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

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Terrorism

Friday Funnies: GOP Terror Response

John Cole | 11.20.2015 7:00 AM

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

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

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

NEXT: I'm Dizzy, Drunk and Fighting

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

Hide Comments (196)

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

  1. Fist of Etiquette   10 years ago

    And then FDR took us to war.

    1. Restoras   10 years ago

      And rounded up Japanese Americans and put them in camps. American Hero.

      1. invisible furry hand   10 years ago

        And kicked Aleutians out of their homes and quartered soldiers there.

      2. Tonio   10 years ago

        And kicked mountain people aka hillbillies off their land to build Shenandoah National Park.

        1. wareagle   10 years ago

          well, they were the wrong kind of people.

        2. Austrian Anarchy   10 years ago

          After he kicked the mountain folk out of Cades Cove, he kicked them (many the same people) out of the Cumberland River Valley, and then out of the Bear Creek Valley.

          Oh and let's not forget that in addition to the Japanese, FDR interned Italians and Germans too. Plus that curfew for Italians on the west coast...

      3. Austrian Anarchy   10 years ago

        If we translate that with the the Ronald Bailey Cosmotarian Style Guide (RBCSG) we get:

        Japanese Americans voluntarily moved from the coast to resorts farther inland.

    2. John   10 years ago

      After he sat on his ass and let the Japanese destroy the Pacific fleet

      1. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

        He had no choice but to shit on his ass, you anti-wheelcharian.

      2. tarran   10 years ago

        Actually, he *ordered* the Pacific Fleet to Pearl Harbor. And he ordered them to stay. The Navy wanted to return the bulk of the ships back to the west coast, but FDR wouldn't permit it.

        Not because he wanted them destroyed, but because - I suspect - he was trying to engineer a provocation involving the East Asia fleet that would serve as a casus belli. I base this assertion on a couple of chapters in The Fleet The Gods Forgot by Admiral Winslow which describes a few operations that were pointless other than giving the Japs a nice expendable target to shoot at.

        Strategic surprise is such a bitch!

        1. tarran   10 years ago

          Oh, and having the fleet at Pearl for a huge exercise rather than dispersed in their homeports meant they could be assembled and organized for a quick counter-attack more readily.

    3. In League with the Dark Ones   10 years ago

      After butchering Haitians under Woodrow Wilson.

    4. testqwe   10 years ago

      Test reply

    5. qweasdzxc   10 years ago

      test

  2. Rich   10 years ago

    Awesome strawman.

    1. Bobarian (Would Chip Her)   10 years ago

      Where da fuck is Hillary in that mess?

      1. sloopyinTEXAS   10 years ago

        Probably inside the podium pulling a "Police Academy".

        1. Loki   10 years ago

          *barf*

      2. Cyto   10 years ago

        It is pretty interesting that the people actually engaged in killing folks and directly involved with the destabilization of the Syrian government which lead to the establishment of IS in Syria get a pass on this one, while rhetoric is apparently dangerous fear-mongering.

        (I'll grant that it is incoherent and addle-brained rhetoric in most cases. And generally counter-productive and often potentially harmful rhetoric.)

        1. sarcasmic   10 years ago

          This rhetoric is usually a prelude to passing a bunch of legislation that increases governmental power at the expense of privacy and liberty.

          1. Ivan Pike   10 years ago

            This rhetoric is usually a prelude to passing a bunch of legislation that increases governmental power at the expense of privacy and liberty.

            +1 Patriot Act

          2. Tonio   10 years ago

            ...and a predictable uptick for Depends stock

  3. sloopyinTEXAS   10 years ago

    Yeah, we didn't have to fear nationalization of industries, rationing, conscription, a federal land grab, entire cities and towns deliberately flooded and the people displaced, internment of entire races, erosion of the 1A, 4A and 5A and government-enforced segregation.

    Fuck, this is retarded.

    1. Restoras   10 years ago

      Yeah but it was Progress, sloopy! Why do you hate Progress?

      1. sloopyinTEXAS   10 years ago

        Because it's usually at the expense of Liberty.

        1. Bobarian (Would Chip Her)   10 years ago

          Last night I was screaming at Fox News like it was an Obama SOTU.

          The pants-shitting was epic.

          Have to say, Tucker Carlson was even more emotional about the incursion into individual freedom presented by Patriot Act bullshit and surveillence of the US Citizen than the Judge. Some of TCs reasoning sucked ("we should really be worried about refugees"), but at least he was on the right side of it.

  4. Radioactive   10 years ago

    ...and spiders, always fear spiders.

    1. sasob   10 years ago

      You'd do better to be afraid of cockroaches and flies; most spiders are harmless, timid little creatures.

      1. Bill Dalasio   10 years ago

        who eat the more harmful cockroaches and flies.

        Yay spiders!!!

      2. bacon-magic   10 years ago

        Anasasi?

      3. In League with the Dark Ones   10 years ago

        Not here.

        We have mostly black and brown widows here?

    2. The Last American Hero   10 years ago

      Ungoliant nods in agreement.

  5. WTF   10 years ago

    NEEDZ MOAR LABELZ!

    *SLAP!*

  6. Alan Vanneman   10 years ago

    FDR referenced positively in "Reason"? Sorry, dude. Does not compute.

    1. Austrian Anarchy   10 years ago

      The new Cosmotarians need to walk that fine line between VOX and The Daily Worker to remain relevant in their cocktail circle.

  7. sloopyinTEXAS   10 years ago

    Can they draw a picture of Libertarian Fonzie jumping a shark while a group of people watching shit their pants (with "cosmos" labeling them) while another group (labeled "yokels") turns their backs and walks away?

    1. Banjos   10 years ago

      Needz Moar Labels!

    2. bacon-magic   10 years ago

      With the Fonz yelling "Open Boarderz!"

  8. sloopyinTEXAS   10 years ago

    I move that Reason change their motto from Free Minds and Free Markets
    To "Free" Minds and Free Markets.

    1. UnCivilServant   10 years ago

      Needs moar scarequotes.

      "Free" "Minds" and "Free" "Markets".

      1. Slammer   10 years ago

        "Reason"

      2. invisible furry hand   10 years ago

        Are you mad?

        "Free" "Minds" "and" "Free" "Markets"

      3. Austrian Anarchy   10 years ago

        Needs more sarcasm: 'Reason'

  9. Slammer   10 years ago

    WHYCOME YOU PANTS SHIT? LIGHTNINGZ IS MORE SCARIES!

  10. Mr Lizard   10 years ago

    Your Future Reptilian Overlords will give you something to fear.

  11. Derpetologist   10 years ago

    I wonder what FDR would think about his party's embrace of trigger warnings and safe spaces. I think he would call them all pussies, or whatever was the equivalent of that in the idiom of mid-century, upper class WASPs.

    1. Agile Cyborg   10 years ago

      Sobbing Intolerants are remarkably aggressive for demands extraordinarily shallow.

    2. Medical Physics Guy   10 years ago

      I wonder what Teddy Roosevelt would have thought of safe spaces and trigger warnings........

      1. invisible furry hand   10 years ago

        He would have been all in favour of a safe space in which to squeeze a trigger.

    3. Rhywun   10 years ago

      whatever was the equivalent of that in the idiom of mid-century, upper class WASPs

      Queer?

  12. Agile Cyborg   10 years ago

    Aside from Rand Paul not a single goddamn glance from politician imbeciliacs will fall on the genuine apex of violent Islam: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE who have given decades of billions toward the architecture, both physical and ideological, of breeding grounds around the planet nurturing psychopathic divine killers in numbers that should fucking make ALL Muslims question their goddamn fucking faith and its pathetic foundations of brutality.

    1. Medical Physics Guy   10 years ago

      I agree. US supports the Saudis, they support extremism around the world, the extremists attack the US. Until that changes I don't see what else will.

      *returns to disengaged attitude*

  13. sarcasmic   10 years ago

    Earlier on the radio I heard Jeb Bush ranting about how if he was elected president he'd reinstate all of the spying programs on American citizens because terrorism. Thing is, these assholes in power have stacks upon stacks of Big Brother style legislation that is already written, and just waiting for an excuse to pass. All it will take is one more terrorist attack and we'll take one more step towards tyranny. For our own good of course.

    1. Slammer   10 years ago

      This is why infowars and "false flag!" is so popular, because it feels like an intentional set-up

    2. Derpetologist   10 years ago

      There's a great hunger for security theater, no matter how absurd it is.

      Most people feel driving is safe even though tens of thousands die in car accidents each year. This is because most people think the govt has taken every possible step to make driving safe through signs, lights, speed limits, etc.

      There are a lot of people who doubt that the govt has taken every reasonable step to prevent terrorism.

    3. Agile Cyborg   10 years ago

      I'm so fucking weary of the media bend-over as a constant cum-and-puke pipe for the intelligence and military community. Very few outlets investigate the shit factory drummed out everyday by the rights-dissolving P.R. wizards slinking behind the iron gates of our most arrogant and violent authorities.

      Islam is a fucked-up religion with serious totalitarian implications for Muslim society in the long-run and there will certainly be run-off of the global nature simply due to the ubiquity of Islam but to witness American security cabals bandy grand schemes that counter the nature of constitutional liberty every time a bunch of people get strafed to death or blown to bits is a bubbling tank of mind-grating exploitation.

      1. Zeb   10 years ago

        It sure is.

    4. MJGreen - Docile Citizen   10 years ago

      WELL WHAT'S YOUR PLAN, HUH???

  14. Notorious UGCC   10 years ago

    From what I've read, there are ISIS enforcers in the refugee camps, enough to scare off the Yazidis, Christians and other minorities. If the U.S. admits refugees from these camps, it stands to reason that some of these ISIS enforcers will be admitted too. Unless there's some basic screening done, and even that may not be enough.

    But yes, the problem is that politicians are expressing concerns about admitting large numbers of refugees. That's the issue we should focus on with laser-like precision.

    1. Austrian Anarchy   10 years ago

      Those must be the moderates Mrs. Rodham-Clinton was telling us about when she was warming a chair for John F. Kerry.

  15. db   10 years ago

    Fuck Roosevelt.

  16. straffinrun   10 years ago

    Just when I was getting comfortable with hating all the GOP candidates, I see cartoons like this and the hate ebbs a little.

  17. sloopyinTEXAS   10 years ago

    I think I'm going to go long on Depends. The pants-shitting will only get worse, right? Not to mention the pants-pissing I've been hearing about too.

    Refresh my memory, is it the right-wing teahadists that are shitting their pants over the terrorist attacks that are actually happening before our eyes? Or is it the left-wing progtards shitting their pants over the teahadists wanting to either limit, stop or vet all people from a violent part of the world before entering our country? Because I can't remember.

    1. Zeb   10 years ago

      Both?

      I mean, the cartoon is terrible as usual. But pants shitting, even largely legitimate pants shitting over actual threats in the world, is a danger. That's how we got Patriot act, massive domestic snooping, pointless security theater, etc.

      1. John   10 years ago

        So legitimate concern is now a danger? And since when is "how about we not take in a bunch of Syrians whom we have no idea what they are" become pants shitting?

        1. Zeb   10 years ago

          Yes, it is. Probably more dangerous that illegitimate concerns. Legitimate concerns over terrorism after 911 gave us the Patriot Act and a bunch of other terrible shit. There are other options besides "do anything" and "do nothing".

          There may well be legitimate concern over the refugee thing. Probably is to some extent. That doesn't mean that everything done in reaction to such concerns is a good idea. So it is dangerous. "Never let a good crisis go to waste", you know.

        2. Zeb   10 years ago

          And I just said "pants shitting" to mirror Sloopy's references.

  18. Lee G   10 years ago

    Who picked out this completely self-unaware POS cartoon?

    1. Zeb   10 years ago

      I have to assume that they just get whatever comes down the pipe from the "libertarian-ish cartoon syndicate". Surely no one deliberately chose this. Or any of the Friday funnies.

      1. Loki   10 years ago

        I suspect the spam bots actually choose the cartoons in exchange for not going "full Skynet" on our asses.

  19. Lord Humungus   10 years ago

    at least it's better drawn than Bok or Payne...

  20. foetus   10 years ago

    Didn't that crippled fuck turn away Jewish fucking REFUGEES for fear that their numbers contained nazi spies?

    1. db   10 years ago

      That's counter-narrative. Report for reeducation.

    2. MetalBard   10 years ago

      And detained Japanese-Americans. The lack of self-awareness in that cartoon is stunning.

      1. kbolino   10 years ago

        I learned something interesting the other day. While there are (to my knowledge) no reported incidents of Japanese-Americans living on the mainland doing anything treasonous, the Niihau Incident played no small part in driving the internment of Japanese-Americans.

        Which is not to justify the internment or absolve the scumbag FDR of blame for it, but I did not realize such a thing had occurred.

  21. Zeb   10 years ago

    Terrible cartoon in many ways. But it seems worth mentioning that it isn't primarily about the Syrian refugee thingy. Aren't we bored with that already?

  22. Lord Humungus   10 years ago

    what happened to the AM Links?

    1. MetalBard   10 years ago

      The widows and orphans took them out..

    2. Lord Humungus   10 years ago

      there... and gone... much like my love *croons*

    3. Rich   10 years ago

      Bummer. I posted the solution to the War on Terror, but now I can't remember it.

      1. Lord Humungus   10 years ago

        something buttsex something mexicans with weed?

        1. Rich   10 years ago

          Yes! Lord be praised!

      2. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

        My solution to the "war on terror" is an expansion of the executive branch, which I would use to create agencies that exist solely to collect data (in an expansive way), and kill or imprison terrorists. It is so simple.

        Now, forward me all of your emails and text messages.

        1. lap83   10 years ago

          Not sure how our naked pics will help the war on terror but you're the expert

          1. lap83   10 years ago

            Help win*

            1. invisible furry hand   10 years ago

              The terrorists will fap themselves to death

          2. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

            Your emails and texts are full of nudes? Interesting. Also, sup?

            1. lap83   10 years ago

              I heard it's the safest place for them

              1. Loki   10 years ago

                Can't be much worse than iCloud.

    4. Juvenile Bluster   10 years ago

      We're having a sit-in to protest the whiteness of Reason. We're demanding resignations.

      1. Rich   10 years ago

        What is Shikha, chopped liver?

        1. Juvenile Bluster   10 years ago

          Holds wrong opinions, and thus is actually white.

        2. bacon-magic   10 years ago

          She's High-caste...almost white.

      2. lap83   10 years ago

        Too many marginilizing pictures of Woodrow Wilson

      3. invisible furry hand   10 years ago

        The Jacket's blackness makes up for it all

  23. Rich   10 years ago

    ANNND ? the squirrels are back!

  24. Derpetologist   10 years ago

    The AM links were up for a while and then got wiped like Hillary's server.

    1. Tonio   10 years ago

      Like with a cloth?

      1. Rich   10 years ago

        Or something.

        1. invisible furry hand   10 years ago

          *slap!*

          1. Rich   10 years ago

            *slap!*

            1. straffinrun   10 years ago

              *slap!*

              1. Rufus The Monocled Derp Slayer   10 years ago

                /Looks around. Shrugs shoulders.

                *slap!*

    2. Elspeth Flashman   10 years ago

      Well that's what will make my life worthwhile is if I can kibbutz with the other misfits on this site! So hurry up already!

  25. Bill Dalasio   10 years ago

    This has gotten to the point of being ridiculous. The only options I'm seeing from the Reason staffers are you're a pants-shitting loon running around in a panic or you sweep the entire issue of terrorism under the rug (or worse, rationalize it as our fault). Terrorism really is an issue. There really are people out there who wish to kill us. And it isn't always (or even usually) our fault. Just our existence as an incredibly affluent society that flouts every one of their backward authoritarian edicts makes us a threat to them.

    Pretending the world is something other than what it is doesn't do much to advance libertarianism. Mostly it just makes libertarians seem out of touch with reality. And the thing is, if you take the long view, it's libertarianism that's going to win this for us.

    Those bastards hate us because a free and prosperous society (yeah, yeah, I know, it's ever-so-unsophisticated to entertain the possibility that maybe they really do hate us for our freedom) really is a threat to them. In that, they're basically right. In their societies, they're in charge. In a free society, they're asking you if you want to take the side streets because the FDR is probably backed up. But, liberty offers for the bulk of people they'd rule over a wildly better life. And, over time, the defection of the populaces they'd rule over is what will inevitably do them in.

    But, how we navigate to that end with the least damage is a worthwhile topic of discussion.

    1. Rich   10 years ago

      liberty offers for the bulk of people they'd rule over a wildly better life.

      *** rising intonation ***

      A better ETERNAL life?

    2. Zeb   10 years ago

      Here's how I look at it.
      Nothing new was learned from the Paris attacks. Anyone who is paying any attention already knew that there are certainly some bad actors among the refugees/migrants and that weapons can be obtained by such people and that they would like to do things like this. So unless you don't pay attention and just react emotionally to whatever comes along, no one's views should change a lot because of this. It's just an opportunity for everyone who actually pays attention to double down on what they already believe (not unlike what happens when there is some mass shooting and everyone pulls out their favorite gun control; proposals).
      I think Reason could probably cover the issue with a bit more nuance. But it would be ridiculous to expect them to shift their positions on issues of immigration and refugees because of this.

      1. Bill Dalasio   10 years ago

        But it would be ridiculous to expect them to shift their positions on issues of immigration and refugees because of this.

        I don't expect them to. Or even want them to. But, I also don't want them responding with "anyone who has any concerns about any of these things is just a pants-shitting yokel" Providing some inkling of what might be the libertarian way of dealing with the fact that some refugees might really be bad actors (even if that means just living with the cost because its outweighed by the benefits) or discussing how France's officialization of culture probably plays a role in marginalizing their Muslim population might actually convince people to not shit their pants. But that wouldn't give some people here the sweet, sweet, feeling of superiority that they so desperately crave.

      2. John   10 years ago

        So is there anything that would cause them to shift that position? And if not, how is their position in any way reasonable or thoughtful or anything other than just a fanatical reflex?

        1. Zeb   10 years ago

          I don't know about what would change other people's minds.

        2. Bill Dalasio   10 years ago

          Presumably new information.

          Taking the gun example, most people here aren't particularly inclined to change their opinion of gun control because of a mass shooting. But, that's because they've already considered the fact that mass shootings happen in their equation on the issue. If you sell stocks after the market tanks, you're probably going to have a terrible return. It's similar.

          1. Zeb   10 years ago

            That's what I'm saying. If this were the first time people realized that ISIS terrorists want to attack Europe, then I would perhaps expect more people to change their minds. But we've pretty much known that for some time. And anyone who pretended that absolutely all of the refugees/migrants were just peaceful people simply looking to get away from violence were dopes.

            1. Bill Dalasio   10 years ago

              And anyone who pretended that absolutely all of the refugees/migrants were just peaceful people simply looking to get away from violence were dopes.

              Except, some of the coverage here really does border on just that. And that's after what we saw in Paris. And then suggesting anyone who questions that narrative is a nativist or yokel or whatever.

              It's sort of the "team" mentality. Some facts don't necessarily fit the narrative of your favored policies (for the record, I favor admitting refugees with a rigorous vetting process). That's okay. Reality often works that way. We make judgements about where we stand even when some things aren't perfect with the result. But it's dishonest and stupid to pretend the fact that don't fit your narrative don't exist.

        3. PM   10 years ago

          Abandoning first principles when they become inconvenient is cowardice. So if this happens to be a first principle for someone, I wouldn't expect them to change their mind about it, or I'd respect them less if they did. Until I landed at Reason I never understood that transporting people halfway across the world at my expense was a libertarian first principle, but I see now that it unquestionably is.

          1. Zeb   10 years ago

            It absolutely is not libertarian principle. Open immigration is. But actively transporting people into the country on the taxpayer dime is clearly not.

            1. PM   10 years ago

              I've long broken with libertarian principles on the matter by insisting on some semblance of security and infectious disease screening anyway, so I'm irredeemable.

              1. Zeb   10 years ago

                With my realist hat on, I'm willing to compromise on things like that.

                Perhaps part of the problem with the refugee thing (as far as discussions here go) is that neither side's argument has anything really to do with any libertarian principle and it mostly comes down to arguments over facts that are difficult to nail down and differing cost/benefit analyses. Which is a big part of why I'm sick of it. I come here for an interesting argument.

        4. ant1sthenes   10 years ago

          They believe that ISIS aren't true Muslims, and Caitlin Jenner is a true woman, so it's safe to say they are dangerously brainwashed. Maybe a Euro nation falling to Islam will convince them that it will eventually become our problem, but I'm not sure anything other than that or a wmd attack in the us would do it.

      3. wareagle   10 years ago

        But it would be ridiculous to expect them to shift their positions on issues of immigration and refugees because of this.

        Why? People adjust positions based on things around them all the time. Look at changing views over time toward women working, gays, interracial marriage, weed, even the Patriot Act since its inception. Public view toward govt and most other institutions has shifted over time; where there used to be trust, there is now great skepticism. I don't see why this is different.

        1. Zeb   10 years ago

          I think I just explained why.

          Any thoughtful person should have already known that this is something that can and probably will happen and incorporated it into their views on the surrounding issues.

          I'm not saying that people don't often change their views in reaction to major events. I'm saying it is often not rational when they do despite the lack of any real new information.

          1. wareagle   10 years ago

            I doubt that very many people included the possibility that people from an area hostile to us and wishing our deaths would people whom we would willingly take in. Immigration has heretofore been limited to economic questions and the occasional criminal issue involving sanctuary cities. This is wholly new territory. Frankly, Reason's approach of accusing anyone who has a question of pants-shitting is the antithesis of thoughtful.

            1. Zeb   10 years ago

              Maybe they are being unthoughtful. I can't say I've carefully read all of the posts on the subject this week. And I do tend to be rather charitable in my interpretations.

              But we've also got a good number of commenters who accuse anyone who doesn't think we need to immediately exclude all Muslim refugees and immigrants of being stupid or dishonest and seem to think that these attacks should have changed everyone's mind, as if people didn't already know it could happen.

              Anyway, I got shit to do.

      4. Not okay   10 years ago

        Their position is to have taxpayers import refugees. I don't know when that became their position but it's retarded and no more libertarian than welfare.

        1. Zeb   10 years ago

          I'm not defending everything ever published in Reason. Simply saying that there is no good reason to expect them to change their positions on these things because something bad, but largely expected, happened.

      5. Loki   10 years ago

        unless you don't pay attention and just react emotionally to whatever comes along,

        Doesn't that describe a pretty large swath of the population?

        1. Zeb   10 years ago

          Sure. But I like to think that most of the commenters here and the Reason writers are a bit better than that.

      6. MJGreen - Docile Citizen   10 years ago

        Indeed, Zeb, indeed.

  26. Bill Dalasio   10 years ago

    This has gotten to the point of being ridiculous. The only options I'm seeing from the Reason staffers are you're a pants-shitting loon running around in a panic or you sweep the entire issue of terrorism under the rug (or worse, rationalize it as our fault). Terrorism really is an issue. There really are people out there who wish to kill us. And it isn't always (or even usually) our fault. Just our existence as an incredibly affluent society that flouts every one of their backward authoritarian edicts makes us a threat to them.

    Pretending the world is something other than what it is doesn't do much to advance libertarianism. Mostly it just makes libertarians seem out of touch with reality. And the thing is, if you take the long view, it's libertarianism that's going to win this for us.

    Those bastards hate us because a free and prosperous society (yeah, yeah, I know, it's ever-so-unsophisticated to entertain the possibility that maybe they really do hate us for our freedom) really is a threat to them. In that, they're basically right. In their societies, they're in charge. In a free society, they're asking you if you want to take the side streets because the FDR is probably backed up. But, liberty offers for the bulk of people they'd rule over a wildly better life. And, over time, the defection of the populaces they'd rule over is what will inevitably do them in.

    But, how we navigate to that end with the least damage is a worthwhile topic of discussion.

    1. Rufus The Monocled Derp Slayer   10 years ago

      Reason needs to deal with the squirrels before they do terrorists.

      1. Tonio   10 years ago

        Perhaps the squirrels are working for the terrorists. Or vice versa.

        1. Bill Dalasio   10 years ago

          Definitely vice versa.

          Everyone works for the squirrels. We're all just pawns in their little games.

  27. Elspeth Flashman   10 years ago

    Usually I find the Friday Funnies . . . not funny. And this one especially leaves me cold.

    1. Rich   10 years ago

      THAT'S the joke!

  28. Tonio   10 years ago

    In lieu of mourning lynx, did anyone watch Sanders' Georgetown speech? I started but became queasy.

    1. Rich   10 years ago

      Not I. What put you off the Bern?

      1. Tonio   10 years ago

        The smug, whiny voice for starters. Then the naked class resentment. Sure, I'm nowhere near the top .001 income bracket but we all know how that those in the 50-99% will suffer more.

        1. Rich   10 years ago

          Sheesh, is he as smug as Hillary?

    2. Ivan Pike   10 years ago

      I started but became queasy.

      Heartbern?

  29. jimmyrustler   10 years ago

    wow Reason praising FDR. Why dont you guys just come out as liberals already?

    1. MetalBard   10 years ago

      Yes what other libertraian principles are we going to sacrifice on the altar of open borders?

      1. Tonio   10 years ago

        "libertraian" Is that like a libertarian contrarian?

        1. MetalBard   10 years ago

          That reminds me, whatever happened to Botard?

          1. Lord Humungus   10 years ago

            Busy studying for the bar and months of unemployment?

        2. Rich   10 years ago

          Contrarian the Barbarian.

      2. MJGreen - Docile Citizen   10 years ago

        It's not as if FDR was open borders...

  30. Juvenile Bluster   10 years ago

    I need to avoid any immigration threads here. The "MUZZIES GON KILL US ALL" crowd gets on my nerves too much.

    1. Zeb   10 years ago

      Yeah, it's getting to be a bit much.

      1. Lord Humungus   10 years ago

        Libertarian Civil War!

        1. Juvenile Bluster   10 years ago

          At least we know both sides will be well armed.

      2. PM   10 years ago

        Just camp out at Salon for a while until it all blows over, that way you don't have to encounter any icky thoughts with which you disagree.

        1. Juvenile Bluster   10 years ago

          No thanks. I'd rather the anti-immigration crowd fuck off back to Stormfront though.

          1. PM   10 years ago

            Lol. Whoosh.

        2. Zeb   10 years ago

          Fuck off.

          It's not "icky thoughts" so much as the smug assholes who think they are all clever and superior for their brilliant realism and hilarious suggestions that anyone who doesn't agree is a secret Salon liberal.

          1. PM   10 years ago

            Hey, I hear ya. Whilst I'm in the process of laughing off any concerns about terrorism as a yokel Stormfront fantasy, the last thing in the world I want is some smug cunt picking the mote of my eye.

            1. Zeb   10 years ago

              Look, dickbag, I've spent quite some time happily and honestly engaging all the arguments. I just think we've all said what we are going to say and it's getting boring. And smokey from all the burning straw.

        3. MJGreen - Docile Citizen   10 years ago

          I'm fine with icky thoughts, I'd just like some new and interesting icky thoughts. It's the same shit we've been seeing for years, though some people are now more open about it.

          1. Zeb   10 years ago

            Yeah, that's all I'm saying. For the record, I don't think that everyone with doubts about the wisdom of having lots of Syrian refugees come to the US is a Stormfront racist moron.

  31. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

    This was one of the AM links stories: Rand Paul's claim that cities and states led by Democrats have the worst income inequality

    My favorite part:

    As regular readers know, at The Fact Checker we raise a red flag when a politician credits or blames the economic trends of a city or state to the policy decisions ? or even the party affiliation ? of a single executive

    Policy decisions aren't usually blamed for economic trends?

    1. SugarFree   10 years ago

      It is particularly callow article. "Rand's telling the truth, but, but nuh-uh!"

      1. Rich   10 years ago

        "He's telling the truth, so only TWO Pinocchios."

    2. wareagle   10 years ago

      not policy decisions that reflect poorly on Team Blue.

    3. Tonio   10 years ago

      "cities and states led by Democrats have the worst income inequality"

      That's because in those states the poor people vote for the party who actually care about them, when they're actually allowed to vote that is. Kochtopus! Tearat! Bagfuck! Argle-bargle!!!!!!1!eleventytotheeleventy /plug

    4. Zeb   10 years ago

      Not to mention that a lot of cities are completely run by Democrats and it is ridiculous to say that it's all just being blamed on one executive when the place has been run by one party for decades.

  32. straffinrun   10 years ago

    While you're waiting, watch a security guard faceplant.

  33. PM   10 years ago

    Seeing as there will apparently be no AM links I'll just post this here:

    The tiny pill fueling Syria's war and turning fighters into superhuman soldiers

    As The Post's Liz Sly recently noted, the war in Syria has become a tangled web of conflict dominated by "al-Qaeda veterans, hardened Iraqi insurgents, Arab jihadist ideologues and Western volunteers."

    On the surface, those competing actors are fueled by an overlapping mixture of ideologies and political agendas.

    Just below it, experts suspect, they're powered by something else: Captagon.[...]

    A powerful amphetamine tablet based on the original synthetic drug known as "fenethylline," Captagon quickly produces a euphoric intensity in users, allowing Syria's fighters to stay up for days, killing with a numb, reckless abandon.

    We're up against an entire army of Rodney King's folks. Might as well just pack it in now.

    1. wareagle   10 years ago

      if we're up against Rodney Kings, does that mean the remedy is LAPD street cops?

      1. Loki   10 years ago

        If you're suggesting we send the LAPD to Syria to fight ISIS, that's an idea I think we can all get behind. They've been playing soldier for years, so why not give then the chance to go to war for real?

  34. Pogue Mahon   10 years ago

    Why is FDR standing?

    1. Zeb   10 years ago

      Probably because he did stand for public appearances early in his presidency to avoid letting people know the truth of his physical condition.

  35. buybuydandavis   10 years ago

    Is there just more money and power in imitating HuffPo?

  36. Constantine   10 years ago

    Test 123

  37. testqwe   10 years ago

    Test comment

  38. Constantine   10 years ago

    Todays test comment!

  39. Cyto   10 years ago

    Kinda making the opposite point though. And instead of 6 chambers, you'd need a few thousand.

    But it is more succinct and powerful in making its point, I'll grant that.

  40. bacon-magic   10 years ago

    Good one.

  41. Cyto   10 years ago

    To be fair, the families of those folks at a hotel in Bamako are probably mostly outside the GOP primary voter demographic.

  42. Princess Trigger   10 years ago

    That is a direct result of Provo Utah not accepting three refugees from Syria.
    Exactly what ISIS wants!

  43. WTF   10 years ago

    No, they're just pants-shitting Islamophobes.

  44. Illocust   10 years ago

    Huh, so it looks like they are trying to keep up a steady stream of attacks for a while. It'll be interesting to see how this changes the conversation.

  45. Derpetologist   10 years ago

    Let's not jump to conclusions. Clinton has assured us that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism.

    "Let's be clear, though, Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people, and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism."

    -HRC

  46. WTF   10 years ago

    Timothy McVeigh was a Christian, you know. (I actually heard this advanced as a serious argument)

  47. sloopyinTEXAS   10 years ago

    Follow up question: "Mrs Clinton (officials do not keep titles once out of office in a free society), how do you square your statement with the Koran's view on homosexuality, women's status as property and the laws on the books of most every Muslim-majority nation supporting these views? Furthermore, do you accept the treatment of religious minorities, gays, women and non-Arab ethnics in Saudia Arabia, Egypt, Indonesia, Yemen, Libya and Pakistan as "peaceful"?

    She'd shit her pants, so to speak.

  48. ant1sthenes   10 years ago

    In fairness to hillary, if she did badmouth islam, she probably wouldn't get laid for a while.

  49. Derpetologist   10 years ago

    Let us chant the prog Rosary for Terrorism:

    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!
    Crusades! Timothy McVeigh! Westboro Baptists! 1.4 billion Muslims!

  50. Ivan Pike   10 years ago

    Timothy McVeigh was a Christian, you know. (I actually heard this advanced as a serious argument)

    Don't forget the Westboro "Baptist" folks, as well as the clan. They were Christian as well.

  51. Agile Cyborg   10 years ago

    Christians are moderately fucked up when they get jets and drones, though. It's your run-of-the-mill bible skimmer that seems more tolerant in nature because half of them are boozing bikini-lusting dick-slappers which minimizes their religious compulsion.

  52. Derpetologist   10 years ago

    And so I think, on the one hand, non-Muslims cannot stereotype, but I also think the Muslim community has to think about how we make sure that children are not being infected with this twisted notion that somehow they can kill innocent people and that that is justified by religion. And to some degree, that is something that has to come from within the Muslim community itself. And I think there have been times where there has not been enough pushback against extremism.

    -Obama, recently

    Odd that he uses "we" to refer to Muslims.

  53. Austrian Anarchy   10 years ago

    That one is truly bizarre and reveals just what a partisan propagandist the person invoking it actually is.

  54. BeefJokey   10 years ago

    There are only two things I can't stand in this world, people who are intolerant of other people's cultures...

    and the GOP

  55. Zeb   10 years ago

    Geez, no regard for ETA, IRA, etc?

  56. Zeb   10 years ago

    I'd say it's just awkward phrasing. Whether "we" refers to the Muslim community or the country in general is ambiguous.

  57. wareagle   10 years ago

    not odd at all. I don't get why people would find it crazy to think that a man who spent at least part of his formative years in a Muslim nation does not automatically see Islam in a negative light.

  58. Detroit Linguist   10 years ago

    Actually the meme I'm seeing most often is of the Klan.

    You know 'we don't think these guys represent Christianity [picture of Klan guys with burning cross], why do you think these guys [picture of Bataclan] represent Islam?'

    It would be nice if there were a quick snappy answer, but I'm stumped. Then I'm also not a Christian.

  59. Lord Humungus   10 years ago

    You know 'we don't think these guys represent Christianity Democrats [picture of Klan guys with burning cross], why do you think these guys [picture of Bataclan] represent Islam?'

  60. buybuydandavis   10 years ago

    See PEW research polling on Muslim attitudes toward government power.

    I think it was Pakistan with about 80% of the population in favor of capital punishment for adultery and apostasy.

  61. wareagle   10 years ago

    Hillary's answer: the right, for the most part, is skeptical Islam; therefore, I am required by proggie groupthink to take the opposite viewpoint.

    The left is driven by nothing more than wanting political opponents to lose. Progs, by default, will take the opposite site from righties/Repubs/conservatives on anything, even a situation like this where the groups they claim to champion are demonstrably harmed.

  62. What's that smell?   10 years ago

    She'd shit her pants-suit actually.

    A "pants-shit-suit" if you will.

  63. sloopyinTEXAS   10 years ago

    How did the progtards steal the narrative and make it widely accepted that "the GOP and Dems have changed places. Those people all became republicans after the civil rights act passed." I mean, it's demonstrably false.

  64. sloopyinTEXAS   10 years ago

    It's a completely fair question. And if she were asked in a debate, her eyes would glaze over like a pair of Krispy Kremes and the election would end right then and there.

    Which means she will never be asked that in a debate, under any circumstances, ever. Even if Isis lobbed a dirty bomb at Tel Aviv or one went off in the Hudson River.

  65. buybuydandavis   10 years ago

    The progs support the far enemy to weaken the near enemy.

  66. wareagle   10 years ago

    I do not disagree that the question is fair. I'm just telling you what the answer would be because that is increasingly the theme of any answer from the left on any question - reflexive opposition to whatever the right says.

    If some righty stood up today and said "sunshine is wonderful, everyone should spend a few minutes in it" the response from the left would be to accuse the right of wanting people to get skin cancer and to complain of a sunshine gap.

  67. commodious spittoon   10 years ago

    Dems at least are a pleasure to hate.

    The GOP is risible and nauseating.

  68. Zeb   10 years ago

    Yes, I do tend to be reasonable and charitable in my interpretations of things people say or write and not jump to conclusions. What a dick. How dare I not immediately assume the worst about anyone I disagree with based on little or no evidence.

  69. tarran   10 years ago

    Sitting on one's ass implies he was a passive participant. I'm stressing that he played a much more active role than merely "sitting on his ass".

    Now. Let's talk about your feelings towards aspies. Did one touch you... in a bad place?

  70. Kristen Bids No Trump   10 years ago

    Aspies are known to be overly pedantic, even about the tiniest things (such as the use of the word "actually").

  71. Entropy Drehmaschine Void   10 years ago

    little or no evidence

    Surely, you jest.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Maryland's New 3 Percent Tax Will Chill the State's Emerging Tech Sector

Tosin Akintola | 7.6.2025 6:30 AM

Conflicts and Contrasts Make Jerusalem Endlessly Fascinating

Jacob Sullum | From the August/September 2025 issue

In Defense of the Tourist Trap: Why Following the Crowd Might Be the Smartest Way To Travel

Christian Britschgi | From the August/September 2025 issue

69 Percent of Americans Say American Dream Is Not Dead

Autumn Billings | 7.4.2025 8:30 AM

With Environmental Regulatory Reform, California Gov. Gavin Newsom Finally Does Something Substantial

Steven Greenhut | 7.4.2025 7:30 AM

Recommended

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

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

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

r

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

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

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!