Occupy Wall Street

Michael Moore: Me and My Millions


Michael Moore, who came under heavy fire for marching with the 99 percent without admitting that he is among the 1 percent, finally blogged a mea culpa yesterday that is all "mea" and no "culpa." He describes in rather minute detail what he did with the $3 million he made when he sold the rights of Roger & Me to Warner Bros.

 He says:

1. I would first pay all my taxes. I told the guy who did my 1040 not to declare any deductions other than the mortgage and to pay the full federal, state and city tax rate. I proudly contributed nearly 1 million dollars for the privilege of being a citizen of this great country.

2. Of the remaining $2 million, I decided to divide it up the way I once heard the folksinger/activist Harry Chapin tell me how he lived: "One for me, one for the other guy." So I took half the money—$1 million—and established a foundation to give it all away.

3. The remaining million went like this: I paid off all my debts, paid off the debts of some friends and family members, bought my parents a new refrigerator, set up college funds for our nieces and nephews, helped rebuild a black church that had been burned down in Flint, gave out a thousand turkeys at Thanksgiving, bought filmmaking equipment to send to the Vietnamese (my own personal reparations for a country we had ravaged), annually bought 10,000 toys to give to Toys for Tots at Christmas, got myself a new American-made Honda, and took out a mortgage on an apartment above a Baby Gap in New York City.

4. What remained went into a simple, low-interest savings account. I made the decision that I would never buy a share of stock (I didn't understand the casino known as the New York Stock Exchange and I did not believe in investing in a system I did not agree with).

Assuming that there is more truth in Moore's tale than in his "documentaries," boasting about passing out one thousand turkeys for Thanksgiving 22 years ago is impressively tacky, even for Moore. When was the last time Bill Gates gave a laundry list of all of his charitable giving?

But here are my questions for Moore:

One, what exactly is an "American made Honda"? Is it the same as the Japanese transplant that is allegedly  throwing thousands of UAW employees out of work in your hometown?

Two, do you really believe that buying Manhattan real estate instead of shares is opting out of the capitalist system? Who do you think finances your mortgage? A Marxist tooth fairy?

Three, what have you done with the millions that you earned from your subsequent ventures, including your little valentine to Castro's health care system?

Update: Looks like Moore might have been less than truthful in his paean about himself. (Surprise! Surprise!) He claims that he made a decision in 1989 to never buy "a share of stock." But apparently that pledge did not apply to a trust fund that he created and controls along with his wife. Hoover's Peter Schweizer reported in his 2005 bestseller, Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy, that the fund actually invests in a whole host of evil corporations such as: Pfizer, Merck, Genzyme, Elan PLC, Eli Lilly, Becton Dickinson, Boston Scientific, Sunoco, Noble Energy, Schlumberger, Williams Companies, Transocean Sedco Forex, Anadarko, Ford, General Electric, AOL Time Warner, Honeywell, Boeing Loral and even the crown prince of all evil: Haliburton.

Michael Moore hotly denied Schweizer's charges, to which Schweizer responded here.

Thanks to all the readers who pointed this out. And a free Reason t-shirt and one-year subscription of Reason magazine to anyone who can debunk Moore's claim that he actually paid a 33 percent effective tax rate without claiming any deductions other than his mortgage in 1989.

NEXT: Print Media Still Excellent Source of Yesterday's News

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. Millions of cheeseburgers? Oh, yeah, dollars….. right!

    1. For the love of money [property values] is the rot of all evil [property values.]

      The POLICe protect and serve
      the POLIS‘ property values.

      The self-styled but demonstrably false “free” coerced market has an aggressive foundation of government enTitlement that restricts the free movement of free people.

      The world has long noted selfish hypocrites like the Libertarians, who speak with forked tongue.

      White Indian mocks the Libertarian rejection of reason, your contradictions, your intellectual evasions.

      Officer, am I free to gambol about plain and forest like free families did for 15,000 years — until an invasion and occupation that started 200 years ago in these parts?


      Then Libetarianism has ZERO to do about freedom, and everything to do about aggression.

      Kill the bum Kelly and kill the bum White Indian lowering our Statist granted Land enTitlement values.

      Libertarians are killers and haters at heart.

      Go ahead, make fun of Michael Moore, if it entertains you so much.

      So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him be the first to cast a stone at her. ~verse 7, chapter 8, The Jefferson Bible

      1. Needs more gambol.

        1. Thus, no gamboling.

          1. “When is it legitimate to initiate the use of force against others? Never! Unless, of course, you really need to initiate force … then it’s pre-emptive protection of property rights.”

            Critiques Of Libertarianism

            1. You are aware that the right to defend the home and person are will rooted in British common Law and Anglo American laws with roots going back to Magna Carta. It is legal to kill in self defense in all 50 states and Canada; so the ‘exception’ your referring to is well established on this continent.

              1. Don’t feed the troll.

                No troll food = no vermin shit

              2. Yes, I’m well aware of the right to defend the home and persons inside.

                Any other questions?

                Are you aware that the justification of property by libertarians is that property which is necessary to survive?

                Paleolithic humans have honored that kind of property for thousands of years. Nobody disputes it.

                But how does 1% of people need 40% of the property to survive?

                And how does 10% of people need 85% of the property to survive?

                Riddle me that.

                1. Are you aware that the justification of property by libertarians is that property which is necessary to survive?

                  I don’t think it’s fair that you get to do both sides of the argument.

                  1. Please ignore the troll. Everywhere he goes he shits all over everything.

                    No reactions to his insanity = less vermin shit.

                    1. Property is necessary because humans need things to survive.

                      It is the libertarian justification of property by many authors.

                      Riddle me this:

                      But how does 1% of people need 40% of the property to survive?

                      And how does 10% of people need 85% of the property to survive?

                      Are they that needy?


                    2. Please ignore the troll. Everywhere he goes he shits all over everything.

                      No reactions to his insanity = less vermin shit.

                      Sorry, man. I replied without thinking. It’s so frustrating when the reply to his/her nonsense is so obvious. But yes. Ignore. I resolve to do so all over again.

                    3. …as defined by libertarian/capitalist philosophy!

                      Property is necessary because humans need things to survive on our home planet.

                      What is so nonsense about that?

                      Can you explain yourself, Hidalgo?

                    4. I can, but I fear it would encourage you to post more of the same stuff again. Look, I’m willing to debate you, but only on the assumption that you’re not just going to repeat yourself, serve up non sequiters, or refer me to batshit scholars. I have a lot of stuff on my reading list already – I can’t take recommendations from just anyone on the internet. I don’t have time. So I’ll reply this once, but if the reply to my reply violates any of the above conditions, that’s it. Neither of us would gain anything from continued debate.
                      The reason you’re wrong is this: not all libertarian philosophers justify property on the basis that we’d die without it. Some do. But to defeat a position it’s not just a good idea, but in fact a cast iron law, that you need to defeat the strongest argument for that position, not the weakest. The idea of property is justified in many different ways by libertarian philosophers, and there’s no end to the number of arguments made for the pragmatic side of things (i.e. property caters to terminal values outside of property), but perhaps the most famous and oft-repeated argument for the libertarian conception of property is the idea that the alternative to self-ownership is slavery, and without ‘exterior’ property there is no self-ownership. Which is to say, unless one has priveleged control over one’s creation, one is essentially imprisoned by the whims of others – any control you exerted over the world could be immediately and legitimately undone by someone who wanted to use the same resources for something else, and so your control over your own life would be equal only to the control of others over your life, and so self-ownership is violated. Bear in mind, though, this is only the way I like to phrase the argument – what I’m talking about is basically the same as Nozick and Locke (without the divine right stuff).

                    5. Also, sorry to everyone for encouraging him. Yes, I’m sure he’s laughing at the fact he got me to reply.

                    6. The reason you’re wrong is this: not all libertarian philosophers justify property on the basis that we’d die without it. Some do.

                      When did I ever say “all?”

                      Then you try to minimize the ones who do with “some.”

                      Yeah, it’s some. “Most” to be honest.

                      Rand and Rothbard stated it clearly, using the word “survive.” Even Locke in his On Property uses food in his examples.

                      Wanna take another swing?

                    7. As wise man once said this:

                      But to defeat a position it’s not just a good idea, but in fact a cast iron law, that you need to defeat the strongest argument for that position, not the weakest.

                    8. I agree. There are times when the answer is obvious and the fight to NOT respond hard.

                      But we must stay the course!! LOL

          2. I gambol plenty. Just not on “public property”, since the state keeps closing parks ‘n sech.

            “You’re not allowed here – This is public property.”

        2. Read my stupid muthfukkas! READ IT!


      2. Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. ~verse 41, chapter 3, The Jefferson Bible

        “When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.” ~Thomas Jefferson

        Libertarians, you’re beyond swinish corruption.

        Pile up! Pile on! Rend! Trample! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO PIGS! SOOIE!

        What a fucking disgusting sight, worse than Michael Moore, below.

        1. This is begging for a crush video.

          1. Premise Ten: The culture as a whole and most of its members are insane. The culture is driven by a death urge, an urge to destroy life.

            derrick jensen

      3. Crazy much?

        1. It takes an exceptionally stupid specimen of its species to calmly accept the captivity of civilization.

          Wolves & Dogs
          by Jason Godesky
          13 November 2006

          P.S. your daddy is third picture down in the above article

    2. Libertarianism is basically the Marxism of the Right.

      Marxism of the Right
      By Robert Locke
      The American Conservative
      March 14, 2005

      1. This guy is no longer published in the American Conservative when he published an article in VDARE advocating forcible removal of Palestinians. Also, a man who believes someone’s right to live in a society without pornography trumps the right to free speech is not going to convince any libertarians. Also, he’d really piss off Shikha with his “keep out poor foreigners” who’d vote for socialists. And while I normally think reading racism into a statement when it’ not there is ridiculous, it’s hard to argue that he wasn’t implying “brown” in between poor and foreigners.

          1. Well yeah, it kind of does, unless you are a far right winger.

          2. There are certain things that a person may advocate that cause me to dismiss them out of hand. Restricting freedom of speech, other than fraud, or things that cross the line into action, is one of those things.

    3. If Michael Moore were a rapper, his name would be Mos Fed.

  2. Here is a guy who basically put his money where his mouth is (which is what everyone whines that they want guy’s like Moore to do). So now you are left to nitpick.

    1. Reason fattie-fat wrote his stupid column is because he flat-out lied claiming he wasn’t a one-percenter on Piers Morgan when directly asked.

      And for all my personal dislike of him, I do not covet and envy his money or feel entitled to it to subsidize my Political Econ master’s degree. He can keep his money, and he can fucking mind his own business when it comes to mine.

      1. …unless you’re a typical freedom hater.

        1. You greedy bastard. Why do you insist on taking the mortgage deduction?

          1. Wanna-be poor boy Mike does have one thing in common with many “poor” in America: he is obese.

        2. …about plain and forest?

          MARX: NO
          MISES: NO

          Same shit, different day.

          The MARX-MISES Axis of Gambol Lockdown.

          1. ….that means you accept the Officer’s answer.

            1. ….that didn’t accept the officers answer.

              Probably should consider the officer as dangerous as any other predator.

    2. Except, he didn’t really. Yeah, sure he gave some of it away to charity. So did Bill Fucking Gates. The fact that he’s still rich, still living in a giant fucking house, and not living on some commune somewhere while the rest of the millions he’s raked in go to feed the poor in Shitghanistan pretty much puts a lie to his redistributive propaganda.

      1. Isn’t that what happened to the Land after the Trail of Tears?

        1. Fucking yeah. Trail of fucking tears. Fuck!

    3. Yes, but Flint Fuckbag currently has two houses totaling $3.1 million dollars in worth. It’s nice that he was munificent with his Roger and Me money, but the crux of the matter is that Moore still refuses to concede he is part of the 1% despite overwhelming financial evidence to the contrary.

      Good for him for donating to charity. Lots of rich people do as well, and it doesn’t make them an honorary middle-class citizen for having done so.

      1. As I understand it from that Wisconsin union kerfluffle, the middle class is now mostly composed of public sector workers. So yeah, until he gets a government job, he’s not middle class.

        1. Well said.

    4. He’s not under oath, he’s a known “story teller” and most likely engaging in the worst sort of puffery, which is what self-righteous assholes usually do to make themselves feel BIG and IMPORTANT.

      1. Like ‘under oath’ matters. Weren’t you alive during the 90s? Perjury, smergery. Now we’re going to have to go through the same shit again when the Republicans use the Clinton model to avoid taking out their own trash.

    5. Here is a guy who basically put his money where his mouth is

      No, he is putting a lot of cheeseburgers where his mouth is.

      1. Exactly, Zeit.

        Fat bastard forgot his roots, became one of the hoi-polloi and pretends he’s for The Downtrodden.

        Fuck him with a rusty steel pipe.

        1. Your nose?

          1. Why don’t we use your cock.

        2. > Fat bastard forgot his roots, became one of the hoi-polloi

          I don’t know what his roots are, but “the hoi-polloi” (Greek for for “the the people”) means the general population.

          1. It’s also acceptable as a term for the upper-class.

            And as for using the pipe… he deserves far worse.

            1. It’s also acceptable as a term for the upper-class.

              No, it’s not.

              1. Thank you.

                1. I think the reason some people consider hoi polloi to refer to the upper class is that it makes them think of “hoity toity.” It just means “the people,” as in the masses. And “vigilantum”? Of-the-staying-vigilant-ones? I don’t think you want the plural genitive there.

                  1. It can be used both ways.

                    1. I’m sure it can be used in a variety of ways. Using it to refer to the upper class is, however, non-standard, and I would consider it a solecism considering the word’s etymology.

                    2. “It can be used both ways.”

                      And is still wrong.

                      You’re wrong. What the fuck is wrong with twats like you that you can’t just man up and take the fucking lesson.

                      You were wrong. You look like a much bigger asshole pretending it can be used both ways.

                    3. No, it can’t. You learned something today. Stop fighting it.

                    4. “It can be used both ways.” [citation needed non-exsistent, sorry, thank you for playing].

                      Even wiki takes you to a penitent solecismist in this regard.

                      Give it up.

                    5. It’s not that big of a deal. Surely not as big a deal as Michael Moore pretending to give a shit about the poor.

                2. We must now – with the ambiguity of terms presented – clarify who is us and who is THEM and so I leave it to the Ultimate Source of all Wisdom, the one true Slacktastic Prophet and Proselitrizon of all that is Good and is True…

                  The Esteemed J.R. “Bob” Dobbs I quote…

                  the Great Unwashed, the Hoi Polloi, Them, the Conspiracy, the Mediocretins, the strange normal ones, the Somnambulacs, Assouls, Cage Men, Pink Boys, Bootlips, PO’Buckers, Bear-Baiters, Emp Loyees, Box Dwellers, Sarnes, Anthropophobiacs, Infidels, Conformers, Timeservers, Mole People, ComMen, Proleterritorials, Automates, Philistines, Pharisees, Sagisees, Witchburners, Skurnbozi, Thankers, Wankers and Blankers, Heilers and Smilers, Idi-Atts, Credit Heads, Sloths and Moths, Cons and Johns, Barbies and Kens, Cliants, Losers, Weepers and Sleepers, Dirty Invariables, The Slackless Ones, Dibbies, Corpulators, Signifying Monkeys, Underalls…in short, the Remnants of Man: the Witless Principals who are the FALSE PROPHETS, who have been holding us back and forcing Time Addiction on themselves…and…others.

                  1. Okay, okay.


      2. I kan haz hipokrissy?

  3. For a dude from Flint – a flaming lefty fattie no less – to be buying a Honda is worse than Eve nibbling the apple.

    My question for Moore would be regarding his description of how poor he was. His ‘car’ died and for seven long months he had no wheels? What kind of car was that? And how did it break? What self-respecting UAW ‘worker’ from Flint can’t fix a car? What a poseur.

    And one last thing, how does that fat fucker fit himself into a Honda? Won’t believe it ’till I see it. And not one of these new bloated Hondas, I’m talking Roger and Me era Civic here.

    1. His car broke down so he had to get around in a corporate jet. Okay?

      1. Oh, what a sacrifice that had to have been!

        At least it was union-made, right? Right?


        1. I’m sure he paid his luxury taxes for it as well. Right?

    2. “What self-respecting UAW ‘worker’ from Flint can’t fix a car?”

      You’re joking, right? They just snap them together. Some of them just drive the finished cars from the factory door to the holding lot.

  4. “I made the decision that I would never buy a share of stock” Not sure where I saw or read about his investments into Haliburton. (sp?)

    TheZeitgeist, it could have been an American made Honda, but I don’t think those plants have unions.

    I think Moore is still full of crapolla.

    1. Hondas are built in Marysville, OH, and I’m pretty fucking sure they are non-union shops.

    2. Not sure where I saw or read about his investments into Haliburton.

      Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy by Peter Schweizer

      1. He suppposedly based this on filings Moore made to the IRS. Didn’t read the book, so I couldn’t tell you how substansive the book’s claims are.

        1. “Tobacco farmers are evil.”

      2. …to go around:

        The Comedy of Libertarian Hypocrisy

        Now RAGE ON!

        1. Reads like the standard uninformed, illogical anti-libertarian screed to me.

          Maybe we could have a competition to find which huffpo, Mother Jone or Nation contributor can cram the most misrepresentations of libertarianism into an article.

          1. …standard uninformed, illogical pro-libertarian screed.

        2. What a load of shit. He represents a libertarian as an island, like I’m going to grow my own food, heal my own wounds, and educate my own kids. What a fool. This sounds a lot like Elizabeth Warren crying about roads and police. They can’t really be that stupid, can they?

    3. It was an American made Honda. Old Moore prefaced that with ‘American Made’ because he knew somebody would look up what car he did buy. And of course it wasn’t union.

      And the car that broke down on him when he was poor was probably 80’s GM UAW shit out of Flint…no wonder he bought a Honda.

      Maybe that’s why he made Roger and Me; some Freudian lashing out over his Chevy Vega.

    4. A nice blog post that covers this topic with some more details about how his trust invests in all sorts of stocks.

    5. Man, Halliburton was a wonderful investment this decade.

      (I think a lot of people don’t know that it’s main business is oilfield services and corrupt government contracts are just a sideshow.)

  5. I would refrain from commenting on someone in this way but —

    Michael Moore is the epitome Nazi pork. A real, genuine, squealing, fascist hog.

    1. …he claims to be anti-war, but he will work like hell to get the O-bomber-in-Chief reelected……

      1. Change ‘he’ to ‘San Francisco’ and you’re still correct. Who would have thunk that ‘stop war, elect a Republican’ makes sense? The anti-war movement dries up during a Dem Presidency for fear of getting Ralph Nadered, who went from media darling, to irrational purist, to ‘what ever happened to Ralph’.

        1. good point — Mr Nader is only a darling when the OTHER warmongers are in office. And Dr Paul gets ignored too.

  6. Michael Moore is just a piece of hypocritical shit. I’m not going to bother insulting his weight, when his sickening belief system provides plenty to deride.

    1. Libertarianism has plenty of sick all by itself. Unless whipping a slave — assault and battery — doesn’t make you sick.

      Slave-master Rafe would never shell out the cold cash if, after he paid, I could haul him into court on assault and battery charges when he whipped me. Then, without this financial arrangement…

      Voluntary Slave Contracts
      by Walter Block

  7. I think Moore is a scumbag as much as the next guy but reading this article made my brain hurt.

    1. One, I mean, how many, commas, can you put, in one sentence?

      Two, am American-made Honda is one built in America by American (non-union) workers at one of their many America based plants.

      1. Two, am American-made Honda is one built in America by American (non-union) workers at one of their many America based plants.

        You need to read that a bit closer. His point IS that it’s non-union, where as Michael Moore is ostensibly a supporter of union autoworkers, particularly those based in Detroit/Flint, his Hometown. Therefor, by buying non-union, he failed to support those he claims to support.

        1. I still read that sentence the same way. Either way I’m not going to knock him for buying a care made by one American worker over another. (I of course don’t care where my car is built but he does and I don’t see how he betrayed that principle)

          1. He betrayed principle because in Moore’s world the unions are the only institution holding the line against the evils of business.

          2. Buying American-made foreign cars supports a lot less workers than buying American-made cars from American companies. A lot of people like to cherry pick the terms of their argument and compare a GM made from largely Mexican or Canadian parts to some model of Toyota or Honda that just happens to be largely made in the USA, as if that is representative of reality across the board.

            1. This is why I specifically bought a Nissan pickup. Unlike the Ford I almost bought at the time, it was built by non-union workers in Smyrna, Tennessee (and no, I don’t mean Smyrna, Georgia. Look it up), whereas the Ranger was built in New Jersey, by UAW folks. I thought about how much of my purchase price was paying for inflated wages versus quality manufacturing. The recognized superiority of Japanese engineering didn’t hurt, either. At 175,000 miles, my Frontier has needed nothing but the replacement of made to wear parts, like the clutch, the brakes, the shocks, belts and hoses, and regular lube and oil jobs. Still solid as a rock on it’s 10th birthday.

              By the way, BMW SUV’s like X3’s, X5’s and X6’s are almost exclusively made in America, because there is virtually ZERO market for SUV’s in Europe. As a BMW enthusiast, having owned 2 of their cars and helped my roommate rebuild his 1977 R100/7 motorcycle, I like the fact that I could, should my employment situation someday improve, buy an American made Bimmer. I just WISH they would start making DIESELS here!!!

  8. Barb Lahey said it perfectly, “Randy Mikey you know, when I want advice on cheeseburgers or not wearing a shirt, you’re the person I’ll come to.”

      1. Frozen vegetable cocks!

  9. This is just slightly better* than the Madonna story from last weekend, IMO. What Moore does with his money is none of my business. Unfortunately, he doesn’t want me to have liberty as much as I want him to have it.

    *only slightly better because Moore is a condescending cocksucker that actually has some sway in the political world with his fictional movies. Madonna is just a shitty musician with no sway except for with the Malawian government she got suckered into giving money to.

    1. Ehhhh…I think it’s pretty topical, but I see why you made the comparison.

    2. sloopyinca is very insightful here and it would do well for SD to read what he wrote and take note.

  10. Flint Fuck Fatty is the mirror image of William Bennett. Both are gluttonous, platitudinal spewing fuckwagons that preach rules that everyone else, except them, should live by.

    1. Standard Libertarian Disclaimer: I don’t give a fuck what he does with his money.

      1. …a whole article about what he does with his money. Because we don’t care.

        1. …the rant is about what Saint Mike wants to do with OTHER people’s money…

    2. What rule does Bennet say we should live by that he does not?

      1. He had a gambling problem for a while.

        Did you know he once went on a blind date with Janis Joplin? It was not a success.

        1. That’s better than a gamboling problem at least…

  11. Ok, ok, you win Satan. Just tell me who you want killed and I will do your bidding. Just make it so that this song will no longer be stuck in my head.

      1. Awesome, pure awesome.

  12. Someone needs to do a decent punk cover of this song.

      1. WTF? Awesome, not punk, but fucking awesome.

        1. Dr. Demento-era stuff, Banj. Knew listening to his show would eventually pay off.

  13. I proudly contributed nearly 1 million dollars for the privilege of being a citizen of this great country.

    Pretty cheeky from a guy who’s threatened to move to Canada every time the GOP won an election and referred to most of the US as “Jesusland”.

    1. There is no requirement that we accept him.

      And why would the US want to do that to us anyways?

      1. Payback for Celine Dion and Alan Thicke?

        1. That would be like dropping a nuke in retaliation for a firecracker.

          If it were retaliation for Justin Bieber, I might understand, but don’t forget that we also gave you Lorne Greene and Mary Pickford.

          1. One name: John Candy. Don’t know what you could send our way that would run out that credit.

            1. I think there are several SCTV guys including Candy that we owe a lot to. Lets just call it a wash. They still get Doug Kenney and PJ O’Rourke from us to settle the 70’s humor balance sheet, among many others.

              1. I just watched the That 70’s Show where they go to Canada for beer. The one with Dave Thomas (and Joe Flaherty who is only parenthetical because he’s not Canadian) and Tommy Chong in his semi-regular role. Best episode of the series. “You leave Canada, please!”

            2. John Candy overstayed his welcome when he starred in a certain crappy little movie written and directed by — wait for it — Michael Moore: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayOlQ9If_cA

              1. Fuck, I didn’t know that. I might have to give the fattie some Moore som credit. i did think this was funny.


              2. Please, that movie was hilarious. And rather timely, if you ask me.

                “With all due respect sir, enjoy your single term…”

            1. Yeah, but Nickelback.

              1. The shittiness of Nickelback can’t even begin to tarnish the shine that is Rush.

                1. Well said.

                2. Yeah, but still. Someone really should PAY for inflicting Nickelback on us.

                  1. I agree. Someone should pay.

                    Perhaps the welfare state that is Canadadanastan ought to send us some of their wealth as restitution for their sin of exporting fucking Nickelback.

                  2. That said, at least there is one good band that starts with the name “Nickel”.

                    Bluegrass FTW!!

          2. Brian Adams, Alanis Morrissette, Paul Schaeffer, Michael J Fox, ….

            1. THE SHAT

              you people disappoint me

              1. America’s Shat

              2. I fall at his feet and praise all that is Canuckian.

    2. Oh Tulpy Poo, everyone knows that Team Red and Team Blue asshole is a patriot when his team has captured the Presidency and that being a dissonant is patriotic when your team has not.

      1. Tulpy Poo?

        1. I’ve had far too many libations.

          1. Well, hopefully your liver isn’t Swiss Cheese by now. Thanking you and Arf for the trip down tunage lane. Sleep well and dream of bankrupt states washing away to sea, and a noted cheeseburger stuffed blowhard tethered to them.

            1. That’ll happen soon enough. Enjoy.

              Thesis #26: Collapse is inevitable.

              P.S. It’s not going to be like your religio-economic dogmatic fantasy.

      2. “No, you’re schmoopie!”

        1. Now now, Tulpy Poo, don’t get your kickers in a knot.

          1. Jason Hanson is in a knot?

    3. I proudly contributed nearly 1 million dollars for the privilege of being a citizen of this great country.

      Pretty cheeky from a guy who’s threatened to move to Canada every time the GOP won an election and referred to most of the US as “Jesusland”.

      I was wondering that myself, while also pondering how he reconciles that whole “great country” thing with this statement:

      I did not believe in investing in a system I did not agree with.

      The cognitive dissonance, it’s making my brain hurt. Especially when I start wondering about why he thinks the big three American automakers should have kept all their plants and jobs in Detroit and Flint if he disagrees so much with the concept publicly held corporations. I mean, logically, shouldn’t he have been glad to see them leave? Shouldn’t he have objected to their very existence? Has he ever completely thought through anything he says? Is he not capable of following an idea through to its logical end?

      1. …it’s making my brain hurt.

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

        Libertarian: NO! YOUR MUST RESPECT BORDER LINES OR DIE! Ain’t freedom grand?

        1. How do you reconcile your wanting to be “free to gambol about plain and forest” with other people who prefer to build homes, grow their own steady supplies of food, and trade the results of their labor for that of others? Do you only disagree with the concept of land ownership? Or ownership of unimproved land? Where do property rights actually come into play?

  14. With all the other contradictory things the left has to believe every day, adding that @MMFlint is one of the 99% isn’t a stretch for them.

    1. You see, he’s not the 1% because he’s not a greedy capitalist banker on Wall Street. It has everything to do with bankers and corporations, not just money holders. They’re fine as long as they’re not trying to build on their wealth via capitalism. He romanticizes poverty and the middle class because, well, it’s all he can do.

      Also, those in the 99% want an economic system that isn’t controlled by the politicians or the corporations. Capitalism is dead. We are going to create a system that is controlled by consumers, where we each have a say in how the system works, where we set economic policy.

      He’s already moving the goal posts because he doesn’t fit in with his own narrative of the 1% being a specific kind of rich person as opposed to the 1% being the literal top 1% of wealth holders. Because he’s an intellectually dishonest fuck.

      In his recent screed to Anderson Cooper against capitalism and the 99% not having a say in economic policy, he’s either too stupid or too intellectually dishonest (which is not to say that these traits are mutually exclusive, because he’s likely BOTH) to admit what he describes is an economic system that is governed by LESS government, not more. Something like, oh, I don’t know, the free market where shit is controlled by everyone and their wallets making self-interested decisions rather than bureaucrats in suits.

      1. So much for my sarcasm and /sarcasm notes in the text. Fucking squirrels.

  15. Liberal guilt-tripping.

    It’s what’s for breakfast!!

  16. Banjos is shit faced and in a weird mood.

    1. Then you may not want to watch this.

      1. Peckerhead meets Pussyface?

    2. I’m still pissed at you for Falco.

      1. Doesn’t mean a thing… just like the name of the other guy in Wham!, who doesn’t mean a thing either.


          1. nope

            1. Now you’re just being pedantic. Not that anyone cares. What were we talking about?

              1. The answer of course is George Michael.

                1. You got it wrong. His name is Greg Mitchell.

                  1. The answer of course who is Dave Stewart?
                    I’ll take Civil War Generals for $600, Alex

    3. Always enjoyed this one: http://youtu.be/7sxFyu_U2go

      1. One of favorites as well. I think that was original animation. Absolutely amazing.

    4. That fucking rocked. I doff my cap.

  17. It doesn’t matter whether Michael Moore wants to give his money to some charitable cause – however worthy that may be – or spends it on solid platinum dildoes, what matters is the ideas he supports.

    And those ideas are stupid and oppressive.

    1. He spends his money on Steely Dans?


      Sounds about right.

      1. FUCK!!!! You sent me on a bad tangent.

      2. And he’ll go back, jack, and do it again: any major dude will tell you.

        1. It’s the Royal Scam!

    2. He who writes upon these walls (Michael Moore)
      rolls his (deleted) into little balls.
      He who reads these words of wit,
      eats those little pieces of

  18. Before reading the post or any comments: Fuck that fat fuck in his fucking fat neck. All those sheep are out there because of slimy little peckers like him. SLIMY LITTLE PECKERS! PECKERS PECKERS PECKERS!

    1. hard to argue when you are that eloquent

  19. Banjos is all over the fucking map tonight.

  20. Someone explain to me why I love this fucking song so god damn much!

    1. marry me

      1. OK, I will blow and marry every male Reason regular. (But don’t tell my boyfriend, I think he will get pissed).

        1. Neon thought you were a guy.

          1. How do you know Banjos isn’t a guy?

            1. Good point.

              However, “banjo” is one of many slang synonyms for female genetalia.

              TBS, my assumption that Neon is a guy is based on no evidence whatsoever.

              1. However, “banjo” is one of many slang synonyms for female genetalia.

                Wait. What?

                Really, in all my life I have never heard of it being called “banjo”.

              2. Please, can you name one assortment of three or more letters that is not one of many slang terms for female genitalia?

              3. “banjo” is one of many slang synonyms for female genetalia.

                Hmm, I think Doug Stanhope’s girlfriend goes by “Banjo”.

            2. Well…fuck, this is the only proof I have. I hope it will suffice.

              1. sold

                1. If you’ve never heard it referred to as a banjo, perhaps you’re not playing it right.

                  1. I like to think of them more as a Hurdy Gurdy

                    1. I got to pluck this chick’s banjo last night.

                      Yeah, that works.

                    2. pickin’ and grinnin’?

        2. OK, I will blow and marry every male Reason regular.

          Wait. What?

        3. you know what that means

        4. OK, but Steve Smith goes last. Because once he is done with you, whether you are a guy or a lady, you’ll be worn out worse than Michael Moore’s suspenders.

    2. Much better. All is forgiven.

    3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..re=related

      “Never Trust a Hippie.”

      Good Stuff

  21. Didn’t some right-wing commentator prove that Moore actually DID own stock?

    1. Fuck stock, he owns a foundation. Can you say salaried CFO, and all expenses paid?

      1. Did you know Ayn Rand drove on a PUBLIC ROAD?

        HAR HAR HAR HAR what a hypocrite!

        1. Moore had a choice to buy a foundation. We don’t have a choice in what roads we drive on.

          1. Did he buy it or create it? Does he have an alternative to creating a nonprofit? It’s not like he can create a new government agency out of burrito grease or fart and liberate the proletariat.

            Also, yes you do have a choice in what roads you drive on. You just choose to stay here. Goto Somalia and build private roads if you want to really be free.

            1. Doesn’t matter if he bought it or created it. He still made the choice. Ah, the good ole’ “love it or leave it!” response. The last refuge of an authoritarian mind. All those uppity negroes should have left too, instead of whining for a space at the front of the bus.

              1. So we won’t be able to segregate our businesses in libertopia? Tell Rand Paul!

                1. Don’t like Reason?
                  Try this
                  or this

                  1. If I ever run out of morons to argue with here, I’ll know where to go.

                    1. I guess you like to argue with your peers, Derider? It makes good sense.

                  2. Pure pwnage!!!

                  3. Pure pwnage!!!

              1. I think doubles are in order here, to commemorate the first non-spoof post I’ve seen that managed to mentioned Somalia and teh roads in the same sentence. No small feat, that. In fact, fuck the doubles, i’ve got some leftover morphine pills around here somewhere, this might.be a worthy occasion to break them out.

                1. ^^THIS^^

                  It calls for some of the “special” weed.

            2. Pure pwnage!!!

            3. and just bomb the shit out of SOmalia.

          2. If you’re individualistic enough.

        2. You know you else drove on public roads?

          You guessed it?Frank Stallone.

  22. If Michael Moore set up a million in a foundation from the three, he not only did not pay any taxes , Moore received a refund

  23. The best Dead Milkmen song.

    1. Was always fond of Punk Rock Girl myself.

  24. Wow that’s some jealous vitriol.

    How much Koch would you have to swallow to make 3 million bucks at Reason?

    1. I think you mean ‘envious’. But I don’t even see the envy.

      1. ,,,that’s the kind of question no one asks unless he or she already knows the answer…

    2. Freud would say that you’re the one that wants to swallow Koch for money. But I say Freud was an idiot and you want to swallow Koch because you were abused by a billionaire dirty uncle.

      1. Meh. Sigmund Fraud would have been the one to confirm the Koch swallowing via “personal therapeutic intervention.” The morally dilapidated, festering freak-addled pervert that he was.

        1. Man, Freud was ahead of his time.

          1. Indeed. I forgot to add “ethically stunted.” Sigmund Fraud is easily in the top ten of most reprehensible people in history. Though without him, C.G. Jung would probably not have achieved the prominence he did, even though his more holistic approach and contributions to modern psychiatry have been much more positive and effective.

      2. I’d swallow Koch for money. A million bucks buys a lot of mouthwash.

    3. Oooh… Pwned!

  25. Don’t be a lazy ass Shikha, pull the foundation records on MM -they are public.

    1. I mean, if I can fart in a jar, you can put the records out there.

  26. One, what exactly is an “American made Honda”?

    Every Accord sold in America is made in Marysville, Ohio, you idiot. There’s snark to be had here, but not if you lead off with such a fucking stupid question.

    1. Dude, her inquiry is a valid analysis of Moore’s choice to purchase a product of a multinational corporation, built by non-union labor.

      Chill the fuck out.

  27. Too much fun, too fucking much fun!

    1. right…. joan jett’s first band? The all-girl imitation of the stooges….

      didn’t they make a movie about them in the last few years? I forget… Someone told me that was an indie film thing that I missed

  28. […]paid off the debts of some friends and family members, bought my parents a new refrigerator, set up college funds for our nieces and nephews

    That monster. I guarantee there are more needy people than his friends and family. Being able to choose what to do with your money is great, isn’t it Mikey?

  29. Moore’s showing the typical hollywood rich guy mentality: he knows that the work he did wasn’t very hard, and he got a pile of cash, so he can’t imagine that anyone else with a pile of cash actually earned it.

    He has no idea what it takes to start a small business with a real payroll and people’s families depending on you to keep the business alive.


    1. He also doesn’t realize the irony in the fact that he had a choice in what to do with most of his money. That’s a luxury he would deny the rest of us.

      1. Until the aggregate tax rate exceeds 49%, you have a choice in what you do with most of your money too.

        1. You don’t read too well, do you? Try this one again:

          That’s a luxury he would deny the rest of us.

          Make careful note of the tense.

          1. OMG Ayn Rand is DRIVING on a PUBLIC HIGHWAY call the hypocrisy police.

            1. Testing, testing.

            2. The pwnage! It burns!!!

            3. Did she pay taxes? She did? Then shut the fuck up.

    2. Yeah I made a couple of Oscar winning films while I took a shit last week. No big thing.

      1. John C. Randolph told me so.

      2. Ha ha. You said ‘Oscar’.

  30. I want to be stereotyped,I want to be classified.

    1. Just for you. Hope it helps you sleep.

      1. FUUUUCK!!! Thank you Arf!

      2. Better version

        1. Great Big Sea.

          There’s something I should add to my [kinda meager] music collection.

  31. Doesn’t surprise me at all that a moron like Moore would choose not to invest in the stock market, the greatest wealth creation mechanism ever devised by mankind. And a way for the little guy to profit off of other people’s genius. I am not a Mac guy, but damn glad I started buying AAPL stock years ago. If Moore is to stupid to understand what stocks are, I suggest he read one of the old classics by lynch or graham. It’s not fucking rocket science

    1. Haven’t you heard?

      OWNERSHIP IS EVULZ!!!!!!11!!!! UNFETURD MAHRKETS!!!!111!!!1!!!

      We must bring the CORPORASHUNS! in line by allowing them to ransack the public treasuries, pass protectionist legislation, and have enjoy legally-protected monopolies…Yeah! That’ll teach ’em!

  32. The most under rated punk band EVAH! Fuck, I need to upload other albums of their’s on Youtube later. Some one remind me when I am sober.

    1. How will we know you are sober? Also.

      1. Meh, over done. But you can always give me some Op Ivy.

        1. How about a little faux punk?

          1. Nice. Me First is the best cover band ever. This is my personal favorite.

            1. I prefer Country Roads, but I’m also a sucker for 70’s folk. Speaking of covers.

  33. Moore is also a great propagandist. I may not agree with his outlook but he provided a product that the market responded to and became rich because if it. He made a fortune off of essentially lying convincingly and entertainingly. Good for him. Nobody forced me to watch roger and me. I rented it. I liked it. Some of his other movies were good too. They were full of shit, but well done pieces of shit. The ironic thing is that this fierce critic of capitalism is a great beneficiary of it. Very few people have his talent or creativity, there ws a void in the market for his shtick and he filled it with low budget movies that were very popular. He, a fierce ridiculous of capitalism, is a great example of how capitalism WORKS.

    1. I enjoy Soviet-style montage narratives and other editing tricks when the auteur admits that his work is at least somewhat fictional. For Moore to claim that his documentaries represent any sort of truth at all is morally repugnant.

      1. Flint Michigan is a paradise and any evidence to the contrary is heresy!

      2. Leaked Oil Documents Confirm: America Is Being Skullfucked By Oil Speculators…
        Class War For Idiots / September 18, 2011

        Thanks for being a useful idiot for the skullfuckers, CalebT. Enjoying it yet?

        1. I WAS forced to watch Roger and The Fat Fuck from Flint and write a review on it in one of my college classes by some Marxist professor. Then again, that was par for the course at good old Kent State.

          1. it’s a skillfull piece of propaganda. and it’s funny too. the schtick of the schlub trying to get the interview, etc. heck, even sasha baron cohen (who creates theatre to an extent and uses selective editing etc. to create his metanarrative and humor) owes a lot to roger and me.

            it was an innovative movie, well conceived, planned, and executed, done on a shoestring budget and i can’t fault the guy for being a talented director.

            like i said, i think his overall philosophy is full of shit, but that’s tangential to the point that it’s an important movie, it stands the test of time (thus far), etc.

            and you don’t have to agree with moore’s thesis, so to speak, to recognize his talent

            1. I personally found the gal who skinned the rabbits and the eviction process server the most compelling people in Roger & Me.

              1. pets or meat. personally, as a kid who spent some time on a farm, i prefer not to name my meat. pets yes, meat no

        2. I *am* an oil spectator. I have traded oil futures, as well as oil related ETF’s and stocks on a day trading basis as well as a longterm basis.

          if you find that “morally repugnant” i could not give a flying fuck. i help add liquidity! and help with price discovery

          1. All documentary film-making is propaganda.

            1. well, yea. i believe there is NO SUCH THING as an objective media. by it’s very nature it HAS to be biased. the same is true of documentaries, although some are clearly more interested in making a point via selective editing etc. than others that at least TRY to be objective chronicles of what happened. and course the observer, by nature of being present and of course if he’s KNOWN to be present by the observee necessarily changes the reality. you don’t have to be a genius in quantum theory to recognize that.

              for example, when i have cops crews riding with me, there is a noticeable to some extent, change in the dynamic of the cop-non-cop interaction. people who know they are being filmed and could be on teevee necessarily act differently. on both sides.

              it’s lot closer to day to cop reality than, say, the average cop show, but it’s still reality skewed by editing and by observance by the observed that they are being observed.

              i guess something like the live feed that c-span provides of congressional stuff is closest to not being propaganda, although i suspect the congressmen do change their approach a bit when they know the cameras are on them

              1. Have any clips of your ride-alongs ever been shown on Cops?

                I would hope that you’d throw in a few good David Caruso-esque one-liners while responding to domestic disturbance calls.

                1. no. i was in the background in one or two. believe it or not, every clip shown on cops they have to get the participants to sign a release (since it’s entertainment not news)

                  had a couple of cool ones that would have been nice, but they wouldn;t sign the release 🙁

          2. I help add liquidity!

            I’m familiar with your religio-economic faith’s catechism.

            Wash, rinse, repeat as necessary to assuage your shriveled conscience.

            1. every try to trade an illiquid market? completely controlled and manipulated by market makers and by the few who have sufficient fundage to be the “deciders”.

              contrast with a market in, say AAPL stock which is remarkably liquid and thus any person making any trade (certainly within averge investor lot size) never has a problem getting a ‘fair’ price as defined by a especially small divergence between bid/ask.

              1. dunphy, using a logical and clear argument against this troll is like bringing a bazooka to a pillow fight.

              2. well, liquidity skills

                because oil isn’t liquid enough


                1. Dunphy= evil for being an oil futures trader Barbara Boxer= wonderful for being an oil futures trader

      3. I think Christopher Hitchens likened Moore’s effort in Fahrenheit 9/11 to Leni Reifenstal (sp?).

        1. hey, i think moore is a talented director, but reifenstahl was groundbreaking. to this day, olympia has some of the greatest cinematography ever filmed and guys like scorcese, kubrick, etc. owe a lot to her.

          she also prominently showcased jesse owens in olympia. it’s not triumph of the will, that’s for sure

    2. dunphy nailed it here.

      Citizen Moore is not only a bullshitter, he’s a World Class bullshitter. With a true gift for fleecing the clueless unwashed masses he purports to be so deeply concerned for. The joke is on them for buying into what he is selling (and for a comfortable profit). He’s certainly entitled to cash in on their willful self-delusion, ignorance, and pathological need for heroes — much the same as Messiah Obama has done. Ripe for the taking.

      And those clueless masses don’t give a shit how many shares of Haliburton he or his foundation may own, they only care that speaks “for them”.

      “Friends, Romans, Countrymen, blah blah blah…”

  34. Tony, if you show up in this thread – and you will likely do so, eventually, as one of your heroes is the subject:

    I want an apology for your blatant misuse of the term “bigotry” in the Ron Paul gay-stuff thread.

    If I harbored bigotry towards anyone, I’d admit it myself.


    1. Then again, I might as well ask for a pony, because I ain’t gettin’ one of those, either.

      Not that I want one. Just sayin’.

  35. Another underrated punk band.

    1. You realize that there’s no ratings committee for bands, right. You just like music that you don’t think is popular enough. There’s nothing wrong with liking crappy music.

      1. Defensive much? I have never attacked anyone or thought less of them for their shitty taste in music.

  36. Didn’t any of you watch wrestling growing up?

  37. Aquabats?, fuck, I will got there!

    1. Well fuck, of course you can’t do Aquabats without linkin’ some Devo!

    2. That’s cool. Do what you want.

      1. Beautiful, my favorite Bad Religion.

      2. But don’t do it around me…

        1. Awww, you don’t love it?

          1. Sinead of Rebellion! Shock me, shock me, shock me with that deviant behavior.

  38. Brodie is fucking obnoxious, but as a chick, I can’t help but fucking love her.

  39. As a dude, I can’t help but be weirded out by these dudes, but I love them anyway.

    1. I love this song. Every one is allowed their guilty pleasures, one of my many. Shhh… don’t tell anyone.

      1. Yeah, me too. Always sing along in the car. Here’s my guilty pleasure.

        1. I used to own this album, by brother gave it to me for Christmas one year. It for some reason makes me think of this this. Sorry.

          1. I don’t think you *are* sorry. Apropos of nothing.

      2. I used to think that was Mick Jagger singing that song, back when it was new on the radio.

  40. My boyfriends’s input.

    1. I can’t stop laughing. A little darker.

  41. Oh Devo, we all love you.

  42. Goodnight, sweet Reason.

    1. My favorite Social D song.

  43. ” Who do you think finances your mortgage? ”

    I sort of assumed there was no mortgage. I certainly might be wrong, but why would you assume there was one?

    1. “…and took out a mortgage on an apartment above a Baby Gap in New York City.”

      1. And its right around the corner from the place I get the jars that I fart into.

  44. Not the best band, but a great song. It perfectly describes how much I hate small talk.

  45. Portrait Of A Libertarian As A Taxpayer-Subsidized Brat
    By Mark Ames | August 6, 2009

  46. On August 10, 1973, Koch wrote a letter appealing to Hayek to accept a shorter stay at the IHS, hard-selling Hayek on Social Security’s retirement benefits, which Koch encouraged Hayek to draw on even outside America.

    Friedrich Hayek Joins Ayn Rand as a Hypocritical User of Medicare

    1. Oh my god, he tried to utilize benefits that he was forced to pay for! That bastard!

    2. Hayek actually argued in favor of certain aspects of government like a social safety nets. So, he’s hardly hypocritical in accepting them. But if you haven’t read him, you wouldn’t know that.

  47. If you want to be an anarchist, don’t let your wedding become like this.

    1. …give no head

  48. “The libertarian position I once propounded,” Nozick wrote in an essay published in the late ’80s, “now seems to me seriously inadequate.”

    The hypocrisy of libertarians

    1. Robert Nozick did NOT “repent.” Here is what he said in a 2002 interview, when asked directly about that quote (“JS” is the interviewer, Julian Sanchez, now with Cato):

      JS: In The Examined Life, you reported that you had come to see the libertarian position that you’d advanced in Anarchy, State and Utopia as “seriously inadequate.” But there are several places in {his later book -jam} Invariances where you seem to suggest that you consider the view advanced there, broadly speaking, at least, a libertarian one. Would you now, again, self-apply the L-word?

      RN: Yes. But I never stopped self-applying. What I was really saying in The Examined Life was that I was no longer as hardcore a libertarian as I had been before. But the rumors of my deviation (or apostasy!) from libertarianism were much exaggerated. I think this book makes clear the extent to which I still am within the general framework of libertarianism, especially the ethics chapter and its section on the “Core Principle of Ethics.”


      That is to say, one can always pursue an ideal to counterproductive extremes. But even backing off from such zealous pursuit, one can still do one’s best to honor and live up to the ideal.

      Those who have read the actual passage from which Nozick’s controversial quote was taken, may recall that he examined there the corruption (“vulgarization”) and unintended consequences that arose from trying to practice various ideals — communism, capitalism, freudianism, marxism, nationalism, etc. — in the “real world.” In the very same quote, the part that critics of libertarianism don’t usually bother to include — Nozick said that his declaration of the “inadequacy” of his early position was justified “in part because it did not fully knit the humane considerations and joint cooperative activities it left room for more closely into its fabric.” I read that to mean that Nozick had originally given libertarianism’s true heart of voluntarism short shrift in his early work. He never renounced libertarianism; he only admitted that his original explanation overlooked a key aspect that had always been there, but which he didn’t fully appreciate until later in life.

      1. Haha no reply to that. Nice work.

      2. I figure he meant what he said.

  49. I don’t know Michael Moore much.

  50. ? Dylan Ratigan Talks To Yasha Levine And Mark Ames About Kochs, Hayek, And “Ideas For Sale”

    ? Read The Orignal Letter Charles Koch Sent To Friedrich von Hayek Telling Him To Sign Up For Social Security

    ? Monster Koch Bust: Charles Koch Used Social Security to Lure Friedrich von Hayek to America

    article headlines at:

    Michael Moore is a piker compared to the hypocrisy of the Koch Whores.

    1. I find your ideas interesting and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

  51. The bigger the govt. the smaller the citizen (h/t Dennis Prager). Leftist Europe’s welfare state is in ruins; we are closely following, and yet there are still True Believers who refuse to open their eyes.

    If the Kochs did use SS to lure Hayek to the US, that’s not hypocrisy. It may be inconsistency. But hypocrisy would be if the Koch’s denied govt. benefits to others, but reaped them for themselves.

    The Kochs, like most libertarians, don’t want anyone sort of govt. handouts to anyone ever. It’s the Left that wants government to play favorites with public money, not libertarians.
    There will always be winners and losers in society, why do you Lefties want government and not hard work, talent and yes, luck, not to determine the winners?

    I’m sorry, but the personal misfortune of Citizen A does not entitle him or her to Citizen B’s property.

    1. Capitalism of the agricultural city-State is in ruins, and yet there are still True Believers who refuse to open their eyes.

    2. “…why do you Lefties want government and not hard work, talent and yes, luck, not to determine the winners?”

      Because it’s a hell of a lot easier to pull a lever in a voting booth once every 4 years than it is to lift a shovel and attempt actual accomplishment. And if you don’t come out a winner, it’s a hell of a lot easier to blame the person you voted for (“they lied!”) than to accept the personal burden of one’s own failings, inadequacies, or poor decisions.

      This is why the self-victimizing “Us Vs. Them” meme of OWS, Citizen Moore, etc. is so appealing. Guilt-free abdication of responsibility is the new religion — if not necessarily the opiate.

  52. Shat’s answer to Michael Moore:

  53. Moore claims in the blog that he didn’t make money from capitalism, he earned it by making things (that other people wanted to pay him money for), but that’s not capitalism, because capitalism is a pyramid scheme…
    Is he stupid or truly that dishonest? And does he have readers that swallow that stuff?

    1. Those two traits should not be treated as mutually exclusive.

    2. Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life.

      1. But fat, drunk, stupid, and rich isn’t so bad. Money may not buy happiness, but $3M buys a lot of food and booze. Stupidity is self-reinforcing and requires no external resources.

  54. Workers Song

  55. The thread has, by far, the most video links I’ve ever seen. See what happens when you get drunk online, kids?

    1. Other people are more productive in one area whilst I perform in another and I get to reap the rewards of enjoyable music links that I lacked the time and inclination to find?

      Talk about your Joy Division of Labor.

      1. stupid libertarian never studied anthropology, doesn’t know it, probably denies it

        1. Read my stupid muthfukkas! READ IT!

        2. Stupid primitivist making my Starbucks never made his own campfire, doesn’t know it, probably denies it.

          1. …keep up the antagonism.

            #operationmayhem is in the house.

    2. get drunk online?

      Iss whut we doo.

  56. Michael Moore not only bought a $1mm condo in ’97 but mortgaged it multiple times for a total of $1.5mm in the ’00s all at JPMorgan/Chase. Thereby participating in capitalism and contributing to the crash.
    Feel free to check out the records yourself (Glynn is his wife and is easier to search for in NYC). http://i.imgur.com/xt1aE.jpg http://www.nyc.gov/html/dof/html/jump/acris.shtml

    1. that, BY DEFINITION is price speculation (and a stupid example of same). a guy who claims he won’t invest in stocks because he doesn’t understand them – (they are about the easiest financial investment to grok, frankly. you are simply buying a little piece of a company. literally), but is willing to speculate on the value of his house amidst a rampant bull market by mortgaging it multiple times in excess of it’s purchase value IS a fucking hypocritical moron

      1. also, to emphasize, borrowing against the perceived future value of a relatively non-liquid asset is so much more “derivativey” and risky than buying stocks, especially if one buys a diverse basket of same, it’s not even funny

        ask any trader, the #1 thing that will get newbie (and even experienced) traders in trouble is overusing leverage and thus miscalculating real risk.

        bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered

        1. Mornin’ dunphy!

          And, “what you said”. Moore is so far beyond “duplicitous” and “clueless” and “disingenuous” and “do you think you’re fooling anyone? like, really?-ness” that I really think we need a new word for it.

          1. I really think we need a new word for it.


            “His level of Mooreness is so staggering, it makes Satan look honest in comparison.”

              1. I knew someone had been watching my webcam shows!

              2. Why *thank* you.

            1. Less is Moore.

        2. This guy became wealthy and famous by producing documentaries ravaging and condemning the very mechanisms by which he was able to become wealthy and famous. Hypocrisy, a full-of-shit mind, and deviousness are all in the guy, but I can’t help the feeling that he’s also a fucking idiot. He’d probably call you a Nazi if you walked up to him in a crowd and told him all of that.

          1. but I can’t help the feeling that he’s also a fucking idiot.

            That odor is not idiocy, but self-loathing. And fat guy sweat. The kind that no amount of showers can rinse away.

              1. the general consensus i have heard from people who work(ed) for him is that he is a complete and total asshole on the set and to work with in any way. Not that directors and highly successful people don’t often tend to be a little difficult, but i just find it ironic how often a “man of the people” ,especially this guy who takes the “schlub” act to an extreme with his manner of dress, etc. is also supposedly a major prima donna. iow, he supposedly wants good for and likes “the people” but when it comes to interpersonal 1 on 1’s with those who work for him, he’s a total douche. or maybe turd sandwich

                to contrast, from what i have seen (documentary) and from people who have worked in the past with matt and trey who are also highly successful, working under extreme deadline directors/producers/performers, they are fun guys and cool to work for

                1. That’s not a fair comparison, dunphy. Tres and Matt are avowed libertarians. They are by definition cool.

                  I actually did meet them once and they were indeed very down to earth. They’re also the types to put their money into causes they believe in without the need to brag about it in the media.

                  I also remember when R & Me first broke, Citizen Moore started shuttling around in limos and quickly earned a reputation just as you describe — all the while meticulously honing his “slob of the people” facade.

                  1. i think it was an almost purposeful unfair comparison. of course libertarian are, on average, cooler.

                2. When Moore was at Mother Jones he also had a reputation as a complete asshole boss, and ending up suing them. http://www.weirdrepublic.com/episode73.htm

                  1. surprises me not the least how often these alleged “men of the people” , “crusader for the common man” tend to actually be misfit misanthropic assholes who can’t get along with anyone.

  57. Yeah, I read this last night and elected not to pass it on to anyone for fear of spreading teh stoopid.

    *surveys wreckage of the comments above*

    I can see my concerns were well founded. Hope everyone is OK. Fuck the Cardinals, and fuck California (esp. Oakland).

    That is all.

    1. You seem tense. Would you like a fresh, steaming bowl of Cap’n Crunch and Ativan?

      1. I would. Do you see patients on a cash basis?

  58. This putrid, disingenuous sack of shit makes me sick to my fucking stomach. He can crawl back to the left-wing, anti-capitalistic oasis of unadulterated cultural, sociopolitical, and economic splendor and progress that is Detroit; I’ll take my small-town Tea Party neighborhood and starve on the sidewalk along with all the blacks, homosexuals, and children (or better still, black homosexual children). Because, you know, CAPITALISM OOOOOOOOOOOOOMG.

    Pinko mother-fucker. Heartfelt congratulations on becoming a successful individual in the capitalistic system you’ve spent your entire career shitting on, but seriously, Michael Moore, drop dead.

    1. Michael Moore, drop dead

      Aha! Now we see the violence inherent in the [AGRI]cultural [CITY]state[FARM]and[AUTO!})//^^^

      /white rectal

      Mornin’, Res!

      1. Yeah, that White Indian guy sucks pretty badly with identifying metaphoric insults, let alone logic and economic concepts. Arguing with him is like trying to dig your way through a titanium wall with a wooden toothpick.

        Hey, you wanna get together later and go hunting snails and shit on other people’s private property? Because, you know, White Indian told me it’s the way to go. If we starve, we can’t just go out the easy way and shoot ourselves, since firearms are the product of civilizational humans.

        We’ll have to poison ourselves with some plant, or something like that.

        Of course, we won’t starve, because the civilizations spread across the world are last-resort sources of respite for hunter-gatherer naturalists like him. The irony — it burns.

        1. so he has to conjure up bullshit to hide that fact.

      2. Good job remembering, Almanian.

        Libertarianism is the art of whitewashing the government aggression that is profitable to them.

      3. Needs moar gambol, gambAlmanian.

        And m[OA]r [A]nt[I] [SEMI]tism. The LIZARD OVER[lords] hath sp[OK]en.

        [TRANS]mission successful.


  59. So if Michael Moore thinks government can spend money wisely, then how come he only gave government a third of what he earned? He unintentionally makes the point that keeping more of your money means you can help out more of the people you care for.

    1. ‘Property rights for me, but not for thee’ seems like the likeliest explanation. Or, again, he might just be a total moron.

      1. government for me, but not for thee.

        You want government aggression to protect your invading and occupying all the Earth’s resources, and…anybody else can just fucking die already.

        1. Still wrong after all these years Joe.

  60. OT: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lo…..54962.html


    1. That’s what the “free” in “enterprise” means.

      So funny when capitalism becomes a real life parody of itself.

      I got mine, fuck you.

    2. Yeah, I wish I could take lessons from this dude.

    3. The stupidity burns, but it’s a private business and IMO he should be able to teach who he wants to. I see the state is getting involved, though, which will inevitably screw things up.

    4. Yeah, it’s a poor business decision and bigoted, i.e. stupid, but he should have he right to decide to whom he sells his property and services. Otherwise he is not truly free and does not own himself.

      1. That’s what I thought. Whether you agree with him or not is completely irrelevant. Muslims suck, Muslims don’t suck, whatever. How is it that most people don’t understand that it’s HIS DECISION, because it’s HIS SERVICE, and HIS PROPERTY. It’s disgusting.

    5. Bigoted asshole. I hope his business fails, but he can exclude people if he wants.

  61. How can one inhale both at the same time?

  62. It’s like when they use fat people in those Feed The Children infomercials. I see this crap and think “This guy doesn’t seem to have any trouble finding stuff to eat over there.” The kids ought to just eat the spokesperson and they’ll be gorged for a month.

    1. i think south park already beat you to it- think sally struthers

      almost as good as david crosby and rock against drugs. one comedian commented that it’s ironic that david crosby is “rock against drugs” considering that after his rampage through the drug world, it’s surprising there are any drugs LEFT for the rest

  63. This is like the worst chat room ever.

      1. My blushes, Watson!


        a free Reason t-shirt and one-year subscription of Reason magazine to anyone who can debunk Moore’s claim…

        I thought print meadia was dead. No?

    1. How ya doin’?

      1. …to your Charlie Brown. I’m warnin’ ya.

        1. ** dons Tommy Lee Jones in The Fugitive hat **

          I don’t care.

  64. Both:

    1. Put all the arable land under control of agriculture.

    2. Put the food grown under lock and key.

    3. So other people can either starve or work for the hierarchical elite.

    4. Concentrate wealth and power until the system collapses.

    The only thing that capitalism has going for it over communism is that it concentrates wealth and power a little more slowly, thus doesn’t collapse as quickly. But that’s like saying that a fast cancer is worse than a slow cancer. Yay, slow cancer! But it’s still cancer.

    1. Fascinating! No, seriously!
      Do you have more?
      I could read this all day!

      1. The food under lock and key meme comes from Daniel Quinn.

        “You’ll know you’re among the people of your culture if the food is all owned, if it’s all under lock and key. But food was once no more owned than the air or the sunshine are owned. No other culture in history has ever put food under lock and key?and putting it there is the cornerstone of your economy, because if the food wasn’t under lock and key, who would work? If it’s all owned, if you want some, you’ll have to buy it.”

        A Condensation of Daniel Quinn Thought
        Food Under Lock and Key

        Dr. Ralph Borsodi says much the samething, as follows:

        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. wherever access to land is free, men work only to provide what they actually need or desire. Wherever the white man has come in contact with savage cultures this fact becomes apparent. There is for savages in their native state no such sharp distinction between “work” and “not working” as clocks and factory whistles have accustomed the white man to accept. They cannot be made to work regularly at repetitive tasks in which they have no direct interest except by some sort of duress. 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.

        by RALPH BORSODI
        1 9 2 9

        Both of these passages are backed up by volumes of scholarly data in the fields of anthropology, ethnology, archeology, and evolutionary biology.

        1. Read my stupid muthfukkas! READ IT!

        2. No other culture than what culture has ever put food under lock and key? That is exactly what happened as nomadic societies evolved into agrarian societies. The surplus food (economic surplus) was stored and guarded and the first true social hierarchies were developed based on access to the surplus.

        3. Who thinks the red men didn’t go to war and kill amongst themselves to protect their territory? And who thinks the red men didn’thunt and gather natural resources into extinction? Why would they have settled down and started working so hard to grow crops and domesticate animals if all they had to do was gambol, hunt, and gather and then relax and party when their immediate needs were satisfied, knowing that the next time they needed food they could just go out and get it without all the hard work involved in animal husbandry and horticulture?

          1. Who thinks the red men didn’t go to war?


            Primitive society had violence. For them it was something that happened. In civilization its a way of life.

            1. Primitive society had violence. For them it was something that happened. In civilization its a way of life.

              “And then, war broke out for no apparent reason whatsoever!”

              1. War is a staple of civilization. There was no war before domestication (the genesis of agriculture.)

                Here is a well researched essay that backs up my assertion, with many scholarly references, for your perusal:

                War is a staple of civilization. Its mass, rationalized, chronic presence has increased as civilization has spread and deepened…

                The current literature consistently reports that until the final stages of the Paleolithic Age?until just prior to the present 10,000-year era of domestication?there is no conclusive evidence that any tools or hunting weapons were used against humans at all…

                On the origins of war
                by John Zerzan

      1. If slow cancer is bad, then I prescribe a fast cancer revolution! ~Karl Marx

        No, no, no, slow cancer is better than fast cancer, even though we’ve never had one as slow as we claim! ~Ludwig von Mises

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

          MARX: NO!
          MISES: NO!

          Same shit, different day.

          * Why agriculture? In retrospect, it seems odd that it has taken archaeologists and paleontologists so long to begin answering this essential question of human history. What we are today?civilized, city-bound, overpopulated, literate, organized, wealthy, poor, diseased, conquered, and conquerors?is all rooted in the domestication of plants and animals. The advent of farming re-formed humanity. In fact, the question “Why agriculture?” is so vital, lies so close to the core of our being that it probably cannot be asked or answered with complete honesty. Better to settle for calming explanations of the sort Stephen Jay Gould calls “just-so stories.”

          In this case, the core of such stories is the assumption that agriculture was better for us. Its surplus of food allowed the leisure and specialization that made civilization. Its bounty settled, refined, and educated us, freed us from the nasty, mean, brutish, and short existence that was the state of nature, freed us from hunting and gathering. Yet when we think about agriculture, and some people have thought intently about it, the pat story glosses over a fundamental point. This just-so story had to have sprung from the imagination of someone who never hoed a row of corn or rose with the sun for a lifetime of milking cows. GAMBOLING about plain and forest, hunting and living off the land is fun. Farming is not. That’s all one needs to know to begin a rethinking of the issue. The fundamental question was properly phrased by Colin Tudge of the London School of Economics: “The real problem, then, is not to explain why some people were slow to adopt agriculture but why anybody took it up at all.”

          ~Richard Manning
          Against the Grain: How Agriculture Has Hijacked Civilization
          North Point Press (2004)

          1. Read my stupid muthfukkas! READ IT!

          2. I see you said it first and better and my comment was misplaced besides…

          3. Gamboling is, by definition, fun. But it is also gambling that natural circumstances won’t lead you to injury, famine, disease, death, etc. Agriculture is an assertion of humanity’s desire and power to, as much as possible, control its own destiny.

            “This just-so story had to have sprung from the imagination of someone who never hoed a row of corn or rose with the sun for a lifetime of milking cows.” On the other hand, the leisure and advancement that followed from agriculture afforded people the time and energy to address the problems of labor and production via ever improved and effective technology. I did live and work on a ranch for many of my early years, and I can tell you that the “just-so” story Manning criticizes is readily endorsed by any number of people like me. Which makes me wonder, is Manning an armchair quarterback? Did he ever plant corn or milk cows?

            I’m not saying that the path we took was a perfect or even ideal one. I don’t know enough to say that. I will say, however, that doing so provided options: If the farmworker wanted a different life, he or she could go to the city and have several alternatives for making a living there — this is is at least one class of options that those in hunter-gatherer societies did not have. If someone tries hunter-gatherer life and finds it wanting, he or she can return to the farm or the city, or even take advantage of modern technology to pursue agriculture-in-the-small, on a “off the grid” homestead.

            1. …true, then you’d be right.

              Unfortunately, your apologetics story is pure marketing bunk anthropologically, enthnologically, and archeologically speaking.

              the leisure and advancement

              Only for the few hierarchical elite. For the rest, agriculture is a disaster in health, more work, shorter lifespan.

              ever improved and effective technology

              Pure techno-triumphalism. If you only look at the gross gain, and not the net gain of a technology, there’s no end to the scams you can justify.

              If the farmworker wanted a different life

              Of course farmworkers want a different life! Agriculture is horrible work compared to gamboling about plain and forest. If they weren’t doing farmwork, they wouldn’t need a choice now, would they? Remember, you said gamboling is fun?

              Is working in a cubicle 14 hours a day “fun?”

              1. All I can say is that I know what I know from firsthand experience. Have you ever worked on a farm or a ranch? How many people do you think could be supported by this planet if we all were “hunter-gatherers”? I said gamboling was fun — until the snows, or the forest fire, or the animals attack, or the floods come, or the drought, or any of a thousand other privations throw your world into chaos. Gambol away young grasshopper. Live your eloi existence as long as you can. Civilization was made necessary when hunter-gatherer tribes became too numerous and began to compete with each other for resources. At some point, somebody realized that food could be cultivated, allowing people to co-operate instead of being competitors or even predators. No, this improvement didn’t eliminate the human talents for competition or predation, but it did allow people to channel their energies and talents into not only the good of themselves, but the good of others, as well, leading to trade and goodwill between those who might otherwise be enemies.

                Having done a fair share of the hard work of agriculture, and having left the farm for city life and vocations, I think I have at least some understanding of both sides of this argument. I thought I had it bad back in the 1970s, but I drove a truck and a tractor, and had numerous tools and machines to help eliminate the worst and most dangerous aspects of the job. Farmworkers in the generations and centuries before me had it much worse. And the farmworkers who have it bad now will have children who will either be able to leave farming, or will benefit from improved capital equipment, enhanced methods, and hardier, more nutritious, higher-yield crops than we have even today. Look at the evolution of crop species for the past thousand years.

                It sounds to me as if you are just stirring things up. I’m going to hope you are a troll, because it would be scary to think that there are people out there who actually think as your postings indicate you do. Brrrrr.

                1. Lie #1: thousand other privations

                  The whole Hobbesian mythology of nasty, brutish, and short has been debunked by empirical evidence from anthropology and archeology.

                  Read “The Original Affluent Society” by Marshall Sahlins.

                  Lie #2: Civilization was made necessary when hunter-gatherer tribes.

                  No. That’s like saying the world is flat. Or believing in alchemy. Long debunked by anthropology.

                  Lie #3: it did allow people to channel their energies

                  Bullshit. It allowed the hierarchical elite to concentrate wealth at the expense of those below them.

                  Even Thomas Paine observed, “The life of an Indian is a continual holiday, compared with the poor of Europe.”

                  Lie #4: It sounds to me as if you are just stirring things up.

                  Liars say shit like that.

                  1. The whole Hobbesian mythology of nasty, brutish, and short has been debunked by empirical evidence from anthropology and archeology.

                    Shackbrah lifestyle: 30 year lifespan

                    Human civilization: 75-year average lifespan

                    1. Red rock, you’re lying.

                      Upper Paleolithic 33 (At age 15, life expectancy an additional 39 years (total age 54 years)

                      Neolithic (agriculture) 20 years

                      Even the Early 20th Century was only 31 years.

                      Cherry picking the last few exceptional, oil-fueled decades, and only the hierarchical elite within that short timespan, is not being honest.

                      The average age of civilization now is 67.1 years.

                      Guess what? The !Kung in the marginal Kalahari desert do just as well – 67 years.

                      So stop the lies, Red Rock. Or keep them up, while I correct you. Doesn’t matter.

            2. Agriculture in the industrial era isn’t what it was in the horticultural and true agricultural eras. The average men and women who worked the fields and tended the animals were at the bottom of the most rigid social hierarchies in human history, and their individual lives weren’t worth much.

              1. Agriculture in the industrial era isn’t what it was in the horticultural and true agricultural eras.

                It’s the same now as it has been save for 2 minor changes:

                1. Using chemicals to create wide swaths of death instead of physically raping the ground to create wide swaths of death for crops.

                2. Breed and grow shorter plants, more resilient so they can pour 10 calories worth of fertilizer and other petroleum inputs on the fields without the grain lodging (falling over.)

  65. Rather than brag about how much money you give to people who earn less than you, why don’t you advocate non-confiscatory policies that would create an atmosphere in which people could earn and keep their own money? Oh, I see…..

  66. Rather than brag about how much money you give to people who earn less than you, why don’t you advocate a non-confiscatory business atmosphere in which people would earn and keep their own money? Oh, I see….

    1. Your capitalism relies on confiscation.

      You just whitewash your aggression with your religio-economic catechism.

      But it’s still there, and I uncover it.

      1. non-confiscatory. and keep what your earn. there were no qualifiers. You are very bossy today with your pseudo corrections.

        1. …well, I did say “money”, ya got me there. Are you the new tribal boss — what kind of punishment will you mete out?

          1. No hierarchy. No boss.

            It’s how humans evolved.

            As evidenced by low sexual dimorphism and no sexual dichromaticism (such as in hierarchical, but smaller brained, red-ass-baboons.)

            Your power tie devolves you 65 million years into a smaller-brained red ass baboon hierarchical society.

            1. to cut off my gamboling rights? Are you going to build a fence to keep me from gamboling? Barbed wire, right?

            2. Not the ultra-violent ones huh? Isn’t Obama the “elder” of his egalatarian tribe?

            3. “tribe” bullshit.

            4. ….is the deadliest “tribe” of all.

              1. Primitive societies were not devoid of violence, but they did limit it, and it was a much rarer thing. Among them, violence was something that happened. For us, it’s a way of life.

                Noble or Savage? Both. (Part 1)
                by Jason Godesky | 11 January 2008

                1. …hunt your minding-their-own business neighbors out on the open plain for sport or profit?

                  1. there is neither sport nor profit. a band treating a stranger as prey is something that just happens…..no need for explanation, or transparency or accountability.

                    1. I like that world….

                2. Did they have a head-breaking police force?

            5. Read my stupid muthfukkas! READ IT!

            6. Hunter-gatherer tribes were so small they HAD to limit violence or there wouldn’t have been anyone left. In a band of 20 people, with 7 hunters/warriors and the rest women and children, the loss of 2 men meant a 29% reduction of hunters/warriors.

  67. …on the Gambol Lockdown.

    Capitalism relies on as much aggression as Communism.

    P.S. Stalin greatly admired the Capitalist implementation of the Indian “reservation” gulag. America has its very own Gulag Archipelago.

    1. America has its very own Gulag Archipelago.

      Yep. The “Occupy X” encampments.

  68. …of Gambol Lockdown.

    Libertarian: But we need government to protect our property rights enforce the Lockdown on Gamboling.

    The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying This is mine, and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not anyone have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows, “Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody.” ~Jean Jacques Rousseau, A Discourse on the Origin of Inequality

    1. You can reshape some brains by persuasion and others might need something else. That is, if you are into thought control and brainwashing…..

    2. Read my stupid muthfukkas! READ IT!

    3. ….if I cheat on my taxes?

  69. And a free Reason t-shirt and one-year subscription of Reason magazine to anyone who can debunk Moore’s claim that he actually paid a 33 percent effective tax rate without claiming any deductions other than his mortgage in 1989.

    best to just assume the fat fuck is lying until he signs an IRS form 4506T to document his claim. also best to assume he took a $1 million charitable contribution deduction in 1990 for his foundation, at least until he proves otherwise.

  70. He is a lying sack of shoe polish and has most likely been understating his earnings for years, and then bragging about how much tax he pays while lobbying for more tax laws to loot his neighbor’s earnings — what a “sicko” bastard. Completely untrustworthy considering his obsequious attitude toward the thieving State.

  71. Why are you talking to the troll?

  72. Also, because I don’t believe it’s been mentioned: Why does Shikha care what Madonna Moore does with her money? This article doesn’t have anything to do with libertarianism. We don’t know the “Ciccone Moore family side of the story” either!

    /drink idiots

    1. This article doesn’t have anything to do with libertarianism

      A fine time to defend philosophy, cap. Have you noticed at last that “libertarianism” mounts its foundation not on bedrock but on shifting sands?

      1. Please don’t speak to me.

        Thank you.

  73. Michael was telling the truth. He is just too stupid to know what things like “Trust Funds” and “Agents” are.

  74. This kind of hypocrisy keeps popping up again and again among the wealthier progressives. What’s sad is that this consistent pursuit of financial self-interest–which confirms much that we capitalists claim is inherent in human nature–is never understood by their fellow travelers to be the example that is. Just as we observed in the Party haves, versus the non-Party have-nots, in the Soviet Union.

  75. And a free Reason t-shirt and one-year subscription of Reason magazine to anyone who can debunk Moore’s claim that he actually paid a 33 percent effective tax rate without claiming any deductions other than his mortgage in 1989.

    A lie by omission is still a lie.

    I told the guy who did my 1040 not to declare any deductions other than the mortgage and to pay the full federal, state and city tax rate.

    His tax preparer would have responded that the Tax Reform Act of 1986 pretty much killed all the personal deductions with the exception of mortgage interest deduction and that was the only deduction he could use anyway. Pure bluster.

    His income of $3 million would have put him in the 28% bracket. In 1989 he would have been responsible for the full shot of Social Security taxes of roughly 13% (self employed) up to $48,000 which would have wiped out the savings from the income in the lower tax brackets. All things considered his Federal tax bill would have been slightly higher than 28%.

    That leaves roughly 5% for his state and city taxes. From what I have found the Michigan state tax was changed in 1986 to 4.6% and was not revised until 1993 when it was reduced to 4.4%. You have to pay attention to the legalistic way Moore asserts the truth. His statement to “not to declare any deductions” is misleading none the less. What Moore doesn’t tell you is that “Credits” and “exemptions” are available under Michigan tax law to reduce the taxable income. The “Property Tax Credits” and “City Income Tax Credit” are not technically “deductions”.

    So he probably did pay somewhere close to 33%, not because he wanted to, because he had to.

    1. So he probably did pay somewhere close to 33%, not because he wanted to, because he had to.

      “An I would’ve paid more, but the taxman’s gun wasn’t loaded!”

  76. “I proudly contributed nearly 1 million dollars for the privilege of being a citizen of this great country.”

    It’s a privilege? And here I thought I got to be a citizen just because I was born here!

    What if I can’t afford to pay Michael Moore’s steep price for American citizenship?

    Would poor people get to vote in Michael Moore’s America?

    Does he hate illegal immigrants? Is citizenship strictly a cash deal with him, or is there any other kind of commitment involved? How much should illegal immigrants have to pay to become citizens?

    1. about the new Obama shakedown. That’s the new price of admission….

  77. There’s a lot to criticize Michael Moore about. But I don’t see any problem with him protesting with OWS, despite that he’s among “the 1%.”

  78. Seriously, this is bullshit. Ban the troll, get registration, or otherwise fix this, or I am out.

    1. He’s worst than most, but a lot of them show up that way to begin with.

      Over time, once they realize we’re not the voice in their heads, they tend to chill out.

      I can think of a whole list of ’em that came in like this guns blazin’ only to quietly fade away…

      WoneLacko was probably one of the first consistent ones.

      A lot of ’em are just little kids too. They’re just becoming politically aware, and they’ve still got their childish black and white view of the world that informs just about everything they see.

      So, you get that kind of Gen Y and Gen Z demographic force coming into political awareness, and you’re gonna get a lot of childish stuff flooding the interwebs. It comes with the scenery.

      If people wouldn’t respond so trollishly to the trolls, it would help a lot too. There’s nothing wrong with responding to them, occasionally, but when we respond in kind, we really are shooting ourselves in the foot.

      1. I disagree. Stop responding completely and it will go away eventually. This one doesn’t argue, it regurgitates the same thing over and over. Please, stop responding to it.

        1. “Please, stop responding to it”
          / food,
          /vermin shit.

  79. Am I the only one who hears echoes of Nixon’s “Checkers” speech in this latest Michael Moore Joint?

    And I am probably the only one who hears echoes of WKRP: “As god is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.”

  80. Mr. Moore, from his own account, is a very altruistic man. He enjoys giving away his money, and chooses the recipients of his generosity very wisely. This is a wonderful thing.

    Yet he very vociferously wants to take from others the same right he himself so enjoys exercising: the right to determine how to spend one’s own money; the right to put self and one’s own family and friends first (college funds, debt relief, etc.) if one so chooses; the right to determine for oneself who gets what and who doesn’t, under what circumstances, how much, when, and on which goods and services; the right, that is, to dispose of one’s private property (or not) as one sees fit

    Mr. Moore obviously enjoys exercising this control over his own wealth.

    Just wondering why he thinks that what’s good for the Michael Moore Goose isn’t good for the Rest Of The 1% Gander?

    1. Just wondering why he thinks that what’s good for the Michael Moore Goose isn’t good for the Rest Of The 1% Gander?

      That we’re not nearly as smart as Mr Moore thinks he is, so we need to be told by our betters what to do with our money?

  81. Since Moore is so averse to polluting himself with the filthy lucre, maybe he will henceforth restrict himself to asking tough questions and posting the videotaped responses on Youtube, for all the world to benefit from, gratis?

  82. So I get to mock all you stupid fucks who are poor, I gather? I don’t think liberals would have anything to complain about if all rich people got that way by satisfying a market demand by selling products of their own talent and hard work.

    1. Liberals complain about everything. Even if the “rich people got that way by satisfying a market demand by selling products of their own talent and hard work” all good liberals seek to redistribute. That way we can all be mediocre.

    2. And if the moon were green cheese, why frogs could fly.
      Now, shithead, did you have a point? Or are you satisfied posting random lies and strawmen?

    3. “you stupid fucks who are poor”


      Hey, if YOU can use it improperly, Tony, then so can I.

    4. If that’s the case, why is Moore so quick to distance himself from other 1%-ers who earned their money that very way? It’s not like Moore has to worry about what non-liberals think. He never has before. His dog and pony show is for the liberals.

      1. You’ll never get the Tony Brigade to admit it, though.

  83. Why would you mock someone for being poor? Is that a sin to you? Is that why you liberal d-bags always confiscate private property and dole it out to people that didn’t do anything to earn it? After you keep some for yourselves, of course…

    1. Capitalism is a slightly more secular version of Calvinism, but all based on monotheistic domination hierarchy:

      [insert priestcraft here]
      [owned objects below]

      All from Genesis 1:26-28

      And you thought you had “risen” from skygod worship. No, you still grovel.

      1. YA SVOBODEN






        1. LOL. Keep chanting. It makes about as much logical sense as Marx or Mises.

          “To date, however, no philosopher has ever successfully divorced Lockesian property rights from monotheism.”

          The Right to Property
          by Jason Godesky

        2. RPA is the retarded child whose parents defiantly insist is “just like normal children” and must be provided a place at the table. Let him drool. His utterances are inconsequential.

          1. Jesus, dude. It’s a Russian rock balad. Talk about a cheap shot.

            1. RPA – it’s a troll. Ne govorite vmyestya sukha.

    2. Seems to me a rich liberal who argues for higher taxes on himself instead of taking healthcare away from old people is more consistent and sensible than a poor libertarian who defends the greatest income and wealth disparities since before the Great Depression with cheap psychobabble and empty slogans.

      People not getting what they earn is the entire point. You just can’t see that the problem is not at the bottom of the income scale, but the top.

      1. http://www.cpusa.org

        You’ll find many like-minded people there. Check it out.

      2. Whoa! Look at the heavy dose of condescension from little brain Tony!

        A rich liberal “arguing” for higher taxes on himself, instead of actually paying them, is a posturing hypocrite – if only you could see it.

        Income and wealth disparities – it has always been thus. It just that waht we have now is fairer than what we would have if you libertal d-bags ran the whole show. Then it really would be 1% vs. 99% (Pol Pot, Castro, Stalin, etc.). It is infinitely better the way it is now since the top quintile work so hard to produce goods and services that the rest of us are to incompetent or unwilling to do, and lift all of up while doing so – if only you could see that.

      3. You talk of psychobabble and empty slogans but then come at us with the most empty of all economic rhetorical tropes of academia: income disparity.

        Eat shit.

        1. Liberalism IS psychobabble.

          1. And Communism.

            And Fascism.

            And Objectivism.

            Need we go on?

            All can be judged by their agricultural city-STATIST prohibitions and restrictions to freedom.

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

            MARX: PROHIBITED!
            MISES: PROHIBITED!

            The psychobabble lies in explaining away, whitewashing, covering-up the violence inherent in the system.

            1. Capitalism and freedom, even with their faults, beat all the alternatives, you stupid fuck.

              1. So you admit that capitalism isn’t perfect. And unfettered capitalism is demonstrably no better than any other system. So what’s wrong with a practical mixed economy come to by trial and error? Why does there always have to be dogmatism?

                1. There must be a dirty pussy in here; how else can we explain the presence of super-douche?

                2. Seriously dude, just shut the fuck up. You are a dishonest, condescending twit that no one here takes even remotely seriously. Go back to HuffPo.

              2. Yes?

                which faults? The ones I’m pointing out and you’re dodging and weaving to avoid discussing?


      4. “Seems to me a rich liberal who argues for higher taxes on himself instead of taking healthcare away from old people is more consistent and sensible than a poor libertarian who defends the greatest income and wealth disparities since before the Great Depression with cheap psychobabble and empty slogans.”

        Seems to me you have an endless supply of strawmen, shithead.

      5. His arguing for higher taxes on himself is highly unlikely to result in higher taxes on himself. It is however guaranteed to keep him in the spotlight, which is a necessity for his continuing to make money.

        It’s sort of like me telling a chick that I too believe that universities should be forced to have half their math faculty be women. It’s never going to happen so it doesn’t really threaten my job, but it scores brown points.

      6. If liberals, socialists, and communists truly loved paying taxes as much as they sanctimoniously like to pretend that they do, then Greece would probably be running a budget surplus.

        No, guys like Buffett and Moore are just like most lefties; they’re completely full of shit. They don’t personally want to pay more taxes, they want EVERYONE OTHER THAN THEMSELVES to have to pay more taxes. There’s a huge difference.

        The proof is that Warren Buffett is doing everything in his power to avoid paying the billion dollars in back taxes he already owes the feds right now.

  84. This is what passes for thought among liberals.

    1. The movement is morally bankrupt. Will be fun to watch it implode.

      1. And is imploding as we speak.

        It’s not fun though; it’s tragic. Unless you take pleasure in others’ pain.

      2. Schadenfreude is always enjoyable.

    2. What I imagined the author to be was a skinny, capricious little white guy furiously masturbating as he ad hominem’d the Tea Party out of existence on his shitty fucking article. That shit isn’t even good vitriol, or a well-written verbal attack, or a debasement. It just blows. That’s how fucking low these people have sunk — not only are they full of shit, they can’t even trash their ideological arch-enemies effectively.

      What a sorry bunch of pinko fucks. I almost stopped reading when he wrote “our progressive democracy”, holding off the temptation to break down in laughter.

      1. The tea party is the least popular group in America. Half of Republicans reject it. It’s not because they’re right about stuff either.

        1. 1) You used to be pretty good at red herrings. You were good at maneuvering in debates, and now you’re losing your touch. Try harder.

          2) Morality doesn’t depend on a fucking popularity contest. Liberty, justice, and logic must not hinge upon the whims of a majority. Unbridled democracy is a God-awful fucking abomination — kill it with fire.

          Anybody who actually cares about what’s right and wrong, as well as what works, couldn’t give two shits about whether their convictions, or the Tea Party, are popular or not. Only you and your coreligionists can come up with bullshit like this.

          1. But they have nothing to offer with respect to morality, liberty, justice, or logic, either.

            1. kinda like the WarParty Democrats in power now, eh?

              1. Why is “morality” such a hang-up for you, Tony? Do you want a Department of Morality, or should it be a Cabinet position?

                Oh, and a bonus for you:


                I know, you liberals don’t like dictionary definitions of your favorite words – bigotry, racism, and so forth – but it really would behoove you to reacquaint yourself with this one in particular.

                1. Liberals don’t like dictionary definitions because it corners them in to a system where words mean shit, and they just can’t have a conversation in which moving the goal posts isn’t a regularly featured rhetorical device.

              2. Let’s have a check list on the ObamaNuts:

                Morality = Amoral
                Liberty = Fail
                Justice = Fail
                Logic = Applied in a sophistic manner only while defending irrational policies.

                Now the tee party fails, but they are better on at least one of the above.

          2. But they have nothing to offer with respect to morality, liberty, justice, or logic, either.

            1. “But they have nothing to offer with respect to morality, liberty, justice, or logic, either.”

              Lies, shithead.

          3. Unbridled democracy is a God-awful fucking abomination

            Need a bit in your mouth, ponyboy?

            You’re all into that authoritarian submissiveness, ain’t ya? It always reveals itself, no matter how elaborate the masquerade.

        2. The tea party has been partially taken over by the neo-con pro-war Rebublicans. I would guess that the anti-war gang would reject it for that reason. There used to be an anti-war strain but I’m not sure anymore. I am sure that the dominant pro-war Clintonite O-bomber wing of the Democrat party would be scared to death of a genuinely anti-war tea party movement….

          1. Hillary: I don’t.

            1. You loved to use them on defenseless Euros when you were in charge.

        3. “It’s not because they’re right about stuff either.”

          This from shithead who couldn’t find his ass with both hands.

        4. Half of Republicans reject it. It’s not because they’re right about stuff either.

          Actually, that EXACTLY why so many Republicans hate it.

      2. a skinny, capricious little white guy furiously masturbating [as he ad hominem’d!] the Tea Party out of existence on his shitty fucking article. That shit isn’t even good vitriol…It just blows. That’s how fucking low these people have sunk…they full of shit…[as he ad hominem’d!] What a sorry bunch of pinko fucks…

        1. Context, how does it work?

    3. i c wat u did thar

    4. The Kosmies don’t like being shown how the Obama youth are misbehaving. They much prefer insulting elderly Tea Partiers.

    5. Every link in that ant-tea Party screed is actually to an Occupy Wall Street story or video. Did anyone else notice that? The Nazi’s endorsed OWS, not the Tea Party. The anti-Jew rant was that OWS guy Reason.tv featured. The violence was Occupy Oakland footage. !?!

      1. Yes, John and others seem to have missed the tongue-in-cheek nature of that post. It’s a sarcastic attack on OWS. How did it get on the Daily Kos?

  85. Hey, Reason. The whole rather/white indian troll has become extremely tiresome. I’ve been reading and (infrequently) posting to this blog for about 6 years, and I’ve enjoyed this place tremendously until this particular troll started gamboling across every thread like a plague. From this point forward, I will not post to nor even read the comments in any article containing a post by this buffoon. I can supply the number for a good exterminator if you need it.

    1. I feel the same about you. The next time I let one fly, I’ll bottle it up just for you.

  86. “But they have nothing to offer with respect to morality, liberty, justice, or logic, either.”

    Neither does the Occutard movement.

  87. You really are going to continue to tolerate this, editors?

    1. …and we need to protect our fragile religio-economic dogmas from challenge.

      Go ahead, ban me because:

      ? I’m for real freedom, and reveal how you aren’t.

      ? I’m for Non-State society, and you are put in a position of defending the agricultural city-State society.

      ? I maintain logical, non-contradictory positions, and show how libertarianism contradicts its own primary principle of non-aggression.

      Go ahead, declare your intellectual bankruptcy and ban me.

      1. and stop with your authoritarian tone!

      2. Your tribe will be lobbying the government for special handouts for “special class status” so you can gambol on someone else’s dime and in return you will become a supporter of the Killer-Drone WarState.

        1. …was at the cost of a Trail of Tears.

          You’re psychologically projecting your own virulent parasitism.

          1. Tool of the State that he cannot quite escape — not that he really wants to…

          2. …like really nice, he might provide you with a Guvment Motors Hybrid SUV and some long rifles to chase down some open-range buffalo.

    2. Warty|10.29.11 @ 4:18PM
      You really are going to continue to tolerate this, editors?

      Warty calls for censorship. Reason ignores him.

      1. Oh, man, just when I thought it couldn’t get any better:

        Episiarch|10.29.11 @ 6:16PM
        Warty, the editors want us to see what a raving lunatic bipolar maniac retard looks like. This is what crazy is, folks. Obsessive, manic, bipolar crazy.


    3. Warty, the editors want us to see, in detail, what a raving lunatic bipolar maniac retard looks like. IN DETAIL.

      This is what crazy is, folks. Obsessive, manic, bipolar crazy. rectal makes Valerie Solanas look like a model of stability.

      I wonder if rectal has her own SCUM Manifesto? Would it be the ANAL Manifesto? The GAMBOL Manifesto?

        1. The I-STOPPED-TAKING-MY-EPITOL Manifesto.

          No more merely hypomanic episodes for rectal. Nope, only full mania for her.

          Hey rectal, how bad do you think your depressive episode is going to be after this? Probably really bad, right? That’s just terrible.

      1. …by the political officer Episiarch. Any truths the orthodox can’t wrap their small brains around has to be a mental illness.

        Comrades, unite in defense of our beloved religio-economic fantasies!

      2. Pretty sure it’s simple:
        No feed for vermin, no vermin shit.
        Won’t happen overnight; this is probably one of the few boards that haven’t tossed WI, so there’s some desperation.
        And then WI has been fed here, so it’ll take a while to redirect the incentives.
        But, no food, no vermin shit.

        1. …and run with it — freedom, Non-State, non-aggression — and wave it more beautifully — backed up with empirical data rather than ideology — the team is forced to give chase.

          Can’t catch me, I’m the gamboling man.

          It’s fun. I’m free. You can be too — without having to say that horribly ugly contradiction: WE NEED GOVERNMENT TO PROTECT OUR [insert] RIGHTS!

          1. Your proposals to “replace” government with [insert] are as fantastical, and contradictory, as an animated corpse.

            You’re trying to conjure a zombie.

            And yes, I agree with you, the minarchists are totally fucked as hell with their contradictory love-hate relationship with the government.

            It’s like they’ve got Stockholm syndrome and are trying to get their captors to treat them a little better. We all know how that works out for battered women.

          2. Check that:
            A LOT of desperation.

        2. No feed for vermin, no vermin shit.

          Are you fucking insane?
          I have fucking freedom of fucking speech!
          So shut the fuck up!

            1. Get off the phone, rectal.

              1. Epi,
                /vermin shit.

                1. Mouseover the fucking email, maybe.

                  Also, while I understand your message, take the fucking stick out of your ass. I responded once – once in over three months – because I was fooled by something that sounded like a purity test, and you jumped all over me.

      3. I still don’t buy that rectal and WI are one and the same.

        1. Doesn’t matter. No food, no vermin shit. Rats and pigeons respond the same.

          1. It’s kinda funny seeing White Indian reach critical mass and implode in spectacular fashion though.

            1. I think you’re mistaking WI’s normal behavior with the behavior of normal people.
              Outside of some slight increase in ‘clever’ handles, WI is spreading vermin shit at about its common rate.

              1. Which is why I will one day learn to listen to you about troll feeding.

          2. Oh, I agree. No feed the troll.

            I’m engaging in the meta-conversation about the origins of this particular troll. Many seem to think that it’s rectal, but she (it?), at least had some sense of humor, even when hate fucking Warty. There was the feeling that it was more than a copy/paste machine whose primary occupation is to convince us that having humanity travel backwards ten thousand years (maybe more?) and killing the vast majority of the human population in the process is the best we can do.

            1. “I’m engaging in the meta-conversation about the origins of this particular troll. Many seem to think that it’s rectal,…”

              No problem there; vermin shit is worth of lab study.
              As regards rectal, I can’t tell. Epi sure thinks so, but I see some style differences in those posts I can identify.

            2. …close to W.In.

        2. Sevo hangs onto every word WI says.

          Couldn’t get her off my jack she was like static cling.

          Derr Kling On.


      1. And let the man say his piece about the proven freedom of a Non-State sociopolitical typology.

  89. This is like the worst chat room ever.

    1. Hey, come on over here!

    2. Meatspace, baby.

  90. Some soothing hangover music.

    1. No, no. You have to beat a hangover out.

      1. No, no, you have to link to videos nobody will watch!

        1. Trust me. I always have the answer.

          1. Still not watching.


          2. #bi.W.In.Ning! Let’s roll.

            Modern hunter-gatherer lifestyles are cul-de-sacs in cultural evolution terms. They stopped mattering by around 4000 BC, and haven’t significantly affected world events since. Pastoral nomads though, played a crucial role until at least World War I. Until about 1405 (the year Timur died), they actually played the starring role. And in reconstructed form, the lifestyle may again start to dominate world affairs within the next few decades. Their eclipse over the last 5oo or so years, I am going to argue, was an accident of history that is finally being corrected.

            The barbarians are about to return to their proper place at the helm of the world’s affairs, and the story revolves around this picture:

            The Return of the Barbarian
            by Venkat on March 10, 2011

              1. You better have your gear squared away better than the Arnold if you know who the Men’s Department of the Navy is.

                Gotta be strong as an ox. And twice as smart.

                1. “applicants should note that anyone found guilty of academic misconduct or weakness in the face of the enemy will be crucified as an example to the others.”

                  Death to plagiarists.

                  1. …”To Hear The Lamentation of Their Women: Constructions of Masculinity in Contemporary Zamoran Literature” memorized. In the original Cimmerian dialect.

            1. …adaptation.

              And my biopsychosocial status here is intimidating to the catechism mumblers guided only by deductive reasoning from premises within their holy canons.

              Most people are terrified of inductive thinking, much less checking their premises.

              ~White Indian

              If one does not understand a person, one tends to regard him as a fool. ~Carl Jung

              1. Most people are terrified of inductive thinking, much less checking their premises.

                Indeed–look how scared you are to head to the hills and live the shackbrah lifestyle.

                1. …but you’re psychologically projecting.

                  1. …but you’re psychologically projecting.

                    And you’re still too chickenshit to live the shackbrah lifestyle.

    2. It’s nice to know that your go-to drunk music sucks balls, but your sober music rules.

      Have you seen Bela perform any of his classical music? I’ve seen it 3 times. There is one piece that is impossible to play with his hands (not big enough to stretch the fret board), so he has to use his fucking nose to tap the strings. Fucking amazing.

      The only bad part about Bela Fleck in concert is that the audience is almost completely composed of smelly hippies and hipsters, neither of which know dick about music.

      1. “so he has to use his fucking nose to tap the strings. Fucking amazing.”

        Oddly that does not make we want to hear this composition.

        1. You should. It’s pretty spectacular, and Bela is the best banjo player living. Dude can do anything he wants with it.

          1. Next to Widespread Panic, Bela Fleck is the second-best. Or vice-versa.

      2. Unfortunately, I have never heard him play solo. I have only seen him and the Flecktones. And yes, smelly hippies and pretentious hipsters galore.

        1. I’ve only seen him and the Flecktones as well, but it was back in the early naughts not long after Perpetual Motion was released, so every show I saw featured a good dose of solo Bela.

          Great stuff.

      1. If the goal is to just go ahead and kill yourself, yes that is good hangover music.

        1. These two have a musical chemistry not seen often. I’m excited about bringing the wife to see them in Louisville at some swank ass theater (Brown Theater). Front row center. I oughta get some that night fo sho!

    3. Nice Bach on the Banjo….. nice…..

      1. Bela’s classical album is spectacular from beginning to end. Perpetual Motion is the title.

  91. But remember, it’s nothing like Iraq.

    The country’s interim leaders have appealed for restraint, but seem unable to control revolutionary forces whose recent vigilante acts, including the suspected killing of Gadhafi while in custody, have begun to tarnish their heroic image abroad.

    A Western diplomat said Libya’s new leaders need to come out more strongly against the culture of revenge, and hold the former fighters accountable for their actions.

    Failure to resolve such conflicts and bring regime supporters, including in the badly damaged loyalist towns of Sirte and Bani Walid, into the fold could destabilize Libya and hamper the attempted transition to democracy, the diplomat warned, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive subject matter.

    Wow, good thing they found a diplomat to give us that inside information.

    1. “…the attempted transition to democracy…”
      Which attempt has been theorized by, oh, for or five people and witnessed by none.
      Sorry, I didn’t see any ‘we want democracy now!’ signs in any of the photos out of Libya. Looks like a bloody dispute over who gets the oil money, and somebody new won.

    2. “But remember, it’s nothing like Iraq.”

      Well, for me a critical difference is that we are not occupying the nation with tens of thousands of our troops. The Libyans have a chance at freedom now, they may use it as they see fit, our troops are not there for their target practice if it turns bad.

      1. Cutting off your thumb is not as bad as cutting off your entire hand.

        That doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to cut off your thumb.

  92. This is like the worst chat room ever!

    1. 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.

      1. I’ve done gone hun.
        New game in town,
        While it lasts.
        The town, that is.

        Are you scared?

  93. I’m done with hunter-gatherer.

    Modern hunter-gatherer lifestyles are cul-de-sacs in cultural evolution terms. They stopped mattering by around 4000 BC, and haven’t significantly affected world events since.

    It’s time to throw in the towel.

    But I can’t be tamed by civilization. I’m too uncultured, too non-submissive, too rebellious, too un-domesticated.

    Pastoral nomads though, played a crucial role until at least World War I. Until about 1405 (the year Timur died), they actually played the starring role. And in reconstructed form, the lifestyle may again start to dominate world affairs within the next few decades. Their eclipse over the last 5oo or so years, I am going to argue, was an accident of history that is finally being corrected.

    The barbarians are about to return to their proper place at the helm of the world’s affairs…

    The Return of the Barbarian
    by Venkat on March 10, 2011

    I’mma ’bout to pull up at your home and it’s on
    They see me rollin
    They hatin
    Patrolling they tryin to catch me ridin dirty

    Damn. I’m embracing technology too.

    Barbarian technologies, like savage technologies, are fundamentally sustainable, since using them tends to fulfill immediate needs rather than causing wealth accumulation. The connection to mobility is central to this characteristic: nomadic cultures do not accumulate useless things. It is a naturally self-limiting way of life. If it doesn’t fit in saddlebags or is too heavy to be carried by pack animals, it isn’t useful.

    Well now. Who wants to ride?

    1. OK, the vermin shit known as WI (and other handles of convenience) has ‘left’ before when (I’m guessing) it presumed the ban-hammer was raised. Hope the door knob isn’t covered in vermin shit as it leaves.
      But folks, when vermin shit returns, as it inevitably will, DON’T FEED THE VERMIN and you WON’T GET VERMIN SHIT!

      1. I hate to see you in such an anxious tizzy. I can go back to hunter-gatherer if it will calm you down. I know I’m job security for you.

        Besides, I’m still gamboling, either way.

        Have you ever thought of yourself as an archetypical Chick Morrison?

        It was 7:50 when Chick Morrison, the Morale Conditioner, who seemed to be in charge, cried,” All right, boys and girls, all right, let’s take our places!” waving a bunch of notepaper, like a baton, toward the light-flooded circle of armchairs.

        1. /food,
          /vermin shit.

          1. Well, Chick had more class in the novel, but this is the Morale Conditioner we get in real life.

            Sort of like the immense disappointment capitalism has been.

            Even embarrassing.

      2. I bet you scream “SHUT UP!!!!” at the top of your lungs when people talk at the movie theater, too.

    1. You’re gonna find out other lifestyles are cul-de-sacs in cultural evolution terms too.

      Better make sure your high-tech will fulfill immediate needs rather than causing wealth accumulation.

      Oh, and to hell with that cooperation stuff. Libertarians done talked me into competition. As if they’re really ready to compete with neoBarbarians.

      Got started on that Great Wall of China yet?


      1. …a nice cold beer out of the fridgidaire — it is an immediate need.

        1. White “John Galt” Indian had come to call in the middle of the night, like Jesus Christ himself, calling out the elect from the City-State.

          And you go for a fucking beer.

          Dude. It better be a Rolling Rock, or I’m skipping over to Ken Danagger’s office pronto.

          1. Corona long neck with a slice of lime, live with it.

            1. made by non-union Mexicans.

              1. descendents of the Aztecs.

            2. Being what my pay as a short-order cook in a diner comes to, I better settle for it.

              At least until I can get into Dagny’s pretty little… refrigerator, that’s the ticket, in her private car on rails.

              I hope the sound of the wheels clicking in accented rhythm under the floor of her car is rapid enough for a proper cadence.

              Once she’s gone Strack, she’ll never go back.

                1. …at your cervix.

                2. That tunnel connects to a size 2 wide mouth jar. Ready, aim, fart.

        2. /beer


      2. and hype. There is a reason The Lord made Tomorrow. It is Another Day.

        1. …Ra-Amen.

          1. As a civilization becomes increasingly refined, and far less intelligent, it becomes easy prey for pastoral nomads on the margins, who swoop in cleanse the culture of accumulated stupidity, and revitalize it with a fresh infusion of barbarian blood at the top.

            You might even say that barbarians operate at a meta-level: they plant and harvest value out of civilizations. They are civilization farmers, just as they are animal herders.

            The Return of the Barbarian
            by Venkat on March 10, 2011

            Sun Day Morning. The Sun is Risen. Now We Prey.


    2. The Critique of the agricultural city-State (civilization) via differential analysis with Non-State sociopolitical typology still stands as valid — even if forager-hunting has been rendered impossible or undesirable.

      If you leave me now, you’ll take away the biggest part of me Uh uh uh uh no baby please don’t go

  94. He’s a buffoon, but I agree with him about the stock market. Anybody who participates in the game as it’s currently rigged is an idiot.

    1. “Anybody who participates in the game as it’s currently rigged is an idiot.”
      So you keep your retirement funds in a coffee can buried in the back yard?

      1. My investment advisor considers ammo boxes a safer bet.

        1. Then he’s an idiot.

          Not for suggesting that ammo is a better option than stocks right now, it may well be, but because he suggested buying ammo as opposed to making your own. Your purchase dollars will go MUCH further loading your own once you get the initial investment out of the way (which needn’t be that large unless you want to be all sophisticated with your ammo).

          That, and do you REALLY think that we’ll be left with the ability to purchase ammo in the even we ever needed ammo? That shit would be banned post haste. The only option will be to make your own.

          1. Ammo boxes are the things that ammo is kept in.

            1. Fair enough.

              I read ammo boxes as specifically meaning “boxes of ammo”. Perhaps I’m wrong, but in the context given, it seems the only logical choice.

              What good would empty ammo storage boxes do?

      2. I keep my investments private.

        1. Yeah, the location of his coffee can is a secret, sevo.

  95. Why are people still posting hangover music, it’s time to get drunk again:


      1. definitely can’t avoid dancing to that song, which is how I feel about this song:

    1. I love ESL (english as a second language) songs

      1. not available in my country but I concur:

          1. still not available what country are you posting from?


  96. I don’t get it. This person isn’t a troll, they’re really unstable. No way in hell a garden variety troll puts in this kind of time and effort just to troll a blog.

    It’s kinda scary if you think about it.

    1. Agreed. I can imagine going over to the DailyKos or Salon and taking a shot at engaging with “progressives” and “liberals” a few times. It can be occasionally interesting trying to have a dialog with people who have a different worldview. Going in, I’d know full-well that my chances at changing anyone’s mind over there would be slim to none, but it might be an interesting exercise a few times and you never know, someone under 25, with some libertarian instincts already, might read what I have to say and it might at least turn some wheels.
      But the out-of-control posting, the sheer volume of posts, with absolutely no interest in honest and curious dialog, of this type of trolling is just weird. It’s a twisted psychology that only gets its rocks off by trying to piss other people off. Over and over again.

      1. Obviously he was abused by Uncle Pennybags when he was young and has been taking it out on libertarian strawmen ever since.

        1. Who says it’s a he?

        2. heller, the submissive boytoy turned collectivist organization man wasn’t abused because he LIKES school, likes discipline, likes pleasing schoolmarms

          korn-another brick in the wall


          1. Started your shackbrah lifestyle yet?

              1. Started your shackbrah lifestyle yet?

      2. I think this is where we see what happens when you combine trollery with Asperger’s syndrome. Aspies often have very rigid obsessions with topics no one else cares about, and I think this is what we’re being subjected to here with our gamboling friend. He sort of reminds me of a guy I knew who self-identified as a libertarian, but who was obsessed with 9/11 conspiracies (specifically, Building 7), and couldn’t stop talking about it, whether online or in person.

          1. Argh.

            HTML, how does it work?

            1. Neanderthals, Humans Interbred?First Solid DNA Evidence
              Most of us have some Neanderthal genes, study finds.

              According to a new DNA study, most humans have a little Neanderthal in them?at least 1 to 4 percent of a person’s genetic makeup.


        1. Point taken.

          What you identify as a “problem” is actually just higher and more brain function from larger cranial size.

          Lots bigger than yours.

          Neanderthals had a 1500cc brain volume, while modern humans have 1400cc. This means a difference of 7-8% percent. The difference measured on autistic children was 10%. In Aspie-quiz, there is a positive correlation between larger head / hat size and autism in adults.

          The Neanderthal theory

          1. Except that there’s no evidence of a correlation between intelligence and brain size, either within a species or between species. And I have nothing against Aspies – apologies if offense was taken. By “problem,” I just meant that Aspies find things that are very simple to non-Aspies difficult for them, but of course, the reverse is also true.

            1. By “problem,” I just meant that Aspies find things that are very simple to non-Aspies difficult for them, but of course, the reverse is also true.

              Speaking from my own personal experience, that is quite true.

              It’s nothing the right teaching method can’t overcome however.

      3. White Indian has shown that libertarians are contradictory on voluntarism, non-aggression, and Non-State sociopolitical typology.

        I’m not trying to convince you of voluntarism and non-aggression.

        I’m only showing that you are self-contradictory.

        You don’t like it much.

        1. I stopped reading the substance of what you scribble a long time ago (and I imagine I’m not alone in just skimming past your silliness), after I realized you had no interest in honest dialog and were just spewing out a dog’s breakfast of catch phrases, straw men, and complete inanities; Once I notice that it’s you I scroll past any of the nonsense that you puke up. I made an exception here as it appears to be a reply to me, yet again it is nothing more than frothing at the mouth. You’re an annoying mosquito, nothing more. It’s only annoying in that I have to scroll past you so often. But congratulations for causing mild annoyance. You must be orgasming.

          1. no interest in honest dialog and were just spewing out a dog’s breakfast of catch phrases, straw men, and complete inanities

            Got psychological projection?

            1. There’s no cure for Aspergers but it can be managed with help. Good luck (waits for another endless stream of frothing at the mouth).

              1. White Indian is a fanatic and an attention whore.

                Nothing more, nothing less.

                I’ll even go so far as to say he’s one of the trophy generation who was never spanked as a child and was given everything he wanted from mumsy and daddums if he just screamed loud enough.

                1. http://www.nospank.net

                  Why are libertarians so much for initiating violence, especially against innocent children?

        2. White Indian has shown that libertarians are contradictory on voluntarism, non-aggression, and Non-State sociopolitical typology.

          I heard the same thing from the guy who poured my Starbucks this morning. You must have the same college class.

          1. Did the Starbucks dude have his own self-made sockpuppets too?

      1. Taking Aptheist into consideration, one easily concludes that:

        One-on-one, a lower barbarian can outthink, outfight, and out-innovate a civilized citizen any day.

        The Return of the Barbarian
        by Venkat on March 10, 2011

        1. One-on-one, a lower barbarian can outthink, outfight, and out-innovate a civilized citizen any day.

          One-on-one, a lower barbarian gets rolled like a cheap hooker when they attempt to take on civilized citizens.

          1. One-on-one, Revan would totally fuck Sidious up.

    1. No Uncle Pennybags, don’t touch me in the bad place! No! Your perfectly coiffed mustache is scratching against my bare skin! No, don’t put your monocle there!

      Oh sorry, I just blacked out for a second after watching that video. Now where was I?

      Libtarians hate freedumz!

        1. After the mysterious death of my parents, Uncle Pennybags became my guardian. He took me to his farm where he raped every day. When he wasn’t using his monocle as my assplug, he made me work on his marijuana farm (every libertarian has one). Ever since, I’ve sworn a jihad against agriculture and libertarians.

          1. On behalf of ALL the libertarian strawmen, please stop beating us.

            1. Capitalist society school was pretty much like that, metaphorically and psychologically speaking.

              I dub thee Unforgiven, Uncle Pennybags.

              Anatomy of a Libertard: Will Wilkinson And the Koch-Funded Nomenklatura
              By Mark Ames

        2. And UNFORGIVEN

          This observation that Americans do not like to admit their collectivist spirit is not new. What is perhaps unfamiliar to people is the weird idea that large American corporations, those bastions of capitalism, might internally be the last bastions of communism. Corporate socialist cultures might outlast the governments of China and Cuba. And we are not talking labor unions here. We are talking about the culturally communist ethos of the managerial class. Something people usually refer to by means of euphemisms like “a consensus-driven culture.” Whyte dissects this schizophrenia particularly eloquently:

          Collectivism? He abhors it, and when he makes his ritualistic attack on Welfare Statism, it is in terms of a Protestant Ethic undefiled by change ? the sacredness of property, the enervating effect of security, the virtues of thrift, of hard work and independence… He is not being hypocritical, only compulsive. He honestly wants to believe he follows the tenets he extols.

          The Organization Man by William Whyte: Introduction
          by Venkat on November 18, 2008

          1. …William Whyte dissects this schizophrenia…

      1. Communist: NO!
        Socialist: NO!
        Capitalist: NO!
        Libertarian: NO!
        Fascist: NO!

        All city-Statists hate freedumz, including those who use the word freedom as a masquerade.

        Agricultural city-Statism is aggressive Gambol Lockdown.

        1. If Uncle Ted could do it, why can’t you?

  97. WI is obviously off their meds. What was once a mildly entertaining yet not informative back and forth has turned into an antagonistic rant purely for WI’s jollies. It’s kind of sad as I look at this blog entry and see WI here almost all weekend posting copious amounts of high-minded sociology degree tripe.

    Of course, it’s always possible that WI is really a sociology degree project at some backwater college with a whole class participating. At least that wouldn’t be so sad and pathetic.

    1. The only sad and pathetic thing is the libertarian rejection of their own stated principles.

      You’re no different than a Communist or Conservative or Socialist in your regard to Non-State society.

      You’re a tyrant. You’re as much of a city-Statist as the rest of them.

      1. You’re no different than a Communist or Conservative or Socialist in your regard to Non-State society.

        Does your butt hurt, neckbeard? It sounds like your butt hurts.

  98. This is a silly thread. Moore advocating a change to the current rules while working those rules to his advantage is no more hypocritical than libertarians who advocate no public roads or schools using either.

    1. So Moore has little choice but to keep the bulk of his money and invest it with Haliburton and the like, just like libertarians have little choice in whether they drive on government roads vs. private roads. Sounds about right.

    2. SOMALIA!

    3. You missed the part about Moore claiming he was not in the 1 percent.

    4. Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrroooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    5. Less than four sentences. No substance. Try harder next time. FOURTH SENTENCE.

  99. George Will Slamming Romney

    In May, in corn-growing Iowa, Romney said, “I support” ? present tense ? “the subsidy of ethanol.” And: “I believe ethanol is an important part of our energy solution for this country.” But in October he told Iowans he is “a business guy,” so as president he would review this bipartisan ? the last Republican president was an ethanol enthusiast ? folly. Romney said that he once favored (past tense) subsidies to get the ethanol industry “on its feet.” (In the 19th century, Republican “business guys” justified high tariffs for protecting “infant industries”). But Romney added, “I’ve indicated I didn’t think the subsidy had to go on forever.” Ethanol subsidies expire in December, but “I might have looked at more of a decline over time” because of “the importance of ethanol as a domestic fuel.” Besides, “ethanol is part of national security.” However, “I don’t want to say” I will propose new subsidies. Still, ethanol has “become an important source of amplifying our energy capacity.” Anyway, ethanol should “continue to have prospects of growing its share of” transportation fuels. Got it?

    Romney, supposedly the Republican most electable next November, is a recidivist reviser of his principles


    1. Romney’s a faux-republican shithead. I hope the Republican Party realizes this at some point.

      1. Romney’s a faux-republican shithead.

        He’s par for the course.

        1. sounds about right, but with a capital R

    2. Instead of ethanol, I support methane. In fact, I keep a lot of it in jars in my basement. Odorous but powerful.

  100. Keeping the feds at bay

    With Senate Bill 197 ? legislation that would have the federal government dictate how state judges are to try medical malpractice cases and cap what state courts may award ? several Republican senators have reminded us that federal impositions on states that run contrary to the U.S. Constitution and to the spirit of federalism have never been the sole prerogative of just Democrats.

    Senate Bill 197 takes an approach that implies “Washington knows best” while trampling states’ authority and the 10th Amendment. The legislation is breathtakingly broad in its assumptions about federal power, particularly the same power to regulate commerce that lies at the heart of all the lawsuits (including Virginia’s) against the individual mandate of the 2010 federal health-care law. I have little doubt that the senators who brought us S. 197 oppose the use of the commerce clause to compel individuals to buy health insurance. Yet they have no qualms about dictating to state court judges how they are to conduct trials in state lawsuits. How does this sort of constitutional disconnect happen?


    1. Typical statists. Whether their logo’s an ass or an elephant makes no difference. Fuck them all the same.

      1. Typical statists. Whether their logo’s an ass or an elephant [or a government statue hyping liberty] makes no difference. Fuck them all the same.


  101. Typical statists. Whether their logo’s an ass or an elephant or a government statue hyping liberty makes no difference. Fuck them all the same.

    1. The new Presidential dollars seem somewhat plain at times, but the rendition of the Statue of Liberty on the reverse is pretty fucking great.

      1. You know which party of principle has a government statue as its symbol, libertard.

        funny watching you dodge and weave

        1. 1) I wasn’t dodging and weaving. I indirectly acknowledged that I understood you were referring to the Statue of Liberty, fuckbreath.

          2) Do you even know anything about the fucking Statue of Liberty?

          3) In any case, the Libertarian Party (note the capital letters, asshole) is an organization. It only represents its members. It could have Adolf Hitler in its logo, and it would still mean exactly jack shit.

          Are you seriously this fucking retarded?

          1. You’re still dodging and weaving the fact that you are as STATIST as any democrat or republican.

            1. You’re a fucking PRIMITIVIST.

              Let me repeat that again.

              A PRIMITIVIST.

              I cannot and will not take your copious bullshit seriously. Ever. Go gambol through an Indian reservation — with any luck, you’ll get shot through the ass and we’ll be free of you for a few weeks.

              1. …restrict the movement of gatherer-hunting way of making a living.

                But nice to see how you want me shot, you fucking STATIST.

                Of course a Statist can’t take freedom seriously, I’m not surprised you’re so much against it and so much for death.

        2. Also, among the site’s regulars are anarchists, paleoconservatives, run-of-the-mill centrists, Democrats, Republicans, minarchists, and Libertarians(capital ‘L’), among others. Who the fuck gave you the idea I’m a member of the Libertarian Party, or a libertarian at all? For all you know, I’m a Bush neoconservative.

          1. You’re still dodging and weaving the fact that you are as STATIST as any democrat or republican.

            1. You’re still dodging and weaving the fact that you moved all the way to Ft. Collins for an anthropology internship and ended up washing trashcans for the city.

        3. Not a single molecule of the Statue of Liberty was funded by US taxpayers. The statue was a gift from France and the pedestal was funded by private donations.

          It ain’t a “government statue” by any stretch of the imagination.

          1. The government had to approve the interstate jurisdictional conflict that led the island to be disputed between new york and new jersey for nearly a century.

            1. This is the problem with the phrase: “any stretch of the imagination.” Imagination can be stretched almost anywhere.

            2. Plus, ROADS!

          2. Let’s see

            Statue of Liberty National Monument

            GOV stands for GOVERNMENT.

            Stretch that imagination to say it isn’t a government statue, libertard.

            1. God Almighty, this guy can’t possibly be this fucking retarded. The laws of nature have been redefined.

        4. You know which party of principle has a government statue as its symbol, libertard.

          Can’t expect actual knowledge from a witch-doctor wannabe, it seems.

          What’s the message from Turtle Island today, Neckbeard?

          1. Can’t expect actual knowledge from a election winning wannabe, it seems.

            What’s the message from the two dog catchers?

            1. Can’t expect actual knowledge from a witch-doctor wannabe, it seems.

              What’s the message from Turtle Island today, Neckbeard?

  102. Michael Lewis’s Vanity Fair piece on California’s financial woes is worth a read:


  103. Officer, am I free to masturbate in public?

    1. Only if you fart in a jar when you are done.

  104. This is like the worst weekend thread chat room ever.

    1. Have you tried farting in a jar? All will be revealed if you do.

      1. I am a fart.

        1. Are you in a jar as well?

  105. Who’s to blame when situations degenerate?
    Disgusting things you’d never anticipate?

  106. Hmm, White Indian originally claimed that he is a wealthy capitalist who had seen the light. Now, his story is that he was a victim of capitalism. Apparently, he was ass-raping himself.

    1. Somebody probably beat his sorry ass at multiplayer Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, and THAT only exists because, you know, CIVILIZATION and TECHNOLOGY. So now he’s dedicated himself, the limpdick that he is, to bitching about the evils of the horticultural city-state, or some shit, on a libertarian website.

      1. With their mind fixed on W.In.ning

  107. What’s the Hindi for “stupid right-wing cunt”?

    1. Similar to idiot, foul mouthed liberal.

  108. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/…..alter.html

    This is funny. The Obama administration is scandal free. If you just ignore them giving 500 million to a big donor who had no hope of making any money and pretend Fast and Furious didn’t happen.

    1. I stopped reading after this gem:

      But he has one asset that hasn’t received much attention: He’s honest.

      Jonathan Alter was a senior editor, media critic and columnist for Newsweek, where he worked for 28 years and covered five administrations and seven presidential campaigns.

      No wonder our country is so fucked if people like Alter have been covering the white house.

      1. Just a complete ignorant hack.

  109. You might have heard the news: we’re at the end of growth. Growth of the economy, of consumption, of wealth. That this would happen isn’t news to those who’ve followed the writings of Meadows, Heinberg, and many others. What’s different now is that the end of growth may have actually arrived.

    On Friday we learned that after only two years of expansion (mid 2009 – mid 2011), the U.S. economy is re-entering recession:

    Early last week, ECRI notified clients that the U.S. economy is indeed tipping into a new recession. And there’s nothing that policy makers can do to head it off.
    ECRI’s recession call isn’t based on just one or two leading indexes, but on dozens of specialized leading indexes, including the U.S. Long Leading Index, which was the first to turn down ? before the Arab Spring and Japanese earthquake ? to be followed by downturns in the Weekly Leading Index and other shorter-leading indexes. In fact, the most reliable forward-looking indicators are now collectively behaving as they did on the cusp of full-blown recessions, not “soft landings.”

    Why is this happening so soon? What’s the bigger context here?

    We’re not just entering a new recession – we’re at the end of growth as we’ve known it.

    We have passed or are near many of the peaks in natural resources, both by drawing down non-renewable resources and by hyperexploiting renewable ones.

    For example, here are some points we’ve passed and haven’t looked back (approximate dates):

    1979: Peak per-capita gross energy production
    1986: Peak grain per capita
    1989-1995: Peak wild fish catch
    1990: Peak net energy production
    2000: Peak fresh water availability
    2005: Peak conventional oil production
    2011-14: Peak all-liquids (conventional+unconventional oil) production
    It’s possible to overshoot a resource base – civilizations have done it time and again – but only temporarily. The list above is a small subset of what we’ve depleted or are depleting, and many of the critical ones – oil, for instance – have no real substitutes. Even if there were substitutes, we would have to have started a crash program 20 years ago to transition without economic impacts. But it’s too late for that.

    What’s the consequence of these constraints?

    There’s a simple cycle that everyone should step back and observe, because we’re going to be stuck in it for at least the rest of this decade if not the next one as well:

    A recession occurs (2007-2008)
    Demand falls due to the recession (2008-2009)
    Oil/gasoline prices fall (2008-2009)
    A recovery begins (2009)
    The recovery self-sustains for a short period of time (2009-2010)
    Oil prices rise due to increased demand (2010-2011)
    The recovery falters due to increased oil costs (2010-2011)
    A new recession begins (2011)
    When oil prices hit $90/barrel last December, those watching oil prices were worried this would cause a new recession. In a diary in May I predicted we’d see a recession within 12 months due to the persistent high oil prices we’d seen from December through May. (My prediction was nothing special – many others who were tracking oil prices came to a similar conclusion.)

    How does this lead to the end of economic growth?

    As the foundation of oil upon which we’ve built our industrial system crumbles, we will face direct economic impacts. Hirsch, whose 2005 study for the Department of Energy on the peaking of world oil production is still the gold standard, conducted further studies to try to understand how oil connects to GDP. He concluded that there’s a 1-to-1 relationship: for every 1% oil production declines, world GDP declines 1%.

    How much does he expect world oil production to decline? Here’s what he says:

    Best Case Scenario: Maximum world oil production is followed by a period of relatively flat production (a plateau) before the onset of a decline rate of 2?5% per year.

    This indicates that in the best case scenario we should expect a yearly 2-5% decline in world GDP, which is roughly equivalent to having a recession nearly yearly (though it’s unlikely to be that steady).

    The trend break happened in 2005, when global oil production stopped increasing. We’ve been on a plateau of sorts since then. While the graph above is technically about oil, it maps directly to the economy: we’ve been on an economic plateau since then.

    This recently revised chart from Calculated Risk shows that the latest GDP numbers indicate that we’re still below 2007-level economic activity once you adjust for inflation:

    Now that we’re entering a new recession, that GDP is going to head down again before we even made it past the previous peak GDP. That is, we’ve hit the end of economic growth in quantitative terms.

    Going forward, as I mentioned in previous diaries, it’s unlikely that this will result in a constant, smooth decline. Now that oil production is flat and soon to be declining, what happens? We hit our head on the oil ceiling, a recession ensues, and as we begin to recover, we quickly find ourselves hitting our heads on the oil ceiling because production is declining. This has two consequences:

    After a recession, the recovery that ensues will only be a partial recovery – that is, the economy won’t recover to a better state than it was in before the recession
    Recessions are likely to be more frequent (maybe on the order of every 3 years)
    The right priorities and the wrong priorities.

    A good rule of thumb is that when there is consensus on an issue in Washington (or Wall Street), it’s probably wrong. And there is consensus among the mainstream left and the right, Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives that growth is good and should be our objective. What all of the above is indicating is that growth isn’t possible any more. Doesn’t matter if it’s “smart growth” or “dumb growth” or growth for the benefit of corporations or growth for the benefit of the 99%. We’ve reached the long-forecasted Limits to Growth.

    What can be done?

    To be honest, I don’t expect that much can be done top-down or bottom-up. The institutions we have, and the forms of activism we have, don’t work well to address problems like this. The best approach may be individuals and communities first coming to grips with this situation, and then taking action to become more resilient.

    I’m not going to suggest a rescue remedy that will solve the problems above, because there isn’t one.

    Rather, the point is that this isn’t the end of the world and we can live fulfilling lives with less – something we all know, but sometimes forget to implement.

    Here are some things (far from comprehensive) that each of us can do to prepare for this new, harder era both by reducing our costs and by reducing our community’s dependence upon the oil economy:

    Pick up a copy of The Complete Tightwad Gazette (and similar books) from your local library and start cutting costs.
    Weatherize your home or apartment.
    Stop purchasing consumables and disposables.
    Eat only organic, local produce.
    Stop eating meat/eggs/dairy not from farms that are local, grassfed, and organic.
    Use public transportation and travel by train.
    Grow, prepare, and preserve and can your own food.
    Use only truly renewable energy sources.
    Withdraw from the money economy as much as possible.
    Few people have taken all of these steps today – I sure haven’t – but I’m working on them slowly and think that there’s the possibility of a simpler and fulfilling life ahead if we’re willing to adapt to our new circumstances.

    Until next time…


    I thought I should add that if you had to read one book that gets into the future we’re looking at, it’s Bill McKibben’s Eaarth. He might be the only popular journalist today who squarely addresses the economic and ecological limits we face, and does so in easy to understand language. If you have time for another book, I recommend checking out Richard Heinberg’s new book The End of Growth which goes into more depth on a number of these topics.

    1. Oh piss off. People have been claiming the end of growth for literally thousands of years. Sorry, we are all filled up with crazy stupid. Go sell it somewhere else.

    2. You know what this cluster fuck of a thread is missing?

    3. “Felt quotes a writer who said: “The evils
      of litigation abound. People of estates cannot
      raise money, unless they dispose of them at half
      their value. Individuals depending- on their
      labor are forced to take for their toil from onehalf
      to two-thirds in goods, while their creditors
      imperiously demand cash of them. The private
      bank* does not receive encouragement from the
      legislative authorities. ^50,000 ought to be laid
      out for building a bridge over Charles river, so
      that workmen might be employed and currency
      enlarged, as well as the public accommodated,
      and ruin will come unless more bills of credit
      are emitted.” This was in 1719.

      In 1720 trade was stagnant, and there was a
      great cry for more bills. Let it be observed
      how this complaint is heard again
      every four or five years, although the amount
      of paper was continually increasing. It is
      the best instance in history of the way in which
      a country “grows up” to any amount of currency.
      Here was a sparse population in a new
      country with untouched resources, and it seemed
      to them necessary to have recourse to artificial
      issues of currency to “make business brisk;”
      to get up enterprises for the sake of “making
      work ;” and to lay bounties on products in order
      to enable the people to carry on production. The
      distress was real, but it came from turning their
      backs on what nature offered them gratuitously,
      and violating the laws by which they might have
      profited by these gifts.


      “The influence which a
      bad currency has on the morals of a people is
      greater than is generally imagined. Numbers
      of schemes for public and private emissions were
      proposed as remedies. The only effectual one,
      the utter abolition of the bills, was omitted.”
      Expeditions (wars) were favored for the purpose of
      bringing about issues of paper, and public works
      were advocated for the same reason.”


      Same shit, different time period

      1. Dear Crazy Person,
        Next time make it less than 3 sentences, and maybe add a video link.


        1. Yes, I know….30 second sound bites.


  110. Stop sticking hour head in the sand John and go read the material I recommended. Esepcially Heinberg, (writer of The Party’s Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies) who has studied how Cuba has adjusted to Peak Oil (their oil was heavily subsidzed by the USSR until 1991, in a way they had to go through Peak Oil before ANYONE else) and transitioned to a sustainable economy (read The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil).


    Last week I established why we’re at the end of economic growth as we know it. With that comes the end of Wall Street as we know it. The protests going on now may hasten that end, but the end is inevitable one way or another.

    But should anything replace it, and if so, what? That’s the question we need to be asking. What would the economy be like? How would it function? What would differentiate a post-growth, post-Wall Street economy from the one we have today? While I have ideas of my own on this, as I’m sure you do, I wanted to turn to someone who’s been doing a lot of hard thinking about this for many decades: Herman Daly.

    Herman Daly, who is now a professor at the University of Maryland, was one of the first economists to fully grasp the need for ecological economics, a version of economics that at its core recognizes that the economy exists on a finite planet and has to work in harmony with the global ecosystem. I finally sat down and read Daly’s classic book Steady-State Economics, which I think is worth discussing in light of today’s situation. In this diary I’d like to begin to review Daly’s ideas (which were ahead of their time—the first edition was written in 1977). His ideas are both deep and simple at the same time, and should be the foundation of any plans we make for the future economy in our ever more resource-constrained world.

    Daly makes a point at the beginning of the second edition that is both “obvious” and true. (I use quotes because I’ve found that sometimes things that are obvious are either not so, or not true, for a variety of reasons.) Using Schumpeter’s term “preanalytic vision”—the premise upon which a theory is built—he describes the basis for both standard and steady-state economics:

    What is the preanalytic vision of standard economics? Of stead-state economics? For standard economics, it is that the economy is an isolated system in which exchange value circulates between firms and households. Nothing enters from the environment, nothing exits to the environment. It does not matter how big the economy is relative to its environment. For all practical purposes an isolated system has no environment.

    Contrast this with steady-state economics (emphasis mine):
    For steady-state economics, the preanalytic vision is that the economy is an open subsystem of a finite and nongrowing ecosystem (the environment). The economy lives by importing low-entropy matter-energy (raw materials) and exporting high-entropy matter-energy (waste). Any subsystem of a finite nongrowing system must itself at some point also become nongrowing.

    The logic is so simple, yet somehow it isn’t the basis for today’s dominant economic thinking. Daly comments that the discipline of economics is not so keen on creative destruction when applied to the discipline of economics itself.
    I’ve found Daly’s insights incredibly valuable. Over the past few years I have internalized the idea that growth cannot continue and that contraction is likely. However, I had not seen or understood a vision for how an economic system can function without growth or contraction. Partly that’s because our current economic system requires growth to even stay at a steady state. The fact that there is such a thing as a stall speed highlights this: it’s estimated that if GDP growth drops below 2% (which is “stall speed”) the U.S. economy is likely to enter recession. I’ve long been bothered by this fact (that we need growth even to stay flat), but the pieces never came together in my mind.

    The book is filled with all sorts of wise turns of phrase. Consider (in the context of conventional economic thinking and the over-mathematization of economics):

    Separation of ‘is’ from ‘ought’ is an elementary rule of clear thinking.

    Here I’m reminded of the expectation that while high prices ought to yield more oil, in the face of dramatically higher prices, oil production has remained flat for seven years, and so it is the latter we need to focus on.
    One of the essential ways of obscuring reality is through language (though I’m not sure I’m well qualified to expand upon this point given my lack of knowledge in linguistics and related fields). Daly strips many economic terms of their cloaks and in doing so makes the obvious visible. Take for example the ideas of consumption and production:

    But production and consumption are not the precise words, since man can neither produce nor destroy matter and energy but only transform them from one state to another. Man transforms raw materials into commodities and commodities into garbage.

    Again, this is something well known to those aware of such issues, but I’d never stepped back to think about how common terms like consumption and production were hiding what’s really going on.
    The problems with GDP and GNP are well known (and we’re still interested in exploring alternatives like the DOM index further); Daly again explains the problem in simple language, in part citing Schumacher:

    As more people transform more raw materials per person into commodities, we experience higher rates of depletion; as more people transform more commodities into waste, we experience higher rates of pollution. We devote more effort and resources to mining poorer mineral deposits and to cleaning up increased pollution, and then we count many of these extra expenses as an increase in GNP and congratulate ourselves on the extra growth! The problem with GNP is that it counts consumption of geological capital as current income.

    After laying some groundwork, Daly establishes what exactly it means for an economy to be steady state:
    What is it precisely that is not growing, or held in a steady state? Two basic physical magnitudes are to be held constant: the population of human bodies and the population of artifacts (stock of physical wealth)…Of equal importance is what is not held constant. The culture, genetic inheritance, knowledge, goodness, ethical codes, and so forth embodied in human beings are not held constant. Likewise, the embodied technology, the design, and the product mix of the aggregate total stock of artifacts are not held constant. Nor is the current distribution of artifacts among the population taken as constant. Not only is quality free to evolve, but its development is positively encouraged in certain directions. If we use “growth” to mean quantitative change, and “development to refer to qualitative change, then we may say that a steady-state economy develops but does not grow, just as the planet Earth, of which the human economy is a subsystem, develops but does not grow.

    Daly also makes clear the differences between a growth economy and a steady-state economy (SSE):
    However, the SSE is defined in terms of constant stocks (a quantity measured at a point in time, like an inventory), not flows (a quantity measured over an interval of time, like annual sales). GNP is a flow and is logically irrelevant to the definition of an SSE… The steady-state perspective seeks to maintain a desired level of stocks with a minimum throughput, and if minimizing the throughput implies a reduction in GNP, that is totally acceptable. The steady-state paradigm assumes some sufficient level of stocks, an assumption that is absent from the growth paradigm.

    While written in the dry language of an economist, Daly hits on an important point here: that there is no notion of “enough” in a growth-based economy (and by extension, a growth-based culture). Again, this is well known, but he distills it to its essence.
    But why can’t technology solve these problems and free us from the economic constraints imposed by diffuse solar energy? Daly addresses this nicely:

    But have we not given insufficient credit to the marvelous power of technology in our discussion of ultimate means? Is not technology itself an infinite resource? No, it is not. Improved technology means using the entropic flow more efficiently, not reversing the direction of the flow. Efficiency is subject to thermodynamic limits. All existing and currently conceivable technologies function on an entropy gradient, converting low entropy into high entropy, in net terms.

    That is, the best that new energy technologies can do is find marginally more efficient ways of transforming the existing (mostly solar-derived) energy flows on the planet; technology cannot replace energy.
    Daly eventually arrives at a nice summation of what a steady-state economy is, and what its high-level objective is:

    Service comes from two sources: the stock of artifacts and the natural ecosystem. The stock of artifacts requires throughput for its maintenance, which requires depletion and pollution of the ecosystem. In other words the structure and order (low entropy) of the economy is maintained by imposing a cost of disorder on the ecosystem. From the entropy law we know that the entropy increase in the ecosystem is greater than the entropy decrease in the economy. As the stock and its maintenance throughput grow, the increasing disorder exported to the ecosystem will at some point interfere with its ability to provide natural services. As we add artifacts we gain services from them, but beyond some point we pay a price in terms of diminished natural services from the ecosystem.

    From this perspective it is clear that we can define an optimum stock as one for which total service (the sum of services from the economy and the ecosystem) is a maximum.
    In other words, the goal in a steady-state economy is to maximize the benefits rendered to society by both the economic system and the natural ecosystem in which it is embedded, and to do so, the economy’s rate of consumption (“replacement of stocks”) must be limited by both what the ecosystem can provide as constant income (e.g. solar energy) and by what it can accept as waste.

    The discussion thus far helps clarify what steady-state economy is and isn’t, but doesn’t address three important questions: a) how would a steady-state economy actually work, b) if thrown out of equilibrium by a shock of some kind, would the system converge back to its steady-state behavior, and c) how can today’s growth-based economies be transitioned to steady-state operation? I plan to explore Daly’s ideas on these in the next post.

    Early on, Daly discusses means and ends: what is the ultimate purpose of the economy, anyway? Is it to increase industrial production, or is that simply another means to some higher goal, like increasing human happiness or health? I’d like to end on his analogy:

    Our refusal to reason about the ultimate end merely assures the incoherence of our priorities, at both an individual and a social level. It leads to the tragedy of Captain Ahab, whose means were all rational, but whose purpose was insane. We cannot lend rationality to the pursuit of a white whale across the oceans merely by employing the most advanced techniques of whaling. To do more efficiently that which should not be done in the first place is no cause for rejoicing.

    1. And I was the first to fully grasp what farts in a jar could be used for.

      1. You are a fart in a jar

  112. “I didn’t understand the casino known as the New York Stock Exchange and I did not believe in investing in a system I did not agree with.”

    How do you know that you don’t believe in something uf you don’t understand it?

  113. “I didn’t understand the casino known as the New York Stock Exchange and I did not believe in investing in a system I did not agree with.”

    How do you know that you don’t believe in something uf you don’t understand it?

    1. On the other hand, I believe in money but I don’t think anyone truly understands it.


    1. In Soviet Russia, text walls you!

    2. not with reasonable

    3. The divine texting on the Wall.

  115. Everyone’s asking the question – what comes next for #occupywallst? Let’s say we wrest control from the banks. What then?

    Richard Heinberg (who I’m sure many of you know for his uncanny insights and informative videos on fossil fuels and moving to a post-carbon economy) just wrote the following note to the #occupywallst movement. I’m posting it in full below because I don’t want it to get lost in the fray – we need to heed his wisdom.

    Here’s a fact that’s hard for most Americans to swallow: economic growth is over. Given the finite nature of our planet and its resources, the recent trend of global economic expansion was destined to end. No stimulus package or slashing of social programs is going to flip the economy back to an expansionary trajectory. We’ve hit the proverbial wall, and this will be the defining reality of our lives from now on.
    The growth-seeking political-economic system has failed us. Today that system is dominated by Wall Street. “Goldman Sachs rules the world,” trader Alessio Rastani told us in a now-viral BBC interview. I met people like Rastani in researching my book, The End of Growth. At one lavish conference, 800 global investors packed a hotel ballroom to consider climate change. There was no talk of how to avert or mitigate floods and droughts. Instead, the discussion focused on profiting from warming with ? no joke ? weather derivatives. These folks were just doing their job, despite any private feelings of concern, remorse, or dread. And each was getting paid enough to single-handedly fund a midsize school district.

    Both Wall Street and Washington are trying to do something impossible: grow human consumption forever in a world of limited energy, minerals, water, topsoil, and biodiversity, all while protecting and expanding the riches of the top one percent. If economic growth is over, that means we can no longer count on a rising tide to lift all boats. Under these conditions, extreme income inequality is not just unfair, it is socially unsustainable.

    It’s strategic to bring protest to Wall Street rather than Washington. We must go directly to the crime scene ? not with a request for reforms, but with an arrest warrant from the people.

    You courageous people in the #occupy movement are absolutely right in saying the system is broken, greedy, and unfair. But when our discussion turns to replacing the current system, we’ve got to embrace a bigger view of reality than the one held by stock traders and politicians. It’s not just our wealth they want to control, it’s our vision for what is both possible and necessary. We need a post-growth economy that works both for people (all of them) and for the rest of nature: a localized economy based on renewable resources harvested at nature’s rates of replenishment, not a fossil-fueled global economy driven by the imperative of ever-higher returns on investment.

    There will be life after growth ? and it can be a better life if our nation’s priority is the quality of life of our people and the integrity of the biosphere, rather than stock prices and corporate profits.

    With support,

    Richard Heinberg
    Post Carbon Institute

    1. Dear Crazy Person,
      Next time make it less than 3 sentences, and maybe add a video link.


      1. And maybe a demonstration of farting in a jar is warranted.

    2. …to commit mass suicide. Wouldn’t that be a better approach? No wonder these Malthusians love War, Plague, Disaster. They won’t protest the Washington DC WarState because it is thinning the herd, at least the herd that is not close to home.

      1. @Asking

        I suggest methane in a Mason jar.

      2. Atlas these days reads almost like a Peak Oil survivalist fantasy. Rand apparently accepted a form of Malthusianism which held that we have too many philosophically undesirable people in the world. Just withdraw the energy supplies (Galt’s motor, Ellis Wyatt’s shale oil, Ken Dannager’s coal) that sustain them, and the resulting die off will restore Earth to its Objectivist carrying capacity.

        ~Mark Plus
        “To a gas chamber – go!”

        I volunteer Eddie Willers. He didn’t make it to libertarian heaven.

        Many are called, but few are chosen. ~Matthew 22:14

        1. …a lot of that hot secretarial-pool pussy.

  116. What comes next for OccupyMyAnus?

    Farting in a jar. Keeping them bottled up until they are worth more than oil and get bigger subsidies than ethanol.

  117. 1979: Peak per-capita gross energy production
    1986: Peak grain per capita
    1989-1995: Peak wild fish catch
    1990: Peak net energy production
    2000: Peak fresh water availability
    2005: Peak conventional oil production
    2009: Peak Uranium and Peak Plutonium
    2010: Peak world trade
    2011-14: Peak all-liquids (conventional+unconventional oil) production

    As Richard Heinberg describes it:

    “Energy scarcity will cause a recession of a new kind – one from which anything other than a temporary, partial recovery will be impossible. We humans may, if we are intelligent and deliberate, create a different kind of economy in the future, building steady-state, low-energy, sustainable societies…But the industrial-growth global economy that we are familiar with will be gone forever. The timing of this event will depend upon that of the global petroleum production peak.”
    In other words, we’re at the Limits to Growth that seemed so far off when they were first predicted (here is their business-as-usual scenario from their 2004 update)


    Sustainable Energy without the hot air, David MacKay

    On climate:
    Climate Change 2007, IPCC
    Six Degrees, Mark Lynas

    The Ecotechnic Future, John Michael Greer
    The Post-Carbon Reader, Richard Heinberg et al.
    What We Leave Behind, Derrick Jensen
    Deep Economy, Bill McKibben
    The Omnivore’s Dilemma, Michael Pollan

    Overshoot, William Catton
    The Limits to Growth, Donella Meadows et al.
    The Myth of the Machine and Technics and Civilization, Lewis Mumford
    The Collapse of Complex Societies, Joseph Tainter

    1. Dear Crazy Person,
      Next time make it less than 3 sentences, and maybe add a video link.


    2. I have a book on the subject as well. Its called “Farting in a Jar: Sustaining the Earth One Enchilada At A Time”.

      1. heller,

        I have taken on a new calling in my life – self-sustaining energy. Eat a burrito or an enchhilda, wait about 20 minutes, grab a number 2 jar and matching cover and get into the energy business. You have the power to prosper baby.

  118. Michael Moore never said he waned to opt out of capitalism as the stupid right-wing cunt claims. He said he didn’t want to play the stock market casino.

    1. So says the stupid left wing cunt. Look you silly fucking cow. You can’t have capitalism if you don’t have corporations and a stock market.

      1. You can’t have capitalism if you don’t have corporations.

        No shit!!!


        You can’t have corporations if you don’t have GOVERNMENT.

        (unless you have any examples – I won’t hold my breath)

    2. that fat left-wing slut he was.

    3. See Anderson Cooper 360 from this week here he said specifically that capitalism is a failed institution and that the number one goal of the occupy movement, as well as his own, is to replace it with something “more fair”.

      1. It’s scary when people move from statist liberal to downright socialists, especially well-known news anchors.

        1. just as much as any communist or socialist

          Officer, am I free to gambol?

          MARX: NO!
          MISES: NO!

          Same shit, different day.

          1. If everybody owns everything, nobody owns anything — you DO realize that, right?

            1. …how do they work?

              Or is 2 million years of human history pure fantasy to you libertarians?

              Libertarians are like the fucking creationists. Deny, deny, deny.

              Empirical evidence, right in front of your face, how does it work?


              Original Affluent Society
              Marshall Sahlins

    4. Like she said, buying Manhattan real estate and putting your money into banks is, by definition, participating in “capital-ism” (that is, the bank account and probably the real estate are used as capital)

  119. @”Asking for volunteers”

    Mass suicide isn’t necssary. What you CAN do to cope and help transition to a ecologically sustainable steady-state zero growth economy is:

    Weatherize your home/apartment
    Switch to a vegan and organic diet, or at least LIMIT meat and egg consumption to once every other day and then only free range/organic

    SELL YOUR CAR and use mass transit/take a train

    WITHDRAW as much money from the economy as possible

    GROW as much if your own food as you can, and learn to can your own home-grown food

    USE TRULY RENEWABLE energy sources, try to get off the grid

    BUY LOCAL as much as possible

    1. Dear Crazy Person,
      Next time make it less than 3 sentences, and maybe add a video link.



      I suggest to everyone that you fart in jar and keep those jars in storage until you need them for cooking, heating or huffing. You can grow the farts organically and the energy is truly renewable. I fart in a jar about three times a day, more often if I’ve eaten food from Taco Bell. Without a doubt, the worst part is the smell but if you can get over that, there is an abungdance of energy available.

    3. Arguing on the Internet isn’t necessary. What you CAN do to cleanse the world of your debilitating bullshit and help humanity transition to a more reasonable, free, and prosperous state of civilization is:

      1) Destroy all the electronics in your house to prevent yourself from communicating with the outside world from within your home.

      2) Chain yourself to something you will never be able to damage/break free from and throw away the keys.

      3) Profit.

      I especially like the part where we should SELL OUR CARS and use MASS TRANSIT. Really?

      1. @Res Publica

        How THE END OF GROWTH could spew so much and not capture it in a jar is beyond me.

    4. the most STATIST form of movement!?!?!?

      “Hey, look Juanita, there’s a neoBarbarian in your seat, sitting down.”

      1. Hell yes, you get to go where we want you to go and when we want you to go.

    5. It renews itself after a few billion years. Think long term, get out of the short term quick profit, quick fix mentality.

    6. [] Eat only calorie-free food.

      [] Grow your own food but don’t water or fertilize it.

      [] Take all your money in dollar bills to use for fire-starters.

      [] Don’t start polluting fires.

      [] Weatherize your cave with bat guano.


    “SELL YOUR CAR and use mass transit/take a train”

    You do know that only cars and light trucks have been modified to run on farts. Obama wants to get trains from Uranus that run on farts but no one at the Uranus Trainwerks wants to give him campaign contributions. So here I sit broken hearted, came to shit and only farted (and didn’t have a jar ready).

    1. What is this I don’t even

  121. You don’t even what? All out of jars?

  122. You don’t even what? All out of jars?


    [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!


    1. Valhalla!

    2. THE EMPIRE WILL DEFAULT ON DEBTS ? Borrow, Tax, Print QE’s and Spend like there is no tomorrow

      [The Bear of Bretton Woods]

      Barry Eichengreen a Professor of Economics and Political Science at [UCB] University of California Berkeley, author of Exorbitant Privilege: The Rise and Fall of the [$USD$] United States Dollar and the Future of the International Monetary System, wrote and article for (www.Project-Syndicate.Org) a George Soros Funded organization, entitled The Bear of Bretton Woods, a commentary on the meeting held in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, the birthplace of the [IMF] International Monetary Fund, The American-Israeli Empire directly appoints the heads of the [IMF], which is basically the loan sharking department of the Empire. The [IMF] in concert with the World Bank give’s huge high risk, loose term, loans to countries to cope with crisis situations, putting them in the back pocket of the [IMF], who in turn request [Services in Return], the [IMF] is the Landlord and the loaner country becomes the provided service renter, if you get the drift. The best thing for any country is to avoid dealing with the [IMF] because they do attach strings and conditions that do more good for the [IMF] at the cost of the country taking out the loan, forcing many countries to build up huge currency reserves, rather than deal with the [IMF]. The [IMF] basically provides the Empire policy-makers with advice as how to put other countries under their economic thumbs. If a country has a sick economy going to the [IMF] is the same as cutting your own throat, plus the [IMF] can be counted upon to miss the boat when it comes to providing early warnings of impending crises, your better off seeing a Clinical Physiologist/ Medium/ Mentalist/Physic/Witch/, or just flip a coin.

      [[SDR’S] Special Drawing Rights]

      [SDR’S] or Special Drawing Rights seem to be something the good professor has a real problem with, and just what are [SDR’S], a Supra-National Reserve Currency, or emergency credits, to be controlled by the [IMF] and that is a very bad idea, not the [SDR’S] the idea of the [IMF] under the control of the [EMPIRE] having more power to mess things up then it already has, if the fund were in Swiss Banks with oversight from the global [Parity Spheres of Influence], bank systems, with continual audits, that might work, but the [IMF], that would be shooting the worlds economy in the foot. The other complaint that the good Professor had is that [SDR’S] would not settle cross-border transactions, nor could they denominate international bonds, [no private markets for them], and any governing body would have to be able too issue them when need [a financial melt down], or crisis such as Japan the professor used Lehman Brothers as an example, and felt that even Texas Rep. Ron Paul would object to any central bank located anywhere, having that much power. The problem is the good professor didn’t give a good alternative, meltdown after meltdown, sit on your hands and do nothing or a loan distribution process, with strict oversight would seem the reasonable alternative, and that is what the duty of responsible government oversight is for, not like today where the cart is pulling the horse, where [Fox] banks, business, and lobbyist run the [Chicken House] of government, the inmate’s running the asylum.

      [Tri-Polar Vs. Diversified Multilateral Currency Regime]

      It is no longer a question of if the American-Israeli Military Industrial Complex ? the [EMPIRE], [$USD$] will be replaced by a new international monetary and financial system, its simply a matter of when, and the good professor gave some bad news on that front it may well take decades, and his guess at least [3] more world economic crises if not more away. What will the [$USD$] based world economy be replaced with, well so far it’s a toss up, either a [3] three way split consisting of the [$USD$], [?EURO?] and the [PDRC] Peoples Democratic Republic of China, Yuan/Renminbi. Or, a Diversified/Multilateral Currency Regime, based upon a broader trade-weighted basket. The Multilateral Currencies would be the GLOBAL NUMERAIRE CURRENCIES [Euro, Pound Sterling, Japanese Yen, and Chinese Yuan], and hard currency Gold, Silver, Oil and Mineral Currency-The Russian Federation, Food Production Currency-Brazil, and Production Currency The Peoples Republic of China/India, assets that are less volatile, against price fluctuations, virtually context-free of the chance of their value disappearing entirely. With the creation of a [16] Sixteen Nation currency trading bloc within the Asian Sphere of Chinese Influence, as the Euro represents the nations of the [EU] European nations linking the [ASEAN] Association of Southeast Asian Nations, countries, who already want a single currency by [2020] but by the generally accepted end of the American-Israeli Empire, member would include; Japan, China, Australia, South Korea, New Zealand and India, and not decades down the line.

      [THE EMPIRE WILL DEFAULT ON DEBTS ? Borrow, Tax, Print QE’s and Spend like there is no tomorrow]

      At present we are looking at a complete economic global meltdown, the [EMPIRE] simply has borrowed, taxed, printed [QE’s] Quantitative Easing [$USD’S$], and raised its debt ceiling, and spent like there is no tomorrow, with the hope that tomorrow will never come, and the debt will either disappear or not be called due, and the government of the [EMPIRE] loves to borrow, tax, print and spend other peoples money, the trouble is in the end it all catches up to you, and the [EMPIRE] is going to default on its debts, that is a given, the question is then what, do something now or multiple economics meltdown, down the road, kicking that can down the road will give you a sore toe eventually.


      1. I… I think I need my smelling salts.

        1. If you would have said something earlier, I just put away another dozen farts in jars. One of them probably would have kept you going.

    3. So, is Chaz Bono an El Camino?

  124. I don’t think Michael Moore is at the end of his growth. His stretchy pants still pants still have a little more room.

  125. RAMS 24
    SAINTS 0

    How’s your civilization going to survive that?

      1. I thought sports was a manufactured distraction of the bourgeoisie?

    1. WI Squaw, trapped in a world she didn’t make and cannot quite escape from (not that she’d really want to, anyway) takes it all out on H&R by uttering endlesssssss inanities.

      1. Libertarians, trapped in a world they didn’t make and cannot quite escape from (not that they’d really want to, anyway) takes it all out by uttering endlesssssss inanities.

        Oh, wait, they aren’t trapped.

        There’s SOMALIA?

        Why aren’t they there?

        1. @The non-content liberatian

          If you use jars with lids that have a rubber gasket, you will never lose the fart that you carefully captured. Try it next time.

  126. When Herc is a refreshingly readable change of pace, you know your comments section has hit rock bottom, and has starting digging.

    1. What about when the critic confuses past participle with gerund?

  127. Everybody knows Michael Moore only makes a movie when he needs more money for CAKE!!!

  128. ….OT or OT, talked to old pal about his recent trip to WashDC. He was flabbergasted by all the Federal Law Enforcement on display and asked a uniformed robot of the State, “why so much LE on display?”, the answer, “we have a lot to protect.”

    1. The POLICe protect and serve the POLIS’ privation property values.

      (Privation property is abstract ownership of that beyond which humans need to survive, especially when it is observed to cause privation to other humans.)

      1. Because of Privation Property.

        Never acknowledged by Libertarians, because they have a phalanx of creationist-strength explanations why its all the poors’ fault.

  129. The justification of property by libertarians/capitalists is that property is necessary because there are things which are necessary to survive.

    Paleolithic humans have honored that kind of legitimate property for thousands of years. Nobody disputes it.

    But how does 1% of people need 40% of the property to survive?

    And how does 10% of people need 85% of the property to survive?

    Are they that needy?

    Riddle me that.

    1. @PROPERTY

      I survive with 50% of the farts that I have kept in jars for years. Inhale, use for cooking, fuel for my Yugo, it does it all. Try a number 2 jar and a matching lid – you will not be disappointed.

      1. White Indians band of neoBarbarians are at the gates.

        We have the moral justification.

        The oppressed 99% have the numbers and will open the gates for us.

        It has all happened before because of the same chain of events:

        1. Property claims are justified by reason of human survival by the capitalists.

        2. The capitalists claim way more privation property than is necessary to survival, and cause privation to their fellow humans.

        3. People get tired of of the conceptual bait-and-switch that causes Privation and revolt against those holding the privation property.

        1. White Indians band of neoBarbarians are at the gates

          Right before they’re harvested for pelts from the rear by the Brown Hordes they thought were on their side.

          1. Brown Hoardes, eh? Rothbard’s Racialist Science?

  130. Masturbating for an audience is fun.


    1. White Indian is exposing the immorality of illegitimate, privation property, as compared to hundreds of thousands of years of human societies honoring legitimate property.

      You’ve been served notice.

  131. Not all property is immoral; in fact, honoring property is necessary for survival.

    Humans have honored legitimate claims of property for hundreds of thousands of years.

    Immoral privation property is the abstract claim of ownership of property and resources beyond what a human needs to survive, especially when this abstract claim:

    1. Is observed to cause privation and poverty to other humans.
    2. Needs a class of enforcers using violence.

    1. You’ve convinced me.
      What’s the first step?

      1. To acknowledge that there is both legitimate property and illegitimate privation property.

        The first step actually twofold:

        1. Accept on face value the libertarian and capitalists justification of property: That property is necessary to human survival.

        2. Reject the bait-and-switch that libertarians and capitalist do by extending the justification of ownership to owning more than is justified by the justification of property.

        1. WI = A Soros-WarState paid troll.


        2. You’d probably have more time for gamboling if you weren’t, you know, having a conversation with yourself on a blog.

    1. How does 1% of people need 40%, and 10% of people need 85% of the property to survive?

      Are they that narcissistic?

      1. “Need” is not a claim to anything.

        1. Rand played fast and loose with concepts, including “need.”

          While she rejected “need,” qua need she also accepted need qua need:

          “…man must produce the physical values he NEEDS to sustain his life…”

          “…man knows that his desperate NEED of self-esteem is a matter of life or death…”

          Maybe you should check her premises, as they seem to be shifting like sand.

  132. Jesus Christ on a stick. This place has gone to hell.

    1. First rule of Fight Club….

      1. …is in the house.

        1. Tyler Durden: It’s only after we’ve lost everything that we’re free to do anything.

  133. Man, I see in fight club the strongest and smartest men who’ve ever lived.

    I see all this potential, and I see squandering. God damn it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables; slaves with white collars.

    Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don’t need.

    We’re the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War’s a spiritual war… our Great Depression is our lives.

    We’ve all been raised on television to believe that one day we’d all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won’t. And we’re slowly learning that fact. And we’re very, very pissed off.

    1. “And we’re slowly learning that fact.”
      You brag about the fact that you’re an ignoramus?
      Oh, good.

      1. /property
        /needed to

        How does the 1% need 40% of our home planet’s wealth to survive?

        Easy. They don’t. We’ve been scammed with a bait-and-switch tactic.


  134. Worse. Weekend Thread. Ever.

    1. Yes, it is, for the capitalist bait-and-switchers.

      Your scam is revealed.

      Your causing privation with privation property is coming to an end.

      If you want your civilization to survive, you had better address this bait-and-switch QUICKLY!

  135. White Indian embraces property, legitimate property, as human have for hundreds of thousands of years.

    White Indian embraces the capitalist and libertarian justification of property; i.e., the things and resources that are necessary to human survival.

    White Indian rejects the bait-and-switch that capitalists do:

    BAIT: I need to own some things on earth as property that I need to survive.

    SWITCH: I need to own some more things on earth as property than I could ever possibly need to survive.

  136. And we feel your pain, blog commentators. When confronted with the charge of “narcissist,” you recoil in horror and deny it, or worse: block it out. Like the racist who is similarly charged, you feel shame in the accusation, yet–through your actions–you confirm its verity.

    Mental illness isn’t funny; it’s tragic. Open forums are the enabler. They provide a stage for the disease and its melancholy actors. But open forums are merely a sideshow, a freak show, a house of horrors. Serious people take a peek through the curtains, are justifiably repelled, and move on, leaving the wreckage to the wreckers and those gawkers who seek to fill the minutes of their miserable lives with such repellent entertainment. Not that you don’t know it. Gambol on, nitwits!

    1. …is in the house.


  137. John from before the text barricade:

    This is funny. The Obama administration is scandal free. If you just ignore them giving 500 million to a big donor who had no hope of making any money and pretend Fast and Furious didn’t happen.

    Ah, but you must not have read the definition of scandal that the author was using:

    Yes, both Fast and Furious and Solyndra have forced the White House to do a lot of explaining, but they haven’t met Dartmouth professor Brendan Nyhan’s definition of a genuine scandal — yet. Nyhan says that political scientists generally see The Washington Post as a solid indicator of elite opinion — so for his study, a problem officially curdles into a scandal once the S-word is used in a reporter’s own voice in a story that runs on the front page of the Post.

    Neu Mejican would be proud of this exercise in sophistry! Actually he probably is.

    1. Watergate = scandal cuz WP said so, even though no one died and that type of shenanigans is commonly accepted practice today.

      F&F = no scandal cuz WP hasn’t heard of it yet even though dozens died as a direct result and it involved the ugliest kind of government corruption with the knowledge and approval of the people at the top.

    2. Hey,
      What ya guys talkin’ about?

      [awkward silence}

      Are you talking about me again?

      [shuffling feet, averted gazes]

      Don’t you think it is absolutely SCANDALOUS they way some people treat some things one way and others treat other things other ways?

      And even worse, have you noticed how the team you are one is always the one that gets picked on…and the other side always gets away with murder?

    3. There is no scandal in the palace unless the court scribes write it down?

      So let it be written, so let it be done.

  138. We are not cleaning up this mess.

    1. When I fart in a jar, there is nothing to clean up. If one correctly, there is nothing but a slight odor that disappears quickly – unless you had Taco Bell.

      1. will you shut the fuck up already. what are you, 11?

    2. …are legitimate.

      Except to those who want to claim property beyond their own philosophy’s justification for property.

  139. I masturbate, therefore I am.

    But if noone sees me masturbate, I am invisible.


    1. …has just been handed it’s tophat.

      Wear it. You need it to keep of the sun and rain.

      But how does the 1% justify needing 40% of the property and resources to survive on our necessarily shared home planet?

      1. Autistism is a terrible syndrome. I feel bad for you.

        1. Autism’s not bad.

          Not really.

          But White Indian’s/Rather’s case IS bad.

      2. it’s nice to see “libertarians” (LOL!) labeling political dissent as a mental issue

        1. Dissent is not the issue. It’s the endless repetition of nonsensical points.

  140. .

    1. All fine things.

  141. The ice cream truck just drove by the house. All writing on the truck was in Spanish and it was playing “Dixie Chicken,” by Little Feat.

    California is a strange place.

    1. I don’t know about Spanish, but I’m learning Mexican.

    2. “All writing on the truck was in Spanish and it was playing “Dixie Chicken,” by Little Feat.”
      That would make me smile in the Commodore Hotel.

      1. Well, it’ll sure as fuck make Tulpa smile.

        1. Go have your sloopy seconds and get back to us.

          1. Touch?, mon frere.

          2. Two degrees in bee-bop, a doctor of swing, he’s a master of rhythm; and a rock and roll king!
            Is that you, Tulpa?

            1. Nope, it’s Tulpy Poo.

              1. Ah yes, my sweetums, Tulpy Poo!

  142. These weekend threads are tedious, indeed.

    1. I’m beginning to believe Rather and White Indian are the same person.

      Their tone of voice is the same. They won’t shut up. They keep talking about the same things over and over again [Rather’s jabbering about canned flatulence; WI won’t stop talking about how bad it thinks civilisation is]. The obsession. The attention-seeking.

      Seriously. Who does she think she’s trying to fool?

      1. Evidence: same ol’ shit.

        Seriously, who does she think she’s trying to fool?

  143. Just popped in to see what all the comments are about. Nothing much, apparently.

    Michael is a boor and boring to boot, so I could not garner enough interest to read the article.

  144. Go back to India, Shikha, nnd peddle your curried cunt in a private whore house.

    1. Why don’t you go peddle your racism elsewhere?

      1. I’m just curious why rectal changed her handle to make the post.

        1. I’m going to have to grudgingly disagree, this doesn’t seem liker her style. Just your average racist progressive.

  145. Thread TL/DR for you?

    Recap: WI and rectal 69’d each other for 48 straight hours. Some regulars, lacking a sense of smell, decided to debate them. The smarter of us stayed away.

    1. The narcissism involved is sort of morbidly interesting.

    2. That’s pretty much what I did. Jebus fuck Reason, way to go slum-lording by letting this idiocy continue. This used to be a nice neighborhood.

      Rectal and her Insane Indian Posse are giving riff-raff a bad name.

    1. “‘The trend is probably strongest in the United States, where people who have had enough of the fast food way of life and generations of illness have taken it up.'”

      Too FUNNY! But they left lichen and pebbles off the menu…

      1. Cavemen smoked their salmon, ate limes and pickled capers?

        Fuck, who knew they were so….so….so into fusion cuisine. I mean, items that in no way would have made it onto the same plate 200 years ago, and we are expected to see em on a caveman platter?

        Fucking Germans. Stick to sausages, beer and a few varietals of wine. Leave the dumbass culinary ideas to the frogs.

        1. Chinese people who visit the US are baffled by the cuisine found in purportedly Chinese restaurants, so it is kind of appropriate that cavemen are similarly libeled.

          1. But in Mandarin we order “off menu” real Chinese food

          2. No kidding.

            I mean, breaded chicken balls? That can’t be Chinese.

            1. You misspelled “cat.”

              1. You misspelled “dog”, slippery sloop.

              2. I always thought there was something funny about how they tasted…

    2. It is a very effective weight loss and health regimen, regardless of it’s authenticity as genuinely “paleolithic.” Grains and sugar are not good for you.

      1. *finishes 3rd McRib of the day*

        What did you say?

      2. Grain and sugar is agricultural city-STATIST food.

        #Paleo is in the house!

        1. You hate beer?

          1. Civilization is an addiction of power and technofetish, a 10,000 year long drunken bender.

            The home planet is getting totally trashed.

            The kids are all abused, anxious, half of them unfed.

            And we’re about to hit rock bottom.

            Did a thirst for beer spark civilization?

          2. /food.
            /vermin shit, Joe.
            It’s easy.

            1. Do you have a 5 year plan to stamp out political dissent?

              Can I attend your LibertSoviet re-education camp?

    3. White Indian is right about paleo diet.

      White Indian is right about paleo everything else.

  146. We resign.

  147. Wonderful and excellent escort service from gorgeous girl How are you! my name is Tina,24 years old,166cm,50kgs,English speaking, elegance, glassy, warmth , sexy firm body ,pretty, cuter, smooth skin, softer long hair. Good temper good manners. I offer all kinds of beijing massage service, I take pleasure in every moment, Let me be your ****, Let me spend quality time with you and provide you with a girlfriend experience as only an Asian woman can. ? I will give you relaxation and personal massage service at your home and hotel. Erogenous zones of the body are stimulated; starting with a relaxing soothing massage session. This special massage is meant to please the mind and awaken the body’s senses. Sensual tantric massage provides a healing, yet heightening experience of euphoria; a wonderful relaxing experience awaits you! I truly believe in the benefits of massage for health and well being .24 hours outcall service: http://www.massageinbeijing.org

  148. Civilization is an addiction of power and technofetish, a 10,000 year long drunken bender.

    The home planet is getting totally trashed.

    The kids are all abused, anxious, half of them unfed.

    And we’re about to hit rock bottom.

    Did a thirst for beer spark civilization?Why don’t you go peddle your racism elsewhere?

  149. Halloween question. Do you think it would freak the kids out too much if my house was blasting Slayer? Or maybe make the parents skip my house?

    1. Depends on what your motive is: Are you trying to discourage the becostumed tykes from approaching the house or are you trying to convert them to thrash metal?

      The level of planned decibel output would help as well.

      1. After realizing that my Halloween set up was missing a vital element, sound, I thought of getting one of those Halloween music cds. But they are usually lame. Slayer is a perfect solution, but I don’t want to freak out the neighbors too much.

        1. Blasting might be a poor idea. The music choice, however, is excellent. Besides, many of those parents might find the change from played out hip hop Autotunes drones, Katey Perry-philes, and BieberFags, a most welcome diversion. You never know how many of those parents really dig good, wholesome thrash metal.

          If I had children and was toting them around for Hallows’Eve stuff, I would gladly knock on a decked out house with Slayer raging in the background.

      1. Slayer sucks

        1. Meh. Bite your toungue.

          1. I don’t have one.

            1. Aglossia? Congenital, forcibly removed, or fell off from cunnilingus with a rancid, festering and infected naughty bit?

        2. this from a Pixies fan.

          1. this from a beslubbering unchin-snouted canker blossom!

  150. This is just awful! I mean, when an MNG post, an MNG post, is one of the few oases in a boiling, frothy sea of gamboling turds, grammar and syntax poobahs, unreasonable (drink!) Mr. and Mrs. Columbo Internet slueth facsimiles, and wacky flatulent sockpuppets, c’mon editors!

    Kolohe is right: When that moonbat of moonbats Hercuwad Trinomial Septicimia is a joy to read and Tulpy Poo is a welcome beacon in the night, editors, drastic action is needed.

    WI, whoever or whatever it is, is Reason’s OWS’er equivalent. Which one of you editors wants to keep feeding and clothing it? Or is WI some sort of purity test to see who really is “live and let live, free minds and free ideas, hate all regulation and licensing schemes, racism is a worse sin than wealth redistribution, and only gamboling across plain and tundra where the power of Darwinism and the Market in it’s naked Occam’ed glory will prevail,” editorial project or part of an doctoral dissertation on Internet tolerance? Jeepers!

    Last week, Jonathan Sloopington Seagull posited that Shikha was posting this stuff as an elaborate troll hoax. Not 100% on board with that, but if Shikha posts one more hypocrisy piece on some faggoty lefty douchenozzle who earns/has millions yet doesn’t give away 90% of their wealth whilst advocating for income redistribution, methinks a pattern of punching-pizza-dough-level difficulty for cheap page hits will be concretely established.

    1. Not 100% on board with that, but if Shikha posts one more hypocrisy piece on some faggoty lefty douchenozzle who earns/has millions yet doesn’t give away 90% of their wealth whilst advocating for income redistribution, methinks a pattern of punching-pizza-dough-level difficulty for cheap page hits will be concretely established.

      Well you have to admit it’s a step up from her Bollywood phase.

      1. Well you have to admit it’s a step up from her Bollywood phase.

        I suppose. I kinda liked the Bollywood stuff. It was, if nothing else, interesting and enlightening how the Hollywood business and culture model was/is viewed and emulated by foreign lands and cultures.

  151. “Which one of you editors wants to keep feeding and clothing it”

    GM, it’s the *posters* here who feed the vermin and we all get the vermin shit.
    WI is here for attention; nothing more. So long as WI gets or hopes to get attention, WI will stay.
    There is also a pretty strong level of desperation; WI has likely been tossed from most every board where WI has posted, so WI will rip out fingernails clinging to this board, so it won’t happen overnight.
    But the solution is obvious and has to do with the concept of incentives; ignore WI and WI will go away.
    (and I oopsed on another thread; shame on me)

    1. You are right sevo; however, the editors reserve the right to slash and burn whatever they wish. It has been done in the past with Herc and a few chronic poli-porners.

      Personally, I think Stone Burners would be more appropriate. We’re overdue for a good Stone Burning.

  152. I am mostly ill, ignorant, or and unclean.

  153. GM, it’s the *posters* here who feed the vermin and we all get the vermin shit.
    No, it is the regular posters who feed themselves; they are the trolls.
    I don’t post for weeks, and even months, and somehow I’m on every thread.
    The regular trolls post for you, not us. We know they are playing a game; you are their target and your whining is their food

      1. Sevo, you are too slow to know when you are being used. Good luck, asshole

  154. Well the Republican Primary just got down and dirty and Cain’s campaign guy is a complete incompetent:

    I personally am quite skeptical of this whole story. A settlement in the five figure range doesn’t mean anything as it could easily be business decision.

    What I really want to know is who leaked the story.

    1. The attack is coming out of the conservative wing that feels he last too long and is too powerful according to Juan Williams -I agree

      1. Please don’t feed the disgusting troll.

        1. What part of ‘ignore me’ do you not understand?
          BTW, I didn’t think of you as a useful idiot but then I suck at judging a man’s character

          1. Only a number 2 jar and a lid seperate you from energy independence. Eat at Taco Bell, grab a jar and lib, let one fly, cover jar with lid, label with date and meal eaten and store for later use.

            1. Use my handle again and I will ask to have your IP banned asshole

              1. And that is where to put the number 2 jar. Good call thgere.

  155. And once more, the AGW hoaxters jump the gun, then lie.

    Professor Richard Muller, of Berkeley University in California, and his colleagues from the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperatures project team (BEST) claimed to have shown that the planet has warmed by almost a degree centigrade since 1950 and is warming continually.

    Published last week ahead of a major United Nations climate summit in Durban, South Africa, next month, their work was cited around the world as irrefutable evidence that only the most stringent measures to reduce carbon dioxide emissions can save civilisation as we know it.

    But today The Mail on Sunday can reveal that a leading member of Prof Muller’s team has accused him of trying to mislead the public by hiding the fact that BEST’s research shows global warming has stopped.

    Prof Judith Curry, who chairs the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at America’s prestigious Georgia Institute of Technology, said that Prof Muller’s claim that he has proven global warming sceptics wrong was also a ‘huge mistake’, with no scientific basis.

    Prof Curry is a distinguished climate researcher with more than 30 years experience and the second named co-author of the BEST project’s four research papers.

    Her comments, in an exclusive interview with The Mail on Sunday, seem certain to ignite a furious academic row. She said this affair had to be compared to the notorious ‘Climategate’ scandal two years ago.


    Prof Muller also wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal. It was here, under the headline ‘The case against global warming scepticism’, that he proclaimed ‘there were good reasons for doubt until now’.

    This, too, went around the world, with The Economist, among many others, stating there was now ‘little room for doubt’.

    Such claims left Prof Curry horrified.

    ‘Of course this isn’t the end of scepticism,’ she said. ‘To say that is the biggest mistake he [Prof Muller] has made. When I saw he was saying that I just thought, “Oh my God”.’

    In fact, she added, in the wake of the unexpected global warming standstill, many climate scientists who had previously rejected sceptics’ arguments were now taking them much more seriously.

    They were finally addressing questions such as the influence of clouds, natural temperature cycles and solar radiation ? as they should have done, she said, a long time ago.

    You. Don’t. Say.

    1. Where’s Tony and JP to contort this uncomfortable nugget of clay into the neat little dogma mold of the eco-theological cult?

      I would also submit that we also do not know the effects of lunar orbital decay on our climate, if there is any at all. I have yet to see it posited one way or the other.

    2. can save civilisation as we know it

      Civilization itself is a fraud, so don’t be surprised if its saviors are fraudulent.

    3. I hope there is global warming. If there is, in 20 years, or so, I’ll own beachfront property.

  156. I just want to tell you both good luck. We’re all counting on you.

  157. …all that will be left are the sophomoric taunts raging at a man of mind who has consistently applied the principles of libertarianism and intellectually spanked the libertarians with their own “Statist aggression!” paddle.

    And spanked them hard. Several seem to have tears in their eyes.

    But they deserve it. Should have checked their premises. Because contradictions cannot stand.

    White Indian counts coup on fundamentally contradictory libertarianism.

    1. White Indian is a spamtastic cuntrag without a thought in its head that some equally stupid person did not place in.

      You love Ralph Bordosi. We’ve got it. You’d dig up his dead cock just to gobble it if you knew where it was buried. We also have the title of his agrarian sleeping-aid to peruse, so you can run along and if you’re needed for your…insights, someone will call you in from gamboling about the forests and plains.

    2. Sounds to me like a regular think he dug his hole to deep 🙁

      Who would Houdini with WI?

      I think epi or that pancreatic-less guy

      1. Who would fart in a jar? Its all the rage with gas pries so high these days. The market for captured mrthane has been going up, up, up. Catch some and challenge those OPEC countries.

          1. That is very mean for someone providing you with useful energy self suffiency information.

    3. LOL

      I already whipped your punk ass in short order over in the other thread when I pointed out that you aren’t the least bit capable of proving that YOUR preferred artificial construct of property is one iota more valid in any way than the one you continually squeal about.

  158. My best friend’s mom makes $77 an hour on the computer.She has been out of job for 9 months but last month her check was $7487 just working on the computer for a few hours. Read about it here NuttyRichdotcom

  159. From the linked Schweitzer piece:

    Conservative leaders who have fallen short publicly apologize, take responsibility for their actions, and work on changing.

    Like, you mean, George W. Bush? Dick Cheney?


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.