Oregon Standoff

Matt Welch Talks Oregon Standoff on All in with Chris Hayes Tonight

Tune into MSNBC after 8:40 p.m. ET to hear whether white ranchers are being treated differently than if they were Muslims

|

The standoff in Oregon has already prompted a lot of silly culture-war commentary, and disappointingly scant analysis of the precipitating legal conflicts (though this historical overview of standoffs is useful). I shall attempt to address both issues tonight on MSNBC's All in with Chris Hayes at 8:40ish p.m. Tune in, and heckle me on Twitter!

NEXT: Police Should Be Able to Accept Constructive Criticism

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. Chris Hayes,isn’t he the 12 year old that rides a bike to work?

    1. No, she is the very popular lesbian Rhodes scholar who shares fun drink recipes.

      1. There are plenty of lesbians who would be fun to have a drink with. She however is not an ne of them.

      2. Does she have a bionic penis?

      3. I thought I knew who you were talking about until the “very popular” part.

        1. I did take that a few steps too far.

    2. She is one homely girl however old she is

      1. It’s because she’s a guy.

        1. Stop it with your heteronormative crap. That is a girl man.

    3. So I guess I haven’t stumbled into a safe space here.

      1. We don’t take kindly to no safe places round these here parts, mister, best you just mozy on.

        1. Hey,he ain’t hurten no one

      2. If you feel safe (or entitled to) on the internet, I’ve got some swampland in Florida to sell you.

  2. The same people who thought the Occupy Wall Street should be allowed to turn public parks into open sewers and shanty towns think these guys should be murdered for taking over an abandoned building in the middle of nowhere.

    1. But they have scary guns. See the difference?

    2. You only have to be wrong once to be wrong entirely. As it happens, you are wrong and there is at least one Occupier who believes the feebs should negotiate terms immediately, starting with an investigation into the Hammond case as a whole, the agencies responsible, the prosecutors, the judges, the appeals courts, moving right along to the justice system, our whole outlook on life and their own personal heads. Those definitely need examining.

      You have two choices. You can be pissed that I shake your narrative, or you can feel hope that there was at least one.

      1. Name names.

      2. Don’t ruin the collectivizing, Timbo.

      3. [citation needed]

        I am sure you are right in a theoretical sense, that out of millions of proggies, at least a few must see how corrupt government has become. But relly, [citation needed] or you’re just theorizing.

        1. Oh, I don’t think there’s any doubt that plenty of them see how corrupt government has become. But what’s their solution? More government, that’s what.

        2. I think Hammy is admitting to being an Occupier. Get ‘im!

          1. The rumor that Hamster is a dude is really taking on a life of its own.

            I also heard that Hamster was in Richard Gere’s butt.

              1. No, quite active.

                1. BOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

            1. The rumor that Hamster is a dude is really taking on a life of its own.

              That is partially due to some people calling her Tim, because those people are assholes. Also, it’s fun.

              1. Eugene should be jealous that my meme is lasting much longer than his.

              2. Wait, I’m having a faint recollection here…. it was just the holidays you know… but it’s coming back. Something about a female libertarian … missing part here … named Tim.

                1. We both know it was’t the holidays fault.

          2. Hammy has stated openly to being an Occupier on many occasions, the last time yesterday, and doesn’t think the inference was terribly subtle.

            People persist in refusing to take me at my word. That’s what I find perplexing.

            1. I believe that you were a stinky, raping, freeloader.

            2. Wait. Did you just refer to yourself in like 3rd person or something?

              1. I responded in kind for effect. You couldn’t find anything else to have a go at, could you.

                1. I has a confused. I’m just trying to figure out what’s missing in this puzzle. So far, I got a libertarian girl named Hamster of Doom, who’s real name is Tim, and refers to herself in 3rd person.

                  There’s more, right?

      4. Except John’s comment was a generalization. No, one exception does not invalidate a generalization.

        If you don’t think there’s a positive correlation between people who supported the Occupy movement and people who think the government should deal “aggressively” with the people in Oregon, I suggest you take a review of the opinion pieces out there.

        1. I remember the entire Occupy moment. It was the Democrats October surprise or something like that. What it actually turned out to be was a collection of losers and idiots gathered all in one place. Handing out the communist manifesto and standing around with a microphone saying some really weird thing… what was it they were saying? Anyway, it was all retardation, all the way down. You knew it was going to fall apart at any moment.

        2. “If I just slap this paint on thick enough, to cover up all the dead bugs and peeling paint, it’ll look the same as doing it right.”

          That’s what I think about generalizations. They’re sloppy. You’re getting as much wrong as you’re getting right, and the end result is shit.

          A groundswell against corruption, and people think there weren’t libertarians there?

          1. I was in DC one day walking at the national mall when they were there. It was earlier in the morning and I think most of them were sleeping in their tents, but there were a couple of younger guys standing around and I walked over and talked to them. They seemed totally bored and like they really were not there for any particular reason. Not saying that’s representative of them. But I watched a lot of it on TV and it seemed to just be a loose collection of commies, radical SJWs, and mentally disturbed individuals off the street.

            1. With the latter group (mentally disturbed) being the most coherent.

            2. But I watched a lot of it on TV and it seemed to just be a loose collection of commies, radical SJWs, and mentally disturbed individuals off the street.

              TV said it, and TV would never lie to me, Marge.

              Some of my best special snowflake stories come from particular dipshits I met at Occupy. Some do not. Two of my former compatriots are the subjects of recent Reason articles about jury nullification. One of them evacuated me during a raid on the encampment.

              But sure, let’s pretend that people can have an informed opinion – expertise, even – while having little effective knowledge of the subject, and I’m the silly goose.

          2. Part of the problem, T-Bone, is that the easy association to make with regard to the occupy protests is the one in New York. The other ones were not necessarily like that, of course.

            Also, generalizations are easy.

            1. We can add them to the list of things only okay when it’s us doing it.

          3. If John had said,

            The same There is a high correlation between people who thought the Occupy Wall Street should be allowed to turn public parks into open sewers and shanty towns and those who think these guys should be murdered for taking over an abandoned building in the middle of nowhere.

            the substance of his comment would not have been any different.

          4. The world, and conversation would be difficult without generalizations.

            “That’s what I think about generalizations. They’re sloppy. You’re getting as much wrong as you’re getting right, and the end result is shit.”

            ^ This is a generalization. Tigers have stripes, winter is cold, ferrari’s are expensive- all generalizations.

            To avoid these you would have to talk like some kind of idiot adding a qualifier to damn near every sentence. Seems kind of a silly demand when the whole of humanity doesn’t find it difficult to use and understand generalizations.

            1. No, no, you’re right. Generalizing people is intellectual honesty and cold logic, while generalizing generalizations is a bridge too far.

          5. I hung around at the Boston one after class. There were some libertarians. There were some crazy people who seemed like libertarians but then went full communism. I swayed a few minds. Or tried, at least. libertarians made up a minority of the people I met while there.

          6. “That’s what I think about generalizations. They’re sloppy.”

            And that was a generalization. GG

            1. I suppose talking in circles whilst trying not to take any substantive meaning away from any of it was a third option, yes.

              Don’t you all feel so much better that the narrative is safe now?

      5. I am skeptical of your claim.

        1. Behold, the barren field where I grow my fucks.

          1. Barren field? Then how do you…

            Oh… Hey. You’re not really a farmer, are you?!?

            1. A doom hamster, rapper-farmer with a stage name of Tim. I can’t keep up anymore.

  3. I’m not following this in any detail. A couple questions, though:

    (1) What’s the law enforcement presence on the scene?

    (2) Has anyone actually asked them to leave, yet?

    Because without cops on the scene, and a demand to leave that has been refused, you don’t really have a stand-off, do you?

    1. No you don’t. God forbid the Feds not escalate the situation or the light giver commute their sentence. Nope. The asshole is going to make this a national crisis because that is what he does.

      1. Well he can use this to call for more gun control and how we need to reject Republican Obstructionism and Extremism.

        1. And no doubt he will.

        2. We can have one more thing to hate each other over. And he will love it. Obama is truly a loathsome asshole. Sone people really do just want the world to burn.

          1. Sometimes I really do believe the guy wants to start a civil war. I also think that he’s not thought that out too well, it might not turn out the way he hoped it would and he might not, along with large portions of the rest of us, even live through it to find out.

            Guy’s a sociopath.

            1. I would welcome a valid pretext to exterminate progkind.

          1. Sorry, wrong link

            http://www.gazette.net/stories….._32541.php

            1. That’s the same one.

        3. Of course he will. He simply cannot help himself in this instance. He’s like a three-pack-a-day guy who’s been doused in gasoline – he knows it is the wrong thing to do and how bad it’s going to turn out but just can’t help but try to light up another cigarette.

      2. I suspect they haven’t sent Fed snipers in because there are no unarmed women holding babies.

      3. The asshole is going to make this a national crisis because that is what he does.

        To his credit, he hasn’t yet.

  4. Isn’t Chris Hayes a big OWS booster?

    1. Yes. But this is totally different. It will be all law and order summary executions tonight.

    2. I thought that he’s Pajama Boy. I mean, he does look like Pajama Boy, no?

      1. Ha,I just thought of him in Speed Racer pajamas.

        1. Whatever floats your marshmallow.

    3. Yes,and he believes the whole country should be running on ‘renewable energy’ and eliminate all use of fossil fuels.. But,he’s 12 and still believes in unicorns ,Santa and the Eater bunny. I think his mommy still cuts the crust off his sandwiches still.

      1. I once had a nice Eater bunny, but he was eaten.

        1. Serves him right, that hypocrite.

    4. Isn’t Chris Hayes a big OWS booster?

      So a member of the Federal Government Pep Squad?

      1. They were calling for the right left Top Men

  5. For all the stupidity about “They aren’t killing them because they are white!” does anyone remember Waco, Ruby Ridge, Kent State and the Bonus Army?

    1. Stop making stuff up!

    2. That was Zen. This is Tao.

      1. +1 hand clapping

        1. *narrows eyes at the both of you*

          1. *high fives croaker*

  6. He’s Maddow’s little sister and yes, he was wearing big sis’s PJ’s. Don’t tell b/c Hayes leaked a little in them.

  7. Sure, prosecuting people under terrorism charges and sending them back to prison is a perfectly reasonable use of federal resources for people who may or may not have violated a burn ban, actually attempting to protect the wider land from wildfires that the federal government won’t maintain itself.

    1. The government have been using their discretion and interpretation of the vast jungle of laws they’ve created, to punish those of their choosing, for a long time now. It’s just getting a lot worse. It makes me think of when they went after Tommy Chong. Once they’ve made up their minds they want to get you, you’re pretty much fucked, makes no difference what you did or whether anyone was harmed or not.

      1. And it’s because they wouldn’t sell their ranch to BLM and refused to be run off by BLM.

        If there’s an investigation to be made, it should be an investigation of BLM. And I don’t mean Black Lives (only) Matter.

        1. Remember when Harry Reid said it’s not over?

  8. This entire thread has confused me.

    1. My job is done then.

    2. Solution: sniff some glue, and then reread the thread.

      1. I find a good stout or porter work well.

      2. Uline S-15802 with a Sharpie chaser works well.

  9. Ot from TiredPrestidigitation: Dog Days

    http://thinkprogress.org/justi…..s-defense/

    Wall told the police that he shot the dogs to protect the deer that he breeds on his property, which is about a mile from Drew’s house. Allegedly the dogs were “trying to get under the fence to get to the deer.”

    “Randy got on his four-wheeler and tried to chase them off and as a last resort had to shoot all three of your dogs,” Musch said, according to Drew.

    Drew was stunned. “How do you shoot three dogs?? This was a dog hunt,” she told the officer.

    “No ma’am, dogs kill deer,” Musch replied.

    Drew told Musch that her dogs lived in a subdivision and would be terrified of deer.

    “Ma’am, he had every legal right to shoot your dogs.”

    1. That neighbor should be killed for what he did. If someone harmed my pets like that, it would be the last thing they ever did. Except for their wails of agony.

      1. Yeah, no; if your dogs are harassing someone’s livestock or game animals, they are fair game. If you don’t want them shot, keep them in your fucking yard.

        1. Agreed, and Suicidy sounds trollish, anyway.

  10. Here is a page which presents a lot of background. I’m sure it has its own bias, but if even half the facts are true, only a fascist can say justice has been had.

    1. Oh, Justice has been had alright.

    2. Even if you accept the “lamestream” media’s account, prosecuting these people under terrorism charges and putting them in prison for as long or longer than violent offenders is a serious injustice.

      Everything I’ve read said that the rancher’s were doing controlled burns to try to abate wildfires. Assuming they’re 100% guilty of some kind of crime or regulatory violation, a fine or something was probably in order. Prosecuting them as terrorists proves once again justice is but one ambitious prosecutor away from being shredded.

  11. BTW,what the hell was this post about?

      1. Let’s have a debate about who would look the best in Speed Racer jammies, Matt or that dude that everyone is trying to say is a chick.

        1. The 12 year old boy,or the guy that makes the drinks on his show?

  12. MSNBC again, Matt? Between Hayes, Perry, and even Sharpton, you’re just about a weekly occurrence. Good thing liberal media is around to give libertarians air time. If you depended on right wing media, you would be mute.

    1. Yes, of course, because no libertarians, including Matt, have ever been given air time on right wing media. Let alone their own shows, or anything like that.

      1. Do let us know when.

        1. If you’re that fucking clueless, it would do you good to figure it out on your own. I’m not optimistic that you can.

          1. Hyperion|1.4.16 @ 7:41PM|#
            “If you’re that fucking clueless, it would do you good to figure it out on your own.”

            It is and it won’t.

      2. Don’t talk to it,it’s not real.

    2. Left-wing media has to occasionally present “the crackpot voice” to gin up some controversy. Otherwise it’s just a big Air America circle jerk.

    3. He’d have to make do with a year of hosting a show 4 days a week.

      1. Matt has a French wife and looks like a hipster who plays in an ironic band, so he can at least get past MSNBC security.

      2. I mean, I guess what I’m trying to say is MSNBC staff thinks Welch is Chris Hayes so he flies under the radar… so to speak.

    4. This is too dumb to be real.

      1. It’s not fake, just delicious.

      2. Apparently Jackass never got the memo that Matt had his own show on fox business last year.

    5. What does it feel like to have your shins surgically removed and then in turn have your feet attached to the bottom of your knee-stumps?

    6. Hey dumbfuck, Stossel makes regular appearances on O’Reilly, as does Napolitano, who also appears on Special Report. Kennedy has her own show. Among others.

      Stupid shit. Go back to jacking yourself off over global warming.

      1. Stossel also has his own show. It’s called “Stossel”.

  13. Wouldn’t a better parallel be when the unions took over the capital building in Wisconsin when they threw a temper tantrum over Scott Walker’s reforms?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
    2011_Wisconsin_protests

    1. Unions were fighting for government power. Totally different.

    2. JeremyR|1.4.16 @ 7:42PM|#
      “Wouldn’t a better parallel be when the unions took over the capital building in Wisconsin when they threw a temper tantrum over Scott Walker’s reforms?”

      How ’bout when the ‘indians’ took over Alcatraz?

  14. Well well well.

    Look at what’s going around on Facebook.

    http://gizmodo.com/oregon-was-…..1539567040

    1. Hollywood was too. Time to throw the Hollywood Left under the bus.

    2. Oregon was a popular restaurant in the 1950s for both locals and travelers alike. The drive-in catered to America’s postwar obsession with car culture, allowing people to get coffee and a slice of pie without even leaving their vehicle. But if you happened to be black, the owners of Waddles implored you to keep on driving. The restaurant had a sign outside with a very clear message: “White Trade Only ? Please.”

      You didn’t actually link to facebook, so I clicked.

      So they have revealed to us that in the 1950s, Oregon had “whites only” signs at certain businesses?

    3. Ah, the dream of the 1890s!

    4. Wait, I thought that Oregon is a progtopia?

      1. It is, certainly in the urban areas (most of the population) but it’s also as conservative as most of the rural west outside of that (most of the land area).

        It’s funny how the piece tries to play up the racial angle. The KKK of the 1920’s in Oregon was a anti-Catholic movement that was the big support behind getting a Democrat elected as governor and compulsory public schools. Ooops, that doesn’t fit the narrative.

        1. The same phenomenon characterizes NYC vs upstate NY.

          1. It’s just as true in MD. Outside of Baltimore and Annapolis, just one little narrow strip down the west side of the bay, it’s all conservative. But there are very few people in most of the state.

            1. Upstate NY has some big blue cities (I grew up in one of them and did college in another) but otherwise it might as well be Pennsyltucky.

              1. I’ve been in some of those parts of NY state, and yep, rednecks in their pickups just like here in Murlan once you’re far enough outside of Balmer.

                1. I might live in NYC now but I have a lot of upstate redneck in me as my family is scattered all over towns like that. Mom is from a little border town in PA/NY. I hate how leftists have killed the economy there.

                  1. I’ve always told some of my friends that I can live anywhere. Partially because I already have. I’ve lived around the most backward rednecks and most retarded progs, and everything in between. I could pretty much blend in anywhere. Except for inner city Baltimore you know, I’m a few shades too white to make that work.

      2. We need a constitutional amendment that designates progressives as soulless things. Then we can do whatever we want to them. Nice and legal.

    1. Nothing about thin slicing and the judicious use of dill? I am dissapoint by this GIF.

      1. “Look at me, I’m Quincy, I don’t approve of Crusty’s hilarious brand of low-brow humor, which isn’t at all juvenile and strange.”

        You sicken me.

        1. Dude, I buy spray glue by the case. Sometimes, I actually use it to make things adhere to each other. You want some?

            1. Party at Crusty’s house. W00T!

  15. Okay, this better be good. I’m staying up past my bed time.

  16. The president is trying to ban guns out of principle. The gun nuts are fighting it out of craven self-interest.

  17. There’s little political upside to banning guns, but there’s a huge ideological, power-grabby side to it.

    1. If you’re pandering to proggy voters, there’s an upside.

      1. Yeah, but Obama ain’t running for anything anymore, and doesn’t care about his fellow Democrats who are. Plus, those Dems are getting those proggy votes, no. matter. what.

      2. Because they are going to vote Republican if Democrats don’t pander to them?

        Gun control is just someone the left drools over. They know it won’t solve anything, it’s just part of winning power for the left is so they can punish their opponents. This is one of the big ways.

        1. “Gun control is just someone the left drools over.”

          ….Gun control is…. Ryan Gosling?

          1. Funny – that’s not how I imagine him at all.

        2. In order to get rid of the rest of those pesky amendments, especially that extra pesky first, it’s going to be imperative to first get rid of the second. An unarmed citizenry is much easier to nudge in the right direction.

          1. “Nudge”?
            Like paying income tax is “voluntary”?

          2. Aaahh, so when they get you bent over and lubed up you call what comes next a “nudge”??

  18. Prediction: 2 minutes, 37 seconds of air time

    1. Prediction: pink shirt

    2. I didn’t have a stopwatch on that, but i’m guessing it was closer to 2 mins flat.

  19. Tell me Matt is wearing a cowboy hat pushed down so low his ears are poking out. If not, I’m not watching.

    1. Turn on MSNBC? Really attractive neckid ladies might get me to do so.

      1. Like that chick that sounds like daffy duck? Daffy is black. *Thinks….* Melissa Harris Perry IS Daffy Duck!

        1. To be honest, I’d forgotten who she is/was, so I did a search and:

          “MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry owes $70,000 in delinquent taxes, IRS says”
          Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/…..z3wKdbzrHK

          1. Is she still on TV? After all of her mouthing off on air about people not wanting to pay their fair share…

            1. Dunno, but when I was searching, one of the auto-complete tags was “MH-P show canceled”.

          2. Still.

            Would.

            /looks to high five Crusty.

  20. Anti-government? Is that anything like pro-rights?

  21. Ha, they’re showing a flashback to Santorum earlier in the show rather than have Welch on camera.

  22. Prediction: Why bother at this point?

  23. Ugh, they’re not even giving Welch his own segment. And the other guy isn’t even wearing a tie. WITH A GOATEE.

    1. Ben Jelly looks like he’s having trouble pinching one

  24. This a-hole is somehow making this about race.

    1. Its all they have.

      Oh, you’re criticizing the wanton misuse of Federal Power?

      WHY DO YOU HATE BLACK PEOPLE?! (waves bloody shirt)

      1. You have to admit that it’s amazingly effective at times. Look at how the police brutality thing was finally getting national attention, people were coming together and ready to make it a top issue and then BOOM! The left fucking managed to make the entire thing about race and the entire thing just blew up into a clusterfuck and that was it. Cops continued on doing the same shit and everyone else chased the next shiny object that was tossed out for them.

      2. Well, it was they (both the feds and progressives) who saved blacks and other POCs from racists. So if you criticize them, you’re criticizing blacks for being black. Duh.

  25. So, Hayes actually understands the basis for the Second Amendment. If scoffingly so.

  26. You can’t use Filthadelphia as a representation of anything but Filthadelphia.

  27. So Jealous’s point is since urban folk get the unjust mandatory minimums, everyone should be?

    1. Not the neckid lady I had in mind. Not at all!

      1. Her unearned smugness is rather naked. Does that count?

        1. Even more so…

  28. My livestream made that segment into stop-motion animation, but from the 2-3 sentences i heard from Matt, he seemed to own the Proggy lobbyist guy.

    Also, White Shirt, Cyan Tie? We approve. Not crazy about when he wears the pink shirt w/ same. But it seemed an apropos choice to use the Left’s own color-scheme against them. Subversion couture

    1. Would it kill his wife to dress him in an American flag tie?

      1. I think if you’re going to go for that look you need to go All The Way

        Also, the only appropriate accessorizing is “live sparklers”

          1. 3 button suit? Ugh. This isn’t 1998

        1. Welch is marginally better than that guy at knotting a tie. And I don’t like to give out tie-related compliments, so…

    2. I thought you said that you got a nice severance. You don’t have cable????

      1. technically I didn’t have a TV* until recently, but i’m not changing rooms just for MSNBC.

        *yes, i’m that guy

  29. You also have to appreciate the subtlety of MSNBC’s coverage.

    They interview some guy, and the caption is “ANTI GOVERNMENT PROTESTOR”

    Is that how they handled OWS? “Anti-Capitalist Protester”? Or “Leader of Tomorrow”?

    1. That’s actually funny. People are going to be looking at Welch and thinking… that’s what an anti-government protester looks like? He doesn’t look scary … he looks like my English teacher from 8th grade!

      1. Sorry, I was referencing a clip they had of one of the people holed up in the Nature Preserve, not Matt. He just got, “Reason Editor” or something.

        The protester had a sport jacket on though. It wasn’t the ‘heavily armed hayseed’ image that MSNBC might have wished for.

  30. Has Matt’s attire improved since the TI days?

    1. He even looks more handsome now. I am not sure exactly what he is doing, but whatever it is, it’s working.

    2. He really pulled it together in the last 3 months of the broadcast of the show. Since then he seems to have 4 or so preferred arrangements in rotation. Most are 50% (i.e. “acceptable”) or better…so, yeah, i’d call that an improvement.

    3. I think he should eschew Gil’s sartorial advice and wear a novelty tie during his next MSNBC appearance.

      1. The 2nd to last time Matt was on MSNBC i gave exactly that advice. Only my recco was slightly less subtle.

  31. Is that how they handled OWS? “Anti-Capitalist Protester”? Or “Leader of Tomorrow”?

    Time person of the year runner-up.

    1. Here’s MSNBC coverage of OWS in Oct 2011

      they describe them as protesting “Economic Inequality”. To be fair, it was more-articulate than what any of the protesters might have come up with themselves. But i don’t think that’s any more accurate than the broad-brush description of the Oregon folks as “Anti-Government”

      The fact is that they both share a lot in common. Its just that MSNBC likes to take the side of the protesters when Lefties are doing it, but will demonize rednecks who might be protesting almost the exact same thing = federal power being used in unpopular ways.

      1. Gonna disagree with your police work there. OWS was protesting the lack of federal power, and at best, its misdirection.

        Almost every demand from OWS to the state was “more, faster, harder, bigger, and at me and my student loan debt”

        1. Yeah, what we got in SF was ‘MORE FREE SHIT!’.
          It certainly wasn’t organized, so I have no idea what was the pitch elsewhere.

        2. “Gonna disagree with your police work there. OWS was protesting the lack of federal power, and at best, its misdirection.”

          i actually did think for a second about how one could phrase it in a way that showed some underlying similarity.

          “”federal power being used in unpopular ways“” is not really any different from your “the misdirection of federal power”. They certainly weren’t protesting the “lack” of federal power over the financial sector. They were protesting the extraordinary powers the Fed utilized… to what they perceived to be the public-detriment..

          While most of the kids i talked to were too stupid to articulate anything specific, there were 1 or 2 who thought that the Taxpayer funded bailout of banks was highway robbery. And I think they were right to think so.

          None of them probably understood what Hank Paulson did when he decided to “Save” Goldman & Citigroup, force BoA to buy Merrill Lynch (and all its liabilities), cut the nuts off of AIG, and let Lehman go the way of the Dodo…. but it was indeed unconstitutional exercise of Federal Authority.

          they may not have known that’s what they were protesting… but it was still the reason they were there.

      2. Flyover country has got to be flownover.

      3. The difference is that the left lets the government totally off the hook and puts the blame on evil corporations who are buying our government. Libertarians understand that is total bullshit.

        1. I dunno. I think libertarians accept that will happen and thus want to limit government so as to limit corporations control over the government.

          That’s not to say corporations are evil, but they will take advantage of the government to keep out competition and ultimately harm the consumer

  32. Are we going to talk about Robby’s award?

    1. http://www.forbes.com/30-under-30-2016/law-policy/

      3rd from the end. It isn’t his best hair day, but maybe he’s just trying to blend in with the uglies.

      1. Hey!

      2. What’s with this ‘remove your adblocker’ shit?

      3. An O, maybe not a standing O.

      4. That’s awesome! Congrats, Robby!

    2. I think the fact that it went unmentioned is because people know that sort of “Top People” shit is just an assortment of people the junior editors at Forbes happen to know

      Also, the hair was fine, but that Grin looks like he has a dismembered body in his closet

      1. He was remembering something from the humour section in one of the campus circulars.

  33. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireS…..w-36065315

    Food cooperative programs that allow members to scoop rice, sort organic vegetables and ring up sales in return for grocery discounts are fading fast amid a changing marketplace and fears of violating labor laws.

    1. Liberalism Eats Itself, redux

      There were a spate of articles in 2013 about how many of these Urban Farmer’s Market deals were all selling the same produce* that the regular Mega-Mart had for sale, only the slightly-more abused/spoiled variety. That particular thing was in LA… and much of the produce was actually coming from Mexico, while people thought they were “buying local”.

      In NYC, it was a little different – instead, the “Local Produce” turned out to have heavy-metals included… and we’re not talking the Pantera variety.

      I loved that latter one, if only because i thought it fitting that Brooklyn Hipsters would be giving each other lead poisoning, and bragging about how much better it was than the awful stuff at C-Town.

      1. It’s like putting anti-freeze in the wine!

        1. Look….we stopped that decades ago!

          /Austria

      2. Wife and I stopped at a couple of places advertising ‘local’ farm fresh produce here in Maryland a couple of summers ago while we were doing some in state traveling. It was all the super market stuff. It was totally laughable to me that they could try to pass off those hot house tomatoes as local grown ripened on the vine. It was nothing but bulk super market produce being sold outside.

    2. “Food cooperative programs that allow members to scoop rice, sort organic vegetables and ring up sales in return for grocery discounts are fading fast amid a changing marketplace and fears of violating labor laws.

      SF Chron did a puff-piece on the local hippy-dippy market; now some 30 years old, selling veggies that aren’t what you’d serve to guests and ‘food’ you really never heard of before.
      They neglected to mention that it never would have been allowed to start now; the min-wage and time-off benes would have killed it in the first month.

  34. Doing end of year cleaning. Thanks to my first job, at age 16, working at McDonald’s, I know to clean from high to low. My wife, silver spoon baby, decided she’d help me clean. First thing she does is vacuum. She doesn’t move anything, just vacuums around it. She cleans the oven hood with windex and complains if I use to many paper towels while cleaning. If Agile is out there, I need advice.

    1. Clean glass surfaces with Windex and newspaper. Newspaper is very slightly abrasive so it gets small specks of gunk off better than paper towels – and your wife (probably) won’t complain about using too many old newspapers.

      1. That is useful advice. I used a squeegee on the windows. Just hot water and it worked fine. Problem is cleaning together. Everybody has their own way, I know, but my way is much more effective and she just gets in the way. *Sigh*

        1. btdt… this AM my spousal unit decided to “help” as I was loading the dishwasher from the sink. She ended up knocking over/shattering a drinking glass in the sink. We both know she is often clumsy like that but she has a hard time just letting me complete some chores.

          1. The mother in law won’t even let her own daughter in the kitchen. I just redo everything she has already “cleaned”, but then she says, “I’ve already cleaned that!”. My 3 brothers and I are infinitely better at cleaning than our 2 sisters or our wives. I just don’t get it. What is so hard about cleaning systematically?

            1. It’s just the opposite in my house. My wife is obsessive about cleaning and organizing the house. No matter what I do, and I’m no slob at all for a guy, it’s not good enough. So I don’t try too much, I just let her do it. I pick up after myself, take out the trash, help with laundry (which is one thing I am better at than her ) and dishes, run the vac, that’s about the extent of it. She’ll just redo what I did. She is a master of organization though, I have to give her that. When we get groceries, it’s nice, because I just haul them inside and she puts everything away since if I do it, she’ll just redo it anyway.

              1. Good thing you didn’t marry my wife.

                1. If he had would you guys have to flip a coin every night to see which of you sleeps on the couch?

                  1. No, she’d sleep on the couch. NTTAWWT.

    2. I suspect his advice will involve fucking her with your cosmic dick as she vacuums the cocaine from the carpet of infinity. Or something.

      1. + 1 astral splooge bonghit

    3. If Agile is out there, I need advice.

      Did you try explaining to her why your way is better and then asking her to do it that way? If you did and it didn’t work then you can either live with it or get divorced.

      1. That probably sounds harsh, but there are no tricks to it. You talk to her like a person and if you can’t agree, then you go from there.

  35. OT: I saw the movie Joy tonight. I give it two thumbs up. The basic premise was enough to make me like it: perseverance amid incessant pleas to give up. I also enjoyed the patent law plot point.

    I think one could accurately say there is a slight libertarian undertone in the movie; at the very least, it celebrates individual talent. Also, Jennifer Lawrence performed very well.

    I’d recommend it.

  36. OT: Finished re-reading “True Believer” (Hoffer). Read first in the ’60s, uncritically. Not an easy read; the brush is overly broad at points, but mass movements and their true believers are distilled to the elements. Certainly worth the read if you haven’t or a re-read if you have.
    A claim I’d missed earlier has to do with the *necessity* of coercion in the process of revolutions; the examples establish plausibility and that bodes ill for those who subscribe to the NAP.

  37. More OT: Wealthy football owners gang up to fleece LA taxpayers!

    “Raiders, 2 other teams officially apply for L.A. move”
    […]
    “Owner Mark Davis wants to partner with the division rival San Diego Chargers to build a stadium in Carson. The Chargers and St. Louis Rams also filed a relocation application Monday night.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/

    1. Mark Davis is an idiot.

      1. I mean there’s times when visual evidence speaks for itself:

        Mark Davis

        1. Darn your fast fingers!

          1. Al must have looked at that kid and thought, good god, I shouldn’t have done so many drugs when having sex with the wife.

            The guy made Reggie McKenzie general manager of an NFL team and for a while, Dennis Allen was head coach. LMAO, WTF?

      2. Now, personal appearance really shouldn’t figure into your judgement of another person, but what if the person in question decides that MOE HOWARD IS A GREAT LOOKING GUY?!
        http://www.bing.com/images/sea…..ajaxhist=0

        1. I think big Al must have fucked an orangutan and hid the entire affair from the wife, lol.

        2. Its like he went to a barbershop and said, “Give me the “1970s Cult Leader

          1. “Its like he went to a barbershop and said, “Give me the “1970s Cult Leader””

            The barber I go to, after the blow-off and damp-towel wipe, hands me a mirror and turns the chair around so I can see the back side; I can already see the front and sides.
            And I presume Mark gets the same and he says ‘LOOKS GOOD TO ME’?!
            W
            T
            F?

          2. Same barber as Jose Canseco?

    2. Commenter Sevo throws a dart at the map from 20 yards away and thinks Carson is within the city boundaries of Los Angeles. He may have hit the mark but I have no idea. Do Carsonites get a monthly invoice from the LADWP?

      1. widget|1.5.16 @ 12:54AM|#
        “Commenter Sevo throws a dart at the map from 20 yards away and thinks Carson is within the city boundaries of Los Angeles. He may have hit the mark but I have no idea. Do Carsonites get a monthly invoice from the LADWP?”

        Sorry; “So Cal taxpayers”. But I think most folks got the point.

        1. No. I’m not ragging on you Sevo, but most folks who live east of the Mississippi do not understand western america’s political boundaries. I don’t either, FWIW. The NFL venue in the Los Angeles area will most likely be in the City of Industry or Vernon, neither of which is in the City of LA.

          Vernon is the city of colossal refrigerators.

      2. Carson is its own city, but exists within LA County. And as such, they are not serviced by the DWP. On another note…WELCOME HOME RAMS! And may the Raiders continue to suck hot garbage for the rest of their days.

        1. WELCOME HOME RAMS!

          *Insert jab at Cleveland and the Browns*

    3. That’s actually not quite the case though.

      The owner of the Rams plans to build his own stadium in LA, even though St. Louis has offered to partially fund one in St. Louis ($400 million worth)

      Beyond that, most studies about the effects of sports teams seem to ignore income tax on the salaries of the owners/players. That pretty much covers the cost of the stadium proposed in St. Louis

  38. And yet more OT; ya think maybe the Corps of Engineers may cause more harm than ‘climate change’?

    “Levees among possible cause of more frequent flooding”
    […]
    “Prior to levee building, the river was a wild thing and it spread out between the river bluffs,” Knaup said Monday. “Now we’ve tried to tame it. Mother Nature and Old Man River will fight back.”
    http://www.stltoday.com/news/n…..b3334.html

    Pretty sure we can add fed-sponsored flood insurance to the increased costs and losses.

    1. It’s only fair that we are taxed to pay for people to live in flood plains. Nobody saw it coming.

  39. I made coq au vin tonight, it was delicious. Thanks to Old Man with Candy for the perfect wine recommendation.

  40. Guns and gun rights are increasingly popular, we’re entering a presidential election year, and the Democrats are going to go after guns and bring in thousands of Syrian refugees. Sounds like a winning platform! I’ll bet Democrat candidates across the nation are rubbing their hands in glee, eager to defend those policies on the 2016 campaign trail.

  41. I just watched the segment and Matt did a bang up job.

    All the best Matt.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.