Reason TV Replay: 47 Ways to Say "IRS" … What do those initials really stand for?


On Friday, the White House acknowledged and apologized for targeting Tea Party groups for additional IRS reviews during the 2012 presidential election. This seems like a splendid time to expand our growing list of just what the initials IRS should stand for.

I Review Selectively? Inappropriate Retribution Society? Is Revelation Surprising?

Here is the original text from the April 13, 2011 video:

The "Internal Revenue Service" is such a bland name for an agency that stirs so much passion.

With Tax Day just around the corner, the time is right to consider what the initials "IRS" really stand for.

WARNING: Immature Subject Matter. Viewer discretion is advised.

Approximately 1.40 minutes

Produced by Ted Balaker. Written by Balaker, Meredith Bragg, Tim Cavanaugh, Paul Feine, Nick Gillespie, Hawk Jensen, Damon Root, Peter Suderman, Josh Swain, Zach Weissmueller, and Matt Welch

NEXT: Taking the Cake

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. OT, how Lawrence O’Donnell lies about Ron Paul and his Op-Ed about the Boston lock-down:

    1. Larry O’Donnell is in competition with Chris Mathews and MHP for biggest socialist douche bag in America.

      Sadly, he’s not in the lead.

      1. Alexis. I agree that Frank`s blog is unbelievable, I just got a top of the range Subaru Impreza after having made $4745 this month and-a little over, ten-grand lass-month. with-out a doubt this is the easiest-job I have ever done. I started this three months/ago and practically straight away started making more than $86, per-hour. I work through this website… http://WWW.DAZ7.COM

  2. We just need a few thousand more pages of tax law to perfect the system.

  3. Immoral Rectal Scrutiny

    1. Insert Rectal Skewer

  4. Incalculable Riches Stolen was listed twice, I reluctantly say.

    1. I see what you did there. Very subtle.

  5. Biometric Database of All Adult Americans Hidden in Immigration Reform:…..-dossiers/

    1. “They turk our jerbs! Why do you hate brown people?”

  6. By the way, politicization of the I.R.S. was one of the offenses that Richard Nixon was going to be impeached for.

    And this vile president that we have is every bit the out-of-control thuggish criminal that Nixon was. It’s time to start seriously considering examining impeachment.

    1. Nixon was a lightweight, corruption wise. There was a pretty good case for impeaching Grant for sheer incompetence, for example (when you are so out to lunch that you aren’t even aware that rampant corruption is going on, I believe that that is impeachable). Jesus, look at the shit that Wilson pulled off.

      Nixon just had the bad luck to run up against a press that had suddenly decided that its job was to speak “truth to Nixon” (not power though, as later shit revealed)

      1. The press always hated Nixon. I’m not sure why since he was a the biggest statist douchebag of the last 40 years, before Obama slithered along.

        1. Because he was jowly and mean and didn’t suck Kennedy dick seems to be the reason.

          1. Nixon was a pretty good anti-communist. That was enough to spawn the hate.

            1. But Kennedy was an equally fervent Cold Warrior.

              Honestly, it was the fact that Nixon was not from the NE corridor that made them hate him so much, IMO.

              1. Alger Hiss. Nixon always said he was guilty and never backed down.JFK only went after brown and yellow commies.

                1. Alger Hiss.

                  Indeed, that’s exactly why.

    2. Just wait till Obama’s mysteriously a billionaire when he leaves office.

    3. On the other hand, it is interesting to see the editorial pages line up to demand something be done about this. It hasn’t gained huge traction yet because it was a Friday Dump, but it will probably feature prominently in Sunday editorials, and blow up Monday.

      This may be the last bit of goodwill with the media Obama had being pissed away.

      1. They’re starting to shit their pants because they know that the American people are going to get fed up with this loathsome man sooner or later and it’s going to screw up Hillary’s chance of winning.

  7. HSBC man who passed clients’ details to tax investigators escapes extradition…..e-falciani

    Switzerland charges HSBC banker in Geneva who stole and leaked info to the IMF, EU, US other governments. Spain says no to extradition, grants him refuge and:

    The court said it was lifting all restrictions against Falciani, who has French and Italian citizenship, allowing him to leave Spain if he chooses. Falciani had been arrested in July 2012 after he left France by sea and tried to enter Spain through the north-eastern port of Barcelona.

    In an interview with El Pa?s newspaper last month, Falciani said US justice department officials suggested he should go to Spain as he was in danger.

    1. Now that’s the kind of whistleblower the Obama administration can wholeheartedly support.

    2. The Federal Government arranged his asylum in Spain, huh.

  8. U.S. officials arrest Swiss banker: sources…..ME20130429

    Last year, many Swiss bankers told Reuters they were changing their holiday plans to avoid the risk of arrest or extradition.

    Tax lawyer Douglas Hornung said lower-ranking bank employees may also need to be wary of travelling to the United States.

    “The Swiss Bankers Association said in September that Swiss bank employees didn’t have anything to worry about, and this does seem to hold for the higher echelons, but it doesn’t seem to be the case for other employees,” Hornung said.

    The arrest is seen by some in Switzerland as the United States applying pressure to the Swiss government as they grapple to end a dispute over Swiss banks accused of helping wealthy Americans evade billions of dollars in taxes.

    “It seems the United States are using intimidation methods to show that they aren’t bluffing,” said Jean-Christophe Schwaab, President of the French-speaking branch of The Association of Swiss Bank Employees (SBPV).

    “For people in senior positions, we still advise not to travel to the United States. The situation obliges us to remain prudent,” he said.

    1. If you’re an Islamic terrorist who despises America and wants to murder us, you get welcomed into this country with open arms and made a citizen. If you run a gambling site or you’re a Swiss banker who believes in serving their American customers instead of complying with the government, you get arrested as soon as you step off the plane.

      Jesus Christ, what a fucking government we have in this country today.

    2. What this indicates to me is that the Obama Administration doesn’t have much in the way of leverage with the Swiss.

      So they have to invent some.

      Meanwhile, Obama’s regulation of the financial industry has all but assured that the United States (or New York) will lose a ton of investment banking activity. They’re selling derivatives out of the Cayman Islands, now. And the feckless Obama Administration is trying to regulate investment bank activity outside of the U.S.!

      There’s no reason why all those high paying investment bank jobs that used to be in New York can’t be done out of London and Singapore. Now Obama wants to antagonize our relationship with the Swiss, too?

      He’s clueless. He’s just lashing out at people he can’t control. He’s worse than clueless–he’s childish. He’s throwing a temper tantrum because he can’t get his way.

      1. ^^THIS^^
        If I were inclined toward paranoia, I might think that the U.S. government was actually trying to eviscerate the one industry that the U.S. is a world leader in – first with SarbOx and now with Dodd-Frank. Actually, I have to take that back. I actually saw Frank on television out-and-out saying he wanted to reduce the size of the American financial services industry.

  9. WARNING: Immature Subject Matter. Viewer discretion is advised.

    So you finally sunk to the level of the commenters?

    1. That’s a matter of perspective.

      Some people might say they’ve finally risen to the level of the commenters.

      For goodness’ sake, they used to let The Weigel post here!

      1. NO HAT TIPS FOR YOU!!!

    2. Finally, the sort of editorial license h&r commenters deserve.

  10. If Rich, Squeeze
    It’s the Revenue, Stupid!
    I Rape Society
    Infidel, Realize our Sovereignty!

  11. Do you hate The Da Vinci Code and all things Dan Brown? Then read this.

    The critics said his writing was clumsy, ungrammatical, repetitive and repetitive. They said it was full of unnecessary tautology. They said his prose was swamped in a sea of mixed metaphors. For some reason they found something funny in sentences such as “His eyes went white, like a shark about to attack.” They even say my books are packed with banal and superfluous description, thought the 5ft 9in man. He particularly hated it when they said his imagery was nonsensical. It made his insect eyes flash like a rocket.

    1. I listened to the DiVinci code on tape once during a series of long drives. I thought it was entertaining for what it was. People give some books way too much credit both ways. The people who think that book is anything but entertaining fluff don’t know what a good book it. And the people who go out of their way to talk about how horrible it is need to get over themselves. Sure, the prose is bad and the history and religious information inaccurate? For sure. But that is like bitching about he dialog in a porn movie. You don’t read Dan Brown because of your interest in medieval history.

      1. A really good audiobook reader can add a lot to bad writing. The late, great Frank Muller could make the ingredients list of a poptart sound good.

        I don’t mind a nice shallow beach reader, but Dan Brown is simply awful. Just shockingly bad writing. Michael Crichton’s prose was pretty wooden but not awful, and he made up for it by exploring interesting topics.

        1. I never thought of that. But the fact that it was being read to me probably made the bad writing much less annoying. I was driving like six hours in the evening after work. So I would just zone out and listen to it. I wasn’t paying a lot of attention to the prose, just following the plot.

          1. Heh, I’ve got The Club Dumas read by David Warner, listened to it a jillion times. While it’s a good book, Warner’s reading turns it into an amazing book.

        2. Speaking of…

          Audio version of Bastiat’s What is Money?

          Been watching an online lecture series on Marx’s Das Kapital and needed a goddamn break from that shit. I found the above to clean my brain.

          1. What is gelt?
            Baby don’t hurt me
            Don’t hurt me no more….

      2. The people who think that book is anything but entertaining fluff don’t know what a good book it.

        It’s just jealousy. Their magnificent books gather dust in a library while that hack Dan Brown sells tens of millions.

        1. Ah yes, the Balph Eubanks of the world.

          Rand really nailed people, IMO.

    2. I think my biggest problem with the DaVinci code was using DaVinci’s “Last Supper” as evidence as to what actually happened at The Last Supper. That was just stupid. Other than that I find Dan Brown books pretty entertaining. Like John said. you have to keep in mind what they are. I certainly have more issues with Tom Clancy’s writing than Dan

      1. I certainly have more issues with Tom Clancy’s writing than Dan

        As applied to early Tom Clancy this is Clearly Wrong. But I bailed on Clancy long ago when he started thinking he could write sex scenes.

    3. What I found so very irritating about Digital Fortress is that speculative expansion upon real computer science would have been much more interesting and plausible than the crap he pulled out of thin air, his ass, somewhere.


    Read the comments to the above Post editorial and McArdle article about the IRS scandal. Even the Post admits this is bad. But the comments are frightening. Liberals are totally gone. They think this is great the IRS is being politicized.

    1. They’re fascists John, they haven’t been liberals for decades.

  13. For comparison purposes, I think what the Obama Administration did with the IRS is worse than what the Clintons did with those FBI files.

    When the Clintons used FBI files to dig up dirt on their political rivals, they were targeting other politicians. Hell, what was in those FBI files on our politicians probably should have been public knowledge anyway–Hillary Clinton was almost ahead of her time! If she’d published what was in those FBI files instead of giving them back, she’d have beaten Julian Assange to the Wikileaks idea by decades!

    But when the Obama Administration used the IRS to harass its political adversaries, he wasn’t going after politicians. He was using the IRS to go after people like you and me–regular people who organized themselves in opposition to things like ObamaCare, nationalizing GM, and TARP.

    What’s worse? Going after politicians or going after regular people like you and me?

    In my book, going after regular people means Obama’s gone way sleazier than Slick Willy did.

    1. Are you guys feelin’ me here?

      We sicced an independent counsel on Clinton becasue of this.

      No, it wasn’t “all about sex”. Most of it had nothing to do with sex…

      And it sure wouldn’t be about sex if an independent counsel investigated Obama!

    2. It is much worse. This is using the federal government to prevent Americans from engaging in lawful political activity.

    3. I remember some crappy pop thriller from the early 70s whose plot had a president (or someone in the administration)using secret fbi files to blackmail his political opponents and the press.

      It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if Obama is doing exactly that.

    4. Going after politicians or going after regular people like you and me?


      Using the IRS to go after one politician or one regular person — which one will have more pernicious effects on governance?

      Using the IRS to go after one politicians or 1,000 regular people — prolly the latter is worse.

  14. More congressional hearings toot sweet! 8-(

    Could it possibly be that all these (apparently unassailable) scandals are purposeful distractions? Nah, that’s just too far out.

    1. Nah. They are just crooked, arrogant and incompetent.

  15. Panic

    However, Congress should show courage and, at the very least, renew this act. Allowing individuals to 3-D print guns represents a public safety hazard and a national security issue. The process could exacerbate the illegal gun trade, give unlawful individuals access to weapons, and provide terrorists with an undetectable means to threaten the safety of air travelers. We should not have to wait until someone uses a weapon of this kind to commit a crime with such high-visibility as the Boston Marathon bombing or the Aurora shooting.

    Congress should also have a larger conversation about developing a comprehensive public policy that reasonably regulates the dark side of digital technology. This conversation may very well determine that the digital world is far too large and complex to regulate, but it’s certainly a discussion that should be had.

    If our wizards to cast a magic spell, we’ll be safe from harm!

    1. However, Congress should show courage and, at the very least, renew this act. Allowing individuals to 3-D print guns represents a public safety hazard and a national security issue.

      Because the current gun laws are so effective at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.

    2. “Congress should also have a larger conversation about developing a comprehensive public policy that reasonably regulates the dark side of digital technology.”

      And if they can’t find any, they’ll imagine it and write the laws anyhow.

    3. “You don’t know the power of the dark side.” ?Darth Vader

  16. Epic concern troll handwringing

    Riddled with the candor, colloquialisms, and cadence of a particularly African-American dialect, his description of the rescue to a local TV news anchor, coupled with his appearance, became instant fodder for the social media machine. It was not heroism that caused the interview to go viral, but amusement at the typecast unfolding before our eyes.

    This portrayal has overshadowed the act of heroism that should be at the heart of Ramsey’s story. While there’s much of Ramsey’s persona to delight in, glorifying stereotypes can have serious repercussions. Studies have shown that imagery, even if fake or inaccurate, works itself into our memories and can affect our behavior. And the disproportionate coverage of African-Americans in local media as poor, uneducated criminals, for example, influences how society views blacks as a whole.

    1. Yeah because if that guy had been a white hillbilly with no teeth and a funny accent, no one would have noticed

    2. It’s telling that the writer automatically concocts a connection between Ramsey’s interview and …African-Americans in local media as poor, uneducated criminals.

      In my evil, racist libertarian heart I never even considered this when watching the interview. I thought it was awesome how a regular guy, like in the Boston case, uncovered a criminal that heaps of supposedly well-trained new professionals couldn’t find.

      That a regular guy spoke in colorful colloquialisms probably shocked our pearl-clutching commentator as it’s not the pre-masticated, ideologically “correct” bullshit he’s used to consuming.

      1. I thought his comment about the “pretty white girl” was at once funny and sad; it was utterly disarming especially coming from someone who pretty much saved four people from unspeakable cruelty.

    3. If you portray the world as it really is, people might see it as it really is. If you show, as in C.O.P.S., how blacks commit so much of the crime, people might start to think that a large number of criminals are black! DAT BE RACIS’

      1. NOTE TO ALL LURKERS: American is a racist misogynistic asshat who does not in any way represent the views of libertarians writ large, or the views of everyone on this site but himself. However, we are not responding to him because we would all like to have a nice weekend, and arguing with it only encourages it.

        1. Perhaps I should have said anyone, but really, everyone on this site thinks he is a racist asshat.

          1. No, American is a sockpuppet posing as a racist asshat.

    4. If this guy is so upset about the ‘wrong kind’ of black guy getting interviewed on T.V., then he must be really psyched when he sees a well-educated, intelligent black person like Thomas Sowell or Ben Carson interviewed. Right?

      1. What?! Those Brazil nuts?!

    5. This makes utterly, completely and totally no sense. Why couldn’t Ramsey be both a hero and a funny stereotype? Cripes, any five-year-old who’s watched Shrek is familiar with the notion of the ugly hero. But I guess that’s a bit much to expect from these pseudo-sophisticates. Okay, yeah the guy was goofy and somewhat funny. Does anyone with an IQ over 40 think that makes him any less a hero? What, do we have to make sure all our heros from now on have to be from central casting? Somehow, I doubt the public that whoever wrote this piece of drivel is afraid of getting the wrong ideas saw him as any less a hero because there were laughable qualities to the guy.

  17. More:

    It wasn’t long ago that the black community cringed when the “wrong” person was interviewed on television. Many of us lamented any confirmation of stereotypes and wondered aloud why it seemed that the “educated and presentable” among us never seemed to be chosen to represent the race in front of the breaking news cameras.


    1. What is the deal with the hatred they are piling on that guy? He was the actual witness. Would they prefer that the press have Sidney Poitier stand in for the interviews conducted with honest to god human beings in order to affirm some high and mighty collectivist self image? Of course they would.

      1. And the only negative comments that I’ve heard about him have come from the left.

      2. The actual woman who refused to give up her seat and move to the back of the bus was a smart-mouthed single mother. The civil rights leadership then recruited Rosa Parks to imitate her.

    2. It wasn’t long ago that the black community cringed when the “wrong” person was interviewed on television.

      I thought back in the day, only blacks like Hymietown Jackson or the guy who made up the Tawana Brawley rape shit were the ones interviewed on TV.

      1. Now now, Tawana Brawley made up the rape story, not Sharpton. He merely hyped the story he knew was a hoax.

    1. NOTE TO ALL LURKERS: American is a racist misogynistic asshat who does not in any way represent the views of libertarians writ large, or the views of everyone on this site but himself. However, we are not responding to him because we would all like to have a nice weekend, and arguing with it only encourages it.

      There. Now no one has to respond to American and we can have a weekend thread that isn’t covered in troll shit.

      1. I tend to think the American bashing is overdone, personally.

        1. “I tend to think the American bashing is overdone, personally.”

          It’s as much defensive as anything. Sadly we need to have someone pin a disclaimer to his posts in order to slightly discredit muckraking attempts to ascribe his views to the rest of us.

          1. Some of his preferred policies, if not their justifications, are favored by some of us.

            1. You’re welcome to say so. But there is a need, sadly, for someone to denounce him. I’d rather just ignore him, but I understand what Goldwater’s doing.

              1. Just ignore him. American is a sockpuppet, possibly a reason editor.

        2. Agreed. “Racist!” “Sexist!” “Antisemitic” automatic discussion/thought stoppers all and way too easy and convenient. I have no idea if American is actually racist, but certainly arguing that violent crime in the US is disproportionately black certainly does not make him one. If he were to argue that “blacks” are racially inclined toward crime, that would be racist. Now, I understand that society has created this criminal, inner city subclass thanks to prohibition in general and attempts at social engineering. The fact that it happens to be that this subculture is predominantly black is completely incidental and has nothing to do with people’s race, but with the culture that has developed and it could be any ethnic group.

          1. If he were to argue that “blacks” are racially inclined toward crime, that would be racist.

            He does argue that blacks are racially inclined towards crime and that Hispanics and black people are naturally dumber than white people.

            This is literally his argument. Calling him racist isn’t a ‘thought stopper’ it’s a statement of fact.

      2. I don’t agree with everything American says but I think he does have some good points. Hispanics are irredentist socialists who blame all their problems on white people and will never vote for a libertarian position. And what he says about women is spot on, and I cringe whenever I hear feminist arguments coming from libertarians. What the fuck is a “misogynist?”

      3. I don’t agree with everything American says but I think he does have some good points. Hispanics are irredentist socialists who blame all their problems on white people and will never vote for a libertarian position. And what he says about women is spot on, and I cringe whenever I hear feminist arguments coming from libertarians. What the fuck is a “misogynist?”

      4. I don’t agree with everything American says but I think he does have some good points. Hispanics are irredentist socialists who blame all their problems on white people and will never vote for a libertarian position. And what he says about women is spot on, and I cringe whenever I hear feminist arguments coming from libertarians. What the fuck is a “misogynist?”

      5. ADDITIONAL NOTE TO LURKERS: American often uses gimmick accounts to seem more popular. Thus, ignore any further responses.

        There. Now, scroll on down and discuss hockey like real men.

  18. From Volokh, some illustrations about the arbitrary nature of the tax law’s restrictions on political activity by nonprofits. Gaming the system is remarkably easy.

    Americans United for Separation of Church and State is a 501(3)(c):

    Which publishes material like this:

    “Breaking Up Is Hard To Do: GOP Ties To Religious Right Reaffirmed

    “Despite recent suggestions from some GOP leaders that Republicans should distance themselves from Religious Right ideologues, the decades-long marriage between the two doesn’t seem to be headed for the rocks anytime soon….

    “We’ve said it before, but it’s worth saying again: the GOP made a Faustian bargain years ago, and now it’s wrestling with the consequences of that decision….”

    1. For bonus irony points, they posted this on April 15. For extra bonus irony points, Americans United files complaints against other nonprofits, specifically churches, for intervening in politics.:

      “Retain Ban On Church Politicking, AU Advises Evangelical Study Panel

      “…AU called churches’ abuse of their nonprofit status a “real problem,” noting that it has reported 128 violations since 1996.”

      1. Here’s a 501(c)(3)

        Which is “a national civic training institute that develops diverse leaders who can effectively advance progressive political and policy change.”

        They got their exemption, perhaps because they use the buzzword “nonpartisan,” though I imagine one can guess which party tends to get their support.

  19. Chris Bosh looks like an alien, facially. Discuss.

    1. It’s something about the dude’s eyes, and the way his mouth is open a lot but his leap is always covering his lower teeth.

      Like, wtf is this?…..-Bosh1.jpg

      1. Bosh jumps high enough to cover his lower teeth?

        1. I know, freaky, right?

  20. So, are the dynamics of Canadian hockey such that the nation will rally behind the Senators because they are the last Canadian team?

    Or are you proper sports fans, with only hatred in your soul for the fucking Senators?!

    1. I think there is such bitter rivalry between the canadian teams that the Senators will probably not get the national support one would presuppose.

      If the flyers were going on and the pens were out, I wouldn’t root for those nasty bastards just because they’re from pennsylvania.

      1. Wanna know who should have a hockey team? Indiana. Wanna know who shouldn’t? Florida.

        Also, put Carolina back in Hartford.

        God, hockey is so much about fun regional rivalries. Why did they ever expand?

        1. Reminds me of this.

          And yes, bring back the goddamn Whalers! If only for the jerseys.

      2. I always thought everybody hated both Pittsburg and Philadelphia.

    2. Um, I don’t think the Maple Leaves have been eliminated yet.

      1. “Oh, come now, you’ll be dead in five minutes.”
        “I’m feeling better!”
        “No you’re not!”

    3. The country didn’t rally behind the Sens when they made it to the finals in 2007.

  21. Nico Rosberg on pole. Hamilton outside.

    Maybe Hamilton actually knew what he was doing when he jumped.

    1. Button missed the top 10.

  22. If you’re gonna force me to read your videos you need to slow that shit down. Damn.

  23. This morning I went shopping to supply this evening grill out. Some guy was in the store handing out the local AP resell newspaper in a booth near the wine section. When he asked me if I wanted a complimentary newspaper, I asked him if the store management knew that he was there. He huffily said, ‘of course.’ He asked again if I wanted a free newspaper. I told him, ‘Hell no, I don’t won’t your rag. The day after Rand Paul fillibustered the murder drones, I checked out your coverage. A tiny blurb less than fifty words on the bottom inside corner whereas Mad Bomber McCain and General Suck Ass Lindsey Graham meeting with the Murderer in Chief got a full page spread. You people are the worst. If you weren’t such pussies treating murderous deviant behavior from politicians as normal I would accept your offer. But as it is I’m appalled you would even asked.’

    He said, its just a newspaper. We’re not killing anybody.

    Man, did I confuse him.

  24. Speaking of the thing in Cleveland, how many people have come forward to say, “I always knowed there was sumpthin feeshy goin on in there!”?

  25. its just a newspaper. We’re not killing anybody.

    William Randolph Hearst must be rolling over in his grave.

    1. “You provide the pictures and I won’t publish them unless it helps a Democrat.”

    2. Rosebud!

      Oh, btw, it was his childhood sleigh and it represented his last moment of innocence and happiness before he inherited the vast gold fortune that allowed him to build his empire but which ultimately left him empty and alone at the end.

      1. Citizen Kane is overrated. I vote for While the City Sleeps.

      2. No, no, no. Rosebud is the metaphorical name Kane gave his mothers’ vagina. Uttering Rosebud on his death bed indicated that Kane thought his death would be a re-birth; i.e. he was traveling through “Rosebud” as a child travels the birth canal.

        It’s like you never even saw the film. Jeesh!

  26. I think this could really hurt Obama, but not for the reasons that most here are giving. I think that using the IRS for political ends really affronts the sensibilities of what Walter Russel Mead calls “gentry liberals” but for a more modern term one would probably use “Aaron Sorkin Liberals”. These are the liberals who work on newspaper editorial pages; Maureen Dowd is just one example. These people are utterly convinced of liberal ideas about the power and morality of big government, the sanctity of the labor, a socially liberal set of beliefs, and a preference for people to live in large, centralized urban city centers even if they themselves vacation in Aspen to appreciate its natural beauty. However, they are also utterly and completely convinced that these beliefs are what any moral or intelligent person would reach, and that therefore the strong arm tactics that actually grease the wheels of politics are beneath them. They want to win by treating voters as intelligent adults and convincing them with high minded speeches and passionate, well executed debates. If you ever saw the Third Season of the West Wing, where Barlett wins by being an unapologetic intellectual who wins by intelligently and rationally explaining why he is the best choice for America- that is how gentry liberals want to win. They don’t just want a political victory- they want a complete intellectual and moral victory as well.


    1. Cont…

      Now, gentry liberals will accept a President who uses occasionally unsavory tactics as long as it gets result. Lydon Johnson’s true sin was to be the target of hate for much of the current liberal intelligentsia as they came of political age; as time and memory of Vietnam fades, expect a reevaluation of Johnson’s presidency. They will even work with Republicans, though they prefer Rockefeller Republicans who favor an expansive government and say the uncomfortable truths that gentry liberals may believe but never say in polite company (single motherhood is not a good environment for a child; perhaps the teacher’s unions are a bit too powerful; don’t we all feel safer when the police harass certain young men because of their skin color?). They will also forgive nice but ineffective- Carter is beloved, although Habitat for Humanity helps a lot.

      Obama’s problem is that he is both ineffective- gun control, the sequester- and using strong arm tactics- Benghazi, this IRS scandal. He is also lying to the media, which makes the media as a whole, including op-ed columnists look foolish. They hate looking foolish.

      Ineffective and shady are a bad combination. Gentry liberals will accept one or the other, but not both.

      1. Did you write this yourself or is this from an article?

        1. Myself. Is it that terrible/good?

  27. OT note: Am I the only one who’s really ticked off when people say “the United States tax/kill/forbid/negotiate/fight/[whatever]? The United States aren’t doing anything — the government of the United States is.

    Conflating the two is bad shit.

    1. I’m with you on that. It is especially problematic in foreign policy, because of a lot of people who normally are very skeptical and critical of government suddenly forget that we’re talking about the government and not the country or society when people say “The US does X and that’s bad” or whatever the subject is

    2. Technically, the government isn’t doing anything — it is a hypothetical construct with no volition.

      Specific individuals who call themselves “government employees” do things, usually bad, to other individuals.

      This is waaay wordy, but using that language is really helpful in clarifying what actually happens.

      1. “The U.S. bombed Libya” might sound almost excusable from a certain point of view.

        Described as “a blatant sociopath ordered some of his hired killers to bomb a distant group of individuals because he felt that might help him and his allies hang onto power”, not so much so.

  28. my friend’s ex-wife makes $87/hour on the . She has been fired from work for 8 months but last month her pay was $18363 just working on the for a few hours. Read more on this site go to this site home tab for more detail— http://WWW.JOBS34.COM

    1. Did the three of you ever fuck? Is that why she is now the ex? Threesomes aren’t for everyone. You need a psychological make up that is malleable, one that bends, but is not so delicate that it breaks. He was the hot house flower, right? I mean, obviously she has gone on to be this huge success working for jobs34, and you are right there with her cheering her own, promoting her success on boards across the internet. Wait. You discovered something about yourself in those threesomes. Now, you and the ex are together, and you remain ‘friends’ out of guilt and sympathy. Damn it, Angelina. You are not doing him any favors. The guy is not going to be able to move on until you and the ex make a clean break from him. It sucks things had to turn out this way, but that’s life. Sucking cock on Monday, chewing carpet on Tuesday. What its really about.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.