Rand Paul

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz: Separated at Birth? Uh, No.

Two very different candidate test themselves with the Republican Party, and maybe the American people


Rand Paul

Job one for Sen. Rand Paul in his new role as Republican presidential aspirant is to somehow distinguish himself from ideological doppelganger Sen. Ted Cruz and kneecap his rival for the GOP nod. Or so say some media outlets that may be driven as much by an appreciation for good political bloodsport as by a touch of political insularity.

According to Bloomberg's David Knowles, "Both seen as conservatives just outside the mainstream of the party, Paul and Cruz will compete for support from the same voter demographic during the GOP primary, meaning that only one of these men will likely have a realistic shot at challenging establishment candidates like Jeb Bush."

Fox News/Associated Press agree that "Republican Sens. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul both tapped into the powerful Tea Party movement, fueled by frustration with big government and overspending, to win their seats in Congress. Now, the two freshman senators find themselves competing directly for that same constituency as they seek the party nomination in the 2016 presidential race."

They're "two peas in the tea party pod," chimes in the Christian Science Monitor's Francine Kiefer.

Well…not really.

Yes, both Ted Cruz and Rand Paul rode Tea Party support to the United States Senate, and both can legitimately claim outsider status relative to both D.C. politics and the Republican establishment, but that doesn't make them clones of one another. Both are critical of large, expensive government. Ted Cruz famously invoked Milton Friedman upon winning the GOP senatorial nomination in 2012. Rand Paul is a second-generation libertarian who champions smaller government and free-market solutions at every turn.

But while that might make them twins in the eyes of East Coast journalists for whom the intrusive state occupies a place in nature as unquestionable as the moon in the sky, it ignores a host of issues on which the two disagree.

Reason's January profile of Cruz, by Glenn Garvin, noted the Texas senator's seemingly innate religiosity, and that he seems "bellicose on the subject of U.S. policy in the Middle East, and he has mocked Obama for not taking a tougher line over Russian intervention in the Ukraine." Cruz has been critical of NSA surveillance—and supportive of Paul's efforts against the same—though he shows a "clever propensity for framing the issues in a way that will appear to the religious right," as Garvin's profile put it.

Paul, by contrast, has courted the religious right amidst suspicions that he reached adult life without especially traditional religious beliefs to speak of, and possibly even a contempt for them. Originally known as a noninterventionist on foreign policy issues, the Kentucky senator now sounds a more hawkish note without actually winning over traditional GOP saber-rattlers who already oppose his presidential aspirations. His civil liberties efforts, including a 13-hour filibuster over drone strikes, show cross-party appeal and are core to his identity.

Of course, Cruz and Paul now have to appeal to broader constituencies in their parties (and maybe tick off their bases just a tad as they do so). But even as they shift, wriggle, and reposition in fine political tradition, they do so in distinct ways.


As Nick Gillespie noted last week, Sen. Ted Cruz's first post-announcement video was "Blessing" which steeped itself in more religiosity than has been seen since Blackadder's Puritan aunt came to dinner. That video features front and center on his campaign website right now, along with an emphasis on "courageous conservatives."

The four themes of Cruz's campaign at the moment are "Our Standard: The Constitution," "Stronger, Safer America," "Life, Marriage & Family," and "Jobs & Opportunity."

Cruz isn't wandering any distance at all from very familiar Republican ground—which may serve him well during the primary process, since it's GOP stalwarts who get to decide who carries the party's standard.

By contrast, Sen. Paul's announcement emphasized an outsider stance against "special interests" that use Washington as "their personal piggy bank" and the "Washington machine that gobbles up our freedoms and invades every nook and cranny of our lives." He promised criminal justice reform and an end to the NSA's domestic surveillance.

The pull-down menu of issues on his campaign website features (among other options) "Civil Liberties," a phrase not apparent on Cruz's site, and a modest-ish (in modern terms) "vow to explore all diplomatic options before sending our Armed Forces into battle."

In his campaign announcement, Paul freely criticized both Republicans and Democrats for creating the bloated and intrusive federal government. The Los Angeles Times's Seema Mehta noted that "Paul has burnished his image as an unusual candidate for his party, visiting inner cities and college campuses and talking about issues such as reducing penalties for drug use as he courts the young and minority voters. But to succeed Paul will have to shore up his appeal among the Republican base of older white voters."

While both Ted Cruz and Rand Paul are trying to win the presidential nomination of the Republican Party, one is trying to do so as a traditional conservative, and the other as a libertarian-ish conservative. Both will have to make compromises along the way as they reach out beyond the base that elected them to the Senate and has supported their causes as lawmakers—and Paul, at least has already disappointed some supporters who'd hoped to see a purer libertarian challenge to the status quo.

But the contest isn't between identical candidates at all; it's between outsider Republicans who are different in important ways. The question is which approach will be more successful in the modern Republican Party—and have a chance to test itself with the general electorate.

NEXT: Can a Spending Rider Save a Medical Marijuana Supplier From Prison Seven Years After He Was Convicted?

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. Paul and Cruz are nearly ideologically identical. They’re just different in tone and their strategy of seeking the nomination.

    1. No not quite. Cruz is softer and vaguer on foreign policy and domestic spying and seems less committed to criminal justice reform. He also panders harder to the borderite crowd.

      1. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz have very similar positions on border security (see for example this white paper describing an amendment proposed by Paul: http://www.paul.senate.gov/fil…..Verify.pdf).

        It is a matter of different emphases, in large part.

        1. I am pretty sure Rand is against e-verify and I am pretty sure Cruz is for it, maybe even making it mandatory (?). That’s a big negative for Cruz.

          1. After some googling, you are correct. From the same article:

            “I introduced two amendments to dramatically increase and improve and streamline legal immigration focused on high skilled workers. High Tech and high skilled foreign students study here and graduate here in engineering, science, math, and then we send them back to their own country to work. They start businesses there, when they could start business here, and create jobs. It makes no sense. The amendment I introduced would increase the numbers of temporary high skilled visas five fold. Again, every single Democrat voted it down. Why? Sen. Chuck Schumer explained why. He said the Democrats had cut a deal with the union bosses and they could not go any higher.

            Another amendment I introduced was to streamline and simplify the legal immigration system. It is now an extremely complicated bureaucracy. It takes years, and it’s expensive and burdensome. I proposed to end the per country caps. Actually, Mexico is hurt the most by this. It can take as long as 10-20 yrs to come into the U.S. legally from Mexico. Increasing per country caps would help with that. Every Democrat voted against it. Again, they cut a deal with the unions.

            My conclusion is that Cruz is worse than Paul on this issue, but that they are separated by their differing views on E-Verify more than any restrictionist policy.

            1. Cruz has taken a much more hardline approach on deportation, and to my knowledge (backed up by HM’s ontheissues links) is completely opposed to amnesty under any circumstances, while Paul has indicated that he’d be in favor of it under certain circumstances.

          2. It’s a big positive for Cruz, as far as I’m concerned.

            1. Congrats you’re a troglodyte and an enemy of freedom.

            2. E-verify is one of the most anti-liberty propositions in the history of this country. You’re asking that the surveillance state be given oversight of the entire labor market, and for what end? To prevent a few immigrants from lowballing natives?

              The knock-on effects from such an apparatus will be terrible; just think of what the EEOC is going to do with all that hiring data. And what’s more is that it will do fuckall to solve the problem it’s intended to in the first place: illegals tend to work cash jobs under the table, after all.

              1. I still think the differences between Cruz and Paul are relatively minor on ideology and principle but E-verify is a big strike against Cruz. I’ll call it a “deal-breaker”. I don’t like Cruz’s support of E-verify any more than I liked the (tacit) support of it by Reason editors.

      2. Positions change with the circumstances, as they should. Forget them for a moment. Let’s support a man of character and libertarian principle that will have the will and ability to bring our country through the crises that are most certain to present themselves in the near future. I have met both men and had the fortunate opportunity to discuss issues at length with both. From these exchanges I will share no specifics but share two observations. Mr. Cruz is the more intelligent man, more politically savy, and more bold. He may be the supreme operator if elected to the White House. Dr. Paul is somewhat less polished, certainly less calculating, and yet speaks with true knowledge and genuine desire to bring this country back to the foundation that has made us so successful. Would it be possible, I would elect both to the presidency. Short of that, I choose Rand…….

  2. Paul is a libertarian when it’s convenient to criticize libertarians, and a conservative when it’s convenient to criticize conservatives.

    1. You were a journo-lista, weren’t you?

      1. Check your sarcasm detector.

  3. “Paul and Cruz are nearly ideologically identical. They’re just different in tone and their strategy of seeking the nomination.”

    That seems to be one meme that’s begun. How much it is repeated and how long it lasts will be interesting to find out.

        1. It was the slippery slope of gay marriage that led to the legalization of human-website marriage in 2024.

      1. Yeah, I don’t know how anyone can compare the following and say they’re the same:

        Ted Cruz on Crime:

        World Court should have no say in Texas executions. (Jul 2011)
        Fully monitor sexual predators & bring them to justice. (Jul 2011)
        Supports the death penalty. (Oct 2012)

        Rand Paul on Crime:

        Blacks look who’s in prison & conclude cops out to get them. (Aug 2014)
        Let convicted felons regain the right to vote. (Jun 2014)
        Justice cannot occur without a trial, especially minorities. (Mar 2014)
        Defend trial by jury & oppose unlawful searches. (Feb 2013)
        Stop over-criminalization in vague laws like Lacey Act. (Sep 2012)
        Lacey Act applies foreign laws to US citizens. (Sep 2012)
        Many criminal statutes lack requirement of criminal intent. (Sep 2012)

    1. It’ll last until they stake out opposing positions. It isn’t just a “meme”, it’s a fact. Ron endorsed and campaigned for Cruz in Texas. Ted backed up Rand on the filibuster demonstrating they were ideologically nearly identical.

      1. That doesn’t demonstrate they are ideologically identical.

        1. It’s SIV, man. He’s pretty much tulpa-lite.

          1. That seems harsh.

  4. FFS Tooch, you use a Blackadder clip instead of the Twins movie poster? What kind of communist are you?

    1. He did nothing. The pavement was his enemy.

      1. Rand is Arnold, obviously. Because every interview he has to play “who is my daddy, and what does he do?”

  5. Neither are talking about how they would cut spending though. Perhaps they learned a lesson from Paul Ryan’s proposed Medicare cuts in 2011-12 (and he became a two time loser).

  6. I think that now I’ve decided to only support Rand if he agrees to Rule from Mars with his new side kick, Mullet Space Girl.

  7. This must have come up during the dozens of other H&R threads about Senator Rand Paul’s presidential aspirations. RP has not been an executive, AFIK. This Obama guy wasn’t either, thank goodness, that’s why he screwed up during the first two years and only left us with the ACA. But he’s sure figured it out since. Cruz is just an orator too. I still cannot see any potential contenders, other than Scott Walker, who will stand up under fire, to Leviathan.

    I’ll probably regret this, but SCOTT WALKER! It’s not what you say it’s what you do. The Department of Education, e.g., has doubled in size under Obama. Does Rand Paul have the nerve to hand out the pink slips? I think he wants to be liked, get along, and rise above these practical matters with philosophical arguments. I think he is beta and won’t do it.

    1. I think Paul is up to the task of hacking away at government, but that’s just a hope at this point. No telling if he’ll actually do it. Walker has done some good things, but I feel much less comfortable with him as an anti-statist. Bush was a fairly “limited government” governor, as far as that goes, but we can see how much that’s out the window as far as his presidential ambitions go.

      1. ^This.

        I’ll take someone with the intellectual and policy bona fides over someone with the executive experience. One can learn on the job and grow into competency at the executive level (and frankly the executive actions a POTUS handles are more about who to appoint and delegate to anyhow).

    2. Let’s agree that no one from the Bush clan shall ever again take the oath of office. Dubya said some graceful things to say about small governance on his way, but he wet his pants on 9/11. GWB was a governor in a state with a booming economy. He got away without a test. Privilege!

      1. No Bushes, no Clintons. Not in any capacity. Really, how do we not have ostracism?

        1. The fear of a Bush or Clinton dynasty should pale when compared to an…gulp….Obama dynasty.

          I believe that the American people would absolutely elect Michelle Obama President of the United States. Experience? She has been right there, involved in all the big decisions made for the past 8 years. The President’s “go-to” adviser. A Woman. Actually black, instead of only half, which makes her election even more not racist. She would also have the sitting President campaigning for her the entire time. Ellen just loves her!

          **Guzzles a pint of cheap Canadian “whiskey”**

          1. I really doubt that, outside the halls of Jezebel, Michelle is particularly well liked. She might not be reviled, exactly, but I don’t think she’s exactly beloved, either.

            1. One might say that about the current top D pick..

              1. Oh, Clinton is without a doubt reviled by many. Michelle, though, apart from high school students, I don’t think most people care.

      2. Oh, but Jenna?!

    3. I think he wants to be liked, get along, and rise above these practical matters with philosophical arguments. I think he is beta and won’t do it.

      I think this is bullshit.

    4. This is where I’m at, as well (hence why I supported Gay Jay in ’12).

    1. Of course he is, but is there a downside to him?

    2. The first link was bad form by Paul. Wait until the JOURNALIST has finished giving her speech. Pause. Say “What is your question?”

      “But I just asked you 75 questions.”

      “I am a man and can only answer one question at a time.”

      “Hillary Clinton could.”

      “I can’t.”

      1. Maybe he should try.

        “I never did beat my wife, so no, I didn’t stop beating her, because I never started”.

        Seriously, I’d love to see that be his actual answer. But it’s probably too flippant to taken as “serious”.

        1. I want a flippant response to a retarded, self-righteous shit-head masquerading as a journalist asking ‘trap’ questions. It is the only response the asshole is deserving and we need to start meting those out to put them in their proper place.

  8. Where is Cruz on the WOD? On foreign policy?

    Maybe Cruz won’t really know until he consults further with the invisible sky god.

    1. And consulting the invisible natural rights tablet is just so much better. Nope no faith going on there. The Holy Spirit of Reason tells you that the individual is the greatest end and not a means to any higher good and is endowed with the right of self determination. It’s just reason. Only unreasonable people could think differeny.

        1. I think she does a good job of using her hands to supplement the blow job.

        2. HM, I am dissapoint. I watched that entire video and didn’t see a single female ass shaking. You feelin’ OK?

        3. Hey, that’s not Princess Zelda!

      1. And consulting the invisible natural rights tablet is just so much better.

        Sure, Tony. Whatever you say.

        I think libertarians who logically deduce from premises like the NAP and self ownership have a better claim to morality than someone who learns right and wrong from an invisible friend. Then again, if that someone lacks the ability to reason, I suppose it’s better that they have some sort of moral foundation. Even if it means asking advice from an invisible friend.

        1. Libertarians who logically deduce from the NAP are no different than Christians who logically deduce from God given natural rights. Someone could just as easily claim reasoning those who reason God given rights have a better moral claim than someone who gets their rights from an Ayn Rand novel.

          1. Except that no one claims to get their rights from an Ayn Rand novel.

            1. Well…Cytotoxic might. I don’t really know.

              1. Not her novels. But Objectivism does lay it out correctly, and is the only ism that does so.

                1. Not her novels. But Objectivism does lay it out correctly, and is the only ism that does so.

                  Only because Scientology isn’t an “ism”.


                  Oh, also somebody mailed me something from Vancouver today. Does your communist mail system run fairly efficiently? I need this package by the weekend.

                  1. Only because Scientology isn’t an “ism”.


                    Does your communist mail system run fairly efficiently?

                    Not really. There are non-CP options though at least for international shipping, I think.

                    I need this package by the weekend.

                    Good luck with that I don’t think it’s going to happen.

                    4-6 business days for a letter. Don’t know about a package.




                    1. The joke was, because Scientology actually has all the answers, but your statement was still technically correct since it isn’t an “ism”.

                      And I am now saddened that my space marines will not see paint until next week.

                    2. Oh and it is CP, but the tracking number isn’t showing anything yet except, “received”.

                    3. Scientology does not have all the answers. But Objectivism actually does /humorlessness

                    4. Scientology has all the answers, but is missing the questions.


                    5. 4-6 business days for a letter.

                      You lie. I got my new TV overnight for $4.99 through Amazon Prime and you can’t get a letter for 4 business days?! If it isn’t communist, it is just as efficient, apparently.

                    6. It’s from the CP website. See the broken up link.

            2. Jesus got his rights from Ayn Rand.

        2. Self-ownership is not in any sense derived in libertarian thought, it is *defined*. There’s a difference, and frankly the logic behind the standard argument for self-ownership is almost as piss-poor as Locke’s argument for homesteading.

          1. I didn’t say it was derived. I said it was a premise. If you don’t agree with the premise, then I guess you support slavery.

            1. “Deducing from premises” is to derive. Axioms are different from that which is deduced from the axiom.

              And this:

              “If you don’t agree with the premise, then I guess you support slavery”

              is a false dichotomy.

              What if I’m not something that is, in principle, possible to be owned? Speaking of ownership of self starts from invalid premises unless and until one has established that individuals can be owned — whether by themselves or others. There are many other problems with the chain of logic, most of them having to do with the individual = property categorization.

              (In fairness, the argument is a fairly silly little import from Objectivism and can be blamed on Ayn Rand’s philosophy moreso than libertarianism, persay)

              1. People can be owned when enough force is employed. But might-makes-right doesn’t negate self-ownership. It only violates it.

              2. You’ve got to start with a clear definition of ownership. Let’s define ownership as the ultimate or primary control of the disposition of a thing. When I say that I own something, I’m saying that, absent force, coercion, or deception, I have the final say as to the usage of a thing. As a sentient, conscious being, that obviously holds true for each individual WRT to his or her body, right? So, in that sense, you are owned, and you’re owned by yourself, and ultimately nobody else can have a higher claim on your body because you can’t cede control of your body to someone else.

      2. The Holy Spirit of Reason

        In which John demonstrates that he not only doesn’t understand reason and logic but actively holds them in contempt.

        1. It’s Red Tony. What do you expect?

        2. Especially funny given that all I have to do is look at the piss-poor state that collectivist countries inevitably end in and I can deduce from that that individualism is a good thing.

          That doesn’t exactly require any appeal to a ‘Holy Spirit.’

          1. When you’re a creationist, be it someone who worships the state as their god or an invisible man as their god, everything must come from some sort of authority. Thus morality must come from their god, be it an invisible man named God or The Will Of The People. The concept of principles simply being right on their own merit, as opposed to originating from a higher power, simply does not compute.
            It’s like trying to explain emergent order to someone who keeps asking “Well who controls it? Be specific. I want names.”

            1. When you’re a creationist, be it someone who worships the state as their god or an invisible man as their god, everything must come from some sort of authority.

              Dude, never go full Botard.

              That is a pretty fucking broad brush you have there, collectivize much? While I am not among them, it seems that there are a pretty large number of self-described religious people on this site. They had to ask Jesus to decide that Libertarianism is appropriate, rather than simply deciding for themselves? No one could believe in God and also conclude rationally that they believed in Libertarianism?

              Add the words “some” or “many” to your post and I totally agree. Here let me show you.

              When you’re a creationist For many creationists, be it someone who worships the state as their god or an invisible man as their god, everything must come from some sort of authority. Thus morality must come from their god, be it an invisible man named God or The Will Of The People. The concept of principles simply being right on their own merit, as opposed to originating from a higher power, simply does not compute for some.
              It’s like trying to explain emergent order to someone who keeps asking “Well who controls it? Be specific. I want names.”

              I realize that the comparison to Bo is probably over the top. Just trying to show you how some of the anti-religion rhetoric comes off to me, a very avowed atheist.

          2. Libertarianism =/= classical economics and its derivatives, though it of course includes such things within it as subsets.

            Singapore is a pretty nice place, by most of the measures you are likely to find important. It is also offensive on many counts to libertarian morality, particularly (but not merely) on social freedoms.

            If your only argument amounts to a (fairly broad) anti-communist argument, you’re not even halfway to fully-realized libertarianism.

      3. Some of us are Mills fans. What is the greatest good? For me I can determine that. For others, I cannot. Therefore the principle of self-ownership and freedom are the best I can do. And I have to admit that my freedom and others will necessarily come into conflict and we will attempt to resolve by the least restrictive means. It is quite imperfect, bur Liberty is the value and least restriction is the criterion.

        1. I didn’t know you were a Frank Mills fan.

          1. JS Mills. But Frank ain’t terrible.

            1. JS Mill – that extra ‘s’ is yours.

        2. Interesting. I usually hear Mill’s Utilitarianism come up in the context of socialism, but your take on it make a lot of sense.

      4. John|4.8.15 @ 6:20PM|#
        “And consulting the invisible natural rights tablet is just so much better. Nope no faith going on there.”

        Damn, that strawman takes a hell of a beating, John.

        1. Red Tony likes to beat on strawmen.

    2. The WOD is a proxy for arresting blacks between the ages of 13 and 28 for some other crime they might have committed. The cops have a hard time getting them to court for boosting at Walmart and when they do the sentence is very light. Just about every unemployed black on the midnight sidewalk is wearing something that was stolen. But she has to have a crack pipe (that she really did purchase) in her pocket to get arrested, brought to court, and sentenced with any serious consequence. It’s upside down.

      This may be worth the pixels it’s written on, but it would be better to be more vigilant and harsh on theft than on drug position. Retailers just put this off as a the cost of doing business in the hood.

      1. Theft is a crime with a victim. There’s no profit to be made from policing that. Victimless crimes though, they are an excuse for the state to rob someone of everything they own. Those are worth policing.

      2. The K Street accountants for Walmart and Target will factor in theft as the cost of doing business in the hood. Bad. Asian storekeepers, who live above the store, will chase you barefoot over hot coals for a nickel. Good. Some will shoot you. Ugly.

  9. I must have missed Cruz’s soaring oratory on the need to reform criminal justice and shut down spying on citizens.

      1. Ya John you probably should read your links a bit better:

        Cruz backed the USA Freedom Act sponsored by Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont which ? had it passed ? would have reformed but not gutted the Patriot Act.

        Paul, the singular presidential contender who uncompromisingly opposes NSA surveillance, voted against the measure because he wanted to altogether de-authorize the Patriot Act, according to the Journal.

        So Cruz’s soaring oratory about ending the surveillance state is to narrow its reach. Paul wants to actually fucking end the thing.

      2. So, you are here for the swarthy latino buttsecks. I mean fuck you – a bill from Leahy, that bag of shit eating maggots? The only act that Leahy could propose that I would support would be his own fucking suicide.

        And at best you only would have been half-right since there is no evidence that Cruz isn’t a run of the mill Drug Warrior (and not to mention the foreign policy difference that I didn’t even start off with). Is that par for you?

    1. “I see an America where criminal justice is applied equally and any law that disproportionately incarcerates people of color is repealed.”

      Does that count as soaring oratory?

      1. “…and any law that disproportionately incarcerates people of color is repealed.”

        No more drug laws. Or murder laws. Guess we’d just have to make sure more whites are arrested for murder…

        1. That’s Paul, on one of his priority issues, in the most important speech of his career. Unbelievable. It’s reminds of when Gary Johnson had to suspend his campaign to fly to NH because he forgot to file paperwork.

      2. Not particularly since he isn’t talking about an America that actually exists.

        1. I thought your point was that Paul has “soaring oratory” on criminal justice reform and Cruz does not.

          1. No, the contrary. And I like Cruz as a Senator, Paul the same. I don’t think either is anywhere near ready to be President.

            1. Paul is clearly ready, and a case can be made for Cruz.

          2. Crap, that didn’t come out right. Cruz’s signature is his rhetorical gift (and a wicked sharp mind). He has made no hay on the subject of criminal justice reform, “soaring” or otherwise.

            Paul is not a gifted speaker. But he proposes sound policy changes even if you won’t jump up and down while he is speaking.

            1. Ah, I see. I mostly agree. But that quote sounds like a policy change to me, and it’s insane.

              1. It is stated poorly. I agree.

                However, I’m pretty sure he isn’t actually against repealing laws against murder. So maybe you are being a tad nit picky here.

                1. Can you steelman that quote into something that isn’t depressingly stupid?

                  1. Look, the context is the War on Drugs, where minorities are imprisoned much more frequently than whites while drug use is fairly constant across those various demographics. It is a little disingenuous to generalize that across all of criminal justice – which would be depressingly stupid.

                    1. the context is the War on Drugs

                      The preceding sentence was about foreign policy. The next was about the IRS. His campaign says the context is “nonviolent crimes.” But you said “look” so I guess you’ve divined the context.

                      where minorities are imprisoned much more frequently than whites

                      Some minorities are. Some are imprisoned much less frequently. This puts a pretty low upper limit to how much of that is due to racism.

                      while drug use is fairly constant across those various demographics.

                      According to surveys about illegal behavior. The well-known and documented problems with this approach should be obvious.

                      .It is a little disingenuous to generalize that across all of criminal justice

                      Why? I need a partial list of laws that should be repealed because they have a disparate impact, and laws that are immune to this argument.

                    2. Perhaps you are right and Paul is speaking to randomly reforming the criminal justice system and has failed to focus on the spectacularly inept War on Drugs. Or perhaps you are just being as big a pedantic asshole as myself.

                    3. He hasn’t focused specifically on the war on drugs. He’s sponsored as many bills withholding federal prison funds from states that don’t allow nonviolent felon voting (GOP lol) as he has reducing drug sentences. Unlike better politicians who outsource their opinions to think tanks, Paul seems to believe a mish mash of middlebrow crap he saw on the internet.

                    4. Rand Paul is a more libertarian-inclined Glenn Beck is what I’m sayin’.

  10. Neither has a chance to win the GOP nomination. That nominee is going to be whoever the GOP establishment ordains. Everyone else will get whittled down to be the ‘grassroots’ candidate. And the only issue is how many and which demographic of the grassroots folks will simply bleat their way to being thrown under the bus by the GOP establishment. My guess is it will be the older social conservatives. Which means Cruz prob has a big head start v Paul

    1. Neither has a chance to win the GOP nomination.

      And why do you believe that the case? Money and adverts? I know the big GOP money will back the establishment fraud of the week (Jeb or Walker being the establishment picks). But so many people get their information outside of the standard TV these days. Tons of cable cutters everywhere. I think we’ll begin to see an even more pronounced trend toward the futility of money in elections starting in this election and continuing for decades to come.

      1. Actually they are both better as Senators then as President. I don’t want another fucking inexperienced Senator as President. JFK wasn’t good. Obama wasn’t any better. And those are the only two examples (no, LBJ doesn’t count).

        1. JFK’s economic policy was actually not bad. HUGE tax cuts-bigger than Reagan’s-and dismantling of some government enforced cartels. He also kept spending below 100 billion a year…I think. Foreign policy OTOH…

          1. I’ve never been a fan of the quasi-fascist “ask not…” and “bear any burden” bullshit. His only reasonable policy was on taxes – which while better than most, isn’t exactly grounds for an outstanding Presidency.

            1. I thought he deregulated stuff too. You’re right about the ‘ask not’ stuff but come on it’s just a stupid quote.

              1. No deregulation that I know of, that wouldn’t come until Carter (and represents the sole redeeming aspect of his Presidency). JFK was a Galbraith devotee IIRC.

                1. JFK was a Galbraith devotee IIRC.

                  You do. Who could forget The Affluent Society? Well anyone, I guess.

      2. Jeb and Rubio are the Establishment’s 1-2 punch. Walker is still far outside. I don’t think he could sell out/ get co-opted this cycle if he tried.

    2. I’m glad Reagan ignored doomsayers like you.

  11. Rand was able to do a soft-focus, woman-reassuring ad showing him as a physician, helping people’s eyesight.

    It would be hard for Cruz to do a soft-focus ad about his career as a lawyer – impressive though that career is.

    So yes, Cruz’s approach makes sense.

    1. Most people put lawyers on the very bottom of the respect hierarchy structure. Best not focus on that angle.

  12. I think some serious consideration should be given to the question of which of them would make a better running mate for an establishment candidate.

    Cruz may have more name recognition, just like Walker, but if Rand Paul were someone’s running mate, I think Rand Paul would bring participation in from swing voters that Cruz can’t bring.

    Cruz may have tapped into Tea Party support, as well, but the Tea Party support Cruz tapped into were mostly Republicans anyway. Rand Paul’s Tea Party support, on the other hand, includes people who might not vote for any establishment Republican if Rand Paul weren’t on the ticket.

    I know I wouldn’t vote Jeb Bush for president if Rand Paul weren’t on the ticket. I wouldn’t vote for Jeb Bush if Cruz was his running mate, either. But I’d vote for Jeb Bush if Rand Paul were his running mate.

    If Rand Paul were Jeb Bush’s running mate, that would make Rand Paul the presumptive nominee eight years from now–regardless of whether Jeb Bush won reelection. And that, my fellow libertarians, is the stuff that dreams are made of.

    I hope Rand Paul wins big in New Hampshire, comes in the top three in Iowa, and then blows everyone’s mind by winning the nomination. But that libertarianish swing vote he brings to the table is something that none of his competitors can deliver as a running mate. And I’m not sure Jeb Bush needs much help from Cruz in Texas anyway.

    1. If Rand Paul agreed to serve in a hypothetical Bush administration, he would lose everything he’s built. So many constituent parts of his hodgepodge coalition of libertarians, minorites interested in real criminal reform, and even the ocassional principled prog that prioritizes ending American foreign meddling would immediately resolve to not vote for Rand again.

      Myself included.

      1. There’s no need to bring back an even hypothetical Bush administration.

        1. “There’s no need to bring back an even hypothetical Bush administration.”

          There might be if the alternative is a hypothetical Hillary Administration, and, like I said, setting Rand Paul up to be the presumptive Republican nominee in eight years is one hell of a consolation prize.

          And if Bush loses, Rand Paul would be a much stronger candidate against Hillary’s reelection campaign if he were Bush’s running mate.

          I mean, if Rand Paul doesn’t win the nomination, it’s not like he’s about to do the libertarian movement much good as 1/100 of 1/2 of 1/3 of the federal government anyway. If he’s not going to win the nomination, I’d prefer he did what was necessary to make sure he’s the presumptive nominee eight years from now.

          1. So you’d rather him be 0/100 of 1/2 of 1/3 except in the absurdly rare tie in Senate votes? Also to be relegated to a position that was most recently occupied by the only man that makes me look classy and dignified?

            1. To be the presumptive nominee eight years from now?

              Yeah, I’d give up being 1/600 of the federal government for eight years in order to have a 50/50 chance of being more than being the emperor eight years from now.

              And given the recent rules change proposed in Kentucky (and supported by his new friend Mitch McConnell), Rand probably wouldn’t have to give up being 1/600 of the federal government if his running mate loses the Presidential election.

          2. Okay. I’m not ready to think about that today. If it comes down to a Jeb Bush presidency I’m going to get that not so good here we go again feeling.

        2. Look, if the progressive Left can have a hypothetical gay wedding in rural Indiana with a wish to have a small town pizza caterer, then the establishment Right should be permitted it’s hypothetical JEBush admin.

        3. My back is exactly what a Bush or Clinton admin will see as I leave this country to the people that deserve exactly what they asked for.

          1. If only. I keep trying to explain to my wife that Costa Rica isn’t perfect, but we could afford to brine our way to happiness.

            1. Bribe. I don’t think brining meat would be enough. Barbeque isn’t going to cut it

              1. I thought you were talking about heavy drinking.

            2. Costa Rica is not very libertarian at all. The seatbelt and driving laws alone are crazy.

              1. You can buy great pills over the counter, brah… in CR. I hate to throw this shit out there but…. man I’m fucked up but I gonna stop

              2. Costa Rica is armied for a reason but beneath it all you can get fucked up without alerting the leo…. I don’t trust this site or I’d explain in depth… for the fucking whore DEA/NSA type pay attention- I don’t sell or distribute- I am purely a recreational head nothing more… I have no stash and travel with none…

              3. Please. I once talked my way out of a ticket because it was Christmas week and I was “leaving” before the courts would open again. I’ve got six uears while my passport is valid to make friwnds with the cops.

              4. You’d have to be a crazy person to not wear your seatbelt in Costa Rica.

                Plus, how is that any different from the US?

                The only reason I wouldn’t move to the Arenal area is because I’m sure some generation of my family would get burnt alive by a pyroclastic flow. It is ridiculously beautiful there. Stayed at Nayara for a bit, highly recommended if you can get a deal.

            3. If we go spanish-speaking, it would be Chile not Costa Rica.

              1. But CR is English speaking. Or gios enough.

                1. Spanish is easy to lean and CR does not have much English. Belize does.

                  Chile is way better on the liberty and economy thing than CR. CR has a lot of corruption.

              2. I lived in Mexico for more than a year–and I didn’t know Spanish.

                The language barrier is way overrated.

                I would never pick one country to live in over another just because it’s English speaking.

                I think I’d rather live anywhere in Central America rather than Belize City–and they speak English.

                1. I was there before it became a tourist Mecca. They spit on me in the street because I am white.

                  When it turned into a tourist Mecca I was astounded.

                  1. “They spit on me in the street because I am white.”

                    UCSB campus?

                    1. I thought that was Santa Cruz.

      2. It’s even worse when the hypothetical Bush administration is a Jeb Bush one.

      3. You should wait until that administration starts doing awful things and then see what’s Rand’s reaction is.

    2. Cruz would help with Hispanics (though much, much less than is assumed by some Republican types), and energize social conservatives (again, less than is typically assumed). He would also be a good attack dog a la Cheney.

      Rand would energize libertarians, and social conservatives to some degree as well (less than Cruz, but more than is often assumed).

      Both would motivate the Tea Party, though for slightly different reasons.

      I would rather have Rand as VP, all things considered: the concessions on the issues he could extract for this would be better and more focused on traditional libertarian concerns, and of course it sets him up to potentially be President himself, after he already knows how things more or less work.

      1. Oh, and it’s not going to be Jeb Bush. It might be Walker or one of the other governors.

        1. I keep saying, I met Walker. He’s the real deal one-on-one. And I’ve done the same deal with GWB and Jeb. Don’t count him out. He’s not my preference, but I respect that he is at least as good as Jeb on that score. I think Walker is a competitor.

        2. I figured a year ago that Kasich was the quiet but serious threat. Still possible.

    3. If Rand agreed to be Jeb’s running mate, I’d vote 3rd party and never listen to another word he said.

    4. I wouldn’t vote for Jeb Bush if Zombie Lysander Spooner was his running mate.

  13. Start working from home! Great job for students, stay-at-home moms or anyone needing an extra income… You only need a computer and a reliable internet connection… Make $90 hourly and up to $12000 a month by following link at the bottom and signing up… You can have your first check by the end of this week………….


  14. Among those I associate with I’ve heard both Paul/Cruz some and Cruz/Paul from others. A little early for guessing, but maybe they’ll end up on the same team. If they’re really doppelgangers as J.D. implied, why not?

    1. *from some

  15. Cruz is liberty midget next to Paul but he would still be a massive improvement as president. At this point I most of all just want to prevent America from turning into ArgentinaDetroit. I want real wealth creation and less fueling of bubbles please. Cuts to spending. I think President Cruz would be better than Reagan and would deliver on this at least. His energy bill and positions are fantastic. Still prefer Rand but you guys have to be open-minded.

    1. I’m in for any combination of the two. Been taking quite a beating for the past few decades. Considering the life penalties involved I don’t know if I can afford to be finicky at this point.

    2. That’s great that you think anyone as President can deliver on cutting spending considering the 435 petit bourgeoisie that actually determine spending (based on suckering the morons that vote for them).

      1. I call it a ‘veto’.

        1. How’d that work out for Bush?

          A President really committed to cutting spending would just end up seeing his veto over-ridden by the bi-partisan snivelling coven of craven snots we call Congress.

          1. How’d that work out for Bush?

            We will never know since he was never committed to reducing spending.

            A President really committed to cutting spending would just end up seeing his veto over-ridden by the bi-partisan snivelling coven of craven snots we call Congress.

            Maybe, or maybe partisanship comes to our rescue and divides them too much to get past the veto.

            1. You do realize that he vetoed one part of the budget in 2007, right? He complained that it was too much and too full of pork. Granted, he was in no way committed to limited govt, but he ended up caving on his veto just the same.

              And the power of the purse properly belongs to Congress not the President. He can object all he wants, which usually isn’t very much. Most Congress-critters are more concerned with their own asses than the President. I can only think of one time that the President pulled off the appeal to the people to sway Congress and that was 34 years ago. And even then, that was on taxes – he caved to Congress on spending.

              1. This comes close to fisking me but not quite because that’s not a veto override.

            2. There is no partisanship in congress when it comes to extracting wealth from the tax cattle. The partisanship comes after the fact on which cronies to hand it over to.

  16. Saw this vid in another thread: https://youtu.be/0Pij5Sg4_DY?t=3m34s

    Guy sounds remarkably similar to the crazy yelling guy from Parks and Recreation:


    1. @6:02 “Obviously, feel free to speak at length through your comments”

      *looks down the page*

      All Comments
      Comments are disabled for this video.

      1. Define irony: disabled comments on a video that praises open debate.

      2. I commend you for getting to @6:02. For that, you win this debate on these gals.

    2. lol

      i thought this was a joke. Sometimes you don’t need to mock people so much as trigger them to ‘defend themselves’.

      I think paul should take this particular route with the “Shushing”. Keep shushing people and let the retards go apoplectic with rage denouncing him.

      1. In a group of people going apoplectic, at least a few ought to fatally stroke out.

    3. You motherfucker.

      Now i get CEDA debates in my youtube ‘recommends’.

      Fortunately the Internet Aristocrat did a takedown of the CEDA affair, which may help erase them. Plus perhaps i can click on a lot of thuglife videos and they eventually will shove them out.

      1. What’s a CEDA?

        1. ‘Cross Examination Debate Association’

          You remember the crazy people who were in the “debate” competition that consisteed of people doing Slam Poetry/performance art? that’s them.

          1. I don’t remember that, and am glad for it.

    4. Wow.

      I was wondering what kinds of people unleashed that idiocy on the world. Now I see; actual idiots.

    1. I haven’t seen video of Maddow in a few years. She seems manlier than ever.

      1. What’d you say?


    2. I haven’t seen video of Maddow in a few years. She seems manlier than ever.

  17. Marie Harf harfs harder than she’s ever harfed before.

    Regarding an Op-Ed from Kissinger criticizing Obama’s foreign policy:

    “I didn’t hear a lot of alternatives. I heard a lot of?sort of a lot of big words and big thoughts in that piece, and certainly there is a place for that. But I didn’t hear a lot of alternatives about what they would do differently,” Harf said.

    This is the Obama Administration. There’s no place for big thoughts here.

    1. Yeah, but Maddow makes Pee Wee Herman noises:


      Serious. Journalism.

      1. Pee wee herman is stupendous on cocaine.

        1. I have to ask – when he is on it, or when you are?

      1. Contemplate this upon the tree of woe.

      2. So the basis of her career is kissing her bosses’ asses and telling them it tastes like ice cream.

        Makes sense.

      3. i think she was an analyst for about 5 minutes before she was moved to the PR department. that’s what i gathered from the source material at least.

        besides, the sort of stuff “junior-analyst” people like her do is the equivalent of cut-pasting CIA’s version of wikipedia into Power-Point slides.

        Dwell on the fact that she was considered *less competent* for that than she was for “making Other People Look Smart” by answering tough-questions.

      4. Harf is like a massive alien crap from deep space unexpectedly hit the important federal buildings (because lots of federal buildings can be swallowed up and no one would give a fucking single shit) and lodged strange particles in all the foyers and these particles emitted an unearthly shape-shifting collective of all the old tired socialized universities and this fucking pet of all the threaded rods is called Harf.

    2. ” “Ideally we would like [Iran] to stop supporting Hezbollah and the Houthis and to release all American prisoners but it defies logic to make that argument””

      Whereas, the logic of a “deal” with Iran which remains opposed by the 2 other major powers in the region most likely to go to War with Iran (Israel, Saudi Arabia)…. makes a great deal of sense. “Any deal is better than No Deal”, we are told… because…… why? Because it is *imperative*…that….. something? what?

      It “Defies Logic” to demand both sides change their current policy?

      1. Are you talking about Harf or the Reason editorial line?

        1. the quote was Harf, rejecting criticism of Obama’s “Iran Deal” as being “unrealistic” for expecting any actual concessions from Iran.

          For you see, in exchange for them making WE TOTALLY SWEAR promises about nukes? We need to allow them to keep funding Hezbollah, and trying to overthrow various regimes in the region. You can only expect so much when you’re trying to ‘get stuff done’ just to say you can.

          1. I was being snotty because of the (stupid) editorial line here at Reason that expecting Iran not to be evil is ‘unrealistic’ and probably ‘imperialist’.

  18. Sounds like a solid plan to me dude. Wow.


  19. Ted Cruz is that hunch-backed beer can-sucking master in all the old hills… He gets tradition and the mystical old ways…. Rand Paul is that hunch-backed beer can-sucking master in all the old hills with bat wings…. he gets tradition and the mystical old ways but understands that delicious blondes and grappling hooks get shit done.

    1. This is why I like you, Cyborg. You say what we’re all thinking but are too afraid to admit.

      1. And the fucking slayer of Huns wields a fucking sword that goddamn slices all the monitors… we have to buy all new fucking monitors, IRISH!

    2. For your consideration, Agile Cyborg, I offer you Vernon Love Supreme.


      1. An eternity of words can’t describe the love…

    3. “Rand Paul is that hunch-backed beer can-sucking master in all the old hills with bat wings…. he gets tradition and the mystical old ways but understands that delicious blondes and grappling hooks get shit done.”

      Not seeing the love in Peoria…

  20. I’ve outderped the Derpetologist: A pre-married Elizabeth Stoker and Matt Breunig talking at Blogging Heads which includes a segment at the 35 minute mark called ‘does property really exist?’

    It is unbelievable. Matt Breunig is now explicitly saying that when he advocates a tax increase he isn’t saying we’re taking anything from you, it’s just that we distribute less to you.

    Got that? Every dime you own which the government has not yet taken you only have through the government’s benevolence.

    1. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you…Cass Sunstein.

      “In what sense is the money in our pockets and bank accounts fully ‘ours’? Did we earn it by our own autonomous efforts? Could we have inherited it without the assistance of probate courts? Do we save it without the support of bank regulators? Could we spend it if there were no public officials to coordinate the efforts and pool the resources of the community in which we live? Without taxes, there would be no liberty. Without taxes there would be no property. Without taxes, few of us would have any assets worth defending. [It is] a dim fiction that some people enjoy and exercise their rights without placing any burden whatsoever on the public? There is no liberty without dependency.”

      1. cont…”If government could not intervene effectively, none of the individual rights to which Americans have become accustomed could be reliably protected. […] This is why the overused distinction between “negative” and “positive” rights makes little sense. Rights to private property, freedom of speech, immunity from police abuse, contractual liberty and free exercise of religion ? just as much as rights to Social Security, Medicare and food stamps ? are taxpayer-funded and government-managed social services designed to improve collective and individual well-being.”

        1. Not taking is giving and not giving is taking.

        2. It’s just a new way for them to describe outright stealing without admitting that’s what it is. These people are always hungry for other people’s stuff. The only reason they don’t take it all is that they don’t have all the guns.

          That’s it. Full stop. They just know that if they are honest about it, people will react badly. So they’re always trying to come up with some horseshit that makes people less pissed about it.

          1. It isn’t an injustice if the people who commit the injustice are the people tasked with dealing justice. After all, if the people who are supposed to help you when you are robbed are the people who robbed you, how can it really be robbery?

            1. – 1 robbed

        3. Cass Sunstein is a supremely evil man.

          So, the author of ‘Nudge’ is trying to rephrase Obumbles’ and Warren’s “You didn’t build that” in a way that makes it sound less idiotic. He failed.

          Its an old theme. It used to be phrased this way – “What’s mine is mine and what’s yours is mine.”

          1. And his name makes it sound like he’s a chick.

      2. Without taxes, there would be no liberty. Without taxes there would be no property. Without taxes, few of us would have any assets worth defending.

        I do not trust a man I do not have to pay for his effort. I insist we pay the night watchman. So I agree with Cass Sunstein, to some extent, at least.

        1. Here’s one of those conundrums to think about if you’re Cass Sunstein.

          Property cannot exist without taxes. So what was the first thing that was taxed?

          1. I would allow the viceroy or king to take a share of my crops in exchange for fielding an army to defend my village. I’d even offer my second son, or my first if I didn’t like him, to His army’s service in that defense. But not both, then we’d have a problem.

    2. And now Elizabeth Breunig, nee Stoker is babbling about how this socialist idiocy also informs her Christian worldview. She is saying God owns everything, therefore we can distribute it however we want, even if we don’t technically own the stuff. She’s justifying government theft through appeals to God.

      And Matt is bitching about inequality and claiming inequality causes deprivation. We should ask him where poor people are worse off, super inequitable America or one of the equal but dirt poor societies.

      Next time someone whines about inequality, I’m showing them this.

      Afghanistan has a lower Gini Index than the United States. I hardly think the lack of income inequality in Afghanistan has turned that place into a paradise.

      1. But she’s so cute!!!

        1. Young and dumb and should be full of my semen.

          1. Too thin for John. Too normal for SugarFree. Too fragile for Warty. Too real for Cytotoxic.

            Yep, I’d say you win by default.

            1. And not Grace Park enough for JJ.

              1. Grace Park isn’t Grace Park enough for me.

                I’m still searching for that mythical sideways vagina I was told about in elementary school.

                1. We all are, JJ. We all are.

                2. that mythical sideways vagina

                  Rainbow 4, Nana Plaza. Trust me on this.

                  1. Nana Plaza? Why not send them to Patpong?

                    1. Because the Night Market is too crowded and the shills too annoying.

              2. Mmm, Grace Park.

            2. Too real? Too genuine? DAFUQ?

            3. How dare you. I’ll have you know I that I love tiny fragile ladies like her expertly and tenderly and not at all crushingly. Mostly.

              1. Warty only crushes them when they want it. Which in his world is always.

                Warty does not believe in safe words. Even mine, which is “antiquing”.

              2. I still don’t know why you guys are attracted to ESB.

                There are so many other crazy political figures who are better looking.

                I’ll start. This is Marine Le Pen’s niece, a politician for the National Front in France who hates homos and non-whites.

                Her name is Marion Marechal Le Pen, she is a 25 year old blonde and she has said in the past that she is worried her party is being overrun by gays and that people who name their children things other than traditional French names are destroying the country.

                Crazy and hotter than ESB. You’re welcome.

                1. I have room in my heart for many, Irish. Plus there’s something about ESB being so cute and looking completely opposite from the way she is personality-wise (at least to me). It’s kind of fascinating that inside that sweet looking cute girl is a monster.

                  1. It’s kind of fascinating that inside that sweet looking cute girl is a monster.

                    Hmm. Steinbeck wrote a novel about that once.

                2. I love tiny little nerd girls, I can’t help it. And if you read her article about how football is tyranny and homecoming is patriarchy, you can tell that I’m exactly her type. Alas, communism and her stupid cult have come between us. Our love is meant to be and yet can never be. O CRUEL FATE

                  1. FUCK YOU I SAW HER FIRST…oh wait no I didn’t.

                    1. FUCK YOU I SAW HER FIRST…oh wait no I didn’t.

                      I knew about her since before she added the ‘B’ to ESB. I’m a bit of an ESB hipster – I was mocking her before it was cool.

                    2. Did she convert for her little pussy husband or did they both join their stupid cult together?

                    3. No. She was religious before she converted to Catholicism. She went to Cambridge to study religion and studied under an Anglican, according to her article about the Pope (who she loves so very, very much you stupid conservatives!)

                      She actually explicitly bases her leftism on the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas according to that blogging heads video. Say what you will about her, but she came by her religion on her own. I don’t even think her husband is very religious.

                    4. Mental illness. Poor girl.

                    5. But, you like mental illness, I thought. I mean, think of how much you like Irish’s mom.

          2. This is why TANFL. Not being ironic.

            1. But we always have you to be our bitch.

              1. …what? That doesn’t even make sense. And I’ve been though enough debate here to know that I’m not the one who’s the bitch.

        2. This section is hilarious and you should all watch it.

          They’re talking about human dignity. It’s glorious. COREY ROBIN JUST GOT A NAME DROP!

          When someone starts talking about Corey Robin, you know they’ve lost their mind.

      2. She’s justifying government theft through appeals to God.

        The divine right of the king has been replaced with the will of the people. Different costumes, same feudal system.

    3. “I’ve outderped the Derpetologist…”

      We’ll see about that. You do remember what happened the last time someone tried to outderp me?


      Math has traditionally been seen as the domain of old, White men, and when students cannot identify with mathematics?with role models who have been successful in math or with reasons that math matters to them and their lives?it becomes harder to stay motivated, particularly in secondary mathematics when the content leaves the easy applicability of grocery stores and bank accounts and becomes significantly more abstract.


      1. Here’s Matt Breunig saying we should give everyone money at Christmas so that they can buy presents.

        Progressives are no longer even arguing we should have a welfare system that provides the bare necessities, they’re now arguing in favor of giving people money for X-Boxes.

        1. Here’s Matt Breunig defending Jesse ‘Full Communism’ Myerson.

          This has to be the dumbest couple in the history of the human race. Their children will be the harbingers of the apocalypse.

          1. My only consolation is that always, the revolution eats it’s own.


          2. No, Irish! I can fix her! Really!

            1. I found an even better blogging heads with her and Matty.

              It starts with them asking if the US government should pay people to have children.

              1. When are they going to quit pussy-footing around and just do it on camera already?

                I’d give five bucks to see that. I bet she has 70s bush, and somehow justifies it with Christianity.

                1. Shut up JJ! STOP IT STOP IT STOP IT

    4. For the love of all that is holy Viscount, back away from that leftist hive mind before it is too late.

      Oh sure, you could chip a little and stop any time you want. Really. I believe you. But dude, you aren’t just mainlining – you’ve got a fucking catheter drip going and THAT is too much.

      You aren’t Agile Cyborg after all.

      1. This. The last time we had a Derp Off it destroyed part of me.

  21. Prog criticizes Vulcans for perceived, racism, sexism, and homophobia

    So let’s talk about everything that is wrong with Vulcan society, and thus everything that is wrong with our own.

    Spock grew up around one woman whom he thought was illogical and generalized that to mean all women are illogical, but he hangs out with two men he sees as illogical on a regular basis, yet doesn’t generalize that to all men. That’s pretty screwed up.


    But other issues, such as the sexism and potential homophobia in Vulcan society, are never addressed and so are passed off as “logical”, and therefore okay. And that’s just unacceptable.

    1. White privilege explained by Everyday Feminism.

      Bring it.

      Also, I see the mentally ill weirdo we call ‘Kizone Kaprow’ left comments at your blog. My favorite is when she claims you’re totally going to get sued for talking about a girl on the internet. I’m pretty sure every lawyer in America would laugh that lawsuit out of the office.

      1. I didn’t even notice when she posted it. I see also she decided to impersonate Playa.

  22. What do Paul Krugman, NPR, HuffPo, Slate, & Salon have in common? They all agree we need MORE inflation!



    Rogoff says the Fed should announce that it will essentially print money until inflation rises to around 5 percent a year. A few years ago, Rogoff says, this was the prescription one very prominent economist suggested that Japan use to get out of its deep economic funk.

    And how’d that work out, moron?

      1. People who save money are stealing from the masses.

        1. Saving is hoarding and hoarding is evilzzzzz…..

  23. Alternet says large corporations prove capitalism has failed:


    First, global corporations are too big. We’re living in the age of corporate dinosaurs. (The largest multinational is JP Morgan Chase with assets of $2 Trillion, 240,000 employees, and offices in 100 countries.) The original dinosaurs perished because their huge bodies possessed tiny brains. Modern dinosaurs are failing because their massive bureaucracies possess miniscule hearts.

    If big organizations are bad, then why isn’t the fed gov bad with its trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of employees?

    That’s what teenagers in Afghanistan have in common with teenagers in England; they’ve been fed the same image of success in the global community and they know it’s inaccessible. They are angry and, ultimately, their anger has the same target — multinational corporations (and the governments that support them).

    Got that? Corporations cause suicide bombing.

    1. The original dinosaurs perished because their huge bodies possessed tiny brains.

      HOLY SHIT. Speaking of tiny brains.

      1. There is currently a trolling competition being held by this blog.

        The fact that a sentence that ludicrous was in that article makes me wonder if this isn’t purposeful trolling of alternet.

    2. I like that he apparently believes teenagers in Afghanistan have been ‘fed’ an image from the global community.

      If he actually knew fucking anything about Afghanistan, he’d know the primary problem is that they’re so walled off from the rest of the world that all they do is stew continuously in Islamist juices.

      Afghanistani teenagers aren’t worried about multinational corporations because they’re too busy herding yaks and keeping their tribes safe from interlopers.

      1. they’re so walled off from the rest of the world that all they do is stew continuously in Islamist juices.

        A serious problem over there is that many are illiterate and rely on the Saudi-funded imam to tell them what the Koran says, and that Koran is probably in Ye Olde Arabic so not even the literates understand it. In this regard, a reformation in Islam-where the Koran is printed in your language of choice-would be beneficial to Islam.

      2. That doesn’t really explain Turkey though. They’ve gone full Islamist, basically, despite having all access to Western influences.

        There’s a misconception that people pick religion because they are ignorant and force fed it. But they pick it because it appeals to them. In the case of Islam, it’s about largely power.

        1. Turkey is not remotely ‘full Islamist’. They have a weird political culture that is dominated by secular left and religious right authoritarianism.

    3. God they’re morons. I guess it’s not surprising that they equate revenue with profit.

      For the record:

      JPM Net Tangible Assets 175,790,000 (thousands)

  24. Rand Paul is like a heavy sweatin bottle of Double Simcoe or Stormking or Undercover Lagunitas…. peppery, rich, altered, like the best black labia where the little butthole is a dam of when the sweet chocolate spreads her legs… on the wife bed and the wife leans over and shackalaka licks choco bean… my stories are meanderation….

    1. Chocolate baby body called my Vashanique in high school her tits were on fire everyday and her skin was the smoothest hershey and her lips were every wonder and her eyes thundered black lightning and I adored her entire structure every fucking day in 1990. I made buckets of boy streams to her….. I wanted to kiss every fucking inch of her brown pelt… she was the greatest fox of my world in 1990…. she was my black angel….

      and then she went off into the ghetto and I never saw her since….

      1. A 1 job. Just some tremendous strings of English happening there. I love the reason comments section. Smoking please.

    2. The wife is on the wife bed and leans over and shackalaka licks…please go on…

      1. My fucking vibe loves the Crusty Jug…. Pure peace for my sweet brother….. and the tongue is the love of all the galaxies… and when her tongue licks your dick and she pulls your cock into her throat your sweet love must understand that Crusty isn’t done until her tongue assasinates your glans and her face assaults all the inches of Crusty my boy…. and when all that is the loving lover of Crusty Jugglers smash assaults the hard cock of Crusty and he cums violent streams of cum then my special recipe of my reason thread lovers is on target

  25. the ghetto stole my black baby vagina in the 90’s…. and I’m pretty sure she never missed my dumb ass in business class at that school they bulldozed in Toledo called Libbey…

  26. I also loved a black baby called shannon in middle 80’s but time is a strange juxtap and so on but these fingers type all sorts of loves and I loved several chocolates and that sweet gorgeous babe in 2nd grade was crazy cute… her afro braids were pure girl power and I just wanted to be all over that as a dangerous boy….

  27. Feminist Economics: It’s a real thing

    She could have stopped after this:
    “Because I am a feminist economist, I am hypersensitive…”


    Thinking like a feminist economist, reveals this stark conclusion: Women in the United States do not need more “tax cuts.” What all of us need is a shift away from taxes on work (payroll taxes) and a significant increase in the taxes on the highest income earners?virtually all of whom are men.

    And so we see once more that feminism is just Marx in drag.

    1. Feminism is a second hand hood… its a girl ghetto crying to be like the slaves… but……everyone kind of LIKES vaginas and these shitty bitch cunts have to make out like all their cheese slacks are constantly raped in the alleys but rape isn’t necesarily common and all these cheesy fucking whore feminist assholes will never find men like me…..

      Me….. like lots of libertarians buddhas………

      I am dr. lovalot and so are my libertarian bros…

    2. Marx in drag

      Nice band name.

    3. Third wave feminism is just Marx in drab. Original feminism had good points.

      1. Original feminism had good points.

        yo,,,, yes

  28. I might of been hallucinating but while I was getting ready to go out to eat I turned on my hotel TV as background noise and I swear I heard Andrea Tantaros say W was as bad as Obama on foreign policy because of the nation-building spreading democracy stuff. This can’t be true, can it? I mean she was absolutely correct if she really said it. I’m just not believing my own ears. I was running water in the bathroom. The context was “worst presidents” on O’Reilly and he was listing off a bunch of 19th century failures .

    1. I applied for the job Andrea Tantalus has now, but they told me I didn’t have the right assets.


      1. That’s a pretty terrible picture if you’re trying to point out Tantaros’ assets.

        1. “Andrea Tantaros tells feminists: Rape accusers should be able to handle liquor like ‘the boys'”


          1. Andrea regularly blurts out that she can handle her liquor.

        2. The first picture had a much better smile.. That too is an asset.

          1. Errr…that’s not her ass, dude….

          2. Errr…that’s not her ass, dude….

    2. If you put Andrea Tantaros on a jew bun slathered with boondocks, spaghetti, and truffle oil and heat that submarine human body monster on a pure honky-tonk bonfire…. Andrea Tantaros will slip softly down your hillbilly throat like an old Ford on a tired Friday night in Dickson, Tennessee….

      1. OK, Agile, I’m cutting you off.

        1. Wait… what the fuck? bitch, girl…. I like and love Jews, GK … don’t let your long hair down on this cushy bro….

          1. I’ll put your bitchass on a sandwich motherfucker… I’ll steal some fucking GKC and put all that rockin mama on a south train pizza lined with fresh deep-friend catfish, supar awesome rocking rains from the south bound train, some johnny cash cum bought from some old bitch on the cumberland gap and some peppers shipped in from Amish farms below loboville, TN… right at cane creek where all the great veggies are grown in that part of Tennessee…. and then I put ears on the GKC pizza and that flour slab of wild clicks and claks like a tired and shot rattlesnake……

            1. If I knew what you were saying, I might be insulted, but as it is…

              1. I love you, punk ass

  29. University of Michigan to add trigger warnings to math books:

    One student protest group, the Students Triggered by Euclidean Math (STEM), wrote on their Facebook page, “For too long, Euclidean geometry was the condescending symbol of patriarchal axioms of only straight lines. Clearly this exclusion of non-straight lines for nearly thousands of years perpetuated a heteronormative cis-gender social order, in conjunction with class exploitation and sex, gender, and race manipulation by dead white Greek-centric males.” It seems the message of STEM was heard.

    1. OK, *this* is a joke, right?

      1. It’s real. Here’s a similar label from a philosophy book:


        This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work.

        1. No, it’s not real.

          Let’s make a deal:

          If it’s real, just send me your monocles every time they need a polish and I’ll polish them to sparkling perfection.

          If it’s *not* real, then you give me the answers to the next 3 “spot the not” quizzes.


          1. I mean the Euclid story isn’t real.

            Come on, take my bet.

            Cluck cluck cluck…chicken!

            1. I’m calling this early…this was a *not* you didn’t spot.

              1. Even monkeys fall out of trees.

                -Japanese proverb

                1. Here’s looking at Euclid.

                  1. We’ll always have pear-ass

              2. Get comfy with reality not being that which is real…. you should visit me, lovely brother and then get intro’d into the underpass of trains you can jump into those old times and cries and tattoos of time

                1. Meeting Agile Cyborg would be like a religious experience if that religious experience included orgies and hashish.

                2. You really need to start taking your meds again, Agile.

        2. I’m positive the first one isn’t real. It comes from a website that explicitly publishes satire.

          1. Damn, you guys are right. Burned again. It’s the same magazine the Muslim student who got prog-mobbed for his satire.


            1. When I saw that it was from a paper called the Michican Review, which published several explicitly satirical articles, I figured this was another piece of satire.

              A satire that brings us into the nameless realms of non-Euclidian geometry and the blasphemous domain of Yog-Sotthoth…

              Hmmm…I don’t know if I’m channeling H. P. Lovecraft or Agile Cyborg.

              1. “Hmmm…I don’t know if I’m channeling H. P. Lovecraft or Agile Cyborg.”
                Alan Sokal…

            2. So you polish Eddie’s monocles? Hee, hee…..

        3. The leading student activist, Carl Guass, writes in a public letter, “Euclidean geometry is exclusive to many other historically marginalized forms of math: feminist geometry, queer theory field equations, applied algebraic oppression studies, not to mention the injustice of the exclusion of non-straight lines and those who draw them.”

          Come on, Derpetologist. This is obviously a joke.

          1. BTW, a math teacher was detained at Dulles earlier this week for carrying a terrorist tome attributed to Al Gebra!

          2. Yep, I got burned. The last time it happened, I thought this was real:


            1. Derpetologist|4.8.15 @ 10:22PM|#
              “Yep, I got burned.”

              Derp, if you’re old enough to have read National Lampoon, you’d see that what was satire then is reality now.
              It takes some careful looks to get ’em all right, and I wish I had a nickle for the ones that I bit on…

          3. You are telling me Carl Guass (yes, that Guass) didn’t rise from the dead after nearly 200 years of slumber?

            Rats, I was hoping to get his autograph.

      2. That is Onion quality – best of Onion actually. If that isn’t trolling, then this country is truly and totally fucked.

    2. I’m going to guess UM is having some fun at the expense of the social justice crowd there.

      I’m guessing. Hoping, really.

    3. Students Triggered by Euclidean Math (STEM)

      Wizard-level trolling.

    4. The ancient Greeks weren’t exactly cis-gender though. I’m not sure what the acceptable modern term for pederast is, but that’s what they were…

      1. I’m not sure what the acceptable modern term for pederast

        I believe it’s “Pashtun”.

        1. I dunno what link you SF’d there, but I really enjoyed MM Kaye’s Far Pavilions and that had something or other to do with Pashtun or sommat. I don’t recall, it was back in high school. But the whole romantic epic schtick was really playing to me back then.

            1. Well, that doesn’t seem very… cricket.

            2. Weren’t it you who explained the whole Muslim pederasty thing a few weeks ago as a response to the Islamic expansionist impetus pushing young men into soldiering because securing wives is so difficult? Is there anything else I should garner from this other than generally being upset?

              1. Actually, I have a question. And maybe it gets to a more significant issue altogether. Why did the Taliban attempt to stamp it out? I assumed that the Taliban was some atavistic throwback within Islamic culture, but they come out of this appearing almost civilized relative to their pederastic cousins. Is this just a cultural quibble the Taliban has with the Pashtun?

                1. Why did the Taliban attempt to stamp it out?

                  My analysis is that because bacha bazi is a luxury of the wealthy, and is practiced by the warlords whom the Taliban overthrew and we put back in power, the Taliban’s suppression of it was a way to win the hearts of the less powerful part of society from which the dancing boys were recruited.

                2. “Why did the Taliban attempt to stamp it out?…Is this just a cultural quibble the Taliban has with the Pashtun?”

                  actually, as someone (hilariously) points out in the comments of those stories, its a problem not limited to Pashtunistan…but actually afghan-wide. it was noted among “northern alliance” troops in the early days of the war, and they were almost exclusively non-pashtun minorities.

                  While it may have been declared unkosher by the Talibs, they only had real overwhelming ‘control’ of a few cities when they ruled the country, and then for only about 4 years or so.

                  I think the Taliban banning the “Titanic” haircut was actually more-strictly enforced

              2. Weren’t it you who explained the whole Muslim pederasty thing a few weeks ago as a response to the Islamic expansionist impetus pushing young men into soldiering because securing wives is so difficult?

                I did mention the latter part, yes.

                Is there anything else I should garner from this other than generally being upset?

                Well, I was thinking about this a few days ago, actually. What is the usual response of a young man who suffers, say, a prison rape? Of course, he feels hurt, ashamed, and angry; however, he also tends to adopt a posture of hyper-machismo. Probably as a shield or as a way to “reclaim” his masculinity. Now think of that writ large upon the lower classes of Afghanistan and other places (you think this isn’t also happening to the child sidekicks of ISIS?) from when these boys are recruited. What happens to a civilization when you systematically molest a large portion of their future men? I’d assume you eventually get a civilization of hurt, ashamed, angry, hyper-macho young men.

                1. An entire society of anti-Andy Dufresnes. My God.

        2. You know you travel into the old mountiasn all over those deep valleys where the jungles live under teh thables and safety is a dope and those chemistry get all the lost smashing in on the mayan tribes and whistles…

          1. Is anyone writing this down? Why do I feel like someone should be writing this down?

  30. Rand Paul is a second-generation libertarian who champions smaller government and free-market solutions at every some turns.


    Wanting a larger military is not the same as wanting a smaller military.

    1. Why is ISis so fucking different than Iran and the Saud fucks. Why is the black man in the white house fighting devils in the desert? Why does our black superhero think all time is worth negotiating with desert spiders? What THE FUCK is up with all the rags and their dumbass scribes that are NOT kicking the SHIT out of an IRAN lover?

      IRAN. Where gays and sex parties go to die. Saudi Arabia. Where gays and sex parties go to die. The entire Muslim culture in the middle East where gays and sex parties go to die….

      NOTHING about Islam is great. NOTHING about muslims can benefit society… LET US TEACH THE FUCKING IDIOTS in the middle east how to be free and love……… they are incapable of this…

      1. “LET US TEACH THE FUCKING IDIOTS in the middle east how to be free and love.”

        AC, I see you found your calling!
        Uh, but seriously, how do you propose to convince bleevers that they’re not only wrong about their sky-daddy, but totally full of it regarding their brand of morality?

        1. Freedom starts with the lord sevo

    2. Yep, the guy’s a long ways from libertarian, and he’s being labeled as ‘libertarian leaning’. IF he gets nominated, it’ll be worth it to see what he says THEN and try to parse pitch from statement.
      It’s possible that he could be the second Rethug who got my vote; the first was a florist who ran for Mayor in SF.

    3. Wanting a larger military is not the same as wanting a smaller military.

      You imply Rand wants a larger military. Citation?

  31. So… is that going to be his campaign slogan? How do we fit that on a bumper sticker? “DWM/UAD”? Why is this driver fascinated with driving while masturbating? Much less while operating an unmanned aerial drone?

  32. Life is a stream of voices changing the towns and these lovely streams with all the boys and girls of massive intelligence in the reason galaxy can intro new planets…. I think tons of the star drops in these summer planes are the greatest leaning muscles… I love my special reason everclear and ….

  33. All lifelong on the lovely thoughts are a pure vortex of rhinestones of freely… total dials on those steams in the universes and my lovely special reason babies should fight the onslaught of the coming asteroids. so I make these shields of blonde hair and tight pussies and tons of tit licking…..

  34. OT. We had to take my 8 month old son to the hospital last month( severe vomiting and diarrhea) turns out he had salmonella. So today my wife gets a phone call from the department of environmental health. They start asking a shit load of questions about what he ate, where we’d been, etc, until my wife got tired of it and asked why they wanted to know all this shit. The woman on the phone said the questionnaire helped to determine if it was an isolated incident or part of an epidemic. To which my wife replied in the kindest way she could manage ” It was over a month ago. If it were an epidemic you’d damn know it by now wouldn’t you?”

    1. Ah, yes, clueless bureaucrats making our lives better…

    2. Why does your wife hate America?

    3. Clearly the child manifests the angry touch of tired rejected angelics and these horrible fuck worthless skeletal humans messed with the DARK Lord’s offsprang….

      1. I should have had her transfer the call to you AC. The lulz would be epic.

    4. Sounds like less of a way to mitigate the outbreak and more of a way to triangulate the source of infection and penalize the parties responsible.

    5. “The woman on the phone said the questionnaire helped to determine if it was an isolated incident or part of an epidemic. To which my wife replied in the kindest way she could manage ” It was over a month ago.’

      It reminds me of the phone survey from microsoft which asked me about 100 questions about my software usage…and then the last question, which was “Do you use a computer at home or work?”

      Of course I said, “No.”

      1. You say through a one hundred question survey from Microsoft? I hope they sent you an AOL trial CD for your troubles.

        1. at the time, i was actually managing/directing a lot of survey-research for corporations myself (part of my first job), so i humored them for the first 20 minutes…

          …then i was like “How fucking long is this?” By the end I was doing anything i could to sabotage the results because it was so offensively stupid

          1. I used to participate in survey/focus/study groups for money. Everything from fast food to migraine medicine (I threw the shit in the trash, filled out the questionaires and took the money).

            The moist important thing I learned was that men wouldn’t buy a brand of frozen cornish game hens that didn’t include the giblets while women would pay extra if the poultry packer left them out.

            1. I hit the jackpot once and got paid 10 bucks to drink beer.

              1. Dark Lord of the Cis|4.8.15 @ 11:52PM|#
                “I hit the jackpot once and got paid 10 bucks to drink beer.”

                If it didn’t take more’n 5 minutes to answer the survey, you won!

        2. My Dad used to stay on the phone and ask stupid questions to telemarketers. Until they got really bad in the mid 90’s Once they started to call so much that it pissed him off he started keeping a whistle next to the phone.

          1. My dad’s favorite quip with them was “Sorry, I can’t afford any more free stuff.”

          2. Not survey related, but I have a friend who spent some time working in a call center for blind and deaf people. They would call in using either a keyboard or the phone and he would serve as their conduit for contacting the outside world (his literal description: a conduit). He wasn’t allowed to invoke any personal interpretation: he had to repeat exactly what was said to him or what was typed out, except to let the other party know his client had not yet responded. Which led to a funny situation in which his client called some tech support service, but dropped out midway through the call. The tech support employee, some poor girl working a minimum-wage job at another call center, wasn’t allowed to hang up unless given explicit confirmation that the call had been concluded. And my friend, who wasn’t allowed to confirm whether or not the call was complete, could only repeat that his client had not yet responded. After ~20 minutes, the girl started sobbing because this call was fucking up her metrics. And my friend, being the semi-sociopath he is, continued reading Dune while he assured her that his client had not yet responded. This went on for 45 minutes before his shift ended and he disconnected unceremoniously.

  35. I need to redeem myself by posting authentic frontier derp. Here is a congressman boasting the US government has made communism work. Guess which party he’s with.


    1. A Dem, of course. Jesus, just when I start to think that I’m too harsh on the Dems…

    2. Also he said he was being “tongue-in-cheek” though the whole “give everyone a government job to reduce crime” does not appear to be a joke.

    1. That’s old news, friend.

      Now if you could tell me what are Lewinsky’s thoughts on Clinton’s campaign, I’m all ears.

    2. Derpetologist|4.8.15 @ 10:34PM|#
      “Monica Lewinsky gave a TED talk about bullying:”

      Maybe it’s old news, but I hadn’t heard and I’m giggling!

    3. Looks like the cow lost a few pounds.

  36. Liberty is a piano plucking the lost…

    I am fucked beyound belief on booze and my favorite drugs but
    I remember Ayn Rand stories about vocal resistance and how young people were sent to die into the Siberia by the thousands… I cry now….

    Ayn taught love without oppressive regs…. she saw the vocal sent into the Palin Buttplug camps…. she saw the innocent rejected and killed because of egalitarian ‘love’….

    Gawkers, Ars, and all the other silly rags haven’t a clue how dungeons work……

  37. Everyday in the future is a possibility that the webs can’t drift into.

  38. The future is long and voice from the past in the digital books cry as the dead to change to pulsating raves far from those nights where we crawl on notes and drugs but let’s live into a surreal river from these blanks..

    1. That’s gold, Jerry! Gold!

      Is that site fucking up my browser, though, or are the gifs slowed down to match the length of the sound clip?

      1. Good question. I have no clue.

  39. Humans survived a few thousands on billions of FUCKING years….

    This nation is a jerk off in the volcanoes of time…. All the other nations are tired human screeches built on knives and violence….

    There is no power node here on this marble unless we get ethics and the fucking math of liberty and then reject with a karate kick to the neck tyranny Saudi Islam….

  40. General butt naked used to use gunpowder and fucking cocaine mixed on the child soldiers who chopped thousands of limbs of t a villagers in sierra leone…

  41. Wu tang clan and cocaine and tupac which we all love formed the soldier boys of sierra leone…

  42. Your brilliance is truly blinding us mere mortals now. Time to take a little nap, okay?

  43. Humans survived a few thousands on billions of FUC

    1. My reply was eaten and half-barfed.

      1. widget|4.8.15 @ 11:13PM|#
        “My reply was eaten and half-barfed.”

        And I’ll bet you were pointing out that ‘billions’ has nothing to do with human existence, right?

  44. OK, time for the Whitest Honky In History contest.

    First entry:


            1. Even I didn’t listen to the entirety of entry #6


              1. Disclaimer: Some of my best friends are white.

                1. Oh, and if you/re at work…


              2. until I saw Klingon Rick Astley, and that obviously wins the whitest white since white came to whitetown award.

                1. yIntagh! qIj tlhInganmey!

                  1. OMG, that’s the dirtiest joke I’ve ever heard, worse than The Aristocrats!

          1. I was going to vote for Hellmann’s, because my girlfriend tells me mayonnaise is the whitest thing about white people

            1. I hate mayo, maybe I’m not as white as I previously thought.

  45. Hey, y’all, guess what we’re celebrating tomorrow?


    Oh, and before you ring your bells too loud, recall that you’re being a tad premature:


  46. Interesting to see the comments on the Ferguson election. I mean there were huge riots in Detroit in 1967 in protest of the white racist police force and things improved didn’t they?

    1. One national media site actually pointed out what is obvious to those of us who live in St. Louis – there is a neighboring city called Pine Lawn that does exactly the same thing Ferguson does, even though it’s almost entirely black (in terms of politicians).

      And similarly, I have a little town near me called Byrnes Mill that does the same thing, only it’s white cops preying on white people who pass through the town.

      They recently cried about the state law that proposes to cut the revenue they can use from fines down to 20% of their budget and eventually 10%, saying they need the money for their police force, blah blah blah. Never mind, every location touching Byrnes Mill has the county sheriff as the police with no problem. And every month, once they reach 30% (the current limit), they shut down the police until next month.

  47. Sen. Ted Cruz’s first post-announcement video was “Blessing” which steeped itself in more religiosity than has been seen since Blackadder’s Puritan aunt came to dinner. That video features front and center on his campaign website right now,

    Why’s the Blackadder video on Ted Cruz’s campaign Web site?

  48. Fun fact about Woodrow Wilson’s Secretary of the Navy (who banned booze in the Navy) and FDR’s Mexican Ambassador Josephus Daniels: he was a racist who supported mob violence against blacks and Republicans and helped implement Jim Crow in that state.

    Prior to the pivotal election of 1898 The News and Observer was instrumental in encouraging white supremacist attitudes. In editorials, the paper advocated the use of violence and intimidation to control black voters. A study by the Wilmington Race Riot Commission states that the Wilmington Race Riot “was not a spontaneous event, but was directed by white businessmen and Democratic leaders.” It further states that “Daniels was involved in the Democrats’ 1898 campaign from the beginning, working with Furnifold McLendel Simmons and other party leaders to formulate strategy. Daniels wrote later that ‘The News and Observer was the printed voice of the campaign.'”[4]

    Daniels later said he regretted his tactics, and supported a number of progressive causes, like public education, anti child-labor laws, and banning alcohol.[citation needed]

    1. Oh and: Secretary Daniels believed in government ownership of armorplate factories, and of telephones and telegraphs. At the end of the First World War he made a serious attempt to have the Navy permanently control all radio transmitters in the United States. If he had succeeded amateur radio would have ended, and it is likely that radio broadcasting would have been substantially delayed.[5][6]

  49. NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition…

  50. Republican Tea Party supporters have a problem here; Sen Paul is still riding on his father’s coattails. Without them, this guy couldn’t win a seat on his own local city council, and Sen Cruz is a statutory Citizen of the United States at birth. He is not, and cannot be, an Art. II, ?I, Cl. 5 natural born Citizen, which acquires US citizenship by nature, as a natural political right. So Tea Party supporters will just have do what I am doing: “vamp till ready”.

    1. Neither of these points has a lick of accuracy to either of them..

      Rand’s appeal is mostly due to his *abandonment* of some of his father’s particular policy-quirks, not trying to win over former Ron Paul supporters by being a re-run of the same.

      And apparently you haven’t done your Birther-homework

      “The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term “natural born” citizen would
      mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship “by birth” or “at birth,” either by being born “in” the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents(1); or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship “at birth.” Such term, however, would not include a person who was not a U.S. citizen by birth or at birth, and who was thus born an “alien” required to go through the legal process of “naturalization” to become a U.S. citizen. “

      (1 = as Cruz was)

      Anyway, what does it matter? The Cruz-Missile has Jesus campaigning for him. Why do you hate Jesus?

  51. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.netjob80.com

  52. No way they are the same. Cruz is harsh and pathetic and has zero chance of beating a Democrat. He is closed to accepting the moderate wing of the party and proves that by his regular references to RINOs. His view of immigration reform is pathetic and actually pretty embarrassing from the son of an immigrant. He is a terrible candidate and about the only way that I would vote for Hillary (yes, I can’t stand him that much).

    Rand at least talks a better game. He seems to desire to be more inclusive of moderates as well as minorities and youth. I’m not sure that I could support him, but I could see him winning my support especially if is were him versus a Clinton.

  53. My Aunty Mackenzie recently got a nearly new blue Toyota Venza by working part time online… website here ????????????? http://www.jobsfish.com

  54. I just got paid $6784 working off my laptop this month. And if you think that?s cool, my divorced friend has twin toddlers and made over $9k her first month. It feels so good making so much money when other people have to work for so much less. This is what I do…


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.