Pro-Obamacare Ads Reveal Annoying Millennials, Hide Ugly Truth


Earlier this week, I wrote a column for Time about the controversial "Got Insurance?" ad campaign created by two Colorado-based nonprofits. Here's a snippet:

Is massive stupidity covered under Obamacare? What about sexual promiscuity and heavy drinking? Those are some of the questions raised by a controversial ad campaign that aims to encourage younger Americans to sign up for health-insurance plans created by the Affordable Care Act.

But there's a deeper issue that the new "Got Insurance?" campaign ignores completely: Why should young and relatively poor people be forced to sign up for insurance that charges them above-market rates to subsidize rates for old and relatively wealthy people?

In this sense, Obamacare is simply the latest instance of generational theft being perpetrated against younger Americans. It's a feature and not a bug of the President's signature health care law that insurance premiums for those under 30 are likely to increase significantly to allow premiums for older Americans to fall. Indeed, the whole plan hinges on getting 2.7 million whippersnappers out of a total of 7 million enrollees to sign up in the individual market during the first year. If too many older and sicker folks flood the market, the system will crash even faster than the HealthCare.gov website….

Read the whole thing here.

Do Millennials see themselves in these ads (check 'em all out here)?

And if so, what is wrong with them?

Related: "Will Shitty Obamacare Ads Get Young People to Buy Insurance?"


NEXT: Obamas, Clintons to Lay Wreath at JFK's Grave

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. Too bad these young ejits are going to be voting 2 to 1 for the Hillerator.

    1. Not necessarily. Did you know that Reagan, running against Mondale (& Ferraro), won a higher percent of the 18-24 vote than he did the 25-29 and 30-49 vote?


      1. Yeah, but that was back in the 1980s, when the Republican Party was still sane, and could nominate “moderate Republicans” like Reagan.

        In 2016, now that the GOP has been taken over by lunatics, they’ll run somebody way to the right of Reagan, like that extremist Chris Christie.

        1. Moderate Republican? Reagan? I smell the stench of revisionism.

          I remember what Republicans called Reagan when he was actually President – and it wasn’t “moderate”.

          1. Dammit. My sarcasm detector just flicked on right as I hit submit. I hate when it does that.

          2. I thought calling Chris Christie an extremist way to the right of Reagan was so obviously sarcastic I didn’t need to bother tagging my post as such.

            1. And I posted too late. I hate when I do that.

            2. I’ve learned to mark all sarcasm, even though this is one of the better places.

              1. It’s way more fun troll with even greater sarcasm.

              2. I don’t. I think its funny when mistake obvious sarc for real.

                Reagan did govern as a moderate.

                1. Fair to say he was further to the left than I am.

              3. Dumb millenials don’t understand sarcasm. It’s the reverse Flynn effect in action.

            3. What kind of a commie-bastard jerk doesn’t communicate in sarcasm?

          3. I have read that Reagan was good at exuding optimism and did not come off as intolerant to, for example, immigrants as some modern Republicans.

            GOP sour grapes over losing the last two Presidential elections has predictably translated into its supporters criticizing parts of the electorate that rejected it. ‘Low information voters,’ young people, voter fraud, are faulted (all the things that when Democrats lose Presidential elections they also fault of course) rather than fault the terrible candidates the GOP nominated. I frankly can not blame young people if they did not get excited about two fuddy-duddy dinosaurs like Mitt Romney or John McCain, especially with conservatives demonizing young voters.

            1. While I do think there’s something to what you’re saying, I don’t think it’s quite as simple as you suggest. At the time of Reagan, an 18-24 year old could reasonably expect to have encountered conservative or libertarian ideas in his formal education. He or she would not, as Killazontherun suggests, have much to fear in terms of exclusion or being treated as an ignoramous, announcing his views in a college classroom. It’s not at all clear to me that the same thing applies today. Increasingly, our formal education system is more closely resembling an indoctrination system.

              1. Even ten years ago when my husband was getting his masters, he had a professor who steadfastly refused to state his political preferences in a poli sci class. My husband said the kids nearly rioted. We have been socialized to expect the tv to tell us who the good guys are, it seems straight forward to assume the professor will, also.

        2. Chris Christie, Extremist? WTF? He may be insane, but like the Bush he was cloned off of, he is not an extremist by any definition of the word.

          1. Poe’z Law

        3. Wow- we are in real trouble if people think that the statist judas Christie is an extremist.

        4. The difference is that the media industrial complex didn’t and couldn’t portray Carter, Mondale, Dukakis etc. as cool and hip guys that were going to make all our dreams come true if they won. I doubt Hollywood even did much to support those bozos.

      2. You could sit in a class at Chapel Hill in the late 80s and early 90s and more than half would identify themselves as Republican without any hint of embarrassment, or risk or persecution. Shocking, I know.

        1. They just aspired to own slaves.

        2. I find it hard to believe that education systems closer to the 1960’s were places of more intellectual diversity and tolerance than today. The ‘liberal domination of academe’ rhetoric is not some new invention (Agnew’s ‘pointy headed intellectuals’ or Adlai Stevenson’s campaigns come to mind).

          1. You need to read “the Closing of the American Mind” by Allan Bloom

            It dates from the mid ’80s, and specifically addresses the gradual infusion of relativistic, lefty dogma into all aspects of university education, to the point where anything resembling ‘critical thinking’ was completely eradicated in favor of ‘politically acceptable’ interpretation.

            The ‘liberal domination of academe’ you refer to is, at least in bloom’s argument, a post-Vietnam phenomenon. You could certainly deride pointy-headed liberals since the dawn of time, but not until the 1970s had they come to represent the status quo, and been completely institutionalized. Even in a fairly conservative university in the South in the early 1990s, you were still going to end up reading the literature of the Left-dominated intelligentsia simply because it had become so de rigeur, and was the common currency of academia. I suppose the point is, you’d almost *have* to be well-read in the Frankfurt School Marxists, French Deconstructionists, et al, just to be able to explain to other college-educated peers just how absolute *shit* it all is… because that kind of shit has been the bread and butter of the university system since the ’60s.

            (cue some STEM motherfucker going, “nya nya nya nya nya nya this is why we always laugh at you BA’s”)

          2. You want the truth? In the 70s, the progressives started to push educational methodologies modeled on communist reeducation camps, and it gradually seeped into academic culture before dominating it. There is more tolerance today as in there is an official Party of Tolerance, more diversity as in there is an official Party of Diversity; tolerance and diversity not codified, but instead informal and endemic to the system as we took for granted a quarter of a century ago, not so much.

            I see the new system in play in the posts written by some Millennials on this board, but definitely prevalent everywhere else. You are like Skinner machines living in a state of fear of social rejection. I’ve played you in previous discussion a few times just using the tools your instructors provided me. They have turned you into marks, and that is by design.

    2. Don’t know about that…even without the OC implosion, Hitlary does not that ‘cool factor’ Chocolate Jesus.

      1. What!? Hillary is a DGAF bro.

        Compare with Obama.

        1. Godammit Jesse….why not just slap the old bitch….it would be less painful than letting that photo see the light of day again!

          1. Compare with Obama.

            I’m the whitest guy you’ll ever meet and I’m more a “brutha” than poor Barry…I, for the most fleeting of instances, felt sorry for the guy when I saw that clip.

          2. Whatevs fish, she don’t give a fuck. Just look at her knock back a beer like it’s nothing while her lady companion is drunk.

            When was the last time we had a bro president?

            1. She’s a salty dog, I’ll give her that. Pity about her political ambition though, and how it would lead her to cover up for even a pos like Valerie Jarret.

            2. jesse.in.mb|11.16.13 @ 8:04PM|#

              When was the last time we had a bro president?



          3. Are you trying to cover up the fact that there is an alien Secret Service agent in the background?

            1. That’s no alien, that’s a Terminator unit!

    3. Romney won young Whites. So don’t imagine 2/3 of the mostly White people in those adds voting for Hillary.

    4. You mean Elizabeth Warren.

      She has them all lathered up, just like Obama did.

      1. “She has them all lathered up,..”


        1. Warren will ultimately play like a female Kucinich, or she might be as successful as Dr. Dean, but I just don’t see her getting the nod.

          1. It’ll be like a “near-miss” apocalyptic asteroid, every couple of years…

              1. Elizabeth Warren getting nominated would be heap big surprise.

                1. It will be many moons before Elizabeth Warren win nomination.

                2. It will be many moons before Elizabeth Warren win nomination.

      2. Except for the true believers, she exudes anti-charisma. I would LOVE for her to be their candidate.

        1. I would LOVE for her to be their candidate.

          Be careful what you wish for. Look how successful politicians from Massachusetts have been in the last 25 years when they’ve been nominated for the Presidency. Same thing could happen with Eilzabeth Warren.

          1. Are you referring to Romney and Dukakis?

            As odious as a Santorum presidency would be, a Warren presidency would be worse.

            1. Don’t forget John Kerry. Everyone nominated from Mass gets trounced. I’m not sure why the parties keep sending Mass people up for the office, I think they want to believe they have a new Kennedy each time. But none of these people came across well to regular America, and neither would Warren.

  2. And if so, what is wrong with them?

    My experience with millennials is they lack any antiestablishmentarianism

    1. Considering how their parents and grand-parents “anti-establishmentarianism” was GIMME MOAR FREE SHITZ! It’s no wonder.

    2. Young people in general lack that quality, throughout all time. The liberal historians want you to believe that, in the sixties, youth “revolted,” but what really happened is that older college professors and media controllers taught the children of socialists(red diaper babies), a new language in which to express their socialism.

    3. This is should warm the cockles of your heart:

      1. The Outsiders: How Can Millennials Change Washington If They Hate It?

        By defunding it! That’ll change things.

      2. 1. Millennials, in general, are fiercely committed to community service.

        These kids know they are required to volunteer (insert discussion of the nature of volition here) if they want to get into college and get scholarships, or get into any number of other activities.

        1. 80 hours of volunteering to get my degree. Always thought the root word was voluntary.

          1. The oldest minion is staring down 150 hours for her HS diploma. She took the IB route, though.

        2. They adapted to their diminished political freedom all too well.

          1. They adapted to their diminished political freedom all too well.

            You don’t miss what you never know you had.

  3. And if so, what is wrong with them?

    I’m sure Generation X had some bona fide slackers in it, just not all of them. Similarly there are whiny, self-entitled Millenials out there that are a natural fit for Team U Can Haz Free Shit.

    But again, not all of them.

    1. What I know is that our all-encompassing, involved in every part of our lives mega-state wasn’t created by people born after 1980.

  4. The fat women drinking wine, the ebonics website, the promotion of promiscuity, and someone else paying for it all. For once an accurate portrayal of Obamacare! The only inaccuracy is that the women are white.

    1. Shut the fuck up, American.

      1. I think I have one or more folks blocked – because this whole thread is making no sense to me.

        1. No, American the racist troll was posting and got nuked. He had posted a lot, so that’s why it’s confusing.

          1. Yeah, it’s getting even more baffling below – especially with your vicious smackdowns of yourself.

    2. The only inaccuracy is that the women are white.

      Well, she could self-identify as white, I suppose.

    3. And then, does anybody really know what time it is?
      “White supremacist takes DNA test, finds out he’s part black”
      Hey. Murkin? Was that you?

      1. I don’t buy it.


        1. I’ll wait and see; he’ll certainly get a re-test.

          1. Nahhh….he’s still “pregnant”.

        2. Out of their ~100,000 white American individuals tested, ~5% have any evidence of African ancestry.

          Aren’t we all from Africa?

          1. Yeah, but there’s been sufficient generations that the sub-Saharan and Euro populations have branched.

            1. Branched so much that the two groups share no DNA evidence that they came from the same ancestry?

              Anyway I was only making fun of the author’s unfortunate use of the words “have any evidence of African ancestry.”

              Why did he choose to be wildly inaccurate when he did not have to be? Hell he could have just used the words the study used rather then being wrong.

              1. Corning|11.16.13 @ 7:18PM|#
                “Branched so much that the two groups share no DNA evidence that they came from the same ancestry?”

                No, but enough to be able to tell “recent” mixing.
                But yes, the claim of “African” is typical inaccuracy.

              2. The Merriam Webster dictionary says that “native” means “born in a partcular place” and I was born in America, so I’m going to call myself Native American, ignoring the historical meaning of the word, because it doesn’t fit my narrative.

                1. Fine by me! You could also call yourself raging bigot.

                2. Pauli|11.16.13 @ 7:27PM|#

                  Wait a minute…you’s miscegenated! All you boys! Miscegenated! These boys is not white! These boys is not white! Hell, they ain’t even ol’-timey! I happen to know, ladies’n gentlemen, this band a miscreants here, this very evening, they interfered with a lynch mob inna performance of its duties! It’s true! I b’long to a certain society, I don’t believe I gotta mention its name, heh-heh…Ahem. And these boys here trampled all over our venerated observances an’ rich’ls! Now this-here music is over! I aim to – Listen to me! These boys desecrated a fiery cross!

                  Lock up your wimmen.

                3. I’m going to call myself Native American,

                  And you truly are, as am I.
                  All this “racial sensitivity” is bullshit. Race is meaningless except on –at most– an ?sthetic level.

                  1. Race is meaningless except on –at most– an ?sthetic level.

                    True story — my GFs brother (who is Vietnamese like her) applied for a driver’s license while living in the South. The race question on the application only listed as options “white” or “black”. When he pointed out that he is Asian, she looked at the options on the application, looked at him, and said, “Honey, you is white!”

          2. I am really surprised it is only 5%. I would have thought that there was a ton of mixing, especially in the South, even if it was “out of sight out of mind”.

            OTOH, I was listening to a Radio Lab episode on race, and they had an African American guy who got tested, only to find out he had 0% sub-Saharan African ancestry. There was (IIRC) Native American, Indo-European, and Asian, of all things. It would be really fascinating to see what the test results were for a really, really large fraction of Americans.

            1. “OTOH, I was listening to a Radio Lab episode on race, and they had an African American guy who got tested, only to find out he had 0% sub-Saharan African ancestry.”

              Was he a black supremicist?

              1. Around the 18:00 mark

                I can completely understand how that could be a really jarring experience for someone who’s race is a really huge part of their identity.

                Here is a picture of the guy.

            2. Probably just an affirmative action fraud. A lot of these South Asians can easily pass for Black.

            3. I would have thought that there was a ton of mixing, especially in the South, even if it was “out of sight out of mind”.

              Liberals believe that race mixing is the natural order of things, thus it surprising to learn how rare it was. When it did happen, the offspring was almost always considered Black. A Black needs a lot of White blood before he can pass.

              1. Pass what?

                1. The math test.

                  1. Like… binomials?

              2. A Black needs a lot of White blood before he can pass.

                This is why they’re always coming for the gentile babies and mixing their blood in with the matzoh.

                Pray tell, how much white blood do they need? I have a monoracial black coworker who’s regularly mistaken for a fair skinned latina who would like the answer to this.

                1. I imagine his various screeds and diatribes are cut/cross-posted from the threads on stormfront… He’s like a weekly infomercial for everything that’s toxic about their ideology…

                  1. I don’t like the stormfronters. They have no ability to think critically, they believe religiously in that stupid holocaust denial conspiracy theory.

                    1. I don’t like the stormfronters. They have no ability to think critically, they believe religiously in that stupid holocaust denial conspiracy theory.

                      And… You believe that’s the extent of their character deficiencies?

                2. Latinos aren’t White, except when they are. It depends on how the phenotype is expressed, usually, people of 1/8 Black ancestry still look noticeably Black. If Cobb is really 14% Black, he should try to see how much affirmative action he can get, that would shut up the laughing liberals.

                  1. And what is your point? Where are you going with this?

                3. She should get that checked, we conquistadors left no vagina unstirred.

                  1. What was it P.J. O’Rourke said about the difference between the Spanish and Americans – they fucked their Indians before killing them?

                    1. Lol! Yup.

        3. n The New York Times promoting a separatist racial vision in a small North Dakota town. I’ll be honest and admit that I don’t think that these results will hold up. (though personally I would think it was rich and very funny if they did, just like everyone else).

          The reason is the chart to the left. It’s from 23andMe’s data set. Out of their ~100,000 white American individuals tested, ~5% have any evidence of African ancestry. Of those, you see the distribution of results.

          Yes, because I’m sure the 23andMe’s data set is chock full of the DNA of those Southern working-class Whites who are not only racial supremacists/separatists, but were also willing to pay over 100 dollars to discover if they were predisposed to prostate cancer.

          You’d think Mr. Khan, who possesses “degrees in biology and biochemistry, a passion for genetics, history, and philosophy” might have already learned about selection bias. However, it seems not.

          1. Cobb is from Massachusetts, so the point about “Southern working class Whites” doesn’t prove much.

            1. I take it you’ve never been to the South Side of Boston then?

      2. According to DNA analysis I am 3.5% Neanderthal. I demand reparations for my people and the genocide they suffered!

        1. Only if you say it without the voiceless dental non-sibilant fricative!

          1. “It!”

            Is that good enough for you?

        2. Your ancestors got to fuck humans….us humans should be asking for reparations!!

  5. I remember as a teen girl nearly crawling the walls every time I saw “myself” portrayed in t.v., print, and film.

    The ad that strikes me as the biggest lie is the one with the chick cradling her pills and “hoping” to score with the dime-a-dozen guy who’s already made his intentions perfectly clear.

    First of all, 20-something girls are at best curious when it comes to getting laid. Not horny, just curious.

    Second, those cliches about women giving sex to get love are true. The ad should read more like “Thank God I got these pills so I can flash them at him to make him think I’m safe and then — mysteriously — get pregnant!”

    1. You’re one of the only people here who gets it. A cute girl like the one in that add wouldn’t be horny, but the add wasn’t directed at cute girls like her. It was directed against the fat girl on her yoga ball. Feminists love acting liberated like men by saying things like that, but it isn’t how they really think. Men aren’t “hot,” they are….well, you know.

    2. First of all, 20-something girls are at best curious when it comes to getting laid. Not horny, just curious.

      I find the universality of this hard to believe.

      Also aren’t 20-somthing girls not girls but in fact women?

      1. I don’t get these people who say that “the sky is blue.” Is it always blue, every single day at every hour?

      2. huh. Wow. This guy is hanging with the wrong people.

        1. Faceless Commenter is a woman and I think there is truth to what she says, at least inasmuch as there are a lot of young women out there who aren’t oversexed.

          1. I think people are taking issue with her blanket statement that 20-something women aren’t horny. And for good reason; I can assure you that at least some of them are really fucking horny. Like, me saying “the spirit is willing but the flesh is spongy and weak” level horny.

            Maybe she speaks for herself and some other women, but I know from experience it sure isn’t all of them.

            1. Look, for the last time, she only told you she was in her 20’s. The tennis ball on her cane should have been the tip off.

              1. But I checked her ID and everything!

            2. but I know from experience it sure isn’t all of them.

              And how! One of my luckiest days was when I happened to see a friend who lived in a neighboring apartment crying in frustration because her out-of-town boyfriend wasn’t going to be visiting that weekend like he was supposed to. A great month or so followed, then after college, four very entertaining months, all because I asked her what I could do to help.

              1. My 20 yo cousin is quite the nympho. Conversation with her is about either sexual frustration or conquests. Her last steady boyfriend was so hung up, he hid her phone to keep her from talking to other guys. She kicked his cuckold ass to the curb for that.

                1. Phone number? I’ll settle for a Twitter profile.

                  1. No way I’m going to do that, but here is a pic from her FB page though —


                  2. MMM, a better one —


                    1. This is why Postrel hates us.

                    2. Showing off my gene pool is all.

              2. You don’t even need an extreme example like yours to disprove Faceless Commenter’s claim.

                If 20-something women are only doing it for “curiosity” then why do 20-something women have BFs (or GFs) who they have sex with more then two or three times?

                I speak from experience as well. All the GFs I have had were not doing it with me because they were curious after the 2nd or 3rd time….what on earth could they still be curious about?

                Your 20-somthing GF does not come up to you while you are sitting on the couch watching TV and ask you to “use your mouth down there” because she is “curious” and not horny.

    3. First of all, 20-something girls are at best curious when it comes to getting laid. Not horny, just curious.

      Nah, that’s just what they told you.

      1. I speak from the vagina.

        1. Well there goes my attempt at a burn.

        2. I speak from the vagina.

          You should get that checked out.

        3. I was wondering why it sounded all muffled.

          1. I was wondering why it had an English accent.

    4. First of all, 20-something girls are at best curious when it comes to getting laid. Not horny, just curious.
      . . . cliches about women giving sex to get love are true.

      Really?! Things have evidently changed significantly since the 1970s and 1980s. I had a great time (especially in college) by simply admitting I was happy to have sex without looking to become romantically involved. I’m still friends with several of them, and we haven’t been active together for 25-30 years. When we were young, they were slender, lovely, energetic, eager and imaginative.

      1. I’ll be happy to qualify. Something tells me there was something REALLY adorable about you.

        But judging from those ads taken together, I’ll say the notion that a chick as hot as the one in that picture is on the make for casual sex with an average-looking guy is an emanation from a retard’s mind.

        “Thank God, now that I have free pills from Obamacare I can spread my legs more often!” Just doesn’t ring.

          1. The goofy pose, very wide-angle lens and strained camera angle combine to make them both look a bit like something out of Team America.

            1. She might be hot if she didn’t look less retarded, and be attributed as wanting to hook up with an obvious smug douchebag.

        1. Something tells me there was something REALLY adorable about you.

          Maybe. I’d like to think so, but my height is dead average for my cohort and my looks peaked in grade school. OTOH I’ve always been told I’m a nice guy. I make women comfortable.
          I was always trying something different, maybe that was it. I once asked a woman next to me in line (pointing my thumb at the gossip mags) “Who do you think lie more, men or women?”
          Her answer took three hours and dinner.

  6. And I thought nothing could be worse than the Live Long in Oregon folk song ad.

    1. Subject matter aside, I actually thought it wasn’t bad.

      1. Agreed. Laura Gibson is a treat.

  7. Newborn twins bathed in warm water, embrace each other


      1. Uh, what? I can’t even wrap my mind around the idea of someone being sexually aroused by that video. Can you explain this to me?

        1. Someone told me a story that Nero would take newborns in the bath with him and stick his dick in their mouths underwater until they drowned. Their gasping would stimulate him.

          No idea if it is true.

          1. He must have been pretty tiny, then. Perhaps that explains his legendary mental disorder.

          2. if it comes from a later source it may have been exagerated, particularly later christian sources. It might be false

    1. Cute, but not as cute as kittens, especially this one,

      1. Love the cat in the horse mask!

        1. What they dont tell you is that james bond came in shortly after those pictures were taken.

          1. You know, because Nazi-like bond villains have cats…get it?

        2. Meh, it seems a bit of a stretch to call them Nazis, though. Many of the subjects were just Germans during the war.

  8. “Why should young and relatively poor people be forced to sign up for insurance that charges them above-market rates to subsidize rates for old and relatively wealthy people?”

    Same reason as for Social Security

  9. “Why should young and relatively poor people be forced to sign up for insurance that charges them above-market rates to subsidize rates for old and relatively wealthy people?”

    Yeah, I remember when ObamaCare was about making insurance affordable for the working poor, too.

    The solution? Sic the IRS on the working poor who can’t afford to buy it!

    LOL, working poor people. The ObamaCare joke’s on you.

  10. On-Topic: Chicago Tribune calls for repeal of Obamacare.


    Ka. Boom. Headshot.

    1. It’ll take more than the Colonel’s rag, but it’s good to see a start.

      1. It would’ve been unthinkable just a few short months ago…

  11. These ads seem to be directed at college kids. Which is pretty stupid, considering college kids are covered by their parents’ plan (until they turn 26).

    I am 27 and in no way do any of these ads appeal to me. I don’t think they would even if I were an Obamacare supporter.

    The only conclusion I can draw from this is that the people who made these ads are idiots.

    1. There are two possible conclusions: the people who made these ads think the people they are targeting with them are retarded, or the people who made these ads are in fact themselves retarded.

      I’m with you in that I think it’s the latter.

      1. A big part of the SWPL ethos is thinkng that there are only three kinds of people in the world: white people(SWPLs), white trash(middle Americans), and the non-Whites who would be just like the White people if it weren’t for the boggeyman of the day. They think that the average thirty year old white fry cook thinks the way they do, and values the same culture that they do. Thus, you get people asking “if this add doesn’t apply to me how can it appeal to anyone?”

        1. Shut the fuck up, moron. I didn’t give you permission to address me, fuckstain.

          1. Is there like a form we can submit?

            1. Epi normally just gives me permission as he’s whispering sweet nothings in my ear on Christmas morn while wintry sun streams into our love den.

              Then he leaves the money on the dresser and takes his leave.

          2. Awesome! Now it looks like you’re schizophrenic!

          3. Shut the fuck up, moron. I didn’t give you permission to address me, fuckstain.

            This comment is hilarious now that American has been erased.

            1. It’s the best part of that moron being nuked: hilarious responses ensue!

            2. Shhh! He’s monologueing.

        2. “white people(SWPLs), white trash(middle Americans), and the non-Whites “

          Sooo.. Where do you see yourself on that scale?

          1. I would probably be identified as a SWPL at first sight, if my political views were revealed, I would be called “white trash.”

            1. ” if my political views were revealed, I would be called “white trash.”

              Sooo… are you, like.. a Klansmen? Do you still have most of your teeth?

          2. I thought he was saying that’s the way progressives see us.

            In the progressive worldview, SWPLs are progressives–and everybody else is either white trash or a minority.

            So, by definition, from the SWPL perspective, everybody that disagrees with SWPLs–that isn’t a minority–is white trash by definition.


            1. Thank you for including the link. I was going insane trying to figure out what SWPL stood for.

              1. Yeah, I was wondering what these comments had to do with lady’s soccer in northern Britain.

    2. If you are writing comments at reason.com, these ads are not meant for you, no matter your age. Just look at the name: doyougotinsurance

    3. Just because you can buy insurance, that your kid probably doesn’t need, doesn’t mean you will…or even should.

      They charge you more for having your 25 year old kid on the policy, right?

      1. I’m unclear on whether it’s mandated that the insurance company keep adult children on until 26 at the same price, or whether they’re just required to offer it at an additional price.

        1. They charge you more for having an extra kid on your policy.

          Lots of people don’t buy insurance for their 20 something year old kid already–because you have to pay extra for it.

          The 25 year old kid may get a price break for being on the family plan compared to buying it for an individual–but it costs more to have your kid on the family plan.

          You don’t get free insurance for one kid–just because he’s under 26.

          1. If your plan is “family” it doesn’t matter how many dependents you have, it’s the same price.

            Whether or not it costs extra would depend on if your spouse is on your plan or if you have lots of children.

            My gf’s plan options were individual, Indv+child, Indv+Children, Indv+spouse, and Family.

            If you are married with 2 kids and one is in their early 20s and one is a minor, then the older one costs zero additional premium dollars. Same if you are single with 3 kids and 2 of them are minors.

            YMMV depending on your plan, but this is how I have seen many plans breakdown over the years.

            1. “My gf’s plan options were individual, Indv+child, Indv+Children, Indv+spouse, and Family.”

              When we’re talking about the difference between covering your kid or not covering your kid, the comparison most people are making (in your example) is more like the choice between Indv+Spouse or Family.

              The choice usually isn’t between family (of 4) vs. family (of 5).

              Other common choices probably include:

              individual vs. Indv+child

              Indv+child vs. Indv + children

              Most Americans are having two or fewer children these days, so for most people, not covering their kid anymore probably means they’re saving money.

              Obama did this to encourage parents to pay the extra money necessary to keep their healthy, young children paying into the system–and using very little in the way of healthcare resources.

              But if you have two or fewer children, keeping Junior on the plan is not the low cost option.

              1. You didn’t read very well. If you are married and have 2 kids, then there is no change. You save $0 by knocking the older one off insurance.

                1. Okay, if that’s true? then Barack Obama is even dumber than I thought.

                  If the success of ObamaCare hinges on young, healthy people paying into the insurance system and you’re telling me that ObamaCare made it so a huge chunk of them under 26–won’t have to pay any more into the insurance system at all?

                  Then ObamaCare is self-defeating.

                  There isn’t any dispute about the success of ObamaCare depending on young healthy people buying insurance to make up for all the money the insurance companies are going to lose on Medicaid expansion and taking on people with preexisting conditions.

                  …and if all those 26 and unders can get insurance without their parents, their employers, themselves, or anyone else paying more to the insurance companies–because of ObamaCare? then Barack Obama is even more of a blithering, self-defeating, ignoramus than I thought.

                  …and I already thought he was an idiot.

                  1. C’mon Ken – how can you not see the genius of this. Set up to fail and the insurance companies to be the fall guys. The only flaw was the timing – this wasn’t supposed to happen until 2017 or so.

                    1. Obama isn’t that smart.

                      I haven’t seen any evidence to suggest that Obama is smart enough to pull off a strategy like that.

                      I’ve seen plenty of evidence to suggest that he has no idea what’s in his own best interests.

                      He has no idea what he’s doing. Once we understand that, there’s no reason to project brilliant political strategy motives onto his foolish behavior.

                    2. I was kidding. Never ascribe to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.

                  2. Oh they pay more for it, as the price of family premiums increases. It’s just that the rest of the risk pool pays more for it too. All in all, it probably isn’t a dramatic increase.

                    1. I don’t see it that way.

                      If they’re not paying more into the insurance regime for these young, healthy kids, and these kids are young and healthy and won’t make many claims on their insurance plan, then the other people in the system won’t be paying premiums into the system for them either.

                      And that’s the whole point. ObamaCare hinges on making healthy, young people pay premiums for insurance that they probably won’t use.

                      Now you’re telling me that another part of ObamaCare makes it so that an enormous chunk of middle class, young, healthy kids, under the age of 26, is going to get insurance without paying any premiums whatsoever.

                      Obama is a dumbass. Just for that, he’s a dumbass.

      2. I assume so.

        I work with many young co-workers and many seem to be scrambling because daddy kicked them off the policy as soon as they left the house.

      3. The age 26 thing is essentially cost free since people between 21 and 26 hardly ever need to see a doctor anyway.

        1. Who are you, and what have you done with Hazel?!

          It’s not cost free if they’re charging you for it.


        2. “The age 26 thing is essentially cost free pissed away money, since people between 21 and 26 hardly ever need to see a doctor anyway.”

          And that’s why Obama, and the insurance execs are praying they’ll enter the market… And they don’t give a shit if those “kids” squeeze their folks for it, or cough it up themselves. The ‘squeeze the parents’ option is just dangling candy out of the van..

          1. So, she was being sarcastic, and it totally went over my head again.


            1. The worst part of it, is how badly they have these 20somethings over the barrel. If they refuse to pay for fine/insurance, they can kiss fed backed student loans good-bye. These kids folks have seen their own housing equity and personal savings absolutely decimated, so paying for their kids collage/insurance is hard, at best. Coming fresh out of collage, with crushing loan debt, and low-end/ entry level occupational wages, a 1% hit, or outrageous premiums is a financial deathblow that will be difficult to recover quickly from… They’re pretty well fucked, either way they go..

            2. It’s my fault – I was slow on the first sarcasm on the thread and threw everyone elses sensitivity off.

  12. HEY
    wanna go to Medford, NJ?

    1. I’ve had some really excellent vegan deserts. There is some ice cream place in Manhattan in particular that our friends took us to (forget where) that was spectacular.

      1. It was so great that you can’t remember it?

        Doesn’t sound that impressive.

        1. There was some weird legal dispute between the owner and her ex husband, so the name had to change and I don’t even think they had settled on a new one yet. Apparently it used to be called Lula’s Sweet Apothecary.

    2. So if they are morally opposed to eating critters, why are all their menu items named after critter dishes?

      Ooooh, oooh, look at me, I’m so trendy and compassionate.

      1. So if they are morally opposed to eating critters, why are all their menu items named after critter dishes?

        Same reason that people who won’t eat dogs will still eat hot dogs.

    1. I’m not watching such a blasphemous video. There is nothing wrong with Back to the Future. Hey Serious, why don’t you act like a tree and beat it.

      1. I believe it’s:

        Why don’t you make like a tree and get outta here!

        1. “We got a 911 call that someone was beating the tree here. Have any of you seen anyone of that description?”

        2. No, the correct version is act like a tree and fall like Stanford. Go Trojans!

      2. Oh yeah? Well why was it necessary for Doc to bring Marty and Jennifer back to the future of 2015? Why couldn’t he just tell them what happens to Marty Jr. so in 30 years they’d be ready for it?

        Clearly at this point, after using future knowledge to save his own life, it would be hypocritical for Doc not to help Marty avoid ruining his own life.

        1. Because, you nincompoop, where they’re going, they don’t need roads.

          QED. I win.

          1. …where we’re going, we don’t need roads.

            Most libertarian line evah.

            1. They went to Somalia?

            2. Back to the Future II depicts a world where a woman is president, Diana and Charles are King and Queen, and Japanese corporations own America.

              How is that libertarian?

              1. He said line not movie.

              2. And here he goes, bringing up sequels. You know, if I didn’t know better, I’d think you were a fan of the second and third Matrix movies. You aren’t…ARE YOU?

                1. Actually I’ve never seen any of the Matrix movies, at least not that I remember.

                  1. You…you haven’t even seen the first one? Are you serious? Oh wait, it says in your handle that you are. What the fuck is wrong with you?!? Go see the first one right now. I saw it in the theater and almost shit my pants. Mostly because of the bad burrito I had, but partly because the movie is awesome.

                    1. Canoe Reeves is the worst actor EVAH!

                    2. Strange things are afoot at the Circle K.

                    3. I was 6 when it came out in theaters and after that I just never got around to seeing it all the way through in one viewing.

                  2. “Actually I’ve never seen any of the Matrix movies, at least not that I remember.”


                2. Matrix 2 and 3 were not great, but I think people are too harsh. The third one was entertaining enough.

                  Animatrix is quite good.

                  1. If by “too harsh” you mean, “if time travel were possible, one of the first plausible uses for it would be to tell the Wachowski brothers to never do sequels, and George Lucas to never do prequels…”

                    You may feel otherwise. Perhaps then we should strap you in this chair and force you to sit through the Matrix 3 “tribal house music dance party”-cum-“love scene” on FUCKING REPEAT. UNTIL YOU WANT TO DIE. UNTIL YOU WANT YOUR DEATH TO BE SO PAINFUL THAT IT ERASES THE EXPERIENCE FROM YOUR DEAD BRAIN CELLS. AND ALL YOU REMEMBER IS PAIN. WHICH IS MUCH BETTER THAN THE THIRD MATRIX, WHICH MADE MOST SENTIENT BEINGS WANT HUMANITY TO DIE FOREVER.

    1. There is nothing entertaining about Heartiste.

      1. You’re incorrect. Reading Heartiste is entertaining in the same way watching that Dutch soap opera with the all Down’s Syndrome cast is entertaining.

        1. From Heartiste’s comments:

          Zombie Shane
          “Why do ads that, by any reasonable suspicion, seem primarily aimed at the problems of minorities”

          It’s even worse than that ? if you look closely at the second ad, then you’ll realize that the girl is a filthy shiksa whore who is being urged to fornicate with a dark swarthy mediterranean-looking dude, named “Nate”.

          And a name like “Nate” would rule out all southern Mediterranean Muslims, all Mediterranean spaniards [ever since the Sephardim got kicked out in 1492], all Mediterranean frogs, all Mediterranean wops, and all Mediterranean guppies.

          Which leaves which Mediterranean nation that often names its sons, “Nate”?

          Gosh, lemme think about that one, and see whether I can get back to you with the answer sometime. Maybe later this decade.

          In the meantime, rest assured that this advertisement is very definitely pushing the idea of miscegenation upon poor stupid gullible unsuspecting filthy shiksa whores.

          It’s not random.

          It’s all part and parcel of the same damned pattern which keeps repeating itself, over and over and over again.

          Note: No one criticized this man in that comment section. They saw nothing wrong with this.

          1. the girl is a filthy shiksa whore who is being urged to fornicate with a dark swarthy mediterranean-looking dude, named “Nate”

            Go on….

      2. There is nothing entertaining about Heartiste.

        I have to admit I laughed at this one:

        Susie and Nate:
        “Shit, I’m late!”
        “I’m outta here.”

  13. This actually says more about the people who work at non-profits than anything.

    There seem to be an endless supply of these non-profits. Not just in Washington DC, but in every state. These things don’t ever do any sort of useful productive work, basically they act as quasi-governmental propaganda operations.

    1. “These things don’t ever do any sort of useful productive work, basically they act as quasi-governmental propaganda operations.”

      You’re too kind.
      In SF, it’s where the politicos park their supporters between elections and at nice salaries, too.
      Bring a voting block to Willy’s candidate, you’ll have a job and benes for life!

      1. They are money-laundering operations.

        1. Freshly printed money needs to be washed- https://www.nccivitas.org/2013/moneymonday/

        2. Jayburd|11.16.13 @ 8:42PM|#
          “They are money-laundering operations.”
          Good description. Willy & Co. ran donor’s and gov’t money through those oh, so wonderful non-profits who used, oh, 10% of the money to ‘feed the poor’ and the remainder to finance the election campaign.

        3. Books are as well.

          “So Obama i want a loan for my green energy research.”

          “Ok this is what i need you to do. Go to Amazon.com and buy 5000 copies of “American Grown.”

  14. The Nazzies are starting to go after ‘spicy’ foods now. And, Hot Cheetos are ‘spicy food’, apparently. Also, watch look at all the retarded commenters blaming ‘additives’ and ‘processed food’. People are full of shit.


    1. You’ve seen this NPR article on the issue from 2006, no?

      Money quote

      And the part that’s actually important in the article:

      MARCY PELCHAT: We think it’s probably the case that when you eat a spicy food and experience a burn, you have a release of these morphine- or opium-like chemicals in the brain.

      BURBANK: Marcy Pelchat is a food preference expert at the Monell Chemical Senses Center in Philadelphia. She says when we eat spicy foods, something called our trigeminal nerve is actually irritated. Scientists theorize the body releases endorphins to help us cope with the discomfort.

      PELCHAT: So you get a little high from release of these chemicals.


      1. If that were true, I’m pretty sure McDonald’s would be adding Guatemalan insanity pepper extract to all their Big Macs.

      2. Well yeah, why else would I just eat a jolokia?

    2. Uh oh, I just Indian for dinner.

      1. If this isn’t a problem in India, I am going to call bullshit.

        They eat MUCH spicier foods from an earlier age than anything Frito-Lay is putting out.

        1. But Indians (dot, not feather) use NATURAL spices. Unlike the Frito-Lay korporashun.

        2. I agree. In Thailand, they don’t down-spice the food for kids at all.

      2. And lo, you are writing sentences without verbs.

      3. That’s ok, I just carne asada and queso enchiladas in the oven.

        1. Aaaand his adverbs are still ticking!

      4. How were the fava beans?

    3. “Andrew, who was eating more than 20 bags of spicy snacks a month,…”

      There may be other issues here.

  15. I think the ads kind of subversively describe the “moral hazard” problem created by the ACA’s socialization of healthcare costs. When individuals don’t have to pay for their own irresponsible behavior, they are more likely to behave irresponsibly and take bigger risks. The ads say, straight up, “it’s okay to be an irresponsible idiot, because the government will take care of you.”

    I have no idea if that was secretly intended, but it would be difficult to come up with a more direct way of making that point.

    1. I thought of that, but then I remembered Heinlein’s razor. That is what these liberals want, they want their promiscuity and fatness to be subsidized by the state, so they can have FUN. Normally, they are smarter than this with their propaganda, it usually includes a picture someone the commoners are more likely to find sympathetic, such as a young, poor white father figure who can’t get his children health care. Another possibility is that it is a publicity stunt to get donations for this “non-profit .”

      1. I can’t tell who I hate more right now, EvH or you…it’s a tough call.

        1. If you decide on hating me morr than american, I am so going to fire my publicist.

          How many kitten videos did ameripauli post?

          1. And your response looks interesting now atat americans posts are gone.

            1. It was disconcerting to see the posts when I first started reading this thread a half-hour or so ago, and then see them all go missing after I posted a comment in some other part of the threads.

    1. now THAT’S upping the dozens.

    2. When Gameday was at the Northwestern campus this year before the Ohio State game, you could see a similar insult directed at the OSU coach:


    3. Don’t show that to Epi, I’m concerned that Obamacare Fuckup woody he’s been sporting might just burst.

  16. Are you ready for a late dinner?
    Becuase you’ll need enough to eat.

  17. Explaining mixtapes to the kids

  18. Joey: What? Let me see that. Oh no! This sucks. When I had health insurance I could… catch on fire, you know or get hit by a bus. Now I gotta be careful?

    Chandler: I know what you mean, man, there’s never a good time to stop… catching on fire.

  19. Hetero people are contaminating gay people with heterosexist and patriarchal customs

    The very topic of marriage equality foregrounds assimilation; those b-rolls sent to the studios presented LGBT people as typical middle-Americans, working middle-class jobs, raising kids, living the American dream. The half-naked Pride paraders were carefully pushed off center-stage. At the extremes, this trend meant gay people themselves were sidelined, as in the much-maligned failed 2012 Proposition 8 campaign in California, which focused on straight politicians and allies touting gay marriage rather than showing pictures of gay families (though a campaign in Maine the same year which centered on gay families also failed).

    Moscowitz writes that, “in selling one particular version of gay and lesbian life, the movement risks unintentionally casting other forms of gay identity (not being part of a monogamous, married, child-rearing couple) to the margins.” She argues that when news media chose LGBT weddings to highlight, they inevitably included couples who looked and acted as much like traditional heterosexual couples as possible. In a couple of instances, Moscowitz says, “one partner took the last name of the other, ironically participating in a heterosexist and patriarchal practice historically rooted in property ownership.”

    1. Cultural Marxists tell us the only difference between a homosexual couple and a normal couple is the gender of one of the individuals. Thus, when they make their propaganda, they portray gays as “like us.” But the gays know that isn’t true, and they want society to accept all their other deviations, but the smart cultural marxists say “one at a time.” A similar situation occurs with Blacks. Whenever the media shows them, they always select the one who can speak normal english, but the Blacks want to be able to speak Ebonics.

      1. they portray gays as “like us”

        None of the gay people I know are as vile as you are.

      2. “But the gays know that isn’t true, and they want society to accept all their other deviations,”

        Says the raging bigot!
        Thanks for your idiocy, murkin!

      3. I regret linking this article given that a bigoted a-hole is flaming the threads today.

  20. Libertarians often misunderstand that so much of politics is not the disinterested ideological analysis that is typically found here, but is a game of gimmie and gimmyfriends. The “friends” here is whatever group they consider themselves part of, Christians, SWPLS, women, Blacks, Mexicans, poor people, ect.

    1. What group do you consider yourself a part of? I’d like to know so I can ever, ever associate with them.

      1. I don’t like labels, I would say that my most important characteristic is that I reject cultural marxism. I don’t believe n the blank slate theory or the essentially “moral” nature of mankind, two things that are at the heart of cultural marxism. I read Vdare.com a lot.

        1. Pauli|11.16.13 @ 8:35PM|#
          “I don’t like labels”

          That’s a laff riot, murkin! You fucking idjit!

        2. I’ll just go ahead and file you under pig shit.

    2. What group do you consider yourself a part of? I’d like to know so I can ever, ever associate with them.

    3. Pauli|11.16.13 @ 8:11PM|#
      “Libertarians often misunderstand that so much of politics is not the disinterested ideological analysis that is typically found here, but is a game of gimmie and gimmyfriends”

      But asshole bigots like you have a handle on it?

  21. OT:Young and Educated in Europe, but Desperate for Jobs

    MADRID ? Alba M?ndez, a 24-year-old with a master’s degree in sociology, sprang out of bed nervously one recent morning, carefully put on makeup and styled her hair. Her thin hands trembled as she clutched her r?sum? on her way out of the tiny room where a friend allows her to stay rent free.

    She had an interview that day for a job at a supermarket. It was nothing like the kind of professional career she thought she would have after finishing her education. But it was a rare flicker of opportunity after a series of temporary positions, applications that went nowhere and employers who increasingly demanded that young people work long, unpaid stretches just to be considered for something permanent.

    Her parents were imploring her to return home to the Canary Islands to help run her father’s fruit business. It was a sign of the times, though, that even her own father probably would not be able to afford to pay her.

    “We’re in a situation that is beyond our control,” Ms. M?ndez said. “But that doesn’t stop the feelings of guilt. On the bad days, it’s really hard to get out of bed. I ask myself, ‘What did I do wrong?’?”

    Well, I’d say that Master of Sociology degree would be a good place to start the analysis.

    1. “Well, I’d say that Master of Sociology degree would be a good place to start the analysis.”

      Good place to stop too. Hope it was a ‘free’ education; it’s worth every penny!

    2. Well, I’d say that Master of Sociology degree would be a good place to start the analysis.

      Why, I had to fire my last 3 sociologists. It’s so hard finding good domestic help.

      1. I know. They can explain everything you want to know about how Wal-Mart crafts your social identity, but they can never remember to starch my shirts and not my pants.

    3. I’m a similar position as her in terms of the kind of degree I got, so I really can’t make fun of her without making fun of myself.

      But yeah, that was dumb. Dumb, dumb, dumb. But I think the worst thing you can do is feel like a victim for your decisions.

      1. My undergrad degree was in journalism in 1990.

        I’ve worked in IT since 95.

        1. My degrees were in biology and anthropology in 1995.

          I’ve worked IT and software since 96.

          1. I got my degrees in Linguistics and German in 1993 but I didn’t get into software until 1998. It took me five years to realize that grocery store clerk was probably not going to do it for me.

        2. Degree in political science, just this year. I’m not too worried because I don’t have that much student debt, but as of right now my degree doesn’t qualify me for shit.

          1. as of right now my degree doesn’t qualify me for shit.

            Neither did mine and unless you have a degree in the hard sciences of some type, neither did anyone else.

            I sold my beloved motorcycle, bought my first computer with the proceeds and then begged the IT director of the law firm I worked for for a job. It worked out OK.

            I have a buddy who has a philosophy degree from UVA. He’s worked for CaptialOne in the risk analysis division for years now.

      2. But yeah, that was dumb. Dumb, dumb, dumb. But I think the worst thing you can do is feel like a victim for your decisions.

        Don’t feel bad. Eventually, the feelings of frustration and betrayal will fade, you’ll learn to laugh at your PoliSci degree like I learned to laugh at mine.

      3. There are plenty of opportunities in sociology…if you make them. Do independent marketing research for companies. Start a criminology consulting firm. etc.

        All it takes is an entrepreneurial mindset.

        1. Yes, thank you. Sociology is a widely varied discipline that overlaps with other fields including economics, demography, epidemiology, criminal justice, anthropology, statistics…many sociologists have a very quantitative orientation. Get a masters at the right program and you can come out with a solid set of skills including statistical modeling and data programming/ analysis using packages such as SAS and Stata, and get decent jobs in a variety of industries.

    4. I don’t understand these people, don’t they understand that you can make 80,000 a year if you become an engineer. Why isn’t everybody an engineer?


    5. Why in Zod’s name would you not want to live on the Canary Islands?

      1. Because that would mean working for her parents.

        1. Beats being unemployed.

    6. Well the fact that she’s worried she might not get a job at the supermarket says it goes a little beyond that, no?

      Kids going for useless credentials is part of the problem, but the fact is she’s having more trouble finding work than a high school dropout would have over here says something about the economic situation.

      1. To be honest, I think it says more about the absolute shit job market in Spain more than anything. The idea that the Canary Islands is a better option says something.

  22. On-Topic: UnitedHealth dropping doctors by the thousands

    MINNETONKA, Minn., Nov. 16 (UPI) — Financial pressures from the U.S. government are pushing UnitedHealth Group to drop thousands of doctors, the firm’s president said.
    “That’s what’s driving our actions. It’s no secret that we are under substantial funding pressure from the federal government,” said President Austin Pittman.

    The Wall Street Journal reported Saturday that UnitedHealth earned profits of $1.57 billion in the third quarter, although the company’s Chief Executive Officer Stephen Hemsley has warned that the Affordable Care Act is expected to include cuts to Medicare Payments.

    If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Period.

    Until he or she gets dropped from the network.

    They droppin’ like flies, boss.

    1. Huh. It’s almost like il Douche wasn’t being straight with us or something. [shrug]

      1. “Il Douche”

        Now that’s worth stealing.

    2. People are probably getting sick of me saying this, but their earnings for Q1 2014 are gonna be really interesting.

    3. Let’s not forget UnitedHealth was/is involved in the website fuckups, and one of their VPs is a big-time Obama donor.


  23. *Poof*… and murkin goes down the memory hole…

    1. And it leaves a LOT of comments hanging in the air.
      ‘WIH was that supposed to mean?’

      1. I have to admit, coming into the thread late, that it was hard to figure out what all these passionate responses were directed to.

        1. W.I….American.. “Pauli…

        2. It was especially weird for me because his comments were still there when I was reading the top of the thread. Then as I continued down, all of a sudden people were replying to comments that no longer existed.

      2. It’s is all a ruse, to completely baffle and perplex @Postrel….

  24. So, that weird Sqrlsy One guy who periodically shows up replied to one of my posts earlier today with this:

    Hi Irish, But don’t you see, Washington was a LEGAL human while the native tribes-peoples were ILLEGAL people? King George was mentally insane and just did not see the distinction. We as Euro-derived pepples born on American soil are legal people, if we PROUDLY call ourselves Americans? And others are all ILLEGAL people, whose rights are highly suspect to say the least? They just MIGHT have been born 5 yards on the wrong side of the border, ya know? And they might even have been so un-American as to have dubbed themselves with un-American internet names such as “Irish”! “America (except for native America), Love it or Leave it!” ? A Proud LEGAL Humanoid (Y’all illegal humans take a hike!) ? Born on the RIGHT side of the rail-road tracks, I am, with the RIGHT kind of birth certificate; “Show me your papers, please, Citizen? Or ARE ye?”

    I don’t even know what’s going on right now.

    1. “Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow”…

    2. “Pardon me stewardess, but I speak raving jibberish.”

    3. He’s like the Cylon-hybrid from Battlestar Galactica. His words are prophecy.

      1. He’s like the Cylon-hybrid liquor-bottle Santa from Battlestar Galactica that seedy bus stop. His words are *cough syrup and Clan Macgregor* prophecy.

      2. You are the harbinger of death Kara Thrace Irish.

    4. I think his brainworms are taking over. The good news is he’ll lose the use of his hands within a week.

    5. “I don’t even know what’s going on right now.”
      Neither does that whacko; s/he loves to read his/her bullshit on the screen.

    6. “So, that weird Sqrlsy One guy”

      Sorry, I smell White Indian.

      WI’s only mental process has to do with some vague linkage between the dissolution of borders, nation states, racial distinctions etc and that we’re all supposed to be Gamboling in some non-property-owning fucking utopian environmental playpen.

      So that stew of stupid resembles something like White Indian vomitus.


  25. Turbo Tax Timmah is off to greener pastures

    Former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, a trusted lieutenant to President Barack Obama who played a leading role in the government’s response to the financial crisis, will join private-equity firm Warburg Pincus LLC in March.

    On Saturday, the firm, which is headquartered in New York, announced Geithner will hold the titles of president and managing director.

    “Warburg Pincus has an excellent record of performance, a very compelling global strategy and an ethical reputation of the highest regard,” Geithner said in a statement. “I look forward to working with my new colleagues and to contributing to the firm’s continued growth and success.”
    Private-equity firms’ role in the financial sector played a leading role in the 2012 presidential campaign, with Democrats criticizing Republican candidate Mitt Romney over deals involving his firm, Bain Capital, that led to layoffs at different companies.

    1. Warburg Pincus, ISIS Comptroller.

  26. So…soon the Gettysburg Address anniversary will be upon us. How do you plan to celebrate?

    1. Ravaging a ~ 50mi wide swath of destruction across Georgia, then drinking some beers and fishing off the coast of Savannah…

      1. How will anyone tell you’ve been through there?

        1. Good point, I guess I’ll piss on every lamppost and fire hydrant along the way..

    2. Unsurprisingly, we’re hearing very little about that, but oh so much about the Camelot shit.

      1. Well, JFK’s grave needs wreaths! Obama can’t be in two places at once!

    3. Blasting this song at full volume for 24 hours straight in front of Thomas DiLorenzo’s house.

      1. Lincoln haters are insufferable. But you got to admit that the Confederacy had some awesome songs.

            1. As an aside, for bad-ass-a-tude, nothing, and I mean nothing, beats Turkish mehter music. Can you imagine standing guard in the fortifications of Constantinople and you hear this coming toward you from miles away?

          1. Hail Columbia, the original national anthem.

            Absolutely destroys the Star-Spangled Banner.

        1. I hate Lincoln and I am insufferable but I like to think it’s not because of Abrahaterey.

        2. This is actually still the Maryland state song.

          Interestingly, they don’t sing the “despot”/”tyrant” (i.e. Lincoln) or “northern scum” verses during Preakness.

      2. Go Down, Moses still gives me the chills in a good way. I think ill listen to it now.

      3. got any good songs from the British Redcoats?

          1. Hey, wait just a second now.

            If you’re going to link to songs with my handle in them, well,
            two can play at that game….

            1. Lol.. Right on. +1

      4. Blasting this song at full volume for 24 hours straight in front of Thomas DiLorenzo’s house.

        Have you read ‘The Real Lincoln?’ The whole book reads like Thomas DiLorenzo is having a stroke in the midst of writing it.

        1. I’ve only read his essays on LvMI and Rockwell, I don’t think I could take a whole book…. not that I believe Lincoln was a demigod either. The truth, as usual, is between hagiography and diatribe.

          1. He literally argues that since other countries peacefully abolished slavery it must be Lincoln’s fault that America did not.

            Obviously there is no difference between slavery in America and slavery in Britain which might account for the difference in outcomes. None at all.

            1. Fort Sumter was a false flag attack, didn’t you know?

            2. I’m becoming less and less patient with Confederate apologists. It doesn’t matter if Lincoln violated the Constitution, the Confederacy was primarily fighting for the right to keep human beings as property.

              No government that treats human beings as subhuman chattel is legitimate.

              1. “The principle, on which the war was waged by the North, was simply this: That men may rightfully be compelled to submit to, and support, a government that they do not want; and that resistance, on their part, makes them traitors and criminals.

                “No principle, that is possible to be named, can be more self-evidently false than this; or more self-evidently fatal to all political freedom. Yet it triumphed in the field, and is now assumed to be established. If it really be established, the number of slaves, instead of having been diminished by the war, has been greatly increased; for a man, thus subjected to a government that he does not want, is a slave. And there is no difference, in principle?but only in degree?between political and chattel slavery. The former, no less than the latter, denies a man’s ownership of himself and the products of his labor; and asserts that other men may own him, and dispose of him and his property, for their uses, and at their pleasure.”

                ? Lysander Spooner (an abolitionist)

              2. Thank you! These people are quacks.

                As libertarianism gets bigger, it is certain that the quacks–the Rothbard, Rockwell, Block,DiLorenzo crowd–will be rolled out by the leftoids as examples of libertarianism. “I heard those libertarians support the South in the Civil War, hence they are racists who support slavery!”

                Rationalism is a two-way street, boys. I don’t believe these guys support slavery, but their defense of the South is inexcusible, and it is exactly the kind of absurd theorization that only ivory tower rationalists are capable of.

            3. And somehow, America violently ending slavery didn’t have any effect on later countries doing so peacefully.

            4. The difference is that the Brits kept slavery at arm’s length by confining it largely to the colonies. So yeah, kind of hypocrites.

    4. the Gettysburg Address anniversary

      4 score and 7 beers?

      1. +lotsa plunderins’ and womenz

  27. I’m surprised that no here has pointed out the obvious fact that these ads show complete contempt for college kids – one of Obama’s largest block of supporters. The ads are literally the administration calling them a bunch of dumb asses.

    1. But.. who doesn’t like to be treated as clueless, patronized, and condescended to when being forced into an expensive, and pointless insurance scam predicated by Chicago Jesus, and his wall St. cronies?

      1. Yeah,

        I’d think that they’de go for a soft sell that flatters their ego.

        But no, it’s just another variation of the FYTW that the dems are using to defend Obamacare now.

        1. I’m interested in seeing how well the smug condescension, and “hip”.. patronizing drivel approach will go over after the 20/30somethings take that 1% hit on tax day…

      2. Hey, kids! We dig you. We get that you want to groove and swing.

        You girls have your hair spray.

        And you guys have your breath mints.

        Obamacare is on your wavelength!

        1. Be there, or be square — []

        2. Be there, or be square — []

    2. Have you met an average university business school student? Communications? Having lived exclusively the “non-trad” commuter lifestyle, I grudgingly must pipe up and defend their most accurate characterization of college douchebags… even though the intent of the ads is supposed to be that of appeal to the demographic.

      1. Yeah, smearing a little shit in their faces ought to get them on board for this trainwreck…

    3. These are people who watch MTV, Jerry Springer and the Jersey Shore. How exactly would you go about insulting their intelligence?

      1. Claim that ACA is a good thing?

        1. Tell ’em Obo is ‘caring’?

    4. VG Zaytsev|11.16.13 @ 9:56PM|#

      … The ads are literally the administration calling understanding them to be a bunch of dumb asses.

      Hope that helps

    5. “I’m surprised that no here has pointed out the obvious fact that these ads show complete contempt for college kids”

      Nope. Plays right into their desires: free shit.

  28. Why should young and relatively poor people be forced to sign up for insurance that charges them above-market rates to subsidize rates for old and relatively wealthy people?

    The elderly at least aren’t reproducing themselves, and don’t engage in hazardous behavior.

    1. “The elderly at least aren’t reproducing themselves,”

      They probably already have..

      “and don’t engage in hazardous behavior.”

      Simple tasks, like.. taking a shower, or, walking out to get the mail is “hazardous” when you’re elderly…

    2. The elderly at least aren’t reproducing themselves, and don’t engage in hazardous behavior.

      The elderly better hope the young are reproducing if they want to continue collecting Social Security until death. Old people engage in hazardous behavior when ever they walk. Old bones are brittle and sidewalks are slippery.

      1. Old bones are brittle and sidewalks are slippery

        Which is our best hope to keep Medicare and Social Security from going bankrupt.
        Stop putting salt on that sidewalk!

  29. Your daily dose of schadenfreude.

    It’s an Obama campaign ad from 5 years ago. Every comment is from that long ago. Reading the hopeful little rubes assuring themselves that Obama shall usher in an era of prosperity is really surreal given the fact that we know what happens next.


    Instead, we’ll be giving our hard earned money and give it to a failed war, fueling terrorist nations and giving money to the CEO’s while the middle class crumbles under the falling economy. Sounds good!

    This guy thinks that Obama won’t be doing any of those things. Sorry, person from 5 years ago. I am so sorry.

    1. Matthew Falk5 years ago

      McCain = Bush, 90% of the time. The other 10% of the time he’s just an angry, confused old man. Don’t let the republicans fool you again. Vote Obama

      Yeah we really dodged a bullet there!

      1. jane busby5 years ago

        The democrats have never REALLY won! The republicans have had 20 of the last 28 years in the white house, and when the dems have been in the majority was slim! We MUST crush the republican FILIBUSTER! Or this won’t do any good.

        Yeah, that filibuster proof two year Democrat majority ushered in some truly wonderful legislation.

        1. “when the dems have been in the majority was slim!”
          Tell that to that miserable hag Pelosi.

          1. That person also fails to mention that the only time the Republicans had an undivided government was in the beginning of the Bush years.

            Hmmm. Undivided Republican government gave us the clusterfuck of a Bush presidency and undivided Democrat government gave us Dodd-Frank and the ACA. I’m beginning to sense a pattern.

            1. Fuck yeah.. Gridlock? FTW!

            2. The Rs had control between the 02 and 06 elections. Now their lead wasn’t huge in the Senate for the first 2 years (51-49), and it increased to only 55-45 after the ’04 elections, but there were 4 years where they had nominal control of both chambers and the WH.

    2. Check out Daily Kos “diaries” from September 30. It’s like Christmas Eve. We’re all going to tiptoe downstairs in a few hours and open all the insurance plans Obama Claus has left us!

      1. I do so wish that we could track these people down, just to laugh in their fucking faces.

        THEN, they can haul me off to the camps.

    3. macflyfilm 5 years ago

      This campaign will be studied for DECADES.

      LOL.. you don’t say..

    4. This, I can’t even . . .

      5 years ago

      Love it!! Can anyone tell me the name of the song playing in the background?

      It sounds like a boring pre-set track from a 1980s Casio synthesizer, and someone wants to know where it came from?

      1. and someone wants to know where it came from?”

        The elevator..

    5. Raymond Greenlaw
      5 years ago
      in reply to jdeppfan2003

      and what mccain is right well mccain is even worse and obama is like the only person who was funded by the people not companys .

      1. That is just about every negative stereotype conservatives have of Obama voters.

      2. Apparently, Raymond Greenlaw highly evolved “Progspeak” doesn’t translate well to the typed word medium… Some things are lost..

  30. Jason Lovell5 years ago

    I love my country and I cannot wait to see what the future holds.

    Jason.. you poor, deluded fool…

  31. OT =

    Just discovered “Simple-English Wikipedia”


    it reminds me of a book I own = “The History of the United States in Words of One Syllable”


    Only funnier.

      1. Oh, they only do that a few times, then they come up with a new name for it, like “the war to be free”. In-di-an became “Red Man”. “Gen-er-al Wash-ing-ton” became “George”. Etc.

        Good stuff. The coverage of the Civil War is really not bad – given it was written only 20 years or so after shit was over, much was still fresh in people’s minds. The mild racism is cute in context of the Forrest Gump-ish rendition of history.

  32. Now Irish has got me started. Obama five years ago on Civil Liberties

    ChrisM705 years ago

    There is something fundamentally flawed if someone reasoned and intelligent like Obama loses to a fear mongerer and Bush apologist like McCain. Let’s all hope that doesn’t happen, and work to make sure Barck wins!

    crikeyuncle5 years ago

    What I don’t understand is how people can even think about voting for someone who’s whole run for the presidency depends on baseless personal attacks, and building up their WELL known background as a POW. What I dont’ understand even more is why in the world they would think about voting for him when you have someone who is young and genuinely wants to help the American way of life by restoring the civil liberties, actually having policies that can be PAID FOR. OBAMA 08/12!! Destiny is at hand.

    tigerakabj5 years ago

    That’s right Obama! These Republicans have clearly been ignoring the Constitution doing their own thing. Initiate trials on these folks Mr. Civil Rights Lawyer & Constitutional Scholar! Obama/Biden 2008/2012!!

    I wonder what these people think now. Especially the angry lady in the video that was tired ‘Republican fear-mongering to subvert our Constitutional rights’.

    1. “I wonder what these people think now.”

      Pretty sure they think he’s wonderful and the GOP has forced him to do bad things!
      These are people who VOTED for that lying piece of shit; you think they’re going to admit they were suckered by a con man?
      Not on your LIFE! It’s someone else’s fault. Not theirs and not his!

    2. What I don’t understand is how people can even think about voting for someone who’s whole run for the presidency depends on baseless personal attacks, and building up their WELL known background as a POW. What I dont’ understand even more is why in the world they would think about voting for him when you have someone who is young and genuinely wants to help the American way of life by restoring the civil liberties, actually having policies that can be PAID FOR. OBAMA 08/12!! Destiny is at hand.

      I’m so sick of personal attacks! Don’t vote for that old motherfucker who hates civil liberties and is bought by the corporations!

      Honestly, McCain’s age is about the 9 millionth thing that would concern me about a McCain presidency. If you have to sink so low as to mock the guy for being old, you clearly haven’t done much research on the idiotic positions he actually holds.

      1. I like pointing out to people that statistically Obama, a lifelong smoker, has a greater chance of dying from a smoking-related illness than McCain does of age-related illness.

      2. Wisegeorge
        5 years ago

        For 45% of the electorate that means voting for the oldest President and the least experienced Vice President, ever. God save us, your reputation is not on the line but the future of our Country is.

        Experience mattered so much to these people!

        1. How is McCain inexperienced? He’s been in Congress since 1982.

          Seriously, there are so many things to dislike about McCain, and they settle on his age, which shouldn’t really matter, and his inexperience, which doesn’t even exist?

          Fucking idiots.

          1. I think he was referring to Sarah Palin being a heartbeat away from the presidency.

            Apparently Palin was the wrong kind of stupid for the job whereas Biden is the right kind of stupid.

            1. I should really work on my reading comprehension since he actually said vice president in the comment.

              Still, Palin had more experience in an executive position than Obama did. So Palin as a vice president was too inexperienced, but the even more inexperienced Obama was right for the presidency?

              1. Still, Palin had more experience in an executive position than Obama did. So Palin as a vice president was too inexperienced, but the even more inexperienced Obama was right for the presidency?

                Who needs experience when you’ve got a smart, analytical guy like Obama? Just look at how smashing a success his Middle East foreign policy has been!

              2. Blew my mind then, still blows my mind now. I asked one of his supporters at the time to explain how he could support someone with no real experience, he pointed to the success of the campaign itself. If that’s the case, I threw back at him, you should be writing in David Axelrod.

                1. I threw back at him, you should be writing in David Axelrod.

                  Heh, nice.

  33. I noticed one commenter there named AmericanMuslimGirl, and wondered if in that interim she’s noticed Obama’s drone policy. I did a little research, and here she is on that post —
    5 years ago

    I feel like the whole world is standing on the edge of a precipice, holding its breath. Everyone is edgy, sick, insular, worried…. and waiting.

    and on one earlier this year —

    Street Interviews : Is Drone Warfare Un-


    9 months ago
    Linked comment

    What a douche. It’s OK if drones are killing people in other countries, but if they’re just doing surveillance in America, he’s not in favor of it.

    Hmm, if that guy is a douche, she must be in a rage over Obama himself given he is a murderer. Should Secret Services be warned?

    1. “I feel like the whole world is standing on the edge of a precipice”

      Well, since that time the country took a giant step forward!

      1. Hey, the GREAT Leap Forward.

        1. The Five-Year Obama Plan has been a smashing success!

          1. He is the man who called for a “New Economic Patriotism”. The only way it could have been more fitting is if he called it “state capitalism”.

      2. ++++

  34. “I wonder what these people think now.”

    Speaking of which…

    Why do you think the Clintons want to take over Obama’s immediate wreckage?

    Sure, Bill will get to rehab his legacy and Hill will finally get her paycheck for staying married to him all these decades, but at what cost? Think of what they’ll be inheriting, both domestically and abroad. The middle class will have been totally looted, we’ll have a big military but no respect, and the institutions we need to rebuild everything will be in smoking ruins.

    I can see why an energetic, patriotic, conservative reformer would want to be #44, but what is in it for a pair of vain old thieves?

    1. Even as she is cashing in that half mill from Goldman Sachs, she honestly doesn’t see it.

    2. ” but what is in it for a pair of vain old thieves?”

      A throne of skulls, crafted of their political enemies..

    3. Before this past election I was saying that the next 4 years are going to be such a shit storm that 2016 is going to be a guaranteed change in which party controls the White House.

      Romney would be on his way to a guaranteed loss, and I think it is going to take a monumental implosion on the part of the GOP to keep them out of the White House in 3 years.

      1. Never underestimate the GOP’s uncanny ability to fuck up a wet dream…

      2. I completely agree Romney would have served one term and then we’d be back in nanny’s lap.

        And omg what a shitstorm it’s going to be starting in 2017. That’s why I don’t get the Clintons wanting back in.

        Yeah, pile of enemies’ skulls, but they would end their political careers in a shitstorm, not that perfumed bath of adulation and respect that they seek.

        1. There are some who say that Nixon wanted to be a “power-broker” (? la Dick Helms) as bad if not worse than he wanted to be president. And that, he was.. His presidency was the stepping stone. Even Slick Willy sought advice from good old Tricky Dick..

          1. Alas, poor Bill then. He was never permitted to upstage Obama — except for that day he took the podium!

            Well, I simply can’t understand such power-mad, lying, contemptuous, delusional hypocrites, but I will be glad to see them crushed again. I mean…. they will be crushed, won’t they? WON’T THEY?

            1. Only under the weight of their own genius hubris…

    4. Sure, Bill will get to rehab his legacy

      Why does Bill need to rehab his legacy? His presidency is looking like a golden age compared to what followed.

      1. I think Bill is still stung and Hillary is still furious that he is “the blowjob president.” I think they want to end their political careers with something that erases “blowjob.”

        1. The history books will remember Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan as the two geniuses that led America in the years before the decline.

          The idea that he needs any sort of image rehab is just as ludicrous as the idea that Reagan needs one.

        2. I think he’s just a narcissist who craves a return to the spotlight. If he was worried about his legacy I think he’s smart enough to realize it would be better to leave well enough alone.

          1. Yeah.. when given the chance, Slick Willy took to Obama’s podium like cancer to a prostate..

            1. I’d vote for him over Il Douche any day of the week, though.

              1. As would I, sadly enough..

          2. Yes, it’s something about narcissism, but there’s so much desperation in it. The way they’ve been crawling before Obama all this time, knowing what a fuckup he is and how they would be outperforming him by leaps and bounds if Hillary had won.

            And look at the way they banished Weiner. They’re still touchy about Bill’s sex scandal.

            It’s true, the Office still retains its luster despite Obama, but its occupant come 2017 is going to be in the thick of a shitstorm every single day of his/her term. I think of it as a dubious way for a couple of narcissists to end their careers, but maybe they’re so blinded by their own faults they don’t see it that way.

            1. Well I have to admit calling a politician a narcissist is like calling water wet, but even in this class Bill stands out, I don’t think Hillary is even close.

              I don’t know if you are old enough to remember Clinton back in his heyday but he was always good at crawling before anyone. That’s a big part of what made him ‘Slick Willie’. Things could fall like a ton of bricks on whoever ends up POTUS in 2017 but if it’s Hillary the media will do whatever it possibly can to frame it as War on Women which will help a hell of a lot. Add in some foreign policy distraction like bombing Iran and she could end up getting reelected.

              1. I just can’t imagine being President Hillary in 2017. Even SHE must know how inadequate she is — but then I guess that’s what Bill would be for.

      2. He was a fuck up by the standards of that day in so many ways, first two years were a mess, he only really caught his stride until after Oklahoma City, and then came Monica Lewinsky which consumed ’98 and then the fallout of 99-00 was a wash of lameduckhood. But you know, I’d easily trade in the last two regimes for that one.

    5. I’d think this is her last chance. She’ll be in her 70s in 2020, so even older and sicklier. What likability she may have will only deteriorate.

    6. “Think of what they’ll be inheriting, both domestically and abroad.”

      Presidents do not inherit anything: They campaign for years to take it on.

  35. Bill Maher rightfully points out that the Boston Strong obsession is largely bullshit, so Townhall.com throws a hissy fit and calls him evil.

    I also saw, so the Red Sox won the World Series, congratulations Red Sox,” Maher said to Weiner. “So the parade, they go to the place where the marathon bombing took place, they put the World Series statue there and they sing God Bless America and they say ‘Boston strong’ and they chant ‘USA,’ you know. It was again, a bad day, three people died, that’s terrible. More were maimed, that’s horrible, but unfortunately that happens every day, in car accidents and everything else. I mean, your city was not leveled by Godzilla.

    This is like the least offensive thing Bill Maher has said in the last 10 years. I hate this perennial outrage nonsense and I’m really starting to get annoyed by the fact that everyone expects me to be pissed off and outraged all the time.

    I just really don’t care.

    1. Why do you hate America?

    2. Fucking fuck fuck. I have to agree with something that Mr. Hookers n’ Blow said.

      1. The worst part about conservatives is that their impotent outrage is constantly making me defend people I should otherwise hate.

        I guess being forced to defend Michael Moore or Bill Maher because the cons are throwing a petulant temper tantrum helps keep me from becoming a partisan.

        So at least there’s that.

        1. The worst part about conservatives is that their impotent outrage is constantly making me defend people I should otherwise hate.

          We must run in opposite circles. I frequently found myself in the exact same position, but with raging liberals.


          1. I did have to defend Palin during those moronic attacks on her after the Gabby Giffords shooting. I also periodically defend Beck or Limbaugh when some leftist attacks them for something they’re clearly right about.

            Partisans are the worst.

            1. The worst is when you do this and the other person basically says that they refuse to ever give the opposing view any kind of charitable perspective.

      2. I’ve been expresseingthis sentiment privately since the city cowered in lockdown for 18 hours.

        #BostonStrong? More like #BostonScared!

        1. That’s the worst part for me. They willingly allowed two losers to shut down their city for an entire weekend as the police trampled on their constitutional rights and forced them into a lockdown.

          Then, when the only reason the kid got caught was because the lockdown was lifted, no one had the balls to point out that the cops were totally ineffectual and their thug tactics unnecessary.

          Yeah, you showed some real courage, Beantown.

          1. But those cops brought people milk! So it was really a very area…right?!

          2. Fucking autocorrect…GREY area.

        2. I was arguing with someone at the time who lived there about it, and her response was, “But they are driving around, with homemade bombs!”

          Yeah we used to make pipe bombs also and blow up TVs in the desert.

          1. Two lowlife and the police hijacked Boston with a word.. “BOMB!”


            1. Keep in mind that this is the same city that was brought to a screeching halt by 2 cartoon characters displayed on LED signs.

              If there’s anything remotely STRONG about Boston since the Revolutionary War, I have yet to witness it.

      3. I’m too deep into a movie to read about it right now, but it sounds like a pretty ballsy thing for Maher to do. Bostonians can be, what’s an apt word here, ‘unforgiving’?

        1. Bitchy.

    3. Who says it’s outrage? Some people are grieving. I always go to some 9/11 ceremony, and I choke up every time.

      1. The people on Townhall who do not live in Boston and are using this as an excuse to attack a political opponent are unquestionably doing it out of mindless outrage.

        The people at Townhall would not say shit if someone on the right said something similar.

        1. Oh, I don’t read Townhall.

          Okay, I just did. I see. The word “outrage” should be banned from the language for a while. Also, the words “I demand an apology.”

          1. The Townhall hissy fit is not helped by the atrocious writing of that blog post.

            What a disgrace! A terrorist attack is not something that we should be deeply affected by? The Red Sox decided to pay their respects to those that were lost in the city they called home and that is too much? No a terrorist attack is not the same as a car crash Mr. Maher. You should think before you speak.

            This prose is so stilted that it reads like it was written by a fifteen year old who doesn’t speak English as a first language.

            Admittedly, her picture does make the writer appear to be about seven so maybe I shouldn’t be too harsh.

            I’m sure her writing is very advanced for her age.

            1. “Heather Ginsberg is Townhall’s web editor and community manager.”


      2. Who says it’s outrage? Some people are grieving. I always go to some 9/11 ceremony, and I choke up every time.

        You know what?

        When people seek that out, and stage it, I am forced to conclude that they are doing so because they enjoy it.

        They enjoy it the way one might enjoy listening to a sad song or attending a sad play.

        And that’s OK. It’s perfectly fine to enjoy sad songs and sad plays. But it’s recreational. The people doing that are staging emotionally moving moments for themselves for fun. It’s a fucking game.

        The problem with the outrage machine is essentially we’re talking about one group of people playing a fucking game who are demanding that the rest of us take their game seriously, and refrain from disrupting it by observing that it’s a game.

        1. ^this in spades.

    4. 264 people were injured. Just because only 3 people were killed doesn’t mean it wasn’t a big deal

      Coping out by saying “many” were maimed is trying to obscure the facts.

    5. I would have disagreed with Maher, the day after the Tsarneavs were caught.

      But you know what?

      That’s a long time ago.

      And whatever genuine sentiment might have existed has long since been buried under a pile of maudlin play-acting and affected sentiment. It was LONG AGO beaten to death. It was beaten to death when the tape of the Bruins crowd singing the national anthem was played for the 500th time. It was beaten to death when that fucking Boston Strong jersey was hung up in the Red Sox dugout for longer than ten days. It was beaten to death when people started saying / writing / tweeting “Boston Strong”, for that matter. As soon as a cute little saying has been devised, the moment of genuine emotion is over and you have entered the realm of kitsch.

      And the problem is that if you have a low tolerance for fake-o recreational self pity and FUCKING GAY remembrances and memorials (I’m sorry to use that homophobic expression, but I’ve been sitting here trying to think of a substitute for five minutes and I just can’t, my childhood programming is just too strong and those are the only words that will do), you will become exasperated with clown antics like putting the World Series trophy on the finish line so everyone can take iPhone photos and cry big stagey crocodile tears long before the rest of the citizenry will.

      1. So I agree with Maher, but at the same time I know better than to openly say something about it. He should know that when you disrupt the oh-so-enjoyable self-pity party and come between people and their cloying role playing, that pisses people off.

      2. Hailing from the greater outreaches of the Metro NYC-Boston megalopolis here. Very well put. People around these parts are still scrawling “Boston Strong” on their vehicles with window markers, especially in conjunction with sports teams.

        The truth is that Bostonians and Massholes in general are giant pussies that are afraid of their own shadows with some exceptions…Whitey Bolger type psychos that wouldn’t think twice about kicking you’re teeth in. Just knowing that Tom Menino was popular for so long is telling.

    6. I’m just surprised Maher was able to say something without whining about Sarah Palin.

    7. I’m just surprised Maher was able to say something without whining about Sarah Palin.

  36. A DUTCH woman will remember her Italian vacation for all the wrong reasons after being bitten by a Mediterranean recluse spider.

    1. I didn’t even know that Europe had any dangerous bugs.

      1. Europe’s false widow spiders are a savage breed of killers..

        1. Until they were regulated out of existence by the EU parliament!

  37. Sounds like some serious business.


  38. Is it generational theft to tax young people in order to build a bridge that won’t be complete until they are older?

    Everyone isn’t going to approve of every law. I was opposed to the war in Iraq, but I have to pay for it.

    Likewise, as a nation we have largely decided that people who are sick get treated first and billed later. It is the norm that laws require hospitals ‘must treat’ in life threatening cases, provide ‘uncompensated care’, and render ‘requirement to treat’ to indigent populations. The ACA did not create this reality, the laws which do so reflect a national character trait, we don’t sit back and watch people die.

    The ACA doesn’t change the number of people with heart disease without health insurance to pay for their treatment; who are are getting treated on the tax payer’s dime already.

    Those of us with premiums that reflect our age and good health ALREADY pay for the healthcare of older and less healthy people, it’s just billed to us in different ways.

    The current system fails in that people without insurance get little support in managing their health and receive treatment via the most expensive channels, and there is nothing requiring people who CAN afford to financially cover their own risk to do so.

    It is a child’s logic that suggests that Obamacare creates a system in which the young and healthy pay more for their healthcare so that the old and sick pay less. That’s a reality that predates this administration (and several others).

    1. Fuck off, slaver.

    2. Its a child’s logic that reduces “we already pay X, Y, Z…which is redistributing costs”, to, “ergo, THIS WAY of robbing peter to pay paul IS (SOMEHOW, BUT UNSTATED) GOOD!”

      By your own argument = ‘we already pay for the healthcare of older, less healthy people’. Via Medicare I presume you mean.

      Yes = and as noted, its a shitty way of doing things – which is precisely why these reforms are attempted in the first place. *Because Medicare is *bankrupt*

      So, the argument, “We *already* do something economically unsustainable and really poorly managed by the Federal Government…” does not therefore logically lead to = “ERGO we need to do THE SAME THING ONLY BIGGER AND FORCE EVERYONE TO DO IT”

      Its compounding a fundamentaly flawed idea. You seem to see this as some kind of ‘obvious’ and self-validating position, when in fact it is the apex of fucking boneheaded stupidity. Its Magic Rock syndrome; or Einstein’s definition of insanity = somehow more of the same, done with the force of a “federal Penaltax/Gun to people’s head” will resolve its own inherent flaws.

      Sorry, that kind of stupid only works with recent college grads. See above.

    3. Yes, the pre-Obamacare system was already inefficient and included hidden wealth transfers. So supporting a new system that makes the situation even worse, even more inefficient and unfair, would be incredibly stupid. Are you incredibly stupid, cobright? (Don’t answer that question, it’s purely rhetorical.)

    4. You shouldn’t have to pay for the Iraq war. All you do is posit, posit, and posit. Yet you roll over and just accept that you are bankrolling the incineration of the hapless conscripts in the Republican Guard.

      I honestly don’t know where to go from here. You already tacitly approve of unprovoked mass slaughter, yet “oppose” such a course of action.

      What a pathetic little worm.

    5. People were not just fucking dying in droves on hospital doorsteps before EMTALA you fucking retard.

      Now kindly duck off slaver.

  39. You know Mr. Gillespie, being born in 1990 to baby boomers, I feel I do not fit in with my generation. I never will.

  40. Google is paying 75$/hour! Just work for few hours & spend more time with friends and family.On sunday I bought themselves a Alfa Romeo from having made $5637 this month. its the best-job Ive ever had.It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it out http://www.Buzz95.com

  41. There really is no way for the program to crash faster than Healthcare.gov, which has never worked. Of course non functional is not exactly the same as crash, but close enough for the discussion.

  42. Am I the only person who noticed that there are only two ethnic (hispanic-ish) looking women in all these ads and they happen to be a young mother with a child, and a pregnant woman, respectively? hmm

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.