Print Media

Watch Matt Welch Talk Fear of a Koch Media Takeover on HuffPost Live

|

This evening I participated in a HuffPost Live discussion with the even-handed title of "Koch Brothers Plan for Media Takeover" (subhed: "MEDIA MONOPOLIES"). It concerned the reported interest of Charles and David Koch (the latter of whom is a trustee of the Reason Foundation) in buying the Tribune Company's eight newspapers, a portfolio headed up by my ex-employer, the L.A. Times.

Hosted by former RT personality Alyona Minkovski, the panel was filled with people who have been advancing this particular story: Hillel Aron, who broke the news of possible Koch interest for the LA Weekly; Kathleen Miles, who reported yesterday in The Huffington Post on a recent gathering of LAT newsroom types at which half or so of the audience raised their hands when asked if they would quit after a Koch purchase; and Daniel Fisher, who published a shrewd analysis of the Kochs' potential interest over at Forbes.

Here is the full segment:

Some related past writing from me:

* "Are Big City Newspaper Inevitably Liberal Due to Market Forces?"

* "When Losers Write History: Why legacy-newspaper media reporters get their own industry so wrong"

* "Newspaper Daze" (book review of James O'Shea's The Deal From Hell: How Moguls and Wall Street Plundered Great American Newspapers)

* "Free Sam Zell! Why media activists should be mocked for trying to block the buying and selling of newspapers and television stations."

NEXT: Sen. Graham Wants Committee to Investigate Boston Bombing

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Damn people with money, thinking they can spend it as they wish!

  2. a recent gathering of LAT newsroom types at which half or so of the audience raised their hands when asked if they would quit after a Koch purchase

    Just like they moved to Canada after Bush got elected?

    (sneer)

    1. They will be ready to do that right up until someone explains to them that you don’t get unemployment if you quit your job.

      1. Right. Having half the staff quit a bankrupt company does quite the favor for the incoming buyers. They don’t have to negotiate any severance packages.

        Also, the whole situation exposes the “media neutrality” lie.

        1. “Also, the whole situation exposes the “media neutrality” lie.”

          Someone should slam this in the face of those who will “quit”.
          In large, red letters: HYPOCRITE!

        2. Also, the whole situation exposes the “media neutrality” lie.

          Is it even a lie any more, or is it of a knowing wink between those in the know? I do love the collective pants-shitting sessions that have been taking place. DELICIOUS.

          That whole freedom of speech thing is so passe.

    2. Hint:
      Sign your name. You won’t have to quit; you’ll be fired, asshole.

      1. As above comment mentioned, if ever Koch brother bought LA Times, they much preferred if you just quit. Hell, they pretty much preferred if the entire staff quit, so they can start over without paying severance package.

    3. Because jobs for reporters are just booming.

  3. has anyone said “kochtopus” yet?

    1. I say it every night during my prayers before bed.

      But in supplication, not out of fear.

    2. See my post, at 10:14. Thank you.

    3. Archduke Pantsfan| 4.30.13 @ 9:55PM |#
      “has anyone said “kochtopus” yet?”

      What was it called when Murdoch was saving their damn paychecks?

    4. The Kochtopus is only 70% complete. Buying the LA Times and the Chicago Tribune will allow us to behold the power of an 80% complete Kochtopus.

      1. Fortunately, the Kochtopus uses base 8 so after this it will be totally complete.

      2. I hope by newspapers they mean websites.

  4. Kathleen Miles, who reported yesterday in The Huffington Post on a recent gathering of LAT newsroom types at which half or so of the audience raised their hands when asked if they would quit after a Koch purchase;

    Maybe I’m just a spiteful asshole, but I would make note of every one of their faces and hold them to that manifestation of their intent to be bound by the terms of “if the Koch’s buy our paper, we quit.”

    1. They are talking out of their asses. Journalism jobs are impossible to come by. There are literally hundreds of qualified out of work journalists for every single position at the LA times who would crawl to LA to take one of them.

      Yeah, you guys go ahead and quit. Good luck with that.

      1. John| 4.30.13 @ 10:14PM |#
        “They are talking out of their asses. Journalism jobs are impossible to come by.”

        Hey, maybe Huffpo can hire ’em all at a hefty salary!
        Or not.

      2. I’m sure there are some very literate high school students who could easily replace the LA Times staff and no one would notice.

        Get’em while their young, don’t know the value of a dollar, and haven’t incurred the time and expense of Propaganda School (Journalism School).

        1. Get’em while their young, don’t know the value of a dollar, and haven’t incurred the time and expense of Propaganda School (Journalism School).

          This was my dating strategy in my early twenties.

        2. As far as liberal rags go, the LA times is actually not so bad. They occasionally put on libertarian airs, during the porn condom requiremment and so on.

      3. Yeah, you guys go ahead and quit. Good luck with that.

        Door. Ass.

  5. Netflix losing almost 1,800 titles from its streaming library starting tomorrow

    1. The instant watcher dot com site must be getting hammered. The individual pages are taking forever to load.

      1. You can also use moreflicks.com to find out which service has what title.

      2. I’ve given up after five pages. What I did see though was that many of the movies are obscure and not much of a loss.

        Of course Tony will be mad that Barney and Bob the Builder are going away.

        1. “Of course Tony will be mad that Barney and Bob the Builder are going away.”

          And shithead will demand gov’t regulations to make them available again, because stuff!

    2. I read that as titties

    3. That number includes 15 seasons of South Park

      The entirety of that show is already available for free at the official South Park website. Not much of a loss.

    4. There’s always new reasons not to get netflix.

      for every Adaptation that’s on the chopping block this month there’s also a Barb Wire.

      I’d miss Barb Wire a million times more than Adaptation.

  6. OH NOES! Kochtopus!

    The media was so fair and totally unbiased, and then…. KOCHTOPUS!

  7. GE can buy NBC. Pinch or Paunch or whatever the fuck his name is Sulzburger can go from 60s communist to publishing the NYT from daddy and no one cares. But anyone outside of the Left buys a newspaper and that is horrible.

    Go to hell you fascist fucks.

  8. I love seeing progtards bitch and moan.

  9. Apparently the Kochs are significantly more hated than the leftists’ traditional right-wing media boogeyman Rupert Murdoch.

    1. Emanuel Goldstein is treacherous and takes many disguises. Sometimes, he’s Newt Gingrich, other times, he’s Bob Dole, except when he’s being Karl Rove, or when he puts on some heels and adopts his Sarah Palin guise, but when he really wants to be sneaky, he splits himself in two and becomes Charles and David Koch.

      No matter what his disguise, Goldstein shall never prevail over our glorious Oceania!

  10. The Kochs are to the left idiots as Soros is to the wingnuts.

    Personally, I appreciate both their efforts in freedom and civil liberties.

    But a fuckstick like “John” (Red Tony) reacts to Soros with the same idiocy as a moonbat reacts to the “Kochtopus”.

    1. IMO, Tulpa is Red Tony. Say what you want about John, he’s not a partisan hack with no principles like Tulpa.

      1. Tulpa is not a Republican though. Tulpa simply has beliefs that defy classification.

        1. Tulpa simply has beliefs that defy classification.

          I disagree. His beliefs fall squarely into the circle of statist assholes who hate anyone they don’t understand or associate with, aka, foreigners.

          This is something along the lines of fascism.

      2. Tulpa’s like Cthulu Tony. His morality is simply not comprehensible to those of us who are not Great Old Ones.

        1. Fucking asshole; this comment cost me a mouthful of DFH right through my nostrils.

      3. John is certainly a partisan hack. He even routinely defends the empty tampon Sarah Palin.

        1. …Empty tampon?

          1. Her entire net worth to society would be the blood contained therein.

            1. Sweet sexism and tolerance, bro. Tell us again about the party of compassion and realism.

        2. John is certainly a partisan hack.

          Said the pot to the kettle.

          1. “Said the pot to the kettle.”

            Certainly true, but for all of my gripes with John, it seem he knows he’s a right-wing partisan.
            Dipshit here fantasizes he’s some sort of ‘independent’ while licking Obozo’s cock and trying to fuck his daddy.

            1. You’re an idiot obsessed with cock.

              I am far more libertarian than Red Tony. My single “progressive” allowance is the Federal Reserve (how much like Milton F.)

              John is a Santorum like creature with a full Cheney war boner and a penchant for a Christian Aborto-Freak authoritarian state.

              1. am far more libertarian than Red Tony

                Umm, no, you’re not. Get your head out of Obamas arse for 2 seconds, and then maybe we can talk about it, when your brain starts to recover from total head up arse insertion.

                1. Yes, I am. All I have said regarding Obama is that he is better than Bush, McCain, or Romney.

                  He meets that low bar easily.

                  Go ahead and defend the GOP now, you “libertarian” (snickers).

                  1. Palin’s Buttplug| 4.30.13 @ 11:13PM |#
                    “Yes, I am. All I have said regarding Obama is that he is better than Bush, McCain, or Romney.”

                    Yep, dipshit, that pretty much lists your claims. And your stupidity, since Obozo doesn’t quite measure up to Carter.

              2. John is a Santorum like creature with a full Cheney war boner and a penchant for a Christian Aborto-Freak authoritarian state.

                Now this is just a lie. With the exception of his admittedly turgid warboner, nothing John believes is at odds with libertarianism. That includes abortion, by the way. If you believe abortion is murder, then it would violate the rights of the child, and therefore there’s nothing unlibertarian about being opposed to abortion.

                He’s not anti-gay, pro-drug war, pro-police state or any of the other stuff that a guy like Santorum is in favor of.

                1. He is an Aborto-Freak. He wants to construct a surveillance state to observe women for nine months against their will.

                  The “war on terror” is nothing compared to the “war on maternal and sexual privacy”.

                  1. He wants to construct a surveillance state to observe women for nine months against their will.

                    When the fuck did he ever say this? If he’s against abortion, that does not follow that he believes we should create a surveillance state and watch women for nine months. Show me a cite of him saying this.

                  2. Hey buttfuck, care to voice your opinion on the fact that GWB’s approval rating is as high as your savior’s?

                    Tell us how you feel about this development.

                  3. The “war on terror” is nothing compared to the “war on maternal and sexual privacy”.

                    I believe you mean “WAR ON WIMMINZ.” But what you don’t know is that I am the designer of the UConn rape-Husky. I am most proud of its extra-rapey, male privilege filled, eyes that say “don’t mess with me.”

                  4. Palin’s Buttplug| 4.30.13 @ 11:16PM |#
                    “He is an Aborto-Freak. He wants to construct a surveillance state to observe women for nine months against their will.”

                    Yeah, dipshit, we got Obozocare as an alternative.
                    And I’m quite sure you’re thrilled, since you haven’t yet figured out how to fuck your daddy.

              3. Palin’s Buttplug| 4.30.13 @ 10:56PM |#
                “You’re an idiot obsessed with cock.”

                No, dipshit, you have daddy issues and you lick Obozo’s cock and you’re been called on it.
                Get back to us after you’re worked out you daddy issues, asshole.

                1. Quit talking about cock, you fucking one-track idiot.

                  1. Palin’s Buttplug| 4.30.13 @ 11:27PM |#
                    “Quit talking about cock, you fucking one-track idiot.”

                    Quit obsessing with your daddy issues, you fucking stupid shit.

                    1. Why are you guys interacting with Shrike like he’s people?

                      When you walk down the street, and you come across a homeless guy who pissed himself and is screaming at a wall about the Illuminati, do you talk to him? No. You keep walking.

                      So why are you talking to him when he shows up on the Internet?

              4. Why on Earth would I pay the least attention to the pronouncements on someone’s libertarian credentials of someone calling themselves “Palin’s Buttplug”?

        3. Please don’t torture the metaphors.

      4. Tulpa is like the anti-libertarian, libertarian wannabe.

        Agree with you about John, the Red Tony thing was hilarious, but John is a real Libertarian, even if a small L, we all got to start somewhere, and IMHO, John is progress…., err, getting there…

        1. John’s like someone who’s straight but has one exception for a guy he’s strangely attracted to.

          Like ‘I’m a libertarian, but whenever I think about Muslim’s, I just get this war boner. I can’t help it.’

          1. John’s a good guy, Irish, totally unlike Tulpa, who is either a complete asshole, or a troll.

          2. Libertarians usually reason, but whenever they think about foreign affairs, they get a boner for dead BROWN BABIeZ in the same way that gun grabbers get a boner over dead Newtown kids.

            1. We really need profiles so I can tell people apart, because iirc you could just a easily be describing yourself.

              1. No you’re just projecting.

              2. That is it. I am making a google doc for everyone to reference. It will include handle, level of partisan hackery (1-5 in each of 3 categories…if you need to ask what categories this document isn’t for you), probability of sock-puppetry, ability to argue in good faith (scale 1-10), and notes on commenting style.

                I wouldn’t have to do this if Grylliade would do their job…MARKET FAILURE…WHERE IS THE WIKI????

            2. Says the foreign policy sociopath.

              1. No you’re just infantile and morally stunted.

                1. Said the pot to the kettle

                2. Yeah, the guy with ethical qualms about killing innocent people is the “infantile, morally stunted” one. You really are a psycho, Cychotoxic.

            3. Unlike some people, we don’t forget that government is full of incompetent corrupt sociopaths when foreign policy is discussed

    2. The Kochs are to the left idiots as Soros is to the wingnuts

      You already said that, and it wasn’t witty or funny, or smart, the first time.

      1. But it is true.

        Soros is a Hayek/Popper student of Open Society Capitalism.

        He rates higher than the Kochs on freedom.

        1. Some of us are not obsessed with the Koch Bros, or Soros, but are paying more attention to what congress is doing.

          Get you head out of Obamas arse.

          OK? Can you do that? I don’t think that you can. Prove it.

          1. Congress is in near total gridlock again – like in the Clinton years.

            Dem POTUS (for social freedom) and GOP House (as an opposition party) is the best we can get. And Dems don’t have a Viagra War Boner like the GOP does.

            No one here can argue that single party control is better than this.

            No one.

            1. No one here is arguing for single party control.

              Most of us favor gridlock, so that they can’t do any more damage.

              That being said, the most Libertarian congress critters are Republican, and that is not a trend that I see reversing in the near future.

              So when are you going to stop pretending that Obama is better than Bush, because, he’s not.

              1. Well, there are no libertarians in Congress but you said “most” libertarian thus I cannot dispute you.

                And Obama is certainly better than Bush. You are no doubt in the insipid LIBYA = IRAQ crowd and immune to logic.

                Libya = Iraq — EXACTLY THE SAME!!!

                Morinic.

                1. Not the same at all. Dubya actually got Congressional approval for his foreign adventures.

                2. Well, there are no libertarians in Congress but you said “most” libertarian thus I cannot dispute you

                  There certainly are Libertarians in congress, you damn fool.

                  1. No there are not. There are R’s and D’s and and a couple of I’s – no L’s.

                    1. No there are not. There are R’s and D’s and and a couple of I’s – no L’s.

                      FOOL! What do you think that Paul, Massie, and Amash are?

                      They aren’t any different than your heroes, the progtards parading as Dems.

                    2. OB is talking party affiliation, not political leanings. There are, unfortunately, no Libertarian (big L) Representatives or Senators.

                    3. Some folks just can’t fathom the difference between small l and big L. About ten years ago, I was chatting with a local tv news guy at a party (and yes, he was as dimwitted as most tv news folk.) I was telling him that PJ O’Rourke was libertarian (he was at the time) but tv news guy insisted that was impossible, because PJ wrote the book “Republican Party Reptile”. He just couldn’t see how someone could be libertarian and an R at the same time.

        2. Palin’s Buttplug| 4.30.13 @ 10:57PM |#
          “But it is true.”

          Yeah, dipshit, we all ahve fantasies.

        3. Soros is a Hayek/Popper student of Open Society Capitalism.

          I citation for this claim should be no problem then.

          Hint: Voices in your head are not a “citation”.

        4. “Soros… rates higher than the Kochs on freedom.”

          Tell it to the hundreds of Jews he gleefully helped send to Hitler’s ovens.

    3. Well, the Kochs never actually helped the real Nazis.

      1. Are you saying that the real Nazis were worse than the teabaggers?

        Why do you have the children?

        1. HATE the children, Goddamn you H&R!

          1. Why do you have the children, but also hate them?

      2. Cheney is a NAZI.

        See how easy it is to Godwin someone, idiot?

        1. Except unlike you he isn’t just saying it. Soros literally helped the Nazis, and has stated he feels no guilt over it.

          KROFT: My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson.

          Mr. SOROS: Yes. Yes.

          KROFT: Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.

          Mr. SOROS: Yes. That’s right. Yes.

          KROFT: I mean, that’s?that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?

          Mr. SOROS: Not?not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don’t?you don’t see the connection. But it was?it created no?no problem at all.

          KROFT: No feeling of guilt?

          Mr. SOROS: No.

          1. Oh, he’s also stated that it was the “happiest time of his life”.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1Qr7TnWG74

            1. I’ve pointed this out to PB before. The fact that he did that is excusable because he was only 14. Feeling no guilt about it is sociopathic.

              1. This, exactly. Although I’d argue that even at 14, he should have been able to recognize what he was doing was wrong. Going along with it to keep from being sent to the ovens yourself is one thing, but being guilt free over it…Jesus.

              2. A 14 yr old was forced into taking property via the NAZIs. He should not feel any guilt.

                How is it worse than the Bushpigs forcing a soldier into killing an innocent Iraqi?

                Yet those soldiers are “heros” to the nutcase GOP.

                1. There is really only one way to live without guilt in that situation (provided you live through it, anyway): Refuse to participate. If you go through with it, even to survive, you better fucking feel guilt, or at least remorse. He felt neither, and instead claimed it was the happiest time of your life. That’s Grade A Sociopath material right there.

                  1. *his life.

                2. Are you really comparing a United States soldier fighting for his life in an active war zone to someone saying that Nazi collaboration was the happiest time of his life?

                3. Palin’s Buttplug| 4.30.13 @ 11:34PM |#
                  ‘My daddy is really a nice guy and I should get to fuck him’

                  Got it, dipshit.

        2. Palin’s Buttplug| 4.30.13 @ 10:58PM |#
          “Cheney is a NAZI.
          See how easy it is to Godwin someone, idiot?”

          No, dipshit, what I see is one more false claim.

    4. Hey buttfuck. John is 10X the libertarian you are.

      BTW, did you hear GWB’s approval rating is equal to BHO’s?

      I’ve yet to hear you comment on this…

      …asshole!

      1. I commented on it in the second H/R article on that- I was first to comment by the way.

        1. I must have missed it. Can you please repeat you rationalization thoughts for those who missed out?

          1. Palin’s Buttplug| 4.23.13 @ 4:48PM |#

            That record low of 23% was during the financial meltdown.

            All forgotten by the masses now.

  11. I like the two-minute intro of people just standing around. Very cin?ma v?rit

    1. Holy crap! you weren’t even kidding a little bit. Why would they do that?

  12. Alyona is so fucking hot

  13. BONUS HOCKEY!!!!

    OVERTIME in St Louis and Chicago!

    1. “BONUS HOCKEY!!!!”
      Pretty sure there’s a Caber Toss somewhere near you.

  14. I like that it’s ‘plan for media takeover,’ not ‘Koch’s plan to purchase Tribune Company.’ I guess pointing out that it’s one news company which they’re legally trying to purchase doesn’t have the same Machiavellian ring.

  15. This is not to be confused for when a government takes over a media outlet.

    1. That’s fucked up. What are you doing, Harper?

      Didn’t he also use public funds to attack his opponent in the liberal party?

      1. Yeah, he made stupid ass attack ads after the Liberals selected a new leader.
        Some Conservative MPs asked him to give the money back.

    2. Er I don’t like that at all but the CBC is State Broadcasting, so…not that big a deal.

      Harper is still a statist fuck. Fuck him and his supporters.

      1. I’d be happier if they just stopped funding it.

        1. Good point. This is classic Harper: “no we’re not going to just fix it or eliminate the problem. We’ll just fuck with it in a unsabstantive manner that will probably cause me political problems later”. I actually look forward to PM Trudeau.

            1. Cool idea. Too bad that stupid fuck supports supply management and voted for S-7, our latest step towards a police state. Now police can detain us for 3 days under the right pretence.

  16. 5 yr old kills 2 yr old sis in Kentucky. 5 yr old got gun as birthday present. This is called an accidental death.

    1. It was an accidental death.

      1. No dude, the .22 had been plotting this for weeks. Investigators checked it’s browsing history and found that the rifle had been on Youtube watching videos on self-loading.

      2. It was certainly accidental. But leaving a loaded gun around where very young kids are seems like a pretty negligent move by the parents. It’s not that hard to make sure it is unloaded.

    2. A sad story, indeed.

      That being said, I’m still unwilling to hand over my civil liberties and firearms to a legion of suited, narcissistic thugs in DC.

    3. Yes, accidents happen all the time. Tragic.

      Or was there another point?

      1. WHO THE FUCK GIVES A GUN TO A FIVE YEAR OLD

        1. ^^^^LOADED GUN

          1. So your gripe is with bad parenting and not guns? I’ve seen you trolling these boards before bro, so I’m pretty sure you give zero shits about bad parenting. C’mon hyphen, show your fuckin’ hand.

            1. Someone who’s going to give a gun to a 5 year old should not be allowed to purchase any kind of firearm.

              1. And how would you know that someone is the type of person who would give a gun to a five year old? Should we form some kind of coven of wiccans and have them cast a mind reading spell?

              2. What about a knife? Or a telescoping police baton? Or a rolled up, Sunday edition of the New York Slimes? Should we all have to lose our freedom to own these items because of one derelict parent? Nevermind; I know what the answer is.

                1. A gun has one purpose. TO kill.

                  1. A gun has one purpose. TO kill.

                    Technically not correct, but let’s, for argument’s sake, say you’re correct.

                    What’s the point?

                    1. Did you read the article.
                      I’ll give you a few minutes.

                      Ok.
                      The gun the 5 year old was given was designed for children.

                      Why would you market a gun to children?

                    2. The gun is made for children to teach them how to shoot. There’s nothing wrong with that, since you can take them to the range and have your eye on them at all times, so no one will get shot.

                      The issue here is that the parents left the gun in a corner (???) because they assumed it wasn’t loaded (?!?!?!).

                      Basic gun safety tells you to always assume a gun is loaded, and to therefore not leave it lying around for your child to play with.

                      The parents should go to jail.

                    3. Shooting guns are synonymous with death. I’m racking my brain trying to figure out why a 5-year-old would need to learn how to shoot.

                    4. Shooting guns are synonymous with death. I’m racking my brain trying to figure out why a 5-year-old would need to learn how to shoot.

                      That’s because you are a fucking idiot and a pussy.

                    5. THIS. THIS. A THOUSAND TIMES THIS.

                    6. The parents should go to jail.

                      Not sure this was criminal. We had guns in corners when I was 5. Of course, my father made a point of the ramifications of “playing” with one, both from the perspective of what could happen if discharged AND the beet red color my ass would be if he ever caught me playing with it.

                    7. yeah, so reading comprehension not your strong suit?

                      The gun wasn’t Bubba’s which he happened to have left in the corner. It was a gift for Bubba Jr.
                      Bubba Jr. took it and shot his kid sister.
                      Happy Birthday!

                    8. Got it. FdA can reed good.

                      Yes, pussy, I know of many children who “own” firearms. They are given as gifts with the understanding they are not to be touched unless under the direct supervision of a parent.

                      Just because you are a cowardly, pussy who fears inanimate objects, doesn’t mean the rest of the world need be or teach their children to be cowardly like you.

                      Go away pussy.

                    9. let me make this clear, just so we both understand you see.
                      If your 5 year old picked up a shotgun and shot his sister, you’d punish him with an ass-whoopin?

                    10. 1. It wasn’t a shotgun, you ignorant fuck.

                      2. My 5 yo wouldn’t pick up a gun without my permission.

                      Just because a cowardly, pussy such as yourself cannot control their children, doesn’t mean everyone else is as bad a parent as you.

                    11. 5 year olds always do things without permission. because they are 5.

                    12. 5 year olds always do things without permission. because they are 5.

                      Perhaps the children of cowardly pussies do. Children of good parent don’t. You know how I know that, cowardly pussy?

                      Because when I was 5, I didn’t. My father was a good man and a good parent. He took me aside when I was 4 and showed me his rifle (that was sitting in the corner with the ammo not 3 feet away). He explained to me that it was to be respected but not feared. All guns are to be treated as loaded. Children are not to touch them without parental approval or there would be hell to pay. He explained how a mishandled firearm could discharge and possibly kill my mom or little brother and asked me how I would feel if I accidently killed either.

                      You see pussy, my father was a real parent, who taught hard lessons by not being afraid to talk about hard subjects with their kids.

                      Unlike cowardly pussies like yourself.

                    13. So you are saying it definitely is the parents fault for not teaching the kid to stay away from the gun?

                    14. I thought that was made perfectly clear since your first post.

                    15. The gun is made for children to teach them how to shoot.

                      That exists? That might’ve been less discouraging than my mom’s friend taking me to the range and handing me a pistol when I was 7.

                      Although a Ukrainian of my acquaintance claims that he had his daughter properly handling a pistol at six. Those Slavs are dam liars though.

                    16. Why not? I think it’s great that young kids are introduced to guns. When properly supervised, they learn to respect the weapon, how to responsibly handle it, and gun safety.

                      Just because these parents are dipshits, doesn’t mean there is some sort of systemic problem.

                    17. Just because these parents are dipshits, doesn’t mean there is some sort of systemic problem.

                      Don’t you understand?! A BAD THING happened!!1! With GUNZ!!

                      That’s all I’m getting from this particular troll, anyway. He hasn’t come around to his gun control point yet, but I’m sure he will after he’s properly lathered up.

                    18. More children die from swimming pools every year than guns.

                      Doesn’t fit the narrative though.

                    19. Swimming pools are NOT designed to KILL
                      Guns have ONE purpose. To kill.
                      In spite of what you mouth breathers believe.

                    20. Well it’s a little late in the day but what the fuck..

                      Marc in his natural habitat.

                    21. What either is designed to do is completely, utterly and totally irrelevant to the level of risk either play in the presence of children.

                    22. Teaching a five-year-old to wield a killing tool is not noble.
                      You should be ashamed of yourself.

                    23. If I agree to be ashamed of my self will you promise to go away?

                    24. Yes, please go away pussy.

                    25. You do realize that hunting is a sport, right? And taking someone to a shooting range results in the death of 0 people.

        2. WHO THE FUCK GIVES A GUN TO A FIVE YEAR OLD

          A bad parent?

          Did I get it right?

          Or was there another point?

          1. THE CONSTITWOSHON SEZ I CAN GIVE GUNZ TO MY CHILLENZ

            1. Okay, Mary. Don’t think that was his point.

              1. *SMOOCH*

            2. You’re kind of retard aren’t you?

              Are you going to get to the point or continue running in circles chasing your dick?

            3. Yes, you can.

        3. *Takes a deep breath*

          I think there’s a strong case to be made that the parent(s) are guilty of a crime. Perhaps…’adjunct manslaughter’ or child endangerment?

    1. Go way, murcan; boring.

    2. …the fuck?

    3. He has a point you guys. I detest his racism as much as anyone but his points on women are valid. Women love love love dominant, uncompromising, arrogant personalities. I know because I have seen it, all my life.

      1. Some women. Not all, or even most. Generalizing like that is the worst kind of collectivization.

        1. They generalize that we want young, thin women, and they modify their behavior accordingly, and they are perfectly justified in doing it. No one lectures them about making “generalizations” about us, no one accuses them of collectivization. I have observed, millions of other men have observed, that the types on men who have women fall at their feet reflect that dominant, arrogant personality.

          1. “the types on men who have women fall at their feet reflect that dominant, arrogant personality.”

            That may be true, but it still doesn’t say anything about women in general. You also need to address what kind of women fall at the feet of that kind of man.

      2. I detest his racism as much as anyone but his points on ______are valid. Blacks love love love grape drank. Jews covet covet covet money. Gooks have tiny tiny tiny cocks. It’s all the same.

        1. Except that women are not a race so that comment doesn’t really work in implying that said commenter is racist.

      3. There’s a type of woman who goes for the terrorist types; I wouldn’t call them representative. Yet the groupies are one of the few advantages of a terrorist lifestyle.

        What I *will* say is that what used to be called normal male self-confidence and self-assertion is getting rarer, for lots of reasons, but including the fact that it’s been demonized as abusive and oppressive. So a guy who acts what used to be called normal will be considered, in some quarters, deviant and dangerous (Which in turn means that he has to be the kind of guy willing to be considered deviant and dangerous). So people will be scratching their heads at the deviant and dangerous men who seem to attract women.

  17. Drudge Teaser:

    UK DAILY MAIL: Saudi Arabia warned USA IN WRITING about Tamerlan Tsarnaev in 2012, and rejected his application for an entry visa to visit Mecca in 2011… Developing…

    1. This might explain today’s Obama news conference

    2. What difference, at this point, does it make?

      1. Amazing how that line can be used for anything embarrassing to the administration.

    3. Saudi Arabia warned USA IN WRITING about Tamerlan Tsarnaev in 2012.

      Entirely Bush’s fault. God-Emperor Barry merely inherited the inefficient and ineffective system put into place by Dubya.

      1. This is clearly Romney’s fault. If he didn’t force Obama and his team to run a reelection campaign, they could have stayed on top of these security issues.

  18. Matt, the proper headline would include “Fear of a Koch Planet.” I’m surprised and a little disappointed that you missed this 90s reference.

    1. Koch is pronounced like the Atlanta beverage.

      1. I know that but I’m not sure what your point is. Just because it doesn’t rhyme with black doesn’t mean it wouldn’t fit.

        1. It would work better if it was pronounced like a synonym for a rooster.

  19. Rethuglicans are beating the war on SCIENCE!

    1. Does that mean that in the first time for the last 50 years that we are going to stop wasting our time in low orbit, and revert back to sticking our heads up our own arses for fear of getting eaten by sea serpents?

      Yeah! I am sure that the government can accomplish this!

    2. At least they’re good for something.

      1. You can sure say that again.

    3. At least they’re good for something.

    4. At least they’re good for something.

    5. At least they’re good for something.

    6. At least they’re good for something.

    7. At least they’re good for something.

      1. dude!

    8. Two things:

      1. The social sciences are often nothing more than exercises in confirmation bias.

      2. Even so, studies don’t ‘prove’ anything. They merely point out patterns and infer possible relationship between events.

      The left abuses Science the way the so-cons abuse the Bible.

    9. Was the research “in the interests of the United States to advance the national health, prosperity, or welfare, and to secure the national defense by promoting the progress of science?”

      Compound question is compound.

      Could the NSF say that it was “the finest quality, is groundbreaking, and answers questions or solves problems that are of utmost importance to society at large?”

      Also a compound question.

      Social scientists don’t agree, but it’s difficult for them to justify their own funding in a time of severe government cutbacks. Since March 1, when Congress and the president failed to replace sequestration with anything less idiotic, the human faces of austerity have included children whose Head Start programs are being cut, older people who are going without Meals on Wheels, and?less heart-tugging?business travelers and tourists whose flights were delayed. (We fixed that last one.)

      Meanwhile, Diamond Joe Biden spends half a million a day for a trip to Paris.

      But not a penny of spending can be cut!

      Oh Slate. Just when I think Peak Stupid has been reached, you up the ante.

    10. “The Republican War on what Feynman Pointed Out Wasn’t Science Forty Years Ago” has a nice ring to it.

    11. Social science isn’t science.

  20. Damn, I haven’t been into boxing for a while, but this is one badass honkey!:

    Denis Lebedev

    Damn, lefty has a devastating left hook, cross, and uppercut.

    1. Jesus. Those last few KO’s were brutal.

      1. The 3rd from the last victim was Roy Jones Jr.

          1. Ummm, is that song about the same Roy Jones Jr., that just got his ass kicked by the Russian dude?

            I will give him credit, he hung in there, and it was a good fight, but in the end, he didn’t turn out to be nearly as big as his mouth is.

            1. It isn’t a song ABOUT the same Roy Jones, Jr. It’s a song BY the same Roy Jones, Jr.

    2. Either the Russians decided to use Rocky IV as a training manual, or Rocky IV was a fucking documentary disguised as a Stallone vehicle…

    1. I don’t think they ever wanted pot legal for the purpose of generating tax revenue. It was just a talking point to attract liberals.

  21. TEEMU SELANNE! 42 and still getting it done in the NHL.

  22. Just noticed that the ad at the top of my page is anti-citizens united. I guess Reason will take anyone’s money. Good for them.

    1. LIKE TRUE LIBERTARIANS!

      Plus, isn’t it a good idea for reason to take their money on a site where their ad won’t convince anyone? Reason is playing the long game, slowly bankrupting its opponents by giving them advertising space.

      1. Those Koch Bros think of everything!

    2. If you click on it, Reason gets more of their money.

      Crazy like a fox!

      1. If we all click on it, over and over again, from different computers, we can bankrupt our ideological opponents…pure genius.

    3. What ads?

      1. I had trouble viewing a site and turned off my obnoxiously stringent hosts file. I’ve got ads for a riding mower now. A LOT of ads for a riding mower. I need to set that back on.

        1. One ad I saw on this site was some blonde woman in a black bikini laying on a raft in a pool with the caption “Click HERE to See What Happens Next”.

        2. Make a yearly donation to Reason and turn on Adblock plus.

          1. I’m halfway there!

  23. “…not to mention the horror of managing a newsroom full of smartass journalists…”
    Yeah, buddy you guys in the press are just sooooo brilliant. It’s not like the Kochs have any experience working with guys with degrees in engineering or Ph.Ds in physics or mathematics or even traders (for just sheer ego size).

  24. John Nolte of Breitbart.com

    1. Looks like I pressed submit too soon, sorry for the inconvience. ^^;

      John Nolte from Breitbart.com posted the following then I decided to quote.

      These provincial, ideological bigots won’t even work for a conservative.

      Apparently, too many staffers at the L.A. Times have also deluded themselves with their own propaganda. The media have been working overtime to pretend Obama’s failed economic policies are not failed economic policies. Imagine their surprise at the reality of the job market after these bigots walk out on a good-paying gig.

      Please Koch Brothers, please, please, please buy these newspapers.

  25. Sounds liek some crazy smack to me dude.

    http://www.GoGetAnon.tk

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.