A.M. Links: Romney Creams Gingrich, Ron Paul Talks Sense on Cuba, Syrian Government "Massacres" Women and Children


  • Gingrich bombed at last night's debate, now destined to lose Florida. 

  • Ron Paul calls for an end to Cuba embargo; polls say he's wise to do so
  • Eyes turn to Sen. Marco Rubio as GOP VP pick.  
  • Mitt Romney overpaid in taxes, says…The New York Times
  • More on Twitter's new censorship policy
  • Syrian forces commit more monstrous acts

Do you want hot links and other Reason goodies delivered to your inbox twice a day? Sign up here for Reason's morning and afternoon news updates.

New at Reason.tv: "3 Reasons Not to Get Worked Up Over Super PACs"


NEXT: Smart City Logic: Ten Tall Buildings Worth More Than 20,000 Family Homes

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. misspelled

    2. My neighbor just met a bisexual man on —datebi*cOMit’s where for men and women looking for bisexual and bi-curious individuals to meet in a friendly and comfortable environment.
      It’s a nice place for the people who have the same sexual orientation.

      1. My neighbor just met a minarchist man on reason.com where for men and women looking for ancap and libertarian individuals to meet in a friendly and comfortable environment.
        It’s a nice place for the people who have the same cantankerous orientation.

        1. What are you lookin at?

  1. Can we get morning links earlier? Dammit it’s 12.40 in the morning here! Or is this a cunning plan to discourage sleep-deprived antipodeans?

    1. Hell, 12:40AM is when I go to bed. But this 5:37AM deal is starting to push it a bit for us Californians.

      1. So both sides of the Pacific get screwed? The plot thickens…

        1. Screwed? Maybe. AM Links is at least rimming the Pacific.

          1. It’s a travesty of epic proportions.

  2. Didn’t watch the debate, but weren’t people all like, “Gingrich would flatten Obama in a debate; that’s why he should be the GOP candidate?” So if Romney creams Gingrich in a debate, what does that mean?

    1. It means it’s another day.

    2. You know how when you first start to question the War on Drugs in your mind and you reach a point where you are against it but you understand how reasonable people can still be for it? But then eventually you stop thinking reasonable people could ever hold that opinion? I’m at that point with Gingrich. How on earth can anyone think he’s a good debater? He is routinely the worst on stage. He routinely appeals to authority, sets up countless strawmen, and uses a knowledge of history to cover-up a complete lack of critical thinking skills.

      1. He’s glib and facile. That sells. Most folks don’t need no stinkin’ critical thinking rules.

        1. glib glib glib glib glib glib glib glib

          i’m a newtfish!

        2. ^Pretty much this.

          In addition, I cringe at how other people I know use straw men and other fallacies, and think they’re scoring points.

          I just don’t think many people see your objections as a problem, because they do it too.

          1. In addition, I cringe at how other people I know use straw men and other fallacies, and think they’re scoring points.

            It approaches universality. Most people, even in the intelligent crowds we all run with, simply don’t know the difference. Truth be told, every one of us here tosses out a fallacious argument more often than we’d like to think.

            1. every one of us here tosses out a fallacious argument

              Nice appeal to common practice.

              1. Sorry sparky Ice never said that because everyone spouts bullshit sometimes that it makes it ok or reasonable. Rather his point is that everyone can be unreasonable. So he never made the fallacy of appealing to common articles, its right there in point number two.

                1. So he never made the fallacy of appealing to common articles, its right there in point number two.

                  Anyway, my point was a little more meta.

          2. You’re absolutely right. Back when i was a dumb republican I routinely bought into the fallacious tu quoque arguments posited by conservative writers. Then I grew up. Taking logic classes in college also helped.

            1. it is NOT tu quoque however to ask why the same standard does NOT apply to both parties.

          3. In addition, I cringe at how other people I know use straw men and other fallacies,

            Did you just call Obama other people?

      2. uses a facade of knowledge of history to cover-up a complete lack of critical thinking skills.

        I haven’t watched a single debate this year, and I doubt I ever will, in my life. Ever.

        You want a perverse sort of irritainment? Watch a Presidential debate.

        You want some knowledge/information about a candidate? Look at their record and history.

        1. I think you get stung by joke handles more than any other commenter.

          1. I think I have a near 100% fail rate with joke handles.

          2. Yeah, yeah. For me, they are sort of “fire and forget”.

        2. Agreed and agreed. I haven’t watched a debate since maybe freshman year of college.

          1. 1992 Democratic Debate may have been my last (seven dwarfs debate).

            Ive probably seen bits of others since, but none that I paid attention to.

      3. routinely appeals to authority, sets up countless strawmen, and uses a knowledge of history to cover-up a complete lack of critical thinking skills

        A lot of that comes from the way debates are done. It’s kind of hard to make any kind of sunstantial response to a question when you’re only given a very limited amount of time, so appealing to authority, setting up strawmen, and don’t forget about presenting false choices are about the only tactics that work. And if you can cover your tracks with historical references so much the better.

        In truth a Gingrich vs. Obama debate would be the most horrible thing ever to watch because they both do all of the above, and people eat that shit up for some reason.

      4. Appeals to authority are a logical fallacy, but not necessary a debating fallacy.

        “Because Einstein and Feynmann said physics work that way” is fine 99% of the time. The other 1% is hanging out at a physics conference, which I dont do. Anymore.

        1. Very true, but that would more relevant to debates that involve the hard sciences than public policy.

          1. Not necessarily — an appeal to Washington’s fairwell address or JQ Adams’ 4th of July speech is nice shorthand on certain foreign policy questions.

          2. Referencing Madison’s public works veto is also an appeal to authority.

            Basically, constitutional originalism is based on appeals to authority.

          3. Cringe inducing is browsing through a hard science and technology oriented site like this one:

            And realizing much of the staff has never been exposed to the Ricardo/Malthus debate. Look at just one headline there today — Manufacturing Is Key to Innovation as Well as Jobs. So naive. Dig into the article and try to find ‘comparative advantage.’ Nada.

    3. I dunno, Romney is pretty creamy himself.

    4. “Didn’t watch the debate, but weren’t people all like, “Gingrich would flatten Obama in a debate; that’s why he should be the GOP candidate?” So if Romney creams Gingrich in a debate, what does that mean?”

      You can use the transitive property of debate creaming to answer that question.

  3. The first part of the debate, when Gingrich was getting his ass handed to him, was surprisingly entertaining. I turned it off when they asked about the wives.

    1. Gingrich was getting his ass handed to him

      And thankyoujesus for that!

    2. Gingrich was getting his ass handed to him

      A task requiring some serious heavy lifting, to be sure.

  4. “Romney Creams Gingrich”

    Did Newt just leave it on his face while he meditated and absorbed Mitt’s essence?

    1. There’s got to be a Santorum joke in this.

      1. There’s got to be a Santorum joke in this.

        Someone upthread said something about “rimming the Pacific.” You might try riffing off that . . .

        1. Nah, I’m lazy. I was hoping somebody else would make the joke.

          1. What? It was the joke!

            1. What? It was the joke!

              Exactly! To anyone who’s ever imagined Santorum giving a rim job to a fat Samoan (and who among us hasn’t!), it was a real knee-slapper.

  5. Nth!

      1. ^ you guys are ?

          1. I can’t open YouTube at work… so I’m hoping that is a Steve Martin and Dan Ackroyd skit…

            1. 2 comedians, one cup?

            2. I don’t think NBC allows any SNL skits on youtube.

          2. Can’t touch this^ 😉

  6. “Mitt Romney overpaid in taxes”

    Joe Biden thinks he’s a patriot.

    1. Joe Biden thinks?

  7. Newt Gingrich: Asshole.

  8. Dear Reason: when I use my phone’s browser to view HnR, I don’t want to go to a mobile site. I want the full site. The only issue I have with the full site is that I can’t post threaded comments. With your new mobile site I don’t see any comments and all your articles look crappy like a Slate layout or something.

    1. And I know you have a “Desktop Site” option, but then I run into this problem.

      1. Try dolphin browser if you’re on Android, and change the agent to desktop.

      2. If you’re using the default browser on Android, go into settings and uncheck the line “Mobile View – Enable mobile versions of web pages”

        1. Using a Blackberry, but a similar option helped.

        2. Switching the “appear as” option to Firefox seems to have fixed the threaded response issue.

          1. Though now this is making other sites more annoying because I actually preferred some of their (well done) mobile sites.

    2. I beleive there is a link on the mobile site, at the bottom, that says “desktop” that takes you to the full site. Agree though that it would be nice to see comments in the mobile version.

      1. I tried that on my Evo and got the full page but when I click on Comments it goes to the mobile site.

        1. I have the same problem on my iPhone.

        2. Me too. Lame.

      1. Try adding “/?nomobile=1” after reason.com/blog

      2. Anyone noticing the trend toward fewer readers and more chatters? The articles are becoming irrelevant. If they went away, would the chatters stay?

        1. I don’t know that it is a trend. I started reading here a year or so ago and the repartee is the reason I stuck around. I read news and analysis all day long and I find it all over the Net. The analysis here is smart and erudite but the banter is unsurpassed. Have some fun

          1. Yes, then?

            1. Oh, I thought the question was rhetorical. Of course not; the banter needs a foil. The articles are obviously that.

        2. How could you possibly tell how many readers there are?

          1. By the number of off-topic comments?
            By the lack of reference to the articles?
            Readers, not visitors.

            1. Okay, question for you: Are you actually taking this seriously? Like, the chattering commentariat is really getting you down? Are you (gasp!) one of the Koch Brothers???

              1. Philosophy and psychology are interests of mine.
                This place is a Petri dish.

                1. AM Links is not only a place for the Reason editors to put up some topical links, it also is a place for the commentariat to join in and put up their own. It’s been like that for as long as I’ve been reading here.

                2. So is a restroom floor.

            2. I blame threading.

              Before that, comments flowed better. Plus incif worked much better.

            3. Oh, it’s you again. Fuck off.

        3. it only takes a few months until you’ve read everything once.

          “Drug war still a reprehensible affront to individual liberty.”

          “Economic Liberty, how the fuck do they work?!”

          “Eminent Domain Abuse, how the fuck do they work?!”

          “Newsflash, your elected representatives don’t actually represent you.”

          there’s a few more

          1. You forgot something about the police and the selling of a book.

            1. Funny how metaphysics, epistemology, ethics almost never comes up. Too smart for the house?

              1. You’re obviously trying some new stupidity instead of your old White Indian Stupidity.

                1. Wait. This is WI’s new schtick? Jeebus…

                  1. Yes, I’d wager both my kidneys and my liver on it.

              2. They did try that horrid article where some guy tried to prove the existence of Gawd by misunderstanding the mathematics of infinity.

        4. Maryland is proposing to tax online chatting. It’s the only way to save those phony baloney jobs.

          “I’ve gone over the bill a little more closely and, of course, I have more questions. For one, how would the state go about taxing “chat room discussions” and “weblogs” (page 34)? “

          1. jesus fucking christ.

            Maryland collects taxes on the sale of music CDs, for instance. But when that same music is digital and electronically transmitted, it does not, thus missing out on revenue.

            I need to go check my internet bill, but I’m pretty sure I get taxed on that.


            Oh, and as always, GO FUCK YASELVES, FUCKFACES.

          2. “weblogs” (rule 34)

            Sounds like a steamy tax proposal.

            1. The ‘rule 34’ tax is so that they can tax anything that can be turned into porn – which, via rule 34, is everything.

              Martin O’Malley will tax LOL cats and furry sites.

    3. I have the same problem. When you try to see the comments to a post, it automatically puts you in the crappy mobile mode which doesn’t show the comments.

      Dear Reason,

      It is 2012 not 2006. We all have smart phones that can show the full internet and have no need for Reason Mobile.

      1. There are those who would say that H&R was a better site before smart phones.

        1. Smart phones are a scourge. When I go out, half the people are more interested in playing with their stupid phones than they are in talking to other live humans.

          1. +1. Fuck smartphones.

            1. What pisses me off most of all is how these phones have become the new status symbol for people who want to be “hip”. A new fucking iPad comes out about every six months, and if you don’t have the latest one you’re made to feel like you’re inadequate or something.

              1. iPod, not iPad.

                1. I bought my wife a nano and my daughter a shuffle. I quickly realized just how badly iPods suck so I bought myself a nice Sansa.

                  1. Sansa makes a great product, for 1/2 the price of a fucking Apple iPod. I bought an iPod years ago and the battery died pretty much right away. Five years later my Sansa is still going and it holds a charge for days & days.

                    Fuck Apple. And not in a nice, sexy way.

              2. Since everyone has them, are they really “hip” anymore? When people’s parents and grandparents all have something, I think it ceases to be hip.

                1. I can’t wait until geezers start sagging. I’ve been subjected to ghetto boxers for nearly twenty years.

              3. I bask–nay, I revel–in not having the latest peice of techno-crap. I have never even owned a cell phone, and I don’t allow others to make me feel inadequate.

                But I’m probably an outlier.

                1. I used to say that I would never own a cell phone until those blue BellSouth boxes disappeared. Well they have. And I’m an iPhone addict. Really sad.

                2. yes. yes you are.

                3. I bask–nay, I revel–in not having the latest peice of techno-crap.

                  “Why, I don’t even own a television!”

                  Techno-illiteracy is nothing to be proud of.

                  1. Techno-illiteracy is nothing to be proud of.

                    Nor is a techno-leash. I have a brain that is easily capable of keeping track of all my contacts and appointments. It also has some pretty handy functions for when I get bored with my immediate surroundings.

              4. A new fucking iPod comes out about every six months, and if you don’t have the latest one you’re made to feel like you’re inadequate or something.

                You need to hang around different people, dude. Also, no, there aren’t that many versions of the iPod. #damnkidsthesedays

          2. meh. people were self-absorbed solipsists before electronic technology.

            1. people were self-absorbed solipsists before electronic technology

              Technology is not responsible for the Age of Narcissism. It’s just the facilitator.

          3. I blame the other live humans, not the smartphones.

            1. ^^This^^ If other people were more interesting than Angry Birds, I would talk to them.

              1. So…we rate higher than Angry Birds?
                Good to know.

                1. Barely. Don’t push it.

          4. Smart phones = shallow humans.

          5. Other live humans aren’t always that great to talk to, especially if they can’t outcompete 4pt text on a smartphone screen.

            1. This is very instructive. There seems to be a corollary in smart phones facilitating anti-social or at least a-social behavior.

          6. Smart phones are a blessing. When I go out, I’m more interested in playing with my phone than in talking to other live humans.

          7. Thats a feature, not a bug.

            Try to be more interesting. The market has spoken, you are less interesting than Facebook, apparently.

            1. Yeah. Why go out at all if you’re just there to play with your phone? What’s the point?

          8. Maybe they’re just not interested in you. If everyone gets his phone out when you’re around, maybe you’re the problem.

            1. One boring person makes all the others get their phones out? Sounds like a whole crowd of boors to me.

              1. Right – it’s the group of people all doing the same thing who have the problem, not the “getoffamylawn” cranky misanthrope.

                1. Nothing says going out with the guys like sitting around playing Facebook with other people.

          9. I consider that a feature, not a bug.

      2. Proud owner of a dumbphone.

        And an Ipad, but it was a gift. But I like it. Great for what I use it for (keeping up with email from multiple accounts, web browsing, a few apps).

        1. Yep, I have a stupid phone, and I just laugh when people have to plug their phone in to charge it whenever they stop moving.

      3. IHow do you sort through the comments on your phone?

    4. + 1 gazillion. It’s only been doing this to me for the last few days. I used to be able to view the desktop site from my phone by going to reason.com/blog. No longer….

  9. I beg you, couldn’t we make this a Stephen Colbert-free zone?

    1. how successful are they at keeping out all the other trolls?

      1. herc is gone…


        1. He was back yesterday. Looked like his meds had been adjusted, based on reduced CAPS and [brackets] usage.

          1. It’s a shame he hates cats.

            1. I thought it was a point in his favor.

  10. Good thing we got rid of all the male teachers:


    1. Man, where were those teachers at my school?

      (Oh wait I home schooled)

      1. That’s just wrong.

    2. Who got rid of the what now?

    3. That woman was so fugly she probably had the kids high and/or drunk before they would have sex with her. I can’t imagine the amount booze or pot that it would take for me to want to hit that.

      1. *had to get
        *amount of booze

        1. I can’t imagine the amount booze or pot that it would take

          Sounds like you’re pretty close. . . .

      2. OTOH, you’re not a horn-crazed 17yo boy.

  11. Saved by Silicone:


    1. ‘If this saves lives, there’s nothing wrong with passing a law that everyone should have breast prosthesis,’ Filiberto joked.

      How long before this turns from joke to policy position?

    2. Nitpick: those were saline implants, not silicone. Indeed, with its greater viscosity, a silicone implant might offer even more protection, as well as better squeezability.

      1. Her implants stopped a knife stab from penetrating? Saline, schmaline – sounds to me like they were made of depleted uranium or something.

        1. You mean like Nuclear Titties?

    3. Doesn’t the attacker know the slow blade penetrates the breast?

    1. Yet if I did that I’d be arrested…

      1. As with so many things, it depends on how cute you are

    2. Goes to show Robert Anton Wilson was on the right track with wanting Congress to be 1/3 ostriches.


      1. There’s way too many ostriches. Why are there so many ostriches? The brochure said there’d only be a few ostriches. This is a terrible vacation.

  12. Eyes turn to Sen. Marco Rubio as GOP VP pick.

    “Eyes” are little bit slow on the pick up. The day he was elected Senator I said, “There is the GOP Veep candidate.” An absolute natural.

    1. I thought that too. I wasn’t aware it was that hard to figure out.

      1. These are journalist you’re talking about, John, and you’re asking them to be intellectually sound in their analysis of Team RED activities.

        I just want to know how the media will spin this campaign being about racism if Rubio, a child of Cuban immigrants, is the veep candidate.

        1. Easy. He is a sell out to his race. And Cubans, since they are reliably anti-communist, don’t count as minorities.

          1. I think it will have to be more nuanced than that. Even dumb ass liberals know that Hispanic is not a race.

            I salivate at the questions which will ask Rubio about illegal immigration and the “hispanic” vote, as if Argentinians and Cubans and Mexicans are exactly the same and have a homogenous voting bloc.

            1. All Hispanics are Mexicans and they are brown and poor and mow your yard in Liberal land.

              1. It’s that way in conservative land too, John.

                Don’t fool yourself in to thinking that liberals have some kind of monopoly on stupidity.

            2. Even dumb ass liberals know that Hispanic is not a race

              But does John know that?

              1. Yes I know that you half wit. But the term is thrown around in the media like it is.

                1. No, it’s “thrown around” as a pressure group, a constituency, not a race.

                  1. Which is why I wondered whether you knew the difference.

                  2. “No, it’s “thrown around” as a pressure group, a constituency, not a race.”

                    The reason why it is considered a “constituency” is because the treat it like a race. See for example how the “Hispanic vote” is listed right along side the black and Asian vote in polls.

                    No it is not a “race”. But it is treated like one out of ignorance.

                    1. What I think is really funny is how people from Spain or of Spanish decent (not by way of Latin America) don’t count as Hispanic.

                  3. Which is equally as stupid.

                    They may all eat rice and beans, but that doesn’t make Cubans or Argentinians give a shit about issues which face the Mexican community.

                    1. It is utterly stupid MLG. You watch, if Rubio is on the ticket there will be a spate of stories about how this is designed to appeal to the “Hispanic vote” never mentioning that Mexicans and most other Latin Americans have no use whatsoever for Cubans and the feeling is mutual with Cubans.

                    2. I agree.

                      I also know that they (the media) aren’t that stupid. They’re simply hoping their viewers are, and we all know that nothing gets a liberal excited like racism accusations.

                    3. This ^^^

                      One of the biggest mistakes the left make was to create this monolithic ethnic group called “Hispanics.”

                      When politicians speak of Hispanic issues, they mostly mean those pertaining to Americans of Mexican descent.

          2. Also, he’s not a Negro so he only gets a quarter of a point.

            1. A racial politics quadroon?

    2. Romney/Rubio. Alliteration. Can’t miss.

      1. I still intend to vote Pan/Rufio.

        1. Yams, candied apples, and psychedelic rainbow pies for all!

          1. you left out the jetpacks. (I’m not arrogant enough to think I can get the American People to fly on the strength of their beliefs along.)

    3. I know that all political statements come with an expiration date, but Rubio said he wasn’t going to take the VP slot if offered to him a couple months ago. Doubt he’s reconsidering. If he’ll stop sponsoring stupid shit like PIPA, he’s on the short list for Prez nominee in 2016 or 2020.

  13. 85% of Americans Believe the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Means the Right to Keep and Bear Arms


    1. Damn. Maybe publik skools ain’t so bad afterall.

    2. I wasn’t aware that 15% of the country is comprised of constitutional “scholars” from “elite” law schools.

      1. Never underestimate the power of fear and ignorance among people who think they are clever.

    3. 85% of Americans Believe the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Means the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

      Despite all the heinous shit our government is doing, I believe this is one area where we can relax a little. Any meaningful gun-control legislation, at least on a national level, would be political suicide for any politician who tries to push it through. When they’ve been reduced to underhanded shit like Fast & Furious, you know the whole gun-control movement is on the ropes.

      1. The problem is that at some point, shit like Fast and Furious will actually work close to how it was intended to work, and no one will be the wiser.

        1. Come the anti-gun apocalypse, I’d hate to be the guy whose job it is to go around collecting the guns. Or the guy they hire the next day, or the guy they hire the day after that..

          1. Call ahead before you get to my house. My wife will get pissed if I don’t lay out plastic and drop-clothes.

      2. Why did the Bush people start their gunwalking programs anyway? Fox News never explains that part while they are doing their brainwashing (obviously its working per your comment).

        1. Stop lying Shrike. Stupidity, we can take. But the lying cannot be tolerated. The Bush DOJ had a program called Wide Reciever, which unlike Gunwalker, actually had a plan to stop the guns at the border and arrest people. And when they failed and a very guns got away, they stopped the program.

          Fast and Furious in contrast had no plan to stop the guns at the border and made no effort to. And it continued while thousands of guns went across the border.

          They are two different programs that are in no way analogous. We have talked this issue to death. Everyone knows the facts. Don’t insult people’s intelligence with your KOS talking points.

          1. The point is there is no conspiracy to take people’s guns away, you idiot.

            Redneck right-wing AM radio is always making shit up to sell to their hicks. Its like the Fairness Doctrine. They dredge that up every year. Or the War on Christmas.

            1. No the point is the Obama DOJ let thousands of guns go across the border for no apparent reason other than the knowledge that they would show up at Mexican crime scenes and give them ammunition to enact stricter gun control laws.

              1. There are and won’t be any stricter gun laws.

                It’s the Bilderberg thing, right? They are controlling us all with microchips.

                1. Sure there won’t. But that won’t be because Obama wouldn’t enact them if he could.

                2. Holder and Obama seem to think differently about the prospects for MOAR CONTROL! Seeing as they keep saying we need MOAR CONTROL! Often while fending off questions about F&F.

                3. That’s crap. A Texas judge just signed off on requiring gun sellers to record purchases of two or more long rifles. Exactly what the emails told us was the point of Fast and Furious.

            2. The point is there is no conspiracy to take people’s guns away, you idiot.

              A conspiracy? No. But there are lots of people who, like you, detest private gun ownership and would love to see it ended, a la Great Britain. Only some of those people, unlike you, have actual power.

              1. I own a couple of handguns, you stupid dickhead. I am far more freedom oriented than ANY fucking conservative.

                I support all the SCOTUS decisions on freedom – CU, Heller, Griswold, Roe, Lawrence for starters.

                1. I own a couple of handguns, you stupid dickhead.

                  Uh huh. Do you keep them in the gloveboxes of your Ferraris?

            3. Except there was a conspiracy to enact harsher gun control laws with F&F.

              Documents obtained by CBS News show that the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) discussed using their covert operation “Fast and Furious” to argue for controversial new rules about gun sales.

              In Fast and Furious, ATF secretly encouraged gun dealers to sell to suspected traffickers for Mexican drug cartels to go after the “big fish.” But ATF whistleblowers told CBS News and Congress it was a dangerous practice called “gunwalking,” and it put thousands of weapons on the street. Many were used in violent crimes in Mexico. Two were found at the murder scene of a U.S. Border Patrol agent.

              ATF officials didn’t intend to publicly disclose their own role in letting Mexican cartels obtain the weapons, but emails show they discussed using the sales, including sales encouraged by ATF, to justify a new gun regulation called “Demand Letter 3?.

              [. . .]

              “It’s like ATF created or added to the problem so they could be the solution to it and pat themselves on the back.”

              Or are you going to claim that CBS is somehow part of the “Redneck right-wing AM radio” network?

              1. MLG,

                That is really the smoking gun. But liberals don’t want you to believe your lying eyes.

              2. These people were burrowed in the ATF for years where the program was hatched.

                I hate to defend the DOJ because of their crackdown on medical MJ. But they kept most of the old US Attorneys too.

                1. The careerists bureaucrats are a different class from the political appointee. The careerists will continue their agendas through the changing of the appointees. This is not news to anybody who understands the dynamics of federal bureaucracies. The ATF, as an organization, is hostile to individual ownership of guns. The standard line is always “We respect the 2nd Amendment, but…” which when parsed means everything before the word ‘but’ is to be ignored.

            4. So Mayors Against Illegal Guns and the Brady Campaign don’t exist?

        2. Fox News never explains that part while they are doing their brainwashing (obviously its working per your comment).

          I haven’t watched Fox News in a couple years, though I guess you’re a fan since you know what they’re talking (or not talking) about. I’m basing my comments on stuff like the recent Heller and MacDonald decisions, the growth of the number of shall-issue CCW states, and the fact that Obama – a man who I’m pretty sure hates private gun ownership – has been largely mum on the issue.

          I stand by what I said: gun rights are enjoying a period of ascendancy.

          1. You are correct about gun rights but incorrect on Obama. He has stated his support for the 2nd Amendment. Heller should put all this crap to rest.

            Hell, Obama sucks on the Drug War. Get him there.

            1. He has stated his support for the 2nd Amendment.

              He also said net spending cut. He says a lot of shit.

            2. He has stated his support for the 2nd Amendment.

              Which only serves to reinforce my point. When a far-left Chicago liberal has to give lip service to 2A, you know things aren’t going well for the anti-gun crowd.

              Heller should put all this crap to rest.

              Heller was a great start, McDonald was even better (incorporation against the states). The only real victory would be the repeal of the NFA and GCA68.

            3. SCOTUS hasn’t put anything to rest. The slapfight over what restrictions are “reasonable” has barely begun.

              1. SCOTUS hasn’t put anything to rest.

                To rest? No. But things are trending in our direction. The issue will only be at “rest” when I can walk down the street with an AK-47 slung over over my shoulder (and I mean an original Soviet full-auto version, not some crappish Norinco knock-off), and the cop I pass on the street doesn’t give it a second glance.

        3. Enough already dude. We get it. You’re an Obamabot. Also, seems to me that Bush is no longer PotUS. That “but Bush did x,y,z” line is getting hideously tiresome.

  14. Gingrich bombed at last night’s debate, now destined to lose Florida.

    And you people complained there were too many debates. They serve a purpose.

    1. Debates swell the chat rooms and boost liquor sales. Everybody wins.

      1. Thanks for the reminder. I don’t drink beer, but I need to go restock cuz my brother does when he comes over…

  15. Porn stars about to pull out of LA.

    Officials with the Aids Healthcare Foundation, which lobbied for years for such a law, welcomed the decision and said they would turn their attention to getting a similar condom requirement adopted elsewhere.

    “The city of Los Angeles has done the right thing [by enacting mandatory condom use in the porn industry]. They’ve done the right thing for the performers,” said Michael Weinstein, president of the foundation, which had pushed for the measure for six years.

    He said its adoption was crucial in protecting adult film actors from HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases.

    Doing the “right thing” in spite of the porn industry openly advocating AGAINST the measure.

    Don’t you just love it when two 3rd party actors conspire together to “protect” you?

    1. But will they leave it with a money shot?

      1. Let’s hope they leave while flipping them a bird.

    2. Even worse, the same asshats worked to shut down AIM. So it’s obvious they are against porn, not against AIDS.

    3. Are they going to move to Washington? Its the only place I can think of that has as many whores who want to do their job in front of a camera.

  16. Romney had some good hits on the grinch. He forced Newt to bring up the “language of the ghetto” ad. Then Romney hit Newt with:

    “Mr Speaker,I know that sounds like an enormous revelation, but have you checked your own investments? You also have investments with mutual funds, that also invested in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”

    Right after Mitt’s comment, Newt gave Mitt a little nod, like he was acknowledging “you got me”.

    1. Gingrich had many of those last night. Like when he got called out by Ron Paul for supposedly balancing the budget back in the 1990s.

      1. That was a good one too. The funny thing was watching Newt try to suck up to Paul, only to see Paul turn around, and drop the hammer.

    2. Willard: You did it too.

      Great debating skills there.

  17. Emails reveal Michael Mann to be quite a piece of work.


    1. I didn’t see anything new there. Looks like they’re still trying to get his emails released under FOIA. Did i miss somethjng?

      1. Nothing we didn’t already know. But the emails they do have show him to be just a really awful person.

    2. In PE-22, Mann alludes to his “dirty laundry” which cannot come out, requesting his correspondent to not pass the email or the data attached to it to anyone else (UVa has claimed no attachments to any emails were preserved on their system). In this email, Mann admits he has failed to follow the most basic tenet of science, to keep a record of exactly what he did in his research, and thus himself could not reproduce his own results

      Repeat after me:

      Top. Men.

      1. Fucking peasants just don’t understand that shit gets lost sometimes, even to the Topliest Of Mannly Men.

      2. Why is there no quote in that quote?

      3. The science is settled.

        Why would he need to reproduce his own results?

    3. Michael Mann is a slimy motherfucker. The AGW crowd couldn’t have picked a worse pointman for this whole operation; right or wrong just having him around makes everything they do seem less trustworthy.

      1. In his favour Heat was a big pile of dumb fun. Oh wait…

      2. That is the downside of leftists running a movement. They never will admit fault in a fellow traveler. A healthy movement would have kicked Mann’s ass out years ago and never let him anywhere near the forefront. But since leftists can’t ever criticize a fellow traveler for any reason except being insufficiently leftist, slimebags like Mann can often thrive.

      3. For a slimy motherfucker he was great directing Al Pacino and Robert De Niro. Oh, wait…

  18. SHOCK: ‘FEAR FACTOR’ Donkey Semen Makes NBC Question Taste


    1. Donkey Semen Makes NBC Question Taste

      I assume it tastes more or less like human semen, but if they want to do some studies on it that’s their prerogative.

      1. They could use stem cell proteins. Unless it’s filmed in Oklahoma..

  19. Gingrich seems to be the Rex Grossman of Presidential candidates. Grossman will play two or three quarters or sometimes a whole game or two were he plays really well and looks like a real NFL quarterback. But inevitably he melts down and turns the ball over three or four times in a quarter.

    1. Let’s just hope that Newt doesn’t make it to the Super Bowl a la Grossman.

      1. If he loses in Florida, I think he is done. His hope was to sweep the South and take over the front runner spot from Romney. If he doesn’t do that, how does he win? You can only come back so many times. This may have been his last chance.

        1. Fingers crossed

    2. If you’re going to compare Gingrich to Rex Grossman, then here’s Gingrich with Rick Santorum. 🙂

      1. According to SugarFree Santorum would be on top

        1. According to SugarFree Santorum would be on top

          Yuck. Truth be told, I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if something like that actually took place.

          1. I will never be able to see him without thinking “Just relax. I went to Catholic school. I know what I’m doing.”

            1. The perfect caricature for Rick Santorum is the guy in Boogie Nights who pays ten bucks to watch Dirk Diggler jerk off, then beats him up for being a queer. But at the same time, I have a hard time picturing Santorum beating someone up. Still though, that’s exactly the sort of inner conflict he must have had to repress to begin his career as a Bible-thumping politician.

  20. Christian Student Bullied for “Bullying”


    1. School officials at Shawano High School in Wisconsin have censored and punished Brandon Wegner, a 15-year-old, for writing an op-ed article explaining the Biblical view of homosexuality and supporting natural mother-father adoption, according to Liberty Counsel.

      After Brandon wrote this article [PDF] he was pulled into hours of meetings with school administrators and staff, without his parents’ knowledge.

      Superintendent Todd Carlson told him that the column “went against the bullying policy,” and asked him if he “regretted” writing it. According to Liberty Counsel, when Mr. Wegner stated that he did not regret writing it, and that he stood behind his beliefs, Superintendent Carlson told him that he had “to be one of the most ignorant kids to try to argue with him about this topic,” that “we have the power to suspend you if we want to” and that the column had “personally offended me, so I know you offended other people!”

      What a bunch of pathetic little tyrants school administrators are. It takes a real tough guy to pull some 15 year old kid in without his parents and kick him around.

      1. “SkinNer!”

      2. The student should sue the half-wit and the school system for whatever his laywers can come up with, no matter how ridiculous. Make that prick’s life a constant, tedious, irritation.

      3. It doesn’t sound like they kicked him around. It sounds like they tried to and he stuck to his beliefs.

        1. Good for him. But the fact that they tried to reveals them to be pathetic little tyrants.

          1. Not exactly man bites dog. They did the same general thing to me 30 years ago over my hair and their dress code. Once I explained to them that I could get a Mohawk (just a coincidence) so that my hair wouldn’t touch the top of my ears or my collar and would thereby conform to their dress code, they suddenly didn’t have as much problem with my hair being a little longer than they preferred.

            1. Just curious, Elf (if you see this). How’d that episode play out over time? Precipitate any non-hair hassles by being a “smart ass”?

            2. Haha, good work. I’ve told this story in other threads, but 9 years ago, when my son was 13, he was sent home for coloring his hair blue, and I was basically ordered to make him remove the dye or have him face suspension. I replied that their standard for hair color– that it be neither “unnatural” nor “distracting”– should apply equally to olive-skinned girls with hair bleached white-blonde and anyway they were talking to the wrong person because it wasn’t my hair. This went over poorly.

      4. He should have just told the Superintendent he was Muslim. They would have kissed his ass and sent him back to class with apologies.

      5. anyone else planning on teaching their kids to never, ever, talk to the school administration?

          1. you’re DC area, right? so you’re probably familar with this:


            reading that, my wife and I determined that lesson 1 would be “keep your mouth shut”

            1. I was out of the country when that happened. So hadn’t heard about it. I love this little nugget

              Dale would not discuss the Stuban case but said: “The connection between teenage suicide and discipline policies is erroneous.”

              That story is horrible. The part about parents saying they feel they need an attorney to deal with these assholes. The people who run public schools are just awful.

            2. Stupid fucking administrators.

              Getting kicked out of school is the best thing that can happen to any kid.

            3. Those brave, self-less school administrators saved that boy from a lifetime of drug abuse.

            4. Could you link to the single-page version of articles in future?

              I’m not about to go through the hassle of downloading all the extra antisocial networking apps and other bloat on six pages just to help the WP generate ad revenue.

      6. “personally offended me, so I know you offended other people!”

        Oh, I get it. I’m supposed to get in your car and let you put your finger inside me.

      7. Chubby little obnoxious Christian bigot (and fucking terrible writer, I might add) gets kicked around by petty pussified school administration tyrants?

        “I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.”

      8. the column had “personally offended me, so I know you offended other people!”

        The proper response to this is
        so the fuck what?

  21. Author of “Latino Wisdom” calls Pat Buchanan ‘a white supremacist” and “a white extremist”


    1. In fairness the book seems to be “Latino Wisdom” as in wisdom from various successful people who happen to be Latino, whatever that is. I don’t think she meant the book to be a celebration of wisdom specifically to them.


      1. So what if someone wrote a book titled “White Wisdom”?

        1. True. But that double standard is so ingrained that no one even notices it anymore.

          1. But not fallacious.

    2. Oh, the mind of a liberal.

      From the Author
      While researching for Latino Wisdom, my Latino interview subjects have taught me a thing or two about achieving success (as they see it). You have to …

      1. Know when to quit! When necessary, leave your comfort zone to move on to better things. 2. Wear blinders! Focus on YOUR future, and use your will and desire to stay motivated. 3. Be selfish! Be careful and protective of yourself when others may try to bring you down. 4. Be a little na?ve! Decide to “just do it,” as the Nike ads say, and think about details later. 5. Be stubborn! Stay focused on the goal, while ignoring the nay-sayers.

      1. This worked for me.

    1. How could a bear use a camera?

      1. Email me.

    2. The woman looks like she has excellent peripheral vision. Good for the ambidextrous handie, I suppose.

  22. After Brandon wrote this article [PDF] he was pulled into hours of meetings with school administrators and staff, without his parents’ knowledge.

    American education; exploring ideas through open inquiry.

    1. i’ll open your inquiry

    1. The first one. Watching Joy Division co-opted by Disney is actually pretty funny.

      1. When Disney Cruise Lines used Iggy Pop’s Lust For Life in their advertising was a shining moment of corporate cluelessness for me.

    2. The Mickey Mouse Club…

      Concentration Camp Sex Slaves…

      Sounds about right.

  23. At least they taste better than tampons:


  24. Adriana Lima is still hot:


    1. Yes. Reminds me of Megan Fox

      1. Why is it that these “hot” chicks can never close their mouths?

        1. Gotta keep their body temperatures down.

        2. I dunno. Perhaps because they’re female and females never shut up?

        3. Fwiw, her mouth is closed in the last several pics…

          1. OK, OK, so she got a little snarly, “sexy” lip fatigue.

    2. Ann at the bus stop is preetier.

  25. Ron Paul calls for an end to Cuba embargo; polls say he’s wise to do so.

    What? No hat tip?

    1. I don’t see why anyone cares about Cuba. If the Syrians and Libyans can revolt, so could the Cubans. If they want to sit down there and live in a shit hole, that is their business. Lift the embargo and forget about them.

      1. Weren’t you arguing for sanctions on Iran the other day though John? Or is that a different John?

        1. If Cuba were in the position to shut down a big portion of the world’s oil supply, or it were the cold war again and they were a conduit for the Soviet Union in Latin America, it would be different. But since it is neither, then Cuba really doesn’t matter like Iran.

          And if Iran had not waged proxy war against the US for the last 30 years and were not causing trouble all over the Middle East, i wouldn’t care about them either. But since they have and are, we have to care.

          And lastly, sanctions only work if the whole world buys in. The worked against South Africa. But they never work if only one country does it. Since Cuba trades with everyone but the US, our embargo is pointless.

          1. And lastly, sanctions only work if the whole world buys in.

            I don’t know where you get the delusion that the whole world will buy in to an Iran embargo.

            1. They bought into a South African one didn’t they? And Europe, Russia and China seem to be buying into an Iranian one these days.

              1. Russia and China

                There seems to be a lot of evidence to the contrary on this.

                1. They are less resistant then they were. We have to do something. And economic sanctions seems like a better idea than war.

                  I don’t like countries like Iran or China for that matter. I hope countries that have horrible oppressive governments and sponsor terrorism. I hope their governments fall and new better ones replace them. So forgive my optimism.

                  I know you guys think that most the evil in the world is the result of the US. But I don’t look at it that way and hope things get better.

                  1. And economic sanctions seems like a better idea than war.

                    It seems like a good idea, yes. But it’s not. Sanctions just allow the regime to tighten its grip on the populace. The people at the top will not suffer; the people at the bottom will. And they will not rebel in response, so what’s the point?

              2. Re: John,

                They [the world] bought into a South African one [sanctions,] didn’t they?

                Which didn’t really work as advertised.

                1. Somehow the South African government gave up power didn’t they? It wasn’t because of a revolution. And it wasn’t out of the goodness of their hearts.

                  They may not have worked as advertised, but the results show they worked.

              3. But the South Africans were RACISTS!!!!!!!! That’s way worse than anything the Iranians have done.

      2. Re: John,

        If the Syrians and Libyans can revolt, so could the Cubans.

        Notwithstanding the fact that Cuba is a) an island and b) arms dealers do not regularly visit there to sell peashooters to regular Cubans, am I right?

        1. True. But they are still the ones who collectively let the communists take over. The Soviet Union came to an end didn’t it? Cuba is bad but it is not North Korea.

          1. they are still the ones who collectively let the communists take over.


  26. Eyes turn to Sen. Marco Rubio as GOP VP pick.

    He will be the perfect VP! He can best Joe Biden in a bumbler competition.

    1. The problem is that every Mexican and Puerto Rican I have ever met hated Cubans. I don’t see how he helps with any vote outside of the Cuban vote, which will go Republican anyway.

      1. Sample size is limited, I assume.

        1. Reasonably large NM and very uniform. SFB only mildly exaggerates below.

          1. I totally believe you.

            1. You are right NM. I just hallucinated it all. It never really happened. I have never known any person other than a southern redneck who ever expressed any dislike for another group because such things are just impossible. It is inconceivable that one national group could hate another, unless one of the group is an evil white person.

              Got it.

              1. You see the world so clearly John. We are lucky to have you around.

                1. NM,

                  Sorry saying something you don’t like and have no response to makes you turn into a smug prick. It is your problem, why do you feel the need to make it ours?

                  1. I am way more smug than you are, ’tis true.

                    And it makes me feel more smug that you think I have “no response” to your idiocy.

      2. If the Mexican-Puerto Rican-Cuban triumverate were ever placed in the same geographic area they’d make the Sunni-Shia-Christians look like a pancake social.

        1. None of you have any idea of what you’re talking about. I don’t know about Puerto Ricans, but Mexicans do not generally hate Cubans and least of all big-culo Cuban women.

          1. I lived in San Antonio for years. I had a lot of friends from Mexico and their feelings towards Cubans were shocking. I was shocked that is until I started vacationing every year in Puerto Rico and heard what they had to say about Cubans and Mexicans for that matter. Everyone in Latin America seems to hate Mexicans. Not sure why, but wow do they.

            1. Mexicans from different states (in Mexico) hate each other.

          2. Yep, its true. John has managed to get Old Mexican and me on the same side of an issue.

            That’s how strong the collectivism is in him.

            1. In other words NM, you have know response. And in fact probably have had similar experiences but refuse to admit as much because mouthing PC platitudes is all you are capable of. So instead you just make a stupid remark. Par for the course.

              1. Yeah, cuz, me and Old Mexican got together on this at our PC Platitudes Seminar at Liberal U.

      3. Having been born and raised in Miami and living there until I was 26, I know one thing for certain: the worst thing you can call a Cuban is a Puerto Rican.

        1. That’s nothing, try calling a Colombian (Venezuelan) girl a Venezuelan (Colombian). I still have the scars.

      4. It’s like every other group of similar yet different sub-groups… The only people they hate more than each other is everyone else. Ask them about Haitians or Jamaicans.

        1. If there’s one thing everyone in the world can agree on, it’s that foreigners suck.

      5. “I don’t see how he helps with any vote outside of the Cuban vote, which will go Republican anyway.”

        If the GOP wins FL, they win it all.

  27. I saw a little clip of Newt Kuan Yew vs Romneytron earlier.

    I don’t understand why Mittens didn’t turn to Newt and ask, “Do you even understand what capitalism is, or how it works?”

    1. Yeah, it seems like the candidates could (and should!) be a lot more catty and sarcastic with each other. It’s not like what they say will change the Media Narrative!, so why not just let it loose instead of playing so fucking coy all the time?

      1. Romney “So Mitt, have you thought about seeking professional help for you ADD and bi polar disorders?”

        1. Why does everyone keep picking on the ADD kids?

        2. Newt: Willard, it’s time to wash the magic underwear, it’s reaaaalllly stinking up the stage

  28. This just in! Olivia Wilde is still hot!


    Kate Moss is still a lush!


    1. “Kate chatted to fellow night owl and Italian artist Francesco Vezzoli instead until the early hours, proving to have quite the stamina”

      Alcohol wouldn’t be my first guess…

    2. The waitress at the Modern Cafe is prettier.

  29. …Kate Moss is still Wilde

    You missed a good opportunity, there.

    1. …and I missed your thread completely, there. 😐

      1. Head banging to Madonna is hardly what I would call Wilde.

    1. You did it wrong man.

    2. And barely a peep out of them.

  30. I just wanted to say it’s pretty bad when the realization that Newt could win the republican primary makes you hope for Mitt Romney.

    It’s a sad day in America.

  31. http://online.wsj.com/article/…..TopOpinion

    Interesting article in the WSJ about the cult of safety and how it is destroying childhood.

    1. Looks like it’s subscription only…

      1. Sorry

        A new study of how preschoolers spend their days may make you want to run around screaming, which is apparently more than the tykes themselves get to do. After interviewing child-care providers from 34 very different Cincinnati-area centers?urban to suburban, Head Start to high income?researchers found that kids spend an average of only 2% to 3% of their day in “vigorous activities.”

        Can you imagine that? Children spending 97% of their day not running around? It’s like a desk job, except with cookie time. Excuse me?apple time. When you consider that three-quarters of American kids aged 3 to 5 are in some kind of preschool program and a lot of them come home only to eat, sleep and go back again, this is beyond sad?it’s bad. Bad for their bodies, their brains, their blubber. Baddest of all are the reasons behind this institutionalized atrophy: The quest for ever more safety and education.

        “Injury and school readiness concerns may inhibit children’s physical activity in child care,” writes pediatrician Kristen A. Copeland, lead author on the study, which will appear in next month’s Pediatrics but is already available on the journal’s website. Let’s take a look at both these concerns, the twin fears haunting modern-day childhood.

        Fear of injury: The centers, the parents and the state regulators are all so worried about injuries that they end up steering kids away from play. They do this in part by only approving playground equipment that is so safe it is completely boring to the kids. As one child-care provider told the investigators, “We used to have this climber where they could climb really high and it was really challenging. Now we have this climber that looks cute, much cuter than the old one, but it’s not as high and . . . scary.”

        “Scary” equals “fun” for kids. (It equals potential lawsuit to everyone else.) Faced with this pitiful excuse for a plaything, the kids started doing things like walking up the slide. But of course, that is verboten, too, because a kid could get injured! As several child-care providers told the authors, “the [safety] guidelines had become so strict that they might actually be limiting, rather than promoting, children’s physical activity.” Uh, “might”?

        Fear #2: Falling behind. The trembling triumvirate of child-care providers, parents and regulators also worries that kids must perform at a certain level when they reach school, so play time is sacrificed for academics. Some parents specifically request that their kids not participate in outdoor activities but “read a book instead”?an attitude that spans the economic spectrum.

        The funny thing is, if you are really concerned about children’s health and school-readiness, there is a very simple way to increase both. It’s called playing.

        That is the gist of it.

        1. It’s all part of the plan to turn Americans into pussified sheep.

          And it’s working!

          1. And to fatten them up, apparently.

    2. I honestly think that this kind of shit does more harm to kids than just about anything else (well, excluding actual violence or abuse). I’m also pretty sure that lack of activity can account for all of the increase in childhood obesity (and probably adult obesity too) that we seem to be seeing.

    3. Maybe if parents didn’t sue the school everytime their precious little cherubs got so much as a skinned knee they wouldn’t have to be such health and safety nazis.

      I’ve noticed that playground equipment is pretty much a joke these days. There’s a park near my house that I walk my dog by and you hardly ever see kids out there playing because the jungle gym is so small and pathetic. You’re far more likely (depending on the hour) to see teenagers hanging out smoking and drinking than younger kids playing.

  32. The Big Ignore starts today!

  33. Eyes turn to Sen. Marco Rubio as GOP VP pick.

    Rubio …. Isn’t he the anchor baby of illegal aliens who is Constitutionally disqualified from running for President?

    1. Quit trying to one-up me.

    2. There is no such thing as a Cuban who is an illegal alien.

      Look up wet foot-dry foot.

      The gist is that if in the course of immigrating to the US they so much s set one toe on dry land, they get a green card after a couple of days in detention. Generally there will be someone from the Gloria Estefan foundation waiting outside Chrome Detention Center with a job and temporary housing too.

      1. Do they have to get above the high tide line, or does the inter-tidal zone count? (sorry)

  34. The clown car is getting smaller. the “anyone but Obama” crowd has to be getting nervous. While the president speaks of issues and solutions, challenging the republicans to do some governance, the candidates throw red meet at each other in the pits. What do any of the republican candidates offer the country other than ideology and experience based on a life of privilege?

    1. What does it really matter who of the self-centered candidate is moving ahead and how slow or fast they do? It is all obvious to those who really care. More to the point is analysis of what each candidate says and what is true or not true about what they say. What they ignore is what exactly they would do to create jobs, what exactly they would do to control the financial industry, what exactly they would do to improve education, what exactly they would do about Iran, what exactly they would do about the nation’s crumbling infrastructure, instead of whining about what Obama has not been able to do because of the Republicans who hold the majority in the House and have enough members in the Senate, who are in the unwholesome grip of the corporate world, to impede and choke any decent legislation in Congress, American or otherwise. Whoever wins the Republican nomination will join in the continuation of the destruction of middle working Americans.

    2. Is Marshall legit or is he just trolling like all the others?

      1. Is Marshall legit?

        Who can define “legit” in this topsy-turvy chat room existence of ours?

    3. While the president speaks of issues and solutions,

      The President speaks about a lot of things. When he starts actually pushing solutions that will work, give me a call.

      challenging the republicans to do some governance,

      I could have sworn the President was a Democrat, as were the majority of Senators.

      Or is this more of the “leading from behind” that worked so well in Libya?

      1. It’s like the same day, over and over again. The president is going to take bold steps to solve the economic problems facing America. Fucker has been saying that for years. Even one of the idiots we’re facing next in the White House (barring a Paul surge) has got to be better than that.

        I’m more concerned about who gets into Congress. There’s likely going to be considerable turnover to new representatives and senators, and, regardless of who the president is, these need to be of the slash-and-burn-government variety, or we’re in serious trouble.

        1. Regardless of Presidency:

          53/47 Republican majority in Senate.

          225/210 Republican majority in the House.

          I base these numbers on no analysis whatsoever.

          1. I’m 95% confident both houses will be under the firm control of the GOP, but that doesn’t mean anything by itself. The GOP expanded government, including the welfare state and the regulatory regime, at near-record levels last time they ran the show. No reason to expect that they won’t do it again, unless some serious reformers get into the Congress in sufficient numbers.

            1. Hooray for our return to throwing money at prison ministries, public schools and the military instead of union jobs, public schools and the military.

            2. No reason to expect that they won’t do it again, unless some serious reformers get into the Congress in sufficient numbers.

              I’m assuming that most of the freshmen are going to be Democrats and most Democrats are Tonys. There’s going to be a whole lot of teeth gnashing about Congress employing the wrong kind of statism and we’re gonna keep on trucking towards the cliff.

    4. Re: Marshall,

      While the president speaks of issues and solutions,

      The president of which country?

  35. What do any of the republican candidates does Obama offer the country other than ideology and experience based on a life of privilege?

    Since high school, at least, I would say Obama has been leading a life of privilege.

  36. Any of the four Republican wannabes would be a horror as President, as bad or worse than George W. Bush and his disastrous eight years in the White House.

    We have a disgraced former Speaker of the House who was thrown out of Congress, had a checkered personal life and worked for years cashing in on his Washington ties as a major lobbyist.

    Then there’s the John Birch Society supporter, a racist who believes that the Federal Reserve is part of a grand conspiracy going back to the Illuminati, who wants us to go return to the inflexible gold standard that gave us repeated boom-and-bust economic cycles in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, and who subscribes to the Ayn Rand philosophy of “I’ve got mine, too bad about you.”

    There’s the former moderate Governor who changes his mind to suit his audience, destroyed numerous companies as a corporate raider and culture capitalist, and who believes that when he dies, he’ll become a god and get his own planet.

    And lastly, we have the ultra-right-wing religionist who wants to ban abortion and birth control, and inject his brand of religion deep into what’s left of our government after he takes it apart.

    These “debates” may make enjoyable television, but you really have to wonder about those who support any of these fools.

    1. Where is this crap coming from?

      1. The Random Meme Generator.

    2. who wants us to go return to the inflexible gold standard that gave us repeated boom-and-bust economic cycles in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s,

      Yes the Federal Reserve’s ever expanding money supply that gives us more frequent and deeper boom-bust cycles is sooooo much better.

    3. There’s the former moderate Governor who changes his mind to suit his audience, destroyed numerous companies as a corporate raider and culture capitalist,

      What’s a culture capitalist?

      Is that a guy that makes his money from entertainment?

      1. Yeah, I wondered about that too, and had to Google it. Apparently it’s referring to the “culture of capitalism,” and from what I can tell, 9 out of 10 university professors agree that this is a very bad/dangerous thing!

        Here’s an example from a textbook titled Global Problems and the Culture of Capitalism.

        Imagine an underdeveloped country rejuvenated and refurbished by capitalist entrepreneurs. They come in, they build, they buy, they leave. The economy booms. The population explodes, but there are not enough resources for everyone. The population continues to grow. Poverty, famine, and disease creep in. The cycle continues, created, destroyed, and recreated by the ebbs and flows of capitalism. It is both a boon and a pariah on the interdependent global system, its presence simultaneously marking the growth and decline of culture. The purpose of this book is to outline the consequences and costs of the development of the culture of capitalism for people all over the world.

        Yeah, and imagine monkeys flew out of my butt.

    4. Hey porter, get my trunk up on that railroad car.

    5. This thead deserves a better class of mindless troll. And I’m gonna give it to ’em.

  37. lol, American politicians, best politics money can buy lol.


  38. No Need to Panic About Global Warming
    …Although the number of publicly dissenting scientists is growing, many young scientists furtively say that while they also have serious doubts about the global-warming message, they are afraid to speak up for fear of not being promoted?or worse. They have good reason to worry. In 2003, Dr. Chris de Freitas, the editor of the journal Climate Research, dared to publish a peer-reviewed article with the politically incorrect (but factually correct) conclusion that the recent warming is not unusual in the context of climate changes over the past thousand years. The international warming establishment quickly mounted a determined campaign to have Dr. de Freitas removed from his editorial job and fired from his university position. Fortunately, Dr. de Freitas was able to keep his university job.

    This is not the way science is supposed to work, but we have seen it before?for example, in the frightening period when Trofim Lysenko hijacked biology in the Soviet Union. Soviet biologists who revealed that they believed in genes, which Lysenko maintained were a bourgeois fiction, were fired from their jobs. Many were sent to the gulag and some were condemned to death.

    Why is there so much passion about global warming, and why has the issue become so vexing that the American Physical Society, from which Dr. Giaever resigned a few months ago, refused the seemingly reasonable request by many of its members to remove the word “incontrovertible” from its description of a scientific issue? There are several reasons, but a good place to start is the old question “cui bono?” Or the modern update, “Follow the money.”

    Alarmism over climate is of great benefit to many, providing government funding for academic research and a reason for government bureaucracies to grow. Alarmism also offers an excuse for governments to raise taxes, taxpayer-funded subsidies for businesses that understand how to work the political system, and a lure for big donations to charitable foundations promising to save the planet. Lysenko and his team lived very well, and they fiercely defended their dogma and the privileges it brought them….

    1. Dammit, man. I just posted that a minute later. This is what I get for reading the links, then posting.

  39. …A recent study of a wide variety of policy options by Yale economist William Nordhaus showed that nearly the highest benefit-to-cost ratio is achieved for a policy that allows 50 more years of economic growth unimpeded by greenhouse gas controls. This would be especially beneficial to the less-developed parts of the world that would like to share some of the same advantages of material well-being, health and life expectancy that the fully developed parts of the world enjoy now. Many other policy responses would have a negative return on investment. And it is likely that more CO2 and the modest warming that may come with it will be an overall benefit to the planet….

  40. Heresy! WSJ Editorial signed by 14 prominent scientists, Burt Rutan and a former Apollo astronaut equates AGW to Lysenkoism.

  41. the inflexible gold standard that gave us repeated boom-and-bust economic cycles in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s

    Fortunately. it’s been smooth sailing since the Great Hero Nixon got us out of Bretton Woods.

  42. Oddly enough the GOP establishment supported Bush and weren’t saying the kind of things about him as they are Newt. Weird how that works.

    Bush wants lunar stepping stone to Mars – January 9, 2004

    President Bush will announce a bold plan next week to establish a permanent base on the moon with an eventual goal of sending a manned mission to Mars, senior administration officials said last night.

    Three senior officials said Bush wants to aggressively reinvigorate the space program, which has been demoralized by a series of setbacks, including the Columbia disaster that killed seven astronauts last February and financial problems dogging the International Space Station.

    The officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Bush’s announcement would come in the middle of next week. They would not say when a moonshot would take place, but one said it could be soon. A
    mission to Mars would not happen before 2014, officials said. Experts have placed 2018 as an ideal time, based on the positioning of the planets.

    Then again we’re talking about a Republican establishment that is saying Romney is more conservative than Newt. Talk about being out of touch with reality. Perhaps they and Romney are worried Newt wants to attack the incoming aliens from planet Kolob when they return? http://tinyurl.com/843zon4



    Oddly enough its the GOP establishment that is living in outer space by believing the Republican nominee don’t need to motivate the base because the Democrat will because it worked so well for Dole and McCain.

  43. I can take a lot of shit from the Leftist trolls. I can deal with them calling Paul a loon or with them comparing libertarianism to Anarchism, or saying that without regulations we all die.

    BUT I cannot stand it when they come in here and don’t even seem to realise that we’re not Team Red and their ‘all republicans are crap’, ‘Bush did it too’ and ‘Romney sucks’ type attacks are not registering with us.

    It reeks of the ultimate disrespect because the show they haven’t listened to us before attacking.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.