Reason Roundup

Cambridge Will Recognize Polyamorous Partnerships and Other Domestic Arrangements With More Than 2 Adults

Plus: An Iowa reporter is on trial for covering a Black Lives Matter protest, Arkansas governor signs abortion ban, and more...

|

Cambridge legalizes polyamorous partnerships. The city of Cambridge, Massachusetts, will become the second municipality in the country to legalize domestic partnerships between three or more people. On Monday, Cambridge City Council approved an ordinance amending the city's existing statute to stipulate that a domestic partnership needn't only include two partners.

Now, a domestic partnership in Cambridge "means the entity formed by two or more persons" who are not related and file a registration declaring that they're "in a relationship of mutual support, caring and commitment and intend to remain in such a relationship" and "consider themselves to be a family."*

The new language removes the requirement that all individuals in a domestic partnership must reside together. It also does away with a section declaring that domestic partners must submit to the city various pieces of evidence proving their familial relationship.

"The ordinance was developed with detailed input from the newly formed Polyamory Legal Advocacy Coalition (PLAC), and is the first of what advocates hope will be a wave of legal recognition for polyamorous families and relationships in 2021," said PLAC—a coalition comprised of the Chosen Family Law Center, the Harvard Law School LGBTQ+ Advocacy Clinic, and members of the American Psychological Association's Committee on Consensual Non-Monogamy—in a statement.

The group pushes for legal recognition for polyamorous partnerships and other types of "non-nuclear families."

"Non-nuclear families—such as single parents supported by relatives, step-families, open adoption families, multi-generational families, multi-parent families, and polyamorous families—have changed the landscape of American society, and yet, many of these diverse family structures are not protected or recognized by the law," Alexander Chen of the Harvard Law School LGBTQ+ Advocacy Clinic said in a statement.

"The lack of legal protection makes non-nuclear families especially vulnerable to stigma and discrimination in employment, health care, housing, and social life," notes Diana Adams, executive director of the Chosen Family Law Center. "I have represented hundreds of clients who have been discriminated against because they're polyamorous, whether that meant being unable to visit their life partner in the hospital, losing child custody in court battles, or losing their job. Legal recognition of these families reduces social stigma and provides families with the stability we all deserve."

Cambridge follows in the footsteps of Somerville, Massachusetts, which last year legalized domestic partnerships between three or four people. But the Somerville statute contained "provisions that made it difficult to be utilized in practice," according to Adams. "Cambridge's ordinance is based on a model ordinance drafted by our legal expert team at PLAC, and may have much greater practical impact," they say.


FREE MINDS

An Iowa reporter is on trial for covering a Black Lives Matter protest. The reporter, Andrea Sahouri, was one of 116 U.S. journalists arrested for covering protests against police brutality last year. NBC News has more:

The trial of journalist Andrea Sahouri began Monday with a police officer stating that he had no choice but to arrest her during last year's racial justice protests in Des Moines, Iowa, because she didn't leave the area after he deployed pepper spray.

Sahouri, a Des Moines Register public safety reporter, is one of 116 journalists arrested or detained while covering Black Lives Matter protests that erupted after the death of George Floyd, according to the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, but she is the first to be taken to trial. She is charged with failure to disperse and interference with official acts, both misdemeanors.

"This is a case about a journalist arrested for doing her job," defense attorney Nicholas Klinefeldt said during opening arguments.


FREE MARKETS

A tale of two lockdown strategies:


QUICK HITS

• Arkansas is attempting to ban almost all abortions, with a new measure signed into law by Gov. Asa Hutchinson on Tuesday. Similar bills in other states have been struck down as unconstitutional.

• Is it time to end daylight savings time?

• New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is facing a sixth sexual harassment allegation.

• Alaska will start permitting any resident age 16 and older to get the COVID-19 vaccine.

• Following in Illinois' footsteps, Pennsylvania moves to end cash bail.


* CORRECTION: Applicants need not state that they are "not in a domestic partnership with others outside this partnership." That language appeared in the original proposed ordinance but was removed before final passage.

NEXT: From the Archives: April 2021

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. I’m gonna flag so many comments today it’s going to be ridiculous. Also, let’s refrain from the insults today, assholes.

      1. Flagged!

        1. I quit working at shoprite to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $45 to 85 per/h. Without spo a my doubt, this is the pay easiest and most financially rewarding job I’ve ever had. I actually started 6 months ago and this has totally changed my life………… READ MORE

          1. [ PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings NHBG are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
            on this page…..work92/7 online

          2. [ PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings QWQQ are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
            on this page…..work92/7 online

    1. LMAO

      1. Flagged!

    2. Lol

      1. Flagged!

    3. I’m sticking to the usual suspects. You already know who they are because they are, well, usual.

      1. I said no insults, dickhead.

        1. I quit working at shoprite to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $45 to 85 per/h. Without spo a my doubt, this is the pay easiest and most financially rewarding job I’ve ever had. I actually started 6 months ago and this has totally changed my life………… READ MORE

      2. And by “usual suspects”, you mean Kevin Spacey-like child molesters, IYKWIMAITYD?

    4. “Cambridge Will Recognize Polyamorous Partnerships”

      ENB is tired of her little poof husband already.

      1. KillAllRednecks, Mormon advocate, hardest hit.

        1. This post is so offensive, I’m copying it to a notepad for later.

          1. +100000

        2. Good one! I don’t care if consenting adults want to have 3,4 or 20 ways. I care about mormons forcing their morally bankrupt beliefs and lifestyle on everyone.

          1. and you’re jealous one fucked a 15 year old

            1. That seems kind of old.

              1. *Real* men are jealous of Muhammad and Aisha.

      2. Do you think it’s possible that either one of them actually believes that they’re fooling people? Or are they both fully aware that almost everyone else at the parties is laughing and joking at their expense when they leave the room and they don’t really care all that much?

      3. Hey! Liberty Magazine long ago made the suggestion: If two parents are best for kids, why not three, four, or more?…as long as they are on the same page, of course.

    5. Change Your Life Right Now! Work From Comfort Of Your Home And Receive Your First Paycheck Within A Week. No Experience Needed, No Boss Over YourDFG Shoulder… Say Goodbye To Your Old Job! Limited Number Of Spots Open… Find out how HERE……. Visit Here

  2. Is it time to end daylight savings time?

    IT’S DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME and it’s the best time of all.

    1. If only one daylight is saved!

    2. Arizonans think you all are heathens with your fancy time changing.

      1. Except for national parks and other federal outposts, which proudly defy states’ rights.

        1. But, but what about Greta Thunberg?

      2. I’m chuckling to myself about all the Hoosiers I know who jumped on the DST bandwagon just in time for everyone else to jump off.

    3. NO!! I just got my houseplants used to the routine changes!

    4. The proposal is to end standard time and make DST permanent. What ends is the switchover.

      1. Move everything 30 minutes up from Standard time and / or 30 minutes down from daylight savings time, and end the switchover.

        Also, make time zone changes only occur at state lines. Sorry Kentucky and Tennessee, you either need to pick one or split into two states.

    5. “We have to make daylight savings time permanent in order to end daylight savings time.”

      As someone who grew up without DST, that sounds par for the course.

    6. Time zones were set up so that when it’s noon near the center meridian of a zone, the sun is at it’s highest elevation of the day. That makes perfect sense to me. End Daylight Saving Time (which doesn’t save anything at all, on the average) by returning to Standard Time (look at the name – it’s *standard* time) everywhere.

      1. Dang! “It’s” => “its.”

      2. The justification for DST is wicked outdated if you think you’re saying power. I’d suspect in fact the opposite is true in the summer: a later sunset means evening cooling starts later so AC’s run longer.

    7. Why can’t we have 3 or more DST’s? Bigot!

      1. Everyone should be able to self identify their own time zone.

        1. Nobody needs 24 different time zones.

          1. I identify as being in the Martian Time Zone.

      2. I think we should have DST just about every day – set the clocks forward an hour every weekday at about 4 in the afternoon, set them back 5 hours on Saturday afternoon.

  3. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is facing a sixth sexual harassment allegation.

    Also he caused a lot of deaths.

    1. That’s a local story though. Just like the lawsuit against Whitless about nursing home deaths in Michigan.

    2. More than 6? Ciiiiiiittttttteeeeee!

    3. “None of those ladies said at the time that it made them uncomfortable when I hefted their breasts and nibbled on their necks. How was I supposed to know?”

    4. These two factors mean that he’s a perfect candidate for a job in the Harris/Biden administration.

      And that’s nothing to sniff at!

  4. Ballot Transfer Forms Show 78 Percent of 89,000 Absentee Ballots from Drop Boxes in Cobb County, Georgia Were Not Transported to Registrar ‘Immediately’ As Election Code Rule Requires
    https://georgiastarnews.com/2020/12/11/ballot-transfer-forms-show-78-percent-of-89000-absentee-ballots-from-drop-boxes-in-cobb-county-were-not-transported-to-registrar-immediately-as-election-code-rule-requires/

    1. Four Months After 2020 Presidential Election in Georgia No Chain of Custody Documents Produced for 404,000 Absentee Ballots Deposited in Drop Boxes; Fulton County One of 35 Scofflaw Counties
      https://georgiastarnews.com/2021/03/04/four-months-after-2020-presidential-election-in-georgia-no-chain-of-custody-documents-produced-for-404000-absentee-ballots-deposited-in-drop-boxes-fulton-county-one-of-35-scofflaw-counties/

      1. Still No Chain of Custody Documents Produced in Georgia for 76 Percent of Absentee Ballots Cast in Drop Boxes Two Months Ago in Presidential Election
        https://georgiastarnews.com/2021/01/03/still-no-chain-of-custody-documents-produced-in-georgia-for-76-percent-of-absentee-ballots-cast-two-months-ago-in-presidential-election/

        1. No <widespread fraud.

          1. You definitely have found evidence of a procedural error here.

            Was there any fraud? Maybe, maybe not. Of course, in your mind you are treating it like a fact that this means there was fraud.

            1. Sorta like your fantasy that pepper spray caused a guy to have a stroke a day later?

              1. If it’s a fantasy, it’s the FBI’s fantasy. We shall see what the final investigation report says.

                1. Keep hanging on; you’re getting more amusing all the time, TDS-addled shit.

                2. the FBI said pepper spray causes strokes the day after?

                  cite?

                  1. She said wait for the final investigation! (But in the meantime go with the narrative)

                    1. Funny how White Knight wants to wait for the coroner’s report now, but didn’t give a shit about it before when the narrative was that the crowd beat Sicknick to death.

                    2. “Funny how White Knight wants to wait for the coroner’s report now, but didn’t give a shit about it before when the narrative was that the crowd beat Sicknick to death.”

                      TDS-addled shit’s concern for veracity is highly variable: If it can be considered anti-Trump, any hearsay will do.

                3. Fbi made no assertion on it in testimony dummy.

                  1. Duh. All information about Sicknick’s death are anonymous and second-hand sources.

                    1. Then why did you repeat he was beat to death by a fire extinguisher for a month include almost 9 days after CNN and NYT retracted? And then immediately switched to bear spray?

                    2. I’m not the one who immediately discounts stories that use anonymous sources. That’s something you CACLLs do (except when you like what the anonymous sources said).

                    3. You didnt answer the question.

                    4. “I’m not the one who immediately discounts stories that use anonymous sources…”

                      Correct. You’re the TDS-addled shit who continues to lie about it even when given the evidence.

                  2. It’s telling that the CACLLs here have made past diatribes against the use of anonymous sources, but then hypocritically turn around and tout the CNN story, in which the information that “medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma” came from “one law enforcement official”.

                    1. Yes, it’s particularly telling that a network so devoted to TDS-addled shits like you withdrew the claim and no one has yet tried to make that claim again.

                    2. It’s telling that the CACLLs here have made past diatribes against the use of anonymous sources

                      The multiple sources are not anonymous, and include the officers captain and his mother.

                      Disingenuous cunt is such a fitting descriptor for you $.50 bois.

                    3. Have you seen his birth certificate? If not, how do you know it’s really his mother?

                    4. Hey Chuck:

                      Go fuck yourself fascist!

                    5. Reading comprehension pop quiz, Chuck: Can you quote the rest of my sentence? You know the part you cut off when you quoted me?

                    6. It’s telling that you can’t tell that most of us here are saying there is no evidence he was killed by any action from a protestor is the same as you saying there is evidence.

                      Show us your evidence if there is not. You just above said the FBI hasn’t released anything, so currently there is no evidence making your CACLLs correct.

                    7. Can you quote the rest of my sentence? You know the part you cut off when you quo

                      I edited your bullshit for brevity. Yes, you said “one law enforcement official”, but you have to be fucking kidding if you believe that isn’t burying the lede. That one official is his direct commander but you word it it so that it can be interpreted by the $.50 brigade as if was made up on the spot by an idiot community outreach officer.

                      You are still ignoring his own mother’s comments. Fuck you.

                    8. “I edited your bullshit for brevity.”

                      If the TDS-addled shit can kick up enough dust, he can hope his dishonesty might not be visible.

                    9. Chuck you lie and distort like most mormons you piece of fucking shit.

                      Sevo a drink will cure your BDS.

                      You should have a drink too Chuck you goddamn fucking pussy.

            2. If you suddenly have a lot money you can’t account for the IRS will be interested but if you have a lot of votes you can’t account for, no big deal.

      2. Yeah. But these ballots were all rescanned a second time proving no fraud anywhere occurred according to WK. Who cares about ballot origins!

        1. The election wasn’t close and Joe Biden will be sworn in as President
          -Barak Obama

          1. Well, if Obama says so…

            (actually good enough for many Democrat true believers)

            (and yes, the same is true for many Trumpettes, which just proves that we have far too many idiots who are allowed to vote)

            1. “which just proves that we have far too many idiots who are allowed to vote”

              After HR 1 allows 16 year olds to vote, this should improve.

              1. Presumably that bill also allows them to buy cigarettes and alcohol and firearms, and sign contracts and act in pornography too, since they’re clearly Fully Mature Adults ™ right?

        2. Dee didn’t seem to see any problem with mail in applications being sent to to people that didn’t live at the address they were sent to. What could go wrong with that?

          1. OK, please explain what the problem is with *applications* being sent anywhere? Who cares? These are the same applications that someone can download off the state website, or pop into the local library or county clerk’s office to grab a few.

            If there is not an adequate procedure to validate and approve applications, then you have a problem that needs to be fixed.

              1. Which state are we discussing? (If I recall correctly, you, or whoever brought this subject up, yesterday said they live in … Michigan? I don’t remember.)

                Which point in my comment do you want a cite for?

                1. All of them.

                  1. OK, which state are we discussing?

                    1. He said all of them. Which part did you struggle with?

                    2. WK: “Which point in my comment do you want a cite for?”
                      R Mac: “All of them.”

                      Reading comprehension pop quiz for you JesseAz. What noun in my sentence was R Mac referring to when he uses the word, “them”?

                    3. Okay but where are the cites to any of tham?

                    4. So no cites. Got it.

                    5. Which state are we discussing, R Mac?

                    6. R Mac
                      March.10.2021 at 11:59 am
                      All of them.

                      Which of those 3 words is confusing to you?

        3. According to Tony, a recount is an audit.

          1. And if they recount twice it’s even more audity, cuz they did it twice.

        4. Nobody can possibly satisfy what you want. Once ballots are accepted, there is no way to go back and re-analyze their origins. The best you can do is recount them.

          The best you can do is tighten up laws and procedures for the next big election. Like I said the other day, I’m all for Republicans doing whatever they feel they need to do to have more secure elections.

          1. “Nobody can possibly satisfy what you want. Once ballots are accepted, there is no way to go back and re-analyze their origins. The best you can do is recount them.”

            Which is exactly why the typical lefty shitbag refrain that “there is absolutely no evidence of fraud” is bullshit, as is the suggestion that future safeguards are unnecessary due to a “lack of evidence” of prior fraud. It’s a stupid Catch-22, but these retards (including Reason) have latched onto it as if it is some sort of unassailable barrier of irreproachable logic.

            They’re fucking lying, and they know it — which is precisely why we abuse them.

            1. Personally, I have never made any such statement as “there is absolutely no evidence of fraud”.

              There has always been some fraud, and even more procedural errors in elections.

              1. Today’s White Knight:

                “No evidence of fraud.”
                “No widespread evidence of fraud.”
                “No systemic evidence of fraud.” <=== We Are Here
                “Well, it wouldn’t make any difference.”
                “Well, it’s too late now!”

                1. Actually I’m at “Well, it wouldn’t make any difference.”

                  1. “Well, it’s too late now!”

                    1. “Racist!”

                  2. An assertion made with no evidence.

                2. “No widespread evidence of fraud.”

                  You could at least get it right. It’s: “No evidence of widespread fraud.” And it is still true.

                  1. “No evidence of widespread fraud.”

                    I think that the Lizard People have it, and they’re sand-bagging on us! Time to whip out the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) on the Lizard People!!!

                    Will you trumpanzees gone apeshit PLEASE stop whining and crying all day on the internet, and, instead, get BUSY on this? #WhipOutFOIAonLizardPeople !!!

                    1. Are they still letting you use the computers, Melvin?

                    2. Yes, Goldilicks Girlshit, the Lizard People are STILL letting me use the internet!

                      Do you know WHY? Prepare yourself now, for a SHOCK!!!

                      …because the intelligent Lizard People DO NOT EXIST!!!!

                    3. I was talking about the staff at the mental institution where you live, sarc.

                    4. Now, are the Lizard People and the secret Satanic pedophile society the same, or do they just work in league with each other?

                    5. “Now, are the Lizard People and the secret Satanic pedophile society the same, or do they just work in league with each other?”

                      Donning my tin-foil hat now, beaming down the communications-side-channels of the Jewish space lasers, looking for an answer… Not sure yet… Pepe the Frog MIGHT be involved on the GOOD side here, of ALL of this!

                    6. “SQRLSY One
                      March.10.2021 at 12:32 pm
                      “No evidence of widespread fraud.”

                      I think that the Lizard People”

                      Of course you do.

                  2. Didn’t you just say Once ballots are accepted, there is no way to go back and re-analyze their origins.

                    1. NOTHING on Earth is perfect… Except for Der JesseBahnFuhrer!

                      Der JesseBahnFuhrer will perform DNA analysis on ALL voters, to make SURE that they’re who they say that they are, NOT illegal sub-humans, and then Der JesseBahnFuhrer will count all of the votes! PERFECTLY!!!

                      Trust in Der JesseBahnFuhrer, just in Der JesseBahnFuhrer!!!!

                    2. JesseBahnFuhrer does kind of look perfect when compared to your crazy ass, Sqrls.

                    3. Scheißkopf!

                      It’s “bannfuhrer” unless you are calling him a highway patrol sergeant.

                  3. The fact that you engage in a positive way with SQRSLY while simultaneously trying to skewer your mental portrait of a conservative is proof enough that you are more than likely a sock.

                    Or, alternatively, a dumb lefty shitbag.

                    1. @WK

                  4. You could at least get it right. It’s: “No evidence of widespread fraud.” And it is still true.

                    How do you know?

          2. Nobody can possibly satisfy what you want. Once ballots are accepted, there is no way to go back and re-analyze their origins. The best you can do is recount them.

            I know, that’s why the system is so fucking awesome.

            1. I know, right? It’s not like we could expect to have something like a CHAIN OF FUCKING CUSTODY for legitimacy. Like the police will do with, you know, what do they call that stuff they bring to court? Oh, yeah, Ev-i-dence. So secure. Cuz we said so, so too bad.

          3. Pennsylvania has a law to keep all envelopes for 2 years. So there is a way. And they violated that way.

            Do you think it is difficult to hold on to the original ballots pre adjudication? Are you that dumb?

            1. What are you planning to do with those envelopes now that they’ve been separated from the ballots that were in them?

              1. Okay, you could have said yes, you are that dumb.

                Hint: Look at the addresses, confirm the addresses exist and the residents are where they said they were. Confirm they weren’t someone filling out a ballot as someone else. Many things they could do.

                Also it is the law in Pennsylvania which you conveniently ignore.

                Now rationalize how they can’t keep originals of the adjudicated ballots.

                1. I never said they couldn’t.

                  1. So why did you ask the question?

          4. The best you can do is recount them.

            That isn’t even remotely true. They are supposed to keep the outer envelopes to allow a signature audit among other tests.

            1. What did you think of vote by mail when you lived in Oregon Chuck?

            2. So, say you do a signature audit on the envelopes, and you find out the signature acceptance rate was too high. What can you do with that information other than try to do better in the next election?

              1. How does one know to do better next election without that information? How does one know incidence of fraud such as wrong addresses or out of state voters without that information?

                1. You don’t. I’m honky dory fine with doing all the signature audits you desire.

                  Just don’t try to use a signature audit as the basis for throwing away accepted ballots, or the results of an election, such as the presidential election, that cannot be re-done.

                  Once ballots are separated from envelopes there would be no way to determine which ones to invalidate, even if you knew some percentage were likely invalid.

                  1. “Just don’t try to use a signature audit as the basis for throwing away accepted ballots”

                    Then, pray tell, what the fuck is the point of the audit? You are saying that, even if the ballot is invalid, we have to stick to it because it was already accepted.

                    Bullshit.

                    If the vote is invalid, you toss it, and subtract. Not hard.

                    1. The point would be that you do better validating signatures in the next election.

                      I explained why you cannot throw away votes. You don’t know which to throw away.

                      If it weren’t a time-boxed election, such as the presidential election, you could redo the whole thing.

                    2. You only say “toss it, and subtract” because you know it would make Trump the winner of an election that he lost.

    2. NO EVIDENCE! DEBUNKED CONSPIRACY THEORIES!

      1. I’m willing to consider, I even suspect it is the case that there was a higher than normal amount of fraud this last election. Is the implication from Georgia Star’s allegations then that courts all across the US are bought and paid for? Wasn’t it only 1 of 59 lawsuits found to have any merit by the courts they were submitted to?

        1. Last I heard, every single one of the lawsuits were thrown out for lack of standing. Merit never even entered into it.

          1. You are incorrect. Various lawsuits failed for various reasons. Some of them failed for lack of merit.

            1. Cite? Every single one that failed due to merit please.

              1. Here’s one example:

                https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/27/politics/trump-pennsylvania-lawsuit-appeal/index.html

                I am not going to go through all 60+ cases.

              2. BTW, that took one minute of googling. Do I need yo teach you how to do web searches?

                1. “[T]hat took one minute of googling.”

                  Cite?

                2. I asked for every single one, you failed. Your response was to this:

                  Wasn’t it only 1 of 59 lawsuits found to have any merit by the courts they were submitted to?

                  So finding one doesn’t actually prove anything.

                  You failed buddy.

                  1. So, you don’t understand the logical difference between X and Not X. Explains a lot.

                    1. You responded to someone asserting 1 of 59 as wrong and presented evidence of 1.

                      Are you this dumb?

                3. Here, so you don’t look like an idiot in the future:

                  The results to date are:

                  a) Eight cases have been withdrawn or consolidated. (These are not wins or losses to either side.)

                  b) Twenty-five cases have been stopped from proceeding (dismissed) due to legal technicalities (standing, timing, jurisdiction, etc.).

                  forty-two (42) lawsuits relevant to the 2020 Presidential election where a judge has ruled (or hopefully will rule) on the merits. The results so far are:

                  c) Nineteen cases are completed (adjudicated). These are where the court heard arguments, considered evidence (where applicable), and then formally ruled on statutory issues (e.g. the legality of a state’s election process), etc. Of these:

                  i) Eleven cases were WON by Trump, et al, and

                  ii) Eight cases were lost by Trump, et al.

                  d) Twenty-three cases are still active and have not yet been decided — so the ultimate winner and loser of these cases has not been determined.

                  So the majority of cases were not decided on merit. So your inferences are idiotic. Thanks for playing.

                  1. You just proved the point I was arguing. But I’ll let you take my victory lap for me.

        2. It had nothing to do with merit, but lack of standing which is judicial speak for “I’m not going to hang myself by taking on something so dangerous”.

          1. Every case that I saw that rejected for lack of standing was accompanied by a lengthy explanation of the lack of standing by the judge.

            1. Then you did not read any of the actual cases.

              Before the election, they declined to hear the cases because they could not cute a specific harm …. Yet.

              After the election *the same judges* said that the case was moot because the damage was done.

              The courts were officially closed for any remedy in the 2020 election. Several courts explicitly violated election laws and ordered that state law not be followed….. Without any reasoning beyond “because Covid”. These decisions were never reviewed. Other states saw Democrat operatives reach “settlement agreements” with state attorneys to change election law.. something they had no such authority to do. Also never reviewed.

              The courts studiously avoided hearing any of the real cases, as the media studiously avoided covering any of the real cases. Instead they covered Q as a distraction.

              Why?

              There is the salient question. All of this unprecedented activity… Bragged about by DNC activists in Time magazine as having been the reason that Biden won… Why?

              And why the violent reaction to any suggestion that something untoward happened in the 2020 election? Why the overt censorship of any such suggestion? Any question even?

              1. One suspects public release of legally-valid documentation of these, um, observations would be pretty damning.

              2. The why part is easiest, Cyto. We know why.

            2. So they were dismissed due to standing and not merit. Okay.

              1. There were about 60 cases. They failed for various reasons. Some for standing, some on merits.

                1. Oh? Which ones failed on merit? I don’t need a long list, just one example will do.

                    1. You have provided citation for the 1 of 59 mentioned ny End Child Unemployment, so you have failed to prove him wrong. Why do you insist on doing things so idiotically?

                    2. Go back and read his comment. He referred to the 1 of 59 that HAD merit, not the 1 of 59 that did NOT HAVE merit.

                      Wow, and you call other people idiots.

                    3. That was me, Jesse requested more.

                    4. I indeed said all to get to a point that his assumptions are wrong. I gave him the results as of February above. Many of the other suits have now been dismissed as moot. Ultimately a majority of the suits will be tossed due to standing or mootness. So his claims of all these lawsuits proving no fraud is inherently wrong.

                    5. Also trump won a majority of the merit decided cases.

            3. By the way, w hat happened to the lawsuits after the election, surely they had standing if harmed after an election right? Surely they wouldn’t switch to the argument being moot would they?

            4. Lack of standing ≠ Lack of merit

    3. Fulton County … told The Star News they would send forms after Inauguration Day. However no documents have been provided to date.

      Well, to be fair, “after Inauguration Day” is quite a window.

  5. Alaska will start permitting any resident age 16 and older to get the COVID-19 vaccine.

    Sterilizing them early up there.

    1. NOTE: The facts asserted in this comment are disputed.

      1. Please refer to the CDC website for the correct propaganda.

    2. To late. Already flagged, reported, and copied to my notepad for later use.

    3. In Alaska, men still out-number women, so not really a problem.

  6. Arkansas is attempting to ban almost all abortions…

    Which is wrong because who in her right mind would bring a child into Arkansas?

    1. What did the 12 y/o Ozark girl say the first time she had sex?

      “Get off me Daddy, you’re crushing my cigarettes.”

      1. Go fuck yourself.

        1. Still smarting over that scene in Deliverance, huh?

          1. I don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about, asshole.

        2. Nice reference

          1. That is not a happy camper, nosiree.

    2. “her”? Men can have babies too.

  7. “New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is facing a sixth sexual harassment allegation.”

    Ugh, how do sleazy GOP operatives keep finding these attention-seeking women? Clearly they’re all lying. Cuomo is the best governor in the nation. He literally wrote the book on pandemic response.

    #HarrisCuomo2024

    1. Up to par today; good to see you in form.

      1. Except that there is at least a 75% chance that Harris supporters are behind the flip against Cuomo.

  8. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2021/03/10/and-now-its-tucker-carlsons-turn-to-roast-meghan-markle-n2586013

    What’s going on here? A lot of things, probably. For rich people, deciding that you’re a victim has many levels of appeal. For one thing, it gives meaning to your decadent, empty life. There are only so many expensive vacations you can take to St. Barth’s, only so many overpriced clothes you can buy, only so many dumb parties you can go to in Aspen before you begin to realize that none of it is enough. None of it really means anything. It’s empty. Victimhood solves that problem. When you’re a victim, you’re inherently significant. Martyrdom means you’re forever the hero of the story. So you can see why narcissists love it, and there are a lot of those right now.

    But there is another, darker effect of all this, an effect that has changed our country. When powerful people decide they’re oppressed, the balance of power changes. If you were very rich, you might imagine that you owed something to the people below you. Noblesse oblige, they used to call it, back when we had a responsible ruling class that thought about other people.

    Previous generations of rich people understood this very well, and they taught their children this: To whom much is given, much is expected. That was the deal for centuries. But self-identified victimhood instantly nullifies this deal, and restores power to the powerful. No one expects anything from a victim. Victims don’t give, they receive.

    “That poor duchess,” you think to yourself, “I hope she’s OK”. Of course, she should be thinking that very thing about you, but she’s not.

    1. Watching three of the wealthiest, most privileged people on the planet have a bitch about other wealthy, privileged people not being “sensitive”, may just be one of the most disgusting things ever aired.

      1. I think the prince and duchess are being very smart here by playing to the current wokeness. I mean, otherwise, who really gives a shit about the royals outside of British tabloids? Now the millennials have their own princess Di story

        1. That’s not an accident.
          Markle’s doing the whole Single White Female routine with Diana

          1. Dude, I saw those pics. Super creepy. Harry should be concerned, but he doesn’t appear bright enough to understand why.

            1. I beg to differ it, is you who doesn’t seem to understand; the royals have been inbreeding for time immemorial. She’s just performing her wifely duties.

          2. (Sort of) Single Three-Quarters White Female

      2. What you were seeing was “Oprah Throwback”. She was no better than Jerry Springer in the 80s. I’m guessing she was missing the old days.I was very surprised that they didn’t do a DNA test on the kid on the shw to see if he has actually has any of Prince Cuck’s sauce in him.

    2. This is nothing more than an attempt to stay relevant. Their celebrity is fading.

      I do kind of feel bad for them, but not because the royal family was mean to her. (Really? You married into the world’s most publicly dysfunctional family, and you expected something different?) I feel bad for the vast, meaningless emptiness of their lives, and the fact that they pissed away a position of power and influence that could have been an opportunity to do good in the world. That’s the real tragedy here.

      1. Less mean than most families are to each other TBQH.

        1. My cousin is married to a black man. They just had a baby. She’s 100% ginger, and he’s very dark skinned. I off handedly wondered once if he would have dark skin and red hair, because all the kids in our family have red hair. ALL of them. I guess I’m a racist.

          (The baby does, in fact, have darker skin and a reddish tint to his hair)

          1. Is he the quarterback at Oklahoma?

            1. His father sucks at every sport, so probably not.

              1. He’s jewish?

          2. This is the dumbest controversy ever. And it is how you know they are lying. Not about someone saying such a thing, but about the reaction. And not Harry and wife… The media.

            Oprah sits there aghast that someone would speculate about the appearance of an unborn baby. It is clearly nakedly racist….

            Zero chance that this was her honest thought. She’s an old woman. She has undoubtedly seen dozens of babies born in her family and circle. People always speculate about the baby’s appearance.

            And in black families, part of this is coloration. “Your aunt is a redbone.. maybe he will get that…”

            “Your grandfather was dark like that …”

            “Great grandma was high yellow…”.

            Among all of the black neices, nephews, cousins, friends babies I saw born, there was never one that came without such speculation. Hair texture, facial features, skin tone, height, etc. All was open for idle speculation.

            Zero chance that this was in any way new or shocking for Oprah.

            But we have to further an agenda of creating racial divides…. So have at it.

            1. Bingo, exactly this.

              My cousin married a black man. Had his child. Blonde hair, blue eyes, skin as creamy as a bowl of milk, all white features.

              I laughed.

              I think everyone laughed.

              That aryan baby is the whitest kid in our whole family, and he’s technically half-black. Now that’s some woke shit.

      2. Is there a more whipped man on the planet than Mr. Markle. Monarchy will die in the UK from one epically pussy whipped prince.

        1. She’s a beautiful-strong-black-woman-who-don’t-need-no-man, and he’s a ginger.

          1. A strong black woman that someone has to tell you that she is black. I would have guessed armenian.

        2. Unless something epically tragic happens to William’s family, Harry is never going to be near the throne. The monarchy survived Edward VIII, it will survive Harry. If someone will kill it, it will be Charles.

          1. Oh it will not die due to him being king. It’ll die to him being pussy whipped and going along with a mediocre actress who is a gold digging whore.

        3. Did you think Charles would father a real man? The man is like a cartoon. It is as if Olive Oyl started cross dressing.

      3. I feel bad for the vast, meaningless emptiness of their lives, and the fact that they pissed away a position of power and influence that could have been an opportunity to do good in the world. That’s the real tragedy here.

        Those two will be just fine. They have a multi-million dollar deal with Netflix, and left-wing celebrities and politicians kissing their ass who will keep them in the elite lifestyle to which they are accustomed. The best part of their interview was how hilariously solipsistic it showed them both to be, Meghan in particular.

        There was nothing “good” they would have accomplished as royals that ultimately wouldn’t have been about elevating Meghan’s self-promotion as a blameless, saint-like figure, rather than the acts in and of themselves. She clearly wants to be seen in the same light as Harry’s mom, and is working the media to boost that particular signal.

        1. That’s my point. They have all the resources and all the privilege that anyone could want, yet they still manage to be miserable. There’s a giant, joy-sucking black hole where their souls should be, and all the Netflix deals in the world are never going to fill it.

          It pisses me all the way the fuck off, but also, at my soft, chewy center, I have deep pity for people like that. It’s tragic. Meghan Markle goes on TV in an outfit that costs more than most people’s take home pay, lives in a $10 million dollar mansion, and she’s fucking miserable. What a rotten way to live.

          1. I’m wondering if she was actually happier when she was some C-list actress on an obscure cable TV show, or if she’s always been miserable. Harry certainly has always had an ambiguous relationship with his status, and in light of what happened to his mom, I can definitely empathize with him there. But it looks like he ended up choosing a rather toxic individual as a partner who is just going to exacerbate those resentments, not enable him to come to terms with them.

          2. What do you expect when you marry a reality-show star?

      4. You married into the world’s most publicly dysfunctional family

        Not even close by either the ‘publicly’ or the ‘dysfunctional’ metric. Probably top 10. Top 5? A pessimistic maybe. See Hunter Biden, Kaitlynn Jenner, and N. Korea’s current royal family. IMO, they’re somewhere in the middle of the pack with the Palins and the Cheneys.

    3. We’re still talking about the most expensive episode of Jerry Springer ever?

      1. They tried to book Springer, but he is white.

    4. I saw some clips of some recent interview she did and during the interview, there was some suggestion she was black. I had honestly forgotten.

      1. That’s because you’re a racist for not observing the one drop rule.

    5. Everything Is So Terrible And Unfair! ™

      #EvenForRoyalty

  9. California and Florida took vastly different approaches to COVID-19. Here’s how it turned out.

    Thank Libertarian Gaia that there we no trade offs for that California advantage.

    1. I don’t think there was any advantage in CA. Not when you consider demographics. My understanding is that over 65 y.o. Had a 20% higher death rate in California than in the Sunshine State.

      So the chart is somewhat misleading.

      The point of the post is still fundamentally correct: as a California resident and sometime visitor to Florida, California has been a complete disaster. It’s like a very lovely prison camp, where all the other citizens are the jailers.

      1. Pretty rich that the article, from the LA Times, says that California’s climate is worse for Covid than Florida (is it really? How?), but didn’t mention age differences.

        1. Any chance there are more victim-narcissist types in Cali?

        2. It mentioned age difference: FL avg is 42 and CA avg is 36

      2. Well, Cali is where they ran that Stanford prisoner-guard experiment.

        1. I believe it is now called the Stanford prison guard play, as they have discovered that the student guard were told to be brutal, and the student prisoners wer told to be victims, and the professor told the students he would probably cut the experiment short.

    2. Florida has exploded to nearly 32k deaths.

      California is just shy of 55k deaths.

      The population of California is just shy of 40 million.

      The population of florida is about 22 million.

      These are estimates of population. Florida has been growing rapidly. California has seen a mass exodus.

      Still, those numbers are in the same ballpark. And Florida is much older, and we have to deal with New York refugees.

  10. Today the trolls are again going to attempt to hijack the comments and make it unreadable. The purpose is to bury commenters who are making posts that challenge establishment narrative, below a mountain of garbage.

    For the love of all that’s good, please don’t engage them.

    You might say that “this doesn’t matter, I can flag and refresh”. But there are still people reading the comments who don’t know that they can do that, or don’t have accounts.

    Make the board readable for everyone. Today don’t engage with the sockpuppets SQRLSY One, KillAllRednecks, Sevo is a pussy alcoholic, KillAllMormons, SaveTheRednecks KillTheMormons! or other threadshitting spammers.

    If he doesn’t get attention he will go away.

    1. WK is so pissed right now.

      1. Nah, I’m good.

        Your comment, “WK is so pissed right now”, was a troll, by the way. Which isn’t surprising because YOU are a troll.

        1. “Nah, I’m good”

          What he says when he is definitely not good.

        2. Are you Pee Wee Herman?

          1. Yes, and everyone I know has a big but.

        3. By the way, why did you get mad for me offering so many citations yesterday for your ignorant ask of citations? That seemed quite trollish of you. A thanks would have been nice.

          1. Thanks.

            1. You’re welcome. Sorry I can’t teach you how to use search engines, I don’t have the patience or the time.

              1. See https://reason.com/2020/01/01/trumps-inartful-dodges/#comment-8068520 , where
                Der JesseBahnFuhrer says, of Trump, “He is not constitutionally bound on any actions he performed.”

                Hey JesseBahnFuhrer! Is this statement of yours, above, now applicable to Biden? Or is only Dear Leader Der TrumpfenFuhrer qualified to be our dictator? If so, why?

                1. Fuck off, sarc.

    2. If he doesn’t get attention he will go away.

      Just like a Libertarian to be optimistic about the pants-shitters having ethics.

      The Pants-shitters Veto

      – a logical fallacy in which the offender does not engage with an argument, but simply posts garbage insults and screeds in an attempt to prevent anyone else from engaging with the OP. A metaphorical shitting of one’s pants in the middle of a conversation knowing that posters who might otherwise engage with the OP will flee the smell or stand off in fear of getting something on them.

      1. It’s tough, but it’s still better than 200 posts of someone being a fuckhead, and everyone else telling him to fuck off.
        Because that kind of thread spam was his aim from the start.

        1. I don’t find scrolling or reading to be particularly difficult.

        2. I do so enjoy informing the incels that I refuse to play in their shit. It really dredges up their childhood traumas of other kids refusing to play with them and the girls that reacted to their touch with disgust later in their youth.

          1. “reacted to their touch”

            You goddamn pervert Chuck. Touching women without consent.

            It wouldn’t surprise me if the LDS Church had Catholic Church levels of pedos.

            Actually it would because of Catholics celabite priest horseshit.

      2. Chuck he was referring to you you Mormon piece of trash.

        You don’t reply to any of my questions you fucking pussy.

        If you’re going to believe such bullshit and force it on people at least defend your beliefs you fucking coward.

        Of course you won’t. Mormons always lie and play dumb.

        Scum of the fucking earth.

        Cowardly waste of life!

        CHUCK IS A COWARD

        1. Kill mormon children. It’s not their fault their parents brainwashed them.

          However if we don’t kill them they’ll grow up to be Mormon Nazis.

          Kill every mormon on earth!

      3. That’s rich, coming from YOU, Up-Chuck the Smug-Pig!

        The Pants-shitters Veto… If this is BAD, this pants-shitting (“appeal to fear”), then WHY do YOU try and make other posters shit their pants about… OMG! Up-Chuck the Smug-Pig is flagging and refreshing on me! Run and hide in fear!

        Smug-pig hypocrite, it was YOU and YOUR constant bragging about YOUR oh-so-awesome computer skills at “flagging and refreshing” that started it! And you compounded your sins (bragging) with clutter-pigging!

        Oh-so-Holy churchgoer, eh? Study up on the contagiousness of smug self-righteousness! Start with the “Yeast of the Pharisees”!

        https://www.thebanner.org/features/2019/01/beware-the-yeast-of-the-pharisees

        When are YOU going to start being a “recovering hypocrite”?

        1. Fuck off, sarc.

        2. Figures you’d chime in to a post where shit is mentioned.

      4. Hey Chuckles the Smug-Pig… You do know this, right? Your magic underwear will NOT protect you from the results of your smug-pig ways!!!

        1. Fuck off, sarc.

    3. I sympathize with your sentiments; as I have often posted lately, just prior to flag and refresh [now I see a troll, now I don’t]:

      “Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker’s game because they almost always turn out to be—or to be indistinguishable from—self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time.”
      ― Neal Stephenson, Cryptonomicon*

      I am here because I derive benefit from the articles and many of the comments. It is helpful to put something out and receive honest albeit sometimes severe feedback [so much the better].
      Trolls are nuisances, and the surest truism that comes to mind is DON’T FEED THE FUCKING TROLLS. We all know who they are, but many of us just seem to enjoy playing the part of anti troll, which of course is why they come here in the first place. It is why threads turn into endless pissing matches, that are productive of absolutely nothing useful.

      *I’m in the third chapter of this book; so far interesting [even more so as my Dad was an actual “China Marine” in the 1930s.

    4. About 80% of the spam here, is here, because people think with their hunter-gatherer brains, not with their modern-day, rational, data-driven brains.

      If you want to eliminate the MAIN source of spam here, BEG the knuckle-draggers to actually THINK! (But good luck with that anyway).

      http://www.churchofsqrls.com/Do_Gooders_Bad/

      From the above link:

      To me, sociobiology is often intuitive. At first glance, the hunter-gatherer tendency (instinctually driven?) to immediately “take down a peg or two” the hunter-hero who just bagged a good kill of “red meat” to help feed me? This is counter-intuitive! But take a deeper, more thoughtful look at it: If we make a BIG hero out of the hunter-hero, he might steal all of our women, and make all of our babies! So the tribal shaman will remind the hunter-hero, and the tribe, that it is the shaman that knows how to beat the drums just exactly the right way, who drives away the sun-god-eating (eclipse) demons, and make the demons un-eat the sun-god! And the tribal artist will remind everyone that it is he (maybe even sometimes she) who knows the right way to carve the mammoth tusk, to make a magical fertility icon-figurine, and keep the tribe fertile. We are ALL heroes around here, and NOT just the hunter-hero! So the hunter-hero needs to be reminded of that, so that he’ll not steal ALL of our women!

      The knuckle-dragging troglodytes among us, on the internet, even when we know darned well that most of the commenters are anonymous, go into an instinctually-driven mode of “punish the people who are wise, benevolent, and correct”, and make them look bad! Else they might steal my wife or girlfriend, and make my babies”! It is knee-jerk stupidity, on a largely-anonymous chat board, but there it is!

      1. “If you want to eliminate the MAIN source of spam here, BEG the knuckle-draggers to actually THINK!”

        Ok.

        Please think.

        1. He walked right into that one.

          1. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/in-love-and-war/201706/why-some-people-resent-do-gooders

            From the conclusion to the above…

            These findings suggest that we don’t need to downplay personal triumphs to avoid negative social consequences, as long as we make it clear that we don’t look down on others as a result.

            End out-take. Good advice! I’ll take it!

            So, just because you, authoritarian jerk, are nasty, does NOT mean that I want you to feel BAD about YOU being a jerk, and me NOT being one! PLEASE feel GOOD about you being a jerk! And I do NOT want to steal “your” woman! You do NOT need to push me (or other REAL lovers of personal liberty) down, so that you can feel better about being a jerk! EVERYONE ADORES you for being that jerk that you are, because, well, because you are YOU! FEEL that self-esteem, now!

            1. So asking you to think doesn’t work.

            2. Pretty please, with sugar on top, think.

        2. I think, and I think that it is relentlessly smug, arrogant, self-righteous nincompoops (AKA “Perfect Ones”) like YOU who go and kill the decent ones among us!

          From the cited link above: See “Antisocial Punishment Across Societies”, https://science.sciencemag.org/content/319/5868/1362 … Don’t you go making me look bad, by being a better person than I am! This is why Jesus, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., etc., got themselves killed!

          1. Looks like it didn’t work.

            SQRLSY wrong again.

          2. God damn bitch, he did what you asked stop bitching.

    5. Unfortunately, people here just can’t help themselves, which is odd since they do a good job of restraining themselves when the Rev posts. And they definitely kill comment threads. When I see one of these pissing matches, I always scroll down to the next “clean” thread. The other thing I hate is before I go into the comments on an article, I always note how many comments there are. It used to be when I saw a lot of comments I would think that there was a lively and dynamic discussion of the topic at hand. Nope, 2/3 of the comments are dedicated to these idiotic “you’re a sock – no you are” back-and-forths.

      1. I called Lambchop a sock once, bitch tried to knife me for it

      2. Reason really needs to find a new font for the comments section. Capital “I”s and lowercase “L”s look identical. The person who posted above my original comment here is not me. I am “D-Pizzle,” 2nd to last letter is lowercase “L”, while he is “D-PizzIe,” 2nd to last letter capital “I.” WTF Reason comments section.

    6. “If he doesn’t get attention he will go away”

      This has never worked in the entire history of the world.

    7. Eat a dick Mormon lover! You’re part of the problem.

      1. Warren Jeffs…is that your beef?

      2. Glad you’re here. You always criticize Mormons over polygamy. Any thoughts on what your fellow leftists are doing in Cambridge? How would you react if this was done in Utah?

        1. I don’t criticize the LDS Church over polygamy because they abandoned it. They lie about it and their racism and I criticize that.

          If consenting adults want to practice polygamy that’s fine.

          Problem is most mormon fundamentalist polygamy is sexual slavery and abuse.

          “Other leftists” you mean “other libertarians?”

          Consenting adults can love who they want.

          Eat a dick fascist!

    8. This should help.

    9. And again with the speech control. Get bent, fuckface.

      1. The pants-shitter’s veto is undeniably an attempt to control speech, so this is actually a call for free speech.

        If this is sarcasm, it failed.

        1. Your not for free speech moron!

          Why would you belong to a fascist church that restricts speech?

          You won’t answer my questions about your church.

          You have no problem sending your kids out to trick people into joining, but if someone asks “what’s your thoughts on the book of Abraham being a forgery?” You’re silent.

          You’re just like most mormons. Fascist lying pieces of filth!

          1. Dear Mr. KillAllMyUnderwear,

            Based on your history on cyber-stalking and and disingenuous . I just flag them and go on with my life. But I did read what Red Rocks posted yesterday, to which, curiously, you did not respond.

            So, in the interest of forever assuaging your insatiable curiosity about my personal beliefs, this is my work address:

            6448 E HWY 290
            AUSTIN, TX

            If you are serious about having a discussion with me, just let me know a time that is good for you and I will be happy to meet. If you post your own address, I will stop by next time I am in Portland.

            Otherwise, shut the fuck up, you little bitch.

            1. Dude, you really shouldn’t power-level like that.

            2. What suite number?

              I’m not gonna post my address on here. I’m not an idiot.

              1. What suite number?

                If you head around between the D & E buildings and let me know when you’ll be here, I have an unobstructed line of sight to the parking lot. I won’t miss you.

                I’m not an idiot.

                Can you cite evidence for that claim? You have have yet to present any in your comments.

            3. The last thing I need is the Fascists on this comment section knowing where I live.

              I will say I live NEAR Portland. Not in Portland. I am from there though so I can talk shit to all the pussies from the subarbs.

              1. I can talk shit to all the pussies from the subarbs.

                A stellar example, in direct contradiction to your previous post where you claimed you were not an idiot.

    10. “…For the love of all that’s good, please don’t engage them…”

      Squirsy got flagged 5 or 6 times; the newest asshole probably 20 times, and it seems to have worked.
      The obnoxious prick was simply whining for attention.

      1. Have a drink Sevo

  11. The city of Cambridge, Massachusetts, will become the second municipality in the country to legalize domestic partnerships between three or more people.

    Devil’s threeways are still illegal in the eyes of the Lord.

    1. At this point government recognition of people’s relationships is utterly pointless.

      1. People can do whatever they want. But do businesses have to provide healthcare to a dozen people, not living together, because they all claim to be in a non-nuclear family?

        What about the Manson Family? Sly and the Family Stone? Do they all get health care and benefits in the Commonwealth?

        1. If everybody is a star, then everybody should get insurance.

        2. People can do whatever they want.

          In light of your other point I disagree and or assert it isn’t exactly clear.

          A bit of a litmus test: If we have a FFM marriage and there’s a conception, if the non-biological F skips out, does she still owe child support? If the biological M skips out does he? To whom does he owe the support? Biological F, other F, or both?

          If we’re still going to parse out who the biological parents are and give them preferential treatment then the whole polyamory thing is stupid virtue signalling/window dressing.

          However, it should be clear that there is the potential for SJW skullduggery. Using divorce courts, which are already notoriously inequitous, to effectively punish wrongthinking/wrongsexed tribes.

          1. My guess would be the M is the only one required to pay child support and may end up compelled to pay alimony to the other F that left.

          2. The family law issues are pretty much insurmountable when it comes to polygamy/polyamory.

        3. I’m wondering the same thing? time to nullify spousal benifits but that may be the goal

        4. What about the Manson Family?

          Or the Bonanno, Colombo, Gambino, Genovese, and Lucchese families?

      2. That’s the point and they state it overtly. The idea is to get rid of the nuclear family in favor of the tribe.

        1. The reason to return to tribalism is to remove individual responsibility and, with it, individual liberty.

      3. The whole interest government has in recognizing family relationships is to establish financial and legal responsibility for any specific member in the event of crisis (e.g. healthcare) or tragedy (e.g. divorce or death). It is to ensure nobody ends up a burden on the state if there is another viable option.

        This becomes moot as we move towards the utopia where government is financially and legally responsible for all of us.

        1. This becomes moot as we move towards the utopia where government is financially and legally responsible for all of us.

          Unless you want to punish the pussygrabber-in-chief and then look the other way while the hairsniffer-in-chief’s son sleeps with sisters, sisters’ sisters, and strippers and skip out on the child support.

          Then it becomes a byzantine maze which only the privileged can hide behind.

        2. “…utopia where government is financially and legally responsible for all of us.”

          Mamabug gets it! If a sea turtle can lay her clutch of eggs buried in the sands, and then wash her flippers of the whole thing, why not? (Oh, well, sheepishly I hang my head and admit that human babies are a tiny bit different than sea turtles freshly hatched).

          But Government Almighty can take care of ALL of our babies 24-7!

          (/Sarc)

    2. So the slippery slope was real after all.

  12. The #BidenBoom continues to pay off for his billionaire base.

    Elon Musk earned $25.1 billion yesterday.

    I realize some Koch-funded libertarians have criticized Musk because he didn’t make his billions the honest way, like Charles Koch did. Still, one person’s wealth increasing by over $25,000,000,000 in a single day is a strong indicator the economy is working as Koch / Reason libertarians intend.

    #InDefenseOfBillionaires

  13. …he had no choice but to arrest her during last year’s racial justice protests in Des Moines, Iowa, because she didn’t leave the area after he deployed pepper spray.

    NO CHOICE

    1. Pepper spray? Did everyone have a stroke the next day?

      1. Just two bears – – – – – –

      2. What the story didn’t tell you, is that she had ZIP TIES! with her.

    2. Between the fact that seemingly every twit with an iPhone present in the same city as a protest has become a journalist and the fact that actual journalists like the ones at Reason insist on an elevated set of privileges for ‘The Press’, I’m inclined to give precisely zero shits about the issue without some reference to the underlying story first.

      “Reputable journalists” get picked up all the time for violating various celebrities’ privacy rights. Unless you’ve got footage of the police conspiring to shoot rioters or similar, I don’t much care. It’s not like nobody knows there are/were riots happening and it’s not like her employers weren’t going to use her reporting to paint a mostly peaceful narrative.

      1. And we did in fact see many scenarios that cast doubt upon the narrative.

        Antifa vetted reporters and only allowed reporting by approved allies. They prevented others from covering their activities, sometimes violently. We also saw footage of CNN and NBC reporters intentionally setting up in front of police lines in areas that were ordered cleared, and then pretending to simply “ask questions” when ordered to leave.

        Police will usually work with the press to find locations from which they can cover police activities in these situations. In front of the police line that is moving to clear a street is not that place.

        Color me skeptical. They absolutely do not describe a scenario where reporters are arrested for simply doing their job.

        1. Not to mention that, a majority of the time, the journalist in question walks away with whatever footage or documentation they captured and could effectively publish from a jail cell if necessary.

          That’s not to say that they should be in prison, but this “The US is jailing reporters!” nonsense sounds like a false flag or red herring to equivocate when China kicks in the doors of locks up political dissidents who disagree with the media outlets that the ChiComms control.

      2. Reputable journalists….an oxymoron. 🙂

        1. Oh, they do have reputations.

      3. I saw an Al Jezeera reporter stand erect during a massive gunfight. He was hit by a bullet and killed instantly. There is a fine line between reporting and being part of the problem.

    3. being a journalist does not give a persons rights above others like the right to continue to riot

  14. Do We Even Have A Republic Anymore?
    https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2021/03/08/do-we-even-have-a-republic-anymore-n2585826

    You know, it’s illegal for foreigners to come into our country without us inviting them. There are laws, lots of them, that say that’s not allowed. And the laws further say that illegal aliens are to be rounded up and shipped home. I took high school civics back about the time Reagan was in his first term and apparently stuff has since changed, but according to my civics class, the president is supposed to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Of course, our president is a wizened old dust puppet and if what he’s doing is faithful, then by that standard Bill Clinton is staying home playing Go Fish with Felonia Milhouse von Pantsuit instead of scamming on half-hammered cougars at his local Ruby Tuesday’s.

    So now, apparently, it’s totally fine to ignore laws the elite doesn’t like even though they are laws that our representatives enacted. In the case of immigration, that means just order all the little executive branch functionaries not to function. So, suddenly, everyone from Tijuana south is heading north. Effectively, the laws our reps made have been repealed. Except you and I never got a say in that repeal. We said – and we know we did because it’s a law – that we didn’t want this. But, somehow, now it’s cool to ignore the law – that is, the manifest voice of the citizens – and instead effectively make a new and different law without all the hassle of asking us what we think.

    1. Everything is fine as long as the Proper Outcome is reached.

      1. Everything is fine as long as the Proper Outcome is reached Intent is set forth.

        FTFY

        1. Everything is fine as long as the Proper Feelings are indulged.

          More precise.

      2. Its been that way since dread scott. Contrary to what I believed most of my life, the US is a fucking corrupt joke.
        I still think its probably better than anywhere else, but if someone can point to a country that actually enforces it’s laws as written, as well as consistently and evenly, I will move there in a heartbeat.

        1. We’ve been starting to think of our exit plan, but can’t figure out the best place to go.

          1. I think that Hell may have a place reserved for YOU, lying R Mac! It’s not exactly the BEST place, overall, but it may be the best place available to YOU!

            If you DON’T want to go there, start studying up! Start here! M. Scott Peck, The People of the Lie, https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684848597/reasonmagazinea-20/

            People who are evil attack others instead of facing their own failures. Peck demonstrates the havoc these people of the lie work in the lives of those around them. He presents, from vivid incidents encountered in his psychiatric practice, examples of evil in everyday life.

            1. I wrote that book about you SQRLSY, not R Mac.

        2. “Contrary to what I believed most of my life, the US is a fucking corrupt joke”

          Love him or hate him, Trump forced the establishment to remove their mask of benevolent competency and expose themselves as the grifting rats that they are.
          The bureaucracy, media and corporate world have all taken enormous popularity hits.

          1. But the trumpanzees gone apeshit did NOT prevail! Democracy stands; mobocracy failed! For that much, we can thank judges and courts and election officials! AKA, the Lizard Men WON, and the Amphibian People (like Pepe the NAZI Frog) LOST!!!

            Sore losers are free to join Moose-Fucker Great White North Snowflake, and commiserate with her in her innermost “safe space”, “safe-room / house” complete with teddy bears and cuddling-moose, in Inner Islamic Canuckistanistanistanistanistan!!!

            (Just stay the hell away from me and my (defective as it doubtlessly is) DEMOCRACY, Inner-Islamic MooseFucker from Canuckistanistanistanistanistan!!!)

    2. As long as it’s the correct Top Men making these decisions, it’s for the best.

      -Jeff

    3. Any fair judge or just official should decline to enforce laws that trample human freedom. They’re not Robocop.

  15. “Study” justifying the bureacracy, #3,089,0643:

    “WHO study finds 1 in 3 women face physical, sexual violence
    The U.N. health agency and its partners have found in a new study that nearly one in three women worldwide have experienced physical or sexual violence in their lifetimes…”
    https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/study-finds-women-face-physical-sexual-violence-76342076

    Odds-on bet this is every bit as meaningful as the “food insecurity” bullshit.

    1. That’s probably right ul there with 1 in 4 wemon in collage gets raped

      1. If “rape” is any perception of unwanted attention from a male-type humanoid, even years after the date in question, then probably true.

    2. They probably include giving birth as violence.

      1. Well, it certainly is violence against equity.

    3. A related study found that nearly 1 in 1 men have experienced physical or sexual violence in their lifetimes, too.

      1. They were asking for it dressed like that.

        1. I had a proggi friend try to convince me that attractive nuicessence laws were good (ie if you have a swing set on your property and a kid breaks his arm on it your liable because the kid couldn’t help himself). I asked if we should apply the same lega rational to rapists that say the woman was asking for it being dressed like that. I havent gotten an answer yet

          1. If someone were to rape my daughter, would I get less time for assaulting him? If so, the context of the original assault should also be a factor.

      2. I think it is probably closer to true.
        From my personal experiences and that of friends, I would guess its probably around 90+% of everybody.

      3. One time, at a bar in college, Brett Kavanaugh threw ice at me.

        #metoo

    4. Have a drink Sevo!

      1. Sevo is sarcasmic?

  16. The reporter, Andrea Sahouri, was one of 116 U.S. journalists arrested for covering protests against police brutality last year.

    All those locked up reporters must be why we heard very little from professional journalistic outfits about how damaging protest-based rioting can be. (Until January 6 of this year, that is.)

  17. https://twitter.com/barnes_law/status/1369445677869187090

    Anyone who doubts cancel culture (and its corollary methods of intimidation, including defamation, doxxing & rioting) should watch the jury selection in the #ChauvinTrial — juror after juror admits fear an acquittal will put them in personal danger.

    1. They’re not wrong.

  18. https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1369344853226700800

    Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has vowed to overturn a “she-cession” by implementing a “feminist, intersectional recovery” from the lockdown policies he introduced.

    1. Prime Minister Zoolander can’t think real good, but he can read stuff off his teleprompter just fine.

      He was the oligarch’s original puppet prototype, and Biden and Kamala are 2.0.

  19. Why is ENB celebrating government involvement in any firm of individuals relationships? Going the wrong way.

    1. Because she’s not actually a libertarian?

      1. “Elizabeth Nolan Brown is the most libertarian person I have ever met.”

        1. As hilarious as sarcasmic calling Jeff one of the last true libertarians on this site.

          1. If Chemjeff’s libertarian then so was Pol Pot.

            I think sarcasmic was just looking for friends.

            1. Friends with benefits?

              1. It wouldn’t be the first time he tried that.

                1. That was so sad. It’s what broke poor sarc.

          2. And he’ll swear to it BY THE GARDEN OF THE GODS.

            Yes, he actually used that phrase.

            1. Unironically ….

          3. Wow, chemjeff living rent-free in your head.

            1. Your name is literally an admission that Tulpa beat you.

              1. Poor Dee doesn’t understand what “mocking” means either.

                1. I’m sorry, but for mocking to be effective the person being mocked has to be present. Mocking chemjeff when he’s not even present is just the rent-free thang.

                  1. “[B]ut for mocking to be effective the person being mocked has to be present.”

                    Another retarded take. Hope you are around to read that.

                  2. Definition of mock (Entry 1 of 4)
                    transitive verb
                    1 : to treat with contempt or ridicule : DERIDE

                    Don’t see being present anywhere. Wrong again.

                    1. Reading comprehension pop quiz for you R Mac: In the sentence, “I’m sorry, but for mocking to be effective the person being mocked has to be present.” the phrase “for mocking to be effective” was used instead of the single word, “mocking”. How did that change the sense of the statement being made?

                    2. You’re not here half the time when people are ripping you a new asshole and exposing your retardation, but I find it to be plenty effective … especially when you show up and validate their mockery.

                    3. No it’s effective.

                  3. Aaaand White Knight just demonstrates he has zero idea what the rent-free idiom means either.

                    And before you write a huffy response, WK, that makes you just look dumber, Google it first.

                  4. SNL isn’t comedy because they can’t guarantee their targets are watching the show. – WK

                  5. Comedians can’t target politicians with jokes unless they are watching their standup – WK

                    1. lmao

                      Sarc level stupid

                  6. But he’s you. So he’s present.

            2. Fuck off Jeff

            3. Not really. Making fun of someone who is here every day. Sorry that you are starting to realize your team is sophomoric and nobody respects you.

    2. Because as a leftist, she values government involvement in people’s lives over individual liberty.

      1. Yes, but only because ordinary people need proper guidance and care.

    3. Unless you are a libertarian of the anarchist bent, government establishment of well-crafted, lightweight regulatory frameworks facilitating people’s ability to work and live freely is totes legitimate. Lightweight, helpful government has a legitimate role in classical liberalism.

      1. By the way, she didn’t celebrate anything. She did straight up reporting.

        It is telling that the CACCL contingent here often reads intent into neutral reporting. It is even more telling that the CACCL contingent reads intent into _not_ reporting on something.

        1. CACCL?

          That’s not right.

          1. Ugh, you are right. CACLL.

            1. ???????

              You go to the trouble of creating your own acronym

              but it’s so stupid that you can’t remember it

              AHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAJHAAHAHAHAH

              AHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAH

              AHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHHAHH

              AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH

          2. >>That’s not right.

            fucked up his own acronym

            1. Yup. Sure did.

              1. >>Yup. Sure did

                yup just said that

              2. Do you ever self reflect on why you fuck up so much?

            2. When you have a cool acronym like EASTUA, it’s easy to remember.

              1. Oh, god dammit.

        2. The only argument a libertarian should make is that the only role of government in this case is contract enforcement. That’s not the role she is arguing for.

        3. The White Knight
          October.22.2020 at 3:18 pm

          It means conservative and conservative-leaning libertarian, and I coined it.
          Is there a law in Canada that ordinary people aren’t allowed to coin acronyms. Here in the godamn USA we have freedom of speech.

      2. “Lightweight, helpful government …”

        Well, as long as we are discussing unicorns and other fictional beings.

      3. Difficulty, it isn’t light weight. See the family court system.

        Next sophomoric argument?

        1. You suck at reading. I didn’t say that we have a lightweight family law framework. I said one is desirable — in contrast to the anarcho-libertarian claims that the government shouldn’t be involved at all.

      4. Libertarians for controlling personal relationships!

        Do you also think that minimum wage is libertarian?

        1. Ugh. For government controlling personal relationships.

        2. A proper legal framework isn’t about control.

          And, no, I do not think minimum wage is libertarian nor a good idea.

  20. “Pentagon Set To OK Extending National Guard Deployment At US Capitol”
    […]
    “The Pentagon is set to approve an extension of the National Guard deployment at the U.S. Capitol for about two more months, defense officials said Tuesday…”
    https://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-set-ok-extending-national-010200802.html

    I’m sure all fire extinguishers will be replaced with pillows, too.

    1. I am sure that it won’t be extended beyond that.

      Good job, Libertarian publication. We are all serfs now…but at least tweets ain’t mean from the PRESIDENT.

      1. https://reason.com/2021/03/04/capitol-building-riot-national-guard-fences-remove/

        Do you ever actually look at any of the blog posts here?

        1. Wish to compare outrage over this over questions about the legitimacy of the election? Or the sheer deluge of posts about the Ukraine call?

          1. Ah, the ol’ CACLL “well, OK, Reason did write about it, but it doesn’t count because they wrote about this other thing more” save.

            Look, admit it, Reason agrees with your views on this, and you have nothing to complain about.

            1. >>CACLL

              practice will hell you remember it

              1. OK, I’ll try to use CACLL more today. When people complain, I’ll tell them you told me to practice using it more.

                1. they know I’m trying to help you avoid looking like a dumbass again

                2. So you’ll do what Dillinger tells you?

                  1. Sure.

            2. “CACLL”

              Remind me, who coined this acronym?

              1. I did. It’s my right as an American and a bloody Protestant to coin an acronym whenever I damn well please.

                1. The White Knight
                  October.22.2020 at 3:18 pm

                  It means conservative and conservative-leaning libertarian, and I coined it.
                  Is there a law in Canada that ordinary people aren’t allowed to coin acronyms. Here in the godamn USA we have freedom of speech.
                  .

    2. Isn’t it strange how Democrats want to defund the police in your neighborhood, but are totally fine with hiring more police at the U.S. Capitol to protect politicians?

      1. Your desire for public safety come from a place of privilege.

    3. The coup continues.

      1. By coup you mean over-reaction to an attempted coup.

        1. LOL

        2. I mean the illegitimate regime that is stationing troops in the capital, purging the military and civil service of dissenters, persecuting supporters of the ousted government, and rewriting laws to legitimize it’s permanent grip on power.

    4. Have a drink Sevo!

    5. Semi-serious question: what is the current list of national capitols with fortifications and combat-ready military forces on guard?

      1. Interesting question.

      2. Besides Baghdad, Stuttgart, Kandahar, and all the Stans?

    6. I’m sure all fire extinguishers will be replaced with pillows, too.
      And do we have the pillows for that purpose!
      https://www.mypillow.com/?gclsrc=aw.ds&&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI7pHJmZ2m7wIVAeKzCh1CkgHlEAAYASAAEgLJi_D_BwE

      1. Insurrectionist!

    7. any day now those proud boy boogaloo people will attack.

  21. An Iowa reporter is on trial for covering a Black Lives Matter protest. The reporter, Andrea Sahouri, was one of 116 U.S. journalists arrested for covering protests against police brutality last year. NBC News has more:

    That’s not why she is on trial you feckless cunt.

    I think you mean it to say, “NBC News has fabricated more…”

    1. Care to elaborate?

      1. NM, covered below.

  22. https://twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1369077751211323392

    Today we learned more about how awful
    @ProjectLincoln
    is.

    If you’re wondering how these guys survived for so long, it’s because tons of people in the media & beyond boosted this pack of no-good grifters.

    And I’ve got the receipts to remind them

    1. Everyone knew the Quislings running the Lincoln Project were pedophile sex deviants and grifters, looking to enrich themselves. But the utility of “principled” “conservatives” opposing Trump was too good to miss, and the Lincoln Project grifters knew this.

      1. I know it’s been “debunked” that a lot of people in power are pedophiles…but it does seem an AWFUL lot of people in power in this country tend to have issues with diddling kids.

        QAnon is powered, largely, by the reality that a lot of our “elites” are creepy as shit motherfuckers.

        1. Remember Jeffrey Epstein? Because the media doesn’t. And the media forgetting about him probably has no impact on these conspiracies.

      2. The funniest part was Steve Schmidt whining about someone giving him a “good game” in summer camp, quitting the organization, and converting to Judaism.

    2. What a shock. The establishment props up establishment goons that work to prop up the establishment.

  23. “This is a case about a journalist arrested for doing her job,” defense attorney Nicholas Klinefeldt said during opening arguments.

    This is a shock to journalists, but you’re not a protected class. If regular citizens are under legal order to disperse, so are you.

    Don’t know the full story here, just recognizing journalists aren’t a special caste in America.

    1. You are saying that when police order a crowd to disperse, they should do so? You support that police power?

      1. Yes. If there is a riot, protecting the community at large trumps the freedom to assemble not peacefully. The people who had their property burned are worth more respect than the ones burning it.

        1. He is back to arson is a form of peaceful protest apparently. But selfie are a coup.

          1. It’s almost like she judges actions by who is engaging in them.

      2. No, I clearly said what I said. What part did you struggle with?

        1. Dee is Cathy Newman.

    2. Yeah, I thought this too. Heard the story on the NPR, and they were all like, “yeah, but how can you do this to a Journalist?” Leaves me cold every time a journalist has special rights that no other American has, or deserves special treatment because of some press credential.

      Same as police officers … they have no more or no less rights than any of the rest of us do. Journalists are getting paid to be there, as opposed to everyone else in the protest crowd — so do your effin job, eh?

      1. Police have the same rights everyone else does

        But they have a metric crap-ton of privileges we don’t share.

  24. San Fransisco has too many grocery stores; BoS addresses the issue:

    “S.F. approves hazard pay increases for grocery, drugstore workers”
    […]
    “Many San Francisco grocery and drugstore workers will see a $5 per hour bump in pay after the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved an emergency ordinance Tuesday…”
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/S-F-approves-hazard-pay-increases-for-grocery-16013440.php?cmpid=gsa-sfgate-result

    And many others will find they now make the *real* M/W: $0.00

    1. Another sign they don’t want this to end.

    2. Stop posting nonsense Sevo and go get drunk.

      You can’t be any dumber drunk than you are sober.

      1. Sorry sarcasmic, you’re the only chronic alcoholic here. You’re never going to find a pal.

  25. An Iowa reporter is on trial for covering a Black Lives Matter protest.

    FAKE NEWS
    The girl reporter is on trial for failure to disperse and interference with official acts. Her defense is that as an “accredited journalist” she has “special rights” under 1A and shouldn’t be treated the same as a commoner who didn’t go to J-school.

    1. >J-school
      Cool it with the anti-Semitism!
      Also, we call it a “yeshiva”.

    2. Was she actually a reporter, or just an Antifa symp who runs a blog?

  26. “Cambridge legalizes polyamorous partnerships.”

    Exactly what they assured us would never happen! It was always a slippery slope! Now a man is going to be able to marry his dog, or his toaster. GREAT!

    1. His toaster? Shocking.

      1. Well done, sir!

        1. Well-done might be risky. You should start with a lower setting.

          1. 11 or bust.

            1. I love the smell of burnt toast in the morning.

              1. That’s a stroke. Have you been pepper sprayed ever?

                1. hahaha

                2. Hey! The death of a police officer is a big joke! Let’s yuck it up!

    2. Of course it was. It always is. Leftists are always being entirely disingenuous when they dismiss the “slippery slope” argument.

  27. “I have represented hundreds of clients who have been discriminated against because they’re polyamorous”

    “If you like your clients so much, why don’t you marry them?”

    1. By discriminated against they probably mean weren’t given free domestic partner benefits to more than 1 extra adult.

      1. “Yeah, … *that’s* the ticket!”

  28. A trip down memory lane:

    “No, Polygamy Isn’t the Next Gay Marriage

    “Group marriage is the past—not the future—of matrimony.

    “By JONATHAN RAUCH June 30, 2015

    “…Opposing the legalization of plural marriage should not be my burden, because gay marriage and polygamy are opposites, not equivalents. By allowing high-status men to hoard wives at the expense of lower-status men, polygamy withdraws the opportunity to marry from people who now have it; same-sex marriage, by contrast, extends the opportunity to marry to people who now lack it. One of these things, as they say on Sesame Street, is not like the other….

    “Unlike gay marriage, polygamy is not a new idea. It’s a standard form of marriage, dating back, of course, to Biblical times and before, and anthropologists say that 85 percent of human societies have permitted it. This means we know a thing or two about it….

    “This competitive, zero-sum dynamic sets off a competition among high-status men to hoard marriage opportunities, which leaves lower-status men out in the cold. Those men, denied access to life’s most stabilizing and civilizing institution, are unfairly disadvantaged and often turn to behaviors like crime and violence. The situation is not good for women, either, because it places them in competition with other wives and can reduce them all to satellites of the man.

    “I’m not just making this up. There’s an extensive literature on polygamy….

    “Allowing same-sex couples to marry requires only small institutional and legal adjustments (like revising gendered language on some documents). In sharp distinction, polygamy requires making a host of contentious social and legal decisions to rewire marital arrangements pretty much from scratch.

    “There might conceivably (although not likely) be a case for taking the trouble to do all that messy and confusing rewiring if the moral claim of polygamy were remotely as strong as to the moral claim of gay marriage. But it is not.”

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/polygamy-not-next-gay-marriage-119614/

    1. While I favor recognizing gay marriage, if anyone said something like gender fluidity, pick your own pronouns, 18 year old boys competing in girls’ competitions then showering with them was the next step on the slippery slope, they would have been ridiculed.

      Pedo is next. Minor Attracted Persons. If a 4 year old can consent to having his dick cut off, who will say he cannot consent to sex?

      The left will overreach. They have to. They have to be resisted by 99% of the population to feel better than everyone else.

      1. “Pedo is next. Minor Attracted Persons. If a 4 year old can consent to having his dick cut off, who will say he cannot consent to sex?”

        Bingo.

      2. If I claim to be libertarian, I should not really care what others do absent actual harm to defenseless persons [children/ those truly incapable of informed consent] or directly screwing with me and mine. But I sometimes wonder if we are at either a Sodom and Gomorrah or the Fall of the Roman Empire level of debauchery gone mainstream; I think it will have to arrive at the logical progressive conclusion [examples of which you provide] at which point “the left will overreach.” For me mandating that males* identifying as females be allowed to participate in female sports is such a breaking point. If that is going to be the case, why even have separate categories at all?

        *A study in the Journal of Applied Physiology found that men had an average of 26 lbs. (12 kilograms) more skeletal muscle mass than women. Women also exhibited about 40 percent less upper-body strength and 33 percent less lower-body strength, on average, the study found.Dec 7, 2015

        1. “But I sometimes wonder if we are at either a Sodom and Gomorrah or the Fall of the Roman Empire level of debauchery gone mainstream”

          We are.

          1. I seem to be missing out.

            1. If one wants a catamite, you need to have mucho plata to cover your tracks and find yourself amongst those accepting of alternative lifestyles.

              1. https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1369322357043630080

                Unilever, which owns Dove, Axe and other personal-care brands, has said it would no longer use the word “normal” on its products and in its advertising, after a study found that it makes most people feel excluded.

                1. How about “special”?

                2. Wow people that feel marginalized by the word normal are going to have a really rough time if they go into any Stem feild

                  1. Not anymore as Scientific American is now desperate to prove:

                    Physicists Need to Be More Careful with How They Name Things
                    The popular term “quantum supremacy,” which refers to quantum computers outperforming classical ones, is uncomfortably reminiscent of “white supremacy”

                    1. Jesus fuck. It’s really getting to a point where clubbing these dolts over the head and burying them deep is the only practical solution to this nonsense.

        2. Trans women wanting to play women’s sports is just a myth, so it shouldn’t be addressed.

      3. The left will overreach. They have to. They have to be resisted by 99% of the population to feel better than everyone else.

        The pendulum will swing the other way, the rights will roll all this back and demand submission to their authoritay, and we will all have crappier lives. Sad.

  29. hugged her repeatedly in a manner that was “too long, too tight, too intimate” when she tried to leave.

    Well, at least COVID has fixed *that*.

    1. No Wuhan virus does not apply to polital elites with a (D) next to their name

  30. https://www.zerohedge.com/political/weekend-bidens-handlers-shut-down-yet-another-qa-after-public-appearance

    For the third time in as many days (the previous two detailed here), President Biden’s handlers abruptly panicked at the prospect of him answering a question from the press.

    Today’s debacle takes place in a DC hardware store as double-mask-wearing Biden stares blankly at the store owner during his polite introduction, then becomes distracted by people on an upper level of the store.

    1. It has been 48 days since President [Biden] took office and he has yet to hold a formal press conference, [but] Psaki said last week that Biden will hold a press conference “before the end of the month,”

      “a month of our choosing.”

    2. And it’s not like they’d hit him with difficult questions.

  31. “Today is not a day for politics,” [Cuomo] said. “I’m focusing on my job.”

    *** facepalm ***

    1. Like when he avoided politics and did his job by lying about the number of people he killed.

      1. Have a drink Sevo

    2. Fuck and duck; try to lay low business as usual approach for however long it may take to blow over, at which point one can say “time to move on [.org].”

      1. Worked well for the Virgina governor.

        1. It does for some [like Northam, and his Lt Gov, Ted Kennedy] but not for others [Franken]; suppose it depends on the level of pearl clutching it induces, and if it is enough to cause your supporters to abandon you less they look too hypocritical. Killing several thousand elderly and now 6 “me too” accusations is going to be a pretty high bar, even for that world class asshole. It is also going to reflect badly on his allies in the media who have given him a pass for so long, because he was on “their side.” Some one will have to go down for this, and it might as well be a governor in his last stretch with no foreseeable usefulness.

  32. https://mises.org/power-market/weaponization-term-far-right

    But the term far right hasn’t been watered down nearly as much as the ‘r’ word. And when most people hear far right, they likely think of Nazi flags, white supremacists, ultranationalists, etc. So, if you are eager to wound an individual’s or a group’s reputation, the term is most certainly a useful one.

    Indeed, like its close cousin – the neologism ‘alt right’ – far right has become an effective tool for those in the media and politics, used to discredit and smear people who they consider a threat, or with whom they merely disagree. A recent example of this is the anti-lockdown protests that took place in Dublin, Ireland on February 27, 2021.

    1. Nardz you senile old fool. Far right is an accurate description for you and your fascist buddies.

      I know you fascists think you can change the definition of fascist traitors think you can change the meaning of words but you can’t.

      Anyone with a brain knows you’re America hating fascists.

      It’s not your fault though because you’re so senile.

      1. I enjoy your posts because the obvious stupidity you post with highlights that of leftists in general

        1. For example, you seem to have no idea why you’re trolling in a particular way. You have to have some foundation to be effective, yet you cast sevo as a drunk despite alcohol/drinking having nothing to do with his posts.
          Your attack has to be in some way relevant to your target for effect.
          That you don’t understand anything you try to do is hilarious.

          1. I suspect there is some serious damage there. Of the kind a Mormon elder would inflict upon a small, defenseless child while everyone just stood by and pretended not to notice.

            1. No, I think it’s the anger of outright rejection.
              He went to college with Mormons, who were probably really nice to him, but he’s such an obnoxious dumbass that everyone avoided him, he couldn’t get any dates, didn’t have any friends, and bombed all his classes.
              That would be my guess.

              1. No Mormons are fucking assholes who will lie and cheat to trick stupid fucks into joining their cult. They’re trying to force their horseshit lifestyle on everyone.

                Of course you defend them. They’re fascists like you!

          2. Sevo outed himself as a 12 stepper.

            He could of easily not outed himself, but he’s really fucking stupid.

            He’s a BDS addled fascist.

            Like you!

        2. I’ve often thought that about the rev as well.

      2. Just to waste a few ones and zeros;
        Fascism is left wing.
        National Socialist German Workers’ Party.
        Mussolini was originally a socialist politician and a journalist at the Avanti! newspaper. In 1912, he became a member of the National Directorate of the Italian Socialist Party (PSI)

        So a political movement that advocates government control over the economy is left wing. Refer to the party platform of the US Democrats.
        Deal with it.

        1. Fascism in Germany and Italy was a mix of left and right.

          Banning trade unions or having them fascist run is right wing.

          You fascists can try to change the definition all you want.

          Doesn’t change the fact YOU ARE FASCISTS.

          Now get out of MY COUNTRY you Trump worshipping traitors!

    2. Nazis are the far-est of the right? What about heavenly-ordained dictatorial monarchies?

  33. The Ruling Class has the left well trained.

    Threat: guy in vest, no shirt, face makeup, and a Viking helmet.
    No Threat: a handful of billionaires deciding what books you can read and who can speak in public.

    1. In many ways there really needs to be a revolution, but unfortunately those hardly ever turn out well, either.

      1. Mother’s “Jonesin’ for a Second American Civil War that I can watch on TV while I suck down a Molson’s” Lament.

        Sorry the violent MAGA insurrection failed. Must have bummed out your whole day.

  34. Better headline:
    Mormons Outraged As Polygamy Is Legalized For Everyone But Them

    1. Ok now your just baiting a known troll.

  35. https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2021/03/09/la-teachers-union-warns-members-not-post-vacation-pics-school-still/

    The teachers were urged to keep spring break pictures off social media because it could hurt the union’s argument that it’s currently unsafe to return to the classroom, according to a screenshot that appeared to be from a roughly 5,700 member Facebook group titled, “UTLA FB GROUP- Members Only.”

    “Friendly reminder: If you are planning any trips for Spring Break, please keep that off of Social Media. It is hard to argue that it is unsafe for in-person instruction, if parents and the public see vacation photos and international travel,” a post from the group read, according to FOX 11 of Los Angeles reporter Bill Melugin.

  36. “The unnamed accuser, a member of the Executive Chamber staff, claims Cuomo inappropriately touched her during an encounter last year at the Executive Mansion, the official residence of the governor.”

    I am not one to defend Cuomo; I hate the guy. But watching his sanctimonious pandering backfire is particularly delicious. However, this latest allegation is a fucking joke and I sort of admire his stubbornness and refusal to resign. If he bends but doesn’t break, I would wager this shit simply goes away and the efficacy of #metoo as a cudgel to beat political adversaries out of the office will be greatly diminished — which would be better for everybody.

    Also, as a lesson to anyone maneuvering or aspiring to work in or around politics, avoid the women. They are all pathological narcissists, liars, and you will scarcely ever find one among them that hasn’t been literally “raped” in their own minds since the day they were born. They fuck their way to the top, but don’t you dare fuck them. Women in politics are a deliberately deployed honeypot paradox. They are professional kompromat reactors, and there is no telling when they will have a meltdown. They are soulless ghouls, and we should fear them much more than any man.

    1. So how do you really feel about the VP?

      1. 🙂

    2. Of course it was. It always is. Leftists are always being entirely disingenuous when they dismiss the “slippery slope” argument.

      1. Wrong comment thread.

  37. https://twitter.com/LeonydusJohnson/status/1369668110253494274?s=19

    It’s a weird paradox when a group of people passionately defend liberty only to see another group of people take advantage of that liberty to actively work to destroy liberty altogether.

    1. It’s worse than that. It’s more like it seems that every institution that makes up western civilization has been infected by an insane religious cult and is now actively working to destroy western civilization.

      1. I think the explanation is far simpler.

        Western civilization is collapsing, rapidly. The race nonsense, the woke police, the astronomical spending, the never-ending wars, the politicians that are pulled straight out of comic books, the grifters, etc., all are examples of people trying to suck as much money out of the system as they can, any which way they can, while there is still something left to steal. The faster the collapse, they easier it is to steal.

        The country is done, and there is no bringing it back. We are only noticing the bottom feeders now because the lake is damn near bone dry.

        1. Damn. Gibbons 2.0

        2. Sharks ripping chunks off the floating whale’s corpse, before it sinks forever into the abyss.

          I don’t know what will replace it. Many of the candidates (China, India, Brazil, an African Union) have titanic social and structural problems of their own.

          1. Russia went from a communist titanic with complete regional dominance to a diminished kleptocracy overnight. We are probably looking at something like that.

            1. Possibly, but we dont really have any competitors in our neighborhood. We kinda are the region. Russia has to deal with Japan, China, Germany/EU, Turkey and Iran.
              We have to worry about Canada and Mexico.

              1. Competitors? Perhaps not. But the concern is not that they are not going to rise to our level. The concern is that we are going to fall to theirs.

                1. No. I don’t believe that. We got a lot o cool shit hyah.

          2. A new dark age.
            Global Socialist overlords confiscating peasants productivity to obtain and allocate resources for a techno-eugenic cleaving of man into separate species, squabbling among themselves for feudal dominions but united against the underclass.

            1. The easiest visual analogy would be Stalinist USSR worldwide, with no opposition.

          3. China is the most likely candidate. They are a hyper-jingoistic monoculture that has no time for the pretensions of western bourgeois liberalism, they have an aggressive global economic colonization program, their military is rapidly gaining parity with ours, their cyberwarfare capabilities grow by the year, several US-based corporations are heavily dependent on Chinese factories and Chinese dollars to stay afloat, you have fuckhead traitors like Fauci praising their public health policies, and even our agricultural sector is dependent on them purchasing our goods.

            Nixon opening up relations with China is going to be marked by historians as the moment when the US began selling out its primacy in the world, in exchange for cheap Chinese shit and the laughable premise that China would ever liberalize.

            1. You should move to China traitor

  38. Andrew Cuomo’s secretary Melissa DeRosa agrees with journo that we shouldn’t ‘let scandals distract from [Cuomo’s] pandemic competence’
    https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2021/03/09/andrew-cuomos-secretary-melissa-derosa-agrees-with-journo-that-we-shouldnt-let-scandals-distract-from-cuomos-pandemic-competence/

    1. I guess Twitchy is like the Babylon Bee.

  39. https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1369661202931068935?s=19

    As the Very Smart People begin to realize that the Deplorable riff-raff was right months and years ahead of them, do not expect them to give credit. Expect them to claim it, deny knowledge of the Undersirables, and to claim they were too alarmist and this not really right.

  40. “Sahouri, a Des Moines Register public safety reporter, is one of 116 journalists arrested or detained while covering Black Lives Matter protests that erupted after the death of George Floyd, according to the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, but she is the first to be taken to trial. She is charged with failure to disperse and interference with official acts, both misdemeanors.

    Beware the fallacies of composition and association (in this case, honor by association)

    On the one hand, because one person in a group of 116 journalists was unfairly prosecuted, that doesn’t necessarily mean the other 115 weren’t actively rioting. On the other hand, there isn’t anything about being a journalist that entitles anyone to special privileges.

    If you break the law, there shouldn’t be anything about being a journalist that entitles you to special treatment. It’s just that if you embed yourselves with anti-fa, or others who riot, 1) you shouldn’t be surprised to be mistaken for a rioter, and 2) you should be free to tell the jury that you didn’t really do anything but cover the riot from the inside as a journalist.

    There is nothing legitimately elite about journalists or journalism.

    1. Fail. The 1st Amendment specifically grants journalists special protection from fucksticks like you and those pigs.

      1. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

        —-First Amendment

        The First Amendment is a prohibition against government action, and anyone who speaks or writes enjoys the same protection from the same government–regardless of whether they’re professional journalists.

        You appear to be quite ignorant, and that may be because you’re stupid.

        1. But Ken, every religious ideology requires a priesthood with special privileges. Why even bother working as a media activist?

          1. It is like a religious ideology, isn’t it?

            Talking to Lord of Strazele, certainly, seems to be like trying to deprogram a Moonie.

            I suppose it’s a good thing the progressives got to him first. Otherwise, he might have ended up hassling people at the airport.

            1. Don’t give him ideas.

      2. No, it really does not. Given that anybody can be a “journalist”, all they have is protection from having their writing banned by the government. They still have to abide by all laws everybody else does.

      3. It’s amazing that lard ass failed so hard on his own fail attempt.

        Next time keep your trap shut dumb shit. You aren’t educated enough to compete here.

      4. “Freedom of the press” refers to the printing press and means that government cannot legally restrict what one writes, except for the same exceptions that adhere to speech. It does not mean “freedom of commercial news organizations.” But lets assume arguendo that your contention is correct and freedom of the press refers to commercial news organizations and freedom of speech refers to everyone else. The Constitution does not place freedom of the press on a higher plane. The text of the First Amendment states, in relevant part: “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press….” Note how the restriction on government restriction on freedom of speech and the press places neither on a higher level. Of course, this discussion is just for the sake of argument, and the first two sentences of this post make the most salient point.

      5. This is the dumbest thing you’ve ever said here, and that’s saying a lot.

    2. “On the one hand, because one person in a group of 116 journalists was unfairly prosecuted, that doesn’t necessarily mean the other 115 weren’t actively rioting.”

      Do you have any evidence at all that the other 115 might have been actively rioting? Or are you just blatantly dealing in hypotheticals?

      1. The fallacy of composition remains a concern regardless of whether the other 115 were actively rioting.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition

        The fact is that we don’t know whether the other 115 were charged unjustly–certainly not because one of them was. And anyone who believes that the other 115 were arrested or charged unjustly–because one of them was–is wrong to do so for that reason.

      2. An fancy way to ask for a cite.

        1. Sort of. Not really, because I highly doubted Ken has a cite.

          It was more a way of pointing out to Ken that he was putting for the a line of reasoning based on engaging in pure speculation.

          1. Not really, what he said was ““On the one hand, because one person in a group of 116 journalists was unfairly prosecuted, that doesn’t necessarily mean the other 115 weren’t actively rioting.”

            WHICH YOU QUOTED and isn’t speculation.

            What you did was take a big creamy shit on his comment because you’re a moron troll.

            1. If she doesn’t understand what’s wrong and why, even after I linked to the fallacy in question, then she apparently doesn’t accept the validity of logical fallacies, and if she doesn’t accept the validity of logical fallacies, then we shouldn’t assume she understands what logical fallacies are or why it’s wrong to perpetrate them.

              She should start here:

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_fallacy

              And then maybe hope to be taken seriously.

              1. There were some babies in that bathwater we threw out with the Objectivists.

                The idea that the world would be more libertarian and more capitalist if it were more rational was one hell of a big baby.

                The Objectivists went too far–and often said things like that the world can’t become more libertarian and capitalist until it becomes more rational, which I reject, but they were right to the extent that they were right.

          2. Hahaha you fucked up AGAIN Dee! Do you do it on purpose?

    3. Delusional self righteousness can make people (journalists, teachers) act very stupidly, and then claim victimhood.

  41. Here’s to hoping that Mormon fundies soon outnumber the LGBTQ thrupples in Cambridge that I’m sure they intended to legalize polyamory for.

    1. I meant polygamy

    2. The matriarchy wants to have a harem of twinks and soyboys, let em have it. If the positives outweighed the negatives re having multiple wives, it would never have been banned.

      1. The matriarchy has no desire to bang the soyboys.

  42. Blue-checks are afraid of life getting back to normal. Really. They are tweeting this to their followers right now.
    https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2021/03/05/blue-checks-are-afraid-of-life-getting-back-to-normal-really-they-are-tweeting-this-to-their-followers-right-now/

    Emily Ramshaw, co-founder and CEO of @19thnews, tweeted on Friday night that she “panicked about life inching back toward ‘normal’”:

    Suddenly, today, I panicked about life inching back toward “normal.”

    I don’t want to travel endlessly for work. I don’t want my weekends to be over-committed with activities. I don’t want to miss bedtime with my kid. I don’t want to wear blazers — or, hell, even shoes.

    — Emily Ramshaw (@eramshaw) March 6, 2021

    You see, there have been many “liberating” moments in the past year that counter all the truly awful parts:

    This year has been heartbreaking, depressing, paralyzing — in almost every way.

    But some things about it have also been liberating, and I have to figure out how to cling to those things in a vaccinated future — even when others expect me not to.

    — Emily Ramshaw (@eramshaw) March 6, 2021

    1. But some things about it have also been liberating, and I have to figure out how to cling to those things in a vaccinated future — even when others expect me not to.

      Easily done, Emily. Just infect yourself with something else.

      1. Sounds like she loves the perks but hates doing actual work.

    2. So get married and stay home barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.

    3. Well, you start by growing a pair.

    4. This pandemic basically broke the white, left-liberal bourgeoisie and exposed just how neurotic and damaged they really are.

      1. And teachers. Or are you counting them?

        1. Eh, same difference.

      2. Yup. Along with the woke nonsense.

  43. Is ENB aware that blm is not an anti police abuse organization? They are a socialist organization that relies on terrorism and complicit corporation involvement. Their own website doesn’t even mention police, “a resilience against deadly oppression”.it’s important for them to be as vague as possible, because now the can say anyone is a deadly oppressor and an enemy. Of cource the websight is a more toned down version of what they really believe, you have to go to the way back machine to look at their true craziness. But what do you expect from an organization that hires a terrorist to help them run things.

    1. And it’s not even a secret that they take orders from the DNC…

    2. “socialist organization that relies on […] corporation involvement”

      So you mean a quasi-fascist organization?

    1. “Helful blog?” If it’s a “Christian singles dating app,” shouldn’t it have nothing to do with “hel?” 🙂

  44. mortgage advice dursley
    mortgage advice dursley Hey check this out helpful blog, Amazingly compiled!

  45. “Young people seeking to change federal policy on climate change try new tactic”
    […]
    “After a federal appeals court reluctantly dismissed a lawsuit by 21 young people demanding government action against climate change, the youths proposed Tuesday to scale back their suit and seek only a ruling that U.S. promotion of fossil fuels violates their rights to life and liberty….”
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/local/environment/article/Young-people-seeking-to-change-federal-policy-on-16012902.php

    Young watermelons attempting to tell the world they know what’s RIGHT, dammit!

    1. Have a drink Sevo

      1. you’ll still be too ugly to fuck

    2. Why don’t they try storming the Capitol?

    3. That faggot loser, jacob blake’s, publicity whore uncle is going on a hunger strike for climate change. No comment from BLM/Uncle blake on the black guy that murdered his black girlfriend after prior domestics in kenosha yesterday.

  46. mortgage advice stroud
    mortgage advice stroud Hey check this out helpful blog, Amazingly compiled!

  47. “On Monday, Cambridge City Council approved an ordinance amending the city’s existing statute to stipulate that a domestic partnership needn’t only include two partners.”

    What about goats? Asking for a friend.

  48. Now let us go back into the mists of prehistory, all the way back to 2013:

    “Same-sex marriage: They’ll just never get it

    “Even conservatives who fancy themselves intellectuals make insulting and unreasoned arguments against gay marriage

    “…Polygamy is the most plausible candidate [for official recognition]: It is quite common historically, and there may well have been circumstances (for example, a shortage of men due to war or other dangers) that made it work well in particular societies. But that’s only half the story. The other half requires asking whether, despite these goods, there are overriding reasons for discouraging or condemning polygamy today. Polygamous societies are almost always polygynous, where one husband has multiple wives. (Polyandry — one wife with multiple husbands — is, by contrast, quite rare.) The usual result is a sexist and classist society where high-status males acquire multiple wives while low-status males become virtually unmarriageable. Thus, from a social-policy point of view, there are reasons to be wary of polygamy. Perhaps those reasons could be overcome by further argument, but the central point remains: Arguments about the morally appropriate number of sexual partners are logically distinct from arguments about the morally appropriate gender of sexual partners.”

    https://www.salon.com/2013/03/10/same_sex_marriage_theyll_just_never_get_it/

    1. We are all slipping down the slippery slope they said was neither slippery, nor a slope. They were lying, of course.

      Kid fucking is next.

    2. Look up what todays poly”amorous” couples are… average woman with 3 or 4 below average “men”.

      Welcome to the matriarchy.

  49. “Is it time to end daylight savings time?”

    Sure, but what next? The libertarian approach that lets people define their own time zone? Or the CCP system that placed the entire country on Beijing time?

    1. I already said it above, but it fits better here: “No one needs 24 different time zones.”

  50. I couldn’t have said this better myself.

    Three points about the Democrats’ $1.9 trillion “stimulus” bill and the $350 billion bail out of the states:

    1) The bill ostensibly prohibits states from using the $350 billion to bail out their pension funds–directly. However, money is fungible. Every dollar they use from the bail out to spend on programs they would have spend anyway from their own tax revenue can and will be diverted from other programs to meet their pension obligations.

    This bail out bill might as well let them spend it on their pension obligations anyway because after moving the money from one column to the other, that’s what will happen. The only reason that verbiage is in the bill is because it’s being passed without any Republican support, so the Democrats are embarrassed about this and want a fig leaf to hide their shame.

    The reason they’re afraid to being called out on this is because they’re smart, and if we’re smart, we’ll never shut up about them bailing out the over compensated state bureaucrats of California and New York with working people’s paychecks until November of 2022.

    2) The bill expressly prohibits states from cutting taxes as a condition of taking any of the $350 billion, which is not only evil but stupid as we’re coming out of a recession. That provision is presumably about states like California and New York trying to stop the tide of productive and wealthy residents from fleeing the state.

    3) All of this could have been prevented if we had reelected Donald Trump. California, Connecticut, Illinois, and New Jersey would have been forced to slash their state work forces without a bail out. Seeing all those governments about to get smaller, only to be saved from budget cuts by the stupidity of our fellow Americans is heartbreaking. We should have done a better job of persuading them. All we can do now is crush the Democrats in 2022.

    1. Things are not looking good right now for the GOP in 2022. The dems have everyone hooked on free shit more now than at any time since FDR. Also several GOP senators are retiring but no dems are, yet…

      1. Historically, the president’s party takes a beating in the House in a new president’s first midterm. Here are all those first term midterms going back to 1910.

        First column is House seats won/lost. The last column is what I see as the dominant issue(s) of that midterm.

        +9 1934 Franklin D. Roosevelt Great Depression Response
        +8 2002 George W. Bush 9/11
        -4 1962 John F. Kennedy Cuban Missile Crisis
        -8 1990 George H. W. Bush USSR Falls, Operation Desert Shield
        -9 1926 Calvin Coolidge 1st Midterm in 2nd Term (Harding Died)
        -12 1970 Richard Nixon Vietnam, Kent State
        -15 1978 Jimmy Carter Energy Crisis, Inflation
        -18 1954 Dwight D Eisenhower McCarthyism
        -22 1918 Woodrow Wilson Broken Promise not to Enter WWI
        -26 1982 Ronald Reagan Recession
        -47 1966 Lyndon B. Johnson Great Society, Civil Rights Act
        -48 1974 Gerald Ford Nixon Pardoned
        -52 1930 Herbert Hoover Smoot-Hawley Tariff, Great Depression
        -54 1946 Harry S Truman Labor Unrest, Price Controls
        -54 1994 Bill Clinton Gun Control, HillaryCare
        -57 1910 William Taft Republican/Progressives Split
        -63 2010 Barack Obama TARP, ObamaCare
        -77 1922 Warren Harding Republican/Progressive Split

        The median is -24 House seats lost.

        The average is -31`House seats lost.

        The more radical the agenda, the bigger the backlash. If and when Biden pursues the Green New Deal, gun control, that alone should put him in Obama territory. The more interesting detail may be that the average and the median aren’t anywhere near zero.

        Regardless, we should expect to see the Democrats lose 24 seats in the House in 2022, maybe more. Bush Jr. did well because the 2002 midterms were after 9/11 and before we invaded Iraq. Unless Biden gets an historically significant gift like that, he’ll probably trend towards the median. If he pursues his radical goals on the climate and gun control, the Democrats will suffer bigger losses.

        Incidentally, I believe this is the reason that Pelosi has agreed not to seek the Speaker’s chair after the election of 2022–because she fully expects the Democrats to lose control of the House in 2022 anyway.

        1. “Regardless, we should expect to see the Democrats lose 24 seats in the House in 2022, maybe more.”

          Why? If you’re going to cite more historical precedent to show I’m wrong, maybe you can find a situation where the incumbent President gained nearly 15 million votes over the prior Election, and still lost.

          Until the fraud is fixed, the uniparty isn’t losing shit. No matter how angry people like you, who pay attention, become.

          1. Ballot stuffing has a history going back to before the Civil War. I supposed It’s been a feature of every democracy since forever.

            I don’t know how to correct for that, but political machines and corruption were more of a feature before and during the Great Depression and remained when the union vote was more important from World War II through the mid-1970s, as well.

            I’m not sure that’s a consideration that needs to be corrected for. The question probably wasn’t even whether there was ballot stuffing in the past, but whether it was enough to make a difference. Regardless of the answer, what I reported were the results of those elections–in spite of and/or because of the ballot stuffing.

            So, this is more or less what we might expect in spite of and/or because of the ballot stuffing. The tide goes out for the President’s party in his first midterm as a reaction to his agenda.

            Oh, and I should point out that even if the presidential ballot box was stuffed in 2020, the Republicans gained seats in the House despite all that ballot box stuffing. The model above isn’t about the outcome of the presidential election in 2024. If all that ballot stuffing by Democrats resulted in the Republicans winning seats in the House in 2020 anyway, then maybe ballot stuffing isn’t as big of a deal in House races.

          2. And HR1 is going to go a long way to insure that these changes never recur

      2. Things are looking great for the GOP. Romney and Cotton are all on board with the minimum wage bullshit, for example. They just want to do it slower, over time — which means they’ll be bullied into just doing it.

        The GOP are only marginally less “free shit for everyone” than the Democrats.

        1. They opposed the stimulus and bailing out the states.

          They deserve credit for that.

          And Romney is in no way a leader of the party anymore. If he runs in 2024, he has no chance of winning the primary. He’s about as influential with the party base as Liz Cheney, who probably won’t stand in the general election in Wyoming after losing in the primaries.

          1. Fair enough.

            But they are not going to put a stop to the “free shit for everyone” because their only counter policy to that is “free shit for everyone, but over time, not today.”

            You can plug up the leak in your boat your finger, or some tape. Democrats are the finger. Republicans are the tape. They may be buying some marginal amount of time but, ultimately, we end up in the exact same place.

  51. https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1369623714426454018

    Fauci, asked “what’s the science” for denying vaccinated Americans a return to travel, can’t explain.

    “When you don’t have the data and you don’t have the actual evidence, you’ve got to make a judgment call.”

    1. https://dossier.substack.com/p/fauci-shares-stage-with-top-ccp-official?r=6a3x3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=twitter

      This past week, Dr. Anthony Fauci shared a platform with a Chinese Communist Party “health expert,” and it went largely unreported by any Western media outlets. Chinese state media, on the other hand, could not get enough of it, because Fauci delivered a propaganda coup for the communist regime in Beijing. Countless state media outlets and CCP official praised the co-panelists for endorsing the endless amounts of anti-American propaganda shared during the event, which included demanding more devastating draconian restrictions in order to “combat” COVID-19.

  52. OK, let us go back even further, back to when the earth was still cooling, in 2005:

    “Letting same-sex couples make the same gender-neutral commitment that opposite-sex couples make doesn’t open the doors to polygamy, where, traditionally, “One man owns many wombs and grows lots of household labor,” according to [E. J.] Graff. “That is precisely the opposite of gender equality and of individual-based capitalism. It violates all our contemporary notions of fairness and democracy. Polygamy would mean heading backward into marriage’s feudal history; same-sex marriage moves us forward into its equal and democratic future.””

    https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/16437

    1. But things are different now! Besides, this is easily fixed by requiring at least two spouses to be of the same gender.

      1. “…at least two spouses to be of the same gender.”

        Did you get that from a MENSA test?

        1. I meant the primary spouse and at least one of his/her/xi concubines

          1. And I’m being sarcastic

            1. As am I…

        2. may be more difficult than it looks

    2. It is odd how often “cretins” who question the wisdom of asinine policies end up being correct in ways that the elites seem to be oblivious to.

  53. Does anyone else feel like the move to normalize polygamous relationships is to legitimize Hunter Biden’s sleeping with his brother’s widow, her sister, and a stripper in the span of a few months.

    Seriously, I support(ed) polyamorous marriage, but on it’s own merits. To juxtapose it against the nuclear family is to embrace/encourage more explicit tribalism.

    1. Normal in the near future will be to have gender fluid pansexual parents who aren’t married, heck the majority of kids now are born to single moms anyway. And families won’t be defined by blood or genetics but the “community” the parent lives in, which may include multiple unrelated adults who care for the child. That is what this means.

      1. As someone mentioned the other day, it takes a village to burn a witch.

      2. “And families won’t be defined by blood or genetics but the ‘community’ government.”

        The purpose of destroying the nuclear family is to replace it with a nuclear government, one that sits at the center of our existence and around which everything, and everyone, revolves.

      3. And even these disgusting single mothers have thirsty betas lining up to fuck them.
        They’ll have 4 dads, but no male father figure.

  54. “The Russian government has disrupted access to Twitter, accusing it of failing to remove banned content as the Kremlin grapples with the role social media is playing in protests against President Vladimir Putin.

    Russia’s media watchdog Roskomnadzor said Wednesday that the social media giant had ignored more than 28,000 requests since 2017 to take down illegal content.

    These claims included posts with child pornography, information about drug abuse and calls for minors to commit suicide.”

    —-Newsweek, about 15 minutes ago

    https://www.newsweek.com/russia-twitter-slow-down-1575102

    This isn’t really about pr0n, drug abuse, or minors committing suicide. It’s about trying to disrupt Navalny related protesters from communicating with each other and organizing.

    Why is that interesting?

    Because here in the United States, the Democrats are trying to disrupt social media for more or less the same reasons–but they’re no longer hiding behind other issues.

    The Democrats wants Facebook, Google, Twitter, et. al. to shut down protests and extinguish so called “misinformation” for blatantly political reasons.

    Isn’t it interesting that where Putin feels it necessary to hide his censorship and justify it on other grounds, where the Democrats in the U.S. no longer feel that’s necessary?

    1. “This isn’t really about pr0n, drug abuse, or minors committing suicide. It’s about trying to disrupt Navalny related protesters from communicating with each other and organizing.

      Why is that interesting?

      Because here in the United States, the Democrats are trying to disrupt social media for more or less the same reasons–but they’re no longer hiding behind other issues.”

      This can’t be stressed strongly enough.

    2. The democrats are justifying it on other grounds, just like putin.

      Insurrection? Coup? Treason? His batch of Karen’s have different concerns than ours. Russia Karen worries about her kid becoming a gay, ours worry about him becoming an white supremacist.

  55. So how hard is it to get out of such partnerships? If it’s easy, then it’s quick way to gain custody of the children with your new boyfriend, leaving the father out in the dirt. Or the pothead who doesn’t bathe gets priority over the grandparents.

    I could care less if twenty people want to live together with their cats and dogs and consensual gerbils. But making them on par with actual married families is a bit much.

    Legalize group marriage instead. Force them to say their vows and make it painful to leave the group. Make them actually commit before they they state granted privileges.

    1. Maybe delete the privileges.

      1. That does not solve the extensive family court issues that arise with polygamy/polyamory.

  56. Cambridge legalizes polyamorous partnerships. The city of Cambridge, Massachusetts, will become the second municipality in the country to legalize domestic partnerships between three or more people.

    Wait a minute, I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I recall back in the 90s (before ENB was born) that the left mocked social conservatives for suggesting this would be the next logical step if we legalized gay marriage. I’m all for polyamorous relationships…but…

    The lack of legal protection makes non-nuclear families especially vulnerable to stigma and discrimination in employment, health care, housing, and social life,” notes Diana Adams, executive director of the Chosen Family Law Center. “I have represented hundreds of clients who have been discriminated against because they’re polyamorous, whether that meant being unable to visit their life partner in the hospital, losing child custody in court battles, or losing their job. Legal recognition of these families reduces social stigma and provides families with the stability we all deserve.”

    So my question is this: What does it mean? Are people in Polyamorous relationships who say, work for the city, entitled to monetary benefits like pensions and the like? Does this multiply the financial burden on the public by the number of people in the polyamorous relationship?

    1. Financial burden you say? Hell, if the feds aren’t worried about paying for their largess, why should anyone else be?

      1. I imagine Oprah running around Cambridge city hall yelling, “You get a pension and YOU get a pension and YOU get a pension and YOU get a pension!”

    2. And also where does this end. The left uses these culture wars as a stepping stone to more power. I don’t think they care one bit about the issue itself but it’s such a great wedge issue in campaigns and republicans manage to step all over themselves. Transgenderism was a non factor in any election until the supreme court legalized gay marriage. Once that was a non factor they moved on to a new issue. So yeah I expect they will make this the new hill to die upon. If republicans were smart they would just coopt every democrat talking point and issue, then completely ignore it once they get elected just like the dems do.

      1. It ends with a new generation of some seriously fucked up children.

    3. The city’s employment costs are poised to skyrocket. It’s just like with transgenders, you only have to state that you are in a polyamorous relationship, you don’t have to actually bang. There is zero downside to claiming to be in a polyamorous relationship.

  57. The first polyamorous “divorce” should be interesting – – – – – – –

    Of course, just like homosexual marriages, the libertarian question is “why is the state involved at all?”
    If the lazy legislators had not leaned on the transient concept of “marriage” instead of thinking through tax and inheritance laws, none of this would matter. I can see the logic in determining marriage to be a religious institution with no room for the governments.
    Wills, power of attorney, and medical directives can deal with all of this much better than “the government”.

    1. It’s not about the mere act of being in a committed relationship, it’s about money and benefits (including the money and benefits that come out of divorce). Otherwise, why would anyone care?

    2. I’ve been wondering this forever. If people should not be prevented from marrying who they love, why did the line get drawn at gay marriage but not poly?

      Why did the left give up the marriage equality fight before there was actual marriage equality?

      I haven’t gotten a good reason, but the “best” seems to be “multi-way marriages are hard to do.”

      1. Nobody seems to be discussing the real ramifications… Did Cambridge address the insurance issues raised by this? There are mandates that businesses provide coverage.. can I force my employer to subsidize my 7 spouses? Can the insurance company be forced to cover additional spouses? How many? No proof is required… Can I get a buddy in Cambridge to list my wife and I and our kids as a part of his polyamorous family and get coverage?

        1. What about city employee policies? Can my buddy name an arbitrarily large number of spouses and get us all covered under his flat rate family plan?

      2. Why did the left give up the marriage equality fight before there was actual marriage equality?

        To bludgeon deplorables overtly. Seriously, 30 yrs. ago it was widely discussed by libertarians and Republicans that ideas like common law marriage would both be simpler to implement, require less government involvement, and allow for much wider/freer individual association. People advancing such talk were labeled as anti-gay sophist bigots and the polygamous were openly derided as a fringe sexual deviants participanting ancient religious cults.

  58. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is facing a sixth sexual harassment allegation.

    I’m beginning to think this is a false flag operation to get the media to stop talking about his handling of the COVID situation. A democrat can often survive a sexual harassment allegation– or even blackface. But the COVID handling appears to be an entirely bipartisan fuckup.

    1. Starting? Of course it is.

      The AG began this by giving credence to the Covid story. Wanna take bets as to her allegiances? Think they are closer to Cuomo, or to the other DNC successor in waiting, Kamala Harris?

      But nobody wants to go down that road. So MeToo gets the scalp, and no damage is done to the Covid narrative.

    2. I concur. I’ve heard some say that it would be a real shame if Cuomo went down over #metoo crap rather than all of the deaths he caused and the subsequent coverup thereof, and I have to agree.

    3. Where do you get “Bipartisan” from in New York?

      1. All I mean by that is the COVID coverup is so awful, even his own party can’t ignore it.

    1. Don’t worry. You have time to craft a response. It should be years before this reaches our cities.

    2. “The student had told her father that the teacher kept Muslim students after class to show ‘a photograph of the Prophet [Muhammad] naked.’
      Her father then went on to file a legal complaint and began a full-on hate campaign against the teacher. This included creating videos detailing the accusations against the teacher.”

      A photograph? Of Muhammad? How stupid are these people?

    3. Nor do I; I suppose it has been relegated to local news.

    4. Celebrate Women’s History month with a remembrance of Carolyn Bryant.

      Let it serve to remind us that women and children have always been the primary victims of war.

    5. Wow, that really is a story that is too local.

  59. torn on whether government sanctioning threesomes sucks the fun out

  60. So, another rather big/obvious wrinkle in the ‘legalize polyamory’ question: I’ve known a few people who’ve gone through DNS interviews because they were marrying someone who lived here on a Visa (fucking invasive Canadians). At what percent makeup or directness of the relationship does a/the marriage confer citizenship? If an Arab prince manages to seduce an American citizen into his harem do the prince and the entire rest of his harem get citizenship? If one F of an FFF threesome moves away and joins an FFM threesome and has a baby, can citizenship be conferred on the child by way of one of the remaining Fs in the original FFF threesome?

    I think marriage should include ‘polyamory’ by being rolled back to something more like common law. If you cohabitate for X years, you’re “married”. It more intrinsically solves or addresses many of the issues associated with the legal protections of any given family and relegates active government intervention to more niche cases.

  61. I recognize them too.

    They’re fucked up. Enough said.

  62. I’ve been predicting that poly would be the next trans. And here it is.

    How many people are going to use this to get their friends covered under their health insurance? Family plans are already MUCH more expensive than individual plans, and this will only exacerbate that. I don’t understand why insurance companies don’t increase their family plan rates according to the number of humans in the “family”.

    1. I’ve been predicting that poly would be the next trans. And here it is.

      Plenty of libertarians and conservatives (myself among them) advocated for a simpler, more objective common law standard of marriage that would include both gay and poly marriage 30 yrs. ago. We were bigots for not wanting to provide extra special protections and extra special licenses for homosexuals.

  63. Yes, it’s Daylight Saving Time (no “s”). And it accomplishes nothing.

    That out of the way, I could never understand why DST occurs during the SUMMER. We don’t need to conserve daylight during the months when there is lots of daylight!

    1. Another victim of the public school system.

  64. OT, but timely: Today on NPR’s “The Takeaway,” a Boston Philosophy Professor Nicholas Evans and the host were talking seriously about “vaccine shame,” which evidently means feeling shame about getting the COVID-19 vaccine in the face of the “systemic injustices in the health care system.” Whiskey Tango Foxtrot???

    I’m thinking: “Do you even herd immunity, Brah? Do you even know how immuization even works? Protecting yourself with immunization also protects those around you who are too young, too old, too sick, or with expired vaccines, like Adam Smith says “as if by an invisible hand!”

    SJWs value their ‘doxy literally higher than life itself! Get them and Anti-Vaxxers an island of their own where they can torment themselves and each other away from the rest of us!

  65. “Bipartisan group of senators reintroduces bill to make daylight saving time permanent”

    Well, it’s about time.

  66. Logical argument doesn’t do the trick and he seems fond of rhyme, so in an effort to promote harmony in the comments, here is a little ode to the SQRLSY One:

    You poor crazy bastard
    I do not play in shit
    You reply to my posts
    But I don’t read a bit
    I just flag and refresh
    And move on, say bye-bye
    Please don’t shit up my threads
    I will never reply

    🙂 Have a nutty life, bud!

    1. You’re not funny or clever.

      I’m not Sqrls. I’m a mormon’s worst nightmare.

      1. You’re a moron’s wet dream. Piss off.

    2. Up-Chuck wants to help the trumpanzees gones apeshit steal democracy and replace it with mobocracy. If anyone objects, Up-Chuck will accuse them using the “pants shitter’s veto”. Quit yer bitchin’, whining crybabies who use the “pants shitter’s veto”!

      Next, Up-Chuck will start emulating his Hero, Ervil LeBaron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ervil_LeBaron … And steal all of the women, make all the babies, and murder (“Blood Atonements”) those who object! And those who object to THAT, will be accused of using the “pants shitter’s veto”!

      1. Nope. Just you.

  67. Harvard was always a haven for three-somes

  68. Wow, that really is a story that is too local.
    Best Regards: Essay Writing Services

  69. I don’t understand why that’s anyone else’s business.

  70. Well we will find out if all these “discriminatory” laws have some fundamental reason to exist..if polygamy destabilize communities or not. Why does marriage exist anyway ? Probably based on the stability it created in small communities before recorded history. We might very well 100 years from now have evidence of why things were the way they were..or perhaps with fiat currency none of this matters anymore as govt takes over all “responsiblity” of peoples. Funny how same sex couples are very much against this when polled..insightful?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.