Charlie Hebdo Massacre

Watch Anthony L. Fisher Talkin' Pope Francis, Oscar Snubs, Free-Range Kids on FNC's "Red Eye" Tonight at 3a ET/12a PT

|

Tune into "Red Eye" on the Fox News Channel tonight at the ungodly hour of 3a ET/12a PT, where I'll be joined

Cookies in the green room!
Fox News Channel

 by dapper "Independents" co-host and occasional Reason TV contributor Kmele Foster, comedian and filmmaker Bonnie McFarlane, as well as regular panelist and mensch Andy Levy, and tonight's guest host Joanne Nosuchinsky!

Scheduled topics include Pope Francis' failure to understand both free expression and basic Christianity, Oscar snub fury, the latest state assault on the parents of Free-Range Kids, and the possibly fatal threat posed by microaggressions. Tune in for maximum sardonic insight!

NEXT: Time to Start Planning Your Cuban Vacation, Pope Criticized, Terrorists Thwarted in Belgium: P.M. Links

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. I hope you are wearing a better sweater than Andy (his are the worst).

  2. So, nothing about The Independents being shit-canned?

    I might be late to the party on this, so just tell me to shut the fuck up if it’s already been covered.

    1. So the show’s been cancelled? I didn’t that.

      1. I’m guessing the rating must have been bad. I guess the libertarian moment will have to be delayed.

        1. Damn, and as far as I know I never made Two Minutes Hate.
          So much for my chance at fame and glory…

        1. Ah so they’re being dumped for Kennedy. There is hope for washed up MTV VJs. Is Carson Daly busy?

          1. Check the alleys behind any L.A. supermarket and find out.

        2. It’s the Fox way, interrupt your guests, be obnoxious, and succeed.

    2. Has anyone checked on GILMORE to make sure he’s okay?

    3. Ah, disappointing.

      1. Not to this guy.

        ndependents my azz…..it was nothing more than rightwing propaganda aimed at the 25 to 35 demographic, hip music…..younger fox liars…..it was as fake as the libertarian party

        1. -25. It didn’t have enough State fellating to be remotely trollish.

          1. needs more “Koch Bros” and “Faux News” mentions!

            It reminds me of the posts by this one dingleberry Facebook friend from HS, who during the Bush-Kerry election wrote several times daily about the
            “$wift Boat Liar$”

            1. $wift Boat Liar$

              Ah, the Argument from dollar signs. Classic!

              1. Argumentum ad pecunia?

                1. first declension!

      2. I just hope they have a persistent early event post here at Reason.com around which commentators can assemble.

        1. sheesh “early evening”

  3. So will Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Mullah Mohammed Omar, Jeff Schoep, Vladimir Putin, Nicol?s Maduro, Khaled Masha, Hassan Nasrallah and
    John Bachtell be joining the Ron Paul Institute? They all oppose US foreign policy which is the key aspect of libertarianism.

  4. In case I’m not here to see Red Eye, I’ll just add this about the Pope:

    The remarks attributed to His Holiness are wicked retarded, and would . He didn’t make the comments infallibly, or even in a vetted Church document, so I’m going to consider this as his non-binding private view.

    In fact, I think His Holiness, with all due respect, has in these purely private and non-binding remarks, himself misapplied a key Vatican II teaching:

    1. “It is in accordance with their dignity as persons-that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility-that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth. However, men cannot discharge these obligations in a manner in keeping with their own nature unless they enjoy immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom. Therefore the right to religious freedom has its foundation not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it and the exercise of this right is not to be impeded, provided that just public order be observed.”

      http://www.vatican.va/archive/…..ae_en.html

      A heckler’s veto goes beyond “just public order.”

      Since the Pope’s private remarks – spoken in an unofficial capacity – contradict Church doctrine – I am absolutely confident that when he speaks ex cathedra on matters of faith and morals, he will not repeat these sentiments.

      1. I should have added after “wicked retarded,” “would adopt the heckler’s veto principle into the law and overthrow free speech and freedom of religion.

        1. I should have said I believe His Holiness is *misapplying* Church doctrine, due to a mistake of fact, not due to a heretical dissent from doctrine.

          Whew!

          1. But even so:

            “Other people wonder how infallibility could exist if some popes disagreed with others. This, too, shows an inaccurate understanding of infallibility, which applies only to solemn, official teachings on faith and morals, not to disciplinary decisions or even to unofficial comments on faith and morals. A pope’s private theological opinions are not infallible, only what he solemnly defines is considered to be infallible teaching….

            “Of course, infallibility does not include a guarantee that any particular pope won’t “neglect” to teach the truth, or that he will be sinless, or that mere disciplinary decisions will be intelligently made. It would be nice if he were omniscient or impeccable, but his not being so will fail to bring about the destruction of the Church.”

            http://www.catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility

            1. Joanne is a pretty good addition to the show, but I really do miss the zany irreverence that was Bill.

              1. Sure, that’s…what?

        2. The pope blows the gay offspring of the fake prophet Muhammad. Fuck the both of them, and yes, with WARTY’S DOOM COCK!

          1. You see, this is the sort of statement which I do not believe should be punished, since religious freedom rights “continue[] to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it”

            1. My wife was raised catholic and I just told her that the pope can suck my dick. And I’m not being punished! And I care a lot more, I mean really a LOT more, like infinity more about what she thinks than I do some old fucker in a clown suit and totally retarded looking hat.

              1. Just giving my 2 centimes.

                1. I can’t decide if you are starting to see through the cracks and a terrible truth is dawning on you or if you are trying to rationalize away what you are seeing.

                  1. What, that I’m “discovering” that Popes can say and do bad things?

                    I bet I know more about Papal misdeeds than you do.

                    1. Come on, let’s have that discussion I dodged earlier!

                    2. Chime in any time before 9, if not, I’ll be off to be with my wife, Morgan Fairchild.

                    3. OK…I’m coming, Morgan!

                    4. My apologies. I am juggling too much to keep up in a timely manner.

                      Perhaps my comment was a bit too harsh.

                      What I see is a Pope who is a zealous progressive, very un-pope like. It could not be more obvious.

                      Your attempt to explain away the glaring flaw in the infallibility doctrine is just not convincing. Every single bit of empirical evidence indicates that the guy is no more guided by god than the leader of any other organization. He is a politician motivated by politics, not divinely inspired.

  5. I never saw this coming:

    Google to stop consumer sales of Glass to redesign device
    Google will stop selling its Internet-connected eyewear to consumers until the company can develop a more polished and affordable version that’s less likely to be viewed as a freakish device.

    http://seattletimes.com/html/home/index.html

    1. The glass didn’t go over well at all. The watch thing is not going to go over too well either, I’m going to guess.

      I really don’t know why anyone likes any Apple products, I think that they all suck and the OS is a horrible.

      1. I anxiously await the Google Bidet

        1. I’m sure that will be an overly hyped, over priced, piece of proprietary garbage as well. It’s Apples entire biz model.

  6. punched by the pope

    Good band name.

    1. “punched by the pope”

      Huh. I thought it was “boxing the bishop”, but that works too for some related activities.

  7. Pope Francis’ failure to understand both either

    1) free expression
    2) basic Christianity

    1. (and for those who apply the teaching about if *you’re* hit on one cheek, turn the other cheek, technically that doesn’t cover the case of someone hitting *yo mamma* on the cheek)

      1. I’m thinking it also doesn’t apply to ‘if someone makes a cartoon you don’t like, then just go shoot them and their friends all to fuck’.

        1. Actually, Pope Francis denounced those attacks in clear terms:

          http://en.radiovaticana.va/new…..ck/1117329

          1. Saying that people shouldn’t have free speech to criticize religion sort of takes the wind out of those sails. The guy is as full of crap as Obama. Sorry, my honest opinion.

            Don’t get me wrong, if you’re Catholic, I’m not insulting you or any other Catholics, only the guy in the weird hat who is advocating limiting of free speech. That’s a huge slippery slope right there.

          2. Legit question, no trolling:

            Given the idea of papal infallibility, what happens if the pope says or does something that’s blatantly not correct per the already existing doctrine of the church? Does the new stuff just automatically overwrite the old?

            1. The old quip “Is the pope catholic?” doesn’t really apply here. The guy is more of a progressive than a catholic. Most of his blathering is about inequality, global warming, limiting free speech etc.

              Given a choice between converting everyone on earth to catholicism and being the supreme leader of a worldwide fascist/commie regime I think his choice might surprise a lot of people.

              1. He’s an average Argentinian, namely a socialist twit.

              2. Suthen,

                see my invitation above

            2. According to Wiki:

              The infallible teachings of the Pope must be based on, or at least not contradict, Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scripture.

              1. So is he teaching or talking out of his ass?

                1. I’m going to go with the latter, with a smattering of the former as in ‘teaching the ignorant a bunch of totally useless drivel’.

      2. The Pope doesn’t seem to grok that Jesus was an apostate of Judaism. His own personal savior seems to be the American philosopher, Rodney King. “Can’t we all get along?”.

    2. Sounds like he’s also joined the cult of global warming. Isn’t that like a form of heresy?

  8. From the book “Train” I’m reading:

    “[the] Chinese [are] ready to spend up to $292Bn before it [the expansion of their rail system] was all over.
    China is preparing, in short, for a possible oil shock in the medium-term future, and it wants to have a system already in place in which goods and people can be moved by very little fuel while the rest of the world remains locked to the private car”

    Published in 2014; written sometime earlier. The wonders of central planning for all to see!

    1. Yes but when the inevitable oil-shock comes, they’ll already be ready for it. Thus is the ancient and forward-thinking nature of the Chinese revealed; they plan everything to the 7,000th generation.

      1. Is that you Tom Friedman?

        1. …yes. Yes it is.

    2. Well, we’ve only been a couple years from running out of oil for 50 years now, just ask Jimmy Carter.

      I guess the Chinese finally heard about the imminent crisis while the rest of us continue filling up our gas guzzling super SUVs and snort coke off hookers behinds. Looks like our sins are about to catch up with us, any minute now…

      1. My father chose metallurgy instead of petroleum engineering sixty years ago because we were about to run out of oil.

        1. Have we hit peak aluminum?

        2. Maybe there’s some oil in those asteroids that we’re looking to mine for metal?

      2. Hyperion|1.15.15 @ 8:13PM|#
        “Well, we’ve only been a couple years from running out of oil for 50 years now, just ask Jimmy Carter.”

        In the ’20s, I.G. Farben started development of synfuels, since ‘the world was running out of oil’.
        The cost of synfuels was such that it sparked an oil prospecting boom, and I think the west Texas fields were found.
        The price of oil tanked.

        1. I’m eagerly awaiting the future when I purchase my ultra-mini compact nuclear fusion cell, the size of your average microwave oven, for $50, that will power my entire home for 4.3 billion years and the $20 one that powers my car.

          Until then, DRILL BABY, DRILL!!!

  9. So, looks like we have the pope, the muslims, and the entire proggy hoards are joining up to demonize and eliminate liberty at every level.

    So when can we just abandon this false conservative vs. liberal, republican vs. democrat garbage and get down to the final war between the authoritarian axis of evil and the liberty loving libertarians? And don’t forget, axis of evil, guns are icky, you can just talk us out of this silly liberty shit, trust me.

  10. my co-worker’s half-sister makes $69 /hr on the internet . She has been fired from work for ten months but last month her payment was $17800 just working on the internet for a few hours. try here……
    ????? http://www.cashbuzz80.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.