Reason Roundup

Anyone Who 'Aids or Abets' Abortion Could Be Sued Under New Texas 'Heartbeat Bill'

Plus: Death penalty proposed for Atlanta massage parlor shooter, judge tosses Google antitrust suit, and more...

|

Texas abortion bill includes civil suit provision. They say everything is bigger in Texas. This apparently includes attempts to thwart reproductive freedom. The state has now passed one of the most extreme anti-abortion bills that this country has seen.

The bill's main tacks are twofold. Like many recent measures passed by Republican-led legislatures—and later struck down in court—this one would ban abortion after the presence of a "fetal heartbeat." The term is typically used to refer to any embryonic cardiac activity—an electrical pulse that mimics a heartbeat even before an embryo has a heart—and can generally be detected about two weeks after pregnancy registers on a typical home test.

Where Texas takes things even further is by allowing almost anyone who thinks an abortion has taken place outside these parameters to sue—essentially creating pro-life "vigilantes," as Emily Shugerman at The Daily Beast puts it

The person suing does not have to have any connection to the parties allegedly involved, nor even live in Texas. They just can't be "an officer or employee of a state or local governmental entity."

Nor must their target be limited to abortion providers. Anyone who "aids and abets" an abortion taking place—say, by driving someone to a clinic or helping someone find an abortion provider—can be sued (though a woman getting an abortion cannot). This includes anyone "paying for or reimbursing the costs of an abortion through insurance or otherwise," the legislation specifically notes.

Amy Hagstrom Miller of Texas-based abortion clinic Whole Woman's Health told The Daily Beast, "It's unprecedented, there's no question. The idea that just anybody should be able to police a highly trained physician and their staff—that any Joe on the street can make that claim—is just totally shocking."

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has indicated he will sign the bill into law.


FREE MINDS

Should the Atlanta massage parlor murderer get the death penalty? MSNBC opinion columnist Chris Geidner argues no:

The desire of many prosecutors to seek harsh sentences is a well-documented problem. The practice can be coercive, forcing people to plead guilty in circumstances where they would ordinarily go to trial to take the most significant charges off the table. The practice has thrown fuel on the fire of mass incarceration, filling our prisons with an increasingly aging population.

But here, in a case where charges of hate-motivated violence are also at issue, the practice is particularly ill-suited: The death penalty in America is both historically and presently a biased system, and using that most extreme punishment to prosecute bias-motivated crime only serves to root that biased system more deeply in our lives.…

The March 16 spa shootings must be prosecuted, accountability for the killings must be sought, and the effect of bias in the attacks must be addressed. But using this case to further entrench the death penalty in our nation and in our lives does not — and cannot — advance those goals.


FREE MARKETS

A win for Google in antitrust case filed by advertisers. A federal judge has dismissed an antitrust lawsuit brought by several businesses that used Google ads, while giving them until June 14 to amend the suit. From Reuters:

The ruling by District Judge Beth Labson Freeman in San Jose, California, marks one of the first major decisions in a spate of antitrust cases filed against Google over the last two years by users and rivals as well as the U.S. Department of Justice and state attorneys general.

Labson Freeman said plaintiffs, including Hanson Law Firm and Prana Pets, that alleged Google abuses its dominance in digital advertising need to clarify which market they think it monopolizes.

"The Court is particularly concerned that Plaintiffs' market excludes social media display advertising and direct negotiations," she wrote.

The plaintiffs also need to better explain why Google's refusal to support rival systems that the advertisers rely upon is anticompetitive, because antitrust law does not require monopolists to help competitors survive, Labson Freeman said.


QUICK HITS

• In light of the new guidance, some states are lifting parts of their mask mandates. "Oregon and Washington are working quickly to update their guidance for businesses to lift masking and distancing requirements by verifying a person's vaccination status," reports KGW8. "The new guidance will not apply to schools yet."

• In Minnesota, "Gov. Tim Walz Thursday announced his statewide coronavirus mask mandate will end Friday, although, in line with CDC recommendations, the state is still recommending that only fully vaccinated people stop wearing them," according to the St. Paul Pioneer Press.

• "A new study finds that both legal and undocumented immigrants are more law-abiding than native-born U.S. citizens," Reason's Billy Binion reports.

• A "kidnapped baby" situation in Phoenix turns out to have been fabricated by people who wanted police to find their stolen truck.

NEXT: He Lost His Eye After a Cop Allegedly Fired a Tear Gas Canister at His Face. The Officer Says He Has Qualified Immunity.

Reason Roundup Abortion Reproductive Freedom Texas Women's Rights Women War on Women Pregnancy

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.

Please to post comments

394 responses to “Anyone Who 'Aids or Abets' Abortion Could Be Sued Under New Texas 'Heartbeat Bill'

  1. Biden: “If you are fully vaccinated, you no longer need to wear a mask.”

    Yeah, he tweeted something else on the topic as well.

    1. Reason’s subservient conformity is beyond question

      1. 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 SDDS 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…..VISIT HERE

    2. Has the federal mandate to wear masks at all times on federal land been rescinded?

      1. Nope.

        1. When I visited the Kennedy Space Center about a month ago, there was a maintenance worker out in one of the courtyards. He was cleaning railings and doing other work outside. He was 30 to 50 yards from the nearest human being, outside on a breezy hot day. Per Joe Biden’s executive order, he was wearing a mask.

          It struck me as one of the most ridiculous and oppressive things I had ever seen. They had signs at every prominent location reminding you that the federal government required wearing a mask at all times on federal property.

          So the guy driving the cool zero turning radius lawn mower out in the middle of a large field was also wearing a mask.

          1. well it would be silly to sanitize railing while simultainiusly breathing virus all over them. it kind of makes the effort of cleaning useless doesn’t it.

            now if he was not cleaning and just standing on break yea no mask

            1. You….do understand that a cloth mask is not going to prevent that railing from being sanitized…don’t you?

              I mean, you may be joking here, but seriously- if your sanitizer works, it doesn’t matter whether or not you wear a mask. And if it doesn’t work, your cloth mask won’t do anything about it.

              1. Unless you sanitize the railing and THEN sneeze on it.

                1. Sᴛᴀʀᴛ ᴡᴏʀᴋɪɴɢ ғʀᴏᴍ ʜᴏᴍᴇ! Gʀᴇᴀᴛ ᴊᴏʙ ғᴏʀ sᴛᴜᴅᴇɴᴛs, sᴛᴀʏ-ᴀᴛ-ʜᴏᴍᴇ ᴍᴏᴍs ᴏʀ ᴀɴʏᴏɴᴇ ɴᴇᴇᴅɪɴɢ ᴀɴ ᴇxᴛʀᴀ ɪɴᴄᴏᴍᴇ… Yᴏᴜ ᴏɴʟʏ ɴᴇᴇᴅ ᴀ ᴄᴏᴍᴘᴜᴛᴇʀ ᴀɴᴅ ᴀ ʀᴇʟɪᴀʙʟᴇ ɪɴᴛᴇʀɴᴇᴛ nhd ᴄᴏɴɴᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴ… Mᴀᴋᴇ $90 ʜᴏᴜʀʟʏ ᴀɴᴅ ᴜᴘ ᴛᴏ $12000 ᴀ ᴍᴏɴᴛʜ ʙʏ ғᴏʟʟᴏᴡɪɴɢ ʟɪɴᴋ ᴀᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ʙᴏᴛᴛᴏᴍ ᴀɴᴅ sɪɢɴɪɴɢ ᴜᴘ… Yᴏᴜ ᴄᴀɴ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ʏᴏᴜʀ ғɪʀsᴛ ᴄʜᴇᴄᴋ ʙʏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴇɴᴅ ᴏғ ᴛʜɪs ᴡᴇᴇᴋ,go to tech tab for work detail,………. READ MORE

    3. Nancy Pelosi says masks will still be mandatory on house floor.
      Who is the science denier now?

      1. Perhaps she’s just protecting those congresscreatures who are not fully vaccinated.

        1. LOL.

          1. Here is Job opportunity for everyone! Because of Corona Work from comfort of your home, on your computer And you can work with your own working hours. You can work this job As part time or As A full time job. You can Earns up to $1000 per Day by way of work is simple on the web. It’s easy, just follow instructions on home page, read it carefully from start to finish Check The Details…… Click here

        2. Haven’t all of them gotten stuck? If there were any Congresscritters saying they weren’t taking Trump’s Vaccine, you’d think we’d have heard about it.

          1. I believe Rand Paul hadn’t yet gotten the vaccine, because he’s already had Covid. But he’s also a Senator.

      2. It’s appropriate to wear a mask when stealing.

        1. Ding!

    4. First Newsome and now biden. So democrats almost act safely after they burn the house down. Both decided to open only when engulfed in failure or scandal.

      1. Act sanely*

      2. its not the first time the democrats destroyed the economy to get there person elected. the housing crash of 2007/8 was all there work

      1. The replies are, predictably, cancer.

        And some are word for word the same bullshit arguments that Jeff and Tony regularly make.

  2. In light of the new guidance, some states are lifting parts of their mask mandates.

    WARNING: LOSS OF SIGNAL

    1. RECALCULATING… RECALCULATING… RECALCULATING…

    2. Weird it wasn’t mentioned that many states have already ditched their mandates, and in exactly zero of them did we see a surge in covid cases.

  3. Oregon and Washington are working quickly to update their guidance for businesses to lift masking and distancing requirements by verifying a person’s vaccination status…

    Oh boy.

    1. Will it be by tattooing or just gold stars?

      1. By the shit-eating grin of being free at last!

    2. They will have to completely ignore the ADA and HIPAA to do any such thing.

        1. Again, this is what gets me: they’re presuming that every last filthy non-mask wearer is unvaccinated and trying to kill grandmas unless they present bona fides dissuading the presumption of guilt and not-misguided individuals are (forced into) arguing “What about HIPAA?”

      1. How do schools get around HIPPA?
        I for one welcome having the Walmart greater becoming the vaccine police.

    3. just like everywhere else it depends. on the west side of wa where all the libtards live all this is true, but on the east side where there are few libtards this is not true. on the east side people have been done with the lockdown for a while. you can enter business & restaurants without a mask anytime. you’re very close to idaho where there has never been a lockdown so there is stiff competition with wa business. all you need to do is flee the blue areas and life is already back to normal or never left normal.

  4. In Minnesota, “Gov. Tim Walz Thursday announced his statewide coronavirus mask mandate will end Friday, although, in line with CDC recommendations, the state is still recommending that only fully vaccinated people stop wearing them…”

    So if you see someone in Minnesota still wearing a mask this weekend, make sure to scream “ANTI-VAXXER” in their face at the very top of your lungs.

  5. A new study finds that both legal and undocumented immigrants are more law-abiding than native-born U.S. citizens…

    Legal immigrants because they appreciate their new home and had an actual U.S. civics lesson, and illegal because, well, you don’t speed when you’re sitting on a suspended drivers license.

    1. In California there is a certain sort of one-vehicle accident – the car sits there, perhaps even upside down, and no one is in sight. No one reported the accident. The car is unregistered, with apparently stolen or counterfeit tags.
      Guess why no one stuck around?

      1. Guess why no one stuck around?

        Trump.

  6. A “kidnapped baby” situation in Phoenix turns out to have been fabricated by people who wanted police to find their stolen truck.

    Their bullet-riddled truck was subsequently returned to them.

    1. After the gas was siphoned out.

  7. “If you are fully vaccinated, you no longer need to wear a mask.”

    “That is, if you’re wearing a mask, you’re not fully vaccinated. Quit scaring and discouraging people by wearing a mask!”

  8. https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1393197404569092100?s=19

    Why are they bringing children
    “Jordanian protesters trying to reach King Hussain Bridge which leads to the occupied Palestine. [Video]”

    1. You say Potatoe I say potato,
      you say tomato I say tohmato,
      you say children, I say pr meat shield,
      let’s call the whole thing off

    2. They’re just peaceful protesters going to a peaceful protest as believers in the religion of peace.

  9. “The state has now passed one of the most extreme anti-abortion bills that this country has seen”

    Get ready for even more crazy from these fascist pukes. The next step is keeping pregnant women from leaving the state to get an abortion.

    1. The next step is keeping pregnant women from leaving the state to get an abortion. kitchen.

    2. “The next step is keeping pregnant women from leaving the state to get an abortion.”

      While I share your commitment to preserving abortion access, I must take issue with your cisnormative language. Remember, transmen and nonbinary people also get abortions. Therefore the preferred inclusive term is “birthing people.”

      #ILoveScience

      1. Wouldn’t it be “non-birthing people”?

    3. Good thing we all learned from Portland that if someone firebombs an abortion clinic it will be mostly peaceful and the media will love them.

      1. Ironically a pro life center was just torched.

        1. Really? Do you have a link?

    4. Lard ass strudel belches something about “fascists” and everyone yawns.

    5. Of they were Democrats they would ask non pregnant women not to leave or have a non pregnancy passport.

      And no. Your histrionics aren’t reality. You can take off your handmaid tale costume now.

    6. The next step is keeping pregnant women from leaving the state to get an abortion.

      Called that one years ago.

    7. fascist pukes

      Funnily enough the actual fascists were totes cool with aborting Black babies.
      Just like Stroozle.

      1. Why do you racists try to virtue signalthat you’re totally not racist by feigning concern for “aborted black babies?”

        It’s obvious to everyone you hate non-whites.

        1. This coming from the spittle-flecked antisemite who wants to abort black babies.

          When did this reality become a bizarro-world where an unrepentant race-baiting facist like KAR can insinuate everyone else is racist?

          1. How am I antisemitic? I stand up to Mormon Jew bashing!

            Criticizing Israel isn’t antisemitic.

            1. Take that

        2. Hey killallrednecks, how many ya’got so far? Any your tropies past the age of puberty or do you exclusively go for the safer “young”?

    8. Well, at least they are consistent. If you believe that abortion is murder, then all of this makes complete sense. You aren’t going to win this argument unless you can convince people either that it’s not murder or the least of a choice of evils.

  10. Should the Atlanta massage parlor murderer get the death penalty? MSNBC opinion columnist Chris Geidner argues no…

    Anti-Asian racists over at MSNBC.

  11. “and the effect of bias in the attacks must be addressed.”

    Why?

    1. And also…. Hasn’t it already been addressed? Dude was a guilt-riddled, religious, sex addict. He did not exhibit anti Asian sentiments… He wanted to remove the temptation of attraction to their services.

      People who believe the voices in their heads are scary, whether they are shooting up an office or filing indictments.

      1. He did not exhibit anti Asian sentiments

        That’s not what the narrative says.

        1. Yeah, he feels guilty because of his sex addiction, which the narrative says he should, but not because he’s Christian. The real problem is that because he’s so focused on his Christian guilt, he doesn’t feel appropriately guilty of being white.

          1. As someone who doesnt oppose the death penalty and would like to see it expanded to include rape, child molestation, attempted murder and aggravated assault… Why the fuck does it matter why he killed EIGHT people?

            BTW, I mean actual violent rape or molestation of an actual child. And guilt would need to be 100% certain.

            1. Whether you believe in capital punishment or not – whether you think it can be applied fairly or not – life imprisonment as the sentence for murder makes for an interesting equation:

              The first murder is expensive – it can be very expensive. But with no alternative for capital punishment, the second, third, fourth, ad infinitum are free!.

  12. Yea, the Dems are totes the party of controlling Corporate America on behalf of “the people”.

    https://twitter.com/laralogan/status/1392847986238050306
    Zuckerberg’s election funding put thousands of drop-off ballot boxes on the streets, with NO chain of custody whatsoever for those ballots. We were told this was needed because of the pandemic -now the city of Detroit says “We have created new normal”.

    1. So we’re going to be in a situation where your vaccination status will be verified if you step outside but your breathing status will not be verified to vote.

  13. Tonight is officially Rob A Ben And Jerry’s Night.

    https://twitter.com/benandjerrys/status/1392555182857220099
    Police reform will never work because policing isn’t broken—it’s doing exactly what it was designed to do. We need to start from the ground up and build a new system of public safety that protects the health and safety of all communities. Learn more:

    1. I agree. Law enforcement needs to stop patrolling the cities and spend more time beating the shit out of commies like the founders of Ben and Jerry’s.

    2. We need to start from the ground up and build a new system of public safety that protects the health and safety of all communities.

      Sooooo, a police department, but nicer? How will that work in high-crime urban areas?

      It seems like the “abolish the police” crowd tends to come from two subsets–people who live in low-crime, mostly white suburbs, and people who live in high-crime ghettos. The former can’t imagine why police are needed because they already live in safe communities, and the latter want “space to destroy” without consequences.

      1. How will that work in high-crime urban areas?

        Greetings and Salutations! May I assist in resolving your boggle by suggesting you review the perennially-prescient instructional video; Demolition Man.

        1. “People have a right to be assholes.”
          -Simon Phoenix

          Even the psycho killer is better on liberty than progressives

          1. To be fair, the progressives of San Angeles made him more so with their mind control implant.

            1. Fellow citizen, I’m sure you meant criminal rehabilitation program.

    3. You know they means police reform in minority communities. The police in their district are just fine.

  14. The state has now passed one of the most extreme anti-abortion bills that this country has seen.

    Even more extreme than the laws that were struck down by Roe v Wade?

    Reminds me of Cynthia Tucker straight-facedly declaring that race relations under George Bush were worse than they had ever been in the history of our country, which, if true, would suggest Cynthia Tucker would be happier if we re-instituted slavery because things were better then than they are now.

    1. Are they ignorant, or counting on the audience to be ignorant?

    2. The “Extreme” part is the civil enforcement, which seems to be a deliberate circumvention of the law so prosecutors cannot negate the law via prosecutorial discretion.

      The aiding-and-abeting sounds harsh, but it’s just borrowing phrases from murder. When abortion was considered murder, it wasn’t necessary to have these spelled out.

    1. I bid 5 cents.

    2. In a world of bizarre things.. this is one of them.

      The artspeak is thick… But it sounds like you get a digital token in exchange for your cash. That is all.

      1. In that case, I retract my bid.

    3. Didn’t she already do that when she got into the modeling industry?

      1. If she did it to get her Suicide Squad and Carnival Row bona fides, she should get her vagina back.

        1. I’m still trying to figure out who she or her agent fucked to get those roles. She’s a horrible actress and doesn’t even have the screen charisma to make up for it.

    4. “My first word was ‘mine’.
      To me, that means something that is most mine, my vagina.
      I own it. It’s mine and no one else’s.
      I choose what I do with it.
      And no one can take that away from me.”

      I literally cant even. Zoroastrians had the right idea.

      1. “My first word was ‘mine’.

        She just summed up her entire generation in one sentence.

    5. Sniff! Sniff?!! Does anybody smell fish?

  15. https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1392987198325198850

    On the same day that gas shortages ravaged the east coast because of an attack by foreign hackers, our Attorney General told congress that the greatest threat facing our country is white supremacy.

    Our government is run by psychotic clowns. We’re doomed. Have a nice evening.

    1. https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1392985637956034567

      Terrifying to think that hackers thousands of miles away can push some buttons on a computer and cause a gas shortage in the US. And they can do a lot worse. Good thing our intelligence community is busy promoting diversity and inclusion. That’ll keep us safe for sure.

      1. Who says they were thousands of miles away?

        1. Currently believed to be Russians. I suspect if Russians did something like this a year ago, the response in the media would be a bit different.

          1. I will note that now that our president is no longer one of Putin’s puppets, our White House has been vociferous and it’s condemnation of Russian cyber crime and has publicly committed millions of dollars in resources to apprehending these criminals.

            1. “and has publicly committed millions of dollars in resources to . . . ”

              . . . use the attack as an excuse for more federal takeover of the economy.

          2. Keep in mind, the Solarwinds hack wasn’t all that long ago either, and we’re not far removed from the OPM hack that took place.

            We’re absolutely getting our ass kicked in the cyberdefense theater right now. You’d think our dipshit Attorney General would be a little more worried about his own department getting its files stolen by foreign adversaries rather than some blue collar plumber complaining about trannies in the military.

            1. Someone needs to let these companies know that opening up your systems to the Internet is probably not the best idea, especially when they appear to be single points of failure for critical supply resources.

          3. Which is why the regime’s blase “not our problem” attitude seemed to be so strange. Is the big guy getting some stacks from Putin, too?

          4. They probably sent a link labeled “Cara’s vagina” and some schmuck clicked on it.

      2. More terrifying that Joe refused to answer if he knew or advised the company to pay the 5 million dollar ransom.

        1. With all due respect, basement bunker Biden doesn’t know if he knew, or if he advised, anyone about anything.

          1. He seemed awful sure about his advice to the Ukraine about Burisma.

    2. When you label left wing violence like the scalise shooting as suicide by cop, that’s what you get. Newsweek is the primary action of democrats now.

      1. New speak*

        1. Newsweek – newspeak
          Either way – – – – – – – –

    3. Foreign hackers never tried to disrupt the transition of power after an election. The greatest threat facing the country today, from a pure immediate security standpoint, is home grown terrorists. It often is. The current flavor that is most active are various right wing types, which they love to shorthand as ‘white nationalists’.

      1. But if you took umbrage at the finger pointing at white nationalists…

        what does that say about you?

        1. Everything you wrote was a lie and you know it’s a lie. How do you live with yourself?

          1. You aren’t american and you aren’t nearly insightful or smart enough to make up for that deficiency. You are the first person I’m considering muting, because you add absolutely nothing here.

            That’s right, Sevo rates higher than you for contribution value. Maybe work on that.

            1. “YOU’RE NOT AMERICAN!!! YOU’RE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE AN OPINION!!!!!”

              Go fuck your hat, xenophobe. For a guy who get’s his book learnin’ from CNN, and obviously never graduated high school, you’re being unwarrantedly snippy.

              By the way Stolen Valor, who the fuck was the Barak Obama sock who supposedly verified your lie about being in the armed forces? Funny how he just showed up out of nowhere to “prove” you’re a Green Seal Beret and totally not a fat Media Matters Fifty-cent keyboard warrior.

              1. bonk. gone.

                1. Hey, make me proud! Mute me!
                  You pathetic pile of lefty shit…

                2. Why didn’t you do it much earlier? 🙂

                  Life is so much better with Mother’s Lament, Nardz, JesseAz, and Sevo muted.

                  1. Nardz and Jesse need to be countered. They post so much disinformation and present their fascist and conspiratarian opinions as the libertarian default. I can’t abide.

                    Although I did notice that yesterday had a bunch of interesting conversation, including debates between Tony and everyone else that were actually interesting. I was trying to figure out why, then realized that Jesse was mostly absent yesterday. The flow of conversation really moves better without all of that angry incel-ic rage polluting the place.

                    1. Absolutely! The quality of discourse in the commentariat has noticeably improved since the introduction of the Mute User button.

                    2. Hey “Mike”, you forgot to activate your White Knight sock.

                    3. Being on a fascist puke like DOL’s mute list should be a badge of honor for every libertarian.

        2. The ones pointing the fingers are far more concerned with what it says about them.

          Virtue signaling theatre and complete nonsense.

      2. The current flavor that is most active are various right wing types, which they love to shorthand as ‘white nationalists’.

        The current flavor is to ignore the fact that the CDC has unequivocally and relatively successfully executed a domestic campaign of terror for over a year, killing tens of thousands, if not millions, of Americans.

  16. Do we have to agonize over every abortion law? It is of a certainty to be struck down at the circuit court and SCOTUS is not going to overturn it. Doing so would justify the immediate packing of the court.

    At least abortion laws have a purpose founded in science. It has been demonstrated that a fetus will grow into a human without outside intervention. There actually is a moral quandary serious enough to merit a legal discussion.

    1. Yeah, this is an unwinnable argument.

      If you truly believe that human life begins at conception, as many do, abortion is pretty directly murder. As such aiding and abetting is similarly a crime.

      If you do not believe that human life begins at conception, then the state interfering with medical decisions like when and how to terminate a pregnancy is anathema to freedom and dignity as an individual.

      Since there is no possible way to resolve this difference over when human life begins via any objective measures, these two viewpoints cannot be resolved.

      This is not a libertarian versus a not libertarian argument. No libertarian would agree to allowing me to individually determine that it is in my medical interest to terminate another human life. Not even if they were a teenage kid who was sucking my resources away. Equally, no libertarian would condone government prohibition on a safe and effective medical procedure agreed to by me and my doctor.

      If you are opposed to this law it is because you do not believe that abortion is murder. If you support this law, it is because you do believe that a human life is being taken. There are no other interesting elements to this argument, they are all just distractions. And since there is no resolution that could possibly bring these viewpoints into alignment, the discussion is unproductive and could not possibly yield any fruit.

      1. It doesn’t need to yield fruit. It just needs to piss the zealots on both sides off and keep them screaming at each other over a disagreement that is irreconcilable.

        A majority of Americans support legal abortion, with certain limitations. Only the absolutists are fighting about this.

      2. There’s another argument to be had there about when one person’s rights supersede another’s. Which also comes down to one’s fundamental assumptions about the nature or rights and/or what it is to be a human being. There’s no “correct” libertarian answer.

        1. A lot of arguments around what is or is not libertarian are really arguments about conflicting rights. Vaccine mandates are another example.

          1. Nope; no argument. My body, my choice.

          2. I came to this realization a few years ago. There were two libertarian groups I contributed to, one for school choice and one for religious freedom. I think one was the Institute for Justice, and I can’t remember what the other one was.

            They ended up arguing against each other in a Supreme Court about whether school vouchers could be used to pay for tuition at a religious school.

            I was thrilled! Two libertarian advocate groups debating the relative merit of rights in front of the Supreme Court is exactly what libertarians should want to see happening more often.

            1. That sounds interesting. I wonder if that was covered over at Volokh?

              1. I think it might have been Zelman v. Simmons-Harris in 2002, so that was probably before Volokh was hosted at Reason. (I’m not sure how far back Volokh goes in its pre-Reason days.)

                https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/723/zelman-v-simmons-harris

                  1. Thanks!

          3. A lot of arguments around what is or is not libertarian are really arguments about conflicting rights. Vaccine mandates are another example.

            Weird huh. In all your time on the battlefield did you ever stop and wonder if it was always a battlefield or if it just magically became a battlefield when the troops showed up? Ever do any fighting in Eastasia? Want to? Want your grandkids to?

      3. Since their is no absolute standard, everyone should mind their own business and make their own decisions. The default libertarian position is therefor pro choice.

        1. *there

          oh fuck, I’ve given the grammar nazis live ammo

          1. *therefore

            1. I have seen it both ways.

        2. One could certainly make that argument. That kind of defines a lot of my opinion. However, that argument quickly breaks down under pressure.

          If prevailing opinions were that ritual sacrifice of our conquered enemies at the top of a pyramid was a fine and dandy thing to do, there’s no libertarian argument that says that since there is no consensus we should just let them have at it.

          That is only an argument you can arrive at if you do not believe it is murder. There is no libertarian argument for the Holocaust, despite opinions within the Nazi government that the final solution was the best option for humanity.

          This is actually kind of the perfect example of the immovable object coming up against the irresistible force. They are just fundamentally unreconcileable. And unlike the Holocaust, there are no objective standards that can be arrived at from first principles to turn to.

          1. The difference between your examples and abortion is that your examples involve the killing of autonomous humans and not fetuses occupying space within autonomous and rights-having humans.

            In your examples, it is not up for debate or consensus whether or not those ritually sacrificed are human and therefore* have human rights.

            Likewise, the final solution example requires the primacy of collective rights over individual rights, and is therefore not libertarian.

            *(the commentariat has spoken on this grammatical matter)

            1. it is not up for debate or consensus whether or not those ritually sacrificed are human

              Did I miss the part where people were giving birth to babies that were not human? If we can’t agree that a fetus being carried by a human is human, there is no place to even start a discussion.

              Autonomous also has no bearing. Human children are in no way capable of autonomy for years after separation from the placenta.

              The question is not whether it is an autonomous human with rights. The only question is at what point a parent has a legal responsibility to it.

              1. The question in my mind is when does a fetus become imbued witk inalienable human rights, which is what I meant by “autonomous human” etc.

                1. when does a fetus become imbued witk inalienable human rights

                  For that, you have to look to the courts. Their answer is definitively: 18 or ‘whenever some government agency deems it appropriate’.

                  Historically, parentage was a matter of property rights, but the courts have severed the rights of parents while maintaining the associated responsibilities. That is how they can justify both the seizing of children arbitrarily and the concept of child support as a debt owed, not to the child, but to the state, with the threat of imprisonment for non-payment.

                  Meanwhile, the fatherless and wards of the state have mostly the same outcomes as they did when Dickens wrote Oliver Twist. Abused youth lured or pressed into gangs of thieves and punished as adults when caught.

                  But that only applies for those unalienable rights. A 13 year-olds right to an abortion without parental knowledge or consent is sacrosanct.

            2. “involve the killing of autonomous humans and not fetuses occupying space within autonomous and rights-having humans.”

              That fetus/human was created by the autonomous human in whom they occupy space.
              The autonomous human bears responsibility for the fetus/human, not the other way around.

            3. Libertarian theory is much more clear about what to do when there are conflicts of interest between sane adults.

              But when you don’t have that tidy scenario, things get fuzzy: a woman carrying a baby, at various stages of development; parent vs. young child; parent vs. an adolescent; a scenario involving adults, but one of them is mentally retarded or not fully sane.

          2. Again, this is a false dichotomy/preferential interpretation. You say that it’s an immovable object coming up against an irresistible force, but we aren’t confined, intellectually, by the laws of classical mechanics. Even if we were, there’s nothing in classical mechanics (even your metaphorical interpretation) that says an irresistible force cannot be allowed to contest an immovable object.

            Broader science would recognize that immovable objects and irresistable forces meet all the time and, assuming equality (and getting sloppy with the metaphor), ~33% of the time the object wins, ~33% of the time the force wins, and ~33% of the time the object and force mash themselves into a massive ball of fusion.

            1. Immovable objects and unstoppable forces do not exist in nature. Neither does an objective definition of when human life begins.

              1. Eminently quotable.

              2. Immovable objects and unstoppable forces do not exist in nature.

                If you’ve got problems with your metaphor you should take it up with you.

              3. Neither does an objective definition of when human life begins.

                And just because you refuse to believe it doesn’t make it non-objective. Even the most ardent believers of souls, spirits, and afterlife don’t refute that conceptual line that separates a 180 lb. adult human body from a 180 lb. lump of cells. If you refuse objectivity more zealously than they do, what would that make you?

                1. This comment makes you a moron incapable of following a simple logical argument.

                  1. Not buying into your religion of unstoppable forces and immovable objects doesn’t make me a moron. It makes me more objective.

                2. Mad.
                  The issue is that you can make a logical coherent argument both ways
                  1: Life is continuous. You and I represent an unbroken line of life from the first reproducing protein. Therefore, destruction of a fetus is murder, no matter the time frame.
                  2: Until the child is born and separate from its mother, it is not a separate being any more than my spit, which also has self-reproducing cells. Abortion is no more murder than getting your ears pierced or a cancer removed.
                  3: Same argument as 2, but the change comes when the child is viable outside the mother, heartbeat, or quickening. Take your pick. There’s a dividing line between secretion and infant and you have to pick which one based on subjective views.

                  All of these are viable arguments and philosophical opinions. You cannot use facts to distinguish them. Though I have to say that, while I don’t believe in it personally, the absolutist no-abortion-ever is the simplest argument with fewest holes.

          3. What if I simultaneously hold two opinions or observations.

            A fetus is a human with rights that should be protected from aggression by an inconvenienced mother.

            Likewise, humans are … human. There are 50 millions women of child bearing age. Assuming that women desire and have sex because they have evolved to do so (science!) and they all use birth control that is 90% effective, then 5 million of them are going to get pregnant when they did not plan to do so.

            It’s therefore a pretty basic part of the human condition to see 3-4M abortions per year. Regardless of what we might consider to be right or wrong.

            Punishing people for doing what humans have evolved to do seems like a pretty pointless thing to do. You can modify behavior at the edges, and divert behavior toward better contraception, or adoption, but it’s a hopeless.

            1. Which is pragmatic.

              It is not an argument from first principles though.

              You could argue for slavery from pragmatism. Pragmatism can get you to a lot of evil.

              And libertarianism is kind of based on an empirical ethos. We are imbued with natural rights. Right and wrong are defined based upon those rights and upon the sanctity of individual rights. there are many situations that it fails to address. This is one of them.

            2. Bubba, usually you’re pretty well reasoned, but this is abysmal.

              First, in your terrible off-the-cuff estimates, you left off half the population. If the women’s birth control is 90% effective and the men’s birth control is 80% effective, what does that make the overall? And when you say 90% is that overall throughout child bearing age or per ‘attempt’?

              Second, 3-4M abortions per year exceeds the birth rate. If you claim your birth control is 90% effective and >50% of pregnancies are terminated, your birth control is pretty shitty.

              None of the above even begins to touch on the grey areas that even many hard line conservatives cede the point on like plan B/morning after.

              So are you making up artificially large abortion number and artificially low contraception numbers because you really like cutting men out of the reproductive equation and aborting babies?

      4. The official position of my church is that life begins at first breath. The sin in an elective abortion is not murder, but the abrogation of the commandment to procreate. They take it very seriously, but it is not something for which excommunication is mandatory.

        Personally, I believe that our creator was serious about the whole ‘free will’ thing and that moral choices should not be criminalized. I am on board with the ‘it is for God to judge’ thing. When morality is legislated, the choice to do the morally correct thing carries no spiritual weight. I am well aware that my belief is not shared among many religious people.

        What I don’t get is people that support it based on science. A human life, without question, begins at conception. Once cell reproduction begins, the inevitable result will be a human baby barring systemic errors or outside intervention. Would you take anyone seriously who said that a sprouted apple seed was ‘a clump of cells’ and not the viable offspring of the tree from which it fell?

        Unlike COVID, which almost exclusively kills people past breeding age and those with compromised immune systems, i.e., ‘the weak’, abortion is literally an existential threat. The CDC should describe it as an epidemic that disproportionately kills minorities and the poor with a 100% mortality rate. The potential threat to American lives from abortion is of a magnitude greater than that of gun violence, which the CDC did declare to be an epidemic.

        1. The official position of my church is that life begins at first breath.

          No Church: A definitive human becomes a lump of (human) cells ~7 min. after breathing has stopped, definitively confirmed by a lack of pulse and brainwave function. Ergo, a lump of (human) cells becomes a definitive human once pulse and brainwave function are present/stable (~8 weeks).

          Moreover, this has been parsed relatively ad nauseum; pulse but no brain waves? NOK’s choice. Brainwaves but no pulse? Medical intervention depending on NOK’s wishes. Weak pulse, low brainwaves? Inform NOK of likely outcomes. NOK not present/non-existent? MD’s choice…

          1. Not sure that’s true. It’s not clear that mammalian embryos exhibit species differentiation at early stages.

            Also, for some people, the standard isn’t when the baby is human. It’s when it has awareness, or can feel pain, or has a heart.

            1. Not sure that’s true.

              ROFLMAO!

              Not sure if you’re wilfully that retarded or if it’s just incidental but the idea of going around asking pregnant women “Are you sure you didn’t fuck a gorilla? Because a simple DNA test will tell us if you’re lying!” is pretty damned funny. No, the last non-human species that could impregnate humans died out and/or was assimilated eons ago.

              1. ROFLMAO!

                I concur. That sounds like the weird excuse of those ‘vegetarians’ who won’t eat anything that has a face. Last time I checked citizenship doesn’t pass to a non-citizen who is the recipient of an American donor heart, nor does a citizen lose their rights for the time their heart is out of their body.

                awareness, or can feel pain Those are both arbitrary and undefinable. Of course, that is how the lefties like all their criteria.

                1. To me, it undermines his assertions of belonging to other libertarian groups and/or those groups credibility as well. It can’t be told whether he’s deliberately that stupid and missing the point or not. Either way, he’s not even as intellectually valuable as an ELISA chatbot.

                  1. ELIZA, sorry. Vaccine-talk has got me thinking immuno-sorbtion.

          2. And yet abuse of a corpse and necrophilia are illegal. Funny that.

            1. Also grave robbing and defacing a grave.

              1. What does theft and destruction of property have to do with abortion?

            2. The lump of cells still belongs to someone.

        2. My church believes in mandatory abortions for Mormons.

          1. I finally tee up some religious dogma for you to take a whack at, and this is what we get?

            Bigotry wilts in the light of the truth.

            1. I’m trying to not be as big of a dick to you.

              I’m terribly sorry.

              1. Hi KARen!

                Haha. “Mandatory abortions” is a solid effort at not being such an asshole.

                Chuck threw out some red meat, and that was the best you could do because you are mentally a child. Go sit at the kids table and wonder aloud about who might be muting you. Too funny.

                1. I’ll try to be better!

                  Hope you have a great weekend buddy!

      5. That makes sense. So, then, does a lot of the debate come down to one’s religious views, or non-religious views?

        1. Science does not support the ‘lump of cells’ bullshit. A nuclear explosion starts the moment critical mass is reached, i.e., when it is the inevitable result of all possible outcomes. The equivalent for human life is the moment of successful fertilization. To select any other point in human development is arbitrary.

          As proof, I offer that, after conception has taken place, barring medical intervention that lump of cells will proceed through the various stages of human development and be brought to term in 993 out of 1000 cases in the US. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/infant_mortality_rates/infant_mortality.htm. To deny that abortion results in the cessation of a human life is to ignore basic biological science.

          That being said, framing abortion as only a religious issue is a tactic utilized in the organized effort to discredit the opponents arguments as dogmatic instead of moral, while, in fact, the vast majority of Americans, including the president, believe themselves to be religious and a strong majority support legal abortion. It is obvious conclusion that a sizable number of religious people (including myself) prefer the choice be left to the individual and not mandated by institutions.

          The debatable issues are: is there a natural right to refuse to care for a child? Is there a natural right to abandon a child to the care of others? Is their a natural right to abandon a child by medically intervening before it is born and could potentially be cared for by others?

          There is also a simple scientific argument for abortion that skirts the moral issues. Many animals abandon or even consume their young when in existential crisis. Now try tweeting to a black woman that it’s OK to get an abortion because that is what any other primate would do with offspring they could not support.

          I will wait over here, so as not to get blood on my shoes.

          1. Your infant mortality numbers are not true for fertilizations.

            About one and three fertilizations do not end in successful implantation or pregnancy. The pregnancy self-terminates within a few weeks. Such things are very common in the first trimester. Many, or even most women do not even know that they were pregnant in these situations.

            Reality is way more complicated than our simple black and white argumentation.

        2. It’s not necessarily religious. The original Hippocratic Oath has a doctor swear to not prescribe any medicine for an abortion, right after the oath against deadly medicine.

      6. If you are opposed to this law it is because you do not believe that abortion is murder. If you support this law, it is because you do believe that a human life is being taken.

        Disagree. Let’s say you and a partner decide to start a business together. You start transferring funds into a joint account and filling out paperwork to incorporate. A month later, you discover that your partner took a portion of the money to hire a lawyer to dissolve the corporation.

        One side of the argument raised for this bill says TX is protecting your right to sue. The other side is saying you have no right to sue and that TX shouldn’t be allowed to protect it. There may be a libertarian argument that the government shouldn’t be directly involved in mediation, but it’s a slim (exceedingly anarchist, especially at the state level) one, and that’s not exactly the argument being made; that you have no right to mediation/recompense.

      7. +++

      8. RE: Yeah, this is an unwinnable argument.
        >>>
        Wrong.
        * it matters not when life begins
        Stipulated:
        Life begins at conception, of a unique DNA Human Being.

        1. The Right to Life is limited.
        There is no right to exist inside another Human Being
        Equal Rights for fetuses, not special rights.

        2. The 13th Amendment prohibits involuntary servitude.
        AND, there are NO Exemptions for:
        * viability
        * trimesters
        * saving fetuses
        * waiting periods
        * hospital admitting privileges

        The 13th Amendment:

        Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

        Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

    2. It is also scientifically true that an embryonic “clump” of cells with human dna is indeed a human, but it really doesnt matter does it? Women like to whore around (because men do and anything that men do, women want to do. Like spoiled toddlers. Lets not mention that men that fuck anything that moves and dont take care of their kids are scumbags that other men have no respect for) and that would be a lot harder if they couldnt vacuum out their bad decisions.

  17. https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1392840899198033923

    Can’t believe that the candidate who had to drop out of the presidential race before she got even a single vote — despite huge media adoration and being from the largest state — is not popular even in the administration’s quasi-honeymoon stage. #KHive

    1. Cleanest election ever!

    2. Harris will easily win the Presidency in 2024. Unless, of course, Biden ends up serving two terms after all. Then she’ll win it in 2028.

      #LibertariansForHarris

    3. “Huge media adoration”. Glenn is fucking blind. The Republican media was smearing the fuck out her.

      1. The Republican media …
        LOL.

      2. Yeah.. that’s what happened …

        Where is my eye roll emoji?

        The networks and top line press were in the tank for Harris. The DNC calculus was “mainstream black female” is a winner. She was the chosen one.

        The Vox, Atlantic, Slate, types were much more critical of her. And Tulsi wrecked her with a single observation.

        If you think that whatever Breitbart was publishing is a driving factor for DNC primary voters’ opinions, you should probably share some of what you were smoking with with the rest of us.

        1. “…you should probably share some of what you were smoking with with the rest of us.”

          No, thanks. Makes you stoooopid.

      3. In fairness to reality, Harris smears herself. All anyone needs to do is report what she’s actually done.

        1. Are there many Harris fans out there, even among Democrats? Gotta be a smaller camp than genuine Hillary fans, and I have never met one of them in person.

          1. Harris’s biggest constituency is the DNC power elite, which is ultimately what really matters. That’s the only reason she was named VP candidate after getting blown the fuck out in the primaries, and why she’d be just another self-aggrandizing lawyer if she wasn’t from California.

            If she hadn’t imploded so spectacularly, it would have been her and not Biden as the Presidential nominee.

          2. I know some Harris fans. I’d say a lot of them don’t actually know much about her except her sex and race/ethnicity.

      4. The Republican media

        You just out Stroozled yourself.

  18. https://twitter.com/BecketAdams/status/1392951042896187399

    have we considered the possibility that public health experts are actually dumb as shit?
    Quote Tweet
    ABC News
    @ABC
    · 18h
    Bars, gyms and restaurants were just a few settings health experts warned could become hotbeds for COVID-19 as states began reopening. Yet, public data analyzed by ABC News tells a different story.

    1. And I think we’ve known this for a long time now. Some places never closed down restaurants.

      1. Kind of amazing how people were kicked off of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube for posting this information six months ago. But now it’s totally fine.

        1. Yeah, it’s almost like declaring something “misinformation” when there hasn’t really been time to really sort out what’s true or not is a bad idea.

          1. It is not a bad idea if what you were trying to do is control the conversation and ensure that your side wins all arguments by controlling the facts that people are allowed to share.

          2. Crowder just got a second strike for saying Makaya Briant (no idea how to spell her name, but I said it) deserved to be shot by cops for attempting to murder the other girl with a knife. Clown world.

            1. That is the kind of thing that should have members of the press up in arms. Whether you are left right or center, if you are a journalist you should see this as a clear threat not only to political discourse in the United States but to the core of your profession. It is astonishing to me that these people are so partisan that they are willing to forgive all the spying done by the Obama administration while flailing about an abject terror over a tweet by the former president that criticizes them for having dishonest coverage. Here we have a direct and unambiguous threat to the central tenants of journalism and The supposedly free speech left and even more stunningly the libertarian press cannot even bother to notice.

        2. That seems to be a more and more common pattern

        3. It isnt a fact until msm says it is okay to be a fact.

        4. We weren’t always at war with Eastasia six months ago.

      2. Some places never closed down restaurants.

        As I was pointed out in March of last year, grocery store clerks and gas station attendents continued to serve more people across the nation, 24-hours a day, than any bar, restaurant, or gym and, somehow, managed to avoid being infectious nexuses.

        IMO, this is why the contact tracing craze subsided. They discovered that any given bar or restaurant that had an outbreak could have at least 2, if not more, of the infected in a grocery store/gas station within a week prior (almost certainly less). At which point, the contact tracers were either stymied in trying to explain why the grocery store/gas station wasn’t the origin, stymied when they discovered that every grocery store/gas station within a mile radius of any given superspreader event was its own superspreader event, or stymied to discover that they could trace people back to the grocery store/gas station, but only had contact data on less than 10% of the patrons there.

        1. “Infectious nexuses”. That has to be a band name. It should be now.

  19. We have to show how advanced our civilization is, especially when it comes to Orwellian euphemism quality and reproductive freedom, by killing them babies.

    1. Advanced civilizations do not FORCE women to REMAIN pregnant.

      That is womb slavery.
      ALL slavery or involuntary servitude is prohibited by the 13th Amendment.

  20. https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1392927162613723137

    The vaccine was ready before the November election.

    This wasn’t announced at the time in an effort by a corporation to interfere in the election.

    How many people died of covid due to the decision to delay the announcement is one no corporate media outlet has any interest in.

  21. Despite pathetic attempts to portray Biden as having a shaky start — “border crisis!” “gas crisis!” and so on — this Administration is performing exactly how we Koch / Reason libertarians hoped it would.

    Reason.com’s benefactor Charles Koch is already up over $7,000,000,000 this year.

    #InDefenseOfBillionaires
    #LibertariansForBiden

  22. https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1392088380029218820

    What if I told you Capitol Police has more than 14,000 hours of footage from btw noon and 8pm on January 6?

    And what if I told you USCP, DOJ, and federal judges are doing everything in their power to make sure you don’t see it?

    1. Clearly they are part of the white supremacist system, covering up for the boogaloo boys and the Proud Boys who attempted to overthrow the US government.

      1. Using nylon-ties and pepper-spray!

        1. Since we have been talking about banning misinformation, remember how everyone on the planet kept saying that they came there to kidnap prominent members of the house? Remember how those handcuffs were the proof?

          Making counter claims got people banned on Twitter and YouTube.

          I would assume that the state knew that the narrative was a lie even as they were saying it to the media. But certainly they knew within just a few days that those handcuffs have been picked up from a desk where capital police left it and had been handed over to the police.

          Yet even today you will not be banned from any platform for claiming that this is proof that they were in the midst of an attempted coup. Even though it is absolutely known that this is a lie, disinformation if you will, the social media platforms prohibitions on such disinformation do not apply, apparently.

          The mind boggles at what reasons writers are thinking as they carry water for these people.

          1. Well, what were the flex cuffs and pepper spray and pipe bombs for?

            1. Well, they were going to TAKE OVER THE GOVERNMENT!!!!!!, according to most of the media, and gullible pieces of lefty shit like you.
              BTW, did anyone ever report what the “pipe bombs” were loaded with? Before the whole thing went down the memory hole, it wasn’t clear if there was any gunpowder involved.

            2. The flex cuffs

              Lol, every bit of your Reistag Fire Big Lie has fallen apart.

              “Eric Munchel, a pro-Trump rioter who stormed the Capitol building while holding plastic handcuffs, took the restraints from a table inside the Capitol building, prosecutors said in a court filing Wednesday.”

              https://www.insider.com/zip-tie-guy-capitol-riot-plastic-handcuffs-police-prosecutors-2021-1

              1. As if “the case” rests on where he got the zip ties. I also like that you leave out the quote showing that him and his mommy (lol!) had guns with them that they stashed just before going in the capitol.

                Go away, hoser. I would call you a traitor, but you are just a foreign enemy.

                1. It proves there was no conspiracy to kidnap anyone. Your second claim also proves that there was no intention of visiting violence upon anyone. If you want to go storm the capital and kill Nancy Pelosi, you don’t stash the gun before you go. You bring it with you.

                  1. You’re right, these details are important to the accused and his specific case. I was speaking more generally to the organizers’ purpose with the riot.

                    1. “Oh, I meant in theory applying to the whole”

                      You’re disgusting.

                2. “As if “the case” rests on where he got the zip ties.”

                  Actually, it does. lefty shit.
                  If he brought them, it shows intent. Finding them shows nothing of the sort, but I’m sure that logic is far beyond your mental capabilities.

                3. “I would call you a traitor”

                  I’m not the one here lying about a protest in order to excuse extreme authoritarian measures, Herr Goebbels.

                4. you know, I didn’t think it was possible to out stupid the last guy who out stupided shrike, but fucking congratulations.

            3. Has there been any further information on the origin of the pipe bombs? I haven’t seen anything linking them to the Trump rally/protest/riot/whatever.

              1. Good question. There are several news articles, as recent as two days ago, that say no suspect has been identified.

                1. So there is really no reason to assume that they had any connection to the people who bum rushed the capital.

                  1. The pipe bombs were found the same afternoon, so that is a pretty good basis for presuming a connection. It’s certainly not an ironclad assumption.

                    1. Sure. I’m sure there is some connection of some sort. But that could mean a lot of different things.

                    2. Don’t disagree.

          2. Two further claims:
            WK keeps claiming ‘They were attempting to overturn an election!’
            If you are to be ‘charged’ with an attempt to do X, there must be some reasonable possibility of accomplishing that. They could NOT ‘overturn an election’; the absolute most they were capable of doing was delaying a vote for at most a couple of hours.
            You might just as well claim ‘They were going to have flying pigs shit on Pelosi!’
            And then, every AP feed starts with “The deadly January 6 insurrection…”
            Yes, it was deadly; a cop murdered an unarmed protestor, but AP certainly hopes to suggest something else entirely happened at the protest (not “insurrection”).

            1. Something else that will not get you banned on social media, claiming that five or six people were killed in “the insurrection”.

              We now know that that number was one, and it was an unarmed protester shot at point blank range by police.

              Yeah even today, such claims on a YouTube channel will not invoke their disclaimer or a strike against community standards. They’re still commonly made in the mainstream media, without denouncement from media matters or Snopes.

              1. A mob is a weapon. A mob is not unarmed. No country on earth would let their security forces lay down their guns and let a mob chanting “death to elected lawmakers” into the same hallway as elected lawmakers.

                Fuck around and find out. Actions have consequences. Play stupid games win stupid prizes. etc etc

                1. I did not say it was an unjustifiable shooting. I said she was unarmed. That is an arguable.

                  It is important in this context, since we spent a year watching mobs attack people they disagree with and police with impunity all while having the media tell us that it was not happening. You know perfectly well that had this exact shooting happened in Portland as rioters attempted to burn the federal court building and enter its lobby, the response of the media and the Democrat caucus would be entirely different.

                  Nowhere in the country did we see unarmed protesters shot, despite much greater provocations and violence being visited upon police. And the one time the tables were turned, someone gets shot in the face and Nancy Pelosi fosters the big lie and has a fake martyr lying in state on the Capitol rotunda.

                  That is the point.

                  1. I agree that BLM protests turned riots’ media coverage was not fair to police in many cases. But the use of force against protestors, even before they rioted, was in many cases initiated by police and they used plenty of it. Clearing the DC Baptist chapel was a clear example of egregious violence visited on both protestor and church clergy by Barr’s goons.

                    The main differnce in the capitol riot was the rioters had broken into a controlled area and were literally threatening the life of the vice president and other elected officials who were right there in the immediate vicinity. Thus, the situation is completely different, and I do not think that comparisons to street violence or looting are appropriate.

                    Seeing Trumpists excuse the Jan 6th riot feels a lot like when your previously rational and normal black friends and co workers applauded the OJ verdict. Same, “it’s our turn to get one over” energy.

                    Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_police_violence_incidents_during_George_Floyd_protests

                    1. “Seeing Trumpists excuse the Jan 6th riot feels a lot like when your previously rational and normal black friends and co workers applauded the OJ verdict. Same, “it’s our turn to get one over” energy.”

                      Watching lefty shits try to turn a protest into some existential crises is enough to make you think lefty shits are stooopid.

    2. Traitor sympathizers still crying that “Rule of Law” means they are subject to laws too. Traitors respond with “Nooooo. Not like that!! Rule of Law applies to Mexican toddlers, not grown up real Americans like me!”

      1. What is it about access to historical records that frightens you?

        1. I’ve repeatedly asked him and Talcum X (generously assuming they aren’t the same person) if they, or anyone under their command, have opened fire on unarmed civilians in a war zone. I think the consistent deferals I get in reply speak for themselves.

          1. They’re not the same person. DOL’s other sock is OhLookMarketThugs.

          2. You are such a fucking idiot.

            you’ve never asked me, that I have seen. The answer is no, dumb fuck.

            1. The answer is no, dumb fuck.

              OK, why not? If you never dealt with unarmed oppositional civilians, then what does your input matter any more than any couch jockey who’s put holes in paper? If you have, then what did the Capitol Police do wrong that you didn’t?

              1. I have dealt with “unarmed oppositional civilians”. The answer was usually talking followed by force that was less than lethal. But they also never came close to overwhelming us, especially while chanting their intent to murder the vice president who was not right there with us. See the difference?

                I think the capitol police should not have tolerated any breach of the capitol, and should have used a lot more force, up to lethal if needed, starting on the steps. The rioters were encouraged by the lack of opposition they encountered, and it made the whole thing worse. Much like appeasement and subsequent emboldening of BLM rioters by not following through on prosecutions. The breach would have never occurred, and there would be a lot less “insurrection” talk today that the GOP is still dealing with.

                1. But they also never came close to overwhelming us, especially while chanting their intent to murder the vice president who was not right there with us. See the difference?

                  Sure, you never worked a Presidential detail. What were your non-murderous insurrectionists chanting? “Take our garbage out!” “Deliver our mail quicker!” “Fill the potholes!”

                2. Yeah, there are a lot of ways it could have been better handled. The police could have kept them out if they really wanted to. Or they could have just let them in, let them have their rowdy protest, as has been more or less tolerated from many protest groups over recent years, and it would have been over.

                  1. It’s interesting to watch even supposedly elite military-trained personnel talk about the Capitol shooting while tip-toeing around the fact that when BLM set fire to the Church across the street from the WH, no one died or like none of the rest of us watched Federal Agents lock down and defend the Federal Courthouse in Portland without killing anyone.

                    The servicemembers I know IRL aren’t so… unaware? ideologically motivated? and are generally respectful of civilians, especially American ones, and deferential to officers, especially when they peform such acts under similar threat and with non-lethal response. They recognize that if the BLM rioters can set fire to the Church across the street from the WH and shoot each other dead in the street and police can effectively repel the violence without killing anyone, then the Capitol Police abjectly failed to do anything except execute Babbitt. The may not say it like that but they’ll at least admit that the Capitol Police failed in their duty and that Babbitt’s death was at least wrongful/an unfortunate accident.

                    Maybe I just haven’t met any service members who are openly hostile (I don’t know how else you would describe someone who approves of the killing) to Americans.

          3. And you cultists were tripping over yourselves, literally thanking Talcum for his service when he was challenging my identity on these boards. Right up until he verified my identity and likewise made his opinion on Jan 6th known. Now he’s suspect too. Lol. Predictable as always, conspiratarians.

            Guys, as much as you think you are the sole real Americans, if you have not taken the oath to the constitution and fucking bet your life on it, you will never understand. Soldiermedic also had very harsh words for the rioters of Jan 6th. Likewise, he has taken that oath.

            Speaking of which, SoldierMedic, email me at DeOpressoLiber42069@gmail.com if you want to verify who I am. Jesse already blew his chance to restore his honor on a bet with me, so I will give it away for free to those who have the ability to vet.

            1. And you cultists were tripping over yourselves, literally thanking Talcum for his service when he was challenging my identity on these boards. Right up until he verified my identity and likewise made his opinion on Jan 6th known. Now he’s suspect too. Lol. Predictable as always, conspiratarians.

              Show me where I thanked Talcum for anything.

              1. I forget who it was, but there was definitely no accusations of sockpuppetry until he came back with an answer you guys did not like and an opinion that was outside of accepted cult opinions.

                I’ll try some google fu when I have longer to find it for you. It’s worth a laugh.

                1. Oh, I absolutely questioned his bona fides and still do. I’m fairly certain I didn’t literally or ‘literally’ thank him (or anyone) for posting anything on this forum.

                  I question his bona fides because his assertions about himself were consistently between fudged and fantastic. Even if you and/or he were both ex-SF, I’d have to wonder what’s happened to the SF that members now feel free to go on the internet and say “People were literally thanking him.” and then, when asked “Who?”, turn around and say “Well, people were questioning his bona fides.” If that’s the kind of attitude and thinking that passes in SF, I’ve had my low opinion of military intelligence adjsted.

                  The service men and women I know are generally more careful about starting/stepping into a fight they aren’t equipped for and can’t win. Admittedly, I’ve heard much discussion about how the less elite enlistment positions are being filled with abjectly stupid kids that officers can’t get to stop fucking each other (and anecdotally I’ve met enough of them who’ve completed boot camp within 10 mos. of giving birth to convince me it’s not a complete fabrication). I just figured the SF would be more, you know, Special.

                  1. Even if you and/or he were both ex-SF, I’d have to wonder what’s happened to the SF that members now feel free to go on the internet and say “People were literally thanking him.” and then, when asked “Who?”, turn around and say “Well, people were questioning his bona fides.”

                    If you instructed one of your subordinates to go thank someone and they went over and said “Where’d you serve?” and came back with the person’s ID and paygrade, I can only assume you’d think they were inept too.

                    1. Doubly so, if when you said, “Do you consider yourself to be a well-trained soldier?” and they replied “Call Don Shipley!”

                  2. His assertions are not fantastic at all, and you would know that if you had any, any at all information on the subject. But you do not. You are abjectly ignorant, but armed with an opinion all the same.

                    Uh huh. I’m not special enough for special forces because I’m not looking up a comment I remember on a site that has no functional way of looking up users’ past comments.

                    Do realize just how incredibly ignorant you are on military matters and many other topics? I would think that might occur to you before you go around spouting off abjectly stupid opinions and picking fights you cannot win.

                    1. His assertions are not fantastic at all, and you would know that if you had any, any at all information on the subject. But you do not. You are abjectly ignorant, but armed with an opinion all the same.

                      You don’t even know what assertions I’m questioning. For all you know he claimed to serve on the moon or gave 1060 W. Addison as his boyhood address.

                      I would think that might occur to you before you go around spouting off abjectly stupid opinions and picking fights you cannot win.

                      Lemme know when you find the post where I literally thanked him for anything.

                    2. You don’t even know what assertions I’m questioning. For all you know he claimed to serve on the moon or gave 1060 W. Addison as his boyhood address.

                      And arguing under the color of uniform like you are, you’re continuing to give the actual servicemembers I know a bad reputation. The vast majority of them aren’t so… cavalier.

      2. “Traitor sympathizers still crying that “Rule of Law” means they are subject to laws too.

        Lefty assholes are afraid the footage will show a largely peaceful protest and cops acting like idiots.

      3. I don’t think many are saying that the law shouldn’t apply to those who trespassed, stole or broke things at the Capitol. The objections are to the ridiculous “insurrection” narrative and to it’s being used as an excuse for an ideological purge. So let’s at least argue about those things rather than building strawmen to attack.

        1. That is a fairly rational position on your part, but there _are_ commenters right here that say there was no trespassing, theft, etc.

        2. I don’t think many are saying that the law shouldn’t apply to those who trespassed, stole or broke things at the Capitol.

          Quite the opposite. In virtually any other circumstance, summary execution for unarmed trespass, theft, or destruction of property would be considered ‘cruel and unusual’ under the rule of law.

          Moreover, it’s the whole principle undergirding the George Floyd argument/protest. ‘Equal before the law’ would suggest that burning down businesses because Floyd died for committing a trivial offense means burning down businesses for Babbitt is just/equal *or* that the riots should be judged independently of Floyd’s death. Similarly, the argument of trespass is relatively weaker, there are situations where Babbitt could legally stand inside the Capitol without having committed a crime. There is no situation where Flyod passing off a forged check isn’t a crime (arguably forging a check was a crime itself and passing it off was an additional crime).

  23. “by verifying a person’s vaccination status”

    Yeah that will work well.

    1. As a libertarian, I would balk at showing ID to police without valid reason. Now I am supposed to show medical information to the greeter at Wal-Mart?

      1. Government cannot access your info…but they can make other people do it. Nice.

        1. thats how they get around the vac id requirement by making business owners do it who will do it out of fear of suit if someone gets the covid. And according to Reason its okay when business do the government work for them since it private property just like when private business censor speech its all okay with Reason

      2. Do you have to show your garments to get into a temple? Do you write your name on them? What if you’re wearing your buddies or something? How do they verify if someone is “temple recommended”(or bones or clams or whatever you call them) or not?

  24. Idea: cancel every COVID restriction while the feds confiscate all Chinese holdings in US territories. Create a fund to which those affected by COVID can apply for remedy.

    We know where the virus came from and who lied about it. This way people get some compensation for the public risk and the government gets its next war before the Chinese are ready.

    Externalities accounted for!

    1. Fauci funded the lab that created and leaked the virus.
      It’s on him.

      1. Not defending any use of American taxpayer dollar for Chinese labs, but the grant came out to something like $120k a year. I think the total funds required running that lab or even just a gain of function experiment would be much more than that. Fauci or whomever signed off on that needs to answer for it though.

        1. Not defending any use of American taxpayer dollar for Chinese labs, but the grant came out to something like $120k a year. I think the total funds required running that lab or even just a gain of function experiment would be much more than that.

          1. More than 120K USD or more than 729K CNY?
          2. Run the lab to American standards or run it just well enough to obfuscate culpability when it leaks contagion that kills millions of people around the globe?

        2. “…Fauci or whomever signed off on that needs to answer for it though.”

          Correct. Trying to do something for cheap is no excuse for doing it at all.

    2. Won’t happen. Much like China’s strategic payments to the WHO got the WHO to do China’s bidding, so too with China’s strategic payments to the current regime.

  25. [Diverse] Pentagon Surveilling Americans Without a Warrant, Senator Reveals
    https://yro.slashdot.org/story/21/05/13/2111251/pentagon-surveilling-americans-without-a-warrant-senator-reveals

    1. Biden already announced partnering with private companies to spy on Americans and avoid pesky warrants.

    2. no one cars have we heard anymore about CBS report of how the post office is checking all of our online postings. not a word about it not even from Reason

  26. The Defense Department appears to be buying location data and data about our browsing behavior from private providers–as a way to circumvent needing a warrant.

    Sen. Wyden (Oregon-D) sent some specific questions to the Pentagon about these practices, but the responses to some of the most pertinent questions were classified. Wyden is trying to get them declassified so he can share the answers to those questions with the public without having to flee the country like Snowden.

    “Pentagon Surveilling Americans Without a Warrant, Senator Reveals”

    —-Vice Media

    https://www.vice.com/en/article/88ng8x/pentagon-americans-surveillance-without-warrant-internet-browsing

    There may be a legitimate open question about whether it’s okay for the government to buy data that it would need to get a warrant for if it were collecting the data themselves. If the data being shared is covered by a terms of service agreement that doesn’t specify that their location and browsing data are being shared with the military, consumers may have a lawsuit against the big tech companies that are collecting that data and selling it to the DoD. That doesn’t mean, however, that the DoD buying our data from private sources is necessarily unconstitutional.

    It does, however, appear to violate both the spirit of the Constitution and standard practices. Because the phone lines are owned by private companies hasn’t meant the government doesn’t need a warrant to access what you say over the phone. Why would that change if the information being obtained is location and browsing data rather than the contents of your conversation? Don’t you need to get a warrant to listen in on my phone conversations–even if I’m not sitting at home when I have the conversation? I think the Pentagon just got caught with their hands in the cookie jar.

    1. Working thru corporations to do things otherwise illegal. Nope, not a fascist govt structure at all.

    2. They are private companies and they can sell the data to the Gov. At least that’s what reason has been all about for the last 5 years

      1. Their right to sell it is debatable and I don’t like it, but I think it comes down to contracts. But the bigger problem, I’d say, is that the government is allowed to buy it.

        1. “But the bigger problem, I’d say, is that the government is allowed to buy it.”

          I agree, and this line of thought leads to an easier solution. To stop the companies from collecting the data in the first place, you need legislation similar to what they have in Europe, which basically breaks some of the “free” services we get from google et al. That kind of legislation would not be constitutional here (imho), and hampering our internet giants’ ability to do business and make money would be shooting ourselves in the foot, as far as global economic competition goes.

          1. You mean the EU legislation that grant google a monopoly on data collection? And does absolutly nothing for privacy?

    3. Because the phone lines are owned by private companies hasn’t meant the government doesn’t need a warrant to access what you say over the phone. Why would that change if the information being obtained is location and browsing data rather than the contents of your conversation?

      If cell lines are listed under the same category as landlines as far as telephone communications, then yeah, technically the DoD is breaking the law. If they’re operating in that grey area, it’s not a surprise that they going about it this way.

      Keep in mind, the Biden administration was planning on doing this anyway–using private companies as third parties to get around the FISA requirements and other Constitutional restrictions on surveillance and signals intelligence gathering of American citizens.

      It’s also important to remember that the CIA and NSA have been sponsoring these kinds of programs and software development ever since the mid-90s–they knew full well what kind of intel could be gathered on people just through their browsing and search habits. The FBI had already been doing an “analog” version of this by tracking people’s library records. The people who started Google were funded by spook seed money during this time while they developed their search engine. So this kind of cooperative arrangement is not anything new.

      1. It’s time for the Supreme Court to weigh in here. I don’t know how you get standing in case like this, but they aren’t both buying reams of location data and “particularly describing the place to be searched” as required in the Fourth Amendment.

        I would also argue about this from the service provider’s perspecti8ve. The terms of service, and the user’s willingness to share their location data for certain things, doesn’t or shouldn’t necessarily cover anything and everything the service provider wants to do with that data forever.

        When you sign a release of medical information, to send your medical records to an attorney, an insurance company, or even the government, you need to specify who can receive that information, which information they’re allowed to see, and how long the authorization is in effect. If the authorization doesn’t contain all those elements, it can be invalid, and you could be subject to a lawsuit for sharing someone’s medical information without their knowledge and consent.

        If you authorize an app to share your location with Uber for a pickup or with Google so you can get directions, and their terms of service suggest that they can share that information with advertisers or your payment processor, that’s one thing. I’m not sure they should be free to assume that means you authorize them to share your data with the Department of Defense, the NSA, the IRS, or local law enforcement. It also shouldn’t necessarily mean that you’re willing to share your location data with anyone the service provider wants forever.

    4. I don’t think it should be an ‘open question’ given that the requirement for a warrant doesn’t say jack or shit regarding exceptions to that requirement. It would be ‘buy the information, and get a warrant’ not an either/or situation.

      Besides all that, we can already be pretty sure that everything Snowden revealed is still being done. And more since then.

      This is just them being a little more clumsy in doing basically the same things domestic agencies are already doing. It seems the Pentagon is mad that the NSA isn’t sharing.

      1. What if they dont technically even ask for the information? Say some company gathers and analyzes the data then drops it in their lap. Then say that company received govt funding for something else entirely, which is something they actually do. I mean, if they are looking for information on BYODB, who are they going to get a warrant on?
        What if the purpose of the information gathering/purchasing and analyzation isnt intended as a means to build a case against anybody, but if they find something they pass it on?

        SC is definitely going to have to weigh in at some point. Or congress is going to have to get off their ass and write some actual laws.

    5. I think the Pentagon just got caught with their hands in the cookie jar.

      Oh no! Not again!

    6. If you agreed to let the phone companies sell your data to anyone they wanted to, so that you didnt have to pay for service, it would be a different question. Thats why I dont use any social media or alexa or any of that shit; I dont want my data sold to advertisers.

  27. Big Tech Enters Fray To Save Jobs for Spouses of Foreign Workers
    https://news.slashdot.org/story/21/05/14/1356250/big-tech-enters-fray-to-save-jobs-for-spouses-of-foreign-workers
    Under the Obama-era “H-4 Rule,” the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in 2015 issued visas to spouses, more than 90% of whom are women, of more than 580,000 highly skilled workers who live in the U.S. on H-1B visas, according to the companies’ filing.

  28. Fuuuuuuuuuuck…

    Israel’s deadly deception: IDF TRICKED Hamas into believing a ground invasion was underway… then obliterated tunnel network knowing militants would be hiding underground waiting to ambush tanks

    The Israel Defence Forces managed to trick Hamas into believing a ground invasion was underway last night and then obliterated their tunnel network knowing militants would be hiding underground waiting to ambush tanks and soldiers, reports in Israel claim.

    There was confusion when the IDF said shortly after midnight that ground forces were ‘attacking in Gaza’, and later suggested that boots were on the ground. A spokesman later retracted that statement – saying that military operations were conducted along the border, but no Israeli troops had crossed it.

    However, the announcement was apparently a well-planned ploy to get Hamas to send its fighters into its underground tunnel system beneath Gaza City, before bombarding the area, in the hope of eliminating large numbers of militants in one fell swoop.

    Soldiers and tanks with drones equipped with night vision lay in wait for survivors as they surfaced, hitting them with aerial and ground fire. Snipers and missile units were also waiting for them on the ground.

    Apparently there’s been warning shots fired by the Lebanon border as well.

    1. War is hell.

    2. Yea, Reason’s complete silence on what’s appeared for the last 72 hours to be the beginning of a full on war has been a bit odd

      1. ABC and NBC were on the case this morning. After mostly ignoring the issue for a few days, they have been framing it as the Israeli military bombing civilian targets unprovoked.

        This morning there was no mention of 400 rockets raining down on Israeli civilians a few days ago.

        It took a while to get the narrative together, But it looks like the neocons on the left have finally figured out the message that protects the US administration from any culpability while casting them as potential saviors.

        The power of motivated reasoning really is astonishing. When Trump declared his support for Israel and moved The US embassy, the same people predicted a blood bath. Instead, the aftermath of US policy changes was an outbreak of peace that is unprecedented in the region.

        The new administration immediately reversed the US policy on Israel and the Palestinians, and began cutting checks. With great fanfare they announced that this was the United States commitment to peace. Five minutes later, all hell breaks loose and it is a bloodbath.

        Yet ABC and NBC this morning were talking up this administration’s expertise in bringing peace to the Middle East.

        1. Trump got multiple Middle East peace deals signed, but in just four short months Biden has another war brewing.
          But somehow Trump was the embarrassment to international diplomacy.

        2. Yeah, now that the insane orange man is out of office, we can finally start doing real diplomacy! See, it’s already bearing fruits!

        3. https://twitter.com/Oilfield_Rando/status/1392639205512257536?s=19

          I’m just sayin, sh*t in the mid east got a whole lot better while the most powerful dude on the planet was tweeting out all caps “F**K AROUND AND FIND OUT” all the time.
          You may not like it, but is what it is

    3. Don’t fuck with the Israel.

      1. “Be polite, be courteous, show professionalism, and always have a plan to kill everyone in the room.”

        Hard to tell if Mattis would be proud or was just regurgitating lessons learned.

    4. Nice.

    5. Awesome. Really clever. Best part is that collateral damage gets reduced if the bad guys are hiding in known, reachable spots underground. Good earth-penetrating munitions have comparatively smaller explosive charges than a run of the mill JDAM, plus the surrounding earth really cuts down on shrapnel and shock, if you’re not in the underground system getting bombed.

      Shades of some of the Russian IO tactics versus the Ukrainians. Like finding cell phone numbers for Ukrainian militia, spoofing messages like, “Call home, Yuri; your kids are in trouble.” Yuri calls his house—while his unit is in the field. Russia DFs the cell signal, and that grid reference eats a Grad battery.

      1. That’s fucked up.

      2. It’s fucking surreal how poor OPSEC has gotten in the age of cell phones and social media.

        1. +1 blown black site, because SF and sundry can’t stop wearing their fitbits.

      3. You know, I was just noticing, in how many of the zerohedge videos, the blasts seemed to be narrow, coming straight up from the ground. Ground penetrating munitions – The More You Know*

  29. https://twitter.com/laralogan/status/1393203898652008458?s=19

    This is how children in 6th Grade at a Catholic school in the Texas countryside are teaching Karl Marx – as a famous German philosopher who designed a system of economic organisation -no mention of the millions who’ve died as a result of Marxism or the eradication of religion. [Pic]

    1. To be fair this is a Catholic School in Texas, are we sure this isn’t day 1 of a multi-part lesson where they go into explicit detail about how Lenin’s interpretation of Marx went, Stalin’s interpretation of Marx went, Breshnev’s interpretation of Marx went, Mao’s interpretation of Marx went, Kim Il-Sung’s interpretation of Marx went… culminating in an in depth examination of how KJI and Maduro’s interpretations of Marx are going?

      1. Yeah, I highly doubt a Catholic school in Texas is trying to indoctrinate kids to Marxism. But if you wait for the full story you never get to experience that satisfying outrage.

        1. And looking at the page of the textbook, it is completely accurate. Marx was an economic philosopher and considered a political radical, just as the book says. He as not a political leader or revolutionary, outside of his head. He wrote long books and argued with other jobless intellectuals. Marxist economics is still a school of economics and the labor theory of value should be covered if you are teaching the history of economics or philosophy.

          Teaching that something exists is not endorsing it.

          Dumb asses like Nardz is one of the reasons public school sucks. Sorry they did not draw devil horns on Marx’s picture and declare him the anti christ on page 1. Indoctrinate your own children if you are worried they might get ideas in their heads.

          And I am detecting some anti catholic bias here as well? Checking the responses to her tweet…

          “BOOMER’62
          @TADinKaty
          ·
          22m
          Replying to
          @laralogan
          Modern day Catholicism is a menace to American society.”

          “J.
          @odcusa
          ·
          15m
          Replying to
          @laralogan
          Are Catholics out to destroy the country? This is disturbing!”

          “Flag of United States
          Texas Nana
          Flag of United States
          Heart with arrow
          Crown
          Latin cross
          Medium star
          @Debbieh625
          ·
          29m
          Replying to
          @laralogan
          and
          @BeanK511
          Marxists have always persecuted Christians. I guess the communist pope is affecting American Catholics. SMH”

          …I’d say that’s a ‘yes’.

          Oh, and a couple anti-semites showed up too:

          “Denver9
          @Denver9Left
          ·
          1h
          Replying to
          @laralogan
          Lol a “German” philosopher…where he is from is less important that what he is, and what he is is Jewish. Atheist Jews are responsible for the Holodomor Genocide that put actual Germans on the defensive against these evil people in Germany.”

          Nice crowd you run with there, Nardz. Are these people supposed to be better or worse than actual communists?

          1. Why do people waste time on Twitter?

            1. I have an account to follow a few big traders who specialize in some sectors I like, but even in that limited scope the utility is questionable.

              1. Even sentiment aggregators have largely fallen by the wayside.

                1. too easy to manipulate.

          2. Nardz has a history of linking to Twitter accounts for hucksters. He’s also pretty slow from what I can tell.

  30. Welp…

    Bill Maher has been forced to cancel Friday night’s upcoming episode of Real Time after he tested positive for Covid-19.

    The 65-year-old comedian tested positive after receiving his weekly nasal swab test ahead of the taping, Deadline reported on Thursday.

    Maher is already fully vaccinated against the virus, and so far he’s reportedly asymptomatic.

    I think I’m more surprised by the fact that Maher is eligible for Medicare now.

    1. Maher is already fully vaccinated against the virus, and so far he’s reportedly asymptomatic.
      False positive.

      1. False positive.

        If only we’d done more testing sooner to flatten the curve.

        Additionally, the total number of positive-after-vaxx is *already* getting to the point where it’s clearly not false positives (while still below the efficacy claims of the vaccine). It’s possible the test claims are off, but that still doesn’t bode well for the pandemic-rush to get to settled science for testing, mandates, or vaccines more broadly.

        1. It is exactly what was expected. The vaccine does not prevent infection; it makes it mostly benign. You will still get virus in your body and it will multiply for a time before your immune system “gets” it. Depending on the sensitivity of the test, vaccinated people will test positive for the virus, but will most likely not suffer for it.

          1. In other words, not sick, go back to work.

            1. Yeah, that’s the whole point.

              1. I think you missed his point.

                “Policy 2019, 2020, 2021: Not sick, go back to work.” Not “Policy 2019, 2021: Not sick, go back to work.” punctuated by a “Policy 2020: Not sick, panic, shelter in place, mask up, wait for vaccines.”

          2. Not exactly, relatively. More than 74 deaths among the vaccinated. Still 0 among the naturally immune and still only 5 mos. in. Not saying Doom! but there’s plenty of sensible reasons for people under the age of 50 to forego vaccination entirely.

            In the larger sense I agreed and have agreed since the beginning. Natural immunity can’t be generally avoided except through death or extinction. Artificial immunity that doesn’t eliminate the disease, just as with antibiotics, can/does/will specifically select for more virulent strains. I’ve said since the beginning that many of the people killed by the virus have been one flu shot away from death for a decade. And NOTA addresses/justifies mask mandates, lockdowns, vaccine adventurism (maybe, but it shouldn’t have taken COVID), passports, etc.

          3. Apparently a bunch of the Yankees that got the J&J vax just tested positive for covid, too, and are all asymptomatic.

            1. IOW, not sick.

          4. Forgive my ignorance here. After they get covid while vaccinated, are they then naturally immune as well?

            I would assume yes, but I know shit about immunology or virology.

      2. “…False positive.”

        That was his IQ test.

  31. I’ll be “abetting” the pro dead baby crowd will be all up in arms about this.

    1. Somebody really should oppose the rather principled evil of “libertarians” opposing the government “allowing” people to sue.

      1. Lawsuits are practically murder, and practically murder is a civil right in ENB “libertarianisming”.

        1. and practically murder is a civil right in ENB “libertarianisming”

          Unless you’re an male American on American soil.

  32. Where Texas takes things even further is by allowing almost anyone who thinks an abortion has taken place outside these parameters to sue—essentially creating pro-life “vigilantes,” as Emily Shugerman at The Daily Beast puts it.

    So a husband who’s had his reproductive rights effectively stripped away from him shouldn’t be able to sue Planned Parenthood for participating? A government that denies its citizens the right to petition, especially when the complaint is against a corporation, one that is government-funded no less, is the definition of fascism.

    Fuck you ENB and fuck your retard-wave feminism. You and your clown-faced friends should take your Bustle vlog on the road. You’d probably make more money charging $5 a head so people can gasp and snigger at you. You could even call it your OnlyFans Tour to make yourself feel better.

    1. “You could even call it your OnlyFans Tour to make yourself feel better.

      That may have been sexist.

      1. Mean spirited, intentionally sexist, and still more libertarian that the fascist vaginal keyboard discharge she pollutes the internet with.

        1. Do people know about OnlyFans?

          I think it might be one of those things half of America knows about but few of them want to talk about.

          1. Reason’s run several articles about it specifically, even a feature I believe. I haven’t conducted any polls but would agree with your assessment, I wouldn’t generally toss it out in personal conversation with people, even some of whom would tolerate the mention of Hustler or Playboy.

    2. Racist! Ohhhh snigger, sorry

    3. Thanks for displaying how clearly and solely emotional this issue is for anti choice types.

      Principles of liberty?! But think of the baybiessssssss!

      1. What’s emotional about the inalienable right to life?

      2. Did they stop teaching Green Berets to read or have I got the timing/age inverted and you joined before it was a requirement? Show me where I said babies.

        I hate women who hate men and try to strip their rights away from them. I’m not ashamed of that. How about you?

    4. RE: So a husband who’s had his reproductive rights effectively stripped away from him shouldn’t be able to sue Planned Parenthood for participating?
      >>>
      A husband can NOT legally force his wife to remain pregnant.
      That is involuntary servitude and prohibited by the 13th Amendment.

      The husband does have the right to divorce his wife.
      That’s the practical extent of his rights OVER his wife.

  33. This guy has been arrested repeatedly for recklessly “driving” his Tesla from the back seat.

    “Sharma spent a night locked up, and he “committed the same crime shortly after being released from jail,” according to a story yesterday by KTVU Fox 2

    —-Ars Technica

    https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/05/tesla-owner-jailed-for-leaving-driver-seat-empty-says-he-feels-safer-in-back-seat/

    He says he feels safer riding in the back seat. He posts videos on Instagram of himself riding in the backseat of his Tesla. When his Tesla gets impounded because of his reckless driving, he just goes out and buys another one.

    He might be ahead of the curve. He might be a dangerous nut. He could be a dangerous nut who’s ahead of the curve, but he’s also definitely a jackhole.

    1. How could anyone that stupid have that kind of money?

      1. Stock options?

        Or maybe he made his money the old fashioned way–he inherited it.

      2. Bitcoin hodler.

    2. He might be ahead of the curve.

      And when he’s dead because either the Tesla crashed or he got pulled over by the wrong officer on the wrong day, he’ll regress back toward the mean. Let’s just hope that, if it’s the latter, the offending officer is black so we don’t have riots about anti-AAPI systematic racism.

      1. The people arent doing a good job of picking up on the fact that Indians and other peoples west of them are asian.

  34. “Anyone Who ‘Aids or Abets’ Abortion Could Be Sued Under New Texas ‘Heartbeat Bill'”

    Too bad.

    Babykillers and their accessories should rot in jail forever. No one who sees a sonogram can dispute that there is a human being there.

    1. Babykillers and their accessories should rot in jail forever.

      Except it’s not criminal, it’s civil, and it’s defending a right that should already exist/not need defending unless you don’t think men and/or anti-abortionists shouldn’t have a right to petition their government for redress of greivances.

      But, of course, ENB’s never been big on the whole distinction between state and private actors as long as the right people are getting kicked in the reproductive organs.

    2. RE: No one who sees a sonogram can dispute that there is a human being there.
      >>>
      Yes.
      But that fetus does NOT have a right to occupy the body of another Human Being
      …. permission is needed from the Womb Owner.

      The right to life is limited.
      There is no right to exist inside another Human Being.

  35. Also, a quick Ctrl+f indicates that this thread is missing vital commentary:

    Would and would.

  36. If you are looking for cam contacts in EU check out the best web platform right now Online Sexcams

  37. ENB says “They say everything is bigger in Texas. This apparently includes attempts to thwart reproductive freedom.”. here’s a news flash: killing a child is not reproductive freedom. when you have another human being in your womb with a beating heart your freedom ends with the other life. a fact that no one want to say is that there is never a medical reason to abort a child. it is always a convenience on the mother’s part. even in cases of the mother’s health, which is very rare, the medical requirement may be to deliver the child, but sucking it out in small parts and ensuring it’s death is never required.

    1. That’s clear.

    2. Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

    3. As someone who takes that absolute position, are you willing to step in and make sure the child is adopted, or that the mother and child are supported financially if she chooses to keep the child?

      What I’m getting at is are you interfering in someone else’s life decisions. When you do that, are you just interfering and walking away, or are you ready to deal with the consequences of your interference?

      1. “Murder is ok if the murderer isn’t provided charity”

      2. i believe in personal responsibility and the last thing we need are more gov programs. i do know that there are many good charities that can and do help people with many needs. i personally donate to them every year.

        your assertion that i’m interfering in another’s life decision is ridiculous. that is like saying that if my neighbor threatens another with murder and the police stop him that they are doing the same. as i already said once, your freedom ends with another’s life.

        1. “your assertion that i’m interfering in another’s life decision is ridiculous”

          Depends. Let me give you a scenario where I think it is interfering: Say that a woman decides to have an abortion very early in her pregnancy, but you interfere because you have a personal religious belief that human life is sacred from conception. Say that she doesn’t share your religious belief. You are interferring in her decision based on your religious belief.

          1. you’re making an assumption that is not true. you think that everyone opposed to abortion does so based on religion. while it is true that religion informs many people’s view, it is not necessary. one can oppose abortion simply based on science and the absolute fact that we know it is a human life. this scientific fact does not require belief in any god. since we live in a secular society i believe this is the best approach to take. opposition can easily be argued without involving religion and should be persuasive for anyone who looks at the facts we know through modern science and medicine.

            1. “you think that everyone opposed to abortion does so based on religion.”

              Not everyone, but many.

            2. Yep, Im an atheist and Im against abortion because I believe that murdering someone else to make your life easier is morally wrong.

              I would also say that Im not opposed to it if done within the first 6-8 weeks. When we had my first kid, I spent a lot of time studying the process of human development in the womb and would say that it can not be argued in good faith by any rational person that the fetus is not a human at that point.

              The personhood question is a stupid dodge. Any rule to define person would include other subsets of humans that it is not legal to kill. Same with issues of dependency.

              Another annoying redirect: The fact that Im pro death penalty also has no bearing on the reasons I find abortion offensive. If the person to be executed was completely defenseless and innocent, obviously I would be against them being executed.

        2. It’s not. You have to have the courage of your convictions. If you want less abortions, then yes you do need to intervene, on the behalf of the unborn baby.

          People like to pretend Prohibition didn’t work, because it did not put an end to alcohol consumption. But it did REDUCE alcohol consumption. Banning abortions won’t end abortions, but it will result in a LOT LESS abortions. If that’s the goal, and if you believe protecting life is pro-liberty, than a ban is perfectly reasonable. Just as we have a prohibition against murder, we should probably have a prohibition against abortion.

          1. My question is not a question of government policy but of personal ethics: if you feel it is your moral duty to stop a woman from having an abortion, do you feel you have any accompanying moral duty to help her raise the child, if she is facing, say, financial hardship?

            1. Just some random woman? No, I didn’t fuck her, it’s not my problem. If I was the father then yes, obviously.

              1. But she’s not just some random woman when it comes to your getting involved in her decision making and the course of her life.

                1. I’m more concerned about the unborn baby she’s planning to murder than her. Sorry not sorry.

                  1. Their two lives are most likely going to be intertwined for the next eighteen years. If you show no concern for her, you are, by extension, showing no concern for what happens to the child after it is born.

                  2. Let’s take another hypothetical scenario. A woman is about to get an abortion, early in her pregnancy. She tells you she will keep the child if you can help her find financial assistance (not necessarily from the government, but from somewhere). Do you help her find financial help, or do you force her to have the baby?

                    1. Abortion is prenatal murder.

                    2. Heres a question for you… Why is it morally acceptable for a mother suffering financial hardship to kill a fetus but not for the same woman to kill a newborn or a month old baby or a 3 year old for that matter?

            2. So… it’s ethical for her to kill the life she’s created due to personal inconvenience, but unethical for someone to object

  38. Anyone notice that many blue lockdown states have quickly announced ending their mask mandates within one day (after the Big Guy’s pollsters and handlers realized that most Democrats now oppose Biden’s/CDC’s mask mandate).

    After wasting millions of taxpayer’s dollars advertising and promoting PA’s mask mandate, Gov. Wolf quickly announced that PA’s mask mandate would end (even though last week Wolf insisted the mask mandate would end only after 70% of PA residents were vaccinated).

    It’s ironic (or not) that Democrats and left wing media propagandists who vilified GOP Governors for ending mask mandates in previous months have done a 180 degree flip flop after Biden and CDC did a 180 degree flip flop.

    This just shows the disdain Democrats have for science, freedom, the GOP, and anyone else who has common sense.

    1. Is it hilarious that I think at least part of this is the teachers unions, now fully vaxxed, complaining about mask wearing?

  39. The right to abortion, the death penalty and marijuana legalization are about the only issues for which Democrats have adopted libertarian policies, although Joe Biden still wants to persecute marijuana smokers (as occurred when a bunch of his new staffers were fired because they admitted to smoking pot in the past).

    1. The older I get, the less I am convinced being pro-abortion is a liberty position. This only works by discounting all agency for the unborn baby. Pro-abortion is mere convenience; the party in danger cannot complain, cannot protest, and so we give preference the mother, who is usually not in danger, but being forced to live with her bad choices.

      1. Yes, blame the woman.

        1. Who the fuck else would you blame? We arent talking about forced abortions dipshit.

          1. Women who have been raped?

    2. the death penalty

      I don’t think ‘the death penalty’ as broad policy is an anti-libertarian position. Libertarian principles are pretty mum as to the appropriate response to aggression. I concur that the FedGov shouldn’t be executing people, I’m not entirely clear on how libertarianism forbids a lower-s state or county or circuit from executing people who’ve aggressed against it. I think Democrats have contorted the definition to make it seem as such. Under the Democratic definition a retarded homicidal meat grinder screaming “Kill me! Kill me! Kill me now!” can’t be executed because it’s retarded. Moreover, they use such claims to obfuscate the unstated and decidedly un-libertarian position that taxpayers should simply bear the burden of housing, feeding, and rehabilitating a retarded homicidal meat grinder.

  40. Anyone who “aids and abets” an abortion taking place—say, by driving someone to a clinic or helping someone find an abortion provider—can be sued

    I wonder if this necessarily means lawsuits against Uber, Lyft, and Google to name but a few. I mean if you’re just looking for money why not start with the deeper pockets.

    1. As I believe life begins before conception this is a ban on the big fat friend/cock blockers.

      1. Writing ‘No Fat Chicks!’ into law would be epic.

    1. Why won’t you answer my questions about how often you get called Uncle Tom or House n word?

      So do you have one or zero black friends?

      1. Probably muted me.

        Cancel culture run amok!

  41. The thing about abortions bans is, they HAVE to be broad. The whole point it to reduce the amount of abortions taking place. You can’t do that with a slap of the wrist. Sitting outside an abortion clinic isn’t enough.

    Look ladies, I paid money to have a doctor dig around in my nutsack so I don’t give you any more unwanted babies. The least you could do is exercise a fair amount of preparation before you fuck.

    1. Well, they all stay away from you, don’t they?

      1. Pithy takedowns are not arguments.

    2. The least you could do is exercise a fair amount of preparation before you fuck.

      Does the law allow for selective abortificients? At least not blame me if you fail to clean yourself up appropriately afterwards.

  42. • A “kidnapped baby” situation in Phoenix turns out to have been fabricated by people who wanted police to find their stolen truck.

    Thinking outside the box, nice. If we prosecuted stolen trucks like we prosecuted stolen babies, we’d wind up with less stolen trucks.

    Libertarians for the rule of law, because without laws, we’re just anarchists.

    1. They seems to care a lot more about a false report than a stolen truck as well.

  43. What on earth is the reason for requiring proof of vaccination in a country where anyone who wants a vaccine can get one? If you dont want a vaccine and get sick, too bad. But there is no reason to require this “proof” business. The great thing about the vaccine is it works. So if you’re scared of Covid, get one and then shut the hell up, it doesn’t matter what other people do after you’re vaxed.

    1. It’s never been about health. This is just authoritarianism. Get the jab or else.

  44. Abortion, pot, and open borders..oh the fundamental issues of libertarianism to ENB…oh boy what a one trick pony. Of course there was the article about how covid impacted her wokie DC move and how they couldnt smoke and drink like before…there really should be a rule at reason that no writers can live in NYC, DC or Seattle..please…

    What is wrong with the historical social contract…marriage, no abortion and no pill. Seemed to work very well didn’t it for society? Stable marriages, kids that were not obese, moms that were happy, families that would live on one income..50’s were pretty good..

  45. Since I started with my online business, I earn $25 every 15 minutes. It sounds unbelievable but you won’t forgive yourself if you don’t check it out.

    Learn more about it here..

    ……………………… http://www.Cash44.club

Comments are closed.