Morgan Spurlock's Vision

|

Morgan Spurlock, he of Super Size Me fame, has a new project. He's asking you, Internet user, to help him assemble a panoramic photo of Times Square . . . but with all the advertising scrubbed away. Because that's the first thing most of us think when we visit Times Square. Golly, if only this place looked more like Pyongyang! 

I'm also not sure what point he's trying to prove. Wait. I mean I very much know the point he's trying to prove. It's just absurd. The aim of the project is to appreciate the glory of Times Square without those crass accouterments of commerce . . . that made the glory of Times Square possible. (Spurlock seems to have gotten the idea from Sao Paulo, Brazil, which banned outdoor advertising in 2007.)

If you think I'm exaggerating Spurlock's commie sympathies, here's a fun passage from his 2005 book, Don't Eat This Book:

Right now, I'm planning a trip to Cuba. I want to experience the country and its people before that Pandora's box is opened there. Because you know after the day Fidel dies, the shipments of American consumer crap will come flooding in. 

Maybe that's what this project is all about. It's so that when the damnable day comes that the Cuban people are finally afforded personal, political, and economic freedom, Morgan Spurlock will still be able to visit a magical place where the buildings are bare, the nights aren't littered with neon, and everyone suffers quietly—but equally—in poverty. If only, sigh, on his computer.

My 2006 Reason piece explaining why Morgan Spurlock and values crusader Ben Shapiro are the same person here.

BONUS: A reader sends this fascinating article from the Wall Street Journal about zoning laws in Times Square. The garishness is actually mandatory.

Advertisement

NEXT: Obama Administration to States: Don't Cut Medicaid. Instead, Do More With Less.

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. “a magical place where the buildings are bare, the nights aren’t littered with neon, and everyone suffers quietly?but equally?in poverty”

    [masturbating furiously]

    1. Never gets old…

      1. No one ever criticizes Max trolls. That’s discrimination.

        1. Because I’ll rip off your head and shit down the stump.

          That beats the hell out of pissing yourself, doucebag.

          1. How gauche. You are an embarrassment to progressives. When the revolution comes, you will be the first to go.

            1. LOL

              People like me use DFs like you to make a revolution. Once we have power your ‘people’ are the first to be liquidated.

        2. Criticism or compliment, you decide!

          1. A huge poster of Obama, the progressive’s god, in place of the signs.

            1. “It is a good day to Diet”
              All Hail! Libton House of Barack!

  2. You know who else had a vision?

    1. G.W. Bush…wait, no…

      Ummmmm….

      1. oooh… oooh… Pick me! I know!

        1. Golda Meir?

    2. Apparently the guy who is spoofing Tony 😉

      1. It’s really me. The world shouldn’t pay attention to advertisements. The must pay attention to people like O and me.

        1. But we do, Tony, in exactly the same way we pay attention to the 12-car pileup we pass along the highway.

          1. And, the same way we paid attention to GWB during his miserable reign.

            1. No, all Libertarians loved Bush. That’s an indisputable fact. And my refusing to look through Reason archives to back that claim up is proof that it is true.

              1. I liked his tax cuts…

                1. the Patriot Act makes me all warm and fuzzy…

              2. Medicare Part D was a godsend!

                1. All hail Eris!

    3. Tele… Savalas?

      Ezekiel?

      David Berkowitz?

      David Bowie minus the sound?

  3. “Because you know after the day Fidel dies, the shipments of American consumer crap will come flooding in.”

    He wrote that sentence in 2005? I didn’t know we manufactured any consumer crap.

    1. Perhaps he was speaking of teargas and guns? Cause we still MAKE that stuff here! Fuck yeah!

      1. lol “consumer crap”…what do you call groceries then?

        1. what do you call groceries then

          Weapons of mass ingestion?

          1. thought he meant the Chevy Volt?

            1. Float me on a raft!

      2. USA! USA! USA!

    2. I hear eating Chick-Fil-A cures homosexuality. Let us know how it works out

    3. Eating Chick-Fil-A might cure you.

      1. The only thing I saw was the guy’s wedding ring-why are all the good men taken!

      2. Eating Chick-Fil-A might cure you.

        and if you work there, it might “save” you.

  4. Because you know after the day Fidel dies, the shipments of American consumer crap will come flooding in.

    Yeah, like books written by authoritarian fucks who want to forcibly impose their “dreams” on everybody.

    1. Or DVDs of Super Size Me.

      1. So, Cubans don’t need coasters? Why do you hate Cuban Woodworks?

      2. Or Che Guevara t-shirts.

      3. Don’t forget Michelle Moore’s SICKO.

  5. “a magical place where the buildings are bare, the nights aren’t littered with neon, and everyone suffers quietly?but equally?in poverty”

    [masturbating furiously]

    1. Hmm…I don’t need an excuse Helle. And BTW ignoramus, girls masturbate gently…slowly…yahhhhhhhhh

      1. Where do libertarians go when they die?

        Helle!

        1. What do libertarians drink while in Munich?

          Helles!

      2. Not me dumbass, I come up with my own jokes.

        1. No, your the only one who makes fun of me. Everyone else loves me! ME! ME!

          1. it’s achy-breaky time

        2. Not me dumbass, I come up with my own a jokes.

          FIFM

          1. oops, I pooped myself from trying to spoof ^

            1. FIFM?

              -glad you’re having fun jerk-offs.

              1. pooped myself again trying to convince people that I didn’t spoof heller ^

                1. It’s too late Rectal, I have your little accident preserved for the mirth of all. Don’t soil yourself trying to take it back.

                  1. don’t be a fucking idiot-more than you can help

                    1. Great comeback, really relevant to the what we were discussing.

                      Do try to keep up.

                    2. Thanks for visiting my blog bitch and commenting 🙂

                      Should I go ahead and subscribe you?

                    3. LOL, keep on dreaming, dumbass.

                    4. “LOL, keep on dreaming, dumbass.”
                      Hmm…you really do tempt me to punish you little boy

                    5. Awwww, is Wectal gettin angwy? Poor baby must have diaper rash…

      3. Not in any porn movie I’ve ever seen.

  6. WTF? Yeah, the worst thing that could ever happen to Cuba is some advertising or capitalism.

    Can I call this guy a Marxist? At what point does expressed hatred of capitalism allow me to assume that?

    1. I think it would be safer to call him an idiot.

      1. At this point, what’s the difference?

        1. Merely a matter of semantics.

          1. Let”s split the difference. He’s a Marxiot.

        2. Marxists comprise a subset of a much larger set of idiots, which includes Obamatons, Progressives, radical environmentalists, and people with an IQ of less than 20.

          1. “people with an IQ of less than 20.”

            That subset category significantly overlaps with all the prior ones you identified.

          2. People with an IQ of less than 20 are considerably less dangerous than those willful idiots you speak of.

        3. “…what’s the difference?”

          All marxists are idiots, but not all idiots are marxists.

          1. somewhere in New York a town is missing their marxist…

          2. No, most are idiots. A few are just plain evil.

      2. Go ahead, but whatever you do, don’t call him a socialist! They don’t exist. Socialists are just a myth, like Bigfoot, or Ezra Klein’s penis.

        1. like quantitative easing…
          (sounds like something from the laxative section at Rite Aid)

      3. Does sadistic f**k work? Seriously, why does this jackwagon get his knickers in a twist at the prospect of someone having stuff that makes them happy?

    2. Yes, Cubans will soon have to face the scourge of cheap consumer goods. It’s so much worse than being put in jail for saying bad things about the government and being forced into abject poverty in the name of equality.

      1. Si, we have free health care.

        1. Si, mucho medicamentso gratuitos y poco dinero!

    3. At what point does expressed hatred of capitalism allow me to assume that?

      The moment Spurlock stops pitching his media business to make a profit, and instead sends all the proceeds to the government.

      1. That’s for non-party members.

  7. http://www.corbisimages.com/im…..F11205.jpg

    I’d just love to be tourist there. And even in 1900 you can’t escape the Pabst ad.

    1. I only drink it “ironically.” And as soon as my paintings start selling, I’ll be able to quit my horse-shit sweeping job.

  8. WAITING FOR RAPE SPOOF!

    1. …waiting to rape the rape-spoof, right?

      1. RAPE SPOOF-HOLE RAPE WYLIE RAPE RAPERS RAPE…RAPE…UM…RAPE…

        SO TIRED…RAPE…?

        1. TIMAY?!

          1. little know fact:

            that sound he makes when he’s not saying “timay”? “rbdbldrrraaa”? Yeah, he’s actually trying to say “rape”.

            The more you know.

              1. “I told you! It’s Timmy and the Lords of the Underworld!”

  9. Balko’s white whale has surfaced again. We knew he would.

    Yeah, Spurlock is the absolute worst kind of person, reluctantly benefiting from the free enterprise system he seems to hate so much. Although, in his defense, his dream system would most likely commission him to do exactly what he’s making money off doing now.

    1. It always amazes me how lefties always assume in a communist world they would have jobs making movies/music/paintings/literature etc… for the state, and not toiling on the farms or factories. Because, obviously, any commie gov’t would be better at recognizing their talents than the art enjoying public in the real world.

      1. lefties always assume in a communist world they would have jobs making movies/music/paintings/literature etc… for the state

        Hey, somebody has to make all the propaganda.

          1. I want to be a ballet dancer in the National Dance Theater.

        1. And what percentage of the population gets those jobs in any communist society? I’d guess way less than one.

          1. I wasn’t really putting the idea forward as a solid employment scheme to be pursued….so, ok.

            1. I think you kinda missed my original point, which is those who have affections for a communist system always assume they would have the more glamorous jobs, while in reality the vast majority ended up with jobs they starry eyed lefties would hate.

              1. Ah, so the small proportion quashes most of those aspirations, got it. Sry for the mixup.

              2. But they’re never happier than when they’re forcibly depriving everyone else of happiness.

          2. “And what percentage of the population gets those jobs in any communist society? I’d guess way less than one.”

            Any reading of commie history says you *don’t* want those jobs; when the ‘correct road’ changes direction, why you’re just shot as a propagandist for the ‘wrong road’.

            1. Lefties don’t tend to think that far ahead when envisioning a perfect communist utopia. They just assume that the right people will be in charge this time.

              1. Lefties don’t tend to think

                Stop right there.

            2. Morgan Spurlock? No such person exists, friend. The records have been searched thoroughly. Surely you must be mistaken?

        2. On the other hand, the communists knew useful idiots when they saw them. The communists always made it a point to co-op the “creative” classes, realizing their usefulness for propaganda purposes. It continues to this day. See, e.g., Obama’s NEA urging artists to create “pro health care reform” art.

          1. I think it’s a more organic process. “Artsy” people are less likely to have ever worked for a living.

            1. And much easier to dispose of them since they lack hardy constitutions!

            2. “”Artsy” people are less likely to have ever worked for a living.”

              As talented as we are, we shouldn’t have to. That’s why we hope for a government who will support our talents and save us from having to support ourselves. That’s for squares.

      2. The only nice thing about Communism is all the lefties it kills.

        1. Wow…this Freedom of Speech thing can be a bit rough at times…

          1. Eh. I’m reading Bloodlands right now. Bleakest book I’ve ever read. The only good thing is watching the bastards who shot peasants for eating the food they grew on their land get purged a few years later in the Great Terror. You know things are bad when the only hope of good things happening is that Stalin will decide his current group of torturers and murderers is actually working for Poland or Japan or the international monocle and top hat club and shoot all of them.

    2. Yeah, Spurlock is the absolute worst kind of person, reluctantly benefiting from the free enterprise system he seems to hate so much.

      Like a lot of other SWPL types, it’s really just a pose to make himself feel better.

      Although, in his defense, his dream system would most likely commission him to do exactly what he’s making money off doing now.

      Pretty much the whole purpose of the NEA, really.

    3. FoE

      his dream system would most likely commission him to do exactly what he’s making money off doing now.

      Exactly. It would be called the Federal Ministry of RightThink Publications.

      I think I already told the story about the NY liberals who argued with me that Cony Island should be state-run, and “stripped free of commercialism”. The ironies never registered for them. I was like, ‘what would “shoot the freak” become? “Execute the Wall St Kulak?” The Cyclone would be flattened out and called, “The Wonder of Keynes”? Nathan’s would serve state subsidized soy-tubes with sides of Workers Millet?…

      I work in/near Times Square. Trust me, it would be uglier without the ads. But at least it wouldn’t drag any more fat dumb tourists in to spend money on terrible musicals and comedy shows.

      In retrospect, it should be called, “failed publishing business model square”

  10. A friend of mine vacationed in Cuba (via Canada) and stayed in a resort that “looked like the set of ‘I Dream of Jeannie’.”

    1. Quit trying to make Cuba sound like some hidden paradise. We all know it’s not wall-to-wall Barbara Eden navels.

      1. You only think that because of propaganda from Fox News.

        1. Are you saying that Cuba *is* wall-to-wall Barbara Eden navels?

          And did you learn this from MSNBC?

          1. The point is, that people have rights, like a right to a job, a right to health care, a right to food. People are granted those rights in Cuba. They are not here. As the maxim goes, freedom of speech won’t feed my children.

            1. Mikey I’m not so sure you’d be able to continue exercising your right to be as wide as you are tall if you were to take up residence in Cuba.

              1. but it certainly teach them to hum…
                Barack Hussein Obama, Hmmm Hmmm Hmmm…

              2. American consumer culture forced me to be fat. If I went to Cuba, I wouldn’t be forced to be a fat fuck anymore. And, I would have no need to make movies, because society would be so much better, and everyone would be happier.

      2. How are the resort golf courses?

    2. If the resort had 1960s-vintage Barbara Eden, I might think about going.

    3. It looked like an Air Force base? That sucks.

  11. NEW ELECTRIC SIGNS OFFENDING THE EYE; No Law to Stop Their Display Nor to Forbid Erection of Freak Buildings to Hold Them.

    The time has come, in the opinion of Rudolph P. Miller, Superintendent of Buildings for Manhattan, and many others, when something should be done to regulate the character of electric sign and advertisements along Broadway.

    New York Times, Sep 10, 1910.

    1. “When there comes the man…who wants to slap people in the face with his wares by the means of outlandish towers…and any other offensive means,there ought to be some power…to lay upon him the restraining hand.”

      Yes, it seems I’ve heard that somewhere before…

      1. it seems I’ve heard that somewhere before…

        You heard that from a DVD sleeve, produced by a Video Company in the San Fernando Valley.

        1. Yeah, “Erection of Freak” really stood out in that headline.

      2. This from the paper that put gatling guns on the roof to shoot at the mobs demanding freedom from Government stripping their liberties…

        Oh, wait. That was the Tribune

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Draft_Riots

  12. Shouldn’t Sullum being the one writing about this story. I have to think that he contributed the most to the film’s appeal than Spurly.

  13. Spurlock spelled backwards is Kcolrups.

    1. The tentacles, they have reach.

  14. I always thought huge garish billboards were the entire *point* of Times Square. I well remember as a kid seeing the huge Camel billboard showing actual smoke (well, steam, I suppose) being puffed out of the mouth of a happy smoker. Of course they can’t show THAT anymore!

    1. Some day they will- combined with LCD technology.

    2. Next up: Morgan Spurlock invites folks to create a photo panorama of the Vegas strip without neon signs…

  15. How about the following counter- challenge: Photoshop Times Square plastered with nothing but North Korean style propaganda posters, preferably of Spuriouslock.

      1. Holy shit, that was fast and well done…

        1. Thanks – I just wish I’d cropped around the edges more, so the details of the billboards would be more visible.

        2. the all hail our glorious overlord thing is a bit overdone with the north korean and chinese flags. Why not just put a big O poster instead, like “celebrate your president!”

          1. yonemoto – I was going off of Radley’s sarcastic comment “Golly, if only this place looked more like Pyongyang.” While I was deliberately being hyperbolic, remember that this Spurlock asshole was talking about how great it would be to go see Cuba.

            Admittedly, Cuba is less barbaric than North Korea. however, it’s a matter of degrees. And someone who is willing to trade basic freedoms – merely for a cityscape with fewer (but non-corporate!) billboards – is a piece of shit. Sticking Spurlock’s french-fry filled gullet in the place of Kim Il-Sung was well deserved, IMO.

            BTW, it’s not a Chinese flag, it’s a North Korean variant – the hammer, sickle, and (writing) brush. The brush signifies the intellectuals – I’m assuming the ones who weren’t murdered in 1946.

          2. the cursive “Obey” was a really creepy touch…
            almost felt a kimchi jones coming on…

      2. WTF, say it’s your Urkobold site-it screws up my computer 🙁

        1. that is a feature, not a bug.
          fuck off cunt pickler.

        2. Vista + Internet Explorer = URKOBOLD FAIL.

  16. Spurlock is the type of progressive who would have been defending Stalin back in the 1930s. We can only hope that once the Castro brothers are executed and Cuba opens up, people will realize what a completely intellectually bankrupted person Spurlock (et al) really is.

  17. Spurlock’s a tool.

    When the hell is Sonny Astani going to finish his Bladerunner Geisha building?

  18. He wrote that sentence in 2005? I didn’t know we manufactured any consumer crap.

    He meant “American-consumer crap.” Stuff poor people like?like far larger servings of food for a few cents extra.

    Dude’s got a theme goin’.

    1. See, they have to ban it for the poor people’s own good.

      Man, I hate Walmart and McDonalds as much as the next lefty urbanite, but I don’t want to ban it just because I find their products or their clientele displeasing. You can be an elitist twit without telling people how to live their lives.

      1. You can?!? That’s un-possible!

      2. Yeah, what’s the point then?

    2. Damn, only poor people are supposed to east McDonald’s? Will I get a ticket?

  19. What else do you expect from Morgan Shylock . . . oops! I mean Spurlock . . .

    1. . . . balls

  20. Communism . . . Ain’t nothin but a Jew thang, baby!

    1. Austrian Economics is a Jew thing too. The Jews! They’re everywhere!

      1. I fucking love juice.

        1. But we don’t love you.

      2. Ultimate irony for progressive Jews–Freidman was a Jew, Keynes was an anti-Semite.

    2. Objectivism – nothing but a Jew thang

      Rothbardianism – nothing but a Jew thang

      Austrian Economics – nothing but a Jew thang

      The Chicago School – nothing but a Jew thang

      1. There really aren’t many thangs that aren’t Jew thangs. I can’t think of any other than violent Islamism and National Socialism (at least it’s an ethos, etc).

        1. but caused by jews 😉

        2. You know who else thought that Jews controlled everything?

          1. jewish mothers?

            1. Are you going to be here all week?

              1. Trying to rep me?

                1. No , I just want to know so I can take a vacation from your incessant blog whoring.

                  1. do I make you do things helle? Do I make you think things? Do I make you touch yourself? Poor helle, has lost control…Why you’re my little Manchurian boy!

                    1. don’t be stupid tarran

                    2. do I make you do things helle? Do I make you think things? Do I make you touch yourself? Poor helle, has lost control…Why you’re my little Manchurian boy!

                      LOL, Rectal how many times ARE you going to fail in this thread? How does what I said imply control? Idiot.

              2. Incif that cunt, heller.

                1. He likes cunt honey-just like you

                  1. Don’t you mean cunt pickle?

        3. But wasn’t Adolf Schickelgruber part Jewish?

  21. Haha! Austrian Econ . . . take a poll of some Jews, and see which is more popular, Communism or Austrian Econ.

    1. Aww, did your Jewish boyfriend dump you?

  22. The best thing about advertising is that Google is now giving me ads for American Apparel lingerie on HnR. So now, in addition to the normal assortment of idiots and trolls on this comment page, there’s a hipster chick with her fine titties on display in a bra so shear it might as well be transparent. Capitalism is beautiful.

    1. It’s sheer–they’re not saw blades–but at least you spelled titties right.

      I assume when you said “idiots and trolls” you meant me.

      1. Somehow you manage to be plural in both categories.

        1. I am legends.

          1. Will Smith to the red courtesy phone.

            1. Richard Matheson to the courtesy phone.

            2. the white zone is for immediate loading and unloading of passengers. there is no stopping in the red zone.

              1. “Listen Betty, don’t start up with your white zone shit again.”

                “Oh really, Vernon? Why pretend, we both know perfectly well what this is about. You want me to have an abortion.”

                “It’s really the only sensible thing to do, if its done safely. Therapeutically there’s no danger involved.”

  23. Bingo = Jew

    1. ching chang chung = retarded fuckstick

      1. helle = retarded fuckstick + Jew

        1. I’ll change your soiled panties in a second dear, no need to lash out.

          1. don’t wear any idiot

            1. Now, now, no need to lie because you’re embarrassed.

              1. helle, isn’t today your holy day? Don’t you have masturbating to catch-up on?

                1. Dammit, you’re cranky today. I guess I’ll use extra baby powder next time…

                  1. helle, come back to my blog-I want to keep playing with you

                    1. Hi, Rectal!

                      Hate to keep bringing this up, but…

                      Rather|1.26.11 @ 11:16AM|#
                      I HATE YOU ALL! I’M NEVER POSTING HERE AGAIN!
                      .

                      Bye, Rectal!

                    2. What part of that was a spoof don’t you understand? OK, let me explain

                      s l o w l y

                      that wasn’t me

                    3. What part of that was a spoof don’t you understand?

                    4. Ladies and gentlemen, the wit and wisdom of H&R.

                    5. I wished I could quit you all, but I can’t. I’ll be that boil on your ass that never, never goes away.

                    6. helle, baby, why won’t you admit you love my blog, visit it, comment on it…it’s kinda like masturbating-everyone does it; you can say so big boy

                    7. I wonder if Rather is Hillary Clinton.

                    8. I’ve never fucked Bill Clinton-wait, that isn’t exactly a disclaimer, is it?

                    9. “I never had sexual relations with Rather, Monica Rather, Dan Rather or any other Rather…in fact, I’d rather have Spurlock’s rather…I miss my McDonald’s” (chuckle chuckle)

                      “B’Sides, Hillary’s got a bigger dick than I do, and Rather’s jockstrap couldn’t hold a McNugget…It’s great to be me!” (chuckle chuckle)

                    10. My men don’t need a jockstrap-I keep them safe in my warm hands

                    11. I seriously doubt Rectal has ever had an adult male inside her.

                    12. This is just so sad, I’ve never seen someone lie to themselves so much. People here don’t like you Rectal, we don’t visit your blog, we don’t comment on it. Move on you delusional little cunt.

                    13. And now we enter Rectal’s twilight zone, where her depraved fantasies and deepest desire (me coming to her blog) appear real to her.

                    14. Baby, I think I’ll send you an email; you would find the contents highly amusing-I did

                      -anything you want to take back first?

                    15. Baby helle….I’m waiting…lol

                    16. Do you do half sours or just kosher dills?

                    17. helle, are you changing the topic? Are you denying that you visited my blog today?

                    18. Yes, you dumb cunt. Understand English?

                    19. helle, deny it then. How difficult is it to deny a ‘fabrication’?

                    20. I just did. Again, do you understand English?

  24. Because you know after the day Fidel dies, the shipments of American consumer crap will come flooding in.

    No shit, Spurlock. Because the Cuban people actually really, really, wants that stuff after 50 years of corn rations and five hour speeches.

    1. Don’t you understand BP, the corporations are exploiting the noble Cuban people by forcing them to buy these products. They will be brainwashed through advertising turning their worker’s paradise into another haven of wage slaves and mindless consumers.

      1. “haven of wage slaves and mindless consumers”
        sounds like spring break

    2. Hey, I hear their ration of chickens is up to four a year now. That ain’t no small deal in Gulla-Gulla-Gulag.

  25. Am I the only one that’s surprised Mickey D’s hasn’t sued the crap out of Spurlock for promoting the notion that eating nothing but Big Macs causes permanent brain damage?

    1. How about someone informing the self-inflicted tard that McDonalds has fucking salads, and had already had them for years when he made his stupid fucking film?

      Also, we would have been better off making a film about him trying to survive on Popov vodka for a month. At least that would have been funny.

      1. Patsy: [Feels her stomach in discomfort]

        Edina: Have you eaten something?

        Patsy: No, not since 1973.

      2. Super High Me was actually kinda funny.

        “Heinous Anus”—actually laughed out loud at that one.

        1. …and it wasn’t directed by Spurlock.

      3. Karmic justice demands that Spurlock and Michael Moore be accidentally locked in a walk in freezer with nothing but one case of McRibs, a microwave, and a knitting needle for about a week.

        1. *AND* that godawful “caramel mocha is what I want” song playing on a continuous loop.

      4. Also, we would have been better off making a film about him trying to survive on Popov vodka for a month. At least that would have been funny.

        Super Size Me with Whiskey

        1. Too bad it wasn’t Spurlock…

  26. Does Spurlock ever wonder why the buildings in Times Square were built in the first place?

    1. So people weren’t milling around outside on the sidewalk watching strippers and pay-per-view porn?

      1. I was wondering when someone was going to bring that up. I was younger, but Times Square used to be a sort of no-go on parental trips to NY. Peep shows, grime, and squalor. So was the East Village, where NYU sunbathers have replaced used needles in the parks.

        Oh, and get off of my lawn.

  27. Spurlock’s focus on Times Square is idiotic. Times Square has always been a place of crass commercialism, and has been covered in ads since the 19th century ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F…..,_1880.jpg ). Even its name is an advertisement (for the NYT).

    Criticizing it for being too commercial is like slamming the National Mall for being too Roman or Arlington Nation Cemetery for being too mournful.

    1. Or Vegas without lights.

      1. Or San Francisco without teh gays.

  28. “If you think I’m exaggerating Spurlock’s commie sympathies,…”

    No, I don’t.

  29. Times Square is a useless waste of time. Bunch of idiots getting in your way standing there looking at… signs. If you need to walk some where past the other side of Times Square, save time by going around it.

    Whats he trying to do, find pictures of the buildings before they had signs?

    Times Square was named after another piece of shit- the New York Times:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Times_Square

  30. No ads, no commerce, no life.

  31. WASHINGTON?In a strong rebuke of President Obama and his domestic agenda, all 242 House Republicans voted Wednesday to repeal the Asteroid Destruction and American Preservation Act, which was signed into law last year to destroy the immense asteroid currently hurtling toward Earth.
    The $440 billion legislation, which would send a dozen high-thrust plasma impactor probes to shatter the massive asteroid before it strikes the planet, would affect more than 300 million Americans and is strongly opposed by the GOP.
    “The voters sent us to Washington to stand up for individual liberty, not big government,” Rep. Steve King (R-IA) said at a press conference. “Obama’s plan would take away citizens’ fundamental freedoms, forcing each of us into hastily built concrete bunkers and empowering the federal government to ration our access to food, water, and potassium iodide tablets while underground.”
    “We believe that the decisions of how to deal with the massive asteroid are best left to the individual,” King added.
    Repealing the act, which opponents have branded ‘Obamastroid,’ has been the cornerstone of the GOP agenda since the law’s passage last August. Throughout the 2010 elections, Republican candidates claimed that the Democrats’ plan to smash the space rock and shield citizens from its fragments was “a classic example of the federal government needlessly interfering in the lives of everyday Americans.”
    “This law is a job killer,” said Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), who argued the tax increases required to save the human species from annihilation would impose unbearably high costs on businesses. “If we sit back and do nothing, Obamastroid will result in hundreds of thousands of lost jobs, which we simply can’t afford in this economy.”
    “And consider how much money this program will add to our already bloated deficit,” Foxx continued. “Is this the legacy we want to leave our children?”
    Many GOP members have also criticized the legislation for what they consider pork-barrel spending, claiming the act includes billions in “giveaways” to NASA, nonperishable food manufacturers, and pharmaceutical companies contracted to produce mass volumes of vitamin D supplements in the likely event that dust from the asteroid’s impact blots out the sun for a decade.
    In an effort to counter Republicans’ claims, Democrats have asserted that the long-term benefits of preventing the United States from being incinerated by an explosion several billion times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb would far outweigh the initial monetary outlay.
    In support of their position, Democrats have pointed to estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office that show repealing the law could result in a loss of up to $14 trillion in the nation’s GDP.
    “I will be the first to admit this is not a perfect bill, by any means,” said Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), who has argued that the measure does not go far enough in deflecting the ensuing debris that will rain down on Earth once the asteroid has been destroyed. “But it is absolutely a bill that each and every American needs now if we want to move forward as a country.”
    According to political pundits, the showdown over whether to let the asteroid blast a 150-mile-wide, 20-mile-deep crater in the Earth’s crust represents a potential turning point for the nation, and could completely reshape the American political landscape for many centuries to come.
    “If efforts to destroy the asteroid are successfully overturned, then there will be major ramifications for both Obama and his Republican opposition, as well as the American populace at large,” political scientist Alan Abramowitz said on Face The Nation Sunday. “This could have a huge impact come 2012.”
    With repeal rhetoric reaching a crescendo, the president used his weekly radio address Saturday to state his case for destroying the one-trillion-ton asteroid before it barrels into Earth at 60,000 miles per hour.
    “I am more than willing to work with my Republican colleagues to improve the Asteroid Destruction Act,” Obama said. “But let me be clear: Repeal is not an option.”
    “While I recognize that intelligent minds may disagree on this issue, I believe we have an obligation to prevent our citizens from having their flesh seared off in a global firestorm that transforms our planet into a broiling molten wasteland,” Obama added. “I think Americans deserve better.”

    1. You’re not fooling anyone with this. It’s the plot to the movie Deep Impact, starring Morgan Freeman as Barack Obama and Tea Leoni as Ezra Klein.

      1. Totally miscast. My boobs are much bigger than that.

      2. To SM—

        Dude, at least give credit to the Onion when you steal their stuff.

        1. Chalk up another reason why the Onion has lost its humor now that a Democrat is in office.

    2. SM|2.4.11 @ 9:10PM|#
      “WASHINGTON?In a strong rebuke of President Obama and his domestic agenda, all 242 House Republicans voted Wednesday to repeal the Asteroid Destruction and American Preservation Act, which was signed into law last year to destroy the immense asteroid currently hurtling toward Earth.”

      HR-In a boring attempt at satire, SM posted Friday, Feb 4, an infantile fantasy demonstrating once again that brain-deads are incapable of argument without claims of ‘false equivalence’.

      1. Ok, so, i should rephrase the argument as such: If humanity is confronted with a problem so large that no individual is able to prevent its harms, up to and including the extinction of the human race, what should we do? Should the congress vote against the bill that could prevent it from happening, if it required taxing, spending, etc?

        1. SM|2.4.11 @ 9:30PM|#
          “Ok, so, i should rephrase the argument as such: If humanity is confronted with a problem so large that no individual is able to prevent its harms,”

          No, you should shove your stupid hypotheticals up your butt

          1. Anybody reading this site for the first time: welcome to libertarianism. Leave your brain, and logic, at the door. Instead, feel the warmth of the market fundamentalists…we know what’s good for you, just do as we say…

            …you people have more in common with the fascists than you realize…

            1. SM|2.4.11 @ 9:53PM|#
              “Anybody reading this site for the first time: welcome to libertarianism. Leave your brain, and logic, at the door.”

              Particularly when SM posts one of his brain-dead fantasies in the infantile hope someone will mistake them for an actual “argument”.
              Definitely, brains and logic are not in evidence.

            2. Leave your brain, and logic, at the door

              Irony, abounds.

    3. Think about it for a minute…replace conservative with libertarian…you would agree, yes? Repeal the bill?

      If there is a problem so large that individuals are unable to solve it, we should just suffer the impacts, correct? I just want to make sure i understand libertarianism.

      1. SM|2.4.11 @ 9:28PM|#
        “Think about it for a minute…replace conservative with libertarian…you would agree, yes? Repeal the bill?”

        Think about it for a minute. Replace SM with random ignoramus; would you agree?

      2. SM
        I once got robc to admit that if he were put to a choice between pushing a button that would restrict the freedom of an employer by limiting him to offering a minimum wage or the world would blow up he would not push the button. A lot of libertarians are intelligent folks with a healthy distrust of government more so than the average person, but some are nutty fanatics.

        1. MNG|2.4.11 @ 9:32PM|#
          “SM
          I once got robc to admit…”

          Gee, I’ll bet you once got someone to agree that if purple unicorns pooped……..

        2. In fairness to libertarians robc’s inhuman nuttiness is more the result of his insane deontological fixations than libertarianism, but around these parts many folks seem to mix the two rather strongly.

          1. @minge

            Dude, really? I realize that you don’t agree with everybody here on everything, but you seem alright. SM is trolling hard, tomorrow he’ll be the xenophobic ‘america’s hat’. I’d say that it reflects poorly on you to be associating with such trash.

            1. I’m not convinced SM is a “troll.” He comes on and he tries to throw reductio ad absurdems onto libertarians about how they don’t want government to do anything, well how about x or y? I think he’s trying to tweak the absolutism I myself see around here too much. Overly provocative and baiting and often much too simplistic, yes, but certainly no worse than many other regulars around here but with one difference: they are in agreement with libertarian philosophy while he is opposed.

              1. “He comes on and he tries to throw reductio ad absurdems”

                Translation:
                He offers stupid hypotheticals in the hopes someone will bite.

              2. …too a point…there seem to be two types of libertarians as far as i can tell…the absolutists, and the pissed off conservatives…label them however you want…

                …obviously this was aimed at the absolutists…with whom i realize we have a fundamental disagreement, but at least I can respect that – while pointing out to any visitors you may not want any parts of that…

                …but i spend plenty of time pointing out the absurdities of the pissed off conservatives too…those are the ones that think government should be arbitrarily “limited” to that which they desire, and not that which society agrees on…they despise democracy, and want to enact their agenda on the masses because THEY KNOW its the “right” agenda…sound familiar to anyone?

                1. SM|2.4.11 @ 10:00PM|#
                  “…too a point…there seem to be two types of libertarians…”

                  Seems there’s only one type of brain-dead lefty; the one that would tell you what to do, but let the government agent hold the gun.

                2. The dichotomy presented in your hypothetical is inherently fallacious. Nothing stops a group of individuals who agree with each other from doing voluntarily what the government does through coercion. Basically, all non-libertarian ideologies are based on the belief that coercion is necessary. This is simply not true.

                3. Yes, we want to force freedom on people.

                  Imagine the camps where people won’t have to go because they disagree with us. Imagine the prison crowding we won’t have when consensual “criminals” are set free. Imagine billionaires not getting billion dollar handouts from the government, but having to earn that money by providing goods and services people want. Imagine the wars we won’t start, the people all over the globe we won’t kill.

                  It’d be hell on earth! You’ve completely changed my mind.

                  1. You people complain about democracy, that its “mob rule” and all that – guess what – libertarianism is mob rule.

                    I’ll stick with democracy where at least there’s a mechanism for society to prevent mob rule if necessary.

                    You are a market fundamentalist – no more, no less.

                    1. SM|2.5.11 @ 6:44PM|#
                      “You people complain about democracy, that its “mob rule” and all that – guess what – libertarianism is mob rule.”

                      Guns, you bozo; that’s the difference.
                      What an ignoramus……….

                4. those are the ones that think government should be arbitrarily “limited” to that which they desire, and not that which society agrees on…they despise democracy, and want to enact their agenda on the masses because THEY KNOW its the “right” agenda.

                  Yeah, but we know best.

              3. Minge, he has other obvious personalities, and is obviously trolling. The difference between him and other regulars isn’t ideological viewpoint it’s that he is a 12 year old here ostensibly to anger and annoy.

                Also, part of the definition of reductio is taking a viewpoint to its logical conclusion. It would be like me saying; “Minge you agree with the government putting people in jail for murder, therefore you agree with everything the government does. Now let’s say a government decided to kill all of the Jews, then you would have to agree with that, right. If you want to remain consistent then you have to agree, otherwise you are a hypocrite.”

                —parity

                And, in what world does libertarianism = anarchism?

                I think that we should have an army for defense and stopping an asteroid would qualify as proper government function. It doesn’t follow that because I don’t agree with government health paid for healthcare that I am being inconsistent.

                1. No, that would be “pretending MNG’s viewpoint is something ludicrous”, ie a strawman.

                  Reductio ad absurdum would be: MNG, you believe that taxes are justified and people should go to jail for not paying them, right? So if somebody had to choose between paying taxes and feeding their family, you would rather they pay taxes?

                  1. Yeah, I left out a sentence there. I was trying to use parity to show that what SM does isn’t actually reductio, because the positions that he claims we must take regarding his outlandish hypotheticals don’t logically follow from the principles of libertarianism.

              4. Overly provocative and baiting and often much too simplistic,

                Or you could just identify it as “retarded” and save time.

      3. Thank goodness we need those politicians to fund the means to stop an asteroid from wiping out all of us.

        Because as we all know, if we didn’t tax people to save their asses from an extinction level event, it would never be done, what with everyone in society wanting to die and all.

        This is what i believe is called a false choice-fallacy, government worshipping dummy.

        1. Dude, I imagine he was joking, playing on the “I hate everything government” does stuff.

          Fundamentalists are nearly always folks who cannot laugh at something they believe in…

          1. “Fundamentalists are nearly always folks who cannot laugh at something they believe in…”

            People who are starving because someone enforces “taste” also seem to lack a sense of humor.
            Funny, isn’t it? Why, it’s not anything serious! The guy is just, well, expressing superior perceptions!
            Ha, ha.

      4. So it’s better do something rather than nothing? Even if it makes things worse? Even it causes harm?

        Perfection is the enemy of good.

        Reality is imperfect. Trying to create perfection on earth has led to all sorts of fascist nightmares… including Nazism.

        Don’t you fricking get it?

      5. Just admit your hatred of individualism, SM… you’ll feel better.

        1. Just admit your hatred of democracy and minorities, you’ll feel better.

          1. SM|2.5.11 @ 6:45PM|#
            “Just admit your hatred of democracy and minorities, you’ll feel better.”

            Lies repeated by ignoramuses are, well lies repeated by ignoramuses.

          2. Post proof of my “hatred for minorities”, prick.

            As for pure democracy… damn right I don’t like it.

    4. In a strong rebuke of President Obama and his domestic agenda, all 242 House Republicans voted Wednesday to repeal the Asteroid Destruction and American Preservation Act, which was signed into law last year to destroy the immense asteroid currently hurtling toward Earth.

      And the asteroid is only heading this way because of a conspiracy among corporashuns, libertarians and Dick Cheney.

      The want to destroy humanity so that they can have a fresh start for libertopia.

      And Bush, it’s really Bush’s fault.

  32. I dunno guys, before going on a two minute hate I guess I’d want to see that quote in context. If it was at the end of some rant about consumerism then I seriously doubt it was some homage to Cuba’s dictatorship…

    1. “If it was at the end of some rant about consumerism then I seriously doubt it was some homage to Cuba’s dictatorship…”

      And that would make it less ridiculous?

      1. He’s lamenting the kitsch of consumerism as a lamentable by-product of capitalism, notes he’s going to a place that is a non-capitalist society, notes his interest in seeing a place with a lack of the kitsch, and then laments that as soon as that system perishes the relentless forces of capitalism will introduce the kitsch the very next day.

        That’s what he could be getting at.

        Lamenting the “coarsening” effect of capitalism is not exactly something new and unheard of. You do know it was something quite popular with conservatives a while back, especially European ones, right?

        1. I don’t know what context could possibly change the suggestion that he seems to prefer Castro’s Cuba to a nation where all the ’57 Chevys get replaced with Pontiac Vibes.

          Oh, wait, I see where you’re going with this.

          1. He doesn’t say he prefers “Castro’s Cuba” only that he would like to see the place before it becomes filled with cheap consumer goods.

            1. “…before it becomes filled with cheap consumer goods.”

              Like, oh, Big Macs? Food? That sort of “cheap consumer goods”.
              The only reason Cuba would ‘become flooded’ is because the Cuban want that stuff. And you (and he) would deny them that because of some sleazy, false presumption of superior “taste”.
              You are a sorry excuse for a supposed moral agent.

              1. I wouldn’t deny them that. He likely would, but he doesn’t think it’s good for them, so there’s that. And I’m a poor moral agent because, what, I don’t hate him for taking that stance? Fuck you dude.

                1. MNG|2.4.11 @ 9:58PM|#
                  “I wouldn’t deny them that. He likely would, but he doesn’t think it’s good for them, so there’s that.”
                  Oh, so you’re only defending somesone who would? Why, I guess that makes you only somewhat sleazy?

                  “And I’m a poor moral agent because, what, I don’t hate him for taking that stance? Fuck you dude.”
                  No, you’re a *sleazy* moral agent because or your desire to direct others to starve to death for your fucking “taste” asshole. Up yours.

                2. Fuck you dude.

                  Science, MNG! I have attempted to call you every name in the book, and don’t think I have ever made Mr Nice Guy tell me to fuck off.

                  [Salutes sevo]

                  1. “I have attempted to call you every name in the book, and don’t think I have ever made Mr Nice Guy tell me to fuck off.”
                    Holding up a mirror works best.

            2. You’re answering the set up to my joke?

        2. MNG|2.4.11 @ 9:36PM|#
          “He’s lamenting the kitsch of consumerism as a lamentable by-product of capitalism, notes he’s going to a place that is a non-capitalist society, notes his interest in seeing a place with a lack of the kitsch, and then laments that as soon as that system perishes the relentless forces of capitalism will introduce the kitsch the very next day….”

          Yep, that damn kitsch! Horrible! Starvation and political prisons are so romantic by comparison.

          1. You make that conclusion for him. He doesn’t say “Cuba is great, it’s going to be so terrible when it’s invaded by kitsch.” Whatever else he feels about Cuba is not indicated in the quote at all, all that is indicated is that the second it is not stopped from happening the kitsch will flow right into it.

            You’re conjuring the devils in your head at this point.

            1. “You’re conjuring the devils in your head at this point.”

              Yep, all in my head:
              “I want to experience the country and its people before that Pandora’s box is opened there.”
              He could “experience” Cuba quite easily; go to a really run-down part of the US and eat two slices of bread per day. And try to get some other folks to do the same, if they stop laughing.
              Sorry, it ain’t “Pandora’s box” that he’s avoiding; it’s some decent standard of living.

              1. Some people don’t like how gaudy consumer capitalism seems. He’s saying he’s going on a trip to a place known, by both sides, to be without much of that and he hopes to check that out before it goes away. Really, one doesn’t have to read some homage to any element of Cuba other than it’s lack of consumer culture there, and even here we don’t know from simply that quote if he thinks that is great or just curious as to what a society without that looks like.

                Look, I think liberal hate of “consumer culture” is lame. I like Wal-mart and McDonalds and I like Times Square, I’ve rebuked Chad on H&R when he starts to run down “McMansions.” But I’m not interested in a two minute hate on a guy for a two sentence quote without knowing more on where he stands. There are lots of idiots on the left like Sean Penn and Oliver Stone who have shamefully and stupidly lent support to the thuggish regime in Cuba. Unless I have better evidence Spurlock is similarly morally retarded I would be fair to him.

                1. MNG|2.4.11 @ 9:57PM|#
                  “Some people don’t like how gaudy consumer capitalism seems….”

                  And you (and he) would use the awesome power of the government to enforce your taste!
                  Sleazy doesn’t begin to describe that.

                2. going on a trip to a place known, by both sides, to be without much of that

                  No. Not ‘without’ much of that.

                  “that” has been removed, and excluded (except for the ‘betters’) by force – often the force of death.

                  I understand the human curiosity and interest in unnatural physical situations, but please don’t pretend that it’s anything other than a ghoulish practice, akin to looking at a body mangled horribly by the physics of an automobile crash.

                  There’s no ‘art’ there.

                3. Supersize Me was a two-hour hate against McDonalds. Why? Because they offer certain food that will make you sick if you eat it for every meal of every day.

                  NEWS FLASH: You need variety in your diet. If Spurlock had eaten a McSalad a day along with the Big Mac (which, as I pointed out above, existed for years prior to his fucking movie), and he still suffered severe health effects, then he may have had a point. As it is, his movie was nothing but mental masturbation for the I-hateses-coprorationz! crowd.

                  And now he’s stating that Times Square has too many ads. Go to Alaska, asshole. You’ll see miles and miles of ad-free land.

                  If the douchebag had an ounce of integrity, he’d admit that Cuba has plenty of advertising, just of a different kind. Fuck him.

                  1. My 10:03 comment was directed to MNG @ 9:57. And I’m not upset with you, MNG, I know you were just describing how some people feel.

                    I even understand that people can get sick of billboards, etc. My point was that there are plenty of options that don’t involve forcing people to obey your aesthetic demands.

                    1. My urban planner brother-in-law refuses to take the beach bypass to Gulf Shores because it is littered with billboards. What an ass.

                    2. Good. Keeps one idiot off the road.

                  2. I liked the film. I went into it thinking it was going to be about those lawsuits at the time blaming McDonalds for obesity. He didn’t change my mind on that but he did bring up some interesting side notes imo, for example I saw the film as much more critical of soda overconsumption than McDonalds, his points about the awfulness of school lunches and vending machines, his point about the advertising budget of Pespi alone being 200 times greater than the ad budget for fruits and vegetables combined, his point about how little the average American walks (1 mile a day, 4 miles a day for the average new yorker)….

                    I get your point about diversity in his diet (but he did that didn’t he? Iirc he had to order everything on the menu at least once or something), but if you run an establishment that claims to offer meals then it is not a good thing that eating those meals consistently will kill you…

                    1. “I get your point about diversity in his diet”
                      You obviously don’t:
                      “but if you run an establishment that claims to offer meals then it is not a good thing that eating those meals consistently will kill you…”
                      ‘Nuff said.

                    2. his point about the advertising budget of Pespi alone being 200 times greater than the ad budget for fruits and vegetables combined,

                      Are you really this dim? As if judging the ad budget of a soda company that sells worldwide versus a collection of independent farmers has any meaning whatsoever.

                      I have to ask you – Which company invented fruits and vegetables?

                      Does the nagging of every mother on the planet count as ‘advertising’? Or are you suggesting that minus a commercial ad campaign, humans simply won’t understand that its healthier to consume fruits and vegetables than it is to drink soda pop?

                      This is a cataclysmic level of ignorance.

                    3. I’m suggesting that advertising matters in getting people to purchase and consume one product over another. You know who agrees with me? Every major company in the world. So if a single soda company’s efforts in this area are 200 times the efforts of fruit sellers combined the latter are at a bit of a disadvantage.

                    4. You’re correct, if the products are related, such as Coke and Pepsi. That’s what Pepsi is spending the money on – influencing people to say the word “Pepsi” when they are ordering a sodanot when they’re ordering toppings for their salad.

                      But Spurlock doesn’t seem to understand a simple point like that, and you’re agreeing with him.

                      I asked you who invented fruits and vegetables for a reason – because, for those items, people don’t make purchase choices by brand name, they usually make more general choices according to the market (Whole Foods vs. Vons).

                      Might that explain the discrepancy in promotion? And if so, does it start to make sense that comparing the soda and vegetable ad markets is meaningless?

                  3. Those are educational public health notices, not advertising.

                4. Oh, I think that there is plenty of evidence that Spurlock is pretty morally retarded. Anybody who thinks they are fit to determine how others should eat and live is fairly obviously morally retarded.

        3. I don’t think conservatives would have used Cuba, of all places, as the proper example of a place that would be “ruined” by such kitsch.

          It takes a commie to do that.

          If only because a capitalist understands that prosperity is based on competition. And competition is based on making people believe your product is the best.

          The notion that Cuba can get economic prosperity without the mechanics necessary to achieve it, is a commie’s fantasy. Which is precisely why Cuba is what it is.

          As far as conservatives not understanding this.
          Guess what, a lot of them believe praying is going to get them in heaven, too.
          They believe morality can only be known by what was written on a bunch of stone tablets brought down by a man with a large beard.
          In other words, they’re dumbasses.

        4. European conservatives, if you mean the European right, have little in common with libertarians. They tend to be an extreme version of the Bush/Obama style corporatism that has marred the Japanese economy for two decades. They also tend to engage in fear mongering in the “they took err jobs” vein about immigrants.

          I don’t know much about Spurlock, and thought SuperSizeMe was interesting. But, I have no interest in European conservatives.

          1. The objection to immigration in Europe has nothing to do with jobs. It is about the inability of the societies to absorb and assimilate these minorities. The existence of huge unassimilated minorities is the problem, not jobs you fucking ignorant philistine.

            1. I largely agree but will note that a theme in the objection is that many European immigrants seem to not care for assimilation.

              1. I’m not sure a majority of Europeans care for it, either.

                On the one hand they make a fetish out of diversity and multi-culturalism, but on the other, they really aren’t that interested in living side by side with “lower class” immigrants, not that they would ever admit it that way (see “fetish” above), but in reality, yeah.

            2. “not jobs you fucking ignorant philistine.”

              Tony’s right for once, you are a prick. In fact, he’s less insulting towards me when I say something he disagrees with. I actually agree with a lot of your posts, though.

              Do the two have to be mutually exclusive? Perhaps the immigrants are kept from assimilating because because nativists want to protect their jobs.

              1. Then you and Tony should suck each others dicks and wallow in your own self-pity.

                If you can’t handle my rational approach to matters, then get off this thread.

                Now, I’m off to a Palin rally. It’s the only way to REALLY restore sanity.

        5. Re: MNG,

          He’s lamenting the kitsch of consumerism as a lamentable by-product of capitalism[…]

          … as many romantics and nostalgics have done in the past, MNG. There’s nothing new going on with this guy.

    2. at the end of some rant about consumerism

      You mean the consumerism that Spurlock practices? The consumerism based on attracting viewers via film and TV (ticket sales and ratings), rather than just sending a message for free on YouTube?

      If you knew how many different shows this guy has pitched, and what type of content, you would understand the hypocritical nature of the ‘rant’.

  33. Balko always goes for the low-hanging fruit. I think maybe Balko is a fucking fruit.

    1. Max|2.4.11 @ 9:32PM|#
      “Balko always goes for the low-hanging fruit.”

      Can’t be. You’d be the first target.

    2. Edward, homophobia doesn’t suit you…oh wait, yes it does.

    3. Ran Pual’s

    4. Max, no true liberal would ever deride people based on their sexuality.

      1. You saying I’m not true blue?

  34. I’m going to go ahead and treat this as the weekend free-for-all thread.

    In the spirit of the weekend check out these Ukrainian political activists (NSFW).

    1. Have you never noticed that all threads here are free-for-all threads, idiot?

    2. Hey, Cossack funbags on display! Hows come our feminists don’t look like that?

      1. No idea, but I’m thinking female libertarians should take a few hints on effective ways to draw attention to the movement!

        1. “Female libertarians”. You’re funny.

          1. Ya know, it does seem to be a pretty freakin huge incentive to want Communism to fall in Cuba, aside from general ideological principle. Check it – befor the Wall came down, the only pictures of chicks that came out of the Soviet Union were matronly old babuskas, and after, bada-bing, it was an online pr0n bonanza. Imagine the new stock of babe-a-lisciousness to be savored coming from a tropical paradise. . .

            1. Imagine the new stock of babe-a-lisciousness to be savored coming from a tropical paradise. . .

              Or you could just hop a plane to Oahu and check out a lot of really hot women who look like Cubans …

            2. Iran and Cuba are to untapped babeness what ANWAR is to untapped oil.

          2. Fist of Etiquette|2.4.11 @ 9:56PM|#
            “Female libertarians”. You’re funny.

            They exist. Seriously, I know one.

            1. My boyfriend is dating one!

              1. oh yeah? well what’s her name?

          3. A lot of porn stars and exotic dancers have libertarian sentiments.

            …um, or so I’ve heard.

            1. A lot of whores do too. Check out the blogs of Maggie McNeill, Feminisnt, and Emily Hemingway.

              I can’t link all of these because of stupid squirrels.

        2. Bingo|2.4.11 @ 9:51PM|#

          No idea, but I’m thinking female libertarians should take a few hints on effective ways to draw attention to the movement!

          Ew, creepy.

          1. Yeah actually, considering the average American BMI it might not be such a good idea.

    3. I have no idea what it is that they’re protesting, but whtever it is, they have my full support.

      1. they have my full support

        Fucking bras…how do they work?

      2. I’m for it. Or against it. Whatever the right one is.

        1. they’re marxists. are you sure?

          1. I’ll volunteer to go undercover.

    4. “FEMEN calls on the international commu ignore the clumsy blunders of our President, and once again reminds the world that Ukraine is not a brothel, and Ukrainian women are not prostitutes.”

      “Yanovich energetically promoting FEMEN and may not include Ukraine. We dismiss our incompetent PR man Yanukovych without severance pay, our Pr-manager – Karl Marx!”

      In their defense, at least some of their incoherence is due to Google Translate. I wish our incoherent feminists had tits this nice, though.

      1. According to Wikipedia, they go topless as a protest against sex tourism. Uh…yeah.

        1. Yeah, I gathered that. I like their strategy.

    5. There is snow on the ground!

  35. I’m helping Canadians now. You Americans are so beyond hope.

    http://www.cbc.ca/politics/ins…..fight.html

    1. And all you need to know is right here:
      “Vale’s takeover of Inco was approved by Ottawa in 2007”
      One rent seeker arguing with another, and that fat turd tossing in his 2-centavos.

  36. Alert! Alert! Alert! It is the end times! How do we know this?

    “Breaking News….”

    *waits with anticipation – Mubarek quit, perhaps?*

    “Sarah Palin speaking at Ronald Reagan 100th birthday celebration….”

    You’re. Fucking. KIDDING. This is “breaking news”, “stop the other shit that was on and show this” news?

    Really? And there she is yakking away with what sounds like…the same speech she always gives. Fuck….

    Get right with yourself or your imaginary lord, whichever way you swing, cause it’s all over….

    Now – back to your regularly scheduled programming!

    1. Busted! You were watching O’Reilly weren’t you? There’s only one channel right now that cut away for Palin’s “speech”.

    2. Why do you watch cable news? They have to have programing for all 24 hours in the day. That is pretty hard to do. So they either make “news” out of stories no one cares about or they show the same film of some guy burning something in Cairo over and over again.

      1. I think that Almanian may be Canadian. All that they have on the teevee is hockey, Red Green, and the news.

        Wait, that sounds pretty good.

        1. Red Green is the 21st Centuries Canadian Benny Hill.

        2. I am still angry at Canadians for not allowing the export of Tim Horton doughnuts.

          1. There’s a Tim Horton’s at Consol Energy Center…

            1. So there is one at a Hockey arena in Pittsburgh. That pretty much is Canada isn’t it?

              1. Yup…and it’s awesome.

      2. They have to have programing for all 24 hours in the day. That is pretty hard to do. So they either make “news” out of stories no one cares about or they show the same film of some guy burning something in Cairo over and over again.

        And yet almost no one will give Radley Balko or his reports airtime. Ok, here’s one where I’ll agree with the lefties: market fail.

  37. Remember how Cleveland is a dump and Reason was trying to help fix it? No need, it’s fixed now.

    1. Because they have a fucking greenhouse in a mall? WTF is wrong with people…

    2. “I know where my basil is coming from,” said manager Sara Ortiz-Martinez.

      And I know where my Basil is coming from.

    3. Meanwhile, the “Top Headline” next to this article says:

      MetroPark lake closed for fish deaths

      Shadow Lake in the Cleveland MetroParks is closed until further notice.

  38. Right now, I’m planning a trip to Cuba. I want to experience the country and its people before that Pandora’s box is opened there. Because you know after the day Fidel dies, the shipments of American consumer crap will come flooding in.

    I thought it would be Chinese consumer crap flooding in… you know, from that other communist country?

  39. Oh come on, this is totally unfair, and I’m no fan of Spurlock. Equating advertising/marketing with capitalism is just asinine. I am a die hard capitalist, but I absolutely hate marketing. As the great Bill Hicks said, if you are involved with marketing, KILL YOURSELF.

    It’s sad that anyone would consider Times Square great because of the advertising festooned over every inch of it. That’s not why Times square is great. It’s great because it’s an iconic, historic place where America has celebrated the ends of wars and the triumphs of heroic American acheivements, from Lindberg’s flight to the moon landing. There’s also the historic NY Times news ticker, which before the age of the internet was the most current source of news for many Americans.

    That’s why Times Square is great, not because of a 200 foot tall Starbucks sign.

    I hate all advertising, mostly because it’s annoying and 99% of it (anything beyond showing a mere logo) is fraudulent. The only legitimate advertising is bona fide word of mouth. Everything else should be a felony. And I hate communism. Communists don’t inherently oppose marketing, they simply have nothing to market. Saying someone is a communist because they hate marketing is like saying someone is a dolphin because they hate jogging. Stupid.

    1. yes, because something annoys you it should be a felony. And marketing is capitalism. Saying you can’t market is another way of saying you can’t do business or you have to do business the way the state tells you to.

      Yes Bruce, you hate freedom.

        1. Mmmmm Maura Tierney…

          1. Mmmmm Rather’s blog …

              1. helle-did I piss you off? Aww sorry baby.

                1. Fuck Off!

                  Fuck Off!

                  Fuck Off!

                  I hate me!

                  1. helle baby! That’s more than you wrote on my blog today!
                    Come back and comment 🙁

                    1. Doctor, the delusional episodes have become more and more frequent. What are my options?

                    2. helle, come on admit it…

                    3. Admit that you’re a delusional cow with self esteem issues?

                    4. No, I’ll never deny that you are a delusion cow with self esteem issues. It’s 100% true.

        2. He confuses the Constitution with the Declaration of Independence. Was that intentional, or unintentional by the writers?

      1. WTF? Nowhere did Bruce say he wanted to outlaw marketing, he just said he found most of it stupid. He hates freedom because he finds it stupid?

        Your just looking for enemies under every bed. You hate freedom! Outrage, outrage, Islamic socialism, argh!

        1. Oh OK, he did say it should be a felony, my bad. So let me turn that WTF around, a felony dude? I hate a good chunk of marketing too, but a felony?

          Don’t watch the Super Bowl being televised it’ll be like a crime spree.

          1. My bad includes “sorry John” if that wasn’t clear, I was accusing him of jumping to conclusions and yet it was me, so, egg on my face!

            1. We’re all just so relieved that you stopped short of equating the Super Bowl with a spike in domestic violence, dropping to Eric Holder levels of gratuitous myth making.

            2. Is that egg a part of Denny’s “Moons Over My Hammy” sandwich? Or how about a delicious “Denny’s Grand Slam” – perfect for starting out your day! Add a bottomless cup of Coffee and a glass of refreshing Orange Juice for only 2.75 extra!

    2. Marketting serves a very valuable purpose! You’d miss a LOT of TV if it wasn’t there providing the opportunity for pee breaks and refilling your beer. Which is pretty much the same thing with most beers that are advertised.

      1. Really, for example, the TV advertising for the “trendy and hip” pseudo micro brew named after some guy alive when the 3d Amendment was a genuine concern. Going on about their latest “trendy and hip” specialty product, featuring “Saigon” Cinnamon. THE new trendy and hip variety of cinnamon. Likely because the totally missed the last fad, or couldn’t make it work, because “Chipotle” beer just flopped with the focus groups, and “Panko” beer never realized any noticeable flavor difference.

    3. So how does one start a new company, retard?

    4. Re: Bruce,

      Equating advertising/marketing with capitalism is just asinine.

      Nobody equates one with the other, Bruce. Advertising is just one more way the market provides information to potential consumers. That’s all.

      […]but I absolutely hate marketing.

      Well, that may be a reflection of your own derangement than of marketing itself.

  40. Some people object to marketing because of aesthetics (or a broader concern that “market forces” or “market values” begin to trump other societal values, aesthetics/tradition (preservation) being two such values. But I’ve also heard arguments that advertising subverts the entire rationale of capitalism. It goes like this. According to classical defenders of capitalism like Smith it is a good thing because competition among producers allows consumers to rationally choose the product and producer which serves them best, and this pressure to make a better mousetrap so to speak makes everyone better off. But advertising subverts this process by manipulating people, especially appealing to their irrationality, into buying inferior products. Or so the argument goes.

    1. The OJ defense: commercials made me do it!

      1. There must be some middle ground between the view that commercials brainwash people into losing their free will and the libertarian view that advertising has no effects on anyone and all those companies spend billions on it as a form of ad-sector charity.

        1. It isn’t that libertarians don’t think advertisements don’t effect people, it’s that libertarians don’t think advertisements are magical or very different from any other communication humans experience in their daily lives. An advertisement has as much, but probably less of, an effect on you as this conversation. I say probably less because you are involved in this conversation, you are digesting what I’m saying. You don’t have to do that with a commercial, you can just tune it out. Any subliminal meaning in a commercial is no more effecting you than a subliminal meaning in this conversation. Yet advertisements get singled out as bad because, drumroll please, teh corporashunz are doing it.

          1. An advertisement has as much, but probably less of, an effect on you as this conversation.

            So the companies paying for advertising are idiots and wasting their money?

            1. No, when did I say that?

            2. No, the companies have not yet figured out how to engage you in a one on one conversation that would be vastly more effective than mass marketed commercials.

              1. prole, see time shares…

        2. MNG|2.5.11 @ 9:21PM|#
          “There must be some middle ground between the view that commercials brainwash people into losing their free will and the libertarian view that advertising has no effects on anyone and all those companies spend billions on it as a form of ad-sector charity.”

          Yep, you’d like a “middle ground” that lets you and other brain-deads define what people read, see or hear. You don’t want a “middle ground”, you want “censorship”.
          Here, read the 1st Amendment:
          “…Congress shall make no law…”
          Is that clear?

    2. Free shit!

    3. The word irrationality and decision theory are not compatible with humans. People make decisions based on need/want/information. There is nothing irrational about anyone of those trumping another. You just have a different proportionality of the three for the same purchase.

      I’ve heard the argument, it falls apart under any scrutiny and is at the foundation of most progressive beliefs that people aren’t rationale and need some superior intellect to guide them. I call bullshit.

      1. People are, in fact, often irrational. The only escape from the countless studies and historical events demonstrating this is to retreat into some Austrian economics non-falsifiable definition of “rationality” that covers every possible choice anyone made (past tense since these guys love the after-the-fact explanation).

        1. Saying people are irrational over and over isn’t going to make it true.

          You don’t need every contingency to prove individuals act rationally given the information they have at the time, their desire at the time and whatever needs they have at the time.

          You just think you are better at making those decisions. given the same information. (I should include information includes the ability to understand and use that information.)

          1. You don’t need every contingency to prove individuals act rationally given the information they have at the time, their desire at the time and whatever needs they have at the time.

            You just think you are better at making those decisions. given the same information.

            Then how do you explain democratic-socialists winning political elections?

            1. The promise of free shit.

            2. Information gap, asymmetric information, immediate wants fulfilled

              Really not rocket science. As the person below demonstrates.

              1. Make that person above, “free shit” comment.

          2. Axiomatically and tautologically saying people are rational after the fact isn’t going to make that so either.

            1. I didn’t peg you for a Creationist.

            2. Congratulations on saying what I said with slightly larger words. I guess that’s the difference the PhD makes.

              How about arguing information gaps (including the ability to use the information), and needs and wants aren’t part of decision making and that people at the time of a decision make a rational decision based on those metrics. Or show one time people don’t do so.

        2. Saying people are irrational over and over isn’t going to make it true.

          You don’t need every contingency to prove individuals act rationally given the information they have at the time, their desire at the time and whatever needs they have at the time.

          You just think you are better at making those decisions. given the same information. (I should include information includes the ability to understand and use that information.)

          1. Here’s the “gambler’s fallacy”, a mistake that psychological research has shown over and over people are prone to make. Is it rational?

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler‘s_fallacy

            1. Not if you’ve read about the Gambler’s fallacy, and have any mathematical capability.

              Why no concern for seemingly ‘irrational’ behavior when people fall in love? Shouldn’t we have a government authority to specify which people should pair in a relationship?

              Head outside Vegas for a bit, and stroll across the newly built bridge over Hoover Dam.

              Why is the cement beneath this bridge not littered with bodies? After all, you’re asserting that people don’t behave in a rational manner.

              In this context, there are only two groups of bodies at the bottom of the ravine: Suicides and those who have made physical errors. The former are termed “irrational” (depending on the circumstances), and the latter are termed “accidents”.

              If, as you suggest, humans are not rational, how do you explain the difference in the rate of bodies under bridges and those failing the gambler’s fallacy?

              It seems as though you wish to define ‘rational behavior’ by labeling ‘people’ (somehow you and your supported political candidates excluded) generally ‘irrational’, without the ability to put forth a consistent definition.

              The profitability of such a scheme is obvious to all, rational or not.

            2. And people that understand this fallacy and give it credence don’t rationally don’t fall prey to it while those who do not understand it or even know what it is do. That is not irrational, it’s a lack of information. You don’t even have to understand the theory behind the fallacy to understand that not knowing about it or not understanding it is not a signal of irrationality and just a lack of information and understanding.

              1. What would be irrational? Someone understanding the theory and continuing with the fallacy. Kind of like the entire New Keynesian economic crowd. Maybe that’s the root of the problem after all…

            3. MNG|2.6.11 @ 2:30PM|#
              “Here’s the “gambler’s fallacy”, a mistake that psychological research has shown over and over people are prone to make. Is it rational?”

              And if you’d like even more laughable attempts at ‘proving’ irrationality, pick up a copy of “Predictable Irrationality” wherein the author *PROVES* that college students forced to make snap decisions sometimes make choices that third parties find irrational!
              How amazing!

              1. Oh god I forgot about that.

                /facepalm^nth

        3. MNG|2.5.11 @ 9:23PM|#
          ‘People are, in fact, often irrational.”
          Definition, please.

        4. Since when does austrian economics insist on hyperrationality?

          1. It never does. But then again anything that isn’t aggregated to the point of absurdity is clearly hyper in some eyes.

    4. Re: MNG,

      […]I’ve also heard arguments that advertising subverts the entire rationale of capitalism. It goes like this[:] […] advertising subverts this [Capitalist] process by manipulating people, especially appealing to their irrationality, into buying inferior products. Or so the argument goes.

      That would explain the Ad Council, then.

      What’s there less worthy of anybody’s money than whatever the government offers? Yet here were are! Being manipulated!

    5. I object to the majority of advertising, as lowest common denominator shit. But, rather than call for it’s demise I just ignore it.

  41. Jews

    1. are awesome.

      1. for appetizers.

        1. Mmmm gefilte fish and matzah ball soup.

          1. Latkes: apple sauce or cream cheese?

            1. Def apple sauce.

            2. They usually go with sour cream, not cream cheese.

              1. Sorry, I meant sour cream. I’m lapsed.

  42. You could make a really good argument that many goods would flow the other direction. You know how many vintage cars are still truckin’ around cuban cities?

  43. National Geographic has already outdone him. They had a pictorial a few months ago recreating from maps what New York looked like when it was mostly forest. There’s a picture of future Times Square with nothing but, like, a marsh and a moose and a beaver dam.

    1. There’s a picture of future Times Square with nothing but, like, a marsh and a moose mosque and a beaver dam.

      FIFY

      END TIMEZ!!!!!

    2. Reminds me of the short lived TV series New Amsterdam. Has a cool intro showing the evolution of Times Square, which the protagonist personally witnesses beginning from the marsh/moose/beaver days.

    3. Hmm, I wrote future instead of past. I shouldn’t be allowed to post until my third cup of coffee.

  44. Does Spurlock’s vision include the ability to scope out a sexy barrista while getting his latte? (Work Safe) I think not.

  45. But advertising subverts this process by manipulating people, especially appealing to their irrationality, into buying inferior products.

    Umm, yeah. And a carnival hypnotist can make you fly.

  46. This is cool: When you line up the various McBain clips from the Simpsons, you get a mini-movie with an actual storyline.

    McBain

    1. So I see Die Hard, every Arnold Schwarzenegger movie, and Lethal Weapon in there. What did I miss?

  47. “The safety of the traveling public is our top priority, and we will not negotiate on security,” Mr. Pistole said in a statement. “But morale and employee engagement cannot be separated from achieving superior security.”

    The International Brotherhood of Petty Tyrants salutes you, Mister Pistole!

    1. Pistole deserves a “Real Men of Genius” song. Here’s to you, Mr. Gives Up Essential Liberty for a Little Temporary Safety Guy.

  48. Completely off-topic and ire inducing –

    Chrysler in talks to refinance U.S. debt

    Chrysler Group LLC Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne said Friday the automaker was in talks to refinance its bailout loans, and criticized the government for charging the company “shyster” rates.

    Marchionne has said that Chrysler paid $1.2 billion in interest on its government loans and other obligations in 2010, resulting in an annual net loss of $652 million. Chrysler made $763 million on an operating basis, which excludes interest and taxes.

    “I am paying shyster rates,” Marchionne said Friday. Chrysler had no choice in 2009 but to pay the high interest rates the government set in its $15 billion bailout of Chrysler, he said, calling the loans “a thorn in my side.”

    Wait, it gets better –

    Marchionne is hopeful that Chrysler can win an agreement in principle for a $3 billion low-cost loan through a U.S. Energy Department program meant to help auto companies build more fuel efficient vehicles.

    That loan is necessary for Chrysler to win private financing, he said.

    1. shyster rates? Did anyone ask Sergio Marchionne if mob rates are cheaper?

    2. Ford is the only really American car company left.

      GM is doing well now but almost entirely because of China. We basically bailed them out so they could make China priority #1 and fuck us over.

      Chrysler is just a back door for Fiat to re-enter the market (God help us!)

  49. Is there nothing we cannot criminalize?

    Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul was the sole “no” vote Thursday night on a measure that would make it a federal crime to aim a handheld laser pointer at an aircraft.

    The measure, offered by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) as an amendment to a measure on funding the Federal Aviation Administration, passed on a 96-to-1 vote, with three senators not present. It would call for anyone who knowingly aims the beam of a laser pointer at an aircraft to face fines or a prison term of up to five years.
    hier

    1. Our planes are so fragile that a couple photons are going to bring them down?

      1. Not sure, can it confuse the autopilot landing system?

      2. Our planes are so fragile that a couple photons are going to bring them down?

        No, but it shouldn’t be legal to blind pilots, which is what a higher wattage laser can accomplish – even from the ground.

        I don’t have a problem with this measure, as it criminalizes an action that can cause physical harm. (pilots need to have unobstructed vision out of the aircraft)

        There’s also no constructive purpose other than mayhem for shining a laser at an aircraft. At least not one I can think of.

        I’m actually shocked that they didn’t try to enact a permitting scheme, complete with fees and fines, for anybody that purchases a laser.

        1. Apogee|2.5.11 @ 4:30PM|#
          “Our planes are so fragile that a couple photons are going to bring them down?

          No, but it shouldn’t be legal to blind pilots, which is what a higher wattage laser can accomplish – even from the ground.”

          Agreed. I’d like to hear why the “no” vote. This sounds like a legitimate government function unless I’m missing something.

          1. no federal police power. Should be state law.

            1. “no federal police power. Should be state law.”
              That’s what I was missing. Thanks.

            2. no federal police power. Should be state law.

              I think you may be incorrect about that. According to USC 40103

              1) The United States Government has exclusive sovereignty of airspace of the United States.

              The crux of the argument rests, IMO, on whether the laser is actually traversing the airspace on its way to the airplane.

              There is no question that the practice interferes with the proper use of the airspace.

              Even the Cops need FAA permission:

              For now, the use of drones for high-risk operations is exceedingly rare. The Federal Aviation Administration – which controls the national airspace – requires the few police departments with drones to seek emergency authorization if they want to deploy one in an actual operation. Because of concerns about safety, it only occasionally grants permission.

    2. The light scatters when it hits the cockpit glass and can be very bright at night. It messes with the pilots’ night vision and startles them. Worst that would probably ever happen would be for the pilot to abort a landing and circle around to let his eyes readjust.

      1. Worst that would probably ever happen would be for the pilot to abort a landing and circle around to let his eyes readjust.

        No, the worst could possibly be an aircraft crash, depending on the weather and approach position of the aircraft at the time of the pulse.

        If you shine a laser at someone’s eye, AFAIC, that person can respond as though you’re trying to blind them.

  50. “I am paying shyster rates,”

    Call Kindly Old Grandpa Buffett, and see what sort of terms he offers you.

  51. Speaking of Communists, this link is dedicated to all China worshippers, but especially Tom Friedman:

    http://chinageeks.org/2011/01/…..ideo-card/

    Use the second embedded video (the first one was blocked by the Chinese govt) and read the translations.

    Anybody got Friedman’s email, btw?

  52. Goddamnit, the link didn’t work, just go to chinageeks.org and click on the “Little Rabbit, Be Good” link.

  53. That Morgan Spurlock in alive means only one thing. Big Macs are not nearly lethal enough.

  54. May I join your feces-throwing party?

    1. I want free shit!

  55. Release the second chakra!

    Morning….er, afternoon Reasonoids.

  56. Release the second chakra!

    Morning….er, afternoon Reasonoids.

  57. Commenter “Plate-O” had a good idea – recreate Times Square in Spurlockian fashion. As I point out on the thread, it’s not like Communist countries lack billboards, they just aren’t put up by companies. So I recreated Times Square with billboards sure to get the Spurlock seal of approval.

    1. Not bad, but you need several HUGE posters with Obama’s mug on them, celibrating his wonderful reign.
      You could call him Dear Leader, just off the top of my head.

      1. I was thinking about putting Michelle on the broccoli one, but it was already small and hard to read…

  58. I hate that Spurlock bastard, I hated his idiotic 30 Day shows where they make politically incorrect people live with politically correct people so they can learn how wrong they are.

    And most of all, I hate Americans who love Cuba. If they like it so much why don’t they move there permanently? Why don’t they find out what happens when you disagree with Castro and his thugs?

    http://politicallyincorrectlibertarial.com

    1. LOL! I didn’t know you had a blog, Greg.

      Do you have a newsletter that I could sign up for?

    2. Sorry,”politicallyincorrectlibertarial.com” does not exist or is not available.

      dumbass

    3. I hate Americans who love Cuba

      What, you don’t think it’s possible to love a country while despising its government?

      -jcr

      1. Is it possible to love Nazi Germany while despising Hitler? No, it’s not possible, you either love freedom or hate freedom.

  59. “I am a die hard capitalist, but…”

    Actually, you’re a miserable lefty who hopes someone will like you anyhow, right?

  60. “But advertising subverts this process by manipulating people, especially appealing to their irrationality, into buying inferior products. Or so the argument goes.”

    It’s a good thing you tossed in the qualifier at the end, otherwise folks might think you believe that happy horse-shit.
    You bet people can be mislead by marketing. Why look at what happened in the 2008 elections! So should we outlaw anything that comes out of Obama’s mouth?

  61. “I’ve heard the argument, it falls apart under any scrutiny and is at the foundation of most progressive beliefs that people aren’t rationale and need some superior intellect to guide them.”

    I once challenged MNG to show a difference between want and need, beyond the obvious of food and water.
    He couldn’t, and that pernicious belief that regressives can define what people need is a large foundation of regressive politics.

    1. Yeah, besides food, water, shelter, etc….Those are pretty big besides. But apart from them the idea that some things are “better” than others for living the good life is as old as Aristotle dude.

      1. MNG|2.6.11 @ 2:34PM|#
        “Yeah, besides food, water, shelter, etc….Those are pretty big besides.”

        IOWs, you still can’t separate need from want.
        Go away duuuuuuuuuuuude.

    2. All needs are wants but not all wants are needs. That’s the difference. I assume that was already said or assumed.

  62. Right now, I’m planning a trip to Cuba. I want to experience the country and its people before that Pandora’s box is opened there. Because you know after the day Fidel dies, the shipments of American consumer crap will come flooding in.

    Well, that makes him an ascetic prude more than a commie.

  63. Spurlock’s violent rhetoric has caused this tragedy, or stupidity…

    I say send in a team and wipe them out. The fat ones book-ending the group are huge fucking targets. I’m bettin’ they’re pretty slow moving as well.

    1. They kidnapped Ronald McDonald? What’s next, the fucking Easter Bunny?

      1. I’d like to see them try. The Easter Bunny is a hard ass!

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO-QqRJOi9U

  64. Cleveland = New Las Vegas

    I wonder what the tax breaks and incentives look like.

    1. Probably something like this:

      http://www.nj.com/business/ind…..es_wi.html

      What the article doesn’t mention, is that there’s a law that allows the residents of AC to force a referendum on certain projects. In an unusual alliance between the casino workers union, Unite-HERE, conservative politician Steve Lonegan, state director of “Americans For Prosperity”, and the Sierra Club, enough signatures were collected to force a referendum on continuing the Revel project. The City of AC refused to act. So, it went to court where a Superior Court judge ordered the City to verify the signatures and make preparations for a vote. Not more that month after the ruling, the State Legislature enacted a law which prohibits local referendums on any projects receiving State Stimulus Funds.

      The $260 million over 20 years in tax reimbursement isn’t really that much, but it’s enough to stop the referendum.

      I’m not necessarily a fan of referendums, but this is just a weasel way around the laws that were enacted in good faith when the casino act was enacted in the 70s.

      The odd thing is, Morgan Stanley agreed to write down the $1 billion note for $20 million in cash. I guess they are expecting some QE4 or 5, whatever we’re on, now.

      Statism? Mercantilism? Socialism? What it sure-as-shit isn’t, is free market Capitalism.

  65. I know what Spurlock means. I constantly regret not taking the opportunity to visit China before they instituted market reforms, or India before they did the same. Watching people live in utter destitution, in a hand-to-mouth existence, is a truly beautiful thing that you really can’t replicate in a western, capitalist country. Luckily, I can still go to Africa and see horrific poverty caused by idiotic socialist kleptocracies.

    1. Are you threatening me?

  66. He also just made an entire film completely financed by corporations. So strange that you don’t mention that, but I guess that wouldn’t serve your purpose now would it. You ever stop to consider that this guy, much like yourself, actually just wants people to think for themselves?

    1. Thinking for yourself is fine. Espousing one thing while doing another is usually seen as a sign of being either an idiot, or a lying shitball.

      1. Espousing one thing while doing another is usually seen as a sign of being either an idiot, or a lying shitball hypocrisy.

        1. I reserve hypocrisy for those that aren’t idiots or lying shitballs.

    2. Mikhail|2.5.11 @ 5:06PM|#
      “He also just made an entire film completely financed by corporations. So strange that you don’t mention that, but I guess that wouldn’t serve your purpose now would it.”
      Well, what it really does is make him a hypocrite.

      “You ever stop to consider that this guy, much like yourself, actually just wants people to think for themselves?”
      Yeah, and if they don’t think (like him), he’s willing to use a gun to make them.
      Slight difference, but you seem to miss it.

    3. You ever stop to consider that this guy, much like yourself, actually just wants people to think for themselves?
      reply to this

      No. He wants to make money, like every other greedy Capitalist, including myself.

  67. If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it 5000 times. This week!

  68. Ha ha. Glibertarian douchebags have minds so tiny that their alternative to a landscape stuffed with cheese-dick advertising for tourists is Pyongyang’s landscape. Ha ha.

    I swear, you guys are two books shy of being Juggalos.

    1. Books, how the fuck do they work?

      1. Orel once again proves the dangers of anti-capitalism.

        1. Getting off your knees and taking capital’s cock out of your mouth is definitely dangerous — it’s dangerous to retarded false binary ideas like the kind you prefer.

          See, there’s about a million miles of potential difference between a Times Square that looks like Pyongyang and a Times Square that shoves an endless epileptic fit of ugly crap in tourists’ faces.

          That fact, of course, would be lost on dimwit libertarians, who are little more than the beaten wives of capital:

          “He loves me. Those ads aren’t filled with lies and he doesn’t sell poison. I hope he puts ads on the moon. It’s communism to object! Slurp slurp slurp.”

          Ha ha.

          1. So much hate. I blame those damn video games, rap music, and vitriolic political discourse.

          2. there’s about a million miles of potential difference between a Times Square that looks like Pyongyang and a Times Square that shoves an endless epileptic fit of ugly crap in tourists’ faces.

            And each mile a toll road operated by a “concerned” third party that constitutes a business whose sole product is the restriction of freedom.

            Nice work if you can get it.

            1. Yes, absolutely. Preferring that ads covered less than 100% of all available surfaces is exactly like creating millions of freedom-destroying toll booths.

              It’s so true!

              P.S. http://tinyurl.com/ybsfnux

              1. I’d prefer zero adds, but I’m not willing to force anyone to use their property in a way they don’t intend.

                Most libertarians like toll booths when they are attached to private companies with no connection to a government. I know, confusing as hell isn’t it.

              2. Preferring that ads covered less than 100% of all available surfaces is exactly like creating millions of freedom-destroying toll booths.

                No. Preferring’s got nothing to do with it. You can prefer all day and it won’t do shit.

                What you’re talking about is forcing behavior, but you need to lie in a lame attempt to refute the point.

                You act like anyone with property is powerless to stop advertisements from “covering every surface”, which of course means that the state must charge people for the right.

                Restricting behavior is a profitable business – but somehow you’re embarrassed to admit it’s your focus and feel the need to lie that you only ‘prefer’ some subjective level of ad space.

                1. My subjective level is this much.

                  |————————|

  69. It’s a mother fuckin’ “learning experience.” /facepalm

    http://www.wtae.com/r/26747605/detail.html

    1. “We don’t allow that, whether it be Penguins, Pirates, Panthers, Steelers. It’s something we just don’t do,” he said.

      OBEY OR DIE!!!

      1. “…they were flaunting authority.”

        If that’s an actual quote, I think the principal needs a “learning experience.” Also, who the fuck are the Panthers?

        1. Pitt’s teams are called the Panthers. Although, for some reason, Pitt insists on being called The University of Pittsburgh nowadays. Idiots.

          1. Ah, thanks. Do they actually include the the “The” when saying University of Pittsburgh? I’ve already given my reason for my undying hatred of Columbus, but emphasizing THE Ohio State University was the shit icing on the smegma cake of Buckeye-land.

            1. I don’t think so, but I make it a point to forget as much as possible about Pittsburgh. Try asking that shitweasel Tulpa, if you think you can tolerate the lecturing.

    2. Pittsburgh City High Students Suspended For Wearing Steelers Gear

      Why the fuck weren’t they tortured to death? Fucking Steelerfan scum.

      1. Just leave the girls with Roethlisberger. Can you imagine if the Steelers win?
        “What are you going to do next, Ben?”
        “I’m going to Disneyland!”
        And 10,000 families with girls ages 13-16 cancel their trips…

    3. Wertheimer also said that while students may have said that teachers told them they were being suspended in part for inciting a riot, the actual reason is they were flaunting authority and breaking the school’s dress code.

      “I was upset. Their behavior was provocative and they were flaunting authority. It creates an environment that is less than academic,” Wertheimer said.

      Ah, the real reason revealed. The thing they are trying to teach the kids is how to correctly deal with their police superiors.

  70. For your amusement I present SM’s latest bit of true stupidity:

    “SM|2.5.11 @ 6:44PM|#
    You people complain about democracy, that its “mob rule” and all that – guess what – libertarianism is mob rule.
    I’ll stick with democracy where at least there’s a mechanism for society to prevent mob rule if necessary.”
    Yes, SM would use the coercive power of the government to prevent those who would act in their own behalf without force from doing so, pretty much admitting a total lack of moral agency. A wannabe thug; no more no less.

    “You are a market fundamentalist – no more, no less.”
    And this means, uh, pretty much nothing. But SM sees it as a nasty comment, I guess.
    There must be those with dimmer bulbs who are capable of typing, but it’s hard to believe.

  71. Anybody catch this?

    http://www.businessgreen.com/b…..uses-stink

    Don’t tell Bloomberg. This will be next on his list.

  72. “Anybody catch this?”
    I’d have sworn this was on Morning Links this week. But that ‘ol memory…

    1. html le failage

    2. I must have missed it. I’ve been unusually busy this month, and I don’t have a computer at work. I heard it on the BBC News Hour on NPR.

      1. I’ll bet Spurlock can make some meaningful art out of that one.

  73. Yo Spurlock, I’ma let you finish, but Michael Moore is the biggest left-wing propaganda douchebag of all time. Of all time!

    1. Kanye, I didn’t get into it when you lambasted my Georgie boy, but based on your “art”, it’s clear to me that YOU are the one who hates black people…

      1. I LOL’d.

  74. You all who don’t travel to these poor countries are really missing out.

    I personally like to bring popcorn with me to every poor nation I go. It’s doubly delicious. I get to watch malnourished people up close, so that’s really cool, because It’s like I’m watching a movie, but for realz, you know?

    And not only do you get to watch hungry people up close, you’re eating popcorn in front of them, and you can really see the pain in their eyes when they see you eating. Man it’s sweet. I’m really going to miss all this when countries wise up and get rid of these authoritarian regimes. Until then, I’ll take a lot of video, that way I can go home and masturbate at night to children starving, like I do with that picture of the little kid with the vulture waiting for him to die. Man is that sexy.

    1. Morgan Spurlock travels around central Africa showing people the truth about food with Supersize Me.

  75. OK, that really makes a lot of sense dude. Wow.

    http://www.internet-privacy.tk

  76. WaPo Article Defending Extended Magazines

    In fact, the extended magazine actually vitiates the pistol’s usefulness as a weapon for most needs, legitimate or illegitimate. The magazine destroys the pistol’s essence; it is no longer concealable. Loughner allegedly wrapped the clumsy package in a coat for a short distance, but he could not have worn it in a belt or concealed it for an extended period. It had really ceased to be a pistol.

    That’s why extended magazines are rarely featured in crime – and that awkwardness spells out the magazine’s primary legitimate usage. It may have some utility for competitive shooting by cutting down on reloading time, or for tactical police officers on raids, but for those who are not hard-core gun folks it’s an ideal solution for home defense, which is probably why hundreds of thousands of Glocks have been sold in this country.

    Particularly in rural Arizona, given the upsurge in border violence, it’s likely that residents feel the need to defend themselves against drug predators, coyote gunmen or others.Particularly in rural Arizona, given the upsurge in border violence, it’s likely that residents feel the need to defend themselves against drug predators, coyote gunmen or others.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..06709.html

    1. That and the things freakin’ jam 24/7.

  77. NYT Article on Measures to Keep Guns from those with “No Gun Rights”

    Tens of thousands of gun owners, like Mr. Perez, bought their weapons legally but under the law should no longer have them because of subsequent mental health or criminal issues. In Mr. Perez’s case, he had been held involuntarily by the authorities several times for psychiatric evaluation, which in California bars a person from possessing a gun for five years.

    Policing these prohibitions is difficult, however, in most states. The authorities usually have to stumble upon the weapon in, say, a traffic stop or some other encounter, and run the person’s name through various record checks.

    California is unique in the country, gun control advocates say, because of its computerized database, the Armed Prohibited Persons System. It was created, in part, to enable law enforcement officials to handle the issue pre-emptively, actively identifying people who legally bought handguns, or registered assault weapons, but are now prohibited from having them.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02…..l?_r=1&hp;
    What could possibly go wrong, eh?

    1. “It was created, in part, to enable law enforcement officials to handle the issue pre-emptively…” One small step away from the precrime department.

  78. Shaken-Baby Syndrome Aspects Questioned After Many Jailed For It

    Some doctors are taking issue with the diagnosis of the syndrome, raising the possibility that innocent people have been sent to jail.

    http://www.nytimes.com/magazine/

    1. Wait as a second, shouldn’t we have figured this shit out in the late 90s?

  79. Katie Couric to Egyptians:

    “Don’t you know who I am?????”

    1. It should have been her.

    2. Damnit!! I’m important and people like me!!

  80. Is there a football game today? I mean American football – there’s always a soccer game going on somewhere in the world…it’s the STD of sports – ubiquitous and repulsive.

    My dollars say Stillers, but I’d like to see the Pack win. Hope everyone’s parties are SUPER!

    1. I’ll show you repulsive!

  81. Art that makes you see things from a new perspective is valuable. As long as Spurlock’s project remains purely an art project more power to him. Balko comes off as a whiny ‘fraidy cat baby. “Oh no, a semi-popular film maker hates capitalism! The Bolsheviks must be at the gates! Let’s all freak out!”

    1. If it’s art, I love it. I’ll give it a nine because it jars the sensibilities of the establishment.

    2. vanya|2.6.11 @ 12:45PM|#
      “Art that makes you see things from a new perspective is valuable…”

      Could be, but what does that have to do with worn-out, hypocritical bullshit?

    3. So blatant propaganda is a good thing?

      Because we all know someone else who was all about the propaganda.

      (not that this absolutely applies to this particular case)

      1. PT Barnum?

      2. Pictures of Time Square without advertising are not in themselves propaganda. If Spurlock decides to use them that way then, yes, he is an asshole worthy of condemnation. But personally I’m kind of curious what Times Square looks like bare. I bet the pictures will probably inadvertently make a good case that advertising enhances the area.

  82. I think Reason Magazine should buy the naming rights to Spurlock’s TED Talk next month: http://tinyurl.com/4gle7uc

  83. http://www.iphone-5-release.net | We Are The Top Source of Up To Date News, Information, and Rumors About the iPhone 5, iPhone 6. Our Team Updates You Hourly So You Are Always Informed.(http://iphone-5-release.net/) iphone 5

  84. We Are The Top Source of Up To Date News, Information, and Rumors About the iPhone 5, iPhone 6. Our Team Updates You Hourly So You Are Always Informed.(http://iphone-5-release.net/) iphone 5

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.