L'Etat, C'Est Barry; House GOP Plans Immigration Proposals; New Jersey Starts To Sour on Christie: P.M. Links

|

Follow Reason and Reason 24/7 on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.  You can also get the top stories mailed to you—sign up here.

Advertisement

NEXT: More Evidence That Most Americans Oppose Marijuana Prohibition

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

  1. …President Obama reportedly plans to announce executive orders hiking the minimum wage for federal contract workers, and taking some sort of action on job training and retirement, in an effort to bypass Congress.

    Maybe if we try the same old policies but in a different sequence….

    1. Also, let’s see how many sides of the aisle applaud this bypass.

    2. Hello.

      Do we work? By we, I mean us.

    3. What would happen if no republicans and none of the Supremes showed up at the SOTU address?

      1. I predict the cameras would be strategically positioned to give the impression of a full gallery.

      2. Can that happen?

      3. The media would have a field day reporting about how horrible and petty the Republicans were.

  2. Hillary Clinton has the best wishes of 57 Democratic lawmakers if/when she announces a run for the White House. Yay.

    One for every state!

    1. Did they apply to safety candidates, in case Shrillary is content being a grandma? Or planet?

      1. “Did they apply to safety candidates”

        Maybe they could do a little dance:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjPau5QYtYs

        1. Well, they do act real rude and totally removed, and like an imbecile.

        2. They can use Robert Reich as the midget with the lute.

          1. That’s not a lute. It’s a bowl backed mandolin.

            /musical pedant

          2. Ohh, cruel…BUT very funny.

  3. Memento mori, Barry

    How dare you consider Him mortal.

    1. The Romans took all the good catch phrases.

  4. The Pentagon is reviewing very generous pension hikes that have some high-ranking retirees taking in more than they made on the job

    They’re jealous of the new minimum wage the contractors are all getting.

  5. Hillary Clinton has the best wishes of 57 Democratic lawmakers if/when she announces a run for the White House. Yay.

    Yeah, I’m sure that will put her over the top.

    1. 57? I thought John Kerry was the one with the ties to Heinz.

  6. While he still polls 48 percent approval, that’s down 14 points from October.

    Time to tighten that lap band.

    1. He could go on “The Biggest Loser”!

  7. The U.S. says it doesn’t want to release Guantanamo detainee Abdel Malik al-Rahabi, who has never been prosecuted in his 12 years on ice, because he could rejoin al Qaeda if released. Well…He could do a lot of things…

    I guess they’re worried he might have somehow, in some way, come under the influence of extreme anti-American ideologies during the decade the American government deprived him of his rights and locked him in a cage.

    1. It’s funny, the easiest way to guarantee he never joined Al Quaeda would be to announce he cooperated with the US, give him $100,000 and fly him home to wherever he wanted to live.

      He probably wouldn’t live long enough to spend that $100,000 but it is almost certain that he would never become a member of Al Quaeda again.

    2. Are you saying he might foster some ill will that could potentially blow back on us!?

      1. That’s just a crackpot theory.

  8. Does your wife/girlfriend get mad at you about something you said 6 months ago, but you have no idea what she’s talking about? That’s because a study says men are more forgetful than women.

    1. Oh, I had something for this…wait, what was it…

    2. You think that’s bad. My wife has dreams, that she knows are dreams in which I do absolutely horrible things and then actually wakes up pissed off at me because of something she dreamed I did.

      1. Meh, you have it coming anyway.

        1. Well being male I fully understand that everything is my fault. That is a given.

          But if I’m going to be in the doghouse for something at least give me the satisfaction of having done something wrong first.

          1. But if I’m going to be in the doghouse for something at least give me the satisfaction of having done something wrong first.

            Why should you be afforded a benefit no other man gets?

      2. Haha, what a crazy psycho, haha…

        Mine too.

        1. Oh that’s just it, my wife is generally speaking not a crazy psycho, she just has a VERY active imagination when dreaming and it affects her moods.

          When she wakes up she knows it wasn’t real but it doesn’t stop her from being pissed for a while.

          1. I also have the problem where my wife has vivid dreams and remembers every detail. Then tells me about it assuming I care.

            I estimate I probably remember 1 dream a month and even then the details are very fuzzy.

            1. And let me guess, if you ever admitted the details you did remember she’d be pissed at you for a month, right?

              1. Well certainly I never tell her about the dreams involving her friends.

                1. Now that you mention it, I had a dream last night where I was an airplane pilot. For some reason my wife’s best friend had an apartment that had a jetway to an airstrip. I went to her place and fucked her but felt guilty because my passengers were waiting in the plane.

            2. So there’s no hope for a cure? Damn.

          2. This is extremely irrational. Why do you tolerate it?

          3. Emotions really are a completely different thing from thought and reason.

            1. TIWTANLW

              1. I Googled TIWTANLW & got this post. Huh?

                YGJMTSU?

                1. This is why there are no libertarian women

                2. this is why there are no libertarian women

            2. “You cannot beat a woman in an argument. Why? Because as men, we are handicapped by a need to make sense. Women ain’t going to let a little thing like sense fuck up their argument. Because she’s not in it for sense, she’s in it for distance and irritation. ‘How long can I talk before this motherfucker snaps?'”

              –Chris Rock

          4. See, shit like this happens and women wonder why we have a need for “mancaves” or generally retreat to the garage. It’s because they’re the one place in the house that’s considered a refuge from this stuff.

      3. What your wife should remember is that we don’t really dream about other people. People in our dreams are just different aspects of ourselves. So really, she should be pissed off at herself.

        1. You mean it’s all just PROJECTION?!

        2. Yeah I pointed out to her that if anyone should be pissed it should be me because in her subconscious I am the biggest piece of shit on the planet

        3. This is terrible advice.

          1. I suppose it should come with a warning label stating that saying such to your wife/girlfriend may cause great physical harm to yourself.

      4. I have a friend who is forbidden from ever working with or befriending anyone named “Amber” for that exact reason.

        1. That is extremely, terribly irrational.

          1. Amber is a fucking trashy name, though.

            1. That must be why I like it so much.

            2. I have a thing for girls named Amber… the mother of my daughter is an Amber. It’s quite possible the mother of my next child will be named Amber.

              1. Since you’re not married to my buddy’s wife, I assume you’re in the clear.

              2. Are you quite fond of the warning light between red and green at stoplights?

          2. Highly illogical.

        2. If you tread around her like she is a precious snowflake, she’s going to respond in kind. Can’t work with people named ‘Amber’; the dude ought to be slapped for putting up with that shit.

      5. My mom does that with my dad, my brother, and me.

        1. Yeah, that is some mommed-up shit right there.

      6. My wife was like this when pregnant. It wasn’t my favorite feature of the process.

      7. Actually my now ex husband used to do that.

    3. Ever notice how the only acceptable way for men and women to be different is if the difference makes men look appallingly buffoonish?

      1. Nu uh, didn’t you know there is a war on wimmenz?

        Seriously though, yes I have. When is the last time there was a pop culture work that involved relationship issues in which the man was not a buffoon, moron, or single minded sex fiend

        1. Or all three at once. Giggity.

        2. Well in Don Jon the main character is supposed to be a single minded sex fiend but it turns out he’s much more nuanced while Scarlett Johansson’s character comes off as a huge bitch. At least that’s how I viewed it.

          1. Well in Don Jon the main character is supposed to be a single minded sex fiend but it turns out he’s much more nuanced while Scarlett Johansson’s character comes off as a huge bitch. At least that’s how I viewed it.

            For all their progressive pretensions, people in Hollywood can be laughably traditional in their worldviews–the story about the rough man being tamed and civilized by a steady relationship with a woman is as old as Shakespeare.

            1. Not this movie though, it basically mocks the basic Hollywood romcoms. It sets it up that way but it turns out that she’s just a controlling bitch.

      2. “Ever notice how the only acceptable way for men and women to be different is if the difference makes men look appallingly buffoonish?”

        Eh, it depends on the context.

        1. I had an awesome retort, but I forgot what I was gonna say.

        2. Beyonce’s hit “Irreplaceable” was written by a male hip hop singer about his girlfriend.

          But when it was recorded they thought that singing it from the male viewpoint would be too harsh, and so gave it to Beyonce to sing from the woman’s viewpoint about her boyfriend.

      3. Its called the Ann Althouse rule.

    4. I am definitely not more forgetful than my wife. Though she usually does remember the things that I get pissed at her about from 6 months ago.

    5. Yes, we are.

      Especially when it comes to petty nonsense no reasonable person would hold a grudge over.

      1. a grudge

        Most men think they know what this means in the context of women. I worked as a floor nurse for a long time, and I assure you that most men do not have a fucking clue what this actually means. A woman will- for fucking years- hold a grudge against another woman for looking prettier than her on a particular day.

    6. “a study says men are more forgetful than women”

      I feel that way about my husband definitely. But I’ve learned to like it because he generally doesn’t stay mad at me for longer than a few seconds “ooh, look a squirrel!”

      1. My wife is such a master at this that I find myself doing chores I agreed to do, like, months ago. Which is why I’ve spent the past couple of weekends reflooring one of the guest rooms.

        She compensates with delicious, delicious cooking. I really don’t have a lot to complain about.

      2. “But I’ve learned to like it because he generally doesn’t stay mad at me for longer than a few seconds “ooh, look a squirrel!” “ooh, look a boobies!”

        FTFY

  9. The Queen’s royal household has been told by a Commons committee to reduce its costs and increase income after its cash reserves were found to be at a historic low of ?1m.

    1. Parliament’s just sick of the Queen hanging out in the basement smoking pot and playing Call of Duty all day.

    2. I smell a new supply of discount monocles available on Ebay. Get the orphan monocle-polisher team ready!

    3. Time for the Queen to start showing up for an appearance fee at new car-wash openings, rich girl birthday parties, and motivational corporation events.

    4. I can’t imagine most of the royal families wealth would be held in cash though.

      1. Garage sale?

      2. I believe most of their income is actually tourism-based. They own so many historic buildings and estates that it’s pretty easy to set up tours when they’re not residing there at the moment.

  10. Freelance writer living in Seoul says Silicon Valley Is Now Public Enemy No. 1, And We Only Have Ourselves To Blame:

    The technology industries around Silicon Valley have had a remarkable run in building support among the general public for our innovations. That tide has permanently turned, and our community is ultimately to blame…

    At the heart of this controversy is Silicon Valley’s changing emphasis from pure technological advancement to disruption of existing manufacturing and service industries. For decades, the region worked in greenfield territory ? spaces where existing incumbents were only other technology companies or simply did not exist. The advancement of vacuum tubes, defense technologies like radar, and integrated circuits… essentially had no antecedents.

    This new type of disruption is far more pernicious and far more political to boot. Silicon Valley still believes that it exists in a creation world, where it builds new things that create exclusively positive value… Today’s companies are increasingly destroying the value of existing companies to create the next generation of products and services. …we cannot avoid the immediate impact our work has on the rest of the country anymore.

    Apparently offering superior alternatives to existing products and services is not “creation”, and thus bad.

    1. Isn’t this just a variant of the “we don’t make anything any more” whine? That never gets old.

      1. Which is weird because we actually make lots of things. Even if you didn’t count all the assembled things, there’s still a huge number of people, my guess is several percent of the population) involved in making things in small batches at high margin for First World consumption.

        1. Yep. Manufacturing employment is down, but the value of what the US manufactures is way up.

          But efficiency bad! or something.

          1. I’ll be Tony. See, Obama was right about those ATMs.

      2. It’s more of a “the Luddites hate us because we make looms” whine.

    2. Scratch the freelance writer bit, he’s a “contributing” writer and has had a couple management positions at tech firms. “We” is still a bit of a stretch for him, though.

  11. India’s Supreme Court won’t revisit a ruling that recriminalized homosexuality under a colonial-era law.

    They’re too busy with all the gang rapes?

    1. I’m sure there are no gays there, anyway. Like Sochi.

      1. It’s getting close.

        “The number of gays has dropped for years. Every year there have been fewer and fewer … now they have almost all disappeared,” he said, adding that he himself is looking to leave the country.

        During Soviet times, Sochi had gained a reputation for tolerance, especially after it became a top tourism spot at a time when Soviet regulations stipulated that husbands and wives must vacation away from each other and their children.

        The city became the background for many summertime romances among married and unmarried people.

        I find it weird that it used to be something of a gay haven.

        1. when Soviet regulations stipulated that husbands and wives must vacation away from each other and their children.

          But remember, folks: communism is TEH BEST!

    2. I read the original post as ‘Indiana’s Supreme Court’…

      but they probably are too busy with all the gang rapes.

  12. Abdel Malik al-Rahabi, 34, only wants to rejoin his Yemeni family, attend college, teach and start an agricultural business, Yemen Milk and Honey Farms Ltd., attorney David Remes told a review panel whose proceedings, for the first time, were partly open to the public

    There’s his mistake right there. He’s already in the land of milk and honey. Well, not exactly in it. Sorta, quasi-legally in it.

    1. they ruined it with the mint…

    2. Yuck. Though I can’t stand using any sweetened toothpaste anymore after years of using hippy toothpaste (well not too hippy, it does have fluoride).

  13. Question for my American libertarian cousins.

    What’s your take of the GOP’s immigration tinkering? And do you accept, as Huntington posited in Clash of Civilizations (and conservatives in general), that the new immigrants coming from other parts of the world other than Europe simply don’t accept the founding principles of the republic; that is they are more likely to vote liberal democrat?

    1. It’s likely. Some of those people come here looking for better opportunities or a number of other reasons, because their governments are fucked up. Then they push for that same shit that fucked up their home countries.

      It’s like Californistanis spreading to other states to avoid the excessive taxes and regulations only to want to bring that shit to their new home states.

      Now there are plenty of exceptions. Many people who come here having grown up under the oppression of communism are terrified about what they see happening here… it was the same shit happening in their home countries.

    2. It’s as simple as this:
      1) They didn’t follow the rules; and
      2) they don’t assimilate like Europeans do.

      In their minds it just bolsters their cause that the illegals consume a disproportionate level of welfare, don’t speak English very well, ship their money back home, and vote D.

      1. Which are both pretty bad arguments. I don’t follow the rules unless it suits me, so why would I expect the same from anyone else? And Europeans who migrated in large numbers took a good while to assimilate too. And changed the broader culture a lot in the process. Italian food hasn’t always been the center of American cuisine.

    3. Absolutely all anti-immigration rhetoric in our political discourse is reheated leftovers of the arguments that nativists leveled at the Irish, and the Italians, and the Poles, and so on, throughout the 19th century, so it’s a charge I find hard to take seriously.

      1. ^^This

        There’s a letter from Henry Cabot Lodge out there on the interwebs that I’m too lazy to link to. It sounds like it was written by modern conservatives about Latin American immigrants, but it was referring to Southern and Eastern Europeans of a century ago.

        The GOP could go a long way towards disproving the accusations of xenophobia if they would push for some sort of low-cost, easy to obtain guest worker visa and massive expansion of current visas instead of supporting the status quo and bitching about rule breaking.

        1. Exactly. I don’t understand all this DC-driven desire for a “path to citizenship.” I think most of the illegals in the country just want to make enough to support the folks back home, and eventually be able to return to their family and friends once things are good enough to facilitate that.

          Give people renewable work visas that are easy to get. The vast majority will be happy with that and screw the “citizenship”. Indeed, if it is easy enough to travel between countries, lots may even decide its not necessary to have the anchor babies and bring the family to stay (which has such major impact on state and federal budgets, especially schools.)

          1. I don’t understand all this DC-driven desire for a “path to citizenship.

            You can only vote if you’re a citizen, and both Ds and Rs see immigrants as an untapped resource. They just haven’t figured out a way to tap it.

    4. Most native-born Americans don’t accept the founding principles.

      1. Sounds a lot like what we hear up here about Canadian immigration.

        They fall into two broad camps ‘they don’t want to assimilate’ and ‘they respect our values.’

    5. My guess is that most who come here don’t care. When presidential elections can barely get 60% of eligible voters to the polls, I don’t expect a bunch of poor people from non-democratic countries to flock to the polls. And hey, plenty who come here are socially conservative.

      Besides, I’m fine with making it difficult to gain citizenship and thus the privilege to vote.

      As for the broader question about “founding principles”… I mean, these are individuals heading out to a foreign land and going through a lot of trouble to better their own lives and the lives of their families. That’s pretty American.

      Plus, really, Europeans accept the founding principles? They’re going to come here and not vote liberal democrat?

      Final, final note: It doesn’t matter. You don’t get to stop a person from coming here because you’re afraid some other immigrant will vote in a way you don’t like.

    6. I think incentives are the main difference between immigration patterns today and in years past. It’s like the difference between the living standards of a quiet, bookish student looking for a roommate and a crack head with a rundown house full of squatters. There is nothing stopping the open-door policy crack house from attracting quiet, bookish students. But they are unlikely to get any studying done, so they’ll probably avoid it…even if they get to live there for free.

      Over time, if our immigration policy becomes more open while we reward responsibility and productivity less and less, what’s to stop us from turning into the nation-state equivalent of a crack house? And I’m not being racist, I’m just pointing out that the good intentions of an open door policy mean nothing. Incentives mean everything.

      1. And I’m not being racist

        I can only judge your racism by how enthusiatically you fellate Obama. Since you aren’t slobbing his knob, I can only assume that you are, indeed, a racist.

        /prog

  14. So we are battening down the hatches for as many as 12 hours of sub-freezing temperatures and perhaps non-liquid precipitation. Not sure we will survive without eating the neighbor’s dogs. But I have a whole chicken cut into parts to fry tonight, a neck, back, and sweetmeats to turn into a nice stock, and lots of winter vegetables. So as long as the power stays on, we probably won’t die. Probably.

    Of course, this had to happen on my usual work-from-home-Wednesday, instead of giving me an extra day of remote work.

    1. It’s finally above 0 here!

      1. Oh Lord. I’m doing some work for Cook County Jail. One of their guys proposed some onsite meetings last week. I nearly shat myself. Luckily, some co-workers from Nashville fell on that grenade.

      2. Double digits — 11 F right now, but it will drop back to -5 F or so overnight. The good news is that when it warms up tomorrow,it will fucking snow again 😉

        1. Here in the Lowcountry, life has been basically canceled because there might possibly be some ice on the road tonight and tomorrow. I shit you not.

          1. Subaru might not be sexy, but all-wheel drive and decent all-terrain tires means I get to work even in terrible weather.

            1. Excuse me, kinnath, but I will have you know that I most definitely put the sexy in Subaru.

              1. Every reply I come up with results in “this is why there are no female libertarians”, so I will keep my thoughts to my self.

            2. The only weather that ever stopped me from going to work was the ice storm in 2008 that knocked out power to pretty much the whole state and knocked a very large tree down across my dead end road. Snow is not an acceptable excuse to miss work.

              1. 4 inches of fresh powder and 30 mph winds in sub-zero temperatures can easily produce drifts three feet deep that cross the road and that you can’t see until you hit it.

                Best to stay home those days.

                1. We don’t get that. Too many hills and trees.

              2. In the Lowcountry, they just cancel work if it’s gonna freeze.

                I am a nurse practitioner, and all of my patients canceled for tomorrow. The area’s military base is closed. The bridges are closed. The roads are closed. Schools are closed. Because of the possibility of black ice.

                I’m not really complaining. I had a few bottles of Chimay waiting for an excuse to be in my bloodstream.

            3. Subaru might not be sexy

              My wife says that Subaru is in fact sexy. I’m kinda worried now because I told her that there is no way in hell I would ever drive a Subaru unless it was an STi.

              1. Subarus are fucking great cars.

                Just because hippies and chicks with armpit hair made them popular doesn’t mean they aren’t great cars.

                1. Subarus are fucking great cars.

                  Just because hippies and chicks with armpit hair made them popular doesn’t mean they aren’t great cars.

                  Hippies can’t drive this. And true that.

                2. Subarus are fucking great cars.

                  My experience begs to differ. The Last Subaru That I Will Ever Own had monthly repair bills that were about the same as my monthly car payment. The happiest day of my life was when I was able to trade that POS in on an S-10 Blazer (#2 of 5).

                  … Hobbit

                  1. You got a lemon, then. They are usually quite reliable. Though I will say that they are not as good as they used to be. I think about 1992 was their peak of durability and being good in the snow.

      3. Before or after windchill?

        1. I never quote bullshit windchill numbers.

          1. It’s 31 degrees, but it’s NEGATIVE 288 WITH WINDCHILL!

        2. Before. What are you, nuts? My “feels like” is -17.

          1. Nuts? It’s 60 and “feels like” 60 where I am.

            1. Yeah but you know I’m in a polar vortex or whatever. Ain’t gonna be that warm yet.

              1. You have to wonder if Randall Munroe at xkcd feels like he pulled the trigger too early on last Friday’s cartoon about number of sub-zero (F) days in St. Louis. Because I think there are 3 or 4 more coming.

                1. I don’t like it when my nerd humor gets invaded by politics.

              2. Yeah, kinda glad my potential road trip imploded. That would’ve been shitty.

      4. The check out clerk at the grocery tonight told the guy ahead of us to try & stay warm going to the car. The guy–big guy with Carhartt’s on, beer & polish sausage in his cart–said, “Mam, been working out in it all day. Little more probably ain’t gonna kill me.”

        Wanted to shake his hand.

    2. non-liquid precipitation

      OMFG S N O W !!!!!!!!!!

      1. Yes. I’m seeing pictures of the Houston and Austin snowpocalypses (snowpocali?) from friends. The horror.

      2. Wimps, I’ve already gotten close to 70 inches of the stuff at my place including storms of 16 inches and 26 inches back to back while still in December

        1. Listen, people around here can’t drive when there is liquid water on the road, which happens often. Right or wrong, I’m locking it down until after I know if there is any frozen water on the road.

          1. Watching videos of people in the south trying to drive on slippery roads is one of the funniest things ever. Car not going in the direction you want it to? Step on it, what could possibly go wrong.

            1. Yeah, but it’s no different here in Chicago. You’d think that people would have developed an ability to handle snow here, but we were stunned to find out during our first winter here that this isn’t true. Watched a guy go off the road this afternoon while I was driving home.

              Jesus, I moved here from fucking AUSTIN TEXAS and I still drive better in snow and ice than these Obama-loving morons.

              1. Hey! Keep your generalizations to yourself!

                Oh, who am I kidding – that about sums up no less than 95% of our local population.

    3. Schools in my area delayed a couple of hours because it’s cold…

      because it’s cold…

      Now, I could understand if it was like -15 outside. No, was 18. The pussification of america’s youth continues.

      1. Where are you at?

  15. The Pentagon is reviewing very generous pension hikes that have some high-ranking retirees taking in more than they made on the job.

    How generous are you willing to be to get people to leave DC employ?

    1. I’d be VERY generous if I could stipulate the position remains unfilled indefinitely.

    1. AM Links called…

  16. Slate praises Pete Seeger for standing up to HUAC

    Slate commentators go full-on communist apologias when I and others call out Seeger for his support of Stalinism. Seriously:

    Joshua Trujillo

    For the umpteenth time, your intentions DO NOT MATTER. You’ll never achieve peace, equality, and justice through socialism because violence, inequality, and injustice are firmly rooted in the means necessary to achieve the desired results.

    Dr. Bob 17 minutes ago
    @Joshua Trujillo @pi_geek @Ernst Blofeld Yeah…capitalism never does that, because as even “Gangs of New York,” demonstrates, our great cities and industries were built on loving-kindness and mutual cooperation, without the slightest…

    Hey, hang on. That’s not true at all!

    Joshua Trujillo
    Joshua Trujillo 12 minutes ago
    @Dr. Bob @Joshua Trujillo @pi_geek @Ernst Blofeld

    Wake me up when a capitalist economy starves 60 million people.

    Sheesh, pinkos like you are making the most ignorant arguments that have zero sense of proportion and history.

    Dr. Bob 7 minutes ago
    @Joshua Trujillo PINKOS! That is EXCELLENT!!

    a) how many starved during the Irish Potato Famine,

    b) how many starved in Europe during WWI,

    c) how many starved in South Africa under apartheid,

    d) how many kids currently go to bed hungry in this country?

    Your cluelessness about history is hilarious!

    1. A-D is less than 35 million. In fact, probably about 1/3rd if we count all 3M children in this country experiencing government defined “hunger”

      1. And “go to bed hungry” is not “starve to death”. No one in the US has to starve to death.

      2. Perhaps point out that a huge percentage of supposedly “hungry” kids are obese, and that with welfare, food stamps and food banks everywhere, the only possible reason they are going hungry is not due to the government or capitalism, but because someone in the family is not caring for the child, perhaps using all the income and food stamps for drugs. Plus, the number going “hungry” is just a riduculous govenment estimate designed to increase pet project funding, and has little basis in reality.

        1. I make $125,000 a year and my kids qualify as “food insecure” according to the government.

          Now don’t get me wrong, they’ve never missed a meal because I couldn’t afford food in their lives. Never even had to get food from a food bank but yeah because of high expenses we’ve had several instances in the last 6 months where short term liquidity crises have had my wife and I scrambling to come up with money for food

        2. What’s the percentage of obese kids in this country again? Especially low income kids are obese. No kid anywhere at anytime has ever gotten obese because he didn’t have enough food.

    2. Your cluelessness about history is hilarious!

      The projection, it burns.

      1. It always does. You see people starved during the potato famine. So that makes Stalin and Mao killing over a hundred million people totally okay.

        1. No, they would never excuse the “excesses” of communism, they only mean that capitalism isn’t any better because TRIANGLE SHIRTWAIST FACTORY.

        2. Yes, but Stalin and Mao only killed people who deserved it. Or something like that.

    3. And I would dispute (a) and (b) happening under capitalist economies.

      1. IPF, yes a capitalist economy, but not a democratic society.

        WWI is a sticky trap in terms of this argument because it wasn’t a single economy, because war, and many of the actors were not democratic societies.

        1. I think it was Friedman who said capitalism is a necessary condition for freedom, but it’s hardly a sufficient one.

          But again, pinko idiots like the ones I was arguing with are just too dishonest to acknowledge that.

        2. IPF: OK, I can go along with that. Perhaps a better way to put it would be capitalist but not really free trade. I’m pretty sure the British government attempted to control food exports to keep prices low in England (same as they would do during some famines in India later in the century).

          WWI: again, generally agree. But, even most of the democratic states had instituted some form of command-and-control system to fight the war & that distorted the flow of goods.

          So, re-thinking it all, it would probably have been more accurate for me to say capitalist but not really free trade.

        3. IPF was practically feudalist, wasn’t it? Irish land was highly regulated, precluding the kind of market reactions you would see in a more liberalized country.

        4. “IPF, yes a capitalist economy, but not a democratic society.”

          Uh, bullshit, Victorian England was Mercantilist not Capitalist

        5. Indian economist Amartya Sen won a Nobel Prize in Economics because of his study of poverty. And he asserts that there has never been mass starvation in any country that had a democratic government and a free press. “I know of no historical exception.”

          And for the record, the biggest famine ever recorded was the Chinese Famine 1959-1961. 10 to 20 million starved to death, and never mind the tens of millions more who starved without actually dying.

      2. a) how many starved during the Irish Potato Famine,

        1 million.

        The Famine resulted from feudal landlord-tenant arrangements still being enforced against the Irish (the tenant had the duty to pay and the landlord had the duty to not a damn thing), than KKKapitalizms.

        1. No, it was caused by a potato disease.

          1. There was some contemporary Irishman, I forget his name, who wrote something to the effect of “God created the blight, but the English created the famine.”

            I’ll have to pull up some more in-depth info to substantiate that quote.

          2. And the English Corn Laws.

    4. As I said in a thread somewhere here earlier this morning, and mentioned over at Michael Totten’s site in his latest post about visiting Cuba, it’s amazing how many people are willing to become apologists for totalitarian collectivism if it’s perceived as coming from their side of the political aisle.

      It’s also sickening.

      1. As I said in a thread somewhere here earlier this morning, and mentioned over at Michael Totten’s site in his latest post about visiting Cuba, it’s amazing how many people are willing to become apologists for totalitarian collectivism if it’s perceived as coming from their side of the political aisle.

        And I think it’s bullshit.

        I’ve literally never heard a “right-winger” engage in apologia for totalitarianism from a perceived “right-wing” side.

        The only people I’ve seen personally, read in print or on the internet, heard on the radio, or seen on television make defenses of totalitarianism are fucking left-wingers. I repeat for emphasis ONLY.

    5. Apartheid and WWI have nothing to do with Capitalism.

      1. Nor do aristocratic landowners of a colonizing country who were literally rent-seeking with the help of their government.

    6. Wow. Full blown stupidity on full display.

    7. Was that you trolling the AV Club comments?

      1. If so, you’re out there doing the Lord’s work in some of America’s toughest comment sections.

    8. I like the implicit assumption that everything that is not communism must be the fault of capitalism. As if the destruction of a functioning local food economy in Ireland, or WWI was the result of free market capitalism.

      1. EVERYONE KNOWS THAT CAPITALISM IS THE SAME AS THE TSETSE FLY

        ERM, AND SMALLPOX. BECAUSE MONEY

    9. a) how many starved during the Irish Potato Famine,

      b) how many starved in Europe during WWI,

      c) how many starved in South Africa under apartheid,

      This is hilarious! The Irish starved because of British LAWS that made it difficult for them to have food and the Europeans starved because governments destroyed fields in order to murder each other’s citizens.

      Hardly the result of freedom.

      As for c), I don’t even think that many South Africans starved during apartheid. If they did though, that’s the result of a government forcing them to starve.

    10. I also love d. You’re talking about people STARVING TO DEATH and he says ‘children sometimes go to bed hungry.’

    11. What the hell does the Potato Famine, caused by potato blight, WWI, and apartheid have to do with capitalism?

      1. What the hell does the Potato Famine, caused by potato blight, WWI, and apartheid have to do with capitalism?

        Derp.

      2. As Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen points out, there has never been starvation caused by crop failure. Never.

        During Mao’s Great Leap Forward there was actually enough food in government storehouses, where often enough it was left to rot. But crops were confiscated and soldiers would kill anyone caught “food hoarding”, which meant having any food at all that wasn’t “given” by government, (and government wasn’t giving anything).

        The only way anyone could avoid starvation was to “hoard” food and NOT GET CAUGHT. Thus millions starved.

  17. House Republican leaders say they’ll put forward their immigration reform proposals, this week.

    Hispanics apparently aren’t voting GOP no matter what the party does.

    1. I do not know, if President Obama decided to issue a tax cut this year I would not think he was suddenly a friend of small government. And if he did so in response to the GOP House passing a much bigger cut, then I especially would not.

    2. Hispanics apparently aren’t voting GOP no matter what the party does.

      Governor Susana Martinez (R-NM) begs to differ.

      Don’t take the collectivist assumption that “they” are all the same. A lot of Hispanics are quite conservative, especially on abortion and guns.

      … Hobbit

  18. President Obama reportedly plans to announce executive orders hiking the minimum wage for federal contract workers

    Er, what? This is pure Potemkin policy. Come on, even the densest lefties must see through this.

  19. SoCons and School Policy: Map of Schools Where Tax Money Can Go To Teaching Creationism

    http://www.slate.com/articles/…..tives.html

    1. Solution: close public schools.

      1. No disagreement there, but while we have them we should not use them to further any religion.

        1. Re: Bo Cara Esq.

          but while we have them we should not use them to further any religion.

          Like Statism, for instance.

      2. Way to obvious.

    2. If you wanted to create a map with dots all over it, you could call it Tax-funded schools that teach bullshit.

    3. Definitely a violation of the 1A. I laugh every time I hear the term “Constitutional conservative”.

      1. Yes, and from the LP Platform:

        “We oppose government actions which either aid or attack any religion.”

        1. PBP doesn’t acknowledge a party outside the left-right dichotomy. To PBP, everything is within the Party and nothing is outside the Party, and nothing can oppose the Party.

          1. I certainly acknowledge the LP.

            I just refuse to concede that the LP is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the GOP.

            1. With comrades like you, who needs counterrevolutionaries?

        2. LP is conservative?

    4. So, since you, and most of us here don’t think that Creationism has anything to do with science we should curtail the Liberty of those who do?

      Yeah, we should take their Liberty cause they are stooopiid? In what other areas would you curtail individual Liberty because you know better than all the stupid people? Just this one?

      For supposed libertarians, you and the shrieking imbecile sure do seem to hate the idea of religious Liberty.

      1. No one has the “liberty” to force Creationism classes on school children in public schools.

        1. “Palin’s Buttplug|1.28.14 @ 5:20PM|#

          No one has the “liberty” to force Creationism classes on school children in public schools.

          Lots of progressive-liberal anti-economic horseshit though is perfectly Ok – in fact, MANDATED!/[DERP]

          1. Only if you believe the wingnuts who state that Natural Selection is a secular humanist lie from the pit of Hell (Paul Broun, GA Rep and US Senate candidate)

            1. Take federal money out of primary education. Solved.

              What was the problem with that again? NOT ENUF CONTROL!!!

      2. What are you talking about? Opposing the taking of money from people and using it to teach whatever religion the majority picks is somehow to ‘curtail Liberty?’

        Capitalizing the word is no replacement for knowing what it means.

        1. Opposing the taking of money from people and using it to teach whatever religion the majority picks is somehow to ‘curtail Liberty?’

          You play the obtuse poorly, or maybe it isn’t a play. The whole idea of collectivized “education” implies that anyone not in the majority will be forced into something that they do not believe. When the religious are in the minority, you are fine with this because they are stooopiiiid and Establishment Clause!

          What is the Liberty difference? None. Apparently, majorities in these States prefer that which you do not believe.

          How in the fuck is it wrong to force the unreligious to learn about Creationism but OK to force the religious to learn about the Standard Model of the Universe?

          Again, what is the Liberty difference?

          1. “How in the fuck is it wrong to force the unreligious to learn about Creationism but OK to force the religious to learn about the Standard Model of the Universe?”

            Because one is based on scientific evidence, and thus merits inclusion in an educational environment, and the other is based the words of a religious text written thousands of years ago? This is seriously one of the dumbest arguments I’ve ever heard on this site. Obviously, I agree that there shouldn’t be public schools. That said, that doesn’t mean that the most liberty-friendly policy is whatever the majority believes, regardless of its proof or validity. Should we teach common historical myths about history in history class instead of real history (well, to a large extent we already do, but that’s besides the point, because I do not agree with that)? Schools shouldn’t be teaching kids that God doesn’t exist or whatever, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t teach kids accurate science just because some people interpret the Bible in a manner contradicted by modern science.

            1. Because one is based on scientific evidence, and thus merits inclusion in an educational environment, and the other is based the words of a religious text written thousands of years ago?

              You mean like the scientific evidence for AGW? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

              IF you are opposed to public schools, offense at how the majority indoctrinates isn’t selective, especially from a Liberty standpoint.

              I am an atheist. While I do not want my children indoctrinated into the Church of Christianity, I also do not want them indoctrinated into the Church of Rachel Carson or Howard Zinn.

              So I repeat, or you could respond to Gilmore below, how is it different from a Liberty perspective? It isn’t.

              This is seriously one of the dumbest arguments I’ve ever heard on this site.

              Thank you so much. Few things could confirm my views more than your disdain for the same and pathetic attempts to counter them.

              1. “You mean like the scientific evidence for AGW? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA”

                WTF does AGW have to do with this discussion? Am I somehow obligated to support every leftist cause because I disagree with you on this issue? Do you believe the scientific evidence regarding the age of the universe and evolution is no better than the evidence supporting AGW?

                “IF you are opposed to public schools, offense at how the majority indoctrinates isn’t selective, especially from a Liberty standpoint.”

                Could you clarify what you’re saying here? What part of my post was this in response to? What is your point? My offense to this isn’t selective … ???

                “I am an atheist. While I do not want my children indoctrinated into the Church of Christianity, I also do not want them indoctrinated into the Church of Rachel Carson or Howard Zinn.”

                Who said I supported that? What is it with people who think that criticizing one side means I automatically support the equivalent crap pulled by the other side? And while I think Zinn is mostly full of shit, reading him in a history class is nowhere near on the same level as using the Bible as a textbook on biology or geology, although that’s besides the point. I don’t support conservative Christian communities using public schools to indoctrinate kids into their religion, and I also don’t support “progressive” communities using public schools to indoctrinate kids into their bullshit.

                1. So, you only read one comment? Perhaps my characterization of you below is a bit understated.

                  WTF does AGW have to do with this discussion?

                  You mentioned supposed “scientific evidence” against Creationism. While I agree, they also teach the “scientific evidence” of AGW in the classroom. Why again is the teaching of this religion worse than some other?

                  Bo didn’t start the discussion naming another reason for the end of Public indoctrination. Did you read the first Soconz! post? Not a mention of ending public education, just the horror of the wrong kind of indoctrination.

                  The follow up second post is also missing anything about the end of public education. He did agree with the premise, after being challenged, like you have, and then claimed “you can be opposed to all kinds of indoctrination”.

                  Finally, we agree. Under all circumstances, regardless of if I agree or disagree with the premise the public indoctrination of children is wrong.

            2. Because one is based on scientific evidence, and thus merits inclusion in an educational environment, and the other is based the words of a religious text written thousands of years ago?

              You mean like the scientific evidence for AGW? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

              IF you are opposed to public schools, offense at how the majority indoctrinates isn’t selective, especially from a Liberty standpoint.

              I am an atheist. While I do not want my children indoctrinated into the Church of Christianity, I also do not want them indoctrinated into the Church of Rachel Carson or Howard Zinn.

              So I repeat, or you could respond to Gilmore below, how is it different from a Liberty perspective? It isn’t.

              This is seriously one of the dumbest arguments I’ve ever heard on this site.

              Thank you so much. Few things could confirm my views more than your disdain for the same and pathetic attempts to counter them.

      3. This is a simple case of,

        “federal govt spends money on everything = some stuff turns out to be religious – instead of making obvious case that federal spending should get out of that business, idiot proposes that religious stuff be restricted, because constitutions”

        I don’t care that someone, somewhere, believes a bunch of religious creationist horseshit. I do care that the government spends buttloads on shitty education *writ large*, religious OR NOT.

        Which is the greater travesty? I say the spending itself. The fact that some recipients happen to be flat-earth morons is no more upsetting than if some of them are screaming communist fuckwads trying to convince kids that Meat is Rape and Naomi Klein said corporations! and property is theft and economics is lies!!! and many other wonderful things I recall having some taxpayer-paid, ‘never had a real job’-teacher throw my way during high school.

        1. Thank you Gimore. You made the point I was trying to make about a hundred times more eloquently. My compliments.

        2. Meat is Rape and Naomi Klein said corporations!

          I can not think of a compliment that does this justice.

          +infinity

        3. Well said. Thank you.

          … Hobbit

        4. “Which is the greater travesty? I say the spending itself.”

          I agree with that, but that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t care at all about how public schools are run or what is taught in them. If the government is going to steal taxpayer money for schools, then I would prefer they do not use the schools to indoctrinate kids into a particular religion, or feed them the leftist bullshit you describe. One can oppose both forms of indoctrination.

          1. ” If the LOCAL government is going to steal taxpayer money for schools, then I would prefer…”

            “..they use that money to serve the local taxpayer interests rather than some federally mandated dogma”.

            FTFY

            you don’t like it? move somewhere they locals agree with your brand of bullshit. Let the marketplace of ideas win rather than the government pick winners and losers.

            1. OR = caveat – let there be tax deductions for spending on private education of your choice. as with 529s re: higher ed.

          2. in case any idiot comes forth pronouncing me a nihilist for rejecting the notions of top-down mandated content in educational curricula, please understand: I like schools, and think what schools do well is make kids WORK. at WHAT they work is usually less important than HOW.

            for an example of a more ‘how-based’ idea of an primary education-template, see the Essential Schools concept (just one of a variety of educational reform concepts):

            the nugget of which might be,

            “Asking questions as a way of organizing content also serves to strengthen students’ sense of their own authority over the content“…

            …versus, digesting certain content mandated by the teacher and getting the right ‘answer’ already being fed to them.

            http://www.essentialschools.org/resources/122

            by the way, another useful and interesting read is Bloom’s book “The Closing of the American Mind”, which I think is pertinent

          3. that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t care at all about how public schools are run or what is taught in them

            Science, you are a scumbag. I probably don’t disagree a bit with you about what should be taught. You are simply a sick totalitarian fuck believing that your beliefs hold more importance because of scientific consensus.

            Liberty, you turd, includes the Liberty to be stupid religious morons. Only the most evil human beings would deny people their freedom of conscience. Stalin and Mao come to mind.

  20. Dinesh S’Souza launders $20,000 into a failed Senate campaign and it is a felony. When the Obama campaign was caught hiding over $1 million in excess donations, it merely was fined.

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2…..-magazine/

    But we are not seeing the emergence of fascism or anything. Nope.

    1. It’s not illegal for the president to do it…

      /Nixon

    2. Fascism is government control of economic policy, with the capital remaining nominally under private ownership; usually, ethnic nationalism is mixed in.

      Say what you want about Obama going after Dinesh D’Souza — I wouldn’t quibble with saying it goes against the rule of law as opposed to the rule of man. But I don’t think it has anything to do with fascism.

      1. Fascism is not just economic. At its heart it is the politicization of the state so that its power can be used to crush dissent.

        This is fascism. Yes, that is a species of rule by man. But using the state to crush your opposition is the fascist variety of that.

        1. Other aspects of fascism include military supremacy, racism, nationalism, sexism, xenophobia,adherence to overt religiosity, and election rigging (all recent trends in the GOP).

          1. Other aspects of fascism include personality cults, overt religiosity (to the state), redistributive policies (in the name of fairness), dehumanization of all opponents (they’re all hateful), conflation of society and state (you want granny to die if you try to cut one penny of spending), and the use of mild offense as a weapon to delegitimate the opposition (microaggressions). Sounds quite like the modern left, doesn’t it?

            1. Shreek is a fascist. It is how he rolls.

          2. Re: Palin’s Buttwipe,

            adherence to overt religiosity

            Yes, Statism.

            and election rigging

            Acorn.

          3. adherence to overt religiosity

            That isn’t fascism.

  21. A major British politician is advocating the legalization of handguns:

    Hand guns should be legalised and licensed, Nigel Farage has said. The Ukip leader says the ban on the guns, which were made illegal in the wake of the Dunblane shooting, was a “kneejerk” reaction and should be lifted

    1. He wants children shot? If the law saves just one future tennis star…

    2. Ukip tops Independent on Sunday poll as the nation’s favourite party

      http://www.independent.co.uk/n…..69625.html

    3. That clinches it. I don’t like his immigration stuff more than the next libertarian, but he’s still the best Britain’s got by far.

  22. Great Caesar’s Ghost
    The annual State of the Union pageant is a hideous, dispiriting, ugly, monotonous, un-American, un-republican, anti-democratic, dreary, backward, monarchical, retch-inducing, depressing, shameful, crypto-imperial display of official self-aggrandizement and piteous toadying, a black Mass during which every unholy order of teacup totalitarian and cringing courtier gathers under the towering dome of a faux-Roman temple to listen to a speech with no content given by a man with no content, to rise and to be seated as is called for by the order of worship ? it is a wonder they have not started genuflecting ? with one wretched representative of their number squirreled away in some well-upholstered Washington hidey-hole in order to preserve the illusion that those gathered constitute a special class of humanity without whom we could not live.

    It’s the most nauseating display in American public life ? and I write that as someone who has just returned from a pornographers’ convention.

    It’s worse than the Oscars….

  23. How Canadians spend their f’ing time:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swF04IwhBWw#t=40

    1. They sit on the chesterfields in their tuques eating Kraft dinner, right?

      1. And watching SCTV reruns and Hockey Night in Canada.

        Fuck I hate Kraft dinner. I have to make it for kid from time to time and it nauseates me. I even offer to make it home-style the smell sickens me so.

    1. “These predators are not that fast or particularly smart, a bird expert told Fears, so the doves managed to break free, while only losing some feathers in the scuffle.”

      Maybe that’s a *good* omen.

  24. Breaking: New Climate Data Rigging Scandal Rocks US Government
    A newly-uncovered and monumental calculating error in official US government climate data shows beyond doubt that climate scientists unjustifiably added on a whopping one degree of phantom warming to the official “raw” temperature record. Skeptics believe the discovery may trigger the biggest of all “climate con” scandals in Congress and sound the death knell on American climate policy.

    Independent data analyst, Steven Goddard, today (January 19, 2014) released his telling study of the officially adjusted and “homogenized” US temperature records relied upon by NASA, NOAA, USHCN and scientists around the world to “prove” our climate has been warming dangerously.

    Goddard reports, “I spent the evening comparing graphs?and hit the NOAA motherlode.” His diligent research exposed the real reason why there is a startling disparity between the “raw” thermometer readings, as reported by measuring stations, and the “adjusted” temperatures, those that appear in official charts and government reports. In effect, the adjustments to the “raw” thermometer measurements made by the climate scientists “turns a 90 year cooling trend into a warming trend,” says the astonished Goddard….

    1. Ron Bailey has been putting that graph up monthly since forever. He will be crushed to learn the top men have been lying. They were wearing lab coats for God’s sake. How can this be?

      1. These are noble lies, as their motives are pure. These lies are also your fault for not giving them the power over you they deserve.

      2. Actually, the Christie dataset Ron posts is satellite data and independent of the ground stations that USHCN/NOAA report here. I consider the ground stations thoroughly discredited by more creditable people who have already reported similar adjustments to raw data — this isn’t breaking news to anyone who’s been reading Tony Watts.

      3. I don’t think those are the same datasets. His data comes from Roy Spencer, who is decidedly skeptical of AGW.

    2. But…but…intentions. And, look, over there!

    3. I’m not sure that data can be called a trend just because you can draw a fit to it in Excel, but that’s essentially my argument to the warming crowd as well. You can fit a small part of a sinusoidal function to a line, but that doesn’t make it the trend.

  25. Democratic Senators file amicus brief in Hobby Lobby case

    Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, a Democratic senator who led the amicus brief effort, is planning to criticize Huckabee and other Republican opponents of the mandate in remarks on the Senate floor tomorrow announcing the brief.

    “Allowing a woman’s boss to call the shots about her access to birth control should be inconceivable to all Americans in this day and age, and takes us back to a place in history when women had no voice or choice,” Murray will say, according to prepared remarks provided by her staff.

    The case is the second big challenge to President Barack Obama’s signature legislative achievement to reach the Supreme Court in two years. The government fought back a challenge to the heart of the health care law, the individual mandate, in a split decision authored by Justice John Roberts in 2012. One of the lawyers who argued against the individual mandate then, Paul Clement, has joined Hobby Lobby’s legal team.

    Meanwhile, cases brought by dozens of religiously affiliated nonprofits against the birth control mandate are also likely to reach the Supreme Court soon. Last week, the justices ruled that a nonprofit group of Catholic nuns does not need to comply with the mandate while their legal challenge is pending.

    Yes Patty, this totally means women can’t get the pill

    1. You know who actually controls my “access” to birth control pills, bitch? YOU DO. Smash the FDA, bitch, and shut the fuck up.

      1. This is why there are no female libertarians….

        1. I know. We’re all anarchists.

          1. Nice.

    2. Allowing a woman’s boss to call the shots about her access to birth control should be inconceivable to all Americans in this day and age, and takes us back to a place in history when women had no voice or choice,”

      The obvious solution is for her to go back to the kitchen, where she calls her own shots!

    3. Has anyone met any actual, authentic people who believe that not mandating that employers pay for birth control means that women cannot access birth control? I mean, it’s so obviously, demonstrably ridiculous that I have difficulty believing there’s anyone who takes it seriously. I used to pay for a girlfriend’s birth control (while I was in college) and it came to $25 a month. Now, I’m willing to believe that there is some subset of women who can’t afford $25 a month, probably less than one percent, but I’ll be generous and say it’s 5 (I’ll retract this entire comment if someone finds research suggesting that $25 a month is an unconscionable burden for more than a third of women, or something).

      If we’re talking about a measure that affects at most 2.5% of the population, then it’s inexcusable to talk about it like some great national crisis. But of course, even that assumes that the pill is the only method of birth control available. $10-$15 can get you enough condoms for a month (depending on how often you use them, of course). Is that too much? Most clinics give the damn things away for free.

      So where is this woman who is being denied access to birth control? Because even sans-mandate, I see very little reason to believe she even exists.

      1. I am morally obligated to note (FUCK THE AMA AND FDA) that in addition to the relatively small monthly fee for the pill, you must take into account the cost of the annual doctor visit necessary to get a prescription, which without insurance could easily run you a few hundred bucks, etc etc, no I do not support any part of PPACA, etc etc.

        1. Is there a medical reason that the pill is a prescription drug? Or is for cultural/social reasons?

          1. The pill is not the pill; there are many different kinds. I’m not sure if that’s the reason they’re prescription only, or just the excuse.

          2. There are reasons for some people to avoid some formulations of the pill and it’s probably wiser to have a doctor help you find the right formula and dosage, but it’s really not necessary for an annual top up once you’ve found the right one.

            It’s frequently argued that doctors like the requirement because they can get more people in for an annual checkup, but I have no way of evaluating that claim.

            1. It’s frequently argued that doctors like the requirement because they can get more people in for an annual checkup, but I have no way of evaluating that claim.

              Incentives.

        2. For you youngsters, there used to be a time when pharmacists were doctors for a reason. You didn’t have to see an MD for minor things. A perfect example was cough syrup; everyone knows that an MD can do nothing for a cold. However, a pharmacist could sell you codeine cough syrup based upon his assessment. Birth control could easily be the same way.

          … Hobbit

      2. If there are women who can’t afford $25 a month then they should be fucking AND getting paid for it.

        1. Keep yo pimp hand strong!

      3. “Has anyone met any actual, authentic people who believe that not mandating that employers pay for birth control means that women cannot access birth control?”

        All over my Facebook!

  26. SoCons and Schools, Part Two: Daily Beast Article Describes Religion in a Louisiana Public School

    “‘Paintings of Jesus Christ, Bible verses, and Christian devotional phrases adorn the walls of many classrooms and hallways, including the main hallway leading out to the bus pick-up area. A lighted, electronic marquee placed just outside the building scrolls Bible verses every day.’

    Those sparkling electronic bible verses help students follow along as ‘staff members routinely lead students in Christian prayer’ and “also distribute religious literature to students.

    But if you aren’t religious, or if you aren’t a Christian, don’t worry. The school’s overt emphasis on religion?and on one religion in particular?is all perfectly legitimate and lawful under the Constitution and the First Amendment. Just ask the superintendent of schools in the parish, Sara Ebarb, who has said, ‘[t]his is the Bible Belt’ and who asked the parents of a Buddhist student recently if he ‘has to be raised Buddhist’ or if he could ‘change’ his faith and suggested to them that he should transfer to a school where ‘there are more Asians.’

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/a…..roats.html

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/a…..roats.html

    1. We have about a million tons of Prog nonsense taught in every school in America. And oh by the way, we spend hundreds of billions of dollars for an education system that produces generally crummy results.

      But you really put all that in perspective Bo. All of that pales compared to the horror that a bunch of people I don’t know in a place I will never visit much less live maybe have read the bible in their local school.

      My God, we need get right on this.

      1. You have to give credit where it’s due though, John. This is clearly a fucked up case, based on the info presented.

        1. But this is a “Christian nation!!!” :rolleyes:

          I’m as evangelical as they get, and I think that these folks need to band together and start a low-cost private school if they want religious curriculum.

        2. It is totally fucked up. But the case in New York where the principle was stealing all of the money and the kids had no textbooks was pretty fucked up. Our entire public education system is fucked up.

          But think of it this way. If I had my way there would be no public education system and these people would be getting vouchers to spend on any school they wanted for their kids. And I bet you they would be sending them to a school that taught the bible. Given that I would be perfectly fine with that since I view the education of children a fundamental right of parenthood, why should I really give a shit about this?

          1. You say below that the only problem is that it wastes taxpayer dollars, and I disagree. That’s a problem, for sure. But it’s also a problem because this right here–yeah, this stupid, stupid shit–is what people fight over. And on top of that, it’s actually wrong and fucked up. Yes, of course my response is simply that these kids should all be privately educated, but an important part of why I think that is: take away the shit people fight about, because you don’t have to share it in common and fight about it. It is an ugly thing in the world to have a “public servant” basically suggest to you that your kid is going to be proselytized to in a school he is legally obligated to attend, unless you can afford significant additional expenditure. Ugly.

            Anyway I’m not saying it needs to be at the top of your list. But kids and religion–that’s shit people flip out about.

            1. People only fight about this because force everyone to go to the public schools and pay for them whether they go there or not. That is the only reason anyone who is just not a busybody cares about this.

              To me this case is an argument for ending the public education system rather than some huge indictment of the people involved. Make it so people are free to educate their kids as they like without anyone else having suffer for it by being forced to be in the same school and this stuff ceases to matter.

              In fairness, I think you probably agree with that.

              1. Yes, I completely agree. I just think that’s why it’s not-unimportant: because it is an argument against public education in toto.

              2. “To me this case is an argument for ending the public education system rather than some huge indictment of the people involved.”

                No, you just want to take money from me and Nikki to be used to educate other people’s children.

                That’ll solve it.

          2. “Our entire public education system is fucked up.”

            So we should not criticize any particular example of it?

            “If I had my way there would be no public education system and these people would be getting vouchers to spend on any school they wanted for their kids.”

            Why would you take my money to give to my neighbor as a voucher to be used for his kid’s education? How about instead we have no public schools and let everyone pay the tuition of their own kid’s education.

            1. Why would you take my money to give to my neighbor as a voucher to be used for his kid’s education? How about instead we have no public schools and let everyone pay the tuition of their own kid’s education.

              Because we have an interest in making sure that people can afford to educate their kids. In the end doing that requires that we restrain ourselves and let parents raise kids as they want even though they are getting some tax money to do that. Now for someone as hate filled, nasty and in love with control as you are, restraint is going to be difficult. But I am optimistic you will find something better to do than go to bed at night worrying that someone in Louisiana might be teaching their kids something you disagree with. It will be tough for you. But I think you might make it.

              1. “Because we have an interest in making sure that people can afford to educate their kids. ”

                ‘We?’ ‘People’?

                That is collectivist twaddle. I have an interest in educating the kids I have or choose to help, not the ones you and a majority of voters use force to make me support.

                “Now for someone as hate filled, nasty and in love with control as you are”

                My Lord, the projection. Look at your cursing fits and attacks throughout this conversation, and your collectivist nonsense. It speaks for itself.

                1. Bo.

                  Your concern trolling how now become comedy. It was a nice act for a bit. But when you started calling any form of education “collectivist twaddle” you jumped the shark.

                  I give you credit, you are better troll than shreek. But you haven’t quite perfected your act. There are real ancaps on here. You are not one of them and any claims that you are or are in any way such a doctrinaire libertarian that you reject the concept of any government spending on education is laughable and even more insulting than the things you usually post.

                  FAIL

                  Go back and reread your trolling manuals.

                  1. “you started calling any form of education “collectivist twaddle” you jumped the shark.”

                    Any form of education where you compel me and others to pay for the education of those I do not wish to.

                    Are you so hopelessly a statist you cannot even imagine education without you stealing money from me?

                    1. Any form of education where you compel me and others to pay for the education of those I do not wish to.

                      Lets get a count of everyone on here who believes you actually think that. And further, even if you did, the mere fact that they are spending tax dollars on education at all should be outrageous to you. Therefore, what these people are doing is no more or less outrageous than anything else. It is all in your view stealing from you.

                      You might want to think about the logical implications of arguments and how they relate to arguments you have previously made before you pull them out of your ass and spew them on here.

                      Just a suggestion. But consistency and thoughtfulness are really not your strong suits.

                    2. John, if you have any evidence in my months of posting here that I support public schools you are free to offer it.

                      On the other hand we know you support taking money from me and others and giving it to other people to use towards their kid’s educations, you have just said so, that you got called out as a statist for that on a libertarian website should not shock you.

                      “even if you did, the mere fact that they are spending tax dollars on education at all should be outrageous to you.”

                      If you look at this thread I said early on this would be (yet another) good reason to end public schools altogether.

                      Your logic fails: a policy could violate the LP Platform in more than one way. For example, schools should be privatized and government should not aid religion, in this case both occur and both deserve denouncing. You act like only the former can, which is of course ridiculous.

                    3. Here is an easy way to see my last point: take something like the ‘faith based’ federal welfare programs Bush and then Obama operated. To a Libertarian you can object that such programs should not exist at all because they involve ‘positive rights’ which violate the rights of others and one can point out they are wrong because they aid religion over non-religion. There is no problem with pointing out any of the above.

        3. Red Tony cannot stand for any criticism of his beloved GOP.

          1. We know. You would murder these people and anyone else not in the hive, you fascist retard.

        4. No, John is an admitted conservative Republican who only wants libertarians to complain about what conservative Republicans think is wrong, so this case troubles him not.

          Of course an analogous case with a leftist school official treating a poor kid who thought differently this way would cause him to curse and denounce the official, but in this case his political allies are doing it, so it is OK.

          1. Except that I never said it was okay. I just said you are a half wit concern troll who points out number 1 million on the list of 100 million public school outrages and pretends it is some big deal.

            1. Again, if this were an analogous case with a leftist school official and a kid from a conservative family you would be howling at the moon.

              Partisanship and Team thinking is a sad thing to behold.

              1. Again, if this were an analogous case with a leftist school official and a kid from a conservative family you would be howling at the moon.

                Yeah, of course. That is why you can find all of these examples of me doing that.

                You won’t and cant. But don’t let the facts get in the way of your concern trolling.

                1. Are you telling me you have expressed no anger at insane leftist school policies like this?

                  Incredible, John.

                  1. No Bo, I don’t spend my time concern trolling about shit that everyone knows to be true.

                    1. Among other things, you seem to have no concept of ‘concern trolling.’ Pointing out a violation of the NAP and the LP Platform on a libertarian website is ‘concern trolling.’

                      Of course it is your response that is classic concern trolling. ‘I know this is messed up, but it is not as bad as X.’

                    2. Pointing out a violation of the NAP and the LP Platform on a libertarian website is ‘concern trolling’.

                      Hilarious. Above you don’t say, public schools force the minority to pay to learn that which they don’t believe, you said SOCONZ!

                      So now your entire posting is about how you are opposed to public schools? In neither of your original posts did you say the words “this is simply another reason to end public education” or anything of the sort. It wasn’t until you were challenged that you even mentioned ending public education. Now you are a Libertarian defending the right not to have people taxed for other people’s children’s educations?

                      Moving the goal posts is dishonest arguing, but you probably knew that already. Why have you not responded to Gilmore’s post above? Oh, yeah, I already answered my own question.

      2. Chill, Red Tony. It’s possible to be critical of all forms of indoctrination at the same time.

        1. Go fuck yourself Jordan. It possible to not to care how people choose to raise their kids. You only object to “indocrination” because you are a stupid fuck you thinks freedom only applies to people who do things you like.

          The only complaint about this is that it is wasting tax dollars. And well, yeah that is a problem. But it is not like it is very high on the most wasteful list.

          Serious, why do you care how people you don’t know raise their kids? I don’t. Maybe you should try fascism. I think it might fit your nature better.

          1. You only object to “indocrination” because you are a stupid fuck you thinks freedom only applies to people who do things you like.

            Mind reading fallacy. A Tony special.

            Serious, why do you care how people you don’t know raise their kids?

            I don’t, as long as I’m not forced to pay for it. We all know what your reaction would be if students were required to pray toward Mecca or to study Das Kapital.

            1. I don’t, as long as I’m not forced to pay for it.

              Go back and read my post only this time try comprehending it you smug fuck. I never said it wasn’t a waste of money. I just said is is so small that it is not worth caring about.

              You only care because it is an excuse to fight KULTURE WAR you lame ass concern trolling aside.

              1. I never said it wasn’t a waste of money. I just said is is so small that it is not worth caring about.

                Serious, why do you care how people you don’t know raise their kids? I don’t. Maybe you should try fascism. I think it might fit your nature better.

                You only care because it is an excuse to fight KULTURE WAR you lame ass concern trolling aside.

                Mind reading fallacy. A Tony special.

                1. No Jordan, I can’t read your mind. I don’t have to. You are the one who got your hate fundies groove on not me.

                  And as we say above, this is an indictment of public schools. It is not really a culture war issue, which means it really shouldn’t be of interest to you.

                  1. “You are the one who got your hate fundies groove on not me.”

                    Really? Jordan just said ‘Chill, Red Tony. It’s possible to be critical of all forms of indoctrination at the same time’ and then faced a string of cursing attacks from you. It seems more like you had an emotional reaction to criticism of socons rather than Jordan was ‘getting his hate fundies groove on.’

              2. That is right, only NAP violations that John has certified as reaching the threshold he deems warranting of criticism should get them, and he has deemed this one not sufficient!

  27. Steven Glass cannot become a lawyer because he’s a liar

    I figured he’d fit right in. Or maybe he’s just not as skilled at being a liar as required to be a lawyer.

    Court says, “A lawyer’s good moral character is essential for the protection of clients and for the proper functioning of the judicial system itself.”

    Someone said that with a straight face? Wow. Give this man a job in Congress… or hell, make him President!

    1. You don’t understand

      You have to be a GOOD liar to be a lawyer.

  28. “President Obama reportedly plans to announce executive orders hiking the minimum wage for federal contract workers

    OMG! Handing out moar of other people’s money to unionized politically connected employees!? THE BOLDNESS! THE LEADERSHIP!

    1. And how many ‘federal contract workers’ are actually getting minimum wage now?

      I bet somewhere close to none.
      In some cases, though, they’re unionized hacks who are paid based off of some multiple of min-wage, so this is just another fucking of the AMERICAN TAX-PAYER.

  29. First Chinese-Taiwan Government Meeting Set, Daily Reports

    China and Taiwan officials set a date for talks next month, the United Daily News reported today, paving the way for the first official government-to-government meetings since a civil war six decades ago.

    The head of Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council, Wang Yu-chi, will meet with the head of China’s Taiwan Affairs Office, Zhang Zhijun, on Feb. 16 in the mainland city of Nanjing, the Taipei-based newspaper reported, citing an unidentified person. Nanjing was China’s capital before the civil war forced Chiang Kai-shek’s Kuomintang Party to flee to Taiwan in 1949, ceding power to Mao Zedong’s Communists. Taiwan and the mainland have been governed separately since then, with the island’s constitution retaining the Republic of China’s name and territorial claims.

    “The meeting is a considerable breakthrough because this is the first time that two government officials are going to meet in their formal capacities, representing a certain level of mutual recognition,” said Joseph Cheng, a political science professor at the City University of Hong Kong.

  30. From Rand Paul’s Twitter feed:

    Senator Rand Paul ?@SenRandPaul 7m

    I want to hear from you: what do you want to hear in my #SOTU response? Tweet #RandResponds with your suggestions.

    1. I want him to conspicuously drink bottled water.

    2. Is this like the ‘Independents’ 2 minute hate?

    3. “Mr. President, the majority of inhabitants of our prisons are nonviolent drug offenders. We incarcerate more people than any country in the world. What do you think we can do about that?”

    4. I want to hear him say that the government does things “because fuck you, that’s why”.

      1. Hasn’t he said that already?

  31. YAY new POLI?A!

    It came out in October, but I finally got around to buying it. Channy is now among my top two ladies.

      1. Give it a listen. You won’t be disappointed. But if you are, I promise you a full refund.

        1. Sorry, I tried, but techno(?) isn’t my thing. Thank you for the prompt refund.

    1. Dark Star is a funky song.

      1. Our work internet blocks YouTube, so I can’t see this. Is this a version of the Dark Star, as in GD? I’m guessing so by your posting name.

        1. No neither a GD or Mike Oldfield cover…

        2. No. Just a surprisingly good band from Minnesota.

    2. I like this record (and the last one) a lot.

      1. Me too! But Shulamith is, for me at least, superior.

  32. Rawstory even lies about what Bill Maher says.

    In a post on Tuesday on his blog, “Real Time” host Bill Maher warned Republicans not to think that New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R)’s Bridgegate scandal is going to blow over and leave the outspoken governor unscathed.

    The closing of the George Washington Bridge, he warned, is not going to turn out to be another faux-scandal that evaporates upon close scrutiny like “the birth certificate, the New Black Panthers, Fast and Furious, Solyndra, Pigford, anything Eric Holder ever did and that time Kathleen Sebelius violated the Hatch Act.”

    You can see what he actually said here:

    That’s right. Bill Maher isn’t even partisan enough for Rawstory.

    1. Their sarcasm detector on the fritz?

      1. Yeah, I guess they read the sarcastic title of the post and just assumed he didn’t say what he intended to say. So they improved it.

        1. Wow, it wasn’t even sarcasm, it was a plague-on-both-your-houses rant on how we ought to be discussing substance and not throwing accusations at each other. And they took this as *endorsing* their Republican-baiting?

          1. I would never EVER read Bill Maher, so don’t try to trick me into doing it.

            Bastard!

  33. Tax-dodging corporations are hurting our children!

    Imagine sending your child to kindergarten in a school district that is in such a budget crisis, her school no longer has a library, or an arts program, or music classes, or a science teacher. To save money, her classes have been cut to a half day.

    Now, imagine that a $5 billion food distribution company plans to build a warehouse in your town. The company expects to generate $460 million in annual sales from this location alone. Tax revenues from these sales would strengthen your community and restore funding to the schools.

    But this dream scenario becomes a nightmare when you discover that your state and town will give this corporation millions of dollars in tax breaks instead. By the time your kindergartner graduates from high school, this company still won’t be paying its full share of taxes to your community.

    This is not just a bad dream. This is what’s happening right now in Montgomery, New York. Whole Foods’ largest supplier of natural and organic foods, United Natural Foods, Inc. (UNFI), is slated to receive at least $17.6 million in state and local tax breaks while it serves the expansion of Whole Foods’ footprint in New York City. And as UNFI receives tax write-offs and road and utility improvements in Montgomery, local residents have just been handed a property tax rate increase of 16.6 percent.

    1. paying its full share of taxes to your community

      Translation: however much I think they should pay.

      1. Should you be surprised? Look at who the author is.

      2. But, um, won’t the presence of the company lead to major economic benefits in other ways? Like many employed locals who pay income taxes and the property taxes? Boosts for local businesses who supply the needs of the company and its employees? And perhaps the business might even make regular large donations to the school system, like so many local major corporations always do?

        No, the company should not be permitted to have the tax breaks, that brought the damn company there in the first place over other potential sites. Would you prefer they’d never come at all? And then there would be no taxes at all, dimwit. Plus, no one is “giving” them anything, they are just “taking” a little less than normal.

        I know the State of New York wants this, because I see their commercials on The Independents.

      3. Hmmm, I thought tax breaks meant they are not paying as much in taxes, not nothing at all in taxes. And it’s a far cry from a subsidy.

    2. Corporatism? Never heard of it.

      Nah, this is the unfettered free-market at work.

    3. Ok, so no tax break, UNFI or whatever corporation doesn’t expand into your area…and then what exactly?

    4. Tax revenues from these sales would strengthen your community and restore funding to the schools.

      Because that’s all government does. It is a kind, caring nanny that wants the best for the children.

      Government is Mary freakin’ Poppins. And I’m the Pope. Now kiss the ring.

      local residents have just been handed a property tax rate increase of 16.6 percent.

      Property taxes pay for the local schools. Why do you not want the chillunz to have 16.6% more education?

      1. As if the property taxes wouldn’t rise anyway.

  34. Oh, also I got my drone t-shirt from the reason fundraiser in the mail yesterday, so I’m just waiting for a warm enough day to start wearing it around and annoying my friends.

    1. Yeah, I got my “classic black” shirt yesterday, along with the drug war vid.

      Which I’ll watch in the unlikely event I’m not pissed enough about things.

    2. Got mine too, I’m also looking forward to it being warm enough to embarrass my wife with. Fortunately Houston should provide that weather within a couple of days.

  35. Ask republicans directly, “How much sex is too much sex?”

    However, I have one major problem with it. It seems the terms are ill-defined. We are a nation of quantifiers. When we say we control our eating or drinking, we mean we drink no more than X number of drinks or eat no more than X number of calories. We need to apply the same standard to the issue of “controlling their libidos”. Huckabee says he wants to have a discussion about whether or not women are in control or whether they need to be treated like a bunch of worthless slags. Okay. But we need to know: How do you tell a controlled libido from an uncontrolled one? We need to define our terms.

    How about, sex that you have to have someone else pay for? That sound like a good line, you obtuse harpy?

    1. That’s also like, the exact opposite of what Huckabee actually said. He said Democrats were the ones acting like government needed to be involved in “control[ling] their libido,” not that he thought the government should be involved in that. The implication, in fact, was that he does not.

      1. What did Huckabee say? I am not surprised the feminists were too stupid to understand what he meant.

        1. It wasn’t what you would call an awesome or genius quote. But this is it:

          “If the Democrats want to insult women by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it,” he said. “Let us take this discussion all across America because women are far more than the Democrats have played them to be.”

          1. It infuriates me that we now have to defend fucking Huckabee. My god, how far off the reservation are these kooks when Huckabee is the sane one?

            1. Coeus, dude, I know…I know…

            2. Pretty far. You guys think Shreek and Tony are sock puppets. They probably are. But they might as well be real. These people have gone insane.

          2. It is not genius in the sense that it just states the obvious. He told the truth. No wonder the feminists are angry.

      2. The comments on that article are even more obtuse. They’ve got their talking points, and it appears that they actually can’t read anything that contradicts them. Their eyes just glaze over. It’s like that slate article which said that the vast majority of conservatives aren’t against birth control.

      3. This is not the first time Huckabee has ranted about government-mandated birth control coverage. He called it evidence of “a nation that has lost its morals.” He complained that “since you want me out of your bedroom, I just don’t know why I have to pay for what happens in there.” He has even deemed it a factor in the Sandy Hook mass killings by helping remove God from the “public square.”

        He’s been hopping mad about it for two years.

        Funny story: in 2005, Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee signed a law mandating Arkansas insurance plans provide contraception coverage, including church-affiliated organizations such as hospitals and universities.

        Nine years ago, Huckabee thought that the government should ensure that everyone had access to contraception. In fact, as the Los Angeles Times detailed in 2012, all sorts of Republicans were happily embracing contraception coverage mandates in the days of Bush and Clinton.

        http://freakoutnation.com/2014…..president/

        1. Because the ad hominem fallacy is totally not a fallacy. I mean if Huckabee did that, he is wrong here.

          Wow you are a fucking retard.

          1. I thought this was an example of tu quoque rather than ad hominem.

            1. I was pointing out that the Huckster is a fucking hypocrite but you probably already knew that.

              1. A politician, in other words. Because expedience is the only virtue politicians know.

              2. I was pointing out that the Huckster is a fucking hypocrite but you probably already knew that.

                See my comment above.

            2. Damn. I guess I need to refresh before posting anything.

          2. That’s actually a tu quoque fallacy but whatever.

    2. Ask Democrats directly, “How much income is too much?”

      Or “How much home is too much?”

      1. A guy at work told me $250,000/year is enough for anybody. Not to state the obvious, but him and I have serious disagreements about morality and government.

  36. Get rid of rules, get rid of bullies oxygen.

    http://blogs.babycenter.com/mo…..at-recess/

    1. The implications are profound.

  37. Ah, when bank execs pay bonuses out, fin du monde! But when green execs do it…silence!

    http://www.torontosun.com/2014…..bankruptcy

  38. Disney channel sitcom introduces first-ever gay couple in the form of two lesbians

    After it was announced over the summer that the family-friendly show Good Luck Charlie will feature a character with two lesbian moms on an upcoming episode, the the groundbreaking episode aired on Sunday, Jan. 26?the same night as the 56th Annual Grammy Awards.
    In the storyline, parents Amy and Bob Duncan (played by Leigh-Allyn Baker and Eric Allan Kramer) set up a playdate for their preschooler Charlie (Mia Talerico) with one of her new pals, who happens to have two mothers (TV Guide was first to report the news in June).

    While there are certainly a number of both gay and lesbian couples featured on TV today, the kiddie channel took extra care before deciding to introduce the very first same sex couple on the network.
    “This particular storyline was developed under the consultancy of child development experts and community advisors,” a Disney Channel spokesperson told TV Guide in a statement in June. “Like all Disney Channel programming, it was developed to be relevant to kids and families around the world and to reflect themes of diversity and inclusiveness.”

    So much gayness on Sunday night. How did the world not end in fire?

    1. Bert and Ernie have been gay lovers for decades.

      1. And cousins…Kinky!

          1. Odd. I remember when there was push for them to get married people had responded with “no wait they’re cousins” but it seems that was just idle speculation

            Sesame Workshop Statement on Bert and Ernie Petitions
            August 11, 2011 at 9:00am

            Bert and Ernie are best friends. They were created to teach preschoolers that people can be good friends with those who are very different from themselves.

            Even though they are identified as male characters and possess many human traits and characteristics (as most Sesame Street Muppets? do), they remain puppets, and do not have a sexual orientation.

            1. Elmo was the only muppet with a sexual orientation.

              To quote Ron & Fez:

              Show me on the under-aged boy where the puppet touched you.

              1. Wait, Miss Piggy and Kermit the Frog don’t have any sexual orientation?

        1. Maybe they live in a state where you can marry your first cousin.

    2. Disney channel sitcom introduces first-ever gay couple in the form of two lesbians

      No 69’s? No watchie.

      1. Scissor me, Xerxes!

    3. The daughter looks more like a lesbian than the moms do.

    4. “This particular storyline was developed under the consultancy of child development experts and community advisors,” a Disney Channel spokesperson told TV Guide in a statement in June. “Like all Disney Channel programming, it was developed to be relevant to kids and families around the world and to reflect themes of diversity and inclusiveness.”

      You could have just said, “It’s terrible, boring schlock” and we’d have gotten the message without wasting the extra words.

  39. How many of these 57 lawmakers are facing primary challenges this year, and where do we send our checks?

  40. Holy shit:

    St. Petersburg, FL – University of South Florida researchers say they’ve located 55 bodies at the now-closed Dozier School for Boys in the Florida panhandle. That’s 24 more than official records indicate.

    1. What the fuck?!?

    2. …What

    3. But we totally need the state to step in to make sure parents don’t harm their children. The state of Florida systematically murdered 55 and counting children. Sickening.

    4. Now THAT’S profoundly evil.

    5. “Well, that’s just what happens when you right-wing extremists CUT FEDERAL FUNDING!”
      /progderp

  41. Retrial For Executed 14-Year-Old George Stinney Would Be Unprecedented In South Carolina

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..08505.html

    I can’t see a murderer in those pictures.

    1. Listen, I don’t think the kid did it either, and we all know the history of Jim Crow…but what does a murderer “look” like?

    2. Will Anwar Al Walaki’s 17 year old son ever get a trial? Since he was killed by the state without trial, it won’t be a retrial. But you think he might at least get a trial, since this guy is getting a retrial?

  42. No, stop, come back.

    Do not stare at the image in the above video, that is unless you actually want to break your brain.

    That’s the warning from Tom Scott of Things You Might Not Know, who claims the two squares of opposing horizontal and vertical black, red and green lines can permanently rewire an individual’s brain.

    The McCollough effect, as it is called, apparently doesn’t work on a retinal level but rather a cognitive one, and can leave an individual seeing white gratings as coloured for up to three months after staring at the image for anything between 15 seconds and 15 minutes.

    ‘I realise that telling people on the internet not to do something is like telling a five-year-old not to stick beans up their nose, but seriously if you work with text or video, don’t do this,’ Mr Scott says in his YouTube video.

    ‘It’s quite scary, it’s a real image that can lock into your brain, change the way it works and stick around for a good while.’

    1. They said the same thing about Naomi Klein.

      But no one listened.

    2. OK, I won’t look.

  43. Below is an email exchange I had with a conservative drug warrior. I think I got the better of it, not because I am that bright but because they really don’t have a leg to stand on.

    The purpose of government is to provide just mediation of conflicts between people. We have criminal law because when one person victimizes another we don’t want to leave justice for that to the vagaries of vigilantism.

    But that justification breaks down if there is no victim. When I use drugs I am at worst harming myself. So what is the government’s role there? If you say the government has a role in stepping in and making sure I act in what it feels is my own best interests, you have lost the argument.

    Conservative drug warriors never get this. They hate drugs and think people should be stopped from using them. Okay, Progs hate transfats and guns and a lot of other things and think people should be prohibited from using them. Once the conservatives have conceded that yes government’s role is not just to mediate disputes between people but to make sure people at some level act in their own best interests, they have lost the argument because people being fat and owning guns and smoking really does cause harm. The world would no doubt be better if no one were fat or smoked. So how can we not want the government to step in? You are just negotiating the terms of surrender at that point.

    1. His response

      Among my problems with this argument is that it assumes the harm is solely limited to the individual user. As someone whose brother died because of his addictions I can tell you the harm wasn’t limited to his own life. Drug addiction has LOTS of victims besides the addict.

      Second, and relatedly, classical liberalism assumes individuals are rational actors. Drug addiction created very irrational actors. I think marijuana is different than, say, meth or cocaine because of this very different variable: the nature of the addiction. Pot is, I think, psychologically addictive (for some people). But you don’t steal your mother’s wedding ring to buy weed.

      Pretty weak.

      1. I really can’t stand people who blame DRUGZ for their own, or for family members’, actions. The DRUGZ didn’t harm your brother, your brother harmed himself and those around him.

        People will do just about anything to foist responsibility off.

        1. He wasn’t rational Epi. You just don’t understand.

          It is about on the level of parents who claim that if you had kids you would understand.

      2. Who rules whether or not you are a rational actor?

        L’etat.

        So, same difference.

        Re: ‘it hurts others too!’ – in those cases, its still not the *drugs* at that point, but *the person* doing things to hurt others. “Blaming” the drugs is just bullshit to excuse bad behavior.

        Which all goes back to your original point – you give the state to judge when you’re ‘rational’ or ‘not’, then its the same as their having discretionary authority over your being. Same as if they begin to blame your “potential abuses” of something they’ve deemed ‘bad’ on the object and not *you*.

        i.e. “No one should have it, because it drives SOME PEOPLE NUTS AND THEY DRIVE CARS INTO TREES!”
        – See, Alcohol: Too much.

    2. And my response which he has never responded to.

      Of course it is not. But consider this. My father in law has type II diabetes. He refused to follow his doctor’s orders and now is blind, deaf, and a lot of other things. Your pain over your brother while I am sure great, is no worse than my wife and her family’s pain over her father’s refusal to treat his diabetes. He could have used heroin all of these years and not done anymore harm than he has.

      I don’t care what the item is, there is always a story about the horrors its misuse has done to the loved ones of the irresponsible. Once you buy into the idea that is the government’s responsibility to keep you from being irresponsible and harming yourself because when you harm yourself you harm your loved ones, you have once again Jonah, lost the argument. I am sorry for your brother. But if you had my wife’s father, you would be equally sorry for him. And if you had a nephew who accidentally shot himself because your brother left a gun lying around, you would be sorry to. If it is the government’s role to stop one of those tragedies, it would seem to be it is also its role to stop all of them.

      Or to put it another way, what is a victim? I would submit a victim is someone you harm directly through your actions. You would submit that a victim is that and also someone you harm indirectly through the pain caused by harming yourself. Well, there are a whole lot of ways we harm ourselves. what is so different about drugs?

      1. That was an excellent response, John.

      2. Precisely. My younger brother died of type 2 diabetes complications. He also wouldn’t take his meds and refused to stop consuming cases of Mountain Dew. By Mr. Conservative’s logic, my family and I are victims of Mountain Dew addiction. I personally think my brother committed slow and messy suicide cause his life sucked… but the suckitude was entirely of his own making.

  44. The aptly named Abortion Barbie decides to do the responsible thing again…and hide behind her kids:

    Questions about errors, conflated information and omissions in Davis’ compelling personal narrative have rocked her Democratic candidate’s campaign for governor. She has blamed Republican Greg Abbott for trying to smear her. Davis critics have pounced on the blurred facts of her official political narrative while supporters have rallied around the Fort Worth state senator’s uphill bid to win the Governor’s Mansion. Questions about the divorce arrangements have proved particularly vexing for the campaign, which hopes to woo large numbers of moderate women to becoming the first woman elected governor of Texas since Ann Richards in 1990.

    It doesn’t matter of Wendy is a mendacious liar. Her narrative is compelling. The people don’t need facts or evidence of a candidate’s character; they need bedtime stories and fables and compelling narratives.

    USA! USA! USA!

    1. I got into it on facebook with a liberal friend of mine. His position was “what does her personal life have to do with it”. My response was that when your campaign is based on your life story, your life story being a fraud is kind of a big deal. This is like finding out John McCain stayed at an actual Hilton in Hanoi and not the metaphorical one. His response to that was something like that is different!!! garble garble.

      1. I don’t know why the story of Trailer Park Barbie landing a rich lawyer husband who subsidized her academic career is less compelling than…whatever Lifetime Movie bullshit Wendy tried pass off as true.

  45. Way to go, GOP!

    The House of Representatives passed a bundle of abortion restrictions Tuesday that would dramatically reduce the number of health insurance plans that cover the procedure. The vote was 227 to 188, with one lawmaker voting present.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..81743.html

    Telling private insurers what to do!

    1. CHRISTFAG!!!

      Eventually the meds wear off and the Christfag tick starts.

    2. Big government’s not as much fun when it fucks your side, is it?

  46. Someone posted it this morning, but here it is again: Turkish Prime Minister delivers speech by hologram

    http://mashable.com/2014/01/28…..-main-link

  47. So, last night me and the lil’ lady were at the bar and there was some hippy lookin’ dude and an office-type clown talking politics too loud. The hippy dude said that we should have a public health care system just like we have a public education system. I was shocked that someone can look at our education system and want to put their lives in the hands of such a scheme for medicine.

    This is the stupidity we’re against.

    1. Most people are ignorant about their bodies and they way they are built and work. Ascribe it to ignorance, because ascribing it to willful commie retardation fucking sucks.

  48. Nominated for the Potemkin peasant for Obo’s lie-fest:
    “‘Long-term unemployment’ ? one mom’s story”
    She’s got three kids, Dad’s work is not secure, so she quits her job. Yep, I’m looking all over for my sad face.
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/us/…..180900.php

  49. Turkey has been on the brink of a currency crisis fora long time and in the last few days it kind of went critical. The government wants low interest rates to the CB just dumped dollars to stop the lira slide but that did not work. So they raised interest rates. A LOT.

    The bank raised its overnight lending rate to 12 percent from 7.75 percent, its one-week repo rate to 10 percent from 4.5, and its overnight borrowing rate to 8 percent from 3.5, much sharper moves than economists had forecast.

    http://www.reuters.com/article…..W420140128

    Erdogan is all burrhurt about it of course.

  50. Indeed, though their apartment is a tight fit for five people, they have a home ? no small thing in these days of extreme cold ? and food on the table. He and his siblings all have their own rooms. He sleeps in the den, using a curtain for a door. And the living room serves as a bedroom for his parents, who sleep on a pull-out sofa bed.

    My sympathies do go out to these people, since they seem to be getting by the best they can, but if the archetype of crushing poverty in modern America involves a heated apartment with multiple bedrooms (and it’s not mentioned, but I’d say it’s a pretty safe bet that there’s a TV and at least one computer in there as well), am I a heartless bastard for not seeing the urgent national crisis in this?

  51. Parting shot. For guitar and voice excellence. Night.

    1. Nice!

      But what’s with male singer-songwriters in that genre and those same stupid hats? Jeffrey Foucault, Peter Mulvey, Greg Brown, Matt the Electrician…

      1. I am willing to forgive Darrell Scott the hat. But he’s the only exception.

  52. Remember, these people bill themselves as skeptical and rational

    38

    Tony! The Fucking Queer Shoop!
    28 January 2014 at 4:44 pm (UTC -6) Link to this comment
    “The cost to adopt the Caucasian child was approximately $35,000, plus some legal expenses. “Versus when we got the first phone call about a little girl, a full African-American girl, it was about $18,000,” Lantz says. The cost for adoption of a biracial child was between $24,000 and $26,000.

    http://www.npr.org/2013/06/27/…..s-to-adopt

    It is twice as expensive to adopt white children as than black children???
    Yeah, the GOP was definitely right?racism is over.
    Pardon me, fatal eyeroll coming on.

    39

    Tony! The Fucking Queer Shoop!
    28 January 2014 at 4:53 pm (UTC -6)
    Oh fuck, I’m a damn fool. I was wrong. Not only that, but I made the mistake of jumping the gun. Sorry.
    Kate Donovan explains the reasons behind the adoption prices.

    So he did good. Admitted he was wrong and corrected.

    1. here was a reply:

      41

      CaitieCat
      28 January 2014 at 5:12 pm (UTC -6) Link to this comment
      Tony, I’m not sure that leaping to the conclusion racism may have been involved was a) unwarranted, or b) harmful. Far too often, people spend enormous amounts of energy trying to deny that something is racism when it patently is; defaulting to the most-likely explanation is a sound strategy, and given that this strategy is one which is fought with all its might by white supremacy, I would argue that to start from a position that it’s likely racism is, in fact, the most rational position to take.

      There’s also the fact that, even though there are, per Kate, good reasons for this, it still adds to the constant flood of messages that on their surface ? and how many white peope will go deeper to find out they’re wrong? ? on their surface, devalue Black bodies.

      Remember, these people bill themselves as skeptical and rational

      1. There’s also the fact that, even though there are, per Kate, good reasons for this, it still adds to the constant flood of messages that on their surface ? and how many white peope will go deeper to find out they’re wrong? ? on their surface, devalue Black bodies.

        We should be opposed to this because people like me are too stupid to look beyond the surface level.

        That is why I am a progressive.

  53. I was thinking about the State of the Union address. I have no interest in watching it. My liver will not take the abuse. However, I had a thought. In 2011 The Chive had a humorous Yoga Pants For President post. I think that if the campaign had succeeded, the world would be a better place. That is all.

    1. +50 occasions of sin

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.