Reason Morning Links: Primary Day, GOP Pushes for Bush Tax Cuts, Crime Falls Again


NEXT: I.M.P.: The Isabel Paterson Story

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Remember when the Dems were campaigning against Bush’s trillion dollar deficits?

    MoveOn, Bush in 30 seconds: Child’s Play

    1. I believe this was the winning entry in MoveOn’s ad contest.

    2. Lighten up. It was a joke!

      1. We gotta hunt down a “civil liberties” ad to go along w/ the deficit one.

    3. You know, I’m thinking huge cuts in tax revenue would really help those deficets!

      1. I am thinking an economy with stagnant growth and 16% functional unemployment isn’t going to help much either. If the tax cuts actually helped the economy, they would reduce the deficit. That is what happened after the Kennedy and Reagan tax cuts. The government collected more money than it projected that it would in both cases. We still had deficits because the spent even more.

        Only a lunatic would advocate raising marginal taxes in the middle of a severe recession. Even Keynesians are smart enough to know better than that.

        1. “That is what happened after the Kennedy and Reagan tax cuts.”

          You forgot Bush!

          1. I believe they increased revenues, but the ridiculous spending increases more than made up the difference.

                1. That link is fairly asinine.

                  The bottom line is that after the tax cuts total receipts rose dramatically.

                  “Wah! You can’t prove causality!” is something of a BS counterargument, for the simple reason that by that standard of proof we could never prove anything in the field of economics.

                  That asshole Krugman is one of the chief practitioners of this style of argument. Although he routinely and in virtually every column he writes makes bold statements of economic cause and effect, whenever the topic changes to the Laffer Curve he suddenly adopts a pose of extreme skepticism even in the face of fairly simple and straightforward data. If he consistently applied the same level of skepticism to the Laffer Curve’s supporting data to all other areas of his life, he’d never be able to make a single unqualified statement, ever, including “I need to take a shit right now, excuse me”. The Factcheck people seem in this case to be doing the same thing. “Wah, we don’t want to quibble, but…” Then don’t.

                  1. I suggest that those who are looking for “supply side” evidence look at the following:


                    The argument is pretty clear that tax increases reduce labor supply.

                  2. Nice. Few people know that “that asshole Krugman” is his full name. Pass it on.

                  3. “Wah! You can’t prove causality!” is something of a BS counterargument, for the simple reason that by that standard of proof we could never prove anything in the field of economics.

                    That asshole Krugman is one of the chief practitioners of this style of argument.”

                    That’s funny, I see it most often here from uber-libertarians…

        2. You are completely correct John (as usual).

          It’s all about growth. This is what people keep forgetting. If your fiscal policy leads to high growth rates, you rapidly grow your way out of the massive deficits, and are left with just mild deficits.

      2. A cut in rates =/= a cut in revenue necessarily. And experience shows that reduced rates increase revenues in many cases.

        But you knew that.

      3. Actually, “huge tax cuts” would help the deficit by spurring private sector growth. Couple them with significant reductions in public sector spending and pow, Bob’s your uncle, we have shrinking deficits. But you knew this already.

  2. Extending the Bush tax cuts to all income levels is a fight very much worth fighting, especially with our economy still very close to the edge of the abyss.

    Meanwhile, the Tea Party is in danger of cutting of their nose to spite their face in attempting to upset Mike Castle in Delaware: Christine O’Donnell can’t win the general election in DE, so voting for her just means voting for the Democrat (Coons) to win in the fall. Which will mean that much less check on the Obama agenda.

    1. Extending the Bush tax cuts to all income levels is a fight very much worth fighting.

      Politically, it’s foolish to do this fight right now. McConnell’s plan will never make it past the house and past Obama. Voting against the Obama plan on the table will lead to a much broader tax hike. There’s a lot of upside to the Obama plan. Yes, a full extension of the existing rates would be better for the economy as a whole. But politically for both parties, especially the GOP, the Obama plan is the way to go.

      1. Republicans need to signal deadlock in face of the November election, not compromise.

        1. Republicans need to stand firm on spending and the expansion of government. There’s plenty of room for compromise when it comes to tax cuts.

    2. “Extending the Bush tax cuts to all income levels is a fight very much worth fighting, especially with our economy still very close to the edge of the abyss.”

      Someone’s looking for one of those trickle-down jobs! Maybe making rider’s crops for polo matches?

      1. First, this is not keeping a “Bush tax cut”. It is not cutting taxes. It is not raising taxes. This is a Bush tax increase that is coming up. The economy has adjusted to the current rates. So we are going to raise marginal taxes in the middle of the worst recession in 80 years. Even the Democrats know this is insane, which is why they are trying to compromise on this.

        Second, countries that have lowered marginal tax rates and seen economic growth as a result

        Germany in the 1950s
        US in the early 1960s
        US in the 1980s
        Ireland in the 1990s
        US again in the 00s

        Countries that have raised marginal tax rates during a recession and seen growth as a result


        1. It is not cutting taxes. It is not raising taxes.


        2. But but but… they’re super-rich!

        3. It’s just common sense, right John? I mean, I can remember how the economy tanked after Clinton’s “Greatest Tax Increase in History” for example…

          1. Clinton had the great good fortune to raise taxes right as a recession was ending, and he caught the wind of the recovery just right.

            That makes him the one Keynesian of all time to ever do what the theory called for doing. Usually Keynesians are like Krugman – “All foot on the gas! All the time! People need jobs!”

          2. The economy had anemic growth in 94 and 95. In 1995 the rate was only 2.54%.


            It was after the Republicans took Congress and cut Capital gains taxes in 1995 that the economy took off.

            It also should be noted that the recession in 1991 such as it was was over before those tax increases took effect. Clinton raised taxes at the beginning of a recovery to a very mild recession. That is totally different than raising them in the middle of a near depression. And even then they tanked growth in 1995.

            Try harder MNG. That is Tony level trolling.

            1. See, just keep looking until you find some cut in government alongside increases. Blame all good on the cut, all bad on the increase.

              Religious people do this all the time. God sends the rain, the Devil sends the hurricane.

              1. hurricanes are called ‘acts of god’. Thanks for playing, you can pick up your consolation prizes on the way out…

        4. To use the common libertarian meme, maybe all those good things happened DESPITE those cuts ;)?

      2. Only MNG the liberal can tell us with a straight face that although the Obama stimulus plan was necessary to “save or create X million jobs!” it’s somehow also not necessary – nay, it would be a destructive sop to polo players everywhere – to cut taxes on those who actually pay the bulk of the income taxes.

        I am an honest neo-Keynesian libertarian, as I’ve tried to show in prior posts. MNG is just a partisan hack who hates “the rich.” Once you include in a stimulus plan the idea of letting people keep more of their income, he becomes a fan of “austerity.”

        1. MNG is just one of those angry people who argues for the sake of arguing. He’s unwilling to find common ground on anything or admit when something makes a little sense. Everything you say, he’s got to dispute. Reminds me of a certain member of my family.

          1. Are you talking about Christopher Wallace?

          2. Yeah, I think reality is more nuanced than your dogmatism and it’s me that just wants to argue…

        2. Was I ever a fan of the Obama stimulus plan, or are you arguing with a liberal in your head?

      3. Institutionalized envy is a tough addiction to kick.

      4. Can we just raise taxes on democrats? I mean, if morality has nothing to do with it, and it is just about maximizing revenue according to certain tastes, I’d much rather tax democrats as a class than rich people as a class.

    3. Meanwhile, the Tea Party is in danger of cutting of their nose to spite their face in attempting to upset Mike Castle in Delaware

      Surely you jest. I have it on good authority from a large number of liberals that the tea party movement is nothing but a bought and paid for arm of the Republican party.

  3. Action game players make more correct decisions per unit time.

    And more incorrect ones per unit time.

    1. I have a strong hunch that if RPG players had but one life to give to their console, they wouldn’t be quite as quick to jump into the fray.

  4. Why are the British so excited about spending cuts and austerity measures?

    Despite the deep shock the nation supposedly experienced during the banking crisis of 2008 and the recession of 2008-09, we are, in other words, still far away from Clegg’s “long-termism.” I don’t hear anyone in America talking about cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security, the biggest budgetary items (even though “private” pensions now look a lot safer?even when taking stock market fluctuations into account?than those that will depend entirely on a bankrupt federal budget 20 years hence). In Britain, by contrast, everything is on the table: pensions, housing benefit, disability payments, tax breaks.

    Listen harder, Anne. Oh, that’s right… libertarians are only a scary bedtime story for all the liberal boys and girls when they start to question the wisdom of giving up half their candy to kids too lazy to go trick or treating for themselves.

    1. So does this mean we can be more multi-cultural and sensitive to our European role-models by cutting Social Security. The French, the Brits, and the Germans have done it. Do we need to wait for the Russkies to start a pension austerity plan to get motivated?

  5. But Mr. McConnell’s position also served as a political counterweight to Mr. Boehner’s statement on Sunday, which suggested that some Republicans wanted to avoid a brawl in which they would be cast as blocking tax relief for the middle class to ensure that tax cuts continued for the wealthy.

    By whom? Why, by the writer of this article, of course! It pissed me off to no end that they try to frame the news like this, editorializing in the middle of a supposedly unbiased report.

    You could just as easily turn it around, and say Democrats are blocking tax cuts for 95% of Americans to spite the top income-earners.

    1. How the fuck is extending a tax cut “blocking tax relief” for ANYONE?

      1. Stop confusing me!

  6. [Senator] Nelson said he did not want any tax increases until the economy improved.

    Care to quantify that, Senator? Is “Never” good for you?

    1. Nice. Inquiring minds want to know: Who took the photo?

      1. A man in a shark cage, obviously.

        1. I think you mean “in a shark *suit*”.

          1. Sure, if you feel like living dangerously.

              1. Two feet, Mr. Sharksuit, you do have a way with words.

                As STEVENSMITH would say; the rape is strong in that one.

              2. Bravo, you magnificent bastard.

  7. Can someone explain to me how we ended up with 8 million people collecting social security disability benefits?…

    And how we ended up in a situation where that number should rise to 11.5 million in 2015?

    There are only around 150 million people in the US workforce total. 5% to 8% of the total workforce is disabled and entitled to permanent benefits?

    People who work are such suckers. I’m going to make it my business to steal as much as possible.

    1. It is ridiculously easy to get SSI disability. I have enough things wrong with me to qualify twice, and I am far from being bedridden. If really wanted to badly enough and had a doctor that played along, I probably could have gone on disability 12 years ago. When I was 28.

      1. Exactly. It is very easy. And also SS does things that it was never designed to do. I have no problem helping to take care of people who are disabled. But what does that have to do with what is supposed to be a national retirement plan? There should be no such thing as SS disability. If the government wants to help the disabled, create a different program to do so.

        1. Actually, I’d say the reverse — the main reason people were concerned about old age in the past is that they would be too physically broken down to work productively and take care of themselves. A means-tested welfare program based around disability would help old people who aged badly, but people who are spry and capable at 70 can work like the other healthy adults.

          It seems a more understandable to me to demand that society take care of its weak and helpless members than to demand that it let people go on indefinite paid vacation at some point, just cuz.

      2. You can get on SSDI for depression? Depression?

        Every last one of those depressed sons of bitches would get out of bed and out the door if I set their house on fire. That means they’re more than capable of getting up and getting out if they just want to badly enough.

        1. Who isn’t depressed? Some of the most creative and productive people in history suffered from horrible depression. There is such a thing as clinical depression. And it sucks. But it is not like being a quadriplegic or having cancer. You can still be productive and work.

          1. Who isn’t depressed?

            People who don’t follow politics. I remember when I used to be one of them.

        2. I read an article somewhere a few years back (can it get any vaguer?) telling about how recent Russian immigrants in some cities had perfected applying for what they called “crazy checks.” These were the SSDI checks you could get for showing that you were mentally disabled.

          I actually had to root the bastards on: good for you, you smart Russkies. Come to a country run by bleeding heart liberals and proceed to exploit it to the max!

        3. I’m too sad to move. At least the flames will bring a warm end to the cold, dark shell of my life…

          ..Wait! I get a check tomorrow! I want to live!

        4. I think that article just put me over the edge to debilitating depression.

        5. From Fluffy’s link…

          Of course, the best deterrent to future bloating of the SSDI rolls is an economy that generates enough good-paying jobs to make SSDI seem unattractive to vulnerable marginal workers. But if the federal government could do that ?

          Or you could defund the cocksucker. Even when Slate recognizes a problem with the welfare state (is there a lunar eclipse tonight?) they refuse to entertain the obvious solution.

          1. What pisses me off more than anything is that there are people who really are disabled out there and have no one help them. We are a rich country. We ought to be able to take care of the people born with 70 IQs and the people who have strokes and can’t walk or talk anymore. But have a hard time doing that without going broke because cock suckers who don’t want to work game the system.

            1. No one wants to make the distinction between unable to work and unwilling to work.

              And the $1000 a month figure is misleading. Like the benefits for a job, the total “compensation” for disability has to count in Medicare, food stamps, rent and mortgage assistance, and the very real possibility that they are also receiving good old fashion welfare if they have kids.

              SSDI approaches 6% in Kentucky. I’d like to see how many of those claims are paid out for obesity.

              1. Or alcoholism or drug addiction. Rule number one ought to be if your condition is self inflicted you don’t get shit.

                1. Alcoholism and drug addiction are not qualifying disabilities. Physical ailments resulting from alcoholism and drug addiction may be, but not if they would go away on stopping substance abuse.

                  1. Or, rather, you don’t get money, even though you might be found to be disabled. Which is confusing to me, but eh.

        6. Yeah, a friend of mine said she’s going to apply for disability for her depression. I just rolled my eyes and walked away when she told me that. She’s been unemployed for like two years now. Yes, she has depression issues. But I’ve known this girl for seven years and her main problem is that she’s LAZY.

          Fortunately, she’s so lazy she’ll probably never actually fill out the paperwork for SSDI.

          1. Send me her address. Someone from HHS will be over to do it for her.

          2. The punch line, of course, is that the symptoms of chronic laziness are pretty much the symptoms for chronic depression.

            Persistent sad or empty feeling
            Difficulty sleeping (sleeping too much or too little)
            Insomnia (early morning awakening)
            Feelings of helplessness, hopelessness, and worthlessness
            Feelings of guilt
            Loss of interest or the ability to enjoy oneself
            Loss of energy or fatigue
            Difficulty concentrating, thinking or making decisions
            Changes in appetite (overeating or loss of appetite)
            Observable mental and physical sluggishness

            Persistent aches or pains, headaches, cramps, or digestive problems that do not ease even with treatment
            Thoughts of death or suicide

            1. But we can treat depression. It is called prozac. That shit is nothing but a good mood in a bottle. So really in this day and age, there is no reason to suffer from debilitating depression.

            2. Yup, pretty much all of those apply to her. And I remember when she used to have a job, she was noticeably happier and more energetic. It’s cyclical thing. Depression causes laziness, which in turn causes more depression. Only a little bit of determination and self-control will help.

              1. Shit, I’m lazy and I’ve been employed for 25 years. How do I break this vicious cycle?

            3. I have a friend whose condition gives her recurring, crippling pain but NYS – who will throw money at just about anybody for any reason – won’t give her dick for disability. Now I can tell her to just fake a “depression”. This is news I can use.

              1. I saved the US from a fake depression.

        7. They’re more likely to set their own house on fire with the acid pills the pharmaceutical industry is giving them.

        8. Every last one of those depressed sons of bitches would get out of bed and out the door if I set their house on fire. That means they’re more than capable of getting up and getting out if they just want to badly enough

          Despite attracting a record number of firefighters and law enforcement, Fluffy’s school of psychiatry never achieved widespread popularity.

          1. Sounds like a Far Side cartoon.

    2. Based solely on anecdotal evidence, it seems to me that the country is entering a sort of bank rush mentality towards the government.

      Everyone realizes that there is no real money left and nothing will be paid out in the future, so the secret is to get your cash now.

    3. What’s especially infuriating to me is that these grifters get treated better than most of the young men coming back from the war zone with limbs blown off do.

    4. Fluffy, your surprise at this situation made me chuckle.

      You see, I grew up in on of those small towns full of “real Americans”. It seemed that half of the working age males spent their time falling off of bar stools, popping painkillers, and bitching about how “the n*ggers got all of the good jobs at the post office”.

      All the while collecting checks but not feeling the mooch because, and you’ve heard it before, they had “paid into the system”. Of course they all had a “bad back”, and were waiting for the mills to open back up.

      1. “It seemed that half of the working age males spent their time falling off of bar stools, popping painkillers, and bitching about how “the n*ggers got all of the good jobs at the post office”.”

        With the exception of the last part about n*ggers and the post office, I think that is how I want to spend my retirement.

        1. Dude, retirement…hell yes(except for the racism)

          These are healthy dudes in their 30’s.

    5. Well, it sort of makes sense. There’s a cost associated with employing disabled people. In good times, it can be worthwhile to put up with it, if only to avoid lawsuits. In bad times, you need to cut as much dead weight as possible.

      That said, disability is not supposed to substitute for unemployment — they’re not disabled because they can’t find a job, they’re disabled because supposedly there isn’t a job they can do well due to their condition.

      The baby boomer retirement isn’t helping — as I understand it, the older you get, the easier it is to get approved for disability. A 20 year old might need to be a quadraplegic, where a 60 year old with severe arthritis could get approved.

  8. Can someone explain to me how we ended up with 8 million people collecting social security disability benefits?

    That’s easy: the crappy U.S. health care system.

  9. Top song on the charts on this day in 1985…Money for Nothing by Dire Straits.

    How we went from Mark Knopfler to Lady Gaga is beyond my ken.

    1. It is funny to think that Sting was once so cool that his mere presence as a backup singer in a song was a big deal. And the “state of the art” computer animation on that video, although primitive, has kind of held up in a South Park sort of way.

      1. God, I hate me some Sting. Fucker was lucky to be in a band with a really creative guitar player and a solid drummer.

        1. Stewart Copeland is more than solid. And Sting did write all of the songs. Also, he was a great bass player. He was great until he broke up The Police. He needed the other two to tell him no and keep him from turning into a more talented Micheal Bolton. As long as he had Copeland to tell him to shut the fuck up and play the song at a decent tempo instead of like bad cocktail jazz, he was fine. When he replaced Copeland with compliant studio musicians it was all downhill from there.

          1. Also, his mid-life tantric crisis, where he would creepily tell anyone with a microphone about his 7hr orgasms. Image killer.

          2. I think the contribution of Sting to the Police can be seen whenever anyone other than Sting attempts to perform any song from the first several Police albums.

            Periodically an American Idol contestant will try to do “Every Little Thing She Does Is Magic”. And every time they do it they prove that only Sting could do it.

            1. I saw the reformed Police at Bonoroo in 2007. They were fantastic. They pretty much blew everyone at the festival off of the stage. And there were a ton of younger bands who had serious reps who couldn’t hold a candle to them (Widespread Panic, Kings of Leon, The Black Keys, Ben Harper, A Perfect Circle and others). None of them held a candle to the Police. Some were close, Ben Harper and Kings of Leon were really good. But the Police came in and just gave off this vibe of “Okay the kids are done now the rock stars are going to play”. Their stage presence and musical ability was just amazing.

          3. Spot on analysis. I suppose there are a lot of talented people who would do better with someone telling them “no” once in a while.

        2. I admit that I enjoyed his solo albums at the time, but for the most part they haven’t held up well (unlike the Police albums). They’re overproduced and pretentious.

    2. How we went from Mark Knopfler to Lady Gaga is beyond my ken.

      Lady Gaga is simply the failure of the 1980s to completely stamp out the scourge of disco. Disco is like a tire dump fire, it never really goes out.

      1. As long as there are gay men and fag hags who love them, disco will never die.

        1. I once told my gay uncle that the enduring career of Madonna is a rational basis for homophobia.

          He used a spoon to flick a cube of cheese at me. Pepper Jack, if memory serves.

          1. The detail from the last paragraph made that a nice piece of literature.

      2. What is interesting is that with the limited demographic reach of homosexuals their cultural reach is as vast as it is.

        Think if libertarians could do the same thing. If gay males are roughly 5% of the population, and libertarians are about 2.5% we should be able to come up with something half as popular as Lady Gaga. That amount of people could easily swing a presidential election.

        All I’m saying is that libertarianism is fabulous…no homo*.

        *this is the first and last time you will see me use this retarded phrase*

        1. It is because gay men dominate the a lot of important cultural fields. They total dominate fashion design and thus exert a tremendous influence over women and by extension men. They are very prevalent in the fields of art and dance and theater. There are few of them, but they hold very asymmetric positions.

          1. “they hold very asymmetric positions”

            And for hours at a time.

        2. Since gay men are trendsetters for both straight women and about 30% of the men who want to sleep with them, their natural base is far larger than libertarians. We really only set trends for ourselves, and a small portion of people who only half-understand our ideals.

          1. Well, yes I agree with both of you, but shouldn’t we explore why this is so. I mean, it’s not like the music or or clothes are good. So it must be image, right?

            1. It’s the attraction of outsider status. We don’t really have outsider status due to the fact that both sides just see us as a stealthed version of the other.

              Libertarianism is auto-ad hominemed by the persistence of Manicheistic obsession.

              1. Sweet, all we have to do is become Outsiders. I get to be Dallas, someone else has to be Ponyboy.

                Whoa, Ponyboy sounds kind of gay when you think about it.

        3. Limbaugh was bitching about something similar a long time ago, probably the influence gays had on politics. He was idly musing why a group comprising only 3% of the populace (leave it to Rush to totally lowball their numbers) had so much power and couldn’t think of another group like it.

          Nobody called in to point out American Jews, at 2.5% of the population.

        4. “we should be able to come up with something half as popular as Lady Gaga”

          Trust me, the subset of gay males who give a shit about Lady Gaga is smaller than you might think. There are probably *more* libertarians.

      3. Actually, Gaga is performing a valuable function.

        There’s a lot of Disneyfied pop out there, and Gaga’s songs are about drinking too much and not knowing how your shirt got taken off, or being a stalker and having that work, or how being in an abusive relationship is awesome, etc.

        She’s even pro-smoking, as far as I can tell.

        1. Part of growing up is seeing your heroes turn to shit, if they are already shit valuable life lessons are lost…

          Wait, you know a lot about The Lady, and her music, Big Fan?

          1. At first, I was like, “When did Christina Aguilera start making great dance songs again?”

            But my gay friends set me straight. [Nyuk nyuk nyuk.]

            I can’t really tell you what distinguishes a great dance song from a shitty one in technical terms. All I know is that Gaga hit five or six in a row. Not my favorite type of music, but I can recognize when someone is better than anyone else on the court even when I don’t love the sport.

            1. Not my favorite type of music, but I can recognize when someone is better than anyone else on the court even when I don’t love the sport.

              I know what you mean. I mostly hear pop music in the car because somebody else had the station set there, and I didn’t bother to change it. It’s almost all catchy autotuned stuff that goes in one ear and out the other, but the first time I heard “Poker Face,” I thought, whoa, that’s going to be a HUGE hit.

    3. It has to do with Knopfler being not exactly a vibrant show biz personality. He kinda mumbles his way through “Money for Nothing”, for example.

    4. Everybody tells me Dire Straights was great, but that song fucking sucks and was more overplayed than any song in the history of songs, with the possible exception of all songs performed by the Cars.

      And the other Dire Straights songs that got radio play also were dreadful.

      1. Sultans of Swing is not dreadful. And the later Knopfler solo records, which were just DS records without the name, are great. The guy is a great musician.

        1. I think the measure of a great song is its ability to stand up to the desire of radio stations to play any good song into the ground.

          By that measure, “Sultans of Swing” fails.

          I once liked it a little, and now hope never to hear it again, ever. It may as well be a Hootie song. Or Dave Matthews.

          Yeah, that’s right, I played the Dave Matthews card.

          1. comparing Knofler to Dave Mathews, you really know how to hurt a guy. I like country music. Knofler plays a rockish brand of it really well. He is a consummate musician. You don’t get to make records with Chet Atkins without being a great musician.

            A matter of taste I guess.

            1. Neck and Neck is a really good album.

            2. Bluefinger, a Jerry Reed song as played by Chet Atkins. Not his fanciest pickin’ but one of my favorites.

              I could almost play this at one time.

            3. Yeah, that was kind of mean.

              Bringing in Matthews is going nuclear. And bringing in Hootie is going chem/bio. That may have been an unnecessary escalation.

      2. It’s the fingerpickin’.

      3. ++1

        I too remember my almost unique hatred for that song when it was everywhere. That freaking riff still makes me want to saw my ears off.

        1. Whoops, just meant to concur that “Money for Nothing” is an overrated song.

    5. The fact that Money For Nothing instead of Skateaway (for example) was their #1 hit answers a small bit of your question.

    6. When was the last time any rock & roll song was the #1 single?

      1. If Coldplay counts, June 28th, 2008. Before that Marron 5 in 2007.

        Ugh and ugh.

        1. Prior to that, Nickleback in 2002. More ugh.

          1. Creed, Matchbox Twenty, Vertical Horizon and Santana (w/ Rob Thomas) in 2000.

      2. If you count indie pop (i.e. not country, hip-hop, or neo-disco): November, 7 2009: “Fireflies” by Owl City.

        I don’t care for them, but the May 12, 2007 No. 1: “Makes Me Wonder” by Maroon 5 is undeniably mainstream rock.

        1. I didnt count them. Or Savage Garden in 2000.

      3. When was the last time one deserved to be?

        It’s a lot like the 80’s right now, I think. The current autotuner sound will become ridiculous in the not so distant future, not unlike what happened with overly synthesized 80’s pop.

        1. Autotuning became ridiculous with the invention of the autotuner.

          1. The fact that Cher and Madonna used it as a trick in singles and discarded it on their 18th and 7th comback albums, respectively, should have destroyed the autotuner as a viable tool in the pop arsenal, right? Then again, when you only have to have looks and vapidity without being able to carry a tune, I guess it makes the record companies’ life easier.

          2. What the heck is that? Same as “vocoder”?

  10. Get this, while working furiously to take over every aspect of our lives and destroy the private sector economy, president Obama has somehow or another managed to find the time to write yet another book.

    1. Apparently, he finished it in 2008. If he really did write it (as opposed to a ghost writer) it must have been written while he was campaigning.

      1. I heard the Pentagon is buying up all the copies to destroy.

    1. I saw that and was about to post it. What a fucking moron. Basically, anything you don’t like, just riot and kill a few people after the person says it. And then Breyer will declare that speech illegal.

      And he doesn’t even understand the famous fire in a crowded theater statement anyway. It is the intent that matters not the result. If you really and reasonably thought there was a fire but were mistaken, it would not be a crime even if people were trampled.

      I am becoming convinced that everyone or at least 90% of the people in important positions in this country is stupid. How else but stupidity could you explain this statement?

  11. Hello my pasty friends, I just want to tell you that; yes the rumors are true, capitol l is making a run at the presidency. I will be his top adviser and the vice presidential candidate. We will eat the children of our enemies.

    PALIN THREAD, Good ol’ U S of A (AP)-
    My goddamn exploratory committee’s conclusion is that I have no chance of winning. The good news is that I am still going to run for potus…That’s right you all heard it first.

    My campaign slogan is:

    Vote cap l, he’ll make it legal for your kids to buy heroin!
    (dang I wish we still had blinky capabilities, that would look sweet)

    Pretty catchy, if I do say so myself. I am moving to Iowa tomorrow, and I expect beers and giant breakfasts to be awaiting my arrival. I am the candidate you would like to have a beer with, because I got your back America.

    You think Obama or Palin will be there when you “accidentally” brush up against some woman’s tit, and her giant boyfriend wants to stomp your head in…nope, they won’t.

    America, cap l is the friend holding a pool cue, standing right behind that big dude that is all up in your face.

    Also, the weed, we will free the weed.

    Note to supporters: You are expected to be heavily armed at all campaign rallies. Even if we don’t win you can be consoled by the fact that many women and children will be harmed during this campaign.

  12. This is for you Warty. Have some yummy tears.

    Dem aides could face massive layoffs

    1. Overall, there are roughly 18,000 workers on Capitol Hill, including those in nonpolitical support positions.

      18,000? Holy crap. That’s over thirty employees for every single member of Congress!

    1. That whole article rests on the twin fallacies that only Republicans ever go to war or increase military spending and only right wing southern rednecks ever join the military or work for a military contractor.

      When your entire argument is based on lunatic stereotypes, it is going to always be bullshit.

    2. “neoliberal Democrats like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama”


    3. Those constituents include not only well-paid military contractors, who for all practical purposes are government bureaucrats in a socialist economy, but also ordinary men and women in the ranks, where conservative white Southerners are over-represented.

      It’s mostly poor black men who are sent off to fight and die in the war. Everybody knows that.

  13. Sugar Free reads jezzebell, I can’t help but look at the train wreck that is the satorialist. Do these people really exist or is it photoshop?


    1. I’m pretty sure that girl threw herself off a scaffold at Tulsa Doom’s behest later that very day.

      1. Oh my god oh my god oh my god

        That is the best worst thing I’ve ever seen.

      2. That guy should have pedobear following him around to warn all the kids off.

      3. I saw that horror to. But wasn’t quite cruel enough to inflict it on the board.

      4. Looks like Angus Young and Rivers Quomo had a son.

    2. Its about time cultism came back as a fashion trend.

    3. I like how that picture has like 100 comments, and not one of them points out that those people look absurd.

    4. From the comments:

      Wow. This picture is rife with emotion. The story! The shared glances mesmerizing; I want to know what the two of them are thinking about!

      They are probably thinking that the dogshit that they just stepped in is going to stink up their loft.

      1. I see it as the girl just told him something really intelligent and insightful she read on feministing, and the dude is about to hit her in the face.

    5. She doesn’t look that bad.

      She’s hot; she can wear whatever she wants.

      He, on the other hand, is crying out for someone to end the shame that is his life.

      1. Exactly. She is young and hot. And young and hot wears anything well. But the fact that she is hot doesn’t make her cult attire look any less ridiculous.

        As for him, I can’t really put it any better than you.

  14. I think they meant crazy Czechs. Czech woman are nuts n bed.

  15. Shocker, egg production facilities > 30,000 birds have increased risk factor for salmonella.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.