'A Highly Personal Music'

Jazz, commerce, and individualism.


Why Jazz Happened, by Marc Myers, University of California Press, 267 pages, $34.95.

Jazz personalities have provided material for some of the best biographies and autobiographies written in modern times, and some histories of jazz qualify as significant contributions to the cultural history of the United States during the twentieth century. In Why Jazz Happened, Marc Myers of has given us another important contribution, but this is a contribution with a difference.

Myers opens and ends his book with discussions of the Original Dixieland "Jass" Band, a quintet that, on February 26, 1917, played the two songs that constitute the first jazz record ever released. The band, though commercially successful, was far from the best ensemble of its type. Its members never improvised, and their tunes incorporated corny barnyard effects. But they were partially responsible, Myers writes, for "the dramatic moment in time when jazz was first documented on record. As I listened to the music, I couldn't help thinking about the irony—that jazz may have been born in New Orleans, but the music's documentation began at RCA Victor's studio on West 38th Street, in the heart of New York's Garment District."

Few jazz enthusiasts would see anything "dramatic" in the first recorded jazz tunes, except perhaps that they were performed by an all-white New Orleans ensemble instead of by superior black and Creole musicians who (for the most part) were the true pioneers. Myers' comments typify the unusual nature of his book. Most histories of jazz focus on what might called its internal history: the biographies of notable jazz musicians, composers, and arrangers; the various stylistic developments of particular musicians (such as the early and later styles of John Coltrane, Miles Davis, or Bud Shank); and the nature of jazz music itself. Myers focuses on the external history of jazz—on those "nonjazz events" that significantly influenced the genre's development. Among these influences were the invention of long-playing records (which permitted long solos to be recorded), the postwar G.I. Bill (which enabled many jazz musicians and composers to study classical music), unions (especially the two-year ban on recording, beginning in 1942, by the American Federation of Musicians, which led to the emergence of many small record companies), DJs, promoters, and much more.

Myers concentrates on developments in jazz from 1945 to 1972. It was during these postwar years that "influential nonjazz events became more abundant and potent," he writes.

[D]uring the twenty-seven years that followed World War II, jazz was reshaped frequently by external events. After the war, the vise-like grip of the three major record companies [Columbia, RCA Victor, and Decca] on the industry weakened in the wake of labor actions, increased competition from new labels, changes in the radio industry, and the promotion of concerts. As a larger field of record labels emerged and competed, jazz musicians gained greater creative independence. From 1945 to 1972, the ten major jazz styles that emerged certain reflected their times. But instead of conforming to proven blues and dance models, jazz began to be filtered through the views of individual artists rather than solely through the commercial interests of a few large record companies. For the first time, jazz play an assertive role, reflecting and shaping America's values and culture rather than merely mirroring them. As all the arts began to reflect the personal vision and freedom of the artist, jazz's natural reliance on self-expression allow the music to pivot neatly from syncopated dance music to individualistic statements.

A refreshing aspect of Why Jazz Happened is its richly nuanced treatment of the relationship between commerce and creative individuality. Although the story here is far from linear and uniform, Myers makes it clear that market processes, such as the competition among record companies and the persistent efforts of jazz artists to adapt to changing musical tastes, frequently had a beneficial influence on jazz. The old chestnut—as told, for example, by the Marxist Sidney Finkelstein in Jazz: A People's Music (1948)—that jazz musicians have typically been "exploited" by capitalists and entrepreneurs does not hold up to historical scrutiny. More than a few of those supposed exploiters were jazz enthusiasts who took considerable risks to underwrite and promote their favorite musicians.

I have been a jazz buff since the early 1960s, and I counted Duke Ellington, Count Basie, Stan Getz, Gerry Mulligan, Art Pepper, Bud Shank, Paul Desmond, Cannonball Adderley, Dizzy Gillespie, and Charlie Byrd among my childhood heroes. As I later became interested in political theory, the relationship between the cultural individualism of jazz and the political individualism of libertarianism seemed so natural to me that, with all the innocence of youth, I frequently expressed surprise upon discovering that few of my libertarian friends shared my interest in this form of music.

The improvisations that characterize jazz have produced the most individualistic form of art in American history. Solo jazz musicians are at once composers, arrangers, and performers; and the variety found in their solos reflects the individuality of the musicians themselves.

"No two persons ever hear jazz the same way," the celebrated bandleader Woody Herman wrote in 1964. "It is a highly personal music. It is complicated. All of us, musicians and laymen alike, enjoy or dislike a performance because of an infinite number of intangibles—our personal background, listening experience, knowledge of vocal and instrumental skills, even our age. Part of the charm of American jazz lies in its variety."


NEXT: Suicide Bomber Targets Shia Pilgrims in Pakistan

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. Needs more jazz hands

  1. “corny barnyard effects.”

    Paul’s Boutique?

  2. Skitch Henderson used to do a radio show called “Guard Sessions” which was paid for by the National Guard to promote enlistment and support of the NG by employers and wives. The format was to bring on a Jazz or Big Band musician as a guest. They’d chat for a while, play some music, tell anecdotes, etc. On one occasion in the late 60s he had Woody Herman on the show. Skitch asked Woody about the recent Grammy awards show Woody did, on the same bill with a band called “The Mothers of Invention.” As a big fan of both Jazz and Zappa I thought the following exchange was amusing, so I’ll transcribe it:
    Skitch Henderson: “On the bill with you that night was an organization called The Mothers of Invention, is that right?”
    Woody: “Yes.”
    Skitch: “Could you tell me what that is? And I don’t mean to be in any way funny or derogatory at all.”
    Woody Herman: “I, for the first few minutes, was quite intrigued because I found the satiric aspect of it was very funny. And these guys are not children, they’re men, uh, several of them.”
    Skitch: “I think that’s important that we say that.”
    Woody: “Yes. In other words they’re guys who are 40ish, you know.”
    Skitch: “Have been around.”


    1. Woody: “That’s right. I talked to a couple of them just for a moment and found one had worked opposite us at Reno in one of the gaming clubs and another had worked somewhere in San Francisco where we were on the same bill. But they had worked in typical entertainment groups, the kind that play in the lounges of hotels and so forth. But now they had formed this thing in recent years and I guess it’s been very successful and particularly in the bay area. And as long as they stayed away from music I thought they had a possible chance but then they started to play and that, you know, that did it.”
      Skitch Henderson: “You know what destroyed me? I know we’ll get letters on this, but The Mothers of Invention are a big act I guess for the young people, aren’t they?”
      Woody: “Yeah”
      Skitch: “Isn’t that a young people’s act, basically? Or is it?”
      Woody: “Oh, I guess it is, except that I don’t know where their audience is. You know, I haven’t followed them that closely.”
      Skitch: “It’s funny, their audience wasn’t there that night, and this was the whole record industry, really, wasn’t it?”
      Woody: “It was and I was amazed at the non-reaction.”
      Skitch: “Yeah, the ‘boos,’ actually. It was almost like a symphonic feel. It was kind of frightening.”

      I find it delicious that the guys who used to listen to and play the music their parents thought was rebellious eventually came to despise other forms of music for the same reason. Seems like that cycle never ever ends.

    2. Zappa was great because he managed to connect the odd, counter-cultural content of his music with the more traditional, conservative ethic of his personal life.

      That’s probably a matter of necessity. The music he wrote was too complex to write while doing drugs, and he wanted it to be equal-opportunity offensive, so he eschewed the leftist worldview of his contemporaries.

      1. Can’t pass up an opportunity to post this.

        1. Brilliant.

  3. Oh, poor Eli. If the Bears win the Giants are out no matter how much they destroy the Eagles. And the Bears are winning. Bigtime.

    1. The Giants have got to put a stop this institutional dysfunction that has plagued them during their off-Super Bowl seasons. If they had played with even the slightest bit of fire they have shown today, they would have made it to the playoffs, where they always do some damage.

      If you ask me, Eli Manning has a really slow development curve. He’s still making decisions that elite quarterbacks learn not to make in their fourth year. And he’s in his ninth.

      1. Eli’s inconsistency sucks, but the Seahawks are clinched for the playoffs so I’m not overly worried about the Giants. They did win the Superbowl last year after all.

        The Lions are making it tougher for the Bears at this point but five (?) turnovers by the Lions is pretty bad.

        1. Let’s not look past the fact that Eli plays in the NFC East, which is far and away the toughest division in the NFL. Peyton would definitely survive in the NFC East at this point in his career, but if he had been made to develop in that murder’s row, I doubt his career would be as lauded as it is today.

          But going back to Eli, even Romo and RGIII have been able to be more consistent and they are in the same division. This definitely indicates that there’s something going on in Eli’s head that keeps him from developing to Romo or Rodgers type consistency.

          1. Vick had that brief spurt of energy in 2010. But whether it the intellectual or the physical demands, that division eventually took its toll on Vick.

          2. Let’s not look past the fact that Eli plays in the NFC East, which is far and away the toughest division in the NFL.


            The NFC (L)East is the worst division in the entire NFC.

            Out of division records…
            East 19-21
            North 23-17
            South 22-18
            West 23-17

            Further from the AFC…
            East 19-21
            North 21-19
            South 19-21
            West 14-26

            1. A combined 12 Super Bowl championships, plus 6 NFC Championship Games for the Eagles, during the past 30 years.

              The records you showed just tells me that none of the East teams get out of the season unscathed.

              1. Oops, sorry, 10 Super Bowl championships. I accidentally included the two Dallas won in the 1970s.

              2. Right, what was going on in 1982 is totally relevant to the division now.

                In the past 15 years, they have 2 SB wins and two other NFC championships. If we exclude the Giants, that’s one NFC champiionship and 0 SB wins.

                1. Tulpa, you’re like our very own George Will. If you stick to sports, you make sense. When you delve into politics, you sound like a retard.

                  1. WTF? I don’t even know how to tie a freakin bow tie.

                2. The only other division I might consider is the NFC South, which has had two Super Bowl winners over the past 10 years (Tampa and New Orleans). But they have consistently been too dysfunctional to claim their division is a juggernaut. Whereas you could count on having 3 competitive teams in the East, you could only hope for 2 South teams at most.

                  This year, NYG, Wash, and Dallas all stayed in playoff contention until the final Sunday. In the South, New Orleans was eliminated in early December, making Atlanta the only team worth watching for the past three weeks.

                  1. This year, NYG, Wash, and Dallas all stayed in playoff contention until the final Sunday.

                    Yeah, because all of them were mediocre and someone has to win the division. They’re the Big East of the NFL.

                  2. In the South, New Orleans was eliminated in early December when Goodell got the red-ass this summer about the so-called bounty scandal,


                    Oh, and the AFC North was done pretty well the last 10 years. 3 Super Bowl Champions and another AFC Championship.

                    1. 2 SB champions, you mean. And that’s all Steelers.

                    2. What are the Ravens?

                    3. I refer to them as the ex-Browns.

                    4. You’re right. I was a year off on the Ravens SB win.

                    5. Nah, I think you can count the Ravens from 2000. I still think the out of division match-ups in the NFC are far more rigorous than what you see in the AFC, but I’ll grant that the AFC North is a very solid division.

                    6. We can all agree that the AFC West is a basket case. Especially if Elite’s brother wasn’t there.

                    7. The AFC West was screwed up by losing Seattle to the NFC West and Al Davis’s growing senility.

                    8. And Josh McDaniels. Not sure what happened to KC and SD.

                    9. How screwed up is the AFC? The last 9 AFC championships have been won by only three teams (NE, PIT, IND). Talk about inequality of outcome.

                    10. If the NFL was fair, a different team would win each year and every team would win before another team repeated.

                    11. Just out of curiosity, how would that work in the CFL? Would the Rough Riders Grey Cup win eliminate the need for a Roughriders Grey Cup win before they could restart the cycle? What if the Roughriders played the Rough Riders?

                    12. There hasn’t been an Ottawa Rough Riders since 1996.

                    13. So we reached Peak Rough Rider and are now on the Roughrider decline? Damn, that’s depressing.

                    14. Don’t worry, the Sask Roughriders aren’t going anywhere. There’s nothing else to do in Regina.

  4. I have a question for pro-immigration libertarians:

    Those Americans who understand and appreciate free markets and limited government are almost entirely native-born whites. Blacks and hispanics are hardline Democratic voters. They generally see no problem with government providing for people’s material needs, and they will always want a bigger welfare state. That’s the unfortunate reality. The explosion of Hispanic immigration over the last 40 years will make whites a minority by 2043. More immigration = more Democratic voters = more statism.

    I understand if you oppose immigration restrictions out of principle, concern for civil liberies, “compassion,” or whatever. But you basically have to admit that mass immigration is making limited government a lost cause in America. Without calling me a racist or a xenophobe, what do you say to libertarians like me who are concerned about changing demographics?

    1. You’re an asshole? Also, fuck off. Note I didn’t call you a racist or a xenophobe…though you called yourself one, which is fucking awesome. Seriously, go fuck yourself.

      1. Such a welcome response for my first post! If I did follow your advice and trying to eff myself caused serious bodily harm, you’d feel pretty bad.

        1. No I wouldn’t. Seriously, go fuck yourself, asshole.

        2. This is a pretty weak showing, guy. Link to in the handle, AND being afraid to invoke the evil magic inherent in the word fuck. How shitty must it feel when being a racist and a terrible troll aren’t even the most pathetic things about you?

          1. Registration said URL was optional but it wouldn’t let me proceed without entering one, so I just put CNN. I’m not cool enough to have my own webzone.

            1. You could use your email address instead. That way we could all swap ideas about libertarianism with you.

              1. Really? I sign people up for porn sites.

                1. Canadian porn sites?

                  And if so, are the actors more polite in Canadian porn? I’m already guessing no bukkake.

                  1. And if so, are the actors more polite in Canadian porn? I’m already guessing no bukkake.

                    This is the most awesome thing ever…please, please let this woman comment on HyR.

                    1. What the hell did I just watch?

                    2. @4:04 “I might have died right there, sobbing in a pool of sperm and AIDS”

                      –Brett Spiner

                    3. “The only way to describe it is like the cheapest mushroom alfredo you have ever had left to rot in the fridge for several months.” ~6:00

                      “Jesuit semen” ~6:20

                      This is Saccharin Man’s wife. It’s gotta be.

                    4. What makes you think she hasn’t already been on here for the last year or so?

                    5. What makes you think she hasn’t already been on here for the last year or so?

                      Because the world just isn’t that beautiful.

                2. Hey, Pantsfan, seen this?

                  1. That’s awesome. thanks for sharing.

                    taught himself how to handle carbon fiber

                    That’s intense.

                  2. The Brits have always been notorious for building one-off cars in their sheds. It’s a beautiful thing to see someone create something like that. Thanks for the link.

                    1. That’s because British cars all perform like they’ve been built in a shed.

                    2. You know why British cars and bikes are so fast? Because they have to get home before dark.

        3. This is a nice thread so far.

      2. I agree with Frank Smith. You are an asshole.

        These people wrecked their country now they want wreck ours.

        Seriously, go fuck yourself.

        1. Fuck you, you racist xenophobic piece of fucking shit. Seriously, go fuck yourself with a chainsaw. TROLL HARDER.

          1. Oh Yes!

            RACISM!! RACISM1

            I’ve been here many years.

            You and little shit sucking friends have wrecked more comment threads thane WI ever did.

            1. Seriously, go fuck yourself, asshole.

              1. U mad, bro? CRY HARDER. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

                1. Oh! Oh ! I’m! slayed!!

                  1. Holy shit you’re tedious. Go be a racist piece of shit somewhere else. Some douche posted a site you’d probably like below. Go there. You aren’t wanted here.

                    1. OK!! Thanks!!

                    2. RACISM!!

                      Any one oppoesed to importing moar socialists is a RACIST!


                    3. No, it’s racist to assume that a particular individual holds a certain political ideology merely because they belong to a particular ethnic group, which is what you seem to be arguing.

                      If we dealt with the domestic socialists here at home, we wouldn’t have to worry about attracting imported ones.

                    4. When I say that mass immigration leads to more statism, it is not based on judgment of any particular individual. It is based on the documented fact that the vast majority of Hispanic voters support the Party of Big Government.

                      I would like pro-immigration libertarians to be honest and say something like this: “Immigration restrictions violate freedom of movement and should be abolished immediately. If tens of millions of poverty-stricken foreigners relocate inside the jurisdictional boundaries of the United States and vote in large numbers to confiscate the wealth of established residents, it falls on those residents to educate the newcomers about the virtues of free markets and limited government, even if: a) they don’t speak English; b) they can’t read; and c) they show no desire whatsover to assimilate into American society or understand what made it freer and wealthier than the shit-holes from whence they came. Besides, their contributions to America in terms of cultural diversity and cheap labor more than make up for their support for statism.”

                      Or something like that.

                    5. When will idiots like you get it through your thick fucking heads that most of us aren’t “pro-immigration” but are pro-freedom of movement? And like most other problems with American governance IRT the welfare system and immigration are spending problems?

                      By and large, we want the welfare system abolished. You take that away, and all users of the system, regardless of culture, background or race, will either become productive or will migrate to another locale that is fine with their parasitic nature.

                    6. Frank, you need to distinguish between immigration and naturalization. Immigration does not (and should not) necessarily lead to naturalization. A bunch of people coming here to work, study, or even live for an extended period, need not equate to a surge in new voting citizens, statist-leaning or otherwise. We can let people go back and forth across the borders relatively freely, as long as they are peaceful and obey our laws, without admitting them into the population of citizens. Further, if we wanted to, we could reserve grants of citizenship for only those foreigners who demonstrated exceptional self-reliance, as well as superior understanding and active promotion of our constitutionally-limited, republican form of government.

                    7. Also, I would like to point out that the transformation of California from a fairly “red-state” society to an infamously “blue” State DID seem to happen because of mass-immigration in the way that Frank describes — but not so much from South of the Border as from North and East. In other words, the Democrat voting strength in this State came largely through immigration from other States. These people were ALREADY voting US citizens, and they brought with them either socialist views and habits from their respective States of origin, or a desire to create and/or benefit from a socialist environment, of the kind that their States of origin did not provide. I sometimes wish that it had been possible to withhold full citizenship status from those transplants until they had proven that they could fit in and contribute to (not to mention preserve the essence of) the California society that WAS. Sure, let everybody in, but don’t let them vote until they demonstrate a good understanding of and agreement with the propositions 1) Live and let live; 2) Don’t pick other people’s pockets for the benefit of yourself or those you favor. Sadly, the Constitution only lets us do that for people who are foreign to the nation, not in the case of interstate migration.

                    8. It’s so cute how you claim to be a libertarian and then demand the ability to control people’s movement based on their thoughts and opinions. It’s almost like you’re…a complete scumbag racist whose “libertarian” beliefs go out the window when it’s them damn foreigners. Does being a scumbag make you feel good? It does, doesn’t it?

                    9. I was NOT taking a position against mass immigration. I was merely pointing out the inherent tension between the libertarian position on mass immigration and the anti-libertarian views and voting patterns of most immigrants. I was genuinely interested in what other libertarians thought about this. Instead of intelligent discussion, all I see is hysterical insults. I expected more from readers of “Reason” magazine. Maybe I’ll try again on another post that relates to immigration.

                    10. DRINK!

                    11. I would suggest just going and fucking yourself.

                    12. Now I know why you keep telling us to stop responding to it. It’s because you want to have all the fun.

        2. Apparently, some people just aren’t worthy of freedom because they’ll use it the wrong way. That about right? Those people need oppressive governments to keep them in line?

          1. You don’t understand, dude. Real libertarians want to oppose freedom of movement to keep freedom for…no one? I’m kind of confused about that, actually. Oh wait, it’s racism and xenophobia, there’s nothing to be confused about.

          1. Like socialism works? OK?

            You maybe think I don’t like Hispanic?

            My Anteater was one of the Godamn sumabitchs that ever walked the face of earth.

            I don’t want import socialists.

            OK Cunt Face?

            1. Oh my. This is getting embarrassing. Maybe if you frothed at the mouth a little less you’d be a more coherent troll. Alas.

              1. Who? me or him?

                I oppose open borders.

                1. I oppose open borders.

                  Aw. I bet you like turtles too, don’t ya, little guy?

            2. OK Cunt Face?

              Well, at least we know you’re not a sockpuppet of Ken Schultz.

              1. Fuck Ken Schultz.

                1. See? Who said peace in our time wasn’t possible! We just need to focus on what we all have in common.

              2. Dethklok RULES!

    2. Yes it’s true that currently the majority of libertarians are white but I don’t see why it should stay that way. You seem to forget that the majority of whites are also statist both Democratic and Republican.

    3. What I would tell you is this: Tell the libertarians to go fuck themselves with a red-hot poker, and affiliate yourself with a political movement that supports the same personal freedoms you’re interested in, but doesn’t have any truck with Cultural Marxist bullshit the libertarians are peddling these days.

      1. Yes, because liberty means individual freedom for White individuals only!

        At least you’re honest in identifying yourself with the “Old Right” fascism-lite Ezra Pound bullshit.

        Your views are a grave insult to the Vedantic meaning behind your forum handle, and, in a more civilized time, I would have gladly run a sword through the belly of a scoundrel such as you.

        1. There are a lot of white nationalists, nativists, paleoconservatives etc who like to call themselves libertarians or associate with libertarians. I’ve learned to just ignore them.

          1. I’ve learned to just ignore them.

            Well, I don’t have that luxury. I won’t be made to feel uncomfortable in my own house because some hobo wandered into my living room and took a shit.

            These ideological parasites want to co-opt the small success that libertarians have had in providing an alternative and pervert it toward their own vile Producerist/Dominionist/etc. nonsense.

        2. Well, I was simply going to laugh at the aggressive stupidity of the article on why furrinerz are ruining everything, except when they are pretty (white, I guess) ladies, but your response is better, HM.

          Why the hell did a jazz thread bring out the racist trolls in full force?

          1. Why the hell did a jazz thread bring out the racist trolls in full force?

            Because it’s the latest article and Mary is gettin’ her racist on.

          2. Why the hell did a jazz thread bring out the racist trolls in full force?

            I blame Swing Kids.

          3. Dagny T.| 12.30.12 @ 5:13PM |#
            Why the hell did a jazz thread bring out the racist trolls in full force?…

            Jazz = acknowledging black people’s contribution to American culture = HERRRR DERRRRP!!! TEH LIBERTOIDS HATES TEH WITEY AND THEYS TEH SOCIALISTS NOW!!

          4. Isn’t jazz a threat because the black musicians are going to take our white women?

            (Or at least, wasn’t that the fear 80 years ago?)

        3. Dude, in more civilized times, the likes of you weren’t going to be running a sword through anyone, because you’d have been too busy picking cotton.

          1. I have to admit, I lol’d.

          2. Ever notice how everyone named Ken turns out to be a world class jagoff?

              1. In retrospect, you may be correct.

              1. Best Kline character ever.

            1. It’s probably caused by the frustration of Barbie being so hot but not having a vagina.

      2. Cultural Marxist bullshit the libertarians are peddling these days.

        Was that the stuff about not constantly pretending there’s some cultural reconquista ongoing?

        is failure to engage in racist-pants-wetting, “marxist”? I missed that

        1. I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure we get to DRINK! after that post of his.

    4. Here’s what I say to “libertarians” like you, Frank:

      A fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning.
      A rule or belief governing one’s personal behavior.

      You might want to develop a few of these.

      1. Like the Bible says, it’s easier for a rich man to pass through a camel’s asshole than to pass the LP Purity Test.

        Or something like that.

        1. It certainly would be for the likes of you, Shrike.

          1. The LP Purity Test is hard for a fucking reason, pal!

            It keeps the interlopers out – the “middle”, the riff-raff, the undesirables, etc.

            Embiggening the party is not important – purity is!

          2. Not sure if he’s rich but I’d be willing to bet he’s passed through a camels asshole more than once. Or a sheep.

          3. Dude, why are you responding to it? Just. Fucking. Ignore. It. It hates that. Be a hater. Do it.

            1. Sorry, sometimes I can’t help it. I’ll go perform a kindness for one of my child laborers as a penance.

            2. I’m sure “it” likes people futilely urging others not to respond even more.

              1. Tulpy-Poo, it’s cute that you think anyone cares the slightest what you’re “sure” of. I seem to remember you being “sure” about address parsing too, and, well, look how that worked out for you.

                1. I only hope you’re better at parsing addresses than you are at making rational arguments instead of glib insults.

    5. Well you’re completely wrong right off the bat. The boom in Hispanic population isn’t going to knock whites out of being the majority. It just means that when you add up all of the “minorities” they will equal more than 50%. No single minority group will become the majority.

      And Hispanics, as a population (nevermind that collectivism is total bullshit), would vote for more liberty minded candidates if they didn’t refer to them as criminals and drug dealers and want to deport anyone they thought looked like an illegal.

      1. Or, at the risk of drawing the mouth-foaming, albeit 5-word-vocabulary vitriol of Episiarch, it might just be that there are cultural differences that happen, by sheer coincidence, to break down along geographical, and hence sometimes ethnic/racial lines. Like, maybe, for example, there’s a reason why all of Europe embraced either social democracy or communism post-WWII. Of course, can have an intelligent discussion about the reasons for European attitudes toward government without anybody having a goddamn heart attack and bringing out 10 decks of race cards for a game of 52 pickup.

        1. Warty told me that Epi’s mouth breathing meant he liked me. Is that not true?

          1. It’s very true. What are you wearing?

    6. The vast majority of voters, as in 99% of them, favor larger and more intrusive government. Race has very little to nothing to do with it. We libertarians are distant outliers.

      Hispanics tend to be Democratic voters, but they aren’t that hardline. They reason they lean towards the Democrats is because the Republicans are so tone-deaf when it comes to racial and immigration issues. Ditto for asian voters.

      Blacks on the other hand are very hardcore Democrat. For a variety of reasons over the past century and a half, blacks have been conditioned to be subservient and dependent on the ruling class. About seventy five years ago the Democrat Party figured that out, and grabbed themselves a huge voting block. But even if they were a Republican bloc, they would still be government-needs-to-do-more-for-me style Republican bloc.

      1. But even if they were a Republican bloc, they would still be government-needs-to-do-more-for-me style Republican bloc.

        You mean they’d be just like old people?

    7. robc’s rule of web posting:

      lurk for 3-6 months before posting, then you dont ask stupid questions.

      Also, stop creating new accounts to post the same shit in every thread.

    8. I think you’re naiively generalizing people of other races. While I think you have a point as far as historical evidence is concerned, especially in the black community (because they have been made dependent on government since times of slavery – they can’t get equity because they can’t own houses without credit), I also think you underestimate the willingness of immigrants to learn. If Libertarians were to educate new immigrants on free market principles and economics, I think we’d have a lot of friendly new allies.

      You and I can’t just sit back and say “oh, well, I guess they’re liberals forever!” because:

      1. people who leave their country and customs are clearly open to new things.

      2. Assuming they are not willing to change/learn is lazy

      I argue that lazy libertarians = more democratic voters = more statism.

  5. The problem with improvisation in groups is that humans are not telepathic. If Hummel or Liszt or Bach were improvising on a keyboard instrument, the right hand knew what the left was doing, so that the improvisation was completely under control of the composer. But when you improvise in a group, you cannot simultaneously control what the others are playing. If the soloist wishes to switch from E flat major to C minor, or from a simple to composite meter, it will take several measures before others “catch up.”

    And forget about counterpoint, such as strict fugue or canon. It can never be properly realized In a group improvisation. Sforzato, crescendo, controlled modulation, all the compositional devices you hear in even a mediocre art music work cannot be improvised In a group. That is why jazz has such a monotonous quality to it. The “background” music must be relatively stable and static for the soloist to improvise over. And for that reason I find jazz simplistic, boring, and lacking in invention or art.

    1. The “background” music must be relatively stable and static for the soloist to improvise over.

      Isn’t that true of all popular music forms?

      1. Yes. That’s why I don’t listen to popular music.

    2. Apparently you never heard of a “cadenza”.

      But in any event, jazz improvisation presents an interesting rebuttal to libertarianism. The freedom of the musicians to improvise isn’t derived from a lack of rules, indeed, the freedom is facilitated by a mastery of them, and an agreement of them by all musicians participating. Absent an agreed upon set of rules, you don’t have jazz, you merely have cacophony. Kind of like what a libertarian society would look like.

      1. indeed, the freedom is facilitated by a mastery of them, and an agreement of them by all…participating.

        The phrase in bold is the very definition of libertarianism, you mendacious twit.

        If you’re going to engage in polemic against a concept, it helps to, you know, be educated in said concept.

        1. Presumably, then, we’re currently living in a libertarian society, given that the populace has agreed to be governed by the rules currently in place.

          Of course, that pretty much applies to any political regime where people have a right to exit.

          The bar for libertarian is indeed low these days!

          1. Presumably, then, we’re currently living in a libertarian society, given that the populace has agreed to be governed by the rules currently in place.

            Really? I don’t remember agreeing to any of this bullshit. Can you link me to the agreement I signed?

            Of course, that pretty much applies to any political regime where people have a right to exit.

            So the Jews that stayed in Germany in 1937 and were exterminated were fine with it, right? After all, they had a right to leave at that time.

            The bar for libertarian is indeed low these days!

            It is if you consider yourself or Frank Smith to have gone over it.

            1. Dude, it’s a trolling sockpuppet. Ignore it. It craves responses, and hates when you ignore it. Do the hateful thing. It’s the bestest.

            2. Maybe you should ask HM, as he was the one who stated that

              an agreement of them by all…participating

              was the heart of libertarianism. Given that the rules governing jazz improvisation are so numerous and strict that it takes many years of study to master them, I submit he largely missed my point.

              If you choose to participate in a jazz group, by implication you are agreeing to be bound by the rules of jazz music. Likewise, if you take up residence in a particular political domain, you’ve implicitly agreed to be bound by the laws of that domain (agreement with the laws not necessarily being a prerequisite to compliance in either case).

              Given that HM has asserted that mere agreement by the interested parties to be governed by a set of laws qualifies as libertarianism, I submit your argument is with him, not me.

              1. I submit he largely missed my point.

                No, you just chose to ignore my arguements @5:26.

                1. *arguments

                2. Wait, all I hear at 5:26 is “He could barely speak. His words still spraying with the remnants of inhaled semen, as he tried to force them out.”

                  Or did I listen to the wrong video at 5:26?

                  1. Or did I listen to the wrong video at 5:26?

                    No, that’s basically my argument in a nut-shell.

          2. given that the populace has agreed to be governed by the rules currently in place.

            No, we haven’t.

            Of course, that pretty much applies to any political regime where people have a right to exit.

            The ability for an American to “exit” is based purely on the fiat of a consular officer. We don’t have a “right to exit”.

            1. Also, persons who wish to renounce U.S. citizenship should also be aware that the fact that a person has renounced U.S. citizenship may have no effect whatsoever on his or her U.S. tax or military service obligations (contact the Internal Revenue Service or U.S. Selective Service for more information).

              I like (no, I don’t, I fucking hate) the casual use of “may”, like a list of side effects for a prescription drug. Fuckers.

      2. Yes, I have heard of cadenzas (and played them). Improvised cadenzas are played while the orchestra is silent. That’s my point. As for cadenzas that incorporate the orchestra, they are written into the score (as the ones used in Beethoven’s Emperor concerto).

        1. Fair enough. Group improvisation does impose restrictions. But as you acknowledge, that’s hardly a unique limitation of jazz.

          But not all jazz is necessarily improvised:

    3. …. And for that reason I find jazz simplistic, boring, and lacking in invention or art.

      I can now imagine how people characterize long conversations with you. I suspect they prefer to subscribe to your newsletter

  6. I’m from Kansas City. We don’t do jazz here.

  7. My mom told me stories about Her and my Dad and my uncle Nelson and Aunt Juanita going to downtown Kansas City to hear bands like Count Basie play. This was back in the 1930’s.

    They would walk down there and and save a nickels for a taxi home.

  8. I thought Jazz happened because Negroe men had to do something after smoking all that marihuana and before raping all of the white women. At least that’s what progressives of the time said.

    1. And conservatives of today say.

      Wait! The progs of yesteryear are the conservatives of today?

      Brilliant, oh sloppyinCa!

      1. Yep, conservatives are all about the income tax and giving more power to the national government.

  9. And conservatives of today say.

    [citation required]

    And before you ask, I paraphrased noted progressive Harry J. Anslinger

    1. What’s the matter, shrikey? Cat got your tongue?

  10. Gail describes some of her latest chats with Jesus Christ, Brent Spiner and herself through Skype and email

    1. Needs more Nukkake.

    2. Great troll or greatest troll?

      *none of which precludes schizophrenia

    3. Ok, I am convinced that Crazy Gail actually is a forum regular:

      @5:55 “The host of the party led GA1L [Crazy Gail’s evil android twin] into a room full of dancing, half-nekkid bodies, half-naked bodies, farm animals, mazes of sex furniture, and a full bar with every alcohol from every country on Earth. ‘GA1L!’ he said ‘Join us and we will provide you with more than swift repairs. We will give you all the free rape and bukkake a sentient robot could ask for!’

      GA1L, expressionless, appeared to accept. “I will take what you offer.”
      The room erupted in evil cheers, and scores of wicked laughter, and alcohol glasses clattering together in celebration. The next few hours were a blur of secular music, and obscene assortment of sexual activities only a Jesuit could understand. The Jesuits all collaborated to offer GAIL sexual activities from the plethora they had experience in, hoping to impress her enough for her to stay.

      GA1L sat cross-legged on the fur couch, a harem of lesbians caressing her cold, steel body.”

      Still a better love story than Twilight.

  11. What really sucks is that if I had played the Reason H&R J sub D Memorial FFL finals this week, I’d have beaten the shit out of everybody.

    Stupid fucking schedule.

  12. Anybody else sick and tired of the “fiscal cliff” stalemate? I feel like have I been arguing about dealing with the nation’s fiscal crisis for a decade now while the rest of the world procrastinated. Now, all of a sudden, we’ve decided to deal with it at the last possible second.

    I failed many an assignment waiting until the last minute to deal with it.

    1. Dude, our government failed the assignment of governing with the Alien and Sedition Acts.

      1. I’m beginning to suspect that this whole thing was dreamed up by the 24-hour cable news networks in order to drive up ratings over the typically placid post-Christmas week.

        1. I’ll add that CNN has a friggin countdown bug in their bottom right screen. It reminds me of this scene from my favorite Jeff Goldblum movie:

          1. Dude, you the fuck would you be watching CNN on the last Sunday of the NFL season? Especially with such a good game on.

            1. It looks like Peterson is going to fall short of the single season record. I can’t abide by watching the poor guy have his hopes crushed. Too heartbreaking.

              1. Damn, Ponder is awful. He should be cut if he can’t cover the third down and keep this drive alive for Peterson.

                1. He did. Of course, he needed a Buckeye to get open for the pass.

                  1. The Falcons cut Jenkins. Not that I know why but he was a first-round pick they bailed on.

                2. I thought he had a decent game today. If he could make some more of those 65 yarders Vikings would be in business.

              2. AP’s gonna get close. 9 fucking yards short. Damn.

                1. Vikings’ coach was trying to save his job by getting in the playoffs, but I thought they had plenty of time to spike the ball, dial a run play for Peterson, and call a timeout.

                  They would have barely squeaked by if it succeeded, but falling short by 9 yards is a travesty for the way Peterson played this season. He made running the ball sexy again.

                  1. What if he fumbles? What if there’s a bobbled snap on the FGA?

                    1. “What if he fumbles? What if there’s a bobbled snap on the FGA?”

                      True. That’s why I think the coach elected to kick it. But the game was tied. It would have likely gone into overtime. I’m not saying it’s a smart move. I just think the league MVP ought to be able to pick up 9 yards, or at least protect the ball.

                    2. I love AP but that was the right move. Too many possibilities for a mistake.

                    3. Was anybody else hoping the kicker missed and the vikings won the OT coin toss? I really wanted to see him break the record, especially if it was on a breakaway 80 yard TD run.

                    4. Eric Dickerson.

                    5. I really wanted to see AP get it but no, I’m a Vikings fan first I definitely did not want to see a miss.

                    6. I think a lot of Packer fans were hoping Walsh would miss, and the Packers would win the OT coin toss.

                      Of course, the Packers would have had a first-round bye locked up if it weren’t for fucking Lance Easley.

                    7. My son and I were actively rooting for Blair to miss the FG. We wanted OT and a chance for AP to get the record.

                      The really sad thing about coming up 9 yards short was that they coddled AP at the beginning of the year. (First 6 games = 84,60,86,102, 88, 79 yds).

                      And that they sat him at the end of the Texans game.

                      The kid and I are both Vikes fans, but I’d rather see AP get the record than go into the playoffs.

        2. At least Obama knows it’s not his fault.

  13. Wow, this Green Bay-Minnesota game is fun to watch. Go Vikings! I don’t want those deep-dish eating mongoloids to make the playoffs.

    1. dontchaknowit

    2. Me either. #FireLovie

    3. Unfortunately the rematch next week is at Green Bay.

  14. Update: Venezuela’s vice president says Hugo Chavez has suffered “new complications” following his cancer surgery in Cuba.

    1. Unpossible! I’ve been reliably informed by various promoters of government medical care that Cubans have the best medical system on earth!

    2. Maybe Chavez needs to check into Cancer Treatment of America – that spiritual center the Tea-bagging “libertarian” asshole Matt Welch wrote about who is ripping off Medicare for a living.

      A “rent-seeker” – in the parlance of HyR.

      1. The only reference to Cancer Treatment Centers of America I could turn up in a search of and via Google was this:…..omworks-pu

        Maybe Shreek needs to check into the nearest mental health facility.

      2. The only reference to Cancer Treatment Centers of America I could turn up in a search of and via Google was this:…..omworks-pu

        Maybe Shreek needs to check into the nearest mental health facility.

        1. The fuck, squirrels?

  15. Who’s stupider here, the protester or the journalist reporting on the protester?

    1. At least the protester will be safe.


    Hillary Clinton was hospitalized with a blood clot related to a previous concussion from earlier this month. I’ll avoid making light of her situation because isn’t this the same thing that killed Natasha Richardson a few years ago?

    1. I heard the clot occurred in the Benghazi vein.

    2. This blood clot won’t kill Hillary. The same thing that killed Vincent Foster will kill her: knowledge of the truth.

      1. Bill Clinton wouldn’t allow her to get knocked off. He’s not exactly turning the chubby interns’ heads anymore at his age.

        1. Really? Like he ever did, $$$ and power turns the head of young slut interns, not looks, ya doofus, like Willy would have been quite the catch as an Arkansas pig farmer with no money or power.

          Nope, he would have been stuck with an ugly and obnoxious wife and would have been better off sleeping with his pigs.

          1. Nope, he would have been stuck with an ugly and obnoxious wife and would have been better off sleeping with his pigs.

            Which is what happened anyway.

  17. And so it begins

    1. Flu? Or diseased-monkey sex?

      1. There might be a demand uptick for backhoes and front-loaders.

  18. Always interesting in its unpredictability, H&R. You never know when a thread about Jazz will wind up in a discussion about sports or how tyrants will ultimately meet their demise.

    Vikings? Meh, Adrian Peterson is one of the great running backs of all time, knew that before he was even drafted.

    Hitlary? Just another in a long line of tyrants who will die. It’s the only one thing that makes me hesitate when I think about the quest for eternal life. Now tyrants just eventually die of natural causes. When we succeed in the fountain of youth quest, and we will, we will have to set aside a special ‘kill tyrants because they won’t die on their own’ fund.

    1. You know whar would be good to have to help overthrow a tyrant? Assault rifles.

      1. I’m with ya, bro.

        Almost joined the NRA today, holding off until next year when I can have time to think more alcohol free. But whatever I do, it will be focused in a pro-gun direction.

        I plan to buy more weapons, including an AR-15 type, and to become more active in pro-gun support.

        Once they have all our weapons to resist, stomping out the rest of our original amendments, including the first, will without doubt in my mind, follow quickly.

      2. We’re sorely lacking in crew served weapons.

      3. The US military would chew up and spit out a bunch of guys running around with AR-15s and then break for lunch.

        The only hope if something like that came to pass would be for mass defections of troops who bring their equipment with them over to the rebel side.

        1. Tulpi-poo, we already know that you are a statist sheep. Do you really need to declare your subsurvience to your masters every time that you show up here?

          And do you really think that some of us gun nut anarchists do not have friends and family in the military?

          1. What does that have to do with anything?

            It’s going to come down to winning defections from the military if it ever happens. Civilian ARs aren’t going to matter either way. The realities of the world have changed vastly since Hamilton wrote in Fed 29:

            [I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude[,] that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens.

            There is no way that private individuals could hope to form a body “little, if at all, inferior to” a modern military. The realities of warfare have changed drastically in the intervening 225 years.

            1. Of course the US military in a perfect world would quickly defeat any force that came against them, foreign or domestic.

              This is not a perfect world, see Afghanistan, Vietnam, etc.

              Anyone who thinks that if a state, such as TX, decides to openly rebel against the feds, that the feds are just going ot send in tanks and air stikes and all of that, are totally delusional. The result would be civil war and our elected officials would become prime targets. They are all a bunch of wimps, this scenario is never going to happen. Obama can put on his Abe hat all he wants, but he will never have the balls to take on the challenge.

              This is not 1865 and the federal government will stand down when the citizens rebel, period, end of story.

            2. I said they would be a nice thing to have which they would, not necessarily the only thing. Would you not fight a tyrant that declared themself president for life and if there was no longer any hope of a political solution?

              1. Would you not fight a tyrant that declared themself president for life and if there was no longer any hope of a political solution?

                I not only would, but I plan on having to before I die. And I bet I’m not the only one on here that feels this way.

                1. As your 2nd favorite TNG recurring character said, “Boy, don’t ever say that again, especially not at your age in a world that’s not ready for such… such dangerous nonsense.”

                  1. “You’ve been… uninteresting.”

              2. Well, our body politic must have deteriorated mightily if a political solution was impossible. I would only openly fight if there were a significant hope for success, which there probably wouldn’t be in that situation.

                1. So you would meekly submit then?

                  Wow what a pussy.

                  1. Those who live humbly for freedom will ultimately cause much more trouble for tyranny than those who die nobly for it.

                    1. Living humbly for freedom and meekly submitting to the boot stomping on your face are two totally different things. And someone that says “I’ll fight if it looks like my side is gonna win” is about as chickenshit as you can get.

                    2. Living humbly for freedom and meekly submitting to the boot stomping on your face are two totally different things.

                      Yet you immediately assumed that the latter is the only alternative to turning yourself into cannon fodder.

                    3. I assumed the latter because you said this:

                      I would only openly fight if there were a significant hope for success, which there probably wouldn’t be in that situation.

                      Sounds like a bandwagon-jumper to me.

                    4. OK, but where do you get meek submission out of that?

                      If the chance of success is low, it’s better for proponents of freedom to live another day and slowly subvert the tyranny rather than to get themselves killed for nothing.

                    5. Yeah, you hold out and lull them to sleep after their victory over those who would stand up for liberty and fight. Then, when they’ve crushed us and created their police state utopia, you can make your move.

                      You’re a regular George fucking Washington, you are.

                    6. It’s great that so many of you are willing to die for the cause, but that’s the easy part. You only have to do one thing, and then your burden is relieved forever. There’s something to be said for being willing to live for a cause, to grind yourself away day in and day out keeping the faith.

                      There is no virtue in dying just because – you have to be productive in your death.

                2. Fuck hope. I’ll be taking some bitches out.

                3. I would only openly fight if there were a significant hope for success, which there probably wouldn’t be in that situation.

                  10:1 odds good enough? It was for Mannie in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.

                4. Mal & Zoe fought knowing they would lose.

                  1. And in real life, as opposed to a TV show, they would have made no impact. Just like Captain Kirk would have been killed or relieved of duty like 36 times in real life if he did the stuff he did in Star Trek.

        2. To your second point, I would think most soldiers would be on the right side. To your second point, in open warfare it would obviously be a slaughter but that is not the only tactic available.

          1. My second point was addressing your first obviously.

        3. The defections would be massive if the government were the aggressor. Air support would be the key, however.

          1. Air stikes against citizens of the USA, by our own government, would end the USA as a superpower, forever.

            As you said, defections would be massive.

            I don’t see anyway out of a confrontation, the nation is too divied now. But I hope it will be a peaceful solution and I think that it will be, in some type of split up of the union.

            1. Unfortunately, the political divisions today are not really geographical in nature. So a nice partition isn’t feasible unless you have mass population displacements.

              1. the political divisions today are not really geographical in nature

                That can be fixed.

                Or otherwise, the proglodytes give up on trying to rule a nation 3000 miles across and 350 million inhabitants, who mostly disagree with them, from a small settlement on the banks of the Potomac.

                Look, man, it’s already started. CO and WA just passed MJ legalization and spit in the face of the feds. If you think this is not only the beginning then you are a bigger fool than I already thought you were.

                1. And they also voted for the biggest power-centralizing president in US history. That vote was about MJ, not about federalism.

                  This partition is going to be very messy.

                  1. Does nobody vote in Alaska? Weird.

                    1. Maybe Ron Paul is in white.

        4. You do realize when a guy with an AR-15 kills another guy with an M-240, it doesn’t disappear with his dead body like on GTA, right? “That guy with the AR-15” would become “that guy with the AR-15 and M-240.”

          1. It seems likely that there would be way more instances of the reverse happening. “Today we may make the enemy pay ten times our loss at the passage and yet [we may] rue the exchange. For he can afford to lose a host better than we to lose a company.”

          2. A .22 RF is much better for that sort of thing. Preferably with a can.

        5. The US military would chew up and spit out a bunch of guys running around with AR-15s and then break for lunch.

          Taking it and keeping it are two different things. They have to let their guard down sometime. Besides, 500,000 vs. 300,000,000 requires a 600:1 ratio, and killing civilians runs down morale fast.

          1. and killing civilians runs down morale fast

            And since most of our military have civilian family, it runs it down at an accelerated rate.

            Look, people like Tulpa with statist dreams of the US military running rough shod over the civilian population are delusional.

            If they are ready to die, then bring it on, otherwise, I would suggest some more civilized compromise. This is not 1938 or 1865, you want to rule with no opposition, then I suggest, you better be ready to meet your maker.

            1. Oh come on. Where are you getting the idea that I would *like* the military to crush a civilian rebellion on behalf of a tyrannical govt? I’m just stating the fact that if it comes down to that the military will win. Easily.

              You don’t need to demonize people who disagree with you.

              If the military troops refuse to fight their countrymen, we don’t need ARs to defeat the govt. If they don’t refuse to fight, ARs won’t help us. Trying to head off a ban on “assault rifles” by saying they’re necessary to fight against the government is going to make a ban MORE likely, not less.

              1. You don’t need to demonize people who disagree with you

                No, I am not doing that. I have family and friends in the military, and I can tell you that there will be a split.

                I am not demonizing you.

                I am just telling you, that you are wrong.

                There will be no ban on ‘assault rifles’ and if there is, it will only accelerate the ownership of such weapons and strengthen the resolve against the gun grabbers.

                You are not going to win this one. It’s over, just accept it.

          2. Where do you even get 500,000? A large majority of the military is tail of some sort, whether administrative, mechanics, logistics, acquisition, or some other function. Actual riflemen, tankers, and pilots are much fewer.

    2. Vikings? Meh, Adrian Peterson is one of the great running backs of all time, knew that before he was even drafted.

      He is probably the best all-around running back the game has seen since O.J. Simpson, and the geniuses in the media gave Matt freaking Leinart the Heisman over him! Their sports intelligence is about as bereft as their political intelligence.

      1. Mike,

        That draft class was full of talent over Leinart, like maybe Marshawn Lynch, lol.

  19. OT: I happened to watch the episode of ST:TNG last night where Dr Crusher is on the ship where people start disappearing (Remember Me).

    Banjos and I were laughing almost to the point of tears every time The Traveler and Wesley Crusher gave that Frodo/Sam Gamgee look at each other.


    1. Funny, it’s always the ultra tolerant ones who see gayness in every deep male relationship.

      If there had been a man like the Traveler in my life at that age I would have turned out very differently.

  20. And Tony Romo is naturally showing yet again that no matter how many padded stats he accumulates, at heart he’s a loser.

    1. I wouldn’t go so far as to call him a loser, but he’s defin…yeah, nevermind. He’s a loser.

      1. The one fucking time I want the Cowboys to win, and they’re not. Of course.

        1. Fuck, Epi, what does it matter?, the Sea Chickens are invincible. Relax, man.

          1. Oh, you want them to win so the Seahawks will play Dallas in Round 1. Dude, they match up better against Washington’s defense than Dallas’s.

            1. Actually, I don’t care. I am just messing with Epi.

              Dallas sucks. Sea Chickens? Meh, we will see.

              I am thinking that right now I am a Bengals fan since they just beat the Crows, and I live in MD now but grew up in Cincy.

              1. Hey, I grew up just north of Cincy. Springboro represent.

                1. Hamilton, Fairfield, Indian Hill, Sharonville, and of that ring a bell, meu amigo?

                  My grandfather was a contractor in the area, we were building all over the place.

                  1. Oh yeah. Sharonville had the big mall and Hamilton High School was the “Big Blue”.

                    1. I spent a lot of time in Butler county before we started moving all over the country.

                      Some of the most craziest moments of my life were in Hamilton and Oxford, OH, total hedonism. I was 16-19 years.

      2. He’s like the Mark Sanchez of the NFC.

        1. Whoa, dude, that’s cold. Seriously cold. Brian Hoyer is the Mark Sanchez of the NFC.

          1. Question: why the hell would you want the Cowboys to win a game? I mean ever? Jerry Jones is the biggest asshole owner in professional sports with the possible exception of Daniel Sn…

            Oh, I get it now.

            1. I assumed it was because he fears what RG3 will do to the She-Hawks.

              1. Possibly, but that’s misguided. The Redskins secondary isn’t as good or experienced as Dallas’s and with a rookie QB, playing against a young secondary is a big help.

                That TD and conversion are two examples of their weak secondary.

            2. Tulpy-Poo is right that the Redskins and RG3 are more dangerous than the Cowboys. However, on reflection, I sort of want the Seahawks to have one of their games this season where they crush their supposedly very good opponents, and doing that to the Redskins would be way more awesome than to the Cowboys. You know, like crushing the 49ers 42-13. Like that.

              Also, the Cowboys just scored a touchdown.

              1. Problem is they won’t have any home games unless they meet the Vikings in the NFC Champiionship.

                1. The home game effect, while it exists, does not change the fact that they’ve really come together towards the end of this season. It’s a young team with a lot of inexperience, but they’ve learned a lot this year and it’s showing. The 12th man is just loud, not some magic token.

                  And Romo just got intercepted.

          2. Is Hoyer as overrated and overpaid as Romo? Honest question there, but since I’m not too familiar with Hoyer I’m guessing not.

            1. No. Are you implying Sanchez is overrated? I thought everyone but Rex Ryan agreed that Sanchex was horrible.

              1. Yes, finally. ESPN was falling all over itself to compliment the guy as late as the start of this season.

                1. ESPN would have done the same for any QB in the New York market.*

                  *Unless his name was Tim Tebow

                  1. Does that count for me or for Epi?

                    1. That was about the Sanchize, so you decide.

                2. No one listens to what ESPN says. That’s silly. You’re silly.

            2. What the fuck is a “Brian Hoyer”?

          3. Does that mean Matt Flynn is the Tebow of the NFC?

    2. He can pass to either team.
      Who else can do that so effectively?

      1. Haha. And make sure if you’re gonna take a sack that it pushes you 10 yards out of field goal range.

        What a scrub.

        1. I think the team has turned on him.

        2. The Redskins punter has more pride than Romo.

        3. Haha, looks like RG3 tried to match him for getting sacked out of FGR.

          1. You can’t match Romo’s ability to throw a game away! No way RGIII throws that pick.


      2. Holy cow, that was a Tim Tebow throw. LOL.

  21. Dallas is back within a score.

    1. Oh, shit. That stiffarm on the kickoff return was tits.

  22. If Peterson wanted the record so bad, he should have broken it with a game to spare, like Calvin did.

    Speaking of which, 2 of the top 4/5 receivers in the league (in yards) will be from my alma mater. Thomas of Denver will finish 4th unless Bryant gets another 40 or so yards tonight.

    And if Sanchez didnt suck so bad, Hill might have had a better year for the Jets (and not got hurt). Tebow would have worked for him, he is used to inaccurate QBs who rarely throw.

  23. I’m surprised a production assistant that really cares about football hasn’t tried to poison Collinsworth and Michaels yet. I bet they have a booth “taste tester” like the kings of old or they have a clause in their contract that all food and beverages that come into the booth have to be in an unopened container. Otherwise, there’s no way they’d still be alive.

    1. see also: Gruden, Jon and Buck, Joe

    2. What do you mean? That assessment of Romo’s INT was gold.

    3. sloopy, you’d be fired the first week if you had to do Coach Collinsworth’s job. You’d call someone a xenophobe cunt or something and become another scalp for Brent Bozell’s lipstick case.

      1. I wouldn’t make it out of the first quarter before I called some primadonna a useless twat. My only saving grace would be the fact that the NFL tends to schedule SNF and MNF games poorly so few people would be watching.

        1. Whatever you do, don’t pick on Bob Costas. That’s too easy.

  24. And Romo throws the INT.

    That is probably that.

  25. Collinsworth: “It will haunt him at least until his next opportunity.”

    You just can’t make up commentary that bad.

    1. If you paid me $110,000 a week I could.

    2. you’ve never listened to a hockey game with Pierre McGuire?

    3. I recall a MNF game in the 90s where boomer said “both teams have lead, and now both teams have trailed”.

  26. Skins are going to end up kicking a FG after the 2 minute warning and give Romo another chance, arent they?

    1. Yep, but another chance to do what, exactly? My money is on him getting Dallas to the Redskins 30 yard line an then throwing the ball to a wide open defender.

      1. Im not going to criticize his art.

  27. I love how checked out the announcers are when they have to pump the networks regular shows

  28. There’s that Redskins song again. You know who else said “Hail Victory” a lot?

    1. Your mom?

      Well that’s that. Seahawks will play the Redskins.

    2. Is it that fat British guy who said “Nozzy” and was a terrible painter?

  29. Who wants to bet that Romo turns the ball over again? I’ll bet somebody a Reason print subscription for a year that he turns it over somehow.

    1. Clock’s going to kill this one.

      1. I do feel a little silly posting that with ten seconds left.

        1. According to some viewers, you could be Collinsworth’s replacement.

          1. I lack the charisma.

  30. Baby detail and James Bond time. Later, all…

  31. Cowboy QBs in important “win or go home” games:
    Aikman 12-4
    Staubach 12-6

    Romo 1-6

  32. manning, romo, roethlisberger, brees all watching wilson, luck, griffin in playoffs.

  33. manning, romo, roethlisberger, brees all watching wilson, luck, griffin in playoffs.

  34. Wow, the cornball brotha won? The big eared one gotta have a talk with that boy.

  35. AP’s reporting on the EvilCliff is stellar as always:

    Democrats and Republicans have failed so far to reach a budget deal despite intense negotiations. Much of the impasse centers on how to address the automatic tax increases that take effect in 2013. That’s when tax cuts first enacted under President George W. Bush, and extended under President Barack Obama, are scheduled to expire.
    That would drive taxes up for nearly all Americans and deplete the already fragile economy of $600 billion. And budget cuts of 8 percent or 9 percent would hit most of the federal government, touching all sorts of things from the military to weather forecasting.

    Back when they were talking about rich people getting their taxes increased, the tax totals were going to help decrease the deficit. But when nonrich people get their taxes increased, it’s depleting the economy of money (yes, I know “deplete” is not the right word, but that’s what they used).

  36. You would think that the AP would be out for blood from the guy who signed the law that created the fiscal cliff… but it seems they don’t even know who that guy is. Maybe they cut their research department a bit too much.

  37. Oy vey! Russkij narod vezdesdushhij!

    Good morning, Reasonoids!

    1. Oni vzyali nashu rabotu!

  38. Nicest chat and chat Iraqi entertaining Adject all over the world

  39. Myers concentrates on developments in jazz from 1945 to 1972. It was during these postwar years that influential nonjazz events became more abundant and potent he writes. SohbetChat

  40. It is complicated. All of us, musicians and laymen alike. SohbetSohbet Odalar?

  41. with all the innocence of youth, I frequently expressed surprise upon discovering that few of my libertarian friends shared my interest in this form of music.Sohbet SiteleriChat Siteleri

  42. But they were partially responsible, Myers writes, for “the dramatic moment in time when jazz was first documented on record. G?zel S?zler?ark? S?zleri

  43. After the war, the vise-like grip of the three major record companies. SohbetChat

  44. More immigration = more Democratic voters = more statism.Mynet SohbetMynet Sohbet

  45. by the American Federation of Musicians, which led to the emergence of many small record companies. Film izleDizi izle

  46. Look, people like Tulpa with statist dreams of the US military running rough shod over the civilian population are delusional. SohbetSohbet Odalar?

  47. But even if they were a Republican bloc.OyunMirc indir

  48. And someone that says “I’ll fight if it looks like my side is gonna win. R?ya TabirleriYemek Tarifleri

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.