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

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

World

Friday Funnies: John Kerry's Peace Mission

Chip Bok | 8.1.2014 7:00 AM

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

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

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

NEXT: Brickbat: Distracted Driver

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

Hide Comments (99)

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

  1. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

    Looks like Kerry's yacht ran out of gas. And Netanyahu needs to water his bushes. They're looking a little dead.

    1. UnCivilServant   11 years ago

      Are you sure that's not just the orangeleaf fern?

      1. WTF   11 years ago

        I thought maybe they were incarnations of the biblical burning bush, and God was speaking through Kerry.

        1. UnCivilServant   11 years ago

          Wouldn't he be on fire then? And there is no way John Kerry is the Metatron.

    2. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

      HELLO - burning bush, yo. The Lord works mysterious ways.

      1. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

        Um, maybe I should have read WTF's comment 36 minutes earlier before posting this.

        Or not. Movig on...

      2. Lord Humungus   11 years ago

        yes I do.

  2. Bee Tagger   11 years ago

    Unless that gas can has a YouTube video inside of it, I'm not too concerned.

  3. mr lizard   11 years ago

    You know who else had an innocent gasoline fight?....

    1. UnCivilServant   11 years ago

      John D Rockefeller?

    2. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

      The Children of the Wasteland?

    3. Atanarjuat   11 years ago

      Derek Zoolander?

      1. mr lizard   11 years ago

        Winner! ....Took you guys long enough

      2. sarcasmic   11 years ago

        That has to be one of the dumbest movies I've never seen all the way through.

        1. UnCivilServant   11 years ago

          Were you strapped into that device from "A Clockwork Orange"?

        2. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

          Thank you for the warning. I've never seen it - will continue to avoid.

          1. Hyperion   11 years ago

            Don't listen to sarc, that movie is hilarious, watch it.

            1. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

              Damn! Now I'm all conflicted!!

              1. Hyperion   11 years ago

                Don't be, if you like comedies, that one is really good, seriously.

                1. sarcasmic   11 years ago

                  if you like comedies, that one is really good, seriously.

                  My idea of a comedy is Pulp Fiction. Now there's a funny movie.

                  1. Ska   11 years ago

                    Pulp Fiction is funny, but it's not a comedy.

                    Zoolander is a comedy, but it's not funny.

              2. NealAppeal   11 years ago

                I second seeing it. It is highly qoute-able and quirky. Lots of good cameos with genre nods ie. Duchovny as the hand model conspiracy theorist.

        3. Hyperion   11 years ago

          Mer-man .... MER-MAN!

          1. Ted S.   11 years ago

            What do you have against Ethel Merman?

            1. Rich   11 years ago

              Nothing!

        4. Brett L   11 years ago

          "I got the black lung, pop."

          Use that about half the time I cough.

  4. John   11 years ago

    http://license.icopyright.net/.....gzNDA2ODg=

    IRS Strikes Deal With Atheists To Monitor Sermons And Homilies

    The FFRF says that such events at "rogue churches" have "become an annual occasion for churches to violate the law with impunity." But doesn't the Constitution say that Congress can make no such laws?

    Because the real threat to freedom is those evil FUNDIES.

    1. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

      Well, they helped elect Obama, so...

      /kidding

    2. SugarFree   11 years ago

      Non-religous non-profits engage in political speech all the time.

      Non-profit status invites too much scrutiny and it is pretty much bullshit anyway. Just do away with it and no one will be singled out.

      1. John   11 years ago

        Except that the FRF folks are not arguing for that. They love non profits. Their problem is they are authoritarian fucks. Like gay rights and a lot of other things "atheism" increasingly just means "one variety of totalitarian leftist".

        1. Bo Cara Esq.   11 years ago

          Churches get special tax treatment more favorable than other nonprofits (including secular nonprofits that engage in politics). If you want special sugar you have to expect that daddy will have conditions

          http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&.....ed-Filings

    3. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

      Well, they helped elect Obama, so...

      /kidding

      1. SugarFree   11 years ago

        BEHOLD MY POWER!

        1. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

          SPLITTER! God'll getcha....

          1. Swiss Servator, spare a franc?   11 years ago

            +1 Maude?

            1. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

              Where's Johnny Longtorso for some "Golden Girls" lynx when we need him?

              1. Swiss Servator, spare a franc?   11 years ago

                I know, I hang this fat, lazy curveball over the plate, and no one stepped up to take a hack at it.

    4. Bo Cara Esq.   11 years ago

      This is about a government granted benefit, not free exercise. If they ran afoul here all they'd lose is their extra special deferential tax status and be treated like secular nonprofits

      1. Duke   11 years ago

        Not really Bo. My right not to pay taxes on donations for charitable and spiritual matters is God given. It's a relinquishing of that right to allow government to tax such activities. You have it backwards.

        1. Bo Cara Esq.   11 years ago

          I'm against taxation generally, but when people and orgs get special treatment in that area just because they're religious that's a problem , an establishment problem ( and for what it's worth a violation of the LP platform that government must not hinder or aid religion)

          1. sarcasmic   11 years ago

            Show me a church and (with a few exceptions) I'll show you a charity. Why do you hate charities?

            1. Zeb   11 years ago

              Churches are indeed charitable organizations and generally do a lot of good things in that capacity. But I don't think they should be treated any differently from any other charitable social club.

              1. sarcasmic   11 years ago

                As soon as an organization is taxed, the government uses the tax code to tell them how to operate. Do you really want churches to be regulated through the tax code?

                1. Zeb   11 years ago

                  But doesn't the tax exemption they get now already mean that they are regulated through the tax code? That's what this whole discussion is about, whether some churches should lose their tax status because they get too far into electoral politics.

                  1. sarcasmic   11 years ago

                    But doesn't the tax exemption they get now already mean that they are regulated through the tax code?

                    By not being taxed they are regulated?

                    Is not giving taking and not taking giving?

                    1. Zeb   11 years ago

                      By not being taxed, but having the possibility that they could be taxed if they say the wrong things, they are regulated. This has nothing to do with whether tax brakes are giveaways or not. It is about the IRS having power to take away the special tax treatment if the churches don't behave in a certain way.

                    2. mad.casual   11 years ago

                      By not being taxed they are regulated?

                      Is not giving taking and not taking giving?

                      Yes. The way giving homosexual couples the same "special treatment" you give to heterosexual couples makes everyone, couple or not, homosexual or not, the same and more free.

                2. optimusratiostultum   11 years ago

                  I say cut the ol Gordian knot and abolish the damn income tax

                  1. Zeb   11 years ago

                    Yeah, that would be the best. My biggest beef with the income tax is that it allows too much government access to private information and too much opportunity for social engineering projects.

                3. Zeb   11 years ago

                  Also, I said "I don't think they should be treated any differently from any other charitable social club".

                  That could also be accomplished by treating all charitable social clubs as churches are treated now. Or better yet, not taxing any corporations, non-profit or not. Or even more better, not taxing income at all.

            2. Stormy Dragon   11 years ago

              Very little of the average church's budget is spent on actual charity. Most of it is spent on providing services to its own members that would be considered non-charitable in a non-religious context.

              If I pay a psychiatrist for marriage counseling, that's not charity. Paying a priest for marriage counseling shouldn't be either.

          2. antisocial-ist   11 years ago

            I fail to see how not taxing religious donations establishes a state religion. I could make a case that taxing and regulating religious activities does hinder the free exercise thereof.

            1. Bo Cara Esq.   11 years ago

              It's the preferential treatment of religious organizations.

              1. sarcasmic   11 years ago

                So you'd prefer religious organizations be regulated through the tax code. As in do this and you get taxed at this rate, do that and you get taxed at that rate, so as to "nudge" them into doing what the regulator wants them to do. By wanting to tax religious organizations, you want a de-facto state religion.

      2. Hyperion   11 years ago

        Right. Government owns everything, so if they let you keep a little more of what you have, that's a benefit. Got it.

        1. Bo Cara Esq.   11 years ago

          So are you ok with tax breaks for, say, Gaia friendly energy companies that fossil fuel based ones can't get?

          1. UnCivilServant   11 years ago

            Sure, I love Nuclear.

          2. Bobarian   11 years ago

            All for tax breaks, as long as the 'break' isn't bigger than the taxes they actually pay (most gaia companies).

        2. Zeb   11 years ago

          But aren't special tax brakes for certain types of organizations a case of government picking winners and losers? I'd like to see the income tax go away completely, but I don't think that that necessarily means that any reduction in the tax for anyone for any reason is necessarily a good thing. Isn't the fact that the income tax is used that way what enabled all of the recent IRS scandals to happen?

          1. antisocial-ist   11 years ago

            What enabled the IRS scandal are the laws and regulations that seek to censor non-profit speech.

            1. Zeb   11 years ago

              Which appears to be exactly what the tax exemption for churches does.

              I'm not saying I want churches to pay more taxes. I'm saying that the tax code should be consistent and not treat different organizations differently based on their political alignment or the content of their speech.

              1. T.A.L.L   11 years ago

                As someone who regularly interacts with churches I would say this. That the whole system should be put away with when it comes to the tax or not to tax. Churches are already singled out in the constitution. They should not be categorized as other charities. Religious organizations should simple have to file a record of what land they hold so that taxes are not collected and no record of either activity, speech, or employment need to be recorded or submitted. This would though also eliminate special tax breaks for those who give to churches and keep special tax breaks who are directly employed by the religious organization. That would be real freedom.

  5. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

    Wait - Bill Walton is in Hell in the future with Donald Sterling? Is he interviewing him for Inside the NBA from the future beyond or something, and he's being sent to Middle East/Africa in the hereafter as punishment? or are they both there, burning in hell for eternity, because they BOTH suck? Enquiring people want to know.

    NEEDS. MOAR. LABELZ.

    I don't get it. Awful - therefore - perfect.

    Happy fucking Friday, Reasonoids!

    1. Bo Cara Esq.   11 years ago

      This is awesome, I thought Hell at first glance but the rest you've got here is what you fellows call a thread winner

  6. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

    Arthur Brown has something to say about all this....I'd like Kerry if he'd walk into a meeting and say this.

    1. Atanarjuat   11 years ago

      I just learned what a pangolin is thanks to my son's National Geographic Kids. Those little critters are adorable! I'm thinking about buying a few and releasing them. We need cuter invasive species here in Floriduh.

      1. Bo Cara Esq.   11 years ago

        You already plenty of Yankee retirees

        1. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

          +Canucks

          1. Bobarian   11 years ago

            He said 'cuter', as in cuter than pythons.

        2. Brett L   11 years ago

          We need cuter invasive species here in Floriduh.

          19 year old girls from SEC campuses not located in Gainesville?

          1. Swiss Servator, spare a franc?   11 years ago

            + a lot

      2. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

        ProL'Dibs' "Boas, Pythons and Moar" not "warn 'n' fussy" enough for you Sunshine Staters?

        1. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

          pfffffffft

          "fussy" = "fuZZy"

          I lulz at mice elf.

      3. UnCivilServant   11 years ago

        Let me get this straight... you want to add armored skunks to the gator and python infested swamps because said armored skunks are cuter than the assorted reptiles and snails that have wandered in?

        1. Ted S.   11 years ago

          I always thought they looked like mammalian crocodiles.

          1. UnCivilServant   11 years ago

            The 'skunk' classification was in regards to the defensive scent glands that they appear to have in addition to the armor scales. I think they'd fit right in with the current residents of the everglades if they can survive in a swamp. (Not sure if they're arid adapted or not)

            1. Brett L   11 years ago

              But how do they taste, and what are the potential Florida Man follies?

              1. UnCivilServant   11 years ago

                Do you think that I, a Mere Upstate Bureaucrat can predict what Florida Man might do? I, sir, am not psychic, or psychotic. I lack the insight into madness required to make that assessment.

                1. Bobarian   11 years ago

                  I, sir, am not [...] psychotic.

                  The certainty of that statement causes me great concern.

                  1. Stormy Dragon   11 years ago

                    "I'm not crazy; my mother had me tested."

      4. Heroic Mulatto   11 years ago

        I just learned what a pangolin is thanks to my son's National Geographic Kids. Those little critters are adorable!

        *narrows eyes*

      5. Stormy Dragon   11 years ago

        Some of us knew what they were because we've had their song stuck in our head for the last thirty years.

    2. Hyperion   11 years ago

      Well, then we would say to you... that, uhhh, oh hell, I have no freakin idea what I'm doing, but it was my turn to be secretary of state.

      /honest Lurch

  7. Swiss Servator, spare a franc?   11 years ago

    The art work is poor, even for Bok - tho' I must give credit, at least he got Kerry's head right.

    Since sage hasn't popped in, I will cover for him...

    *ahem*

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    1. Almanian! AKA pangolin mafia   11 years ago

      God Bless You

      1. Swiss Servator, spare a franc?   11 years ago

        I wonder, has anyone laughed, I mean really laughed at Bok offering before?

        1. UnCivilServant   11 years ago

          At the offering, or at the 'joke'?

          1. Swiss Servator, spare a franc?   11 years ago

            Well, either I guess - I was reluctant to call Bok's ....thing, "art".

        2. Bobarian   11 years ago

          A lot of 'laughing at', not so much 'laughing with'.

    2. Lord Humungus   11 years ago

      I will add my more succinct -

      ha.

  8. Heroic Mulatto   11 years ago

    Why is Kerry holding a red suitcase while exposing himself to someone forced to wear a Judenstern on his lapel while they all stand in the middle of a forest fire? Did Kerry time travel to the 1940's just to do that?

    I don't understand.

    1. UnCivilServant   11 years ago

      It's actually a British Government Red Box regarding the North Sea extraction plans.

  9. hamilton   11 years ago

    If you have Kerry in the image, and the message is that he's showing up to help, why on earth would you use anything other than "John Kerry, reporting for duty!"?

  10. Bobarian   11 years ago

    Nice! The Israelis make Jews wear stars on their clothes too?

    And why is that penis talking and carrying gas?

  11. The Late P Brooks   11 years ago

    As Friday Funnies go...

    NEEDS MOAR LABULZ

  12. VicRattlehead   11 years ago

    Idea for alt-text
    "I didn't start the fire"

  13. Ron   11 years ago

    churches and political groups should never be taxed no matter what they say or preach, religion or politics since to do so would be the same as a poll tax. Once you tax something it is no longer a freedom. That being said this would only apply to donations to the church and the building they use for their church services. Any other buildings they own such as apartments etc and any income gained from outside services such as renting the hall to an outside group or wedding all those and any income generated from anything but donations should be taxed just like everyone else.
    Thats my two cents anyway.

    1. Ron   11 years ago

      I ended up out of thread but T.A.L.L. said it better anyway.

  14. GILMORE   11 years ago

    I don't get it.

  15. Will4Freedom   11 years ago

    I'll NEVER have BOK paint the flames on my chopper.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

America's Baby Formula Rules Are Due for an Update

Kelli Pierce | 7.13.2025 7:00 AM

The Decentralized Master Planning of Seaside, Florida

Peter Suderman | From the August/September 2025 issue

There Are Better Ways To Help Restaurant Workers Than No Tax on Tips

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 7.12.2025 7:00 AM

Digital Nomads Are Getting Caught in the War on Tourism

Fiona Harrigan | From the August/September 2025 issue

Trump Walks Back Talk of Abolishing FEMA

Autumn Billings | 7.11.2025 5:18 PM

Recommended

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

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

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

r

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

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

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!