The Fifth Column

Locker-Room Talk With The Fifth Column

Do men really "joke" like that? Are Mormons keeping America safe? Do conservatives really mean it when they complain Gary Johnson isn't libertarian enough?

|

In fairness, this latest episode of The Fifth Column, the weekly three-headed podcast of "analysis, commentary, sedition," was recorded last night just as the world was discovering a rash of new sexual assault allegations against Donald Trump. So Kmele Foster's qualified defense may not be aging as well this morning….Still, we soldier on, R-rated, through the crazy political news of this week, including but not limited to Wikileaks revelations about Hillary Clinton, the Red Menace allegedly behind them, the Mormon-led GOP revolt against Donald Trump, Michael C. Moynihan's fancy new Vice News job and interviews with Glenn Beck and Evan McMullin, and the disingenuousness of some of our never-Libertarian conservative pals complaining that Gary Johnson isn't libertarian enough.

Come for the Michael McDonald impressions, stay for the Cold War onanism:

Here are the places where you can download, interact with, recommend to your friends about, and write reviews of, The Fifth Column: iTunes, Stitcher, Google Play, wethefifth.com, @wethefifth, and Facebook.

NEXT: Utah Cop Arrests Shaken but Sober Car Crash Victim for DUI

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. Still, we soldier on, R-rated, through the crazy political news of this week, including but not limited to ….

    I just heard a serious assertion — I am not making this up — that soon will surface a video of Bill having sex with an underage girl.

    Truly a sickening election. 8-(

    1. I read that as “truly a sickening erection” and it didn’t really change the meaning of your comment very much.

      1. Something, something, premature ejaculation.

    2. Isn’t it well-known that he goes to pedo-island with that other pedo guy?

      1. I know Bill Clinton was a frequent flyer, I don’t know if Trump did.

    3. Prediction: The actual video will never surface, but it will become just common wisdom that he actually did it anyway.

      1. Not for a Democrat. There are standards of proof for them. #AlwaysBelieveHer applies only when the accused isn’t a prominent Democrat.

    4. that soon will surface a video of Bill having sex with an underage girl.

      Is the delay because they are still taking volunteers?

      1. Or maybe it’s because possession of such video would be possession of child porn and therefore a felony.

    5. My co-worker’s step-sister makes $97 hourly on the laptop . She has been out of work for six months but last month her paycheck was $14100 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Go this website and click to tech tab to start your work… http://tinyurl.com/hhwe4zl

      1. If your co-worker’s step-sister was abducted by Jeffrey Epstein, give us a signal of some sort.

        1. Not for nothing, but I bet the Clinton Foundation would pay a lot more than $14K for the video.

          Don’t sell yourself short, Honey-bot!

  2. Cold War Onanism would be an excellent name for a band.

    1. Kmele Foster’s Qualified Defense would be just okay as a band name.

      1. A solid album title, though.

    2. These euphemisms ….

      1. We are dominating this comment section, Rich.

      2. When did “Onanism” become a mere euphemism?

        1. When “Better on the ground than on the belly of a whore” became mere sarcasm.

          1. “You got $50 bucks?”

        2. I have never truly understood the use of the word “Onanism” to refer to masturbation. That is totally not the point of the story. If I remember correctly, Onan’s brother died, leaving his wife without a child. The Hebrew god commanded Onan to give his sister-in-law a child. During the act, he essentially “pulled-out” and god killed him.
          So Leviticus is filled with sexual prohibitions of all kinds. Yet not a word is said there regarding self-pleasure. The only other references in the 5 Books of Moses, are to Keri (the act of emitting semen.) and that for a period of time following, the man is ritually unclean, similar to a women during menstruation, or after childbirth. It DOESN’T state anywhere that it only means non-penetrative seminal emissions.

          1. To be fair – Onan *was* supposed to give his sister-in-law a child, but he preferred to jack off instead.

            He wanted to jack off while avoiding getting his wife pregnant – because there was nothing in it *for him* if she did.

            If the child would have been considered his, Onan wouldn’t have been tempted to jack off.

            The Biblical patriarchs were happy to get their wives pregnant if the children were counted as theirs, so the question of jacking off wouldn’t arise in that context.

            So it’s not as if the Bible was saying “it’s only wrong to jack off if you’re having sex with your brother’s wife, otherwise it’s OK.”

            1. For example, King David sends Uriah into battle and abandons him (Uriah) to the enemy so King David have have Uriah’s wife.

              To a theological liberal, this means, “AHA! So it’s OK to deliberately have one of your officers killed by the enemy, so long as the motive *isn’t* to take his wife!”

            2. Hmm. What’s ancient Hebrew for “jack off”?

              I always thought it was more about coitus interruptus than masturbation and that the masturbation interpretation was just a broader interpretation of the “spilling seed” part. And he was killed for disobeying the god, so it doesn’t seem obvious that it should be seen as a blanket prohibition on spilling one’s seed.

              1. you beat me to the exact argument!!

                1. I guess as long as you aren’t “beating off” to this argument…..

                  1. You have something against Rule 34?

                    This is getting almost pedantic enough that Bo Cara would pass out from blood loss to the brain.

              2. I’d just say, who has the burden of proof – those who say that Bible-approved sex is the marital, procreative type, or those who say that it’s not?

                It’s one thing to look at the pro-divorce and pro-polygamy parts of the OT and say, “look scriptural proof that these things are all right!” Opponents of these practices would at least have to come up with reasons why those passages are no longer applicable (persuasive arguments, in my view).

                But there aren’t any comparable passages endorsing jacking off of coitus interruptus. So, really, there’s nothing for orthodox types to explain away.

            3. There is much to what you say. However, the Hebrew implies that when he went unto his brother’s wife, he spilled his seed. So he wasn’t jacking off per se. He was practicing coitus interruptus. Perhaps in the Catholic view, these are the same thing. But I think to most people they are not. The thing that was evil in god’s eyes was to not give his brother’s wife seed in the name of his brother. So the selfishness of not taking care of Tamar.

              It seems to me the lesson wasn’t about jacking off. But rather if god tells you do something, you do it. You don’t hedge on it. And, you take care of family, even if it doesn’t personally benefit you. Otherwise, why wouldn’t in all of the lists of biblical prohibitions on sexual behavior have included it?

              1. Here are some specifics on Catholic teaching.

                Yes, I may have used the theological term “jacking off” incorrectly. But as you say, the Catholic Church is against both.

                1. I appreciate your opinion on this topic, and I do find discussions like this fascinating, though I personally don’t have a dog in this fight. I don’t consider myself theological liberal. Rather I am a traditionalist, but merely in a far different tradition.

                  And I do agree that taken as a whole, the Bible (whether one stays with the Hebrew Bible or includes the NT) indicates that sex between married adults is the ideal. And in Jewish tradition, the very first commandment is to “go forth and multiply”. In addition, it is quite easy to show that everywhere polygamy is practiced in the Hebrew Bible, it doesn’t turn out well. (Of course, Jewish law is based in the Torah, but is developed with the Talmud).

                  However, I guess what I am merely arguing is that the Bible goes WAY out of its way to state so many specific prohibitions on sexual behavior. But the term that religious Christians and Jews use when referring to masturbation is “the sin of Onan” or “Onanism”. And I think in this particular case, there is no solid proof that that is what is implied in this biblical story.

                  1. I wouldn’t recommend using my posts as authoritative, but I hope I at least gave some links which could be educational (including educational to myself, since sometimes I need to look it up).

              2. 6 Judah wuz liek “I gots wife for u Er, her name iz Tamar.”

                7 But Ceiling Cat was watching Er be badz! so Ceiling Cat killded him.

                8 Then Judah wuz liek “OK Onan, u know WHERE HARBLZ GO wif ur brother’s wife. Its ur job now to make kittenz for ur brother.”

                9 But Onan knew that the kittenz would not be hiz (bcz thatz how Jewish law workt LOL) so he wuz all “DO NOT WANT” n soz he pulld out n got man juice on teh floorz.

                10 Ceiling Cat didnt likez that neithr cuz tehn no kittehz are get created. So Ceiling Cat killded him too.

                1. I see you use the Cool Dude’s New International Revised Version.

            4. I’ve heard a NES professor argue that Judaism is a reform of Zoroastrianism just like Christianity is a reform of Judaism. Purity laws, dietary laws, monotheism, etc., etc., it’s all the same. Esther is all about how Jews were so comfortable under Zoroastrian rule that they started abandoning their faith. I’m not sure you can really understand that story, anyway, unless you know something about Zoroastrianism. “He wanted to jack off while avoiding getting his wife pregnant – because there was nothing in it *for him* if she did.”

              This is a little more complicated than most people realize.

              Suffice it to say, bodily fluids hitting the ground in Zoroastrian religious law was punishable by death, and the Jews who were editing and compiling the Torah were tremendously under the influence of their Zoroastrian masters.

              1. In Zoroastrian practice, the purpose of the Priesthood was to keep the earth pure from evil contamination. The sentence of peeing in a river could be death. Also, for instance, they would not bury their dead in the earth. Also, because they believed that fire was a sacred substance, they wouldn’t burn bodies like their Vedic cousins either. So they practiced the rite of exposure–which means, basically, letting the bodies rot in the sun and be eaten by bugs and vultures. They had a special building the priests watched over the dead bodies as they rotted and eventually collected their clean bones and put them on cliff ledges to prevent them from touching the ground.

                It should also be noted that Zoroastrians indulged in next of kin marriages–for the same reason. There was no clean place for semen to go–other than back to its origin and the closer it went back to its origin the better. That meant you were supposed to marry your mother if you were a man or your father if you were a woman. If neither were available, you’d marry your sister or brother, next an available cousin, and if there wasn’t anyone as closely related to you as that, then getting married is just gross.

                1. Might take a look at this article.

                  “The general theory concerning such defilements was that everything leaving the body (such as blood, excre?ment, spit, breath), whether naturally or through ill?ness or injury, was impure. Hence blood from a cut was also defiling, and after swallowing a tooth one should again not drink water for three days (Riv?yat of ?durfarnbag 34-35, 100). To spit was forbidden, and sneezing, yawning, and sighing were to be checked as far as possible (??yest n? ??yest, suppl., 12.32). One had to urinate squatting, so as to limit the area contaminated (Vd., Pahl. Vd. 18.40-43; ?ad dar-e na?r 56), and great care was to be taken with hair combings and parings of nails. These were hixr, dry contaminating matter, and so could be buried in a barren place, furrows being drawn ritually round the spot with recital of Avestan texts (Vd. 17; on such traditional observances in the 20th century see Boyce, Stronghold, pp. 107-09; idem, Zoroastrianism I, p. 309).”

                  http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/cleansing-i

                2. I admit, I do find your comparison interesting. But, I am not convinced. Of course, it doesn’t matter to anyone if I am convinced! 🙂 And as you probably know, I don’t have a dog in this fight. Nor do I argue theology since there is no point, and none of us KNOW any more than anyone else about whatever ultimate truth there may be.

                  Also, the Book of Esther, did certainly take place in Persia. However, the Jews compiling the Torah, and ultimately the Talmud were in exile in Babylon. Not a Zoroastrian place. And much of what you were referring to would be abhorrant to Judaism. For example, burial of dead bodies. And while marrying a sibling’s spouse if they died was quite common, the prohibitions on relations inside the family are quite detailed. And the priestly caste (the Kohanim) are specifically forbidden to be near dead bodies.

                  1. “Also, the Book of Esther, did certainly take place in Persia. However, the Jews compiling the Torah, and ultimately the Talmud were in exile in Babylon.”

                    The Babylonians conquered Judah and took them into captivity.

                    The Persians bested the Babylonians, and the “Babylonian Captivity” ended under the Persians.

                    See Nehemiah, Ezra.

                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylonian_captivity

              2. Somehow the text on this post got completely mixed up.

                It’s out of order. I don’t know why.

                It’s all supposed to be in response to the italicized quote like this:

                “He wanted to jack off while avoiding getting his wife pregnant – because there was nothing in it *for him* if she did.”

                This is a little more complicated than most people realize.

                Suffice it to say, bodily fluids hitting the ground in Zoroastrian religious law was punishable by death, and the Jews who were editing and compiling the Torah were tremendously under the influence of their Zoroastrian masters.

                I’ve heard a NES professor argue that Judaism is a reform of Zoroastrianism just like Christianity is a reform of Judaism. Purity laws, dietary laws, monotheism, etc., etc., it’s all the same. Esther is all about how Jews were so comfortable under Zoroastrian rule that they started abandoning their faith. I’m not sure you can really understand that story, anyway, unless you know something about Zoroastrianism.

                1. I’m sure the exiled Hebrews were exposed to Zoroastrianism – that’s not the same as saying that they simply became Reformed Zoroastrians.

                  1. I do appreciate this interesting and civil discussion. I do respect both of your viewpoints and the knowledge you have. We Germanic pagans aren’t ALL about pillaging and berserker rages!

                    However, I think the unwashed masses of the commentariat are getting tired of all this useless book learnin.

                    MOR TRUMPZ!

                    HILLARY CAREZ!

                    1. Screw the rest of them!

                      I’ve taken classes at UCLA on the history and practice of our Aryan Indo-Iranian . . . er . . . their Zoroastrian religion. We’re not supposed to use politically incorrect terms anymore, I guess.

                      And I’ve been reading up on Norse syncretism with Christianity in my spare time, as well. It’s a fascinating subject. And it appears to go back into the 8th and 9th centuries.

                      If more people understood religion and culture as part of an evolutionary process, there’d be a lot less hostility in the world–and it all leads back to Adam Smith. Darwin got some of his most important ideas from Smith and Theory of Moral Sentiments hit on what we’d now call social adaptation long before Darwin was around. That’s what the invisible hand was about–it was the hand of benevolence. Why does benevolence erupt spontaneously from the state of nature?

                      To me it’s interesting as a study in natural law. The highest evolved civilizations appear to be those that reverence individual rights. Those that fail to adapt to that reality fade. Those who embrace it thrive.

                  2. Yeah, I know it’s not the same.

                    Still, if the ways in which the Judaism that came back from the Babylonian captivity differed from the Judaism that remained behind are the same as the things it has in common with Zoroastrianism, then that’s a pretty good indication that Zoroastrianism had a profound influence.

                    Being unusual in featuring monotheism, an abhorrence of idols and idolatry, and similarities all the way down to their dietary laws?

                    And that isn’t the only evidence. God repeatedly showing up as a sacred fire, etc. We’re not talking about just one example. The evidence for syncretism is pervasive.–throughout the Torah.

                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syncretism

                    And why wouldn’t Jews be influenced by the culture in which they were absorbed?

                    This shouldn’t even be a knock on anybody’s faith. If there’s a real God, he’s smart enough to account for syncretism.

                    1. Probably should have linked to this one.

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_syncretism

                    2. Great point about Cyrus the Great, though he was known for not forcing his conquered territories to adopt Persian religion or customs.

                      But overall I agree wholeheartedly with your ideas about synchretism. There is a lot of scholarly discussion regarding Snorri Sturluson and the Prose Edda, especially since he was a Christian. I believe strongly in some divine influence behind the physical world. I choose to start with the my ancestors’ vision, as we best understand it (as expressed in the Poetic Edda IMHO). But obviously we will never know how much of that was influenced by Christianity at the time the surviving manuscripts were compiled.

  3. Kemele should just come out and say he’s voting for Trump already.

    1. Y CUM KAMELALILE DUNT AMDIT HE LIEKS TRMUP

  4. “the disingenuousness of some of our never-Libertarian conservative pals complaining that Gary Johnson isn’t libertarian enough”

    Can I have the TL;DR version (or Didn’t Listen version – I won’t say “DL”)?

    1. They are disingenuous fucks.

  5. This might be of interest:

    Turns out one of Hillary’s “private positions”, per leaked speech transcripts, is adamant opposition to pot legalization.

    http://www.marijuana.com/blog/…..eak-shows/

    1. +2 much money in it

    2. What is Hililary’s contention about Lincoln? That his private position was the opposite of his public position?
      That Lincoln was telling one group he opposed the 13th amendment and working behind the scenes to pass the 13th? More Hilliary b.s.

      1. I think she’s referencing the movie *Lincoln,* where Lincoln bribes enough Democrats to get the Thirteenth Amendment passed (the unbribed Democrats voted their consciences and opposed the amendment).

        There’s also a scene where Lincoln uses Clintonian evasion to conceal peace talks he had with the Confederates (PS – the talks were unsuccessful).

        I suppose Clinton’s takeaway is that, if you can use corrupt means to win the Civil War and abolish slavery, then you can use corrupt means to get elected, too.

        1. Getting Hillary elected president will be our nation’s greatest accomplishment since, nay including, abolition!

        2. Well, as everyone knows, with Trump as president black people will be enslaved and all women will be raped. So Clinton being elected is clearly as important as passing and ratifying the 13th Amendment.

    3. Wikileaks published an oppo research memo her campaign did…on her!

    4. The newly-leaked documents showing Clinton’s strong opposition to legalization in a private appearance, combined with comments from the candidate’s daughter Chelsea last month implying that marijuana use can lead to death, could present an added sense of urgency for Clinton to evolve on the question of ending prohibition prior to Election Day.

      It’s evolution all the way down.

      1. Evolution happens a lot quicker than it used to.

    5. And also an ardent defense of DOMA.

      1. Which, as it turns out, was a lie.

        DOMA wasn’t a strategic response to a Republican Constitutional amendment. No such amendment was on the table at the time.

  6. “Kmele Foster’s qualified defense may not be aging as well this morning”

    A tape made eleven years ago means whatever it meant when it was made–eleven years before this morning.

    And I guess Welch isn’t aware that I and several other Hit & Run regulars have come forward as victims of groping at the hands of none other than Hillary Rodham Clinton.

    If we need to rethink a tape made eleven years ago because of something someone said this morning, then Welch and company should retape today’s Fifth Column in light of the fact that I and several others have come forward as victims of Hillary’s groping.

  7. NEEDZ MOAR PUSSYGRABBINGZ!!!!11!!11!!!!!

    1. Wasn’t Pussygrabbingz a Bond girl?

    1. Not only was that NOT obligatory, the urge to link it should have been suppressed.

      1. They’re not people, they’re Jimmy Buffet fans!

  8. Matt Welch has no place mocking other peoples petite-stardom. I think being on Bill Mahers at least twice means you are officially a C-List celebrity.

  9. True Story = *I* raped Bill Cosby

    He kept rolling his eyeballs and making pudding-pop jokes.

    1. What’s the next step up after “ewwwww!”?

    2. He kept rolling his eyeballs and making pudding-pop jokes.

      “Put your popsicle where it doesn’t belong!”

      My youtube search history must be really interesting thanks to you bunch of degenerates.

  10. Do men really “joke” like that?

    Not at all.

    Oh, hey, Sugarfree, could you email me that link to the granny double anal-fisting where their husbands get to watch wearing “The Gimp” outfit? That Professional Pussy-Grabbing in 2014 Pasadena is getting stale. Oh, and since I had voluntary sexual intercourse with Hillary Clinton, I’ve developed a rash around my cock.

    1. That’s not a rash.

      1. Doctor say good news – we not have to amputate.

        It fall off on own.

      2. Ring worm?

  11. Do men really “joke” like that?

    Depends on what “like that” refers to. Do men make lots of nasty sex jokes? Yes, of course many men do that.

    Just like what Trump said in the video? Maybe not so much. But it could be that I just avoid hanging out with giant assholes.
    And I’m not convinced he was joking. Or if he was, it probably was one of those “funny because it’s true” deals.

    Apparently obligatory disclaimer: Bill Clinton is almost certainly an even bigger creep.

    1. Apparently obligatory disclaimer: Bill Clinton is almost certainly an even bigger creep.

      Sorry, Zeb, you know the rules. You can’t criticize Trump because that means you’re okay with Hillary and Bill Clinton and everything they do is okay.

  12. Do men really “joke” like that?

    I’m not convinced Moynihan and Welch are the ones to ask.

    1. Men being the operative phrase…

    2. More common is men making jokes that degrade each others masculinity.

  13. ca. the 66:00 mark, Moynihan, that shit DOES still happen in North Korea. Every single day.

  14. the disingenuousness of some of our never-Libertarian conservative pals complaining that Gary Johnson isn’t libertarian enough.

    Nice to see that ad hominems are on the menu!

  15. Trump is a narcissistic dumbass. His “Touch her in the pussy” comments are clearly jokey bragging. They are also awful comments that any normal person would never make. It’s very possible Trump has had sexual encounters with women in which they did not voice their displeasure because they figured that if they let Trump have his way, they would get ahead in life somehow. If Trump was a $50k/yr schlubby accountant who made those comments, I would take them much seriously. If Trump was very fit and a sex symbol and $50k/yr accountant, I would take them more seriously. So Trump, who bases his career on being an ostentatious “Billionaire” who always gets what he wants, making lewd comments talking about being sexually successful is not surprising. He exaggerates his wealth, so why wouldn’t he exaggerate his sexual conquests? Plenty of regular dudes will brag about their sexual conquests(beyond what actually happened), so why wouldn’t a career exaggerator brag about being a sexual predator?

    I don’t think we should be voting for anyone who behaves this way. We should not be voting for narcissists. But, I don’t think what Trump said is uniquely awful for people like him. Not that all of the people like Trump are not awful.

  16. While coming to education, the technology has brought many advantages to students and as well as teachers. showbox For example, students can do their homework or assignment with ease and can complete it faster by using the Internet.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.