watching queer eye for the straight guy because of Robertson's GQ interview.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Well, considering Queer Eye has been off TV for several years, they don't have much of a choice. But what makes you think a group that's riled up enough won't boycott a network?

  • VG Zaytsev||

    The fact that it's never actually happened?

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Apart from commentators imaginations, no one has acted beyond their right to do so in the DD controversy.

    Sure. But it is rather convient for A&E now that 1) the most recent season is already in the can; 2) they're currently running a DD marathon every day before Xmas; and 3) there was an A&E rep sitting right there with Robertson during the GQ interview. So this gesture by the network is really nothing more than superficial peacocking for GLAAD.

    More and more, this is looking like the network wanted to set up their own version of "Here Comes Honey-Boo-Boo," but with rich rednecks instead of welfare rednecks, and they lost control of the show's interpretive narrative when the Robertsons became wildly popular and made the faith/family message the central theme of the show instead. Maybe they were gambling that the Robertsons would still want to do the show without Phil so the gravy train didn't stop, but since they're sticking by him, A&E will probably have to give up its biggest cash cow to CMT or Spike or some other network that will trade off giving up some creative control of the show for the money it's bringing in.

  • John||

    That is a really good take on it. I have heard over and over again how the show and the people were nothing like the execs or the producers thought it was going to be.

    I have been saying to various Washington conservatives since I first saw the show how subversive it is. What is funny about the rise of the show is that all of the beltway conservative thinkers and writers at places like National Review and the Weekly Standard are constantly bemoaning how the Right loses the culture and how there needs to be entertainment that doesn't demean right wing and especially religious people. So here comes Duck Dynasty that does just that and is a huge hit. But they totally missed it. They didn't watch the show much less understand its significance. It is almost like they are the same sort of elitist douche bag that writers on the Left tend to be.

  • ||

    It is almost like they are the same sort of elitist douche bag that writers on the Left tend to be.

    NO WAI! You're saying Washingtonians can't relate to real folk in middle 'Merica??? When did that happen?!?!?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    There is nothing "real" about reality TV stars. The Robertsons are just as constructed as the Kardashians.

  • John||

    That wasn't my point. Real or not, that show does everything that Right wing writers had been calling for entertainment to do and was a huge hit. Yet, they didn't notice it.

  • Rasilio||

    Actually no they aren't. Everything that happens in the show is constructed and staged and the Robertsons may play up some parts of their personalities and play down others but they aren't acting on that show and remember, this is a family that built itself from poverty to being multi millionaires before they ever landed a TV show and they are completely real

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Everything that happens in the show is constructed and staged and the Robertsons may play up some parts of their personalities and play down others

    Right.

    this is a family that built itself from poverty to being multi millionaires before they ever landed a TV show and they are completely real

    I'm not saying they're a "fake" family, but Duck Dynasty isn't a documentary. Everything that is shown on the program is chosen by the producer for maximum entertainment value, as opposed to an objective depiction.

  • BigT||

    RRR, there's a sucker born every minute. A&E might well get back together with the DD folks. There's gold in them thar quacks!!

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Maybe they will, T, but I don't see how they can now without people getting fired. A&E is owned by Disney, and DD never really fit into Disney's corporate ethos. Disney is very much invested in the modern sensibility of "Thou Shalt Not Offend Particular Groups," and A&E painted themselves into a corner by suspending Phil rather than cancelling the whole show and eating the production costs, for the very reason you describe--because DD is a freakin' cash juggernaut.

    The whole episode reeks of corporatist hypocrisy--they don't want to be associated with people who think like Phil, but they don't want to give up the sweet, sweet money the show brings in, either. And now they're stuck between a rock and a hard place because of it.

  • R C Dean||

    Disney is very much invested in the modern sensibility of "Thou Shalt Not Offend Particular Groups,"

    Disney is also very much invested in the age-old idea of "making shitloads of money."

    It will be interesting to see whether the Chief Financial Officer or the Chief Diversity Officer wins this round.

  • BigT||

    " And now they're stuck between a rock and a hard place because of it."

    Yes, and it will be fun to watch them slither out of their predicament. IIRC Disney has a division that handles R-rated material, so they may well have a strategy for DD or other non-PC fare. The whole DD episode has exposed a storm of stupid on all sides.

  • CatoTheElder||

    Then why does Disney keep churning out the likes of Britney Spears and Miley Cyrus?

  • Zeb||

    Just like the Jews who had their shops burned on Crystalnacht did not have their property rights' violated.

    Um, what?

    That whole thing is stupid, A&E shouldn't be surprised when the star of their show about some Bible belt rednecks turns out to have some Bible belt redneck views on things.

  • Restoras||

    I know right? Why can't we all be the same, like the Dutch or the Icelanders?

  • John||

    It is a simple analogy Zeb. The point of that article is that you can't have your free speech rights violated if the government isn't doing it. Okay, well the government didn't do Krystalnacht. It was all private parties in a mob. So by that logic, those Jews didn't have their property rights violated.

    The point is that there is more to a free society than our legalistic views of government power. If society decides that it is okay for the mob to boycott and ruin anyone who says anything outside of the accepted view, it is not a free society anymore regardless of what the 1st Amendment says.

    Indeed, Libertarians of all people should be the most sensitive to this. It is this kind of mob "you can't say that" group think that prevents us from having any kind of an intelligent debate about things like public school funding or the Civil Rights Act.

    What happened to the guy on Duck Dynasty has been happening to Libertarians for decades; a mob reaction that makes it impossible to utter certain views in public. Just because you don't like his view, doesn't mean you should support the reaction to it or think it is no big deal.

  • Restoras||

    What happened to the guy on Duck Dynasty has been happening to Libertarians for decades; a mob reaction that makes it impossible to utter certain views in public.

    I have had plenty of experience with this in Westchester County, NY. I had the audacity to suggest that maybe the idea of not keeping score in our kids sports leagues was such a good idea - and attempted to explain that in life you learn a lot more from losing than you do from being told you are a winner but don't worry about it just have fun!

  • John||

    Yup. The progs politicize everything. And they are very adept co-opting society and mores for political purposes. Why bother winning an argument when you can just get the mob to make even thinking much less speaking the other side unacceptable?

    There is more to creating an oppressive society than what the government does.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    It's more about this than anything else. The politicization of everything means more calls for government in everything.

  • Zeb||

    There is more to creating an oppressive society than what the government does.

    True, but there are two sides to that coin. If we want a society where government is less involved in trying to make people do good, then you also need social pressures to discourage people from behaving badly.

  • John||

    then you also need social pressures to discourage people from behaving badly.

    Sure, but since when is voicing a dissenting or unpopular view "behaving badly"? If the Duck Dynasty guy had gone gay bashing one night, then yeah, I am all for running him out of society. But that is not what he did. He merely voiced an opinion. I really don't want to live in a society where the mob comes for you or your job whenever you voice an opinion they don't like.

  • Zeb||

    Sure, but since when is voicing a dissenting or unpopular view "behaving badly"?

    I didn't say it was, necessarily. But some people evidently think it is.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    I didn't say it was, necessarily. But some people evidently think it is.

    And those people are fascist fucks that need to be ostracized, not followed.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    There is more to creating an oppressive society than what the government does.

    The progs realized a long time ago that government is downstream of culture and set about changing the culture of the US.

    An oppressive government requires a cultural acceptance of oppression to remain functional.

  • CatoTheElder||

    Here's my take:

    - All so-called "reality TV" sucks. Therefore, Duck Dynasty sucks.
    - The callous remarks by the Dynasty Emperor suck.
    - The gay mafia sucks for getting their panties in a wad over his utterances.
    - A&E sucks for caving in and firing the Emperor.
    - Most importantly, the government should take no role whatsoever in this controversy because government sucks really, really bad, and can only make the situation worse.

    Even though the gay mafia sucks and A&E sucks, they are not suppressing the Emperor's right to free speech. Only the government can do that.

  • ||

    Some places dictate games must in a tie I've read.

    As a sports junkie and a soar loser, lemme tell ya, that enrages me. Not only that, it really fucks kids up.

  • Restoras||

    That's right Rufus. They grow up thinking all they have to do is show up and they get a reward.

    Funny, it's only with team sports. One of my kids swims and well, there is none of that. I wonder how the proggies deal with that? Just not put there precious snowflakes in that kind of position?

  • John||

    One of my kids swims and well, there is none of that.

    What are they going to do, make the kids in front tred water until the others catch up? That must drive them nuts.

    If I am ever lucky enough to have kids, I want them to do a sport like swimming or golf or running where there is none of this "we don't keep score" crap. Do a sport where you compete against the clock or your personal best and no coach or numskull parent can screw you.

  • Restoras||

    For team sports in the area, if you want your kid to actually compete and learn anything you have to get them on the 'travel' teams.

    My son was in a lacrosse tournament a few weeks ago - and his team got destroyed in every game. His reaction was great "they were all better than us and we didn't deserve to win. We will just have to practive more and play harder next time." Not even a thought of quitting.

  • Zeb||

    It is totally fucking stupid. When I was kid I played Soccer and basketball. I wasn't very good. My teams usually weren't very good. And I knew it and it was OK. You need to learn early on that you are not good at a lot of things and for anything you are good at, there are loads of people out there who are better than you are. If you don't get that lesson early, life is going to be disappointing.

  • Azathoth!!||

    My kids played in one of those leagues. The 'adults' may not be keeping score--but the kids knew EXACTLY who'd won and lost every game.

  • Zeb||

    I still say it's a bad analogy. A&E has free speech rights as well, which include not showing Duck Dynasty for any reason they want. In the crystalnacht example here is no opposing right of the mob to destroy people's property. Maybe A&E is in violation of the contract in which case they are in the wrong.

    I see what you mean, and you have convinced me to some extent. It is stupid and bad to try to punish everyone who privately holds views that people find offensive.
    But the right to free speech comes with the right of other people to tell you to shut the fuck up. There is no parallel in the case of the right to be secure in your property.

  • John||

    I still say it's a bad analogy. A&E has free speech rights as well,

    Zeb, for the third time, the analogy has nothing to do with A&E. The analogy is about the mob of probs who make sure no one in popular culture or politics, or if they have their way society as a whole, can say anything that deviates from what they deem to be acceptable thought.

    That is what they do to Libertarians and that is what they are doing here. Saying "well A&E can do what they want" misses the entire point.

  • Zeb||

    So what is the point? What do you want to do about it?

    And I still don't like your analogy. No mob took this guy's speech rights. He's still rich and has a high profile and people will still hear what he has to say if he wants them to.

    I pretty much agree with your broader point. Tolerance is necessary to a free society.

    Anyway, what the fuck do I care. Merry Christmas, John. You're all right. I don't care what they say about you.

  • John||

    What do you want to do about it?

    Hopefully have enough people to stand up to the mob and tell A&E not the fire the guy and tell the people who are doing this that it is a free country and they can go fuck themselves if their idea of freedom is "you can only say what we like".

    What do you want to do about the cops who beat people up? All you can do is point it out and argue your case and hope enough people get it and stand up and do something about it.

  • Zeb||

    I'd like to imagine that if we are going to have laws and government and stuff the cops who beat people up would be punished in a proportionate way. But we all know how well that goes.

    And seeing how popular DD has been, I imagine we will see quite a few people standing up to "the mob" and demanding their show back.

  • R C Dean||

    What do you want to do about it?

    Hit back twice as hard?

    Cracker Barrel already reversed course and reinstated DD merch, together with that rara avis, a genuine apology.

    If A&E can be convinced to do the same, I count that as a win for civil society. And freedom.

  • ||

    Basically you want to form your own mob, a bigger mob, and have that win the day.

  • Azathoth!!||

    No. We want people to stand and face the mob and say 'no, not this time, everyone does not have to agree with you, your tantrum will not work'.

    That's not a mob.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Basically you want to form your own mob, a bigger mob, and have that win the day.

    Unfortunately, that's the rules of the game these days. Idealistic notions of the "marketplace of ideas" aside, you get your agenda legitimized by who you can cow into compliance if they happen to stray. Logic and philosophical principles have nothing to do with it.

    Thank the left for creating this type of primitive, tribalistic social atmosphere over the last 100 years.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Just because you don't like his view, doesn't mean you should support the reaction to it or think it is no big deal.

    I think that's what's getting lost in all of this. I saw a FB post the other day saying, in effect, "No, we will not tolerate intolerance, and if you say stuff we disagree with, we're going to make you regret it." It reminded me of that scene from the end of "The Robe" where Caligula is interrogating Richard Burton, which, ironically, was a metaphor of McCarthyism. Just because I think what Robertson said was foolish and narrow-minded doesn't mean I should support him being the target of the left's latest McCarthyite crusade/Two Minutes Hate. If most people will watch the show or buy their merchandise based on his personal beliefs, that will show up rather quickly in the market.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    In the broader context, if people can lose their livelihood because they said offensive things (for instance, the Sacco tweet that no one should have given a shit about), is this really a free society? Or is it just enforcing a certain type of cultural conformity and silence under the threat of punitive retribution? Now this doesn't necessarily apply to the Robertsons because were already wealthy and will remain so because their primary source of income is their duck call business, not the show. But if Lena Dunham had called white people in the South inbred hicks who didn't deserve a voice in society and should simply shut up, would HBO be tripping over itself to distance themselves from her? Hardly--because the social class that Dunham belongs to controls the media and the cultural narrative, not the one that the Robertsons belong to.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Ultimately, yes, A&E is well within its rights to fire Phil if he says stuff that might give the network a negative public image. But are they really living up to their principles when they've obviously known about this stuff for years? And the public reaction to it so far reveals that a lot of people are getting dog-tired of political correctness and recognizing it as a lever of authoritarian coercion

  • CatoTheElder||

    "living up to their principles"

    Seriously? This was a cynical business decision. No doubt it was heavily influenced by the deciders' career ambitions after DD ends. It was not a principled decision.

  • ||

    The comments on the DC article are weapons-grade retarded. Didn't read the CNN comments.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Sadly, utilizing our greatest untapped resource constitutes a war crime.

  • John||

    One of my facebook friends put up some dumb ass Prog meme about Leviticus telling people to cut their hair with a picture of the Duck Dynasty guy. I made the mistake of looking at the comments.

    It was like a black whole of retardation and hatred. What is scary about them is not that they object to what the Duck Dynasty guy. I can see where some people would. It is how mindless and hate filled they are. The idea of saying "well that is his opinion" and walking away never occurs to them. Give them an object to hate and they go completely insane outdoing each other saying more and more crazy nasty, shit. All they need is for the threat of the person defending themselves and legal sanction to be removed and these people will start killing. It is really disturbing.

  • BigT||

    Just like the H&R commentariat!

  • John||

    Yeah, just like it. Once you get them into a frenzy, they go on a binge of leaving people the fuck alone. God help us if these people ever get any authority.

  • BigT||

    John 9:49 "Give them an object to hate and they go completely insane outdoing each other saying more and more crazy nasty, shit"

    John 9:44 "I hope that guy at Gawker gets a painful disease and dies a long drawn out horrible death."

    Peace on Earth. Goodwill to Men!

  • John||

    Yes Big T, I am a big meany who wished the guy at Gawker a terrible death in a single statement of hyperbole.

    You have really mastered the art of false equivalence and lying. Looks like they might have replaced shreek with a troll who payed some attention in troll school.

  • BigT||

    Excuse me for pointing out your hypocrisy. Why not just own up to the fact that most of those comments are not much different from what occurs right here rather too frequently? I know I've written the occasional hysterical rant. Not a crime, but not very mature, either. And I'm old enough to know better. sigh

  • John||

    Why not just own up to the fact that most of those comments are not much different from what occurs right here rather too frequently?

    Because the voices in your head don't count. I can only read the comments which are on here not the ones you imagine to be on here.

  • ||

    At least 1/2 of the DC comments are weapons-grade Christian conservative retardation.

  • John||

    What are they saying beyond "we don't like gays"? I would look myself but I have hit my quota of stupid for 2013.

  • ||

    Not a single person on there has actually addressed what Paglia said (well, maybe one or two).

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    It is the dailycaller after all.

  • ||

    Look, his comments resonated with the kooky base of Christian fundamentalism just like Obama's infantile 'living wage' assertions appeal to the economic illiterate.

  • ||

    It's almost as if they waited for such a moment. They didn't watch the show but they secretly hoped they could lynch those "red necks."

    The irony is that they can't really use the usual "ignorant hicks" shtick given Roberton being basically a design genius, athlete, a highly educated man and dedicated family man.

    They can't attack him with the usual meme without coming off as hopeless ignorant hacks. Which is what they actually are.

  • Restoras||

    That's part of the problem with being an idealogue - anything outside of your straightjacket ideology forces you into cognitive dissonance.

    It's one of the reasons everyone hates libertarians.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    The American public has turned into the equivalent of 300 million 7th grade girls. You're either in their clique or you're dogshit.

  • Zeb||

    Plus several million libertarians who are the weirdo D&D playing kids who no one else wants to talk to.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Keep rolling for a save.

  • Restoras||

    any idea where I can get a loaded d20?

  • Rasilio||

    Depending on what it is made of, microwave it for a few seconds with the 20 facing up, causes the interior to partially melt allowing the heavier compounds to settle slightly shifting the center of mass.

    Won't guarantee you 20's but it will increase the likelyhood that you'll roll them a bit.

  • ||

    Ow. Critical hit, save vs. poison or take an extra 2d12 Humiliation damage.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Ha! As an internet Troll, I'm immune to humiliation damage.

  • ||

    although it does explain why we avoid the sunlight.

  • Agammamon||

    ROLL

    FOR

    INITIATIVE!

  • UnCivilServant||

    Fist wins.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Which means everybody loses.

  • Restoras||

    They are the very worst sort of religous zealots, John. They honestly scare me. They have no moral grounding aside from the whims of progressivism. At least with Christian zealots you can make an appeal to them based on some teachings of Christ (turn the other cheek, golden rule, etc. though I honestly don't know anymore how that would be received). Not so with these animals - you bow to them or face the wrath of the state.

    All for your own good, of course.

  • John||

    That is the thing. You may not agree with or like the Christians. But they have very little influence in this society and they at least have consistent views they understand. The progs in contrast are hugely influential and really don't understand why they hate this or that object of hate. They only know they have been told to do so. And that is scary.

  • Tim||

    It's like a flock of starlings, one turns and the whole thing instantly turns with it.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    dumb ass Prog meme about Leviticus telling people to cut their hair with a picture of the Duck Dynasty guy.

    Huh? I know Chadasic Jews with bigger and bushier beards than Mr. Duck.

  • Swiss Servator, Pikes Forward!||

    Don't mess with the Kohan facial hair...YOU CANNOT WIN!

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    While Paglia is right in principle, Robertson probably violated his contract. It's on A&E to determine whether or not they want a diversity of opinion on their network. We are free to criticize and ignore them for being PC numbskulls.

    And Granderson proves himself an uneducated idiot again:

    Robertson didn't falsely yell fire in a crowded theater -- which Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. said was not protected by the First Amendment back in 1919 -- so he is legally free to say whatever he wants to GQ about anyone he wants.
  • ||

    A&E can do whatever it wants. I agree.

  • Brett L||

    Eh. I doubt his contract stated that he had to toe the A&E company lion in an interview with a 3rd party publication that specifically asked for his description of his personal spirituality. If they want to cancel DD and pay whatever contractual penalties result, that's cool, though. I saw a bottle of Duck Commander branded WINE at WalMart last night, so I suspect the Robertson family won't be eating mudbugs and dirt for supper any time soon, whatever happens.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Maybe he didn't violate it, but I'll bet there is a clause that allows A&E to terminate if he causes a hubbub.

  • Brett L||

    Absolutely. And as long as they pay the man or the lawyers to settle with the man, there's no ethical problem. Contracts are cancelled all the time for good and bad reasons, and usually have exit clauses for that purpose. It doesn't make A&E or the Robertson family right or wrong.

  • 2ndClassProle||

    I hear on the merch side it was around half a billion dollars. It was just a matter of time before A&E folded.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    First of all Brett, it is TOW the LION. Second, mudbugs are delicious and I would wager that the Robertsons eat plenty of them willingly. Probably not dirt though.

  • Brett L||

    Sorry. I started to write the correct analogy, remembered where I was, and neglected to fix it.

  • CatoTheElder||

    I don't watch the show, but isn't the DD out of Louisiana? Dirt won't be on the menu, but mudbugs are a tasty delicacy there.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    I already addressed this in my above comment. Also, I love eating mudbugs. I can eat pounds at a sitting, especially if they are spiced well.

  • ||

    LZ Granderson. I remember his "manufactured scandal! nothing to see here, move along!" idiocy about Fast and Furious.

  • Entropy Void||

    Wow.

    That is the longest thread I have ever engendered in the History of the Intertoobz.

    I almost feel like a Junior Quasi Unpaid Intern Member of the Commentariat.

    Over the past few years, I already sparred with Bo the Troll, commented in German about homebrau, ejaculated over 3D printed guns, personally insulted Il Duche the Emperator and his family, drunkenly insulted the one female libertarian that lurks this blog, contributed to the proliferation of 42 internet memes, and repeatedly called for the NAP overthrow of this Administration.

    I am truly blessed.

    Now, I just gotta get a Hat Tip from the Jacket and beat Fisty on the AM Links and I get my chit.

    I have my work cut out for me.

    Merry Christmas and Happy Festivus, Reasoniods!

  • The Late P Brooks||

    The president is getting some "sleep and sun" during a two-week vacation in Hawaii, presumably having muttered "I hate this job" the whole nine-hour flight there.

    Actually, he spent the first leg of the trip musing, "I wonder if there's anything down there."
    But the pilot buzzed the Golden Gate Bridge for him, so he could get a quick glimpse of civilization before going out over the Pacific.

  • Knarf Yenrab (prev. An0nB0t)||

    That's being unfair. I'm sure he's aware that Busch Stadium is located somewhere amidst the corn fields of East Texas, where the bitter clingers sleep in their shanties.

  • John||

    Did everyone see the thing about the PR woman who had the "racist" tweet on her flight to South Africa? This woman had a hundred followers and was not any sort of a public figure. But some asshole at Gawker somehow saw the tweet and now the woman is out of a job. We make fun of progs at places like Gawker for being stupid. They are certainly epically stupid. But we should never forget just how evil they are. You want to know what the every day banality of evil looks like? It looks like some retarded asshole at Gawker deciding to ruin some woman he has never met and knows nothing about's life because she said something offensive to the hive.

  • ||

    To be fair, John, her Twitter account identified her as a PR person, and her company. The Intertubez reaction was the usual pitchfork-wielding mob of batshit crazy, but frankly her employer really had little choice on this one. even if they did feel pressured.

  • John||

    I am not blaming her employer. But what kind of a sick fuck do you have to be to be trolling for tweets you find offensive so you can on lose the mob? I hope that guy at Gawker gets a painful disease and dies a long drawn out horrible death.

  • BigT||

    "I hope that guy at Gawker gets a painful disease and dies a long drawn out horrible death."

    Merry Christmas! This season brings out the best in Christians the world over!

  • John||

    I am a terrible Christian Big T. I freely admit that. But unlike the Gawker guy, I just idlely wish bad things on my enemies instead of making it my life to harm anyone who doesn't conform to the hive.

  • Zeb||

    The Gawker guy is pathetic twerp, I'm sure. But on the other hand, this is what you expose yourself to when you put every idiotic thought you have on the internet.

  • tarran||

    THIS!

    I honestly am baffled why anyone in PR would touch twitter with a ten foot pole (except to put out tweets on behalf of the people/orgs they are PRing).

    Actually, I honestly am baffled why anyone in PR would touch twitter with a ten foot pole.

  • Tim||

    I think there's a big demand by celebrities to have ghost tweeters. They can issue carefully crafted concern tweets about organic fair trade coffee and the need for condom subsidies.

  • ||

    Yeah. But it's unnerving you have 'Twitter vigilante's' out there.

    Snitches deserve a sound beating.

  • John||

    The problem with that Zeb is that this time you find the thought idiotic. Next time you might not. The left has for decades used this kind of manufactured outrage to make any position they don't like or is any sort of a threat to them unacceptable in the public discourse.

    It is easy to say "well stupid bitch shouldn't have said something racist" about this. But what are you going to say when Gawker does the same thing when Rand Paul says that maybe it is time to rethink the CRA or end affirmative action?

  • Zeb||

    I really wasn't thinking of this case specifically and I have no idea what she wrote. It is the whole phenomenon of people twittering whatever they are thinking of at the moment that I think is idiotic.

  • Swiss Servator, Pikes Forward!||

    THIS.

  • Rasilio||

    You forgot that it doesn't matter so much what she said but rather who she was. If she were a good liberal celebrity who publicly held all the right views then the tweet would be ignored, or if it did make the news cycle explained away.

  • BakedPenguin||

    It depends. She might be given one pass, but Alec Baldwin was eventually fired.

  • ||

    I actually think popehat was pretty good on this topic.

  • John||

    None of that justifies why Gawker decided to destroy that woman. It is not like they are some PR relations police service. The fact that the woman was in PR just meant they really had some leverage to get her fired. But they would have done the same thing to anyone.

  • ||

    That's the same guy who led a successful Twitter campaign to get that guy fired from Business Insider.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    That guy from BI was asking for trouble. Not saying that I approve of Nitasha Tiku being the self-appointed internet censor, but tweeting racist and misogynist stuff when you work for a public company, particularly in media, is beyond stupid and any employer would be right to question his judgement. Tiku was merely capitalizing on his utter foolishness.

    In The Passion Of The Christ 2, Jesus gets raped by a pack of niggers. It's his own fault for dressing like a whore though.
  • ||

    I agree.

    But I didn't feel the righteous glee Ken felt. He really thought he was some sort of goddamned hero. I can't stand that sort of mentality, which is why I no longer follow ken or popehat.

  • Ken at Popehat||

    I'll let people decide for themselves if that characterization is accurate or not. http://www.popehat.com/2013/09.....sequences/

  • ||

    Companies should not give her leverage. She's a totalitarian.

  • Mike M.||

    The new free speech paradigm in America: you have the freedom to say anything you want to about straight white guys (doubly so for conservative and religious ones), but if you make fun of anyone else in any way shape or form you will be tracked down and destroyed.

  • sarcasmic||

    What you say matters less than who you say it about. Principals trump principles.

  • ||

    Also Steven Martin had to grovel for making a "racist" tweet about spelling lasagna.

  • 2ndClassProle||

    North Dakota employment 2.6%. There are rumors that people at McDonalds are making 15hr, because folks are in such short supply.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/.....39993.html

  • Restoras||

    I wonder how that is affecting the cost of living. Of all the lessons I learned about the gold rush, it was that the miners got hosed by people selling shovels and jeans.

  • 2ndClassProle||

    or the strippers making about three grand a night. When I worked in the oilfield, I paid a many stripper's tuition. :)

    I also hear there is hard time finding places to stay. If I was younger, I would be up there. God awful hours, but a person can make around 150k a year, just with HS diploma.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Though under those conditions, supply was more restricted, and the infrastructure wasn't in place. With today's infrastructure, suppliers can expand more readily, so the issue will be mainly what those suppliers have to pay their labor. It'll be less of an increase than the gold rush rates.

  • BakedPenguin||

    It's being affected. Living space was hard to come by earlier in the year.

    I had some idle thoughts about buying used RV's, then driving to Williston and renting them out or re-selling them.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    Williston Basin is ON FIRE...quite literally. It is visible from space at night as if it were a city for all the gas venting.

  • CatoTheElder||

    If it's on fire, it is said to be flaring, not venting.

  • CatoTheElder||

    And the flaring is impressive:

    http://www.midwestenergynews.c.....rom-space/

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    My answer to everyone bitching about not finding a job is to make themselves more flexible. If that means moving, then so be it.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    This! Unless your surname is Johnny-Chases-His-Horse, someone in your family made the long and dangerous ocean voyage to find opportunity in a new land. Moving and working abroad was one of the best decisions I made. And if you don't wish to move...start your own business.

    Obama hasn't destroyed that opportunity, yet.

  • tarran||

    Are Tesla a bunch of scam artists?

    So here we are, fifteen months after Tesla started getting carbon credits for the battery swap. The company has already cashed out, probably for more than $60 million. Without building a single swap station, or demonstrating the feature in consumer cars, or bothering to provide any sort of explanation.

    I have emailed them, written on their Facebook page, posted in their forum. Their only “reaction” was to kinda make the battery swap disappear from their website. It’s impossible to get an actual response from the company.
  • John||

    Yes, they are. I am not sure they started out that way. I think they probably started out as a bunch of well meaning techies who didn't know much about building cars and really believed that the only reason we all don't drive electric cars is because of some evil plot by the oil industry.

    Once they got into it and they realized they were building a glorified golf cart that was never going to make money and that there was millions to be looted from the Treasury, they just said fuck it and started stealing.

  • Jordan||

    Uh, yeah. I think even GE would feel an ounce of shame in watching the con men and welfare queens of Tesla at work.

  • Brett L||

    GE, maybe, UAW? They're only angry that they didn't get their piece of the con.

  • db||

    Wait, I thought we were Pivoting to Asia. Then it was Syria. Now it's Africa? Health cate, gun control, everything this Administration has tried to do is the Most Important Thing Ever. And they can't complete anythung competently.

    We are living the ADHD Presidency.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Are Tesla a bunch of scam artists?

    I'm going with YES.

  • ||

    What was a bigger lie?

    "Read my lips" or "You can keep it?"

  • UnCivilServant||

    The second. I still think Senior honestly thought he could make the country stay within bounds of its existing revenue stream, and was not as unrealistic a belief from the information at hand when it was said. Also, it was not repeated ad nausium even after it was obviously false.

  • Agammamon||

    I'd agree with this - Bush's problem was solely political. *he* didn't have the pull to keep the US from increasing spending faster than revenues but its still *physically* possible to do.

    You *can't* keep your doctor is basically written into the law from the start - the most generous interpretation is that he knew almost nothing of the details of his signature (and soooo important) legislation, IOW he failed to do his job.

  • John||

    And beyond that, the budget deal that Bush signed set the framework that created the budget "surplus"* that we had under Clinton. Moreover, that deal was a bipartisan deal where Bush went against his base and worked with the mushy middle on both sides. Bush was doing exactly what all of these assholes claim Presidents should do. And his thanks was to have the very people who supported that deal and tell him it was the right thing to do call him a liar even now 20+ years later. It really takes a lot of nerve for any beltway centrist asshole to call Bush a liar over that.

    In contrast "you can keep your policy" was an outright lie used to sell a policy that was not bipartisan and is going to create the worst government made disaster since the 1930s.

    Yeah they are just alike.

    *Yes I know the "surplus" in the 90s was only a surplus if you counted Social Security revenue, but that is not my point.

  • ||

    Good luck with the left giving credit to Bush I for helping to lay the foundations for the surplus Clinton enjoyed.

    That would destroy their "Bush II inherited a surplus and squandered it thus ruining Obama's "real" plans" meme.

  • John||

    Facts must never be allowed to not fit the narrative.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    And did Bush Sr ever say "What we said was [something other "no new taxes"]"?

  • Ken Shultz||

    Cowboy monkeys are riding around on dogs to drive small herds of big horn sheep.

    Seriously.

    http://tinyurl.com/orlc9da

    And the government isn't doing anything to stop it.

  • tarran||

    You know, I just don't get it. How does someone look at a dog and be inspired to add a monkey to its back?

  • UnCivilServant||

    You don't? I see it immediately whenever I look at a dog of any appeciable size.

  • Agammamon||

    With tiny little revolvers!

  • 2ndClassProle||

    Whole lot of awesome!!

  • John||

    Do monkeys and chimps ever get old? No they never do.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Well, except for shreek.

  • Zeb||

    As long as you don't have to take care of them anyway.

  • Brett L||

    Surely this was the best part of the game.

  • sarcasmic||

    Stop it? You kidding? They're probably getting a grant or subsidy.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Cowboy monkeys? I have all their albums!

  • The Late P Brooks||

    I think even GE would feel an ounce of shame in watching the con men and welfare queens of Tesla at work.

    Let's not go overboard with that "goodwill toward all men" stuff.
    Everything has a limit.

  • Libertymike||

    Except for liberty.

  • Sevo||

    ..."a senior Obama administration official stated that a "good faith" exception will be given to those who try to sign up but fail."...

    Can I get one of these for taxes on 4/15? I mean the guy's making up the law on the fly, so I figured I'd ask.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Here I was, hoping for a relaxing week off - and my old man ends up in ER 2x. He's going to see a specialist today to figure out what the problems is - I'll be on the icy roads, driving him back and forth (75 miles each way).

    I hope everyone has a good holiday.

  • Libertymike||

    Same to you.

    Hope your father's health improves.

  • Brett L||

    Good wishes for your father's recovery and safe commutes.

  • John||

    You too. Be careful man. Hope the old man does well.

  • Lord Humungus||

    he's a tough old buzzard - still chopping trees down and hauling wood at age 72. He's the kind of guy who would drive the hearse to his own funeral, so him asking me to ferry him around was surprising.

  • John||

    That probably means he will come through it. I really think that most people who die of illness or old age, rather than an accident or quick death like a heart attack, more just get tired of fighting it and give up. Eventually everyone of course hits that point. But people who keep going and have lives and interests tend to last a lot longer.

  • ||

    Hope he feels better LH. Happy holidays.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Best wishes - and even prayers - for his recovery!

  • BakedPenguin||

    Back at you, LH. Best wishes for your dad.

  • Lord Humungus||

    thanks, everyone. H&R, though wonderfully strange and filled with snark, is one of my few social outlets.

  • ||

    Best of luck, LH, please pay attention to the road and don't try and rebuild the cars amplifier whilst driving.

  • Mike M.||

    Best wishes to you and your father. Be safe!

  • ||

    Hope your Pa gets well soon, LH!

  • Cliché Bandit||

    Be careful and make sure to do a J Sub check when you get back from your ferrying.

  • ||

    Good luck and all the best!

  • mr simple||

    Best of luck and safety first.

  • DEG||

    Best wishes

  • Libertymike||

    Congrats to Peyton Manning!

    Here is a guy who had four separate neck surgeries and could not throw a football ten yards to his buddy Todd Helton in early 2012. He had to learn anew how to throw the football and he had to adjust his mechanics in light of his weaker arm.

    Who, in the history of team sports, at the age of 37, has overcome what Manning has, only to go and produce the record breaking numbers that No. 18 has this year?

    Sports Illustrated got it right last year by selecting Lebron James as Sportsman of the Year and the mag got it right by choosing Peyton Manning this year.

  • John||

    Call me when he wins the Super Bowl. Anything less than that and the various haters like me will be able to dismiss the entire season.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I actually think that you give him too little credit, but people like mike who have been slobbing all over him his entire career make me apt to side with you.

    When his run game sucks, it just shows how he's the best ever because he has to carry the whole team. When it does well, it shows how he's the best ever because he makes the smart decision to audible to the run. Same thing happens with his defense depending how they are playing ("They gave up the fewest points in the league in 07? They still sucked, it was just that Peyton made it easy on them by putting them in the lead!")

  • John||

    I think Sudden made the best point I have ever heard about Manning. If you notice, his bad games are nearly always in the playoffs at odd times or after a week off when his routine has been thrown off. He is almost like a savant who completely loses his edge when he can't prepare exactly the way he wants. His two horrible games this year were against Indy, when the owner threw him a pre game party throwing off his prep and the Thursday night game against the Chargers.

    Last year he played lousy and lost to Baltimore on a Saturday night. His two great playoff games he has ever played (2003 vs Chiefs and 06 vs Patriots) were both Sunday afternoon early games. It is uncanny.

    The bottom line is that he is a great QB. But he is also a great QB who has, unlike Elway and Montana, played markedly worse in the playoffs. That to me takes him out of the conversation of "best ever".

  • ||

    That to me takes him out of the conversation of "best ever".

    Maybe, but still top 10. I'm a Dolphin's hater. But I still respect the hell out of what Marino did over his career. He makes my top 10 even though he has nothing to show for it in the playoffs.

    So I give the same to Peyton. But top five...probably not.

  • ||

    There should be no caveats or asterisk next to Marino's name.

    He's definitely among the greatest all-time. This obsession over titles as a zero-sum game is bull shit. A few average QB's have won - does that make them greater than Marino? Please.

    Marino was dominant. Period.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Criticizing just for no rings is wrong, but criticizing for playing worse individually in the playoffs is valid.

  • ||

    Referring to Marino?

    By the way, those Dolphins teams were decent but hardly juggernauts. And the defense wasn't all that.

  • John||

    Marino never played on a team with a great defense, never had an even close to HOF receiver and never had even a good running back.

    And Marino's numbers are comparable to numbers that are put up now even though the rules were not nearly as slanted towards the offense back then. Can you imagine the numbers a healthy Marino would put up today playing for say the Saints?

    I think you can make a pretty strong argument that Marino is in at least the top three since the merger and maybe best ever. He was astounding.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    I think you can make a pretty strong argument that Marino is in at least the top three since the merger and maybe best ever. He was astounding

    I'd put Elway above Marino for carrying three teams that had no business being in the Super Bowl to the big game, even though they got their ass beat. He not only had to work with the handicaps of having no HOF recievers or great RBs to work with before the mid-90s, but having Dan Reeves calling the plays on top of that(run, run, pass on downs 1-3 the whole fucking game, then letting Elway loose in the last five minutes). At least Shula put in a pass-friendly offense for Marino to work with, and as great as Montana was, he got to work with the greatest WR of all time and Roger Craig for most of his career.

    For my money, Elway's the best quarterback ever, because he still succeeded in spite of being handcuffed by Reeves most of the time.

  • John||

    Red Rocks.

    At least post merger, I think it is Elway and Montana 1 and 1a. Montana never drug the sorry ass teams to the Super Bowl Elway did. But Montana also never throw an interception in four Super Bowl appearances, and was completely dominant in the playoffs whenever he had a great team. Montana was just astounding as was Elway.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Yeah but Dilfer has more rings.

  • Kid Xenocles||

    I actually think it's useless to pretend we have the sort of resolution to be able to name a best ever. There are too many differences. Even in an individual sport like golf we have the quality of the field to evaluate and the conditions of the courses and the technology of the day. But a sport as dependent on team effort as football? Forget about it. I think the best we can do is to put players in ranked groups. Both Manning and Brady belong in the top group and that ought to be good enough for everyone but sports journalists.

  • John||

    Kid,

    I think you can make some distinctions. At some point it gets to be impossible. But Manning's playoff record, not just win loses but the fact that his personal numbers are much worse in the playoffs, keeps him out of the conversation.

  • Kid Xenocles||

    Distinctions, yes. I just think we can ever get to a real apples-to-apples comparison.

    I've said in the past that the most important thing by far for a player should be hoisting the Lombardi Trophy as often as possible. I still believe that. But there is only one team each year who can do that, and I don't think it necessarily takes away from a player's talent if he doesn't make it. Manning's talent is manifest. His playoff troubles are as well, but he's gone 1-1 in the Super Bowl. I don't think I need to be a New England homer to note that Brady's 3-2 is much better than that, and I'd rather have the three rings than every possible QB stat record. But those records do reflect ability, and holding some of them does build your resume for the top tier.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    He also had a horrible game this year in Foxborough, which was a standard SNF game. Not sure if that would really fit into the theory.

  • ||

    My friend says the exact same thing about Manning. In his view, Brady is better. In addition, he argues Brady would accomplish even more if he had Manning's steady access to great receivers over their careers. Same with Eli who benefited even more with great receivers.

    Then again, he's from Boston.

  • ||

    What?

    No love for Romo this week?

    I mean, that was a huge win.

    Problem is, they barely beat Washington while Philly clobbered Chicago. Ergo, Eagles kill Cowboys? Is that how it will go down?

    I hope so.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I think that's true, depending on what you mean by "more". Brady's stats would definitely be better if he'd been throwing to the same receivers Manning has been. But to get that great offensive talent you likely would not have been able to have such a great defense early on. So he'd be much more like the 5 years prior to this year where he puts up monster numbers, but if he wants to win a ring is going to have to drag an average defense there and score a TD in the final 2 minutes to win it.

  • tarran||

    I imagine having one of your best receivers arrested for murder might negatively alter your stats.... ;)

  • Auric Demonocles||

    The turnover in terms of Patriots receivers from last year to this year is crazy.

  • John||

    Don't forget Manning got to play the prime of his career in a dome. Brady is to his credit one of the best bad weather quarterbacks ever. Maybe the best.

  • ||

    I'll say "more" equals more Super Bowls.

    Look at the Pats this year. Again full of incredible injuries yet they're STILL in the conversation. This is a weak AFC. They can reach the SB. Heck, this can be one of those unexpected victories for some team including the Pats.

    Expect upsets.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    If it's more Super Bowls, I doubt it. Brady's been in the scenario that I think has been best for him to win them. But it has come at the expense of his personal stats.

  • John||

    That is the other thing about Manning. He had Marvin Harrison, Dallas Clark, Edrin James around him in Indy and never won a Super Bowl. This year will mark the tenth time in his career that he has taken a team with twelve or more regular season wins into the playoffs. And he has once Super Bowl win and another loss to show for it.

    Elways and Montana didn't always win. But every time they had a great team around them, they didn't just win a lot of games, they won the Super Bowl. The years that Elway "couldn't win the big one" he was on fair teams that he took much further in the playoffs than they had any right to go. And when he finally did get a great team around him, it was lights out.

    Same with Montana. Even in his late 30s with almost no offensive weapons, he took the Chiefs to the AFC title game. There has never been a quarterback that has been on so many 12+ win teams that lost in the playoff than Manning.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    That is the other thing about Manning. He had Marvin Harrison, Dallas Clark, Edrin James around him in Indy and never won a Super Bowl.

    I was never struck by how great the disparity was until earlier this year when Gronk became the player to catch the most TDs from Brady (it was at 40). At the same time they showed other top tandems, and the top on the list was Peyton to Harrison... with 112.

  • John||

    Harrison was a great player. Look at it this way, the only great wideout Brady ever got to throw to was Randy Moss and he only had him for one year and they went 16-0 that year and Moss had statistically the greatest season any receiver has ever had.

    Manning had a great GM and a great coach for ten years and they won a single Super Bowl. That doesn't mean Manning isn't great. He is. That just means that when you start talking about "best ever", Manning doesn't make the cut.

  • Mike M.||

    In addition, he argues Brady would accomplish even more if he had Manning's steady access to great receivers over their careers. Same with Eli who benefited even more with great receivers.

    Up until this season, Brady spent the last several years playing with one of the best offensive lines in the history of the game, the best possession slot receiver in the game (Welker), he had one of the best receivers in the history of the game in Randy Moss for a little bit, and all the incredible tight ends he got to play with recently.

    Your friend is a full of shit excuse-making apologist.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    access to great receivers over their careers.
    Up until this season, Brady spent the last several years

    At least address the actual argument the friend made.

  • John||

    I am not a fan of Welker. Welker is a smart reliever with good hands who had the great fortune of playing with great quarterbacks.

  • ||

    Have you seen how awful his replacements are???

  • Libertymike||

    AD, it is true that I have been slobbing all over this year. However, it has been over time that I have grown to appreciate his game.

    When Manning was at Tennessee, I actually rooted against the Vols because of him.

    Early in his NFL career, I didn't think too much of him. Yes, I was impressed with how he turned things around in Indy in his second year, but that kind of faded.

    The thing that first caught my attention was the dramatic comeback against Tampa Bay in 2003 when the Colts trailed 35-14 with 5:00 to play. That comeback was on a Monday night against the defending world champs at their place.

    In 2003, he was co-MVP with Steve McNair. He had those 2 tremendous playoff games against the Broncos and Chiefs before losing the 2003 AFC championship game to the Patriots.

    That Patriots defense had the highest defensive passer rating of all time. Its not as if Manning just laid an egg in that game; rather, one should credit the Patriots defense.

    Manning has never had a team the defense of which could hold the jock of that 2003 Patriots defense. Even at that, the Patriots held, clutched, grabbed and interfered with the Colts receivers the whole game and got away with it. After the Broncos played the Chiefs in their first match this year, Jaws and Chris Carter and others pointed out that Andy Reid had taken a page from Bellicheck's 2003 AFC championship game plan.

  • Libertymike||

    John, well, at least you admit you are a hater.

    However, haters usually don't want to listen to all of the facts and their presentations often reflect that.

    Manning has never had a team the defense of which set a record for defensive passer rating as the Patriots did in 2003.. Check out Coldhardfootballfacts.com and you can see that the single best statistical correlator to winning championships is defensive passer rating.

    As I noted in the previous post, I did not always like Manning. In fact, I could not stand him when he was at Tennessee.

    Has Tom Brady thrown 51 TDs after FOUR NECK SURGERIES, at age 37? Elway? Montana?

  • Auric Demonocles||

    after FOUR NECK SURGERIES, at age 37?

    And look, totally irrelevant crap that has nothing to do with how good he is. And is actually kind of hilariously stupid since the only year he could possible do that hasn't happened yet.

  • Libertymike||

    NO, look at my original post. I made the factual point that he has produced prodigious numbers after having the four neck surgeries at age 37.

    Of course, I knew that John and you would inevitably turn the discussion into playoff performance.

    Did I whine about the Colts defenses? What I pointed out was that no Colts defense during the Manning era had anywhere near the defensive passer rating of the 2003 Patriots.

  • John||

    Manning has never had a team the defense of which set a record for defensive passer rating as the Patriots did in 2003.. Check out Coldhardfootballfacts.com and you can see that the single best statistical correlator to winning championships is defensive passer rating.

    True. But go back and watch all of the playoff games he lost. If it had just been about Indy having a bad defense, they would have lost in scorefests. But that is not what happened. What happened was, Manning didn't play well in those games and the team lost in games that were played in the 20s. If New England or Pittsburgh had put up 50 points in those games, I would admit "Manning never had a defense". But that is not what happened.

    And sure the 03 New England defense was great. But that team also won like 21 straight regular season games and two straight super bowls. So when Brady was given a great defense, he dominated the league, even though those teams had totally average receivers and running backs.

    Manning in contrast, despite having great offensive weapons in an offensive era, never dominated like that.

    And I am not a hater. If I hate anyone, I hate Brady and Bellicheck. But the facts are what they are. It bugs me when people say Manning is the "best ever". He is just not. No one with his playoff record and his record of being on great teams that couldn't win a title deserves that title.

  • Libertymike||

    Tell me about your Brady and Bellicheck hate.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Ah, the ignorant "Manning's defense has always sucked" argument. His defense from 2005 was: 5th, 23rd (Sanders missed 12 games), 1st, 7th, 8th. If you're going to give the guy constant blowjobs at least know anything about his actual career. I bet you blame a "shitty" defense for last year too, despite them being #4.

    Yes, throwing 4 interceptions in a single game should yield no blame on the quarterback. This is exactly the attitude I was referencing in my reply to John.

    They didn't "get away with it". They played the way the rules allowed, until the Colts whined their way into the arena football league.

  • John||

    That too. Those defenses were not that bad or the teams would not have been winning so many regular season games.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    The Patriarchy forces women to stress out over Christmas, shopping, cooking, getting the doilies set up just right on the table for Christmas dinner - and husbands refuse to help make the organic gingerbread. It's a plot to make women obsess over Christmas more than men, those jerks.

    http://blogstupidgirl.wordpres.....nequality/

  • 2ndClassProle||

    I think most men would love to not put up any lights, deal with family, and just buy gift cards, watch the game, call it a day.

  • Zeb||

    Huh. What the fuck was I doing all day yesterday making cookies and decorating shit?

    The decorations are actually the main thing I like about Christmas. That and drinking in the morning.

  • ||

    And? My mother did all those things while my father ran a business and smoked all day long.

    73 and she's still doing it.

  • Zeb||

    Hmm. Maybe, just maybe, those things can be fun and enjoyable to do.

  • R C Dean||

    Here's the deal:

    Women do almost nothing (entertaining, decorating, cleaning, dressing, etc.) for men. They do it all because of peer pressure from women.

    What was that about progs and projection, again?

  • T||

    My wife goes nuts over Christmas. Being, at best, only nominally Christian, I could give a fuck. So, yeah, she stresses out harder than I do. Especially now that we have a child. OMG! Christmas must be perfect for child! He's 18 months old, he could care, so the whole 'men don't care thing' starts early.

  • Brett L||

    See my Festivus airing of grievances above. Why stress the fuck out about it? Our families know how we live. Nobody is going to be surprised to turn up at a house that isn't going to make Southern Living.

  • T||

    She will stress out because she is not meeting her own expectations.

    OCD is a bitch, man.

  • Brett L||

    SHE DOES NOT HAVE OCD!!

    Or at least that's how the discussion goes.

  • T||

    Mine admits it. So I can occasionally get her to dial things back a notch by pointing out that she's crossed sprinted past that line.

    And she really did tone it way the fuck down this year, so I'm not complaining any. We only have one tree up instead of the usual six.

  • Brett L||

    So a FB acquaintance with a PhD in Communications or Philosopy or something posted a link to Liberapedia, because Wikipedia is an obviously biased source completely run by the enemies of Progressives.

  • Zeb||

    I can't imagine that will be anywhere near as entertaining as Conservapedia.

  • Zeb||

    Here is the intro to the Libertarian article. Reads like it was written by a 12 year old using facebook as source material:

    A Libertarian in the American term, is an individual with right-wing economic beliefs and left-wing social belief. Some ultra-conservatives, such as talk radio host Neil Boortz, pretend they are libertarians so that they can trick Liberals into listening to them for few minutes in hope of converting them to Conservatism. Libertarians are kind of like liberals, except they think they're living in the 18th Century or in the first part of the 20th Century when Ayn Rand lived. They are just more appealing to conservatives.[2]

  • Acosmist||

    A PhD in philosophy is a loooot different from a PhD in communications, dude. Check the GRE numbers.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Just as not everyone who identifies as a Christian believes black people were happier before the civil rights movement
    -L Z Granderson's article about Duck Dynasty

    This pisses me off. It is a gross and deliberate mischaracterization of Robertson's statement.

    I interpreted what he said as, "The people I knew and dealt with on a daily basis were too busy living their lives to obsess about the Great Injustices of Life every fucking minute of every fucking day." But I am not in general predisposed to assume the worst about people.

    I certainly did not read any sort of "They wuz better off" into it.

  • John||

    What he said was that black people had families and values when he grew up and thus were happy even though their economic and political situation sucked.

    That is a fact that liberals must do everything to deny. The fact is that black America should be a thousand times better off now than it was in 1940. But in reality, black America in many ways is worse off thanks to broken families and schools and various social ills. Liberal policies have done horrible things to black America and America in general. And progs will do anything and say anything to ensure they are never called to account for it.

  • ||

    He also repeated the lie that Roberson "equated homosexuality with bestiality". What he said is that they are both sins according to the Bible.

  • ||

    and used the word "compared."

    All he did was RECITE the Bible.

    Fucking disingenuous blathering.

    Can anyone make a point without mangling the facts anymore?

  • Brett L||

    I agree. The source material, taken as a whole, is completely in line with someone who grew up poor in the South a generation and a half ago and in no way constitutes actual racist sentiment to state plainly that the racial grievance industry has done little to improve the actual life of poor black people in rural Louisiana.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I think you're being too generous toward Robertson's statement. I serious doubt Robertson is a racist, especially in light of his very open acceptance of his grandchildren of Asian and African heritage; however, parts of his statement were ignorant.

    We’re going across the field.... They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!...

    While he had no malicious intent, to employ the 'joyful darkie' trope is well, ignorant.

    Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”

    First of all, why would they, in the atmosphere of Jim Crow, confide in him, considering that while he was poor, he was not part of their own disenfranchised group? Let's not forget that during that time saying "Honky this and Honky that" to an actual "Honky" was a good way to get a beating at the hands of the whole town.

    Secondly, while I'm not a Jon Stewart, I gotta hand it to him with his observation that, "Yes, that was exactly when 'they' were singing the Blues."

    Related: Leadbelly for John.

  • John||

    Secondly, while I'm not a Jon Stewart, I gotta hand it to him with his observation that, "Yes, that was exactly when 'they' were singing the Blues."

    Of course most of the blues were really about the white man. They were about their own societal dysfunction.

    I would also say, Robertson was speaking from his own experience. I have read people of his age give similar accounts. For example, read Levon Helm's autobiography sometime. In it he talks about growing up in Arkansas in the 40s. He talks about his family at least never was cursed with racism and how he lived with and worked with blacks and how he never personally experienced racial tension.

    The thing both Robertson and Helm have in common is that they were both poor whites. And poor whites were treated really as bad as the blacks were. Sure, they were allowed to go into the "whites only establishments" but they didn't usually have the money to shop there and were just as unwelcome as the blacks in the good ones.

    I don't think he meant to give the "happy darky" myth anymore than Helm did. I think they are both giving an honest account of what it was like to be a poor white in the South back then.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I'm not saying Robertson was being dishonest. I do believe that he truly believes what he said, and I agree wholeheartedly with his points about the welfare state. However, it's easy to say Blacks were "happy" back then when you weren't one. Especially when even the mildest expression of discontent by a Black person could get you labeled "uppity", which had undesirable consequences, to say the least.

  • Brett L||

    Too nuanced to point out that there is a difference between being racist and being right about how he remembers things.

  • ||

    It's exactly what I was thinking as I read your comment. The blues were being sung from the 20s right up until today - though not with the quite same cultural resonance.

  • creech||

    Did anyone catch Susan Rice's interview on 60 Minutes last night? It sure sounded like she threw Hillary under the bus with her admission that Hillary couldn't go on the Sunday shows after Benghazi because it had been a stressful week, what with consoling the families of the dead Americans and all. Not the picture of someone who should be President taking calls at 3am.

  • ||

    As my wife keeps telling me, I'm not allowed to use stress as an excuse in front of employees since we own our business.

    Imagine the leader of the free world!

  • Sevo||

    Rufus J. Firefly|12.23.13 @ 10:50AM|#
    "As my wife keeps telling me, I'm not allowed to use stress as an excuse in front of employees since we own our business."

    Gen. George Marshall:
    'Enlisted men are allowed to have bad morale, not officers'

  • ||

    That's the thing I've learned. You can't do what you want just because you're the boss.

    There's like an imaginary hand orchestrating all our behaviors.

  • John||

    It sure sounded like she threw Hillary under the bus with her admission that Hillary couldn't go on the Sunday shows after Benghazi because it had been a stressful week, what with consoling the families of the dead Americans and all

    It of course won't make any difference because any politician who points this out will be immediately branded as a big sexist meany. But how could you possibly think someone who was after a single week "too stressed out" to do the job of the Secretary of State is in any way fit to be President?

  • tarran||

    Didn't Hillary spend more time on the road than any previous Secretary of State?

    Constant traveling will exhaust a person.

    People cite her mileage as a positive accomplishment, but I think it's kind of weird. And, one of the important duties of an executive is taking care of themselves so that they are able to do the job.

  • John||

    How much do you think the President travels? Being President is an insanely stressful and demanding job. I think someone who cracked under the pressure of being DOS, has no business being President.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    It's Hillary's turn if the job stresses her out, it just means that the sexists are stressing her out to keep her out of the White House.

  • Fluffy||

    If society decides that it is okay for the mob to boycott and ruin anyone who says anything outside of the accepted view, it is not a free society anymore regardless of what the 1st Amendment says.

    People have said some pretty stupid things on this board, but this is really right up there at the top.

    It's like it's John's first day thinking about what a free society entails.

    So what you're saying is that unless I am forced to buy products from people I don't like, those other people aren't free?

    That if I have any input whatsoever into the private purchasing decisions I make, other people are enslaved to me and are having their rights violated?

    I know you like this Robertson guy but please don't make these dopey ass progressive douchebag arguments around here, please.

  • tarran||

    Fluffy,

    I don't think that's what John is saying at all.

    Look at it in terms of Nazi's and Jews.

    Let's s ay a libertarian Nazi movement rises up. They use economic and social oppobrium to harass anyone who does business with Jews. What would be the impact on society?

    Eventually, jews would be so marginalized socially that when a politician starts proposing the Nuremberg laws, nobody would really bat an eye.

    Which is kind of what happened to gays, if you think about it.

    Yes, we have a right to boycott people for any reason under the sun, including not liking their predilection for trilbys. But, at some point, to maintain a culture that permits free expression we must also pushback against the people who act as concern trolls.... by using the power of speech to lessen their influence.

  • John||

    People have said some pretty stupid things on this board, but this is really right up there at the top.

    It's like it's John's first day thinking about what a free society entails.

    Really Fluffy, so a society like say in Africa where one tribe runs everything and some other small tribe can't so much as start a business or do anything but live on the bottom is a "free society"?

    What about India? Does the existence of the untouchables in anyway reflect on the freedom of that society?

    I think it does. Are you really so fucking stupid that you think that the only measure of how free a society is is how much the government is involved in various means of oppression? Moreover, do you not understand that using the mob to control what can and cannot be said in public has a direct effect on what kind of a government you have?

    Fluffy, I have never considered you stupid. But my God you cannot be so fucking simple minded that you think that anything and everything is okay as long as the government is not involved or understand that the way to create an oppressive government is to first create an oppressive society where ideas deemed unacceptable cannot be uttered.

    If you don't realize that you are an astounding moron who thinks that once the magic words of "contract" and "private party" are uttered nothing could possibly go wrong.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Does the existence of the untouchables in anyway reflect on the freedom of that society?

    Wait, let's follow this line of argument for a bit. In India, discrimination against untouchables is illegal. (I want to say its in their constitution, but I'm not certain on that). There even exists an affirmative action-like policy that gives untouchables preference in college admissions and other things. However, socially, discrimination and violence against untouchables is still a widespread practice.

    It seems to be that liberty requires both culture that supports it and the legal mechanisms to protect it.

  • John||

    It seems to be that liberty requires both culture that supports it and the legal mechanisms to protect it.

    If your culture protects it, you don't need the legal mechanisms do you? And if your culture doesn't, then how are the legal mechanisms going to be any more successful than any other prohibition scheme?

    Come on HM this is easy. Do you think the CRA is what keeps people from discriminating against black people or is it that we have a society that unlike 1960, no longer tolerates such? I am pretty sure most people on here would say the latter.

    Forget the law for a moment. If India were 90% Hindu and those Hindus absolutely believed in untouchables, would that society be free? I don't see how.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    If your culture protects it, you don't need the legal mechanisms do you?

    There are always going to be people who violate cultural norms. Our culture is strongly anti-murder (as opposed to the good old days of blood money), yet we still need laws against it.

    And if your culture doesn't, then how are the legal mechanisms going to be any more successful than any other prohibition scheme?

    I agree with the rest of your comment.

  • Fluffy||

    None of that counterargument matters AT ALL.

    The bottom line is this. A free society has two absolute requirements - ABSOLUTE:

    1. I only buy the things I want to buy, and not other things.

    2. I am allowed to tell you anything I want to tell you.

    That means it is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to the existence of a free society that I be free to decide "I am not going to buy anything from Elliot Spizter because I think he's a douchebag."

    It is also ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to the existence of a free society that I be free to decide to tell you, "Hey John, you know what? I decided not to buy anything from Elliot Spitzer because I think he's a douchebag."

    Those two things together constitute a boycott.

    Anything that arises from those two things together - any scenario you give me - falls into the category of "So fucking what?" I just don't care about any sob story you tell me about someone who is unhappy because other people won't buy things from them. That's life. I promised you a free society, I never promised you a rose garden.

    The reason you're wrong now is the same reason the CRA was and is wrong.

  • John||

    Anything that arises from those two things together - any scenario you give me - falls into the category of "So fucking what?" I just don't care about any sob story you tell me about someone who is unhappy because other people won't buy things from them. That's life. I promised you a free society, I never promised you a rose garden.

    Then you don't care about living in a free society. When the mob comes down and burns down someone's house or uses the threat of that to ensure no one steps out of line, you will do nothing and think it is great because we are oppressing each other instead of using the government to do it.

    Your reasoning is wrong because you see the words "contract" and "private party" and think they are somehow magic and can never affect our freedom. You simply do not understand government and society or really even freedom beyond a very rudementary level. And that is a shame because I always thought you were smarter than that.

    If we have an opressive fucked up society that doesn't tolerate dissent, we will not have freedom. No amount of "I am free to object to you" will make it any different. Objecting is not the same as demanding someone lose their job or be punished for voicing an opinion.

  • John||

    You are free to object to any opinion. But you are not free to demand someone lost their livelihood over their opinion. Well, you can do that but doing so makes you a fascist intolerant fuck. None of your fucking sob stories about how you really love freedom change that.

    And no, you don't promise a free society. You promise anything but.

  • OldMexican||

    Members of the Russian punk band Pussy Riot have been released from prison as part of an amnesty bill, but they dismiss it as a PR stunt to prep for the Sochi Winter Olympics.


    I guess they would prefer to rot in jail, being so principled and all...

    Ah, those silly leftists!

  • OldMexican||

    President Obama told Congress on Sunday that he may take further military action to protect Americans trying to evacuate violence-plagued South Sudan.


    Yay! Another war! I never knew wars were so cool until Obama started a few!

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Let's s ay a libertarian Nazi movement rises up. They use economic and social oppobrium to harass anyone who does business with Jews. What would be the impact on society?

    That depends. Does this "opprobrium manifest itself as violence and destruction?

    John's dopey "Kristallnacht" analogy falls completely apart when the shops are looted. Property rights are pretty clearly violated. In a legitimate legal framework, the perpetrators will be caught and compelled to make restitution.

  • tarran||

    Yes, but the shops being looted was preceded by propaganda encouraging boycotts and the like.

    Remember, the vulgar masses don't care about legal principle. They'll happily violate or tolerate the violation of a principle if they think that all right thinking people think the violation is OK.

  • John||

    John's dopey "Kristallnacht" analogy falls completely apart when the shops are looted. Property rights are pretty clearly violated. In a legitimate legal framework, the perpetrators will be caught and compelled to make restitution.

    So if the mobs would have instead made it impossible for those shops to operate, that would have been okay?

    Lets say the Nazis had made it clear that anyone who went to a Jewish owned shop should be fired from their job and any employer who didn't fire such am employee should be subject to the same sort of boycott. That is okay with you?

    If your movement is large enough and the minority you are picking on small and unpopular enough, all of that is very possible.

    Oppressive governments do not arise out of no where. They arise out of the societies they oppress. And the way they are created is by first creating an oppressive society and then the government just naturally springs from it.

  • John||

    There is a reason why communism and fascism never took hold in America like they did in Europe. The reason is not our Constitution or laws. European countries had those too. They didn't take hold because our society was not sufficiently oppressive to allow the fascist ethos to ever take hold over a wide number of people. That is slowing changing in this country. The idea behind going after the PR woman or the Duck Dynasty guy is to create a society where only approved opinion are uttered publiclly. Once you create that, the oprressive government is the easy part.

    Why you and fluffy can't understand that and think it is just wonderful to have a society where anyone who utters an unapproved opinion risks losing their job is beyond me. Don't you understand that the Duck Dynasty guy could have said "we need to get rid of all of the civil rights laws in the name of free association" and he would have received the same treatment?

    Come on Brooks, I never thought you were this fucking stupid.

  • OldMexican||

    Today is the deadline to sign up for Obamacare, but a senior Obama administration official stated that a "good faith" exception will be given to those who try to sign up but fail. No word on how they'll verify that such an effort was made.


    The administration will rely on the good faith of those that claim they tried and tried but just couldn't get the darn thing working! Honest! I swear on the toys of my children!

  • 2ndClassProle||

    They also said a million people have signed up. Would really like a demographic break down. It makes me suspicious when they do not.

  • Brett L||

    Holy Shit, y'all. Happy Holidays! I am completely okay with this. Except for the fact that his employer probably cannot terminate him.

    A jury awarded Michael Troso $500,000, half which the city must pay, the other half which Wheaton must pay, who incredulously, is still employed by the Atlantic City Police Department, despite the liability he has proven to be.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ...another of those three lawsuits involved him beating up a prosecutor from the state attorney’s office nonetheless, which is probably the last person you want to beat up if you’re one of these asshole cops like Wheaton who think they can do whatever they want.

    And no punitive damages, which seems odd to me.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Lets say the Nazis had made it clear that anyone who went to a Jewish owned shop should be fired from their job and any employer who didn't fire such am employee should be subject to the same sort of boycott. That is okay with you?

    Sure, Bo. Whatever you say.

  • John||

    Fuck off Brooks. Let me put it in simpler more direct terms, since the ability to think metaphorically is apparently beyond you.

    Is there anything short of outright violence that society can do, no oppressive and stupid, that you would object to provided the government is not involved?

    That make it easier for you?

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