Campaigns/Elections

Take Arizona. Please.

|

Here's a headline that will drive a libertarian to drink.

NEXT: Deconsumption Versus Dematerialization

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. Meh.

    He’ll never get the necessary undocumented vote.

  2. My state is constantly finding new and creative ways of making me embarrassed to live here.

  3. He’s tough on crime.

    1. Balko? Yes.

    2. Only on those crimes not committed by himself or his office.

  4. I’d probably be drinking anyway.

    It seems out of 4 comments on that site, 2 are in favor of the notion.

    I weep for America.

    1. And one of the other two doesn’t want him to “leave his post.”

      1. And picking up a general,
        Who just arrived here from the coast.
        Who looked so fine at first,
        But ended up looking just like a ghost.

  5. I liked this commenter’s take:

    Run Josef Run!
    Wmin Phoenix
    If Arpaio runs for Kyl’s soon to vacant Senate seat, he will have his finances become public record. We will all see how he aquired his multi-million dollar real esate empire. Cough, cough, bribes, cough, cough, drug money. He will also have to answer press questions about the 54 million dollars in Civil Rights suits MSCO lost, reasons for illegal arrests of his “enemies”. In a run for a Senate seat, Arpaio can’t hide. Run Joe, run because this will be the funniest thing since Sarah Palin. Joe, can you see Mexico from your tower?

    1. And because he has an R after his name, the media will actually look for faults.

        1. Careful, those kind of smilies are encroaching orrin territory.

          1. Fuck OhioUrine.

    2. That should make for a fun campaign.

  6. Radly, your headline is completely misleading. What good libertarian needs a reason to drink?

  7. I’m already drinking so I don’t have to read no stinking article. Besides, Arizona is just one of 50 states. I lose no sleep over what Arizonans do or say. They’re just, at present, a handy whipping boy. Also Californians.

  8. Here’s a headline that will drive a libertarian to drink.

    Black Bush, neat.

    Better make that a double.

    1. Black Bush, neat.

      You’ll never go back. Or so I hear.

      1. Sip it, though. Don’t guzzle or I won’t let you back.

      2. You are correct about the not going back thing, sir.

    2. Ditto. Good to know someone else has taste here.

  9. He’d probably do less damage as a Senator than as Sheriff. What’s one more idiot in the Senate, after all?

    1. Cup half full, half empty.

      Our current problem is the cup itself.

      1. One cup, two jobs

        guess what role Arpaio fills?

    2. Right now, Joe’s idiocy is limited to Maricopa County. If he hits the Senate, he can unleash his idiocy on the whole country. Keeping Joe in AZ makes it easier to vote with your feet.

      1. Well, he can do more damage as a big fish in his little pond than as a small fish in a huge pond.

        1. True. However, his damage is limited to the little pond and therefore doesn’t affect me (except when visiting the in-laws). So selfishly, I want him to remain in the pond that I’m not in.

        2. we can hope his new pond has pirhanhas

          1. I think that’s a given…

        3. Considering that both major political parties have a tendency to nominate shitbag senators to the presidency, I’d like him to stay where he is.

          Though the idea of flinging him into a pond does sound intriguing.

        4. “Well, he can do more damage as a big fish in his little pond than as a small fish in a huge pond.”

          That was the claim about Pelosi.

      2. I don’t know. Barbara Boxer and Joe Arpaio constantly fighting while the rest of the senate actually debates an issue? My concern is he might actually be clever. It that case, where he tones down the rhetoric while ramping up the damage, god help us all.

        1. One of the commenters noted that if he does make a serious run for senator quite a few of the very shady practices he uses as sheriff will suddenly become very public.

          Should make for some interesting debates, with Arpaio explaining the merits of forcing someone to stand in the hot sun until they die or chaining women to the bed during childbirth. Or raiding a newspaper because he doesn’t like them, or stopping and searching every vehicle on a highway, or…

          1. He’ll just note they were all criminal and everyone will be happy

            1. But dey wuh awl bahd gaiz.

          2. You must be kidding. People will eat that stuff up. He’s already very popular outside of the state, and is the darling of many viral emails.

            1. His popularity is mostly a reflection of the American People’s disgust with the failure of the Federal Government to enforce its own laws regarding the border. Most of the “civil rights” complaints against him are the usual smear tactics used by the radical left against anyone who unapologetically opposes their demands.

              One good thing that might come out of his candidacy is that it might raise the awareness of the scam of our current “loser pay” system regarding civil rights violations. That legal atrocity has allowed the ACLU and other unscrupulous groups to bully people, cities, states and organizations into concessions and payouts through mere accusation and without a court room battle, effectively letting radical groups set government policy in some areas.

      3. Holy fuck, my state re-elects Babs Mikulski every 6 years. How much worse can he be than her? At least he’s easier on the eyes.

        1. Stand up, Senator, so we can see you.

          1. No please, *don’t* stand.

          2. But she’s just as wide as she is tall. Plus her legs are shorter than the chair legs. So if she stands up, she looks shorter. Plus, she’s almost spherical, so she might just roll away…

        2. As bad as she is, I’d still take her over Arpaio. He’d be at the top of my “hated Senator” list.

  10. drive a libertarian to drink

    But not on public roads! 😉

    1. air drives a libertarian to drink

      1. We’re funny that way. Must be genetic or something.

  11. The words. I do not have them.

  12. Yep, that does it for today. Drinking time.

  13. CADILLAC – CORVETTES & NASH

    CADILLAC ? CORVETTES & NASH

    [Cadillac’s the Revisionist History]

    Now, we went to bed and had a hard time not the other one get your mind out of the gutter girls, but a difficult time getting to sleep, something was grinding on us, stop it girls clean up your act, we meant out minds were else were and there you go again that clue guy with the nice butt right. So, anyway, we had read an article during the day were the author had written about the [LOVE BOAT], the [1959] Cadillac and like any of you kids, even know what a Cadillac, or the [LOVE BOAT] was or even care. But, to have revisionist history written by a kid who never saw one, give me a break. The boy described it in military precision as a [WAR MACHINE] from the two front protruding chrome front projectile shaped forms to suggest its military appearance, to its higher than the roof of the car fins, in the rear to suggest the late [P-38] dual prop-engine fighter of [WWII] World War Two, to all the chrome, and its huge back trunk, for the Brits the Bonnet. The first taught was this kid is a nut case, but then we understood he must be a Democratic who believed in Nancy Pelosi revisionist written history.

    [Cadillac the LOVE BOAT]

    The truth is a Cadillac was [THE LOVE BOAT], when you spoke Cadillac you spoke Comfort, Leisure and Luxury, A man’s size version of a woman, a Cadillac Woman, [Aretha Franklin], say about Come And Ride My Pink Cadillac, but the new generation has no idea what the girl was really singing about, and Afternoons Delight would mean Ice Cream to them. Now, we always liked women who talked so real men understood just what they meant, May West, [I’m The Best Woman Walking These Streets and Come Up and See Me Sometime Big Boy], Loren McCall, [Are those Quarters in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me, If you need me just whistle, you do know how to whistle, don’t you, just put your lips together and blow] and the Bond Girls, but back to the Cadillac. The Cadillac Oozed Sex, for those of us and men have types, those of us who like the FULL BODIED TYPES, more than a mouth full is a waste for one sitting but who’s planning a one course meal. Now, if it was a [2] two-tone job, White and Pink, Black and Pink, Full White, Full Black, Black on White, White on Black, the tone of color was all good. When it pulled into our Station, it was always Full Service, pull the old hose out and fill that baby with high octane, and we mean, top it off, always check under the hood pull the old dip stick out, wipe it off, stick it back in ALL THE WAY, and check that oil, no need asking, if there low on oil, you know they want it right up to the full mark. An a Cadillac has a BIG BACK SEAT, a very soft yet firm back seat, just place your hands upon it and feel the warm, soft, firmness, you know this baby has back, from looking at it. And fins, this baby is meant to Fly, you get this mama revved-up and pop her clutch, she’s got a full bored and blown engine.

    [JP’s Corvette’s]

    Now, we were once again going to come down on the case of the Jew’s both Israeli Jew’s and Non-Israeli Jew’s, but we will make one remark about those [JP’s], you can’t call them [Jap’s] that refers to the Japanese of [WWII] for all those Great-GREAT-Grandkids, who could care less, and you can no longer refer to them as [JAP’s], Jewish American Princess’s any longer, they can be found in almost every country if not every country in the world, around the globe, so now you have to just call them [JP’s] Jewish Princess’s, but the one thing we did want to say about them was they are like the late [50’s] Fifties, early [60’s] Corvette’s, High Priced, High Octane, High Powered, made for only Driver and Rider, always in a heated rush, unlike the pictures portrayed by the [AIPAC/AZC] The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee/American Zionist Council, after [2] Two-Years of [IDF] Israeli Defense Forced drab uniforms, they shed more than the uniforms down at the Mediterranean on a hot summers afternoon, mostly in a one-piece French Bikini.

    [Niecy Nash]

    Now, Niecy Nash is a FULL BODIED, Ebony Goddess, on the American version of Dancing with the Stars this season. Now, the girl has the name NASH, now a Nash Rambler was a Drive-In Car, it was the type of car you took to an Outdoor Drive In Theater, the seats all folded down, and you just drove it in, and drove it out, at the old Drive-In. But Niecy is not a small size model NASH Rambler but more in the Mid-Range-Size Hybrid modern day model of the Cadillac, Corvette, and Nash all parts in tune, ready to roar, when Niecy says beep, Beep, BEEP, me BABY, she sure isn’t talking about being topped off with the low octane brand, say why don’t you just latch yourself onto these hood ornaments, pop my clutch and will turn corners like it’s on rails, which color version do you prefer, do you prefer your [2] two-tone in Ebony on White or White on Ebony, if not stated prior, guys have certain models they prefer, Hey Louie! [Louis Van Amstel] there is another customer over there and he has been giving you the eye since he pulled in the Italian Job with the Bruno License Plates, let me handle this one. Now, Niecy let me pot the hood and will check the dip stick, too begin our full service treatment, we can discuss the color arrangement while your getting serviced. And the kid taught the Cadillac Was a War Machine!

    HERCULE TRIATHLON SAVINIEN

    1. OCD can be treated. Ask your shrink if Anafranil is right for you.

    2. I only read the first line. Is this a review if that Don Johnson, Cheech Marin show?

      1. No, this is what happens when you mix acid with mushrooms.

        1. More like Ketamine HCl with meth. Completely insane and very amped is not a good combo.

          1. Nah. I read about a trip like this in PIHKAL. It’s some kind of fucked up phenethylamine analog.

    3. Radley didn’t say to drink THAT much.

    4. “Loren McCall”

      bwaHahahahaw!

      1. You know, that chick that used to date Humphrey Bonaparte.

    5. You know what Stuart, I like you. You’re not like the other people, here
      in the trailer park.

      1. HERCULE TRIATHLON SAVINIEN knows what the queers are doing to the soil.

  14. At least he wouldn’t be Sheriff anymore.

    1. Which takes away half of Balkos material which is why he’s drinking.

  15. I took a shit in Arizona once. But it was a dry shit.

    1. I often wonder if Sandi is lurking. What is the H&R blog without his notification of places he had defecated? Nothing.

      1. I think he’s usually hanging out with barfman.

        1. She.

          1. Pictures or I don’t believe it.

  16. But today, war is too important to be left to politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. I can no longer sit back and allow Zionist infiltration, Zionist indoctrination, Zionist subversion and the international Zionist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

    1. Nineteen hundred and forty-six. 1946, HERCULE. How does that coincide with your post-war Israeli conspiracy, huh? It’s incredibly obvious, isn’t it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That’s the way your hard-core Israeli works.

      1. I so want to deny you my essence right now!

      2. HERCULE, helle is one of them joos-he likely is out to get you 🙂

  17. Could they release that gun-toting maniac who has a thing for congresscritters on a “weekend furlough”?

  18. Arpaio as frontunner to replace Kyl in the Senate is old news.
    Always trust OT H&R coments for the latest in latebreaking news!

    SIV|2.10.11 @ 12:25PM|#

    OT: I just heard on the radio that With Senator John Kyl (R-AZ) retiring the frontrunner to replace him is Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

  19. Jeff Flake must run as an independent. It’s our only hope.

    1. Beavis and Butthead?

      1. But much, much better looking.

  20. If Joe gets to the Senate, he will finally get to carry out his greatest wet dream: Tent City meets GITMO. Say good bye to orange jump suits and hello pink prison stripes.

  21. I’m late here, has anybody blamed Arapio on “progressivism” yet?

    1. Statism is sufficient.

    2. No, but we still haven’t bridged the gap between Arizonan’s supposed desire to liberalize and legalize weed, with the strange fascination to pull the lever for Arpaio, without even pausing for irony.

  22. Some of the first rules the anarchist rebels in Chiapas (who are still autonomous and free) put into effect was extremely harsh penalties for minor drug offenses…

    I suppose it’s the old small state-libertarian Vs. anarcho-capitalist argument, but I think we can chalk this as one score up for the small state libertarian side of that argument…

    Government is there to protect us from what the majority wants–if the majority were free to do whatever they wanted, a whole lot of us would be running for the hills.

  23. I guess I’ll have to change my registration to “R” to vote for Flake in that primary.
    In the meantime, I’m going to happy hour to banish the thought of Arapio going to the Senate.

    Should a libertarian drink in a bar called Che’s Lounge?

    1. You’re drinking. It doesn’t matter.

    2. Wear an anti-Che t-shirt. Or point everyone to Che Guevara was a Murderer

  24. Left wingers hate the sheriff…Sheriff wins poll for senate.

    These two items are not unrelated.

    In other news the election is a little under 2 years from now…plenty of time for Flake to be hated enough by the left wing that Arizona voters will take notice.

  25. The really scary thing is that if the 17th was repealed, Arapio would have an even better chance to become Senator here.

  26. 2 non-exclusive possibilities.

    One is that law enforcement officials, or maybe gov’t officials generally, gain popularity simply by doing stuff to somebody — anything to anybody. It gives the impression of getting their money’s worth.

    The other is that people give this answer in the poll specifically to piss people off.

    1. One is that law enforcement officials, or maybe gov’t officials generally, gain popularity simply by doing stuff to somebody — anything to anybody.

      You are over thinking this.

      law enforcement officials, or maybe gov’t officials generally, gain popularity simply by being in the national news.

      How many times has the sheriff been on Fox, MSNBC and CNN vs Flake? My guess is the ratio is over 10 to 1 in favor of the sheriff.

      We know Flake (hard body nature survivalist freak with a pretty good libertarian voting record) because Reason writes about it him and we pay attention. 100$ says most Arizona voters out side of his district don’t know who the fuck he is….and another 10$ says most voters in his district don’t know who the fuck he is.

      1. On this note does anyone else notice how terrible Reason writers are when it comes to political analysis?

        Most of their analysis like the one given to us by Balko (yes i hate myself as much as you do right now for criticizing one of the best cop beat reporters on the planet) simply implies voters are stupid terrible creatures then stops thinking.

        It is fairly obvious that the Sheriff won because people see him on TV all the time and Flake only got second because he is not a national figure. If Flake is any sort of politician he can easily over come this.

        Balko is not the only one. I think it was Walker who wrote that Rand Paul would hurt libertarianism by being a libertarian senator. Then you have Mangu who says we should not vote because it does not matter….essentially giving up before the fight even starts. Then you have Sudderman who got the passage of Obamacare wrong.

        And none of them predicted the gains the tea party would make until it was obvious even to the die hard left.

        Terrible stuff really.

        The sad thing is that last good political analyst Reason had was Weigal…but only when he was not pushing his agenda.

        It makes me wonder if this is a problem with only Reason magazine or if it is a problem with libertarians in general.

        I also follow Cato’s blogs and after the “purge” of Lindsy and his libraltarian rants against the tea party makes me think it is a general libertarian disease.

        If this is true then i ask, why do libertarians suck so badly at playing politics?

        1. On the other hand, Flake won one of the more resounding 2010 congressional victories in AZ. We had a number of Dems lose their seats in fairly close races and 2 hold on to their seats in similarly close races. Flake is hated by the anti-“amnesty” crowd, mostly because “amnesty” has come to mean any law related to immigration not sponsored by the politician who is currently speaking.

          1. On the other hand, Flake won one of the more resounding 2010 congressional victories in AZ.

            I don’t know why you said “On the other hand”. I don’t see how you are disagreeing with me.

            Flake could easily over come the Sheriff’s national fame simply by running and getting national Republican support (support and more importantly money). The only way the sheriff would win is if the tea party backed him but I find that unlikely….Flake has too good of a voting record for the tea party to ignore.
            They will either back Flake or stay on the side lines….the former being the more likely.

            1. I’m not sure I get your point.
              First, libertarians don’t tend to be good at politics, since libertarians tend to be individualists. That’s not surprising.
              As regards the intelligence of the voters, it’s hard telling, since quite a few of the things we vote on are ‘I can get something with someone else paying’. If politics were as defined by the Constitution, that sort of option wouldn’t be available, so it’s hard to judge that intelligence under the status quo.

              1. First, libertarians don’t tend to be good at politics, since libertarians tend to be individualists.

                Stalin was an individualist and very successful at politics.

                Perhaps you mean libertarians are collective ideological individualists…They do what they do for everyone and therefore they are condemned to lose…

                Which

                seems

                like

                a

                pretty

                weird

                claim…

                You are going to have to explain yourself. because my interpretation of what i think you are saying is showing it to be pretty ridicules of a theory.

                Why on earth would an individualist be worse at politics then one who is not an individualist….in fact shouldn’t an individualist be better at politics then someone who is not out for selfish gains?

                1. I think you may be on to something. (Though I see is a difference between ideological analysis of political events, which Reason does pretty well, and political predictions, which is what I think you’re complaining about.)

                  Libertarians are (unfortunately) not in the mainstream of American politics, and like followers of any other ideology, they tend to see politics through their particular lens. That’s even more true for writers for an ideological magazine. Since that lens is not used by the majority (or even a plurality) of voters, it’s not surprising that the predictions are “off.” My biases aside, I suspect Reason’s are roughly comparable in accuracy to those of, say, The Nation, and probably better than that of some Green publication.

                  1. capitol l’s quick guidebook to political predictions:

                    1.) Ask yourself does this: does this bill/candidate increase the government’s size and reach.

                    2.) If your answer is no then predict that the bill/candidate will not have sufficient votes.

                    3.) If your answer is yes, then congratulations!one! you have picked a winner.

                    This simple formula has made me literally tens of dollars…it never fails.

        2. Then you have Mangu who says we should not vote because it does not matter….essentially giving up before the fight even starts.
          She’s right you know.

          1. Please keep your tears on the crying towel and don’t get in our way.

  27. Jeezus. I would hope that maybe Rand Paul would call him out and they could duel with pistols on the Mall at dawn. You know that, as a law enforcement officer, Arpaio can’t shoot for shit. Plus, Paul showed up at last spring’s Knob Creek Machinegun Shoot, so he might have some skills. I didn’t see him shoot anything, but it’s possible.

  28. Here’s a headline that will drive a libertarian to drink.

    Drink? I’m getting a refill on my oxy.

    1. Bottoms up!

  29. Can’t Christopher Walken do something about this?

  30. Looks like I picked a bad day to stop snorting coke… then again, is there ever a good day to stop snorting coke?

  31. You know what really bugs me – I’m sure supporters of the dick wad consider him a great, patriotic American. He stands specifically for everything America is not supposed to be about. Anti-liberty, anti-justice, anti-the rule of law and people love him for it. Think how many in public life stand against what I grew believing America was supposed to be and these people are supposed to be the most patriotic. Makes me want to puke.

  32. This is amusing:

    http://www.businessinsider.com/nation…..lan-2011-2

    It begins. The public union class war, that is.

    1. It appears some Republicans are actually good for something. Then again, Cuomo’s plan was probably tougher.

  33. What’s wrong with Arpaio? He makes criminals sleep in tents saving the taxpayers thousands of dollars in utility bills, he makes them work in chain gangs which delivers very low recidivism rates, he’s not afraid to fight crime, he’s not afraid to fight illegal aliens, he’s not afraid to be politically incorrect, he respects the second amendment, what’s not to like?

    This is the land of the free, not the land of the freeloader. America has no business giving illegal aliens a free education in high school and state rates in college.

    No Smokers Need Apply: Why you should care even if you don’t smoke.
    http://libertarians4freedom.bl…..hould.html

    1. He’s a thug who abuses his powers to ineffectively fight crime and the noncrime of illegal immigration to give emotional satisfaction to neanderthalic assholes like you who don’t even know that crime has increased under Arpaio’s watch and that many cases he’s closed shouldn’t have been. But what’s that to putting those goddam brown people in their place?

      1. Arpaio fights against ALL illegal aliens no matter what color they may be. Of course, it’s PROGRESSIVES like you who think we have to give minorities a break instead of treating them like everyone else.

    2. Greg, why do you insist on calling yourself a libertarian? I mean, there’s no law against it, you can do what you want, but why would you when you really aren’t?

    3. So I take it his drug-warring doesn’t bother you even though you claim to be a libertarian. You are a fraud.

      Oh, and what Cytotoxic and RC Dean said.

    4. You obviously don’t know anything about him, then.

    5. Not that Gregory will respond to any of us, let alone address Arpaio’s support for anti-drug laws and his general thuggery.

      1. First of all, I oppose drug laws, yet I’m not gonna blame Arpaio for enforcing the laws on the books. Don’t like the laws on the books? Demand the legislators to change them, that’s the way to do it.

        Secondly, I am a libertarian, the only difference between me and some of you guys is that I don’t believe criminals are entitled to the same freedoms as me (otherwise there would be no jails), I support the second amendment while most of you don’t give a damn about it, I am proud to be an American while you guys seem to buy into that Global Citizen bullshit, I support politically incorrect speech while you label anyone you disagree with as a racist and a bigot. Let’s face it, some of you are LIBERALS looking for a tax break.

        1. …the only difference between me and some of you guys is that I don’t believe criminals are entitled to the same freedoms as me…

          Actually most here would believe that criminals can have some of their freedoms taken away as restitution, punishment, or simply to protect the public.

          The actual difference is that you believe in crimes that have no victim.

        2. …like illegal immigration for starters. It’s hard to call yourself a libertarian if you don’t believe in a free market for labor.

          And don’t waste our time pointing out that they “steal” from taxpayers when a.) most illegal immigrants pay their full tax burden, since most would not qualify for income taxes anyway and b.) you can’t blame illegal immigrants for the existence of the welfare state, which they had no part in creating.

          Note also I don’t know of anyone here who doesn’t support the 2nd Amendment, or support the right to engage in politically incorrect, even racist, speech. Calling people out for being actual racists is what good people should do, and they need no government to force them to do so.

        3. We get a tax break for reading Hit & Run?

  34. What’s wrong with Arpaio?

    He’s nearly the perfect specimen of a brutal, self-aggrandizing thug.

    That’s what’s wrong with him.

  35. He’ll get 90% of the freedom-loving teabagger vote.

    1. Teabagger? Isn’t that the term PROGRESSIVES use? You probably watch MSNBC. God, you’re like those self-hating white people who make excuses for Jeremiah Wright and the National of Islam.

  36. He polled like this as a prospective governor, but didn’t run.

    I don’t think he’ll throw in for Kyl’s seat, either.

    God help us if he does.

  37. If there’s anything Sheriff Cottontail Smith hates more than immigrants is… two immigrants

    1. They are not immigrants, they are ILLEGAL ALIENS. Immigration is a legal act, people who come through the desert and then buy fake papers or hide from the law are not immigrants.

      1. Where the fuck are your papers at, Greg? I’d like to know that I am not talking to some ANCHORBABYKILL’EM havin’ sumbitch right now…

        Why don’t you take your “I’m proud to be an American” ass back to Ukraine or whatever shithole you emerged from.

      2. So.. illegal immigration is illegal. Any more earth shattering comments for us?

  38. Every Time Joe Arpaio Makes A Cosmotarian Cry, An Angel Gets His Wings.

    Come to think of it, that slogan would look great on a T-shirt, no?

    1. “Don’t Talk To Me, I’m A Nazi Cocksucker” would look nice tattooed on your forehead, no?

      1. Your statement needs clarification. Does he suck Nazis’ cocks, or is he a Nazi who sucks cocks?

    2. That’s enough cross-burning, boys, let’s go get a HOT SHAHR HOT SHAHR HOT SHAHR

      1. C’mon guys let Greg and Slappy have their fun. They only get together once a year for their Mexican Hate-Off and y’all are going to ruin it. Or are you a bunch of Politically Correct LIBERALS?

  39. Gregory, did a Mexican fuck your wife? Take yer job? Beat your son at a foot race? All of the above?

    1. Get it right; the Mexican took his JERB, TOOK HIS JERB!!

    2. Even worse: they were speaking in Spanish to the Jack in the Box cashier while Gregory was waiting in line. Where’s Joe Arpaio when you need him?

  40. The only reason Reason and all real Libertarians hate Joe is because he’s against open borders.

    So once again, please tell me how open borders and eminent domain are any different.

    In both cases, persons with no legal claim to a parcel of land make a claim on said parcel of land. I don’t see the difference philosophically.

    But I’m sure among the many insults flung my way, there may be a point or 2. Flail away….

    1. The country is not a parcel of land.

      In particular, the country, territory-wise, is a collection of parcels of land with commons and rights of way between them. No one has the right or legitimate authority to prohibit travel upon those commons and rights of way without compelling and specific cause.

      That a person exceeds a quota for his class of persons is neither compelling nor specific.

      In both cases, persons with no legal claim to a parcel of land make a claim on said parcel of land.

      Odd. Those who wish to restrict free migration have no legal claim to the vast majority of private parcels of land in the country. Yet they make a claim that the owners of those parcels cannot house or employ people the state does not explicitly authorize.

      Talk about a taking!

  41. It’s funny how the non-racist real Libertarians assume that all illegals are Mexican, which is something that Greg didn’t.

    Glass houses, people, glass houses.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.