The Fifth Column

Have Media-Bias Hunters Lost the Plot of Government Malfeasance? The New Fifth Column

Kevin Williamson guests for a discussion of executive orders, Muslim threats, whataboutism, and whether Reason is "woke."


Hey, Tiger! ||| Matt Welch
Matt Welch

Is there no political controversy that can't be responded to by pointing out the bias of journalists and hyperventilating of opponents? On the latest edition of The Fifth Column, the weekly podcast I co-host with Kmele Foster and Michael "Hollywood" Moynihan, we tangle over that question and so much more with Moynihan substitute Kevin Williamson of National Review. Williamson comes out in favor of explicitly restricting Muslim immigration, due to concerns of terrorism and assimilation; I argue differently, and Kmele is just asking questions, including What role did U.S. foreign policy play in creating the refugee mess?

It's a lively discussion, including some rare Welchian criticism of Reason commenters, and you can listen to the whole biscuit here:

Oh yeah, neglected to link to last week's episode—that's here.

For more places to get our Fifth Column on, check out iTunes, Stitcher, Google Play,, @wethefifth, and Facebook.

NEXT: Trump Visits Dover AFB to Greet Arrival of Body of SEAL Killed in Yemen, Senate Confirms Rex Tillerson, Miami Beach Police Fight for License Plate Readers on State Roads: P.M. Links

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Look, just tell us where to find the part where he criticizes the commenters.

    1. Yeah. Could someone who takes the plunge and listens to the whole thing point us to the time stamp where the bit starts?

      1. Listening now, will post if I get to it before I leave work.

      2. Betting that Welch fails to top Popehat’s characterization.

        1. It’s at the very end, it’s very mild, and he’s pretty much just calling people out for calling him a SJW.

          C’mon Welch, don’t be a cuck, tell us how you really feel! ;p

  2. “whether Reason is ‘woke'”

    I called it. Now, be true to thy self and change the masthead from ‘Free Minds and Free Markets’ to ‘Woke as Hell’

    1. Wouldn’t it be “Woke AF”?

      1. Woke Minds and Intersectional Markets

        1. “Markets” is a bad word.

          Woke Minds and Intersectional Sharing Economy.

          Wait, “economy” is also a dirty word.

          Woke Minds and Intersectional Solidarity.

          Huzzah, we have a slogan!

        2. Gave Huffglue its new motto just by twisting Reason’s. Well done.

      2. Still no RSS feed for the podcast?

      3. Let it be known, that I feel that I was one of the furthest to call you ‘woke’.

        You’re a good sport, Matt. Good episode. Kevin Williamson provided a good balance.

  3. Media or the 4th estate is entirely dead and it deserves to be so. No one with any brains will never believe anything they hear again.

    Trump will make criticism of him a moot point because he has played this fake news twitter thing perfectly.

    The world will suffer as a consequence as all scumbag politicians will seize upon their untrammeled access to graft all the while denying all news coverage of their crimes as fake with their allies in the press supporting them while the party out of favor and their press minions will be ridiculed until it is their turn again.

    1. Why did you write the last paragraph in future tense? There’s nothing new there, nothing that hasn’t been happening for over 150 years.

      1. It certainly has been cemented via the last election cycle. The left propaganda machine ran out of all usable ammo when they just stopped trying and admitted they were total Marxists for a cause.

        And trump was rightly able to pounce when they regularly published one outlandish lie after another.

        The press has been political for a long time but at least they were out for an audience so they had to try to mask their allegiance to washington power. Now it is simply working for one political party or another.

        Frankly, I don’t see how any of the television news outlets make any money.
        The problem of course is the fact that they are still on the air means that there are vast swaths of retarded Americans who believe this stuff and thus why everyone needs to purchase a gun and get ready for shit to get systematically worse and never really better.

        1. Given that nearly all of the MSM has become the “left propaganda machine”, why does anyone still believe or defend it at all?

          Over the years I always hear that totalitarian regimes with completely state-run media always manage to have some die-hard believers in what’s slopped in their troughs by the state. China, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, it really doesn’t seem to matter.

          How did it get so bad that our own news media mirrored such a thing without a government take-over?

          1. Politics is downstream from culture?

            1. +1 Russian water sports dossier.

  4. Is there no political controversy that can’t be responded to by pointing out the bias of journalists and hyperventilating of opponents?

    Based on the failures of the “journalists” around here I think you mean “bias AND hyperventilating of journalists?

    You guys looked so fucking stupid with the dead Iraqi grandma it’s just sad.

    I used to brag about the level of journalistic integrity that Reason had next to other sites but now it’s just a pathetic mix of Huffpo and Jezzie with better commenters.

    1. Got a link to the dead Iraqi grandma shtick, or has it been flushed down the memory hole? I must’ve missed that one. Also, in the interest of full disclosure and solidarity (if possible among libertarians), I come here for the comments.

    2. with better commenters

      with the best commenters

    1. Also, surprised and disappointed that nobody has gone for the low-hanging pun yet: More like Orwelchian criticism of the commentariat, which is in fact a national treasure.

    2. He really has it coming.

      1. I am confused and offended.

  5. Ah, it was recorded last night.

  6. including some rare Welchian criticism of Reason commenters

    Fuckin’ Hihn.

    1. Hihn is the man. In a Hannibal Smith/Sinead O’Connor/Ted Bundy kind of way.

  7. including some rare Welchian criticism of Reason commenters

    Also, please have one of the Reasoners look into a Reason commenter’s mother being assaulted by the police on a high school basketball court, and then kept in jail overnight. Thanks!

    1. Please do this, Welch. And, as always, kill Hitler.

      The actual Hitler, not the bombastic president so many progressives are referring to as Hitler. Just so we’re clear.

      1. “Well, I killed him, it was so chaotic, the bunker was getting bombed…”

        /ripping off xkcd’s joke

  8. Is Reason woke? Oh yeah, you’re woke. Don’t worry. The other woke folk still don’t like you though.

    1. I’m so woke, I wear a clock around my neck so I always know what time it is.

      1. Cool clock, Ahmed. Want to bring it to the White House? We should inspire more kids like you to like science. It’s what makes America great.

        1. I had been hoping for more of a “big clock” joke.

          1. ‘Member that time our President got taken in by a kid hoaxing his school on his parents’ behalf for lawsuit fuel? I ‘member.

            1. You may remember, but does Pepperidge Farm?

            2. I remember the time the whole damn thing wouldn’t have made the news if the principal not been stuck with some zero-tolerance bullshit policy and the cops hadn’t decided to arrest the kid after determining that no crime had been committed to “teach him a lesson”.

              The kid was a dipshit, but the people that should have acted like adults could have done so without pouring gasoline on the fire.

              1. There was plenty of stupidity to go around in that incident. But one would expect the POTUS at the least to not get suckered by it.

                1. Really?

                  1. I was mocking. C’mon. The guy set himself up as the smartest President ever and his legion of sycophants clearly believed it. One had to expect that his zeal for virtue signaling would end up getting him kicked in the jimmy when he called it wrong, and did it ever.

                    Every POTUS is a human being with human fallibility. Hubris was one of Obama’s biggest character flaws (looks like a trend lately).

                    So nah, not really really. Spice the last post with an eye roll for the right flavor.

  9. lol. nice try matt.

  10. Have Media-Bias Hunters Lost the Plot of Government Malfeasance?

    Did they ever have the plot to begin with?

    you can listen to the whole biscuit here:

    In Trump’s America, fifth column listens to you!

  11. Wonder if there is any acknowledgement that this deluge of horseshit hasn’t been very libertarian at all.

    Leftist talking points re-packaged, probably to appeal to them and hope-beyond-hope to get some of them to side with us.
    For-the-children arguments and tugging-at-heartstrings. Hit us with some reason, Reason.
    Terrible collectivist arguments straight out of the pages of the MSM.
    Not a single “radical” libertarian commentary about the growth of the state, reliance upon government support, the costs both social and financial, the erosion of liberty by proggy fiat.

    The “balance” is entirely on one side of the argument, all thumbs are on one side the scale. The commentariat pushes back for a reason, and there are some really damned smart people here.

    1. Listened to a bunch of it so far. This podcast shows a lot more balance in its arguments than anything published in the last few days. It actually sounds more like the commentariat.

      Bring this balance to your writing, please. Have a writer or two write something from the perspective of one of those heartless libertarians who care more about the reals than the feels.

      1. I’ve found that in general with Reason. Their H&R stuff is the clickbait bullshit that we all hate. Their magazine stuff, the videos, the podcasts, and anything else that required more than just pounding on a keyboard for 15 minutes tends to be much higher quality. Take Gillespie for example. Most of his TV and radio appearances are awesome! Most of his H&R articles are deficient.

        1. There’s more editing. The H&R stuff is mostly off the cuff stream of thought stuff.

      2. This podcast shows a lot more balance in its arguments than anything published in the last few days

        Yes it does.

  12. I am going to stout month. will resume listening when i return.

  13. Welchian criticism of Reason commenters


    I’ll listen later.

    1. Why start now?

  14. Libertarianism in one country

    Careful Welch, that makes Williamson Libertarian Stalin, and you Libertarian Trotsky.

    Don’t let him break the ice at the next cocktail party.

  15. Also, re: The criticism of the comments.

    Come on Welch, name names, throw down the gauntlet, let’s get some dueling going. You say people have insulted your honour? Threaten them with gentlemanly personal combat, then we’ll see who the cowards and rogues are.

    1. throw down the gauntlet

      Ah, you’re going with the SCOTUS pick’s might-bring-back-duels angle. I think “punch a Nazi” is more popular right now.

      1. Pugilism’s all well and good, provided the code duello is followed.

        I’ve actually been pro-dueling for awhile, but the SCOTUS pick has got me excited like SIV at a factory farm for chickens.

    2. It was more the deluge on one of my SiriusXM preview posts. Though in fairness we had had like 15 anti-EO posts in the previous 24 hours….

      1. Though in fairness we had had like 15 anti-EO posts in the previous 24 hours….

        Yeah, people have kind of been screaming at Reason to cut it out.

        We prayed for a food truck article, and Walker deliverth.

      2. in fairness

        The Soave signal is lit.

        Double entendre intended.

    3. The City of Seattle has a precedent for this built into the law. It is essentially fight-club rules. 1 on 1. No foreign objects or smashing your opponent into things. Have to stop if the other guy yields.

      To my knowledge, the only one who’s used it recently is our resident Superhero, Phoenix Jones.

  16. OK, finally got to the good part, and…


    1. Notice me, senpai!

      Maybe that should be more Mad Max, given the Trumpocalyptic wasteland we now walk.

      Witness me!

      Did I appeal to the right factions in the commentariat?

      1. For Pan anime’s better, especially if it involves teenage girls driving Soviet era combat vehicles.

        1. More like, that’s the only context in which anime teenage girls don’t make me want to punch people.

          Stuff I like hasn’t been in vogue for 20 years at least, though sometimes there are glimpses, like the Blessed Black Lagoon, featuring Our Saint Dutch.

          1. Only thing I’m watching right now is Drifters, and that’s mostly a “so stupid it’s awesome” show. It’s got the same problems as most anime does now, bad, unnecessary comedy, caters to the fucking otakus sometimes, etc. But the premise is great: Throughout history, famous badasses are taken away just before they die and are sent to another dimension to fight an evil army.

            In short, it’s samurai, cowboys, and Hannibal Barca fighting Sauron.

            1. Drifters is good. And yeah, that’s a really good description of it.

  17. OK, it starts around the 78 minute mark.

    I had to listen to the last 10 minutes.

    1. “it” = discussing the commenters

  18. I will listen to this. Williamson is pretty good.

  19. Have Media-Bias Hunters Lost the Plot of Government Malfeasance?

    Did they ever have it?

  20. I think Benjamin Tucker’s critique of Herbert Spencer in 1884 could apply to many of the commenters on Reason:

    “It will be noticed that in these later articles, amid his multitudinous illustrations (of which he is as prodigal as ever) of the evils of legislation, he in every instance cites some law passed, ostensibly at least, to protect labor, alleviate suffering, or promote the people’s welfare. He demonstrates beyond dispute the lamentable failure in this direction. But never once does he call attention to the far more deadly and deep-seated evils growing out of the innumerable laws creating privilege and sustaining monopoly. You must not protect the weak against the strong, he seems to say, but freely supply all the weapons needed by the strong to oppress the weak. He is greatly shocked that the rich should be directly taxed to support the poor, but that the poor should be indirectly taxed and bled to make the rich richer does not outrage his delicate sensibilities in the least. Poverty is increased by the poor laws, says Mr. Spencer. Granted; but what about the rich laws that caused and still cause the poverty to which the poor laws add? That is by far the more important question; yet Mr. Spencer tries to blink it out of sight.”

    1. It seems to me like there’s a tendency to play up the negative effects created by policies intended to (or presented as a means to) mainly benefit the poor, unemployed, lower middle classes, etc., but not much attention is given to those policies or practices by the US government that distort markets and protect the wealthy/powerful. For instance, there is almost no discussion about the nature of land tenure/ownership under our system (the extensive use of land grants in the US’ past and the sale/lease of public lands to corporations for below market rates). Is there not a reasonable debate to be had about Georgist (or at least incorporating a LVT to some extent) or usufructuary alternatives? Is there not a reasonable debate to be had about our intellectual property system? A focus on burdensome licensure requirements (I realize it’s been talked about before in various articles) would also be helpful.

      There’s also the fact that the most powerful (and arguably most secure) country in Earth’s history continues to spend an unseemly amount on national security related expenditures (just about $1 trillion according to POGO;note this is including more than DoD). It’s disturbing that Trump apparently believes this isn’t good enough. The DoD and intelligence agencies are basically black holes for tax dollars. There needs to be consistency as well when discussing the nature of our economy and trade regime.

      1. There has never been a “free market” or “free trade” (probably impossible under any kind of traditional state) and it makes little sense to pretend given the sheer number of government interventions (subsidies, tariffs, land acquisition through the unjust use of force, etc.) that continue to persist and were used in the past to fundamentally shape the present. Reflexive anti-unionism is hardly surprising given that they are basically state-sponsored entities, act as cartels, and are highly bureaucratic, but this is probably the result of the Wagner Act to a large degree. Due to that law, for instance, workers are barred from engaging in wildcat strikes and sympathy strikes which were often highly effective.

        Finally, I’ve noticed that there’s a sort of fetishization of the founding fathers and Constitution among some commenters that’s puzzling. They had their fair share of great ideas and the Constitution does contain important protections, but I think it’s important to focus on further developing libertarian theory and moving beyond/improving upon their contributions (both their good and not so good ones).

        Tl;Dr…Let’s attack unjust government policies that entrench privilege/protect the wealthy with the same vigor we attack the bureaucracy and traditional welfare programs.

        Obviously, feel free to critique what I wrote. I know it’s a bit vague and lacks specificity, but it’s just the general sense I’ve gotten from the comments I’ve read in the past and more recently.

        1. This guy right here is woke. At least in my book.

        2. Your views intrigue me, and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

        3. Reflexive anti-unionism is hardly surprising given that they are basically state-sponsored entities, act as cartels, and are highly bureaucratic, but this is probably the result of the Wagner Act to a large degree.

          Indeed. Nowhere else did unions ever do anything to create a bad image of themselves. Only in America are they hated, because they can’t inconvenience millions of people with wildcat strikes of, say, subway systems. Everywhere else they are bannermen of free trade, social mobility and personal freedom.

          Margaret Thatcher certainly came to power due to entrenched evil of plutocracy and no other cause whatsoever!

          1. I mean I’m not here to defend British unions circa 1978. Moreover, labor/union history extends much further back and the conditions that led to the rise of unions were far different than Britain in the 1970s. Context is always important, of course. It bears mentioning as well that you can point to specific examples of businesses behaving badly. That clearly doesn’t mean you can invalidate the entire idea of operating a business. In any case, unions and other such worker organizations are completely valid under a free market system (insofar this is possible) so long as they are based upon free association. As you know, we’re a long way from getting unions and their allies to agree, though.

        4. Yay!

          But never once does he call attention to the far more deadly and deep-seated evils growing out of the innumerable laws creating privilege and sustaining monopoly.

          Lockean Proviso
          Corporate limited liability
          Intellectual property law
          Differential tax treatment for capital gains versus wages

          All sorts of violations of free market principles that benefit those who own. When was the last time Reason, Libertarians, or Conservatives, railed against them?

          Trump’s populism is a move in the right direction, even if it’s not well grounded philosophically.

          ps – Tucker quote stolen and kept for future use

  21. If you’re wondering if you’re woke, the answer is almost certainly yes.

  22. Kevin Williamson? Uh oh, John is going to be pissed.

    1. Williamson is like a rash. You just ignore him and hope he goes away.

  23. Matt is smoking crack if he really believes that the “assimilation machine” in the US is somehow going to make the muslims coming over now assimilate like others have over the last century or so.

    Go to Hammtramk Michigan where they play the call to prayer over loudspeakers at 5 in the am. Go to Minnesota where honor killings happen all the time and rarely get investigated. Go to Amarillo (as Kevin brought up) and ask someone about Female Genital Mutilation or if they know any gay people.

    This is so delusional it’s sad.

    1. They will assimilate some. But they will also assimilate us. Every wave of immigrants, while assimilating, has also left its mark on and changed American society to make it look a bit more like them. I wonder what parts of Muslim cultures Matt wants America to assimilate?

      1. I guess the good parts, like algebra, naming stars and schwarma.

        I’m sure the new Somali’s in Minnesota are totes cool with dialing back the whole “kill the gay away” and “mutilate eight year old girls” stuff.

        I know, let’s ask ’em!

        1. Yeah because if there is one thing America doesn’t have, its algebra and kabbab shops.

  24. Also Kmele- the Constitution is a FAILURE?

    What the fuck man?

    1. Tucker and Spencer have already been name-checked; time to bring up a third 19th century anarchist.

  25. The deficiency of the argument “I’ve talked to a bunch of people who came to this country” is, as I have said several times lately: survivorship bias. That is a logical fallacy.

    I have known a lot of immigrants and liked them. But to project that experience to all immigrants is folly. You and I had the chance to meet them because our country limits visas and green cards. That impassioned argument is sophistry. It is not arguing with your head. It’s arguing with your heart. That is why we say you sound like an SJW on this subject. Feels > reals.

    The argument is in favor of the survivors, the vetting process we have. It is in favor of limitation, not completely open borders. I’ve only actually heard rejections of the attempts to put solid numbers and reasoning behind it.

    1. That is an excellent point. I had never thought about it quite that way. But that is dead on.

      1. Not bad for an IQ of 70, huh?

        1. I keep saying this board is doing you good. 😉

          1. I employ a variety of argumentative styles, not all of which work well on everyone in general, but are often tailored to the specific person. Some of it looks rather hostile (the Socratic method tends to piss people off, for example), but I assure you that it isn’t. If I intend you to feel like you took a drubbing at the end of the argument, it’s because I suspected you could grow from that (and so that I did too!).

            My sincerest hope is that by being a moving target and people never quite certain whether or how I’m going to ambush their rhetoric, they end up going forth into their daily lives or social media and giving the proggies what for, better armed than they otherwise would have been.

            I’ve been studying the tactics of the alt-right with interest lately specifically because nothing grows in popularity that quickly without having its own je ne sais quoi. Also fell down the commie rabbit hole to see what those bastards are up to lately too. Clearly, they’re up to something and have experienced something of a resurgence of late. There’s enough bullshit to recoil from in both movements, but I feel I gain much by observing them.

            Finally, sometimes I adopt a bunch of different stances as if they are my own simply because I don’t know what I think yet. Pick an argument, try to see if I can defend it. It’s learning philosophy by doing philosophy — wandering out into the Agora armed with an idea to see how it is received.

    2. Yep, whatever terrorism we have is after filtering the stream. You drink it raw, you start to look a lot more like Europe.

  26. Undergirds your disquiet? My goodness.

  27. Bug Report: Doesn’t play in MS Edge

  28. NYT editorial claims that Gorsuch is qualified and an entirely reasonable pick for a Republican but since it is a stolen seat, Trump should be forced to pick a more moderate.

    This after they correctly describe him as a careful originalist who interprets the constitution as it was meant at the time.

    Never mind that the republicans were fully within their constitutional power to reject Garland. They weren’t obstructionist. They rejected him. As only a majority could.

    This disingenuous shit is why I have stopped trying to understand what the left claims to want. Fck them. Crush them. Make them cry.

    1. It’s not a “stolen seat”, because Scalia was murdered in cold blood.

      When you have a sitting Supreme Court justice assassinated, you don’t to pick his replacement. It’s one of those unwritten rules.

  29. Ah, they play that fraud Zakaria and called him on his bullshit! Awesome! About 21 min. in.

    1. And then make excuses for him.

  30. And Williamson mentions the Obama travel restrictions at 31:00

  31. At about 33, Welch makes all the Obama excuses.

    1. Oddly, none of the Cosmotarians had read a word about the underlying law that the immigration EO was addressing. Williamson had to read it to them.

      1. “I don’t care what it says man, it just FEELS like a Muslim ban, yannow?”

      2. No one at reason has done a single bit of leg work on this issue. They have just repeated media talking points. Is that hard to read the INA? Perhaps try to form your own opinion about the legality of the EO rather than just virtue signaling about the “Muslim ban”?

  32. Not done yet, but still not hearing anything from the Reason staff about Cuban refugees.

  33. The Fifth Column is great (when I have the time to listen to it).

    Welch calls The Fusionist “…looking like Zsa Zsa Gabor’s fat suit.”

    Calls Pan Zagloba “ inflatable vinyl gorilla with a domestic violence warrant.”

    Referred to SIV as “Oberbefehlcheezeburger.”

    Rude and uncalled for.

    1. I am still the number one fascist. And Welch is just bitter about Gilmore’s brutal and continuing critiques of his wardrobe.

    2. All this time I thought I was Canadian version of Rush Limbaugh.
      Now I learn I’m Canadian Mile Cernovitch!


    Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said Wednesday that he spoke with Vice President Mike Pence about how the White House can implement on a federal level parts of the Republican governor’s contentious policy that all-but eliminated collective bargaining for public sector unions in the state.

    President Donald Trump has talked about wanting to weaken collective bargaining protections for federal employees, most of whom can’t currently bargain over wages or benefits, to make it easier to hire and fire government workers and base pay on merit rather than tenure. Those changes would require an act of Congress.

    Walker severely restricted union power in Wisconsin and is now talking with the Trump administration about “how they may take bits and pieces of what we did” with the union law and civil service reform and “apply it at the national level.”

    If Trump does that, he should build himself a throne out of the skulls of his enemies.

    1. God, if only this wasn’t like fifth time someone walked away from meeting Trump convinced he’s got him 100% on-side…

      The howling this would trigger would make Muslim Panic look like a sleeping aid!

      1. I don’t think he is kidding around about any of this stuff. And yes, the howling would be epic.

    2. Gorsuch was a master stroke if his goal is to take away regulatory power and declaw the Unions. Gorsuch is as anti-Commerce Clause/pro-religious/civil liberty as we’re gonna get. The reviews I’ve been reading from lawyers like Ilya Solmin “Judge Neil Gorsuch is a well-respected jurist and a better Supreme Court nominee than I expected from Donald Trump.” are pretty impressive.

      Eugene Volokh clerked with him and Sasha Volokh – “Generally, I don’t have any expectation that Trump will do the right thing, so I’m unexpectedly pleased that ? of the three judges who were apparently on Trump’s short list ? Judge Gorsuch is probably the best on civil liberties issues.”

      And the left is sitting there trying to figure out when to blow its last load before they force the GOP to nuke the filibuster, as Trump rapidly dismantles the power of the government in front of their eyes.

      This didn’t seem possible three months ago.

      1. You have to remember that both Volokhs and Solmin have shot their mouths off so much about Turmp, Trump nominating Gorsuch is forcing them to eat a lot of crow. All three of them have enormous egos and don’t like doing that one bit. It is killing them to even have to say that. And them saying it likely means they think Goresuch is even better than they are saying.

        1. I think all three of those guys are at least aware enough to understand that getting in front of the parade is how you stay an opinion leader. And, professional courtesy.

    3. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said Wednesday that he spoke with Vice President Mike Pence about how the White House can implement on a federal level parts of the Republican governor’s contentious policy that all-but eliminated collective bargaining for public sector unions in the state.


      I had a limited agenda for Trump. Besides saving the country from an imported permanent Leftist electoral majority, he could do whatever the hell he wanted.

      But a week into his presidency, and he is the best president ever. Things like this, that I didn’t even dream possible. And maybe they’re going to happen. Heard about defunding the NEA too.

      Just incredible.

  35. Great, I got past 78 minutes and now I am best friends with the Cosmotarian Inner Party. How can I ever show my face in public again?

    1. I was following your commentary as listening, since I’d already been through the slog. I knew after the second post what your opinion was going to be at the end of it, but it was pretty funny watching you hit all the main milestones and appeared to be losing your will to live.

      Was like the 2-girls-one-cup challenge. The laughing as someone is like “ah, this isn’t so bad, why does everyone hate this?” to the “uh…” to the “not like this… not like this…” to the gibbering in the corner and just hoping someone will hold you after what they just witnessed (if they made it entirely through).

      I apologize for the schadenfreude.

  36. Kevin Williamson’s attitude towards “downscale” whites:

    The truth about these dysfunctional, downscale communities is that they deserve to die.

  37. Williamson ain’t wrong about Flyers fans.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.