A.M. Links: Anti-Romney Super PAC Star Calls President a Jerk, Chuck Schumer Rants About First Amendment, Law of the Sea Treaty Could Sink

Ed Krayewski | 7.18.2012 8:48 AM

A bomb planted by the Taliban destroyed 22 NATO tankers en route to coalition forces in northern Afghanistan.
The United Nations is set to a vote on another Syria resolution as early as today, though it doesn't look like Russia will drop its objections. Syria's defense minister, meanwhile, was killed in a suicide bombing this morning, according to the state media. Assad's brother-in-law, a feared deputy defense minister, was also killed.
A district court judge ruled against seven attorneys general suing to block a federal requirement employer coverage include contraceptives, certain sterilization procedures and abortion-inducing drugs. The judge said the plaintiffs could not show "immediate harm," (because the feds delayed when the requirement comes into effect) and so didn't have standing to sue.
A laid off steelworker hired for an anti-Romney ad by Priorities USA called President Obama a jerk and a panty waist. He also called Romney an asshole. The life-long Democrat says he won't be voting for the first time since 1971 because he's lost faith in politicians. Probably shouldn't have had any faith in them the first place. At least he got paid!
Chuck Schumer parroted George Bush's "limits to freedom," saying in a speech on the Senate floor that there were limits to the freedoms of the First Amendment and that not restricting political speech via campaign finance laws was "just so wrong."
Jim DeMint says he has enough votes in the Senate to sink the treaty of the Law of the Sea, signed in 1994 but not yet ratified by the Senate. John Kerry disagrees.
An Iranian vice president blamed the West for a drought in the southern part of the country, calling it part of a "soft war." Should we blame the Midwestern drought on the Mideast?

Don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily AM/PM updates for more content.

Reason.TV: "Sen. Tom Coburn: How Both Parties Bankrupted America"

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

NEXT: Jacob Sullum on Obamacare's Unenforceable Linchpin

Hide Comments (358)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago

Release the crack whore!
1. Restoras 13 years ago
  
  +Titan
  1. Coeus 13 years ago
    
    Hey, now. Let's stick to giving out our own props, shall we?
Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago

An Iranian vice president blamed the West for a drought in the southern part of the country, calling it part of a "soft war."

The suxH2O virus.
1. Rich 13 years ago
  
  Should we blame the Midwestern drought on the Mideast?
  
  Well, all those towels must be having *some* effect.
  1. Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago
    
    Dammit. I should have said suxwet virus. Do-over.
  2. T 13 years ago
    
    That's it, right there. Casus belli, bitches. Nuke away.
sarcasmic 13 years ago

This just in! Victoria's Secret models are hot!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/fem.....mpics.html
1. John 13 years ago
  
  I saw that. I always laugh when people say Gisselle Budchen is a VS model. No she is a former VS model. No over 30 mom,no matter how hot is competing with 19 year old women. Their standards are about as high as it gets.
sarcasmic 13 years ago

So is Ashley Tisdale!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....lines.html
1. T 13 years ago
  
  I watch to much Phineas Ferb to be completely comfortable ogling Ashley Tisdale.
sarcasmic 13 years ago

Mmmmmm. Kate Beckinsale....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....n-set.html
1. Restoras 13 years ago
  
  Mmmmm with a side of ahhhhhh....
2. Hell's Librarian 13 years ago
  
  In my mind's eye Kate will always be fetchingly attired in a leather catsuit, wielding a sword and a BFG.
  1. sarcasmic 13 years ago
    
    I kinda like the frilled bikini look, but that's just me.
    
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....-look.html
sarcasmic 13 years ago

*knock knock* "Who is it?" "Bondage delivery!" "Honey! The whips and chains finally arrived!"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/fem.....-door.html
1. Abdul 13 years ago
  
  Related, but different: Candian Judge in hot water for her nude bondage pics.
  
  Also interesting part othe story, the client screwed his lawyer for a change.
  
  http://abovethelaw.com/tag/lori-douglas/
  1. John 13 years ago
    
    Judging from the picture at the article, I really don't want to see those pictures.
2. Coeus 13 years ago
  
  Or they could just use Amazon.com like a normal person.
sarcasmic 13 years ago

Old guy with gun thwarts robbery! Take that you anti-gunners!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....-door.html
1. R C Dean 13 years ago
  
  Yawn. Posted yesterday. Try to keep up, sarc.
John 13 years ago

Whatever you think of the Bush "limits to freedom" speech. He at least gave it with the intent of trying to keep the country from being attacked by suicidal lunatics. Schumer's "limits to freedom" speech was given with the intent of saving America from the deadly scourge of corporate sponsored political ads.

Bush's speech may have been a tragedy from a Libertarian perspective. Schumer's speech is a comedy.
1. BakedPenguin 13 years ago
  
  Theoretical Marxists of the early 20th century had a utopian vision. Many of them honestly believed they could create paradise, and used that as a rationale for ending freedom.
  
  Scum like Schumer seek to end freedom so that people will eat fewer hot dogs and not use fake marijuana. They're not only authoritarian or totalitarian, they're very, very small.
  1. John 13 years ago
    
    That is a really good point. They don't even strive for Utopia anymore. In fact it is hard to figure out just what they want beyond crude access to other people's money and control of other people's lives for its own sake.
    1. Restoras 13 years ago
      
      Petty tyrants. Sic semper tyrannis.
      1. SugarFree 13 years ago
        
        Chuck Schumer: No sandwich too bland, no man-bra too big, no tyranny too small
      2. R C Dean 13 years ago
        
        Yes, the tree of liberty is looking might parched, isn't it.
        
        Chupacabra 13 years ago
        
        I'm sure Chuckles will go piss on it soon enough.
    2. ?Ex Nihilo? 13 years ago
      
      In fact it is hard to figure out just what they want beyond crude access to other people's money and control of other people's lives for its own sake.
      
      I think you hit the nail on the head right there.
    3. wareagle 13 years ago
      
      when you control people's every move, it's not really Utopia, is it.
      1. fish 13 years ago
        
        Sure it is....for them.
    4. BakedPenguin 13 years ago
      
      Even the Great Society programs were sold as a way to "end poverty". Now the programs cost 20 times as much and are only meant to provide a "safety net". The goals are getting smaller, but the bills are getting larger.
    5. Suthenboy 13 years ago
      
      From another thread to John;
      
      KPres|7.18.12 @ 8:03AM|#
      "Moran praises Iceland for being the first country in the world to outlaw lapdancing clubs for feminist rather than religious reasons."
      
      What's the difference?
      
      Suthenboy|7.18.12 @ 9:11AM|#
      Intentions...c'mon KPres get your priorities straight.
2. $park? 13 years ago
  
  IS this your version of "it's OK when my guy does it?"
  1. John 13 years ago
    
    Only if you are too stupid to understand what I am saying. Which part of "Bush's speech may have been a tragedy from a libertarianism perspective" is so hard to understand? Do I really need to spell this out for you?
    1. $park? 13 years ago
      
      Whatever you think of the Bush "limits to freedom" speech. He at least gave it with the intent of trying to keep the country from being attacked by suicidal lunatics.
      
      IOW, he wanted to limit speech for the right reasons. Because, you know, sometimes you just HAVE to limit speech. You fucking nutbag...
      1. John 13 years ago
        
        And you are an illiterate moron. Read what I wrote. The point is that the Bush speech was a tragedy in the sense that it went to far in pursuing at least a legitimate cause. The Schumer speech is a comedy because it goes to far pursuing a comically stupid and made up threat.
        
        I guess I do have to explain things to you. Shrike is just crazy. Tony is just a hack. But you seem legitimately kind of dim Sparky.
    2. Suthenboy 13 years ago
      
      I get it....and of course you are right it is a tragedy.
      
      Still, it is an argument that intentions count.
      Bush wiped his ass with the constitution, he doesnt get a pass.
3. ?Ex Nihilo? 13 years ago
  
  Bush's speech may have been a tragedy from a Libertarian constitutional perspective. Schumer's speech is a comedy.
  
  FIFY
4. Ed 13 years ago
  
  "There ought to be limits to freedom" was a 1999 comment about a web site parodying his presidential bid.
  
  http://www.rtmark.com/more/art.....shsite.htm
5. Ed 13 years ago
  
  It was a 1999 comment about a website parodying his presidential bid.
  
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....9-idx.html
  1. sloopyinca 13 years ago
    
    **pulls up La-Z-Boy**
    **gets popcorn**
    1. o3 13 years ago
      
      "please pass the popcorn sloopy"
      1. Mr. FIFY 13 years ago
        
        Buy your own popcorn, stOOOpid.
  2. John 13 years ago
    
    Thanks. I assumed it was a post 9-11. Then at least Bush was talking about liable, which really is a legitimate limit on free speech. So Bush's statement wasn't quite so much the tragedy I thought it was. But Schumer's is still a comedy.
    1. Ed 13 years ago
      
      Both comments share that same ninny tendency politicians have to stop people from saying mean things about them, and then go around spouting garbage all over the place themselves.
      1. John 13 years ago
        
        No Schumer's is worse. Bush was pissed that someone drew a picture of him snorting cocaine. That at least arguably liable since Bush was a committed teetotaler the entire time he was in politics. Schumer in contrast wants to stop all political speech he doesn't like liable or not.
        
        $park? 13 years ago
        
        *facepalm*
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        What a witty comeback there Sparky. I guess it is the best you can do considering your inherent limitations.
        
        sloopyinca 13 years ago
        
        Bush's speech was just as shitty as Schumer's, I'm sorry to say. He knew it was a caricature of him, yet he chose to have it banned rather than address it with a libel claim in a court, which would have been the correct venue.
        
        Bush could have sought redress in the court system, but he sought to ban speech he didn't like. Hell, it could be considered worse since Bush sought to ban outright expression while Schumer seeks to ban giving money by or to certain people.
        
        I'd just admit my error and move on with my day if I were you, John. If you don't, I predict you will be in a very deep hole by lunchtime.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        So wishing to limit libelous speech is the same as wishing to limit all political speech? Got it Sloopy.
        
        That is what you are saying. And I am not the one in the hole, you are. Why don't stop digging and move on. Sparky, has an excuse, he is stupid. You generally are not.
        
        sloopyinca 13 years ago
        
        The venue to attack libelous speech is the court system, John. There are already laws on the books that Bush could have sued for redress under. Calling for any new laws to limit actual expression are always bad, seeing as we've got more on the books than we should have, and surely did in 1999 as well.
        
        Bush took a personal insult and (potential) libel as an opportunity to call for more restrictions on direct [removed]i.e.: speech). He wants to limit the voices of his opponents by creating laws that would create a chilling effect on them. Schumer does exactly the same thing, only he goes after their financial support instead of the actual speech.
        
        One coin. Two sides. Etc. Etc.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        Once again, wanting to restrict libelous speech, something that already can cause the speaker to pay huge dollars in civil judgement, is the same thing as wanting to restrict all political speech.
        
        That is weapons grade stupid Sloopy. And you know it.
        
        sloopyinca 13 years ago
        
        You're intentionally missing my point, John. Bush had a venue to seek redress, but he chose to have new laws created that would further limit speech by his opponents. Schumer is doing the same thing, insomuch as he has an avenue as well...he can spend more of his own money or solicit more donations to counter those made to his opponents.
        
        Both are shitty attempts to limit speech, but in Bush's case, the limits were already codified.
        
        I have to leave for the day, but I hope this sinks in finally.
        
        $park? 13 years ago
        
        John, when the day comes that you finally decide to not go full retard on some issue probably half the commentators here will die from shock.
        
        wareagle 13 years ago
        
        if Bush's complaint was based on libel, that is actionable and not by presidential decree. This seems more a debate over degrees of badness as opposed to a good guy/bad guy case. Schumer does enough other things that make him look like a jackass.
        
        Brian D 13 years ago
        
        Libel, not liable.
        
        /grammarnazi
        
        Kaptious Kristen 13 years ago
        
        That's more than just grammar, Brian. Liable and libel are two totally different words with different meanings. You ain't no pedant for pointing that out.
        
        Azathoth!! 13 years ago
        
        Schumer's is worse.
        
        Bush made a stupid comment--but went after a specific site and person. Schumer wants a blanket restriction on ALL political speech he doesn't like.
        
        Bush is at the top of the slippery slope--Schumers' careening down.
  3. $park? 13 years ago
    
    Ed, you forgot to add, "John, you fucking incompetent retard" to the beginning of your post.
    1. John 13 years ago
      
      You are such a sad little person Sparky.
6. Drake 13 years ago
  
  Schumer is really trying to prevent the deadly scourge of incumbent members of Congress from ever losing an election.
Palin's Buttplug 13 years ago

Sarah Silverman's Indecent Proposal to Mitt's Sugar Daddy (NSFW)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....r_embedded

(she has many fans here - including me)
1. John 13 years ago
  
  You like women with huge nostrils and generally unfunny comedy routines?
  1. sarcasmic 13 years ago
    
    "Racism. Straight up."
  2. SugarFree 13 years ago
    
    Just walk away, John. There can be an end to the horror.
    1. Restoras 13 years ago
      
      Isn't that Lord Humungous' line?
      1. SugarFree 13 years ago
        
        I'm invoking the Designated Commenter Rule. Some people have said it has ruined the game, but barfman doesn't. [barf]
        
        BakedPenguin 13 years ago
        
        Also, if anyone here could rule the wasteland in his stead, it would have to be you.
        
        SugarFree 13 years ago
        
        I'm always willing to step up and help the shattered survivors picking listlessly through the radioactive rubble of this once-great country.
        
        Restoras 13 years ago
        
        I'm not sure the title 'SugarFree' commands enough presence to rule the Wasteland.
        
        $park? 13 years ago
        
        The question is, is the presence great enough to make the name something people fear making fun of? Like the jacked up guy calling himself Tiny.
        
        SugarFree 13 years ago
        
        SugarFree is just my screen name. As ruler of the wasteland, I shall be known by my true title:
        
        LORD DOOMCOCK
        
        Nephilium 13 years ago
        
        So have you staged your coup of the Grail yet?
        
        SugarFree 13 years ago
        
        "I don't get what I want, me an' these goofs're gonna get to watch a fat boy try to eat his own tits off ? an' if that ain't an evening's entertainment, I don't know what is."
        
        db 13 years ago
        
        You might get some competition from Allfather db.
        
        SugarFree 13 years ago
        
        I've got pics of you visiting the Meat Man shack.
        
        "SMEAR THE CHEESE! SAY THE NAME! SAY THE NAME!"
        
        By the way... if you haven't read Ennis' The Boys, I recommend it. He set out to "Out-Preacher Preacher" and pretty much accomplished it.
        
        T 13 years ago
        
        I still have to read Preacher, so I can wait a bit.
        
        Solanum 13 years ago
        
        The Homelander, RIP. I can honestly say I didn't see that coming. Also, Crossed is great, at least the issues written by Ennis are. Ennis is a demented genius.
        
        Lost_In_Translation 13 years ago
        
        Should be Warty...he looms large...
        
        Pro Libertate 13 years ago
        
        What does that mean? Does it mean that he weaves large amounts of cloth?
        
        The Hammer 13 years ago
        
        It does lack a certain gravitas.
        
        Azathoth!! 13 years ago
        
        For the wasteland, sure--but what about the Waistland? Puts it into a whole new context.
        
        Pro Libertate 13 years ago
        
        The DC is an abomination before man, God, and whatever atheists worship.
      2. Lord Humungus 13 years ago
        
        you rang?
  3. Ice Nine 13 years ago
    
    Well, yeah, she's all that but at least she's classy.
2. ant1sthenes 13 years ago
  
  I knew you were Matt Damon!
SugarFree 13 years ago

Jim DeMint says he has enough votes in the Senate to sink the treaty of the Law of the Sea

Jim DeMint: Soft on Pirates; Bad for America
1. Ska 13 years ago
  
  The alternative, hard on pirates, so much worse.
  1. Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago
    
    Shiver me timber!
  2. T 13 years ago
    
    I think Hard On Pirates is available somewhere for donwload, but it's NSFW.
2. sloopyinca 13 years ago
  
  BREAKING: Jim DeMint Refuses To Back Anti-Piracy laws. Women And Children Most Effected.
  1. The Hammer 13 years ago
    
    Affected.
Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago

"And the new theorists on the Supreme Court who don't believe that, I am not sure where their motivation comes from, but they are just so wrong. They are just so wrong."

I'm quite sure you have no idea where their motivation comes from, Chucktits.
1. Kwanzaa Cake 13 years ago
  
  "but they are just so wrong. They are just so wrong."
  
  ____________________
  
  Wow, eloquent argument, there, Chuck.
  1. Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago
    
    He can't define wrong but he knows wrong when he stomps his feet at it.
  2. Chupacabra 13 years ago
    
    Like, I mean, TOTALLY wrong!
    
    /Chuck
    1. Bee Tagger 13 years ago
      
      Like, I mean, all encompassingly wrong!
      
      /Mitch Hedberg
Hell's Librarian 13 years ago

A friend of mine sent me this link, and I thought I'd share the love: Courtney Stodden for your Daily Dose of Surreality
1. SugarFree 13 years ago
  
  She looks like seven miles of bad road. Has she even turned 18 yet? Imagine what 20 more years of drinking and semi-celebrity is going to do to her.
  
  (Just kidding, she'll OD long before that.)
  1. RBS 13 years ago
    
    OD, before or after she's spit out the bottom of the porn industry?
    1. SugarFree 13 years ago
      
      I see it playing out like this:
      
      Divorce
      [Playboy]
      Shoplifting arrest
      [soft core]
      Drunk driving arrest/probation violation merry-go-round
      [hard-core]
      Attempt at a post-porn reality series
      [cell phone footage of her getting poop-bukkake'd]
      OD
  2. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    You never know. Some of them are like human cockroaches, unpoisonable. Like Courtney Love. (Although she may just be a zombie.)
  3. Auric Demonocles 13 years ago
    
    Had no idea who she was, but I have to give props to Horus for marrying a 16 year old when he's 51, even if she looks that used up.
2. Pro Libertate 13 years ago
  
  Can it really all be for real? It's so weird, even for today, when people are really into weirdness.
  1. BakedPenguin 13 years ago
    
    People are really into weirdness? Books in all the supermarkets about the Bermuda Triangle, UFO's, how the Mayans invented television, that kind of thing?
Jeff 13 years ago

I hope someone introduces a bill to curb Chuck Schumer's political speech.
1. BakedPenguin 13 years ago
  
  The constitution isn't a suicide pact!
  1. SIV 13 years ago
    
    The liberty plate only comes with a big side of order. No substitutions!
John 13 years ago

http://news.investors.com/arti.....-money.htm

Not a good idea to call someone who has the money and time to sue you a "pimp" and falsely allege you knew about and support prostitution.
1. ant1sthenes 13 years ago
  
  Well, if you'd rather them spend money on lawsuits than political speech, then it's not so bad (assuming you can dodge the case at low cost).
  1. sloopyinca 13 years ago
    
    Adelson has lawyers on payroll that would be happy to take this case on and bury the asshole at the DCCC. It won't cost him a dime, but even if it does, it'll cost him a smaller percentage of his net worth than it will cost the DCCC to defend.
Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago

The Law of the Sea Treaty, which entered into force in 1994 and has been signed and ratified by 162 countries, establishes international laws governing the maritime rights of countries.

I am wary of international governing bodies.
1. Tim 13 years ago
  
  Those 162 countries just want some of what the 1% have been hoarding.
2. Auric Demonocles 13 years ago
  
  How is it still in the Senate after this long? Treaties don't expire or something if the Senate doesn't approve them?
  1. $park? 13 years ago
    
    Apparently a treaty signed by the Secretary of State will take effect unless the Senate or the President takes a dump on it. I would assume that the opposite would be true, it will sit there forever until it's given the thumbs up.
    1. Auric Demonocles 13 years ago
      
      That is backwards.
    2. sloopyinca 13 years ago
      
      Apparently a treaty signed by the Secretary of State will take effect unless the Senate or the President takes a dump on it.
      
      I'm not sure this is right, so could you cite it please? I always thought any international treaty required a supermajority of the Senate to give its consent, which the President can actually ignore if he chooses. It is then signed by the President.
      
      Where the Senate's "consent" comes into play is that it will rarely be brought to a vote unless a supermajority (2/3) either approves it or disapproves of it. But once this vote takes place, it is sent to the President to either sign or not sign.
      
      Technically, the Senate cannot hold up a treaty by voting it down. They can only hold it up by not voting to either approve it or disapprove of it.
      1. sloopyinca 13 years ago
        
        I think I'm actually wrong on that. It requires a 2/3 majority to consent to the treaty and can then be sent to the WH for the President's signature. Until it has that 2/3 majority, it can languish in the Senate.
      2. $park? 13 years ago
        
        Nope, looks like you're right. I guess that's what I get for believing something reported in the 'news'. Another bad habit to ditch I guess.
Mike M. 13 years ago

Study shows that people who are constantly online can develop mental disorders. But we already knew that thanks to our very own Mary Stack, aka "White Indian", "Palin's Buttplug", and about fifteen other user names.
1. Palin's Buttplug 13 years ago
  
  So the many conservative commenters here are immune to this? It is remarkable how little I disagree with the few real libertarians here on policy.
  1. wareagle 13 years ago
    
    really? All I see is you flacking for Obama and arguing with folks. Liberalism cannot co-exist with libertarianism.
    1. Palin's Buttplug 13 years ago
      
      How would you know? You are one of the many conservatives that post here.
      1. wareagle 13 years ago
        
        I know because you tell us. I am fiscally conservative but that is where it stops. I don't care who marries whom, what substances adults choose to ingest, or a whole lotta other things that fall under the social penumbra.
        
        Your claim dies on the basis of claiming to be both liberal and pro-gun. It's like being pro-choice and Catholic.
        
        o3 13 years ago
        
        the NRA aint the only party that gets to define pro-gun
        
        Mr. FIFY 13 years ago
        
        But... but... Obama = Barry Goldwater! shrike said so, and he's a self-proclaimed genius!
  2. Ice Nine 13 years ago
    
    Which is remarkable when one considers how disagreeable you are.
  3. Mike M. 13 years ago
    
    Well, I'm pretty sure that you're the only person here at Reason who has adopted about a dozen different personas and posts under about fifteen different handles. Definitely a sign of a serious mental disorder.
2. Rich 13 years ago
  
  Sara Thomee, lead author of the study, which was written in cursive and hand-delivered to interested parties, said there was a "central link" between computers and mental disorders.
  1. BakedPenguin 13 years ago
    
    I'm sure that it's computers causing mental illness. Because the idea that maladjusted people with traumatic backgrounds stay indoors and go online is far too fantastic.
3. $park? 13 years ago
  
  Swedish men and women between the ages of 20 and 24 for a year and found that a majority of them who constantly use a computer and mobile phones can develop stress, sleeping disorders and depression.
  
  Alright, wait one fucking minute. Maybe I'm mistaken but isn't that normal for Scandinavians?
  1. wareagle 13 years ago
    
    something about limited daylight for extended periods of time. Which may well contribute to increased computer use since it's too damn cold and dark to do other things.
    1. R C Dean 13 years ago
      
      it's too damn cold and dark to do other things.
      
      Swedish women make me think of plenty of things its never too cold and dark to do.
      1. wareagle 13 years ago
        
        agreed...then, what's with the 20-24 men?
        
        Kaptious Kristen 13 years ago
        
        Emasculated by the "Swedish Model", and I don't mean someone who gets their picture taken for a living.
        
        mr simple 13 years ago
        
        Is that the country where they make men sit down when they piss?
  2. PS 13 years ago
    
    A Swedish rather anti-American friend of mine said that that was a vicious rumor spread by the CIA to discredit Sweden in the seventies because it was against the Vietnam war.
    
    Yes, he was serious.
    1. Brett L 13 years ago
      
      Well, no crazy in that Swede.
Bardas Phocas 13 years ago

"Panty waist" Haha. I always liked that insult. I have no idea what it means but it's got 'pansy' 'panties' 'waste' all together.
1. Hell's Librarian 13 years ago
  
  It's a good word. I also like "milquetoast."
2. SugarFree 13 years ago
  
  pantywaist
  
  n.
  1. A child's undergarment consisting of a shirt and pants buttoned together at the waist.
  
  2. Slang A boy or man who is considered weak or effeminate.
  
  Interesting. I didn't know it was a real thing first.
  1. ant1sthenes 13 years ago
    
    Why didn't he just call him a fag?
    1. T 13 years ago
      
      Didn't was to seem uncultured. Pantywaist is the classy way to call someone a fag.
      1. $park? 13 years ago
        
        That's gay.
    2. db 13 years ago
      
      John Wayne was a pantywaist.
      1. Hell's Librarian 13 years ago
        
        Along those lines, my stepmom seriously thinks Marshall Matt Dillon is/was gay. I now watch Gunsmoke through a whole new lens. Thanks Mom!
Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago

"Proponents of the Law of the Sea Treaty aspire to admirable goals, including codifying the U.S. Navy's navigational rights and defining American economic interests in valuable offshore resources," the senators wrote. "But the treaty's terms reach well beyond those good intentions."

Oh, so all of the sudden professed good intentions aren't enough to carry legislation to fruition? What the hell has the United States Senate become?
1. Restoras 13 years ago
  
  Please, continue, you were saying something about best intentions. What's the matter? Oh, you were finished! Well, allow me to retort!
2. DJF 13 years ago
  
  """"including codifying the U.S. Navy's navigational rights""'
  
  I thought the US Navy had codified their navigational rights earlier this week by shooting up a fishing boat that came too close?
  1. T 13 years ago
    
    Exactly. I thought the US Navy's navigational rights were established by ultima ratio regum.
sarcasmic 13 years ago

Anyone heard of Firesign Theatre?

Heard this bit on the college radio station on the drive this morning, a song called What Makes America Great.

It's candied apples and ponies with dapples
you can ride all day!
It's girls with pimples
And cripples with dimples
that just wont go away !
Its spics and wops and niggers and kikes
with noses as long as your arm!
Its micks and chinks and gooks and geeks
and honkies
(Honk! Honk!)
who never left the farm !

I couldn't stop laughing.
1. Rich 13 years ago
  
  "And you can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right. So wake up! (slap and baby crying) And take a look at your only logical choice. Me."
  
  They are due for a resurgence.
$park? 13 years ago

The headline to end them all: Cyborg gets beat up at French McDonald's.

Human cyborg and University of Toronto Professor Steve Mann claims he was brutalized and kicked out of a Paris McDonald's earlier this month after employees objected to his headset and its ability to record photos and videos of his experiences.
1. Tim 13 years ago
  
  Looks like he shoulda added at least one gatling gun to the camera and mike set up.
2. Abdul 13 years ago
  
  androidism. the last acceptable prejudice.
3. Lost_In_Translation 13 years ago
  
  someone thought they had a borg on their hands?
  1. sloopyinca 13 years ago
    
    someone thought they had a borg on their hands?
    
    I would support them beating Hugh to death, but if it was Locutus, I hope he got out of there relatively unscathed.
    1. nicole 13 years ago
      
      Seriously, fuck Hugh.
4. PS 13 years ago
  
  It wasn't because he tried to order a Quarter Pounder, forgetting they use the metric system?
5. ant1sthenes 13 years ago
  
  From cop-threads, we know that potentially recording someone constitutes interfering with the performance of their duties.
  
  Makes sense. If an employee got caught jacking it into the mayo, someone might get -- well, not fired, it's France. Raped, maybe?
  1. sloopyinca 13 years ago
    
    jacking it into the mayo,
    
    Sounds like a new business opportunity for some hipster fuckheads in Brooklyn.
  2. Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago
    
    Oh wait, I had something good for this... the... Pita Predator.
6. Kaptious Kristen 13 years ago
  
  Your droids - they'll have to wait outside. We don't serve their kind.
7. Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago
  
  Unless it could also record smells, what did the French care?
8. Azathoth!! 13 years ago
  
  And apparently the cyborg pissed itself. Who built this thing? Presented a doctor's note? Really? What is this, the Wimpbot 1998?
  
  This thing seriously needs an upgrade
wef 13 years ago

Just when is it appropriate to call someone like Schumer a fascist?

etiquette experts?
1. Tim 13 years ago
  
  When is it not?
2. Restoras 13 years ago
  
  If it looks like a duck...
3. sloopyinca 13 years ago
  
  Whenever you are awake.
  1. Hyperion 13 years ago
    
    It's totally legit even if you say it when you're asleep.
John 13 years ago

Arpaio: Obama birth record 'definitely fraudulent'

http://news.yahoo.com/arpaio-o.....tml?_esi=1

I find the birther stuff oddly curious. Didn't the Obama people produce the newspaper announcement of his birth? I would love to see it be true for the LUTZ factor if nothing else. But why don't these people let it go?
1. Bee Tagger 13 years ago
  
  I suspect Sheriff Joe knows the direction his fame and post-sheriff career lie. That might explain a great portion of why he's doing what he's doing.
2. SugarFree 13 years ago
  
  If Obama is really not an America and that disqualifies him to be president it allows them to get rid of a president they hate without having to recognize that the political system that let him become president is the problem, thereby preserving their faith in the system.
  
  In a twisted sort of way, all the birthers are really trying to do is hold back the political nihilism that leads to libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism.
  1. John 13 years ago
    
    That is interesting way to put it. It is the flip side of the truthers. The Truthers can't accept that any politically correct group could ever really be a threat to the country. So they hold on to the belief that it was really the government who did it in order to keep from facing that fact.
    
    I think your explanation is probably about as good as any I have heard.
    1. Emmerson Biggins 13 years ago
      
      I think you are slightly mis-applying SF's insightful analysis. I don't think most Truthers perceive "Al Qaeda" as "politically correct", in either the earnest or facetious sense of the phrase. Maybe the left-wing community-organizin types do, but not the Alex Jones wing of trutherism.
      
      Actually I think "Trutherism", if it is in the same category at all, is more of a mental block from making the reverse transition. From nihilistic/anarcho/libertarianism back into the "upright citizen" realm.
      
      I guess it's also why I don't really pity or hate Truthers. Even if they are wrong about this particular set of circumstances, if they can only support one set of Bayesian priors at a time in their heads, I think they and we are still better off assuming that the government is a bunch of lying sacks of crap up to no good.
  2. VG Zaytsev 13 years ago
    
    Or more likely some version of socialism.
    1. Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago
      
      At least it's an ethos.
  3. Emmerson Biggins 13 years ago
    
    That is a very interesting analysis. Never thought of it that way. I think same thing applies to the people who say "you don't have to pay taxes cause you aren't a CORPARASHUN man. You are sovereign citizen". Also the people who say "see that yellow fringe on the flag, that means it's a naval court, so they don't have jursidiction over you as long as you aren't at sea".
    
    Now I actually kind of pity those people.
3. R C Dean 13 years ago
  
  Call me a crackpot, but I've seen enough credible-looking analysis of that PDF to make me seriously wonder if its legit.
  
  As I recall, the first one released had all kinds of edit files attached to it, there's hinky layers, stuff you wouldn't expect on a straight scan.
  
  And, of course, his SocSec number is hinky, also. Could be an innocent explanation, of course, but the adamant refusal to release his college records makes me think he was a naughty boy when he was applying for aid/admission, and claimed to be a foreign student of some kind.
  
  We'll never know, of course, and it stands primarily as an indictment of our supine media and our complete disregard of the Constitution. Like we needed more proof of that.
  1. John 13 years ago
    
    I would bet good money that Obama claimed to be foreign born in college. I still think he was born in Hawaii. But I absolutely believe he would and did pull a Lizzie Warren and road the affirmative action train.
  2. sloopyinca 13 years ago
    
    I'll happily raise my hand and self-identify as a birther. No way in hell is that form he released (well, he released, pulled and then re-released i with many changes) legit. There are font differences, the SSN issue, the verbiage in parts of it, the margin errors, the way it was typed and the halos around the letters in the scan.
    
    I don't know if he was born in Hawai'i, Kenya, Washington or sprung forth from Satan's butthole. But I do know that birth certificate is about as real as Dirk Diggler's cock.
    1. John 13 years ago
      
      The truth always comes out eventually sloopy. If it does turn out he was born in Kenya, I will laugh my ass off. It will most likely come out long after he has left office. But it will come out.
      1. sloopyinca 13 years ago
        
        Agreed. It will come out when Obama, tired of not ruling over people, declares himself eligible to be the head of state of another nation by coming out and saying he "just found out through discovering some old family records" that he was actually born overseas.
        
        He'll blame his white grandmother and say it was to hide his blackness or something. Then, he'll try to start his socialist utopia somewhere else.
        
        Holy shit. I was trying to be over the top, but this actually seems more than plausible.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        He will say it to get African support of his bid to be head of the UN.
    2. SFC B 13 years ago
      
      I thought the SSN issue was a typo. SOmething like the difference between the zipcode for Honolulu Hawaii, and a zip code in Danbury CT, were one number off.
  3. Hell's Librarian 13 years ago
    
    college records makes me think he was a naughty boy when he was applying for aid/admission, and claimed to be a foreign student of some kind.
    
    That's what I think. And also that his pulling "executive privilege" on the FF documents is to conceal that either he and/or Holder knew about what was going on as it unfolded. Basically, he's a lying liar who lies, but we all knew that.
    1. sloopyinca 13 years ago
      
      Yeah, but there's a difference in a "lying liar that lies" and a "lying liar that covers up a criminal enterprise that smuggles weapons into a sovereign nation and results in hundreds of deaths on both sides of the border".
  4. wareagle 13 years ago
    
    has anyone ever seen Obama's passport?
    
    I thought citizenship could be claimed if a parent was a US citizen, and no one argues that his mother was not such. Secondary conspiracy would be that Frank Marshall Davis is more likely the daddy than Barrack Sr, making citizenship doubly done. Look at side by side pics; Obama looks far more like one than the other. Proves nothing but neither does Sheriff Joe.
    1. nicole 13 years ago
      
      I thought citizenship could be claimed if a parent was a US citizen, and no one argues that his mother was not such.
      
      Yeah--even if he was born overseas, he would still have been a "natural-born citizen." So I just don't get it.
SIV 13 years ago

With both major party candidates being androids has anyone noticed if Gay Jay is clutching a teddy bear?
1. BakedPenguin 13 years ago
  
  Barry Hit and Run Excene?
  1. EDG reppin' LBC 13 years ago
    
    Johnny Hit and Run Pauline
Longtorso 13 years ago

Evangelical Christian vermin at it again:

Catching Hell for Hiring a Muslim
...The new hire, Samar Ali, is a Tennessee native, Vanderbilt law graduate, a recent White House Fellow, a former associate attorney at Hogan Lovells and has one of the most impressive resumes of international humanitarian service I've ever seen.

She's also Muslim.

As a result, several county Republican groups and a Tea Party group went berserk and began churning out petitions and resolutions calling for Ali to step down and for Haslam to receive "appropriate action."...
1. John 13 years ago
  
  http://blogs.tennessean.com/po.....more-17554
  
  Here is the petition. Their biggest bitch seems to be that she is a Democrat.
2. wareagle 13 years ago
  
  this is why socon often = liberal.
3. o3 13 years ago
  
  ali should obviously gun them down und bomb the tea party HQ...then snack on royal crown and moon pies!
  1. $park? 13 years ago
    
    Looks to me like o3 and anon-bot are moving ever closer to singularity.
    1. Hell's Librarian 13 years ago
      
      No way. Anon-bot is cheerful and sometimes amusing.
      1. T 13 years ago
        
        In his defense, o3 occasionally gets a good line in. But the signal to noise ratio is still pretty goddamned high.
4. R C Dean 13 years ago
  
  one of the most impressive resumes of international humanitarian service I've ever seen
  
  I'd want some details. Most NGOs that claim to be doing this are suppurating nests of crypto-Marxist tranzi corruption, don't forget.
  1. wareagle 13 years ago
    
    wasn't Ray LaHood's son involved in such a group that found itself in hot water in Egypt?
John 13 years ago

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/physi.....48754.html

Physical inactivity kills millions a year. How long before government mandated morning PT?
1. sarcasmic 13 years ago
  
  It's not a mandate, it's a tax on inactivity!
  
  Exercise a certain amount each day or pay a tax!
2. wareagle 13 years ago
  
  actually, govt stopped mandating it some years back when schools got rid of PE.
  1. o3 13 years ago
    
    which was a mistake...fattie
  2. Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
    
    Wasn't that due in part to the observation that PE activities encouraged competitive behavior and We Just Can't Have That?
3. Tim 13 years ago
  
  ?"Winston had disliked her from the very first moment of seeing her. He knew the reason. It was because of the atmosphere of hockey-fields and cold baths and community hikes and general clean-mindedness which she managed to carry about her. He disliked nearly all woman, and especially the young and pretty ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy."
  1. John 13 years ago
    
    Orwell saw the coming of modern feminists as well?
    1. tarran 13 years ago
      
      It's not like human nature changes much. Carrie Nation would have fit right into the modern feminist movement ahd she been born 140 years later.
      1. Hyperion 13 years ago
        
        She would be a US senator, or head of the DEA.
    2. ant1sthenes 13 years ago
      
      Orwell saw a lot of shit coming. MAD, for example. I still don't get how the hell he could favor even the less awful form of socialism, but I'll give him a pass on it.
      1. John 13 years ago
        
        He really did. That passage if fucking eery when you compare it to modern hard left feminists.
        
        Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
        
        Not to mention the part about young people in general being the most devoted adherents to the authoritarian state.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        That was true in Orwells time. The youth lapped up Nazism and Communism both.
4. Lost_In_Translation 13 years ago
  
  calesthenics for all!!
5. Hyperion 13 years ago
  
  I can just see us all in our gray commie uniforms doing jumping jacks every morning, in front of the TV with mandatory built in webcam so that a bureuacrat can watch and make sure we're doing the repititions correctly. After that we will have 10 minutes to eat our government rationed tofurkey pudding for breakfast.
Longtorso 13 years ago

Man with world's largest penis frisked by TSA
1. Bee Tagger 13 years ago
  
  Finally, a counterpart to the Female Body Inspector t-shirts: Testicle Size Analyzer.
2. Rich 13 years ago
  
  suspicious bulge
  
  Nice band name.
3. Longtorso 13 years ago
  
  No comments? Nothing? Nobody even wanting to claim credit for the world's largest penis?
  
  I am teh disappoint. All of you are dead to me.
  1. sarcasmic 13 years ago
    
    You're a day late. This was in yesterday's links.
    1. sloopyinca 13 years ago
      
      Besides, I thought dunphy had already told us he had the biggest penis in the world, which is what kept him off of the Olympic Games curling team 2 years a
      1. Tim 13 years ago
        
        EH?
    2. sloopyinca 13 years ago
      
      Besides, I thought dunphy had already told us he had the biggest penis in the world, which is what kept him off of the Olympic Games curling team 2 years ago.
      1. fish 13 years ago
        
        No Sloop...Dunphy told us he was the worlds biggest penis.....
        
        sloopyinca 13 years ago
        
        Well then he and I finally agree on something.
  2. Kaptious Kristen 13 years ago
    
    I had some comments about this.....yesterday!
Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago

A laid off steelworker hired for an anti-Romney ad by Priorities USA called President Obama a jerk and a panty waist. He also called Romney an asshole.

Life is about to become very difficult for that lifelong Democrat. At least one of those offended parties has shown no reluctance to get vindictive.
1. Lost_In_Translation 13 years ago
  
  where is Joe the Plumber nowadays anyway?
  1. sloopyinca 13 years ago
    
    I thought he was running for the HoR this year.
    1. sloopyinca 13 years ago
      
      In fact, he was in the news just yesterday.
db 13 years ago

Why is Hans Gruber underwater?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_4TcO....._edit2.JPG
1. Night Elf Mohawk 13 years ago
  
  He bought at the top of the market.
Archduke PantsFan 13 years ago

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hocke.....harge.html
Don't read the comments. They are bringing the torches and pitchforks are out for this guy
1. SugarFree 13 years ago
  
  I'm sure he just had a seizure. Or took some Ambien.
2. sloopyinca 13 years ago
  
  Wow. Read the article. He actually consented to the test, went in and pleaded guilty, accepted the punishment he was given and then apologized for his own poor judgement.
  
  If only our politicians would act this way when they do something stupid.
John 13 years ago

http://cnsnews.com/news/articl.....ulus-money

The country is in the best of hands

DOE unable to locate $500,000 worth of equipment bought with stimulus money.
1. Bee Tagger 13 years ago
  
  Perfect, it'll be added stimulus when they buy $500,000 more.
2. VG Zaytsev 13 years ago
  
  The DOE said it would not be "appropriate" to release the name of stimulus-money recipient where the $500,000 worth of equipment could not be located.
  
  And this case of corruption will be completely ignored by the legacy media as the pursue the much more important story regarding just exactly who did Mitt work for 13 years ago.
Lord Humungus 13 years ago

Jenkins: The Campaign's Stupid Moment
In 'defining Romney,' Obama may be finally defining himself for a mystified electorate.
http://online.wsj.com/article/.....on_LEADTop

Most elections end up being relatively sensible arguments about getting, keeping or restoring prosperity. In a modern welfare state, another top-of-mind priority also jostles for a sizeable number of voters: hands off my benefits!

These perhaps should be two sides of the same coin. In the long run, after all, there can be no benefits without prosperity. But look at Europe: It becomes worrisomely clear that welfare states can devolve into lose-lose fights over a stagnant or shrinking pie. See Greece: Big government also has a way of spawning big corruption.

So maybe, when the stupid moment passes, the two campaigns can take up the question likely to be on every lip in any case given the evening news: Whether America is to become more like Europe.
John 13 years ago

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/imu.....-an-idiot/

Don Imus destroys hack reporter who refused to believe a story just because the evil drudge had linked to the Reuters report.
1. Tim 13 years ago
  
  Imus is still alive? Are you sure?
  1. fish 13 years ago
    
    Imus is still alive? Are you sure?
    
    Probably not. They move his mouth parts and limbs in marionette fashion so the show can stay on the air.
    
    You know...like the Quadaffi (Khadaffi, Quadafi...whatever) corpse.
2. VG Zaytsev 13 years ago
  
  Demonstrating once again the idiocy of 'journalists'.
  
  Is there a stupider group of people in America today? I think they've finally beat out teachers in that category.
  1. John 13 years ago
    
    If there is I can't think of one. I honestly think she had no idea that Matt Drudge doesn't write anything and just links to other news sources. Talk about living in a bubble.
    1. Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
      
      Right. About the only thing Drudge actually adds to the links are the sarcastic headline jabs, and even then he's pretty judicious. Usually, simply quoting the decadent classes' actual words is far more devastating than any Jon Stewart-like mugging or outraged redundancy.
  2. R C Dean 13 years ago
    
    You'd think they'd love him, since he drives massive traffic to their work.
    1. John 13 years ago
      
      They hate him because he takes away their power to set the agenda and decide what is news and what is not. They love power a lot more than they love money.
      1. Tulpa the White 13 years ago
        
        This, especially since the money they get from the extra traffic is negligible compared to the money they lose not having a monopoly on news reporting.
3. Abdul 13 years ago
  
  It seems like a thousand years ago when he was more evil than a child molesting hitler for saying that a female basketball team looked like "nappy headed ho's."
  1. Bee Tagger 13 years ago
    
    You love Hitler so much that you find it evil when a child molests him?
    1. Abdul 13 years ago
      
      Everybody's bikini area should be a safe place.
      
      Even Hitler's.
      1. Entropy Void 13 years ago
        
        You know who else only had one testicle?
        
        gagster 13 years ago
        
        The average human only has one testicle.
Lord Humungus 13 years ago

How Much Has Citizens United Changed the Political Game?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07.....nted=1hp;

The reason for this exponential leap in political spending, if you talk to most Democrats or read most news reports, comes down to two words: Citizens United. The term is shorthand for a Supreme Court decision that gave corporations much of the same right to political speech as individuals have, thus removing virtually any restriction on corporate money in politics. The oft-repeated narrative of 2012 goes like this: Citizens United unleashed a torrent of money from businesses and the multimillionaires who run them, and as a result we are now seeing the corporate takeover of American politics.

As a matter of political strategy, this is a useful story to tell, appealing to liberals and independent voters who aren't necessarily enthusiastic about the administration but who are concerned about societal inequality, which is why President Obama has made it a rallying cry almost from the moment the Citizens United ruling was made. But if you're trying to understand what's really going on with politics and money, the accepted narrative around Citizens United is, at best, overly simplistic. And in some respects, it's just plain wrong.
1. Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
  
  I love how liberals since Citizens United act as if the corporate capture of the political process had been limited up until the decision passed. Even McCain-Feingold didn't do anything except create opportunities for alternative corporate money funnels.
  
  Their biggest problem is that they believe they can end a process that's been going on since Crassus.
Lord Humungus 13 years ago

Podhoretz: The Biggest Mistake of Campaign 2012
http://www.commentarymagazine......aign-2012/
1. fish 13 years ago
  
  Obamas "Macaca" moment!
2. John 13 years ago
  
  I think this one is going to hurt. The liberals on Facebook are going insane trying to spin it. They protest a bit too much.
  1. Ice Nine 13 years ago
    
    Only if Romney hammers the hell out of it - which I wouldn't count on.
    1. Tim 13 years ago
      
      Wouldn't be cricket old man.
    2. John 13 years ago
      
      Amazingly enough, he actually is. His speech in Pennsylvania yesterday killed Obama on this issue. It was actually a pretty good speech.
      
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/....._blog.html
      1. Ice Nine 13 years ago
        
        Yesterday, right. He needs to do it daily through Nov 5. He won't.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        I bet he does. The one thing about Romney is that he is patient and persistent. He really is the tortoise of political candidates. Once he gets on a theme he doesn't stop usually.
  2. Hyperion 13 years ago
    
    The sad part, is, like I have already said, it's not going to hurt him one bit. That is why we are doomed as a nation. Anyone makes a comment like that and still have a majority of the population vote for him... we are already beyond the level of stupidity in that movie 'Idiocracy'.
    
    Obama can go on national TV and put kitties in a blender, hit liquify, and then drink the mess, and it will not change his voter base by one vote.
    1. wareagle 13 years ago
      
      this is the result of generational indoctrination. Oh, sure; there are occasional pockets of young folks discovering curious concepts like liberty but the combination of mind-numbed publicly-educated drones + older folks firmly on the govt tit adds up to a big chunk of the population.
      
      People will talk a good game about the perils of the debt and other horribles, but they will first cling to the free pony they are getting.
      1. Hyperion 13 years ago
        
        Yes, it is exactly that. And the decision by Roberts has emboldened the progressives to the point that they will totally abandon any further pretensions about what they really are. Expect to see more comments spewing from the O, that are far more outrageous than that one, especially after he wins re-election.
      2. Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
        
        Democrats haven't really changed all that much in philosophy from their slave-owning forebears 160 years ago--they're still claiming that dependance on a benevolent overseer is a "positive good." The only thing that's really changed is the scale of the institution that they are promoting.
        
        Hyperion 13 years ago
        
        I am convinced that the ultimate goal of both sides of the one party, is the establishment of a world empire ruled by the UN in combination with the US military, where all choice is eliminated and there can be no escape from their tyranny.
        
        There would be 2 distinct classes in this system, the elite ruling class and the rest of us, the peasants. Call this conspiracy theory if you want, but I don't think it is.
  3. The Hammer 13 years ago
    
    Facebook? Huffington Post has already put out several articles calling anyone who even mentions it stupid and evil because "out of context!!!!!!" They have all ignored the fact that the context was horrible.
3. ?Ex Nihilo? 13 years ago
  
  "If you've got a business, you didn't build that," Obama said. "Somebody else made that happen."
  
  If R has a brain in his head, he will hang this around O's neck and never let anyone forget it.
  1. BakedPenguin 13 years ago
    
    Right? "You didn't build it - why? Because your business also paid taxes to fund roads and schools?" The moron president just insulted everyone who has ever created a business. Also, everyone whose view of human society does not correspond with a beehive.
    
    It would be great to see ads with "THIS IS WHAT OBAMA ACTUALLY BELIEVES" at the bottom.
    1. Kaptious Kristen 13 years ago
      
      What can a professional "community organizer" possibly know about creating a successful (or for that matter, an unsuccessful) business? This Obama is one of the most bubble-dwelling, elitist Presidents we have ever seen. It's absolutely nuts that anyone outside DC (which is itself full of bubble-dwellers) would even consider voting for the asshole.
      1. John 13 years ago
        
        Kristen his pants were perfectly creased. And his speeches sent a thrill up people's legs. And damn it they had always dreamed of voting for a black man for President.
        
        I have never met a single Obama voter who voted for him for any reason beyond blind partisanship or something completely shallow and stupid.
      2. wareagle 13 years ago
        
        bubble-dwelling but also willing to shake down those same evil filthy putrid business folks for every dime possible. And too many are willing to pony up because a power-grabbing federal govt makes it that much more difficult for competitors.
      3. The Hammer 13 years ago
        
        Well you couldn't possibly have built a successful business without a properly organized community!
    2. Emmerson Biggins 13 years ago
      
      +1.
      
      Red letters. Flashing. I'd love to see that.
  2. Hyperion 13 years ago
    
    Romney appears to be brain dead. He has no personality at all, and his only strategy seems to be, make sure the hair is perfect and smile at the camera. He won't use this at all. He just does nothing.
    1. wareagle 13 years ago
      
      but he has been using and, even better, someone in the Camp Mitt has released the Sununu. Finally, a guy willing to call bullshit on bullshit.
    2. John 13 years ago
      
      I thought his speech in Pennsylvania was pretty good. How is he brain dead? You don't agree with him on a lot of things. That is your right. And hell you are probably right in some cases. But that doesn't make him brain dead
      
      And fuck personality. What a stupid and shallow way to judge a politician. Barney Frank has a great and charming personality. Last I looked his having power didn't work out so well.
      1. Hyperion 13 years ago
        
        It's a proper way to judge him, John, due to the fact that voters seem to be so hung up on this charisma thing. Romney is just so flat. I am not judging him on that, I could care less. I care about his policies, which will not look much different than Obamas after he is elected. If he is elected (which he will not be), except that he will be more aggressive when it comes to foreign policy.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        His domestic policies are different. He would work with Congress and do at least a little something about spending. He sure wouldn't be sending guns to Mexico or wasting billions on green energy programs or engaging in the kind of blatent corruption Obama has.
        
        And the "more aggressive foreign policy" dog won't hunt. Obama has put us on a track towards war with Iran. And as a Democrat, Obama has no worries about there being an anti-war movement. Romeny would be more restrained than a second term Obama because he would actually have an opposition when it comes to war.
        
        The problem is there is that Romney is not radical enough. But he is most certainly different than Obama. I don't' know why Libertarians insist on telling themselves that lie.
        
        Hyperion 13 years ago
        
        Valid points, but I think you will be very disappointed in Romney if he is elected, which I don't see happening, because reality will not quite sync up with what you just wrote. His rhetoric will sync with what you just said, but what he will actually do, will expand the size and power of the federal government in one form or another.
        
        And I think Romney believes that his base is SoCons and NeoCons, otherwise they would have voted for RP, so he will be more aggressive on foreign policy to please his base. Sure, the leftists hypocrites will scream about him doing the exact same things that Obama did, but they will be ignored. The wars will continue.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        Romney is going to win. I can't see anything changing between now and the election. And Obama is an incumbent below 50%. Below 50% incumbents nearly always lose. And these polls are ones that are totally skewed Democrat. In reality, Romney is 2 to 3 points above what the polls are saying. And the polls are a dead heat right now.
        
        I have said this all along, the election is always a mandate on the incumbent. The challenger is incidental. Obama is going to lose.
        
        And I would not be disappointed in Romney since I wouldn't expect that much of him. But the chances are very high that Obama is going to lose and the Republicans will have the House and 52 or so seats in the Senate.
        
        nicole 13 years ago
        
        I have said this all along, the election is always a mandate on the incumbent. The challenger is incidental.
        
        Do you think this held in 2004? Was that really a mandate that we still secretly loved Bush? Or a problem of Kerry being so awful? It's hard for me to think of it as the former rather than the latter, but I don't know. I wasn't even living in the country at the time.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        Nicole,
        
        The Democrats made 2004 a mandate on Bush's foreign policy. They invited Micheal Moore to the convention and made ending the Iraq war the face of their party.
        
        And don't forget, the economy was good in 2004. And both Iraq and Afghanistan were going well. Iraq didn't get hard until 2006. Go back and look. Bush's poll numbers were good right up until Katrina.
        
        In the end Bush was reasonably popular, the economy was good, the wars seemed to be going well, so Bush won. Would Bush have beat Kerry in 2006 after the Iraq war got hard and Katrina? Hell no.
        
        Hyperion 13 years ago
        
        It was just the fact that Kerry looks exactly like Heat Misers evil twin that sunk his campaign. Bush didn't really need to do anything.
        
        Snow Miser Kerry
        
        Hyperion 13 years ago
        
        I am torn about what I hope will happen in this election, as far as POTUS is concerned. Of course I hope the GOP takes the Senate and keeps the house, just because what they do will not be quite as destructive as what the Dems will do. But, being redundant, they WILL expand the size and power of the federal government in one way or the other.
        
        I want Gary Johnson to be president, will vote for him, but know it cannot happen. Therefore, I am really torn to the point of not even thinking much about it anymore, whether I want Romney or Obama to win.
        
        I don't like Romney, but compared to my loathing of Obama, he looks pretty good. Still, I don't know if it would be better to see Obama elected and watch him go completely off the deep end if the GOP actually did control both houses, or see Romney win so that there is no further opportunity for Obama to appoint more far left loonies to prominent positions.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        I am torn as well Hyperion. I am not a Romney fan. Some days I think Obama is so bad that he just has to lose no matter what to get him out of there. Other days I think no, let him have another term and take all of the blame for his incompetence. Lets let the country finally see what these people are about.
        
        I am not sure which to hope for.
4. Bee Tagger 13 years ago
  
  I honestly am sympathetic to the argument that the "that" in "Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business ? you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen." referred to the roads and bridges. Listening to the audio, rather than reading the transcript, makes it very plausible. However, the similarity of the speech to Elizabeth Warren's oft-facebooked quotes, the very poor wording, and the gist of the rest of the speech render it nearly irrelevant. So, the interesting thing is and will be: who among Obama's supporters will go with the "he misspoke!" (or more likely, "you misunderstand!") defense and which ones will defend his words as they're being interpreted.
  1. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    So you blame TOTUS for this?
    1. Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago
      
      Well, you sure as hell can't blame the president himself.
    2. VG Zaytsev 13 years ago
      
      That damn machine is always trying to make Obama look bad.
    3. Bee Tagger 13 years ago
      
      I blame the pranksters from Romney's camp who clearly hacked TOTUS!
      1. The Hammer 13 years ago
        
        What's TOTUS?
        
        tarran 13 years ago
        
        The Teleprompter Of The United States. The TOTUS accompanies the POTUS on his travels and is an indispensable member of his team.
  2. John 13 years ago
    
    The problem is that even if you give him the benefit of the doubt, the overall meaning is still the same. Obama is saying
    
    1. You have a business
    2. Your business wouldn't be there if not for all of the goodies the state provides
    3. You didn't build those goodies
    
    The only conclusion to make from that is you effectively didn't build your business and the government has a right to however much of it it wants.
  3. BakedPenguin 13 years ago
    
    So the president doesn't understand that taxes pay for infrastructure? And this is better?
    1. R C Dean 13 years ago
      
      So the president doesn't understand that taxes pay for infrastructure?
      
      I'm sure he thinks infrastructure is paid for with debt.
      
      And he's not exactly wrong about that, either.
      1. Tulpa the White 13 years ago
        
        Debt is paid for by....???
        
        ant1sthenes 13 years ago
        
        Inflation.
    2. Bee Tagger 13 years ago
      
      No, not better. There is no good to be found in there unless he were to wake up this morning and announce that he's a voluntaryist and he was just talking about people cooperating peacefully in the market.
  4. ant1sthenes 13 years ago
    
    The problem for Obama politically is that it was entirely plausible for him to say something like that. He has no problem alienating the shit out of people (bitter clingers, etc.), and he and his fellow travelers do truly believe that their technocratic caste is not only indispensable, but more important than any other group.
  5. R C Dean 13 years ago
    
    Even that reading completely overlooks the fact that successful businesses did, in fact, fund those roads and bridges via their taxes.
    1. # 13 years ago
      
      This is the part i don;t get why people don't point out more. The dems say this as if businesses aren't already paying for the roads, schools, police and so on that the government gives them.
  6. Kaptious Kristen 13 years ago
    
    They did build "that". They paid taxes, just like everyone else. So it hardly matters what "that" refers to, he's wrong either way.
  7. T 13 years ago
    
    Somebody was on here yesterday trying to peddle that line. I'm not sympathetic. In context, the meaning is clear: you wouldn't have a business but for government.
    1. Bee Tagger 13 years ago
      
      Yes, it's a pedantic argument to be sure. The overall theme of the speech is still there, just the soundbite isn't as tidy as you'd like. It provides an out for pundits who want to dismiss Romney's (and others') criticisms.
  8. Tulpa the White 13 years ago
    
    If they want to limit government to roads and bridges and sewers, I'll praise that government plenty.
  9. alex griggs 13 years ago
    
    Anyone familiar with the English language will understand that "that" refers to the noun before it -- "business." If he had said "those" it would be different because it would refer to the plural nouns before it -- "roads and bridges." So I can think of two options here: 1) he meant what he said or 2) he has bad speechwriters and isn't smart enough or strong enough to correct them. Neither is flattering.
5. VG Zaytsev 13 years ago
  
  http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the.....7#48203597
  
  It's official, Van Jones admits to being a fascist.
  
  Says It's deeply patriotic to point out that America's government is a partner to business
  
  Money quote starts at 3:00
  1. Scruffy Nerfherder 13 years ago
    
    He probably doesn't understand what he said. He's a corporatist and an idiot.
  2. ant1sthenes 13 years ago
    
    Funny thing is that Romney said something very similar during debates (well, something like "government should be a partner for business", presumably as opposed to tripping them up with red tape and taxes.)
    
    We're utterly fucked.
Brett L 13 years ago

How is this not in the links yet? Let's just say that everybody's favorite Total Recall character got an upgrade.
1. Ice Nine 13 years ago
  
  Anything more than a handful is too much.
  1. db 13 years ago
    
    So grow another hand.
Brett L 13 years ago

Randall Munroe's new awesome site for random physics questions and answers.
1. tarran 13 years ago
  
  That first one is awesome.
  1. Auric Demonocles 13 years ago
    
    I particularly like the note at the end.
2. sarcasmic 13 years ago
  
  nice
3. Tim 13 years ago
  
  Even with all that power the Sox still couldn't win the Series.
4. T 13 years ago
  
  The final line, explaining the MLB rules implication, is the funniest part of that article.
Brett L 13 years ago

Spot price of dentaured fuel ethanol up $0.40/gal from a week ago, spot price of gasoline $2.87, up about $0.15.

Low corn harvest and idled plants are on track to make ethanol more expensive than gas. Sure am glad they have all those subsidies to keep prices low.
CampingInYourPark 13 years ago

"Obama is campaigning. He's a candidate," Chavez told a Venezuelan television station. "I hope the real revolutionaries understand well. I think that Barack Obama ? aside from 'the president' ? is a good guy."
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfro...../id/445323
1. Kaptious Kristen 13 years ago
  
  That's a ringing endorsement for liberals. "Chavez likes him? He must be awesome! I'm totally voting for him now!"
  1. Warty 13 years ago
    
    Look, you have to trust democracy.
Kaptious Kristen 13 years ago

My friend's husband is a very wealthy guilt-ridden white guy. He was out during the Occutard days, telling people how guilty he felt about having all this money and that the government should take more of it, a la Michael Moore and Warren Buffet. He believes, like most of his cronies, that government is the solution to all of life's ills. Government is the way to make sure everyone is hunky dory and equal as can be.

So imagine my "surprise" at his railing against bureaucrats because his wife can't get a visa to stay in Italy with him for the summer! In fact, I think his exact words were something about "strangling".

I'm sure, when confronted with his utter elitism and hypocrisy (how could I, a wealthy American, be forced to deal with these uneducated, smarmy bureaucrats!!), he would just say "if only the right people were in charge".
1. John 13 years ago
  
  Let me guess, he is a trust fund baby. Since he never earned any of his money, he thinks no one else earned any of theirs. There are few things lower than the trust fund left. Please tell me your friend married this douche bag for his money and plans to divorce him and take him to the cleaners.
  1. Kaptious Kristen 13 years ago
    
    NO, he got a bunch of money from his wife who killed herself, and, unbelievably, he actually earned a bunch of it by (get this) - being a self-employed and very successful audio engineer. It's anti-self-interest at work in it's "highest" form.
    
    My friend is a "professional activist", in that she quit a public school teaching gig to move to DC to do nothing but organize and attend protests.
    
    Of course, now that she's married a rich dude, she has done jackall as far as politics goes.
    1. John 13 years ago
      
      Out of curiosity, I am sure the woman has good qualities or you wouldn't be friends with her. What are those? They sound like a dreadful couple.
      1. Kaptious Kristen 13 years ago
        
        Believe it or not, there are a jillion other things to talk about with someone other than politics. Shocking, I know. With this particular person there's kniting/crochet, dogs, quitting smoking, being single (well, not anymore), sex, car troubles, cooking, wine, parents, health, cancer, restaurants, books, travel, gossip, reality TV. Really, if politics is the only thing you can think of to talk about with someone, and you only limit your friendships to those whose politics are non-offensive to you, I kind of feel sorry for you.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        I am fully aware of that Kristen. I have plenty of liberal friends. The husband's elitism would drive me nuts. I don't care what your politics are. But if you think you are somehow morally superior to the guy who cleans your bathroom, I have little or no use for you.
    2. ant1sthenes 13 years ago
      
      My friend is a "professional activist", in that she quit a public school teaching gig to move to DC to do nothing but organize and attend protests.
      
      Tell the guy that the TSA can see him nude through his cutoffs, and maybe you can turn him (libertarian, that is).
  2. EDG reppin' LBC 13 years ago
    
    I know a couple of trustafarians that grew up in the DC area. One is cornering the market on real estate in Austin, TX. The other is stockpiling automatic weapons at his parents' vacation house.
    
    White guys, but not guilty white guys.
    1. db 13 years ago
      
      It's assholes like that that are the reason an M16 costs $12k and a 1919A4 will run you near or over $30k. I'm glad I bought most of my MGs before prices topped out.
2. Hyperion 13 years ago
  
  Let's see if his attitude changes after the all benevolent government actually takes a lot more of his money. Ask him what he thinks is his fair share? How about 70%, 90%? He can write the IRS a voluntary big fat check each year, remind him of that.
  1. Kaptious Kristen 13 years ago
    
    I don't talk politics with these people, trust. That's why I can maintain friendships with them.
    1. Hyperion 13 years ago
      
      I understand completely. The leftists that I know are completely hostile to any kind of open political debate.
      1. Mr. FIFY 13 years ago
        
        Tony, shrike, Apparently a "shitheel"... yep, leftists hostile to other POVs.
        
        And before any of those fuckheads says a fuckin' word: I used to think just like them.
        
        Hyperion 13 years ago
        
        I think I have always been a Libertarian, but I didn't know it. I was really confused when I was growing up because I tended to like Republicans more than Democrats, but the fact that I had more liberal views socially than any of them, left me with an identity crisis until 2007 when I finally discovered the LP and found that I was not alone in my political views.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        I went to the John Stossell talk a few months ago at Reason HQ. He said he goes around the country preaching the libertarian gospel. And he will go talk to conservative groups and tell them things they really disagree with on issues like drugs and pornography. But he says the conservatives are always polite and always willing to engage in him reasoned discourse even if he doesn't often convince them to join his side. He liberals in contrast are just hostile. He has had liberals come up to him in the street and tell him to his face that they wish he were dead. He says he is met with nothing but disdain and hostility bordering on violence every time he tries to engage liberals.
        
        Conservatives are often wrong. But liberals are just fucking nuts.
        
        Hyperion 13 years ago
        
        Conservatives are often wrong. But liberals are just fucking nuts.
        
        Couldn't agree more. This is of course because they are not liberals, but statist parasites, who want the government to take what you work hard for and give it to them.
        
        I am also able to have political conversations with my conservative friends, even though we typically strongly disagree on issues like the drug war and the military empire, but they are polite.
        
        Tulpa the White 13 years ago
        
        Conservatives are often wrong. But liberals are just fucking nuts.
        
        Back when the shoe was on the other foot, I recall the conservative opinion leaders calling anyone who publicly disagreed with the Iraq War "traitors". There are plenty of nuts to go around.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        I recall the conservative opinion leaders calling anyone who publicly disagreed with the Iraq War "traitors"
        
        Citation please? And no the voices in your head don't count. I don't recall anything like that. I recall a lot of people wanting to think that was true to justify their blind loyalty to Obama.
        
        T 13 years ago
        
        I was in 6th grade when I pointed out that it didn't matter which side you voted for because the whole system was corrupt. My 6th grade teacher (a nice well-meaning lefty, looking back) nearly had an apoplectic fit.
        
        Kaptious Kristen 13 years ago
        
        I had the same experience. My dad was an old school small government Republican. I always felt like the government should GTFO, but at the same time the Young Republicans in my school were trying to have a mural of Jimi Hendrix removed because it "promoted drug use", which I thought was fucking stupid. I had no idea there were any alternatives to R or D until much later. It almost made things worse, though, because I realized a) no candidate I voted for would ever win and b) just about everyone would completely misunderstand my (completely logical and consistent) political stances.
    2. Tulpa the White 13 years ago
      
      My sister's Obama statue next to the front door is enough to scare me into silence.
      
      You can't really criticize someone that your host has a statue of. Maybe I should get a Ron Paul bust.
      1. Hyperion 13 years ago
        
        You should decapitate it when no one is around (:
        
        There is an office that I pass at work, when walking to get lunch, that had a poster of one of our founders, can't remember now, it was Jefferson maybe, with a fucking Obama campaign hat on. I really, really had to try hard to NOT rip the damn thing off and throw it on the floor and spit on it. It finally got taken down and I am glad I don't have to see the abomination again.
        
        Tulpa the White 13 years ago
        
        I came close to putting a dunce cap on it one night we were sleeping over, but figured I'd get caught. I'm the lone non-liberal in our family.
3. PS 13 years ago
  
  Wait, why would an American need a visa to visit the EU for three months?
Tulpa the White 13 years ago

The judge said the plaintiffs could not show "immediate harm," (because the feds delayed when the requirement comes into effect) and so didn't have standing to sue.

This is crap. The impending enforcement of the law is plenty harmful, as you have to plan for it.

So if the government passed a law that said black people would not be allowed to own businesses or houses after January 1, 2014, would the court say, "sorry, you can't sue yet"?
1. Auric Demonocles 13 years ago
  
  "Sorry, you can't sue for cruel and unusual punishment until after we finish executing you via flaying."
2. gagster 13 years ago
  
  I was wondering the same thing WRT the tax issue and Obamacare. Apparently, you can't sue over any law that imposes a tax until it has actually been imposed. So, if they just add a $10 per person tax to every bill and have it start in 2112, no one can sue for a hundred years?
CampingInYourPark 13 years ago

"City of Compton may declare bankruptcy by September: officials"
http://news.yahoo.com/city-com.....55526.html
CampingInYourPark 13 years ago

"Obviously, we wish Solyndra hadn't gone bankrupt," Obama said. "But understand: This was not our program per se."

We didn't build THAT - Obama
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/po.....am-per-se/
1. Hyperion 13 years ago
  
  The government only gets the credit when you are successful. When you fail, it is the fault of evil capitalists.
2. Tulpa the White 13 years ago
  
  It's perfectly consistent. No one is responsible for what they do.
  
  A very convenient attitude for BO.
  1. ant1sthenes 13 years ago
    
    No, that would be consistent. But the actual attitude is that the state/collective is responsible for all success, the market/individual is responsible for all failure.
ant1sthenes 13 years ago

You know, I'm starting to soften up on the president's bullshit. Some people claim cops are assholes to everyone because they mostly deal with the worst pricks in society, and start to feel like that's all that society is.

As president, the businesspeople you're going to be spending the most time around are crapitalists, sort of by definition. If my idea of normal capitalism was the head of Goldman Sachs or Solyndra, I'd probably have a pretty low opinion of them too.
nothinghead 13 years ago

So they lost a hammer?
bopomtXQ 13 years ago

Make money using Google. Find out how to make up to $175/hr working for this billion dollar company. More info @ makecash25dotcomONLY

Please log in to post comments

A.M. Links: Anti-Romney Super PAC Star Calls President a Jerk, Chuck Schumer Rants About First Amendment, Law of the Sea Treaty Could Sink

Latest

Who Is the 'Top Missile Guy' the U.S. Killed in Yemen?

Don't Count on Quitting Social Media To Make Your Life Better

For the First Time in 80 Years, the U.S. Denies Mexico's Request for Water

Third Term

To Remain Canadian, Our Northern Neighbors Should Become a Little More American

Recommended

Login Form