Reason Roundup

FBI Love Among Republicans Slips Below 50 Percent: Reason Roundup

Plus: House OKs billions for undeclared wars, court keeps block of Pence ultrasound law, Senate quietly cuts tariffs, and new filings in FOSTA challenge

|

Ron Sachs/CNP/AdMedia/SIPA/Newscom

Musical chairs. Ahh for the halcyon days of, say, 2015, when it was conservatives who called for abolishing federal agencies and liberals who were wary of federal law agencies like the FBI. But each new administration comes with a reshuffling of the alliance and opinion deck, the Trump era more so than usual. And so here we have a new poll from the Pew Research Center showing serious slippage in FBI love from right-leaning types. Meanwhile, the vast majority of Democrats are against the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency.

Alas, some 65 percent of the total population still views the Justice Department's main thugs positively, according to Pew. Only 26 percent overall view the FBI unfavorably.

But on the Republican side, positive feelings for the agency have sunk 16 percentage points since last year, down to 49 percent from 65 percent in early 2017. Unfavorable FBI views among Republicans were at 44 percent, up from 21 percent last year.

Needless to say, the GOP hasn't suddenly developed a distaste for drug stings, entrapment, no-knock raids, policing consensual sex, and all the other ways the FBI wreaks havoc on American lives. Most evidence suggests this turn is predicated on the FBI's handling of investigations surrounding Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, now and during the 2016 election. But hey—maybe this is a gateway bias accusation, and conservatives will continue to look skeptically at the FBI long after we're done hearing from Robert Mueller. (A girl can dream, can't she?)

And Democrats haven't suddenly gone all anarchist, or even a little more limited-government-friendly, no matter how many #AbolishIce hashtags you see. Sure, 72 percent now view ICE unfavorably—the same percentage as Republicans who view it positively—but 77 percent of Democrats surveyed still had favorable feelings toward the FBI.

Democrats' view of the Department of Justice overall has shifted, falling from 74 percent favorable in January 2017 to 57 percent favorable this June. Perhaps people don't realize the FBI is part of the Justice Department? As Republican views of the FBI tanked, their support for the Justice Department has risen, landing at around 60 percent favorable, up from 47 percent in 2017.

FREE MINDS

No mandatory reflection period for women seeking abortions, says court. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals this week affirmed a district court's block of an Indiana law requiring that those seeking abortions receive an ultrasound at least 18 hours before the procedure. Vice President Mike Pence, then Indiana-governor, signed the waiting period into law in 2016.

FREE MARKETS

Cutting tariffs behind Trump's back. While the Trump administration continues to escalate trade troubles with China (and other countries), U.S. senators "quietly passed legislation on Thursday that would lower trade barriers on hundreds of items made in China," Reuters reports. "With no debate, the Senate unanimously passed a bill that would cut or eliminate tariffs on toasters, chemicals and roughly 1,660 other items made outside the United States," about half of which come from China.

FOLLOW-UP

"Plaintiffs have standing to challenge FOSTA because the law proscribes online speech in ways that directly threaten Plaintiffs' expressive activities," say the Woodhull Freedom Foundation and others challenging the federal government's criminalization of prostitution ads.

In a new filing opposing the state's motion to dismiss, Woodhull, Human Rights Watch, Eric Koszyk, Alex Andrews, and the Internet Archive push back against prosecutors' assertion that it won't be used against them—a sexual freedom nonprofit, LGBTQ activists, an erotic masseuse, the head of a group supporting incarcerated sex workers, and an archival database of deleted webpages.

Sure, FOSTA—which prohibits web platforms from allowing any content that facilitates or promotes prostitution—is not "aimed directly at Plaintiffs" and their conduct, as the feds argued. But under the broadly written law, and given what we know about the history of how laws criminalizing sex and speech are used, it's not at all a stretch to say that FOSTA could be used against any of these groups or individuals. Because of this vagueness and history, websites and platforms aren't sure how the FOSTA will be enforced, and so many have started preemptively removing content that even discusses prostitution positively, content that discusses legal forms of sex work, content that maybe could be construed as involving sex work, etc.

Read the whole thing here. Then watch as FOSTA's author demonstrates that she has doesn't actually understand the definition of sex trafficking under U.S. law or have any idea about the history of sex trafficking law in America:

FOREVER WAR

The House honors John McCain by approving $700 billion in military spending, including aid to the Saudis.

QUICK HITS

NEXT: Brickbat: It's Around Here Somewhere

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. Stormy Daniels’ lawyer Michael Avenatti said he is now representing three more women who claim to have had affairs with Donald Trump and paid hush money about it before he was elected president.

    Our president is a total dawg!

    1. On the plus side, he did pay them instead of seeing his wife go after them.

      1. On the minus side, by today’s definition he human trafficked them.

    2. Clawback that hush money

    3. Hello.

    4. You pay them to go away. Apparently, they didn’t get them memo.

      1. What good is a prostitute that doesn’t fulfill her end of the transaction?

  2. Why were Russians targeting Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill?

    The president asked them to?

  3. Trailer parks could help solve urban housing problems?if city leaders will get out of the way.

    Cities want to appropriate rural culture? I. Don’t. THINK. So.

    1. They don’t want the tornados that inevitably follow trailer parks.

      1. Don’t forget alien abductions.

      2. Trailer parks make tornadoes super horny.

    2. It should be noted that there is no “housing problem” in cities due to population growth. The top ten largest cities in America have only experienced a 0.02% increase in population since 1960.

      Suburbs remain the fasting growing sector of the country. Yet, they don’t have issues with “affordability”

      1. Yet, they don’t have issues with “affordability”

        It’s all relative, of course, but it depends on the suburbs. The average home price in the Denver metro area is now half a million dollars. A lot of that is the hyper-inflated cost of homes in Denver’s neighborhood areas like Park Hill, but if you want a decent house in the suburbs, you’re going to shell out at least $500K for a home that was probably worth $200K just four years ago. Even beaten-down shitboxes in older neighborhoods in Westminster and Aurora are going for over $300K now, when you could have gotten them for half that price in 2013-14. Regardless of the relative cost compared to, say, Silicon Valley, it’s rather astonishing that people who are probably making no more than $70K a year, if that, in those neighborhoods are getting approved for $300K loans.

        1. All true. I overgeneralized the point

          1. Sure. But there’s a lot of truth to your over-generalization as well. Real estate in the urban cores are typically going to be far more expensive than in the suburbs, at least on a per-square-foot basis. With the current trend of twenty-somethings looking to live closer to downtown areas, they often end up paying a mint for a 750-square foot condo or apartment rental, although if they don’t own a car that can save them quite a bit of money on the back end.

      2. “The top ten largest cities in America have only experienced a 0.02% increase in population since 1960.”

        Isn’t that what you’d expect if there were no increase in housing? With a fixed housing base, an increase in population will drive up real estate costs and drive people to the suburbs. Isn’t that what we see?

        1. It’s hard to make the argument that demand has increased for cities. The lackluster population growth, I think, speaks to that.

          If supply and demand remain relatively unchanged than cost increases are due to market manipulations. Supply increases will ease costs, but a better solution may be eliminating things like rent control. Further, density may actually cause demand for cities to be even more lackluster as families, rather than single individuals or childless couples, continue to prefer larger homes with more land.

          1. Supply is constrained through building restrictions. Just because population hasn’t grown much (and it’s very misleading to present an aggregate number — Detroit’s population loss doesn’t balance out SF’s population gain), doesn’t mean that more people don’t want to live in cities. More people would move to SF if they would build more, same with LA, NYC, etc. Lack of supply is a barrier to population growth, not an effect. The bidding wars whenever a new project opens prove that.

            Analogize to a widget maker. If a widget maker can make 1000 widgets due to external factors (NIMBYs in this case), sales cannot grow to meet demand. No matter what demand is, there’s still 1000 widgets.

            Suburbs are easier to grow through annexation and sprawl. Most old cities have no area to sprawl into and political resistance to infill and density.

            1. So this is the Richard Florida argument that isn’t born out with any evidence. San Francisco’s population growth has been roughly on par with national population growth averages over the past few decades. The exodus of families from cities (with the exceptions being in South) accounts for most of the population lags for major cities.

              The high cost of housing is not an issue of supply. It is an issue of regulation and San Francisco is a perfect example of that.

              1. Which doesn’t mean that supply won’t reduce cost, it means that providing more supply is a roundabout way of avoiding the issue that cities are not the preferred option for immigrants and families anymore, which is the main reason why their populations have stagnated. It also avoids the fact that regulation is the main thrust increasing cost.

                Houston remains affordable and continues to attract families. It is also the largest city in America that does not have blanket zoning regulations.

                1. I’m saying people aren’t moving there because there’s no housing growth.
                  We agree that there are artificial limits on housing growth.
                  There is no housing growth in Detroit, but there is no demand growth, so you can get a house for a dollar.
                  There is little housing growth in San Francisco but there is demand growth, so prices rise.

                  I’m not sure the difference in opinion here?

                  Houston is a lot of suburbs in a city, and keeps pushing the boundaries out. The city of Houston is almost 600 square miles. The city of San Francisco is 49 square miles, and is surrounded on three sides by water. Short of annexing Brisbane and Daly City, there is no room for SF to sprawl.

                  However, if SF built more highrises, the population would rise and prices would drop. You can’t have population growth without places for people to live.

                  1. People move to SF, LA, NYC, and Boston because they want to move there and know they have to pay for it.
                    People move to Houston because they can afford it.

                    1. I think, even more broadly, people move to where there is work. And every city you listed there, Houston included, has work. Which industry, and how much that pays on average, differs a fair amount though.

  4. Don’t blame the platform?”Twitter sucks because we suck,” writes Mike Godwin.

    You know who else wanted to blame some of the people?

      1. Oh please, he just stole a response from yesterday.

        1. Commentary appropriation.

          1. [wipes away tear]

  5. Only 26 percent overall view the FBI unfavorably.

    If only more had watched that atrocious The X-Files reboot.

    1. I want to believe.

  6. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals this week affirmed a district court’s block of an Indiana law requiring that those seeking abortions receive an ultrasound at least 18 hours before the procedure.

    Big Sonogram doesn’t own the courts. Yet.

    1. What are you, like 80? Nobody calls them “sonogram” any more.

  7. Don’t blame the platform?”Twitter sucks because we suck,” writes Mike Godwin.

    Or it doesn’t suck in the first place?

    1. Would someone please tell the old lady we are supposed to suck?

  8. “Why were Russians targeting Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill?”

    Probably because she wasn’t, but she’s in a tough re-election race so “journalists” who are indistinguishable from activists are pushing a fever dream to help her campaign

    1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/f…..86f49468c3

      And this fever dream is being used exactly as designed.

      “Democrats to introduce bill that outlaws false information about a candidate during a campaign”

      1. YAY! Free speech!

  9. Why were Russians targeting Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill?

    they needed to fill time while they figured out if there would be a contract for a season 5

  10. activists disrupt Clinton address

    if there anyone left who doesn’t act like she’s still in power?

    1. #StillWithHim
      #InternsToo

  11. Check Out This Kulak

    http://www.twitter.com/knguyen/status/1022538953579290624

    “Are you seriously suggesting that white college liberals know less about communism then the experience of your family under communism? Fascist!”

    1. The Vietnamese are probably the last Asians to hold down the fort and not move to the Left as fast as everyone else from their continent. This is probably because they are still overwhelmingly a political refugee community (and specifically one that hates Democrats), not really diluted by later waves like the Cubans were (the dilution seems to have affected even later generations descended from the original political refugees, by cultural osmosis). Maybe the Nicaraguans are the same; I don’t really know. Hopefully the Venezuelans can be the new Nicaraguans. (Unfortunately it is looking like the Nicaraguans may also be the new Nicaraguans.)

      1. …Speaking of which, I am calling it here: Nicaragua will be the next Latin American country to legalize abortion. They tightened the laws to absolute prohibition, back in the stone age a decade ago when that was the trend; Ortega ran on vehement support for that because he was trying out a rapproachment with the Church and was constantly portraying himself as very religious.

        But now they have pissed him off by refusing to back his human rights abuses, and he has turned viciously against them and is violently persecuting them; we are officially full-fledged and openly back to the good old days of Central America. Now that the last thread of the mask is off, I predict he will fuck them as hard as possible. Argentina will soon legalize, which is huge in the world’s most anti-abortion region; the erstwhile staunchly antiabortion Sandanistas, holding all but a handful of seats in Congress, will soon follow. Very dark days are ahead for the hemisphere.

        1. Ortega is killing his own people, but he’ll legalize abortion so he’ll probably get a pass by the Western world.

          1. If he also bans plastic bags, branded cigarette packaging, and transphobic bathrooms he will probably get a human rights medal.

            1. He needs to ban straws or GTFO

              1. It’s bans all the way down.

        2. Very dark days are ahead for the hemisphere.

          Huh, go figure. I read your comment as good news.

          1. Obviously, the abortion legalization part. The human rights abuses are getting press, and as usual that’s a typical latin american dictator shitshow.

          2. “Ortega is killing his own people, but he’ll legalize abortion so he’ll probably get a pass by the Western world.”

            1. I called it.

              “What’s state sanctioned murder if abortion is being legalized” is a little too on the nose

              1. Wait, are you seriously equating murder with legalizing abortion?

                That’s… so completely wrong. Or at the very least, just your opinion, man.

    2. “@Jafpro_16
      18h18 hours ago
      More
      If you are a communist it doesn’t necessarily mean you agree with stalinism or even Ho Chi Minh. That’s like saying “oh you thought German reunification was good? Hitler must be your hero”
      3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes”

      Doo-dee-doo.

      1. German reunification and Hitler are absolutely related, because I don’t know history before World War II

        1. During the fall of the Warsaw Pact, my very Democrat-voting history teacher (who happened to be Jewish, so his interest in this was understandable) posed a rhetorical question to us about the implications of allowing Germany to reunite when they’d been responsible for inflaming two world wars in less than a hundred years. Turns out he needn’t have worried, since Germany happily jumped in with the rest of the self-loathing EU community.

          1. And now Germany gets to rule Europe without firing a shot

            1. They’re the most economically stable of the large EU economies, so that was probably inevitable.

        2. Maybe @Jafpro_16 is a traditional gro?deutsche leftist, and views the Anschluss as “reunification.”

  12. “With no debate, the Senate unanimously passed a bill that would cut or eliminate tariffs on toasters, chemicals and roughly 1,660 other items made outside the United States,” about half of which come from China.

    So the legislative branch is still a thing, huh?

    1. That bill will certainly strengthen our negotiating position, right?

    2. Look at them do their jobs. Huh.

      1. If they really wanted to do their jobs, they would eliminate the ability of the President to unilaterally do this kind of thing in the first place. One can dream…

        1. Woah there. You expect them to do something actually meaningful?

          1. You would hope that the fear of another president like our last 3 would lead BOTH sides to the realization that the Executive has too much power and they would work to rescind that. Like I said, one can dream…

  13. I voted no

    Amash the scrivener.

    1. Well there were 58 no votes, so Amash was certainly not the lone hold out. I’m sure Massie voted “no”, as well

      1. I feel like I once felt Amash was better than Massie on something, even though he himself characterizes Massie as more of a purist. I don’t think it was Massie’s IP hawkishness, since for all I know Amash is one too. Can’t recall what.

        1. Amash is better on trade than Massie. Massie is better at taking tough votes that Amash shirks.

          They’re both good. No need to rank them against one another, in my opinion

          1. Fuck that hippie kumbaya shit! Something has to tiebreak! Who is cuter?

            1. …Also, examples of both the trade and tough votes? I am glad to have someone to answer this question!

              1. “I am glad to have someone to answer this question!”

                It’s only my opinion, which means that it’s probably wrong.

                Also, Amash is cuter- hands down

  14. “It makes no sense because it is a direct and punishing tax on making things in America and for creating jobs in America,”

    MTIAA

  15. Mississippi cops who went to the wrong house, shot and killed Ismael Lopez (in back of the head), won’t face criminal charges. DA didn’t believe the cops, but GJ wouldn’t indict. Mayor issued a press release condemning “persecution” of the officers. https://t.co/roaYYjQk6n
    ? Radley Balko (@radleybalko) July 27, 2018

    A case of the first word explaining the rest of the tweet.

  16. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes proclaimed “while property may be regulated to a certain extent, if regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking.” But @ishapiro & @TCBurrus say #SCOTUS must provide true guiding principles on regulatory takings. https://t.co/CPNH9jC3BQ
    ? The IHS (@TheIHS) July 25, 2018

    Look, you got your vague line from SCOTUS. What more do you want?

    1. If it’s raining out, then just turn on The Voice at the loudest volume your TV will go to.

      1. For the best, anyway as if Maxine Waters goes outside screaming in the rain she will probably drown.

    2. And I said…. HEEEEEYYYY YEEEAH…. HEY YEAH! I SAID HEY!…. WHAT’S GOING ON!?!?!?

      For the record, I am not blonde.

      1. NO ONE is clicking on my fucking links! What is the matter with all you people?

        Also, if you are not blonde than fuck you. I am Against Non Blondes.

        Take it away, DJ Miko!

        1. You know who else was against non blondes…

        2. Meh. The original is better.

          Why is that dude lip syncing Sara Gilbert’s wife?

          1. The He-Man version is the best though.

        3. No links for me… heavily restricted work access.

  17. “Plaintiffs have standing to challenge FOSTA because the law proscribes online speech in ways that directly threaten Plaintiffs’ expressive activities,” say the Woodhull Freedom Foundation

    If the Woodhull Freedom Foundation says so, maybe they’re right.
    But what does the Woodchipper Freedom Foundation have to say on the matter?

  18. Prosecutors can get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich, but not a pig.

    1. Well played

    2. You can put lipstick on a pig, but putting lipstick on a ham sandwich is just wrong, man.

  19. Needless to say, the GOP hasn’t suddenly developed a distaste for drug stings, entrapment, no-knock raids, policing consensual sex, and all the other ways the FBI wreaks havoc on American lives. Most evidence suggests this turn is predicated on the FBI’s handling of investigations surrounding Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, now and during the 2016 election.

    Hassle our fellow commoners? That’s cool. Just don’t go after our betters!

  20. Why were Russians targeting Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill?

    I thought “targeting” was triggering.

  21. Meanwhile, the vast majority of Democrats are against the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency.

    Example number 12,973 why libertarians and Democrats are natural allies. As awful as Drumpf’s reign of terror has been, one of the most promising developments of the past couple years has been the Democratic Party’s move toward the Koch / Reason position on immigration.

    #AbolishICE
    #NoBanNoWall
    #OpenBorders

    1. The reverse is probably more true.

      This is better satire, though

  22. activists disrupt Clinton address

    IT”S HER TURN!

    1. #StillWithHim
      #InternsToo

    2. “Thanks for inviting us to dinner. So how do we to your new place?”

      “Go straight through the Plaza of Silenced Critics, turn left on the Boulevard of Middle America, another left on Main Street, slight right after Bern Lane, and then IT’S MY TURN!”

  23. Sex worker activists disrupt Clinton address at #AIDS2018 and demand RIGHTS for sex workers, people who use drugs, LGTBI folks and people of color.

    So let me get this straight, sex workers, drug users, and LGBTBBQ+ people, and colored people don’t currently have rights?

      1. “This is about the United States Constitution, people. And half the people in this country aren’t in it,” state Rep. Lou Lang, a Democrat who sponsored the Illinois legislation, told The Chicago Tribune, following the ratification in the state’s House by a single vote last Wednesday. “They aren’t included in the United States Constitution. Isn’t that enough for you to realize the historic moment and step back from predispositions you’ve had and your heels dug in the ground on this issue and that issue and the other issue?”

        This deserves the kind of facepalm that could break your nose.

        1. Or better still, a facepalm to Lou Lang’s nose.

    1. So both sexes are living in a fantasy world

      1. the women sound a tad more realistic

        1. Look at Mr. Perfect over here

          1. I’m not a mr, so I’m probably biased. But I just mean that it’s easier to get physically fit and a good job than it is to get debt-free, un-tattooed and un-deflowered

            1. You try to spend eight years at a University and not develop a supple gut. Low calorie beer is an abomination!

              1. I kid

              2. Eight years? Color me impressed.

                1. It’s not that impressive. Haven’t you read some of my comments?

                  1. maybe if you had spent half as much time studying as you spent on drinking low calorie beer it wouldn’t have taken so long to get your associate’s?

                    1. Vicious

                    2. He never said he actually graduated.

              3. You should commit a crime. Get buff in the weight yard.

            2. Virgins really are no fun…

              1. No kidding. Who would want a virgin. That just feels wrong.

                1. Somebody has to go first.

                2. Maybe not necessarily a virgin, but it does feel better if you can believe that your fields haven’t been plowed by other people’s dirty tools.

    2. DEBT-FREE VIRGINS WITHOUT TATTOOS

      Nice band name. OTOH, perhaps too similar to Barenaked Ladies.

    3. how about all of those qualities? Plus, they never age, are a world-class chef, and have a dying wealthy aunt with no other heirs.

      1. With a nice rack. Don’t forget the nice rack.

        1. It’s impossible to forget a nice rack.

        2. you know who else didn’t let people forget about their nice rack?

    4. The Transformed Wife, eh? Hey, if BDSM saved your marriage, more power to you.

    1. Too perfect as in too Suderman. But it is also too Jeb! Does it get any Jeb!bier than Jeb! retweeting the enthusiastic sentiment of a journalist in 2018 that another man is “the President America Should’ve Had?”

      1. I think Jeb! at this point has probably abandoned his presidential aspirations.

        Trump broke him so badly he’s just angling for a job as Sec of Agriculture or HHS in a future moderate Republican administration, after the Great Establishment Revolt led by Bill Krystol and George Will wrests control of the party back from those drooling trailer park hicks.

        1. I think Jeb! at this point has probably abandoned his presidential aspirations.

          Trump didn’t really do anything other than re-expose what a milquetoast Jeb actually is (his inability to respond to Trump’s barbs recalled when Lawton Chiles shat all over him and reached out to panhandle rednecks), and how he doesn’t really stand for anything other than putting Jeb Bush in office.

          If Trump has done nothing else besides end the Bushes’ decades-long chokehold on the Republican party apparatus, that will end up being his most significant political accomplishment.

    2. Actually, what would be better is Trump enthusiastically retweeting Suderman.

      Regardless of the context, he’d never be invited to another cocktail party.

    1. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sns-bc-…..story.html

      Not to worry, the socialists have found a solution: knock some zeros off the currency

    2. “How Venezuela Struck It Poor
      The tragic ? and totally avoidable ? self-destruction of one of the world’s richest oil economies.”
      https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/07/16/how-
      venezuela-struck-it-poor-oil-energy-chavez/

      Not bad, but they still focus on the dofuses implementing the policies rather than the policies qua policies.

      1. It was because oil is evil. If they would have based their economy on solar, it would be paradise.

        1. Also the Goddess is punishing them with poverty for their lack of reproductive rights and same-sex marriage.

          1. Perhaps they need to ban straws? That would help I’m told.

  24. “You want density and affordability? You should want manufactured housing. Too bad it’s often illegal.”

    Pretty sure that the local politicos don’t really want additional housing as much as they want a populist issue on which to run for election.

    1. Most of their constituents don’t actually want those things either. Even in big cities with so-called housing “crises”. Turns out people aren’t all that into thinking beyond themselves – imagine that.

  25. “Ahh for the halcyon days of, say, 2015, when it was conservatives who called for abolishing federal agencies and liberals who were wary of federal law agencies like the FBI.”

    The liberals were wary of federal law enforcement agencies like the FBI in 2015–does anybody else remember this?

    I don’t remember liberals being upset about federal law enforcement agencies when Obama was in the White House.

    They didn’t put up any significant opposition to them when Bush was in the White House either.

    I remember when federal law enforcement agencies were the solution to right wing extremism during the Clinton administration.

    Instead of 2015, maybe you meant 1975?

    1. Liberals haven’t disliked the FBI since the Church committee hearings. There was a brief moment when they disliked the intelligence community after the Iraq War, but that quickly faded.

      1. They’ll go back to hating the FBI/CIA soon enough. Just as soon as Warren becomes President.

      2. 2014 was the Bundy ranch standoff.

        Liberals weren’t upset about that, were they?

        2016 was the Occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

        Liberals weren’t upset about what federal law enforcement agencies did then either, were they?

        Maybe she meant to write “libertarians” instead of liberals?

        Liberals weren’t even upset about Obama’s DEA raiding state legal medical marijuana clinics hundreds of times in California!

        Liberals weren’t upset about Obama using federal law enforcement agencies to hit record deportation numbers–deportations that Trump is yet to beat if I’m not mistaken.

        Part of the problem with the liberals during the Bush administration was that they just rubber stamped everything the Bush administration wanted to do with terrorism. I can’t remember anything they did to oppose federal law enforcement agencies back then.

        The idea that liberals have opposed federal law enforcement agencies is just a fantasy.

        Did Hillary Clinton oppose federal law enforcement agencies in 2015? I don’t remember that.

        1. Go back further to Waco, Ruby Ridge and Elian Gonzalez.

        2. Liberals were protesting about abuse of the Patriot Act going back to 2002. Warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detentions. Of 66 house members and 1 senator opposing, only 3 were Republicans.
          Liberals were protesting profiling of Arabs and Muslims too.
          Liberals were protesting torture and illegal renditions.
          Liberals were damn outraged about the raids of medical marijuana clinics, and Obama stepped down.
          Liberals were outraged about the deporter in chief.
          http://www.dailynews.com/2016/…..s-angeles/
          http://www.scpr.org/news/2013/…..rallies-i/

          1. Conjecture is not “fact”

          2. Yeah, that list is horse crap. As someone who opposed all that stuff myself, I was quite aware of there being no liberal outcry against those things–especially when Obama was in office. “Deporter in Chief is right–has anyone ever deported more people from the U.S. in a single year than Obama?

            Your links appear to be about rallies in support congressional legislation–rather than opposition to federal law enforcement.

  26. 4.1% GDP growth in the second quarter, way higher than any quarter that Block Insane Yomomma ever managed in his dismal ass eight years.

    Eat a ginormous back of dicks, Dipshit Dave!!!

    1. “any quarter that Block Insane Yomomma ever managed in his dismal ass eight years.”

      and

      “It’s the best quarter in more than four years, and the first time GDP has gone over 3% since 2015”

      1. Even Nick Gillespie was openly wondering if it was possible that we’d never hit a number like that again, because he loves “experts” and that was what so many of the “experts” were saying.

        We real libertarians always knew that was a bunch of complete and total bullshit.

    2. Deregulation is the best thing Trump has done.

      Tax reform hasn’t hurt any either.

      Trump is benefiting from the pent up slow growth during the Obama administration, much of which can be blamed on his heaping regulation on the economy, especially in banking, healthcare, etc.

      We should also point out that this probably wouldn’t have happened under Hillary Clinton. Deregulation would not have happened under Hillary Clinton, certainly not of the healthcare system, and she woudn’t have backed tax reform either.

    3. The Media were quick to point this out morning that Obama had four quarters of more rapid growth.

      The problem with Obama’s economy was that it could never sustain that level of growth; the last two years in office were pretty mediocre.

      1. Proving Keynes right. Government deficits were dropping, and growth was mediocre.
        A huge Keynseian boost through tax cuts and spending growth comes, and there’s one quarter of higher GDP, also boosted by building inventories to beat the tariffs.

        Meanwhile, year over year real wage growth the past year was precisely zero. You can’t eat GDP.

        1. “Meanwhile, year over year real wage growth the past year was precisely zero. You can’t eat GDP.”

          Are you a turd sock?
          He keeps repeating lies long after he’s been proven to be a bullshitter, and here you are doing the same thing.
          “Wages in the United States increased 4.89 percent in May of 2018 over the same month in the previous year. ”
          https://tradingeconomics.com/
          united-states/wage-growth
          Fuck off, lying lefty piece of shit.

          1. I don’t know where that report comes from, but it’s not even real wages. And, it’s a month out of date.

            https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/realer.pdf

            June 2017: $10.76/hr. June 2018: $10.76/hr.

            Non-supervisory:
            June 2017: $9.26/hr June 2018: $9.24/hr

            So, yeah. There’s that.

            Try knowing what you’re talking about before you open your yap.

            1. “June 2017: $10.76/hr. June 2018: $10.76/hr.

              Non-supervisory:
              June 2017: $9.26/hr June 2018: $9.24/hr

              So, yeah. There’s that.

              Try knowing what you’re talking about before you open your yap.”

              Well, as a lefty asshole, you could try posting without picking cherries, but that’s asking entirely too much of a lefty asshole.

            2. And:
              Happy Chandler|7.27.18 @ 5:39PM|#
              “I don’t know where that report comes from, but it’s not even real wages. And, it’s a month out of date.”
              Oh, my! You don’t know where it came from regarless of the link? And it’s a month out of date, while showing a pretty strong gain?
              My goodness! Caught bullshitting again, bullshitter?

          2. Here’s nominal wage growth. Trending down since 2016, despite increasing inflation. Workers are doing worse now than they were in 2016.

            And, learn how to post a fucking link.

            1. Happy Chandler|7.27.18 @ 5:46PM|#
              “Here’s nominal wage growth. Trending down since 2016, despite increasing inflation. Workers are doing worse now than they were in 2016.”
              OMG! A 0.8% decrease in the last year according to your source! How are we ever going to survive?
              Fuck off, slaver.

              “And, learn how to post a fucking link.”
              Stuff it up your ass, imbecile.

      2. Bearded Spock|7.27.18 @ 11:28AM|#
        “The Media were quick to point this out morning that Obama had four quarters of more rapid growth.”

        Were these 4 quarters rising from the pit left us as a result of the gov’t screwing with the housing market?
        It’s easy to grow from zero.

  27. “Sex workers disrupt Clinton address at #AIDS2018…”

    Now we know why Bill accepted the invitation to give the keynote address.

    Going on an all-expenses-paid trip to Amsterdam without Hillary? Hubba, Hubba!!

  28. No mandatory reflection period for women seeking abortions, says court.

    I don’t see why you’d need a cooling-off period before going ahead with the deal, most states have consumer protection laws that cover buyer’s remorse. If you get an abortion and then decide you don’t like it, you’ve got 72 hours to get it reversed. And, hey, you get both your money and your baby back!

    1. No mandatory reflection period for women seeking abortions, says court.

      They’re only required for buying guns.

      1. That’s not fair. You’re making sense.

  29. Anyone seen lc1789? I’m afraid the kernel in his OS may have overheated.

    1. How much of the GDP growth was due to energy use running the rented server that housed the bot running that account?

    2. Im right here.

      I am doing an experiment. So far the boring trolls on Reason are posting as theorized.

  30. North Korea sent numerous US servicemen remains over DMZ. The US government will evaluate which servicemen the remains belong to as they are unknown and possibly co-mingled remains.

    Another big positive for Trump.

    The media is barely covering it and is avoiding givng Trump credit as much as possible.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.