Reason Roundup

No 'Insurrection' or Violence at Virginia Gun Rights Rally

Plus: Clinton says "nobody likes" Bernie, Biden wants Section 230 revoked, Iran takes responsibility for Jan. 8 plane crash, and more...


Peaceful demonstration against increased gun regulation in Richmond. Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam's emergency declaration proves as silly as critics said it would, after thousands of Second Amendment supporters showed up in Richmond without starting trouble.

Before the statehouse rally on Monday—organized by the Virginia Civil Defense League—Northam warned that the event would likely bring out-of-town demonstrators who had "as their purpose not peaceful assembly but violence, rioting, and insurrection." His emergency declaration (covering last Friday at 5 p.m. through today at 5 p.m.) meant that no guns could be brought on Capitol grounds and also allocated special police resources to the area.

But the rally "passed without incident," as Northam put it in a Monday afternoon tweet.

Naturally, Northam took credit for keeping the peace with his security-theater shenanigans, saying that his teams had "successfully de-escalated what could have been a volatile situation."

And yet Virginia Civil Defense League regularly organizes "lobby day" rallies at the Virginia statehouse (as J.D. Tuccille pointed out at Reason yesterday) and such events have gone down without violent incident as well, despite a lack of gubernatorial fussing.

"Unbelievable," wrote Washington Examiner Executive Editor Philip Klein in response to Northam's de-escalation tweet. "This guy exploited stereotypes of gun owners to create hysteria about violent mobs and then when it turns out law abiding gun owners are law abiding, he takes credit for lack of violence."


Impeachment update: House "impeachment managers" in the Senate and President Donald Trump's team will each get "24 hours divided over two days for their opening arguments in the Senate's impeachment trial," CNN reports, after obtaining a copy of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's organizing resolution for the process. This represents "a break from the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton, when the 24 hours were split over a four-day period," notes CNN. General impeachment proceedings in the Senate start at 1 p.m. today.

Iran admits to causing Ukrainian plane crash that killed 176 people. "Investigators…discovered that two Tor-M1 missiles…were fired at the aircraft," said Iran's Civil Aviation Organization in a report on initial findings, released yesterday, about the January 8 crash.


Ugh: Joe Biden continues to campaign against Section 230, the federal communications law that built the internet as we know it. "Section 230 should be revoked, immediately," said Biden in an interview with The New York Times, published Friday. "For Zuckerberg and other platforms."

As Eric Boehm pointed out on Friday, "Biden and Facebook have been feuding for months."

When the Times interviewer responded that Section 230 is "pretty foundational" for "the modern internet," Biden said "exactly right" before launching into a buzzword salad dressed with random rambling associations:

It should be revoked because [Facebook] is not merely an internet company. It is propagating falsehoods they know to be false, and we should be setting standards not unlike the Europeans are doing relative to privacy. You guys still have editors. I'm sitting with them. Not a joke. There is no editorial impact at all on Facebook. None. None whatsoever. It's irresponsible. It's totally irresponsible.

For more on what Section 230 really is and does, watch this:


We don't need to ban (nicotine or THC) vaping, we just need to build better devices, writes Diane Nelson, a postdoctoral fellow in chemical engineering at Carnegie Mellon University:

The knee-jerk reaction by some states has been to pull e-cigarettes and vapes off the market. Even the federal government has suggested it might push for a ban on some vaping and e-cigarette related products. But these products have been shown to be effective at helping smokers quit—more effective, in fact, than any other nicotine-replacement therapy on the market, including nicotine patches and nicotine gum.

We don't need to ban vaping. What we need to do is the research needed to build a better vape.




"More than 40 U.S. states could allow some form of legal marijuana by the end of 2020, including deep red Mississippi and South Dakota," reports Politico.

Good news:

NEXT: Economist Russ Roberts Isn't Worried About the Middle Class

Reason Roundup Gun Rights Gun Control Gun Owners Second Amendment First Amendment Protests Lobbying Free Speech Virginia

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.

Please to post comments

281 responses to “No 'Insurrection' or Violence at Virginia Gun Rights Rally

  1. Great discussion with @realDonaldTrump on digital tax.

    Of course. He uses his digits to grab things all the time.

    1. Hello.

      Reason is a libertarian mag, right?

      I think anyway.

      So how come no comment on a Bernie staffer talking about violence and gulags? If there’s one thing libertarians hate it’s gulags no?

      Forgive my snark. I was just curious.

      1. because all good little liberal journalists know that Project Veritas is unclean.

        Imagine the reaction if a Trump staffer was found to have said that all his opponents needed to go on helicopter rides and that we should purge the communists. I guarantee you everyone would be hearing about it.

      2. He was like a field organizer in Milwaukee. Pretty low on the paid staffer food chain.

        1. He was like a field organizer in Milwaukee.

          Too local then.

        2. So fricken what?

          Bernie attracts these morons and if he cared he’d fire and disown him just like conservatives/libertarians are asked to do so whenever, say, there’s a racist who speaks out in their ranks.

          As for PV, fair enough, so Reason could explain that in the body. I think some ‘token’ mention of it was merited.

          You have to nip shit like that in the bud.

          1. “Reason: double standards are the only standards”

          2. Bernie attracts these morons

            Let’s not forget that a Bernie supporter actually tried to assassinate GOP congressmen before the Capitol police turned him into Swiss cheese.

            Why is Trump responsible for the people at Charlottesville, but Bernie isn’t responsible for the idiots that voted for him and worked on his campaign? And all for a guy who was undermined by collusion between his primary opponent and the DNC in 2016, only to bend over like a bitch after said collusion came to light.

            1. Well, none of them is responsible for what their stupid supporters do.
              If Bernie somehow does get the nom, though, I hope they do hammer on this stuff. That overt commies are making any progress in American politics is something to worry about.

              1. Yeah, I’m sure they’ll get right on that as soon as the primaries are over.

                1. I don’t see why they wouldn’t.

                  1. I think we may be confusing who “they” is.

              2. Well, none of them is responsible for what their stupid supporters do.

                Except that we’re not talking about ‘supporters’.

                We’re talking about campaign workers. People actually out there representing the candidate.

                Not some crazed berniebro having socialist fantasies on fb. Someone who was interviewed and given a task.

                So, yeah, there IS a bit of responsibility.

            2. I don’t pay much attention to what the geriatric commie prick says, so can anyone tell me if he ever got around to condemning the actions of the Bernie Bro who tried to murder Scalise, or did he cop out and blame guns or some shit like that?


          3. Maybe it’s just me, but I feel like Bernie Sanders and his supporters being dangerous idiots kinda goes without saying. I would be interested and amused to hear what these idiots are saying, though.

        3. I don’t remember hearing about the Sanders campaign publicly disavowing the wannabe Chekist’s views, nor publicly and loudly firing him.

          If they did, good. If they didn’t, well, silence is assent.

          Just like when O’Rourke started yammering on that debate stage about taking their AR-15s whether gunowners liked it or not, and not one damned Democrat on that stage told him he was being an un-American, totalitarian piece of shit.

          1. To be fair, Castro pointed out how stupid it was because Beat-o literally believed that people would just knuckle under and obey the law, and that such a law would actually disproportionately affect minority gun owners more than it would the white gun owners that Robert Francis viewed as the primary problem.

            1. “Can’t implement yet.” not exactly the same argument as “That’s unamerican, unliberal, and contrary to the Constitution.”

          2. By the way, it’s two campaign workers he needs to disavow now. One from South Carolina, now.

            Standard Project Veritas tactics: Run the one video, the target declares the person shooting their mouth off to be a lone idiot, then start releasing videos of more people like him.

      3. I don’t see it rising to the level of Reason (or, for that matter, ANYONE) commenting on it. Some low level Bernie staffer says gulags are the way of the future? I’ll match you with a Trump supporter who says white people are the endangered race, and raise you an actual hollywood movie star who is spouting the same climate garbage as a 12-year-old.

        Just because idiots say idiotic things shouldn’t make them newsworthy. And it does not mean that whoever the idiot admires must believe whatever the idiot thinks they do.

    2. Congrats on getting a plug from Welch on the last 5th Column. All your hard work is finally paying off.

      1. I still love “Fist of Etiquette” as a screen name. Right up there with “Wet Sponge of Arousal” and “Recliner of Justice”.

      2. WHAT? I didn’t authorize that.

  2. In an example of how awful the theory of abuse of power is, Schiff declares that the GOP calling their witnesses would be an abuse of power.

    1. “Abuse of power” appears to means anything that might put the Democrats on the back foot.

      1. Volume III of the hit series “Everyone Who Disagrees with Me Is Hitler” and “Anyone Who Disagrees with Me Is a Rapist”.

    2. Notice how the two charges, abuse of power and obstruction of congress are non specific charges? I think the house intentional wanted charges where the actual specifics of the crime could ebb and flow with their narrative de jour.

      1. So, the political version of “resisting arrest” or “disorderly conduct”?

        1. Closer to “aggravated mopery with intent to gawk” at this point.

          1. I’m think more ‘Being Donald Trump in a place where Democrats think Donald Trump has no right to be’–it’s just a variant of the Jim Crow laws Democrats passed all over the place.

    3. So, he traded in the Hitlerjugend look for the Sinead O’Connor thing?

      Not sure which is worse, TBH.


  3. David hogg is back and more effeminate looking to declare black gun rights activists as white supremacists.

    1. Yesterday I purchased a couple of firearms with my friend, who happens to be black. He got a couple too. Also, I’m taking my woman to the range tomorrow to test them out… she also happens to be black. Her dad owns 10. David Hogg is such a tool. At some point it ceases to be “well he’s just a stupid kid.”

      1. he looks like an angry lesbian

        1. He looks more lesbian than the lesbian comrade in his protests after the shooting.

        2. He is going for the Rachael Madow look, she must be his hero

          1. When you look androgynous, you can claim more offense at confused bystanders.

          2. Naw, Rachel is way more masculine looking than Hogg.

      2. Even the Wapo mentioned that the rally was attended by people of color, immigrants and LGBTQ supporters.

        Of course “these people” do not matter, as this does not follow the narrative.

        Commenters consider them as “tokens”. Talk about marginalizing the minority.

        1. marginalizing the minority.


    2. He’s attending Harvard on a Resting Bitch Face scholarship.

      1. I guess there’s always David Byrne cosplay work in a Talking Heads cover band, if this Harvard thing doesn’t work out.

        What a loathsome little ghoul.

    1. Indeed, in spite of the fact that a significant number of the attendees were open carrying firearms including those terrifying black rifles. The media folks ought to consider getting to know gun owners before condemning them.

      1. It would at least help them write better articles of condemnation.

    2. Would there be any way that the VCDL or anyone who participated in the rally be able to have a class-action lawsuit for defamation against Governor Blackface? I feel like with all the lies and bullshit Northam’s been spewing about gun owners, there would be at least some basis. Since he’s actively going after the interests of the people protesting and has been threatening them with force, there would be a pretty good case for showing intent to harm. And since the democrats have done such a good job of canceling anyone who’s labeled racists/sexists/etc, there’s a clear potential for harm by him labeling everyone there as racists.

      1. Would not help, you can’t fight City Hall. Better to run a campaign against the judge who signed the emergency order. Get the pigs voted out next cycle.

        1. Well not with that attitude. Besides, if Northam’s tied up in court then he’s not busy causing more trouble.

      2. Wouldn’t he be able to claim “sovereign immunity” on the grounds that he was just performing his official duties? I’m not a lawyer, hopefully one of our resident legal types can answer that.

        1. Violating constitutional rights is not “performing official duties’.
          He and the judge should go down on conspiracy to violate constitutional rights of all gun owners in Virginia.

          1. I was responding to the poster’s suggestion that Northam could be sued for defamation.

    3. Did you see AOC’s tweet about how the police weren’t in force in Richmond and only show up for peaceful protests like Freddy Gray’s. Which is just sad since their were a ton of cops in VA, the governor for christ sakes declared a state of emergency. In Baltimore, my friend was almost beaten inside Frank and Nicks when “peaceful protesters” smashed the windows. Oh those “peaceful protesters” also burned down a community center being build in Baltimore to help the less fortunate. Both situations were under the jurisdiction of Democrats, I might add.

      1. Chica Marx is dumber than a box of rocks.

        1. It is going to be glorious when her party gerrymanders her district out of existence. Or primaries her. Or both. Better find some rich lefty to spoon up to.

      2. At least Uncle Ruckus never burned down his own neighborhood.

    4. That kind of thing doesn’t happen much at gun-rights rallies, if only because so many of the attendees are peace officers in uniform.

      Of course if the rally is in Portland or Berkeley, all bets are off.

  4. This from Hillary on Bernie is going to cause quite a stir…

    It’s Sanders who has a likeability issue?

    1. That makes Bernie the kettle.

    2. Yeah, and it’s Sanders who is the professional politician.

      1. To be fair, most of Hillary’s political career was as being the spouse of a career politician.

    3. As somebody elsewhere pointed out: “Well, if Sanders spouse likes him, that gives him one up on Hillary”

  5. “Iran admits to causing Ukrainian plane crash that killed 176 people.”

    But we need to keep in mind it’s ultimately Orange Hitler’s fault. He literally started World War 3 in Iran to distract from impeachment.


    1. And, they used Russian missiles!
      We all know what that means!

    2. So, wait, WW3 is over already? Damn!

    3. If that was WW3, he should get the Medal of Honor for ending it so fast!

  6. Without the self realization to understand…. warren asks who can vote for someone who lies.

    1. What has Warren ever lied about? Certainly not her Native American heritage — she was vindicated by that DNA test.


      1. Of course, by that standard, the average white American is also a Native American.

      2. “What has Warren lied about” you mean like being a Native American, losing her job because she was pregnant, and sending her kid to a public school sort of lying?

    2. I saw video of that. She seems very taken aback by the question and pauses before diving into the shamelessness.

    3. Same way they always do? People voted for Obama knowing full well he lies. And Bush Jr.
      Fuck, why would you assume that any politician doesn’t lie? Especially one who acts like government is a magic wish granting machine.

  7. Impeachment starts at 1pm and you get 24 hours from that moment. What a fucking joke. It’s just fucking stupid too. It’s so obviously kangaroo court stuff. Republicans are fucking clowns.

    1. Impeachment has been a joke since day one.

    2. Yes, we need a lengthy and conclusive process wherein the president cannot defend himself or call witnesses and Republicans are not allowed to vote.

      Fuck yourself up the ass with a pickaxe. Subhuman chunk of cunt mucus.

      1. “Subhuman chunk of cunt mucus.”

        Impressive; just added to my personal nuclear lexicon.

      2. Chunk of cunt mucus was my nickname in grammar school.

        1. …that dribbled down a whores leg

    3. This impeachment is a sham you say?!

      Welcome aboard the Trump Train!

      Choo Choo

    4. hi shreek

      stopped pretending you weren’t a prog finally i see

    5. There was never any cause to impeach, and everybody knows it.

      Therefore, the Senate basically had three ways to handle it. (1) Summary dismissal. (2) A medium length yawn-fest followed by a predictable acquittal, just as Clinton got but shouldn’t have. (3) Turn the tables and use the trial to talk for a month about how corrupt Comey and Page and the Bidens are and how they trumped up charges against Trump only to divert attention from themselves.

      I wanted (3), and McConnel wanted (1), but it looks like we’re going to get (2) anyway.

  8. We don’t need to ban (nicotine or THC) vaping, we just need to build better devices…


    1. So they can vote with clear heads

  9. I couldn’t make it to Richmond, but I did purchase a couple of firearms yesterday. There were so many people buying firearms that the wait was 2 hours long.

    Worth it to exercise my rights.

    1. that feeling when you try to ban guns in VA, but the state’s estimated amount of guns sales increases to somewhere between 500-1000%

      1. Yup. I also plan on finding a gun rights org to join (preferably one more staunch than the NRA… the NRA seems weak these days).

        1. Gun Owners of America.

        2. cause they are weak. They’ll back you… unless it means calling out the cops. Got to protect our betters dontcha know.

        3. VCDL. GOA, but get ready for spam.

        4. Thanks for the suggestions, everyone. I’ll look into these groups.

    2. Congratulations. Anything interesting, or particularly good buys?

      I need to get back to the range and work on my position shooting.

      1. These are my first firearms. I got a Gen5 Glock 17 and have an AR-15 on order. Pretty standard stuff but I figured I’d start with the basics. I’m stoked to test them at the local range.

        I have a lot of experience with guns, I was just putting it off because I tend to focus on saving most of my money.

        1. Nice! Wear your eye and ear protection, have the Four Rules absolutely down pat, and insist on them with everyone you go shooting with, and remember to have fun.

          It amazed me how easy the AR was to shoot in 5.56. Compared to the ’06s, 12-gauges w/o recoil pads and other stuff I thought was ‘normal’. Accurate too.

  10. Hoyer’s on the impeachment… trump has “every opportunity to prove his innocence.”

    I’ll let that settle.

    1. Is that after he’s tossed in the lake?

    2. I thought the state had to prove guilt

    3. Say it with me: impeachment. is. not. a. criminal. trial.

      There is no assumption of innocence. There is no requirement for beyond a reasonable doubt level of proof. There is, however, an oath that senators must take to be impartial. Mitch has already broken that oath.

      1. If she floats…

      2. So, is there a presumption of guilt? If not then it is only logical to assume the President doesn’t need to prove his innocence. The presumption of innocence is the default position, the null hypothesis if you will, rather or not it is specifically stated as such. If you are holding a trial there are two outcomes: guilty or not guilty. One of the two is the default position. So which one is?

        1. And hint, it is a trial in the Senate.

      3. Too true; I mean what could me more impartial than four people who are literally after your job? No recusals for opposition candidates, just straightforward impartiality.

      4. And jeff goes full retard again.

      1. Did you bother to read your citation. It appears that precedence is for it to be conducted as a criminal proceeding and for it to provide the President with the same protections as a criminal proceeding. Kind of undermines you’d argument.

        1. The article mentions preponderance of evidence as opposed to beyond a reasonable doubt, but days nowhere that there is not a presumption of innocence. In fact it quotes that the Senators must decide guilt based upon the standards applied for that impeachment, e.g. the default state is still innocent until either the preponderance of evidence, clear and convincing evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt is established depending upon the Senators personal belief as which standard needs to be met. Nowhere does it even come remotely close to stating the President has to prove his innocence. In all three standards, it indicative of the House to prove to the Senate that they have reached the standard necessary to vote for impeachment.

          1. The Senate has historically rejected analogies to criminal trials. Although your point about presumption of innocence being the default may be valid. I’m not a lawyer (obviously) so I don’t know if that question’s answer is only binary.

            >Constitution limits the consequences of a Senate impeachment trial to removal from office and disqualification from holding office in the future, explicitly preserving the option for a subsequent criminal trial in the courts. Added support for their position was
            drawn from the fact that the framers, while borrowing some terms associated with criminal law from the English impeachment model, expressly rejected the English practice allowing the imposition of traditional criminal punishment, including forfeitures
            of life, property and liberty. Contrary to the defendant, they found that historically, the Senate had rejected the analogy to a criminal proceeding, citing the Ritter impeachment8 in 1936 as precedent.<

            1. Learn the difference between standards of proof and presumption of innocence. It is kind of in the name, standards of proof, e.g. the proof necessary to rule someone is guilty.

          2. In fact the statistical example is a near perfect analogy. In most sciences a P-value < 0.05 is enough to reject the null hypothesis. In others a P-value less < 0.10 is enough to reject the null hypothesis (typically the social "sciences"). Others, such as medical sciences, require a P-value of < 0.001 or even more restrictive. At no point do you ever prove the null hypothesis, you either reject the null hypothesis based upon the evidence or fail to reject the null hypothesis. The author is arguing which standard (P-value) is adequate to reject the null hypothesis in impeachment. And the null hypothesis is always the opposite of the tested hypothesis, e.g. the tested hypothesis is the president is guilty of impeachable offenses, the null hypothesis (or default hypothesis) is that he/she isn't. The trial is the testing of the hypothesis and you can only reject the null hypothesis based upon the evidence and if it reaches the decided upon standard. For example, preponderance could be the P-value of < 0.10 and clear and convincing would be < 0.05 and beyond a reasonable doubt would be < 0.001. Nowhere in your citation does it ever make it indicative of the impeached to prove their innocence. That has never been the standard, ever.

            1. What about no presumption required, either way? the presumption of innocence is a jury member requirement. The only explicit requirement for the jury in this case ( the senate) is to be impartial.

              1. You cannot be impartial if you assume he has to prove innocence that presupposes guilt.

              2. If you don’t presume guilt there is only one alternative. Being impartial just means they will weigh the evidence impartially. The presumption of innocence is the idea that if there is not enough evidence to prove guilt you are automatically not guilty. That is all the presumption of innocence means.

              3. And if impartiality were truly a requirement all or nearly all of them would be disqualified. Four of the democrats are running to take the dude’s job and have a clear conflict. Just about everyone else has commented in a very public way for or against impeachment many times prior to the trial starting in the Senate.


              Quite a few sources that document the argument about whether or not politicians are afforded presumption of innocence in impeachments. It seems by no means settled law, as is the case with most aspects of impeachment.

              1. No, quite a few partisan editorials argue that there is no presumption of innocence but the very act of calling for impartiality implies that there can be no presumption of guilt. Which leaves only one option. The Senators need to decide if there is evidence of guilt which means that the default state is innocent until proven otherwise.

        2. Jeff has never bothered to read any of his links. We went over this with him yesterday.

          1. I’m not jeff, dude. Either move on from that, or get stuck on ‘ignore’.

            Accusing me of holding opinions which I do not because Jeff does is a pretty pathetic and obvious attempt to avoid debating me on the points. Ya know, because you can’t.

            1. Or he doesn’t waste his time with someone who doesn’t understand the difference between standards of proof and presumption of innocence. It is, in this case a binary choice. Guilty or not guilty. The standard of proof, even in your citation, requires the proving of guilt. Thus, the presumption of innocence (or rather not guilty) is the default state until proven otherwise.

              1. In the case of impartiality, the default is that you need to see the evidence before rendering a verdict on guilt but you are willing to rule guilty if the evidence supports that. And vice versa. But the impeached are not required ever to prove their innocence and thus the default state is still presumed innocent until proven otherwise.

                1. Additionally, even in a criminal case, the presumption of innocence simply means that the burden of proof requires you to find the person guilty based upon the evidence (or not) not that you go in expecting the person to be innocent. In other words, if the evidence is not convincing you cannot tile them guilty just because they feel guilty.

      2. Again that is about the standards of proof not the presumption of innocence. The article is about standards of proof, which is separate from presumption of innocence. Your quote doesn’t prove your case. In fact the article mentions the Senators have to decide if the impeached is guilty, thus implying that the default state is innocent. There is no requirement for the impeached to prove innocence in any of the standards discussed, quite reversely it states the Senators have to decide if the standards have been met to their satisfaction to vote guilty.

        1. This is in reply to your 3:03 pm reply to me.

  11. “Biden and Facebook have been feuding for months.”

    We all know that if not for Facebook and the Russians Hillary would be president right now and Biden would be outside looking in!

    1. I still find it weird that a libertarian site is arguing for extra legal protections for a subset of favored companies. Protections that have bern extended to contract law as well. All under the guise that the internet will be destroyed without it. Literally the same argument net neutrality proponents made.

      1. What is extralegal about it? Section 230 is part of the law.

        1. It exempts the groups from various civil liability. You did know what 230 is right?

          And for the contract issue go read the judicial opinion against Meagan Murphy.

          It will be interesting to see what ends up with Nunes lawsuit where he is arguing company negligence in enforcing their rules.

          1. 230 merely says that internet sites are not liable for user posted content. Places like… Reason. 230 says that Reason is not legally liable for YOUR posts.

            1. So you ignored the rest of the post regarding contract law and negligence. Weird.

              And no it does not state simply that what you infer.

              1. The contract law part needs some work. They should be obliged to honor contracts with users of their services. But making them liable for user content would be terrible if you ask me.

            2. “230 merely says ”

              This is how you know someone doesn’t know anything about it.

              1. Here’s what it really says:

                The most relevant section to the discussion at hand seems to be:

                (c)Protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material
                (1)Treatment of publisher or speaker
                No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

                (2)Civil liabilityNo provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—
                (A)any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or
                (B)any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).[1]

                1. Neat. So it is just coincidence, and good faith that only conservatives get defined as “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable”?

            3. And what Section 230 should say is that that sites that moderate comments are publishers, and therefore responsible for anything they let through.

              With a very narrow exception for sites that can prove that their moderation is based upon objective and non-political grounds.

          2. Are you in favor of The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act? Seems like the same thing. If someone else uses your product to violate the law, you shouldn’t be held liable for another persons actions.

            Now breach of contract is another matter all together. And the “we can change the terms and conditions at anytime” language should never be enforced by the courts.

            1. And breach of co trast has always been my primary argument. The judge from Megan Murphy wrapped up contract issues into 230.

              1. Having just read the text of the law, the biggest problem with it seems to be the interpretation. Some ammendment to make it clear that they must abide by contracts with users of their platforms (particularly those with a financial stake), seems like it would be appropriate.

                1. That would be a good first step.

                  1. And we’ll wait to see how well it works.

        2. You do realize pulling out the space changes the meaning, right? Affirmative action is an extra legal right, bribery condoned with a wink and a nod is extralegal.

    2. “Facebook and the Russians”

      Don’t forget the Comey letter. And GamerGate.


  12. This represents “a break from the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton, when the 24 hours were split over a four-day period…”

    We have a much more competitive 24-hour cable news environment to feed today.

  13. Conservatives will seize on the fact that nobody died at that gun fetishist event, and try to argue it means Antifa is therefore more violent. Don’t believe them. It was only because of the steady leadership of Governor Ralph Northam that a massacre was prevented.


    1. How dare you disparage Portland’s Progressive left-Libertarian leadership by comparison

  14. Iran admits to causing Ukrainian plane crash that killed 176 people.

    When will President Trump display similar courage and admit to his part in it???

    1. When reason and the media accept their part in hyping world war 3 leading to nerves from iranian soldiers.

      1. “reason and the media”

        Lump them together, you’ll feel much better. This is just another place for rage clicks, the reaction of the commenters are the main value.

        1. You may have been doing so already but separately identifying Reason as some alternative source of information outside the main stream was something I used to do and continue to see others do that isn’t based in reality

          1. Reason occasionally has non MSM articles to this day.

            1. They do and they deserve credit for that. But, especially in H&R (or Latest, I guess now, they do seem to be a lot more attached to the MSM news cycle than they once were.

  15. …his teams had “successfully de-escalated what could have been a volatile situation.”

    Good save, Governor.

    1. The governor also has a rock that repels tigers.

  16. “This guy exploited stereotypes of gun owners to create hysteria about violent mobs and then when it turns out law abiding gun owners are law abiding, he takes credit for lack of violence.”

    It was the only way to save (black) face.

    1. “It was the only way to save (black) face”

      Now that was clever…

  17. His emergency declaration (covering last Friday at 5 p.m. through today at 5 p.m.) meant that no guns could be brought on Capitol grounds and also allocated special police resources to the area.

    I just realized I wasn’t paying enough attention to an aspect of this. Did they even attempt to enforce this declaration?

    1. They ironically put up walls around the Capitol building with checkpoints.

      1. Ugh! Walls don’t work.

        1. +100

    2. I think that the people with guns stayed out of the fenced off no-gun area. Being law abiding gun owners and all.

  18. Northam is some piece of work. No shame with this guy. From Blackface to infanticide to a contrived panic. And then, when nothing happens takes credit for it.

    Christ, what an asshole.

    Everyone’s an asshole since 2016.

    1. HOW DARE YOU?
      I’ve been an asshole since the days of Myspace.

  19. More bad economic news.

    Rob, Jim, and Alice Walton have each lost over $1 billion already this year.

    Apparently their fortunes — like Charles Koch’s — also rely on highly skilled doctors and engineers crossing the US / Mexico border.


    1. It’s because they won’t hire cheap, professional, well-trained union labor.


    Joe Biden’s brother Frank linked to projects receiving $54 million in taxpayer loans from the Obama Administration despite no experience.

    Then there is the news that the Clinton Foundation is now admitting that Qutar gave it $1 million after she was Secretary of State. Was there any part of the Obama Administration that wasn’t for sale?

    1. Ugh. Posts like this make me wish the real Palin’s Buttplug was still around, not that impostor. The real PB was the most eloquent defender of the Obama Administration in this comment section. He’d set the record straight.

      1. Just scream BUSHPIG and Haliburton.

    2. That book is going to be a good read I feel. Apparently no anonymous sources. Reason will be aghast.

    3. “Was there any part of the Obama Administration that wasn’t for sale?”

      Well, he didn’t run the Motel 6 operation on the Lincoln bedroom like Bubba did.

    4. Was there any part of the Obama Administration that wasn’t for sale?

      Sure things like Federal Airports, because only government is capable…

  21. If Governor Northram fears an insurrection, maybe he and his fellow Democrats in the legislature might consider being less tyrannical?

    1. I think Northam is just a typical shitbag politician who will say or do anything to stay in office. Thanks to it coming out that Northam is actually Governor Coonman, the far left owns his ass. The only reason Northam is still in office is because the far left gave him a pass. They could revoke that pass any time they wish. So, Northam is going to do whatever the far left tells him no matter what the consequences to the state.

    2. I dont know a bunch about Virginia politics but Virginia does not seem like a solid Blue state yet.
      2016 election total voters: 3,984,631
      2018 election total voters: 3,351,373

      2018 election for US Senator:
      Democrat Tim Kaine (incumbent) 1,910,370
      Republican Corey Stewart 1,374,313
      Libertarian Matt Waters 61,565

      2016 Presidential election
      Democrat Hillary Clinton 1,981,473
      Republican Donald Trump 1,769,443

      VA Registration/Turnout reports:
      (year) (Total registered) (Total voted) (Absentee)
      2018 5,666,962 3,374,382 337,315
      2017 5,489,530 2,612,309 192,397

      Almost double the absentee voters for 2018. Probably lots of military.
      2016 5,529,742 3,984,631 566,948

    3. I grew up in a relatively small town in Maryland outside of Washington D.C. At least it used to be a small town. Nowadays, I guess it’s overrun by government workers coming from all over the country to feed on off the taxpayers like a bunch of leeches. From people I grew up with, it sounds like the place is ruined.

      I went to the same boarding school in Virginia my parents, grandparents, on and on attended,

      I’m against government spending for a lot of reasons and plenty of them are intellectual. I don’t think Californians moving to small towns in Boise could ever be as destructive as the people who moved to Maryland and Virginia en mass and completely changed the character of those places forever. We’ll know we have a good government when the suburbs of DC shrink like the city of Detroit.

  22. Iran Acknowledges It Fired 2 Missiles at Ukrainian Jet

    Watch the video. It shows a SAM hitting the airliner and then the Iranians launched another SAM about 20 seconds after that. There is the potential that this aircraft survived both SAM hits and then blew up. Tough American Boeing 737.

    1. Imagine how the passengers who survived the 1st missile strike felt for the remaining 20 seconds of their lives.

  23. Hondurans in no man’s land after Mexican troops block path to US

    Mexicans are pretty racist for not allowing non-Mexicans to enter Mexico. I expect numerous Propaganda pieces from unreason about how racists Mexicans are.

    1. One of the so-called “squad” has already blamed evil orange man, I’m sure others will follow.

    2. I wonder if they will build a wall.

    3. Shikha is headed down there

  24. Hong Kong’s Lam in Davos charm drive as protests persist

    If only we had a media fervor that still covered news about Hong Kong protests rather than jokes like the House Impeachment.

  25. Not only was there no violence at the Richmond rally, his aids were able to talk Ralph Northam out of dressing up as Martin Luther King Jr. for the occasion. It was a successful day all around.

    1. Hahaha

    2. Excellent.

  26. Keep on mind while Biden is talking about Facebook specifically, what he said can apply to all non traditional media that bypass the information gatekeepers in the MSM who are latgely the Democrats allies.

    1. Column: Virginia gun rally shows I might be doing this whole ‘white man’ thing wrong

      This is why more and more Americans dont take Lefty Propagandists like this seriously.

      1. This is actually very typical attitude by those who claim to be “progressive.” They are the smart and sensible ones, and everyone else is an ignorant rube. This plays out in faculty lounges, editorial offices, government bureaucracies, and national mainline church headquarters every day. The best they seem to think they can do is ridicule in the belief that it will convince you and me just how much we listen and strive to be more like them.

        1. And a lot of progressives are smart people. The problem is, there is not a very high correlation between being smart and being a good person or being right about complicated issues. Smart people are really good at creating convincing narratives to justify their beliefs.

          1. And a lot of progressives are smart people.

            assumes facts not in evidence.

          2. Smart people dont act the way Lefties do.

  27. Parallels from recent history:

    “Tonight I stand before you to report that America has created the longest peacetime economic expansion in our history with nearly 18 million new jobs, wages rising at more than twice the rate of inflation, the highest homeownership in history, the smallest welfare rolls in 30 years, and the lowest peacetime unemployment since 1957.”

    —-President Bill Clinton

    State of the Union Address

    January 19, 1999

    The date is important because Clinton gave this State of the Union Address during his impeachment trial in the Senate. Rather than hurt Clinton’s approval rating, being impeached raised his approval rating higher than it had ever been before.

    According to Gallup, on December 15-16 of 1998, Clinton’s approval rating was 63%.

    The House voted to impeach President Clinton on December 19, 1998.

    Gallup took another poll on Dec 19-20 of 1998, and President Clinton’s approval rating had jumped to 73%

    When Clinton made that State of the Union address in the middle of the Senate trial on the question of whether to remove him from office, he was riding high on good economic news. He never mentioned impeachment in that State of the Union address. He just hammered away on the economy.

    It’s safe to say that Trump’s support is notoriously difficult to poll.
    For whatever reason, what people tell the pollsters doesn’t seem to reflect what they actually put in the ballot box. Regardless of what the polls say, Trump shouldn’t even mention the impeachment at this point. He should just keep hammering away on how well the economy is doing at this point.

    “America’s newfound prosperity is undeniable, unprecedented and unmatched anywhere in the world,” Trump said at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, hours before his impeachment trial was set to begin in earnest back home. “America achieved this stunning turnaround not by making minor changes to a handful of policies, but by adopting a whole new approach centered entirely on the well-being of the American worker.”

    “Every decision we make on taxes, trade, regulation, energy, immigration, education and more is focused on improving the lives of everyday Americans,” he added. “Only when governments put their own citizens first will people be fully invested in their national futures.”

    —-President Trump, Davos Switzerland

    January 21, 2020

    CNBC link below

    Trump went on after that speech to attack those European countries that force their people to make sacrifices in the name of multilateral climate change treaties, etc. I prefer focusing on American consumers (and their standard of living), rather than rent -seeking for American workers, but making policy about benefiting workers is infinitely better than using the government to force American workers to sacrifice their standard of living on the altar of climate change.

    And regardless of how I feel about his argument for reelection, if Trump stays on this track, he will be unstoppable in November, and the Democrats have probably done him a favor by impeaching him–if he can just keep himself from getting distracted by the impeachment proceedings.

    1. By the time Bill Clinton was impeached, his real accomplishments were behind him. He didn’t do much of anything his last 2 years in office except get us into a war with Serbia.

      Trump in contrast continues to achieve one thing after another as the impeachment circus rolls on to a half empty tent. He got Congress to approve the new NAFTA. He just signed a new trade deal with China. He humiliated Iran and got the Europeans to go back to supporting sanctions. The economy continues to grow.

      The impeachment trial is irrelevant to all but the true believers. Also, the fears that impeachment will be the new normal in politics are overblown. It will only become the new normal if Trump is somehow not re-elected. If Trump is re-elected, the impeachment effort will be viewed as a failure and likely at least partially blamed for Trump’s re-election. If that happens, it is hard to see why a political tactic that failed and is blamed for re-electing the President who was its target will be used again much less its use become the new normal.

      1. The impeachment isn’t only irrelevant to Trump’s would-be supporters, though. I suspect it galvanizes support Trump wouldn’t have enjoyed otherwise. If the elitist snobs in the Democratic Party hate Trump so much that they want to impeach him over nothing, then he must be doing something right! This plays straight into Trump’s “drain the swamp” narrative, which appeals to people across parties–and across generations. The Democrats are handed it to him on a silver platter.

        1. Yup. Trump’s Impeachment is a badge of honor that he is so upsetting the Establishment and Lefties that they will destroy the Democrat Party to try to remove Trump from office.

  28. Iran takes responsibility for Jan. 8 plane crash

    I think since they have now admitted to deliberately shooting down the plane with SAMs you can stop calling it a “plane crash” you mindless cunt.

    1. Somebody did something somewhere.

      1. Twice – – – –

    1. This is the part that drew my eye:

      “Most of Idaho’s new residents hail from California, according to the census. A recent University of California, Berkeley, poll showed that half of the state’s registered voters have considered moving elsewhere because of the high cost of living. Three times as many Republicans as Democrats have seriously considered moving, with many citing the state’s liberal political climate, the poll said.

      In Star, some transplants said the state’s conservative politics were a draw.”

      30% of California’s voters voted for Donald Trump, and another 3% voted for Gary Johnson. The reason Trump won the primaries and the presidential election in 2016 was because Democrats outside of places like California are more conservative than Democrats in places like California. No doubt, a 70/30 split is an ass-kicking in election politics, but those 30% of Californians who voted for Trump are not less conservative or less Republican than conservatives or Republicans in Idaho. As that Berkeley study suggests, the people who are moving to Idaho from California are probably disproportionately California conservatives.

      They may not have the Idaho aesthetic down. They may not know how to dress a deer in the field. They may not know how to dress in the winter. But their willingness to spend $398,950 for a house that was priced at $155,000 ten years ago is a testament to the depth of their commitment to get the fuck out of the liberal hellhole that is California. I understand that urge. Believe me, I more than understand it. I’m living it!

      Thinking electric cars are cool doesn’t mean they we want to take your guns away–although a lot of people make that assumption. Its’ quite the opposite! Californians are going there, disproportionately, because it’s conservative. And bringing a taste for avocado toast with them doesn’t make them any less conservative.

      I was thinking about this the other day–why do I think electric cars are cool? Why do I want a Rivian? A lot of it is because it appeals to my sense of rugged individualism. Being able to power a truck with my own solar panels would make me even less dependent on other people. It’s like fishing. Buying a boat, a truck to haul it with, buying a license, and buying bait is a whole lot more expensive than buying fish at the grocery store. But knowing I can feed myself with the fish I catch is appealing all by itself. It’s part of what makes fishing fun.

      1. I have left off an italics tag.

      2. Some Californians know how to dress a deer and i don’t mean put a dress on it like some would. that said I’ve thought of leaving cali for Idaho and if Cali gets rid of prop 13 I will be leaving but there are so many Californians in Idaho now i think i’ll go some where else now

        1. I appreciate that there are some Californians who know what to do after they shoot a deer.

          I hope my point is getting across that the people moving to places like Idaho are disproportionately conservative–even if they don’t know how to do stuff that everybody’s Aunt Jenny knows how to do in rural Idaho.

          Just because they aren’t aesthetically like local Idahoans doesn’t mean they aren’t just as conservative on issues like gun rights, spending, taxes, regulation, immigration, gay marriage, and a host of other issues.

          When you see somebody dressed up like a cowboy in Hollywood, people often assume he’s probably gay. That isn’t the case in Idaho, Montana, or Wyoming. When you see what looks like a Californian moving in next door in Idaho, Montana, or Wyoming, don’t assume he’s a liberal. Just because he’s never shot a deer, drinks lattes, and isn’t entirely partial to country music, that doesn’t mean he’s a liberal.

          That’s all I was saying.

      3. As a Native Idahoan, and a an adopted Montanan my experiences differ. I saw the first rush into Kootennai County during the 1980s and 1990s. They wanted Idaho prices but brought California politics. Logging, hunting, farming etc were all bad and needed to be regulated out of existence. Boise is now one of the most liberal areas in Idaho (Moscow is worse, mainly because of the University of Idaho, and Washington State University just accross the border). Missoula is only 39% native Montanans, it is also by far the most liberal city in Montana. Gallatin County is less than 50% native born Montanans and is giving Missoula a run for it’s money. Maybe they are conservatives but it doesn’t seem to matter, the more of them that move here, the more they want the state to change to look like what they fled.

        1. Thank Micron for bringing a bit of CA to Boise too.

          Maybe Idaho needs a purity test before letting people move there.

          1. Put up a wall on the WA border!!

            1. Eastern Washington would be happy with putting it up at Stevens and Snoqualmie passes.

          2. Basically, any municipality that invites Big Tech to set up shop there quite rapidly becomes an over-priced, high cost of living bug hive. Big Tech is the business version of AIDS or cancer.

        2. Sounds a lot like the gradual transformation of NH, which has been going on for 40+ years, as Massholes and others move north for cheaper property and lower taxes, but still want all the government services they were used to.

          1. In California, they’re fleeing liberals.

            And just because they look liberal doesn’t mean they are.

            I’m not sure Massholes and the people of New Hampshire have as radically different an aesthetic sense as people from Southern California and people in Idaho.

            1. My experience differs. I grew up in Idaho and saw the way many of these “conservative” Californians tried to destroy our way of life. I see it here in Montana too. Yes, they may claim to be conservatives, but they to often support policies that anything but conservative. Also, Montana and Idaho conservatives tend to be the more leave me the fuck alone and fuck the government type (especially Northern ND Central Idaho) and less worship the government types. The California brand tend to be more of the latter then the former.

              1. So, no policies have actually changed because of the influx of Californians?

                1. Actually quite a few policies have changed. Ask the bluegrass seed growers on the Rathdrum prairie. Oh, you can’t because the influx of Californians forced them out of business with new regulations. That is just one example.

                  1. Or the new zoning, and building laws. The several local ordinances in Missoula and Bozeman that are contrary to state law and traditions. Missoula has been sued multiple times for going against state laws in regards to things such as gun control, especially campus carry.

                2. And just for my information where did you get the take that no policies have changed from my posts?

  29. ‘This isn’t a trial – it’s a COVER-UP!’ Chuck Schumer rages against Mitch McConnell’s rules for Donald Trump’s impeachment trial as a ‘national disgrace’

    Poor Democrats. Thanks to you, Donald Trump is now the best President in US History!!!!

    He is the only US President to survive a coup, joke of a Democrat House of Representatives Impeachment, then be reelected for a second term.

    1. Schumer should do a little Senate history review.

      Everybody knew Bill Clinton was guilty, but the Democrats in the Senate, despite Clinton’s guilty, voted not guilty.

      How does Schumer feel about the Senate’s cover-up of Clinton?

    2. It’s just theater. The Democrats were more than happy to make their own rules in the House for the inquiry, now they can sit back and open wide while progress gets shoved down their throat.

  30. Denver Post Columnist Fired After Arguing There Are Two Sexes

    Propagandists eating their own. Its like Row v. Wade on steroids.

    1. You can transition to male, or transition to female. Is transitioning to “other” or X a medical option?

    2. To think 5 years ago we were warning about activists turning gender into sex for legal argumentation and nobody listened.

      1. Many Conservatives were ridiculed for opposing gay marriage (which I support BTW, better yet let’s get government out of marriage all together) when they predicted next it would be to normalize transvestites and pedophiles. Well, the former is well underway and there is growing noise about the latter. Take that as you may, treating transvestites as human beings is a good thing but special treatment or ignoring biology (allowing biological males to compete against biological females for example) is not.

    3. I wonder if it could sue for discrimination against real science fact

    4. Caldara is a libertarian, not a progressive. He’s the head of the Independence Institute that Harsanyi belonged to for a while.

      Caldara was basically the Post’s “token conservative,” in that he was the local op-ed writer who wasn’t a batshit insane leftist. It’s not his main job, though.

  31. PORN STARS EXPOSED Bank details, social security numbers, passport information and addresses for THOUSANDS of porn stars leaked online

    If you take your porn business outside Commifornia, this is what happens when the Lefty Cabal gets upset.

    1. So are any of them school teachers or soccer moms living secret lives? Anything fun in that article?

      1. First picture is pretty hot!

        ENB is only good for one thing, sex links and sammiches. She has been doing other things.

    2. I love the smell of lawsuits in the morning. Smells like money.

    3. Be interesting to see what the IRS does with the data.

      That Ho Owes Taxes.

  32. Macron and Trump declare truce in digital tax dispute

    The two leaders agreed to the truce after Paris offered to suspend down payments for this year’s digital tax and Washington promised to keep negotiating towards a solution

    China now France!?!

    Poor Boehm.

    1. Boehm is just slightly less embarrassing than Krugman in predictions and analysis.

    2. Tariffs imploding!

    3. That’s great, as IIRC, it was this issue that was causing the threatened 100 percent tariffs on European agricultural products.

      Yay, cheaper Volnay!

      1. Be better yet if Europe would allow American agricultural goods the same access to their markets that the US allows European agricultural goods to the US market.

  33. “”″”

    Apparently the phone is the new security blanket.

    1. Islam will inherit the earth, and deserves to.

    1. The Libertarian Case for Only Letting Government Employees Vote.

      “This country was founded on the Original Sin of only letting white property owning males vote, so restricting the ballot to an acceptable class of people is historically in our nation’s DNA….”

      1. Would you like to know more?

    2. Where this level of stupid comes from is one of the great mysteries of the universe. You could win a Nobel Prize if you could understand how someone could become as stupid as Berlatsky appears to be.

      1. I’m not sure it’s stupidity. Stupid people are easy to deal with. This is something much worse. Smart people who are wrong are much more dangerous than stupid people who are wrong. (Not that I think Berlatsky is necessarily smart, I have no idea one way or the other).

        1. He is a clever person who is adept at rationalizing his depravity.

    3. Does employing a writer mean endorsing all of their views about everything? If Reason had published that piece, I might agree. THat is some garbage.

      1. Haha.

        Unreason sock trolls are so obvious these days. Defending unreason at every turn.

    4. That’s a great way to convince people to ignore libertarians when they argue that something is unconstitutional.

      He’s doing a disservice to those of us who genuinely oppose violating the Constitution.

  34. Anybody else keeping track of the Wuhan, Coronavirus, or whatever the hell they’re calling it?

    It’s spread beyond China to Taiwan and there may be a case in Australia.

    No need to spread panic, but the mortality rate is a concern. Bad bugs haven’t gotten us before, and they’ll get us again.

    1. And here I am with a trip scheduled to go there.

      1. I don’t know what can be done about recirculated air in a pressurized cabin exposing us all to each others’ germs on airplanes, but there must be an engineering solution to that problem. Fuel efficiency and entertainment options save money and sell tickets. I don’t suppose the airlines can advertise that they won’t get the flu on one of their flights, but it’s one of the things I hate about flying the most. If one percent of the population has dormant flu at any given time and there are 300 people on the plane, then my chances of being exposed to the flu are really high anywhere on the plane. The inconvenience caused by the TSA isn’t anywhere near as bad as the inconvenience of getting the crud about half the time when we fly. There’s gotta be a way to fix that.

        Maybe they’ll have it in the flu vaccine by the time you travel. Here’s to hoping you don’t get sick!

        1. I guess you could do a ‘cook-out’ on each plane, a la the procedure described in The Hot Zone. Basically steep the plane’s interior in a noxious biocide until it’s sterile.

          That certainly won’t take too long, or be a health risk…

          Wash hands, don’t touch your face, shoot plague victims. You know, the usual.

          What was the mortality on SARS (what this bug seems to resemble) when that was all said and done?

          1. If the air is recirculated, isn’t there some kind of sterile solution they can push that air through somewhere in the system?

            On a transpacific flight, in a pressurized cabin, you’re probably breathing the contents of everybody on the plane’s lungs at least once.

            Maybe break the pressurized cabin and introduce oxygen from storage–like they do in hospitals for patients who have problems breathing, except they’re not getting the oxygen directly via face mask. They’re reintroducing oxygen after air is being circulated out of the pressurized cabin. I appreciate that oxygen can present a fire hazard, but so does fuel for the engine.

            1. I guess you could retrofit some form of HEPA filtration system, keeping in mind everything in aviation costs orders of magnitude above what it does on the ground. Assuming that’s possible, and doesn’t cause the pressurization pumps to catch fire, or the passengers to asphyxiate, you still have the problem of respiratory droplets from the infected, remaining on surfaces in the airliner near the infected. How resilient is the virus outside the body? How much infectious agent does it take to get someone sick?

              I dunno, rig UV lights in the cabin, give everyone single use eye shields, and tell them to bundle up? Just how infectious is this bug?

              1. There is no treatment except isolation and supportive care.

                Human to human transmission is now known. The presumption is an animal vector which has not been identified. That would be important in containing the outbreak.

                If it is like SARS the death rate was about 10% with many survivors suffering permanent lung damage.

                There are no vaccines or specific antivirals for coronaviruses so far as I can find.

                Chinese health care has been actively sharing information with WHO and other agencies.

                The primary symptom is fever followed by pneumonia and constitutional symptoms.

                As Ron points out the good news is the numbers are small at this point and the disease and epicenter have been identified. Hopefully it can be contained early.

    2. 290 people sick out of 1.5 billion, I’m not concerned.

      1. 1.5 billion people haven’t been exposed yet. The mortality rate among those who have been exposed appears to be high.

        1. last I heard two people while in the United States 30K to 50k people die from flue every year. Is it really a big deal i don’t know but since they, the government and media always say the sky is falling I take everything with a grain of salt these days

          1. I hope it’s not big deal, and I’m not saying it will be.

            It’s an interesting development, and it has the potential become a big deal–if not globally, then maybe just within the context of Hong Kong. They’re already sorta blaming the government for its mismanagement of the issue, and the concerns about the virus are hitting emerging markets.

            NEW YORK (Reuters) – Risk assets took a hit across the globe on Tuesday while the Japanese yen and some developed country bond prices gained as financial markets reacted to mounting concern about a new strain of flu-like virus in China.

            . . . .

            Investors worried that about the threat of contagion, as hundreds of millions travel for the Chinese Lunar New Year holidays, which peak over the coming weekend.

            Emerging market stocks lost 1.59 percent. MSCI’s broadest index of Asia-Pacific shares outside Japan closed 1.63 percent lower, while Japan’s Nikkei lost 0.91 percent.

            Hong Kong, which suffered badly during the SARS outbreak, saw its index fall 2.8%.

            The chill in Asia carried over to European markets. Shares of luxury goods makers – which have large exposure to China – were among those declining the most.

            A U.S. index of airline stocks fell 2.1% and hotel and casino operators Las Vegas Sands Corp and Wynn Resorts Ltd, both of which have large operations in China, dropped about 5%.

            Just because the markets are pricing in risk doesn’t mean there will be a big problem, but if the markets are reacting to the risk, then the risk itself is real.

            1. “Risk assets dragged lower by Chinese virus anxiety”

              —-Reuters, January 20, 2020


              1. its Trumps fault, that is all

    3. Coronavirus

      I get that every summer. Symptoms include flip flops and purchasing overpriced piss water

      1. Me too. It usually impels me to buy a six pack and some limes, and as soon as I take that first sip I realize how much I hate Corona, now I’ve got a six pack I have to finish because my mother didn’t raise no quitter.

        1. Pacifico > Cornona

            1. Negra Modello!!

    4. Japan, Thailand, South Korea.

      Shocked it’s not in the States yet.

        1. Yep, I was just coming back to note that. Washington state. So far. No way it stays there.

          Hope this is just going to be a souped up flu. I wonder what the incubation period on this bug is?

  35. No violence in VA because ANTIFA was not there.

    Pretty simply where there is ANTIFA there is violence.

    1. they were supposed to show up but I saw no news of them, what happened did they realize they would literally be outgunned

      1. There was rumor that a local chapter was going to march in support of 2A. I also didn’t hear anything about it in news reports so I’m guessing it didn’t happen. I was highly skeptical about their motives to begin with.

        But no way in that crowd would the typical masked piss throwing ANTIFA be able to survive.

        But per my original post where ANTIFA goes violence goes. It doesn’t matter who they are targeting.

        I was expecting a Charlottesville hoaxer to respond with what about Nazi’s?

        Nazi’s suck but do still have free speech rights. They held their vigil in C-ville minus ANTIFA and there was no violence.

        Add ANTIFA the next day and we have violence.

  36. “Nobody likes him, he got nothing done”

    What an odd time for a libertarian slanted endorsement of Bernie Sanders

    1. Ah. She must have meant that no one in the Senate liked him. Which I can believe.

  37. Almost all rank-and-file gun control supporters support gun control (and stop-and-frisk, for that matter), due to fear of the street thug and the gangbanger.

    I wonder if this rally dispelled the notion that only street thugs and gangbangers want guns.

    1. Nope because the media will surely report on this but focusing on the rednecks and not on the minorities there or the educated, upper class there. Thugs, gangsters and rednecks, all which are dangerous to their minds.

      1. And BTW, just as an FYI, we never thought Jeff Foxworthy was a comedian we just thought he was talking about our family.

        1. Another ‘true redneck’ test is when you can actually understand Boomhauer from King of The Hill, and realize he’s not speaking gibberish. It’s just a (really thick) ‘East Texas Bubba’ accent.

          Which reminds me, I really need to get up to Tyler for their Rose Festival one of these days.

  38. So sorry no street violence for the media to get upset about but they still call them racist

    1. To racial collectivists, everyone is racist, just as to looters everyone lies along a horizontal line whose only demention is some unspecified length. In a one-dimensional world they’d be really smart.

  39. Ugh: Joe Biden continues to campaign against Section 230, the federal communications law that built the internet as we know it.

    You mean, that enables our tech overlords to decide what we’re allowed to say in public?

    I oppose Biden. But that’s a good idea

  40. ENB has earned a prize for non-soporific journalism her colleagues would do well to emulate. The Cuban-Canadian Senator Ted Cruz footage is apropos for the skillful way he, a subjectivist “lawmaker,” avoids, sidesteps, elides and self-censors all objectivity out of polite conversation, beginning with the forbidden word “objective.” God has rewarded him with cloudbursts of opponents who shun objective and unvarnished data in their zeal to make electricity scarce and unaffordable.

  41. Google pay 350$ reliably my last pay check was $45000 working 9 hours out of consistently on the web. My increasingly youthful kinfolk mate has been averaging 19k all through continuous months and he works around 24 hours reliably…. Read more  

Comments are closed.