Former Virginia Governor Is a Man of Convictions, Brits and Rand Paul Get Hawkish, Cops on the Defensive Over Military Gear: 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.

NEXT: 'I Am Not an Isolationist,' Says Rand Paul

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. Hey all the cool officials were doing it.

    It’s a shame this doesn’t happen to all the political leaders who deserve it.

    1. Hello.

      Isis a bad man!

      Seriously. Why don’t Russia, Israel and Team America Fuck Yeah form an alliance and wipe out this annoying vermin ISIL? Then they can all go back to playing their respective games.

      Connect Four!

      1. ISIS isn’t bad, just misunderstood. If we could all sit down and play Connect Four together all this not-evil stuff would go away.

      2. Uh, you are kidding, right? Israel invading a Muslim country would create more Jihaddis. Not a good idea.

        1. I kind of like the chaos and violence being neatly spread out across the globe. All we need now is a nice Sino-Japanese conflict over some rocks to really get CNN ratings to take off and maybe give Obama a chance to go on vacation again.

        2. If you’re gonna wipe the assholes out you’re gonna need cooperation from those countries and possibly Egypt.

          1. Egypt and UAE recently bombed targets in Libya (Jihadi’s I assume) so they are willing.

            It would be funny to see Egyptian and Israeli F-16s doing bombing runs together.

            1. I wouldn’t rule it out if the Arabs conclude ISIS is dangerous even to their security.

              Then the world will end.

  2. You may not have heard this yet, but Joan Rivers is dead. The after-market parts are likely to be with us for a while, however.

    And a thousand plastic surgeons wept bitter tears…

    1. I expect the Joan Rangers to go out, find someone hideously dressed and make fun of them mercilessly.

    2. This just in, Melissa Rivers is looking for employment.

      1. This just in, Melissa Rivers is looking for employment unemployable.

    3. I keep confusing her with Phyllis Diller, she’s dead as well, right?

      1. Only with a Ouija board.

  3. The White House has another shot at keeping alive tax subsidies for health plans purchased on the federal Obamacare exchange…

    They want to give the courts a chance to let us down one last time.

  4. Matrix trilogy on AMC starting at 8.. However, I consider every film after the first to be some form of aborted Kung-Fu thing.

    1. Interrupted by way too many commercials.

      1. I remember the way AMC used to be, and it makes me sad.

        1. Oh God, yes.

    2. Since I won’t be around tomorrow, TCM is running a pre-code (and nit-pickers, yes, technically the production code was in place but wasn’t enforced) marathon Friday. At 8 PM EDT enjoy the Barbara Stanwyck classic Baby Face, surely one of the very few movies ever released wherein the protagonist is exhorted to read Nietzsche and exercise her will to power.

      1. Ah, yes, Alphonse Ethier telling her to “Use men to get the tings you want!”

        She then proceeds to sleep her way to the top, quite literally, as the camera pans further up the building with each conquest. (One of the conquests is a young John Wayne.)

        1. “Do you have any experience?”
          “Plenty!”

      2. And tomorrow at 5:30 PM is Night Nurse, which has Stanwyck as a private nurse to two girls who comes to believe the people in the house (led by Clark Gable) are deliberately trying to starve the girls to get at the trust fund money, all the while keeping the mother drunk/doped up downstairs!

        Wild stuff.

    3. The first one was good but is now way dated and cliche. The two sequels were terrible.

      1. The first one was good but is now way dated and cliche.

        A cliche of itself?

        1. Thats like saying The Godfather is cliched.

        2. Yes. It was so popular it has become cliche.

          1. You’re a fucking idiot.

    4. As was the first one.

  5. I heard Joan Rivers plastic surgeon is going to be one of her pallbearers.

    1. Let her down one last time?

      1. In their defense, there’s only so much one can do.

        1. But they never even thought of stopping there.

    2. I suspect she’s used enough different plastic surgeons to have an all-MD pallbearer squad.

      1. The word about her demise I keep hearing as “she suffered a heart attack while in a medical procedure in an outpatient clinic.” Given what we know about her, this most likely means she was getting another plastic surgery procedure when she had the heart attack. I’m surprised they keep saying the vague “outpatient clinic” instead of better defining it as “plastic surgery” up till now, wonder when that will change.

        Bonus points if the plastic surgery center is also a spa and massage place — these combos are quite common in the Bay Area, I’m guessing they may be in SoCal as well?

        1. She was getting some work done on the inside of her throat. Her voice has changed over the years because of these issues and she was getting them taken care of when all this happened.

        2. Would someone get plastic surgery at a place called “Yorkville Endoscopy”? Unless they do plastic surgery in unusual places….

          Not an Economist: Plastic surgery on the face can cause throat issues…?

          1. First I’d heard the name given, all I had heard up till now was a generic “outpatient clinic”.

            I wonder if she had a bad reaction to the anesthesia.

          2. The impression I got from the radio was no, she has been having these problems for years (not uncommon for people who make their living with their voice).

        3. Rumor has it she needed her arms re-attached after a mysterious incident with what some witnesses described as a man in womens’ clothing.

          1. So Michelle O. finally got a hold of her?

  6. About that less than $2 a day facebook meme that’s going around.

    Part of the reason Shaefer and Edin’s headline number was so startlingly high?they calculated that the extreme poverty rate among households with children was a chilling 4.3 percent?could be attributed to a very narrow definition of income that ignored all noncash safety net benefits. Today, most of the government’s poverty-fighting efforts don’t involve straightforward cash. Food stamps? Housing vouchers? Tax credits? None were included. Once they accounted for those programs, only 613,000 families were living below the $2-a-day mark in 2011?still up by about half since the Clinton years.

    1 Footnote: Interestingly, they also find that if you use the exact same methods researchers use to estimate developing world poverty, then the number of Americans living on $2 per day also falls to zero.

    1. So you’re a racist 1%er?

      /prog

    2. From comments:

      “Perhaps the households living on less than $2 a day are rich people living off their wealth. No job, no income. That would explain the discrepancy between income and consumption. Does the income metric include capital gains?

      (I should add that I’m not trying to downplay poverty in the U.S.; but when you get such wildly divergent numbers, some explanation is needed.)”

      Jesus. Just. Jesus.

      These people shouldn’t be allowed to handle money.

      1. A fool and their money can’t be parted fast enough.

      2. HTML tags, Rufe. Please use when quoting anything longer than a single line.

        1. The quotes are not enough?

          1. No.

            Better than using -, but not good enough.

          2. Codes are pretty easy when you have a cheat sheet such as this:

            http://www.simplehtmlguide.com/cheatsheet.php

            which a kindly H’n’Rer sent to me to save myself further embarrassment (not saying you should be embarrassed).

          3. The quotes are not enough?

            Quotation marks are the bare minimum for clear expression, but it does cover you.

            Use of blockquote or italics is a great courtesy to everyone else and does avoid unnecessary conflict caused by honest misreadings of what you wrote. Those tags really do make the text stand out as a quote.

            Also, Rufe, on a personal note I’m old and I do those tags by hand. I understand that there are any number of tools you can use to make it easier.

        2. Tonio|9.4.14 @ 4:47PM|#

          HTML tags, Rufe. Please use when quoting anything longer than a single line.

          What the hell? We got us a schoolmarm dedicated to scolding the commentariat here but they do’t do jack shit about the squirrels?

          1. Nope. See above, particularly the part where I focus on readability rather than style for the sake of style. It’s not scolding when you ask politely.

  7. At least some local police departments are getting defensive about all of those military toys they’ve accumulated.

    So they’re not going to use them offensively anymore?

  8. http://blog.seattlepi.com/seat…..acon-hill/

    Dogs attack people in Seattle and cops respond. Guess what happens.
    Surprise!

    Seattle police officers detained two dogs Wednesday morning after a woman suffered serious injuries in a Beacon Hill dog attack, police and fire authorities say.

    1. The Onion?

      1. In the Onion they would turn the detained mutts and set up a sting for the alpha male and his bitch.

    2. They jumped out of the window of the K9 unit?

    3. So they have no problem killing harmless dogs, but they’ll go to the trouble of detaining dangerous ones. What the hell?

    4. Beacon Hill is where poor people live, so dogs are probably higher status to the cops.

  9. Only by turning the tables on sexual aggression can we see how bad it is
    The disbelief of the men in my film mirrors the disbelief we should all feel when acts of everyday sexism happen to women

    They were shocked they were about to get some. I don’t know how she made that movie and came away with the impression that these guys were bothered. (the construction guys were, but that’s cause they thought she was calling them lazy).

    Answering the second area of criticism will help to illustrate this. “None of these men are even offended, they just think she’s crazy! So, that disproves the point” was the gist of many a comment. I won’t bother to address the responses implying that, because the men in the video didn’t run away screaming, women shouldn’t make a fuss about sexual harassment.

    Nice strawman. The strangest part is all the links I’ve seen to this video with stuff like “watch as men are horrified by a woman turning the tables street harassment”.

    1. Guardian and Leah Green can go fuck themselves. UK paper – maybe they should write about Rotherham or maybe she should do the same film in Falluja, hmm?

      Bunch of privileged London assholes.

    2. I tested out real sexist situations on men. I took tweets from @EverdaySexism, where women (and men) recount sexist incidents

      OK.

      1. My favorite thing about the everyday sexism project is how they remove all references to the race of the harassers.

        I can’t remember the exact quote, but the reasoning was that the person might be wrong about the race and just remembering it wrong.

        Always believe the victim. Unless it’s about race.

        1. It is noticeable how often somewhat dweeby white college boys and gamers seem to be the focus of feminist rage, which somehow seems to skip over very macho behavior by black and Hispanic men.

          1. There is no greater disgust in a feminist heart than for weak males. They are the enemy, and there presence in the world disturbs the feminists to their very core.

            Witness the extreme vilification of the “nice guy” for nothing more than the sin of attempting to use the female method of mate attraction.

            1. That is at least one of the core paradoxes of feminism: “We want men to be strong and do exactly what we say all the time.” I also think of all the mature women on Match.com etc. who are liberal or leftist and won’t go out with a man who makes less than $100,000 or even $150,000 a year.

            2. I imagine the hate for nice guys is a lot simpler (but equally damning) reason: these are all upper-middle class women who only interact with other upper-middle class people. Their only experience with “misogyny” is the dweeby guy whose impotent whining vaguely sounds like he thinks women are property.

              I think a lot of them would be put off by what goes on in more macho subcultures, but they’re not a member there (or they don’t want to be), so they don’t experience it or think much about it. They still need to feel victimized, though.

              So, my answer to Papaya: it’s all just in-group squabbling.

              1. I imagine the hate for nice guys is a lot simpler (but equally damning) reason: these are all upper-middle class women who only interact with other upper-middle class people. Their only experience with “misogyny” is the dweeby guy whose impotent whining vaguely sounds like he thinks women are property.

                I disagree. The macho culture is secretly venerated by them. Most of the theories they have boil down to only men having agency. quoting myself downthread:

                Also, there’s the way they are constantly using “neck bearded virgin” and “can’t get a date” as insults, thereby making sex with a woman the sole measure of a man’s worth.

              2. Put off by machismo?

                Or turned on?

          2. I think much of today’s feminism can be boiled down to young white women bitching about their crappy dates/ex-BFs/one-night-stands.

    3. Shorter Leah Green: “I won’t bother to address the responses that cast doubt on my desired result.”

    4. This was on the imgur front page. Thought it was fitting.

      http://i.imgur.com/uFW3dn8.jpg

      1. Hehehe, makes sense.

        I think it says so much that feminists think “male tears” is a great smackdown. Unless they really think they’ve made men cry – and I doubt that has ever happened – they’re just insulting their targets by calling them effeminate. “Haha, I made you cry like woman!”

        1. Also, there’s the way they are constantly using “neck bearded virgin” and “can’t get a date” as insults, thereby making sex with a woman the sole measure of a man’s worth.

          That’s an attitude they claim perpetuates “rape culture”.

      2. Every one of those women with the coffee cups looks like they have Borderline Personality Disorder, there’s something in their eyes. And that affliction, with its inability to see shades of grey (instead everything in the world is either good/bad black/white hot/cold), seems perfectly aligned with the sentiment they are trying to espouse.

  10. Want to read an unscientific, totalitarian-loving article on obesidy?

    You know you do.

    Say what you will about the Chinese, but they know how to make wholesale changes, and sometimes those changes are inarguably for the good. As noted in an editorial in The Lancet last week, the life span of the average person in China in 1950 was 40 years; by 2011 it was around 76. (The average life span in the United States in 2011 was 79.)

    Gee, I can’t think of anything that would have contributed to short life span in China around 1950. Or any developments more economic freedom from 1976 on that would have contributed to better quality of life. Nope, must have been the big government.

    Articles like this are why I hate progressives. Ignorant, unscientific, yet certain that totalitarianism is the answer.

    P.S.- I wonder what the average life span was in China circa 1963.

    1. Gee, I can’t think of anything that would have contributed to short life span in China around 1950.

      Lots of lead poisoning

      1. And not from paint.

      2. Well, most of them starved to death, right?

    2. The sheer amount of mass murder that occurred in China between 1955 and 1976 is insane.

      Mao is probably the most evil human being to ever exist.

      1. Pol Pot only differs in scale

        1. When looking at who did the most murdering as a percentage of their country’s population, nobody can beat old Pol. He wiped out over 1/3 of his countrymen in that agrarian revolution of his. Mao beats him in sheer numbers, though.

      2. Evil, or just misunderstood?

        1. Anita Dunn votes for misunderstood.

          1. So does Thomas Friedman – he loves the new airports.

            Ah, I see this is Bittman. He should go to a Chinese Gulag for a month and review the food they serve.

            1. Chinese prison food? You’ll feel hungry an hour after eating it.

              1. You are such a card, but good one.

      3. Yeah, but at least he got stuff done. Which is truly what counts.

        from the comments:

        Not many Americans would be willing to give up their basic freedoms for an efficiently run but notably intolerant government, though there are times…

        How generous of you, willing to give up my freedoms like that.

        1. Yes, China: efficiently run.

      4. He is. Stalin killed like 30 million people. Mao murdered over a hundred million. It is just incomprehensible what went on there. American Progs who casually wish we were like China really are evil.

    3. the life span of the average person in China in 1950 was 40 years

      Child mortality, how does it work.

    4. Tom Friedman is getting a hard-on.

    5. That looks vaguely familiar somehow.

    6. I couldn’t finish the article, I wanted to punch my fist through the monitor so bad. These people won’t stop until every last fucking shred of enjoyment is ripped out of people’s lives all in the name of “public health”.

    7. As noted in an editorial in The Lancet last week, the life span of the average person in China in 1950 was 40 years; by 2011 it was around 76.

      And we can utterly trust the Chinese government to record and publish accurate statistics.

  11. Hey, so:

    Reason Meet Up- LA

    Sunday, the 7th. 11 AM.

    Rush Street in Culver City.

    Please come. I made a reservation and everything.

    1. This makes me want to a try a NYC one again. If LA can, we can.

    2. Did Jesse get a final count?

    3. We should do another SF one as well.

      1. Yes, let’s.

  12. Breaking news!!!

    Babysitters and burgerfippers join forces to demand higher wages.

    Honestly, they should be demanding computer literacy classes.

    “I got two words for that. Learn to fucking type.”

    1. Does it say how many people actually are on strike? I love how the media plays up protests and you find out there are 20 people there in a top ten metro area.

    2. My oldest recently got a job at Dairy Queen. I love the kid, but there is no way in hell her experience and skills at fast food prep are worth twice what she’s making now.

  13. RIP Joan Rivers:

    “Comedy is to make everybody laugh at everything and deal with things, you idiot,” she shouted from the stage.

    from here: http://www.npr.org/2014/09/04/…..ccess-dies

  14. I know someone mentioned the fast food restaurant worker strikes, etc. earlier today, and the following discussion continued on a bit about using robots to replace fast-food labor. Well, as it turns out, we’re closer than you might think. And it is awesome. Can’t wait to start seeing these babies pop up in local franchises.

    1. Momentum Machines cofounder Alexandros Vardakostas told Xconomy his “device isn’t meant to make employees more efficient. It’s meant to completely obviate them.”

      Excellent!

    2. Reminds me of when I toured a Ford plant in Detroit and saw a robot installing windshields, and a unionized laborer sitting there watching it, making sure it was working…

  15. How can we get science to prove our biases?

    Globalization limits the ability of the United States to intervene effectively on behalf of its most needy. Action taken to shield domestic labor from foreign competition threatens to place constraints on economic growth; protectionist trade policies, in turn, drive up consumer costs.

    The emergence of a rough ideological consensus on the causes of poverty and inequality would increase the likelihood of, but by no means guarantee, agreement on such initiatives as raising the minimum wage, increasing and expanding the scope of the earned-income tax credit, programs promoting marriage and paternal involvement, as well as stronger efforts to improve the quality of education, especially in poor neighborhoods.

    1. Russell Oakland Yesterday
      How do we know that liberals’ ‘good intentions’ have not worked? Is what we have today the worst possible outcome? Probably not and that may well be the result of liberals’ good intentions.

      In Reply to Charles Reply 63Recommend

      1. Unfalsifiable hypotheses are totally scientific, yo.

        1. Null Hypothesis

          Fiscally Conservative ‘good intentions’ = Worst Possible Outcome

          should be readily falsifiable and would be completely over any of these ass-hat’s heads.

        2. Russell does not understand that we’re living on the borrowed efforts of our ancestors who gave us rule of law, free markets and freedom — Liber…, I mean Progs, are eating into the feed corn now with a lot of help from Republicans.

          1. Feed corn or seed corn?

            1. Dooh! Seed corn.

    2. “Globalization limits the ability of the United States to intervene effectively on behalf of its most needy”

      Cuba hasn’t gotten the memo.

  16. Tha fuck?

    Feministing Jamz loves us some Junglepussy, so it was with baited breath that we were waiting for the release of her new video for “Nah.” It does not disappoint!

    I’d just like to point out that she is LITERALLY SITTING ON A WHITE GIRL AND SUBVERTING BASIC ASS SHIT WHILE EATING ASPARAGUS, NBD.

    Pero like?BRB I’m gonna go die now.

    1. Sounds like someone went off her meds…

    2. Why do people write like this? I had to read that 3 times before I understood it (sort of) and I’m not even old.

      1. That’s what I always ask. There are many things about my generation that I dislike but can ignore; this awful, awful style of writing that so many practice is insufferable. I guess it’s trying to be conversational, but it’s Internet/”meme” conversation. Which is STUPID.

        I feel like strangling something when I read, “What in the actual fuck?” or, “Because reasons.”

    3. And, apparently, no one is going to call out the whyte grrrl for appropriating Ebonics.

  17. a rough ideological consensus

    Yeah, we’ve had those

    1. Ummm…

      Nazis are bad.

      That’s like the last time, right?

  18. I assumed that Bob McDonnell was a Democrat since his party wasn’t mentioned.

    The Google tells me otherwise.

    I’m confused!

    1. Not being part of the mainstream media, Reason does not follow the rule regarding party IDs in scandals (GOP = mentioned in headline or first sentence, Democrat = mentioned late in the piece, if at all).

  19. Men Are Harassed More Than Women Online

    The issue of Internet misogyny has received a great deal of attention in recent weeks, …videogame critic Anita Sarkeesian having to leave her home after a series of Twitter threats that included her home address(faked by herself). There is a common assumption that the targets of such vile behavior are overwhelmingly women who are abused because they are women?to the point where “women aren’t welcome on the Internet,” as Amanda Hess argued in a widely discussed article in Pacific Standard magazine this year. Reviewing women’s online tribulations in the last month in The Daily Beast, Samantha Allen asks, “Will the Internet ever be safe for women?”

    1. At the same time, there was little reaction to a report contradicting the narrative that male public figures get considerably less Twitter abuse than their female counterparts. While the study, conducted by the British think tank Demos, was limited to a fairly small sample of British celebrities, journalists and politicians whose Twitter timelines were tracked over a two-week period, its findings are nonetheless interesting. On the whole, 2.5 percent of the tweets sent to the men but fewer than 1 percent of those sent to women were classified as abusive. Male politicians fared especially badly, receiving more than six times as much abuse as female politicians.

    2. Do we know that it was really faked by her?

      1. Check the evidence for yourself

        I saw the jpeg the other day, but this post came up on google. easier to read than the jpeg.

    3. Women are fragile creatures who need the Internet to be made “safe” for them.

  20. Nothing about the ‘fight to debase the currency’?

    “Fast-food protesters cuffed at higher-pay rallies”
    […]
    “Hundreds of workers from McDonald’s, Taco Bell, Wendy’s and other fast-food chains are expected to walk off their jobs Thursday,”…
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/art…..ationworld

    That’s ‘hundreds’ nationwide. Assuming SEIU isn’t just blowing smoke (which is not a good bet) that means something like .0001% or so of the total: http://www.statista.com/statis…..ince-2002/
    Real mass movement, there!

    1. Nothing about the ‘fight to debase the currency’?
      Ooops; yes there is.

  21. Krugman keeps pretending that we’re in an unprecedented era of small government and low spending.

    . Anyway, this seems relevant to Brad DeLong’s flashback to 2009, when I was lamenting bad ideas from freshwater economists and Justin Fox was dismissing them as having no influence on policy.

    As Brad says, it turned out that the bad ideas mattered a lot; Henry Farrell and John Quiggin (pdf) explain why. The reality was that the Keynesian policy consensus of early 2009, such as it was ? and it wasn’t much, even then ? was fragile. Key actors with real power ? Republicans in the US, Germany, and the Trichet-era ECB ? were strongly anti-Keynesian by instinct. They were temporarily bowled over by the vocal Keynesian consensus among economists who had strong public platforms, but were ready to grab hold of seemingly credentialed people willing to offer justifications for austerity and hard money.

    1. And a quorum of economists obliged. Alesina-Ardagna expansionary austerity never got a lot of traction among policy-oriented macroeconomists, but the Harvard connection meant that it was good enough to give the austerians an intellectual fig leaf; the same for Reinhart-Rogoff and the 90 percent of doom. Having John Cochrane insist that Keynesian economics had been proved wrong and nobody was teaching it helped the austerian case even though it was completely untrue; so did having Robert Lucas accuse Christy Romer of being intellectually corrupt. Bad economic ideas didn’t really drive bad policy, but they acted as enablers for bad policy instincts.

      And the people who promulgated these bad ideas therefore have a lot to answer for.

      1. So how much does austerity policy have to fail relative to Keynesian policy before it starts working better?

        1. Please define austerity policy.

          1. To a leftist, it’s “Spending more than last year, but not as much more as we would like.”

            1. I think raising taxes is in there also. Who told them that increasing spending and raising taxes was the opposite of Keynesianism?

              And who told them that it’s what the austrians want?

            1. I don’t like percent of GDP as a measure. Conflating tax policies with spending policies is only useful for obfuscation purposes. Real dollars controlled for inflation is the only metric you can’t play with to reach a predetermined result.

        2. Tony the comedian. Well, except that he isn’t funny.

          You need to work on your act Bub.

        3. Still waiting on that definition.

          1. Coeus|9.4.14 @ 6:32PM|#
            “Still waiting on that definition.”

            Well, medical care isn’t yet provided free to everyone, so austerity!

    2. How do you get $800 billion in stimulas when the real power were strong anti-keynesians?

      Also in what world were Republican’s a real power in 2009?

      1. Krugabe now says the stimulus should have been about 2T!

        Back then, he said 800B was golden and would lead to keynesian nirvana.

  22. Jesus, Rand needs to just STFU. He has been talking way too much about this ISIS shit, and contradicting himself at every turn. He’s a bit of a flip-flopper on foreign policy, and we know how that goes in elections. Seriously, calling Clinton a “warhawk” one week (which I applauded) and then proposing a massive new war (which is what it would take to destroy ISIS) the next week?

    1. It was always gonna be this way, and it’s only gonna get more infuriating. This is the way the game is played and, unlike his father, he has decided to play it. Take a deep breath and look at his voting record. It’s all that matters.

      1. I know, I just hate how soars from highs to lows. I was so happy in June when he blamed the neocons for bringing about the rise of ISIS, and refused to jump on the “Obama’s to blame for leaving Iraq!” bandwagon.

      2. But even if he is playing the game, he should do so in a way that doesnt open him up to the attack of flip-flopping. It’s like he is unaware of his own statements from a month or even a week ago

        1. There was no literal flip-flopping. Someone’s keeping his exact statements in mind and using weasel words to follow popular opinion.

          He’s in it to win it.

          1. “literal” doesn’t matter. If it seems like flip-flopping to me, a supporter, what will it looks like to an undecided?

            1. Hopefully that he holds the same opinion that they do (that’s why they’re following popular opinion).

              Did it mess up Romney? Sure. But Romney flipped his voting record and bill support as well. Paul’s just matching rhetoric to bring in the low information voter. And I agree, it ain’t pretty.

              But as long as his voting record reflects one of the most libertarian in the fedgov, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. Doesn’t mean that reason should. Or that even the commenters should. Hell, it might be good for him if the libertarians turn against him. You’ve seen the way policy prescriptions are attacked as soon as a libertarian says them. Witness Kruggie’s flipflop on a minimum income just because a libertarian floated it.

  23. YAY! The Affordable Care Act is working:

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/re…..121927.htm

    The level of, I don’t know, ignorance, stupidity, blindness is profound.

    1. I don’t get how it’s a success when you say you’ll fine someone if they don’t do something and then they do it. It didn’t make insurance affordable or anything, all it did was make people spend money they’d rather spend elsewhere.

      1. Exactly. What is remarkable is that they’re still a long way from full insurance.

      2. If people pay for health insurance the government has to use most of it to provide minimal health care.

        If people refuse to pay for insurance and instead pay a fine, the government gets the money directly and can spend it however the hell they want.

    2. And the hits keep coming:

      http://www.nationalreview.com/…..y-melchior

    3. How is collecting government statistics and fudging the fuck out of them doing science?

      1. It’s not. But it sounds all science-y and stuff which is good enough because most of the prog base doesn’t give a shit about validity, only The Narrative(tm).

  24. Dude jsut looks corrupt as the day is long lol.

    http://www.Crypt-Anon.tk

  25. UK police raid home of Sam Taylor-Johnson because a neighbor saw a babby killing salt rifle with 30 caliber bullet clips through a basement window. The rifle was demilled and was donated to her by a gun control group to be made into artwork.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..oject.html

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.