Reason Morning Links: Dems Actually Outspending GOP, Bad News in Afghanistan, Russian Bears Learn to Open Coffins


NEXT: Biden: Every Great American Idea "has required government vision and government incentive"

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. ACORN will eat your children!

      1. Nah, they’ll just co-opt my children’s future.

        1. It’s not that I don’t find ACORN to be corrupt. Like a lot of groups that live off of government grant money I’m hardly shocked to see that they are. But so many other organizations, larger, more influential and more nefarious seem to be out there doing the same thing that the myopic focus on them seems, well, indicative of something else, something ugly imo…

          1. OK, I can see that.

            It is a little bit ridiculous to get mad at ACORN because they advise poor people how to steal $10,000 in taxpayer money, but to not get equally mad at major law firms that advise defense contractors and large agribusinesses on how to steal billions in taxpayer money.*

            Out there in America there’s a lobbyist somewhere who got paid a handsome sum to find a way to get Mattel exempted from the testing regime that Mattel’s own fuckups got imposed on the rest of their industry. Surely we can spare a moment to vilify THAT GUY, and make him into a household name the way that ACORN is a household name?

            1. *Dollar amounts are samples only.

            2. Well, I find enabling massive voter fraud to be a bit more insidious than leeching off of the productive sector.

              1. Voting/democracy is in and of itself an example of leeching of off the productive sector.

      2. As usual, the stool fucker is absolutely right.

  1. Time to move my IRA…

    Vanguard Endorses Obama, Democrats
    On the eve of the midterm elections, the giant mutual fund firm Vanguard has weighed in on the side of President Obama and the Democrats with a blog post by a company official declaring that without President Obama’s stimulus bill, Americans might be facing a scenario of “unemployment of 15% or more. A Dow that would have fallen 75% off its peak?to 4,000 or less?before recovering to a level much below today’s. An economic recovery that might not yet have begun. And finally a foreclosure crisis even larger than our present one.”

    The author of the post acknowledges that it is a “guess,” leaving Vanguard investors (including this one) wondering why company officials are publicly guessing about politics and public policy so close to an election….

    1. I would “guess” that some company official is going to be looking for a job soon, in the administration.

    2. All the stimulus is doing is putting off the day of reckening. It will either create more inflation, more borrowing, higher interest rates, and more severe recession down the road.

    3. This isn’t that surprising. I would endorse free money for myself, too.

    4. He has added this disclaimer to his blog post:

      My blog post below has struck a chord with some of you. As a Vanguard blogger, I am charged with sharing my personal and professional perspectives on issues facing investors. The post…represents my understanding of how the federal economic stimulus programs might be viewed historically. The focus is on certain macroeconomic principles and is not intended to endorse specific political leaders or parties. More importantly, my views are my own and not necessarily those of Vanguard, and they do not influence how the company manages our clients’ assets. I regret if some readers have interpreted the posting as representing a partisan point of view.

      Fair enough.

      1. Fair enough = when you want to tell someone they’re full of shit but you’d rather be polite about it.

      2. This would be media Defcon 1 if a large investment corporation had posted something ‘official’ AGAINST Obama, and no amount of disclaimers in the world would change their minds.

        1. It’s only his opinion, after all. It’s hardly an “endorsement” of Obama’s and the Democrats’ wider policies or general political philosophy. And let’s be honest: nobody knows what would have happened absent government intervention.

          1. It might have saved the taxpayers over a trillion dolars.

      3. Fair enough. He’s a salesman talking up his book motivated by his own management fees. I guess people still invest in mutual funds and buy/hold strategy… which is a shame but not surprising.

        1. Vanguard has some of the lowest management fees in the industry.

          1. They’re making me money. Over the last five years I have yet to see a decline in my 401(k) balance. Not even in a single quarter.

            1. Yep. Only fools panicked and sold off their equities in 2008-early 2009. And yet the joke persists amongst people who should know better about the “201-K” (yuck yuck!)

              1. I wonder what the level in the markets would be right now if the Federal Reserve wasn’t pumping it up with billions and billions of dollars of printed money.

                Trading volume is close to all time lows, and almost all it is being done by HFT computers. The market is as fraudulently high now as it was in the middle of ’07, and it’s only a matter of time before it tanks once again.

        2. Because actively trading your account is a sure path to riches!

  2. One ninth of U.S. ICBM stockpile went offline over the weekend.

    How much would it not-cost to leave them that way?

    1. Mr. President, we must not allow an offline stockpile gap!

    2. The not costs might be more than we could not afford.

    3. The launch codes were lost for a few months during the Clinton administration. America, learning of this, yawned. Yikes.

      1. The scary thing is Clinton and staff knew they were lost and they didn’t do anything about it. It’s like the over all instinctual action among his group is always cover it up and it will go away. They’re kind of like cats and turds.

        1. My theory is that they got tossed out one night with the leftover pizza.

    4. Wasn’t this a season of 24? Just review the DVDs.

  3. Were those ICBMs ‘created’ or ‘saved’ when they went back online?

    1. They were saved and restored.

  4. “On Saturday morning, according to people briefed on what happened, a squadron of ICBMs suddenly turned themselves. ”

    a. Off
    b. On
    c. around
    d. openly gay

    1. e. inside out

      1. f. no homo

        1. g. into newts

          They got better.

    2. It was aliens!

      1. I think you’ll find that, in fact, it were aliens.

  5. This will melt some people’s brains this morning:…

    1. Something about a stopped clock

    2. I don’t get the wonkette comment slamming it. Are they really for marijuana laws or are they just such irrepressible assholes that they can’t help but be pricks even when reporting about something good?

      1. They fancy themselves masters of the tweed elbow patch jacket and turtle neck snark.

      2. Where do you see Wonkette slamming it?

        1. Remember when George Soros gave a million dollars to Media Matters and bragged about it? Well now he is funneling millions of dollars to California marijuana smokers. How does this man sleep at night? He doesn’t, because he is a Communist Vampire who kidnaps children and then forces them to eat pot brownies:

          Read more at Wonkette: Evil Bolshevik Billionaire George Soros Donates Millions To Marijuana Hippies

          How is that not slamming it?

          1. It’s possible Wonkette was being sarcastic and doesn’t literally think George Soros is a Bolshevik Vampire.

  6. So, if Keith Ellison is not the only Muslim member of Congress, does that mean he should not be defeated?

    1. He should be defeated not because he’s muslim,. He should be defeated because he’s both a hyper-progressive and a grifter.

    2. According to some Tea Party members, that won’t do much good considering there’s a Muslim in the White House.

  7. “one bear learned how to do it [open a coffin]. He then taught the others,” she added, suggesting: “They are pretty quick learners.”

    They took ur jerbs!

    1. Just how shallow are these graves? Surely not six feet.

      1. Probably not, since the cemetary in question is near the artic circle. I don’t imagine the ground ever thaws much there.

        I wonder if the bears get indigestion from the embalming fluid – if embalming fluid was used anyway?

        1. I wonder if the bears get indigestion from the embalming fluid

          Hell, no — they’re *Russian* bears!

          1. I wonder if the bears get indigestion from the embalming fluid vodka?

          2. In Soviet Russia, corpses eat bears!

    2. Once the bears discover fire, there’s no stopping them.

      1. One of the best Far Sides ever shows these two bears standing by a broken down car. One is saying to the other

        “Bob, if we could get this thing running, we could run down hikers, chase mule deer. Man, we would be the grizzlys from hell”.

        1. I never realized that story won a Hugo.

          This week’s episode of Nature has convinced me that crows will, in fact, seek to impose themselves as our new avian overlords. Apes are limited by their meagre numbers. But if these damn crows are smart like apes, and there are BILLIONS of them – well, we’re one crow Tecumseh away from a big problem.

          1. Naw. We’ll just need to find a crow William Henry Harrison.

        2. Isn’t a filthy commie fantasist?

          1. Isn’t he a …

            1. Most all writers are commies. If I didn’t read commie writers, I’d damn near not be able to read anything at all.

  8. Despite complaints, Democrats still far outspending Republicans in midterm elections.

    Wait a tick, this the exact opposite of what NPR told me this morning? Something screwy is going on. I must conclude that Reason is biased because NPR is publicly funded and is not allowed to have a political agenda. Get the narrative right, it’s the crazy teabaggers whoring themselves to corporate interests to spend democracy into a conservative hellhole.

    1. I think NPR reported (accurately) that the Republicans had more outside money spent on their behalf. Party committee money is all clean and honest and can only reflect the will of the people, don’t you know.

    2. Okay, so party money = good, outside money = evil. Dems spent more good money while Reps spent more evil money. The way NPR reported strikes me as intentionally unclear on the distinction.

      1. waffles
        Obviously it had nothing to do with the two reports highlighting different aspects of the story, both true, but it was NPR conspiring to get you, your children and teh American Way. You’re spot on dude!

        1. and they try to get me to listen to jazz! the bastards!

          1. Didn’t you learn anything from Anslinger regarding those Negro Jass Musicians?

            1. Jazz is white people music now, MNG. You can tell because it’s on NPR. In 10-15 years NPR will have old school hip-hop. You can count on it.

              1. I’ve long wanted the Beastie Boys to have a show replacing Car Talk…

    3. But reason is biased?

  9. The military contends that command and control — “C2″ in their parlance — was not lost, meaning that the missileers in their bunkers could no longer communicate with the missiles themselves.”At no time did the president’s ability decrease,” an administration official said.

    The cause of the failure remains unknown,so the military does not believe the incident was caused by malicious actors.

    1. “‘The cause of the failure remains unknown,so the military does not believe the incident was caused by malicious actors.””

      Damn Microsoft Windows.

      1. As long as it’s not Apple software, they’re okay:



        You also agree that you will not use the Apple Software for any purposes prohibited by United States law, including, without limitation, the development, design, manufacture or production of missiles, nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.

  10. Despite complaints, Democrats still far outspending Republicans in midterm elections.

    They are, after all, participating in a bid for stolen goods.

  11. Tea Party Nation? Never heard of them. I’ve heard of the Tea Party Express and the Tea Party Patriots, but not TPN.

    1. It’s kind of like this.

    2. Splitter!

    3. It’s like the Tea Party Judean People’s Front.

  12. “Senate Republicans have been pressing Senate Democrats to spend more money …”

  13. Afghanistan surge doesn’t appear to have shifted war’s momentum.

    JCOS: “Uh, Mr. President, you shouldn’t play with the map pieces, those represent real troops!”

    Tlatoani: “Where’s the 1st Corp? Where are my men? I need them to hit the enemy hard here!!!”

    1. Don’t worry, I’m sure Steiner is on his way with some help.

      (Couldn’t resist.)

      1. That’s Sargent Steiner to you, pal!

          1. York.

      2. +1

        (sniffs back the tears)

  14. One ninth of U.S. ICBM stockpile went offline over the weekend.

    They were looking for a kid in his teens who may have been involved . . .

    1. Should have stuck with chess.

  15. “If you take in the sum what will be spent by the candidates, the outside groups, and the party, there will certainly be a lot of money on both sides,” said [Democratic National Committee spokesman Hari] Sevugan.

    You’re doing a heck of a job, Hari!

  16. Russian bears turning cemeteries into all-they-can-eat buffets.

    Local hamburguer joints are worried that their stock is dwindling . . .


  17. Tudor’s latest letter to investors great read with good reasoning on why trade with China isn’t “free trade”. Taken a step further it’s an interesting case against fiat currency.

  18. Founder of Tea Party Nation says Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) should be defeated because “He is the only Muslim member of Congress.”

    Thanks for the info. Could reason please give me just a little bit of commentary on this so I know if I should be outraged. Does reason think Muslims make good congresspersons?

    1. Random Political Activist: “I think Congressman X should be defeated so that Congress will have less Jews in it.”

      Some dude: “Can someone please let me know if there’s something wrong with this statement? Should I be outraged? I’m not sure.”

      Am I somehow missing your sarcasm here?

      1. “Jews” are also an ethnic group as well as a religion. Let’s not pick on ethnic groups. A better example would be “Roman Catholics”.

        1. I thought we were supposed to pretend that all cultures were equally wonderful and so no ethnic groups should be looked at askance.

          1. And we’re supposed to pretend that all religions are equal, despite all evidence to the contrary.

            1. No, we’re supposed to not care about religion, equal or otherwise, when it comes to matters of law and politics.

              1. Even when the official dogma of the religion is to replace our law and politics?

    2. The Constitution has it covered.

      The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

      1. Mo, while I agree with the sentiment, individual voters expressing their religious biases is not what the founders had in mind writing that clause.

        1. I agree completely. However, I’m guessing Reason’s POV on individual voters’ religious tests is similar. I would guess some of the people that put in a no religious tests clause would likely prefer that individuals not use one.

          1. It is just a question of whose ox gets gored. If someone said “only atheists or those who promise to leave their religion out of their governing should be elected”, I bet at least some of the commenters on here would agree with them. But, that is just as much of a religious test as what this guy is doing.

            Basically, the guy doesn’t like Muslims. That is the issue not there being a religious test. It is no different than if he had said “we need one fewer Cowboy fans in Congress”.

            1. Or one fewer Jew. Or black…

              1. Cowboy fans, blacks, no relevant difference in the eyes of many conservatives…

            2. There’s a huge difference between someone promising to leave religion out of governing and excluding people of a religion. It’s not like Ellison is trying to make pork or alcohol illegal. I’d be just as annoyed if someone said, “Only atheists should be elected.”

              1. There is also nothing wrong with someone promising to let his governance be guided by his religion. If Ellison were to try to make pork illegal that would be fine although he would inflame the bacon lobby. If you wanted to save your bacon, you wouldn’t vote for Ellison.

                The left’s insistence that mixing religion and politics is only good if the religion supports the doctrine espoused by the State is disturbingly like the attitude of China.

                1. There is also nothing wrong with someone promising to let his governance be guided by his religion. If Ellison were to try to make pork illegal that would be fine although he would inflame the bacon lobby. If you wanted to save your bacon, you wouldn’t vote for Ellison.

                  Agreed. Because the comment of someone saying they would govern as guided by their religion is a comment on how they would govern. Judging someone’s governing style solely on their religion, without looking at their record or comments is religious bigotry.

                  Both Peter King and Nancy Pelosi are Catholics, but there’s a massive difference between their preferred policies, even on issues that the Catholic church has weighed in on.

                  1. Judging someone’s governing style solely on their religion, without looking at their record or comments is religious bigotry.

                    Is playing the percentages, i.e. the likelihood of a person’s behavior conforming to a stereotype (based on reality or not), always a bad thing? The “bigotry” and “discriminatory” labels are powerful, but can’t they be overused? Is shying away from a person based on group identity, especially if the identity is heavily reinforced by the person himself, always unreasonable?

                  2. Nancy Pelosi is not a Catholic; her support for abortion long ago resulted in automatic excommunication. Neither is John Kerry, Joe Biden, or the rest of the wraith-catholics.

            3. I don’t mind a Cowboy fan in Congress if he or she is a real fan. What I can’t abide is Obama saying he’s a White Sox fan without knowing a single player on the team, or Hilary being a Yankee fan because she ran for Senate from NY. If you’re a fan, fine. If you’re not, STFU.

              1. Fans of the Cowboys have no place in American politics or cultural life.

                1. at least Big Blue put a merciful end to their season Monday night.

    3. If you can’t think of any other reasons to boot Ellison, then you probably aren’t a real Tea Partier.

        1. =2

          1. (or 10)

    4. These people are unbelievably stupid. Why would you say that!? I know John thinks the liberal-leaning media are trolls, always looking to attack, but these tea party are trolling themselves. Stupid, stupid, insubstantive, narrow, and stupid.

      I give up on (most) of these Rs, prop 19 you are my only hope.

      1. “I give up on (most) of these Rs”

        Don’t say that, now John and friends will have to post twice as hard and much.

        1. You’re correct again stool fucker.


    So they tracked down the dumbass who stepped on the protestor’s head and he actually was a Paul supporter after all.

    What a fucking idiot.

    No ten Paul opponents put together did more to help the Conway campaign than this moron.

    1. Fluff,

      He was fired and banned from the campaign by the Paul Committee.

      1. Right, but I still have to post it because yesterday I expressed doubt that the guy was really a Paul supporter.

        That makes it incumbent on me to acknowledge that he was.

        If Paul loses, it will be this guy’s fault personally.

        1. Paul isn’t going to lose.

        2. If Paul loses, it will be this guy’s fault personally.

          Yep. What’s worse is that PPP (a left-leaning polling firm)had just released a poll with Paul at 53 and Conway at 40. Paul pretty much had it in the bag, but volunteer Dipshit Mcgee had to play cowboy and wrestle someone to the ground.

      2. Gret. Now DONDEROOOOOO will have a sidekick.

    2. He is an idiot. But people understand he is one person and there are idiots everywhere. Sure, MSDNC and the rest of the idiots are going to have orgasms over it. But it is not like anyone but the true believers listen to them anyway.

      1. Watch the tape. He stepped on her shoulder. He did not “stomp” on her head, as the hysterical left is reporting.

        1. Did she look like Jack Ruby or John Patler?

          1. I did a study on the tape that proves that the foot came from the grassy knoll.

            1. More like an assy troll.

              1. Assy Gnoll?

            2. was there a second stomper?

              1. I too have always question the single foot theory.

      2. Remember John’s frothy outrage at the Coakley thing? See how consistent he is here!

        1. Was Rand Paul standing there smiling while this dufus was doing his thing?

    3. But fluffy you were so sure it was set up! How could your strong feelings be wrong?

      I mean John even offered the steel trap evidence of the Dems history of supporting spoiler campaigns and parties.

      1. Until the guy admitted it, I thought it was a setup because it looked like a setup. She didn’t cry or scream for help when she was being held down or stomped on. It was a total dick move but you have to admit it looked fake. Unless she was trained to start shit and then grin and bear it when assaulted, it looked and when I watch it again knowing what we all now know it STILL looks fake.

        It was effective though. She proved that Tea Partiers, at least one, could be violent. I mean they’ve been saying for over a year how violent Tea Partiers are and they finally got one to respond physically a week before the election. Good job.

        1. she was being held down or stomped on

          Again, watch the tape. She was never “stomped on.” This inconvenient fact did not stop the always excitable liar Ed (The ED Show!) Schultz from literally frothing at the mouth during yesterday’s rant-fest. He actually acknowledged during the show that he had wanted to cross-edit video of 30s-era Nazi atrocities with the Rand Paul footage, but was talked out of it. Schultz is one sick, sick puppy.

          1. I watched it. She did get stomped on. It’s when the guy put his foot on her shoulder and pressed down hard. Was it American History X violent, no. But it is a pretty good example of stomping, like when someone crushes a bug under their foot.

            1. A stomp implies repetition. Also, he certainly did not “stomp on her head” as lefties are screeching.

          2. You grow up on the Minn/Nodak boarder and it’s pretty much a given.

      2. Feelings are not a tool of cognition.

        Also, another great thing is that I am always and everywhere entitled to change my evaluation based on the introduction of new facts.

        I know these are foreign concepts to you, as a result of your leftist brain damage.

        1. I’m just funning your “John” moment fluffy. Of course you, as always, have the integrity to unconditionally admit your wrongness when it (rarely :)) happens.

          1. “I mean John even offered the steel trap evidence of the Dems history of supporting spoiler campaigns and parties.”

            I don’t write the NYT, I just read it.


            Please take that link and shove it up your ass sideways. And then shut the fuck up for the rest of the day you dishonest hack.

            ORLANDO, Fla. ? Seeking any advantage in their effort to retain control of Congress, Democrats are working behind the scenes in a number of tight races to bolster long-shot third-party candidates who have platforms at odds with the Democratic agenda but hold the promise of siphoning Republican votes.
            Related in Opinion

            Room for Debate: The Democrats and the Union Label (October 21, 2010)

            The Caucus

            The latest on President Obama, his administration and other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the discussion.

            * FiveThirtyEight: Nate Silver’s Political Calculus
            * More Politics News

            Enlarge This Image
            Chip Litherland for The New York Times

            Wade C. Vose, a lawyer for Tea Party activists who say Mr. Guetzloe hijacked their movement, issued a subpoena to Representative Alan Grayson, a Democrat with ties to Mr. Guetzloe.

            The efforts are taking place across the country with varying degrees of stealth. And in many cases, they seem to hold as much risk as potential reward for Democrats, prompting accusations of hypocrisy and dirty tricks from Republicans and the third-party movements that are on the receiving end of the unlikely, and sometimes unwelcome, support.

            Seriously MNG. Go fuck yourself.

            1. I don’t write the NYT, I just read it.


            2. Because the GOP has no history of fostering ballot access and such for third party spoilers that would harm Democrats.

              Hi John, like you to met Ralph Nader!


              1. First, they do it to is not an argument you dishonest nitwit. That fact is only pointed out to you about 20 times a day. Yet, it is still always your response when you have to admit the obvious about Democrats. Second, your link gives the example of a single radio ad. My link gives an example of a coordinated campaign to fund third party spoilers that comes from the national level. The two examples are not equivalent. And even if they were, so what? That doesn’t make what the Democrats are doing any more healthy for Democracy.

                MNG I am the only person on here who will engage you anymore. It is because you are so fucking dishonest.

                1. I engage the stool fucker too, John. I do it because I am a GOP’er. And like all GOP’ers, I support legalizing prostitution. And am pro-choice. And believe we should bring all of our troops back home. I also am opposed to teaching Intelligent Design in the classroom. Yup, I’m a GOP’er all the way. Right, stool fucker?

      3. You’ve got somebody wearing an obvious attempt at a “disguise” (the wig), hanging around a political event, trying to get within range of a candidate.

        That has security risk tattooed on its ass. If you go out of your way to act like a security risk, prepare to be treated like a security risk.

        When this was pointed out to the cops at the event, they said “Not my job.” [snarky union comment deleted].

        I’d love to know what (if anything) was said between the MoveOn troll and the Paultard before he decided to “restrain” her.

        Depending on that, its entirely possible that the only real complaint here is that this guy did a perfectly reasonable thing amateurishly.

        I’ll be interested to see how the polls move after this soaks in.

        Compare and contrast, though, the amount of high-profile press being expended on this, as compared to the press expended on an actual beating of an actual guy in a wheelchair by actual union thugs, complete with racist epithets.

        1. I suspect this was another “macaca” ploy, or like the black congressman intentionally walking near that Tea Party rally: doing something provocative to the opposition in public, in hopes that somebody says or does something stupid that “proves” racism or violent tendencies among supporters or whatever.

        2. There is absolutely no way on earth that wearing a wig and approaching a candidate at a campaign event justifies what was done to this woman.

          If you disagree with this, you disagree with Rand Paul himself.

      4. “I mean John even offered the steel trap evidence of the Dems history of supporting spoiler campaigns and parties.”

        I don’t write the NYT, I just read it.……html?_r=1

        Please take that link and shove it up your ass sideways. And then shut the fuck up for the rest of the day you dishonest hack.

        1. “”I don’t write the NYT, I just read it.””

          Why? I thought you hated that paper, and think they are hacks?

          1. I was being flippant. It is pretty damned funny and typical that MNG is pretending that I made up the fact that Democrats are funding sham third parties, when it was in the alleged paper of record yesterday.

            1. You are so poor at reading comprehension you think I’m denying the Dems do (and did) this. I’m not. I’m ridiculing your offering it as some kind of evidence the Paul-supporters rumble was staged by the Dems.

              “I mean John even offered the steel trap evidence of the Dems history of supporting spoiler campaigns and parties.”

              The steel trap is referring to the drawing of such a fallacious conclusion from such a premise, not the truth of the premise. You don’t get out much, eh?

              1. “I’m ridiculing your offering it as some kind of evidence the Paul-supporters rumble was staged by the Dems.”

                I never offered it as evidence of anything about this guy. I said, it was possible that this was a set up. And that if it was, the Dems, are playing with fire. I then sited their support of sham third parties this year, as another example of this kind of behavior.

                It is you that has zero reading comprehension. And like every other subject, you are incapable of admitting any fault whatsoever in the Democratic party. Even when you are forced to admit the obvious, you just change the subject and scream “Republicans do it to”, like that means anything.

                1. You know what’s the difference between Tony and the stool fucker? I have genuine sympathy for Tony.

    4. For the record, I was not one of the people out there yesterday assuming, or even considering the possibility, that this was a staged event. Just look at what the guy was wearing. T-shirt tucked into light blue jeans, and tennis shoes. That’s how middle-aged Republican men dress. Period.

      1. Wow, that’s some hard evidence you’ve got there. Makes for an easy open and shut case. You should easily win on summary judgment, because you clearly are the World’s Leading Expert on How Middle-Aged Republican Men Dress.

        1. Out of curiosity, what do middle-aged Democrat men wear? It would be helpful to be able to identify my neighbors’ political leanings by sight instead of going through that tedious conversation process.

          1. mock turtlenecks

            1. SAVE THE MOCK TURTLES!!!

  20. Morning “news” chit-chat anchor, sob-sister and Democrat apologist Matt Lauer sandbags Meg Whitman before a Daily Show-like audience as “moderator” of a “debate.”…..97723.html

    1. I’ll never forgive Lauer for how he treated Dr. Rick Marshal.

    2. When will news anchor replace lawyers on top of the list of most despicable professions?

      1. I see the need for a lawyer. News anchor, not so much.

      2. news anchor replace lawyers on top of the list of most despicable professions

        That has pretty much happened. The tipping point was during the 2008 elections, I believe, but it had been building for a long, long time. The self-righteous smarminess with which “respected” news anchors like Katie Couric and Brian Williams and Diane Sawyer go about their pretend objectivity is truly sickening.

        1. news anchor replace lawyers on top of the list of most despicable professions

          That has pretty much happened.

          What implication does this have for FoxNC where it is a prerequisite for females, but not males interestingly, to be blond lawyers?

          1. They have brunette lawyers too.

            1. They have brunette lawyers too

              Only on weekends.

  21. I went to a CFA (Financial Analyst mafia group) event in houston yesterday. They had 4 panelists all of which said the biggest driver they see in the coming year is a gridlock boost in the markets. They all said that much of the gains in the past few weeks have been the market already starting to figure the future gridlock into companies projections.

  22. The ICBMs were unionized by the American Federation of Government Employees and 1/9 stopped working.

    1. Ok, that was pretty funny. +1 hmmm

  23. My local tea party has gone down from “great” to “good” in my eyes based on how they’ve responded to Pascrell. Their record is still better than that of the local Democrats and Republicans, but not as good as the local Libertarians.

  24. The Libertarian running for Ohio Treasurer has been endorsed by the Cleveland Plain Dealer.
    Which means he’ll get 2.5 percent instead of 3.

    1. statewide treasurer candidate running as a libertarian? Holy shit!

      I may go ahead and vote in this election after all.

      (This post was written after passing out from shock that the PD would endorse anyone but an establishment Dem.

  25. Russian bears turning cemeteries into all-they-can-eat buffets.

    This is a situation that calls for real leadership . . .

    People, your dearly departed have been eaten because of illegal immigrants!

    1. We will exhume you!!!!

  26. Russian bears

    Has anyone alerted Andrew Sullivan?

    //shows self out

    1. I think I like this idea. Unfortunately, the video is blocked at work. Does the man-bear yell at the person like “GET OVER IT! YOU’RE AWESOME! (S)HE SUCKED AND YOU’LL FIND SOMEONE WAY BETTER! YEAH! YEAHH!!”

    2. Wouldn’t it be more therapeutic to have a real bear visit your ex?

      1. Outsource to the Russian bears. They’re doing a fine job, it appears.

        1. Seems like you’d have to kill your ex first. The bear would just be a way to get rid of the evidence. Some of it, anyway.

  27. “Tom Tancredo riding anti-immigrant campaign to within a few points of Colorado governorship.”

    Is Reason going to publish a correction to its previous claim that opposing illegal immigration is a political loser?

    1. He hasn’t won yet, but if he does there sure are going to be a lot of exploding heads around here.

  28. This is awesome.

    Boardman was hiking with his wife, Susan Chadd, and their friend, Pat Willits, and had stopped for lunch at an overlook when the goat began acting aggressively toward them, the Peninsula Daily News reported.

    Boardman urged the others to go ahead while he tried to get rid of the goat, according to the paper. The two heard him yell and ran back to help.

    Hikers who came upon the group radioed for help. But it took nearly an hour before rescuers could reach Boardman because the goat stood over him as he lay motionless on the ground, according to the Seattle Times.

    “The mountain goat was terribly aggressive,” Jessica Baccus, who was hiking with her family, told the Times. “It wouldn’t move. It stared us down.”


    The End is Near.

    1. Goats who stare at men.

    2. The NFL has issued the goat a $75,000 fine.

    3. The day I get taken down by a fucking ruminant is the day I become a vegetarian because I no longer deserve to eat meat.

      1. Have you ever seen a mountain goat? They are big. They are not like a domestic goat. Unless you have a firearm, which is illegal to have in national parks, they will kick your ass.

        And a moose is a ruminant, I wouldn’t want any part of a moose if I am carrying anything less than an elephant gun.

        1. firearms are legal in national parks…shooting things is not.

        2. I’m with Brett. A sufficiently determined human being with a modicum of snap should be able to convince a goat it has better prospects elsewhere. I might make an exception for buck-naked and falling down drunk, but short of that, man up. We didn’t get to be the apex predator by playing nice with our food.

          1. Have you ever been around a really large and aggressive animal? We got to the top of the food chain because we worked in groups and used tools. One on one in a test of strength, we don’t stand a chance.

            1. There was a group of people and at least as many tools as our ancestors had. Poke it in the eye and see if it still wants to fight. Play your most annoying ringtone over and over again and see if its a music critic. Don’t fucking stand there and wave your arms when a guy’s bleeding out.

            2. Have you ever been around a really large and aggressive animal?

              That’s no reason to shoot them, fascist!

          2. Wasn’t the guy like 63? Predator goats can sense the weakness of the aged.

            1. the goat can smell your fear

          3. I double-dare you to take on a wild turkey with just your bare hands.

            1. I have seen wild turkey in the dirty bare hands of many urban outdoorsmen.

    4. In North Florida, this would not have been a staring contest. Seriously, throw a shirt over its head and beat it with a stick.

    5. Boardman stated that what started as a nice trip ended up “a baa-aad day.”

  29. Rescuer 1 to Rescuer 2:
    Don’t get too close — there’s a goat standing motionless over him!
    (Nearly an hour later)
    Rescuer 2: Can we go in yet?
    Rescuer 1: Looks like the goat is still standing motionless over him. Better not risk it.

  30. Re: Tancredo.
    It is interesting that his race is making it a real possibility that the Colorado GOP will be decertified as a major party and become a minor party understate law (at the same time makig the ACP a major party). Another interesting point is that due to the efforts of the Colorado LP over the last 20 years this distinction means nothing. Minor parties have all the same priveledges as the majors in Colorado. Overal a good thing but too bad the Rs dont get to taste the medicin they have been giving the Ls for years.

    1. Wait, are you saying that status is determined only by the governor’s election? The GOP is doing fine in the senate race and I would imagine they’re doing normally or better in the other ones, too.
      I’m not saying you’re wrong, it just sounds weird.

    2. Don’t worry — the Republicans and Democrats will pass a law guaranteeing the status quo.

  31. firearms are legal in national parks

    I believe they now defer to local laws: Yellowstone yes, Yosemite no.

    Contrary to the hysterical prophesies of doom and bloody mayhem on the part of east coast nannytarian liberals, there has been no O K Corral -style gunplay in Yellowstone.

    1. Yeah, execpt neighbors complaining about what’s in your yard isn’t reserved for Manhattan.

    2. Yeah, no lie. $5,000, two carpenters and five months just to build a fricking treehouse? My friend and I built a really badass treehouse in about a week with house construction scraps when we were about 12.

  32. Wasn’t the guy like 63? Predator goats can sense the weakness of the aged.

    “C’mon, hippy. Just lay the sammiches on that rock- and them bean sprouts, too- and everybody walks away.”

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.