NDAA Reform Fails, Minnesota GOP Gets Libertarianized, Schumer Shuns Tax Refugees: P.M. Links

|

  • They're much cuddlier than you think! Really!

    Saying, "the plaintiffs have in fact lost certain First Amendment freedoms as a result of the enactment" of Section 1021 of the NDAA, letting the military detain anyone it suspects "substantially supported" accused terrorist groups, Judge Katherine Forrest issued a preliminary injunction against those provisions. Meanwhile,  Rep. Tom Rooney smeared Rep. Justin Amash's efforts to eliminate the military's authority to detain individuals without due process as trying to "coddle foreign enemy combatants," setting the tone as the House voted down the amendment.

  • Under fire for "drone strike" assassinations performed without due process, sometimes on U.S. citizens, with known innocent casualties, government officials are considering sharing more information in hopes of winning support for the program.
  • Americans Elect, the establishment-backed effort to groom a high-profile centrist, "problem-solving" presidential candidate, admitted defeat after nobody interested in the nomination raised sufficient support. (HT Eduard van Haalen) The Washington Post painted the failure of the bloodless, "non-ideological" effort as the death-knell for third parties in general.
  • Chen Guangcheng's nephew, accused of attempted murder for defending himself against Chinese officials who stormed his house seeking his activist uncle, won't be permitted representation by a human rights attorney.
  • The Minnesota Republican Party is on the verge of a takeover by young, political-newbie libertarians. They challenge not only the old-guard's ideology, but its financial-management skills.
  • Sen. Charles Schumer thinks that people who flee America's tax collectors are, nevertheless, desperate to drop in for a visit, and should be denied U.S. hospitality unless they cough up lots of cash. It's sort of like extortion, but it's not, because …
  • In advance of the NATO summit in Chicago, lawyers say police preemptively and illegally raided an apartment where activists planning protests are staying, and arrested nine of the occupants.

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.

NEXT: What is an Astronaut's Life Worth?: An Interview with Robert Zubrin

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. Oh, and fuck you all, I’m first!!!

      Oh, and fried chicken.

    2. She’s making it awfully hard to remember that Scott Brown is awful.

      1. Would you have preferred her as head of the Consumer Protection Bureau? That post is the equivalent of Katie Sebelius at the HHS. Remember her rallying cry about “Teh RICH!”…

    3. Don’t people always plagiarize recipes for those vanity “Junior League of Peoria Plain Fancy” cookbook projects?

      1. Probably, but this cookbook was supposed to be from the five civilized tribes. I wonder why a woman who said she really wanted to get in touch with her roots, would plagiarize two from a Virgin Islands newspaper article and the third from a Better Homes and Gardens piece from the 50’s.

        If she was smart, she would have at least taken them from a restaurant at Choctaw Downs or the Buffalo Run Casino and Hotel.

        1. It was one of those “no one will ever know, and if they do, they won’t care” moments.

            1. “I’ve received nothing but rave reviews from my colleagues after whipping up treats from this cookbook in the faculty lounge kitchen. Admirers of Pow Wow Chow may also enjoy Bow Wow Chow, a Indonesian-influenced cookbook from a former professor now in politics.”

              1. The best part of this disaster with the cookbook are the recipes themselves. Crab with Tomato Mayonnaise Dressing: “Imported mustard,” Worcestershire sauce, cognac, and crab.

                Because crab was clearly a staple of the Indians from Oklahoma. They were practically swimming in the stuff.

                1. It was the white man who brought the crabs.

        2. Probably, but this cookbook was supposed to be from the five civilized tribes.

          The British were a civilized tribe, wren’t they?

    4. I linked to this last night from the Boston Herald.

      1. I guess the article I linked didn’t include the plagiarism charge.

    5. “Pow Wow Chow” FTW, BTW.

  1. Police said Rachel George spat on, cursed at and kicked officers while they attempted to make her sit and put her in an [sic] holding cell, and Sgt. Sean Duffy injured himself striking her in the face.

    (Emphasis mine)

    http://triblive.com/news/18153…..ity-county

    1. Seriously, that website needs to be sued for false advertising. When I read “triblive,” I expect to see some live tribbing, not a pig-ugly yinzer and her Matt Welch-wannabee lawyer.

      Shenanigans. SHENANIGANS!!!

      1. her Matt Welch-wannabee lawyer

        Needs an uglier tie for that.

        Sgt. Sean Duffy injured himself striking her in the face.

        Does he keep his hands in Vaseline lined leather gloves so they’ll be soft for the ladies?

    2. Psycho yinzer, qu’est que-ce?

      1. +42 internets for that one, BP.

    3. Poor Sergeant Duffy. It’s a sad, sad world when women’s faces have become so hard that you could hurt yourself punching them.

      1. Pelosi’s mug could probably crack a few digits.

        1. Considering how much work she’s had done, you’d just want to hit her on a seam.

          1. She has so many though. I recommend a body shot. Wait. A body blow. Wait, that’s not right either.

            Just hit her with a damn shovel.

            1. I thought head shot was the approved protocol for zombie?

              1. Exactly. What did you think we were talking about?

                1. Would you want to suck Tekillya Rose off of Nancy D’ellasandro Pelosi (body shot); or perform fellatio on NDP (body “blow”)? Shovel surgery wins by a country mile.

                  Woosh!

              2. I’ve long taken issue with that. If the cerebral cortex is not functioning, then the damage would need to be to the brain stem. The blows to the top of the head, or bullets through the forehead aren’t going to do it. If you’re shooting from at the front, you need to aim for the nose.

                1. Correct, Mensan. I never said I wanted to murder her (and I don’t); I have no qualms putting her out of action. Besides, the brain stem has to be intact for an organ harvest.

                  Unfortunately, I have seen too many botched suicide attempts (I suspect you have too) that belie ignorance of this fact.

                  1. Organ harvest? I thought we were making a blood-brew.

                    1. Organ harvest? I thought we were making a blood-brew.

                      Blood, histologically speaking, is classified as connective tissue, Sloop, so think of it as part of the organ harvest. Don’t worry, waste not, want not on the corpses. We can fetch a good price for those organs on the black market and use the blood for our hemo-potent potable.

                    2. So that’s your angle in moving to UKR.

                    3. So that’s your angle in moving to UKR.

                      That is so untrue and not funny, db! (I laughed any way 🙂

                  2. GM, it occurs to me that, during our disagreement over anatomical terminology, I may have inadvertently created the impression that I am also a physician. For clarification; I am a cardiovascular physiologist and also a registered nurse.

                    1. Also, my post about aiming for the brain stem was in reply to T.

                    2. Also, my post about aiming for the brain stem was in reply to T.

                      I ascertained that after the fact; I was distracted. Arguing with Tulpa can do that.

                    3. I am a cardiovascular physiologist

                      No wonder you gave me such grief over my sloppy vessel taxonomy. You are so much more pleasant than I; you being an RN explains everything now. And yes, I was under the impression you are a physician; RN does not, in any way, lessen your medical gravitas. (Though I still remember some charge nurses from PGY and residency I would still like to strangle.)

    4. Yeah, I LOLed at the nightly news last night when they said officer injured his shoulder defending himself.

      Also, the [sic] is unnecessary as you’re supposed to use “an” before a word beginning with ‘h’.

      1. Also, the [sic] is unnecessary as you’re supposed to use “an” before a word beginning with ‘h’.

        When I cook dinner tonight, should I serve it on an hot plate, or a cold one, Tulpa? But before that, we’re going looking for an home with more square footage. And we’re going to the gym so we can maintain an healthy lifestyle.

        So much for your little theory.

        1. You mean healthful lifestyle.

        2. It’s not a theory, it’s a helpful hint so that you can learn to choose your articles properly.

          1. A hint is only helpful if it’s correct. And yours is not in I’d say half of the uses of the article a/an before words that start with h.

          2. It would have helped if you included phonics and dipthongs in your little soliloquy, Tulpy Poo. There is a difference b’twixt a “hard” and “soft” “H”. You may be a talented mathematician, but you’re a piss poor linguist.

            1. Alex Trebek says “an” before “historic”.

              1. That’s because he’s a Canuckistani asshat, Tulpa.*

                *No offense meant to Canuckistanis that can speak proper American English.

              2. He’s also Canuckistanian. Just because Trebek does it, doesn’t make it correct.

                None of my Canucki pen pals make that error, nor does my British expy atty.

          3. DId you read it in an history book?

    5. MSM take: “Smoking-Related Hand Injuries on the Rise”

  2. Any time Chuck Schumer talks it’s further proof that we have not reached Peak Retard.

    1. Senator Schumer is reason enough to make one consider fleeing the country.

      1. Yep. My parents might be moving to Ecuador, partially due to clowns like Chuckie.

        1. I feel their pain.

          1. Ecuador may not be far enough away from Schumer, but it’s at least a good buffer zone.

        2. My kids’ parents might be doing the same.

        3. They really want to move to the country with that shithead Rafael Correa?

      2. This idiot wants to make it ten years retroactive. Is he really that stupid?

        1. Is he really that stupid?

          It’s Chuck Schumer, so I’ll assume that was a rhetorical question.

  3. A 36-year-old protester arrested and released by Chicago police days before the NATO summit claims he was never read his rights or told specifically why he was under arrest.

    Because NATO’s delicate genius cannot be disturbed. You should have claimed 99% status and paid homage to Dem candidates.

  4. Americans Elect, the American Idol of politics didn’t work? This is my shocked face.

    1. (HT Eduard van Haalen)

      Pustually Cromulent Commenter EvH.

      1. Don’t HaTe on my HT, yo.

    2. Americans Elect, the American Idol of politics didn’t work?

      One thing I will give David Boren, Marshall, is his highly intelligent and overall, interest in solutions over ideology. His son, OTOH, is as dumb as box of rocks and half as sharp.

      He’s done some remarkable academic stuff with OU, particularly with the College of Medicine in both Norman and Tulsa.

      1. As an ex-Senator I don’t care much for Boren but your opinion certainly softens it. He was also Governor, I believe, and so he should know how to get things done.

        And I have also not heard good things about his son.

  5. I’m just going to throw this in here for anyone that may be interested but missed it in the other thread.

    Congress says “fuck Obama” and votes in defense spending increase.

    On a 299-120 vote, lawmakers backed the spending blueprint that adds $8 billion for the military for next year. The bill calls for a missile defense site on the East Coast that the military opposes and restricts the ability of the president to reduce the arsenal of nuclear weapons under a 2010 treaty with Russia. It also preserves ships and aircraft that the Pentagon wanted to retire in a cost-cutting move.

    Lawmakers also rejected the military’s request for another round of domestic base closings. The White House has threatened a veto, as Republicans made wholesale changes in Obama’s budget proposal.

    1. What was that in the other thread about republicans really trying hard to be the party of fiscal conservatism?

    2. Lawmakers also rejected the military’s request for another round of domestic base closings.

      Those BRACs are damn near pointless anyway. They were meant to remove the political element from the decision, but you can’t get Congress involved in anything without it being so, and with some of these installations, you can’t shut them down without causing some serious short-to-long term pain to the communities that use the base as an economic crutch. The last BRAC was a joke.

      1. With that said, if we’re going to shut down bases, let’s at least get out of the overseas ones and turn them back over to the host nations.

        1. We could sell them, and cover some of the close-out costs, if the hosts are willing to pay for them.

      2. I’d like to see a President use his authority as Commander-in-Chief to order everybody to transfer from one of the bases that ought to be shut down. It would be fun, just for the shits and giggles.

      3. I remember one a few years back when I was stationed in CT. BRAC reccommended closing Groton (where I was) and consolidate the 18 subs there with with the fuckton of subs that are in VA.

        Somehow the governor (who got promoted from Lt Gov after the previ gov was arrested – somehow she knew nothing of what he was doing) got the findings changed.

  6. But given the competition of independent expenditures and campaigns that can leapfrog the party through websites and social media, the willingness of Paul supporters to stick with the party is uncertain. Critics point out that they are united more behind the libertarian vision of one man rather than a vision of conservative principles.

    In related news, GOP establishment critics don’t get it.

    1. So what, according to me.

      1. So what? It means Martin supported terrorism. Or Zimmerman might be pregnant right now.

        1. That first ultrasound is going to suck. They go in through the pee pee hole.

      2. He’s a drug addict and it’s most likely his fault he went into a drug fueled rage and attacked George Zimmerman…or something.

        1. It cuts a little against the poor-twelve-year-old gunned down by a racist vigilante.

          1. More than anything, the combination of the THC positivity and the injuries to both Zimmerman and Tray’s knuckles do help put an end to the notion that one under the influence of cannabis can only be some pacifistic hippie. Now, I of course think cannabis should be legal, but some of the arguments made in its favor (based on the substance and the behaviors associated with it compared with alcohol) are absurd. There are good people that smoke weed and bad. Violence and being high on cannabis are not mutually exclusive activities. That said, cannabis ain’t gonna make you any more violent, and even if it did, so fucking what. Violence should be a crime, not a substance.

            1. Sudden, when are you driving up this way so I can get you some beer? And I will be in LA next week on Thursday (at the latest). I can also get some to you then.

              (Thank God Lent is done. You can drink with us now.)

    2. So he’d smoked sometime in the last 30 days? Doesn’t seem terribly relevant to me.

      If anything, smoking a big J on the fateful night probably would have mellowed him out and saved his life.

      1. THC in his blood suggests he smoked in the last 24 hours. It is relevant to Zimmerman’s legal defense.

        1. This was just as fucking retarded when you said it yesterday.

          1. You’re the fucking retard.

            1. Poophead assface!

        2. If you could guarantee he was stoned while the shit went down, I’d say it’s relevant, as then he probably wasn’t acting rationally.

          But if my Bayesian priors are : 50% he was stoned the night shit went down, and 50% he was stoned the night before. Then the fact that he got into a fight on the night he got into a fight leads me to an updated probability of much more than 50% that the stonage occured on the non-relevant night. I guess any probablity at all still helps reasonable doubt for Zimmerman though. So point conceded.

          1. So if you kill someone who’s high on MJ, it’s more likely to be self-defense?

      2. THC is metabolized in 4-8 hours, so it wall only show up in the blood for that long. If his blood tested positive for THC, then he smoked within a few hours.

    3. I keep seeing this crap, but no one has yet explained why the fuck it would matter in the slightest. Although at least this is better than the Daily Fail, whose headline was “Martin had DRUGS in his system (caps not mine).”

      1. I’ll tell you why it matters. Zimmerman told the 911 operator that it appeared that the kid was on drugs. It supports his claim. And as far as I can tell NOT ONE FUCKING THING Zimmerman said has been disproved. But the media shit certainly has.

    4. For the record I agree that this is irrelevent. I’m just reporting it.

      1. Apparently Pip doesn’t.

        1. It’s relevant with respect to Zimmerman’s 911 call. Do I care if he was high? Hell no. In fact, I think I’ll get high myself right now.

          1. Do go out in a hoodie. Pip and Tulpa thinks it’s OK if you get murdered.

            1. *Don’t* rather. You are one of the few I like, yo.

    5. The latest talking point is that the shooting was “avoidable by Zimmerman,” based on a snippet from a March 13 report by Sanford police.

      1. Well, it was. He didn’t have to leave his car to play Batman.

        1. It was, but what’s the relevance? Lots of people do perfectly legal things that lead to avoidable situations which result in crimes committed by others.

          How many rapes are “avoidable” and how many times does anyone bother to point that out? How many car thefts were avoidable if people had used their garage?

        2. To the best of my recollection, he said he left the car to get a street address. That hardly constitutes “playing Batman.”

          Thi is a complex case, everyone. I would suggest we wait for all the evidence to come out before passing judgement. I would suspect the prosecution has some damning evidence that has not come out yet. Either they do, or this prosecutor should be disbarred, because everything presented in the media sure plays into Zimmerman’s favor.

        3. Which, of course, totally excuses Trayvon, A LOVER OF SKITTLES AND ICE TEA, from jumping on a dude and beating the shit out of him.

          So far, everything that has come out in the last couple of weeks has supported Zimmerman’s side of the story–the 911 call, the autopsy, and the medical report. The media did their best to turn this into a “DAS RACIS” Duke lacrosse narrative at the beginning, and now it’s going to come back and bite them in the ass. Even the Martin’s attorney, knowing that the evidence is completely stacked against his side, has resorted to just repeating the same talking points over and over again in his interviews.

      2. Why WAS Travon Martin not allowed to Stand His Ground?

        He was being pursured by an armed man in an suv.

  7. It’s sort of like extortion, but it’s not, because Fuck You, that’s why!

    1. Freedom isn’t Free! If you’re successful.

  8. House leaders let Eric Holder know that they are running out of patience for the umpteenth time.

    Are they waiting for an October surprise, or are they just a bunch of pussies that are afraid to request a special prosecutor and have him arrested for contempt of Congress?

    1. have him arrested for contempt of Congress?

      There’d be an awful lot of people in jail if they did that.

      1. You’re confusing Contempt of Congress with Contempt for Congress, the latter of which is every American’s god-given right.

    2. Who’s going to arrest him?

      Technically the House Seargent at Arms has the constitutional authority take the Capitol Police for a ride over to the DOJ building and bring him back in cuffs, but that kind of thing hasn’t been done in nearly a century.

      1. Then maybe it’s time to start doing it again. I can’t think of a better example to set than cuffing a Cabinet-level official that has lied under oath, refuses to cooperate with a legitimate investigation and gives orders to subordinates to do the same…all in an effort to cover up a gun-smuggling operation that has resulted in countless deaths designed to strengthen gun control laws which are in direct conflict with the Constitution. Can you?

        1. I would like nothing better than to see an outbreak of internecine Beltway agency warfare which forces the government to move the capitol to Las Vegas. But it’s not going to happen. If the House GOP thought the debt ceiling roadblock got them bad press, I don’t expect them to detain a member of the executive branch in the Capitol dungeon or whatever they use.

          1. Boehner’s tanning room.

          2. I don’t think they’d get bad press if they carry signs with pictures of Brian Terry or pictures of the countless kids killed in border cities by guns our DoJ illegally sold them and then allowed them to walk across the border. I think Holder in shackles being led through the streets of DC surrounded by those signs would poll pretty well with Americans who don’t approve of the crimes he committed.

            1. Dude, they’re TEAM RED. They’re going to get bad press from the mostly TEAM BLUE media no matter what they do.

            2. They might get bad ‘press’ but nobody would give a shit.

              The congressional reds are just a bunch of pussies.

  9. But Schumer and Casey said they believed that Saverin renounced his citizenship to save millions in capital gains taxes from future sales of his Facebook stock. They said his move was even more galling because Saverin came to the U.S. as a boy when his family feared kidnappers in his native Brazil.

    The very best legislation is that which is crafted to punish a certain individual. Fuck you, Schumer and Casey. As much as you wish it otherwise, it ain’t your money and you’re not allowed to do that.

    1. Since he obviously doesn’t care about the constitution, couldn’t he at least just write a Bill of Attainder so that we don’t have to make this a general law that screws everyone in perpetuity?

    2. it ain’t your money

      They should be reminded of this fact every day. Unfortunately, once they get their mitts on it at the point of a gun, it is their money.

      They get so, so pissy when proles dare to keep the spoils they earned so it stays the earner’s money.

      1. Tell me GM, in what country is the Facebook IPO occurring?

        Singapore?

        1. So you want to chase IPO’s out of the country too?

          1. If they want to be tax-free, then yeah. Let them operate from Singapore if they want.

            They might not like the speech restrictions and stuff, but hey, you have to take the good with the bad.

            1. You know he’d still get taxed in the US on his income from the IPO in Singapore if he were still a US citizen, right?

              1. I’m arguing this very point with Tulpa right now, Nocturnal Elvish Stripe.

        2. For a while, I thought you had become less of a contrarian. I see you re back with a vengeance today, though. Well done, Tulpa. Your contrarian bona fides are intact with us again.

          1. Better a contrarian than a purveyor of ad hominems.

            1. Why don’t you say what you’re trying to say, Tulpa.

              1. Fine.

                I love you sloopy, and I’m so consumed with jealousy that I can’t bring myself to get out of bed, even after I wet in it.

                1. What are you, an homosexual? NTTAWWT.

                  1. No, I’m not. Which is what’s so distrubing about it.

        3. Tell me GM, in what country is the Facebook IPO occurring?

          Tell me Tulpy Poo, who created FB so an IPO could actually be offered and create a shitload of instant million and billionaires?

          1. Actually, Zuck and Sav stole other Harvarders’ ideas in launching FB. And the likelihood of either of them ever doing anything useful to society for the rest of their lives is approximately nil.

            We’re not talking about Westinghouse or Einstein here. We’re talking about a couple of dime-a-dozen punks who happened to be in the right place at the right time to have their worthless entertainment product catch on. You might as well proffer Michael Moore as a great capitalist hero because his movies make so much money.

            1. I would say employing several thousand people that will help grow the economy would count as something “useful.”

              And if society uses their products, they are by default useful. Power of the market, Tulpa. Power of the market.

              1. The market isn’t an arbiter of usefulness, only an arbiter of desire. Desire is a good proxy but not infallible.

                1. Give me an example of the market deeming something “useful” that wasn’t really useful.

                  1. Facebook.

                    1. From The Wiki: As of May 2012, Facebook has over 900 million active users, more than half of them using mobile devices.

                      and from FB itself: Employees
                      3500+

                      Yeah, try again.

                    2. Not sure how that proves FB is useful, but OK. And again with the jobs numbers? Fedgov blows those out of the water, so I guess they’re useful too.

                2. Even if Facebook is the most useless thing on the planet, their money is still THEIR money.

            2. Even that fuckstick Michael Moore is entitled to keep the money he EARNED with his terrible movies.

            3. OOOO! Someone has him some wealth-envy! Do you have high cheekbones, Dances With Tulpa? Is white the colour of your feather?

              You might as well proffer Michael Moore as a great capitalist hero because his movies make so much money

              Strictly speaking, he is. He’s just eating himself fat and sick with denial.

            4. Tell us more about what “society” wants and needs.

              1. Tulpa’s turning occupier(WS) before our eyes.

    3. I too am dodging taxes of countries of which I am not a citizen.

  10. In my fantasy, Amash immediately strode over to Rooney and punched him in the face.

    I would not advocate such, but it is a pleasant fantasy.

    1. Punching in the face is for pussies. Real men beat their Senate slanderers with a cane.

      (By the way, I found out that Preston Brooks had some justification for what he did, as Webster was slandering his cousin in Senate speeches and using the immunity clause in the Constitution to avoid being sued for it)

      1. No, I think it because Sumner profiled him and then followed him through the Capitol.

        1. Oh yeah, it was Sumner, not Webster.

      2. The namesake of my fair city of Houston did the same.

        1. I heard she was all high on crack when she went upside Bobby Brown’s head, though.

  11. “According to Chinese law, every suspect can only be represented by two lawyers. So we have no way of intervening now. They are not allowing us to see him,” Ding said in a phone interview.

    In a country of a billion plus, those two lawyers must be swamped!

    In all seriousness, the nephew is phucked.

  12. “Americans Elect, the establishment-backed effort to groom a high-profile centrist, “problem-solving” presidential candidate, admitted defeat after…”

    the Republicans nominated Americans Elect’s best shot?

  13. Card Act rule runs afoul of stay-at-home moms.

    “I used to be CEO of a small software consulting business and am now staying at home to take care of a toddler and first grader. If you had to pay someone to do what I do now, it would cost you at least $120,000, which is a lot less than what I used to earn,” one stay-at-home mom wrote on the online petition. “BTW, it’s a 24×7, not a 40 hour per week job. Don’t you think I should be allowed to get a credit card on my own?!”

    1. Uh, no. You have no income. Too bad, so sad.

    2. “I voluntarily took on a ton of responsibilities with absolutely no pay, and now I want someone else to pay me for them.”

    3. Also, I note she lives in Vienna, VA. Every time I see that name in a news story, I know some absolute fucktardedness is going to follow.

      Just about every news story out of NoVA any more make me so glad I left.

    4. Sure, you can have a credit card. At a 40% interest rate.

      Oh wait, those are illegal. Government screwed you again, mom.

  14. Just got this email. Wot’s he talking about?

    Dear _____,

    Yesterday, The New York Times exposed a massive Republican campaign full of race-baiting, fear-mongering, and outright lying against President Obama.

    It’s disgusting, vile and a few other words I can’t print. I’m itching to fight back, hard.

    Republicans have to learn that coded racism is out of bounds. Stand with us to show they can’t get away with it.

    Tell the Republicans to stop – and take a stand against despicable race-baiting. Click here to add your name.

    Republicans think they can cower us into submission and that we won’t fight back.

    I know you’ll never back down. Stand with President Obama right away.

    Guy Cecil

    1. You use that word, race-baiting. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

      1. Yeah, flicking through the channel last night Fat Ed on MSNBC was stroking that particular talking point. I was amazed, wondering if it was projection, or if it was a pro-active defense against the (correct) claims that baiting is exactly what they’re engaged in.

        1. I’d give a months’ pay to anyone who would show Ed Schultz the Websters entry for “racism”… double if Ed actually had to read it out loud and not just ignore it like most liberals do.

          1. Four months pay if someone hit Schultz with a shovel.

            1. Luckily, I have a closet full of ramen noodles, just in case anyone takes the bet.

    2. Whatever you want it to be about. You just *know* that those filthy Republicans are guilty of something.

    3. Narratives.

    4. This talk of “coded racism” reminds me of a Thomas Sowell quote.

      It is not uncommon[…] to find references to their advesaries’ “real” reasons, which must be “unmasked”. Even where sincerity is conceded to advesaries, it is often accompanied by references to those adversaries’ “blindness,” “prejudice,” of narrow inability to transcend the status quo.

      1. *or narrow inability

        That’s what I get for not proofreading

  15. Tell the Republicans to stop – and take a stand against despicable race-baiting.

    Tell me you didn’t read this with a straight, rip roaring poker face…

    1. It’s gems like this that keep me from unsubscribing.

    1. I don’t think your link goes to where you think it goes. (I end up at http://www.funnyjunk.com/ when clicking).

      1. Hmm, it works fine for me. Let me just post the raw link:

        http://static.fjcdn.com/pictur…..332036.jpg

        1. That link doesn’t work either.

          1. Damn it, just Google image search “Ron Paul Back to the Future”.

    2. That link is fucked.

  16. Follow-up to a link I provided earlier. Looks like they have enough “facts” to close this case. And a “hero” gets a sweet-ass vacation.

      1. Jesus Christ. How many Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevards do they want?

      2. Many Georgia cities along the original route have streets named Bankhead which mark the actual route.

        Just to keep things within topic, there’s a city in Louisiana called “Tallulah”

        1. She’s from Alabama.

          I know Tallulah LA quite well.They have a crumbling art deco shopping mall (arcade) that some claim is the oldest in the country.

  17. It’s sort of like extortion, but it’s not, because …

    …renouncing citizenship is voluntary.

    Do I get a fee for helping you guys complete sentences?

    1. You don’t have to renounce citizenship to be subject to the excise and exit taxes, moron.

      Caveat Emptor

      /Completing the expat process

      1. Um, what? The current bill deals only with renouncers.

        If they’re claiming the entire tax system is extortion, rather than this bill in particular, that’s quite a different debate. And I don’t see how they’re making that claim here.

        1. The point, you purposefully obtuse nitwit, is it doesn’t matter if Saverin renounces or not: he is subject to the same taxation rates.

          The only difference is that he will not have to renew a VISA because of renunciation; I will, since I will not be renouncing US citizenship.

          1. But that’s not the “extortion” that Mr Tucille is referring to. He’s referring to the refusal of re-entry until he pays the taxes in question (which only happens if he renounces).

            1. So what? If he renounces, then he no longer pays taxes to the US, but he is still on the hook for taxes to Sling-a-pore. The point is, it’s still his money.

              Soon-to-be expats like myself will have to pay taxes on worldwide holdings and be subject to taxation to both countries. What makes this attractive is lessened tax exposure utilizing certain trusts that the government can’t touch. He is simply a lightning rod to get to those tax arrangements. Big picture here Tulpa.

              How is it extortion if Saverin chooses not to return? You assume the conclusion that Saverin wishes to do so. The world is a big place, and the USA is not the world.

              1. How is it extortion if Saverin chooses not to return?

                EXACTLY MY POINT.

                1. EXACTLY MY POINT.

                  HE STILL PAYS THE FUCKING TAXES, YOU DUNCE!

                  1. Owes, not pays.

                    1. Look down, @ 6:37, Tulpy Poo.

            2. He’s referring to the refusal of re-entry until he pays the taxes in question (which only happens if he renounces).

              Also, Tulpa, if he refuses to pay them, he can have his assets and accounts frozen until he coughs up the dough. Saverin never said he refuses to pay; they just want every blood thin dime that they can get and send a message to other rich folks who might want to flee.

              Once again, you are missing the point: either way, renounce or not, Uncle Sam will get his money.

        2. The current bill deals only with renouncers.

          He’s an easy target since he’s wealthy, just like the disingenuous “Millionaire’s Tax” suggested by Warren Boofay.

          What they wish to do here is A) Raise the rates on all expats; and B) Get access to some trust accounts that are currently untouchable under current tax law.

  18. The Washington Post painted the failure of the bloodless, “non-ideological” effort as the death-knell for third parties in general.

    anyone get the feeling that the whole purpose of Americans Elect was to diffuse the possibility of a left wing third party spoiler?

    Why the fuck would you put “not enough support” clause in your party charter?

    It damn near guarantees that it will never get off the ground.

  19. Holy fucking shit, this Saverin affair is really contributing to making my Facebook feed even worse than 2008. Naked wealth envy and the repeated use of ‘bootstraps’ and ‘privilege’, oh joy.

    I’m on the fence about whether I should just give up with some of these people (one in particular I’m thinking of has a I-shit-you-not degree in Social Justice and Human Rights and another just passed the bar and so his ego is the size of a small planet.)

    I mean, sure, if Romney wins, maybe they’ll remember again that torture, military adventurism and the drug war still suck. Maybe. Hahahaha.

    Ah, George W. Bush. Truly a uniter, not a divider.

  20. Does your cat have a drug problem?

      1. I want the last 20 seconds of my life back.

        1. Schumer would tax you five of those twenty seconds, Banjos.

  21. Bob Barr endorses Romney. Barrf.

    1. Who else would a fine Libertarian such as himself endorse?

    2. I’m still annoyed at his LP Presidential run. The first time I’ve not voted Libertarian for the position.

  22. City Administrator from my old hometown goes full retard. City Councilman calls him out on his idiocy.

  23. The Minnesota Republican Party is on the verge of a takeover by young, political-newbie libertarians pod people.

    This time, however, the GOPers will be the ones screaming.

  24. OK, Banjos and I had to go get her a new bra because her tits are getting too big. Problem is, she went from a 34DD to a 34F in the span of 9 weeks of being preggers. We had to get her a 36DDD at a big woman’s store. Problem is, she still wears a small bottom, so we can’t find her anything to match.

    I know these are first-world problems, but damn.

    1. When you are complaining that it is costing you more to have your wife’s tits bigger, that is indeed a first world problem.

    2. You’ll have to forgive me Sloop if my sympathy well for you is drier than Pelosi’s nether region. Banjos, sympathy she gets; her poor back must be uncomfortable with the increased strain.

      May I also suggest maternity stores, and if worse comes to worse, Lane Bryant?

    3. Have her go around naked. It’s gotta be cheaper.

  25. China denies many women the choice to have children. So choicers should be allying with forced-abortion foe Chen Guangcheng.

    Melinda Henneberger:

    “In the United States, much of the support for Chen has come from those who oppose abortion. But where are the abortion rights supporters? There is so much talk about the search for common ground on the abortion issue ? sincere talk, I believe. But if the brutal oppression of women robbed of any semblance of ‘choice’ isn’t something we can all agree on, I don’t know what would be.”

    http://wapo.st/LeFRva

  26. Breyer robbed again, thieves give his stuff to Pfizer (OK, not sure about that last part):

    http://fxn.ws/KGs58v

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.