Reason Morning Links: Obama Disses Netanyahu, Tea Party Tour Kicks Off, White House Announces New Forclosure Plan


NEXT: Don't Cross Them

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.

  1. Good morning reason

    1. Good morning Suk… wait a minute, what?

      1. Chains we can believe in!

        1. Chains weaken; be leavin’.

      2. It will make sense when you realize that every poster is you.

  2. “The administration’s new push also seeks to more aggressively help borrowers who owe more on their mortgages than their properties are worth, offering financial incentives for the first time to lenders to cut the loan balances of such distressed stupidly impulsive and/or clueless homeowners.”


    1. The list of people whose stupidity I am expected to subsidize just grows and grows. I suppose next Obama will be calling on me to take a second job so that I can pay for some other idiots too.

      1. It’s time to be patriotic.

        1. Because it *is* a big fucking deal.

  3. A teabagging healthcare protester turned me into a newt. Well, I got better….

  4. Obama walks out on meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

    I guess at least he stopped bowing to people.

    1. Anti-Semite!!!

    2. he only sucks arab cock.

      1. domoarrigato, does it taste sweeter?

        1. It probably tastes like camel ass, with some sand thrown in.

          Is that a racist thing to say?

      2. That’s good. The Israelis’ are all sore from the last 40 years.

    3. Note that Obama was not pissed off by the fact that the Israelis continue to build settlements on Palestinian land; he was pissed because the announcement that they would do so came just as Biden arrived in Jerusalem.

      I would have more respect for his acting in such an impetuous manner if his concern were the former, but that he’s throwing a tantrum over the latter shows (once again) that his primary concern is with the IMAGE of his administration.

      1. Maybe if the Israeli government threatened to murder every filthy kafir in America they’d get some respect. Arabs and Islamists sure do.

        1. USS Cole, bombed by aQ operatives: 17 dead, 39 wounded.

          USS Liberty, attacked by Israeli Defense Forces in international waters: 34 dead, 171 wounded.

          so it looks like you guys have tried that strategy already.

          1. That’s an insane comparison.

            1. Indeed it is, because the US started hunting down aQ leadership after the Cole attack, while the organization responsible for the Liberty attack continued to receive our foreign aid.

              1. I was thinking more because it was a mistake rather than a concerted effort. Also because they admitted error, and paid compensation to the victims. So far, I haven’t exactly seen Al-Quada falling all over itself to do that.

                1. Yeah, it was a mistake. Those fighter planes and torpedo boats just couldn’t see the gigantic markings on the Liberty, not to mention the flag it was flying.

                  It was payback for the US staying neutral in their little war. Obvious to those of us who don’t have a vested interest in it being a mistake.

                  1. Well they already killed Jesus after all…

          2. I don’t know the exact facts but apparently something happened on September 11th 2001 that left a few dead and a few wounded. Didn’t you guys those Al-Qaeda chaps have something to do with it?

            1. Perhaps we should count up all the dead soldiers from the wars the pro-Israel lobby in the US has pushed us into.

              1. I’m not going to take sides on the legality or necessity of the wars I presume you’re talking about, but why are the Jews Zionists Israelis to blame?

                1. I do wonder what wars specifically the pro-Israel lobby supposedly pushed us into.

                  1. All of them. Don’t you know they control the media as well as the financial system? I hear they still drink the blood of Christian babies too.

                    1. Would I be wrong to assume that “our only ally in the middle east” probably provided some of that awesome intel on Iraqi WMD?

                    2. Interesting how you put scare quotes around our only ally; which other Middle Eastern state were you thinking of, “Death to America” Iran?

      2. Note that Obama was not pissed off by the fact that the Israelis continue to build settlements on Palestinian land;

        I believe this is what is known as “assuming the conclusion.” “Palestinian land” according to who?

        There is no Palestinian state, after all. I would also venture to guess that the apartments are not being built on land owned by an individual Palestinian.

        In what sense is the location of that apartment building “Palestinian land”?

        1. It’s definitely not Israeli land, as Israel does not give non-Jewish residents of this land the rights of citizens.

        2. Sure, Obama and the rest of the world can continue to cling to this fantasy that East Jerusalem doesn’t belong to Israel, but that’s all it is, is a fantasy. To pretend otherwise is as detached from reality as it would be to pretend that Manhattan still belongs to the Lenapes.

          Truth be told, this a bad hook for leftist Palestinian sympathizers to hang their hat on, because the issue is settled as far as Israel is concerned. Even most liberal Israelis consider Jerusalem as theirs. Obama won’t win any sympathy at all over there with this hissy fit of his.

          1. If it belongs to Israel, then the current residents should receive all the rights of Israeli citizens.

            1. Resident aliens, rather. Israel doesn’t have it to be multiculti, it’s a reservation for Jews. I’m surprised there aren’t more casinos there.

      3. Come on, try harder. International diplomacy is a strange game. Everyone knows this – this is why bowing to enemies is horrible Blame America First concessionary behavior, while holding hands with our enemies is not.

        Although, had you read the article, you would have seen:

        “After failing to extract a written promise of concessions on settlements, Mr Obama walked out of his meeting with [client state governor] Mr Netanyahu […]”

    4. Another said that the Prime Minister had received “the treatment reserved for the President of Equatorial Guinea”.

      The difference is, President of Equatorial Guinea probably deserves far better than Netanyahu.

  5. Obamacare opponents on what to do now.

    -infinity for linking to an article you need a subscription to read.


    No wonder she’s a fan of gay marriage… she’s in one!

    1. Well at least we know who wears the pants in that family – and who picks them out for her.

      I wonder if she and hubby compare dick sizes, too.

      1. Who picked out her face? Because that person should be kicked in the head by a mule.

        1. She’s married to Ian McKellen?

    2. Sug, I’m seeing more of a FemDom/MaleSub situation here. Strange, yes, but who are we to judge?

      1. Nancy can live how ever she wants, but please don’t deny me my malicious glee. It’s all I have.

        1. Sug, I would never kill that for you. Your bile and spleen (though not pancreas, obviously) are an ongoing source of comfort to me.

          Urging you to explore a new world of malicious glee. Google search “manties,” and “milking” in a FD/ms context.

      2. I picture Nancy more as a Miss Oatlash (semi-NSFW) behind closed doors with her poor husband. Whatever she’s paying him it’s not enough.


    1. When you rub it, it turns into a mansion.

      1. Ha! Seriously you should be whipped for that pun…

        1. Thanks for the visual

  7. We often ignore something that many powerful female politicians, including Pelosi, Margaret Thatcher, Diane Feinstein, and Pat Shroeder, have had: a wealthy husband who makes it possible for them to work for government salaries,…

    Yes, without those wealthy husbands, they would be slumming it living off of the meager $174,000 a year that a U.S. Representative makes. Oh God, the stupid. It burns!

    1. That comment should go with SugarFree’s link. I’m not sure how it ended up here.

      1. This is how it worked before the Nesting Menace.

    2. Well, and add to that the notion that if it was a “supportive” woman behind a “strong” man, they’d wind up the howler monkey sirens about TEH PATRIARCHY!!1!

    3. not fer nuthin, but a measly 174k ain’t shit. for that money you’d be living in a 700 sft one bedroom in manhattan. maybe a 2000 ft condo in DC. Since most representatives have to live in both places – you have to have two houses minimum. 174 barely pays the mortgage.

      1. True. Of course the rents in Washington wouldn’t be so high if the city wasn’t full of contractors and lobbyists making millions. And whose fault is that?

      2. So… we don’t pay them enough for the hard work of stealing from us?

        1. we pay them enough – lets just not pretend that 174 is a lot of money.

          1. So you’re saying that more than three times the median household income of the U.S. isn’t a lot of money for one person. That’s certainly an interesting position to take.

            1. well, for one thing, I’m it’s not a lot of money for a family that is essentially forced to maintain residences in two locations – specifically when those places are San Francisco and Washington DC. You can compare that to table waiters in Iowa all you want, but it’s pretty meaningless. Moreover, three times the median is not unreasonable for one of the 435 people out of 300 million that represent us in government. I wouldn’t do that job for that money.

              1. I’m saying its not a lot of money – is what I meant to type (hosed up the edit)

                1. Sorry, domo, but being that I live in the DC area and only making a fraction of $174, I can assure you that it *is* a lot of money. I can only hope to make that much one day.

                  And as already pointed out, congressvermin get a housing stipend on top of that. My compensation package left that out, no doubt by mistake.

                  1. You only think so because you make less. The marginal dollar gets the shit taxed out of it. The lifestyle of someone making 200k is nowhere near twice that of someone making 100k, probably more like 40% better. I started out my adult life with a 30k a year job in Texas and now make many times that in NYC – my lifestyle is about the same.

                    1. Why don’t they just rent an small apartment in D.C.? Why do they need to have two different houses?

                    2. The marginal dollar gets the shit taxed out of it?!?!?!

                      WTF. So now we’re supposed to fucking feel sorry that the fucking fucks who write the fucking tax code are fucked by it, what the fucking fuck?

                      (I’ve always wanted to write fuck that many times in one sentence. Oddly satisfying, it is.)

                    3. Look – I’m not trying to say we should feel sorry for congressfucks – I’m making the argument that 174 is objectively not a lot of cash for a professional person in DC with a law degree (which most congresscritters have) – it’s equivilent to the salary of a second year associate. Whats more, the second 100k doesn’t put nearly as much in your pocket as the first 100k does because of our aweful progressive tax system. these are all facts – like it or not.

                    4. it’s equivilent to the salary of a second year associate

                      Not so much truth to that anymore these days, let me assure you.

                      But I agree with the general premise that $174K is not an outrageous sum for someone who is supposed to have the smarts and experience to be a U.S. Congressperson, do the job they’re SUPPOSED to do, and, as you point out, maintain a residence in D.C., which is insanely expensive.

                    5. I understand that, but I would gladly take a 40%+ increase in my standard of living. As it is now, the wife and I make less than that combined, and it’s struggle to raise 2 kids, save for their college and for our own retirement. I have a very modest mortgage by DC standards and live frugally.

                      I wouldn’t be happy about the higher marginal rates, but I would find every legal tax shelter out there to mitgate the hit.

                  2. Good point on the housing stipend. Don’t forget all the other freebies that they get, which peasants like us actually have to pay for out of our own pockets–parking, gym memberships, cell phones, transportation, entertainment (think of all the free food and booze and vacations they get from lobbyists). None of that comes out of the 174K figure. Underpaid my ass.

              2. it’s not a lot of money for a family that is essentially forced to maintain residences in two locations

                also, the whole notion that they are “forced” into living in high rent/mortgage houses/apts is a stretch.

            2. It is also amusing because that’s salary only. There are amazing perks, also on record, and one has to be a pretty serious fuckup not to have a job for life aftwards. Plus, there have been repeated studies of the trading patterns of members of both houses – turns out, not only is everyone above average, everyone consistently does quite well.

          2. While I don’t know any details, I suspect that $174k is just a salary. I bet that they all receive generous allowances for maintaining the second home, as well as, other allowances.

            Otherwise, I agree with you.

          3. Right, I think the threshold for “a lot of money” was set somewhere around $250k.

            1. a second year associate at a crappy firm in NYC makes 170k. 170 is what a junior employee gets paid for what is essentially glorified secretarial work.

            2. 174K is a lot of money when you don’t pay for your meals, you get free life-long healthcare (exempt from Obamacare of course), kickbacks, free vacations, gifts etc.

              Plus 174k still puts you at a pretty high tax bracket, but who are we kidding? They don’t pay taxes.

              1. 2nd year associates dont pay for meals, transportation, healthcare etc either – it’s all comped by the firm. They still barely make enough money to have a roach free 1br apartment in a shitty neighborhood. I know dual income lawyer couples who live in harlem to make ends meets. They live next to rent stabilized people living on food stamps and have a comparable standard of living.

                1. Maybe they should just fucking move out of New York.

                  I have no fucking sympathy for a fucking 2nd year lawyer who makes 50% more than I do after working for 25 years as an engineer.

                  Don’t they teach laywers how to peform basic cost/benefit analysis?

                  1. sure – they could take a job in BFE and get paid 1/3 of what they make – their real wages would not change. One of my points in all this is to explain to the folks in the hinterland that “real money” ain’t what it seems when you have to spend it in the big city. dont get googly-eyed over a big figure by comparing it to your own salary – theres a lot more that goes into it.

                    1. Their standard of living (not real wages) would almost certainly be better if they did move to BFE.

                2. But how much of that is due to their student loans? If you are not saddled with a ton of student loans, a duel income of over $300K a year will get you a lot better than a one bedroom in Harlem.

                3. Why on Earth would anyone live in New York?

                  1. thin slutty girls who buy their own drinks.

                    1. Which of the three is most appealing: thinness, sluttiness or willingness to buy own drinks?

                    2. slutty, thin, willingness – in that order. If they were to buy me drinks, I’d probably reconsider.

                    3. Best band name ever. Put that on the marquee = packed house

                    4. Everyone’s wives and girlfriends are rolling their eyes.

                4. 2nd year associates dont pay for meals, transportation, healthcare etc either – it’s all comped by the firm

                  In what universe does this occur? Second years making $170K and the firm paying for meals and transportation? Nope. Not happening these days. I work for a large, international law firm with offices in NYC, and I know for a fact our second-year associates do NOT make that much, nor does the firm pay for their meals, transportation or parking.

                  A couple years ago, there was a big salary war and all of sudden some of the biglaw firms went nuts paying first years $160,000. That has stopped, let me assure you.

                  1. In the universe that my girlfriend – who is a second year associate at a big law firm in NYC – lives in. My best friend from college is a fourth year, and he makes even more. Bonuses sucked, but the clients still pay for meals and cars home late at night. Methinks you are underpaid.

      3. Good thing real estate prices are as expensive or more so than New York and D.C., for the entire country, or your argument would be worth less than a pile of dead honkies.

        1. What are you talking about? The real estate prices in Washington are much higher than most of the rest of the country.

          1. I meant that the author of the comment argued that 174k ain’t shit, when considering prices in Manhattan and D.C.
            99% of America is not that expensive, I was being sarcastic. For most Americans, me included, 174k with all the benefits would be an enormous amount of money. I could live like a fucking king with that.

            1. Ok. Sorry. Actually $174 is a middle class salary even in DC. And don’t forget many of these creatures’ wives work big paying jobs.

              1. I’m sure you know it’s illegal to make compensation decisions based on how much money an employee’s spouse has or makes.

            2. I could live in a goddamn mansion in the Villages (you have to make the millions to pull off River Oaks) here in Houston. Jesus.

              1. That is, for $174k/year.

                1. Check out some enlightening regional price level statistics. you will see that prices are 200 something in the city, vs. 130 something in less urban areas. The BLS statistics ignore the effects of relative levels of taxation, thereby understating the true disparity in purchasing power.

                  1. Doesn’t the DC area have this new thing called the Metro, that allows people who work in DC not to have to live in DC?

                    1. They just haven’t installed that Fredricksburg line yet. Seriously? You do realize that people commute 20 minutes by car to a bus stop taking a 40 minute bus so they can then take a 30 minute metro ride, right? Those are the people that prefer not to sit in their cars on 66 for 2 hours each way. The metro goes out about 30% as far as many people commute.

        2. good thing your comment barely passes for english, otherwise I might be forced to respond to it in a substantive manner.

      4. Don’t they get a housing allowance for their DC residence? Even if they don’t, the dumb cunt can rent a one bedroom apt in SF to maintain her district residence and a one bedroom apt in Silver Spring for all I care. Or she can sleep on her taxpayer provided jet at Andrews AFB.

      5. Since most representatives have to live in both places – you have to have two houses minimum.

        Nonsense. They can rent a studio apartment in the cheapest part of their district and that will satisfy the residency requirements. It is true that DC is expensive but please don’t insult me with the “I have to maintain two residences” canard.

        1. Yeah, what Nick said!

        2. I’m sure they could also just park a van down by the river and claim that as a residence too, but then, I’d rather the poverty of our representation not become an international joke. Maybe that’s just me, though. I expect that view will not be widely shared on this board.

          1. President Bush used a hotel address for his Texas residency requirement.

          2. Yeah, that is just you. I could care less if the rest of the world laughs at our representation, because I laugh at them too.

          3. I’m OK with Pelosi living in a van down by the river. So long as I can push it in.

          4. There are plenty of much juicier international jokes to make about Congress than that. Not to mention domestic jokes.

            Somehow I’m having a hard time seeing a foreign comedian make much hay making fun of an American representative who maintains a one-room apartment in his district. But that might just be cultural bias.

        3. Don’t some congresscritters just maintain one home, in their district, and sleep at their offices? They have spare rooms there with beds, showers, restaurants, etc. Why would they need a 2nd residence in DC?

          1. Most Congressmen spend most of the year in DC, so if either residence is going to be shortchanged it’s going to be the one in their district.

      6. Median US income is $50,233.00 according to the Census Bureau circa 2007, so let’s not pretend that 174K is not much money. No, its a pretty freaking good salary and very satisfactory to our congressional overlords. Whine and cry all you want about the cost of living in DC, but maybe if our reps had to commute from a Virginia or Maryland suburb, they’d have an inkling as to what real people may have to deal with. I despise the fact that they can pick their salary. It just leads to more abuse of the system. And reps whose spouse doesn’t work and they have to reside in both manhatten and DC (which, let’s be honest, is 1 freaking rep, the rest can get hotel rooms when they need to go up for some reason) can live in the shaks they can afford. No bleeding heart here.

        1. Demonize Congress people all you want – but this thread has revealed a shockingly populist streak in H&R commenters. Having the audacity to make 3 times the median income somehow makes one a greedy fat cat? Fuck that. I’ll settle for 20-30 times the median wage – just because I wouldn’t know how to spend any more money than that. I’m a greedy capitalist fuck and I am proud of it. Representative should make enough money to put them in the same catagory as to what I aspire to – that way they will think twice before trying to tax away 75% of my income. I don’t want them to identify with some nutjob populist icon driving 80 miles up I-95 from Fredericksburg with 3 slugs piled in the backseat. I want them to identify with someone prosperous and therefore circumspect about the value of private property (Ie. they can afford some themselves) so maybe they think twice before stealing mine.

          1. Congressmen get paid with tax dollars that are taken from the people by force. A wealthy capitalist gets money from voluntary exchanges with others. That is the big difference here. If someone is going to be living off of tax dollars, he doesn’t need to have 7,000 sq. ft. McMansions all over the U.S. He gets enough money so that he doesn’t have to dumpster dive for food, and he should be happy with that. If he doesn’t like it, get a real, productive job.

            1. I get it, you hate congresspeople and want to see them suffer. Let’s agree on that in principle and move on. What incentives does a person who has obscene amounts of power but has to dumpster dive for food have?

              1. An incentive not to become a career politician.

                1. forgetting the obscene amount of power part – yeah maybe – but I was thinking of something else.

              2. The incentive to get off the dole and find a real job.

                1. I was thinking more along the lines of the incentive to convert part of their power into cash by dishonest dealings. We should pay them enough that the marginal benefit from dirty dollars is smaller than the reduction in prestige that getting caught and arrested would entail.

                  1. ‘Reduction in prestige?’ These people don’t experience shame. Besides, they already convert part of their power into cash by dishonest dealings via lobbyists.

              3. domo, stop it with the strawmen. No one is going to be dumpster diving because they make “only” $174K, even in DC. And you’re failing to mention the lucrative pension plan that Congress has set up for themselves, AND all the possibilities for making obscene amounts of money after leaving office that are open to members of Congress.

                1. So now congresspeople are so crazy that they dont respond to incentives? Everyone here argues the same point I am when it applies to common folk – isn’t that one of RC Dean’s lawz? you get more of what you incentivize? Shame is universal – they just currently have incentives that make dealing with it worthwhile. If they were paid more (and punished more), maybe that would be different.

                  FWIW, I didn’t mention dumpster diving – Steve Nash Equilibrium did.

          2. We pay 75 million to congressmen in salaries. If doubling that figure would make them more apt to empathize with rich people on the confiscatory tax scheme in this country, I say that is money well spent – even if the people getting it are loathsome.

            1. If you required real ethical standards and enforcement (i.e. corrupt slobs like Rangel do jail time), I’d be all for doubling salaries. The scamming and skimming they do makes the salaries look like peanuts.

              1. yup – that’s part of my point.

            2. If doubling that figure would make them more apt to empathize with rich people on the confiscatory tax scheme in this country, I say that is money well spent

              That’s hilarious, dude. They will act in whatever way will get them reelected. If that means demonizing rich people, as it often does, then that’s what they’ll do. And increasing their salary while in office is only going to encourage that behavior.

              1. how much is power worth? it’s not infinite. CEO’s of a medium sized company make 10 times as much as a congressperson – being in charge of 100-200 people. Reason is always argueing to allow more money into politics – I don’t se how the reasoning for higher pay is any different.

          3. They should be paid in beatings. And beaten if they complain.

            Many of them are multi-millionaires and haven’t realized that redistributive taxation is theft.

            Nancy Pelosi is more than adequately compensated in her role as a theft, a liar, and a general purpose socialist twat.

            1. 174,00 beatings a year, adjusted for inflation?

              Why doesn’t anyone make the goddamn point that politician was never intended to be a career choice? Running for office and occupying said office was supposed to be looked at as a voluntary sacrifice to be made in the name of civic duty.

          4. I want them to identify with someone prosperous and therefore circumspect about the value of private property (Ie. they can afford some themselves) so maybe they think twice before stealing mine.

            That’s why there are no rich liberals who favor higher taxes, I take it. Right?

          5. It’s a wonderful theory. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work in reality.

            If it did work, we would have a much better gubmint than we do. Instead we have a political class that thinks nothing of robbing future generation of their wealth, via unfunded liabilities that exceed current global GDP, before they are even born.

      7. Congresscritters should stay at the BEQ at Andrews AFB while they’re not campaigning and putting in an appearance in Washington.

        Problem solved.

        1. I could not be less copacetic with domoarrigato’s viewpoint, and my opposition doesn’t stem from populism, but from elitism.

          Congressman should not be a ‘career’ aspired to by anyone as a primary voacation. They should be compensated for single sessions that don’t last more than a season at a time, and not be in session year round. Only those with enough comfort in their lives that they can afford to lose the pay out for a Summer session, like my State House of representatives meets, should ever realistically consider running for congress. No career, no pension plan. This would avoid the tendency of activist like Henry Waxman from running for Congress, as they could not make a living off of it.

          No pensions, no medical plan, just a straight up payout for the limited time served for living expenses. What we tolerate is an absurdity.

  8. Okay, I’ll get it out of the way now, so we don’t have to deal with it later;

    RHOMITES!(sp?), whatever the fuck that is.

    Have no fear, Underzog is here!

    1. That has to be a fake, because the TSA promises you can’t save or print or distribute or jack off to those images even if you wanted to but the TSA doesn’t.

      1. The photo is an old “publicity” shot that has been used to explain the system. The article does not state or imply that the photo was taken during the incident described.

        1. Love how he publicity shot shows some mid 50’s woman with a FUPA. If it were taken using a victoria secret model, I expect the public reaction would be somewhat different.

          1. The photo is of an executive at TSA. She was using it to explain what could and could not be see with the technology.

            If I recall correctly, she was not happy when the photo appeared in the wild.

          2. Here’s a skinnier one for you. But I think she’s peeing.

            1. works for me.

    2. Eww. All, *ahem*, female TSA employees look like that or larger, so it probably gives a pretty good idea of what the guy was looking at.

  9. What a low rent punk Obama is. He may not be the worst President in history. He still has a long ways to go to catch Buchanan or FDR. But, he may be the most shallow vile human being to ever hold the office.

    1. Hi John. I look forward to your saying the same thing 256 different ways today.

      1. I look forward to you and every other liberal troll dying a long painful death.

        1. Like the 5000 US soldiers the Bushpigs killed by lying us into an unnecessary war?

          Or those that have to pay for the Bush $6 trillion tax increase?

          Or his destruction of the economy such that he had to borrow $700 Billion to “save” it?

          Your myopia is astounding.

          1. hurrrrrrrrrrr if u dont like obama u must like bush

          2. Your myopia is astounding.

            Is this performance art? Your habit of ending your posts with comments that, while intended for others, most often define your own comments in the very same post. Surely this can not be on accident.

            +1 trolling.

          3. Like all those soldiers who are still dying in Afghanistan now. Yet, we don’t seem to have an anti-war movement anymore. I guess soldiers dying isn’t a big deal as long as they doing it for a Democratic President.

            That is not even C- trolling.

            1. John, there were more antiwar protesters in DC than teabaggers last weekend.

              1. I don’t care what anyone else says, you are the greatest troll ever even if you don’t have Neil’s rhetorical and verbal flair. Certainly you have caused more than a few people to google that to test its validity, and that is what really counts. They would not bother if you didn’t always sound so sincere.

                1. That one was meant for my buddy, Tony.

              2. Marching on the Pentagon. They used to march on the Whitehouse. Why the change in targets? Isn’t Obama the C&C?

      2. Since you probably can’t read above a third grade level, it probably does look the same to you.

      3. Can I join that club?

      4. I like John, so piss off.

      5. John has the Draco seal of approval. It’s so refreshing to read the thoughts of people who aren’t liberal professors who are wasting their universities’ time and money (like Chad and Tony are — just taking a wild guess) trolling the Reason blogs.

        Keep on keepin’ on, John!

        Fight the powah, yo!

    2. Is he past Johnson already? I say he’s pretty close to Roosevelt.

  10. Yes, without those wealthy husbands, they would be slumming it living off of the meager $174,000 a year that a U.S. Representative makes.

    That’s almost not in the top 1% of incomes. They might as well be chained up in breedin’ shacks in abandoned scrapyards.

  11. Can someone explain, where does the president get the authority to tell banks what to do with their accounts that are in arrears? What law or provision grants the executive that kind of power?

    1. Good one. Like there are any laws that say what government can or can’t do. Hah.

    2. Oh and Obama totally does not want to take over banks or car companies or businesses or whatever. He said so himself.

    3. What law or provision grants the executive that kind of power?

      There aren’t any. But, there weren’t any that allowed the goverment to steal from GM bond holders and give to union workers either.

    4. Laws? We ain’t got no laws. We don’t need no laws! I don’t have to show you any stinkin’ laws!

    5. It’s so bad I’m at the point where I’ve moved into the acceptance stage that we have a minor league dictator running the country.

      I’m now praying that he doesn’t decide to go for the majors.

    6. It’s called the Chavez Principle. It’s similar to the health insurance draft.

    7. I just wish one of these banks would publicly tell him “Go fuck yourself, we’ll run our business as we see fit.”

    8. It’s the “good and welfare” clause, and a couple other clauses.

  12. “Obamacare opponents on what to do now.” I’d shoot for group therapy;-)

    1. I’d group for shoot therapy;-)

      1. Mike, they do that everyday here. Circle jerk has already started;-)

        1. New name, oh no not this again? That previous one was kind of long. Although I don’t quite get the new one, witty or sweet, but I’ve never been great at latin translations.

          1. oh no not this again?, not me. “I’ve never been great at latin translations.” Renaissance Man, I’m very disenchanted.

            1. suavis.

              1. How do you know????

                1. based on traits of refinement, creativity, tenacity and likability.

                  1. I see that we have a trade deficit. I have been importing a surplus of compliments.

                    1. with that when one chooses to export. True sincerity does not require reciprocation. Genuine admiration is in short supply these days.

                    2. I love to read fluent words that convey a story. I have saved some of your posts for that very reason.

                    3. smile. You’re a keeper.

                    4. You can’t keep the wind but you can appreciate the breeze.

                    5. this ship will set sail then and beacon no more. Au revoir

                    6. Pouvez-vous parle en francais? Ou ‘au revoir’ est votre grand accomplissement?

                    7. Un d’entre beaucoup, le professionnel et autrement. Mes opinions et observations sont toujours en fait et l’affection sinc?re. Ce pr?tendant sait quand cesser de harceler, pourtant.

                    8. “Do not spoil what you have by desiring what you have not; remember that what you now have was once among the things you only hoped for.”

                    9. Words to live by. 😉

    2. “Shoot”!!!
      Why are you encouraging violence against our beautiful ruling class?

      You teabaggers are so violent – I just want to slap you.

      1. I know how the “tea party” people feel, the anger, venom and bile that many of them showed during the recent House vote on health-care reform. I know because I want to spit on them, take one of their “Obama Plan White Slavery” signs and knock every racist and homophobic tooth out of their Cro-Magnon heads.

        1. Alright! Let’s get our civil war on.

  13. Obama walks out on meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

    Come on, cut the pres some slack.

    He had to do *important* stuff — prepare to hype HCR.

    1. Are you sure it wasn’t because LOST was on and he wanted to find out what Richard Alpert knew?

      1. Well, no. But if this is the case he was probably multiprocessing during the show — thinking about speeches, playing with Bo, ….

      2. Though the Jacob/Richard and Richard/MiB scenes were pretty damn good, they totally blew it with Richard’s back story. With him being from a Spaniard, and as it turns out, the Canary Islands even, I always pictured him as someone involved in a HMS Beagle type scientific expedition in the early part of the 18th century searching for St. Brendan’s Island


        which fits the Lost mythology like a T.

        No. They just made him another Goddamned loveslob in another Goddamned simple minded Dickensian narrative of a man losing his woman because every one is so mean to him.

        Highly disappointed in his background story. When you compare it to the one developed for Mr. Eko in season two, Richard’s story fails on so many levels.

        1. from a Spaniard

          a Spaniard from

          but you knew that already.

  14. Well it’s good that they’re making plans for the White House’s foreclosure, because you don’t want to be unprepared for when that happens.

  15. Pelosi, Margaret Thatcher, Diane Feinstein, and Pat Shroeder, have had: a wealthy husband

    I am not so sure about having Margret Thatcher in the list. I lived in the UK throughout the Thatcher years and I do not remember anything in the Brit press, a press that regularly treated her worse than GW Bush was ever treated, attacking her or Dennis becuase of their wealth. I am sure Dennis had a couple of bob to rub together, but a solid upper-middle class income, savings and investments do not make a robber baron. Had the press been able to call Maggie an “evil rich person” they certainly would have.

    Maggie was a chemist and later, a solicitor (lawyer), so she would easily have lived a comfortable life with or without Dennis.

    1. Chemist chemist or pharmacist chemist?

      1. Chemist chemist. IIRC she won some kind of prestigious scholarship or something.

        OT, her reputation for having scientific qualifications were one of the reasons she got so much attention as an early rider on the global warming bandwagon. Global warming was something the Tories pushed to crush the miners’ union as well as to increase subsidies for nuclear power.

  16. Two quick things…

    Yesterday, on the bus ride home from the office, the seat behind me opened up and immediately, a young black man slid into and the entire time he was there kept whispering, “white trash.” Glad I’m not that fucked up.

    The second thing? About the first week of February, my natural gas provider — CenterPoint Energy — sent me a letter in the mail saying that they needed to come into my house in order to inspect all of their gas lines (that would be from the wall to the meter) for air caused corrosion. I work for a combined gas utility (over 1M natural gas customers) and have never heard of anything like this. That, coupled with the fact that my meter had been replaced just a few years ago made me decide to ignore it.

    On February 25, I got a second letter telling me that I really should take steps to set up an appointment. If I read a little further I would have seen that they would get a court order to enter the premises if I did not respond.

    Last Friday, I came home to find they had left in my mailbox, a copy of a court order and a letter explaining that on March 4, with the help of a LEO, they had come into my house and done the inspection.

    Two questions: How the fuck can the gas company do this? And isn’t it illegal for a non-USPS employee to put anything in my mailbox?

    I can’t help but think this is someone’s idea to search homes. Because if you think about it, in addition to Libertarians like me, wouldn’t the most likely noncompliant customers be folks running brothels, meth labs or grow operations and this a way for police to have a look-see?

    1. I don’t remember which one it is, but yes, there’s a Federal law that says no one but a postal employee can put anything in your mailbox. Also, depending on your state, to be served someone has to put the document in your hand. So just shred it and refuse entry when they show up.

      1. Given that his house was already broken into (with the help of a LEO), I don’t think refusal is an option. He could always see if e could find a sympathetic DA to file criminal charges or a lawyer to launch a civil suit against Centerpoint, both of which I expect the outcome to be unfavorable. His next option is just to move and hopefully find a place where they don’t just enter your home at their whim.

        1. One of the things that bothers me is that I have two dogs, a geriatric German shepherd and a 100+ lb lab. What is my dogs had gone for the inspector or LEO? Would they have shot my dogs (the lab is a docile rescue dog, but if this had happened five years ago, My shepherd would have gone for the throat.

        2. I missed that part.

          Guess he needs to do an inventory of his valuables and make a report of all the priceless works of art that are now missing.

          1. Found one of the stolen masterpieces online

            1. probable cause

    2. Yesterday, on the bus ride home from the office, the seat behind me opened up and immediately, a young black man slid into and the entire time he was there kept whispering, “white trash.” Glad I’m not that fucked up.

      Were you wearing your “Git-R-Done!” hat again?

      1. It was an ironic fashion statement ok.

      2. Perry Ellis dress pants, shirt and tie. Oh, and socks and shoes and underware.

        As to the CennterPoint deal, I think I’ll let my local alternative paper (City Pages) what happened. They hate the cops.

        1. Was your underwear clean honey? You never know when a nice boy will whisper sweet things to you on the bus.

        2. Were they Stacy Adams shoes that need a-shinin’? Do you live in Alameda County? Are you a muthafucka?

        3. Was the black dude addressing you, or was he talking into a blue tooth or something? If he was talking to you what did you say back?

          Or, was he crazy/homeless? Better to let them mumble to themselves. I got into a huge argument with some crazy black dude that called me a devil one time. He meant THE devil not a white devil, but I, the devil, gave him a cigarette and he was cool then.

    3. How did they get into a locked house?

      Assuming they picked the locks, in my house the alarm would go off and I would get a call, tell them that nobody was home and they should send the police, and head out there myself. Hilarity would definitely ensue, I can assure you.

      Also, I don’t have the faintest idea how they get a court order or warrant for this. You’re not breaking any laws. The gas lines in your house are your property. I would look very seriously at filing civil and criminal charges. If the warrant/court order is invalid, this is breaking and entering, for starters.

      1. “I don’t have the faintest idea how they get a court order or warrant for this. You’re not breaking any laws.”

        Thanks. IANAL, but that’s what I was thinking. I just sent City Pages a synopsis. I’ll see if they respond.

      2. I bet he doesn’t own the house. Otherwise, it would be a legal quagmire. They could only enter in an emergency. They could argue that the smell of gas was present and they just happen to be on site.

        1. “They could argue that the smell of gas was present and they just happen to be on site.”

          WTF? Are you illiterate?

          I bet he doesn’t own the house

          Per the county, I own the house free, clear and unencumbered and have been there for twenty-five years.

        2. Good morning, troll. Sucks to be you, eh?

        3. I bet he doesn’t own the house. Otherwise, it would be a legal quagmire.

          Whether he owns the house or not is irrelevant. Unless and until the owner gives permission, the analysis is the same. It doesn’t look like that happened.

          They could only enter in an emergency. They could argue that the smell of gas was present and they just happen to be on site.

          They could argue that, but they would be lying, as is documented by their own letters.

          Try to discuss the case at hand, not a completely different case.

          1. Counselor, there is a reason intent and happenstance have different denotations.

          2. EAP:
            Is the meter (and demarcation between gas company pipes and customer pipes) within the house? Did the homeowner ignore requests by the gas company to access their property (which was most probably agreed to when gas service was established)?

            Based on other news stories about the practice EAP describes, the most likely answer to both is “yes”. If so, then I have one more question for EAP: Why don’t you live up to your contractually agreed obligations? Do you expect that the courts won’t enforce them?

    4. Any concerns about your neighbors’ rights not to be incinerated in a fireball because the idiot libertarian next door wouldn’t let the gas company fix a leak? Learn how to pick your fights when you fight the power.

      1. He didn’t mention a leak, but rather an allegedly required inspection. Is today a holiday? Lotta middle schoolers posting.

  17. Savannah fires entire staff of failing high school. By the numbers, this school is in trouble.

    Now, it is a Georgia high school preparing to fire its entire staff after the school failed to move its dismal graduation rate. Savannah-Chatham County Public Schools Superintendent Dr. Thomas Lockamy is meeting with teachers and staff at Beach High School to inform them of the restructuring plans.

    The school meets the definition of a failing school because it has been classified as needing improvement for the past eight years.

    Like the Rhode Island high school that President Obama cited as an example of a dramatic action needed to shake up education, Beach High is taking the option of last resort to improve its performance.


  18. On an unrelated note: Apparently, my computer has not only become sentient, but it has better taste than I. Everytime I try to log in to the URKOBOLD, my computer locks up.

    1. could be a script that needs blocking (like a google analytics).

      Or your computer is worried that you’ll get motivated by this week’s “workout of the day” feature.

      Or, that you’re correct – your computer does have better taste. Must have been included in the most recent update 🙂

    2. It could be related to the robot porn we’ve been posting.



  19. God dammit, Obama is a bigger fucking child than Bush.

  20. Israel has nationalized, compulsory health care–shouldn’t the President of the United States walk out on the leader of a nation gripped by such tyranny?

  21. Last Friday, I came home to find they had left in my mailbox, a copy of a court order and a letter explaining that on March 4, with the help of a LEO, they had come into my house and done the inspection.

    A while ago, I heard somebody telling a story about how the had accepted the gas company’s neighborly offer of an “energy audit” only to receive, at the end, a citation for a variety of code violations.


    1. “A while ago, I heard somebody telling a story about how the had accepted the gas company’s neighborly offer of an “energy audit” only to receive, at the end, a citation for a variety of code violations.”

      That factored into my non-complience. The last thing you want the first week in March in Minneapolis is to have them shut down your heating system due to some sort of “discovered” problem, that you suddenly must pay THEM to repair before your heat can be restored..

      1. It also raises the question that if the cops have the ability to enter any home without leaving a trace, then don’t the also have the ability to enter any home and plant evidence?

  22. Plant evidence?


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.