Election 2016

Subscribe to Reason's Podcast and Enjoy Your Commute Again!

It's free, easy, and fun. Never be at a loss for great conversations about politics, culture, and ideas from a unique and principled libertarian perspective.



Will Donald Trump be a peacenik president? In a recent Reason podcast hosted by me, historian Thaddeus Russell—author of A Renegade History of the United States and a forthcoming book on American foreign policy—argues that the billionaire president-elect is a nativist when it comes to trade, immigration, and fighting overseas wars.

Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican who is a staunch opponent of increasing the federal budget, says that he doesn't trust either Donald Trump or Speaker Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. Massie did end up voting for Trump but he tells Reason in a podcast, "November 8th wasn't the election of a monarch. It was the election of the head of a third of our government." Never one to mince words, the Tea Party favorite and Rand Paul protege is painfully aware of what happened the last time his own party controlled the White House, the House of Representative, and the Senate: "I'm very concerned about the combination of Donald Trump and Paul Ryan and the implications for our national debt."

A week before the election, I debated Loyola economist Walter Block, who created a group called Libertarians for Trump, over the idea of voting for the reality TV star. Hosted by New York's Soho Forum, things got nasty enough to where Block called me "vile" and a "nasty man." Check out the verbal fisticuffs here.

Those are just three recent podcasts Reason has produced. We also talked with Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, and LP chairman Nicholas Sarwark, not to mention Brett Smith (the comic book illustrator and co-author of the best-selling graphic novel version of Clinton Cash), Frank Portman (a.k.a. Dr. Frank of the Mr. T Experience and the author of the YA novel smash hits King Dork and King Dork Approximately), conservatarian novelist Brad Thor, and Swedish libertarian Johan Norberg. Each Thursday, Katherine Mangu-Ward and I host a conversation about Reason and libertarian issues.

These are fun, lively, heated discussions about politics, culture, and ideas from a principled libertarian perspective. Subscribe to us at iTunes and never miss a podcast, or check us out on SoundCloud, or at this incredibly easy-to-use RSS feed.

Here's a sampler from recent podcasts that we posted at YouTube in which leading libertarian thinkers ranging from Randy Barnett of Georgetown to Ken White at the great Popehat legal blog to Michael Cannon at Cato make "the case for cautious optimism about Trump's presidency" when it comes to policy outcomes.

NEXT: Watch Anthony L. Fisher on Red Eye Tonight, 3a ET on FNC

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. Nick Gillespie in a debate is similar to a pigeon playing chess. He’s constantly knocking over pieces and shitting all over the board.

    1. To asseverate that Nick was Spassky to Block’s Fischer would be a supreme insult to Boris.

    2. When you’ve lost Free Society and Libertymike…

      1. I’m actually Tulpa. He lost Tulpa.

      2. Crusty, I am an absolutist regarding the NIP principle, whether in casual conversation or formal debate.

        The NIP? The Non-Interruption Principle. Nick violated it repeatedly and Block repeatedly voiced his objections thereto.

        1. Kennedy is a NIP violator? I have to give thought to this…

          1. She is. But whenever she does it (on TV), we get to look at Kennedy, so no foul.

        2. Nick was just twisting the swollen nips of Block, who is apparently his sworn enemy.

          1. See, libertarians infighting is our downfall. We should all agree on everything, just like the progs.

            1. I disagree.

              1. Is your sarcasm meter broken? BTW, like the handle.

        3. the NIP principle


          1. That’s chinks, not nips.

            1. I know, i only realized that afterward.

              so solly

    3. I believe it goes like this: “arguing with x is like playing chess with a pidgeon: they shit all over the board and then strut around like they won.”

      1. If we are doing, shit quotes, I’m going with Gene Spafford:

        Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea — massive, difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind-boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it.

        Which actually is a pretty good description of Reason’s comments. Although, the elephants would be dressed in garters and crotchless panties, once Sugar Free was let loose on them.

  2. Oh, so NOW there is reason to be cautiously optimistic.

    JESUS H CHRIST ON A FUCKING POPSICLE STICK! It was not 2 weeks ago that Gillespie (along with most of the others that write for Reason) were telling us all how Hillary sucks, but she is a normal kind of sucks while Trump is just really awful!

    This is so much fucking bullshit. Fuck all the writers and I am fucking proud to say I VOTED FOR TRUMP!!

    1. So I actually just read the article, and in the immortal words of Emily Litella:


      I still think the jacket is a fuckstick, but not for this.

    2. Hillary is a well known and seasoned awful. And the awful fills the entirety of the pantsuit and is threatening to burst the cankle gaskets.

      Trump is an unknown. I’ve been cautiously optimistic about Trump since it was obvious he would be the GOP nominee. It’s a very skeptical sort of optimism. It’s sort of like when you know you have a case of the shingles coming on, but you hope it doesn’t spread too much.

      The very best we can hope for is that Trump is a populist who accidentally gets a few things right and doesn’t fuck everything else up too badly.

      1. Yeah, the whole “she’s a type of shit that we’re used to. Argument didn’t do much for me.

        If we had run-off voting, I would have gone Johnson – Castle – Trump.

        1. Mine would be Castle – Johnson – Trump – dead possum – bar of graphite – Stein – Clinton.

          1. If you’d go Castle, why not just go write in? Doubt the odds would be any lower.

            1. Castle at least asked for my vote.

              Don’t get me wrong, I myself flagged some of his problems (other commenters flagged others, if in an exaggerated way).

              But of those who were seeking my vote, he was the one making most sense, and that’s not so much praise of him as saying that the others were crap.

              1. You don’t get it yet? Affirmative consent has been replaced with pussy grabbing. Waiting to be asked…SMH

          2. Write ins: 1. Rand Paul, 2. John McAffee.

            I didn’t vote, but if I had of, that’s what I would have done.

            1. You didn’t vote? You’re the reason Gary Johnson didn’t win!

              1. I know, but I don’t care.

            2. So you denied Hillary her deserved vote?

          3. I’d switch dead possum and bar of graphite, but I can see your list.

          4. Bar of graphite? WTF!

            You are on my list for not backing my candidate, the inanimate carbon rod!

            1. the inanimate carbon rod!

              +1 In Rod We Trust

            2. I spent a couple years working in a plant that makes graphite electrodes for arc furnaces in steel mills. A lot goes into making making graphite. Tons of energy to convert carbon into graphite and a lot of work.

              A bar of graphite defiantly goes before the possom.

          5. I bet the cops shot the possum responding to a routine call.

            1. “It started running away as soon as we pulled up!”

          6. What is inanimate carbon rod, chopped liver?

            1. It’s been a while since I saw that episode, and I’m not fully up on nucular power terminology.

        2. “Yeah, the whole “she’s a type of shit that we’re used to. Argument didn’t do much for me”

          That’s the problem, not a solution. May was well take a chance on an unknown.

          1. “May was well take a chance”

            Yikes, I need a beer.

    3. My concern about Trump at this point has nothing to do with the harms he can do, since he’s circumscribed by Congress, a hostile media, a hostile administrative workforce, and potentially hostile staffers within his own office, not to mention the threat of being primaried in four years/losing to the next general challenger. Trump can be contained.

      I’m worried That Trump will relegitimize progressivism because he is such an imperfect orator for conservatism, markets, liberties, and generally opposing the technocratic rule of career bureaucrats and their political patrons. This season saw the mindset that Obama embodies savagely rebuked: voters opted for a man with no political experience over continuing in the footsteps of a man whose only experience is politics. But as extreme as that repudiation has been, it only just succeeded. Lefties are dumb when they make hay of Hillary’s slight popular vote advantage, but they’re not dumb in pointing out how tenuous is Trump’s electoral advantage. He could lose big in two years and bigger still in four.

      1. “he is such an imperfect orator for conservatism”

        He’s not a conservative and that’s a good thing. I just hope he’s not too much of a statist, either way. Both progs and conservatives are hardcore statists.

        1. I meant conservative in the philosophical sense. I agree that conservatives are often pretty statist, but conservatism as an anchor keeping progressives from dashing the ship of state on the rocky shoals of socialist utopianism (to really stretch a metaphor) is important.

          The real damage Trump can do is to the notion of resisting the technocratic impulse at all.

  3. The media is such a circle jerk. NBC shill appears on MSNBC. MSNBC shill appears on NBC.


    1. But…it’s the same company.

      1. And the same people. Why don’t they just merge with CNN already?

  4. You know who else is vile?

    1. Hillary?

    2. Clavicus?

    3. Louise Brown, the first test tube baby?

  5. Only in comparison to Hillary and other progs would Trump look good to a conservative or libertarian.

    We have his promise to nominate Supreme Court Justices from a list of very good people (the best), but we don’t know how faithful he’ll be to that promise. My thinking is that he’ll find a way to break the promise and blame someone else (Democratic Senators for filibustering, for instance).

    1. Everyone realizes the flying-saucers and gorgeous-tits for all kinda promises Trump made were a bit fluffy given they involve things outside of his control (proprietors of flying saucers and gorgeous tits for instance).

      But honoring to pick off his Supremes pre-list is probably biggest unspoken obligation/promise he has. Trump touches a so-far unseen third rail if he squirms on that.

      1. But honoring to pick off his Supremes pre-list

        *Pick from, not off. It was the squirrels Preet I swear.

      2. That’s why I think he’ll at least make a show of keeping the promise.

        Then after the filibuster lasts a certain time, and the Senate Republicans don’t have the balls to invoke the nuclear option the way the Dems did for Obama’s lower-court nominees, then Trump will “reluctantly” say he “has no choice” but to nominate a “moderate,” like maybe his sister.

        1. I’m betting on this. He’ll trade away the pick to a very liberal “conservative” in exchange for Reid getting some piece of flagship legislation passed, maybe border control, maybe Obamacare reform.

          1. Reid’s retiring.

            1. Welp, I’ve plumbed the depth of my knowledge about Democrat senators. Who’s taking over for the commies?

      3. “flying-saucers”

        Confiscated from illegal space aliens?

  6. And let’s bear in mind, sometimes actors outside the U.S. can help shape American foreign policy. Look at 9/11. George W. Humble Foreign Policy turned into a Wilsonian democracy-crusader after that.

    1. Just to clarify: President Bush had choices of how to react to 9/11, and I’m inclined to think he made the wrong choices. But the attacks certainly nudged his thinking in the interventionist direction.

      1. I wanted people to pay.

        But “We’ve been attacked by a Saudi prince living in Afghanistan… let’s invade Iraq,” is pretty fucking spastic.

      2. Well, the neocons, including Cheney, were looking for a reason to invade Iraq since the first Gulf War. 9/11 gave them a big bright green light. What was Bush going to do? Not get with the program? Not revel in his 90% approval ratings?

        1. Well, the neocons, including Cheney, were looking for a reason to invade Iraq since the first Gulf War.

          Eh, not in 1994.

        2. Yeah, the consensus on ‘regime change’ didn’t actually come into being until the late 1990s, with the “Project for a New American Century“, and it wasn’t even thought of in realistic military terms until after 9/11. From post Gulf-I until 1998, then it was thought of as more of a “how to foment dissent within iraq so the iraqis depose him themselves”

          In January 1999, the PNAC circulated a memo that criticized the December 1998 bombing of Iraq in Operation Desert Fox as ineffective. The memo questioned the viability of Iraqi democratic opposition, which the U.S. was supporting through the Iraq Liberation Act, and referred to any “containment” policy as an illusion.[30]

  7. Subscribe to Reason’s Podcast and Enjoy Your Commute Again!

    Another one!? Do we as a country really need thirteen brands of Trump-talk? No, no we don’t.

    1. And we thought the Trump articles would be over soon. Hah! 4 more years of them!

      1. I was thinking about something similar yesterday. I hope Trump takes speech lessons, because I really don’t know if I can take four years of listening to him speak the way he does now.

        1. Trump’s issue is that he actually sounds pretty good for a limited amount of time. Did you see his acceptance speech? Not great, but not bad for a business guy with no political experience. Then he just goes completely off script and starts sounding more like a business guy at a company picnic. ‘Hey Jeff, where’s Jeff? There he is! Get up here Jeff. Great team we got here. Say something Jeff’.

          1. Ok, that was pretty funny because of how accurate it is.

  8. “Will Donald Trump be a peacenik president?”

    This is an actual real possibility. Trump has talked dovish from the get go and has never been known as a war monger from what I know.

    Does anyone know anything about this Stephen Bannon guy besides him being the Chairman of Breitbart? Breitbart is sort of a mixed bag as far as the commentariat goes. Most of them seem to be renegade conservotards and conspiracy theory nuts spilled over from Alex Jone’s sight. However, some of them seem to be quite libertarian. I just don’t know anything at all about Bannon. If someone who does could enlighten me, I’d appreciate it.

    1. He wrote an artcile about how the confederate flag should be a point of pride for southerners and also pointed put that “progs don’t like conservative women because they’re not dykes and want to have a family”.

      These 2 things have made him worse than hitler.

      More than that I don’t know but articles saying why he sucks keep on using the same two stories.

      As for Breitbart, it’s a mix of neocons and socons, many of the reasonable conservative commentators were exiled during the primary.

  9. My morning commute podcast is Tom Woods. Sorry guys, but I like the smell of Austrian economics in the morning.

    1. Is the podcast good? I have listened to a lot of his lectures, even saw him live when he was doing a book tour.

      1. He’s a mild mannered Yokel and not a flamethrower. Has stuff for the beginner to the more in depth. Friend of Block so you won’t catch the Jacket listening to it.

    1. Right to try…have adult patients sign waiver forms with bloodcurdling warnings in ALL CAPS BOLDFACE saying that the federal government DOES GUARANTEE EITHER THE SAFETY OR EFFICACY OF THIS PRODUCT, so if you choose to use the product and SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS, it’s NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S FAULT and DON’T COME CRYING TO US.

        1. You actually had it right the first time.

    2. Well, WaPo has brilliantly blocked my access again. Guess it’s time to clear my cache again.

      1. I just don’t go to WaPo. Saves my sanity.

    3. Most depressing thalidomide story ever.

      Turns out thalidomide is actually pretty great in treating leprosy. Which is fine. What makes it sad, is that when female lepers start their thalidomide treatments, they also get on a shit ton of birth control so that they don’t accidentally end up with a kid with birth defects.

      The thought that there are guys out there who are doing their best to get with a leprous chick is sad, sad, sad.

      1. Well, they might be lepers, too. They might even have websites like ‘LeperLove.com’. Too bad SugarFree’s gone for the day, I’m sure he could tell us.

        And then regale us with tales of bizarre sex interrupted by body parts falling off.

      2. Thalidomide is also a somewhat effective treatment for multiple myeloma, just FYI.

  10. CNN has gone unhinged over Thiel.

    Thiel joins Trump transition team, CNN collectively shits pants

    Thiel is famous in Silicon Valley for holding extreme, counterintuitive views

    Maybe you hacks could name of those extreme counterintuitive views? Do you even know what those words mean?

    Thiel’s fortunes appear to be on the rise while much of the tech industry could be hit hard by a Trump presidency

    The tech industry hit hard by Trump? Can you explain that one also? Didn’t think so.

    1. After California secedes Trump will impose tariffs. Duh.

    2. It’s quite simple, Hyperion: Trump ran as a Republican. Republicans are backwards, creationist, Bible-thumping, climate change denialists. Q.E.D. Trump will be bad for all things sciencey, and what’s more sciencey than silicon valley?

    3. Oh, I almost forgot to best part:

      He is a rabid libertarian who has invested money to make people immortal, develop floating cities away from the reach of governments, and convince young people not to go to college, among other endeavors.

      OH NOES!

      1. How can lefties possibly mesh the notion that it’s anathema to suggest that not everyone should go to college with the reality that paying for college is a huge impediment to becoming a functional adult?

        1. Because society should pay for young people’s indoctrination in stupid ideas.

          1. Spot.fucking.on.

    4. I think I know what they’re talking about, but you have to translate it into progressive techie language.

      The extreme counterintuitive views are probably about his religious beliefs and his sexuality–along with some various transhumanist kinds of stuff.

      The tech industry being hit hard by Trump is almost certainly about immigration and H1-B visas.

      1. So being gay is now extremism to proglotards? Nice to know. Or do you mean being gay and not being a democrat?

        1. He’s both gay and evangelical.

          1. Something like this?

          2. Maybe he can switch to Islam, the progs will dig that.

            1. I mean, what’s cooler than a gay Muslim. Anything? I think that’s the zenith of prog special snowflake.

            2. Just wondering: What do the progs think of Islamorada?

      2. Thiel’s “counter-intuitive”-view thing is giving scholarships to NOT go to college

        1. So encouraging kids to not learn how to become toddlers again, and instead become productive members of society, is bad? Let’s face it, unless they’re STEM students, they’ll learn nothing else.

          1. College is how you expose impressionable, dumb teenagers to critical theory, and therefore indoctrinate generations of thought leaders useful idiots.

    5. The tech industry hit hard by Trump? Can you explain that one also? Didn’t think so.

      1) Tom Steyer
      2) Elon Musk

      1. They hate him and their stocks are taking a hit because he was elected. That’s about it for now.

    6. Surely Thiel wants to help Trump kneecap tech companies. I mean, it’s not like he’d feel any pain if companies like PayPal or Facebook hit hard times.

      1. That’s lefty logic for you.

  11. “WASHINGTON?Aides to President-elect Donald Trump are focusing on former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton as the leading candidates to be the next secretary of state, two people familiar with the process said.

    —Wall Street Journal


    John Bolton as Secretary of State would make me throw up.

    If John Bolton becomes the Secretary of State, there won’t be any reason to believe anything the Trump administration tells us about foreign affairs.

    1. But you’d be ok with Rudy?

      1. Compared to Bolton? Speaking for myself, I’d breathe a sigh of relief. Like when Trump beat Hillary.

        Low expectations.

      2. Myself, I’ve despised that douchebag from the first time I saw him.

      3. I’d be okay with Rudy.

        Bolton shouldn’t be allowed in the building.

        1. “Bolton shouldn’t be allowed in the building.”

          Unless they need a White House piss boy.

          1. If I were Trump’s consigliere, I’d tell him to call George W. Bush, Colin Powell, and Condie Rice and ask each of them for a character reference on John Bolton.

            I doubt you’ll find anybody he’s ever worked for that thinks he should be the Secretary of State.

            1. Bolton would have been the guy for Hillary. Though I doubt that even Bolton could match Hillary’s war boner.

              1. He’s a manipulative guy that apparently withholds evidence from his bosses.

                I’ve seen him blamed for the “Sixteen Words” controversy in 2003 State of the Union . . . and that’s just the beginning.

                If he worked for me, I wouldn’t believe anything he said.

                If he worked for me, he wouldn’t be working for me.

        2. I would not be ok with either one.

    2. Pure speculation at this point. Maybe some of the other Trump insiders can dissuade him of such insanity.

      More importantly, who the fuck is Stephen Bannon? We already know Priebus is an establishment douche. Pence, insider douche. Thiel however is a libertarian, and I have no idea who Bannon is. Best to worry now about who is on Trump’s transition team because they’re ultimately going to decide who Trump’s staff picks are.

      1. Trump is consolidating his support within the Republican party with Priebus and Bannon.

        Smart moves.

        I mean, whether I like them personally or their politics aside, if you want to galvanize your support within the Republican party, that’s the smart thing to do.

        1. Why would choosing Bannon galvanize Trump’s support with the Republican party? Who the fuck is the guy? He’s not a Republican insider for sure.

          1. He’s the head of Breitbart.

            He’s the guy who got Trump elected.

            If you want a guy that’s got his finger on the pulse of the Republican base, Bannon probably knows it better than anyone else in the whole wide world.

            Usually you get these permanent campaign guys from the donor side–like Karl Rove. Rove would be out there trying to triangulate how what you’re doing is going to make donors see you.

            The Breitbart guy is about as grass roots as you can get. He just got Trump elected without hardly spending any money. Of course you want his opinion on how what you’re doing is going to impact your popularity. Who else would you listen to? Nate Silver?

            Priebus is famous for reconciling establishment Republicans with the Tea Party.

            If I were Trump, I’d do exactly what he did with those two guys.

            1. “He just got Trump elected without hardly spending any money.”

              He turned Trump’s campaign around.

            2. Thanks. But what I’m really looking for is exactly who is Bannon politically? Is he an establishment Republican? I know that Breitbart’s readers are not for the most part. Is he friend or foe of libertarians? I post over there very occasionally when I get there from a Drudge link and for the most part, they’re pretty friendly with me. Although a lot of them are pretty goofy.

              1. I doubt he’s ideological like that.

                He’s in favor of Republicans getting elected and Democrats losing.

            3. He’s the head of Breitbart. Otherwise known as Grand Master Dragon of the Klan.


        2. I didn’t think Bannon was a party insider. Far as I know he is all about blowing up the party.

          1. Well, if that’s the case, maybe I can get behind him.

            1. He’s there to give an opinion on what will get Trump reelected.

              He’s there to help Trump manage the media.

              He’s not there to represent anybody.

              Oh, and if I were Trump, I’d offer the spokesperson job to Maria Bartiromo.

            2. I listened to his Breitbart radio show before he went on the Trump team, never heard the overt racism, antisemitism, etc, etc, that he’s accused of. He is however an authoritarian, as long ad the right people are doing the authoritarianing. He’s more than happy to use the violence inherent in the system as long as it’s used ‘correctly’, so fuck him, JMHO.

              1. I don’t check the politics of my surgeon. If he’s a good heart surgeon, you want his opinion on heart surgery.

                Bannon isn’t there to tell everybody right from wrong.

                He’s there to tell you how what you’re doing is going to impact your reelection chances.

                He’s right or wrong regardless of whether you agree with him.

                1. Do you draw the line anywhere?. Do you hire the best plumber in town even if you know he’s a kiddie-diddler? Bannon was at one time speaking admiringly of Philippine strong man Durante

                  ‘Sure he’s cool with extra-judicial executions but he really knows how to get my base fired up!’

                  1. “Bannon was at one time speaking admiringly of Philippine strong man Durante”

                    That’s quite disturbing. No way Bannon is going to be my plumber.

                    1. Hey, Ken started with the politics = surgery thing I just took it in a different direction. Also, touch

                  2. He isn’t a representative of anybody. He isn’t supposed to be.

                    He’s an advisor to the President.

                    He isn’t running any department or agency.

                    He has nothing to do with running the government directly.

                    His position isn’t up for Senate confirmation.

                    You don’t like the way he’s gonna what, exactly? Advise the President on how to handle the media? You don’t like the way he’ll advise the President on how to make his positions more appealing?

                    Is he good at his job? Is Trump smart to listen to that guy on media matters?

                    I think so.

                    That’s about all the traction I can get on the Bannon issue. Apart from what picking that guy tells us about Trump’s own management acumen, there isn’t much there to criticize.

                    I don’t think Trump’s pick for White House chef needs to be confirmed by the Senate either.

                    1. I wasn’t a big fan Valerie Jarrett, either.

    3. Bolton would declare retroactive war with the Soviet Union, given the chance.

  12. Don’t hate TYT but holy shit did they screw the pooch on this one. Trump backpedals on Wall yet the article they base it all on is quoting Republicans trying to get Trump to soften his position. A flat out lie by Cenk.

    1. Who names themselves after a genocidal regime anyway?

      1. The Swinging Hitleres’es?

        1. The Smashing Pol Pots

      2. Rwanda Sykes?

          1. I’ll just bury my next pun Tutsi suite.

            1. Or I could go just go on a roll.

              1. Well hurry up with it. Chop chop.

    2. Cenk in general is just a scummy, unprofessional human being. I’ve seen the guy turn people’s mikes off, and he consistently interrupts anyone he debates in the most condescending asshole fashion. The D’Souza debate turned into D’Souza trying to actually debate him while he just mocked him for being charged, while the Harris debate over Islam could be summed up as ‘Harris makes well reasoned argument, Cenk rolls eyes, smugly says ‘you’re wrong’ and fails to actually come up with a decent argument.’

      Even if he agreed with me on everything I would not want to be associated with him.

      1. “Even if he agreed with me on everything I would not want to be associated with him.”

        Otherwise known as “The Cytotoxic effect”.

        1. Cytotoxic agreeing with you on anything is only an inroad to get an angle to attack you from. He’s the ultimate contrarian little douchebag.

          1. I thought that was Bo’s shtick.

      2. He’s the epitome of prog douche-smugness and a symbol of why the Democrats lost.

      3. “Hey man, you wanna get some beers?”

        “Oh, hey, sorry, I already have plans: to not hang out with mendacious assholes.”

      4. Funny you say that. I once called into his radio show and he let me on the air, then cut me off in mid-second-or-third sentence but responded as though I were still on the line, then went to commercial.

        It was mad shady, as the hip-hoppers say. E’r since then I been like ‘fuck cenk.’

    3. Trump has already set the stage to backpedal on many things. And he’s even said the wall will actually be a fence in some places. But he was unequivocal when he said the wall is still getting built.

      1. Why we’re even talking about physical barriers in the era of drone surveillance is a mystery to me.

  13. My commute is from my bedroom to my basement office. I’m not sure how much podcast I could manage in that time.

    1. Depends if you detour by the liquor cabinet.

    2. Don’t you stop to take a dump?

      1. Dumps are made for the morning standup meeting. Amateur.

    3. Do you wear pants in the house?

      1. Vikes Zubaz ensemble with matching papal tiara.

        1. Vikes Zubaz burnt after loss to Lions. Ugh!

      2. Do some people really get up and dress in full business attire before starting their work at home day? I worked at home today and I’m still in jammies and house slippers, a t-shirt, seriously, I always do this unless we’re having guests over after work or going out.

        1. You wear clothes? Well, la di da!

          1. Yeah, I know, I’m an uppity prude.

            1. I used to play the Four Yorkshiremen game with a couple buddies till my friend hit rock bottom with “Ooooh, fancypants here, Mr. ‘I WIPE’.”

        2. My downfall is my nappy hair. I forget to take a shower first thing in the morning and later on wander out in public forgetting that my hair looks worse than Don King’s fro. Strange looks from all the Straights when I diddy bop into the coffee house.

        3. I wear boxers and rarely a t-shirt if it’s cold. I live alone – why bother dressing?!

  14. God what despicable idiot Robert De Niro – stupid anti-vaccine moron- is. Yeh, the election of Trump is the same as 3000 AMERICANS KILLED BY A TERRORIST ACT. Totally. The immorality and logical fallacies of these people is endless. Oh. About supporting the ‘protestors’. I’m sure he’d tolerate destruction of his property. Fuck this guy.


    Italian town offers him asylum.


    Problem is Trump galvanized Europe I think.

    1. Dude, these people spend all day pretending to be someone else, in a fictional world. Give them a break, reality is not their forte.



        But first I have to finish my cannelloni.

    2. Problem is Trump galvanized Europe I think.

      Disagree. I think Trump (and Brexit) have galvanized the elites and their sycophants because now they realize that they can actually lose. The right-wingers and nationalists view it in the opposite fashion, i.e. hey, we might actually be able to win.

      I think Trump’s Presidency itself will be highly influential on right-wing Europe if it ‘goes well’, and he actually implements some of the things they want.

      1. That’s actually what I was getting at but you said it better.

        I feel the elements of Europe that feel like Trump voters will feel it’s possible to win now.

        There’s heavy discontent in Europe at the moment. Like I mentioned elsewhere, my cousin’s wife is a professor of international law and is a publisher at Sorbonne and she basically said, A) Good for American and B) Europe has to do the same. The EU and its elites are destroying Europe turning it into a gigantic left-wing technocratic state.

        This is no whack job – this is what sane people are thinking.

        1. Marine Le Pen could actually win. Europe has been heading right, we just now caught up with them. Even Canada will go right once they have 50 million west coasters among them. I say we don’t take them back no matter how much Canada begs us to.

        2. “Like I mentioned elsewhere, my cousin’s wife”

          makes $10,000 a week as a professor of international law?

          1. It’s that funny-looking Canadian Monopoly money, so it’s rather less impressive.

          2. My cousin does! Or thereabouts.

            1. Sounds like she may not be 100% in tune with the other French professors?

    3. Problem is Trump galvanized Europe I think.

      You zinc that? They’re not yet charged up enough for that.

      1. You libertarians always looking to squash moments.

        1. squash moments

          I don’t care what Crusty told you, I am definitely not into that kind of porn.

      2. I actually”booed” out loud

        1. The troll shit I do to get a reaction from people!

    4. “We have to just wait and see how things go and keep our eyes ever vigilant on the new government.”

      Because you certainly weren’t doing it with the current one.

  15. Enjoy my commute “again?”

    When did I enjoy my commute?

    And are you suggesting we Make Commuting Great Again?

    1. If money stops influencing elections, Politico will haz a sad. Every fucking article they’ve produced for the last 10 years has been about who spends how much. Hacks, good riddance.

    2. Chump change for most of those clowns.

  16. Make your commute great again!

    1. Global warming!

      Alternate joke: Cultural appropriation!

      1. Alternate alternate joke: No true Scotsman would do this.

  17. Pakistan TV station claims Trump born in Pakistan

    Sting sings “inshallah” at ceremony to re-open site of 2015 Paris jihad attack.

    In any other context, Sting’s “Inshallah” would be derided as the disgusting act that it was. Would he show up the site of Dylann Roof’s killings in Charleston, South Carolina waving a Confederate flag and calling it “a magnificent banner”? I didn’t think so.

    Damn straight.

    Meanwhile, the band that was playing during the attack was banned from playing at the re-opening ceremony and had all its other French gigs canceled. Possibly because a band member claimed Muslim staff at the bar were complicit in the attack.

    1. Sleeper agent?

      “According to Neo News, Trump was born as Dawood Ibrahim Khan in the now-Taliban-controlled Waziristan region of the country in 1954. After his parents were killed in a car accident, a British Indian Army captain took little Dawood to London, where the Trump family later adopted him and brought him to America, the report claimed.”

  18. Hugely addicted to 8 out of 10 Cats Does Countdown. Rachel Riley is a babe. So is Susie Dent, for that matter.

    1. I watched your video. There were no cats actually involved. I was disappointed.

  19. Donald Trump Draws Criticism Over Steve Bannon Appointment
    Former head of news outlet linked to the ‘alt-right’ was named to influential White House post

    “In May, before Mr. Bannon joined Mr. Trump’s campaign, his news outlet ran an article calling conservative foreign-policy journalist Bill Kristol a “Republican Spoiler, Renegade Jew.” In July, it ran two articles with the headlines: “The Solution to Online ‘Harassment’ Is Simple: Women Should Log Off” and “There’s No Hiring Bias Against Women In Tech, They Just Suck At Interviews.” The website also warned of a “Muslim rape culture.””

    1. Ah, the “Renegade Jew” article is by David Horowitz, the well-known scourge of the Left, who concludes the May article as follows (denouncing Kristol’s third-party efforts for splitting the Republicans):

      “I am a Jew who has never been to Israel and has never been a Zionist in the sense of believing that Jews can rid themselves of Jew hatred by having their own nation state. But half of world Jewry now lives in Israel, and the enemies whom Obama and Hillary have empowered ? Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, ISIS, and Hamas ? have openly sworn to exterminate the Jews. I am also an American (and an American first), whose country is threatened with destruction by the same enemies. To weaken the only party [the Republican Party] that stands between the Jews and their annihilation, and between America and the forces intent on destroying her, is a political miscalculation so great and a betrayal so profound as to not be easily forgiven.”

      1. Now, that article is just a tad overwrought, but it’s one Jewish commentator accusing another Jewish commentator of acting against the interests of the Jewish community.

        It’s the Chris Rock rule – whether you like it or not, there’s certain words people can use about their *own* group which someone outside the group isn’t supposed to use.

        1. I watched a Youtube video of this guy once where he was on a campus and was asking a female Muslim student, if she agreed with the statement (this may not be exact), that Jews should be all gathered into one place so that … well, here it is:

          David Horowitz at USCD

          1. FrontPageMag was one step on my journey from Salon to Reason. It wasn’t long-lived.

          2. This is the first time I actually listened to that. Amazing.

            I keep calling guys like him “overwrought,” then you provide a link like that, indicating that maybe he’s onto something.

          3. Amazing. Shameless. I get that a lot of green frog-masquerading dipshits are insulting Jews on Twitter, but how is it the Dems get to claim any credibility on the issue? They’re host to unapologetic antisemites!

            1. The Democrats also claim that most Muslims do not support Shariah. That is not true, most of them do, it’s an integral part of their religion. Ask a Muslim and they’ll admit it. Ask a Democrat and they’ll deny it. Who do you want to believe?

              1. Ask Jeeves? Bing? What’s the right answer here?

    2. Mmkay, we just made the ‘alt-right’ this huge mainstream thing and then arbitrarily assigned anyone to it who doesn’t agree with us, and it’s supposed to be convincing? Ok.

    3. The website also warned of a “Muslim rape culture.”

      Now that’s just crazy talk.

    4. “TEAM BLUE doesn’t like something TEAM RED does” is news now?

  20. Twitter banned Milo, but will they ban this?

    Since Trump’s stunning Election Day victory last week, social media hashtags like #AssassinateTrump and #Killtrump have proliferated. Over the weekend, a protester near Trump Tower held aloft a sign calling for future first lady Melania Trump to be violated, echoing a trending hashtag #RapeMelania.

    Those who support Trump took to Twitter as well, mostly to voice anger over the social media platform’s perceived hypocrisy. They noted hashtag #HillaryForPrison was blocked during the campaign, while #AssassinateTrump was not.

    1. Nah, that’s just protesting. When anyone on the right does that, it’s hate speech, and quite possibly a serious federal crime for openly trying to incite violence against the president. You didn’t get the memo?

      1. Milo on the other hand is a dangerous fag. And that means any fag who doesn’t agree with us.

        1. Stop replying to yourself!

            1. Edit feature. NOW YOU WENT AND DID IT!

          1. I see what you did there.

    2. I’m bombarding my friend in Holland with all this stuff.

      He started on this prog bull shit and now he doesn’t know what hit him.

      If I can save ONE Dutchman…

      Hey, we liberated them once we can do it again.

      1. “Hey, we liberated them once we can do it again.”

        You mean King William’s War? That was more of a draw.

  21. I just blew CNN out of my TV package. I had it. Switched to Fox. I’ve been meaning to do it for quite some time but was too lazy. Even took Velocity.

    Interestingly, my 74 year-old mother – a true blue liberal who watched CNN – called me up and asked about Fox. She was thoroughly disgusted with CNN and especially not impressed with Van Jones. She felt it got to a point they were mocking her and taking advantage of her trust.


    Come to the light side. Leave the dark side. They’re sowers of discord.

    1. Come to the bleached blonde site!

      1. Better than the lying shit those liars were pimping. At least we know what we’re getting with Fox.

        1. From the CNN links I’ve watched, I’m sure you’re right.

          It’s far worse than the Fox stuff I’ve seen.

          1. youtube activity pasting the left has exploded. I wonder if they’re going to clamp down.

        2. You’re getting Bill O’Reilly and Shawn Hannity and Lou Dobbs for crikey sake. But for your loyalty you also get the occasional John Stossel.

          1. What’s the difference? I know what I’m getting. You forgot Cavuto.

            What an obnoxious lineup.

            Isn’t The Independents on Fox? Wait…

            1. No, but for you consolation, you can still see Kennedy interrupt people, and I swear not too long ago I saw Gavin McInness tell an absolutely stunned female talking head that women are happier at home. Priceless stuff.

              1. And sorry, I have to reply to myself again, but no fucking edit feature. But McInnes is actually wrong about that. Women who find themselves having to work are happier at home. Women who have the luxury of being at home are happier working. IOW, women are not happier being any fucking where. They’re only unhappy to not be anywhere else than where they happen to be.

                /why there are no female libertarians

    2. “She was thoroughly disgusted with CNN and especially not impressed with Van Jones. She felt it got to a point they were mocking her and taking advantage of her trust.”

      This touches on a point about ‘The Left’ that a few people, despite being more intelligent than I am, seem to gloss over. ‘The Left’ isn’t some monolithic entity(far more monolithic than small l libertarians, but who the fuck isn’t?), but a conglomeration of views that, like most political movements, can’t bring itself to subconsciously come to terms with the fact that certain philosophical stances of the platform contradict each other. Many of Democrats, if not think this, can’t help emote this, and secretly feel a sense of shame knowing that they sold their souls to the Devil in the name of political expediency.

      The resulting cognitive dissonance(continued…)

      1. may also play a part in the pants-shitting on social media. They know they compromised and lost anyway, a new experience for the socialist under30 crowd.

        Point being: I’m not quite yet about to go all Suicidy on you and dismiss the youngest on the Left as irredeemable.

        Collectivism is antithetical to libertarians as far as I’m conserned.

        1. Collectivism is only antithetical to some libertarians; we don’t all think alike, you know.

    3. I though the Liberals were red, and the Regressive Conservatives were blue.

  22. Eh yo, the moon don’t like Trump.

    1. Maryland voted for Hillary so Trump has blocked the moon for us by sending clouds.

  23. Gavin. The White House sucks.


  24. Ok, so I think I’ve figured out the Trump LGBT freakout thing…

    On 60 Minutes Trump said that he’s “fine” with gay marriage because it was decided by the Supreme Court. I’ve jumped on a few lefty sites to gauge their reaction to it.

    And the discussion largely comes down to “but Pence believes in weirdo conversion therapy!” and “but a bunch of his apparent cabinet is against it!” So it’s not Trump that’s terrifying, it’s apparently his VP and the rest of his cabinet pulling the strings. I’d like to see the actual breakdown of exactly what they’d be able to do.

    So is he the next Hitler or is he a stooge for everyone else in his cabinet? Make up your goddamn minds!

    1. Pence ain’t gonna do shit.

      1. I hope not, because he’s a hardcore midwestern SoSon. Why the fuck did Trump pick this guy?

        1. Because he apparently bought into the “must run conventional campaign” after the primaries.

          1. We all know he should have settled the feud with Vince McMahon and got him to run. We’d get “YOU’RE FIRED!” in stereo.

        2. Didn’t he do well out there? Maybe that’s why?

    2. it’s not Trump that’s terrifying, it’s apparently his VP and the rest of his cabinet pulling the strings. I’d like to see the actual breakdown of exactly what they’d be able to do.

      Its all bullshit.

      There are still socons in this country, and they still vote. there’s no likelihood of them ever getting a government that will enforce their dumbass socon lifestyle, so the best they can hope for is someone that doesn’t spit on them from on high.

      the entire purpose of getting Pence as a VP was to have a do-nothing symbol to Socon america that, “We won’t shit on you all the time” the way the others do. They’re not going to put up abortion obstacles, they’re not going to make people get sodomy-permits…. they’re just going to say, “gays are cool, and so is jesus. Big Black Dildos for you, little american flags for you”

    3. The only power the VP legally has is the tie breaking vote in the Senate. But, even if pence were to become Pres, he still has very little to no actual ability to effect gay issues. The biggest effect would be by appointing Supremes, but the court is highly unlikely to overturn its own precedent.

      1. “the court is highly unlikely to overturn its own precedent”

        yeah, that never happens

    1. I literally just glanced at that page for 2 seconds, and my brain said, “this is a conspiracy-mocking site the same way that the Landover Baptist Church was a mockery of Westboro…”

      I think it was the ad for the Tactical Gas Mask.

      or maybe its quasi-serious? People will do anything if they think they can produce enough clicks to justify it.

  25. File under: hyperbole

    Chomsky declares GOP to be the most dangerous organization in history, because manbearpig.

  26. Amusing: local weatherman gives directions to Canada for cranky voters


    1. does he think this all a big joke?? fuckin hate criiiiiiiiime

  27. It was in my feed =

    When SNL used to actually bust the balls of people in power

    now they perform musical numbers glorifying the same person

    *I think i got this because i watched norm mcdonald’s press-dinner-roast of Bill C. It was also good, if awkward

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.