Immigration

Libertarianism in a Rapidly Diversifying America: Reason Debate on 12/8 in DC

Nick Gillespie, Shikha Dalmia, Avik Roy, and Charles C.W. Cooke talk about immmigration, limited government, and cosmopolitanism.

|

Donald Trump, Twitter

Anti-immigration conservatives and liberals have long argued that as the United States brings in more foreigners, our common culture and values slip further and further away from the nation's founding ideals of limited government and self-sufficiency. Donald Trump supporters who cheered the candidate's plan to curtail immigration from Mexico and ban Muslims from entering the country often stressed the we're just importing "Democratic" voters who will expand welfare. Is any of that true? And what about the large numbers of native-born whites who, while perhaps shrinking as a percentage of the population nonetheless had the clout to elect (if barely) the most restrictionist (and protectionist) president since at least World War II?

Government debt continues to grow and spending as a percentage of the GDP has stayed at or near post-WWII highs. Trump's spending plan hardly reins in such largess even as his tax plan threatens to reduce revenues (and thus raise deficits) by massive amounts. What is the effect of such policies on libertarian visions for smaller, cheaper, and less-intrusive government? Will Trump end the federal war on pot even if he's ramping up the war on immigrants? Will more protectionist economic policy be offset by more wide-open energy or education plans? We're just a few weeks away from the start of President Trump's first term and only this much is certain: It is going to be a hell of a ride.

The event is free and open to the public. Here are the details:

Prospects for Liberty in a Diversifying America

Location: 1747 Connecticut Ave. NW, Washington D.C. 20009

  • December 8, 2016

Now that the election is over, libertarians and conservatives are wondering what the Trump administration will mean for those who favor limited government, free markets, and the rule of law.

On Tuesday, December 8, you are cordially invited to a panel discussion moderated by Nick Gillespie featuring Reason's Shikha Dalmia, Avik Roy, Co-Founder of the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity; and journalist Charles Cooke of National Review.

"Prospects for Liberty in a Diversifying America"

Panel Discussion moderated by Nick Gillespie, Reason.com

Tuesday, December 8

Reason HQ, 1747 Connecticut Ave. NW

Doors open 6:00 p.m., Program 6:30 p.m.

RSVP to Jordan King at jordan.king@reason.org

Please join us for drinks, hors d'oeuvres, and conversation about the future of liberty in America.

NEXT: Trump Has Little Latitude to Change Trade Policies...So Far

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. Charles C.W. Cooke

    Moar like “Charles C.W. Cuck”, amirite?

    1. Is the term “cuck” referring to an impotent man whose wife is being serviced by a Black man? That’s not racist?

      1. Black or Mexican. Yes, it’s a racist term.

      2. I don’t know where the racist connotation came from, before this stupid election the term “cuckold” generally didn’t carry racial implications.

        1. It doesn’t really make sense absent the racial connotation. Who’s fucking whose wives, other than the hordes of swarthy cantaloupe-calved men and tatted blacks roiling up from the south and from within our inner cities? Pajama boy and Manhattanite snobs don’t make credible antagonists.

          1. I don’t think “likes to see his wife get fucked by another man” inherently requires that other man to be dark-skinned but then again this whole bit of analysis is complicated by the fact that two people don’t necessarily mean the same thing when they use the same word, and my give-a-fuck quotient is rapidly depleting.

            1. I don’t think “likes to see his wife get fucked by another man” inherently requires that other man to be dark-skinned

              There’s a difference between the dictionary connotation and the Pornhub connotation.

              Kind of like how the term “Asian Fusion” can refer both to food and Asa Akira scissoring Kaylani Lei.

              1. There’s a difference between the dictionary connotation and the Pornhub connotation.

                Oddly enough, the first time I encountered the term was in Dan Savage’s column, although I guess that is more of the former than the latter when you think about it.

            2. No (although the porn genre seems to feature an awful lot of black men cuckolding white husbands). But the allegation of being cuckolded necessitates someone helping cuckold him. So who is cuckolding all those cuck conservatives? NYT readers? College professors? Campus social justice retards?

            3. And, you’ve got it wrong, too. It’s not some guy who likes to watch his wife and another man, it refers to the female (of any species) being impregnated by a male who is not her mate, and specifically, the male mate then using resources, etc., to rear another male’s progeny, or take care of the pregnant female, etc., and thus the other male’s DNA reproduces instead of the mate’s DNA.

              1. That seems like an awful specific allegation in this context.

              2. So, Paul Ryan is going to raise Trump’s kids?

                1. There’s an idea for a sitcom: instead of getting to run government while Trump is distracted, Paul Ryan finds himself, Mr. Belvedere-style, stuck with Barron as the President becomes laser-focused on his work…

              3. So, normal human reproduction?

              4. So, normal human reproduction?

          2. That says a fuckton about you and little about “cuck”

        2. It comes from the unwholesome fetishes of metaphorically challenged literalists.

          1. It literally has no racial context beyond perhaps as a subset category. It literally means a man whose wife has sex with other men. It would be the proper term whether the fucker was Asian, black, white, Neanderthal or Denisovan. The people who swear up and down that it’s about race and that it’s a racist term are their own sort of racial fetishist.

            1. See: Crazy, Stupid, Love.

            2. Cool story, bro.

        3. Well, the term cuckold also had to do with people who actually fucked your wife before this election too, not just the retarded bellowing catch-all insult of deranged keyboard warriors.

      3. The term Cuck has multiple meanings that work beautifully for the situation. That’s what makes it so perfect.

        Too weak to protect your own interests, too weak to protect your own, a willing accomplice in your own subjugation, a collaborator with those who are fucking your own, a betrayer who sells out your own, a betrayer who wants to see your own fucked.

        Even the racial angle works, as white Cucks sell out other whites to the antiwhite racism of Leftist identity politics.

    2. I don’t care what everyone else says about you, Siv, you aight. You crack me up.

      1. I bring the hard truth and tell it like it is.

  2. Second. Don’t blame me. I voted for Stein.

    1. She’s a socialist – with the integrity of a Democrat but less competent.

    2. You vote for an incoherent commie. Yet, you claim to be ‘libertarian’.

      Pallamadonna.

      1. The LP nominated an incoherent Democrat, so maybe he is just getting even?

          1. I saw that. Brilliant.

  3. Yaaaaawwwwwwwnnnn

  4. “even as his tax plan threatens to reduce revenues”

    The horror! Government having less money to do stuff!? OMG, nothing left to cut! The cupboards are bare!

    1. Dear Reason ed., It seems like all these people who bitched and bitched and bitched about how debt levels were going to turn the country into a Greek shithole have gone home and been replaced by others pushing a libertarian agenda of deficit spending and wall building. Did something unusual happen at the libertarian convention this year? Maybe I should go. I hate wars, drug wars, government nannies, militarists and xenophobia. You hate wars, drug wars, government nannies, militarist and xenophobia.

        1. Blocked a long time ago.

          1. I would like to know how to do this blocking thing, please.

        2. Amsoc’s never found a problem that couldn’t be solved by starving a couple million people.

          1. He makes a dim bulb seem bright. I’ve repeatedly shown his arguments to be mathematically baseless but that has not once stopped him from making them.

            1. He’s only here to make ‘outrageous’ comments and bask in the attention given him by those who engage him.

            2. Amsoc doesn’t argue so much a spit up as much vapid moral preening as he can, regardless of the context.

              Also, kbolino, for the love of God, stop arguing with dajjal. His name is Arabic for ‘Deceiver’. He’s a troll who thinks he’s clever.

              1. Dajjal and AddictionMyth are both shreek sock puppets.

                /Jill Stein approves of this message

            3. Amsoc doesn’t argue so much as spit up as much vapid moral preening as he can, regardless of the context.

              Also, kbolino, for the love of God, stop arguing with dajjal. His name is Arabic for ‘Deceiver’. He’s a troll who thinks he’s clever.

              1. Is argue really the right word? I think “insult” is more accurate. But nevertheless, point taken.

                1. You people really need to read the comments on his blog sometime.

                  And you thought here was a shitshow.

                  1. Not touching that one with a ten foot pole.

                  2. Crikey, it’s a troll orgy!

                    1. Ha! Look at that, shreek is linking to Reason. Gee, not only the Christian Tealiban and the Redhats are after shreek down in Dogdick, but now the Department of Defense? Wow, no wonder he had to move in with Tony.

                    2. I wonder just how much cocaine one needs to insufflate to damage the brain so badly that paranoid schizophrenia-like symptoms occur.

                    3. I wonder just how much cocaine one needs to insufflate to damage the brain so badly that paranoid schizophrenia-like symptoms occur.

                      You heard of using baking soda in a sandblasting type application? Something like that.

                    4. The comments are fucking insane. That has to only be him.

                    5. “The comments are fucking insane. That has to only be him.”

                      No one else will talk to shreek, which is why he comes here to at least have the pleasure of other people making fun of him.

                    6. Do you really think he’s flooding his blog with copypasta as a false flag in an attempt to say “Look how crazy my critics are!”?

                      If true, that’s the most pathetic thing I’ve ever witnessed.

                    7. Do you have alternative theories? The genuine articles (Cytotoxic) are posting? Other sentient beings give half a fuck enough to patronise? I’m not much of a betting man, but I’d go to Macau on this one.

                    8. (Betting on pure one man band shit I mean). Great find.

                    9. Sounds like She Who Shall Not Be Named.

                    10. Broken?

                    11. Never mind. Blocked for some reason because Canada.

                    12. I guess you’re missing out on a lot of fun if you like deranged trainwrecks.

                  3. Huh. Looks like Dajjal is Obama trolling the shit out of everyone he can.

                    I knew it.

                    1. Funny, the site is AddictionMyth and Dajjal is there posting. Who knew that shreek could actutally make a website?

                    2. mad.casual *might* have made an appearance. if that wasn’t just a troll spoofing his name. I think that AddictionMyth blog kind of shows how H&R, in a caricature of libertarian fashion, quietly discharges it’s toxic waste out into everyone else’s internet.

      1. If at the end of Trump’s administration, the government has actually reversed its several decades long trend of increasing revenues faster than inflation and population growth combined, I’ll be fucking amazed.

        Deficit spending is a spending problem not a revenue problem. Never has been and is very, very unlikely to become one.

      2. I hate wars

        … since when? You were all “I’m not a pacifist” and “ra, ra, we’re sticking it to ISIS” quite recently.

        1. Wars fought by libertarian socialists against fascists that are looking to rape your daughters? If we are to fight such things let’s let it be about this– not Kissinger’s dominoes or something about Saddam Hussein’s WMDs

          1. Um, generally it’s the socialists who mass-rape the daughters of countries they invade (under the auspices of defeating “fascism”). Or were Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Poland again, Angola, Korea, etc. all fascist countries threatening to rape the daughters of socialism?

          2. “I’m a hypocritical liar” would have been more accurate and more succinct

  5. “our common culture and values slip further and further away from the nation’s founding ideals of limited government and self-sufficiency.”

    That train left the station a long, long time ago.

    1. And it’s going off the rails at high speed.

      1. It’s going off the rails on a crazy Trump train?

        1. Right now, Ozzy and Trump are on the train eating live bats.

  6. “Will Trump end the federal war on pot”

    The Sessionasauras says no, you dopers!

  7. “We’re just a few weeks away from the start of President Trump’s first term and only this much is certain: It is going to be a hell of a ride.”

    Or, it could be totally boring and business as usual.

    1. No, I want the wild ride!

      Wait, I really shouldn’t phrase things that way here.

  8. …even as his tax plan threatens to reduce revenues (and thus raise deficits) by massive amounts.

    Now, wait a minute.

    1. Cosmotarian economics, dude.

    2. It is fairly simple math. And I wouldn’t really argue in favor of massive tax cuts all over the place with such a large debt problem. But it is certainly strange to hear a “Libertarian” complaining about tax cuts.

      1. Yes I thought the obvious libertarian fiscal position was cut taxes, and cut spending by even more.

        1. Ultimately, spending is all that matters. It’s the government using resources that could be used by private actors, and thus fucking up the price system and efficiency of the market.

  9. spending as a percentage of the GDP has stayed at or near post-WWII highs.

    Think about that for a moment. Our government spending, as a percentage of GDP has remained equal to what it was when we were at total war and the entire economy was on a war footing, existing almost entirely to support said war.

    1. They feds are waging war against the American people.

    2. “post-WWII highs”. So, not the same as WWII, but the same as at the hight of the Cold War.

      1. I presume “post wwii highs” sort of suggests immediately after wwii.

  10. The cosmopolitan set doesn’t seem too excited about the highly likely possibilities of national concealed carry and eliminating the NFA tax and restrictions on firearm suppressors.

    1. possibilities of national concealed carry

      Highly likely? Please, I don’t need the blue balls.

      1. National carry permit reciprocity is likely. 50 state constitutional carry is not.

        1. Repeating that it’s likely doesn’t make it more likely. I mean, don’t get me wrong, I’d love it, but what evidence do you have that this is spring-loaded and ready to pop?

            1. Yeah, one congressman proposing a bill is miles away from teetering on the brink.

              1. NRA’s top priority. They went all-in on TRUMP futures at the bottom of the market.

    2. Except for those on the terror watchlist.

  11. even as his tax plan threatens to reduce revenues (and thus raise deficits) by massive amounts.

    You people don’t know how we get federal deficits? And you wanted me to contribute to a fundraiser?

    1. Tax cuts == less cocktail party invites.

      /Cosmo logic

      1. Ah, it is all clear now. Reason staff uses funds to bribe the cool kids into allowing them into inviting them to the cocktail party. They do it on a credit card and need fundraisers to pay the minimum payments.

        Am I close?

        1. Without all the revenue, a lot of the cool kids in DC will have to go home and get real jobs. So, less cocktail parties to be invited to.

          1. Shit! I hope by “home” you mean Portland. Someplace far away from me.

      2. Tax cuts are awesome. Tax cuts with a reduction in government spending is much better.

        1. Spending cuts or GTFO

    2. I recall that after the Reagan and Bush tax cuts revenues went up. The problem? Spending went up far more. Tax cuts do not cause deficits. Spending does.

      1. If you are replying to my comment, I was indicating the same thing. If not, damn threaded comments.

        1. I was agreeing with you with examples, Nick’s not well versed in economic history it seems.

      2. Tax cuts typically increase revenue.

        1. And yet all you ever hear is the reverse. All they need to do is look at revenues after JFK,Reagan and Bush’s cuts.

        2. I’m not disagreeing with the basic point. However, I’ve read/listened (sadly, I don’t remember where now) to a number of free market types who argue that the marginal rates have been cut significantly in recent years to the point where cutting most income tax rates would not significantly raise revenue. Now, cutting corporate, business, payroll taxes, etc. may be a whole other thing.

          1. It’s likely that we’re at the “tipping point” so to speak, but it’s worth noting that nominal rates and effective rates are two different beasts. Lowering the nominal rates while eliminating many deductions might result in a net increase in tax revenue.

            1. It’s likely that we’re at the “tipping point”…

              Assumes facts not in evidence. Which isn’t to say we’re not at the mystical “tipping point” wrt lowering taxes resulting in increased revenue, but I’ve seen no evidence given.

              Do you have any links to any studies that try to prove this? Or is this more a SWAG?

              Note: I’m honestly interested in any true research you could point to which tries to prove were at this point.

              SLD: Taxes are artificial barriers to the market against whatever is being taxed, which results is less availability of the item being taxed. Therfore, the ideal tax rate on anything is zero. I agree it’s not feasible, but all taxes should be seen as painfully intrusive things to be despised, even is a necessary evil. Making the lowering or removing of any taxes an overall good.

              But I am very interested in any research showing a tipping point whereby further reductions wouldn’t raise economic activity/other taxes.

    3. Indeed. I am too lazy to dig it up right now, but I not that long ago ran the revenue numbers vs. CPI changes and population growth and to no my complete lack of surprise, government revenue has grown at a rate that outpaces both combined, from just about any starting point post WW2 to the present day.

      1. And by “too lazy to dig it up”, I mean here you go

  12. Any president that has that many plans rolled up into tubes behind his desk is gonna make things happen.

    1. This is the scary part. Unlike Obama, who walked on eggshells pretty much his entire 8 years outside of the healthcare debacle and who was almost completely incompetent, Trump looks like a guy who will get things done. To a libertarian that is typically a very bad thing. All we can hope for is that he gets more stuff ‘undone’ than he get done. That’s a long shot, but there’s still few weeks left to be optimistic.

      1. I had a Progressive acquaintance actually say that he’s scared that Trump will have a Progressive agenda and enact many of their policies because then he would take credit for the policies that they have been advocating for many years.

        Ain’t that a bitch?

        1. Wow, I’m really relieved that he probably won’t enact any policies that libertarians want and then take credit for them, that’s just scary stuff right there. /derp

          1. That partisan hackery for you. If President Obama enacted some libertarian policies, I would not care at all if he took credit for it.

            But that comment provided a great insight about many on the Progressive Left. They could care less whether their policies help people. What they actually want, what they really crave is control and power. That’s it.

            1. And want THEIR team to enact things. They will without shame complain about a policy they support if it’s passed by Trump.

              That they lack principles and consistency is a feature in the progressive intellectual gulag.

        2. I had a Progressive acquaintance actually say that he’s scared that Trump will have a Progressive agenda and enact many of their policies

          I remember pointing out to some Progressive types during the George W. Bush administration that many of Bush’s policies were just extensions of Lyndon Johnson’s. Then I asked if they liked Lyndon Johnson’s policies. That pissed them off.

    2. You think those tubes are something, you should see his binders full of women.

      1. He just grabs them by the pussy and puts them in a binder. It’s good to be king.

  13. Tucker Carlson is really good at taking down progs.

    1. More like Cucker Carlson… amirite?

    2. Meh, he’s aiiight, I prefer Milo’s open condescension for SJW’s and Ben Shapiro’s ability to press home the point and make progressives squirm. Carlson can be fun but he’s a little dry for my tastes. All of their respective polictical postions are mostly collectivist, but they are fun to watch.

      1. Milo’s awesome. Also, Gavin McInnes.

      2. Milo and Ben don’t have a 7:00 PM eastern time-slot on Fox News.

        1. They should have. Also, Lauren Southern and Gavin McInnes. Then I’ll turn Fox News back on every evening.

          1. Lauren Southern? Yes!

  14. I don’t consider myself a xenophobe. I think a million a year immigrants to the United States would be fine. But I don’t think they should all be from one country. I also think that if a country sends us someone who kills people they don’t know when they get here from “religious” or political reasons, it simple self defense to say we are going to curtail immigration from that country going forward. Libertarians live in the real world. To ask a bunch of government bureaucrats to guess the intentions of people coming here is beyond their pay grade. The 9/11 terrorists said they were going to study flying jets on their visa applications.

    1. I’m ok with a million immigrants a year, as long as they’re going to work and not sit around and get tax payer money for doing so. Open borders and putting immigrants on welfare as soon as they arrive, does not work for the good of the country. It also reinforces any ideas they might already have about government being all things to everyone.

      1. Don’t forget granting votership.

        1. Right, they take their ideas about what I said in my last sentence and use that as a guide for voting. No good can come of that. We need to keep in mind that American ideals like free speech and gun rights are totally foreign to people in the majority of other countries. They are not going to learn about those things here by being coddled like infants.

        2. I don’t see what’s so damn complicated about saying e.g. you have to work here for 10 years and pay taxes (or serve in the military) before you can become a citizen, and only citizens can vote/are eligible for welfare. But then again I don’t think any many of our laws are supposed to make sense in the first place.

          1. Democrats are not in favor of mass immigration because of the goodness in their hearts. And they certainly do not want 3rd world uneducated poor people living in their neighborhood. All they want is more Democrat voters. I’m sorry if it makes me a grouchy old curmudgeon, but having non-citizens vote in our election is not acceptable, period. Do Democrats think it’s ok for me to go visit Mexico and try to tip their elections by illegally voting there? I doubt it.

            1. Most of our political system seems to be an attempt to make reductio ad absurdum into a performance art project. What’s the sanest thing we can do? What’s the most principled thing we can do? What would enhance the liberty of our citizens?

              Ok, let’s do the opposite of all that.

              1. What’s the sanest thing we can do? What’s the most principled thing we can do? What would enhance the liberty of our citizens?

                All that shit requires forethought. The attention span of the average voter is around 1 week.

            2. I doubt illegals voting comes anywhere near tipping the election, but amnestying millions of illegals will. Which makes my opposition frankly unlibertarian, but we have issues enough with Democrats leveraging welfare for votes without spontaneously awarding them a huge new voter bloc.

              1. Yeah, I realize that, I was just making a point about what hypocrites and phonys the Democrats are on immigration.

              2. Which makes my opposition frankly unlibertarian

                Eh, I think there is a somewhat libertarian argument that can be made in the line of freedom of association.

                1. If you believe big government initiates force, you also believe that more big government voters means more initiation of force.

                  Libertarians are supposed to want smaller government and less initiation of force.

                  But Reason wants open borders and amnesty, so more big government voters, and more initiation of force.

                  It’s not complicated.

              3. Remember, illegals don’t even have to vote to sway things. They just cluster in Democratic Party strongholds, the census counts them, Congressional districts are apportioned, and tah-dah: more electoral votes for Democrats.

    2. I think Milton Friedman said that open borders and a welfare state are incompatible.

      1. Freedom was more important to Uncle Milty than cocktail party invites from the Progressive ruling class.

    3. Will, they did study flying jets. Just not how to land them.

  15. Has anyone covered the Assange news yet?

    Apparently there’s text messages which pretty much absolve him of the rapes that the Swedish prosecutors have been hiding.

    1. That’s pretty old news… if you’re talking about the ones I think you are– where his accuser was texting fawning messages about Assange for days after the alleged rape occurred?

      1. I believe his claim is that the Swedish prosecutors have had them and suppressed them along with other evidence. His claim appears to be that the alleged victim did not want to press any charges but was pressured into doing so.

  16. Anti-immigration conservatives and liberals have long argued that as the United States brings in more foreigners, our common culture and values slip further and further away from the nation’s founding ideals of limited government and self-sufficiency.

    Is either side doing more than paying lip service to either of these? The Democrats abandoned them a lot longer ago, but I haven’t seen the Republicans act any differently for a very long time. Is there a voting bloc, other than us, who genuinely wants our government to adhere to these principles anymore?

    1. I think there are plenty of voters, both Republicans and Democrats, who would like to see less government.

      So long as it doesn’t affect any entitlement, job, or program that affects themselves or anyone close to them. If it affects someone else it’s OK. This of course means that any actual cuts are political suicide, because people will necessarily lose entitlements and/or jobs.

      Politicians know this. So they make sweeping yet vague promises to cut government without affecting you, you, or you. Their cuts will only affect that guy over there.

      And then nothing gets done.

      1. The day the American people started viewing their government not as a check on foreign governments but instead as a vehicle to redistribute the “unfairness” of the world was the day the American experiment failed.

        1. The day that the frontier was conquered and there was no place left to run was the day the American experiment failed.

          1. Maybe. I’m sure having “leave me the fuck alone” space was a key part of making it work, in the sort of way that a problem with other people can be solved by getting rid of the other people. But I don’t think that was either necessary or sufficient to reach this end; the U.S. reached the height of its economic freedom (Jim Crow notwithstanding) after the closing of the frontier.

            1. Once the frontier was closed and there was no where to run, then the busybodies could impose their will on liberty minded people with impunity. That’s when the American experiment ceased to be unique and became just like every other government.

          2. You make a good point, sarc. That’s why I want my starship as soon as possible. There’s no where left on this planet to get away from the nanny state bastards.

            1. I think Alaska now and then. Then I think of how much I hate Maine winters and the thought goes away like a fart in the wind.

              1. Did you ever read about the North Pond Hermit? He spent 27 years in the Maine wilderness, and maintains that he weathered every winter outdoors.

                1. Probably. Shit like that depresses me.

                  1. I very much enjoyed the GQ writeup, but then again I’ve only ever experienced southwestern winters.

          3. +1 Frederick Jackson Turner

  17. Are you going to talk about how the most qualified person to ever run for president was not allowed to win because of racism and toxic man?

    1. You’ve missed out on some news. Women were also responsible for that by not getting in line with their sister wiminz folk. If you’re a woman, you obviously have to vote for the woman, or you’re a female misogynist. Unless it’s a Republican woman, then you have to vote against her, cuz… ok, you just have to.

      1. White woman are traitors to their sex. White girls ruin everything.

        1. Q) How many feminists does it take to screw in a light bulb?

          A) ONE GOD DAMMIT!

          1. A) As many as you want, they can’t change anything.

          2. A) THAT’S NOT FUNNY!

          1. I love white girls. But I am not a feminist hag.

              1. So, in that relationship, whose the bigger freak? The 76 year old woman who has surgery to make her look like a cat, or the 49 year old man who finds her attractive?

                1. or the 49 year old man who finds her [money] attractive?

                  1. Yeah. Sigh. Just another symptom of the matriarchy.

  18. Libertarianism in a Rapidly Diversifying America

    If you replace Robby with a Mexican, its hair must of at least proportional magnificance

  19. http://www.powerlineblog.com/a…..atives.php

    Lefty journalists are just vile.

    1. Conservatives are all Hitler. Killing them is like going back in time and killing Hitler. If you don’t want to kill conservatives then you wouldn’t kill Hitler. Why do you hate Jews?

  20. The great woe that has fallen upon the left in this country was made possible by modern communications, AKA, the internet. The left found themselves in a corner, not being able to escape from, no matter how great their efforts were, their ideology being openly challenged. Having nowhere to hide, they had to respond. They failed miserably, their failed ideas being exposed for all to see. They cannot win by logical argument. The majority of people are just not that into them and are not buying what they’re selling. They desperately tried to change the narrative by making everything about identity politics, but that failed miserably again, they’ve lost the debate. The only way to impose leftist ideals on a people is by brute force. Their only move left is to get a strongman into office who will suspend elections and who is willing to jail and kill tens of millions of people. And I can guarantee you that the majority of them approve of that plan. They have not changed or evolved. No matter what they change their name to, socialists, progressives, liberals, they are the same hateful and evil entity.

    1. “Political tags ? such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth ? are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.”

      ? Robert A. Heinlein

    2. Look at what they did in Venezuela. They would do that here if they could. It is why they hate the second amendment. What they really rely on and have always relied on is mob violence to terrorize their political enemies. That doesn’t work against an armed society.

      1. Arms are no good without the will to use them.

        1. When the mob shows up to burn your house down, the will comes easier than you think.

          1. I won’t argue with that. However individuals are no match for a mob. Individuals must band together. That’s the hard part, especially when everyone is so divided over petty bullshit.

            1. But knowing that people are armed, makes the mob a lot more cautious. Going around burning shit down in this country takes a death wish. That wouldn’t be true if we were not so well armed.

              1. I remember when the commies showed up during the Missouri riots and tried to convince them to move the riots into the white neighborhoods. On camera one of the rioters responded with “Hell no, those people have guns!”

              2. “But knowing that people are armed, makes the mob a lot more cautious.”

                Armed mobs, I assure you, are anything but cautious. My advice, if you run across an armed mob. You should be careful.

                1. And here, yesterday, you were assuring us that weapons don’t matter!
                  I’ll bet you have a cite for this, too, right?

                  1. Damn threading;
                    The above is in reply to trueman.

            2. It’s late, I know, and nobody’s gonna see it, but I wanted to say this:

              “I got one word for you, Buck, just one word… Roof Koreans.”

    3. Well put, Hyperion. And I think their weakest point now is identity politics. If that can be discredited (either by Trump, conservatives, libertarians, the alt-right, or some combination), it would be a great victory for liberty.

      1. This may be why Bernie has tried to pivot away from ID politics towards the economic inequality bullshit. Hopefully it will fail just as hard, but unfortunately you’ve got a whole cohort of youth who recognized the identity crap for what it is, but have bought the inequality hook line and sinker.

    4. Uh … no. The right in this country can only win through misinformation.

      In 1994, it was Rush Limbaugh convincing everyone the country was still in recession.

      This year, it’s Clinton’s emails! No, a pedophilia ring! And coal and manufacturing can go back to the way they were in 1950 if you just close your eyes, vote Trump and wish really, really hard!

      The “logical arguments” are all left these days. That’s why academia, the media and overwhelming majorities of educated people (many of them with libertarian sympathies that you can reach!) are voting Democrat, whether they’re really “left” or not.

      1. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

  21. Well, Democrats haven’t won the white vote in a Presidential election since 1964.

    So assuming Republicans actually are the small government party and taking into consideration that Democrats clearly receive the minority vote in overwhelming numbers… yes, there is real truth to the idea that immigration is bad for your Libertarian moment.

    1. You know what else is bad for the libertarian movement? Republicans. Just slightly less bad in some ways.

      1. Yeah, but millions of Republicans aren’t flooding into the US.

  22. Our wonderful government schools!

    “JACKSON, Miss. (AP) ? Fired, criminally charged and with her state teaching license on the line, Linda Winters-Johnson admitted Wednesday that she’d been wrong to drag a special education student by the hair across the gym floor at Greenville High School.
    […]
    Raina Lee, a lawyer who handles educator misconduct proceedings for the state, said it was the longest such sanction she’d seen. Mississippi has no legal provisions for permanently revoking a teacher’s license, although department officials say they plan to ask lawmakers for that power.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/edu…..779566.php

    You cannot lose your license; that’s what it says right there.

    1. Yeah, but if not for public schools, billions would die in the streets.

    2. Well, there’s your problem right there. If you don’t want kids to be hit, don’t hire old Black women who don’t tolerate no sassmouth to teach them.

    3. OK, a swat to the backside was not uncommon when I was a yute, but dragging a kid by the hair prolly would have gotten my cave-dwelling ‘rents pissed off.

  23. Left freaks over Trump EPA pick

    “House minority leader Nancy Pelosi says the Pruitt nomination must be blocked “for the sake of the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the planet we will leave our children.” New York AG Eric Schneiderman says Pruitt is a “dangerous and an unqualified choice.” Independent socialist senator Bernie Sanders declares the Pruitt pick is not only dangerous but also “sad.” The League of Conservation Voters calls Pruitt not just a global warming skeptic but “an outright climate denier.”

    Heh, a denier to head the EPA! Trump really is a master troll.

    1. New York AG Eric Schneiderman

      One of the shitheads who’s trying to extort billions out of Exxon.

      1. Yep, that shithead.

      2. “One of the shitheads who’s trying to extort billions out of Exxon.”
        Not gonna search now, but I think he’s the last man standing.

    2. for the sake of the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the planet we will leave our children.

      They really do see themselves as gods, don’t they?

      1. Hey, the day Obo was Crowned, the sea level dropped several feet!

    3. Bernie Sanders: “SAD!”

    4. Heh, a denier to head the EPA! Trump really is a master troll.

      And I love it!

      But there is more!

      Linda McMahon for Small Business Administration. Maybe you’ll recognize her husband more. Vince McMahon.
      The WWE comes to DC! Sweet!

      I’m still hoping for Palin for Secretary of the Interior
      Drill, baby, drill!

  24. What’s the preferred jacking destination of the racially insecure these days? Blacked.com? Is blacksonblondes.com still in business?

    1. Free Society? SIV? Want to chime in here?

      1. Do they fear Lexington Steele or adore him? Or both?

        1. They want to be him and that brings on the shame that makes them hate him. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

          They go so insane they try and argue that “cuckservative”–a term that originated with Stormfront for conservatives that were pro-immigration to suggest that they want “mud people” in so the can outbreed White America–has nothing to do with race.

          1. They’re not even aware of the provenance of their stupid little insult? How unsurprising. Hate not heritage, or something like that.

          2. Only cucks think “cuckservative” has anything to do with race. As seen above they get the idea from their favorite pr0n.

            1. Yes, queef bucket. Stormfront has nothing to do with race.

    2. OGs remember when it was Dogfart.

      1. Anyone else remember savagesonblondes.com?

        1. Poor taste Warty. You sure seem to know a lot about all that.

          I binge watched “Black Booty Broke the Scale” series

      2. I still see those videos come up. I avoid them because they’re almost always just short clips, and I’m it for the long haul.

  25. Watching the local news where they had a story on Pearl Harbor and interviewed several people who were there, one was a Marine at the barracks and the other was a child who was waiting in the car while his dad was running an errand inside a building when the Japs started bombing and strafing the parking lot and buildings* and I realized that Pearl Harbor is our “it happened 75 years ago event” while for them at the time their “it happened 75 years ago event” was the end of the Civil War.

    Sort of freaked me out.

    *See Lenore, that’s why we don’t leave kids in the car.

    1. “I realized that Pearl Harbor is our “it happened 75 years ago event” while for them at the time their “it happened 75 years ago event” was the end of the Civil War.”

      Similarly, we listen to the ‘Stones as background to some commercial; 50 years old. What was in use when you were growing up?

      1. Sevo, what was it like being a young boy (but still entirely grumpy) at the end of the Civil War?

        1. Quite enjoyable. All those guns lying about and the blackies singing that, what do you call it?, sad music! And the trains! Why, it just took your breath away! But it was difficult finding fresh onions for my belt.

  26. BTW, I have the pop-corn concession; suck it guys.

    Bitch fight between Trump and local union boss:
    “President-elect Donald Trump is slamming a union leader who criticized his deal to discourage air conditioner manufacturer Carrier Corp. from closing an Indiana factory and moving its jobs to Mexico.
    […]
    In a second tweet, Trump suggested Jones should “Spend more time working ? less time talking” and said the union should “Reduce dues.”
    […]
    He (Chuck Jones, union thug) accused Trump and Vice President-elect Mike Pence of staging “a dog and pony show” around the Carrier deal.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/pol…..779820.php

    I wonder what he has to say about the SEIU employees ‘striking’ as a Mickey Ds where they don’t work.

    1. Not even that. They weren’t union members. They were hired protesters off of the street and were paid minimum wage.

      1. Is that ironic? Shouldn’t they have been paid $15 an hr? I guess it’s not ironic so much as hypocritical.

  27. Time magazine on HRC:

    “Like an American Moses, she was an imperfect prophet, leading women to the edge of the Promised Land. Now it’s up to another woman to enter it.”

    Another highlight:

    “As a Senator from New York and then Secretary of State, her public approval rating hovered near 60%. But it plummeted when she sought higher office. What is it about Clinton that makes her more popular while doing a job than while auditioning for it?”

    Yeah, because absolutely nothing of any importance happened during that period.

    1. “Like an American Moses,”
      Was Moses an un-indicted felon?

      1. Well he did straight up murder a dude.

        1. And fled the scene of the crime, then showed up later and had a buddy commit multiple acts of vandalism, sabotage, and a fair amount of murder.

      2. Are we sure he wasn’t referring to Grandma Moses?

    2. If we’re rolling with Exodus comparisons, she was more like Pharaoh, demanding that the people kowtow to her inherited power.

      Or maybe we just shouldn’t use sycophantic Biblical allegory for amoral politicians.

      1. I am fond of Obama being called “chocolate Jesus”.

    3. More fantastical and gross than anything I’ve ever managed.

      1. In that event I am glad that I missed it, Sugarfree.

        I do note that you typed “anything I’ve ever managed” rather than informing us that it was more fantastical and gross than anything you’ve ever imagined.

        Completely off topic: What are one or two of your favorite/most liked science fiction/fantasy type writing styles (excluding your own, of course)?

        1. Styles? It depends. I really like it when people pull off the hard-boiled science fiction (Altered Carbon by Richard Morgan is a good example.) And The Dresden Files books by Jim Butcher are just fun reads.

          I also like the slighty sloppy books that you can really tell the author was having a ball while writing. Philip Palmer is not a well-known writer yet, but he does this sort of fast-forward info-overload style while writing these violent high-concept adventure books. Version 43 and Artemis are the best examples, and Red Claw is basically one long chase scene set inside a Godzilla movie. It’s just some crazy stuff.

          1. Thanks, SugarFree.

            If memory serves me well I recall you posting a workable link to a definition of a particular style of writing which you did not enjoy, which is why I chose to use the word style in my query.

            I also like the slightly sloppy books that you can really tell the author was having a ball while writing. I’ve little doubt in this regard. I think it’s a good bit of shared fun for both the authors and their readership (well, at least the readers who are more than a little familiar with the authors).

            I’ve copied you response for future use,

            Have a good night.

    4. I thought she was light itself? Sounds like a racist dog whistle to me.

  28. It may seem paradoxical, but the best thing for libertarianism would be to stop the rapid diversification of America.

  29. You guys. You guys. You guys. SolidariTEA.

    1. I can descry more meaning from the whale songs I am listening to than that article. The sentences, they are English, but they are strung together in the most unusual ways, as if a pack rat found a crate of magnetic poetry that fell of a truck and adorned his little underground den with it.

      1. It’s ironic that Chomsky coined the sentence “colorless green ideas sleep furiously” in an attempt to falsify connectionist theories of grammar, yet I’m certain that entire article is a product of a Markov chain text generator.

        1. “It’s ironic that Chomsky coined the sentence “colorless green ideas sleep furiously” in an attempt to falsify connectionist theories of grammar,…”

          I did not know this and will make sure to keep it available; here’s a link to it:
          http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/….._furiously

          Sokal could give him some instruction.

    2. The closest I came to a Donald J. Trump supporter throughout the election was when a friend of mine was verbally assaulted by one at a local Whole Foods, while she poured samples for a tea company she and her partner had created from the ground up, solidariTEA. Offended by its slogan ? “Strong Tea for Strong Community!” ? he called it “socialist propaganda.”

      when worlds collide.

      1. “…was verbally assaulted […] he called it “socialist propaganda.”

        So was the tea black, like CA assault weapons are supposed to be? Was he black? Was he wearing black?
        Assault-minded folks want to know.

      2. A Trump supporter shopping at Whole Foods???

        1. You wouldn’t have to support Trump to call that whacko on propaganda, but you also have to remember Makey’s stores are non-union, and he called Obo on the BS which is O-care.

    3. A safe place for queer and trans youth in a national climate where gender fluidity is under assault and where mainstream bars and clubs can be very dangerous.

      So…a demonstrably deadly firetrap is safe, but a reg’lar old bar with exit signs and stuff is unsafe. I don’t understand how these people manage to feed and dress themselves.

    4. hah….this sentence amused me….

      “No, the warehouse was not zoned for residential use and did not meet safety requirements, but the current housing crisis in Oakland has sent many young people into cooperative underground living situations in an effort to maintain stable housing. ”

      Hmmm, there’s a *housing crisis* in one of the proggiest cities in the country? My goodness, what could have ever led to such a thing?

  30. HRC on economics: higher wages create demand which causes higher wages.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2EA_vycLD4

    Circular logic is fun because circular logic is fun.

    1. alternate punchline: the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club.

    2. To be fair, the emails show that Clinton didn’t believe in much of that crap, she’s just saying bullshit that her idiotic base loved to propel herself into power. So I guess that’s better?

      1. It doesnt matter what she really believes. She says that shit and actually intended to put it into action in order to appease the base further. We spiral into poverty and she points her finger at the obstructionist Republicans…who probably helped her get it to pass…then hops on her 300M dollar jet and zips away to Pedo island.

        1. zips away to Pedo island.

          Are you implying that she enjoys the underaged?

        2. S, Trump is getting free rides here re: what he says vs what he might actually do.
          Far be it from me to defend that hag, but we don’t know if she intended to do that, or was merely playing to the crowd at the time/place.

        3. It doesnt matter what she really believes.

          Yeah it does.
          She believes she has the right to rule the peasants. Because she is better than they are.

  31. Well welll. It looks like the culture war might have cost the Democrats an election for once.

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/251229/#respond

    1. A vagina didn’t vote vagina.
      How could that be?

  32. “Feinstein a no-show as Boxer says goodbye to the Senate”
    http://www.sfgate.com/politics…..781221.php

    Backstory: Boxer sponsored a bill which ‘saved the fishies’; Feinstein stuck a rider on it which ‘saved the farmers’.
    While it’s not mine to defend the farmer’s hand-out bills, they do tend to feed more people than the fishies, so like Trump/Clinton, if I had to chose…
    Oh, and to Boxer: Do let the door hit you in the ass, you imbecile.

    1. So, if she’s gone, we’re going to get something better, right?

      1. Hey, did you hear the one….?

  33. Per Warty’s post above:

    This city is my America. We in Oakland pride ourselves on our inclination to question and to disobey, to establish havens and battlegrounds for those brave and tender hearted enough to resist conformity.

    The closest I came to a Donald J. Trump supporter throughout the election was when a friend of mine was verbally assaulted by one at a local Whole Foods, while she poured samples for a tea company she and her partner had created from the ground up, solidariTEA. Offended by its slogan ? “Strong Tea for Strong Community!” ? he called it “socialist propaganda.”

    First, what conformity are you resisting by exclusivity associating with people who agree with you?
    Second, you can’t verbally assault someone because an assault by definition involves physical contact.

    What semi-literate nimrod wrote this?

    Meredith Isaksen is a poet and English instructor at Berkeley City College.

    Of course she is. The universe is funny that way.

    1. She also wrote a Trump-fearing, cringe-inducing article about her abortion that eventually made me laugh.

      1. Late-Term Abortion Was the Right Choice for Me

        That’s true, in a sense.

        Its just sad her parents didn’t realize it first.

    2. We in Oakland pride ourselves on our inclination to question and to disobey, to establish havens and battlegrounds for those brave and tender hearted enough to resist conformity.

      I can’t be bothered to unpack the word-salad. Is she standing on those dead charred bodies in the warehouse here?

    1. That fucking piece of cheese is a commie before he is pope. That is remarkable though, watching the pope spread pinko propaganda talking points.

      1. Good grief, that reads like his speech was written by some third world nut-bag dictator. Birds of a feather sing the same song I guess.

      2. John Paul the second was a truly great man.

  34. How did this bit of sanity end up in the san fran shitrag?

    http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/…..833675.php

    1. Notice is was buried on a Saturday edition.
      Do not recognize the author (not a Chron writer), and that was written prior to the current E-in-C.
      Still surprising.

    1. That was a great podcast. Can’t believe MSNBC had him on.

      1. Reason’s very own Epstein is on his show today.

        1. Hey! Straffin’! How’s it hanging, man?

          1. Just killing time at work. Drinking?

            1. You know me so well. Also, your reply would mean something different if you had left out the question mark…?

            2. “Just killing time at work.”

              It’s raining pretty well in Nor Cal this evening and I figured it was worth a look at Tokyo (maybe snow again?)
              I use this for weather:
              http://www.intellicast.com
              Over the past couple of years, you no longer have to toggle between the ‘new world’ and Europe, but I see no tracking east of, oh, the 2oth parallel.
              Patriarchy!
              Got a site which tracks weather in Asia?

              1. I just use Yahoo Japan. No snow yet.

  35. The libertarian gun boner I got when I learned that an Islamic nutcase had run over and knifed some college kids has gone soft upon learning that a right-wing nutcase shot up a pizzeria over a fake story he got over the internets.

    My favorite part is where the reporter asked him if he took any drugs. As if! You don’t need drugs in krazy kookville U.S.A. This country is a haven for crackpots of all shapes and colors.

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016…..-news.html

    1. Fuck off, asswipe.

    2. Yes, crackpots and trolls. And idiots. Here’s a mirror.

      1. He doesn’t object to “crackposts and trolls”; he objects to “crackpots of all shapes and colors.”

        Meaning that he wants to ban Asian immigration.

        1. Well, I can relate; I’m really tired of hearing “for Korean, press 2”

  36. How much would we have to donate to get the Reason writing staff to do a shot-for-shot remake of Gymkata?

  37. Adventures in marketing:

    “How have we gotten so digitized in the 21st century, but have yet to figure out how to make women’s shoes both comfortable and stylish?
    Well, we may finally have an answer: Shoes on Solano, a local shoe store in Berkeley that’s changing attitudes around women’s footwear once and for all.
    […]
    In reality, the “beauty is pain” model is simply an adage of patriarchy, suggesting that women must suffer for the sake of adhering to arbitrary fashion standards. Shoes on Solano is calling this bluff, once and for all, by selling not only shoes but an attitude shift?one that empowers women to (finally) look and feel good in their shoes.”
    http://blog.sfgate.com/storyst…..mncKAhhgFA

    I’m saying the model looks like the witch who is going to lecture you on ‘wymyns studies’.

      1. Besides which, all those shoe ads are aimed at WOMEN, for pete’s sake!
        I never bought a pair of shoes for any woman I ever dated or the one I married; they picked those things themselves.
        I guess they just need some time in, oh, a ‘camp’ to get re-educated about that…

      2. HM, I was kind of expecting this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BWNQTqMkezc

    1. Women look good in high heels. Really good. I can’t walk with one inch high heels on cowboy boots, i certainly couldn’t walk in 3″ pumps. But man, makes the legs and buttocks look good.
      Also, when did it become acceptable to offer men’s socks in only one size fits all, 6-12.
      Size 6-12? Fucking really? Why not just offer shirts in one size, s-2xl? You know, the smaller guys can just tuck the shirt in.
      Pet peve of mine. Seriously, I’d really like socks that fit

  38. “BREAKING: Michigan Just Got Revenge On Jill Stein for Recount! They Passed NEW LAW.”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki3kAevYjgk

    Pretty much ‘no standing, pay for it all if you want it’…

    1. I happened on to it on youtube; here’s some print info:

      “Federal judge halts Michigan election recount”
      […]
      “DETROIT ? After a lawyer urged him not to stick taxpayers with a $5 million recount tab, a federal judge on Wednesday dissolved his earlier decision and halted the hand recount of 4.8 million ballots that were cast for president in Michigan.
      The issue, however, is far from over, as an appeal will follow.”
      http://www.usatoday.com/story/…../95121830/

      Is Jill Stein commie-kid? Attention-whoring absent any honest comments?

      1. Naw, age can’t be commie-kid: she made millions of dollars on that scheme. He’s just a loser.

        1. Yeah; kinda like turd ‘worked in finance’; emptying trash cans and sweeping floors.

  39. Don’t feed the troll!

    I’m Jill Stein, and I approve this message.

  40. Donald Trump supporters who cheered the candidate’s plan to curtail immigration from Mexico and ban Muslims from entering the country often stressed the we’re just importing “Democratic” voters who will expand welfare. Is any of that true?…

    So Reason still doesn’t have an answer on how importing big government voters will make the US more libertarian.

    Instead, all I see are “but what about Trump blah blah blah”.

    How about you folks actually answer the question someday?

    If you’re supposed to be a libertarian mag, shouldn’t you have an answer for how your #1 policy fetishism will actually make the country more libertarian?

  41. I’m glad you’re doing this. We need libertarian ideals now, and they’ve been battered at the polls. Maybe instead of climate-change denialism, we can get libertarian ideas on how to fight it. Maybe someone can pick up the persuasive argument that immigration is a good thing and tariffs are not.

    Time to smash the party labels and let reason ring.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.