Election 2016

Mitt Romney Might Vote for LP Ticket of Gary Johnson and William Weld

2012 GOP nominee excoriates Donald Trump's "trickle-down racism, trickle-down bigotry, trickle-down misogyny."


Mitt Romney & Wolf Blitzer
screen capture, CNN

Few #NeverTrumpers have better bona fides than Mitt Romney, the Republican Party's 2012 nominee for president. Yes, he sought out and got an endorsement from Donald Trump four years ago, but the former one-term Massachusetts governor has been outspoken against the billionaire developer during the entire 2016 campaign. Now he's even talking about possibly breaking party ranks and voting for the Libertarian ticket of Gary Johnson and Bill Weld (who, like Romney, also governed The Bay State, though for two terms).

"Presidents have an impact on the nature of our nation, and trickle-down racism, trickle-down bigotry, trickle-down misogyny, all these things are extraordinarily dangerous to the heart and character of America," Romney told CNN's Wolf Blitzer in an interview. "I don't want to see a president of the United States saying things which change the character of the generations of Americans that are following."

To be honest, I'm not sure that the president's character or personal example matters all that much. Only fools take their lead from politicians and celebrities. Did the United States become a nation of cheaters because of, say, Bill Clinton? Did we become paranoid nutjobs because of Richard Nixon, and did we become more pious and puritanical because of Jimmy Carter? No, I don't think so. That's not to say we shouldn't expect and demand basic standards of decency and honesty from our politicians, of course.

And at the same time, Trump's musings about Judge Gonzalo Curiel are, as Speaker Paul Ryan put it, "the textbook definition of a racist comment." We can add to that the presumptive nominee's idiotic thoughts about Mexicans more generally and Muslims, too, both of which betray a mind-set that is all about group consciousness and collective identity. While I think it's likely that Trump himself is not a racist in a 1950s version of that term or in a I-won't-let-my-sister-marry-one-of-them sort of way, there's no question he's channeling Archie Bunker in his own mind pretty much 24/7. Not to minimize his remarks, but part of all this stems, I think, from a difference in context and patois. Trump sees himself as a rough-and-tumble businessman from New York City and he grew up in an era when all racial and ethnic groups routinely and openly insulted one another almost as a way of starting conversations. This ethos is precisely what fired up the Howard Stern radio show in its early days in the Big Apple and you can also see it in the early '70s movies of Mel Brooks, contemporaneous sitcoms such as Welcome Back, Kotter and Barney Miller, and elsewhere. Indeed, much of Trump's appeal is that he doesn't speak like other politicians and he doesn't resort to dog whistles—instead, he just hits the bullhorn turned up to 11. How that will play to voters over time is anyone's guess, but the same Bowery Boys' mentality that produces fucked-up statements about Mexicans, Muslims, and judges is also energizing his blunt statements about Hillary Clinton and her husband's treatment of women. Raised in Queens (which surely pains him a bit to admit, as it's not Manhattan or even Brooklyn), Trump is the quintessential New Yorker before the city became "nice" sometime in the late 1990s or early 2000s. 

True to form, Trump fired back via Twitter:

Gary Johnson
Johnson campaign photo

Romney's also told CNN that's he considering voting LP in the coming election. 

"If Bill Weld were at the top of the ticket, it would be very easy for me to vote for Bill Weld for president," Romney said. "So I'll get to know Gary Johnson better and see if he's someone who I could end up voting for. That's something which I'll evaluate over the coming weeks and months."

The sticking point for Romney appears to be pot legalization. "Marijuana makes people stupid," Romney told CNN. Maybe, but marijuana prohibition makes the whole country stupid. If that is what's holding back conservative Republicans from voting for Johnson, they have a bigger problem than the Trump candidacy. The culture wars are over—at least in terms of using the government to force lifestyle choices on people—and conservatives seem dead set on losing the peace.

For his part, Johnson praised Romney's curiosity in his charmingly low-key way, saying "I think Mitt Romney hit it on the head. He said, 'Hey, I'm going to check out Gary Johnson and see what he's got to say.'…I think that kind of scrutiny holds up under the light of day."

More here.

NEXT: Trump: The Art of the Lie

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. “The sticking point for Romney appears to be pot legalization. “Marijuana makes people stupid,” Romney told CNN. Maybe, but marijuana prohibition makes the whole country stupid. If that is what’s holding back conservative Republicans from voting for Johnson…”

    Hey, I thought you were talking about Romney, now suddenly you’re switching topics mid-paragraph and talking about conservatives?

    1. I don’t want to let conservatives off the hook, many of them think legalizing pot is surrendering to child-poisoning hippies and profit-hungry drug-dealers (because profit is bad in this context, you see). Other conservatives are, shall we say, more mellow.

      But don’t forget who signed the Harrison Act – Woodrow Wilson – and who signed the Marihuana [sic] Tax Act – FDR.

      1. No establishment politicians on either team want the WOD shut down. It’s a very lucrative business for them.

        1. And look at the number of high paying government jobs it’s created.

          Think of the children of the prison guards and DEA agents. Without the WoDs they’d be starving in the streets.

          Heatless fucking libertarians!

          1. ‘Heatless fucking’ must be a Canadian thing.

            When Americans fuck we generate lots of heat, libertarians included.

            1. The F-35 generates all the heat you need.

              1. Wm F Buckley Jr sailed outside US waters and got high. He gave up on banning pot 20 years ago.


                If that isn’t enough to “allow” conservatives to get over prohibition, what is?

                Might be tougher for the LDS crowd than for a Catholic, though.

                Kevin R

  2. Vote GayJay

    He’s a Mitt Romney-libertarian.

    1. Fuuuuuuuuuck that shit.

    2. SIV, do you prefer Johnson Troll or Troll Johnson? I want to be sensitive to your preferred self-identification. Whichever you choose, it is undeniable you troll for any Johnson mentions so you can remind everyone how much you obsess over it day and night


        1. It is truly amazing that you can speak so loudly with TrumpCock so deep in your throat. Just astounding, really

  3. So we might get a Mitt around our Johnson and Willy?

    1. I think you’re having a premature postulation.

      1. Then you’d have Kaffee Mitt Milch.

    2. Your stupid joke made me laugh. I hope you’re happy.

    3. Fist Romney would like a word.

  4. At least Mitt is giving some thought to voting third party. John McCain is sure to endorse Hillary any day now.

    1. There can only be possible reasons for that (Mitt).

      1. He thinks if Johnson gets enough votes, Hillary will win.

      2. He thinks even if there is anything libertarian about Johnson/Weld, that they will quickly sell out to the establishment once elected.

      1. In Johnson’s defense, Romney has bad political judgment, so his assessment of Johnson may be mistaken.

        1. I don’t think he’s mistaken. I just think he sees Johnson as the only move left for the failed #NeverTrump movement.

          1. Its more effective than “#NeverTrump” by itself because it drains potential votes from the pool without attacking Trump too-directly. which just seems to galvanize support for him.

            1. Obverse Psychology?

              1. It is true that “Pro-something” is more effective politically than being “anti-something”

                marginally – people dispute its significance and the evidence is mixed in actual campaign-data.

                but it may rely on the same kind of cognitive-bias which shows that people raise their risk-tolerance when they are told of ‘possible rewards’ (lives saved), as opposed to being told of the ‘negative consequences’ (lives lost)

                that’s just an example HM linked to a while back. in politics its much the same – where they find people tend to gravitate more strongly to an argument of ‘better results’ (hope! change!) as opposed to simply denigrating the opposition as “Unfit to serve”.

                1. “where they find people tend to gravitate more strongly to an argument of ‘better results’ (hope! change!) as opposed to simply denigrating the opposition as “Unfit to serve”.

                  Not to sound snarky but if that’s true then why the hell have not all, but nearly all election ads I’ve seen and heard over the last 20 years been attack ads on one’s opponent; set with ominous background music, then a few throwaway lines at the end endorsing the opponent of said monster?

                  1. Probably because the candidates couldn’t think of any “positive” case they could make which would be *credible*?

                    Whereas the attacks are instantly credible because they’re probably true.

                    You shouldn’t misunderstand the point i’m making. its not suggesting that “everyone should campaign on a positive message all the time because it always wins”

                    positive messages are harder to make, slower to be accepted, and rely on all sorts of secondary-qualities to be effective (*like an appealing personality); negative attacks are easy, fast, effective, but quickly forgotten unless constantly repeated.

                    If you’ve only got a little bit of money and a short campaign window, then Negative probably works much better for things like “local elections”, where its basically unknowns (or one well-known incumbent vs 2 unknowns)

                    the case for the relative benefit of ‘positive campaigning’ is, as noted, mixed when it comes to actual campaign results. its mostly demonstrated in polling on ‘candidate favorability’ and how people rank issues.

                    1. as a case study =

                      I think the LP here is in a position where they can/will present a comparatively positive message relative to the Trump/Hillary campaigns.

                      they are offering a genuine political alternative and some very-clear advantages in not being “the worst 2 people on earth” like Trump/Hillary.

                      They are pitching a ‘best of both worlds’/worst of none!’ political menu which will likely do well with many voters. and i think it will ‘work’ better for the LP than if instead they chose to simply attack the other 2 as “Evil Statists!”

                      i don’t think its going to win very much in the end (5% of the popular vote being the target); but i certainly think they’ll get better per-dollar results from their run-on-a-shoestring campaign than either Hil or Trump, who will each spend a billion or so simply trying to damage one another in swing-states.

                    2. Oh, sorry for the delay. I’m entirely too stoned and ill prepared to respond to a well thought out explanation on your part.

                      +1 GILMORE 😉

      2. I think its the former.

        People in the “GOPe” stand to lose a lot of power if Trump wins.

        If Hillary wins, they remain the caretakers of the establishment-opposition.

        1. That’s pretty much my take.

          The professional establishment Repubs know that their gravy train depends on one of their own being in office. Trump owes them nothing, doesn’t mix with them, has no reason to make them his courtiers and sycophants. He’s already marginalized and impoverished a chunk of the GOP Election-Industrial Complex.

          If they thought they were going to get cushy sinecures and no-show jobs from him like they would a fellow GOPer, they’d support and defend him.

      3. There’s a third reason for Mitt:

        3. He sees the Republican party ideologically split between libertarian leanings and populist leanings, and the populists are winning. He hopes centrist endorsements of former Republicans on the libertarian side will push the party toward liberty and away from populisim.

        I’m not saying he’s a libertarian. But, given social conservatives inexplicably backing Trump, moving toward liberty is the only way out of the cesspool of populism.

  5. “…[Trump] grew up in an era when all racial and ethnic groups routinely and openly insulted one another almost as a way of starting conversations.”

    leading to comical misunderstandings [NSFW]

    1. Something tells me in reality a roomfull of black men would be falling over themselves laughing at the funny-sounding Asian pissant. Not saying a beating wouldn’t eventuate, but only after they’d collected their sides off the floor.

      1. Who’s going to pay to see a Jackie Chan movie where he goes to a bar and *doesn’t* get into a fight involving pool cues?

  6. trickle-down racism, trickle-down bigotry, trickle-down misogyny

    I have to give him credit for using one the left’s most-popular tropes against his own party.

    the “trickle-down” expression is possibly the only thing out of most leftists mouths that amounts to “economic” discussion.

    It doesn’t actually mean anything of course, except for that if you ever suggest that maybe Government SHOULDNT spend more more more more more more more on something? Well, you’re probably one of those ‘trickle down’ types.

    it seems to rely on some kind of vague truism which millenials have been fed during their public-education, which is… that all of the inequities and horrors of the modern american experience? All of the wrongness and economic injustice that persists? Charts back to the Age of Reagan, who somehow slashed and burned all the good works and great ideas of the Democratic administrations which had preceded him.

    I’ve had 20-somethings try and lecture me about this. Its an alternate-history which seems to be widely accepted as established, indisputable fact. It is known.

    1. Leftist rhetoric is never intended to mean anything. It’s meant to keep their useful idiots useful, and shut down any discussion of real issues.

      1. It’s meant to keep their useful idiots useful,

        And idiotic.

        1. It isn’t all Reagan’s fault.

          They still blame Hoover. The idiots either don’t know nor don’t care he tried to fight the Depression with the Proggie toolkit, pre-New Deal version.

          Kevin R

    2. It’s not just meaningless, it’s a lie. As Thomas Sowell has pointed out pointed out, business works the opposite way.

      The very idea that profits “trickle down” to workers depicts the
      economic sequence of events in the opposite order from that in the real
      world. Workers must first be hired, and commitments made to pay them,
      before there is any output produced to sell for a profit, and independently
      of whether that output subsequently sells for a profit or at a loss. With
      many investments, whether they lead to a profit or a loss can often be
      determined only years later, and workers have to be paid in the meantime,
      rather than waiting for profits to “trickle down” to them. The real effect
      of tax rate reductions is to make the future prospects of profit look
      more favorable, leading to more current investments that generate more
      current economic activity and more jobs.
      Those who attribute a trickle-down theory to others are attributing
      their own misconception to others, as well as distorting both the
      arguments used and the hard facts about what actually happened after
      the recommended policies were put into effect.

      1. If the GOP could actually articulate this point in a cute, metaphorical phrase (bottom-up rewards? sounds too much like getting buggered) maybe they’d manage to counter-act the popularity of the ‘trickle-down’ attack.

        …after 20 years.

        The problem with the left’s rhetorical attacks is that they’re not intended to sway the logical or actually influence the people being attacked. They’re purely to reinforce their OWN view of the universe. They attack this straw-man because in attacking they become united in false-belief.

        the ‘right’ may have the better economic argument, but they have far-poorer rhetorical tactics; because the left isn’t interested in engaging on that level.

      2. Thomas Sowell is a black conservative. Therefore, he is a race traitor and can’t be trusted.
        You are part of the rebellion and a traitor.
        I’ve been throwing bricks at your marching ass since 1959.

    3. Yeah, I was thinking that it sounds like Mitt is full of trickle down bullshit.

    4. Leftists have their own trickle-down economics. Confiscate all the money, form an immense bureaucracy ostensibly to redistribute the money where it needs to go, staff it with friends and relatives, then pour the money in. It will trickle down through the myriad layers of bureaucracy and red tape and the poor will get whatever pennies are left.

      1. Arguably, leftists are far guiltier of “trickle-down” thinking than conservatives, who usually favor overall tax reductions with investments and business as a knock-on benefit.

        1. Notice how their are never trickle-down losses, except in employee-owned businesses?

          Kevin R

    5. Isn’t “Keynesian Economics” just trickle-down theory?

  7. So now we’re supposed to be energized by some loser who only managed to get a measly 60 million votes or so for President when he ran? Sad. Anybody who gets 60 million votes can’t possibly appeal to libertarians. I’ll just stick with supporting Trump who represents those good ol’ crony capitalist big government Democrat values we libertarians love so much because he’s going to get way more votes than that. I’m tired of always being wrong when I go to the polls and vote for who I think will win.

  8. “Only fools take their lead from politicians and celebrities.” Yes, we have a country full of fools. Probably why many still refer to politicians as ‘leaders’.

  9. Muslims attend a Trump rally and are surprised at not being attacked:


    Unfortunately the video gets much derpier.

    1. Fake Muslims! Hey, the guy doing all the talking is that dude from Foo Fighters and stupid Trump fans don’t even recognize him!

    2. I know it was Ann Coulter who said it, but in my defense I’ll probably butcher the line: The fun thing about being a prog is that you are constantly surprised – it’s like a new day every day.

      Supporters of the other Team being nice? Shocking!

      Good prog intentions proving insufficient at solving a problem? Who knew?

      Next day they wake up with the same old assumptions, just waiting for a new surprise.

      And that doesn’t account for the ones who are immune to evidence altogether.

  10. Strongest sign of how crazy this election is: people give a shit what Romney says.

    1. I remember how much flak Romney got for stuff as innocuous as the 47% remark and “binders full of women”. Maybe Trump saw that and figured “if they’re going to criticize me over stuff like that, I might as well say whatever I want.”

      And it’s been working. Almost everything he says makes the news and gives him free publicity and it turns out there are a lot of people who enjoy the way he treats the media with contempt.

      1. People are sick of the left being able to just shut everyone up and the pussy politicians who won’t get a spine and fight back. This is Trump’s secret. It’s not the immigration issue or trade that’s got him where he is, it’s the fact that he has the ballz to stand up against the PC bullies.

        If libertarians would run a candidate like that, who stands up to the bullies, but who would also defend libertarian principles with quick wit and facts, then we will break the single digit votes curse and the other teams will have to start listening to us.

        1. People are sick of the left being able to just shut everyone up and the pussy politicians who won’t get a spine and fight back. This is Trump’s secret.

          It should have been Rand…

          Too bad we couldn’t have gotten an anti-PC candidate who wasn’t a complete idiot otherwise.

          1. Rand has the intelligence and the facts, it’s just that he pandered to socons too much, and sometimes he comes off as a little timid.

            1. The Rand I saw before he was a candidate for Prez was like that. Boy, did he get bad advice from whoever handled his campaign. The year where everyone wanted a strong outsider, he decides to tamp down his libertarian opinions and pander to SoCons.

              Jeez, had he just been himself, things could have been so different this year.

    2. No one gives a shit what Romney thinks, other than journalists and politicians. If it wasn’t so pathetic, it would be funny that not only does Romney himself think his opinion matters to the public at large but political journalists think so as well.

      1. Romney might be a retread by now, but he still got 60 million votes in a presidential election, is still held on high regard by many voters (not just Republicans), and even now he still polls about 20% against Trump and Clinton in a hypothetical three-person contest.

        1. A potted plant with an R designation could get 50 million votes for President. And of the other ten million who choose to vote for him, most have either forgotten him or are pissed off at what a loser campaign he ran.

          Ask yourself, what elected office could Mitt Romney win today? I can’t think of a single one.

          1. Ask yourself, what elected office could Mitt Romney win today? I can’t think of a single one.

            Any office in Utah?

            *runs away*

            1. LOL. I doubt that. Utah is pretty conservative and most conservatives are still pretty pissed at Romney for his sorry performance in 2012.

              1. You don’t appear to understand Mormons, who are not typical conservatives. Trump questioning whether Mitt was a “real Mormon” is why the last poll in Utah showed Other at 29%, Trump at 29%, Hillary at 26%, and Gary at 16%.

                Trump managed to turn a solid red state into a swing state with one asinine attack.

          2. He shoulda ran for GayJay’s veep.

          3. And what elected office do you hold?

        2. is still held on high regard by many voters (not just Republicans),

          No. The only people who still hold him in high regard are big donors (the same ones who wasted $100 million funding Jeb’s campaign) and his fellow Mormons. Libs are doing the “strange new respect” game they always play when someone from the other team goes after their bete noire of the month; which means they don’t respect him a damn bit and just like seeing Team Red in-fighting.

  11. Liberal film maker ostracized after criticizing Islam:


    1. Wow! Great approach: discuss Islam in terms of its human rights record/policies and refer to ‘political Islam’ to avoid the accusation of religious bigotry.

      Thanks, Derp!

  12. Romney’s Bain Capital is starting up opiate addiction ‘treatment’ centers across the country. Of course they hate drug legalization – it will expose addiction and the drug war for the frauds that they are (e.g. see Portugal). But Romney’s open mind is a very good sign – people who are not invested in the drug treatment industry will take Johnson seriously, and GJ doesn’t need to pander to anyone.

    “I’m not sure that the president’s character or personal example matters all that much.” – Completely wrong! The whole point of Trump’s support is for people to give themselves an excuse to lie and be racist and start up new witch hunts. This is why Trump cannot win, and even Hillary would be better, as horrid as she is. I’m surprised at Nick’s naivete here, but it is revealing.

    1. Romney’s Bain Capital is starting up opiate addiction ‘treatment’ centers across the country. Of course they hate drug legalization

      Sheek has a good point for once. Of course, he could still open up centers like that, but without the courts having the person in a situation to force them into treatment, it would be much less profitable. Most people, even if they have a problem will not voluntarily go for treatment, except for maybe as a last resort.

      1. Aw thanks. Yes this is why Adelson bought the LV Review-Journal – so he could oppose pot legalization. His wife is an addictions doctor – they can’t force people into ‘treatment’ (which is really just suicide indoctrination) if drug use is legal. The Atlantic’s David Frum is doing the same thing with the help of Mel Sembler (SAM – Smart Approaches to Marijuana). Their campaigns are face-faulting miserably.

        1. Romney is not open minded about it. Romney views “legalization” as “decriminalization” meaning that drug use is now dealt with as a medical not criminal problem. Romney would happily support decriminalization because it would mean the government forces drug users to attend one of his rehab operations rather than prison. Understand, that would not be much of an improvement over the current system. The only way the government could force drug users into rehab would be to use the threat of jail for refusing to go or failing out. So the result would be instead of going to jail, drug users would be sent to what will amount to Orwellian reeducation camps known as rehab and then jailed if they continue to use drugs.

          Frankly, I think that would be worse than what we have, though some would disagree.

          1. “Romney is not open minded about it.”

            “So I’ll get to know Gary Johnson better and see if he’s someone who I could end up voting for,” Romney said.

            Thanks for demonstrating the rank idiocy of the common man.

            1. Are you illiterate? Read the rest of the post. When Romney says “legalization”, he doesn’t mean what Johnson means. He means a set up like the one I describe. So, when he says he is “open minded”, that doesn’t mean he is open minded to any kind of meaningful legalization. He is open minded to his rehab clinics replacing prison as government punishment for drug use.

              Thanks for demonstrating your complete lack of reading comprehension or rationality.

              1. Johnson/Weld 2016!

                (Sorry, John.)

                1. That is fine you want to vote for Johnson. But what does that have to do with Romney? How does Johnson being a good guy make Romney any less of a mendacious asshole on this issue?

      2. Most people, even if they have a problem will not voluntarily go for treatment

        I think part of the problem there is the focus on treating the drug use and not the underlying reason the person is using the drugs in the first place.

        1. Also, an issue is thinking than anyone who uses drugs has a ‘problem’. What about someone who goes to a concert or dance party once in awhile, and takes a little something to make the night that much more fun? And then goes back to work on Monday and is completely productive, never missing a beat? According to the Mitts of the world even the recreational user needs to go to rehab for their substance abuse issue.

    2. If drugs are legal, more people will be willing to seek out the medical help they need to deal with addiction. And the drugs will be less dangerous, because legal manufacturers have to worry about lawsuits.

      1. That doesn’t necessarily make them less dangerous, viz. cigarets. If nothing else changes about the legal climate, it’s going to be tricky.

        1. One of the benefits of drug legalization would be to reduce the risk of OD’ing on drugs like heroin. Right now, one of the biggest risks for a drug user is that different dealers cut their drugs differently. So a user might be used to using a certain amount of 10% pure cut to get high, then switch to a new dealer who is selling a 20% pure cut, effectively doubling their dosage. You can see how that could be bad.

          Under a legalized drug system, a user could simply go to a pharmacy, and know that the heroin or cocaine they buy at Walgreens or CVS will be practically they same.

          Yes, it still won’t be a healthy habit, but it would at least minimize part of the danger.

          1. But unless tobacco cigs were a 1-off, what’s to stop people from suing, saying, “You got me addicted & I was injured by your product”?

  13. “While I think it’s likely that Trump himself is not a racist in a 1950s version of that term or in a I-won’t-let-my-sister-marry-one-of-them sort of way…”

    So you don’t actually think he’s racist at all then.

    1. What weight does it carry when the left calls someone a racist. They call everyone a racist who doesn’t agree with all their ideas, no matter how insane some of them are. Therefore, when the left calls anyone a racist, it’s legitimate to just completely disregard them.

      1. Racism is Team Blue ketchup. They put it on everything.

        -paraphrase of Thomas Sowell

        1. I like that one.

  14. Mitt Romney might for Gary Johnson.

    Libertarian Moment #34,792!

    This time it’s happening.

  15. Do dogs choke often? Seriously.

    1. its apparently a Trumpism based on his fondness for ‘like a dog’ references

      from nov 2015

      The simile of “like a dog” has a few uses. You can work like a dog. You can lie like a dog. You can be like a dog with a bone, or like a dog with two tails.

      Donald Trump, though, continues to use his own “like a dog” references.

      Trump repeated his oft-stated criticism of Mitt Romney on Wednesday, saying the former presidential nominee “choked like a dog” in the 2012 election.

      Trump has repeatedly used the “like a dog” formulation to emphasize any verb, no matter its relation to our canine friends.

      He has criticized his competitor Marco Rubio because he “sweats like a dog.” Dogs don’t sweat very much, and instead pant to deal with heat.

      Trump twice has called for the jobs of media talking heads by using “fired like a dog.”

      The “bizarre” phrase confounded Vox writer Andrew Prokop, he wrote in October. “Can dogs be fired? Does Donald Trump fire his dogs due to poor performance? Is it because they don’t love him enough?” he wrote.

      It doesn’t stop there. Trump has also said Reverend Jeremiah Wright was “dumped like a dog” by President Obama.

      1. You stick one dog on a roof of a moving car and you never live it down. Poor Mitt. How was he supposed to know people might find sticking a dog in a career on the roof of his car would offend people. How was he supposed to know that Americans are crazy about dogs and get really pissed off at people who don’t treat them well. Who knew?

      2. There are about a million words in the English language. In order to expound on his philosophy, his qualifications, and his intentions if he becomes President, Trump needs at LEAST two or three hundred of those words, maybe more.

      3. dogs sweat from their paws, if I correctly recall my “stuff they tell kids to trick them into learning science”.

    2. Have none of you ever used a choke chain before?

      It’s a fairly standard way of training dogs. Hell, there was even a Simpsons episode about it.

      1. Y’know ho else uses “dog” as a huge insult? Muslims see the animals as unclean. The Red Chinese were always on about “capitalist imperialists and their running dogs.”

        Donald Trump: secret Islamistcommie!

        Kevin R

  16. Trump sees himself as a rough-and-tumble businessman from New York City

    I keep trying to tell you – they’re goombahs from Jersey. They’re real good about flapping their gums and talking shit but they’re all just cockroaches not hardly worth squishing. They’re only “tough” when they’ve got you outnumbered about six-to-one and otherwise they run away squealing like babies when anybody actually stands up to them. Just notice how Trump whines and cries about “unfair!” all the damn time and threatens to sue anybody who says an unkind word about him. He gets his lacy little panties in a bunch if you comment on how unusual it seems that a Manly Man spends so much attention on his hair and his make-up and his delicate little hands, not to mention of course his side business as a fashion clothing designer and an interior decorator. NTTAWWT, of course, but it’s not what most of us in flyover country consider stereotypical Tough Guy behavior. Quite the opposite, in fact, which leads some of us to suspect there’s something just a little bit odd about all these Trump worshippers who sure do seem to spend a lot of time talking about cucks and alpha males and beta males and really, really focus on Manly Man-ness more than a normal healthy heterosexual American man ought to.

    1. Yeah that is ironic. McAfee called out Trump on this, as being the exec who always cries to papa government, with McAfee positioning himself as the only candidate with real cajones.

      “… Someone who has real balls and real experience. Donald Trump has experience only up here, all right, sitting in an executive’s chair. I have real fucking experience and real experience including bullets flying over your head teaches you more than any doctoral degree or political experience.”

  17. It wouldn’t be knife-sharp of me to speak of Gary getting 270+ on election night.
    But say he wins some states, comes in third, and keeps Clinton/Trump from 270. In that case, might the house republicans opt for working with Johnson at a safe distance over enduring 4 years of Trump destroying “their” party? On the bright side for the “true” libertarians … in this scenario the senate picks the VP from the highest 2 vote getters, so Weld would be out.

    1. In that case, might the house republicans opt for working with Johnson at a safe distance

      Not a chance in hell. They’ll vote in an establishment guy, pat themselves on the back for being “mature” and “statesmanlike”, and be completely baffled when their party vaporizes out from under them.

      1. They have to vote for the top 3 though — Johnson, Trump or Clinton.

  18. Here’s a neat comparison of jet fighters from the US and Russia:


    I’m sure the F-35 Flying Toaster just makes the Russians laugh.

    1. Have you ever seen a Commie drink a glass of water, Derp?

      1. Ice cream, Gilmore. Children’s ice cream.

      1. It’s 6. As the astute Gilmore said, I made a pastiche of Trumpisms. My bad- I got busy with Army stuff and forgot about it.

        1. Ah.

          No worries. Thanks!

        2. Why does Gilmore get credit? 🙁

          1. People tend to remember the last thing said, not the first.

    2. You do realize that there is more to a fighter than how cool it looks at air shows or what performance its makers claim it has? How well are those Russian fighters maintained? How many of them stay in the air and for how long. How long can they actually engage in their top line performance before running out of fuel or breaking something?

      The list goes on and on.

      1. Did you see the part where the compared US and Russian airfields? US airfields have to be carefully cleaned every day to prevent stuff from getting sucked into the jet engines The Russian jets have special grates to protect the engines. They let grass grow in cracks on the runway.

        That said, maintenance is often poor. The Serbs lost more jets to accidents during the Kosovo War than they did to combat.


        The F-35 has a shorter range and is much expensive to maintain than the current fighters. Since most of these fighters are doing ground support anyway, I wonder why we need a new one.

        1. Even if a fighter is easier to maintain, that doesn’t help if your maintenance is so inferior the plane still doesn’t fly. And the fact that the F 35 is more expensive to maintain alone doesn’t make it a bad fighter. If the performance is that much better, who cares that it is expensive to maintain?

          Moreover, the F35 needing a good runway to operate, isn’t necessarily a significant drawback. It depends on where it is operating.

        2. Reminds me of the comparisons between M-16 / ARs and AKs. Kalashnikov intentionally designed it with huge tolerances as one of the tests was dragging it through sand.

      1. Russian hat and anthem technology is superior to that of any other country.

        Mr. President we must not allow a giant hat gap!

        1. anthem technology

          Just heard it in France v England – it got me all teary-eyed for the old Soyuz.

    3. Love the F-16. It was my father’s favorite plane to work on during his USAF career.

      1. My Dad still tells a story about being in his bomber, at his usual station, when a fighter pulled alongside. Dad says the fighter pilot looked over at him, snapped off a salute, then opened his throttle and was gone “like a shot.”

        That was 1945. Dad was in a B-17. The fighter was a P-51.

        I love the Old Man’s flying stories.

  19. If Romney actually gets a few voters to consider a Libertarian ticket I don’t see a downside. On the other hand, who gives a shit what this clown thinks?

  20. And at the same time, Trump’s musings about Judge Gonzalo Curiel are, as Speaker Paul Ryan put it, “the textbook definition of a racist comment.”

    Well, you see that’s what people are tired of: the timid hypocrisy of people like Ryan who won’t comment on The Wise Latina’s comments about her own racial wonderfulness, about the fact that Curiel is a member of several racist clubs, about the MSM’s (and Reason’s) concern with “white cops” not being nice to black criminals, and the whole legal system’s obsession with “white juries” for the past 40 years. All white people are racists and all racists are white = SJW!

    1. Well, you see that’s what people are tired of: the timid hypocrisy of people like Ryan who won’t comment on The Wise Latina’s comments about her own racial wonderfulness, about the fact that Curiel is a member of several racist clubs,

      The ratchet only turns one way, Flemur. Intellectual honesty is for chumps.

    2. Reason lives in a bubble. They have no idea that the country views this double standard as a problem. Hasn’t reason spent the last 20 years claiming Hispanics hate Republicans and will never vote for them because of their views on immigration? So, now it is racist for a Republican candidate who just won the nomination promising to close the border to claim that an Hispanic judge won’t give him a fair hearing? And reason sees no logical inconsistency with those two claims?

      1. My guess is most of them dwell within a social circle that is mostly hipster leftists. Saying the kinds of things we say here, in those circles, would get you branded a teabagging racist xenophobe homophobe transophobe monster. I personally know some places like that around here, where the hipsters hang out and sip wine and micro brews or their soy lattes and pontificate about their moral superiority to everyone by grace of their leftist political ideology. I for one could not stand to be around those smug insufferable asshole hipsters for 5 seconds. But that’s me. They’re not important to me, therefore I don’t have to shit my pants and prattle on endlessly about every single thing Donald Trump says and echo the hipster douchebag’s every screeching outrage.

        1. I know a good number of Progs. But none of them are hipsters. They are all older and have fairly successful careers. I can still talk to them and enjoy their company on subjects other than politics. And even on politics, they are fairly smart and reasonable people. They just get all of their information from the New York Times. Hell, all I ever did was read the Times, I would probably be a Prog too.

          But your typical 20 something hipster is an entirely different animal. They are just contemptible douche bags.

          1. Yes, but that is because they are 20 year old hipsters. They could be circumcised, deep dish hating, Mises quoting NAP aficionados and they would still be douchebags.

  21. For all you woodchipper fans: Liberal federal judge who outlawed racial profiling now a victim of black mob violence


    The reason Colin Flaherty has a job is because white-on-black violence (Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice, Michael Brown) makes national news and black-on-white violence does not.

  22. Learned something new last night: turns out that the black vote started to favor the Democrats not during the 1960s, but during the 1930s:


    1. Don’t remember who it was, but a black leader during the New Deal advised African-Americans to “turn that picture [of Lincoln] to face the wall. That debt has been paid.”

    2. FDR put them on government workfare during the New Deal.

      There’s a scene in the Monty Clift movie Wild River about his wanting to pay the black people working for his TVA project equal to the white people, and the whites not being happy about it.

    3. Yes FDR agot huge majorities of the black vote. They were more solidly Democratic back then than hispanics are now. I throw this fact at progressives when they get into their “southern strategy” conspiracy theory. That may accounts for another ten or fifteen percent of them, but the whole “see where the racists are based on where the black’s aren’t”-story is already destroyed.

      I’m rather curious what that professor was saying, though he was being a dick.

      1. Yeah, FDR saw the migration of black workers from the South into the Northern cities and worked hard to get their votes since a lot of the urban political machines were already controlled by Dems. It was an easy situation to exploit because everybody was out of work, but that poverty has always hit black communities harder than others.

        1. It didn’t help things that Hoover signed crap like the Republican-sponsored Davis-Bacon Act.

          Kevin R

  23. I don’t know how the GOP could have chosen a worse candidate.

    In spite of all of his flaws, which are many, we have this:


    I can imagine Trump doing something like this, Sanders yeah, Hillary – not so much. Obama? Not a chance.

    This guy gets it – http://insider.foxnews.com/201…..protesters

    1. Maybe I just haven’t lowered my moral standards enough, but I don’t see how helping your best friend find his missing daughter is much of a moral accomplishment. Isn’t that what any decent person would do? I mean good for Romney that he didn’t say “there is no ‘my daughter is missing in team'” but I am not sure how that makes him better than any other person who isn’t totally amoral.

      1. That was my point. You are correct, it is what a decent person would do, which puts him on the short list. It puts him on an even shorter list for the DC crowd.

        1. Suthen, how can you say such things?? If a Senator’s friend’s daughter went missing, the gentleman from the great state of wherever the fuck would:

          1) Tell the anxious parent, “We’re here for you”

          2) Wear a colored ribbon to show support

          3) Co-sponsor a bill called “Hailey’s Law” forbidding girls under the age of majority to attend parties without parental consent. Also, there’s a corn subsidies rider attached for some reason

          …and you think those people have no decency. For shame!

          1. + $15 million for the perverted arts

        2. That reminds me of a list of his good deeds published on townhall before the ’12 election
          He seems like a nice guy. I still didn’t vote for him because of his policies, but I don’t have much bad to say about him as a person

    2. Well, Herman Cain has already been labeled an Uncle Tom by virtue of being a Republican, so the man should just go ahead and speak his mind, which he’s doing and should have been doing regardless of these hypocrites.

  24. Spot the Not: Sonia Sotomayor

    1. Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging

    2. The Latina in me is an ember that blazes forever.

    3. I have a very close relationship with my sister. My sister is a precious jewel.

    4. I had no need to apologize that the look-wider, search-more affirmative action that Princeton and Yale practiced had opened doors for me.

    5. My diabetes is such a central part of my life… it did teach me discipline… it also taught me about moderation.

    6. I am a product of affirmative action. I am the perfect affirmative action baby. I am Puerto Rican, born and raised in the south Bronx. My test scores were not comparable to my colleagues at Princeton and Yale.

    1. 6, I hope. Bragging about how affirmative action helped you overcome lower test scores?

    2. Four. Number six sounds too made up to actually be made up.

    3. 2 is one of the silliest things I’ve ever seen among your spot the nots. I’ll go with that

    4. [game show buzzer]

      3 is the Not. The 2nd sentence is a line from West Side Story.

      Your punishment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhoCbcJbono

  25. Speaker Paul Ryan put it, “the textbook definition of a racist comment.”

    Ryan seems like the type of guy who’d have a racisms textbook.

  26. “Marijuana makes people stupid,” Romney told CNN. Maybe, but marijuana prohibition makes the whole country stupid.

    That’s some good shit, Nick.

  27. Mitt Romney had his chance to beat a failed president but he choked like a dog strapped a dog into a car roof cargo carrier on a family vacation many decades ago and that’s all voters remember.

    1. He lost as much as anything because he was the guy who signed Romneycare and he was too much of an egotistical asshole to admit he was wrong. The biggest issue of the 2012 election was Obamacare. And the Republicans nominated someone who was on the wrong side of the issue and had no credibility to attack Obama on it.

      What the hell kind of a moron thinks that saying “well sure the program I signed looks just like this one but mine was on the state level not the federal level and that is different making his a really bad thing and mine a really good thing”. That is basically what Romney’s argument against Obamacare boiled down to. And Romney and the idiots running his campaign couldn’t understand why it didn’t work.

      Romney is an idiot son. If his dad hadn’t been head of AMC, he would be selling used cars or insurance somewhere. That is okay of course except that he doesn’t realize that and honestly thinks he is smarter than the rest of the world and would where he is even without his family connections.

      1. All Romney had to do was say, “The healthcare plan I passed in Massachusetts falls within the powers granted to the states and people according to the Constitution. It is a solution that the majority of people in the Bay State believe will work for them, but each state can and should make its own decision and pursue whatever solution they feel is best. The federal government was granted no such far-reaching power, so implementing a plan like mine at the federal level would amount to government overreach.”

        1. That would go over well at The Federalist Society and pretty much nowhere else.

          1. Exactly. The great majority of people care about the substance, not the procedure. If a policy is one they like, they’d just as soon it be enacted illegally than foregone. Hell, even I would appreciate it if a military junta came in to say we’re all free. I don’t mind cheating as long as the good guys are doing it.

        2. No, all he had to say was that it was a program he was forced into by a Democratic legislature, and that with a Republican Congress he’d sign a repeal of the ACA.

      2. It wasn’t just Romneycare, though that was the biggest thing. I don’t know how anyone could see him as anything but a leftist. He is the epitome of a RINO, giving lip service to conservative stances but always doing exactly the opposite. Before I had even heard about Romneycare I saw a clip of him campaigning for governor pointing at a distant power plant and declaring to the crowd “That plant is killing our children!”

        There was no way that guy was going to energize the conservative base.

        1. He is the epitome of a RINO, giving lip service to conservative stances but always doing exactly the opposite.

          And he couldn’t translate that into much “moderate”/”centrist” support. Truly a pathetic candidate.

        2. It wasn’t just Romneycare, though that was the biggest thing.

          You mean that defeated him, or that made him a worse candidate?

          There’s only 1 thing that defeated him: Obama voters outnumbered anti-Obama voters. There’s no Republican who would’ve done significantly better, & none of the other contenders would’ve done significantly worse. It really didn’t matter how good or bad a candidate Romney was, because nobody was going to vote for the Republican, no matter who he was. So he could’ve been a better candidate, but nobody would’ve cared, because nobody paid att’n to who the GOP nominated against Obama.

          This election’s different. There’ll be lots of people voting against Hillary, but also people voting for The Donald. I see it all over the place. There’ll be people voting against Trump too, but hardly any voting for Hillary. Plenty of people wanted to vote for The Black, hardly any care about voting for The Lady.

        3. BTW, what was the rap on the power plant? Just the fact that it was a power plant?

      3. In 2012 people were outraged by three things – the bailouts, the TARP and Obamacare. Romney supported the first two and was the godfather of the third. The Republicans could not have found a worse candidate if they had deliberately set out to lose the election. Ok, maybe running Charlie Manson would have been worse, but that’s about it for candidates worse than Romney.

        Unfortunately, in 2016 they had a plethora of terrible choices – Graham, Christie and JEB all of whom would have been worse than Romney. In 2012 Ron Paul was there until the convention. In 2016 Rand Paul was out after New Hampshire. The Republicans have become the mirror reflection of Social Justice Warriors – Social Issue Panderers with Trump as Generalissimo Pandero. Drugs and gay marriage are bigger threats to them than a $20T debt, domestic surveillance and hyper-regulation combined.

        Among establishment Republicans, the “Anyone But Trump” brigade has become the “Anyone But Trump Except Johnson” brigade. The Republican Party faced with the choice of “liberty or death” have chosen death.

        1. In 2012 when it came to voting for president, people had just 2 motiv’ns. Motiv’n #1 was Obama’s awful, got to get rid of him & replace him with anybody, no matter who. Motiv’n #2 was if Obama’s not re-elected that means he was a failure, & we have to fix it so the 1st black prez succeeded, even if he was awful, so we’ll always be able to say we’re fair to the blacks. It was all about Obama. Nobody even noticed who the Republicans nominated.

      4. He lost as much as anything because he was the guy who signed Romneycare and he was too much of an egotistical asshole to admit he was wrong.

        Close. He was too much of an egotistical asshole to admit he was backed into it. Instead he tried to own it as a positive accomplishment rather than damage mitigation (vs. single payer or some such). In other words, he should’ve advertised it like Baileycare.

    2. If Trump tied a dog to the top of his car, voters would think the dog deserved it.

    3. And I can’t get over how they made that out as a bad thing. Dogs love that sort of thing. Apparently anything anybody does that’s different or innovative will be painted as bad by political enemies, and apparently actually believed as such by some.

  28. I did not vote for Mitt Romney because, even for politicians, he was a substance-less blank slate who would transparently take any position at all that the shifting winds suggested.

    Now he’s the conservative with integrity. Sounds like conservatism still has a long way to fall then.

    1. You are not kidding. Every time I hear some half wit at the National Review talk about how much integrity Romney has, I want to vomit. And I voted for the guy, but I sure as hell didn’t vote for him because i thought he had any integrity or was anything approaching a good candidate or good guy.

      1. Didn’t we warn you that if you voted for Mitt Romney we’d get into wars, and the poor would get screwed?

        But you voted for Romney anyway, and just as we predicted, war and the poor getting screwed.

        /old joke

        1. It is an old joke but a good one. I was told that if I voted for Romney, America would be back defending Europe against the Russians and in a ground war in Iraq.

    2. Romney makes a well-oiled weather vane look like the Rock of Gibraltar:


  29. Did we become paranoid nutjobs because of Richard Nixon[?]

    No. Thanks to Nixon, we became slaves to the regulatory state, and victims of the Fed’s fiat money and mumbo jumbo economics.

    1. Don’t forget the war on drugs.

      1. But Nixon opponent Pat Brown & Bobby Kennedy gave a big push into making it a federal issue before him. Looking for an issue to use in the 1962 campaign for governor of Calif., they made a big deal of “dangerous drugs”, seeking to expand the list of prohibited substances & give the federal administration the power to put controls on substances beyond the short statutory list that then applied. Dick targeted the hippie drugs?psychedelics & mj?while the Democrats were more focused on uppers, downers, & synthetic opiates.

    2. But Selective Service ended (until a bipartisan consensus reinstated it a few yrs. later), and he started a bunch of deregulatory commissions whose reports bore fruit over the ensuing years.

  30. OT: Here Are 10 More Examples of Google Search Results Favorable to Hillary

    1. “Hillary Clinton anti?”

    Bing gets you antichrist, antisemitic, and anti gay marriage.

    Google gets you “anti obama ad.”

    1. Bing gets you antichrist

      Did anyone consider that maybe Bing users are just crazy Bible banging right wingers, whereas Google users are calm, serious, and supportive of the first major female presidential candidate and first black president?

      1. Bing users are just crazy Bible banging right wingers

        I have been told that the only reason to use Bing is for porn searches.

        Which of course meant that i immediately tried it out for that purpose, and indeed – they were right.

        1. So I should have added “women-hating” to that description

          Male Google users turn-ons include: sharing household duties, checking their privilege, and they are man enough to vote for a woman

          1. I should have added “women-hating” to that description

            au contraire ma soeur

            Speaking of beardos that are “man enough” for certain things….

    2. I would be surprised if the silicon-valley big tech companies were really universally behind hillary.

      Unless they’ve gotten a informal, over the $10,000-a-plate DNC donor dinner-party-table promise that she’d stop the interference with internet-regulation, banning encryption, FCC bandwidth-fairness type shit that is constantly threatening their businesses.

      Which is honestly what i think 90% of Democrat regulation is really about. Its not that they think that consumers really benefit from any of the so-called “protections” they’re constantly proposing; its just Mafioso-style “you have a nice internet here… shame if someone were to come along and regulate it” shakedown.

      I have no doubt Exxon also probably contributed a very large chunk to Hillary in some way. Not because they think people like Eric Shneiderman have a case… but because they know that if they don’t? Hillary will just double-down on that sort of thing.

      1. I would be surprised if the silicon-valley big tech companies were really universally behind hillary.

        Of course they aren’t. The article is fun, though, and there has to be a reason for the disparity.

      2. Why would they have a problem with the FCC bandwidth-fairness type shit? It means the telecoms can’t charge them for being bandwidth hogs. I have no doubt the folks in Silicon Valley are happy to get in bed with the government to suppress competition.

  31. If conservatives can reconcile themselves to the proposition that just because something is legal doesn’t make it a good idea, and its converse, just because something isn’t a good idea does not mean that it should be made illegal, the Libertarian Party stands to gain a great deal of support from that demographic given the fundamentally awful GOP candidate.

    1. “If conservatives became libertarians, there’d be more libertarians.”

      1. Conservatives are just as anti-liberty as progressives. It’s just different things that they want to punish people for.

        That being said, a much greater percentage of people who refer to themselves as conservative are likely to become libertarians than people who refer to themselves as progressives. But that’s not because of either ideology being compatible with libertarianism, it’s because a far greater percentage of so called conservatives are actually already libertarians, they just don’t know it. They identify as conservative only because they don’t know about libertarians and because they find progressives creepy and dangerous, and think they are communists, which is perfectly understandable. It’s pretty difficult for a sane person to look at progressives and imagine they want to be a part of committing economic suicide, for beginners.

        1. …it’s because a far greater percentage of so called conservatives are actually already libertarians, they just don’t know it. They identify as conservative only because they don’t know about libertarians…

          I find that both likely AND comforting.

          Of course, I may simply be deluding myself, but it was true of me, at least.

          1. Oh hey Franky. How’s it going? Thanks for not reluctantly dropping bombs on me today. And at the risk of pressing my luck, thanks in advance for not deluding yourself into reluctantly and after careful consideration bombing me tomorrow too. 🙂

            1. Shreek, I’m not really sure if passive aggressive you is much better than asshole you. Anyway, asshole you will reappear soon enough.

              Are you going to get a matching chairman Mao pantsuit?

              1. If by ‘asshole’ me you mean the guy who points out that you are shills for the defense industry and govt spy departments despite your vehement denials, then yes, I will reappear as that sockpuppet soon enough. Cato’s perfidy on their lionization of Flanders Rose and support for the Danish ‘hate speech’ caliphate will soon be exposed. How does that make you feel?

                1. If by ‘asshole’ me you mean the guy who points out that you are shills for the defense industry and govt spy departments

                  See how I predict what you will do, shreek and you do it? Did you get fitted for your pantsuit yet?

                2. How does that make you feel?

                  Like you need to stop projecting your inadequacies onto people in a random internet chatroom?

          2. I think the one premise we both agree on is government ineptitude. Now if we can just get them to take the next logical step from there.

        2. “…a far greater percentage of so called conservatives are actually already libertarians, they just don’t know it. They identify as conservative only because they don’t know about libertarians and because they find progressives creepy and dangerous…”

          Speaking for myself, I became a card carrying member of the LP about a month ago. Up until then, I had bought into the binary “lesser of two evils” outlook and rationalized supporting Republican candidates as a matter of practicality. I simply can no longer do so in good conscience. And with the ascent of Trump dramatically exposing the fraud that the GOP functions as a “conservative” party in any sense of the word, I certainly hope many more make the leap. But it requires a thorough self-examination of one’s preconceptions, and the transition isn’t necessarily easy.

        3. No, I don’t think “conservatives” are just as anti-liberty as progressives. Progressives never met a potential control they didn’t like; not that they necessarily want to control all things, only that they like the idea that some form of control would be available if those things were a problem. “Conservatives” by contrast are mostly pro-liberty, just with a lot of exceptions. Their exceptions are confined to certain fields, though, not extending much into most biz. For the most part, “conservatives” will let you make $, but not have fun spending it; progressives want to channel both the $-making & the enjoyment of the fruits.

          1. Also, I don’t think the Democrats have become much more socialist over the past 50 yrs.; in some ways I think they tended more toward socialism ~40 yrs. ago than now. But what has happened is that they’ve tended toward what was labeled ~25 yrs. ago “the loony Left”. They’ve been deflected from the push for redistribution, industrial democracy, etc. of the old “left” into the crazy stuff. They’re about as much socialist as they were then, but no more so, and instead have glommed onto proggy idiocy of the types we see now as who gets to use which toilet, who gets to have cakes decorated, etc.

        4. But that’s not because of either ideology being compatible with libertarianism, it’s because a far greater percentage of so called conservatives are actually already libertarians, they just don’t know it.

          I don’t think this is entirely true. I think a lot of conservatives are libertarians who haven’t thought their premises through to their logical conclusion.

  32. After Romney attacked Trump, the giant Oompa Loompa’s polling numbers improved. To completely kill Johnson’s campaign all Romney has to do is endorse him. An endorsement from Romney would be a declaration that Johnson is the establishment choice which would be the ultimate kiss of death to his campaign.

    Romney: Give us a break and announce your complete, unyielding support for Trump (or Hillary) and mercilessly condemn Johnson as a deluded, dangerous, traitorous poisoner of children whose election would result in Christians being beheaded by drug crazed Muslim terrorists.

    1. That’s what I think too. If I were the LP candidate, I would absolutely not accept an endorsement from this guy. I would tell him to go take a flying leap.

      1. Trouble is, you can’t throw an endorsement in the garbage can. It’s the sort of poison you choke on trying to vomit it. What’s he going to say he doesn’t like about Romney? Fiscally imprudent? Mormon masturBiblator?

        Besides, Johnson wouldn’t be able to resist it. Come on, he’s got a moderate former GOP governor as running mate, you think he doesn’t want it to be known as “the ticket of former Republican governors, endorsed by former Republican governors far & wide”?

        1. Best case: Romney doesn’t endorse, but drops a few words into the ears of donors with cash for Johnson/Weld and any superpac supporting them.

          Kevin R

    2. Trump truly is a master troll.

      I take great pleasure in watching the end of the spineless, smarmy, squishes that make up the Republican establishment. It has been a long time coming and it couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch. The only satisfaction I am going to get out of this is watching the ‘giant Oompa Loompa’ destroy the Republican establishment and the SJWs. If Hillary loses she will lose her mind, which will be so, so delicious. I think Trump has mentioned an intention to prosecute her if he wins.

      I hope she loses her shit completely and in her concession speech tells the country to go fuck itself. Youtube will make sure I can watch it all over and over and over….

  33. Raised in Queens (which surely pains him a bit to admit, as it’s not Manhattan or even Brooklyn)

    Good lord this is class-ist drivel. I don’t anyone is under the misapprehension that Trump comes from old money, blue-blood Upper East Side or that he has ever tried to pass himself off as such.

    1. He has the nouveau riche>/i> obsession with status markers. As a student, I used to do work for wealthy folks on Long Island’s North Shore: washing the eleventy-seven windows on their seaside homes, cutting their lawns. Real “old money” goes out on the boat dressed like the guy you think scrapes it of barnacles.

      Kevin R

    1. “If this place has done its job?and I suspect it has?you’re all scientists now.”

      Yes, but only in the quasi-religious science = leftist politics way i.e. not in the actual science way.

    2. Rebutting bad science may not be effective, but asserting the true facts of good science is. And including the narrative that explains them is even better. You don’t focus on what’s wrong with the vaccine myths, for instance. Instead, you point out: giving children vaccines has proved far safer than not.

      this is similar to my point above about the appeal of ‘positive’ narratives vs. criticism.

      people tend to remember positive claims (“X is good for you!”) rather than someone who points out assorted reasons why its not.

    3. That is hilarious. Either that guy is completely lacking in self awareness or outright lying.

      He gives examples of pseudoscientists – “Some are industry groups (as with climate skepticism). ”

      Then he lists the first characteristic of pseudoscientists – They argue that opposing views emerge from a conspiracy to suppress dissenting views.

      Like the R establishment in the political realm they keep doing the same shit and cant understand why their credibility just keeps slipping away.

  34. culture wars are over?at least in terms of using the government to force lifestyle choices on people

    Citation needed

    And at the same time, Trump’s musings about Judge Gonzalo Curiel are, as Speaker Paul Ryan put it, “the textbook definition of a racist comment.”
    While I think it’s likely that Trump himself is not a racist in a 1950s version of that term or in a I-won’t-let-my-sister-marry-one-of-them sort of way,

    Um what?

    1. He’s basically saying racism no longer exists so we have to come up with make believe racism from non-racist remarks to keep the meme alive. Can’t let up on the fake white guilt.

    2. Tell me again how forcing people to let men in the women’s bathroom isn’t forcing lifestyle choices on people, again?

  35. Also…called it!

  36. Did the United States become a nation of cheaters because of, say, Bill Clinton? Did we become paranoid nutjobs because of Richard Nixon, and did we become more pious and puritanical because of Jimmy Carter?

    Now that you mention it….

  37. Has Gary Johnson called for the abolition of any government agencies?

    And what does he think about the draft? Should it be abolished and if not should women be included?

    1. From his website:

      Governor Johnson has pledged that his first major act as President will be to submit to Congress a truly balanced budget. No gimmicks, no imaginary cuts in the distant future. Real reductions to bring spending into line with revenues, without tax increases. No line in the budget will be immune from scrutiny and reduction. And he pledges to veto any legislation that will result in deficit spending, forcing Congress to override his veto in order to spend money we don’t have.

      1. This sounds good to:

        Gary Johnson believes government should be truly limited ? limited in the way the Founders envisioned. Responsible adults should be free to marry whom they want, arm themselves if they want, make their own decisions about their bodies, and lead their personal lives as they see fit ? as long as no harm is done to others. And they should be able to do so without unconstitutional scrutiny by the NSA, the ATF, the DEA or any other government agency.

        Or you can vote for Trump-Clinton

        1. as long as no harm is done to others

          I.e. no cakes

        2. Or you can vote for Trump-Clinton

          Neither. Winston will just whine.

  38. The King of Squares endorses LP
    Libertarian hipsters distraught, burn vinyl in protest

    1. At least they can say they liked it before it went mainstream

      1. Considering the large number of “outsider”, “radical” and “reformist” politicians who turned out to be the same as the new boss this is hardly an unreasonable fear.

        1. *same as the old boss*

  39. SF pol wants to ban Blue Angels from city:


    “It’s about them crashing and hitting a building ? a place where people live,” Avalos said. “It’s about the terror that they cause in people when they strafe neighborhoods. That’s something I hear about all the time when Blue Angels fly overhead.”

    1. How’s that social liberalism going?

    2. when they strafe neighborhoods

      Somebody doesn’t know what words mean.

      1. Sorry Quincy, you are wrong. The Blue Angels strafe neighborhoods every time they fly. If I remember correctly they are fitted with 20mm’s. Have you ever seen what one of those things can do to a car? A house? A family dog?

        1. Silly me. I forgot about that chapter in the Urban Renewal textbook.

        2. *makes note to go to Blue Angels show*

    3. Send the idiot on vacation to the Isle of Man when the TT is running.

      1. Funny you mention it. It is running at the moment i believe

        1. That race has a casualty rate higher than an episode of Speed Racer.

  40. Guess who said this:


    Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history.

  41. Not sure if this was covered here, but this sounds pretty damning to Clinton, as if she didn’t have enough problems already:

    Clinton appoints top donor with no experience to sensitive government intelligence position


    1. She was just outright selling her office. If she gets elected president every member of her administration will be someone who bought their way in. Trump should ask her for a price list for the positions the president appoints.

      Crooked doesnt really describe her.

      1. Yeah, it will be an unimaginable display of outright corruption. We’ll be like a 3rd world Latin American country. Seriously, I can see Beyonce as Secretary of State and Kim Kardashian appointed to the Supreme Court. I’m not even being sarcastic.

    2. INCREDIBLY poor judgement. Just remarkable.

      1. No. It is not poor judgment. She is just a crook and figured she could get away with it. And she might be right about that.

        1. The scrambling in the end tells me that they didn’t even consider that it was a bad idea. It didn’t even cross their minds.

          Unlike the email scandal, they didn’t even try to lie about it.

    3. ABC News first reported about the revelations Friday, which were included in emails obtained by Citizens United. It was Citizen United’s challenge regarding the creation of an anti-Clinton documentary which ultimately paved the way for the creation of super PACs.

      What does this sentence have to do wit the subject of the article?

      1. I’m guessing so that their typical reader can go “oh, THAT Citizens United.”

  42. In Sharia-Ruled Iran, Muslims Are Willing To Risk Corporal Punishment For A Slice Of Bacon

    Authorities tried to deter people from consuming pork with propaganda, including a recent physicians report that pork consumption leads to miscarriages among women

    The morality police patrol the streets to make sure everything is in order, but that won’t stop some Muslims from enjoying a taste of freedom.

    Underground restaurants, where people can get a break from Sharia law, have popped up in the capital of Teheran. There, people can dress more freely, have a glass of wine and eat pork meat.

    1. Causing confusion if someone shouts, “look out, it’s the pigs!”

      1. Or “I smell bacon!”

      2. An Iranian playing Angry Birds, looks up briefly and says, “Don’t worry, I’m on it.”

  43. Trump’s changed his red hat to a black hat with orange letters, and a black jacket. He’s starting to get on his Darth Trump. He should get a bottle of holy water to throw on Hillary.

    1. Yes, Vader never went anywhere without his SuperSoaker full of holy water.

      1. Vader Anakin never went anywhere without his SuperSoaker full of holy water.

        Did the prequels just get slightly better, or stupendously worse?

      2. You have to be eclectic these days. I’m thinking some shoulder spikes, a vial of holy water in one hand, and a silver spike in the other, and more black.

        I was just watching the Trumpster on a CNN stream, with the black hat and jacket and he doesn’t look or sound like he intends to tone it down. Just the opposite, It looks like he’s planning to dial it up several notches, and then some.

        This is good, I want some entertainment. Mud slinging shitstorm death cage match, nothing less will do.

    2. Van Trumpsing?

  44. The morning after prime rib night.

    I just shit like a dog.

    1. We all were dying to hear about this. Thanks.

        1. Dumped like a dog.


    2. Last night I made salmon with spinach and rice. Very yummy. My morning deuce was black and leafy.

      1. Black? It’s been in there a little too long.

    3. Did you try to eat your shit like a dog, too?

      1. Hadn’t crossed my mind. Until now.

      2. I’m reminded of the story of a guy who was in line at a Wal-Mart with a 50-pound bag of dog food in his cart. The lady ahead of him in line asked, “oh, do you have a dog?”

        “No,” he replied. “That’s for me. I’m on the dog food diet.”

        “What’s the dog food diet?”

        “I keep a bunch of this dog kibble in my pocket all day long. Whenever I get hungry, I just pull a few out and nibble on them. They’re nutritious, fat free, very healthy. I’ve lost 40 pounds already, and now that I’m out of the hospital I’m going back on the diet.”

        “Hospital?” the lady asked. “Did the dog food make you sick?”

        “No,” the man replied. “I was sitting in the middle of the road licking my balls, and I was hit by a car.”

    4. I just shit like a dog.

      Licked your asshole afterwards?

  45. Damn, I had to turn off Death Trump Vader and turn on Rick Steve’s Europe. The dude is like crumpets and tea laced with opium. I feel all laid back and warm and fuzzy. I think I’l watch some cute kitten videos now while I sip my tea…

  46. Serious question, isn’t Romney exactly the kind of big money fake entitled piece of crap politician that the public hates? And doesn’t the Libertarian Party want to position itself as a geniune alternative to the kind of big money, fake entitled piece of crap politicians the other two parties offer?

    So, could someone please explain why accepting Romney’s endorsement rather than attacking Romney is a good idea? I know it feels good to have the butt hurt GOP establishment run over and sing the LP’s praises, but anyone with a lick of sense knows they don’t mean a word of it. None of the never Trump crowd are libertarians nor will any of them remain in the LP past this election. They just want to pretend they are Libertarians so they can vote against Trump while maintaining some deniability to the charge they helped get Hillary elected. Next election they will go right back to being Republicans and calling Libertarians nihilists and terrorist sympathizers who like pot.

    1. Isn’t a better long term strategy to get out there and start kicking around the political establishment the public hates so much and establishing the LP as a legitimate alternative if and when Trump loses? Even if Trump loses in a 50 state landslide, his supporters are not going to go away. And a Hillary administration is going to do nothing but deepen the public’s contempt for Washington and the establishment of both parties. Given those facts, I can’t think of a worse thing for Johnson to be doing than palling around with people like Romney.

      If Trump loses, people are going to look for another alternative to stick it to the political class. Maybe the LP should start thinking of ways to take advantage of that?

      1. Very likely, but I don’t see Johnson’s remark as enthusiastic acceptance of Romney – and Romney didn’t actually endorse him. Romney said he’d have endorsed Weld on the top of the LP ticket, but as it was he’d take a look at Johnson.

        [pause for jokes about taking a look at Johnson]

        And Johnson was like – “I think Mitt Romney hit it on the head. He said, ‘Hey, I’m going to check out Gary Johnson and see what he’s got to say.’…I think that kind of scrutiny holds up under the light of day.”

        Took the opportunity to say, “I welcome people looking at me as a candidate, you’ll like what you see!”

        Now, he could have added a bit of passive-aggressive stuff like “I appreciate Romney’s sympathetic consideration of me and Bill Weld – for a top Republican to even consider a third party candidate who opposes his statist agenda indicates that the Republican candidate must be more than usually awful.”

        1. Libertarians have to get over their disdain for Trump and understand how he has been able to do what he has done and learn from it. The dumbest thing for Libertarians to do is to buy into the media lie about him only succeeding because of RACISM and creating a white supremacy movement. No, he succeeded because he said things that are largely true but are verboten to say inside the beltway media bubble.

          That doesn’t mean the LP should start kicking around Mexicans or come out for closing the border, though becoming more nuanced on the issue wouldn’t hurt. It means the LP needs to do some truth telling and hell raising on their own. If Trump can go after PC over immigration, the LP can do the same with the drug war and crony capitalism and hate speech and all the rest. Go out and connect with people and show them you share a common enemy.

          That is what they should do, but I am not optimistic. People on here kick around Breitbart, but how much better off would the Libertarian movement be if reason had half the balls the people over there have? Why isn’t some libertarian doing the kind of shit that Operation Veritas is doing? Forget planned parenthood, lets get some public sector union leaders on tape or some regulators on tape talking about their contempt for the public.

          1. Maybe if the LP found a younger, more libertarian version of Ross Perot?

            A good old boy, thick Southern accent, maybe a car mechanic.

            Hey, Didn’t Perot talk about looking under the hood?

            “Now, now, here’s what ya gotta do, you gotta get the economy’s hood up and check the engine, find out why it’s so slow. Debt-ridden graduates looking for Art History jobs, Fed policy, overregulation, I ain’t gonna lie, this ain’t gonna be a cheap repair job. But it’s cheaper than letting the engine blow up while you’re driving down Route 66.

            “And these millennials? I wouldn’t hire them to wipe my dipstick. Y’all need to get off your butts, put down the iphones, and get the right attitude and training so you can get real jobs (I didn’t say “pull up your pants,” because that would be hypocritcal, a lot of my friends are plumbers).

            “And if some of ya relax yourselves with a little mary-wanna, or butt-sex, or whatever, it’s not the kind of stuff I’d do, but it’s not the kind of stuff the federal government should worry its head about, either. But if you snowflakes can’t get any self-esteem without the government giving your behavior its Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval, boo hoo, guess what, vote for someone else, ’cause that don’t fly with me.”

            1. “And I visited the Senate recently, and they don’t have spitoons any more. They used to have spitoons on the Senate floor, now where’s an American-lovin’ Senator gonna spit his tobaccy juice?”

              Wait a minute, a messenger just got me to sign for a bulky envelope. It must be important, it’s from the Good Ole Boy Anti-Defamation League. It’s a letter – a long letter, and what’s this? It’s in numbered paragraphs…”

              1. Apparently I have to make my good old boys more intellectual, to avoid illegal stereotypes.

                OK, then:

                “My friends, people used to speak of the Seven Liberal arts, which are Grammar, Dialectic, Rhetoric, Arithmetic, Geometry, Astronomy, and Music. And those are good things to have in the curriculum.

                “But today I will speak of the Seven Safeguards of Liberalism, which are: God, Guts, Glory, Gold, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box.”

                1. “Now, I will not say that I agree with everyting John Crowe Ransom and those other Southern Agrarians had to say, but at least they would be against the modern trend of centralized national tyranny which we are seeing today. As William Faulkner declared at his Nobel Prize speech…

                  “Are those danged monitors from the Good Old Boy anti-Defamation League gone yet? Oh, praise Jesus, they’ve left, now I can talk normal again.

                  “You see, folks, what you got here is a right hell of a pickle. This country been done rode hard and put up wet. And we been lettin’ it happen. So what we gotta do, we gotta go back to the wisdom of Thomas Jefferson, Lysander Spooner, and Murray Rothbard.”

                  1. Did my post hit some kind of “go batshit crazy button” on you?

                    1. I don’t need no button.

                2. So the Quadrivium’s the 4 Gs, the Trivium the 3 boxes?

          2. The dumbest thing for Libertarians to do is to buy into the media lie about him only succeeding because of RACISM and creating a white supremacy movement.

            Most libertarians are libertarians because they don’t buy what the media is selling.

            No, he succeeded because he said things that are largely true but are verboten to say inside the beltway media bubble.

            He succeeded because he says what his supporters want to hear, just like any politician. The truth is debatable. Especially on economic issues.

            1. Giving people a message they want to hear and are receptive to is known as politics.

              1. Um… Duh.

                As far as the truth of it goes, I guess that depends on how ignorant of economics you happen to be. The more ignorant you are, the truthier his message is. The entire appeal of populism, be it Donald or Bernie, rests on economic ignorance. Economics isn’t appealing because it isn’t nice. It recognizes that life isn’t fair. Supporters of Bernie and Donald want government to make life fair for them, so they keep themselves willfully ignorant of economics. They want life to be fair. They don’t want to recognize the truth: Life isn’t fair, and it never will be.

                1. I know, the electorate is beneath you. I don’t know what else to tell you.

                  1. I know, the electorate is beneath you. I don’t know what else to tell you.

                    You could tell me that my overalls look nice. Or that you like my flannel shirt and straw hat. Or that the straw sticking out of my sleeves looks really attractive. I’m sure you could tell a lot of things to a straw man.

                    1. You just spent an entire paragraph claiming the electorate are economic illiterate. Just what exactly did you mean by that if not that the electorate is beneath you? Are you economically illiterate as well? If not, then how is your claiming the public not you saying they are beneath you?

                      It is not a straw man when it is your actual point.

                    2. My lack of ignorance doesn’t make me above anyone. I’m not a dick like you.

                    3. Not being ignorant most certainly does. How could it not? Again, just what is your point here if not to say you are smart and they are not?

            2. Most libertarians are libertarians because they don’t buy what the media is selling.

              And the rest work for Reason.

              *ducks, runs for exit

              1. Most libertarians are libertarians because they don’t buy what the media is selling.

                And the rest work for Reason.

                Not sure whether to narrow my gaze or golf-clap.

        2. Gillespie, sick with longing for respectability, fell over in a swoon of grateful ecstasy for a crumb of attention from the likes of Romney.

    2. So, could someone please explain why accepting Romney’s endorsement rather than attacking Romney is a good idea?

      Because it’s kinda dickish to react to someone’s support with a fuck you.

      1. Such as he did with Petersen’s gift.

    3. could someone please explain why accepting Romney’s endorsement rather than attacking Romney is a good idea?

      From what I gather, the LP strategy for this election is to try and sweep up the #NeverTrump part of the GOP, so they can brag about their rapidly-expanding numbers

      (*never mind that those numbers are purely a factor of sweeping ‘actual’ libertarianism under the rug)

      None of the never Trump crowd are libertarians nor will any of them remain in the LP past this election.

      sure. And as soon as Johnson gets a larger stage he’s going to be pinned down on issues which are deal-breakers for both GOP and DNC voters., and pigeonholed as the “Isolationist nut who wants open borders and let kids smoke crack while they play with fully-automatic weapons”

      still, it will let people who care about the LP’s success feel like they’re steadily ‘gaining ground’.

      1. What does getting the Never Trump votes do for the LP long term other than set them up as a fall guy if Trump loses? The never Trump people don’t give a shit. They will go back to being Republicans and happily let the Trump supporters blame the LP.

        I don’t think the LP wants their support or votes as strange as that sounds. Fuck them. Tell them to stay home or go vote for Hillary if they can’t stand voting for Trump but no way are they going to use the LP as a prop in their little morality play.

        1. I don’t think the LP wants their support or votes as strange as that sounds.

          The LP will take what it can get. This is politics. If someone supports you, even for reasons that you don’t agree with, you still welcome the support.

          I know you live in a fantasy world where all libertarians are idealistic dicks who will shun anyone who doesn’t pass the purity test, but that just isn’t the case. After all, we haven’t pissed in your Wheaties. Yet.

          1. Yeah, so says the person who above spent a paragraph ranting about how stupid the public is. Beyond that, you apparently missed the entire point of what I said. Since you didn’t respond to my point, there is really nothing for me to say in response to yours, whatever that is.

            1. I didn’t say people are stupid. I said they are ignorant, and many willfully so. There is a difference.

              Not that that matters. I’ll let you continue your fallacious tirade without calling you the moniker you have so aptly earned.

              1. So you think people are willfully ignorant. Good for you, but that has absolutely nothing to do with my point. So, I don’t know what I am supposed to say in response to that other than I am glad to hear you old yourself in such high esteem.

                1. So, I don’t know what I am supposed to say in response to that other than I am glad to hear you old yourself in such high esteem.

                  Misspelled ad hominem for the win!

                  1. It is not an ad hominem. I didn’t say you were wrong. I didn’t even disagree with you. Do you not hold yourself in high esteem? It seems you should since so many people are willfully ignorant and you are not.

            2. I didn’t respond to your point because it exists only in your head.

              1. My point is right there. You didn’t respond because you either don’t understand my point or for whatever reason choose not to respond. Whatever the reason, it would be nice if you would stop shitting all over the thread for no apparent reason.

                1. Whatever the reason, it would be nice if you would stop shitting all over the thread for no apparent reason.

                  Says the guy who insists that libertarians are supposed to be total dicks and shit on any supporters who don’t pass the purity test. Sure, PB. Whatever you say.

                  1. Says the guy who insists that libertarians are supposed to be total dicks and shit on any supporters who don’t pass the purity test.

                    Nowhere on this thread did I ever say anything like that. I never said that the LP should have purity tests. I said they would be better off not getting the support of the Never Trump people. But that is not because of a purity test. That is because the Never Trump people are going walk away and stick it to them.

                    You, the person whose only real move is to be a complete prick and yell Strawman, just engaged in a textbook example of it. Can you just go away. Really, get reasonable and block me out. Stop responding to my posts. You fuck everything up and prevent people who might have something interesting to say in response from doing so.

    4. My answer’s a few indents above.

  47. Am I the only one who is disgusted that Nick is playing up Johnson and Weld as if they are real libertarians?

    Weed and gay marriage are nice. They aren’t important issues.


    2. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

    3. Let me know when True Scotsman gets on the ballot in fifty states.

      1. It isn’t a matter of purity. Call me crazy. I just don’t think Michael Bloomberg Republicans should be on the Libertarian Party ticket.

        Almost every libertarian criticism of Trump (who is not a libertarian at all) can be leveled at either Johnson or Weld. Even then, Trump is probably better on foreign policy.

        Maybe John McCain is the next LP nominee. Lindsay Graham can start calling himself socially liberal and fiscally conservative. He is a Patriot Act and Iraq War supporter. He would be perfect.

        1. It isn’t about purity, you just think a guy with a record of balancing state budgets and vetoing bills because he feels they’d be an example of government overreach isn’t libertarian enough to run as the Libertarian Party nominee.

          I’m not familiar with Weld, but Trump wants to ‘bomb the shit out of ISIS’ — I haven’t seen Johnson say anything close. Trump wants to open up libel laws so he can punish people who say mean things about him. Haven’t seen Johnson say anything of the sort. Same with ‘shutting down’ parts of the internet. Trump is for it, Johnson? Haven’t seen him say anything like that. Trump loves him some eminent domain. Johnson? Nope. Johnson is orders of magnitude more libertarian than Trump.

          Hyperbole doesn’t serve you here.

          1. Dude- give me an extra $40K- my budgets are balanced!

  48. So the latest rumor is that the Republicans figure out a way to dump Trump because he can’t resist saying inflammatory things, despite their ultimatum to him. And now that it’s just Trump v Hillary, the press don’t want to have fun with him any more, they want to destroy him, and soon his poll numbers will go down towards Nixon, Satan, Hitler, Dracula approval levels, even most Trump supporters don’t put up much of a protest.

    And so who do they pull out at the last minute to run for President?

    Scott Walker.

    If this really happens, you heard it here first. Bookmark this post.

    1. i find this less compelling than Tulpa’s “Michelle Obama is the democrat’s secret weapon” theory

      1. Good god that joke should not even be made.

        1. Hail to the Chieftess!

      2. All you have to do is read 1 page of her “honors” thesis.

  49. Who’s to blame? YOU.

    Suburban building codes also commonly disallow affordable housing hacks available in older neighborhoods, such as above-garage apartments (sometimes known as granny flats). It is no mean feat to get approval for a small secondary edifice in one’s backyard?something the size of a toolshed, but habitable. Contrary to the individualist-libertarian ideology underpinning widespread suburban attitudes, even use of the space behind one’s walls, within the private sphere, is highly constrained and regulated.

    Boo hoo. Suburbia is teh suckz.

    A lot of tired, predictable whining: Europe is Better! Some of it (like the rant against single use zoning) I agree with or find unobjectionable. But the bottom line is this:


    ps- Quartz and their website suck.

    1. James Kunstler is the king of the suburbia haters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1ZeXnmDZMQ

      1. I hear he casks and ages his farts, and spreads them on WASA toast every morning before his nature speed-walk.

        1. I exchanged some emails with him a few years ago. I told him that there are huge amounts of natural gas on Jupiter, and it probably did not come from living things. So isn’t it possible that the oil on earth did not come from living things?

          His response was basically “well, why don’t you just build a pipeline to Jupiter then herpderp!”

          1. I also had an email tete-a-tete with kuntz.* He called me a poopyhead.

            (*it wasn’t me emailing him – i wrote some screed tearing him to pieces when a friend sent me a link to one of his peak oil predictions.

            My friend then sent that to him; he replied to my friend saying that I was obviously a bad person and that he couldn’t be bothered to respond to any of my criticisms because i had misspelled his name)

    2. Suburbia is teh suckz.

      Meh, I hate suburbs too but I’ve given up trying to convince anyone of it. I have better things to do.

    3. The destruction of the pedestrian public realm is not merely an economic or ecological absurdity; it has real deleterious effects. For just one small example of many: life in a subdivision cul-de-sac keeps children from exploring and becoming conversant with the wider world around them, because it tethers their social lives and activities to their busy parents’ willingness to drive them somewhere. There’s literally nowhere for them to go. The spontaneity of childhood in the courtyard, on the street, or in the square gives way to the managed, curated, prearranged “play-date.” Small wonder that kids retreat within the four walls of their house and lead increasingly electronic lives.

      Or, you know, the fact that letting your kids run around outside out of your sight before they’re old enough to drive will get you arrested and your children taken away from you.

    4. Yes, the folks complaining about suburban building ordinances and zoning almost never have a principled objection to government intervention, or often even an economic one — usually it’s just that the interventions they favor aren’t the ones in place.

      There are some exceptions, such as Market Urbanism.

      And yeah… I don’t know if it’s always been bad and I was just blissfully unaware for a while, or if it has genuinely worsened recently, but ugh, Quartz has gotten to be unbearable.

    5. I have seen the singularity!

      That is such an epic pile of smug that it will surely collapse upon itself…

  50. In case anyone cares = Gary Johnson was on both Joe Rogan and Adam Corolla’s shows in the past month

    It was not mentioned here previously unless i missed it. Which is kind of odd? maybe? I don’t know. I guess those both could qualify as what you might call the “Bro”-media, and maybe Reason is too-cool to toot their horn, but i’d expect both hosts to be very sympathetic to the idea of a libertarian candidate this election cycle and would likely expose gayJay to a lot of people who would also consider voting for him (*who otherwise might have never considered it)

    1. Both were mentioned in the body of one of the AM/PM links posts.

      1. Also, Carolla has been on Reason TV and is in the Can We Take a Joke? documentary Reason has been plugging repeatedly.

      2. I stand corrected! and am glad to hear it.

    1. Too long, didn’t listen version –

      All the people who helped set up this event – great guys and gals
      Religion – so important
      Religious freedom – so important
      marriage and family – so important
      Sanctity of human life – a good thing
      radical Islamic terrorism – bad
      disruptive protesters – rude, professional agitators and Democrats
      racism – bad
      America’s problems – should be added to by admitting lots of Syrians like Hillary wants
      appointing judges who protect the constitution and the rights of all Americans – so important
      the judges on his list – all prolife
      taking care of our neighbors – something we have to start doing again
      rule of law on the borders – must be restored
      police – need more respect
      tough new ethics rules – needed
      Iran deal – one of the worst deals he’s seen
      right of churches to speak their mind – good
      second amendment, will of the people – threatened by the judges Hillary will appoint
      NRA – great people, at least now that they’ve endorsed him
      Obama – repeal and replace
      uncontrolled immigration – poverty and income insecurity
      Hillary’s agenda – taxes, regulation, bureaucracy, govt control, open borders
      inner cities – hardest hit by Hillary’s policies and Democrat policies
      what he’ll do – turn things around
      Hillary’s emails on private server to hide corrupt dealings – bad
      Bernie Sanders – right about Hillary Clinton being owned by her donors
      you – who he’ll work for
      Where America should be put – first

      1. What we should do instead of more “refugee admissions” – “take care of the people who are here” in the inner cities
        what immigration of refugees needs – a time out
        faith should be restored – “its proper mantle”
        Christian Americans – will be respected and protected
        who should be lifted up – all americans
        how we’ll make America great again – together

        1. oops

          America’s problems – should *not* be added to by admitting lots of Syrians like Hillary wants

          1. Obama*care* – repeal and replace

          2. I watched (CNN was on while I was browsing the internet) some of his speech and noticed that those protestors jumped up just as Trump was telling Reed’s bunch of Good Christians how bad it would be for this country to take in Syrian refugees and just had to wonder if that’s specifically was what triggered the outburst. (Highly unlikely.) But it is odd that some of the most refugee of the Syrian refugees are the few Christians left and here’s a bunch of Christians applauding Trump telling them to go to hell. Well, maybe not odd, exactly. “Typical” might be a better word.

            1. I don’t know what Trump would do with the migrants, I don’t know if Trump knows.

              I know that Obama seems to be interested in Muslim migrants who *haven’t* been adjudicated as refugees – a term of art describing someone who leaves his country because of persecution due to, inter alia, religion. Also that the Christian refugees, at least, are scared of going to the militant-patrolled refugee camps where they would be processed.

              I suspect that the actual refugees in Syria are generally (a) off-brand Muslims, (b) Yazidis, and (c) Christians. They would have little interest in messing up the U.S., being religious minorities whose aspirations involve survival not world conquest.

              1. refugees or potential refugees, because I understand that if you’re not outside your country you’re not a refugee, even if you’re internally displaced.

    2. “bleever”

      Are you trying to sound like an idiot?

      1. I didn’t originate the term.

        1. Are you trying to sound like an unoriginal idiot?

          1. In a certain sense, sure.

            1. well that’s good

  51. The Libertarian Party is just tragic comedy. Here we have the year in which the public finally was fed up with the media and political class and were willing to listen to new ideas. Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are by media and political conventional wisdom both cranks. Yet, they got tens of millions of votes because the public wanted something authentic and new. Though they can’t agree why, the public knows how stupid and broken the political class is and how the country has to change what it is doing.

    In that environment the LP run two career politicians whose favorite color appears to be plaid. Becoming the Wall Street Journal’s “honorable alternative” may get a few more votes in the short term but it will prove a mistake in the long run. Ask yourself, whose votes are really more up for grabs long term? The never Trump people butt hurt the GOP is no longer their private playground or the Sanders and Trump supporters who both hate their respective party’s leadership so much they voted for the candidate most hated by them?

    All running Johnson’s and basking in the tongue baths of people like Romney is doing is setting the LP up to look like a bunch of career politicians who in concert with the two big parties act as a spoiler to ensure anyone who wants to change anything loses.

    1. All Bain no gain!

      1. They should have ran MacAfee or someone like him.

        1. But once you run McAfee you can’t get rid of him

          1. You have to reinstall America.

            1. You have to admit “Reinstall America” would have been one hell of a campaign slogan.

    2. The Libertarian Party is just tragic comedy.

      Here’s something you really need to get through your stick skull. Libertarian and libertarian are not the same thing. As in Libertarian with a capital L is not the same as libertarian with a lower-case l. I’m serious. It’s true. Not all libertarians are Libertarians, believe it or not. And as we see on this presidential ticket, not all Libertarians are libertarians.

      I know I’m wasting my energy because you’re on one of your rants, but I just thought I’d throw a nugget of truth in your direction. Though it will only rot in the grass.

      1. Why do you think saying the Libertarian Party is tragic comedy is the same as saying Libertarians are? Which part of LIBERTARIAN PARTY did you not understand?

        Have you lost your mind? What the hell is wrong with you? Go fuck yourself. Or if you can’t do that, at least to make some sense.

    3. The Libertarian Party is just tragic comedy.

      It’s not just the LP.

  52. http://www.espnfc.com/report?gameId=438201

    England continues to be hopeless. Give up a goal in stoppage play to let Russia tie you? That is just sorry.

    1. they retreated and waited for winter?

    2. And Russia wasn’t even any good. That was like their second shot in the whole game.

    3. Not all of us are England fans, and we’ll be happy when their overrated asses are out of the tournament.

      1. I am not a fan. I just find it remarkable how the nation that invented the sport and has the top professional league in the world continues to suck so badly.

        1. Not terribly surprising given that England has other popular sports that the top countries lack.

          1. Hooliganism?

        2. It’s going to be a restless night in Marseilles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zviSR6Fxs60

          1. They’re so civilized in Europe.

            1. Yeah I was gonna wait for the *right* time to comment on this.

              Meanwhile, Copa America on U.S. soil is going off without a hitch so far.

              1. That’s because Canada wasn’t invited. :-p

                1. Association kickball? Yawn.

                  Kevin R

    4. And their fans even got into a scrap in the streets.

  53. White Guilt Cartoon shown in Virginia for Black History Month:


    1. So they’re just standing there instead of darting around the barriers? There’s plenty of room to do it.

    2. Huh, that’s strange. They forgot to include minimum wage laws.

      1. What I thought was interesting was using a race as a metaphor. Here is a recent gathering of the fastest runners in the world. Notice something?


        1. Do you Jamaicans have speed privilege? Imagine the butt hurt and thumb sucking if white athletes dominated a sport the way blacks dominate sprinting.

          1. Wait for the concern troll stories at the upcoming College World Series about the lack of Black Anglo athletes.

            1. Clearly it’s time for affirmative action in basketball:


          2. Imagine the butt hurt and thumb sucking if white athletes dominated a sport the way blacks dominate sprinting.

            No one really cares about hockey though.

            1. They bitch and moan about that once and a while too.

      1. “By Jove, that feline certainly knows where it is located. Sorry, chums, I shan’t be going to the tavern and mingling with loose women tonight, I have more productive and less expensive activities I should be engaged in.”

      2. The group of privileged white guys with whom I hang out periodically break out the “Read a Book, Read a Book” refrain from this song. One of them is quite liberal, too.

  54. Alex Webster is the best bassist. Other thoughts are blasphemy.

    1. Even if he is, he is in a death metal band. How could you tell?

      1. John, my opinion of you keeps going up.

        ProTip: listen for bass sounds.

    2. You know nothing, john snow.

      I know of no one “best bassist” claim. There are many. The pantheon of gods always includes names like James Jamerson, Jaco Pastorius, Ron Carter, and a host of others.

      1. James Jamerson for sure. And Bootsy Collins.

        1. Bootsy is a god on his own planet for reasons having little to do with the Bass. (*with the exception of the Mu-Tron, which he will always be associated with)

          Many funk-connoisseurs (hand raised) and musicians tend to cite Larry Graham (who more or less invented slapping/popping) and Verdine White as being more technically innovative, musically influential.

          1. I am a Jannik Top fan and will put him up against any of the major-label greats.

      2. Geddy Lee.

        1. Blasphemer, have you forgotten the Neil Peart – Rand Paul bugaboo.
          Mike Levine now he’s a bassist.

          1. Neil Peart sucks.

            1. He is not the,best drummer ever*, but dude is no slouch.

              *Reserved for the guy in.The Comtortionist, and Shiner’s drummer. And Dave Grohl.

        2. Geddy Lee.

          Meh. If you look at the 70s fusion/rock scene, he had lots of competition. Why is he more significant than Chris Squire?

          I think they’re both great, but neither is often rated higher than people who have come after them (like Les Claypool)

          1. A lot of the prog rock people had mad skills. Greg Lake was a tremendous musician. And Chris Squire was a lot more significant than Geddy Lee.

      3. What, no Paul McCartney?

        He always won “Best Bass Player” in the annual “Playboy Pop and Jazz Poll”.

        1. Paul was a great bass player. And Ringo an outstanding drummer. The weak link in the Beatles was always George. George couldn’t really play very well much to the frustration of the rest of the band. No one was more shocked than the other three Beatles when George suddenly started writing great songs.

        2. I don’t think any of the beatles were really considered unbelievably influential as individual musicians except for Ringo. Maybe George in second place, and McCartney a distant third. But i think their collective music tends to outshine any of them individually.

          That’s the thing about “greatest” individual instrumentalists – they tend to be higher-rated when they actually have a far-lower profile in terms of the bands they played for.

          James Jamerson, for instance – someone i think definitely qualifies for ‘greatest of all time’ category – no one knew his freaking name for a very very long time. But he played on basically everything out of motown for a decade.

          Session-players, and jazz guys tend to be on the list more often than people who played with “one band” their whole careers… because the former really have to be proper ‘virtuosos’ and be able to play on demand across a wide range of styles.

          1. George was a distant fourth. They had to do things like have him play the solo on Hard Days Night an octave lower so they could speed the tape up to get it right. He fucked up the solo on Your Bird Can Sing so many times Paul ended up playing it. The only reason Paul ever played bass was because someone had to, John didn’t want to and George couldn’t. Paul was always the better musician and guitarist than George.

            And yes, Ringo is a madly underrated drummer who time and again helped make good songs great. Take Here Comes the Sun for example. Take away Ringo’s drumming and fills and it sounds like a Cat Stevens song instead of the classic it is.

        3. Paul McCartney is the anti-Christ. I’ve known this since the 70s. He’s going to appear any moment now with a pentagram on his head and declare himself supreme overlord. If he can save us from Hillary, I for one, welcome our new Beatle overlord.

          1. If McCartney is the Anti-Christ (and I think its a compelling theory)…

            …what exactly does that make Wings?

            also – neither here nor there

            This album is actually considered a DJ collectable… because it has like 2-3 samples which have been used in some pretty banging hiphop tunes. I need to find the particular break… this is one. This is another. I think there’s more.

            1. I love Wings.

              “Love take me down to the streets.” Great song.

              1. Linda’s death ending that band deprived the world of a great joke:

                What do you call a horse with wings?
                No, Linda McCartney.

          2. I really love that rant. I’ve been grinning at it like an idiot for 3 minutes.

      4. If you don’t mention Ray Brown, Slam Stewart, Richard Davis, Ryan Gould, or Jeffo Weiss, then your opinions are worthless.

      5. John Paul Jones or Roger Waters.

      6. Ryan Martinie says hello.

      7. But could any of them play Irish Bouzouki half as well as Poopy Lungstuffing did as a beginner?

    3. Oh yea? Explain this shit.

      1. I actually hung out w/ the wooten brothers in nashville when i was in college, and took guitar lessons from his brother reggie.

        1. I bet Gilmore, The Lesser Wooten, and some cats fucking would be a vast improvement over whatever that was.

          1. I didn’t even listen to your link. from the title it seemed like some music-school wankery?

            1. Oh, you were referencing Alex Webster. I thought you were trying to shout-out Victor.

      2. And as for the inclusion of Victor in the “greatest of all time”…. ehhh.

        here’s the thing – i think victor has probably been ‘the best’ in the modern bass-player scene for like nearly 2 decades, along with maybe a small handful of others. I think he has been voted “best” by Bass Player magazine more than anyone else ever.

        BUT! and its an important one – aside from his “flight of the bumblebee” or a few other virtuoso performances… what has he ever played that you can name? Like ‘a song’.

        Being a great bass player isn’t about having the most wicked chops; its primarily a supporting instrument in modern music, and unless you’re producing tunes which are “hugely popular/influential” and making kids all over the place want to play that instrument… you’re just kind of a novelty act. And there’s nothing wrong with that! but outside the Berklee Clinics and music-store showcases and stuff…

        ….no bass player sits around around going, “man i need to learn my Victor Wooten Chops so i can really help this particular song sound good” – they think, “i wish i could play like Chuck Rainey” – a guy no one ever noticed, but who played on like 100 hit songs.

        Just my $0.02.

        1. I think there’s three ways to answer best bass player:

          1) Who’s least replaceable? Flea?

          2) Who would you call if you needed a bass track for a random band? Carol Kaye?

          3) Who would listen to solo? Wooten?

          1. That’s an interesting way to approach it, and i think you’d get three different answers.

            Problem – most modern music hardly *needs* bass players. a lot of what people are doing these days is sequenced, and there’s not a lot of new music that really involves a great deal of musicianship.\

            as much as i like Flea – i haven’t enjoyed anything the peppers have done since the 1990s.

            i think 1) would be Claypool – because there’s no one like him and everything he does is 100% “him”

            2) would be someone who can just produce solid grooves at the drop of a hat or do something to make a song interesting without overwhelming it. I’d go with Tony Levin (* he did most of the Peter Gabriel hits of the 80s/90s and lots more)

            3) bass solos are about as painful as anything i can imagine, and yeah, victor would probably be close to my pick … but i’d actually choose Oteil Burbridge because he does wicked Solfeggio, and does less needless technical wankery.

            1. No question, when I do my next album, it will be Jim Petti. Tragically unknown but the best comp player I’ve heard in years.

            2. 1) I was thinking in terms of WAR, but $ or record sales instead of wins.

              3) By “solo” I was thinking more of this, i.e. alone or with unobtrusive percussion, than ‘frantic scales between the third and fourth chorus.’

              1. – still not sure what you mean by #1, then. I just scanned the list of “top album sales” and couldn’t find any “Bands” on it that would really suffer if their bass player drowned in the Mississippi

                re #3

                I’d probably still take Oteil (if i’m not allowed Zombie Jaco? I have a car battery and a kilo of cocaine and i’m pretty sure he’d be good for at least one tune)

                the example i provided wasn’t the best, but he is actually very much like Victor in the unbelievable range of things he can do with the bass (both hands plus voice), but to my taste he’s more melodically interesting.

                Speaking of Carol Kaye – i found this clip from him in 1997 and he cites her as a huge influence.

                1. Are we including upright players? Because Esperanza Spalding is goddamn amazing.

                  1. Are we including upright players?

                    I think if its upright in a modern context, yes;
                    if its upright bass but all they ever played was “straight ahead/or free-jazz”, then no.

                    you get far into apples/oranges then. hell its already like that across many genres, when you switch instruments it just gets silly and you’re talking about different stuff.

                2. I meant that if RHCP was 30% less successful because Flea never existed, that 30% represents more album sales/asses in seats than Claypool’s entire career. But yes, there’s very few notable bassists in pop music today.

                  Jaco is one of the 8 or 9 bassists I’ve ever listened to for more than 20 minutes. Certainly a contender.

                  I’m enjoying this clip, but the mouth stuff isn’t for me.

                  1. I get you.

                    I honestly can’t think of anyone who sells a lot of records who needs their bass player more than RHCP, so i guess you answered your own question.

                    re: oteil + Solfeggio (“the mouth stuff”); yeah its a thing you’re supposed to do to train your “melodic soloing” – sing along; its something music teachers use to help people become more ‘expressive’ soloists. You try things with your mouth and your hand realizes there were intervals you were ignoring. He was occasionally cute with it in that he’d duet with himself – harmonize with his own soloing, etc.. But its not like something he does/did all the time. apparently he played for the Allman brothers for a few years? I had no idea. here’s a clip of him doing some solo performance which is more mellow (but not the best video quality)… but then he does some of that solfeg again 🙂 it is sort of his signature.

                    1. apparently the proper term is “Solf?ge

          2. 1) Ryan Martinie
            2) Ryan Martinie
            3) Ryan Martinie
            4) Jannik Top
            5) Justin Chancellor

            1. re: Jannik Top

              do you have a link to example of why you so highly regard?

      1. shut the fuck up donnie

    1. What the hell are you? A Jugalo?

  55. Did the United States become a nation of cheaters because of, say, Bill Clinton?

    No they did not. And its because people are so enamored of the ‘leader’ lie that they forget that Presidents are not ‘leaders’ they are followers. They do not set trends, they follow them.

    1. Presidents are hired help and should be treated as such.

      1. Indeed. The “Mr President” thing from anyone other than a government employee is despicable. Leave the White House unlocked too and anyone who wants to walk in and harangue the occupant should feel free to do so.

        1. The Prime Minister’s Questions in Parliament is one big up for the UK over us. “You lie!” caused fainting spells all over the media salons here, over there they get to call the PM a lying dirtbag every damn week.

  56. I’ve had some time to ponder the universe this afternoon. That’s what being a member of the privileged patriarchy buys you. Anyway, I’ve been thinking it’s going to be an interesting summer. I think that Britain will leave the EU and Bernie will run as an independent.


    1. Thoughts?

      Yes. I won’t be taking stock tips from you.

    2. I think that Britain will leave the EU and Bernie will run as an independent.

      No and no.

      a) they’re pussies, and b) he will be smothered in his sleep like scalia.

  57. Rodger Griffiths
    1h ago

    Only someone that doesn’t see how trump and the libertarian movement are almost the exact same thing would vote for their tangled bunch of imperialistic elitists. Only a someone that loves the Koch bros,the selfish ideologies of that failure and Nazi sympathiser Ayn Rand would vote for a fellow failure of a movement that promotes abandoning other human beings in favor of hoarding everything for oneself. I seriously hope I know no one like that ever! That kind of selfishness wants to remove all efforts to save our environment , any kind of help for the poor – in fact they have no problem with poor folks just dying and getting out of the way. If you think libertarianism is about liberty you have not looked close enough . It’s about taking liberties and promoting selfishness to further the fortunes of the already rich or those deluded enough to believe that other human beings have no worth.

    1. From here. There’s so much more good shit.


      1. And people have the nerve to ask why I won’t vote for this dumbshit. Just a few days ago I made a joke about him looking for the support of Jeb and Santorum, and the fucker has out derped that derp.

      2. Guardian Gonna Guardian

        I love how the “Highbrow Media” say things like the below, and act like its “crazy talk:”

        The Libertarian’s unorthodox views on the Middle East extended to the Israel-Palestine peace process. He said Israel “will determine its destiny but the United States shouldn’t meddle itself or get involved in this”.

        “Leave them alone and let them solve their own fucking problem” is unorthodox… any maybe that’s technically correct, when the orthodoxy is so batshit fucking crazy, between the UN trying to micromanage them out of existence, and the US backstopping their endless mini-wars with their own tenants.

    2. Another retard who doesn’t even know who the Koch brothers are.

    3. Damn he’s onto us. Quick kill all the orphan in reach and abscond with as much filthy lucre as you can carry.

      1. That ungrateful little shit is getting his gruel rations cut in the blood diamond mines.

  58. The Libertarian party is fast approaching the point where it is a mere receptacle for the cum leavings of rejected has-been establishment Republican governors. We can’t trust the libertarians to stand for free speech, to tell the SJW cunts to fuck off, and the party’s nominee claims a great affinity to Bernie Sanders? Fuck it, at some point you have to look like something that’s not just a fusion of right and left-wing establishment perspectives. At this point we’re looking at either joining Eddie in voting Constitution Party, tossing Trump a vote out of pure spite, or writing in John Mcafee. Gary’s appeal to the Bill Kristols and Romneys of the world should win him no respect from anyone with any anti-authoritarian instincts and his place at the top of the ticket severely compromises the LP’s ability to market the libertarian message effectively.

    1. ^this^

    2. Oh, don’t pretend like you won’t be delighted when you vote for Trump.

      1. Sure just as long as you don’t pretend you are not delighted to vote for someone Mitt Romney and various other right thinking people find acceptable.

        Fair is fair

        1. I will be delighted to vote for the one sane choice if I bother to vote. Yes. You’re correct.

          1. It is always good to do the acceptable and honorable thing. I am a little more hard nosed about it.

          2. And you should bake a nazi cake to celebrate voting for Johnson

            1. So proclaimeth a government agent of the most pernicious department, who is fearful of having to find honest work.

              1. So you make up for being stupid by being humorless.

                Is that you Mary? I am not sure but I kind of wonder. You seem aweful my interested in me.

                1. In the same sense that prisoners are interested in the thugs hired to guard them. I just can’t imagine having a conscience shitty enough to be a DHS thug, but I’m aware that there are such repulsive slugs out there.

                  1. Oh Mary. You are so troubled. I am sorry I picked on you. I didn’t realize it was you.

                    1. This is a demonstration of the remarkable skills of DHS in detective work.

                      I’m amazed that terrorists haven’t taken out the Capitol with perspicacious fellows like you on the job of guarding our nation.

      2. And why would anyone not be delighted to vote for Trump and in the process give the finger to every beltway elitist simpleton? I can think of few things more delightful than telling those people to fuck off. And if by some chance Trump wins, their tears and lamenentations are going to make me deliriously happy.

        1. Why indeed?

          1. If he wins, I am going to take off work the next day and just wonder around Washington enjoying the crying. I can’t deprive myself of their suffering.

        2. Hell, you can give them the finger by voting for Bernie or Stein, too – but you’re not plumping for them, are you? The LP purists are never going to be more than a few percent of the electorate so if they’re going to sell out in the name of attracting the libertarianish of any and all stripes, now’s the pefect time to do it. I quit voting LP when they picked Bob Barr as a sell-out candidate and it didn’t make a damn bit of difference because that was not the time anybody was really looking for an alternative. Right now they are. If you gotta suck a few dicks to get some attention, well, you gotta suck a few dicks. Or not. But Jesus, how is voting for Trump not sucking a dick?



            There are people here who call themselves libertarian but are aesthetically attracted to fascism because under fascism the people they hate the most (ie. progs) get their skulls bashed.

            In this case, because progs have deeply embedded themselves in the cause of gay rights and anti-racism it’s fashionable for the yokels here to flirt with, if not outright embrace, hatred against those things.

            1. No the cosmos are too obsessed with asserting their virtue supremacy over the yokels that they refuse to see how the Progs have weaponized those things against freedom. Since it only affects people the cosmos hate, they don’t see any reason to change.

              1. No the cosmos are too obsessed with asserting their virtue supremacy over the yokels

                Jesus Christ, the projection in your comment is astounding. Every comment you make about wanting to see DC denizens weeping in the streets demonstrates you are entirely titillated by Trump because he hurts the people you hate. In fact, the biggest appeal Trump has to people like you who aren’t uneducated is that you get to demonstrate how anti-PC you are!


                I’m not disputing that progs are a loathsome bunch but for fuck’s sake I’m not about to cut my own nuts off out of spite by supporting a deranged narcissist that makes Obama look circumspect and humble.

                1. I assert my virtue supremacy as well. I do t deny that. And if there were a realistic choice other than Hillary, I would take it. But there is not. You like protest votes and that is fine. I don’t. I would rather at least stop Hillary and make a lot of loathsome people unhappy.

                  But yes I absolutely consider myself superior to you typical Cosmo but that is not saying much.

                2. And we were not getting rid of public accommodation laws. There was not a choice of gay marriage with nopublic accommodation laws. So it was either no gay marriage or gay marriage at the price of the freedom to object. There were no other options. Cosmos choose gay marriage. That is not necessarily a bad choice. What is bad is their dishonest redial to accept the consequences of that choice. Ultimately I he cosmos never supported screwing people who objected to gay marriage but they didn’t care much about it either.

              2. they refuse to see how the Progs have weaponized those things against freedom

                And how, exactly, will a Trump presidency make those things go away? He can’t unilaterally make civil rights legislation disappear.

                And to be perfectly frank, if I can’t refuse to serve a black person because I’m a racist I don’t see any reason why I should be able to refuse service to a gay person because I’m a homophobe. Either it’s all okay or none of it is. Either we have freedom of association or we don’t. We currently don’t and I don’t see why Christians should get a pass over racists. That’s offensive to notion of equal protection under law.

                1. So because we have the CRA we can’t refuse to associate for any reason? Once we start to restrict freedom we must restrict it more in the name of fairness?

                  You like gays and hate the people who don’t That is all that is going on here. The rest is just rationalization.

                2. The gays getting in on this action was the last straw for a lot of people.

                  1. Perhaps. But shouldn’t we not want more people to get in on the action?

                    And let’s be honest, if it had been the SOCONs wanting in rather than the gays, do you think the cosmos would have been all about fairness and if we are going to do it for one then for do it for all then?

                    The gays are fashionable and the SOCONs are not.

                    1. Socons already have religion on their side.

                    2. Not all religions.

          2. jerry-

            Jill Stein will not appear on my ballot because the Green Party sucks at retail politics even more than the “L”ibertarians. Bernie won’t appear because we have a “sore loser” law so he lost his shot running as a Dem… Remind me who I should vote for to piss off the GOP Establishment,

      3. If I were, I wouldn’t pussyfoot around that fact. I find voting for a guy who is at best agnostic about liberty (and at worst reminds me of the corrupt Latin American countries I lived in as a kid) absolutely appalling. But you know what? Latin American politics, dysfunctional as they are, at least resemble what humans *do* and believe. At least Latin American oligarchs aren’t running inquisitions against people who deny that the penis is a female sex organ, or trying to sell me on making Iraq into Disneyland while ignoring the debt (and tolerating aforementioned inquisition).

        Maybe next time the LP can do what I thought they’d do any nominate a crazy or aspy guy who doesn’t really care about that bullshit and at least talks about getting the country free and the economy working again.

        1. The funny thing is that if Trump wins the Progs will pretend to like Libertarians again. Once they stop crying and get over their hysterics, It will be cosmotarian old home week.

          1. Maybe next time the LP can do what I thought they’d do any nominate a crazy or aspy guy who doesn’t really care about that bullshit and at least talks about getting the country free and the economy working again.

            I could vote for that person. Too bad the LP went with an aspy Republican who talks about new federal taxes and forcing people to bake cakes. I’ll have to settle for voting to Make America Great Again.

            1. Yes, vote for the guy who thinks the law is a tool with which to bludgeon his opponents. At least he’ll make explicit bigotry and racism fashionable again so people like you can better express your impotent rage at a changing world that has zero use for you.

              1. You really don’t think Gary Johnson cares about you do you?

                1. Uh, no? Why would I think that? The only thing I want from Johnson is responsible fiscal leadership and sane foreign policy, the two things the President is supposed to provide.

                  1. Do you really think any President has that kind of power and won’t let you down? I am not saying don’t vote for who you like. Just be realistic that no President is going to save us or sink us for that matter.

              2. ^Coming from a guy who literally asks “would you like fries with that” for a living.^

                Expecting to supplement your meager income with that monthly “prebate” check Gary Johnson is promising? It’s all about the FREE SHIT with you millennials. Bernie for TEAM BLUE. GayJay now for TEAM RED.

                1. Like SIV, I too will be happy when True Scotsman is on the ballet in all fifty states. Until then I think I’ll vote for the guy whose fiscal policies most closely match what I’d prefer to see done, and hope his social policies can evolve in a direction I like. And if that’s also a protest vote against the current political duopoly, more’s the better.

      4. And it’s funny that you seem to think “Trump voter” is the ultimate insult. I’ve voted for candidates a lot worse than Trump (including a couple Greens and Commies), and been feted for it by your kind of people. Trump is no prize, but neither is the approval of people like you.

        1. Isn’t it fun to be a bomb thrower? Warty is probably the smartest guy on here and is not a poser. But he needs to lighten up.

          1. Wait, are you saying Ken Shultz is Warty’s sock puppet?

            1. No. Warty is a very smart guy. He just doesn’t show off. Ken is not the worst but he is a bit screwy in some ways.

        2. My kind of people. lolz. And utimate insult? Dude, if you think that’s the best insult I can come up with, you haven’t been paying attention.

          And as far as Trump, yes, it will be funny if he wins. I will laugh a lot. He’ll be a disaster and an embarrassment, but at least he’ll be funnier than Hillary.

  59. Um, the culture war is far from over. Just look at what’s going on at college campuses.

    Less than 1% of the prison population are folks who were caught merely smoking pot. I smell whiff of pot in my neighborhood and my house is literally 5 minutes away from a school. The issue with drug wars is its heavy handed approach, not the legal status of drugs.

    Pot has been unofficially legal for years. Same thing in Mexico. It explains why there hasn’t been a bump in teen pot use. That’s because they were getting it prior to legalization. And most “teens” are probably too young to purchase legal pot. The police do not knock down the doors of every house with a marijuana odor, although some raids gone wrong will obviously capture attention.

    Surveys show that teen pot use are flat. But those involve self reported numbers. Honestly, I’m not under any illusion that there’s hasn’t been SOME increase of pot use among the youth. I hear anecdotal accounts of not being able to walk in some places in CO without smelling pot smoke.

    1. I hear anecdotal accounts of not being able to walk in some places in CO without smelling pot smoke.

      The horror.

      1. I recall H. L. Mencken’s tongue-in-cheek suggestion that some form of gaseous alcohol, something that gets you mildly buzzed but not plastered, should be pumped into the air in all populated areas, mellowing out the populace.

        I don’t think Mencken specifically mentioned dope…

        1. Everyone should use drugs at least sometimes if it cures them of the insufferable human condition of being a meddlesome busy body.

        2. Here we go…

          “I am well aware, of course, that getting the whole human race stewed and keeping it stewed, year in and year out, would present formidable technical difficulties. It would be hard to make the daily dose of each individual conform exactly to his private needs, and hard to get it to him at precisely the right time. On the one hand there would be the constant danger that large minorities might occasionally become cold sober, and so start wars, theological disputes, moral reforms, and other such unpleasantnesses. On the other hand, there would be danger that other minorities might proceed to actual intoxication, and so annoy us all with their fatuous bawling or maudlin tears. But such technical obstacles, of course, are by no means insurmountable. Perhaps they might be got around by abandoning the administration of alcohol per ora and distributing it instead by impregnating the air with it. I throw out the suggestion, and pass on….”

  60. It was only four years ago that Romney was a greedy capitalist who gave some poor woman cancer…now he’s a respected elder statesperson.

    How did the media learn about this change?

    1. Facebook.

  61. Was listening to PBS NewsHour a while ago and they were going on and on about how evil billionaire Peter Thiel helped Hulk Hogan to destroy a great bastion of free speech by the name of Gawker. They were horrified that Thiel might be on some sort of mission to shut down speech he doesn’t like. Oh really? Now you fuckers, who have been on a single minded missiong to shut down speech you don’t like, for years, are suddenly concerned about free speech? This is just the ultimate hypocrisy at it’s finest.

    After I found this:

    Liberals suddenly care about free speech

    1. Because if it were Britnart facing that judgement, I am sure they would be saying the same thing.

    2. Well, not Thiel knows what gratitude from the Left feels like.

      He was a LGBLT Ally, telling workers who thought they had jobs at his Charlotte facility that they didn’t have jobs after all because their state was a bunch of hatey-haters who hated gaytransqueer womyn and men.

      But where’s the love he should have earned for his courageous gesture?

      The Left are fickle children.

        1. I don’t think Thiel makes any decisions for PayPal. Was Palantir planning on a Charlotte facility?

          1. Hmmm…if I got that one wrong I’m sorry.

  62. This place used to be informative.

    Is this how it’s going to be for the next 5 months?

    1. Prepare the Brawndo!

      1. Oh God, it’s way too early for cat videos!

          1. Fuck you feathered dinos, we canines are superior, we’re man’s best friends!

            Piss off, canine, at least we can squawk like humans, and we can fly!

            1. Cat coughs up feather, says “What?”

        1. The video sums up the thread pretty well.

          1. At least you don’t have to worry about the thread having a sappy soundtrack, a factor making it difficult to find acceptable animal videos.

            1. Yeah, I know, it’s a problem.

      2. LOL but who the fuck encourages their kid to do that?

        1. Maybe they were hoping she’d learn a Valuable Lesson.

          1. *I* would have smacked her if the cat didn’t.

      3. Dummies. A cat can do serious damage to the eyes.

        Still one of my favorites:


        1. Kitties are entirely awesome libertarians.

          1. Disorganized and full of themselves.

          2. The only thing that brings my two together is food, so yeah.

        2. There was definitely some anthropomorphic humor in that. The face “looks guilty” and he just backs away slowly like, “Ummmmmmmm yeah…i was just ….. looking…..”

      4. That video should be titled “Feminism” and placed in a museum on a loop

        1. Exactly.

    2. Apparently a large number of regulars here are motivated entirely by such hatred for the left that they’d embrace the American Putin if it meant thumping their skulls.

      1. The hatred for the left is well deserved, and they’re deserving it more with each passing day. Just sayin.

      2. the American Putin

        Gary Johnson?

      3. Guilty as charged.

        I live in CA. Are you surprised?

      4. regulars here are motivated entirely by such hatred for the left that they’d embrace the American Putin

        If you really think Trump is an “American Putin” you need to change your diapers.

        he’s a reality TV goofball. He’s not the former head of the KGB with countless deaths on his hands.

        1. Nothing about his personality leads me to think he won’t abuse the shit out of his immense power as president.

          He’s not a “goofball”, he’s a narcissistic conman.

          1. leads me to think

            Lol! Like that would ever happen.

            We have these things called “checks and balances” and “three branches of government” and a “watchdog press” that should all awaken when Trump dares to take down the system to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.

          2. he’s a narcissistic conman.

            Funny, I thought that was the dictionary definition of “Politician”.

            The fact is he’s *less* of a politician than most. If anything, i think its hilarious that people accuse him of being a “Fake” when all they’re saying really is that “other politicians have somehow convinced them they’re NOT”

            at the end of the day, and i’ve said it a number of times, “who gets to be president” isn’t actually the biggest deal in the world – except for the fact that they’re going to have the opportunity to replace Supreme Court justices who are likely going to sway the mood of the court for the next decade-plus

            For that reason alone, i can see people voting Trump and doing so unapologetically. and you really can’t say they’re wrong to do so.

        2. Something about his persona makes it nearly impossible for me to imagine his doing serious evil.

      5. Let me add =

        I don’t hate the left.

        I understand why most of them believe the stuff they do. most of my friends are lefties.

        I’m just tired of the fact that their desire to “not want to have to think about stuff” means that the world around me gets more and more and more confining and restricted and our economy gets endlessly neutered.

        *it doesn’t help that Obama in the last year has passed legislation which directly hurts me and mine. potentially very badly.

        Its not “hate”. Its self preservation to try and simply keep the lefties from fucking everyone over and then pretending they had no idea how it happened.

  63. Reason adds a ‘report spam’ option and even a useless ‘promoted comment’ box but still no edit option.

    1. lololololol

    2. Look, Rufus, edit buttons on blogs have only been around for about 15 years. In order for libertarians to prove how they are not technological superiors, we have to wait at least another 5 years for that. We can’t offend the techno inferiors.

      1. Bah.

        1. You brought it up, and I supported your concern, and all you can say is ‘bah’?

          1. If there was an edit button maybe I’d change my mind!

            1. +1 quantum comeback

          2. Personally, I don’t like edit buttons. Someone says something, which starts a long thread, and then they go back later and erase their post — so you have all these comments responding to what is now a blank space. Etc Etc.

            It’s part of the charm of this place that it doesn’t have editing. (It was even better when there was no registration, too.) If it’s such a big deal to be accurate, use the damn ‘preview’ button before you post to edit your comment.

            If we had edit buttons we would be deprived of John’s malapropisms and SugarFree SF’ing a link.

            1. Agree with all of this.

            2. It’s because of type-os, not because someone wants to change their post.

              1. How do you limit it just to correcting typos? If you can edit at all, you can delete everything you wrote, or completely change it so your point is reversed.

                So what if you misspell/mistype a word here or there. No one here cares about that (at least no one you respect).

                1. Do you work for the NSA? Typically, a blog limits the number of edits you can do over time.

                  1. Do you work for the NSA?

                    No, I’m the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Why do you ask?

                    1. No, I’m the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Why do you ask?

                      Well, now I’m too scared to respond to you. I didn’t say anything about woodchippers, you know?

                    2. AKA, a goat fucker.

                2. Quote buttons work really well for that. I mean sometimes I say stupid shit, sometimes I just make a typo. When I make a typo, nobody cares, and edit buttons work well for that. When I say stupid shit, in the time it takes me to correct my poorly worded statement, two people have already quoted me, and made sensible arguments.

            3. Oh but the madness would be delicious!

              I use edits strictly to rework a sentence because I’m too lazy to self-edit and when I see a poorly constructed sentence and it hurts my eyes I don’t want to look like an idiot and then want to press edit to fix to avoid looking like I’m made an incoherent mess of a thought I may hav had and too avoid more spelling erors especially if I had too much to dring.

              1. As a long time poster on the intertoobz, my take on this is that you are sometimes typing stuff out very quickly and you know, you don’t have your personal editor orphan nearby. Maybe that orphan is too busy working the mines. Duh!

              2. +1 Eats, Shoots, and Leaves

                1. I do a lot of those but unlike many of you assholes I try to come back and respond!

                  BECAUSE I’M CIVIL.

                  1. *Buzz runs Rufus’ leanto*

                  2. Sometimes, the trolls just take what you say out of context and run with it. What will you do then?

    3. Keep bitching about it and they’re going to sic Disqus on us, or even worse, Facebook comments.

      1. Would they really want to declare war on their own commenters? Who would they hit up for money? Besides the Kochs?

      2. Derpbook will be an out for me. Maybe they’ll take that into consideration due to butthurt.

        1. Me too. It’s why I stopped (infrequently) commenting at City Journal.

          1. I’ll use Disqus, no problem. But not derpbook, I deleted my account almost 10 years ago and have no intention of ever rejoining that den of stupidity.

            I developed a blog for an organization in 2006, and even then it was not that difficult at all. All of the tools are readily available for this today and even a non-developer with little knowledge of programming could do it. Don’t get me wrong, I’d advise having a professional do it, but even then, it would not be that costly.

            1. If you love Disqus so much why don’t you fucking gay-marry it?


        1. Well, it would be the end of H&R if that were an only option.

  64. The greatest disservice sociologists and economists have done for their fields and for humanity generally is having conflated income with class, e.g. working class, middle-class etc., and making these fatuous distinctions entities unto themselves. Income does not cause class: class predicts income. Middle-class characteristics of education, productivity, property investment, family virtues, and long time-horizons are prerequisites to enjoying a steady, comfortable income. The lower-class disaffection for education, savings, maintaining property, forestalling gratification, working hard and regularly, and dissociation from toxic influences are characteristics that likewise do not promise much by way of income. Class defines a set of behaviors. So far, so obvious.

    But that view fell into disfavor, since it’s so didactic and judgmental. Now class is meant to refer purely to one’s income, irrespective of the decisions that precede it. Even terms like “lower class” have fallen out of favor in preference to “working class,” whether or not anyone is doing any work. Working class itself is better termed lower-middle class, since that at least implies some of the virtues which attend a classical understanding of what it means to be middle class. And this is to say nothing of the upper classes, the scourge who’ve done nothing to earn their misbegotten wealth (besides undertaking tremendous risks to get it).

    1. The main problem with the “upper” classes is when they “don’t want the kids to suffer like I did.”

      Well, maybe not *quite* as much as you did, but making them take what you have for granted can turn them into lazy, incompetent ingrates.

      1. Hey, somebody has to redistribute the family fortune. Better the feckless trust fund kids do it than the government.

        1. But if they have the character to keep and increase the wealth, they might create jobs, give to charity, etc.

          Oh, wait, “somebody has to redistribute” was a tongue-in-cheek thing?

          1. Well, it’ll be redistributed in any event.

            I used to chat with an English socialist who was adamant that the rich don’t pay their fair share and those pikers need to have their wealth expropriated to pay for all the niceties everyone deserves, and I had to ask: what the fuck does he think they do with their monies, dive into pools of it Scrooge McDuck-style?

    2. I don’t really have a larger point aside from how we’ve lost the understanding the behavior defines class and class is an predictor, not a definition, of income. I spent the day cleaning out a rental occupied by a Native family, who had left the place trashed. It was trashed not like you’d expect a bunch of pissed-off evictees might leave a place, but trashed like they’d lived that way for months: garbage tucked behind furniture and under mattresses and cushions, desiccated morsels of food left everywhere (like a half-eaten PBJ I found under a shelf), filthy furniture and heaps of clothing left behind, never to be collected. So I spent a lot of time thinking about class to avoid thinking about the work. I chatted with the owner of the property. We get on well, we’re very similar. We both agreed that, in a similar situation, e.g. not working, begging family for handouts, our only income welfare and tribal subsidies, and living in abject squalor, we’d both kill ourselves within a week. And yet this family is getting by with their situation. We found ample mementos of a fairly loving domestic situation: letters written from the mother to her daughters, paintings the kids had done, a “family crest” of sorts. There’s obviously a will to live, if not thrive. But the classlessness, the contentment to migrate from place to place month to month, the horrible conditions they live and leave them in, speaks to a sense of detachment from any ethos of ambition and success.

      1. It beat the piss out of thinking about the vermin, anyway.

      2. Dude. Watch some car videos.

        1. CAT. CAT VIDEOS.

          See C.Anacreon. SEE?

            1. TOONCES!

              My daughter lost her mind watching this.

        2. Interestingly, this cars video is the campaign song for the Republicans, Democrats *and* Libertarians this year.

          I don’t care if you use me again / I don’t care if you abuse me again

          1. Due to Windows trouble, I can’t play video, but I would’ve assumed it to be “You May Think I’m Crazy”. BTW, have you ever noticed the resemblance of that piece to Barreracuda’s “Promises, Promises”?

      3. One anecdote the owner told me: during a cold snap, the radiators couldn’t keep up, so he bought them electric heaters. Then, because they didn’t keep up with their utilities, the electrical was shut off. So they packed up and walked several blocks down the street to a sister, and holed up for a few months until spring.

      4. Oh, there was a reason I brought up the fact that they’re Natives.

        Midway through the day I took a break to grab more trash bags. The guy who checked me out at Lowes was Native. So: probably making ~$10 an hour, probably doesn’t qualify for a whole lot of benefits, may or may not have kids. He is almost certainly lower-class in terms of income, and purely on the basis of income after transfers, probably enjoys less disposable income than the evicted family of six. It’s impossible to draw too many conclusions about his circumstances beyond that he was gregarious and working and seemed happy to be. Happier than I was, anyway, but that’s my problem. His attitude and demeanor and dress scream middle class, and yet his meager income would say “working class” by the benighted standard of our age.

        1. What is the goddammed* difference?

          *On purpose. Bent. Get it.

            1. Sorry, bro. Beer. I guess he was of a class. Working with the middle attitude.

              I’ve been there many times. Ace Hardware on a drunk Saturday afternoon, buying woodscrews. The girl ringing me up has too much makeup and too few years. She sneers at my Coke Zero. Fuck. I go home and repair my fence and wish I could get drunker.

              1. “Son, I just saw your lyrics on the Internet. This is the next big country hit, get your ass down to Nashville right now!”


              2. She sneers at my Coke Zero.

                This is why full-sugar Gatorade is still a thing.

      5. Bet they said, “Doin’ the best we can, man.”

        1. In that case, “the best we can” must be a new term for meth.

    3. People who don’t earn much would be surprised how much work it takes to be “rich”.

  65. Kyle Beckerman is problematic.

    1. Well, his hair is.

      1. Want to get your eyes shined?

  66. I propose a “Secret Trumper” button. This whole spiel is getting old. They found the libertarian cave in Lascaux. After years of effort, researchers were able to decode a cave painting. “Ugg secretly luv Moog. #NeverMoog!”.

    1. Please. “Trumpet.” Followed by Riddick.

    2. “Make Neanderthalia Great Again!”
      “Keep Homo Sapiens out!”

      1. That would flip the slur “slope” on it’s head.

      2. “Ladies and gentlemen, I’m just a caveman. Your world frightens and confuses me. So I tried to overcome my fear and confusion by being the best at what I do. I made some great deals in buying caves, fixing them up, and selling them to the best hunters among your people, the ones who could afford quality. Then I found out about this magical box that shows pictures of me to millions of people, and I said, this could be big, I want in on it. So I showed myself on this magical box to people, and people liked what I was doing. Then I learned that your village has a headman called a President. And it was about time to choose a new headman. So I thought that if I could fix up caves, and make them the best caves, and be the best guy who shows his picture on a magical box, I could be the best headman. Because the other villages are laughing up their sleeves at us, or would be if they had sleeves. They are able to push us around, bonk us on the head with giant bones, and steal our hunting grounds. The other people who want to be your headman or headwoman, they are all losers and they will have this bad situation continue. But I am going to get really big bone axes – the best bone axes, and we will chop up the other villages until we’re the best again.”

        1. You got all the from a depiction of Moog wearing a lopped off orangutang scalp to cover his tiny sagittal crest?

          1. “staffinrun has no answers for the problems of this village, instead he makes fun of ordinary hardworking cavemen. Sad.”

            1. If something is about to fall, push it over.

        2. (polite applause)

    3. Everybody luv Moog, it play good music!

      1. Hell of a goaltender, too.

    1. You don’t. I don’t. We have a majority!

  67. Spicy Garlic Chicken.

    I win.

    You assholes lose.

    1. 24 hour fast.

      Holy, holy, holy.

      1. What, did you condense Ramadan?

    2. Perhaps, but your asshole will definitely pay the price tomorrow.

      1. Caucasian spicy. So… not spicy

    3. Salmon Onigiri (rice ball) made by mother-in-law. She’s been a Japanese housewife for 40+ years. She’d take one bite of your garlic chicken, disappear into her kitchen with it for 5 minutes and have you taste it again. Your tongue would cum.

      1. Compliment to the M-I-L, not a shot at your culinary skill.

        1. In spite of the clarification, I’m still incredibly confused.

          1. I’m saying that the amount of dedication Japanese housewives of her generation have towards satisfying their husbands taste buds culminates in the ability to make even the most basic dish sublime. She’s a master. No joking. I’d rather eat dinner at her house than at any restaurant in Tokyo.

            1. I take pride in what I cook. My wife isn’t allowed near the stove except for breakfast.

              But I have a lot to learn about Japanese cooking. Sometimes, I roam the aisles of Marukai, but I don’t always know what I’m getting into.

              1. I’ve tried Japanese food made by Americans who are adequate in the kitchen. Problem is they alter the recipe to fit their taste. It would be like taking a few Judo classes and telling the sensei that this is a better way to throw. You can change a few things after you’ve mastered the correct way.

                BTW, I wouldn’t start with Sukiyaki. Maybe something like okonomiyaki or even a simple miso soup. You’re a hero if you do those right.

                1. Miso soup??? Like I don’t make my own dashi from scratch??? You insult me!

                  1. I’m so so Mr. Miyagi.
                    *Whacks on, Whacks off.*
                    No, Danielsan. Small circles. See. If done correctly, no can defense.

                    1. I can’t make dashi, so hats off to you.

            2. So standing invitation to dinner at staffinrun’s house when in Japan?

              1. Haven’t seen Tejicano around for a while, but there are a few of us here. You make it to Japan and soap land is your first stop.

                1. I’ll be with my wife, so uhm, I better pass (if I’m reading google correctly).

                  1. That’s why I didn’t link it. Clear that browser history.

  68. This isn’t a Rickroll because I just told you it was, and without the element of surprise it isn’t a Rickroll.

    But it has cats.

    1. Hey, don’t make me post the bad cat video. You know which one I mean.

        1. No, not that one.

            1. You want nightmares, I got nightmares.

                  1. Yes, the brain one. I know better than to watch that, so thank you for labelling it.

                    1. I told you I’d post the bad one.

                    2. Did you see where I posted this below?

                    3. Are you coming on to me?

                    4. No, I was trying to horrify and shock you.

  69. Vlad must be preparing an Oct. surprise: some state secret bought off Hillary. We know he’d rather have The Donald as prez, but Vlad wouldn’t dare trot anything out now, because then the Dems would have time to substitute a stronger candidate for Hillary.

    1. We know he’d rather have The Donald as prez

      Putin? Why? Hilary would give him the same tongue-bath he got from Obama. Trump would ignore him.

      1. There is wisdom in what you say.

        then again, maybe Donald is *actually serious* about pulling the US out of NATO.

        which is again debatable about what that might mean for Russia. I think he’d probably again prefer Hillary just because she would be easier to game than some moron like Trump, who you have no idea what they really think.

      2. Tongue bath? Try anything once. Anyways, Putin seems to relish being the West’s foil, so I’m not sure he’d be able to fill that role against Trump as well as he could against Hillary.

        1. Try anything once.

          You won’t regret it.

      3. Putin wants to destabilize the West. That’s why he’s simultaneously supporting migration to Europe and anti-migrant parties (and probably terrorism for each cause).

    2. That would be delicious. Shame on you for making this cycle seem less horrible.

  70. Stopped clocks and blind squirrels:

    “Opponents rally against Brown’s plan to exempt affordable housing”
    “Gov. Jerry Brown’s plan to exempt certain affordable housing projects from local permitting is running into steep opposition from influential organized labor and environmental advocates.
    Brown wants to allow certain projects with onsite affordable housing to sidestep requirements for conditional use permits, planned unit development permits and other local approvals. But labor and environmental groups oppose the governor’s plan because they say it “blows a hole” in the California Environmental Quality Act, and would restrict urban planning control by local governments.”

    Lefty turf war; SF proggies terrified they won’t be able to extract baksheesh from developers!

    1. Baksheesh! I love that term.

      Hey, Derp, give us the lowdown. I read it years and years ago when I was big into James Clavell. What’s the deal?

      1. Baksheesh comes from a Persian word that means gift. It was adopted into Turkish and later spread into Arabic by the Ottoman Empire. In modern Arabic, it means a tip (extra money). It can also mean a bribe or a handout.

        1. “It can also mean a bribe or a handout.”

          SF is ‘desperate for housing’, according to lefties, both near and far (left). But none recognizes (or chooses to do so) that *any* increase in housing supply reduces demand and lowers cost.
          Instead, the proggies fight with each other over who can demand the greatest ‘remediations’ from evil developers, which ‘remediation’ tends to fund a ‘neighborhood house’ which employs the door-knockers of the particular supervisor, hence yielding cheap campaign help. And drives up the cost of all housing, in the name of ‘helping the poor’ (by making them homeless).
          “Bribe” is nice; “extortion” is more accurate. “Slimy” is a good way of characterizing the lot, and for all his many faults, moonbeam might accomplish something here.
          I’m waiting for his apology re: The Dill Act and his abandonment of hit choo-choo before I run up the flag.

          1. And finally:
            “SF is ‘desperate for housing’, according to lefties, both near and far (left).”

            SF is nothing of the sort. It’s a total of 49 sq. miles of very attractive living space, hence the cost of living here is properly very high.
            For all the claims that SF real estate is ‘overpriced’, the market says otherwise; there is not a single parcel of SF real estate that did not sell to a willing buyer in the last year. All of SF real estate, according to the market, is affordable.
            So while I hope moonbeam beats the crap out of the local tin-pot slime-bags, there is no reason to hope his proposal forces the development of X amount of ‘affordable housing’.

        2. “Baksheesh comes from a Persian word”

          BTW, I thought it has Russian roots.

    2. You mean the different lefty groups are in a catfight?

        1. Can’t watch videos, but crows are soooo cute. I love how they walk.

  71. SNL’s take on gay wedding cakes:


    Apparently wedding cakes are basic goods and services now.

    Oh look, here’s a real life baker who lost her business because of this bullshit:

    Isn’t that just *hilarious*?

    1. SNL is like a bunch of kids beating up this one weird kid, and all the other kids are cheering them on, and they’re like, “gosh, we’re so brave!”

    2. Totally. SNL is just smug comedy in my view.

      The comments are awful.

      1. “smug comedy”

        I’d say you’re half right.

        1. People always say that it used to be really funny back in the day. But it’s never really been funny. They’ve had the occasional hilarious skit which is the exception that makes the rule. They get some decent new music talent occasionally and it’s nice to see some of the bigger stars let their hair down but it’s overall just lame and boring. Their derp asshole politics definitely don’t help.

          1. I agree. I would only watch the first 15 minutes and then the Week-end update when it was Miller or MacDonald and that was it.

            The rest was garbage. I never understood with all that talent why they couldn’t come up with better stuff.

          2. It was pretty funny the year(s?) I the 80s when Eddie Murphy was a regular and then again in the early 90s with Dana carved and Neilen. But yeah, overall it’s always been shit.

    3. I made the mistake of reading the comments on the huffpo link.

      1. Juliet Richardson
        someone made the comment that they should stick to the ‘cottage industry’ they put themselves in, but how would that get them around the public accommodation laws? and since they are operating a commercial enterprise out of a private kitchen, is that ‘private kitchen’ even ZONED for commercial activity? not to mention a few other things.

        Jim Ellis ? Works at Retired
        Juliet Richardson and someone needs to call the health department.. there are laws about this type of home business.. I would guess they don’t give a darn about any civil laws.. hmmm

        Juliet Richardson
        and it dawns on me, shouldn’t they have had some sort of insurance so a bankruptcy wouldn’t effect their children? what great parents.

        1. Of course, Grand Moff thinks anyone who listens what these people say – knowing full well that there are tens of millions more of them all over this country – and thinks of them as horrible and dangerous to liberty?

          is actually just a fascist secretly wanting to bash their skulls.

          that’s the intelligent and mature read, apparently.

  72. I can see the pros and cons of both likely outcomes.

    Trump is nuts, and may try to build a big wall, wage trade war with China, etc, and republicans would shrug and go along. Hillary, as far as I know, will probably sit there and whine about guns long enough to guarantee a republican congress for the indefinite future, accomplishing little else.

    On the other hand, if Trump wins, I don’t know when I’ll stop laughing.

    Anyway, looking forward to the shit show, especially the debates. Popcorn in hand.

    1. You do realize that Clinton has been a vocal proponent of every military action the US has engaged in over the past 25 years, right? If there’s any definite warmonger in the race, it’s Hillary. Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and Iraq. Hell, the Clintons were as gung-ho about invading Iraq as Bush.

      1. I’m not saying that Trump would be any better, but at least it’s a coin toss what he would do. I have a pretty good idea what Hillary would get up to.

  73. Umm, ok, whatah, oooh, fuck me….

    fuck yeah

    1. Yeah, she’s pretty hot.

  74. Friedman:



    Mike Smith9 months ago
    It baffles me that liberals want to give blacks choice to kill their unborn, but no choice of education for those who are lucky enough to survive the former choice.?

  75. Thirty years after the danger was highlighted in One Crazy Summer, one institution is finally acting on it.

    1. I’d ask them where they got the stats suggesting this is a danger, but East Anglia for some odd reason doesn’t sound like a trustworthy outfit. Mortarboardgate.

    2. It’s all pomp & circumstance until somebody loses an eye

    3. They suggest that students Photoshop a mortarboard in their graduation photo, as if they’re throwing it in the air?

      A few years ago, I would have riffed on the with a joke about “while you’re at it, erase the ‘Texas Tech’ from your diploma and replace it with ‘Yale.'”

      But today I’d tell the opposite joke – Yalies should be so ashamed of their institution that they should scratch out “Yale” and put in “Texas Tech.”

  76. You know what, my candidate is someone who can talk about “I,Pencil”, without a teleprompter, before a hostile crowd, for five minutes.

    ThatGuy 2016

  77. MP40 vs. Thompson. Where do you stand on this vital issue?!

    1. I’ve never shot full-auto although I would love to. I’m a .45 guy in in fact I have a .45 semi-auto UZI which I love although it’s a very heavy gun. Considering your carrying a full auto gun mainly for suppressive fire I would go with the MP40. You don’t just have the weight of the gun you have the weight of full extra mags to carry as well. I would gladly take either one but I would probably go with the MP40 given the choice. I think it looks cooler by a hair too. Both are well out of my price range though.

      1. I’d like something with a little longer reach but I’d go with the M40 too.

        There’s a annual full auto shoot fairly close by that I’ve been to. Highly recommend to anyone who has the opportunity. Did the Thompson, another SMG or two (one was a M3 or a Sten, maybe both), full auto pistols, and larger ones including some old friends. Some of the SMGs surprised me how slow the cyclic rate felt. I can’t remember how the Thompson ran but ultimately it’s all pistol caliber.

        1. What city is that shoot in?

  78. I was wondering how this thread got to be 600 comments long, and then I realized it’s just John stinking up the thread and explaining how Mitt Romney’s an idiot, and we all HAVE to vote for Trump, because Hillary.

    Meanwhile, I’m checking out my Facebook feed and it appears that I HAVE to vote for Hillary, because Trump.

    1. Vote Hump 2016!

      1. He’s the lesser of two weevils.

    2. Glad to see you back Hazel. =)

      Have a helping of Redneck Iron Maiden. =)


      1. I haven’t been commenting as much lately, because, busy, mostly. Also, Reason has been kind of sucking lately. I’m disgusted by the Trump apologists around here. Also, lack of quality articles, and an increasing number of ads.
        I’ve been hanging out at Marginal Revolution, mostly.

        1. Hey I missed you. I am so destitute that I am forced to trolling Sevo over Atheism.
          A trolls got to eat.



          Honestly I do miss your perspective on things.

          1. Also people are going to argue about the Trump/Hillary thing. Whatever. Economic activity is going to go on no matter who gets elected Grand PuBah. The ads, that’s just Capitalism.

            Ain’t no rest for the wicked.


        2. You never add much when you are here Hazel.

          1. Yeah, I don’t stink up the thread by posting 300 comments basically saying the same thing. We know what your opinion is, and you aren’t convincing anyone.

    3. There’s a way out of this dilemma?the Vote Swap Initiative: http://metalark.com/vs2016/

      1. A few years ago there was a “have sex with a voter” initiative…what happened to that?

      2. Brilliant. Only problem is there is no enforcement mechanism. However, lots of people hate lying so it could still work pretty well.

    4. Hillary will withdraw from the race for “health reasons” (prison cells are notoriously dank and unhealthy for old craters), Joe steps in as an Obama surrogate and picks Warren as his Veep for the Bernie fans and we’re off to the races. Remember that as much as you can’t believe people can seriously believe this sort of nonsense, the last guy that ran on Obama’s record was Obama and he won and there’s apparently millions of voters actually enthusiastic about a socialist dinosaur so who knows what nonsense your fellow Americans are capable of swallowing? Did you imagine a year ago Donald Trump would be anything but a punchline to a stale joke? If we’re living in a computer simulation, the researchers writing the code are obviously testing the “weird” parameters on the program so I ain’t guessing where this is all going to wind up. Anybody know what real estate in Madagascar goes for these days?

      1. You know who else professed interest in Madagascar real estate?

    5. The. Vote Hillary Hazel. At least that is honest.

      1. I’m voting for Gary Johnson. He’s objectively more qualified than Trump, not to mention more sane and rational, and he’s more trustworthy than Clinton.

        Oh, and by the way, he also happens to be a libertarian. But that’s just a bonus.

        1. If I thought Johnson had any hope of winning, I would vote for him too. But reality is what it is. We have a two party system and if you are not the nominee of one of the major parties, you can’t win. The question is of the two people who can win, which one is going to do the most damage to the country. And that answer to that is Hillary. So, I will vote Trump because the election is about the welfare of the country not some morality play for me to assert my moral superiority. And that is all you are doing Hazel. You are voting Johnson because the important thing is you and your right to express your support for who you think is the best President. The actual effects of you doing that on the country don’t matter because you and your desires are the only thing that matters.

          But Trump is the one who is the narcissist.

  79. I guess compared to _Warren_’s video, my video doesn’t look nearly as awesome.

  80. Mitt is just angry that Trump went with orange and not this color.

      1. Maybe *she* doesn’t feel noways tired, but *I* do, good night.

        Oh, and a video making the prequels look good.

  81. Wow 650 comments. What was that one thread with like 1500 comments? or maybe it was just over 1000?

    What’s the thread Rollo was outed as Tulpa? (march 2015?) Havent heard from Tony recently… But I appreciate hearing from John, Fransisco and Hyperion as usual.

    1. You’re easily impressed, you and your atheist religion.

  82. And now my plan has succeed. 666 comments. Hahahaha! Time to get back to torturing the numerologist who convinced people that number had any meaning.

    1. 666 refers to Nero.

  83. “So I’ll get to know Gary Johnson better and see if he’s someone who I could end up voting for. That’s something which I’ll evaluate over the coming weeks and months.”

    If it’s going to take Romney weeks and months to figure this out, he’s even dumber than I thought.

  84. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..tages.html

    Holy shit. This is worse than San Bernidino or even Fort Hood. This strikes at the core of having a free society. You want to put gays back in the closet, let shit like this start happening and gays will go back in the closet real quick. And after they are done doing that to gays, the Muslims will move to Jews or anyone who drinks or any woman who doesn’t wear a head covering in public and so forth.

    If I am gay, I am reconsidering my decision of who to support for President and maybe voting for the one guy who wants to keep the people who want me dead out of the country.

    1. Picture this: a ridiculously well dressed army marching on Mecca

      1. I would offer to join, but I am just not stylish enough.

        1. Everyone knows what this is going to be. Where it goes should be interesting.

          1. It goes nowhere good. This is just horrific.

    2. I can’t find my Jump to Conclusions Mat!

      1. What the fuck are you talking about? An Islamic terrorist in a suicide vest just murdered 20 people at a gay club. Do you think he picked that target at random? Meant to attack a recruiting station and got the wrong address?

        Let me get my map of denial.

        1. uh…sarc?

        2. Slammer|6.12.16 @ 9:15AM|#|?|filternamelinkcustom

          Everyone knows what this is going to be.

    3. Paging Pink Pistols, please pick up the nearest rainbow courtesy phone.

    4. Don’t worry, the gun grabbers are already on it.

    5. At times like this you should be happy that it is Trump and not Santorum or Huckabee leading the GOP fold.

    1. You know it wasn’t anywhere near a city otherwise the police union spokesthug would’ve been bitching the guy out for cutting in on cop turf.

  85. Weld supported Kasich. Kasich’s policies are more aligned with Hillary (Centrist Hawk) than with the Libertarian Party. With only about 20 years of peace out of the 240 year life of the Republic, one would think the people would be fed up with war. If China were to invade and overthrow us tomorrow how would your life change. You would be living in a police state under constant government watch. See any difference between now and then living under the Democrats / Republicans. It is a time for change. Not just in the Presidency but we need to sweep the whole mess out the back door.

  86. Well, it has happened.


    1. I see John beat me to the punch.

    2. Lovely news to wake up to.

      *turns on Euro soccer distraction, puts on pot of coffee*

    3. Daily News headline, afternoon edition:

      “When Are Going to DO SOMETHING About Guns Already”

  87. Trumpu akbar?

  88. After Hillary tries to make this about gun control and Trump starts screaming “I told you so!” Johnson’s new name will be Gary Who?

    1. the suspect armed with an assault-type rifle, a handgun and “some type of device.”

      We also need common-sense “some type of device” control.

      1. I agree; garage door openers and TeeVee clickers have a been menace to societies far and wide for far too long…

        Control the Remote Control!

  89. The cognitive dissonance among the America-hating Alinskyite JournoList scum we’re going to see over the next week will be a joy to watch. Time to grab tubs and tubs of popcorn.

    And don’t forget who demands that we let these animals into our country by the millions. You’ve down the wind you lefty vermin; now you get to enjoy the reaping of the whirlwind.

    1. Who would have thought letting millions of Muslims into country might make the nation more hostile to gays.

      1. If the Left make this about guns it’ll be a nail in their own coffin

        1. They can’t help themselves, Slammer. It’s like a dog returning to its vomit.

          1. David Burge ?@iowahawkblog 29m29 minutes ago

            David Burge Retweeted Meet the Press
            Also, Tom Brokaw after every feeding time at the Old Newsreader Home

            Meet the Press @meetthepress
            “It should be part of the political debate” and both parties should discuss gun control in “rational fashion.” -Tom Brokaw after FL shooting

            1. Because Muslims want to kill gays some guy living in Oklahoma minding his own business has to be disarmed. That is rational gun control alright

              1. Unfortunately rational gun control isn’t logical gun control. The only reason and way for this guy to have killed 20 was because guns are just so easy to get. Blah blah blah…

                ‘When my husband was in office, Democrats and Republicans(*) came together to support reasonable gun safety. We need to do the same today.’

                * Holy shit. I never looked at the roll count for just the Senate. Look at all those yays with a R behind their name.

                1. In case you’ve forgotten, even the NRA backed Brady.

                2. Ben Nighthorse Campbell. Man that brings back memories. I remember when I was a kid, my mom called him a “traitor” after he changed party allegiance.

              2. Email that line to Trump John.

        2. They have to. What else are they going to say? They can’t walk back on the Islam is peace thing without admitting Trump has a point.

          1. I predict they will spin this as a “lone wolf” thing and use that to further “do something” to individual liberty.

            1. It will be that he was just troubled and we can never really know why he did it. That way they can talk about gun control and avoid the truth. Of course everyone knows the truth and understands how ridiculous the spin is.

              1. This is all because Trump made atmosphere of hate


              2. The MTP talking heads are heavily into the gun control aspect right now.

                1. One of them — I’m not making this up — just claimed that white nationalists would kill millions of Americans if they could.

                  1. Who said that?

                2. I am wondering if this guy used a gun that is already illegal or if it was illegal for him to possess.

                  they are going to propose a bunch of regulations that would not have stopped this guy. It is really amusing to watch them shoot their own dicks off. If they weren’t so evil I would feel sorry for them.

                  1. He might have. But remember, the media is profoundly ignorant about guns. When they say he “used and assault type weapon” that could be anything from an M 60 full automatic machine gun to a semi automatic MP5.

                    And of course they won’t mention the suicide vest, because guns are the only way to kill people I guess.

        3. I see it taking shape already. They are going to try.

          Keep in mind this will be a move from a woman who is under investigation for illegally deleting her email account and thought a snappy come-back to Trump was ‘delete your account’.

          1. You would think denial of reality would finally crack under the right circumstances…guess not

            1. When someone is that invested in denial of reality – you don’t want to be anywhere near them when they do finally snap.

  90. The culture wars are over?at least in terms of using the government to force lifestyle choices on people

    On what planet? That is only to the extent that you’re saying “at least in terms of using the government to force conservative lifestyle choices on people”. The entire progressive movement is geared around forcing lifestyle choices on people, from transexual toilets to the revocation of due process on campus to the nanny state. If libertarians have any commitment to liberty, they should be as vehemently opposed to these attempts to force lifestyle choices as the religious right’s crusades against porn, drugs and gays. It’s just unfortunate that some libertarians seem more interested in supporting their cultural affinities than liberty.

  91. “Marijuana makes people stupid,” Romney quipped.

    Breaking: Romney in favor of banning Keeping Up With The Kardashians

  92. “did we become more pious and puritanical because of Jimmy Carter”

    Actually, and perhaps ironically, his example built the movement now known as the Religious Right (before that, such folks tended to stay out of politics altogether).

  93. Unfortunately, Johnson’s actual views would probably turn off both Dems and GOPs. Fascinating mix of worst ideas from both major parties: https://goo.gl/JYfjPC

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.