Walgreens Offers Free Drugs to Ease Pain of Obamacare, Drone Strike Deaths Calculated, The War on Flutes: P.M. Links

  • Does Obamacare cover self-medicating? Not even during the holidays?Credit: yifany / Foter.com / CC BY-NC-NDDrugstore Walgreens has announced that it will provide one month’s prescription of drugs, free, to customers who have signed up for Obamacare but have been screwed over by the system and still don’t have an identification number. They should be sure to include a good mood stabilizer.
  • By putting together numbers from different studies and estimates, the Council on Foreign Relations believes more than 3,500 people have been killed by U.S. drone strikes, more than 450 of which were civilians.
  • The ACLU has filed another suit in connection with the National Security Agency’s snooping, this one to get information about the executive order that governs surveillance abroad that occasionally sweeps up information about American citizens.
  • In addition to its serious data breach issues, Target has apparently failed to properly activate thousands of holiday gift cards. At this point their public relations folks are probably calling the White House for advice.
  • A flute player had all of his bamboo instruments, 11 of them, destroyed by customs officials at JFK airport in New York City. He says customs told him they were all “agricultural products.” (Hat tip to Popehat)
  • We must expand the war on drugs! Even the dolphins are getting high! (Hat tip: everybody on the entire Internet)

Get Reason.com and Reason 24/7 content widgets for your websites.

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

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Happy. New. Year.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    Started early, have we?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    It's 2014 somewhere. Or not, no one really knows.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Fucking time zones. How do they work?

  • Ted S.||

    Wait until the discussion turns to Daylight Saving Time. ;-)

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    DST? That's worse than circumcision and deep dish pizza COMBINED

  • OO=======D||

    Worse than a foreskin and anchovie deep dish pizza?

  • OldMexican||

    It's 2014 somewhere. Or not, no one really knows.


    Just don't feed the mogwai after midnight.

  • Nooge.||

    1630 is early?

  • ||

    Happy...blah, blech.

  • MJGreen||

    Happy New Year, Fist and all. 2013 was like a year long libertarian Christmas. Here's hoping that 2014 is just as embarrassing for the powers that be. If we can't have our libertarian tyranny, we can at least have a good laugh.

  • Brett L||

    Happy New Year, reasonoids.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    A flute player had all of his bamboo instruments, 11 of them, destroyed by customs officials at JFK airport in New York City. He says customs told him they were all “agricultural products.” (Hat tip to Popehat)

    This one time, at customs...

  • SusanM||

    Agricultural products - Essential for global insurgency...

    Fuck this, I'm getting a pizza and getting drunk.

    Happy new year

  • Rich||

    HNY, Susan! Stay safe out there.

  • Ted S.||

    As long as it's a real pizza, and not "deep dish".

  • Michael S. Langston||

    Instigator!

  • Skonkey||

    I guess books are agricultural products.

  • Drake||

    Pretty much anything with wood, leather, silk, cotton, wool, alcohol, etc...

    They could burn all your clothes and luggage in front of you and send you on your way naked with that reasoning.

  • Metazoan||

    send you on your way naked with that reasoning.

    The NSA agent reading this just got a raging boner.

  • Killaz||

    I don't think I have read a story related to government travel disservices in the last fifteen years that made me not want to dip the perps in a vat of smelted iron.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Nobody needs 11 flutes.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Even the dolphins are getting high!

    Just chirp no, kids.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    They were high 2 games in a row

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    This alumni game has all the Leafs and Red Wings I hated as a kid.

  • Winston||

    Shouldn't it be Leaves? Yu Canucks ain't speal anytink write.

  • ||

    Maple Leaves.

    Fucking hilarious.

    Grew up a Habs fan but have learned to loathe them because of the politics as I've grown more cynical and jaded.

  • mr lizard||

    I see CV Greens isn't even waiting for the motivational phone call from El Jefe.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Democrats like vodka and Republicans love whiskey: WaPo maps the liquor of choice for the political

    Consumer data suggests Democrats prefer clear spirits, while Republicans like their brown liquor.
    Democratic drinkers are more likely to sip Absolut and Grey Goose vodkas, while Republican tipplers are more likely to savor Jim Beam, Canadian Club and Crown Royal. That research comes from consumer data supplied by GFK MRI, and analyzed by Jennifer Dube of National Media Research Planning and Placement, an Alexandria-based Republican consulting firm.
    The results are fascinating: Analyzing voting habits of those who imbibe, Dube found that 14 of the top 15 brands that indicate someone is most likely to vote are wines.
    If you see someone at your New Years party tonight drinking Kendall-Jackson or Robert Mondavi wines, that person is highly likely to vote, and they’re likely to vote Republican. Someone who savors a Chateau Ste. Michelle Merlot, one of Washington State’s top producers, or Smoking Loon, they’re likely to cast ballots for Democrats.

    I like Evan Williams.

  • Winston||

    Democrats love a commie drink? Who woulda thunk?

  • Ted S.||

    There was vodka long before there were commies.

  • Winston||

    It's a joke son.

  • Swiss Servator, Pikes Forward!||

    Be sure to read that in a Foghorn Leghorn voice.

  • GILMORE||

  • ||

    Beer is a commie drink...or at least a drink for a political system that placed one leader up as a god who upon death his body must be preserved...which is pretty much the same thing.

  • C. Anacreon||

    Look at the Statist who hosted the "Beer Summit"

  • Killaz||

    You say bad things about beer only because you are a bad person. Sam Adams, a founding father to this nation was no commie.

  • ||

    I was talking about the ancient Egyptians and Lenin's preserved corpse.

  • Killaz||

    Oh, well then, carry on. I'm too drunk to question the veracity of any of that.

  • Ted S.||

    If I drink hard liquor, it's vodka. But that's only because that's the first stuff I tried, when I studied in Russia.

  • C. Anacreon||

    Stay thirsty, my friend

  • lap83||

    what about Thunderbird ?

  • lap83||

  • ||

    Democratic drinkers are more likely to sip Absolut and Grey Goose vodkas

    Most prepper guilds I have read recommend storing a few gallons of Vodka.

    Can be used as an anesthetic, as a fuel, a commodity for trade, for cleaning guns an machinery, for cleaning wounds, as an anti-inflammatory and for sterilization.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Has the prepper fad ended yet?

    Or are they waiting for a white GOP president?

  • ||

    preppers can be split into two groups.

    The zombie apocalypse group which is apolitical and the debt over 100% GDP group which is also apolitical.

    I don't see the The Walking Dead or government spending ending anytime soon.

  • Atanarjuat||

    During the aftermath of the end of the world, a few gallons of vodka would last me, at most, about 3 weeks.

  • Generic Stranger||

    Seems to me something like Everclear or any other highly distilled 180 or 190 proof liquor would work better. It would take up less space for the same amount of alcohol and you can dilute it down for, uh, "disinfecting" drinks or use it straight to disinfect surfaces.

  • CatoTheElder||

    I stockpile single malt Scotch of middling quality for the SHTF contingency. It it takes up less space to store equal value and it's reasonably well-recognized for its value by any sensible person. Food storage is for suckers. Scotch is much better because is has near infinite shelf life. Further, if the S doesn't HTF, the price of good Scotch only goes up. So I can use it as a barter good, a source of calories, or to drown my sorrows if the SHTF, or to celebrate over time if it does not. Win-win.

    The article is another argument for middling quality Scotch over vodka. Cosmopolitan and appletini drinkers aren't going to have anything worth exchanging if the SHTF.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    What do libertarians drink?

  • OO=======D||

    salty ham tears

  • SugarFree||

    Ham Tears Cocktail

    1 oz moonshine
    1 oz Islay Scotch
    1 oz pineapple juice
    1/2 oz Luxardo Maraschino Liqueur

    Shake well with ice, serve poured over a creepy doll

  • Sudden||

    That sounds delicious

  • SugarFree||

    A salt-rimmed glass might be better than the doll, but it's up to you.

  • ||

    Laudanum apparently.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Moonshine. And if we thwart drinking because it's generally a disgusting practice, we smoke weed.

  • Banjos||

    Homebrew

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Alcohol is my preferred drink.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

  • Mickey Rat||

    "Someone who savors a...Smoking Loon, they’re likely to cast ballots for Democrats."

    That sounds about right.

  • Sudden||

    Consumer data suggests Democrats prefer clear spirits, while Republicans like their brown liquor.

    Democrats are clearly TEH RACIST!

  • PapayaSF||

    This needs to be the basis for a paper in some academic journal.

  • MJGreen||

    I also like Evan Williams. Inexpensive but with quite the bite.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    Reminds me once a friend of mine, 10 years or more ago posited that it's likely with enough data, you could more easily tell who someone was going to vote for by asking them seemingly non-related questions such as:

    Do you prefer McDonald's or Burger King?

    Coke or Pepsi?

    What kind of vehicle do you own/drive?

    He thought maybe 5 questions would be all that's needed. I tend to agree with him it's possible, but I don't know if anyone has actually tried it.

    Either way - interesting data.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ...one month’s prescription of drugs, free, to customers who have signed up for Obamacare but have been screwed over by the system and still don’t have an identification number.

    This has got to be illegal.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Nah, because Obama will claim credit for all the free drugs he has so graciously provided to people.

  • Rich||

    One month's worth, soon to be six months' worth.

    I wonder what deals between the administration and Big Pharma are being made behind closed doors wrt this stuff.

  • C. Anacreon||

    And then, when the six months is over, a lot of Dem operatives will go on the talking heads show, crying "we've got to extend the free drugs! If we don't, people will be dying on the streets within hours, unable to get their insulin or heart pills!"

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    Taylor Swift builds massive wall at her Rhode Island beachfront property

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    She should be able to squeeze at least 3 songs out of this whole process.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    She'd dated and dumped all the neighbors. Seeing them was getting awkward.

  • OO=======D||

    She sure maintains an image of purity despite having fucked a shit-ton of guys.

  • SugarFree||

    The rumor is that she goes through so many boyfriends because she doesn't put out.

  • Rich||

    Technically, she could still be a good date.

  • Marshall Gill||

    How, by bringing a hot friend along who did put out?

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Robert Reich: 2014 is the year we must purge the 'Do-Nothing' Republicans from Congress

    For some reason it's a video where he looks constipated fake-playing the guitar to Bohemian Rhapsody.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Huh. You weren't lying.

  • BakedPenguin||

    What a twisted little midget. Maybe he should have taken to heart some lyrics from elsewhere in that song - "Anyway the wind blows" - because it's not blowing favorably for statist fucks like himself.

  • Winston||

    You Know Who Else purged his opponents for being obstructionist?

  • Rich||

    The Philips Lady?

  • Anomalous||

    The Illinois Enema Bandit?

  • Ornithorhynchus||

    Oliver Cromwell?

  • Generic Stranger||

    Joseph Stalin?

  • Pro Libertate||

    At least the fascists are self-identifying these days.

  • Winston||

    What do you expect from a man with named Reich?

  • Kid Xenocles||

    I agree. Let's purge all the do-nothing types out of Congress and replace them with people who will do what I want them to.

    Or is that not what they mean by "do something?"

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Say what you will, class warfare works. Especially if all you care about is political gain.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The ACLU has filed another suit in connection with the National Security Agency’s snooping...

    Good thing the government doesn't have to pay for its own lawyers.

  • Kid Xenocles||

    Whaddaya mean? It's right there in the budget. [ducks]

  • Kid Xenocles||

    Whaddaya mean? It's right there in the budget. [ducks]

  • BakedPenguin||

    Damn it, I knew I should have brought three rocks. [Goes back to collecting rocks]

  • The Other Kevin||

    Drugstore Walgreens has announced that it will provide one month’s prescription of drugs, free, ...

    See? If all those evil corporations and doctors would just do their part and stop being concerned about profits, and give away stuff for free, then Obamacare would work perfectly!

  • Redmanfms||

    See? If all those evil corporations and doctors would just do their part and stop being concerned about profits, and give away stuff for free, then Obamacare would work perfectly!

    This was essentially the sum reasoning of one of the sub-plots of Hancock, except it was Jason Bateman's character trying to sell his "public relations" schtick to a pharmaceutical company by telling them to simply give away their latest, and best selling product. He claimed it would improve their brand and image, I don't know if he explained how after losing all of that capital and going in the hole by giving the drug away for free (not at cost) they were going to be able to fund the development of any other great healing drug products because it was the point at which I got up and walked out of the movie.

    My date (it was our third) was puzzled at why I thought it was a bad idea when I explained why I couldn't stand to watch the movie (which was already pretty terrible anyway). Even when I explained in very simple terms exactly like I did above why it was a profoundly stupid idea she still didn't get it. There was no fourth date.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Salon: We must standardize all fast food menus

    Every restaurant serves different portion sizes: some are large, some giant, and others gargantuan. This leaves many of us confused and prone to eating far too much. How much easier would it be to control our intake if we knew that a cheeseburger had 400 calories whether we purchased it at McDonald’s, Burger King, or Denny’s? Or that lunch was going to contain just 640 calories, regardless of what we ordered?

    Why can’t restaurants be held responsible for designing and serving meals that contain what we need? If people eat too much at one meal, they usually don’t eat less at the next to compensate. Similarly, if we don’t get enough of something at one meal, like fruits and vegetables, we don’t usually make it up by eating more of those foods later. This means that when restaurants serve us too much food with too many calories and too few essential nutrients, they put us at risk for chronic diseases.

    As a society we accept this risk, and we don’t expect restaurants to be responsible for taking care of us. However, this is something we need to seriously reconsider, because it is too difficult for most people to figure out how to compensate for meals with too many calories and too few nutrients that protect us from disease.

    Wow: just flat out say people are too stupid to make the right choices.

  • Irish||

    You could always just not eat out if you're so worried about this.

    Oh, wait. I forgot that the primary goal of the left is to make a world where no one has to deal with the consequences of their own decisions.

  • PapayaSF||

    First, demand that more women work, and demean stay-at-home moms. Then, when fewer people cook at home, demand that portions in restaurants be regulated.

    So much of progressivism works like that: problems are addressed with "reforms" and "solutions" that create new problems, which then require more "reforms." And, oddly, these solutions always involve more government power.

  • andarm16||

    Why are I am shocked that this wasn't written by Sad Beard?

  • Irish||

    Because you don't realize that Sad Beard works for Slate and not Salon?

  • SugarFree||

    And SadBeard loves frozen burritos and fast food in general. He hates having to talk to waiters and would rather eat in his dank little warren than eating outside. (Yes, he has said all these things.)

  • Ska||

    Those are some of his most respectable opinions.

  • SugarFree||

    He has the best frozen burritos reviews on the internet. And since his mom came over with all those post-it notes, he no longer sets them on fire when he uses the microwave.

  • Ted S.||

    I'm sure the waiters would rather see SadBeard eat in a dank little warren than have to talk with him.

  • SugarFree||

    You know he's a shitty tipper. Like Canadian-level shitty.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Isn't that most of DC, though?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "Why can’t restaurants be held responsible for designing and serving meals that contain what we need?"

    This is the craziest thing I have read today. If you want a healthy meal out you know to go to something like Subway and not McDonalds. Why would the McDonalds be 'responsible' for someone choosing their wares?

  • Rich||

    Why would the McDonalds be 'responsible' for someone choosing their wares?

    Well, isn't Sebelius 'responsible' for someone choosing her wares?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    You are mandated to choose her wares (or one she approved), but no one has to choose to eat at McDonalds over Subway (or make your own meal).

  • Rich||

    Check your privilege.

  • BakedPenguin||

    ...isn't Sebelius 'responsible' for someone choosing her wares?

    SugarFree, he's almost as sick as you.

    Oh wait, Rich was talking about Obamacare, not post-menstrual frigid meat curtains. Never mind.

  • SugarFree||

    Frigid? Her Beloved El Presidente keeps that dutchie warm and lubed and ready for broom-closet barebacking.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Nicely written.

  • Ted S.||

    I need to enjoy the food I eat, which may or may not be compatible with what some Nanny Stater wants to force me to eat.

    Whenever they talk about the quality of life, they never talk about the benefits of being left alone.

  • Irish||

    A rational Salon comment?!?!

    I've lived and worked in Europe and frequently entertained European coworkers here in the U.S. when they visit, and there is always a "good god" reaction to the size of portions in (many) American restaurants.

    You know what they do? It's this amazing thing that must be a secret method developed through years of training: they don't eat it all.

    That's madness. How do they do it?

  • Boisfeuras||

    Not the English. They'll eat until they explode like Mr. Creosote, because it'd be impolite to leave food on their plate.

  • PapayaSF||

    +1

  • Pro Libertate||

    I just re-read The Caves of Steel, and I think I know what he means. Community kitchens, with food choices determined by the City government. And everything made of genetically modified yeast.

  • Ted S.||

    GMOs are evil!

  • Pro Libertate||

    Yes, well, maybe they'll skip that part.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Once they are approved by government kitchens, GMOs will suddenly be okay.

  • Irish||

    Salon appears to have been infested with sarcastic conservatives.

    Frank Knarf 6 minutes ago
    It is heartwarming to see that someone with a serious obsessive-compulsive disorder combined with an authoritarian personality can make a living writing books about healthy eating.
    Caliman 10 minutes ago
    So ... I guess restaurants give away extra food to their customers (because they would have been just as happy with a tiny portion, right?) because ... why again?

    Also, if you think drink sizes are "standard," it just ain't true ... alcohol content, volume of drink and drink mixes all contribute to wildly different alcohol amounts per "serving."


    FlagLikeReply
    KPinSEA 9 minutes ago
    @Caliman

    But when you're about to make a preposterous argument, asserting things as facts that aren't even remotely true is as natural as breathing.
  • C. Anacreon||

    The amazing thing is the idea trumpeted here that a 400-calorie hamburger is not a good meal. 400 calories is not too much for just about anyone's diet for lunch -- and if served with lettuce and tomato, you've actually got a fairly balanced meal that gives you protein, a small amount of carbs, and enough fat to satisfy you.

    The nuts who write things like this have this obsession that "hamburgers=bad" when it is the fries and the coke that get you at fast food spots, not the beef. And they'll never talk about the enormous amounts of calories in fried chicken, because, well, that's racist. It's also racist to point out that the average 12-inch flour tortilla alone has 360 calories and 60 grams carbohydrates -- this little wrap alone actually worse for you than your 400 calorie burger!

    But these warriors only point out burgers, because they have no idea what they are talking about, and they don't want to offend anyone, but want their statist pals to nod in omniscient agreement.

  • PapayaSF||

    I would also like to see the author present this idea to chefs from the many innovative restaurants in the Bay Area. What's the standard calorie count for a duck bisteeya? Is that the approved amount of sea urchin fusilli? If she tries telling them what they are allowed to put on a plate, she'd better be sure their knives aren't handy.

  • Mickey Rat||

    That says more about the writer than anyone else. He does not eat a smaller dinner when he's had a large lunch?

    If you are a functioning adult, no is and no one can be responsible for you, but you.

    Also, the things the Left suggests and the regulations they impose all seem to point to a goal of heavily processed institutionalized food, as that is the type that be measured for mass and calories down to gram like they seem to want. I wonder if they realize that is the reality they are shaping?

  • PapayaSF||

    Proles need controls.

  • Boisfeuras||

    "Leftism loathes differences, deviation, stratifications. Any hierarchy it accepts is only 'functional.' The term 'one' is the keynote: There should be only one language, one race, one class, one ideology, one religion, one type of school, one law for everybody, one flag, one coat of arms and one centralized world state."
    - Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, Leftism, From de Sade and Marx to Hitler and Marcuse (1974)

    ...One... value menu.

  • PapayaSF||

    +One

  • MJGreen||

    Parody. Has got to be.

  • Rich||

    Giant rubber duck bursts in Taiwan

    OK, you zany dolphins, do you know anything about this?

  • ||

    AGAIN?!

  • ||

    Dolphins are thought of as one of the most intelligent species in the animal kingdom

    I am pretty sure most mammals can avoid getting trapped in nets....the vast majority of which don't have sonar.

  • The Other Kevin||

    That's why they call it "dope".

  • Generic Stranger||

  • pan fried wylie||

    the vast majority of which don't have sonar.

    Nets may not be opaque to the wavelengths involved.

  • andarm16||

    "We must expand the war on drugs! Even the dolphins are getting high!"

    So between this and the purposeless porpoise killing, Dolphins are like the hoodlums of the sea.

  • andarm16||

    "We must expand the war on drugs! Even the dolphins are getting high!"

    So between this and the purposeless porpoise killing, Dolphins are like the hoodlums of the sea.

  • Winston||

    You must be high since you double posted.

  • Marshall Gill||

    So between this and the purposeless porpoise killing, Dolphins are like the hoodlums of the sea.

    Don't forget the gang rape, but yes, they are.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Sorry. So very very sorry.

    MSNBC television host Melissa Harris-Perry apologized on Tuesday for a recent segment on her show that joked about former U.S. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's adopted African-American grandson.

    Harris-Perry said that the segment on Sunday's "Melissa Harris-Perry" show was meant to celebrate diversity and not disparage it.

    "Whatever the intent, the segment proceeded in an unexpected way that was offensive," Harris-Perry said in a statement. "Without reservation or qualification, I apologize to the Romney family and to all families built on loving transracial adoptions."

    I'm surprised the puerile little moron didn't have a snappy comeback about how only white people can be racist.

  • Rich||

    "The intent of featuring the photo was to celebrate it."

    Jive turkey.

  • SugarFree||

    Jezebellians remain defiant:

    Martha_Jones21UMadeleine Davies191L
    I mean, but were they wrong though? I saw that picture and my first thought was "oh great, one more self hating negro in the world" I bet the first thing the romney family would say in regard to the child would be, oh well we don't see race. Today 11:09am
    lexingtonsteelspenis
    Admittedly, however, when I first read that the Romney clan adopted a black baby my initial reaction wasn't too different from MHP's guests. I'd like to think that it comes from my deep seated hatred of Mitt Romney and conservatives in general. I mean if Elizabeth Warren or Joe Biden (or any white progressive family) adopted a black baby, I would be happy. But I'm sickened at the thought of a black baby being adopted into a white conservative family. There is something disingenuous about it.

    Especially when you consider Mitt's pathological pandering to people who believe that that baby he's holding is inherently subhuman (coupled with the fact he is a patriarch of a religion that not too long ago actually publicly characterized blacks as being subhuman).
  • Rich||

    I'm sickened at the thought of a black baby being adopted into a white conservative family.

    Pretty sure that's covered by Democrarcare.

  • Rich||

    Slurring my speech already! ;-)

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Last I checked, Lexington's Steel's Penis didn't discriminate between black and white.

  • ||

    coupled with the fact he is a patriarch of a religion that not too long ago actually publicly characterized blacks as being subhuman

    Last I checked it was the progressive left that not so long ago characterized blacks as subhuman.

    Looking at drug laws, public schools and zoning regulations it is kind of hard to see how they have changed all that much.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "it was the progressive left that not so long ago characterized blacks as subhuman."

    ?

  • ||

    Give dysgenic groups [people with "bad genes"] in our population their choice of segregation or [compulsory] sterilization.

    I will let you guess who I am quoting.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Sanger, huh. What is 'the deal' with the '[compulsory]' thing? What was actually said?

    Anyways, my point was I do not think it was the 'progressive left' that had that view in particular.

  • ||

    my point was I do not think it was the 'progressive left' that had that view in particular.

    You are wrong. Go back and read what Civil war veterans (all Republicans) wrote and said once they took power.

    Start with the 14th amendment.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "what Civil war veterans (all Republicans) "

    er, you mean like 'three generations of morons is enough' Justice (and GOP Civil War vet) O. Holmes?

  • ||

    Bo, eugenics had its most fervent fans among progressives.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Proof of this? From my readings it found supporters from many political philosophies, regions and parties. Remember, Coolidge signed the 1924 immigration restrictions based on eugenic theory, and the Buck v. Bell case was decided 8-1.

  • ||

    "Our Constitution guarantees equal rights to all our citizens, without discrimination on account of race or color. I have taken my oath to support that Constitution. It is the source of your rights and my rights. I purpose to regard it, and administer it, as the source of the rights of all the people, whatever their belief or race. A colored man is precisely as much entitled to submit his candidacy in a party primary, as is any other citizen. The decision must be made by the constituents to whom he offers himself, and by nobody else."

    - Coolidge 1924

    Go fuck yourself Bo Cara.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Other Coolidge comments:

    There are racial considerations too grave to be brushed aside for any sentimental reasons. Biological laws tell us that certain divergent people will not mix or blend. The Nordics propagate themselves successfully. With other races, the outcome shows deterioration on both sides. Quality of mind and body suggests that observance of ethnic law is as great a necessity to a nation as immigration law. "Whose Country Is This?," Good Housekeeping Magazine (February 1921).

  • ||

    With other races, the outcome shows deterioration on both sides.

    He is talking about interracial marriage. I agree that it is racist but it is not Jim Crow, or Eugenics, or segregation or unequal rights. Degree of racism matters especially when you opposed the most grotesque of the bunch.

    I can probably find quotes from Franklin Douglas opposing intermarriage.

    I will not find quotes like the Coolidge one I quoted from the likes of Sanger or Woodrow Wilson.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    He is taking about ethnic law (eugenics) and immigration, that was pretty standard eugenics talk Corning.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Also Corning, look up Henry Cabot Lodge's speeches given in support of immigration restrictions. Eugenical through and through.

    Sadly, eugenics was a poison found across American political and social philosophies.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Bo, eugenics had its most fervent fans among progressives

    That is just stupid.

    The most fervent Nazi's occupy the right wing of the political spectrum.

    And I know you are going back to the first half of the 20th Century to base this on.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    PB, while I do not think 'leftist progressives' were especially and/or uniquely supportive of eugenics, they certainly were largely supportive of it.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Proof of this?

    Jesus tap-dancing Christ this has been discussed to death here.

    The most fervent Nazi's occupy the right wing of the political spectrum.

    Herp derp dipshit doesn't understand the meaning of the words he uses.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "Jesus tap-dancing Christ this has been discussed to death here."

    If it so well rehearsed it should be easy to give us a quick summary.

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    Why? Until five minutes ago every fucking body knew that Margaret Sanger loved Eugenics the way Reason commenters love porn.

    Proof? Read ANY reliable bio of the bitch. She wanted darker people to breed less. She believed this would be good for society. She talked about this. A lot.

  • ||

    And I know you are going back to the first half of the 20th Century to base this on.

    And the OP from the Jezabel article is going back to pre-civil war and the Democrat dominated Jim Crow south for her observation that "coupled with the fact he is a patriarch of a religion that not too long ago actually publicly characterized blacks as being subhuman"

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Yes, Mormons have changed much since the 19th century.

    Nazis, much like Islamofascists, strive for a social order based on religion, culture, authority, ethnicity, and anti-liberalism/anit-democracy.

    There is really no doubt they are "conservative" or right-wing other than from revisionists like Jonah Goldberg.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I have doubt. I think it is better to say that elements of the Nazi party can be found among both left and right wing groups of the recent American past and today.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    both left and right wing groups

    You will hear your common wingnut spout "National SOCIALIST Party"! See there!

    But the Nazis were about anything other than the "from each - to each" Marxist crap. They were about the exaltation of the Reich (the German Catholic/Lutheran exceptionalists) - Much like how Rush (King of the Rednecks) Limbaugh groans on and on about American Exceptionalism.

    "Exceptionalism" means the rules of order don't apply to you.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    the Nazis were about anything other than the "from each - to each" Marxist crap.

    Marxism =/= socialism

    Idiot.

    They were about the exaltation of the Reich (the German Catholic/Lutheran exceptionalists)

    Uh, wow. No. Not even a little bit. That is so wrong, it's not even a strain of thought that exists in the same universe as the correct answer.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "Marxism =/= socialism

    Idiot."

    Well, if you want to be technical the Nazis did not oppose private ownership of capital.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    the Nazis did not oppose private ownership of capital.

    That is only true in a phenomenological sense, not a theoretical sense -- and was a decision with much controversy within the party.

    More importantly, there were some non-Marxist socialist thinkers who did allow for limited private ownership of capital with ultimate public control of capital -- much like what was seen in Nazi Germany. Nazism doesn't quite fit neatly in the socialist tradition, but it is far closer to the socialist tradition than to that of classical liberalism.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "Nazism doesn't quite fit neatly in the socialist tradition, but it is far closer to the socialist tradition than to that of classical liberalism."

    I do not care for a long debate on this, so I will say that that, with both parts considered, is a fair enough statement.

  • Boisfeuras||

    Well, if you want to be technical the Nazis did not oppose private ownership of capital.

    George Reisman, "Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian":

    "The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands. What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners."
  • PH2050||

    But the Nazis were about anything other than

    This comment leads me to think you don't know much about history or about the argument you oppose since you claim it's based on some silly thing like a similar word.

    Taking into account the Weimar situation with Bismarck and his socialist dream and we see that Nazis *were* about that life, a cradle-to-grave welfare system, only they wanted it exclusively for the right people, in this case, "true Germans".

    Marx has nothing to do with it, clown.

  • Boisfeuras||

    You will hear your common wingnut spout "National SOCIALIST Party"! See there!

    You pretend to like Hayek...Have you ever actually read anything he wrote—other than the title of "Why I Am Not A Conservative", which you disingenuously misrepresent? (He used conservative in the European sense: "[W]hat in Europe was called 'liberalism' was here the common tradition on which the American polity had been built.")

    The Road to Serfdom, Ch 12, "The Socialist Roots of Naziism":

    "[T]he support which brought [Nazi] ideas to power came precisely from the socialist camp. It was certainly not through the bourgeoisie, but rather through the absence of a strong bourgeoisie, that they were helped to power. The doctrines which had guided the ruling elements in Germany for the past generation were opposed not to the socialism in Marxism but to the liberal elements contained in it, its internationalism and its democracy. And as it became increasingly clear that it was just these elements which formed obstacles to the realization of socialism, the socialists of the Left approached more and more to those of the Right. It was the union of the anticapitalist forces of the Right and of the Left, the fusion of radical and conservative socialism, which drove out from Germany everything that was liberal. The connection between socialism and nationalism in Germany was close from the beginning."
  • Boisfeuras||

    Ludwig von Mises, Omnipotent Government, Ch. 3, "Etatism":

    The aim of price control is to decree prices, wages, and interest rates different from those fixed by the market...But when this state of all-round control of business is achieved, the market economy has been replaced by the German pattern of socialist planning. The government's board of production management now exclusively controls all business activities and decides how the means of production—men and material resources—must be used.

    The isolated measures of price fixing fail to attain the ends sought. In fact, they produce effects contrary to those aimed at by the government. If the government, in order to eliminate these inexorable and unwelcome consequences, pursues its course further and further, it finally transforms the system of capitalism and free enterprise into socialism.

    Many American and British supporters of price control are fascinated by the alleged success of Nazi price control...These men who want to fight Nazism by adopting its methods do not see that what the Nazis have achieved has been the building up of a system of socialism, not a reform of conditions within a system of market economy.

    There is no third system between a market economy and socialism. Mankind has to choose between those two systems—unless chaos is considered an alternative.
  • Palin's Buttplug||

    I agree with all that Hayek quote.

    "Right-wing" does not mean laissez-faire to me at all. It denotes where one sits on the side of orthodoxy.

    In left-right politics, right-wing describes an outlook or specific position that accepts or supports social hierarchy or social inequality.[1][2][3][4] Social hierarchy and social inequality is viewed by those affiliated with the Right as either inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable,[2] whether it arises through traditional social differences[5] or from competition in market economies.

    Wikipedia

    Fascism is inequality based on race and social difference - i.e., conservative.

    White people are naturally above others - see right-wing radio and American (white) Exceptionalism.

  • Boisfeuras||

    I agree with all that Hayek quote.

    In your post I replied to, you had just explicitly denied the socialist and Marxian origins of national socialism. In that chapter, Hayek meticulously traced the overwhelming socialist and Marxist influences on Nazism: Werner Sombart, Johann Plenge, Friedrich Naumann, Paul Lensch, Oswald Spengler, Arthur Moeller van den Bruck.

    Fascism is inequality based on race and social difference - i.e., conservative.

    No, "fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer" (The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics), but has little consistency beyond that ideologically. Which is not even the topic of discussion. National socialism is not synonymous with fascism. Nor is fascism even remotely related to conservatism in either the European or American traditions. In fact, it is the opposite, resting on the left alongside other long exploded crank ideologies.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    elements of the Nazi party can be found among both left and right wing groups of the recent American past and today.

    Disagree. Fascism was/is almost exclusively a European development; it didn't take almost anything from the American experience (left or right).

    You are right, however, that it was a radical center ideology in the context of its time and place (interwar Europe).

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    " it didn't take almost anything from the American experience"

    You have my time order wrong.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Oh, yes. I see what you're saying now. My bad.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Nazis, much like Islamofascists, strive for a social order based on religion,

    Dipshit still doesn't know what he's talking about.

    Remember, Coolidge signed the 1924 immigration restrictions based on eugenic theory

    Originally promulgated and carried that far by the Progressive Movement.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "Originally promulgated and carried that far by the Progressive Movement."

    Was it? Do you have any proof of that? That bill passed the Senate 62-6. That is a lot of Progressives!

  • PapayaSF||

    Nazis, like Communists and Progressives, strive for a new, radical social order based on socialism, the suppression of free enterprise, the elevation of group rights over individual rights, and extending state power into all areas of life.

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    I'll burn in hell for stooping to try and explain anything to you, Butftuck, but here goes: After WWII it was the standard communist line that since the former friends of Stalin's USSR were now the enemy, they MUST be right wing.

    In fact, the National SOCIALISTS were thorough statists who put the group above the individual. "Gemeinutz Geht vor Eigenutz": The Community comes before the individual. This was on every Third Reich coin for a reason.

    Does that mean Nazis had nothing in common with authoritarian conservatives? Of course they did. But Nazis have more in common with statist whores like yourself than they do with their natural enemies, libertarian individualists.

  • SugarFree||

    Corning,

    LDS had restrictions on black membership until 1978.

  • ||

    LDS had restrictions on black membership until 1978.

    Did not know that. I assumed she was talking about Christianity in general.

  • SugarFree||

    LDS has an estimated 500K black members currently, so they must have turned it around.

  • Bastiat's Burning Rage||

    If I recall my Mormon history right it was Brigham Young who demonized black people and restricted their membership

  • Libertarius||

    There you go again, repeating the same-old government skool leftist propaganda. There is no giant ideological gulf between communism and fascism--they are two variations of the same LEFTIST theme, totalitarian collectivism.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Much like the Tea Party/conservative alliance here in the US.

    They love collectivism for the right people (SS, Medicare) just as long as the "others" don't get any.

    I notice the "moochers" to the Tea Klan are always blacks, immigrants, wetbacks, non-Christians - in other words "Jews" who deserve nothing.

  • PapayaSF||

    Because fascism arose partly in reaction to Communism, many people seem to think they are "opposites." This view was handy for many people. But "right-wing" in essence means something like "conservative," "traditionalist," etc. Both fascism and communism are the opposite: revolutionary, modern, socialist, collectivist.

    Or, look at it this way. In the standard formulation, both a Catholic monarchist and a Nazi are "right wing," which is absurd. They share almost nothing in common beyond an opposition to communism.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Both at the bottom of the Nolan chart.

  • PapayaSF||

    Exactly.

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    ^This. Thank you.

  • What's that smell?||

    JIM CROW Laws....twit

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    lexingtonsteelspenis

    Said poster has significant race issues.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Pretty obvious who the real racists are.

  • C. Anacreon||

    I saw that picture and my first thought was "oh great, one more self hating negro in the world"
    But I'm sickened at the thought of a black baby being adopted into a white conservative family.

    Because unless you are a liberal, you hate all minorities and shouldn't be permitted to raise children. This is what a lot of people on the Left actually believe.

  • PapayaSF||

    That young black will grow up off the liberal plantation! How will he possibly learn about racial grievances if he's raised by loving white people??

  • Anomalous||

    From the media.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    There is something disingenuous about it.

    Though surely your sense of racism is perfectly genuine and consistent.

    Fuck assholes like this guy. He deserves a rusty chainsaw up his dick hole. Racist motherfucker.

  • Jordan||

    "Whatever the intent, the thegment proceeded in an unecthpected way that wath offenthive," Harris-Perry said in a statement. "Without rethervation or qualification, I apologithe to the Romney family and to all familieth built on loving tranthracial adoptionth."

    Fixed.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Was her "joke" even funny? I doubt it.

    "Look! That Herman Cain gets around!"

    They need a good joke writer - all cable news. They suck.

  • ||

    Bullcockfuckingshit.

    I don't believe a word of her apology.

    They've been at this shit for too long to be a contrite apology.

  • ||

    #MHPapology

  • Michael S. Langston||

    So her statement was that the show was meant to celebrate diversity, which seems like a lie, but even if not; it's followed up by an obvious lie when she says, without qualification, she apologizes.

    Sorry, but stating the intent was different that what took place, then claiming the segment proceeded in "unexpected" ways, are both qualifiers.

    But whatever - given others at that network - this is all just SOP where they actively define being racist, committing constant logical fallacies, attacking others directly, and openly lying as the Four Pillars of Sound Journalim™.

    If only she talked about economics a lot - she could get a Nobel Prize too.

  • GILMORE||

    "IT WASNT ME!! IT WAS THE SEGMENT THAT DID IT! IT PROCEEDED ALL BY ITSELFS"

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    SoCon Vision for Religion in Public Schools

    "'Teaching Christian principles produced a cohesive value system necessary for the successful government of a nation composed of millions of individuals from [diverse backgrounds and groups].' Public education was to be a vital instrument in inculcating throughout society these common Christina values. President George Washington as early as 1789 declared that schools were to teach the 'religion, morality, and knowledge' which was 'necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind.' In 1844 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that 'a public school must instruct in the general principles of Christianity' (Vidal v. Girard’s Executors)."

    http://www.eagleforum.org/proj.....-viii.html

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    We could do without meddling socons like thisGeorge Washington fellow.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I wonder if his Soconnery was up there with his slave-holding?

    More seriously, I am suspicious that Washington was talking about public schools.

  • Winston||

    Soconnery

    Who's the man now, dog?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPjvDE-rKo0

  • Raven Nation||

    Any "public" schools Washington was talking about in 1789 would have been town- or county-based individual schools. And, not a county system like we have today. In Virginia, population was fairly dispersed so there may have only been one or two schools in a county.

    Such town or county schools would have been run directly by the freeholders (or equivalent) and supported by locally voted on and raised taxes. First "modern" public schooling was in Mass around the 1840s.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Thanks, that is helpful.

  • ||

    And, not a county system like we have today.

    We have school districts in my state which are usually restricted to towns/cities but conversely can cross county lines.

    Your distinction, at least in my state, is without a difference. What you think farm kids didn't come to town for school?....in fact the difference still appears to me to the federal department of education. Want to guess what your average libertarian feels about the Federal Department of education?

  • Raven Nation||

    I'm not sure we're in disagreement here. And, didn't mention the feds. I was responding to the issue of Washington & whether he was speaking of public schools.

    In Virginia for much of the pre-Revolutionary period (& beyond to some extent), there were very few urban centers of any kind. Williamsburg was one; Richmond very late on in the 18th century. But not too many more. It wasn't a matter of farm kids coming to town, there just weren't any towns to come to. There was usually a place where the courthouse & church were located. I suspect that some kind of county school may have operated in some of those places.

    This is in contrast to, say, New England or New Jersey where you had multiple towns in each county. And there, each town would be responsible for a school for their own kids rather than the county as a whole. And even then, only New England really pulled off town schools with any consistency.

  • PapayaSF||

    Were schools before the 1840s ever supported by taxes? I seem to remember reading about kids bringing money or food directly to the teachers.

  • Raven Nation||

    Eighteenth century local governments (& I mean really local, like towns with 100 ratepayers or so) could levy taxes on their residents to support a schoolmaster. Not always, everywhere, but often.

  • Boisfeuras||

    I wonder if his Soconnery was up there with his slave-holding?

    The slaves he manumitted?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Obviously why they didn't let Washington write any of the Constitution.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Until I see that he was talking about government supported schools I will reserve judgment there, but yes, in general I will take Jefferson and Madison's view of the First Amendment over Washington's.

  • ||

    Nope. Instead we let the guy who said this about the teachings of Christ:

    "There will be found remaining the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man"

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Yeah, after he cut the nonsensical miracles and resurrection parts out.

  • ||

    So you agree with Jefferson (and me partially) that Christian morality without all the supernatural bullshit is "the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man"?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I would agree with that.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    I would rank Kant's Categorical Imperatives first (although there is some overlap with the Golden Rule).

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I think Jesus' morality more benevolent than Kant's, it seems to obligate more positive do-gooding and forgiveness to me.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    No doubt, but Kant wasn't interested in benevolence. He was trying to establish a code of ethics.

    Kant was far more libertarian than Jesus. Personally I am more in the John Stuart Mill camp.

  • PapayaSF||

    I don't think the John Stuart Mill camp would want you, either.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    First, Jefferson did not write the Constitution either.

    Second, as PB mentions that quote as part of Jefferson's larger project was probably not one SoCons could get behind.

  • ||

    A socon would not consider Christianity to be "the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man"?

    One day maybe you and me and Shrike can have a discussion that does involve you two making finger paint cartoons. today would appear to not be that day.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    A SoCon would not accept the rejection of the divinity of Jesus and the working of miracles by Him, right?

  • ||

    A SoCon would not accept the rejection of the divinity of Jesus and the working of miracles by Him, right?

    Everyone is superstitious. Human brain is designed for it. A recent study showed spiritual people are less likely to suffer from depression.

    Condemning those who hold "the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man" while also holding on to the superstitions attached is not as condemn worthy as you and Shrike would have me believe.

  • SugarFree||

    Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him [Jesus] by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others again of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being.

    -Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Short, April 13, 1820

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Nope, they just put him in charge of the Constitutional convention and let him vote on amendments.

    You idiot.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    As someone who has disagreed with him, where is PB 'an idiot' for writing that Washington did not write any of the Constitution? You are correct he served as President, but he in fact did not write any of it. It is common in constitutional jurisprudence to take the words of someone like Madison as more authoritative of Constitutional meanings than Washington.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    As someone who has disagreed with him, where is PB 'an idiot' for writing that Washington did not write any of the Constitution? You are correct he served as President, but he in fact did not write any of it.

    It was a response to shriek's general fetish about slagging CHRISTFAGS!!! Obviously, if the founders felt Washington should play no role in the development of the Constitution based on his religious beliefs, they wouldn't have given him the responsibilities that they did. Of course he didn't actually write it, he was a general and classic aristocrat, not a lawyer.

    One could simply turn it around and point out that the founders obviously felt that only a deeply Christian man like Washington possessed the temperment to oversee such a contentious process, but that wouldn't be any more accurate than shriek's contention that his Christianity kept him from being considered as one of the writers.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Yes, I sometimes use over-the-top hyperbole but only when it is warranted.

    But I really do hate it when conservatives usurp the founding fathers ideology as their own when nothing could be further from the truth.

  • BigT||

    BP: "Yes, I sometimes use over-the-top hyperbole but only when it is warranted."

    Are you aware that is a self-contradictory statement? You truly are an idiot. But don't go away. We need witless lefties like a schoolboy needs flies, so he can tear off their wings and watch them.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Bo Cara Esq.,

    Public education was to be a vital instrument in inculcating throughout society these common Christina values.


    The primary reason for the imposition of public education in the United States was to impose a truly Christian [i.e. Protestant] education to children of Catholics and other undesirables. This fundamental goal was later changed to teaching children the proper values required to become obedient and trustworthy (in the eyes of the State, at least) citizens.

    If you don't want to be witness to these philosophical fights at our expense, then advocate for the complete abolition of compulsory public education and stop wasting your time with these irrelevant shows of false outrage.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Public education can not be squared with the NAP and so I do not support it, but it would be fairly far down on my 'to do list' for reasons articulated by, among others, Milton Friedman. Having said that, I agree with the LP platform that there should be no government aid (or hinderance) to religion, so I am opposed to government agencies, even ones I might oppose, giving aid to religion.

  • The Bearded Hobbit||

    Very OT:

    Happy SIXTY FREAKING YEARS OLD to me today!

    ... Hobbit

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Cheers. Do you planning on making it to your elventy-first?

  • Rich||

    Wow, Hobbit! How does an old man like you manage to stay alive?

  • The Bearded Hobbit||

    As George Tirebiter says, "I don't eat".

    Thanks to all for the replies.

    ... Hobbit

  • BuSab Agent||

    The secret to immortality is....not dying.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    Congratz Old Timer.

  • SugarFree||

    May your balls droop no further.

  • Ted S.||

    Congratulations on not dropping dead in the past 365 days. ;-)

  • Pro Libertate||

    Sixty is the new thirty. Happy birthday!

  • BakedPenguin||

    Happy Birthday, BH. Just don't make anymore movies.

  • ||

    Cheers!

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    New Years Eve birthday? What an AWESOME deal. Always a party. Never have to work the next day.

    Happy birthday/new year...

    ...old man.

  • C. Anacreon||

    Congrats!! Nowadays 60 really is so very young, not like when we were kids and people in their 40s looked old. You should have another 30 good years easy!

  • Pi Guy||

    Cool. So I have hope.

    For eleven more years...

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Queen B: Queen Elizabeth snubs children offering her flowers

    The Queen broke with festive tradition on Sunday and left church at Sandringham without collecting any flowers from the children waiting outside.

    She decided to return home immediately after the service because she received so many bouquets on Christmas Day that she was made late for lunch with her family, police told people in the crowd.
    The Princess Royal and the Countess of Wessex accepted some of the flowers in place of the Queen, but a number of the children were left disappointed that they had not been able to give them to the monarch herself.
    [...]
    After Sunday's service on a frosty morning the Queen only waved to the well-wishers before driving off in her maroon Bentley.
    One parent, who asked not to be named, said: “We drove more than 50 miles with our five-year-old daughter so she could present a small bouquet to the Queen.
    “She had practised how to curtsey and it would have been a big moment for her so it was very disappointing to be told that the Queen was not receiving any flowers.
    “This policeman just told us that it was not happening today because the Queen was late for her family lunch on Christmas Day due to so many children giving her flowers.”

    Then again a monarch is an archaic absurdity, so I don't feel that bad for them.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I dunno. The way the UK is going, maybe she should take over.

  • ||

    She is a Queen. She should be hung.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Shouldn't the king be hung?

    Or is this some sort of weird euro thing?

  • ||

    England does not have a King.

    After we hang the Queen they might have a King. That hypothetical King should be hung as well.

  • ||

    Kween Bitch.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    One parent, who asked not to be named, said: “We drove more than 50 miles with our five-year-old daughter so she could present a small bouquet to the Queen.
    “She had practised how to curtsey and it would have been a big moment for her so it was very disappointing to be told that the Queen was not receiving any flowers."

    I only feel sorry for the kid in that their parents are idiots in pushing their 5 year old to care that much about what is essentially a very rich celebrity.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    their / her / preview...

  • BuSab Agent||

    She's freaking 87 years old. How entitled do you have to be to make a little old lady stand around all afternoon so your toddler can get a cheap thrill?

  • Irish||

    Towards a Postcolonial Milk Studies

    Using standard feminist methodology [standard feminist methodology?], twentieth-century vegan feminists and animal ecofeminists challenged animal suffering in its many manifestations (in scientific research, and specifically in the feminized beauty and cleaning products industries; in dairy, egg, and animal food production; in “pet” [note the scare quotes] keeping and breeding, zoos, rodeos, hunting, fur, and clothing) by developing a feminist theoretical perspective on the intersections of species, gender, race, class, sexuality, and nature.
  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Now I have to retract my comment about the standardized menus article being the stupidest thing I will read today.

  • andarm16||

    There are schizophrenics in state hospitals that produce word salads with more content than that.

  • Rich||

    a feminist theoretical perspective on the intersections of species, gender, race, class, sexuality, and nature

    "Nice title!"

  • The Late P Brooks||

    As a society we accept this risk, and we don’t expect restaurants to be responsible for taking care of us. However, this is something we need to seriously reconsider

    Yeah, really. Restaurants should have weigh-ins, and BMI checks at the entrance.

    "You too fat. You get three ounces of gruel. Twenty bucks. NEXT!"

  • Drake||

    Stop giving the fuckers ideas.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    Nah - soon enough they can just access the NSAs data-base, get your height and weight from your medical records and determine your BMI, and therefore your portions for you.

    In addition, if they find any airline tickets in which you were forced to purchase two seats for "the twins" (as Homer S puts it) - then no matter what you order, the only thing they give you is a very small salad, no dressing, one apple, and a bottle of water all of which can only be picked up at the end of a strenuous, but short obstacle course. Finish in 60 seconds you get it all, otherwise every 15 seconds over one item is removed.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

  • Irish||

    I got 13 out of 13.

  • Rich||

    But you're a woman, aren't you?

  • Irish||

    No. I'm just a man with a strange knowledge of feminism, apparently.

  • SugarFree||

    9 out of 13

  • lap83||

    7 out of 13. If I wasn't on my period I think it would've been lower.

  • Rich||

    You scored 10 out of a possible 13

    Nice try – but you're a man, aren't you? Never mind, you could learn much from Bridget Christie

  • Irish||

    Based on the last three comments, I am officially King of the Feminists.

    Bow before me, peons.

  • Rich||

    You so smart -- How many radical feminists does it take to change a light bulb?

  • SugarFree||

    THAT'S NOT FUNNY!

  • Irish||

    None. The light bulb shouldn't have to change for society to accept it, you cisgendered patriarch.

  • Jordan||

    King of the Feminists

    PATRIARCHY!!!1

  • amelia||

    I got 12 out of 13, and the same reply. I guessed on all but two of them.

  • General Butt Naked||

    I got 11/13 but don't know what the hell I just did.

    The only question I knew was the wendy davis one. All the others might have well been in Greek.

    Fucking brits.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    10 out of 13. I did guess on like 5 of them.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    13/13. I'm not going to get a notarized letter in the mail informing me that I'm now officially gay, am I?

  • ||

    You got 13 out of 13 in a British Feminist quiz...

    Do you really need a letter?

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Well, it would be nice to have something to show my wife...

  • Killaz||

    Questions about English people doing stuff. I was too bored to finish it to find my results.

  • ||

    7 on 13.

    Not sure if I should brag or quietly forget about it.

  • ||

    Is this supposed to be funny?

  • Jesus H. Christ||

    I got 10 out of 13 and I'd never heard of any of it. My strategy was to choose the most infantile yet not openly false answer.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    You scored 1 out of a possible 13

    Are you a member of Ukip? You need help. Head immediately to see Bridget Christie perform A Bic for Her at the Soho Theatre, 6-25 January.

    I'm so proud of myself!

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Using standard feminist methodology

    They worked backwards from their conclusions, using made-up "evidence" to support their thesis?

  • Drake||

    Started with outrage and looked for a cause.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Jezebel readers reacts to Melissa Harris-Perry apology

    lexingtonsteelspenisUMadeleine Davies151L
    Yeah I do remember feeling slightly uncomfortable when I saw that. The fact that MHP addressed it makes me like her that much more.

    Admittedly, however, when I first read that the Romney clan adopted a black baby my initial reaction wasn't too different from MHP's guests. I'd like to think that it comes from my deep seated hatred of Mitt Romney and conservatives in general. I mean if Elizabeth Warren or Joe Biden (or any white progressive family) adopted a black baby, I would be happy. But I'm sickened at the thought of a black baby being adopted into a white conservative family. There is something disingenuous about it.

    Rich white people can't love black children.

    Martha_Jones21UMadeleine Davies191L
    I mean, but were they wrong though? I saw that picture and my first thought was "oh great, one more self hating negro in the world" I bet the first thing the romney family would say in regard to the child would be, oh well we don't see race.

    Classy as always.

  • Pro Libertate||

    You mean she thinks the Romneys wouldn't judge the child based on the color of his/her skin? That sounds familiar to me somehow.

  • Drake||

    No Mormon hate to go with the rest?

  • Irish||

    Progressives are racists part 2,000,000,000

  • SugarFree||

    Ahem. Even the same quotes I used.

  • Killaz||

    I saw a bit of the pearl clutching over MHPs and her guests remarks, and I thought what they said was pretty mild and in jest. Leave it to the proglodyte commentators to turn it into full on hate mongering though.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    I saw that picture and my first thought was "oh great, one more self hating negro in the world"

    Her definition of a non-self-hating negro must be one that can barely read English and plays the knockout game for laughs.

  • PH2050||

    I find it interesting that *these* rich white people apparently can't adopt black kids without being mocked yet many celebrities, Hollywood and otherwise, do so without being discussed by MSDNC's worst affirmative action hire ever.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    I mean if Elizabeth Warren or Joe Biden (or any white progressive family) adopted a black baby, I would be happy. But I'm sickened at the thought of a black baby being adopted into a white conservative family. There is something disingenuous about it.

    Nothing disingenuous about you, though, is there, you transparently evil bag of pus?

  • Irish||

    It's better for a black child to grow up in foster care than to be raised in a rich white family that can give him a great education.

  • Drake||

    Bastards might be creating another Obama.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I'm not a Romney fan or particularly a fan of conservatives in general, but I daresay they'd be better parents as a rule than these progressive fucks.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "I daresay they'd be better parents"

    Parents, maybe, but not dog owners I submit ;)

  • ||

    With Obama you get the best of both worlds.

    His policies eat his own children and he eats dogs as well.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    If you like your dog you can keep it, but you must return the plate.

  • ||

    if Elizabeth Warren or Joe Biden (or any white progressive family) adopted a black baby

    That poor poor child.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    New York judge upholds most of New York gun laws, strikes down arbitrary 7 round limit

    A federal judge has largely upheld New York's tough gun control law passed in the weeks after the Sandy Hook school shooting.

    Judge William Skretny in Buffalo rejected arguments from opponents that its ban on large-capacity magazines and the sale of semi-automatic rifles infringed on Second Amendment rights.

    He ruled that the provisions were constitutional because the state has an "important governmental interest" in public safety in a suit brought by the New York affiliate of the National Rifle Association.

    However, the judge struck down one restriction that would have made it illegal to put more than seven rounds in a 10-round magazine.

    The law was approved a year ago and some parts are already in effect, while provisions for background checks for gun and ammunition purchases are set to come into force on Jan. 15.

    Well if the government says its important...

    Data show that more than 1,000 gun possession charges – ranging from misdemeanors to felonies — have been filed in New York City since the law took effect, according to The Associated Press.

    Yay! More people convicted of felonies for possessing an inanimate object that was legal 9 months ago!

  • Pro Libertate||

    Say, whatever happened to that ground-breaking Supreme Court decision that recognized the 2nd as an individual right?

  • Winston||

    Same thing with the right to privacy.

  • Cytotoxic||

    "Repeat as needed"

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Online feminism is still breathtakingly idiotic, in case you were wondering.

    Trigger warnings—and the debate over whether they have any value—have long been a part of the feminist blogosphere. Originally, trigger warnings were short alerts put at the top of articles or blog posts warning readers that the following content could trigger known mental illnesses, such as post-traumatic stress disorder or eating disorders[...]

    in 2013, feminist bloggers started to suggest that trigger warnings pop up in all sorts of places. At the popular blog Shakesville, Ruxandra Looft argued that they have a role to play in the classroom. The Onion was routinely singled out as a place that could do with more trigger warnings, with Molly Redden of the New Republic calling the website's edgier humor "trigger warning-worthy."

    But it was when people started seriously arguing that prime-time soap operas should offer trigger warnings for rape scenes that it became clear that the trigger warning was having a moment.

    1) Apparently "Ruxandra Looft" is not just the name of a minor Harry Potter character.

    2) Other scenes in desperate need of trigger warnings: the Red Wedding, Michael killing Sollozo and McClusky, any given musical number on Glee

  • Irish||

    The Onion was routinely singled out as a place that could do with more trigger warnings, with Molly Redden of the New Republic calling the website's edgier humor "trigger warning-worthy."

    These people are so mentally unhinged that the Onion fucks them up. Hilarious.

  • Winston||

    Other scenes in desperate need of trigger warnings: the Red Wedding, Michael killing Sollozo and McClusky, any given musical number on Glee

    How about Tori branding Edith Hardy?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy6mPH-wA0Y

    the trigger warning was having a moment

    Now that is phrase I would like a trigger warning for.

  • SugarFree||

    Michael killing Sollozo and McClusky

    Um... SPOILERS?

  • Winston||

    Did you know Gatsby dies? Or that Soylent Green is people?

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Dammit, I knew I should have put a trigger warning for people who are sensitive to spoiling 40 year old movie.

  • SugarFree||

    All we ask for is respect.

  • andarm16||

    So basically, they're saying that they are such special little snowflakes, that the rest of us should put a warning in front of everything that could possibly trigger unpleasant thoughts in another person?

  • Michael S. Langston||

    Correct - feminists apparently believe very strong in two things:

    1) The absolute strength of women
    &
    2) The infinite weakness of women

  • ||

    What is it with you guys and feminism?

    Do you want to bang them or something?

  • SugarFree||

    ^^^ This comment should have had a trigger warning!

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    TRIGGER WARNING

    Comments on Hit & Run may induce mental images of Lindy West in coitus. You have been warned.

  • SugarFree||

    What you call coitus is really just her wadding up a dozen donuts and sticking them in her blood swamp.

  • BakedPenguin||

    "Uhh, Uhh, Uhhhhhhhh... Oh, thank you, donut dildo!"

  • SugarFree||

    She calls it "Riding The Jophur."

  • Nooge.||

    Dude. I just laughed so hard I got to taste my dinner again. Butter chicken So thanks!

  • Anomalous||

    Never knew who she was until now. She could give Lena Dunham some serious competition for World's Most Unattractive Woman.

  • ||

    Evil Walgreens trying to play "corporate nice" at the expense of Obama. How dare they?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    If I were a lobbyist charged with securing the flow of government benefits, I would hope my clients would be veterans, because that has to be the easiest job in the profession.

    "The plan to trim pension increases for working-age military retirees such as Preston is by far the most controversial provision in a bipartisan budget deal approved by Congress and signed last week by President Obama.

    The cut is small — a one-percentage-point reduction in the annual cost-of-living increase — but it has provoked outrage among veterans, some of whom argue that the country is reneging on a solemn pact. And even though lawmakers, especially in the GOP, fulminate about the need to cut the cost of federal health and retirement benefits, many have vowed to roll the cut back when Congress returns to work next week."

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....ml?hpid=z2

  • Steve G||

    As someone who's about to hit 20 yrs, I fail to get outraged about all this. I've got contemporaries who are all fired up about the "betrayal", but I gotta say a 1% cut TO GROWTH during working years is pretty appropriate. If you're sitting on your ass bitching about your monthly check at 43 yrs old, you're not much better off than the welfare recipient doing the same thing. I'm kinda embarrassed to share the same office with some of these 'entitled' people.

  • Swiss Servator, Pikes Forward!||

    Cue the whining by the VFW and American Legion.....bah.

    I fully expect to see my pension actually gutted (as opposed to a small trim in growth!) before I ever see a dime of it. But I am not going to react like an IL Government employee and demand that I get mine, screw the entirety of the rest of the taxpayers!

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Indiana woman slices the penis of her daughter's boyfriend

    A Johnson County woman held a man against his will at a Franklin house trailer Saturday and sliced his penis with a box-cutter, police said.

    Sheriff’s deputies arrested Bonita Lynn Vela, 35, Franklin, on preliminary charges of battery with a deadly weapon and criminal confinement with a deadly weapon.

    Vela told police she was suspicious that the 18-year-old Avon man had molested her 2-year-old son. The man was adamant in conversation with police he had done no such thing, according to a police report, and Vela admitted to police that her suspicions developed after she had been smoking marijuana. The woman said she was unsure whether she had ingested any other drugs before the incident, police said.
    [...]
    The Avon man, described as the boyfriend of one of Vela’s daughters, told police Vela held him in the trailer for three and a half hours. He told police the woman was “out of control” and initially told him she had called friends with guns to come “take him out,” according to the report. Vela told the man he would be tied to a tree, shot in the head and then left to be eaten by animals, the victim told police.

    Reefer madness.

  • Rich||

    The woman said she was unsure whether she had ingested any other drugs before the incident

    Probably pufferfish.

  • ||

    They should be sure to include a good mood stabilizer.

    Nit-pick: mood stabilizers are for bipolar, not depression (though in a very small number of cases of the latter mood stabilizers can be used off-label as adjuncts).

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Gawker outrage: Steve Stockman cleans his AK-47 with 'liberal tears'

    Stockman loves guns, as evinced by his campaign bumper sticker: "If babies had guns they wouldn't be aborted." So it isn't terribly surprising that he'd try to troll ideological foes with the photo above, posted to his Facebook and Twitter accounts. "The best gun lubricant around," he writes of a lube can labeled "Liberal Tears."

    Har har! Of course, he's joking. You'd never clean your gun with salty water, unless you want it to rust and jam. But even WD-40 is pretty stupid, as one commenter on Stockman's Facebook page points out: "Why would you spray lubricant on the recoil spring of an AK-47? That would only serve to attract dirt."

    AK-47? As in the Kalashnikov rifle, that ubiquitous Russian-made weapon of choice for the very sort of communist rebels Stockman despises? Indeed, that picture appears to show the lower receiver of a semiautomatic AK variant. There are a very few American-made versions of the rifle, because gun wahoos love anything tough-looking and military-ish, but even on the weak assumption that this is a U.S.-made AK, that's sort of like saying a burrito is American cuisine because, hey, you bought it at Moe's.

    Anyway, good joke, Steve. By the way, here's some pictures of what AK-47s do to living flesh.

    Cue graphic gun violence pictures.

  • Irish||

    Oh man. They're so fucking easy to troll. Pretty much say anything and they'll fly into petulant and impotent rage.

    "How dare you talk about liberal tears! Watch me cry over that joke you made!"

  • Winston||

    The only proper jokes are those making fun of Republicans.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    The heady combination of holier-than-thou sanctimony and constant ego-building self-affirmation makes them far too easy to mess with. We have a couple of those SWPLs in my office, and it's my constant joy to fuck with them in little ways.

  • ||

    People who take themselves too seriously are notoriously easy to fuck with. Is there anyone who takes themselves more seriously than progressive jerkoffs? And remember, these aren't celebrities taking themselves SUPER SERIAL, it's absolute nobodies. Man, sometimes delusion is like the finest wine.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Is there anyone who takes themselves more seriously than progressive jerkoffs?

    Sadly, no. I think popular culture satires have basically killed off the insufferable breed of pompous, self-serious conservatives who styled themselves "defenders of civilization" and such. Mocking liberal pretensions with the same type of vigor, OTOH, is virgin soil. Conservatives aren't that great at the humor thingee, which means plenty of digs at the proggie mindset are there for the taking. IMO part of the reason that South Park is so successful is because they're mining humor out of a topic that has not been successfully savaged in pop culture yet.

  • Cytotoxic||

    As conservatives slowly learn to fight the culture battles, progs somehow forget.

  • Raven Nation||

    Maybe there's a finite amount of "culture battle knowledge" in the world? As one side gains, the other loses.

  • andarm16||

    Wait till they see one of those "gun salesman of the year" bumper stickers with an Obama picture on it.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Steve Stockman: troll extraordinaire!

    I don't even care what his political beliefs are, I'd vote for him just to see him continue his trolling.

  • General Butt Naked||

    There are a very few American-made versions of the rifle, because gun wahoos love anything tough-looking and military-ish, but even on the weak assumption that this is a U.S.-made AK, that's sort of like saying a burrito is American cuisine because, hey, you bought it at Moe's.

    What does this even mean? Why would there be American made AKs? The russians and their satellites made millions upon millions of them and warehoused them. Is it because gun people are supposed to be "BUY 'MERIKIN" morons? Or is it because the gun was designed by commies, for commies?

    Is his life so poisoned by politics that he can't imagine liking a product that was created by someone whom you disagree with?

  • Cytotoxic||

    He's grasping.

  • DRM||

    Anyway, a burrito is American cuisine because it was invented in California.

    (Okay, actually it's uncertain if the first burritos were made in northern Mexico or in California, but a burrito with more than one thing in filling is very definitely Californian in origin. And one may well note the only part of Mexico where burritos are popular are those near the US; the center of burrito popularity in Mexico is Ciudad Juarez, a place which I can, in fact, see from my definitely-in-the-US house.)

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

  • ||

    There are a very few American-made versions of the rifle, because gun wahoos love anything tough-looking and military-ish

    What?

  • SugarFree||

    Think of it as a Zen koan.

  • Sukkoi19||

    Most AK variants in this country are at least assembled here with American made receivers (The part the ATF considers the firearm). So his statement is largely false. Examples of imports would the Chinese Norincos and Romy WASRs and Saigas.

  • ||

    AKs don't have a lower receiver, just a receiver. YOU IDIOT. And it doesn't "appear" to be an AK, it's obviously an AK. YOU IDIOT.

    I also like the presentation of the 7.62x39 wounds as if they're somehow more gruesome than wounds from other rifle round.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    That and most of the pics aren't of just the wounds, but the wounds cut open for surgery.

    Michael Moore would be proud.

  • PH2050||

    Some of the comments lamenting about the country becoming more libertarian and less progressive strike me as both extremely deluded and heartwarming at the same time.

  • General Butt Naked||

    From the comments:

    Here's the thing; the left is never going to beat the right is it always tries to take the high road. It's time we took the offensive in the culture wars; even if the right is offended: the greatest weakness of the left is that it constantly tries to be Superman while the opposition paints it as Lex Luthor and the the left just sits there and takes it always losing ground and getting weaker.

    Oh wow, the dissonance is almost as oily as that tear lube.

  • Irish||

    That is the exact opposite of the truth. I don't know how someone can be dumb enough to think the left, which controls every newspaper, T.V., and Hollywood, is somehow losing the culture war.

    I do think the tide is starting to turn and the left no longer enjoys the total hegemony it once did. This is largely because the internet has broken the stranglehold legacy media had.

    They're still in control though, and watching them whine and bitch when they've essentially won the culture war is just wonderful. They really are going to be miserable forever aren't they? I don't think we have to worry about running out of petulant liberal tears anytime soon.

  • Winston||

    So Phil Robertson advocates marrying underage girls. Interesting since that is something that society is quite intolerant about these days when they used to be more tolerant in that area. So how about that social tolerance?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Seems like this cuts both ways, right?

  • Winston||

    Well I know Cathy Young mentioned "shifting cultural taboos" which isn't exactly "social tolerance" unless you like the how taboos are being shifted that is.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    ...in what sense? I have not been following the debate closely, but in general anti-gay types are not likely to invoke social tolerance as the motivation for their views, whereas gay activists are.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "in general anti-gay types are not likely to invoke social tolerance"

    The defenders of Robertson invoked tolerance quite a bit, no?

    But my point is about Robertson himself, busy picking at the immoral speck in the eyes of gays without realizing there was a bit of a beam concerning marrying underage girls in one of his. He without sin cast the first stone, so to speak.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    The defenders of Robertson invoked tolerance quite a bit, no?

    Like I said, I haven't been paying much attention.

    Robertson himself, busy picking at the immoral speck in the eyes of gays without realizing there was a bit of a beam concerning marrying underage girls in one of his

    From his point of view, probably not. Marriage in the Biblical Levant was quite common from as young as 12 (essentially, whenever the girl in question had her period) on up, and 14 would have been a standard age for such. Mary, for example, was probably 14 or 15 when she married Joseph and undoubtedly younger when her parents betrothed her.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    But my point is about Robertson himself, busy picking at the immoral speck in the eyes of gays without realizing there was a bit of a beam concerning marrying underage girls in one of his. He without sin cast the first stone, so to speak

    Well, he and his wife did get married when she was 16 and they've been a couple since she was 14, so that hardly constitutes a "beam."

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    From the "Why in the hell did anyone think Yglesias was smart and self-aware enough make a good propagandist" files...

    My colleague David Weigel has an admirable annual tradition of conducting a pundit audit in which he confesses his sins and bad predictions. But I'm far too egomaniacal to do that. Instead I would like to double down on a forecast I made that the conservosphere has been roundly mocking for months.

    To wit:

    Laying down the marker—Obamacare implementation’s going to be great and people will love it:


    My view is that this holds up really well. I think that relatively few Democrats were mentally or politically prepared for the media blowback, but the media blowback was entirely predictable and, in fact, baked into the basic structure of how the news media works[...] when we look back five, 10, 20, and 30 years from now, a 60-day delay in the functionality of the website just isn't going to be the thing that strikes people as significant.

    Ignore for the moment the complete detachment from reality on display: anyone who would write this for a periodical should be fired on the grounds that he is gravely insulting the basic competence and literacy of said periodical's readership.

  • Winston||

    Any mention of former Reason employee Weigel deserves a trigger warning.

  • Enough About Palin||

    Didn't someone around here allege that Weigel fucks sheep?

  • Pi Guy||

    Uh, drink!?!?!?

  • ||

    I predict that almost assuredly if and when the Obamacare debacle continues and albatrosses the shit out of Obama and the Dems, Yglesias will never, ever mention this post again. He basically tells you so with "I'm far too egomaniacal to do that". Yeah, we know, SadBeard. And it's so undeserved that it's mindboggling.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    You will be wrong again.

  • Cytotoxic||

    I have transcended the emotion of anger.

  • ||

    I can't take much more of these links to putzes and feminists.

    I'm off to waste some time waiting for that stupid year to come in.

    Enjoy to one and all.

    And be safe.

  • ||

    You too? Brunch time for me. I've lifted, I'm going to eat and drink, then get stoned, and then watch the fireworks over the Space Needle from my deck with friends.

  • PH2050||

    Can't tell if serious or Dunphy...

  • ||

    Inside Nick Denton’s phony, hypocritical class war against tech workers

    While presenting itself as the champion of the working classes, the fact is Denton’s Gawker empire is guilty of almost every crime it accuses the tech industry of committing, and several it doesn’t. Denton, who now encourages others to sneer at Silicon Valley’s elite social clubs, made his own millions as co-founder of “First Tuesday,” an elite social club which spanned Europe during the first dot com boom. While crying foul at the off-shore tax dodging of San Francisco tech companies, Gawker Media is registered in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying US taxes, an arrangement which the New Yorker described as “like an international money-laundering operation.” As Valleywag howls that “Google interns earn more than you,” Gawker Media is currently the subject of a class action lawsuit over its earlier refusal to pay its own interns a dime for their labour. And how about Valleywag’s mockery of lavish Silicon Valley workplaces? Why not ask Denton about that when you visit his “steampunk” office, featuring “a lounge area that looks like it’s straight out of the blue pill/red pill scene in The Matrix,” an “office surfboard” and a rooftop party deck? Business Insider claims it’s one of the 15 coolest offices in tech.
  • ||

    So...Gawker is the embodiment of projection. Are you in any way surprised?

  • Winston||

    Not to mention that progs are usually quite opposed to governments taxing them personally and interfering with their own businesses. As for the other people well that's different.

  • ||

    Even Denton’s choice of Valleywag editor reeks of hypocrisy. Which is to say, if you’re going to wage a fake class war, then, Sam Faulkner Biddle is the perfect fake class warrior for the job. Long before he got his gig wailing about “spoiled brat” tech founders who owe their success to their fathers, Biddle gained entry to the prestigious Johns Hopkins university with no help whatsoever from his own father, the Pulitzer prize winning journalist — and Johns Hopkins lecturer — Wayne Biddle. In case the nepotism wasn’t obnoxious enough for his classmates, Biddle promptly joined the Delta Phi fraternity...

    ...Delta Phi is a club you could only join if you have rich parents. After college, Biddle moved to New York where, fancying himself a novelist... he wrote a series called “Diary of an Unemployed Class of ’10 Philosophy Major in New York City” for the Awl, including this revealing paragraph…

    “Is it petty to not share in the happiness of someone else’s success? Is it petty to wish-to beg, even, knuckles blistering, eyes bloodshot, beseeching each god-for their horrific downfall? Is it immature to consider another’s achievement, to imagine them doing the job you wish you had-walking around in your fancy pants, sleeping with your wife in your own bedroom, eating your Frosted Mini Wheats, loudly slurping the milk-and sink into despair? Is this unfair? Should this be beneath me?”


  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Gawker and their commenters are nothing more than modern-day McCarthyites. Look how vociferously they support complete nobodies losing their livelihoods over saying hurtful words. The Puritans were more tolerant of dissenting opinions.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    What is it with you guys and feminism?

    They're all closet SoCons.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    We are all closet SoCons who, being SoCons, are closeted gays who, being gays, are closet Marxists with an agenda to destroy all that is good and holy in American society who, being Marxists and therefore atheists, are closet theists who hate God who, being theists, are all closet anti-religious nihilists... which brings us right back to libertarianism.

    It's quite complex, as you can see.

  • ||

    No, we're all just sad, lonely, forever alone neckbeards.

  • ||

    Oh, and we wear fedoras. Can't forget that part.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Speak for yourself. I'm not wearing anything under this trenchcoat.

  • ||

    /k/ommandos are awesome

  • General Butt Naked||

    That's an awesome story, I hope it's true.

  • ||

    Well, on the one hand, it's on 4chan, so it's probably not true. On the other hand, it is at least plausible.

    I would guess that the truth is somewhere around "a dozen people from the gay bar came to the gun range". Which is still nice.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Slate confusingly thinks California Republicans gerrymandered safe districts for themselves

    California Republican Congressman Ed Royce recently filed for election in the wrong district. Prior to the GOP’s and ridiculous 2010 congressional gerrymander, Royce served the 40th District—where he filed in December—but he now serves the 39th, which snakes through several conservative-leaning counties. (Adding to the confusion, Royce actually served the 39th in the 1990s as well, prior to the 2000 gerrymander.)

    Royce’s consultant has claimed that the misfiling was simply a typo, but it seems much likelier that Royce was thrown off by the labyrinth of districts created by the GOP’s most recent gerrymander. (Business Insider notes that the craggy, horseshoe-shaped 39th closely resembles a Rorschach inkblot.) With so many malformed districts drawn to entrench a Republican majority in the House, it’s quite a feat for congressmen even to locate their districts on a map.

    California's districts are redrawn by a commission, not the legislature. And in any case, Royce, who was my Congressman until 2010, is more vulnerable in the 39th than he was in the 40th.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Sounds like a great argument for breaking up California into several smaller states.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    I don't know CAs laws specifically, but in most states districts are redrawn by (as you point out too) committees, but committees which are formed by the party in control of the state legislature.

    If that's true in CA, then the idea that the GOP redrew the boundaries is idiotic - they may have gotten some concessions or whatever to not complain too much - but they likely were not in charge in CA.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    Happy New Year reasonoids.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Backatcha, Canuckistani. Hope your hockey boys don't embarrass themselves this year.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Pussy. -31C is only -24F.

    It was -32F here two weeks ago, that's -36C.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    For 5 straight days though?

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    It was below -20 for a few days. Not 5 though, 3 maybe.

    Back in 98' we had 2 weeks where my thermometer didn't move from -30. I don't think it was that cold at the airport, because I couldn't find it in the record books (and my thermometer may have been off), but that sucked.

    61F here last Sunday.

  • Nooge.||

    At this point their public relations folks are probably calling the White House for advice.

    "Fuck 'em. Just kidding. They're too stupid to fuck."

  • dunce||

    Cotton is also an agricultural product, are they going to start taking peoples underwear and destroying them?

  • RishJoMo||

    This makes a lot of sense dude. WOw.

    www.BeinAnon.tk

  • GILMORE||

    HNY ANONBOT!

  • Great+Grandma||

    And some people still actually believe that more government is a good thing? The average intellect of a government employee is about the same as a mob or lower. In other words, no thinking apparatus exists. I wonder if that says anything about that kind of voter?

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