Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

More Reporters Complain About Controlling White House, Jack Lew Perplexed at Bitcoins, Boehner Has No Presidential Ambitions: P.M. Links

Scott Shackford | 1.24.2014 4:30 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | Steven Green Photography / Foter.com / CC BY
(Steven Green Photography / Foter.com / CC BY)
  • "Who took this photo? Why did they take this photo? Who is this Steven Green guy? We want answers, now!"
    Credit: Steven Green Photography / Foter.com / CC BY

    NBC White House correspondent Chuck Todd is the latest to complain about the White House is extremely controlling and obsessed with leaks to the media, pointing out they're often more concerned with the leaks themselves than the content of them.

  • Treasury Secretary Jack Lew is "incredulous" at the growing popularity of bitcoin and says the feds need more time to examine it. He is, of course, worried most about the challenges in monitoring their use.
  • Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, have both pleaded not guilty to 14 federal charges that they traded influence for gifts worth thousands of dollars from a businessman.
  • House Speaker John Boehner is not running for president, he says.
  • Everybody on Twitter wants you to know that Gmail was down for a while.
  • An Oklahoma lawmaker trolled gun-grabby pundit Piers Morgan by naming legislation loosening gun controls after him.

Get Reason.com and Reason 24/7 content widgets for your websites.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily updates for more content.

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

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: South Carolina State U Apparently on Lockdown After Student Injured in Shooting, Police Looking for Suspect

Scott Shackford is a policy research editor at Reason Foundation.

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (401)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

    How you doin'?

    1. Mad Scientist   11 years ago

      Going in Fist first again!

      1. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

        Don't be crass.

    2. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

      Hello.

      1. Francisco d Anconia   11 years ago

        Hi Rufus, how are you today?

        1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

          Angry...grrr.

          1. Francisco d Anconia   11 years ago

            What's the matter?

            1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

              Have you been reading the news?

              Everything!

      2. The DerpRider   11 years ago

        Wings and Habs playing tonight for the first time in four years.

        1. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

          Well, I don't hate the Red Wings...

          1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

            But you hate the Habs?

            1. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

              They are one of two teams. French Canadian fans. What's not to hate?

              1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

                So much hate in this world.

                Yeah, well the Habs don't belong to just the French-Canadians.

                1. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

                  Also, Subban.

                  1. hamilton   11 years ago

                    You heartless bastard - just by typing his name, I bet he has flopped to the ice/ground wherever he is.

                  2. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

                    Bah. The NFL is filled with Subban's and the NBA has worse.

                    Truth is, the NHL can use some spunk.

                    Not crazy about some of his antics but, lord, the hate is too much in my view.

            2. hamilton   11 years ago

              There are people who don't?

        2. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

          That's nuts.

          The NHL is ridiculous.

          Habs-Wings is classic. In fact, they should always work the Original Six angle.

        3. 110 Lean   11 years ago

          The fuck is a Habs?

          1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitants

          2. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

            Montreal Canadiens. Now, before you ask what the fuck is Canadiens, it's Canadians spelt wrong.

            1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

              And thus upon one little letter unity hinges.

            2. BigT   11 years ago

              Les habitants.

  2. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

    House Speaker John Boehner is not running for president, he says.

    The GOP will have to try harder to get the Oompa-Loompa vote.

    1. The DerpRider   11 years ago

      Well that settles it. I'm sitting out that election...

    2. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

      Wait, what? Anyone in this dimension thought he might consider such a thing? Why? I mean, it's not like he could get elected. I don't think his own family would vote for him for the presidency.

      1. Tonio   11 years ago

        Speakers of the house haven't done well as presidential candidates, IIRC.

        1. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

          Neither have senators, yet we have the current jackass.

          1. Hyperion   11 years ago

            None of the other senators knew the winning rules of 'always vote present' and 'be half black'.

            1. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

              Truly, his is the superior bullshit.

    3. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

      Boehner knows the establishment already has its nominee (and eventual loser) picked out and it ain't him.

    4. CE   11 years ago

      That news brought a tear to my eye.

      1. jester   11 years ago

        There's a tear in your eye,
        And I'm wondering why,
        For there ne'er should...

    5. Rasilio   11 years ago

      Given that half the Republican voter base wants to primary his ass right out of office altogether it is nice to see he has a realistic assessment of his prospects

  3. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

    NBC White House correspondent Chuck Todd is the latest to complain about the White House is extremely controlling and obsessed with leaks to the media...

    When the dog humps its owner's leg, it's not the owner's fault, no matter how much he may enjoy it. Do something about it, Todd.

    1. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

      Hey, Chuck, maybe if you thought of the government as the enemy and not a giant teddy bear that you can have sex with, you wouldn't care how it abuses you.

    2. Corning   11 years ago

      build stuff, the end. I don't get it.

      He did. He spoke about it loud and clear on a cable news network channel that no one watches.

      1. Corning   11 years ago

        build stuff, the end. I don't get it.

        should be

        Do something about it, Todd.

        For some reason i forgot to cut in cut and paste and instead used an old cut to paste

  4. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

    Treasury Secretary Jack Lew is "incredulous" at the growing popularity of bitcoin and says the feds need more time to examine it.

    IT DOESN'T HAVE MY SIGNATURE ON IT.

    1. gaijin   11 years ago

      Treasury Secretary Jack Lew is "incredulous"

      Yeah, he's alot of things. Incredulous is the least offensive thing he is.

    2. Bookkeeper   11 years ago

      How can it be money if I can't swim in it?

  5. Bam!   11 years ago

    Has anyone gotten the newly released Netflix documentary "Mitt" to stream? Every time I open the info screen, it pretends to be loading indefinitely.

    1. Mad Scientist   11 years ago

      So just like Mitt, there's no content? Sounds like an accurate documentary to me.

      1. Tonio   11 years ago

        Give him a big hand, folks. He's here all week...

    2. CE   11 years ago

      It was working on my PC, but then the picture of Mitt kept flipping to then left, then flopping to the right....

      1. Longtorso, Johnny   11 years ago

        Why is this one of the recommendations if you watch 'Mitt'?

        A Hole in My Heart
        2005NR98 minutes

        While his dad (Thorsten Flinck) shoots an amateur porn film in their squalid flat, disaffected teen Eric (Bjorn Almroth) withdraws to his room and listens to blistering industrial music to block out the progressively decadent proceedings. But as events move toward violence, young Eric intercedes. Helmed by Lukas Moodysson, this unsettling metaphorical critique, which takes aim at reality television and modern culture, isn't for the fainthearted.

      2. Hyperion   11 years ago

        You're saying it went all 'flipflopney' on you?

    3. Corning   11 years ago

      If Netflix payed their internet bill instead of bitching about net neutrality this sort of thing would not be happening.

  6. rts   11 years ago

    If you like watching tires burn and Molotovs fly, have I got a live stream for you.

    1. Rich   11 years ago

      Awesome. Not much coverage by the MSM.

    2. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

      squeeeee!

      needs more flipped Citro?ns

      1. rts   11 years ago

        You mean Ladas.

    3. rts   11 years ago

      Another stream, from ground level.

      1. Bam!   11 years ago

        This one too.

    4. Corning   11 years ago

      I don't understand.

      Are they protesting to stay in the EU or protesting to get out of the EU?

      1. Corning   11 years ago

        Never mind.

        It looks like they are protesting to get away from Russia.

        I have always told people I am one quarter Russian but to be honest I think my Grandma's parents were from around Kiev. I guess I should start saying I am 1/4 Ukrainian.

  7. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

    Everybody on Twitter wants you to know that Gmail was down for a while.

    And so millions of people spent the outage trying to remember their AOL passwords.

    1. Ted S.   11 years ago

      And yet the link isn't to Twitter, but 24/7.

      1. CE   11 years ago

        What's 24/7?

        1. Mr. Sweet Potatohead   11 years ago

          A lie.

    2. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

      I spent it fielding calls from staff members telling them that their inability to get to Gmail was in no way my fault.

    3. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

      I don't use Twitter and knew that.

  8. Francisco d Anconia   11 years ago

    An Oklahoma lawmaker trolled gun-grabby pundit Piers Morgan by naming legislation loosening gun controls after him.

    Fucking awesome.

    That is all.

    1. BakedPenguin   11 years ago

      It was a Dahm good idea.

      1. Francisco d Anconia   11 years ago

        Ugh.

  9. Rich   11 years ago

    CNN's Piers Morgan was not happy about the bill filed in his name. The TV host took to Twitter Thursday and invited Dahm to debate him on his show if he has the "guts."

    I so hope Dahm's idea catches on big time.

    1. jester   11 years ago

      Better to ignore him.

      1. Rich   11 years ago

        Oh, ignore *Morgan*, of course!

        I'm talking about stuff like "The Nancy Pelosi ACA-Repealment Act".

  10. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

    An Oklahoma lawmaker trolled gun-grabby pundit Piers Morgan by naming legislation loosening gun controls after him.

    Do we need new legislation for that? Can't you just start repealing gun control laws and not remind me that Morgan still exists here in the U.S.?

  11. Warty   11 years ago

    Jezebel becomes self-aware.

    It's an incredibly self centered and self-pitying way to externalize one's own mistakes or shortcomings

    Oh, wait, my bad, they're complaining about men.

    1. Fr?ulein Nikki   11 years ago

      Haha I knew that would be the post you linked to. I had someone send it to me approvingly today.

      1. Episiarch   11 years ago

        Projection is a really, really harsh mistress.

        1. Mercutio   11 years ago

          Harsher than the moon?

      2. Warty   11 years ago

        The multiple "Women can get friendzoned too! I can never get anyone to fuck me!" comments are a nice touch.

        I can't tell who's more pathetic - the sad-sack losers who make a whole culture out of their hurt feelings that they can't get their dicks wet, or the harpies that get outraged about it.

        1. Episiarch   11 years ago

          Two sides of the same pathetic coin, dude. They're people who instead of going "you know, I'd like to get with the opposite sex more than I do. I've decided I'm going to think about it, work harder, and try to figure out what I'm doing wrong.", they go "it's all everybody else's fault! Especially that horrible other gender!"

          Good luck with that, losers.

          1. Coeus   11 years ago

            I've decided I'm going to think about it, work harder, and try to figure out what I'm doing wrong."

            Yeah, but you mock people for doing that, too.

            1. Episiarch   11 years ago

              Um, no. I mock people for thinking women are some monolithic set of robots who will want to fuck you if you just treat them a certain (shitty) way. The fact that you can't see the difference between the two is my entire point.

              1. Coeus   11 years ago

                Um, no. I mock people for thinking women are some monolithic set of robots who will want to fuck you if you just treat them a certain (shitty) way.

                Interesting, who are these people? Do you have a link? Or are you misrepresenting the concept of playing the odds to try to make a point?

                1. Calidissident   11 years ago

                  Are you denying the existence of misogynistic idiots that Episiarch describes pretty accurately? Have you ever been the RedPill subreddit?

                  1. Coeus   11 years ago

                    Not that particular one, no. But I've seen other sites he's mocked, and they're all about playing the odds.

        2. Fr?ulein Nikki   11 years ago

          It is a tough contest.

          1. Warty   11 years ago

            Why won't you let me fuck you even though I've never told you I want to fuck you??? YOU BITCH!!! *writes PUA manual*

            1. John   11 years ago

              Didn't her mother tell her that it is only the pretty girls who don't have to ask? When you are fat and homely, you just have to be bold.

              1. Longtorso, Johnny   11 years ago

                "Everything I know about women I learned from Warty".

                1. Coeus   11 years ago

                  "Everything I know about women I learned from Warty".

                  I take it your looking to be a coroner?

        3. jester   11 years ago

          I can never get anyone to rape me!

          1. C. Anacreon   11 years ago

            I was wondering about the various levels of victimotology. Hre's one: white woman college student goes on date with black man college student. They have drinks with dinner, and end up having sex. Next day, woman feels she was raped because the alcohol impaired her ability to give true consent.

            Does this woman make a report and a stink about it? Or is white privilege a bigger crime on campus than date rape? If reported, how will the Department of Wymyn's Studies and the Department of African-American Studies each view the incident?

            1. Warty   11 years ago

              They were pissed that the FSU quarterback got off. There's your answer.

              1. Red Rocks Rockin   11 years ago

                They were pissed that the FSU quarterback got off. There's your answer.

                Yeah, but he's a celebrated, high-profile jock. What if the guy was some preppy African-American/P.E. studies major that never got closer to a playing field than his copy of Madden?

        4. Coeus   11 years ago

          Friendzone is a real thing. It's just they the guys are putting the blame on the wrong party. It's something you do to yourself, not something that's done to you.

          1. Coeus   11 years ago

            It's like when women get mad when guys look at their cleavage. Yes, he's taking advantage of an opportunity. One you provided him.

        5. Rasilio   11 years ago

          Actually the saddest ones are any woman who complains that she can't get anyone to fuck her.

          Any woman, no matter how ugly on the inside or the outside can get laid by someone in a minimum of 72 hours. She might not like the guy or find him attractive but she can get laid.

          Guys who look like movie stars and/or have a heart of gold cannot be guaranteed of getting laid at any point (unless they are willing to consider another guy, in which case the same 72 hour rule applies)

    2. CE   11 years ago

      Last I checked they were complaining about cheerleader pay, which seems odd.

    3. Corning   11 years ago

      The jezebel problem is that every piece of advice given by guys to guys who have been put into the friendzone is to go after someone else.

      Jezebels hate the idea of their nerdy infatuated pets getting off the leash.

      1. Pelosi's Rabbit   11 years ago

        Bingo. "I know I rejected you, but I still want you to looooove meeeeeee."

      2. Rasilio   11 years ago

        Pretty much this.

        "even though I wouldn't sleep with you being my friend means running my errands, helping me move, killing spiders, and any other icky tasks I don't want to dirty my hands with because that's what friends are for and if you ever stop doing all those things for me it means you were never really my friend at all and just hanging around hoping to have sex with me becuase we both know no guy in history has ever had emotions or felt anything other than an orgasm"

    4. Pelosi's Rabbit   11 years ago

      That is some funny shit right there.

    5. Pelosi's Rabbit   11 years ago

      That article and its comments are really indicative of the political differences between progressives and libertarians. A libertarian realizes you can't control what other people do (unless they're actively doing it to you). Progs seem to want to make people think and act they way they want, so you get things like "Don't girlfriendzone me" and bans on e-cigs because they kind of look like smoking.

  12. rts   11 years ago

    Parking lot greenhouse goes bankrupt in Vancouver

    A high-tech greenhouse company supported by the City of Vancouver has gone bankrupt and one city councillor is wondering if taxpayers may be left on the hook.

    Alterrus Systems Inc. leased a downtown parking lot at a cut rate price to run a so-called "vertical farm"

    1. Francisco d Anconia   11 years ago

      Whoda guessed?

    2. Ted S.   11 years ago

      Perhaps the fucking politicians shouldn't give bennies to the politically connected.

      AHAHAHAHAHHAHA!!!

    3. SIV   11 years ago

      Downtown Vancouver real estate is some pretty pricey farmland.

      1. Juice   11 years ago

        In discussions of zoning laws, I always (without fail) get that argument about a pig farm downtown. The answer is always, that's the most expensive, least profitable pig farm ever.

    4. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

      When the Zombie Apocalypse happens and the city is cut off from the many, many acres of farmland within easy trucking distance from the city, they'll wish they still had this urban garden to sustain them.

      1. Cytotoxic   11 years ago

        Something something Godzilla

        1. PD Scott   11 years ago

          Yes, but it's Canada, so it ought to be a giant radioactive fire-breathing beaver.

          1. Bookkeeper   11 years ago

            Let's not bring Pelosi into this.

  13. Coeus   11 years ago

    I finally understand the reluctance of SJWs to have sex.

    Warning, mental images story conjures up are NSFL.

    1. Fr?ulein Nikki   11 years ago

      Way to take the whole GGG concept completely out of context.

      1. Coeus   11 years ago

        GGG? Since you've changed your name, maybe you should google GGG and german. Go ahead, I'll wait.

        1. Fr?ulein Nikki   11 years ago

          Ha, I hope HM knows about that.

          1. Coeus   11 years ago

            Heroic Mulatto is into golden gangbangs? We should hang out.

        2. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

          Ah, I had known what that was. Scrubbing my work browser history now...

          1. Coeus   11 years ago

            You might have to get the bleach out for that one.

        3. SIV   11 years ago

          KIWI SNOCONZ!!11!

          in New Zealand, where publishing anything promoting or supporting urolagnia is an offense punishable by up to ten years in prison, and possessing films depicting urolagnia is punishable by up to 5 years in prison.

          1. Coeus   11 years ago

            But it's sterile!!!

      2. Ted S.   11 years ago

        GGG? Is that like a really big cup size or something?

        1. Coeus   11 years ago

          something.

    2. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

      Melissa brings up the very real harm that Dan Savage's crappy advice can do. The way Dan presents it, GGG means that no one has a right to say no to their partners, and if we want to be a good partner with a lasting relationship, we will acquiesce to all of our partner's sexual desires. He is saying this without regard to the ways that abusive partners use language like the GGG rule to manipulate and control their partners, and without regard to a rape culture that privileges the sexual desires of men to the point of entitlement.

      I know it's been a while since I read Savage, but umm that seems like an inaccurate picture of Dan Savage's advice.

      Sure abusive partners can use the language of being GGG, but by being manipulative shits they're putting the lie to the ethos, no? Like Obama and transparency/privacy.

      1. Fr?ulein Nikki   11 years ago

        Yeah, exactly.

      2. John   11 years ago

        I don't read Savage, but isn't he just saying that unless you are morally opposed to an act or its illegal or physically harms you, you should do it because it makes your partner happy? Basically that "honey I don't like that" is a sorry excuse?

        Why am I not surprised the self absorbed harpies at Jezebel have a problem with that.

        1. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

          That still makes it sound like it's a hard and fast rule. It's more about willingness and openness to new things you might dismiss immediately.

          1. John   11 years ago

            Which is pretty good advice especially for women. Men are emotional about sex just in a different way than women. When a woman says "honey I won't do that" to the man that is her saying "honey you are just not important enough to me for me to do that".

            1. Coeus   11 years ago

              No, no, no. Don't you understand? Going to see that stupid chick-flick, or going on a vacation when you want to stay home, or absolutely anything else you do in a relationship is completely different than sex. Because patriarchy.

        2. Fr?ulein Nikki   11 years ago

          I think even more so, he's saying you should be willing to at least try things--you know, "game."

          1. John   11 years ago

            I agree with him. If you won't try it, you are just telling your partner they are not important enough to you for you to do anything you don't absolutely like.

  14. Coeus   11 years ago

    Whiskey River, take my mind.

    Glen Catrine Bonded Warehouse Limited were ordered to pay ?12,000 for polluting the River Ayr, when 6,600 litres of whisky spirit fell into the water.

    A road tanker containing 27,500 litres of whisky spirit was pumped into the wrong vat, leading to an overspill into the roadway by the river.

    1. Mad Scientist   11 years ago

      I question the quality of any whisky transported in a tanker.

      1. Warty   11 years ago

        "Look at me! I'm a fancy lad! I only drink liquor that comes in at least a plastic jug!"

        1. Episiarch   11 years ago

          If you're not drinking liquor out of an old fruit jar, you're a massive pussy. Elvis said so, and that's good enough for me.

          1. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

            Wait, why are you transferring the liquor from the bottle it came in to something other than your mouth?

            1. Dry_Gin_Wet_Farts   11 years ago

              Glen Catrine Bonded Warehouse Limited were ordered to pay ?12,000 for polluting the River Ayr, when 6,600 litres of whisky spirit fell into the water.

              It should be the other way around. The river polluted the whiskey. Friggin' Brits. No surprise that people who drive ass backward, get this ass backward.

        2. Mad Scientist   11 years ago

          If it doesn't say "Ripple" on the label, I'm not drinking it.

          1. hamilton   11 years ago

            Label? Well La-dee-da lookit' Mr. Fancypants.

            1. Hyperion   11 years ago

              Ok, that there was funny, I don't care who you are.

  15. Tonio   11 years ago

    [T]he White House is extremely controlling and obsessed with leaks to the media.

    It's like 1972 all over again.

    1. Root Boy   11 years ago

      Or maybe 2010 or 2011 when all the media knew this but covered up for their boyfriend.

  16. hamilton   11 years ago

    Objectivist stomps on Ancaps.

    1. I think he has a definition problem, but I'm mildly confused by the article.

    2. Not nearly as much fun as anti-libertarian screeds at Salon.

    1. rts   11 years ago

      Are there any other people that Objectivists can quote besides Rand? Those interstitial quotes sprinkled throughout read more like citations to Gospel than a marshalling of ideas to sustain an argument.

    2. Cytotoxic   11 years ago

      He starts off a little confused but this:

      The wielding of force is not a business function. In fact, force is outside the realm of economics. Economics concerns production and trade, not destruction and seizure.

      Ask yourself what it means to have a "competition" in governmental services. It's a "competition" in wielding force, a "competition" in subjugating others, a "competition" in making people obey commands. That's not "competition," it's violent conflict. On a large scale, it's war.

      and everything afterward absolutely trashes the basis of any ancap argument. I will be annoying people here with quotes from that for a long time.

      1. Apatheist ?_??   11 years ago

        That should be fun...

        1. Cytotoxic   11 years ago

          It will be. For me.

      2. cryptArchy   11 years ago

        Please explain to me in your own words Cytotoxic how he trashes the basis of Ancap arguments. Please oh please enlighten me

        1. Cytotoxic   11 years ago

          RTFA

      3. PD Scott   11 years ago

        The wielding of force is not a business function.

        I'm pretty sure mercenaries would disagree...

        1. Juice   11 years ago

          Or the IRS. Or the local Sheriff's office. Or the court system.

        2. The Last American Hero   11 years ago

          So would rent seekers.

      4. MJGreen   11 years ago

        Yes, seeing this circular drivel re-posted will certainly be annoying.

      5. Head Stomp   11 years ago

        The seizure of resources and exclusion thereof by force is not a business function. In fact, seizure and force is outside the realm of economics. Economics concerns production and trade, not seizure and force.

        Ask yourself what it means to have "property" in resources. It's "property" by wielding force, "property" by subjugating others, "property" in making people obey commands. That's not "property," it's violent conflict. On a large scale, it's war.

        Oh shit, I just refuted property rights in resources and all I had to do was assert a bunch of bullshit. #partialcommunism

        The world exists in a state of polyarchy in which force is a commodity. "Bu bu but warfare" refutes the feasibility of a nation-state capitalist order to the same extent as an anti-state capitalist order. But what's the point given that your understanding of anarcho-capitalism still doesn't extend beyond it's confusing label? "Oh, they define archy differently than i do? Let me ignore that and attack a bunch of straw men, durr."

      6. Michael S. Langston   11 years ago

        First - I think morally, ancap is the correct stance. As if we believe morally, that each person has a right to live under a government of their choosing, and that even if we all love what the US & Constitution once were, none of us were able to vote to agree to any of it - it seems the logical argument leads one to say a "government of one" is the perfect moral ideal.

        However, violence is truly minimized when a society can give the monopoly on use of force to an agreed upon entity - still under control of the people - but like the article says, in doing so it removes the need for vigilantes, etc, etc, etc.

        Aside from that though - I think anarchy is unworkable in human society.

        I look at it this way - a thought experiment:

        Let's suppose, somehow we all woke up tomorrow and the vast majority of people in the US agreed with anarchy, the government is disbanded, and other than the government not existing, the US is mostly like is today - only that we have to replace those institutions ourselves.

        So for courts - arbiters - security in place of police, etc, etc, etc.

        It seems at some point, say for arbiters in contracts disputes, even if there were a great deal of competition, since most people would just want their contracts arbitrated accurately - the end result would most likely be significant merging of those groups to the point were very few exist and they're all basically the same.

        1. Michael S. Langston   11 years ago

          IE - in the end, private arbiters will merge into something which looks, from the outside, exactly like a court system.

          Move forward a little longer & I think the incentive would be to allow one group to monopolize that area of society, simply to keep things stable; as businesses need stability to grow (among other things).

          Meaning I think even if anarchists had their perfect society right now - it would meld over time into a mini-government society, not a no-government society, because there are several societal areas, such as policing and contract disputes, which demands very consistent behaviors which aren't generally seen in private industries which enjoy normal competition.

          Of course I could well be wrong - but it does seem to me anarchy would "fail" as incentives for a small government are too strong for most humans and any society which starts with anarchy, will eventually "evolve" into a society with a government.

          Though maybe it's still the correct starting point - our founding fathers tried to give us a mini-governmental system and it didn't take long at all for all our genius Top Men? throughout history to screw that up.

          Maybe starting with a charter/Constitution which just says "government is evil and should be avoided at all costs" would at least allow a mini-governmental system to last for maybe twice as long as the US 🙂

          1. Head Stomp   11 years ago

            Economic marxism by way of dialectical ideaism:
            People just want their needs satisfied and will give/trade their capital to the most productive capitalists - the end result would most likely be significant merging of those groups to the point were very few exist and they're all basically the same.

            IE - in the end, capital will merge into something which looks, from the outside, exactly like a socialist state.

            Move forward a little longer & I think the incentive would be to allow one group to monopolize that area of society, simply to keep things stable; as people need stability to grow (among other things).

            Meaning I think even if capitalists had their perfect society right now - it would meld over time into a socialist society, not a capitalist society, because there are several societal areas, such as health, housing, and food, which demands very consistent behaviors which aren't generally seen in private industries which enjoy normal competition.

            Of course I could well be wrong - but it does seem to me capitalism would "fail" as incentives for socialism are too strong for most humans and any society which starts with capitalism, will eventually "evolve" into a society with a socialist government.

          2. Head Stomp   11 years ago

            You're arguing for marxism applied to law through dialectical ideaism. Is that your intention? Consolidation of firms is not antithetical to ancapism any more than it is to capitalism. Ancapism requires that a critical mass of individuals desire associations to be voluntary and the economic implications thereof. I don't find assuming away the critical mass by appealing to unavoidable growth of psychological concerns for monopolistic stability any more persuasive than appealing to an unavoidable plummeting marginal product of labor as a justification for socialism.

    3. Surly Chef   11 years ago

      He has a definition problem. Then he moves the goal posts from "initiation" to "wielding". Then concludes that because violence is wrong, we need a big strong violent daddy to love us.

      1. Cytotoxic   11 years ago

        STRAWMAN DOWN

    4. Juice   11 years ago

      The wielding of force is not a business function. In fact, force is outside the realm of economics. Economics concerns production and trade, not destruction and seizure.

      Except for taxes and eminent domain.

      1. Michael S. Langston   11 years ago

        Except for taxes and eminent domain.

        Color me confused... as are you saying that taxes and eminent domain are business functions or economic functions?

        Because I think in both cases the answer is "no" - at least the article is making the point that regardless of whether force can be used to effect economics, force is not a part of capitalism economics/private enterprise.

        Also not a part of private enterprise is eminent domain or taxes - as both represent the use of force which private business in a free market aren't using (or shouldn't be and shouldn't be allowed to use).

        But maybe I missed something - can you elaborate?

    5. Juice   11 years ago

      I'm going to agree with one of his basic premises: anarchy is pretty much unworkable. But I think he's wrong to say that you can't have a free market unless there is a central monopoly on force. Just because two competing businesses have the capability to go to war with each other without a more powerful third party coming in a squashing both of them for fighting doesn't mean they will always go to war. Maybe the people in those organizations value their lives or life in general and would lay down arms out of principle and self-interest. I also can't believe that he brings up Somalia as an example of anarchy. Somalia is not anarchic for pete's sake.

      1. Agammamon   11 years ago

        A good example of this is criminal organizations (most of the time). Sure, there are times when they have outbreaks of large-scale violence between groups, but most of the time they tend to get along well enough - making money is *why* they exist in the first place and fighting each other just gets in the way of that.

  17. Corning   11 years ago

    Paid political hacks are now telling gamers that the world is coming to an end without net neutrality.

    http://kotaku.com/net-neutrali.....1507677978

    They are saying data caps are a huge problem....of course net neutrality would not fix data caps but who cares when you can scare people into accepting more government control.

    1. PapayaSF   11 years ago

      I really don't understand aspects of the whole net neutrality argument. I know why Netflix wants it, because they are bandwidth hogs, but doesn't Netflix have to pay $$$$ for their net access anyway? If their provider gives their packets "priority," is that really going to screw the provider's other customers, who are sending email and surfing websites? Would they even notice?

      1. Corning   11 years ago

        If you look at who wrote the piece you will see they are political hacks working for huge companies like Microsoft and Amazon and google and netflix.

        It just costs less money for these companies to pay some hack firm to scare gamers into asking for regulatory capture then it is for them to build out their own networks and compete.

        Net neutrality is nothing more then astro turf. The sad thing is that among gamers (at least from reading the comments) it is working.

      2. Agammamon   11 years ago

        Dude, its like income inequality - sure, your service isn't any slower, but that guy was able to pay for priority. That's just not fair.

        Nevermind the technical innovations that will push up the data speeds will reduce the costs of already existing technology. Trickle-down economics obviously doesn't apply in the real world, plus there will *still* be people who have faster internet than others. That's just so unfair.

  18. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

    Holy fuck is SadBeard stupid and mendacious

    A Gallup survey released Thursday showed a large and sudden decline in the share of Americans lacking health insurance. It's a potent reminder that despite the problematic launch of HealthCare.gov and continued discontent around many aspects of the Affordable Care Act, it is fundamentally succeeding in providing health insurance to people who previously lacked it. And that progress is likely to continue.

    You will recall that this "large and sudden decline" was by...1.2%, which puts us below the level of insured persons in 2008.

    One of the main means through which Obamacare is expanding access to health insurance is to give states the money they need to expand their Medicaid programs. Many Republican-controlled states have so far declined to do so. But as Jonathan Bernstein points out, GOP gubernatorial candidates in the states that have expanded aren't promising to roll the expansion back. As Paul Pierson and other political scientists have argued, social welfare programs exhibit a strong ratchet effect whereby once expanded they rarely shrink.

    In other words, starting in 2014 and continuing in years to come, more Americans are going to be able to get health care services.

    You can read the rest if you have the stomach for it.

    1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

      No.

      Canada has enough Sadbeard's.

    2. Cytotoxic   11 years ago

      As Paul Pierson and other political scientists have argued, social welfare programs exhibit a strong ratchet effect whereby once expanded they rarely shrink.

      And when the next economic cycle tears through us like the Oklahoma tornadoe we will see that ratchet put to the test. I suspect it will break.

      1. Michael S. Langston   11 years ago

        As Paul Pierson and other political scientists have argued, social welfare programs exhibit a strong ratchet effect whereby once expanded they rarely shrink.

        Not really true - all social welfare programs in their current inception are (internationally) and will (the US) eventually shrink, because the reality is the ponzi scheme is unsustainable.

        But this author seems to be saying - since it hasn't happened recently - it will never happen.

        When in fact we know it will happen - either through voters moving in the right direction or through bankruptcy.

        & the longer we forestall it - the larger the burden will be to fix it.

        They're basically questioning reality - which always fails as reality doesn't give two shits if the government, the voters, or even if every single last human alive doesn't want these programs to shrink - the numbers are obvious and the end is as well.

        See Greece.

    3. Juice   11 years ago

      Oh just wait until the middle of the year when people like me will drop off the roles because they're being priced out of the market.

    4. MJGreen   11 years ago

      In other words, starting in 2014 and continuing in years to come, more Americans are going to be able to get health care services.

      So... "Yes! We got more people on welfare!"

  19. CE   11 years ago

    The White House in the photo doesn't look very transparent.

  20. Coeus   11 years ago

    Rawstory article about Peter Schiff.

    Commenters are not amused:

    Skipdallas ? an hour ago
    This motherfucker should be one of the first ones to be put up in front of a wall and shot in the coming revolution.
    3 ?Reply?Share ?
    Avatar
    LiberalJarhead Skipdallas ? an hour ago
    Although Che is hated by a lot of people, he dealt with the opposition in such a wY that they would never pose a threat or exploit people again.

    1. PD Scott   11 years ago

      Such eliminationist rhetoric! Shocking!

      1. John   11 years ago

        They are all such tough guys. Funny how they only ever act on it when doing so involves killing the defenseless.

        1. PD Scott   11 years ago

          John, if they weren't attacking the defenseless they might get hurt!

    2. Killaz   11 years ago

      Now ask them their opinions on gun control. Pro, I bet, given its a means to control their bourgeoisie class enemies.

    3. Irish   11 years ago

      I've decided that at some point in the next week I'm going to go to Rawstory and pretend to be a psychopathically violent progressive who wants all my enemies to be murdered, all their children to be smothered in their beds, and every CEO to be sent to the gallows.

      What are the odds that anyone at Raw Story would have a problem with that?

      1. Episiarch   11 years ago

        You will have many supporters. The comments above are proof of that.

      2. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

        It's a thought experiment worth exploring.

        Didn't someone in England do something similar?

        1. Irish   11 years ago

          I don't know. I'm just legitimately wondering if even one person would criticize me if I started arguing in favor of lynching rich people.

          I know for a fact that most of them would be on my side, but is there even one who would have a problem with that kind of murderous fantasy?

          1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

            Try it. I'm even tempted.

          2. PD Scott   11 years ago

            Just use a good passage from Mein Kampf, put "the 1%" wherever it says Jews and you should be good to go.

          3. Entropy Void   11 years ago

            An interesting, yet modest proposal.

            1. Michael S. Langston   11 years ago

              Please do - and share 🙂

      3. Hyperion   11 years ago

        How will they tell you from the rest?

      4. The Last American Hero   11 years ago

        so basically, what American does here?

    4. BigT   11 years ago

      The comments are incredibly violent and ignorant. No wonder the country is so fucked up.

      1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

        It's funny. Unless I'm unaware of it, I don't see that kind of violent rhetoric on libertarian/conservative sites. But I see enough of them on lefty ones.

        1. Mad Scientist   11 years ago

          And yet it's always the left talking about how violent the right is. Their capacity for unwitting projection is truly awesome.

        2. Coeus   11 years ago

          It's funny. Unless I'm unaware of it, I don't see that kind of violent rhetoric on libertarian/conservative sites.

          I did wish earlier that Chuckie would sit on a can of four loko. Unless he's really experienced, that would be pretty violent.

    5. Corning   11 years ago

      This motherfucker should be one of the first ones to be put up in front of a wall and shot in the coming revolution.

      Why does the left in the US always think they have the guns?

    6. Bookkeeper   11 years ago

      Slacktivists are soooo mad, they might... link to Facebook with some angry words.

  21. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

    http://online.wsj.com/news/art.....2225570548

    He always bored me to death.

    1. Rich   11 years ago

      Uhh ....

  22. Rich   11 years ago

    From -- I'm not making this up -- The TSA Blog:

    "This year's tragic incident reminds us that being on the frontline also comes with a great risk."

    One disgruntled commenter points out:

    TSA screeners have contact with about 1.6 million travelers each day, 584 million travelers each year, and in 10 years 5,840,000,000 travelers. While even one death is unfortunate to call this loss a great risk is just silly TSA spin. The math tells the truth! 1 death in 10 years/total travelers = 0.00000000017. If anything the risk to TSA employees is miniscule. They face far greater odds of injury or death just getting to an airport.

    1. CE   11 years ago

      Not to mention the fact that the incident showed the TSA isn't protecting anything. One nut with a gun got past them.

      1. Rich   11 years ago

        They certainly didn't protect the guy whose skull fragments were found in checked baggage.

      2. Ted S.   11 years ago

        Make the TSA agents safer by disbanding the agency!

  23. PapayaSF   11 years ago

    Of course the White House is controlling and secretive! You can't advance socialism in the USA without some secrecy. Duh.

    1. PD Scott   11 years ago

      Obama should just say he's not secretive, he just knows people love surprises.

  24. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

    Chuck Schumer explains the Tea Party

    The second deep-seated force that fueled the emergence of the tea party is the rapid pace of change in America's cultural, technological and demographic makeup. Let me draw a historical analogy here to the temperance movement.

    In the 1880s the U.S. was a rural country and people were on farms and small towns living a clean life. By 1920, America had been urbanized and diversified because of manufacturing, immigration, and so many other forces. And the cities were a totally different way of life with slums, bars and dance clubs, emerging suburbs and country clubs.

    Prohibition was not simply about abolishing alcohol; it was an attempt by rural Americans to pull their country back to an agricultural ideal that was being rapidly replaced by a new cultural and economic order.

    Just as the temperance movement at the turn of the last century convinced its millions of followers that if you simply got rid of alcohol, America would almost magically revert back to the American they preferred, the tea party elite have manipulated their millions of grassroots followers to believe the same about government at this moment in time.

    Projection: it's not just for progs with blogs. More to follow...

    1. Episiarch   11 years ago

      Doesn't Chuck support the WOD? Is he really this fucking obliviously stupid? Wait, I already know the answer to that.

    2. Coeus   11 years ago

      Holy shit!!! Banmiester McMantitties is comparing people in favor of less gov. regulation to the temperance movement. Fucker needs to sit and spin on a can of Four Loko.

      1. Ted S.   11 years ago

        I knew I shouldn't have looked for a link. 🙁

        1. Coeus   11 years ago

          Doesn't matter. You couldn't have topped "Banmiester McMantitties" anyway.

    3. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

      To the plutocrats and their allies who run the tea party, government is the enemy. These people are wealthy, hard right, selfish, narrow; people who don't want to pay taxes and don't want government interfering with their companies no matter what damage their companies may do to their workers, to the environment or to anybody else. They gave people a phony explanation for why their incomes were declining, why good paying jobs were dwindling, why society was changing -- and they called it all "government."

      Government is just an innocent bystander. Pay no attention to the ever-increasing regulatory state.

      I'll skip the part where the Senator invokes the ROADZ argument.

      It is up to us to answer the tea party and expose its fundamental contradictions. Here are four ways to make that happen:

      We must stop playing defense and go on offense when it comes to the need for government. We must state loudly and repeatedly that we believe government is often a necessary force for good.
      We must focus, this year, on four or five simple but compelling examples of where government can help the average family, like:
      Raising the minimum wage
      Making college more affordable
      Renewing our commitment to revitalizing our national infrastructure
      Ensuring equal pay for women
      We must address the damage done by the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision.
      We must look at electoral reform -- gerrymandering and top-two primaries.

      Because none of those things contradict each other.

      1. Cytotoxic   11 years ago

        Did Schumer actually write this?

        1. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

          I assume someone on his staff actually wrote it, but it is in his name.

      2. PapayaSF   11 years ago

        Yeah, the Democratic Party is going to save us from "plutocrats"! George Soros, save us from plutocrats!

      3. Michael S. Langston   11 years ago

        We must state loudly and repeatedly that we believe government is often a necessary force for good.

        ^This^ is the fundamental problem. There is no reading of history that demonstrates governments to be necessary forces of good. In fact, most of history and current political realities in various countries today proves that governments are mostly forces of evil.

        What he meant to write, but won't because it proves all this crap to be projection (SOP), is that he believes the current government, with it's current makeup, consisting of people who agrees with in positions of power, must be a force of good, since after all - it's full of people like Chuck and how would any of them do anything bad?

        Example #whatever that the US's downfall isn't going to be stopped/reversed anytime soon as it's impossible to fix any problem if you cannot correctly identify it.

        It's like trying to start your car and it doesn't turn over - no lights, no radio, no electrical power.

        Chuck's solution - add more gas, because the right people built the electrical system so it's simply not possible, not thinkable, that it could be at fault.

        Nope - the right people in the right places is all that's needed - so long as that's true - then we can give those people dictatorial powers and infinite control over every individuals decisions no matter how small and it will all be perfectly fine.

        Just ignore the 150 million dead in the last century - those weren't Top Men?.

    4. Ted S.   11 years ago

      Just as the temperance movement at the turn of the last century convinced its millions of followers that if you simply got rid of alcohol Four Loko, America would almost magically revert back to the American they preferred,

      Fixed it for you, Fuck Schumer.

    5. gaijin   11 years ago

      Chuck Shumer: Freelance Professor of History

    6. Warty   11 years ago

      Here's his neice's tits. Better than his. Probably.

      1. Ted S.   11 years ago

        I don't think I want to look.

      2. Coeus   11 years ago

        Not bad, but I think his are bigger.

      3. Juice   11 years ago

        Is she really his niece? If so, that's disturbing and I don't know what to make of it.

        1. Juice   11 years ago

          Looked it up. Her dad is Chuckie's cousin. Not sure what that makes her.

          1. Warty   11 years ago

            First cousin once removed, in that case. I thought she was his niece.

    7. Boisfeuras   11 years ago

      Funny how so many members of the temperance movement also supported labor unions, universal suffrage, strikes and political violence, anti-Catholicism, indoctrination in the schools, centralized power, pressure politics, eugenics, anti-tobacco crusading, "social hygiene"... It's almost like they were progressives or something.

      1. Tejicano   11 years ago

        Of course the largest bulk of Temperance people were absolutely convinced that once we rid America of alcohol all social ills like poverty and wife beating would disappear. And just like our current crop of progressives, when prohibition did not show that result they claimed that we weren't doing it strictly enough.

  25. Ted S.   11 years ago

    "The holodecks might look fun but I don't think any amount of futuristic air freshener would get rid of the stale smell of other people's sexytimes."

    That's a response to this, which I think might be from some time ago.

    1. Coeus   11 years ago

      Worst job on the Enterprise is the holodeck splooge-wiper.

      1. hamilton   11 years ago

        I just assumed Troi did that, she seemed to have a lot of free time.

        1. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

          Was she actually paid, or was she on some sort of unpaid internship on the Enterprise?

          1. Mad Scientist   11 years ago

            I don't think she was paid. If she had been she could have afforded that nose job.

          2. Longtorso, Johnny   11 years ago

            I assume the same thing that collects food scraps and your poo, to turn it back into replicated food, would handle holodeck cleanup.

            Hmmmm... this burger tastes like Riker splooge....

            1. Coeus   11 years ago

              I assume the same thing that collects food scraps and your poo

              That would be the toilet and the replicator. I don't think there were any poo robots, but it would have made for an interesting filler episode.

          3. Loki   11 years ago

            Money didn't exist in TNG because they had perfected the New Soviet Man or some shit.

            1. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

              They had money on TOS and referred to people being rich, so something went terribly wrong between that time and TNG. Probably all after Kirk's ridiculously impossible "death."

              1. Loki   11 years ago

                Kirk was the last remaining capitalist in the Star Trek universe? I can see that.

                1. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

                  I believe that's canon.

              2. cryptArchy   11 years ago

                Loki is correct. I think Picard mentioned this fact in Lost Contact or in one of the later seasons of TNG

          4. Rasilio   11 years ago

            Weren't you paying attention. They had at least one episode where Riker was dealing with some alien race (possibly the Ferengi) and they mentioned being paid and he patiently explained that Hummanity had evolved past that and now people did things for personal enrichment.

            Funny thing is if you presume the level of technological advancement the Federation had then a post scarcity socialist state probably would naturally evolve

      2. Killaz   11 years ago

        I asked a friend who worked at an adult bookstore if the splooge ever bothered her. She didn't consider cum that gross and it cleaned up easier than most other type of stains. Better than the motel clean up job she had previous before that.

        1. Coeus   11 years ago

          Got a phone #?

          1. Killaz   11 years ago

            She'll be sixty this year. By friend, I meant a pal, a buddy who happens to be swinging a vagina.

      3. Loki   11 years ago

        Not necessarily, do you know much jizz moppers make?

      4. font_of_stupidity   11 years ago

        "Sorry guys, let me know when you're done; I'm the guy that wipes down the loads."

    2. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

      Fucking idiots. All matter left in the holodeck gets reconstituted in any of the replicators about the ship. That space soup you're enjoying? Why, that's from Wesley's prom night simulation.

      1. Longtorso, Johnny   11 years ago

        Too salty.

        1. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

          But unusually high in zinc.

  26. 110 Lean   11 years ago

    Haidt reports on the following experiment: after determining whether someone is liberal or conservative, he then has each person answer the standard battery of questions as if he were the opposite ideology. So, he would ask a liberal to answer the questions as if he were a "typical conservative" and vice-versa. What he finds is quite striking: "The results were clear and consistent. Moderates and conservatives were most accurate in their predictions, whether they were pretending to be liberals or conservatives. Liberals were the least accurate, especially those who describe themselves as 'very liberal.' The biggest errors in the whole study came when liberals answered the Care and Fairness questions while pretending to be conservatives." In other words, moderates and conservatives can understand the liberal worldview and liberals are unable to relate to the conservative worldview, especially when it comes to questions of care and fairness.
    In short, Haidt's research suggests that many liberals really do believe that conservatives are heartless bastards--or as a friend of mine once remarked, "Conservatives think that liberals are good people with bad ideas, whereas liberals think conservatives are bad people"--and very liberal people think that especially strongly. Haidt suggests that there is some truth to this.

    1. 110 Lean   11 years ago

      Link

      1. hamilton   11 years ago

        SF'd, which is a pity because I like Haidt's work.

        1. rts   11 years ago

          Fixed link.

    2. kinnath   11 years ago

      "Conservatives think that liberals are good people with bad ideas, whereas liberals think conservatives are bad people"

      Pretty damn close to how I see it as well.

      1. John   11 years ago

        You really think people like Sad Beard and Friedman are good people?

        1. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

          There are exceptions. Some people are just assholes and insufferably smug.

          But for the most part I think people are decent, they just appear worst posting anonymously comments on the internet.

          1. John   11 years ago

            I think they mean well. But most people who do evil do.

          2. John   11 years ago

            Sad Beard proudly said he was happy Andrew Breitbart was dead. He is a seriously nasty and deranged person. Liberalism more than conservatism or libertarianism seems to attract such people.

            1. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

              Agreed there. But it depends on how ideologically committed you are. If you just think that government should do this, this, and that but don't give it much thought you might still be progressive but are not defined by it.

              It's the ones who are committed to changing the world by any means necessary that are the dangerous ones. But they are pretty easy to spot because they make EVERYTHING about politics.

              And SadBeard is way out there in Aspie land, so I don't think it's fair to extrapolate anything about progs from him,as fun as it is to mock him.

              1. Irish   11 years ago

                Maybe if Sad Beard ever went outside he'd be more normal.

                1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

                  I can't believe that gets past an editor's desk.

                  This passes off as good civic writing, huh?

                2. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

                  That's what sold me on the Asperger's diagnosis. Not just because he referred to the people who invited him outside as "colleagues" rather than "friends" and not even because he would rather eat indoors alone.

                  No, it's the fact that he had no qualms about posting that story for the internet to read that convinced me he has no conception of shame and embarrassment.

      2. Irish   11 years ago

        I think progressives are bad people, I just understand how they think of themselves.

        They're bad people who can rationalize away their evil. As a result, I would probably do pretty well pretending to be a liberal because I know they see themselves as good and just, even though that's a filthy lie.

        1. BigT   11 years ago

          It's not so much that they are actively evil, just remarkably sanctimonious, smug.

        2. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

          To wit, and I'm serious, just watch the Parti Quebecois ans its supporters rationalize their evil Charter.

          Progressive bull shit run amok.

    3. PapayaSF   11 years ago

      This is very, very true, and very important. In my experience leftists have mental caricatures of conservatives and libertarians. The converse is not true, perhaps because conservatives and libertarians are constantly exposed to left/liberal ideas in the mainstream media, school, etc.

    4. Sevo   11 years ago

      ..."In other words, moderates and conservatives can understand the liberal worldview and liberals are unable to relate to the conservative worldview, especially when it comes to questions of care and fairness."...

      Not surprising. That view point is literally filling the airwaves, the pipe and the paper every day in every location of the US.
      It's clear from the trolls we get that any viewpoint other than liberal is poorly understood and largely stereotyped by lefties.

    5. Boisfeuras   11 years ago

      Non-leftists have a better understanding of leftism, because they are constantly exposed to it. Even if you live in a very conservative area, and everyone you know is very conservative, if you consume virtually any media whatsoever, you are exposed to leftism. It is much easier for a leftist to insulate themselves in an echo chamber.

  27. Longtorso, Johnny   11 years ago

    Dems Discuss 'Income Inequality' at Grammys, Posh St. Regis.

    1. Ted S.   11 years ago

      Not that I was going to watch the Grammy Awards, but they're going to use it to push a political message at us?

      1. Loki   11 years ago

        they're going to use it to push a political message at us?

        Of course they are, it's what smug leftie celebutards always do. I wonder how many of them would be willing to part with their millions in the interest of "fairness?" Rhetorical question - I already know the answer.

  28. Lady Bertrum   11 years ago

    New libertarian/nerd (they're the same thing, really) collectibles:

    Get your Kronies; they're connected.

    http://thekronies.com/

    1. Rasilio   11 years ago

      I saw this last night, it was fucking hilarious and I really hope they make a cartoon out of it.

    2. Coeus   11 years ago

      Awesome

  29. Notorious G.K.C.   11 years ago

    Little Sisters of the Poor: 1
    Obamacare anti-religious mandate: 0

    Supreme Court stays enforcement of HHS mandate on Little Sisters of the Poor until the 10th Circuit rules on it. The nuns must attest to their opposition to the mandate, but are specifically exempt from using the form supplied by the government or notifying 3rd party payers.

    http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/.....-24-13.pdf

    1. PapayaSF   11 years ago

      Good.

  30. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

    Shocker: The Panderer-in-Chief is good at pandering, has said the word 'gay' 274 times in his five years in office

    The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay rights group, did some digging and found that President Barack Obama has used "gay" 272 times since taking office in 2009, far more than any of his recent predecessors: Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

    Only Clinton comes closest to Obama, having used "gay" 216 times during his two terms, says a new report from the advocacy group.
    [snip]
    Neither George H.W. Bush nor Reagan used "gay" in any of their presidential remarks.

    George W. Bush used it twice in a public speech or remark, including one in which he disavowed marriage equality. He issued no proclamations on the subject.

    Obama also has used "lesbian," ''gay," ''bisexual" or "transgender" a total of 421 times, the report found, a linguistic feat that the Human Rights Campaign says has played a big part in the American public's acceptance of LGBT people and marriage equality because of a president's power to influence public opinion.

    "Words matter an enormous amount, and when President Obama uses his platform to declare that LGBT people are just as American as anyone else, it has a huge and historic effect," said Chad Griffin, the organization's president.

    Some people are easy to impress I guess.

    1. 110 Lean   11 years ago

      But he used those words! He used words!

  31. Coeus   11 years ago

    If you don't have tit sweat stains in the summer, the patriarchy wins!!!!

  32. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

    Stephen Hawking ruins science fiction: Black holes do not exist!

    Most physicists foolhardy enough to write a paper claiming that "there are no black holes" ? at least not in the sense we usually imagine ? would probably be dismissed as cranks. But when the call to redefine these cosmic crunchers comes from Stephen Hawking, it's worth taking notice. In a paper posted online, the physicist, based at the University of Cambridge, UK, and one of the creators of modern black-hole theory, does away with the notion of an event horizon, the invisible boundary thought to shroud every black hole, beyond which nothing, not even light, can escape.

    In its stead, Hawking's radical proposal is a much more benign "apparent horizon", which only temporarily holds matter and energy prisoner before eventually releasing them, albeit in a more garbled form.

    "There is no escape from a black hole in classical theory," Hawking told Nature. Quantum theory, however, "enables energy and information to escape from a black hole". A full explanation of the process, the physicist admits, would require a theory that successfully merges gravity with the other fundamental forces of nature. But that is a goal that has eluded physicists for nearly a century. "The correct treatment," Hawking says, "remains a mystery."

    But how do you explain Washington? Hey-o!

    1. hamilton   11 years ago

      Wow, when Hawking loses a bet he really sells out.

    2. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

      It'll help when we can actually directly detect one. Or visit one. Or make one.

      1. Rasilio   11 years ago

        We have detected them, we have just never directly imaged them

        1. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

          Which is what I meant. We've picked up, what, some X-rays and radio emissions from the matter around a black hole, right? Which is really indirect. Ditto the gravitational effects we can see in nearby (visible) stars.

          1. Corning   11 years ago

            How can you see a thing that gives off no light and absorbs any light that hits it?

            Also why are gravitational effects and ex-ray and radio emissions indirect but visible-to-the-human-eye electromagnetic effects direct?

            It is like saying the earth is hollow cuz we can't see it and only have indirect gravitational effects telling us it is not hollow.

          2. Agammamon   11 years ago

            Uhm, well - by definition you can never actually *see* one, right?

    3. Corning   11 years ago

      In its stead, Hawking's radical proposal is a much more benign "apparent horizon", which only temporarily holds matter and energy prisoner before eventually releasing them, albeit in a more garbled form.

      This is actually pretty old. I remember reading a book by Hawkings in the 90s that said black holes evaporate. essentially at any given time 2 particles which are anti to each other can appear spontaneously. normally they cancel each other but near an event horizon one will fall into the black hole but the other will escape.

      1. Agammamon   11 years ago

        Originally, black holes were thought to only have mass, charge, and angular momentum - Hawking added a fourth attribute, Temperature to the mix.

        Basically - the intense gravitational field allows virtual particle pairs to occasionally steal energy and become *real*. The vast majority of time they annihilate each other but occasionally they form with just the right trajectory that one of the pair flies back into the hole and the other escapes, taking with it a tiny amount of the energy contained within the hole.

        This reduces the mass of the hole and if conditions are right (ie not enough mass infalls to make of for this loss) the hole 'evaprotates' (ie its mass drops below a critical threshold and can no longer be gravitationally contained and it explodes).

        All holes do this and the smaller the hole, the faster VP pairs are generated, the faster they evaporate.

  33. Lady Bertrum   11 years ago

    Conversation I had today at the grocery story with a 20ish male cashier.

    Me: So, is the Superbowl this weekend?

    Him: Not sure. I'm really not into sports.

    Me: Yeah, me neither. There are other more interesting hobbies.

    Him: I've been reading a lot about Edward Snowden. You know about him? I don't think people realize what a hero he is.

    Me: I agree. He's done us a real service.

    Him: You really think so? (high-fives me).

    Me: I'm a libertarian; civil liberties are big with libertarians. You should check out reason.com if your interested in Snowden and libertarian issues.

    (close scene)

    And, thus, hopefully, another libertarian is initiated.

    1. PapayaSF   11 years ago

      Good for you.

    2. 110 Lean   11 years ago

      And, thus, hopefully, another libertarian is initiated.

      I believe the initiation involves Warty, right?

    3. Warty   11 years ago

      Way to friendzone him.

      1. Mad Scientist   11 years ago

        So, she put him into a zone of some kind?

        1. Francisco d Anconia   11 years ago

          She?

          Didn't we establish Lady Bertrum is a guy? Or am I confused, again (even more than normal)?

          1. Irish   11 years ago

            Didn't we establish Lady Bertrum is a guy? Or am I confused, again (even more than normal)?

            I realize that on a website that once had a man commenting under the name "Stormy Dragon" it is sometimes hard to tell the gender of commenters.

            LB is definitely a woman though.

            1. Coeus   11 years ago

              I always thought stormy was a lesbian.

            2. Francisco d Anconia   11 years ago

              I could have sworn either Serious or GBN got all embarrassed for making that assumption and getting called on it about a month ago?

              Or maybe he/she was just fucking with them. Or maybe I have LB confused with someone else?

              LB, jump in here and set us straight.

              1. Lady Bertrum   11 years ago

                I'm late to the discussion and don't remember the prior conversation. Sorry.

                I have boobies and a vajayjay. Make of that what you will.

            3. Banjos   11 years ago

              Even if Stormy was a woman, I would still not have any respect for them. The only type of person who should use "Stormy Dragon" as their handle is a 12 year old girl.

              1. Episiarch   11 years ago

                How about "The Last Unicorn"? Because I was thinking of changing my handle to that. This one has too many negative connotations attached to it.

                1. Banjos   11 years ago

                  I would go with "Sparkly Unicorn Bieber Fan".

                  1. Episiarch   11 years ago

                    "Princess Sparkly Bieberfan" it is.

                    1. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

                      "Princess Sparkly Bieberfan" it is.

                      Starting with something that has horrible connotations so there is nowhere to go but up?

                      Clever girl.

                  2. Agammamon   11 years ago

                    EpiLovesTehBeib

                2. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

                  Whatever username you choose will end up with negative connotations attached pretty quickly.

                3. Mad Scientist   11 years ago

                  Wishmagic: The Horse Who Wrote Poems

    4. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

      Fool. He was an NSA plant. All grocery store cashiers are. Why do you think there aren't more self checkout lanes?

      1. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

        Because of unions?

        1. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

          Uh, I don't think self checkouts are even unionized. Use your head.

    5. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

      Yay!

    6. Episiarch   11 years ago

      Did you warn him about...us? Especially Hugh?

      1. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

        Why would you scare them off before the blood oath?

        1. Episiarch   11 years ago

          I'm not as into coercion as you, jesse. I only have a fraction of the whips, chains, dog collars, and gimp suits that you do.

          1. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

            Why would you only have a fraction of a gimp suit? Who has the space to keep more than one around?

            1. Episiarch   11 years ago

              jesse, I live in a two-story apartment. I have plenty of room. But I mostly use it for my life-size cutouts of the Next Generation crew. I have two Wesleys and a Traveler for when I want to get really freaky.

            2. Agammamon   11 years ago

              For the fraction of the gimp he keeps in the meatlocker of course.

            3. Bookkeeper   11 years ago

              Isn't a gimp suit fraction just another name for a zipper?

        2. Lady Bertrum   11 years ago

          Flies and honey and all that. We need to sucker him in before.....you know...Warty (mumble, mumble)..and Hugh (mumble, mumble).

          Epi - are you super proud to have been featured in the two minutes of hate on The Independents?

          I wonder if Matt realizes that it's now a competition to see who can come up with the most horrifying comment to get on the show. Because it's on!

          1. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

            Wait, what did I miss when I tuned out early?

            1. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

              You missed the Two Minutes of Hate? Go look for today's Independents post, Welch linked the segment.

              Basically they read angry Tweets, emails, and pull some negative comments from Hit & Run show threads. Pretty awesome even if made Epi even more insufferable.

              1. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

                They really could've pulled more interesting comments from Epi, but that was entertaining. Who is Dry Gin Wet Farts?

          2. Episiarch   11 years ago

            I'm pretty pleased, because I WIN. Or something.

            Matt realizes it's a competition now, and said something to that effect that night. However, the comments of mine that they quoted were actually pretty mild. It shouldn't be hard to top them, and I intend to do so.

            1. Irish   11 years ago

              Unfortunately, the best insults are not going to be Fox Business appropriate.

              1. Episiarch   11 years ago

                You just have to get creative. One can be insulting without being vulgar. Unlike your mom.

                1. GILMORE   11 years ago

                  Who suggested the communist be beaten to death? Sounds strangely similar to maybe 30 or so of my comments while live-posting during his appearance. (I was drinking)

              2. cryptArchy   11 years ago

                Well maybe Kennedy and Co. can make exceptions for us

    7. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

      And he didn't hit on you? Because we already have plenty of Creeper-tarians, thank you very much.

      But really, nice little story. Thank you for that.

    8. Francisco d Anconia   11 years ago

      Most awesome.

    9. Hyperion   11 years ago

      Nice work.

    10. Corning   11 years ago

      You should check out reason.com

      Oh fuck!!!

      Quick someone put away the laudanum and sweep warty under the rug.

  34. Loki   11 years ago

    Boehner Has No Presidential Ambisions

    At least it wasn't all bad news today.

  35. Killaz   11 years ago

    Now, on a less depressing subject -- 50 beers, 50 states --

    http://www.seriouseats.com/map.....very-state

    I have had, maybe ten, one I'm not so sure about. Sounds like a delicious pils I had on tap once. The Victory BC Prima.

    The Dogfish Head Indian Brown Ale, Maui Brewing Company Coconut Porter, Zombie Dust, Two Hearted Ale (Jesus, that one is tasty), and of course, Heady Topper, get my juices flowing. They all sound delicious in the descriptions given.

    1. 110 Lean   11 years ago

      I have a refrigerator full of the Minnesota representative, including the Abrasive Ale pictured. Awesome stuff.

      1. BigT   11 years ago

        Tried the Baba Black Lager recently (UT) and it is great. More of these are showing up locally. Of course the Edmund Fitzgerald Porter (OH) is fine, and I agree about the Two-Hearted Ale - it used to be on tap at a bar within walking distance when I had a second home in Columbus.

    2. Apatheist ?_??   11 years ago

      The particular beer they selected for Texas isn't my fave but they definitely could have done worse for what brewery they chose.

      1. cryptArchy   11 years ago

        The ale they had for Arizona is all right, but I would much prefer Kiltlifter from Four Peaks Brewing in Tempe

    3. DEG   11 years ago

      I've had four: Two Hearted Ale, Smuttynode Scotch, Yeti, and Indian Brown.

      I've had some beers from some of the breweries mentioned (Cigar City, Great Lakes, and Allagash) but not their beers that made the list.

  36. Coeus   11 years ago

    Still with this shit

    Last week I wrote about the fact that in spite of racking up $20,000 worth of damages by egging a neighbor's house, Justin Bieber is in no real danger of being deported. Not because the crime doesn't merit it (that's not a judgement I'm interested in) but because he's white, rich, and famous.

    Well, it looks like JBiebs wanted to test his luck, because he was charged this week with driving under the influence of alcohol and marijuana, driving without a valid license, and resisting arrest. And yet the Canadian-born singer was released on $2,500 bail. And still not deported. Meanwhile, as Prerna Lal explained at Racefiles, Miguel Morales Patzan, an undocumented worker, spent ten days in jail for just driving without a license ? and now faces deportation.

    All three of those things are different, and they make a campaign about guess which word? I'm honestly suprised they didn't say it was because he (probably)has a penis.

    1. Episiarch   11 years ago

      Um, didn't the Beeb's blood alcohol level end up being so low as to be essentially alcohol free, and certainly not up to the 0.08 drunk driving requirement? That might have something to do with it.

      1. 110 Lean   11 years ago

        Yup. 0.014

        1. BigT   11 years ago

          In many states when you are under age that is still a DUI

          1. Michael S. Langston   11 years ago

            That may be - but anyone with Bieber's money can easily mount of a defense showing that one can produce the same reading by simply taking too much of certain types of cough syrup.

            Which is why people with means are never charged with ridiculous laws which say .014 BAC is evidence of anything - only those unable/unwilling/not smart enough to mount a fight will be charged.

            Just like when someone with means gets a ticket for running a stop light when they weren't driving - they start by asserting their rights to go to court, where they want to specifically argue against the law on two fronts - a) how can someone who was not driving get ticketed for a moving violation and b) running a stop sign, whether video captured or seen and enforced by an actual LEO should have the exact same penalty.

            Any guess as to what happens the same day said person makes it known s/he is going to fight the ticket?

            Charges dismissed.

      2. Mad Scientist   11 years ago

        You seem to know an awful lot about this. You know his nick name, you even know about his blood. Are you some sort of Canadian sympathizer?

        1. Episiarch   11 years ago

          (punches Rufus and Archduke)

          Of course not!

          1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

            Heh.

            1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

              Make that...

              Ow!

              1. Coeus   11 years ago

                More like "Ow! Eh."

    2. Coeus   11 years ago

      And, tangentially related:

      You stay classy, MSNBC.

      1. Calidissident   11 years ago

        I posted this yesterday. It seems like something out of the Onion News

      2. Corning   11 years ago

        It makes me happy that the premier left wing statist channel broke an interview with a congress-critter to talk about the drug use of a pop-star.

    3. Tejicano   11 years ago

      Not that I care to stand up for Bieber but I find it bizarre that the "author" simply tip-toed around this little fact : "Miguel Morales Patzan, an undocumented worker"

      I dunno but my bet would be that the singer probably has his immigration paperwork in order.

      You don't have to like or even agree with our immigration laws but it doesn't make a lot of sense to bring up an issue like this if you kinda have to acknowledge them.

      1. Tejicano   11 years ago

        bleah..

        "...but if you are going to bring up an issue like this you kinda have to acknowledge them."

  37. C. Anacreon   11 years ago

    I thought the commentariat would enjoy this letter-to-the-editor in yesterday's Contra Costa Times (SF Bay Area, CA):

    Nutty system with inequality built in
    Responding to a Jan. 13 letter "Being responsible for own behavior" consider this description: One percent of the squirrels take ownership of the most productive trees. They also claim all storage facilities. They hire desperate, hungry squirrels to collect acorns and pay them with starvation rations.

    By winter, the 1 percent own 48 percent of the acorns. The 1 percent hire squirrels, called government squirrels, to collect taxes, build jails and give the impression they are protecting the population.

    In their quest for even more acorns, the 1 percent send acorn collectors to other areas, which infuriate the squirrels there. This is solved by sending army squirrels to protect the collector squirrels.

    Taxes from the 99 percent pay for the army, police, jails and tax collection. There is an illusion of popular influence in government decisions, but real decisions are made behind closed doors by the 1 percent.

    Because they own all the storage facilities, they can charge whatever the market will bear and claim it is a free market.

    John Bulger
    Walnut Creek

    1. Mad Scientist   11 years ago

      Is this in response to tech workers gentrifying his neighborhood?

    2. PapayaSF   11 years ago

      One percent of the squirrels take ownership of the most productive trees.

      Sort of falls apart right there, doesn't it? If those squirrels planted those trees, or bought them, then it's a rather different story.

  38. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

    Huh, The Atlantic: The GOP doesn't need to change because it's already winning

    Without changing a thing, Republicans are very well positioned for the midterm elections this year and even for the 2016 presidential election. As the University of Virginia political analyst Larry Sabato recently noted, Republicans are almost guaranteed to keep the House of Representatives in November; they have about a 50-50 chance of taking the majority in the U.S. Senate; and they are likely to keep their majority of the nation's governor's mansions. The erosion of public trust in Obama and Democrats spurred by the botched introduction of the healthcare exchanges continues to reverberate in public polling of contests up and down the ballot, erasing the public-opinion edge Democrats gained from the government shutdown and tilting more and more contests in the GOP's favor, according to Sabato, who on Thursday revised his ratings of three Senate contests, tilting all of them more toward Republicans.

    At least some people are capable of recognizing that Obamacare is going to be a huge liability.

    The tears will be delicious if the GOP seizes the Senate.

    1. Episiarch   11 years ago

      If? I'm pretty sure it's a lock. I'll be stunned if it isn't.

      Obamacare is going to be years and years of butthurt for TEAM BLUE, and they're just starting to realize that fact, after thinking it was their ticket to permanent majorities for so long.

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

      1. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

        I would be stunned if they didn't as well, but you can't discount the possibility of some so-con retard pulling an Akin.

        The media will be in full-blown panic mode if it looks like the Dems are going to lose big again so they'll do their best to drag down the enemy.

      2. Irish   11 years ago

        Republicans in 2003: We're going to have a permanent majority thanks to the war on terror!

        Democrats in 2010: We're going to have a permanent majority thanks to Obamacare!

        You'd think they'd learn eventually.

        1. Episiarch   11 years ago

          But they never, ever do. Which is what we've learned.

          1. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

            Really, these early years of the new millennium have been quite instructive.

    2. PapayaSF   11 years ago

      The idea that the GOP would lose the House in 2014 was always ridiculous. Second-term Presidents almost always lose seats there in their sixth year, and Obama is on track to undershoot the average, not overshoot it.

      1. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

        But if all you read is the Huffington Post, Salon, ThinkProgress, and other left-wing sources of news you'd swear that Obamacare was working and the GOP was doomed because of their War on Women.

        Hell, today's HuffPo front page headline is "OBAMCARE IS WORKING!" with 3 MILLION SIGN UPS!

        1. Irish   11 years ago

          HuffPo's front page after the Manchin-Toomey bill was defeated is still the funniest thing I've ever seen.

          They were basically calling everyone who voted against that gun bill a murderer.

          1. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

            My favorite was 'TO LIVE AND DIE IN NRA USA---NO END TO GUN VIOLENCE EPIDEMIC'

            Followed immediately below with a bunch of links to various shooting stories throughout the country.

        2. Episiarch   11 years ago

          Hey man, if they want to stick their heads in the sand, why stop them?

        3. Cytotoxic   11 years ago

          Are you fucking kidding me? They're down to hysterical delusions? KEEP CLAPPING OR TINKERBELL DIES

          1. PapayaSF   11 years ago

            "Remain calm! All is well!"

    3. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

      Comment from thread: "Just to be clear, very few non-Republicans are upset about healthcare exchanges (and the few that are will likely be over it by election time). Obama's numbers aren't dropping because he the very thing people voted him in to do and that he campaigned on. Obama's polling numbers have dropped because of the NSA leaks, aka the things his constituents voted him in to fix that he's lied to their faces about."

      1. PapayaSF   11 years ago

        That's part of it, but I think large numbers of Democrats and independents are ticked of about Obama messing with their health insurance.

  39. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

    Lufthansa Heist arrests.

    http://online.wsj.com/news/art.....ding_now_2

    1. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

      So which one was he in the movie?

      1. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

        Good question.

        Certainly not Carbone.

        1. Pro Libertate   11 years ago

          Stacks? Maybe he didn't really die?

  40. Cytotoxic   11 years ago

    I'm not gonna bother providing a link, but it is interesting to watch Argentina come unglued. Their central bank has literally given up on supporting the currency. In a day it fell 15% over a week it fell from 8 per USD to 12. The government was actually forced to loosen capital controls. Other emerging markets like Ukraine and Turkey and Venezuela are also going critical. It's contagion.

  41. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

    And for my last link I give you all porn for John

    1. PapayaSF   11 years ago

      That is someone who should go with a one-piece. At least.

      1. Tejicano   11 years ago

        She could go with a one-piece or a two-piece as long as she isn't going anywhere I can see her. Just go.

  42. GILMORE   11 years ago

    CNN Op-Ed:

    "Because everyone agrees taxing the Rich is the path to 'reducing income inequality..."

    :"...[there are] unmistakable national political indictors that suggest voters are ready for government action to help poor and working-class Americans. The Occupy Wall Street movement of 2011 that quickly spread across the country was one sign; so was the re-election of President Obama in 2012 and de Blasio's victory in 2013.
    ...

    Blah blah blah.... summary = "Which progressive is more awesome? DeBlasio or Cuomo"?

    Ne'er once in the piece is there the slightest curiosity about where the connection between 'raising taxes', 'throwing money into Pre-K' actually does anything about "reducing inequality".

    The unstated assumption is something like:

    1)Take More Money
    2)Get More Power
    3)....
    4)(End Profit!)
    5)Respect

    We need to get this word, 'equality' more clearly defined. Because the idea that 'some people are poor' BECAUSE 'some people are rich' is so fucking brainless that it hurts. There is very little in the way of actually talking about policy that 'enables' poor people to improve their lot. Its almost entirely about just sucking the blood out of private enterprise and empowering the state.

    1. PD Scott   11 years ago

      de Blasio's victory in 2013.

      Yes, because the rest of the United States is just like NYC.

  43. Dave Krueger   11 years ago

    House Speaker John Boehner is not running for president, he says.

    Bummer. He is exactly the caliber of clown the republicans tend to go for. Luckily, they have no shortage of intellectually defective, self-worshiping, idiots to choose from.

  44. Notorious G.K.C.   11 years ago

    John, to further comment on one of your remarks yesterday, here's an example of Catholics as well as Orthodox showing some courage in the Ukraine troubles.

    The Ukrainian government has threatened to revoke the legal status of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Catholic Church (UGCC) for alleged complicity in the demonstrations. This would return the UGCC to the illegal status it had under the Commies, so there's historical precedent for this action.

    The head of the UGCC, Major Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk, responds to the threat:

    "The Church is not a participant in the political process, but at the same time, it cannot stand aside when its faithful ask for spiritual care....The presence of the priest there, where his faithful are, is a fundamental part of his pastoral ministry. It is the duty of the priest to be with his faithful, a duty that flows from the very mission of the Church. Our Church has always been true to this mission that Christ has entrusted to it, and will remain so in the future despite any threats."

    http://en.radiovaticana.va/new.....en1-764254

  45. Coeus   11 years ago

    Holy shit.

    adorkablewifeUCallie Beusman41L
    My period tracker app was a little TOO accurate. I started using it because my cycles were like... 35 - 120 days apart, and over time it gets smarter and learns your patterns. The month it got it completely right, I decided to test its powers of predicting ovulation. I got pregnant. As an experiment. Hubby was not entirely pleased that I forgot to warn him, but as I didn't think it would actually work, I kind of think I should be excused... Still, you can't fault it, as we now have a perfect second child, and we know the exact day he was conceived. I just got my period back nearly a year after giving birth, and I immediately downloaded my period tracker. But hubby swears that he won't have sex with me again without checking the app first to make sure I'm not accidentally on purpose getting up the duff. Today 2:55pm

    1. Corning   11 years ago

      as we now have a perfect second child

      I like this lady.

  46. anon   11 years ago

    House Speaker John Boehner is not running for president, he says.

    Probably said already, but the sentiment bears repeating:

    Thank fucking god.

  47. RishJoMo   11 years ago

    Roll that beautiful bean footage.

    http://www.AnonWork.tk

  48. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

    Actually, soccer player. I play hockey but nothing like my brethren!

    Fine.

    I'll lighten up even though my daughter's eyes are about as weak as Obama's oratorical skills.

  49. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

    Marchand is more annoying than Subban. In fact, the entire Boston Bruins organization are whiners.

  50. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

    I don't have a problem with complaining to the officials or taking the occasional dive. If you're not trying to draw penalties, you're not competing hard enough.

    I can tolerate bad fans but in Montreal it's just a little too much. It's a combination of things. Like I said, I only hate two teams in the entire league and yours just happens to be one of them.

  51. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

    http://instantrimshot.com/

  52. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

    What do you mean 'too much' in Montreal?

    Man, I have my issues with the city and even the psycho fans but one thing you don't mess with is their knowledge.

    Out of curiosity where you live?

  53. Irish   11 years ago

    Hey! There are more than three women who comment on this site!

    Admittedly, it's very rare for more than one to be here at the same time, which plays into my theory that none of them are real and they're all sockpuppets for an obese truck driver living outside of Philly.

  54. Mad Scientist   11 years ago

    I'm pretty sure Banjos is actually female.

  55. hamilton   11 years ago

    I thought we had this argument already and came up with like six or seven libertarian women, problem solved.

  56. lap83   11 years ago

    "they're all sockpuppets"
    I've pondered going to a Reason meetup (assuming they exist) with a "Hi my name is Tony" sticker, just to see the reactions.

  57. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

    Yeah I've met Banjos, who was very pregnant at the time. Then again I have been fooled before...

  58. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

    Then again I have been fooled before...

    STORY TIME!

    *Makes fancy popcorn*

  59. Banjos   11 years ago

    Yeah I've met Banjos, who was very pregnant at the time.

    ARE YOU CALLING ME FAT?!?!

  60. Agammamon   11 years ago

    Actress. Hired for the part. Wasn't even pregnant.

  61. Lady Bertrum   11 years ago

    We've got two commenting at once right now. 😉

  62. Lady Bertrum   11 years ago

    Or, "Hi, my name is Warty!"

  63. 110 Lean   11 years ago

    That's the only one I do not like. To me -- a Turkish Coffee drinker for decades -- it tastes like fucked-up coffee.

  64. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

    Irish was keeping score for a while. I don't know if he's maintained the list. I haven't done a great job maintaining the Directory of Homotarians (DOH), but I know several of them have fallen off the map.

  65. Mad Scientist   11 years ago

    Anyone can claim to be female.

  66. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   11 years ago

    It isn't much of a story: back when I worked at a grocery store while still in high school there was this 'woman' who would come in fairly regularly.

    Very nice person and she would always wear bright dresses that displayed her large bust and showed off her legs. After seeing her a few times one of the cashiers asked me what I thought and I was like "she's nice" and then she told me that that person was actually trans.

    In my defense I was 17 and not too knowledgeable of such matters.

  67. Irish   11 years ago

    I was never maintaining a list.

    That sounds way creepier than what was actually going on. I was following them around in a non-descript van.

    Jesus Christ, it's like you don't even listen to me.

  68. Episiarch   11 years ago

    And then your boner just got that much stiffer. I know mine would!

  69. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

    That's not bad. I had a nice chat with a lady-boy in Thailand and my adorable British companion who was specifically looking to meet a lady-boy had no fucking clue. I said something about "well you've finally met a lady-boy" and he ran back and chatted with her for another several minutes before coming back very happy. I'm not sure what they talked about.

  70. Francisco d Anconia   11 years ago

    In my defense I was 17 and not too knowledgeable of such matters.

    L
    O
    L
    A

    Did you leave home just a week before?

  71. jesse.in.mb   11 years ago

    it's like you don't even listen to me

    Huh, what?

    I'm sorry I was lost in your eyes for a moment

    (that usually works, right?)

  72. Agammamon   11 years ago

    But did you keep the info in a binder?

  73. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

    WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA. Which should give you a clue who the other team is. As for the fans' knowledge, I've never heard so vocal pleas for calls on things that aren't penalties. Maybe it's the acoustics at the Bell Centre.

  74. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

    Ah. Pens.

    Yeah, there are some fans in the upper decks who are silly. And that Ole chant fucking enrages me.

  75. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

    I really must clear this up. I'm a Pens fan and therefore the other team is the Flyers.

  76. Rufus J. Firefly   11 years ago

    I figured it out.

    Flyers. Now their fans are special.

  77. Tejicano   11 years ago

    A guy I knew in high school was telling a group of us about this "girl" he met at some place in Juarez and how, after making out for a few minutes he discovered - with his hand in her panties - she was a "he". Of course we all made a note of it for future reference but what stuck in my mind was that had that happened to me in high school it would have become a secret buried so deep only a hypnotist could have dredged up the memory. That he was telling it to a group of guys in the cafeteria like it was no big deal made my head spin.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Brickbat: Cooking the Books

Charles Oliver | 5.9.2025 4:00 AM

The App Store Freedom Act Compromises User Privacy To Punish Big Tech

Jack Nicastro | 5.8.2025 4:57 PM

Is Shiloh Hendrix Really the End of Cancel Culture?

Robby Soave | 5.8.2025 4:10 PM

Good Riddance to Ed Martin, Trump's Failed Pick for U.S. Attorney for D.C.

C.J. Ciaramella | 5.8.2025 3:55 PM

Trump's Tariffs Are Already Raising Car Prices and Hurting Automakers

Joe Lancaster | 5.8.2025 2:35 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!