Obamacare

Sunday, Stupid Sunday

|

  • At two separate weekend campaign stops, Republican presidential candidate and former food industry executive Herman Cain proposed an electrified border fence that would kill anyone who tried to cross the border illegally; today says, "America needs to get a sense of humor." 
  • Wall Street occupiers are destroying food carts and other small businesses. 
  • Mexico President Felipe Calderon, when asked if his presidency will be remembered as the one that led to the murder of 40,000 Mexicans and counting: "It's possible some will remember me for that or will want me to be remembered for that. But if Mexico triumphs as I am sure it will, if Mexico has new institutions in the future, if Mexico subdues the criminals, if Mexico reconstructs its social fabric there will also be those that remember me as the president who dared to take on the criminals and indicate the long path of institutional reconstruction of the country."
  • Rush Limbaugh accuses President Obama of "targeting Christians" for going after the child-enslaving, village-pillaging Lord's Resistance Army. (Sen. John McCain takes the high road and chides Obama for entering yet another military engagement without the consent of Congress.) 
  • Texas District Attorney opposes DNA testing of convicted suspects because "it overrides what a jury decided." 
  • Daily Telegraph blogger and Oxford historian Timothy Stanley says Western governments should ban Internet pornography because "like heroin, porn has been proven to be addictive," and "the internet turned pedophilia from a private sin into an organized crime." 
  • NewsBusters: "U.S. District Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle, a Clinton appointee, has ruled that the Justice Department does not need to release emails Solicitor General Elena Kagan sent from her DOJ email account to people in the White House—in which she discussed her recusal decisions as solicitor general—because the emails were 'used for a purely personal objective.'"(Via Ben in the comments)

NEXT: Rajaratnam and the "No One Has Gone to Prison" Myth

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. I’m about to go to a winery and drink a whole shitload of their wine. Don’t you try to bring me down, Riggs.

    1. Thanks for the heads-up.

    2. Not joining in the Cleveland Beer Week fun?

    1. “They will either take it out of the medicine cabinet or buy some on the street,” said Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw. “And then they have a party and when they go in, the admission to the party is a big bowl and they just drop pills in the bowl. And of course there’s alcohol there. But the end result is there’s a chemical reaction between those two pills and that alcohol.”

      “If they’re lucky, they will fall in a spot where they can breathe,” Bradshaw said. “More times than not they don’t and in about three minutes they’re dead. And that’s the overdose death from prescription medication.”

      Jesus Christ, the stoopid is awe inspiring.

      1. If only some doctors had tried “to get (them) to be smart and safe about it” that wouldn’t happen so much, you know.

      2. Does anybody really do that “bowl of unidentified pills at the party” thing? Maybe in the ’60s, when medicine cabinets might actually have uppers and downers. This sounds like an urban myth to me.

        1. I just went to one last week. Just my luck, I got a Prilosec and a Glucotrol.

          Thank Cthulu for the alcohol.

          1. “WE DELIVER!!!”

          2. That was funny.

        2. Does anybody really do that “bowl of unidentified pills at the party” thing?

          Yep, people do, though it’s more prevalent amoungst the younger set raiding the medicine cabinet. It’s the urban equivalent of going foraging for wild, edible mushrooms with the majority of participants knowing little to nothing about mycology.

          Oh, and I call bullshit on the good porcinator’s claim of dropping over dead in three minutes from oral polypharmacia (with the possible exception of severe acute anaphylaxis).

          1. Kids have the internet now. Back in my day we relied on the PDR.

          2. No, people don’t. Everyone “knows someone who has a friend who totally went to one of those,” but that “friend” is always just Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw’s masturbation fantasy.

        3. “The boys were so high they didn’t know they were banging a corpse”

        4. This crap was discredited weeks ago, when that nonsense was first mentioned here. The pill party is completely a drug warrior fantasy.

      3. Doesn’t that problem eventually solve itself?

        1. Not as much as it should.

        2. Yeah, if that happened anywhere near as often as that hysterical scumbag thinks it does then everyone involved with such a party would be dead fairly rapidly, and no one else would be stupid enough to try it.

          1. Plus, as long as they’re banging corpses, they’d never reproduce!

    2. But first I’ll contribute something stupid.

      Don’t be so coy. You always contribute something stupid.

  2. Although McCain did, unsurprisingly, support the idea of taking on the LRA in Uganda, he was annoyed that Congress hasn’t been in the loop. It makes him no worse than Obama, though.

    Still looking for something beyond gays in the military where Obama is actually better than McCain. (Can think of plenty of issues where McCain is either same or significantly better.)

    1. The thing is unlike Libya, Obama *does* have congressional authorization for using the military to go after the LRA:
      http://www.govtrack.us/congres…..=s111-1067

      It is the policy of the United States to work with regional governments toward a comprehensive and lasting resolution to the conflict in northern Uganda and other affected areas by–

      (1) providing political, economic, military, and intelligence support for viable multilateral efforts to protect civilians from the Lord’s Resistance Army, to apprehend or remove Joseph Kony and his top commanders from the battlefield in the continued absence of a negotiated solution, and to disarm and demobilize the remaining Lord’s Resistance Army fighters;

      S. 1067 Lord’s Resistance Army Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act of 2009. It had 64 co-sponsors in the Senate, and it passed by unanimous consent.

      This action may be arguable on the merits or on the finer details of strategy and tactics, but in this case, the forms of executive vs legislative authority were followed.

      (and it’s not like we haven’t already been paying visits to Uganda http://www.army.mil/search/ind…..rch=Uganda)

      1. Good link. I didn’t know that.

    2. I’ve said before I don’t think Obama has given libertarians any reason to support him. The handful of areas in which he promised to do so (medical marijuana raids) he’s walked back on.

      Having said that I think his SCOTUS nominees will be better on the rights of the accused than McCains would have been and he did sign the crack/powder cocaine bill, and we are’nt at war with Iran yet (hate to ruin John’s day).

      But that’s slim pickens if you are a libertarian.

      1. We can just ignore that killing American citizens bit. And there has been no noticeable lessening of the drug war and no change in DOJ policy regarding criminal prosecutions that I can see.

        Obama is all of the law and order of the Republicans while making up for it with all of the insane spending and state control of the Democrats. He manages to be the worst of both sides.

        1. Obama is all of the law and order of the Republicans while making up for it with all of the insane spending and state control of the Democrats. He manages to be the worst of both sides.

          Yup. After he tried to get Baby Doc’s stolen Haiti money, I was pissed at Bob Barr. But Obama has given me plenty of reminders about why you have to be very careful ever voting for an R or D.

      2. and we are’nt at war with Iran yet

        Imagine our nearly palpable sense of relief.

        1. Fuck you. You weren’t going to vote for me, anyway.

      3. His SCOTUS nominees more than compensate for any residual libertarian tendencies by their belief that the Commerce Clause, equal protection, and few other things give the federal government nearly unlimited power.

        1. the Commerce Clause, equal protection, and few other things give the federal government nearly unlimited power

          Which is just how MNG likes it.

      4. That’s slim pickin’s for America in general, MNG.

        But not for Slim Pickens. Thankfully – for Slim’s sake – he’s been dead for years.

      5. Obama has given libertarians plenty of reasons to oppose him. Yes, even a broken watch can be right twice a day, but the direction he wants to take the country is completely opposite to the direction libertarians want to take it. Any “libertarian” who says differently is of the Bill Maher variety.

  3. STUPIDEST: on Friday, White House Refuses To Turn Over Subpoenaed Solyndra Documents

    On Saturday, a Clinton-appointed judge ruled Elena Kagan’s old DOJ e-mails on Obamacare were ‘Private’

    Reason‘s measured, considered response to both, on Sunday: “Porn! Limbaugh! SQUIRREL — !!!”

    1. I’ll add your links, Ben. Thanks for bringing them to my attention.

      1. Thank you, and my genuinely sincere apologies for the waspishness, above.

        Sometimes, the news of late gets me a mite… testy. 😉 Not your fault; totally My Bad.

    2. OJ’s gloves, blood, and knife were private, too! Move along, subject.

  4. Jesus Titty Fucking Christ Rush, could you not do some basic research before you open your mouth? Frankly it is bad enough that he didn’t know about this stuff before now but at least google that shit.

    1. Let’s go get us some slaves.

  5. Wait! Rush Limbaugh is an ignorant blowhard!? This is the first I’ve heard of that.

    1. Which link talks about Limbaugh?

      1. “Rush Limbaugh accuses President Obama of “targeting Christians” for going after the child-enslaving, village-pillaging Lord’s Resistance Army.”

        Do you have any filter between what pops in your head and what you type? That is right there in the links above.

        1. God you are an asshole. Not that I care really. But do you understand how much you are embarrassing yourself today?

          1. In this instance he’s got a point. It says “Rush Limbaugh” in the post.

            1. What, the guy can’t ask a question?

              If John had written, “You bitches! None of these links talk about Rush Limbaugh!” then maybe you could give him shit.

              But all he did was ask a question. And not a Truther question or anything. So relax, Francis.

              1. He’s free to ask a question. And others are free to criticize the question. Ain’t freedom great?

                1. Freedom to act like an asshole, freedom to get a firm ass-beating.

                  But these here intertubes changes all that.

        2. Go, thee, and watch a bad Redskins game!

          1. I’m a diehard Georgia Tech fan living in Virginia. Today, it’s like waking up with a horrible hangover and the taste of puke in my mouth saying “I’ll never watch football again.”

    2. People who have actually listened to Rush quickly realize that he’s good at what he does but extremely lazy. His extensive “show prep” often involves grabbing headlines from Drudge. Usually he doesn’t step in it, but he clearly has here. He’ll recover though.

  6. CBS News, “Herman Cain’s long ties to Koch Brothers”:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories…..1046.shtml

    “His links to the Koch brothers could undercut his outsider, non-political image among Tea Party fans who detest politics as usual and candidates connected with the party machine.”

    So, what’s the narrative, again? Is the Tea Party “astroturf” financed by the Koch Brothers, or are Tea Party’ers going to put off by ties to the Koch Brothers?

    1. I don’t know the answers to your questions Mr. Laursen, but what I do know is that Riggs should be ashamed for not including this link.

      Mr. Riggs: Put up this link*!

      *spoken ala Ronnie Raygun

      ——————-
      For a magazine called “Reason”…

    2. And as Fluffy points out on the other thread, how the hell did the Kochs, who to my knowledge have never supported a winning cause in their lives, become political insiders? WTF?

      I think the media is going to go full eat the furniture Palin on Cain once they realize he is actually a threat to win the nomination.

      1. “the Kochs, who to my knowledge have never supported a winning cause in their lives”

        They didn’t support Walker for Governor of Wis? And he didn’t win?

        I think the hyperbole and hysteria over the Kochs is stupid, but this is yet another of your boneheaded assertions John.

        1. He’s right about Cain, MNG… the left is gonna do to him what they did to Condi Rice back when she even gave a hint of running for the Big Comfy Oval Office Chairholdership.

          1. Condi had the war baggage to lug around. If Cain changed his stripes and came out for reducing the US’s military footprint, he might have a chance. But I think like ALL BUT ONE of the candidates of BOTH parties, he is pro-interventionist.

            1. What about Gary Johnson?

              1. Gary Johnson would be wonderful, Dok, but he isn’t going to be allowed to win by Those In Charge.

                As for Condi, was it REALLY necessary for the left to refer to her as “Aunt Jemima”?

                1. “As for Condi, was it REALLY necessary for the left to refer to her as “Aunt Jemima”?”

                  Yes, it was.
                  She is an accomplished woman who didn’t hold lefty views. The left had no choice but to respond with ad-homs; any honest argument would have left (!) them in a hole.

              2. Johnson hardly makes the radar screen.

                1. I know, I just had to point out how the left really feels about black people that don’t prostrate themselves before The Progressive Cause.

              3. I don’t think “The same politically correct shit you’ve been getting for the last 50 years! Now with hookers and blow!” is the kind of political agenda most people are looking for…

          2. Herman Cain ain’t no Condi Rice.

            I expect him to give the media as good as he gets.

        2. So they supported on governor in one winning political fight and that makes them “political insiders’ in national politics?

          That is ignorant MNG and you know it. Fluffy’s post was right and you know it.

          Did you forget your meds today? You are more offensive, stupid and pig headed than even usual. You are really on a roll.

    3. Those sleazy, rich-ass Koch Brothers have way too much behind-the-scene influence on the political process. Sheeesh!

      1. But… but… Soros is a GOOD white old rich man!

        1. The funny thing is that I first heard about Soros from a lefty friend 20 years ago, when he was held up as an example of a greedy, heartless capitalist.

          1. That was true until Unca George became a Team Blue bankroller, SF.

            NOW, the left would follow him even if he bit the heads off a litter of newborn puppies on live television.

            1. Please contact our office.

            2. It’s almost like the left only cares about money.

          2. Jim Rogers co-founded the Quantum Fund with Soros. So, yeah, Soros used to be an evil, greedy Capitalist like Rogers. Except, Rogers retired before Soros became a currency manipulator.

            1. And we’re just fine ‘n dandy with Soros being a filthy-rich currency manipulator!

    4. Let’s just forget about the 16 million given to Obama from Wall St firms.

    5. Anyone associated with “Americans for Prosperity” is obviously just a stooge of the evil Koch monster.

  7. All right doc. You got me fair and square… So, do you want to shoot me now, or wait till you get home?

    1. Shoot him now! Shoot him now!

  8. Silly Riggs. Every day has a healthy dose of stupid. Read any comments section at the Seattle Times and you will swear to have never seen so much derp in one place.

    1. Doesn’t reading the ST make you stupid?

      I just saw a commercial for the latest Adam Sandler movie while watching the Detroit/SF game. Now I’m stupid.

      1. He’s still alive?

        I used to comment over at ST. Today there’s the article by Leonard Pitts and another one by Krugman. I started to go in and thought it’s just not worth it.

        1. It’s not worth it.

          By the way, I saw Drive last night. Really, really good. There are flaws, but overall it’s damn good, and it’s basically an homage to Michael Mann, and in particular, Thief, though the director claims many other influences as well.

          1. By the way, I saw Tucker and Dale v. Evil over the weekend. It came highly recommended by a friend of mine and it’s extremely entertaining and watchable, if one is into hillbilly gore.

      2. Rated ARG for pirates, fuck you!

  9. Just when I think Obama can’t do anything more insane he goes and tops himself. He started another war! Its unbelievable. This is the anti-war candidate who was given a Nobel peace prize. Imagine what the media coverage and protesting would be like if Bush had done this.

    1. Those Nobel boys sure know how to pick ’em.

      1. ….any longer now, can they? We have a madman in the White House — he’s beyond the reach of sane advice and oblivious to consequences. He has surpassed W in the batshit crazy department.

        1. Uganda. Libya. Feh. Bitches just askin’ for shit, sittin’ on top of OUR oil.

          1. …shit, I forgot about the fucking oil.

          2. Europe gets more of that Libyan oil than we do, especially Italy.

            1. ….Obama and the West want to keep the Chinese “Out of Afrika”. This is counter-leverage to the US Govt paper that China holds….conspiracy theory anyone???

          3. BTW, anyone heard anything about a big bunch of oil under Israel? Or another big pool under Somalia which is going undeveloped?

    2. Technically both the Libya and Uganda wars were going on before the US got involved.

      1. Damn! I have to agree with Tulpa on this one. Also, though I’m against sending troops, 100 soldiers is pittance compared to Libya, Afghanistan, and Iraq.

        …on second thought… How many ‘Advisors’ did we send at the beginning of our involvement of Vietnam?…hmmm…

        1. Uh, I hope no one thinks I support either operation…I was just being a nitpicker as usual.

          Getting involved in small scale wars that have nothing to do with us (and often turning them into large scale ones) is not much better than starting wars.

  10. The end of the world is this friday.

    http://www.newser.com/story/13…..-2011.html

    I can’t wait to party with Warty, who will probably still be drunk, when we get to hell.

    1. Still, Camping’s predicting a more modest Apocalypse this time. “I really am beginning to think ? that there’s going to be no big display of any kind,” he said in a recent radio address, according to Time. “The end is going to come very, very quietly.”

      …”So if those hacks in the press go ’round on Saturday claiming it didn’t happen, ignore them; they probably just didn’t notice it.”

      1. What a T.S. Eliot ripoff.

  11. Timothy Stanley loses at the end of paragraph 2 when he speaks approving of North Korea.

    The LRA are a bunch of thugs that the world will be well rid of. But unconvinced that American military help is warranted or will actually be helpful.

    1. Sure they are. But first, how are a hundred light infantry guys, no matter how badass they are, going to do much about it other than get themselves captured or killed and their bodies drug through the streets? And two, once we go into another country and start killing people are we ready to live with the consequences of that, namely that said people’s friends might not be too happy about it, or are we just going to half ass it and run at the first sign of difficulty?

      1. Executive Outcomes did it in Sierra Leone in the ’90s with a few hundred South African mercs. Of course they didn’t need to operate quite as “delicately” as will Team Obama in Uganda.

        1. I doubt they will play by the rules.

          1. a lot of unreported collateral damage….

            1. What ever happened to those casualty reports the corporate media released daily from Iraq and Afghanistan? Soldiers stopped dying?

              1. ….when Obama makes them die.

        2. And then Jennifer Connelly made a movie about them. But it was anorexic Connelly instead of goddess Connelly from previous years so it wasn’t really worth it.

      2. But first, how are a hundred light infantry guys, no matter how badass they are, going to do much about it other than get themselves captured or killed and their bodies drug through the streets?

        Those who fail to learn from us are doomed to repeat us.

      3. It’s the start of Predator 2012

    2. “The bus stop I use in Los Angeles has a large poster of a chap in his underwear. I think it’s supposed to be advertising his briefs, but the object of the picture is clearly the man himself. ”

      Latent homosexuals anywhere?

    3. Where is the machine gun preacher when we need him?

  12. “Texas District Attorney opposes DNA testing of convicted suspects”

    That “innocent” thing s a mother fucker, init?

    I mean how’s a guy gonna get in Congress?

  13. NewsBusters: “U.S. District Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle, a Clinton appointee, has ruled that the Justice Department does not need to release emails Solicitor General Elena Kagan sent from her DOJ email account to people in the White House?in which she discussed her recusal decisions as solicitor general?because the emails were ‘used for a purely personal objective.'”(Via Ben in the comments)

    That was actually me not Ben. But glad to see someone is finally reading the comments. But Ben made the very good point that these are the same people who think that Sarah Palin’s Yahoo account should be made public because it may have contained things about state business.

    1. Won’t want to release the names of all his campaign contributors, cuz its completely personal: his personal quest to be reelected….

    2. No actually, it was Ben. But even if it wasn’t, what kind of pathetic couched seeks, credit for something like that…

    3. But Ben made the very good point that these are the same people who think that Sarah Palin’s Yahoo account should be made public because it may have contained things about state business.

      Pretty easily distinguishable. Palin was using a private e-mail account so that her e-mails would never be subject to open records laws. Kagan used an official e-mail account that is subject to open records laws, which is why a judge was reviewing the e-mails to determine whether they should be released or not. Open records laws don’t mean that ever record is automatically provided on demand, just that there’s a mechanism by which you can request access and get judicial review if the government actor refuses to produce the documents.

    1. Could have waited. It wasn’t that entertaining. Not even in the “seriously” vein.

  14. The Great Unraveling

    It’s here, people. Obama’s plan is to marshal this “People’s uprising” into a political attack on the engine of capitalism, using the Wall Street he’s in bed with as an attack on the capitalist system, and the “bankers” and traders as the scapegoats.
    The outlines of the plan have long been clear, but sadly, those who bothered to look and to express alarm early on were dismissed as fringe cranks and unhelpful “purists” whose outlandish Visigothery would drive away “moderates” and “independents” (who, incidentally, flocked to the GOP in the wake of the TEA Party movement, giving us a 2010 electoral landslide. But we’re to bracket that. Our betters know what’s best, regardless of how many times they prove themselves astoundingly out of touch with the mood of their own base). And now the next stage is beginning: an assault on the “fat cats” and the money men, launched from different angles, with the Occupy Wall Street crowds providing the civil unrest, the social tension, and the optics, making the more outlandish demands (and including the most repugnant fellow-travelers), while Obama serves as the voice of reason and moderation, fashioning his campaign around a populist soft-socialism in which the banks and bankers and money men are required to pay “their fair share” and the “wealth disparity” is addressed ? even as the evil Republicans try to “protect the rich.”

    http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=31311

    1. I am reading Simon Schema’s history of the French Revolution Citizens. I am not done with it. But Shema’s point seems to be that what caused the terror was not the mob. Instead it was the French elite’s willingness to support and encourage violence in the beginning because it suited their short term needs. They were too stupid and short sighted to understand that once that violence started it would be impossible to control.

      I can’t help but be reminded of now. Luckily, the OWS are for the moment a bunch of ignorant twits and more laughable thank anything else. There is nothing to say they will always be that way or that we won’t get a real no shit populist revolt.

      If that ever happens, do the cynical fuckwits of the world who are encouraging this stuff think they will be spared?

      1. It would be interesting to watch Obama wrestle with imposing martial law if the Occupy Everything movement turned mass-violent.

        But, in the long run, Obama would pull the martial-law trigger just as any Republican president would.

        1. The funny thing or sad thing is that the very people who are cheering this on and having fantasies or a real “revolution” will be the first ones to scream for Obama to start shooting people if it ever really happened.

          1. Funny AND sad.

            I’d refer to it as “dark comedy”, but that would be a racist statement.

          2. ….the Street Lamps? — a strange and bitter fruit.

            1. “PRESENT!!!”

              1. And now the next stage is beginning: an assault on the “fat cats” and the money men, launched from different angles, with the Occupy Wall Street crowds providing the civil unrest, the social tension, and the optics, making the more outlandish demands (and including the most repugnant fellow-travelers), while Obama serves as the voice of reason and moderation, fashioning his campaign around a populist soft-socialism in which the banks and bankers and money men are required to pay “their fair share” and the “wealth disparity” is addressed ? even as the evil Republicans try to “protect the rich.”

                This is one sentence? Did Thomas Pynchon write this?

                1. Long enough, but not quite paranoid enough for Pynchon, in my estimation.

        2. Not initially it wouldn’t.

          Because you can be sure that it’s the icky people with guns who’ll first be targeted.

          Only after he has lost all semblance of control will it start to turn on him.

      2. Stop wetting the bed. There isn’t going to be a revolution because some people are sleeping in a park and shouting at stockbrokers and boogeyman Obama isn’t going to declare martial law.

        There probably won’t be even one decent riot which is kind of annoying. Has even one NYPD car or paddy-wagon been burnt yet? Fucking amateurs.

        1. I am not wetting the bed. Maybe you missed this part of the post

          Luckily, the OWS are for the moment a bunch of ignorant twits and more laughable thank anything else. There is nothing to say they will always be that way or that we won’t get a real no shit populist revolt.

          Yes, these guys are pathetic. But that doesn’t mean they will always be pathetic.

        2. Qu’ils mangent de la brioche

    2. If it’s true that the end goal is fascism rather than communism, then OWS are just as much scapegoats as the fatcats, if not moreso.

  15. Regarding the social security scam, will that be the ultimate fate of Chris-chan? (Too obscure and immature for anyone else to get?)

    1. That was supposed to be in reply to Heroic Mulatto’s link. I fail at threaded comments.

      1. You should have just rolled with it, and if called out state that you simply refuse to use the threaded comments, as you think it was better before they implemented them.

        1. R is right, that is the correct approach.

  16. “Rush Limbaugh accuses President Obama of “targeting Christians” for going after the child-enslaving, village-pillaging Lord’s Resistance Army. (Sen. John McCain takes the high road and chides Obama for entering yet another military engagement without the consent of Congress.)”

    Whether the LRA is in fact Christian as–any American Christians would understand the term–is an open question.

    What’s not an open question, in my book, is whether sending troops into Central Africa is a profoundly stupid thing for the Obama Administration to do.

    It doesn’t matter that we’re doing this at the invitation of what passes for legitimate government in that part of the world.

    It doesn’t matter that our advisers won’t be actually doing any of the fighting.

    It doesn’t matter whether Congress approves. It doesn’t matter whether our being there has full international support.

    None of that matters anywhere near as much as the fact that–getting involved in trying to solve those people’s problems is unbelievably stupid.

    We have a stupid president on our hands!

    If we have troops on the ground in Central Africa? Then we’re in deeper there than we are in Libya.

    I don’t understand how someone can be smart enough to keep our ground troops out of Libya–but stupid enough to send our ground troops into Central Africa.

    The simplest explanation is that the emperor has no clothes!

    What a dummy our president is.

    1. And how will we evacuate these guys if they get into trouble? Just what America needs, some SF guy having his head cut off and drug through the streets by some two bit African Army.

      1. It’s not just that either.

        It’s that when you go in–even with good intentions–and you start trying to solve people’s ethnic, economic, political, etc. problems for them?

        They start treating you like you’re responsible for solving those problems for them.

        That’s why the Arab Spring will ultimately be so good for American foreign interests. …because they used to blame the United States for their problems for propping up some of those dictators–then they blamed the dictators for their problems…

        And that wasn’t the issue either. If Saddam Hussein was the cause of Iraq’s social, economic, ethnic and religious problems, then having been dead for years now, all of Iraq’s problems should be solved!

        They’re not.

        If we’d gone into Libya, once the civil war was over, all the Libyans would be looking to us to solve their problems for them–like Iraq did. The Libyan people need to solve their own problems–there’s no substitute. Our putting troops on the ground would just distract them from solving their own problems. The reason the Iraqis and Libyans couldn’t sort out their problems before was because that wasn’t an option!

        Anyway, it’s the same thing with the people of Central Africa. When things go badly, it’s suddenly gonna be our problem to fix. …and that’s not something we’re capable of doing.

        I don’t even think the U.S. government is the solution to the American people’s economic problems! Why would I think we should get involved in solving the problems of Central Africa?

        Anyway, that’s my two cents. When the British first went to Africa, it wasn’t to establish the brutality of British Imperialism. They went to stamp out slavery at its source–and look where they ended up!

        It’s always the same thing.

        1. They start treating you like you’re responsible for solving those problems for them.

          ^This. Choosing to be a scapegoat? Does Obama believe himself to be the Dark Knight? A stupid gimmicky plot becomes the basis of our foreign policy.

          1. This is why he’s so obviously incompetent too.

            There’s nothing good that can come from this–for him–in an election year. …and that’s frightening. It would be one thing if he were doing it to get reelected–that’s not an admirable quality, but it’s at least understandable.

            I’m not about to shut up to leftist acquaintances about how Guantanamo isn’t closed yet–despite Obama’s promises. I’m not about to shut up about how warrantless wiretapping appears to be an ongoing practice.

            If there’s anybody out there who voted for Obama ’cause they thought he was gonna get us out of Afghanistan and Iraq? I’d like those people on the left to know–we’re now in the Central African Republic, amid Uganda, Rwanda and what’s left of the Congo.

            That area has gotta be on the short list for the Single Most FUBAR Place on Earth! For almost 20 years, his stupid predecessors managed to resist the urge to send troops into a place like that.

            But not him!

            The president is so woefully incompetent.

            1. “That area has gotta be on the short list for the Single Most FUBAR Place on Earth! For almost 20 years, his stupid predecessors managed to resist the urge to send troops into [that very place specifically].”

              Fixed!

          2. What… he thinks he fucking Batman? More like batshit crazy man!

    2. “Whether the LRA is in fact Christian as–any American Christians would understand the term–is an open question.”

      Unless most American Christians approve of kidnapping kids and forcing them into your army and massacring slews of civilians this is one of the dumber things you’ve said lately Ken (up there with the “when has a pol ever gone to prison” statement you had to walk back on after doezens were cited the other day).

      1. But you were screaming on the other thread how you didn’t support wars for humanitarian intervention. Do you support this or do you not?

        1. Do you support this or do you not?

          Any military action undertaken by a politician with a large capital letter “D” after their name: “BLUE-riffic!

      2. Things like that were done during the crusades and we generally say that those actions were performed by Christians, that doesn’t imply any sort approval. I think Ken was wondering aloud if the Christians of our country are theologically similar to those of the LRA; leaving aside the behavior of those groups.

        Kinda like wondering if a southern baptist would consider a mormon to be a christian as he understands it.

        Or maybe Ken was getting at something else…

        1. Things like that were done during the crusades and we generally say that those actions were performed by Christians, that doesn’t imply any sort approval.

          I would just like to point out that Jesus said a great many things, however “kill them all, God will know His own” is not among them.

          1. How about “no one may enter the Kingdom of Heaven except through me”? (Kiss my ass or go to hell.) Was that among them?

            1. Kiss my ass or go to hell.

              Your Biblical exegesis is underwhelming.

              1. But accurate, nonetheless.

          2. “I would just like to point out that Jesus said a great many things,”

            I would like to point out that there isn’t a shred of evidence for an historical “jesus”, so any comments about what “he” said is a fail from the start.

            1. Pretty sure that there is a broad acceptance that a Jesus of Nazareth was a real person. Whether he was the son of God, resurrected from the dead, and performed miracles is the question.

              1. “Pretty sure that there is a broad acceptance that a Jesus of Nazareth was a real person.”

                Uh, among who? Churchgoers?
                See, oh, Ehrman, “Lost Christianities”.
                Not. One. Shred.

              2. “The evidence for the existence of Jesus all comes from after his lifetime.”

                Sevo also gets a penalty for neglecting that at the very least, we have the fictional character Jesus to draw upon for quotes.

                1. Sorry, wiki saying ‘the majority’ ain’t gonna cut it.

                  “Sevo also gets a penalty for neglecting that at the very least, we have the fictional character Jesus to draw upon for quotes.”
                  Uh, what?
                  Cite or it’s done.

                  1. I was agreeing with you on that point. The link was for Esteban. There is no contemporary evidence.

                    You did say historical. I withdraw.

                    1. “You did say historical. I withdraw.”

                      Misunderstanding.
                      While I’m sorry to belabor the point, I’m also tired of seeing “Jesus said” to supposedly support an argument.
                      You might just as well say “Donald Duck said”….

                    2. While I’m sorry to belabor the point, I’m also tired of seeing “Jesus said” to supposedly support an argument.

                      Kind of hard to get around it when El Rushbo claims that Obama is out to kill “Christians” (the Lord’s Resistance Army), which leads to 1) DERP Joseph Kony = Joel Osteen DERPEDY DERP 2) Rush is an idiot (the correct answer) 3) The shocking revelation that some people are…wait for it…hypocrites. Apologetics are a necessary pastime when dumbasses insist that Christian = Crusader, Muslim = Shahid, Jew = Zionist, Libertarian = Republican.

                    3. “Kind of hard to get around it when El Rushbo claims that Obama is out to kill “Christians””

                      Dunno what to say. Rush was the preferred radio program say, 20 years ago, at a place that was doing work for me. That’s as close I’ve come to ‘listening’ to him.
                      There’s plenty of reasons to dislike Obama (including his fave, whacko, god-talker), but this is only worth inclusion because he thinks he gets to start a war when he feels like it.
                      “Killing X-ians” is grasping as straws.

                    4. Joel Osteen is less of a pastor and more of an entrepreneur who makes people feel good in exchange for contributions of their choice.

                      He also managed to get a stadium on the cheap from the City of Houston and a slew of tax exemptions, but that’s really no different than a sports team.

                2. Just for the heck of it, I went back to your Wiki ‘cite’ and checked the back stories, links, etc.
                  Not ONE pointed to actual evidence; every one relied on inference from sources that in no way can be considered ‘evidential’.
                  Again, got a *real* cite?

                  1. And then, check the time stamps; replies got swapped. Sorry.

            2. I would like to point out that there isn’t a shred of evidence for an historical “jesus”, so any comments about what “he” said is a fail from the start.

              This is one of those discussions that never leads anywhere. You first have to discount any “church” documents, which of course means that anyone who might have been interested in the guy if he did exist can’t be taken as a source. Then you have to take into account the fact that the DIRECT evidence of anyone being alive at that time is pretty slim…unless you were pretty dang important in the scheme of things. But, of course, Jesus would have been a minor blip on the local news. And yet you get Tacitus talking about him as if he were real about a generation after he was supposed to have lived. So the idea that he was a real guy is taken at face value very early.

              Parsimony would say it is more likely he was a real guy than made up whole cloth. But the two sides arguing about this aren’t gonna come together since there will never be any better evidence available than is currently available. So if one side says “not good enough” then the discussion is pointless.

              1. “This is one of those discussions that never leads anywhere.”

                Only with brain-dead ignoramuses.
                Cite, (and that means *real* cite) or STFU.
                I’m tired of stupid shits claiming Santa Claus is real, since stuff ends up under the tree.
                Again, NM, real cite, or STFU about how ‘it really isn’t known’.

                1. And sevo steps up to emphasize my point for me.

                  Thanks for playing your role so well and predictably.

        2. “Kinda like wondering if a southern baptist would consider a mormon to be a christian as he understands it.”

          I’ve read reports that the LRA leader is basically a paranoid schizophrenic.

          He believes that he is possessed by the Holy Spirit–much like animists in that part of the world imagine themselves possessed by ancestor spirits.

          He believes he is the Holy Spirit and that he speaks with the Holy Spirit’s voice. He trained his little boy soldiers to fight while in the formation of a cross–because if they stayed in the cross formation? …and used some kind of nut oil? Then bullets can’t hurt them.

          He’s captured thousands of children to fight in his army–usually by killing all of their family so they have nowhere else to go. The purpose of his attacks often have no apparent objective–except killing people and conscripting their children either as soldiers or sex slaves.

          When my parents and grandparents talked about Christianity? None of that was what they were talkin’ about.

      3. “Christian”, “Muslim”. Extremists can be found on all sides and Obama’s Administration would exaggerate extremist claims no matter which group was the target. One week dead Muslims, the next week dead Christians. Obama doesn’t care, he’s just having a good time. He wants another country to occupy.

      4. Unless most American Christians approve of kidnapping kids and forcing them into your army and massacring slews of civilians

        Was LBJ a Christian?

        1. OUCH!

        2. Was Abraham Lincoln? Was Wilson? Was FDR? Eisenhower? We had military conscription in this country for a long time. Technically we still have it, since it’s there to resurrect anytime the government thinks it’s necessary.

      5. “Unless most American Christians approve of kidnapping kids and forcing them into your army and massacring slews of civilians.”

        Work on your reading comprehension, buddy!

        I’m criticized Rush Limbaugh for suggesting that the LRA is exactly “Christian”.

        It certainly isn’t any form of Christianity most Americans would recognize as Christian–I point that out, and you complain?!

        The LRA isn’t really all that Christian–that was MY point! They’re certainly not Christian just because Rush Limbaugh says so. So whether they’re really Christian as Rush Limbaugh says is indeed open to debate–wide open to debate, no matter what Rush Limbaugh says.

        When did you become such a big fan of Limbaugh? Why are you defending his stupidity? …when I’m attacking his stupidity for being so stupid.

        “This is one of the dumber things you’ve said lately Ken (up there with the “when has a pol ever gone to prison” statement you had to walk back on after doezens were cited the other day).”

        Again with the voices in your head clouding your reading comprehension skills. I don’t think I ever said “when has a pol ever gone to prison”.

        Go back and read that thread again–here’s what I wrote:

        “Maybe I’m missing some biggies here–when’s the last time a major politician or bureaucrat went to jail? We should compare that to how many Wall Street/CEOs went to jail in recent years and see who comes out ahead.”

        —-Ken Shultz

        https://reason.com/blog/2011/10…..nt_2571041

        I was asking a question! …and I’m still not convinced we haven’t seen more CEOs and Wall Street people do the perp walk than federal bureaucrats, congresspeople, etc.

        Furthermore, I capped my comments off with the observation that cognitive biases cut both ways–and that I’m just as susceptible as anybody.

        But I’ve never willfully misrepresented what other people say! I think that’s something you do a lot though. Even worse, I don’t think I’ve ever gotten so crazy that I’ve attacked someone–for criticizing Rush Limbaugh’s stupidity?! But I think that’s what you just did–for reals.

        If your biases are so thoroughly controlling you that you end up attacking people for criticizing Limbaugh’s stupidity? Then you should see professional help. Unless you’re a big Limbaugh fan now?

        1. You are really stepping on the boy’s sanctimony. Kind of mean of you. Could be all he has got.

    3. It’s East Africa. Uganda has about the most pro-USA sentiment anywhere. Let’s see how long that lasts with the help.

  17. Distraction from the seriousness:

    http://weebls-stuff.com/songs/Jazzwhals/

    Now… back to the doom’n’gloom.

  18. Right now I would vote for anyone who would end the stupid network practice of making us in MD watch every Redskin and Ravens game instead of the national “game of the week.”

    Shit this Redskins game is almost as terrible as the Ravens-Ram “football game” we were subjected to a few weeks back.

    1. live with it or “Occupy CBS and FOX”

    2. Its called Direct TV.

      1. Sunday Ticket FTW!

        Of course my team is fucking pathetic this season.

        1. Exactly why I haven’t purchased game pass this year.

    3. NFL RedZone Channel

    4. I love those comercials where they are telling parents about the dangers of kids becoming addicts from getting into their drug cabinet. If you have enough pain meds in your cabinet that your kid can take enough of them to become an addict and you not even notice, unless you are dying of cancer, I think your kid being an addict is not the only drug problem in the house.

      1. The pill article would be incomplete without mentioning the I learned it by watching you, Dad! PSA

    5. NFL RedZone Channel

    6. NFL RedZone Channel

      1. stupid server squirels

  19. “More times than not they don’t and in about three minutes they’re dead. And that’s the overdose death from prescription medication.”

    At this rate, there won’t be enough teenagers left alive to justify keeping the public high schools open.

    Win!

    1. And millions of people take opiate based pain meds every day. Yet, somehow manage not to overdose.

      1. Unless you’re lucky enough to get a Schedule II ‘script you’ll o.d. on the tylenol well before the narcotic.

        1. True, APAP has a limited window in which an antidote can be administered. After that…let’s just say, it ain’t a pleasant way to go.

      2. Nuh-uh!

        “More times than not”, they die.

        A police officer told me that. It has to be true.

        1. I take it the good officer didn’t bother tell you about activated charcoal, Narcan and acetylcysteine?

  20. Here’s a link you sad fuckers can have some fun with.

    1. Read the first paragraph via Google News and then quit: the man obviously didn’t understand either, and certainly not what Tea Partiers actually think.

      1. Exclusion vs. inclusion, huh? Being a psychologist and psychoanalyst, one might expect he would be at least somewhat capable of divining the reasoning which drives the two, rather than simple-mindedly identifying the classifications, which are an effect, and not the cause.

        A person with individualist tendencies will naturally tend to trust himself over all others, and therefore to distrust, and even to resent, governance of any kind, depending upon the extent to which it attempts to exert control over his personal will. He may tend to be blind to the ways in which business beds down with government, because first and foremost, he identifies with a successful business and envisions himself being similarly successful one day, as well. It is no wonder that his solution to the problem at hand is a less powerful government.

        Conversely, a person with a more collectivist outlook will tend to personally identify with the means and the ends of the government; he sees himself as basically good, and therefore fit for the purpose, himself. By his support and participation, he perceives this to have become the case; he is a part of something, not apart from it. Since he identifies this way, roughly opposite to that of the individualist, he sees the relationship between business and government as one in which government, the good, is variously corrupted by business, the bad, which is always a possibility, individual humans being fallible. It should be self evident, then, that his solution to the problem at hand is a more powerful government.

        Each considers the same problem, and comes to an opposite conclusion, due to biases which are seated deeply in the very self-conception of each. This is why you should expect to have very little luck in successfully convincing either party to consider things from the point of view of the other.

        1. I don’t believe in psychology; I believe in bad moves, good moves and better moves.

  21. if Mexico triumphs as I am sure it will, if Mexico has new institutions in the future, if Mexico subdues the criminals, if Mexico reconstructs its social fabric

    …the sky will be so filled with flying pigs they will blot out the sun.

    1. I am very sad for my Mexico.

    2. Then we will fight in the shade.

      1. And with umbrellas, hopefully.

  22. Wall Street occupiers are destroying food carts and other small businesses.

    Those money-grubbing raghead falafel pushers should be feeding the noble freedom fighter legions for free, and be happy and proud to do it!

    1. ….resent foreigners taking all the jobs….

  23. “….like heroin, porn….” Say, what ever happened to those sixties and seventies radicals that wanted freedom to ass-fuck in the middle of the street, like dogs……Oh, that’s right, they became the sponsors of today’s campus speech codes and hate crime laws.

  24. “WAR ON PORN” another opportunity for the war-mongers. Let’s create a new agency PRICK or CUNT and equip them with SWAT vans and body armor. “Let’s smash some doors down — I love the smell of lesbo-porn in the morning.”

  25. No one should take Cain seriously as a candidate.

    1. they’d open some Godfather’s Pizza joints near my house…

    2. Yeah! Not… like… me, say!

  26. West Hollywood is full of homoerotica of this sort; a sensuality so aggressive that it borders on Hitlerian.

    Talk about a terminal case of the flutters.

    1. Isn’t West Hollywood known for being full of every sort of homoerotica?

  27. O-bomb-a treats our Special Ops Forces like the world is a giant Call of Duty game. “What’s that, there are some bad guys in a remote African jungle!? Call SOCOM!”

    These guys should be used to slay AMERICA’s enemies, no one else’s.

    1. Sorry. We never, ever protest against American military adventurism. Not our line.

      1. well we do sometimes, but we CAMPAIGN for and DONATE to Obama, so it’s a little uncomfortable to make too big of a deal about it now….

      2. The Berkeley Marine Corps Recruiting Center protests began in September 2007 when a small group of protesters from Code Pink began periodically protesting in front of a United States Marine Corps Officer Selection Office located in Downtown Berkeley, California at 64 Shattuck Avenue by standing in front of the office holding banners and placing signs.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B…..r_protests

        1. Wow, how utterly pointless. Removing one Marine recruitment office from an area that probably wasn’t going to get many recruits anyway.

          That’s much more productive than actually demonstrating against the wars those Marine have no choice to fight in.

  28. The internet is a threat to the traditional order and so it is not our friend. The North Koreans understand that, even if we do not.

    Excuse me, Mister Stanley; there’s a man with a butterfly net at the door.

    1. that Jong-Il views some good old western hard-core now and then?

      1. “I’m so ronery…”

    2. And the traditional order *is* our friend?

  29. This Riggs article is about some very serious stuff and all I see is comments making light fun of it all.

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahah!

  30. “Texas District Attorney opposes DNA testing of convicted suspects because “it overrides what a jury decided.”

    This uneducated, low-functioning asshole must be disbarred for violating ethical laws.

    1. The Texas District Attorney is either a Republican or a Democrat. For sure.

  31. If Jim Schwartz is going to try to rumble with the other coach every time the Lions lose, I may have to become a Detroit fan.

    1. If you want to shake my hand, you look Jim Schwartz in the eye.

    2. Jim Harbaugh was imitating the fist-pumping and other celebrations Schwartz has been doing. If anything, you should become a 49ers fan for Harbaugh’s chutzpah.

      1. Did I say anything about Harbaugh?

        Frankly, I like Schwartz’ shitfit MORE the less justified it was.

        I am pretty much pro-bad-sportmanship.

  32. “Herman Cain proposed an electrified border fence that would kill anyone who tried to cross the border illegally; today says, “America needs to get a sense of humor.”

    There’s an important difference here that should be pointed out.

    When Cain said something stupid, he came back later and said that he was just joking.

    When Obama said he wanted to sic the IRS on all the poor people who can’t afford to buy health insurance? He wasn’t joking at all. He actually turned that stupidity into law.

    Everybody see the difference there? ’cause it’s an important difference!

    1. Yes, the difference is Obama is on our side and Cain is a dumb Republican.

      1. Well, duh!

        Everyone (ought) to know that. If they don’t, we need to tax Teh Rich!!!!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!111!!1111111!!!!!11!one!!!1!1111evelven!!!!!!! to pay for our [pulbic] SKOOOLZ1

        1. First, We need to eliminate Land Regulation. Drawing abstract lines on Mother Earth’s surface — the big government that gives away Land enTitlement to the privileged — restrict the free movement of people to forage and hunt for themselves. It also coerces them to wage slave for the owner class or starve.

          1. STFU, White Idiot. No one’s buying your bullshit.

            1. FIFY, are you trying to claim that abstract lines upon the earth demarcating boundaries aren’t made to restrict people’s movement? Got denial?

              1. FIFY, are you trying to deny that it takes the aggression of government to enforce such a system?

                Why do self-styled “libertarians” so quickly piss all over the Non-Aggression Principle?

                1. Shut the fuck up, you idiot. You’re making even less sense than usual, and that ain’t sayin’ much.

                  1. White Indian’s nothing more than a bad parody of himself at this point.

                    Not sure why he bothers anymore.

          2. There’s nothing privileged about landownership. It’s not that complicated really. You get a job. You work hard. You save your money. You buy a house.

            There’s nothing in there that requires privilege.

            1. You get a job. You work hard.

              That is the ultimate goal of this big-government program of creating artificial boundaries on the Land – coercing free people into wage slavery.

              Our system of private property in land forces landless men to work for others; to work in factories, stores, and offices, whether they like it or not….Disestablishment from land, like slavery, is a form of duress. The white man, where slavery cannot be practiced, has found that he must first disestablish the savages from their land before he can force them to work steadily for him. Once they are disestablished, they are in effect starved into working for him and into working as he directs.

              THIS UGLY CIVILIZATION
              by RALPH BORSODI
              NEW YORK
              SIMON AND SCHUSTER
              1 9 2 9
              http://soilandhealth.org/03sov…..i.toc.html

            2. nothing privileged about landownership

              Incorrect.

              Do you pay property taxes for the government enTitlement program of “owning” land?

              Try not paying your taxes, and see if you have a “right” to your land, or if it is a privilege.

              1. So you’re in favor of eliminating property taxes?

                Because such taxes make it harder for poor people to own property?

                ’cause you might have a good point there! Well done.

                1. Ken, you argued, there is nothing privileged about land ownership.

                  You are wrong, as I demonstrated. Admit it, instead of playing cute games.

                  I’m the one consistently against the State. You’re the agricultural city-Statist.

                  But sure, let’s eliminate all taxes, and thereby eliminate the agricultural city-State (civilization) altogether.

                  ’cause you might have a good point there! Well done.

                  1. There is nothing privileged about it. No more privileged than deciding who gets to buy what at the grocery store. Do you imagine that only privileged people are allowed to shop at Whole Foods? Because I don’t see that as “privileged”. They’ll take anybody’s money so long as it’s good.

                    Oh, but Word of the Day for you: “Equivocation”.

                    http://www.fallacyfiles.org/equivoqu.html

                    If you want to play semantics by complaining that only “privileged” people can own their own homes? …and then turn around and argue that “privileged” is about being able to afford to pay property taxes?

                    Then I’m gonna say we should open what you’re calling a “privilege” up to more people by eliminating such discriminatory forms of taxation.

                    Do you really want to keep poor people down and propertyless? Don’t you care about them at all?

                    And then I’m gonna stop–because playing semantic games with trolls over the word “privilege” is pointless.

                    1. Ken,
                      Do you *really* think vermin shit is open to honest argument?
                      Vermin + food + vermin shit. Starve the beast.

                    2. Libertarian argument method: go to fallacyfiles and search for a bullshit fallacy to sling.

                      Still, you won’t address my point, because I’ve debunked your libertarian theory of property.

                      Private property is the primary enTitlement program of big-government. This has been true for 10,000 years, if you cared to check your premises with some anthropology, archeology, and ethnology.

                      You’re trying to deflect the argument to a policy about taxes, while accepting the aggression (and/or trying to hide it) that is necessary for private property rights.

                    3. Do you forage for food, or do you go to the supermarket?

                    4. Mr. FIFY,
                      Do you *really* think vermin shit is open to honest argument?
                      Vermin + food = vermin shit. Starve the beast.

                    5. Just pointin’ out the hypocrisy.

                    6. Protip: Start eating the berries, and spitting out the seeds. It will be much easier on your hemorrhoids, and you’ll be less cranky.

  33. If people want to overthrow the system they need to rid themselves of their masters (like the Arab Spring). And in the West the masters are a monied aristocracy, not the elected president!
    he corporations are the government. The corporations through their lobbyist make laws , change laws, create wars, elect politicians and create political parties to do their bidding.

    1. “And in the West the masters are a monied aristocracy, not the elected president!”

      The first thing Barack Obama did when he took office was give Wall Street, et. al. $350 billion out of working Americans’ future paychecks.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..58292.html

      Why should I ignore that fact?

      1. Yet you ignore CEOs of large US based mutinational conglomerates are getting 350 times the average wage of a US worker while not contributing nearly that much more to society.

        Explain to me how offshoring jobs and flattening wages so that US workers will eventually be at par with those in China and India while fattening your bank account contributes to society?

        1. Why must they contribute to “society”?

        2. “Yet you ignore CEOs of large US based mutinational conglomerates are getting 350 times the average wage of a US worker while not contributing nearly that much more to society.”

          The people who pay those CEOs their salaries?

          Do so willingly.

          How much money do you think Steve Jobs was worth to Apple shareholders and customers over the years?

          He only got a fraction of the wealth he created.

          People should be free to pay those who work for them whatever they please. And if you want some CEOs working for you?

          Go open up an account at E*Trade. You can do it all online, and decide which CEOs you want to hire. Easy as clicking one of Steve Jobs’ mice.

          1. When revenues are increased by cutting the wages and benefits of the workers, then it’s tantamount to theft because the “value to shareholders” is increased via a cut to front line employees.

            1. “When revenues are increased by cutting the wages and benefits of the workers, then it’s tantamount to theft because the “value to shareholders” is increased via a cut to front line employees.”

              Sarcasm?
              Just in case, no, it’s not “theft”. Workers can find other jobs and leave the “thief” with no workers.

              1. devils advocate

            2. “When revenues are increased by cutting the wages and benefits of the workers, then it’s tantamount to theft because the “value to shareholders” is increased via a cut to front line employees.”

              It’s the responsibility of shareholders to ensure their interests are being represented properly. Corporate elections for the boardroom can be more democratic than they way we pick our senators, but it isn’t just the corporate election I’m talking about here.

              Investors can vote with their feet. If your management structure is hurting your frontline employees and their ability to maximize your profits? Then investors will defect away from your company and hire a different one–by selling the stock.

              Downward pressure like that on your stock sucks major for all sorts of reasons.

              Also, if your competitors can take away some of your business because of stupid compensation packages? ..by investing in expansion and hiring? They will.

              That happened to a major pizza chain a few years back. Bad compensation systems can destroy your company.

              1. Employee’s aren’t people, the’re a line on the expense column.

                1. “Employee’s aren’t people, the’re a line on the expense column”

                  Sam, you forgot your “Serve the People” sign.
                  And your brains; they seem to have gone missing.

                  1. I just think laying people off should be illegal. Think how much better off we’d be if no one was unemployed?

                    1. Sam B|10.16.11 @ 10:16PM|#
                      “I just think laying people off should be illegal”

                      OK, folks, we have a WINNER in the “I’m really stupid about business” category.
                      Retire the chair; can’t be beat!

                2. Actually, having the wrong people can really hurt your bottom line.

                  If you’re somebody who can’t see the difference between the good workers and the bad workers you work with? …and why their various talents and experience and attitudes are worth more than others?

                  Then you should get out of the factory and go back to school.

                  1. Sam, you’re really in the wrong place to have those views.

                    DemocraticUnderground, however, makes a nice home for people like you.

                    1. Democratic Underground? What an echo chamber

                    2. “Democratic Underground? What an echo chamber”
                      Well, you don’t seem to have enough brains to deal with anything else.

                    3. Well, Sam, if that’s not to your liking, you could go to many other websites where your POV would be met with the echo-chambery goodness you seek.

          2. The people who pay those CEOs their salaries? Do so willingly.

            Actually, not, and that’s the gripe.

            Nice try at deflecting judgement from your banskter buddies.

        3. Yet you ignore CEOs of large US based mutinational conglomerates are getting 350 times the average wage of a US worker while not contributing nearly that much more to society.

          I don’t pay their salary. I did pay for TARP.

          1. “The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is FASCISM?ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.”

            US President F.D. Roosevelt–1933

            1. FDR toyed with a 100% tax on incomes over a certain dollar amount, so… fuck FDR for having even contemplated such a fascistic fucking idea.

        4. “Yet you ignore CEOs of large US based mutinational conglomerates are getting 350 times the average wage of a US worker”

          Yes, I do. Did you have a point?

          1. When I see a CEO from a large corporation get fired and then receives a $20mil payout, of course it makes me sick.
            When I see large corporations make profits, great! This is where our retirement money is suppose to come from. If they don’t make profits, the whole wheel doesn’t turn.

            1. “When I see a CEO from a large corporation get fired and then receives a $20mil payout, of course it makes me sick.”

              When I see third-parties claiming to know what the price of a certain transaction should cost, it makes me think the third-parties are ignoramuses

            2. When I see large corporations make profits, great! This is where our retirement money is suppose to come from. If they don’t make profits, the whole wheel doesn’t turn.

              Big business can only make poor financial decisions and survive if profits are guaranteed. Guaranteed profits result from some variation of crony capitalism like ignored fraud or regulatory capture.

              Unless these protestors address the corruption in government – specifically the Democratic as well as the Republican parties – nobody should take them seriously, because they’re not serious.

              1. “The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is FASCISM?ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.”

                US President F.D. Roosevelt–1933

                1. “US President F.D. Roosevelt”

                  Uh, Sam, quoting an econ-ignoramus pretty much means *you’re* an econ-ignoramus.

                2. “…of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself…”

                  And to make it clear, exactly what “power” do private organizations have?
                  Ever see an IRS agent pulling a gun and forcing someone to buy anything? Didn’t think so, dipshit.

                  1. The government is owned by the corporations, dipshit

                    1. “The government is owned by the corporations, dipshit”

                      Oh, oh, look! Brand new stupid lefty arrives and spouts stupidity no one has seen before!
                      Actually, brain-dead asshole is boring.

                    2. The root cause of the problem is the greed practised by a few at the expense of the many.

                      Their ability to acquire or control obsecene amounts of wealth has been enabled by this mentality that meeting the financial “bottom line” is the sole priority of governments.

                      Good government works on behalf of the broadest spectrum of society, unfortunately those with obscene amounts of wealth have sway that is disproportionate to what they are entitled to in a democratic society.

                      This has enabled them to pass laws, ignore regulations, and engage in criminal activity to stilt the balance of power, and the balance of the marketplace itself, in their favor.

                      To regain balance, people have to take measures to ensure that those who provide the means for the generation of the wealth have a share in the proceeds of the enterprise.

                    3. The root cause of the problem is the greed practised by a few at the expense of the many.

                      Their ability to acquire or control obsecene amounts of wealth has been enabled by this mentality that meeting the financial “bottom line” is the sole priority of governments.

                      Good government works on behalf of the broadest spectrum of society, unfortunately those with obscene amounts of wealth have sway that is disproportionate to what they are entitled to in a democratic society.

                      This has enabled them to pass laws, ignore regulations, and engage in criminal activity to stilt the balance of power, and the balance of the marketplace itself, in their favor.

                      To regain balance, people have to take measures to ensure that those who provide the means for the generation of the wealth have a share in the proceeds of the enterprise.

                    4. The root cause of the problem is the greed practised by a few at the expense of the many.

                      Their ability to acquire or control obsecene amounts of wealth has been enabled by this mentality that meeting the financial “bottom line” is the sole priority of governments.

                      Good government works on behalf of the broadest spectrum of society, unfortunately those with obscene amounts of wealth have sway that is disproportionate to what they are entitled to in a democratic society.

                      This has enabled them to pass laws, ignore regulations, and engage in criminal activity to stilt the balance of power, and the balance of the marketplace itself, in their favor.

                      To regain balance, people have to take measures to ensure that those who provide the means for the generation of the wealth have a share in the proceeds of the enterprise.

                3. Are you really quoting a socialist as an appeal to authority on a libertarian blog? That just provokes laughs.

                  1. “The root cause of the problem is the greed practised by a few at the expense of the many.”

                    How come I get the feeling that your idea of “greed” is my idea of people doing what’s best for themselves and their families?

                    1. Fuck your family, I got my Bankster Bonus.

                      Thanks Ken, for standing with the thieving psychopaths of financial chicanery, and maintaining that false store front of hard working ‘Murka.

                      Cue up Lee Greenwood.

                    2. I missed where Ken stated his support for TARP.

    2. Purge the influence of the 1% out of your own party, then we’ll talk.

  34. I’m in the 1% but support the 99%

    There is something wrong with our value system that encourages people to aspire to those riches. But there’s something more fundamentally wrong in our political and economic system that permits them to do so while the vast majority of people languish in poverty, or are barely keeping their heads above water after paying their taxes, their student debts, their rent and basic necessities.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm…..all-street

      1. …of Govt milk.

    1. There’s also something wrong with a value system that condemns the aspirations to such riches and yet lusts after the self same riches to redistribute after they are acquired by someone.

        1. The only reason The Left tolerates non-nationalized, privately-owned business is for the tax income.

          Period.

    2. “But there’s something more fundamentally wrong in our political and economic system that permits them to do so while the vast majority of people [buy I-things, spend money at Statbucks, pay practically nothing for their food, buy too much on credit, etc]”

      FIFY

  35. “private sin”? Now that a cute name for raping children

  36. Tragedy in Vegas
    http://espn.go.com/chicago/sto…..-las-vegas

  37. I used to be able to listen to Limbaugh and honestly say that I agreed with roughly 70-80% of what he said. Never agreed with his militarism or War on Drugs support. Some of his social conservatism made me wanna puke. However, I agreed with him on economic issues, and his commentary regarding Establishment types, the “Drive-by” media, and the feckless, lunatic Left.
    But something has happened in the last few years that I can’t quite put my finger on. I don’t know if it’s me, but I just agree with him less and less – it seems as if he’s entered the crass conservative “get off my lawn!” phase of his life, and the bogeyman lurks around every corner for him, especially as it pertains to his SoCon tendencies. Plus, he has so obviously pushed for Perry, which by any stretch is a bad call. Still entertaining, but just not the same for me.

    1. I think he’s just taken himself too seriously for too long.

      It’s hard to remember now that he was genuinely funny when he started out 20 odd years ago.

  38. So glad the hunters and gatherers could contribute today! They add so much, especially when the subject is “stupid Sunday”! Right up their collective alley!

    Thanks, hunters and gatherers!

    1. How does it feel to have White Indian count coup intellectually at reason with your very own, yet not non-contradictorily integrated, principles, such as:

      1. Freedom of movement.
      2. Non-aggression.
      3. Preference for a non-state society over State control.

      Probably the same as a young earth creationist who has lost the argument and won’t admit it.

      1. Seriously, quit swallowing the seeds. It must be playing hell with your diverticulitis.

        1. White Indian beats you intellectually at your own game.

          You definitely win at insults. Very practiced. There is no equal.

          Got “Reason?”

  39. I checked out the OWS crowd in Zucatti Park today, and it confirmed my preconceptions about what the occupiers would look like. 80-90% dirty hippies. Hell, even the people congregating around the Ron Paul banner looked like dirty hippies.

    I also saw some communists who freely admitted they were communists. Why aren’t communists as hated and shunned as much as NAZIs are?

    1. “Why aren’t communists as hated and shunned as much as NAZIs are?”

      I wonder about this too. It’s not like Hitler managed to murder even a *tenth* of the innocents the communists did. As a moral monster, he’s a piker.
      And it can’t even be justified by racism; Stalin hated the JOOZ as much as Hitler did, and added the Poles and Ukrainians for good measure.
      (yes, I know none is strictly a “race”)

    2. Game: guilt by association. Number of players: ?

      “I absolutely insist on protecting private property … we must encourage private initiative.

      ~Adolph Hitler
      March 24, 1942

      If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck….Ah, so fun!

  40. …money to your controller.

    Officer, am I free to gambol about plain and forest?

    Negative ghostrider, the agricultural city-Statists have drawn abstract lines on the surface of Mother Earth to restrict freedom of movement. You will be aggressed against by people who say “We need government to protect privation property rights.”

    Not many, but a few, will even justify their aggression while preaching the non-agression principle.

    1. Well now, if owing real property is illegitimate, then so is owning personal property.

      If somebody whacks you on the head and takes the food you have just hunted and gathered, then you have no more legitimate complaint than do those who insist you don’t trespass on their land.

      The concept of property ownership of any type is, after all, merely an artificial construct. The animals certainly don’t abide by it. The bear will happily steal the wolves kill whenever it can.

      You aren’t the least bit capable of proving that your particular preference for the boundaries of property rights is one iota more “vaild” or superior in any way to the definition that includes the right to own land.

  41. I’m looking for a good chat room. Is this a good chat room?
    What are the rules?
    Are there any women here?

    1. Rule 1: Don’t question their dogma

      1. “Rule 1: Post bullshit and expect to get called on it”

        FIFY

      2. Rule 2. Don’t question their religio-economic dogma.

        READ ROTHBARD!

        He knew what to do with the dirty hippies at #OWS.

        Cops must be unleashed, and allowed to administer instant punishment…unleash the cops to clear the streets of bums and vagrants. Where will they go? Who cares? ~Murray Rothbard

        Because hippies are kinda like those … you know which color.

        In short; racialist science is properly not an act of aggression or a cover for oppression of one group over another, but, on the contrary, an operation in defense of private property against assaults by aggressors. ~Murray Rothbard

        1. Let’s not even get started on what Rothbard wanted to do with hunter-gatherers.

          1. Mike,
            Vermin + food = vermin shit.
            I’ll bet you don’t want vermin shit, so starvation is the way to go.

            1. Sam and White Idiot would make a lovely couple.

              1. Like matching socks, eh…? 😉

                1. I wouldn’t stick the feet of John Maynard Keynes in those socks…

                  1. The agricultural city-STATE is why tube socks are so much more prevalent than the far superior argyle sox.

                    1. Libertarian Statists loves ’em some agricultural city-State (civilization.)

                      Get buttfucked by State good and hard.

                      Whine like a child, “I want liberty but not much of it!”

                      How’s that philosophy of government for me, but not for thee working out?

                      Libertarianism has all the intellectual integrity of Leninism. Zilch.

        2. And to think Andy Rooney scolded Borat when the latter used the word “racialist.”

    2. Excellent Chat Room

      Rule #1, a lot of the trolls here love taking pot shots at libertarians. Don’t fall for it.

      In regards to females–absolutely! It seems like there used to be more.

      1. They aren’t very logical at reason, unless it is convenient.

        1. The insinuation, Ken, is that we are anti-female around here.

          Let these fuckers like Sam and White Idiot post on Feministing, and see how anti-male THEY are on that website.

  42. This tips the scales for me. Time to stock up and go Galt. Sell off my assets, rent a modest bungalow, find a job that pays about a quarter of what I currently earn. Would not want to be in the cross hairs of these zombie fools.

    Thousands of Occupy Chicago protesters cheered the communist leaders last night in Chicago.

    http://www.reuters.com/article…..1E20111015

  43. President Clinton is sexually assaulted by a transvestite!

    http://www.nydailynews.com/ent…..ate_h.html

    While Chelsea and Hillary watched in horror!

    1. That’s because she hates freedom.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEqIEPJBMn4

      1. Good one. I have been trying to find the scene with the reading of Dennis and Dee’s mom’s will without luck. Anyone who can paste that bad boy in gets a free blowjob from White Indian. I hear he is like a Hoover down there!

  44. Cindy Sheehan gets busted in Sacto:
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/…..649D02.DTL
    Can’t tell whether she was protesting Obama’s wars or not.

  45. Texas District Attorney opposes DNA testing of convicted suspects because “it overrides what a jury decided.”

    Does this same DA support drug testing juries, to make sure drugs do not override what a jury decided?

  46. Oh, NOES!
    Cain once worked for a for an advocacy group which got money from the Kochoptupus:
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/…..352D12.DTL

    1. Connect the dots, mannnn!

  47. And then: ‘I don’t like what she says, but she’s a WOMAN’!’

    “It’d be great to have a woman president,” said Michelle Joly, 44, an unemployed former human resources director, who voted for Aubry. “The programs of Aubry and Hollande are a bit ‘six of one, half a dozen of the other.’ And in fact. I’d probably have more negative things to say about Aubry, but I still voted for her.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/…..053D56.DTL

    “The French they are a funny race, fight with their feet….”

  48. OMG! You can’t script this shit!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uE2M7g_IWSE

    These dudes exist, in the here and now; it’s mind blowing.

    1. Two people totally ignorant of history.
      ‘We don’t know they did that’? Sorry the interviewer didn’t ask about the holocaust….

      1. Wait . . I smell a rat, here. one, that uniform is clean. And so is that old hippies shirt.

    2. Self-proclaimed intellectuals coming to rescue us

      Never argue with a fool

  49. “Treat me like a human being.”

    Well, at least now we know what the OWS people want.

  50. “the internet turned pedophilia from a private sin into an organized crime.”

    Rape was better in the old days too. Just ask Steve Smith.

  51. We are the 99%! We are drowning while the rich Atlanteans are safe in their mountain palaces.

  52. We are the 99%! We are all dying of starvation and asphyxiation while the wealthiest Martians are carving out a giant face so they can be rescued by Earthlings.

  53. We are the 99%! We’re all labeled as planets, comets and asteroids and such while the elite 1% get to be galaxies!

    1. In the United States at the end of 2001, 10% of the population owned 71% of the wealth and the top 1% owned 38%. On the other hand, the bottom 40% owned less than 1% of the nation’s wealth. According to this 2006 study by the Federal Reserve System, from 1989 to 2004, the distribution in the United States had been changing with indications there was a greater concentration of wealth held by the top 10% and top 1% of the population. A PBS report by Solman on Aug. 16, 2011 now found that financial gains over the last decade in the United States have been mostly made at the “tippy-top” of the economic food chain as more people fall out of the middle class.

      Capitalism is as psychopathic as Communism.

      ? Superficial charm and average intelligence.
      ? Pathological egocentricity and incapacity to love.
      ? General poverty in major affective reactions.
      ? Specific loss of insight.
      ? Unresponsiveness in general interpersonal relations.

      Excerpts of characteristics of a psychopath, defined by Hervery M. Cleckley in 1941 in the book Mask of Sanity.

      1. ” A PBS report …”

        Ha! ha! ha!

        1. “PBS report” says all you need to know when it comes to taking it seriously.

  54. i would like to be this stupid

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.