State of the Union

Biden's State of the Union Highlights Absurd Reach of Federal Government

Plus: Facebook blocks and free speech, Elizabeth Warren is wrong about cryptocurrency (again), and more...

|

President Joe Biden gave his second State of the Union Address last night. It was, above all, a testament to the ridiculous breadth of issues we expect our executive branch to be involved in and the absurd reach of the federal government into all aspects of American life.

Biden delved into everything from the price of insulin to protecting Roe v. Wade, safeguarding kids from social media ads, lowering consumer prices, getting more Americans mental health services, ensuring better patient treatment at nursing homes, raising the minimum wage, subsidizing childcare, stopping drug trafficking, helping young transgender people reach their potential, creating manufacturing jobs, combating cancer, and more. (You can read the whole thing here.)

One of the most notable—and libertarian-friendly—sections of the speech related to COVID-19 and the pandemic, with Biden (in a test of new Democratic messaging on the issue?) promising a return to normalcy. "COVID-19 need no longer control our lives," he declared, while still touting the efficacy of vaccines, the importance of testing, and the need to stay vigilant about new variants.

"Most Americans in most of the country can now be mask free," said Biden, pointing to new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. He also commented: "Our schools are open. Let's keep it that way."

But Biden's State of the Union hit way too many notes that would've been right at home in an address from former President Donald Trump. He called for more police funding, talked about the need to strengthen our southern border, and went on at length about America-first trade policies and buying American.

"This is more a populist than a left-wing speech: trade protection, business subsidies, transfer payments, more money for police, secure the border," commented Cato Institute's Executive Vice President David Boaz.

Here's more State of the Union analysis from Reason writers:

• "Criminal Justice Campaign Promises Absent From Biden's State of the Union Speech"

• "Biden Says No Troops to Ukraine, Is Silent on Ukrainian and Russian Refugees"

• "Biden's State of the Union Offers More Useless Solutions to Gun Violence"

• "If COVID-19 Is Over for Congress, It Should Be Over for School Children Too"

• "Biden Praises Ukrainian 'Iron Will', Refuses To Use Ukrainian Iron in Infrastructure Projects"

• "Biden Tries To Twist His Domestic Agenda Into a Form Joe Manchin Will Support"


FREE MINDS 

Politician can block people on personal Facebook pages. A federal appeals court ruled that it doesn't violate the First Amendment for a New Mexico politician to block someone on his personal Facebook page. The case involves Otero County Commissioner (and Cowboys for Trump co-founder) Couy Griffin and whether his personal Facebook page counted as a public forum for free speech purposes.

"Three judges from the appeals court ruled unanimously that plaintiff Jeff Swanson, chairman of the Otero County Democratic Party, failed to show that the law has determined when a personal social media profile becomes a public forum, with 1st Amendment protections," reports the Associated Press. Swanson had argued that "elected leaders should not be able to shut out the electorate from political conversations on social media," after being blocked from Griffin's personal Facebook profile after criticizing the commissioner.


FREE MARKETS

Getting cryptocurrency wrong. In which Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) and The New York Times get everything about cryptocurrency and Ukraine/Russia exactly backward:

Cryptocurrencies are much more likely to help out ordinary Russians and Ukrainians than "Putin and his cronies."

"Crypto is a lifeline for ordinary people in countries like Venezuela and Russia, not a means to evade sanctions," comments the Niskanen Center's Samuel Hammond. "On the contrary. Russia is trying to minimize the cost of sanctions through draconian capital controls. Access to crypto markets *hurts* Russia more than it helps."

And—as Hammonds and many others have pointed out—cryptocurrency transactions come with a record. "An immutable ledger is simply not a smart way for nation states or large corporations to evade sanctions," comments Hammond. "There are two sides to every transaction. You really think Volkswagen could just illegally export vehicles to Russia and it not be noticed just because they paid in Bitcoin?"


QUICK HITS

• Russia's attacks on major Ukrainian cities "accelerated on Wednesday, with the Russian military claiming that its forces were fully in control of Kherson, a port near the Black Sea," The New York Times reports, adding that "Ukrainian officials disputed Russia's claim." Russian forces also bombed a government building in Kharkiv yesterday, surrounded the port city of Mariupol, and continued advancing on Kyiv.

• "Don't pour your Russian vodka down the drain," writes Jack Shafer in Politico, and don't kick Russian students out of the U.S.

• Why a no-fly zone over Ukraine is a bad move.

• A new poll finds Democrats more supportive than Republicans of U.S. intervention in Ukraine:

• How Texas abortion restrictions are putting women's health at risk.

• The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is suing over a Texas directive that sex reassignment surgery, puberty blockers, or hormone treatments for minors should be considered child abuse.

• The Washington Post looks at different visions for the American right, as embodied by three conservative conferences that took place last weekend.

• "Is libertarianism a specifically political philosophy whose only legitimate concern is the role of the state and its use of force vis a vis the people it rules? Or does libertarianism, properly understood, also entail a variety of cultural commitments that range far beyond arguments over the size, scope, and spending of government?" Reason's Nick Gillespie and Stephanie Slade discuss.

• Professor and writer Paul Cantor—author of The Invisible Hand in Popular Culture: Liberty vs. Authority in American Film and TV and an occasional contributor to Reason—has died.

NEXT: Ukrainians Take Up Arms in Self Defense

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Notice how reason doesn't want us commenting on Biden's SOTUA? STOP CARRYING THE WATER.

    1. So true. It's a deliberate ploy to make Biden look good. Glad we have wise folks like you to notice such things.

      1. Nothing says "lost the plot" like failing at sarcastic replies to obvious sarcasm.

        Just go home, sarc. You are just making your parents ashamed of having you now.

        1. [JOIN NOW] I am making a real GOOD MONEY ($200 to $300 / hr.) online from my laptop. Last month I got cheek of nearly 50,000$. this online work is simple and straightforward. Don’t have to go office, Its home online job. klj You become independent after joining this job. I really thanks to my friend who refer me this:-
          ..
          SITE….., http://moneystar33.blogspot.com/

      2. Drunk posting before lunch is never a good look, sarcasmic.

      3. Don't ever call him a leftist people.

      4. It’s been rather unfortunate witnessing Fist of Etiquette’s transformation to a total trumpist.

        1. You don’t get it.

        2. Did your parents have any children that lived?

          1. Woops, its the fake White Mike account.

        3. I think I've been out-sarcasmed.

      5. Wow. That sure drew some ire from the trolls.

        1. Poor sarc.

        2. the trolls"

          You mean this guy?

          sarcasmic
          August.12.2021 at 4:45 pm
          I only show up to watch the clowns duke it out while tossing in this or that provocation. Bread and circuses. This is my circus.

        3. Mouseketeer troll call!

          1. "the trolls"

            Or maybe by trolls you mean this guy?

            Mike Laursen
            September.18.2021 at 11:38 am
            SQRLSY, can you cover for me today? In a typical day, I usually:
            – post a comment or two pointing out logical flaws, contradictions and partisanship in Ken’s essays, which he regards as examples of flawless logical thinking
            – post a comment or two pointing out that Ashli Babbitt was not a saint and the January 6th MAGA rioters were violent
            – post one “Fuck Tulpa!” comment

        4. Yeah, spending years being a shrill asshole to everyone while propping up the progs will tend to turn people against you.

    2. Go git ‘em SleepyJoe!

    3. On a positive note, at least our authoritarian overlords are allowing us to choose whether we want to wear masks or not.

  2. One of the most notable—and libertarian-friendly—sections of the speech related to COVID-19 and the pandemic, with Biden (in a test of new Democratic messaging on the issue?) promising a return to normalcy. "COVID-19 need no longer control our lives," he declared, while still touting the efficacy of vaccines, the importance of testing, and the need to stay vigilant about new variants.

    The government giving us permission to live our day-to-day lives unmolested is "libertarian-friendly"?

    No, ENB, this is not a recognition that the state egregiously overstepped its bounds in its COVID response. It's a completely Orwellian, politically driven pullback to save their asses in the midterms.

    1. Never did explain how testing is important.

      1. Because someone is getting rich off of the government buying 500 million billion of them for every American?

        1. From Communist China, remember.
          And how much money does Biden, Clinton, and Pelosi get from Communist China?

          1. The importer of the Chinese test kits is based out of Oakland, CA. Coincidence whose district this is?

            1. Coincidence whose district this is?

              Barbara Lee?

      2. Hey! It provides the data for the CDC to not release!

      3. It was important early on to tell us that it was much more widespread than previously believed, and therefore less deadly. Since then I don't see what testing has accomplished other than to give governments and the press some scary sounding numbers to throw around.

        1. The latter was always the point

        2. test only showed that it was too late and therefore useless.

      4. The tests are paid for, so might as well use 'em!

      5. The pajama class, and their coddled but still neurotic spawn, are conditioned to taking tests and molding their lives according to results.

      6. It helps to track down where you caught it, and who you may have exposed it to, so they can be quarantined unnecessarily too. Which would be helpful, if pretty much everyone wasn't already exposed everywhere.

        1. And if pretty much everyone who does not get outright paid to stay at home ignoring their symptoms and carrying on as normal.

    2. Democrats got to that point before sarc, jeff, Mike, or brandy did.

      1. 2 more years to make sure the curve stays flattened.

    3. "Return to normalcy" is not good news for libertarianism, considering the government took normalcy away, and then conditioned its return on people doing what their told.

  3. President Joe Biden gave his second State of the Union Address last night.

    FAKE NEWS

    1. It is not "fake". ENB cannot be bothered to look up basic facts, like a competent journalist.

      That is, Biden's speech before the joint session of Congress last year was not actually a State of the Union address. President do not give State of the Union addresses in the first year of a their term.

      1. This is such an important fact to get absolutely right in a morning links blog post!

        1. Coming from the sealioning cunt who needs a cite every time someone references something as basic as the time of day or the formula for water.

    2. A cocktail of drugs gave a State of the Union address.
      I wonder if old Joe's liver can handle that sort of punishment?

      Was interested to hear that Putin will never gain the hearts and souls of the Iranian people.
      https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1498860095916195844

      1. But the Russian army is just 1800 miles away from the gates!

        1. And at their current rate of travel they will in Tehran about the same time the Sun goes red giant.

          Coincidence? I think not!

      2. I think it was a sergeant in the Foreign Legion who first commented about the Vietnamese, "if you have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow every time".

      3. This is why he was in Delaware last weekend, and why we will probably not see much of him for at least a few days.

    3. This is why we need fact checkers on the internet.

      1. Politifact called it a lie that we doubled Russian imports of oil in an article that said the US had doubled imports of crude oil from Russia. Their own analysis said it was true bit they went with mostly false.

        Fact checkers are amazing.

        1. They should be called fact makers.

        2. Almost like White House press secretaries.

        3. My favorite is when they go with "missing context".

          It means nothing, applies to everything, and it's dragged out whenever they want to cast doubt on something that's indisputably true.

  4. This is more a populist than a left-wing speech: trade protection, business subsidies, transfer payments, more money for police, secure the border...

    We're pretending there's a difference.

    1. We're also pretending that what Biden talked about last night had any connection to reality.

      1. Just a wishlist with applause as if he had actually accomplished what he's wishing for.

      2. Manchin sitting with the Republicans was a nice touch.

      3. Remember how he's going to make everyone buy America, raise the minimum wage to $15, spend a fuck-ton more on a massive infrastructure project to drive up inflation, AND he's going to make everything cost less? He's apparently going to use magic.

        1. While reducing the deficit by $1T.

    2. Odd how that's today's talking point.

      1. Just because Elizabeth Nolan Brown pointed it out, you think it’s a talking point? Do you have any citations of other news organizations saying that?

        1. Do you have any citations of other news organizations saying that?

          Just below the part that says Elizabeth Nolan Brown, there is a whole bunch of words. If you hover your cursor over them, you will see that some of them have an underline, and the shape of the cursor changes. Those are called "hyperlinks", and if you click on one, it will take you to a different page.

        2. You may be the dumbest.... Wait a minute.... Dammit you got me.

  5. Biden delved into everything from the price of insulin...

    He keeps talking about insulin. Does Joe have the sugar?

    1. It’s a very popular medicine.

    2. Joe undid the Trump executive order lowering insulin prices just last year.

        1. That's the wrong kind of federal meddling, cuz Trump.

      1. Orange Insulin Bad.

  6. ...don't kick Russian students Out of the U.S.

    First Amendment says I get to virtue signal any way I see fit.

  7. Support for US joining a potential war in Europe over Ukraine. By party:
    R - 49%
    D - 53%
    I - 44%

    From twitter:

    The wording to get this high "yes" response in the war poll is extremely leading.

    Judge for yourself: "If a wider war breaks out in Europe, should the U.S. military be involved?" That's very different from, say, "Should the current war between Russia and Ukraine be escalated?" It presumes it already has.

    It looks like the warhawks are trying to manufacturing consent

    1. If that's how it's worded then it's surprising the approval is so low. By the actual wording of the question I'm inclined to agree: if Russia invades Poland, etc then I think we're treaty bound to get involved.

      I guess post-Trump a wider swath of the electorate has become savvy in pollster bullshit.

    2. "A new poll finds Democrats more supportive than Republicans of U.S. intervention in Ukraine"

      I think it is philosophical, and I think the break is probably attributable to Trump.

      I also think that because the anti-war bent of the Republican party is attributable to Trump, that no mainstream journalists will talk about it.

      It is not in the best interests of the United States for the elites to get us involved in a forever war. America first!

      I think that's more or less what's going on.

      1. that no mainstream journalists will talk about it

        And when they do they call it a return to "isolationism" or "America first".

        1. They also couldn't talk about it when Ron Paul was the real anti-war candidate.

        2. Or a dangerous populist movement, threatening democracy.

      2. I also think that because the anti-war bent of the Republican party is attributable to Trump

        In general yes, but for this poll in particular I think it's more attributable to the difference in trust that Democrats put in the media's war propaganda vs that of Republicans and independents.

        1. Using the cursive power of government to force people to make sacrifices for the greater good is the whole point of progressivism.

          In domestic policy, that can take the form of socialism and authoritarian policies like mask mandates or shutting down protests against school boards.

          That whole point of progressivism also dovetails nicely with neoconservative wars of liberation. Instead of forcing homophobes to bake cakes for gay wedding and the unvaccinated to wear masks, they'll use the coercive power of government to force Putin to make sacrifices.

          1. No one writes in cursive anymore.

      3. Taking the numbers at face value, I will bet that the D vs R spread is close to the error margin.

        The real statistical difference is party members vs independents, who might be less retarded.

    3. Yes....the American public is being deliberately manipulated. Those people doing the manipulating want America to make Ukraine an American fight. NFW.

      There is no vital US national interest in Ukraine; Ukraine is not America's fight.

    4. And that's still quite a low number, especially from Democrats, considering the misleading question.

    5. I assumed it was bullshit when I saw those high numbers, which were over 20% higher than previous polls asking if the US should get involved in Ukraine.

    6. Well, they were going to ask "should the USA send troops to Ukraine to help stop the Russian invasion, even if it risks nuclear war?", but the CDC thought people might misinterpret the results.

      1. They could have gone full Kamala:

        Should the US, a large but far away country, send its soldier people to the UKraine? The Ukraine is a small country fighting against Russia, its neighbor, and a big bully country. Sometimes, people confuse Ukraine with Iran. Iran is a different country. If the US does send its soldier people to fight big bully Russia, something very, very, very bad could happen too. Biggy Boomy. Is that OK?

        1. I laugh with sadness.

  8. A federal appeals court ruled that it doesn't violate the First Amendment for a New Mexico politician to block someone on his personal Facebook page.

    The Founders never intended for Facebook to be used as a virtual ball gag.

    1. But Trump!

  9. It would be fun to have a constitutional amendment replacing the State of the Union claptrap with and annual end-of-year report, starting one year after the election, ending just before the next election, and adding two questions to each election (I'm talking Presidential elections here):

    * Did the President's four reports accurately reflect your perception of the State of the Union?
    * Did the President's reports accept personal responsibility for the State of the Union?

    And use those answers to govern the President's retirement, including pension and Secret Service protection.

    1. I would appreciate a GAAP accounting of our finances, too.

      1. Yes, I would like to know the return on my investments I make every April 15th.

        1. I calculate your historical return at -100.00%.

          However, past performance is not a guarantee of future results.

          1. Dunno.
            Seems consistent over quite a while; beginning to look like more than a correlation.

            1. Called the Laughter Curve. Not to be confused with the Laffer Curve.

          2. Given the mismanagement of the money supply and the destructive, hamfisted actions taken with saidminvestments, I calculate the return at -2,358%.

    2. It would be fun to have a constitutional amendment replacing the State of the Union claptrap with and annual end-of-year report

      Wasn't that what it was supposed to be from the start?

      1. I don't know. The Constitution is not specific:

        He shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.

        As far as I know, these have always been at the beginning of each year, as a prediction / wish list, rather than an actual report.

        1. Ah, I see .... from Wikipedia:

          rior to 1934, the annual message was delivered at the end of the calendar year, in December. The ratification of the 20th Amendment on January 23, 1933, changed the opening of Congress from early March to early January, affecting the delivery of the annual message. Since 1934, the message or address has been delivered to Congress in January or February.

          It used to be at the end of the year, which means they could have been actual progress reports. But when Congressional sessions and Presidential inauguration moved closer to the beginning of the year, so did the speechifying, and I shouldn't have been surprised that FDR had a hand in it.

          1. I thought it was more due to the advent of radio and TV. They couldn't make a show out of the SotU before.

            1. Very much this.

              FDR was a leader in new media. Radio was the thing in the 30s and he was the first to really take to it. The Fireside Chats and etc. He saw the propaganda value of radio more than most in his day.

              Initially, the SotU was not necessarily an address to congress. It is just the mandate to update Congress, constitutionally. Washington gave a speech. Jefferson didn't want to do a speech so he just wrote a letter each to the Senate and House, then everyone else did that until Wilson revived the speech thing.

              1. You know who else saw the value in new media like radio and television?

                1. Walt Disney?

                  1. Or Thomas Edison.

                2. The Interahamwe?

    3. If we get to dream about Amendments, I would focus on elections, including scheduled total government recalls, "None of the Above" on all ballots, and something that connects votes to net taxes paid.

      1. My libertopia charter requires "nobody" as an electoral choice, and if over 10% of districts select "nobody", all legislators and all previous candidates are barred from ever running for any office again, and new elections are held immediately. About as close as you can get to an organized peaceful rebellion as I could think of.

  10. Except there was a ruling against Trump that he had no right to block someone on his Twitter account.

    There is also the strange dissonance that this Democrat plaintiff thinks he has a right to not be blocked on a GOP pol's Facebook while the Democrat Party thinks social media platforms have a right to remove the accounts of politicians the Dems do not like.

    1. Wasn't that ruling because his "personal" account made a big deal out of it being his Presidential account? I don't twitter, I didn't follow his tweets, although I know I saw some encapsulated in news reports, I have no idea what this local politician's "personal" account is like, whether he does the same. But there could easily be enough difference to matter.

      1. I don't know. It still seems like "Fuck you that's why" to me.

        1. I am suspicious too. Too many TDS victims on boafsidez.

    2. you can't ask for consistency from politicians Mickey

  11. That's not a stick! Owners share snaps of their proud pets presenting them with SEX TOYS they've found on walks - after they were left behind by people getting intimate outdoors
    Dog owners have been sharing photos of dildos found by their pets on walks
    Rebecca Scott, from Norwich, began thread with a photo of toy her dog found
    Post racked up almost 13,000 re-tweets as many people shared their own snaps

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10566553/Dog-owners-reveal-pets-presented-discarded-sex-toys-walks.html

    Short ones, long ones, skinny ones, fat ones...

    1. Is it true what they say about black dildos?

      1. I dunno. Ask JesseAZ's mom.

        1. Are you being racist again?

          1. He’s definitely not trolling. He’s not a troll.

  12. Cryptocurrencies risk undermining sanctions against Russia, allowing Putin and his cronies to evade economic pain.

    See, kids? Anything can be used as an example of why your given thing must be banned.

    1. Liz Warren is as dumb as a post.

      1. "Individual freedoms undermine our war machine!"

        1. Is that, like, sacred tribal lore?

      2. Why do you hate posts?

        1. Posts have utility value. I’m not sure Warren would even make good compost.

      3. Banning Liz Warren could be universally acceptable.

      4. That's an insult to posts.

  13. Why a no-fly zone over Ukraine is a bad move.

    Send in the Kurds.

    1. I find it difficult to believe how many people think you can do a half assed act of war like a no fly zone against a major power. You are either understand that you are going to full scale war against Russia if you do such a thing with all that implies, or you stay out. You do not have the option of just dipping your toes in.

      1. Most people, especially big government fans, are as clueless about defense as they are about economics, but powered by Dunning-Kruger are eager to run the world be decree.

    2. I don't think the Ukrainians have enough Turkish drones to counter that armor and that shelling from outside the city. I was listening to a retired general the other day talking about how the Ukrainians need to go after the Russian armor at night. The Russians may not be paying enough of a price for taking potshots out of the range of Ukrainians in the cities.

      If I were a wily president, who didn't give a shit about the Constitution, and I wanted to do a covert operation to help the Ukrainians win, I'd probably do it under the guise of making American drones available to the Ukrainians, only, you know, using American personnel to operate them--and keeping it all on the downlow.

      Who can prove the drones are piloted by Americans?

      1. Not worth the chance.

        1. I don't think so either, but if I were a nasty covert operator of a president, that's the kind of thing I'd do.

          1. Like Putin?

            1. Why would Putin attack his own tanks?

              1. you are dense.

                1. At least Pantomime Mike is smarter than regular Mike.

                  1. he is on fire tonight

                  2. Not a high bar to clear.

      2. And Ken advocates direct combat against Russia, but he totes doesn't want the US to go to war.

        1. I don't think I've yet seen Ken advocate for direct combat. If you have a quote showing different I would be happy to see it.

      3. Ken, not for nothing, but GOs are largely full of shit and many have less combat experience than folks posting here. Did he outline his wily plan for the Ukrainians getting from wherever they were to the Russki armor? Getting around the infantry on the ground, the IR and NVGs? Were they going to drive? At night, with headlights, like city folks probably would? I'm all for fucking up tanks, but w/o hearing what was said, sounds like a great set of targets for the main guns. The drone thing, it would come out, because it should, and unless we are officially involved, we should not be involved more than we are. Secret wars and extralegal operations are something one would think libertarian or libertarian-ish folks could agree on as being shitty, both abroad and at home.

        1. "Secret wars and extralegal operations are something one would think libertarian or libertarian-ish folks could agree on as being shitty, both abroad and at home."

          I think we can also agree that President Biden isn't a libertarian, and there's no reason to assume he thinks like a libertarian.

  14. "You really think Volkswagen could just illegally export vehicles to Russia and it not be noticed just because they paid in Bitcoin?"

    Indeed, other measures would be required for illegal exports to not be noticed.

    1. Like re-branding them as Trebants.

      1. Or pretending that transport ship full of Porsches and Lamborghinis sank in the Atlantic, instead of diverting to Murmansk.

        1. Another unfortunate boating accident?

  15. How Texas abortion restrictions are putting women's health at risk.

    One day their offspring might break their hearts by using incorrect pronouns and refusing vaccination and voting White Supremacy or [INSERT CURRENT THING HERE].

    1. If they did less current thing inserting, they would need fewer abortions.

    2. How long until Texas is canceled?

    3. Just remember to get an abortion when you have a headache, because healthcare is holistic.

  16. A new poll finds Democrats more supportive than Republicans of U.S. intervention in Ukraine...

    Anything to make Joe presidential.

    1. That would be an accomplishment.

    2. "Dems R Da Reel Warmongerz"

  17. I heard there was a madman on tv last night shouting "Ein Volk, Ein Reich." Left off "Ein Fuhrer" but I guess that was assumed.

    1. Also, something about Iranians being in the Ukraine.

      1. Hey, once the Russians invade, it's open season.

        1. Maybe they are selling a nuke?

  18. "A new poll finds Democrats more supportive than Republicans of U.S. intervention in Ukraine"

    Of course. Did you think I was joking when I said Democrats are now the natural home of pro-war neocons (Kristol, Frum, Rubin, Boot, etc.)?

    #LibertariansForWarWithRussia
    #IfYoureNotWithBidenYoureWithPutin

  19. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is suing over a Texas directive that sex reassignment surgery, puberty blockers, or hormone treatments for minors should be considered child abuse.

    We must be tolerant of their culture of underage genital mutilation.

  20. The Washington Post looks at different visions for the American right, as embodied by three conservative conferences that took place last weekend.

    PASS

    1. Kind of like NAMBLA looking at child protection agencies.

      1. Like Der Sturmer reviewing local synagogues.

        1. As targets?

          1. That's the implication for all three examples.

    2. I noticed they've started pushing Romney.

      1. With support from Reason’s own Robby Goodhair.

      2. The neocons see this as their big chance to take the party back from Trump.

        It’s fun to dream.

  21. "But Biden's State of the Union hit way too many notes that would've been right at home in an address from former President Donald Trump. He called for more police funding, talked about the need to strengthen our southern border, and went on at length about America-first trade policies and buying American."

    His speech sounds like it was written by pollsters — politically terrified pollsters.

    1. And Trump was worse how exactly?

      1. Duh. Mean tweets.

      2. You don't understand, Zeb. It was Trump you know, Trump.
        He was practically Hitler.

        1. Literally, you mean literally. Not practically, or figuratively. Hell, every damned thing he said or tweeted can be spun into racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, Islamophobia! Hitler, damn it, but like, tall, orange, with a comb-over. No wonder the progressives and left-leaning suckling pigs are so stuck on him, he's like their dream come true fantasy uber-bigot, they only had to invent all of it to make it happen.

      3. Trump was fairly consistent on his talking points.

        Biden's turn to securing the border last night was fucking hilarious. His covid response etc

        Where did trump make such a change that quickly?

        1. Didn't Biden also slip in a "Fund the police!" comment during the speech?

          1. Yeah. Pissed off the squad.

            1. Anybody catch Tlaib's rebuttal? I had some really important dust collection to accomplish; those dust bunnies don't sculpt themselves.

            2. Biden needs to get his bitches under control.

              1. word

  22. ...does libertarianism, properly understood, also entail a variety of cultural commitments that range far beyond arguments over the size, scope, and spending of government?

    In case libertarians aren't off putting enough.

    1. In case anyone forgot: weed, ass sex, and, um, a third one.

  23. "Is libertarianism a specifically political philosophy whose only legitimate concern is the role of the state and its use of force vis a vis the people it rules? Or does libertarianism, properly understood, also entail a variety of cultural commitments that range far beyond arguments over the size, scope, and spending of government?"

    Libertarianism, especially the Koch / Reason school, is fundamentally about one thing — making billionaires even richer.

    #InDefenseOfBillionaires

  24. " The Washington Post looks at different visions for the American right, as embodied by three conservative conferences that took place last weekend."

    A publication that hired Jen Rubin as their "conservative" op-ed writer and Dave Weigel as their "conservatism" reporter certainly understands the Right in America better than anybody else.

    1. Getting the WaPo to explain conservatism is like having a 13 year old boy explain menstruation. They may know the word, or read something in a book somewhere, but they don't understand the topic and have no first hand experience.

  25. Fuck Joe Biden.

    1. Fuck Joe Biden

      1. Fuck Joe Biden

        1. Fuck Joe Biden.

  26. Kudos to Lauren Boebert for having the guts to call out the asshole for the Afghanistan fiasco, which of course is largely what directly led to the tragic nightmare that’s playing out in Ukraine right now. By the way, the people of Ukraine are called Ukrainians, not “Iranians“, you pathetic old man.

    I only hope that Putin didn’t watch that sorry performance. If this craven, weakling excuse for a leader keeps talking too much it might embolden Putin to try to conquer all of Europe, if not the American homeland itself.

    1. Jenny says Biden didn't mention the 13 KIA from Afghanistan because he "didn't have time."

      https://twitter.com/KyleMartinsen_/status/1499047831943921666?s=20&t=j6jKctxcwU6MJyM1DIATPA

  27. "How Texas abortion restrictions are putting women's health at risk."

    Just "women's" health? Not transmen's health? Or the health of nonbinary uterus owners?

    #IntersectionalFeminism

    1. But it’s probably improving the health of the unborn.

      1. You mean parasitic clumps of cells that are worse than slave owners.

    2. "How Texas abortion restrictions are putting women's health at risk."

      Dramatically improving their children's health though. Nothing healthier than not getting ripped to shreds.

    3. Are people who want abortions for themselves birthing persons or not?

      1. Abortingpersons.

  28. Kudos to Lauren Boebert for having the guts to call out the asshole for the Afghanistan fiasco, which of course is largely what directly led to the tragic nightmare that’s playing out in Ukraine right now. She’s my hero of the day. By the way, the people of Ukraine are called Ukrainians, not “Iranians“, you pathetic old man.

    I only hope that Putin didn’t watch that sorry performance. If this craven, weakling excuse for a leader keeps talking too much it might embolden Putin to try to conquer all of Europe, if not the American homeland itself.

    1. You can say that again.

      1. I bet Reason’s commenting system would work a little better if they would put in a few man-hours and a few bucks of that sweet Soros blood money into updating and fixing their shitty outdated web application from circa 2005.

    1. Meh. They're always moaning about something.

      1. It’s fake.

    2. It is pretty bullshit, the kneejerk banning of any and all Russian items and persons, because of the Russian government's actions. It's not complicated. A nation's government is not a nation's people, even in the case of representative democracies.

      1. You're right, but the idea is if you make this a pain in the ass for everyday Russians it affects Putin's public support at home.

        This might not be effective, or Putin might not give a shit about public support, but there's a reason to think that punishing normal Russians might actually shorten the war.

  29. Unfortunately I couldn't watch the speech.

    At any point did Biden brag about rig count? Or mention that inflation is wingnut.com disinformation because literally the only price increase in the entire country is an extra dime for a pouch of spittin' tobaccy?

    #DefendBidenAtAllCosts
    #BestEconomyEver

    1. It was amazing to see the lack of references to these important economic touchstones.

    2. Fryin' oil costs is up too, I have it from a 'reliable source' who is totally not a pedophile.

    3. He did cover the Tobaccy Inflation Tracking Service in detail, yes.

  30. Google, how many days to midterm elections?

    Google says, "In 251 days."

  31. "In which Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) and The New York Times get everything about cryptocurrency and Ukraine/Russia exactly backward"

    Keep the streak going!

    I suppose Liz is just being consistent, and continues to reveal her hatred of regular people who resist her comprehensive government planning, and any methods that might help them.

    1. The New York Times get everything about cryptocurrency and Ukraine/Russia exactly backward

      Accidentally on purpose.

      1. Not just backwards, exactly backwards.

    2. Just like every other democrat holding office right now, Liz doesn't care about Ukraine or Russia. It's just a politically convenient Trojan Horse for her to get her hands on other people's money. If there's one thing Liz Warren hates, it's money that's beyond her reach.

      1. “Trojan Horse”

        You mean Scout?

  32. The SOTU is a ludicrous made-for-TV production that I gave up on years ago. The speech is always a Monkey Wards catalog of talking points and wishes that don't come true (and usually shouldn't).

    And all the bowing and scraping. Damn, he's a president not a god-king.

    1. And all the bowing and scraping. Damn, he's a president not a god-king

      Didn't Trump get boos, theatrical handmaiden costumes and his speech ripped up on stage?

      I guess that was different because he was Hitler or something.

      1. Yes, this time we had Pelosi standing and rubbing her hands when the president was talking about soldiers being harmed by waste pit fires. WTF?!?!?

        1. That was fucking creepy as shit. Like a 6 year old excited for out of the oven cookies.

          1. You mean, the most expensive ice cream one might find, out of a freezer that costs about half of what the average person makes in a year? The sooner pelosi's head is on a pike in front of the people's house, the better.

        2. Yeah, that was creepy shit. I wonder if she has a staffer named Smithers.

  33. Best thing from the SotU address?

    The fact check articles from the usual suspects.

    His pivot to the economy was so laugh-out-loud unattached from reality, it made me wonder where CNN's real time fact check machinery had gone.

    So I loaded up CNN and they actually have a fact check of the speech. Several things they cover are completely wrong, but fact check is True.... With a later paragraph about needs more context. The context is a rambling excuse for why it is ok to claim that up is down.

    They studiously avoided the real big whoppers, or the highly contentious claims.

    The second half of the article was fact checking the responses of republicans. Guess what? They were all false! Even things that are true are false, because they have been debunked! So false!

    1. POTUS Biden is the second coming of Jimmy Carter.

      1. Absent the charisma.

        1. With the addition of an asshole.

        2. And cognitive functionality

      2. Carter was a million times better. A bad politician, and kind of clueless on some things. But at least he had some kind of principles. And deregulated trucking and air travel and legal home brewing.

        1. LOL...million times better. Care to share whatever you are smoking?

    2. His applause line on the recovery was that the American recovery act created 6.5 million jobs. Not that these were jobs destroyed by government and still 3 million under 2019 numbers.

      Democrats think people are idiots. Mostly because they only hang around with democrats.

      1. Schumer is worth watching.

        He stands and smiles and makes exaggerated clapping movements... Then he pauses and the smile goes away...

        Then the line comes:

        And Schumer smiles an open mouthed smile that is comically large. He is trying to project joy... Even rapture!

        He is just hilarious.

        You knew everything in politics was posturing and performance, but until you see someone clap and stand and smile exactly as ordered at an exact word while they are sitting in an audience, it really brings a whole new perspective.

        1. Everything is fake.

          1. Even this post?

    3. Consumer spending is up 6%!
      Gee, I wonder why.

    4. But I'm sure their war coverage is unbiased and impeccable...

    5. The State of the Union was traditionally just a letter delivered to Congress. Joint sessions were reserved for really important national matters and emergencies.
      The State of the Union address feels far more like a monarch opening parliament than anything substantive. Terry Pratchett was right when he said (paraphrased) "that the creator's biggest mistake was giving humans the ability to bend at the knees".

  34. "President Joe Biden gave his second State of the Union Address last night."

    It's his first SOTU. Can't even get the first sentence right.

    1. JOURNALISMING!

    2. Counting is racist.

    3. They're called urinalists for a reason.

  35. What’s with all the halos in the SleepyJoe pictures last night?

    1. Orders is orders.

    2. The photogers did the same with Obo; really subtle, doncha' think?

      1. Yeah, but the chocolate Jesus fans are still disappointed with Biden. Like the kid that gets the white "chocolate" easter bunny.

        1. White chocolate is such a lie.

  36. "Helping young transgenderpeople reach their potential"

    As it is being proven that the female athletes with the most potential are born with testicles.

  37. Interesting moment from the state of the union that shows where we are as a society....

    Biden pivoted to an attack on Trump which drew boos from the GOP. The camera goes to a seated Chuck Schumer. He starts to stand, pauses, stands up and starts to clap loudly and slowly, looks around pauses, starts to clap again, stops, starts to sit down....

    Meanwhile Biden delivers the part of his line that was supposed to be the applause line and then the rest of the Democrat caucus stands up and applauds and cheers loudly over something that they clearly were not all that excited about.

    It was such a blatant and obvious bit of theater. And it was all the more egregious because of how many people were involved. All of the news media had been given the script, including applause line moments. The cameraman and directors for the house of representatives also had the script, along with direction notes as to exactly who should be on camera at given moments.

    They zoomed in on Chuck Schumer and Biden paused in the middle of his speech a half sentence too soon. So the choreography was revealed.

    I know it's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, but this level of propaganda is a bit too much for my taste.

    1. The sad part is they think we don’t know.

      1. The mad part is that they don't care.

      2. If you looked on Twitter and Facebook, most of the idiots in this country DON’T know.

    2. "Please clap."

  38. How many times has Biden promised to end cancer?

    Obama appointed him to a "Cancer Moonshot" program that we never heard about again.

    Then he promised a few times during the campaign.

    Again tonight.

    1. By now Joe has mixed up cancer and COVID, so...

    2. Careful there; the CDC might imagine masks will stop the spread of cancer and we'll NEVER get rid of the things!

    3. Yeah, cancer isn't a single disease or morbidity. It's a wide range of diseases with loosely similar morphologies. If you find a "cure" for one cancer, it likely wouldn't work on other cancers. My good friends wife was just treated for thyroid cancer, which rarely metastisizes and is slow growing. Since she was already on synthroid, so they elected to remove her thyroid, rather than just the tumor, and risk it coming back. It will likely be successful and not require chemo or radiation. But can't do that with other cancers. Anyone who believes we can cure cancer doesn't understand the pathophysiology of cancers. The fact that we refer to it in the singular rather than the plural itself is proof of how misunderstood it is.

  39. CBS News: The greatest danger is that Ukrainian men who pretend they are women, are not treated as women often enough.

    https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1498719849748611072

    1. War Declared! Transgender Women Affected More Than Women!

    2. Who is the audience for this supposed to be? This is such an odd thing to do, and from a major news network.

      And they call it a war within a war. Really? The legal red tape that transgender women have to deal with in Ukraine is within the war of the Russian invasion? Are you sure about that? Do you guys have editors?

      1. Modern Liberalism is a hyperbolic version of white man savior complex.

        1. Also just retarded, or at least a form of social morality autism.

      2. I'm confused; was it CBS, or a major news network?

      3. "Who is the audience for this supposed to be?"

        OBL?

    3. Wait til the Russians put them in POW camps.

      1. You misspelled 'landfills'.

    4. Well, since Ukraine is preventing men from fleeing the country during the invasion, they may have a point.

      1. Maybe the most insightful post of the day

      2. So they can't pull a Corporal Klinger. Actually it didn't work for him either.

    5. That kind of shit always makes me think of the lyrics from the Dead Kennedy’s song ‘Holiday in Cambodia’. Jello Biafra had it right about these people.

  40. Well if there’s one place I’d want to go to learn about the right wing, it’s the washington post.

  41. "Cryptocurrencies risk undermining sanctions against Russia, allowing Putin and his cronies to evade economic pain. "

    That's the POINT ya dumb cunt

  42. How Texas abortion restrictions are putting women's health at risk.

    Including the unborn women?

  43. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is suing over a Texas directive that sex reassignment surgery, puberty blockers, or hormone treatments for minors should be considered child abuse.

    What does this have to do with civil liberties? They ACLU has turned into a cheerleading squad for Team A at this point. Team B, no matter what, is always wrong and Team A is always right.

    1. And not mandating masks is a civil rights violation somehow too. Insanity. Literally promoting the opposite of their stated purpose.

      1. FREEDOM IS SLAVERY.

        The ACLU is stuck in the '80s.

        1. I see what you did there!

  44. As I predicted, the state of the union is "strong" (as it is every year, according to the president):

    The President concluded his speech by reassuring the American people that, "The state of the union is strong, because you, the American people, are strong." "We are stronger today than we were a year ago," Biden said. "And we will be stronger a year from now than we are today.

    So now debt is strength.
    The national debt is (much) bigger today than a year ago. And it will be (much) bigger a year from now than it is today.

    1. The American people have proven themselves to be weak as shit over the past two years.

  45. Finally something like casualty numbers:

    "Neither side’s claims have been independently verified, and Biden administration officials have refused to discuss casualty figures publicly. But one American official put the Russian losses as of Monday at 2,000, an estimate with which two European officials concurred.

    Senior Pentagon officials told lawmakers in closed briefings on Monday that Russian and Ukrainian military deaths appeared to be the same, at around 1,500 on each side in the first five days, congressional officials said. But they cautioned that the figures — based on satellite imagery, communication intercepts, social media and on-the-ground media reports — were estimates.

    For a comparison, nearly 2,500 American troops were killed in Afghanistan over 20 years of war.

    ----The New York Times

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/01/us/politics/russia-ukraine-war-deaths.html

    The Ukrainians are fighting for their survival, but Russia if fighting an elective war. Whatever the costs, survival is worth it. Russia is paying a tremendous price for what they're doing in the Ukraine, and they still don't have anything to show for their efforts. If 2,000 Russian soldiers have died for what they've won in the Ukraine, then so far, they've died for nothing.

    And that's not considering the cost to the Russian economy. Trading still hasn't opened on the Moscow stock market, but I read that Russia's largest bank is down more than 70% where it's being traded in London. The two largest oil companies are, likewise, down more than 40%. I've read reports that players in countries that haven't been targeted by our sanctions are reluctant to buy Russian production for fear of making themselves targets of sanctions.

    And Putin's got nothin' to show for it yet, and time is not on his side.

    1. >>Russia is paying a tremendous price

      even a W is an L now.

      1. It's sort of weird how the 'experts' are saying Russia is struggling because the war wasn't over in the first week.

        1. I think it's more like the war isn't over in the first week because the Russians are struggling.

          Bigger picture, they still don't have air supremacy. The Ukrainians are still hitting Russian targets with drones.

          And from the widest possible angle, the Russians probably can't win, especially if the west keeps pumping the Ukrainians full of hardware.

          If the Russians decapitated the government, the insurgency is still in place with the full hardware support of the west.

          The wider narrative should be about how Russia can't win. I really think that is the reality.

          1. There will be no real winners.

            1. If the Ukrainians can push the Russians to back out, eventually, they'll win. I just don't think it's possible for Putin to install a Ukrainian government that the Ukrainian people won't fight against with all the military hardware the west can send them. It's a quagmire for them. The only way the Russians can "win" is to get out, and Putin can't look like he's backing down for fear of what that would mean for him politically at home. Putin may have genuinely believed that the Ukrainian people would bow to his rule, but if he did when he invaded, I think it's become pretty obvious since then that they won't.

    2. Ken, we don't know shit = Neither side’s claims have been independently verified...

      I don't have a problem with the financial sanctions. I don't have a problem with legal sanctions. What I have a problem with is shipping weapons directly from America to Ukraine. We don't have to do that. We can ship weapons to Europe, and they can decide what to do. Ukraine is Europe's backyard, and Ukraine does not even remotely resemble a vital US national interest.

      We still have to be able to talk to the Russians, regardless of how Ukraine turns out. They do have nukes.

      What I detest are the deliberate efforts by the media, politicians, elites and assorted others to manipulate the American people into making Ukraine and American problem. It is not, and we need to articulate that clearly.

      One learning: In a stand-up conventional fight, America will absolutely cream Russia.

      1. "The Ukrainians are fighting for their survival, but Russia if fighting an elective war. Whatever the costs, survival is worth it. Russia is paying a tremendous price for what they're doing in the Ukraine, and they still don't have anything to show for their efforts. If 2,000 Russian soldiers have died for what they've won in the Ukraine, then so far, they've died for nothing.

        "And that's not considering the cost to the Russian economy. Trading still hasn't opened on the Moscow stock market, but I read that Russia's largest bank is down more than 70% where it's being traded in London. The two largest oil companies are, likewise, down more than 40%. I've read reports that players in countries that haven't been targeted by our sanctions are reluctant to buy Russian production for fear of making themselves targets of sanctions.

        "And Putin's got nothin' to show for it yet, and time is not on his side.

        We know all of those things--regardless of the actual casualty numbers.

  46. I watched the Iowa governor and MTG give their rebuttals to the State of the Union. If Republicans are going to make progress this year, it's clearly not on passion, charisma, or driving innovative ideas. Both of those were terrible-poorly delivered, boring, flat, and offering nothing but accusations about how shit Biden is.

    It's so easy to explain how to fix things-roll back regulations, increase oil/gas production, approve nuclear plants, reduce deficit spending and allow the Fed to raise interest rates, expand school choice and promote home-schooling, etc. But they were so devoid of that kind of good stuff and they were both seemingly reading off teleprompters instead of just actually delivering proper rebuttals and sounding like humans. There are text-to-speech programs that have more vocal variety than what they delivered.

    I was leaning toward voting Republican this fall after I've been voting L for years, but I'm going to need hear Republicans actually articulate some reasonable positions.

    1. You can only get those things unfortunately with either a veto proof majority or a willing president. The current chance of a bi-partisan override is virtually zero. That doesn't mean they shouldn't try but mentioning them or promising them and not delivering would not make things any better.

  47. >>"Most Americans in most of the country can now be mask free,"

    equal protection.

  48. Was Israel evil for attacking first and starting the 6 Day War?

    1. Was Israel evil

      That is pretty much the consensus on the left.

        1. Original sin, baby. Israel was imposed on the region. It is. was, and always shall be evil.

      1. Are you like your fellow Mormons in that you hate Jews but claim you aren’t anti-Semitic because Israel can do no wrong in your mind?

        Glenn Beck spews anti-Semitic tripe all the time, but loves him some Israel so it’s cool…

        No matter how you personally feel you give 10% of your income and send your kids out to recruit for a bigoted church. That makes you a hateful bigot!

        1. Don't you have dead men's families to dox again or something?

        2. My best friend for the last 35 years is a practicing Jew, you asshole. But please, continue vomiting your bile all over my posts for no apparent reason. It does more to get people to investigate the church than I could ever hope to do.

          1. Is he aware that your church has a long history of antisemitism? Baptism of dead holocaust victims even after being asked to stop by Jewish groups? Lying about the holocaust? Encouraging Jews to convert? Many antisemites belonging to your church?

            1. Are you aware that your last sockpuppet had a history of antisemitism here?

              " Baptism of dead holocaust victims even after being asked to stop by Jewish groups?"

              If you don't believe in Mormonism then why the fuck would that even matter? Why would anyone give a shit?
              You're such a drama queen.

              1. “ If you don't believe in Mormonism then why the fuck would that even matter? Why would anyone give a shit?”

                It’s incredibly disrespectful and bigoted.

                I remember you citing me criticizing Mormon antisemitism and criticizing Israel as me being anti-semitic.

                I asked my friend(a secular Jew) about it and they said equating Israel with Jewishness is bigoted.

                Shut the fuck up you lying anti-semitic country bumpkin.

                1. You’re the bigot here. Now fuck off, m’kay?

                  1. I am bigoted against bigots. No one is forcing Mormons to believe a bunch of disproven nonsense and force their beliefs on other people.

                    1. No, you're just a regular old bigot who doxxes dead men's families, because you get some sort of sexual rush out of harassing Chuck.

                    2. It’s a public safety issue. We can’t have Mormon pigs violating people’s civil rights. We can’t have Mormon teachers indoctrinating kids.

        3. Hi KARen!

          Hey buddy, what’s up? What kind of music do you like? I’m sure it’s the cool kind. I heard you live in the cool part of somewhere, not the shithole part. Oh man, that’s awesome. What did you get for question 3 on last nights homework? I hate math class! But I think Kayla likes me! See ya later little guy! Haha.

          1. Haha!

            I see what you did there!

            1. Pointed out you’re a childish little bitch?

              1. Do I believe in golden plates and magic underwear? I think you are calling the wrong person childish.

                1. Didn’t deny the little bitch part I see.

                  1. Damn you got me there.

    2. The big difference is the Arab League was building up for an invasion and stated their desire to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. The Ukraine wasn't doing any of that.

      1. The Arab League had actually invaded Israel in the recent past, whereas Ukraine hasn't invaded Russia since before either country existed.

        1. Ukraine has been the route of invasion for centuries, and NATO/the west have a history of offensive action.

          1. Pretty wide brush there required to support your bullshit.
            Did you know about Nixon and Hitler in Uruguay in '55?!

          2. Two incidents, against much weaker nations is hardly a history of aggression.

      2. So initiating military action is ok in some instances?
        As you say, the positioning and posture of targeted countries indicated imminent and existential threat.
        So "unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation" isn't an absolute evil, but one dependent on multiple factors and judgement as to provocation?

        1. Yes, none of which occurred in this case.

  49. >>Texas abortion restrictions are putting women's health at risk.

    all abortions put someone's health at risk.

    1. I read a piece by a ob/gyn who made the case that inducing labor late term, in cases where the mother's life was at risk is actually more beneficial than abortions. The average induction takes less than 24 hrs, the average late term abortion takes more than 48 hrs. A C-section is even faster, if it is truly life threatening and time dependent.

      1. nobody has time for your facts and logic. babies must die.

      2. Read the article. They're talking about shipping a patient who's in the middle of miscarrying to Colorado for treatment not because they can't treat miscarriages in TX but because they explicitly have to kill the baby in order to treat the miscarriage, they can't wait for the baby to die *or* the mother to get an infection or other complication. A pregnant mother sneezed too hard and the *abort* *abort* klaxons went off in they're head. They are literally, and they say it in the article, trying to figure out how to put her life least at the least risk by getting her out of the hospital.

        It's so fucking incredible. A couple of weeks ago, Mrs. Casual and I went out to dinner, I swallowed a piece of steak and it got stuck halfway down. I wasn't fully choking but it wasn't going down and was inhibiting my breathing. Every CPR class I've taken says that if the person can speak, the Heimlich does no good and I could speak. Now, you walk into a hospital in such a condition and the hospital says, "We could do a tracheotomy but that has it's own risks and really you might pass the food normally or you might choke. So, in order to give you the best treatment possible, we're going to figure out how to get you to a hospital that will perform a tracheotomy and just hope that you don't choke to death on the way there. Rather than choking here. At our hospital. Where we could easily save you if you did."

        And the above argument has nothing to do with the personhood of the baby. These people are sheer fucking evil.

        1. They are certainly spring-loaded to provide only the one option, abortion. It seems to be the case for most feminists and the A"CL'U.

        2. I wasn't arguing for the Texas abortion law, just the fallacy of the idea that abortion is the only, or the best treatment for maternal health problems.

          As for hospitals afraid of being sued for a miscarriage, that seems a pretty big stretch. If they treat properly for miscarriage prevention they have a fairly solid case that what they were doing wasn't an abortion. It seems almost as if the hospital administration is using this as an excuse to bash the law.

          In a court the plaintiffs would have to prove that the miscarriage was the result of an abortion not a natural miscarriage. That would be pretty difficult. Maybe it may be in the case of a D & C, but those even have a medical trail to prove it isn't an abortion and rarely are the first go to treatment.

          I don't agree with the Texas law but if it is threatening women's health, it is far likelier the result of the precautionary principle taken to far by hospital administrators and or a political statement by hospital administrators than the actual law.

  50. Why did Biden gloss over all the things he improved in the last year?
    Inflation rate
    interest rate
    unemployment rate
    rents
    gasoline prices
    republican poll numbers
    etc
    etc

  51. “It’s FUCKED! For whatever time I remain in office I solemnly pledge to fuck it up further as little as is humanly possible.” <~~~~The only State of the Union speech I want to hear (and therefore never will).

  52. "Most Americans in most of the country can now be mask free,"

    Not where I live. They're holding the line!

    1. "Most Americans in most of the country can now be mask free,"

      What have we become as a nation that such a statement might be uttered in the SOTU address? This would only ever be a statement of liberty in the aftermath of a nuclear disaster.

      1. Depends on the polling.

    2. Facemasks today! Facemasks tomorrow! Facemasks forever!!!

  53. One of the most notable—and libertarian-friendly—sections of the speech related to COVID-19 and the pandemic.... But Biden's State of the Union hit way too many notes that would've been right at home in an address from former President Donald Trump.

    Meaning you still think libertarians should prefer Biden to Trump.

  54. A new poll finds Democrats more supportive than Republicans of U.S. intervention in Ukraine

    But the difference is slight, and less than the difference between both of them and independents, who are even less supportive of US intervention. Who writes your conclusions?

    1. The poll didn't actually ask about intervention in Ukraine either. It was about future invasions of Europe. I doubt most Americans realize Russia and Ukraine are in Europe. I mean there is a troll poster on here who maintains leaving NATO is a racist act.

  55. Watching the idiot who singlehandedly weakend the border beat his chest about strengthening the border made me want to stick a fork in my eye. This man has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

    1. This is exactly the same reaction rational folks had to the dimwit's stupid claims about Covid. They weren't libertarian friendly, or in any way on the side of freedom or backed by scientific data, they were driven by polling and DNC fear. The party that has caused so much damage and suffering does not get to claim, as it keeps trying, that it has led the country out of the shit it created.

  56. How Texas abortion restrictions are putting women's health at risk.

    Holy Fuck! OK, setting aside that I think the story is bullshit. 'Anna' just happened to get pregnant after the law went into effect, decided to keep the baby, and then her water broke on her wedding day? But, here's the kicker:

    Anna's water had broken too early for the baby to survive. She and Scott spent the night of their wedding in the emergency room, trying to take in the heartbreaking news.

    Being clear, and the article goes on to parse this, she should have a right to abort *because her water broke*. They're literally debating about how best to cut the baby up before it dies in order to not actually significantly decrease any risk to the mother. They predicate the need to get the baby out based on the risk of injury or infection but after her water breaks we're talking <24-48 hrs. before delivery. They're literally trying to race her out of the state, exposing her to all kind of risk (the story actually goes into this), in order to cut the baby up and extract it before it dies on it's own. It's like cheering a Mexican doctor for sending Mexican patients with medical conditions across the border for medical care when there's nothing preventing them from being given adequate care in Mexico.

    Jesus Fucking Christ, I am or can be a cold, terrible, disgusting son of a bitch, but you people are beyond fucked up.

    1. “She and Scott were open to having a baby, even if a bit sooner than they might have planned, so they moved up their wedding plans to December.”

      So she wasn’t planning on having an abortion, and rather than just let the miscarriage occur naturally, under doctor supervision, they think the best option is to make her travel to Colorado to get an abortion?

      1. So she wasn’t planning on having an abortion, and rather than just let the miscarriage occur naturally, under doctor supervision, they think the best option is to make her travel to Colorado to get an abortion?

        Thank you for putting it more succinctly, yes.

        The only modification I would add is that, through Anna's framing of the story, "they" would seem to include her doctor. Like the only way a doctor in TX can figure out how to deal with a miscarriage is to abort the baby before it dies. Otherwise, the baby *might* live and the mother *might* have an infection or complications and, well hospitals just aren't equipped to deal with infections or complications.

    2. "OK, setting aside that I think the story is bullshit"

      I'm positive the story is complete bullshit.

      1. You saw that the story was from NPR, right?

  57. ENB, for the future, I made things simpler: 'Facebook blocks free speech, Elizabeth Warren is wrong.'

  58. How Texas abortion restrictions are putting women's health at risk.

    I'm still astounded by this take on this story. Imagine a pregnant woman walking into the hospital in TX with a GSW and the hospital saying "Sorry ma'am. We can't treat your GSW without aborting your baby first. You're going to have to go to Colorado to get treated."

    Now imagine the woman doesn't have a GSW and only has minor risk of developing an infection or injury after the baby has died/miscarried and the hospital *still* says "Sorry ma'am. We can't save your life in such a situation here. You're going to have to go to Colorado to get treated."

    Hell yes people are going to die and it's because of you dumb fucks and your reverence for immoral officious political assfucks who run a fucking hospital like that!

    1. Increasing a small risk purposefully to prove a point. Brought to you by the same political hucksters who demand children wear masks in school that have been proven not to prevent anything and get vaccines to attend school that have now been shown to be 12% effective.

      https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/28/pfizer-covid-vaccine-was-just-12percent-effective-against-omicron-in-kids-5-to-11-study-finds.html

      Politically onset psychosis.

  59. Anyone defending cryptocurrency for any reason is a dumb hack. At best they're trying to pump one of their shitcoins so they can get out and turn them back to dollars.

    1. Do you ever not defend the establishment you dishonest fuck?

  60. This is not Biden's America. This is not Trump's America. This is our America!

  61. Vote the brutal Democrat imbeciles off our backs and out of our lives. F J B

  62. The reach of the federal government is absurd, but Biden and the Democrats keep reaching for more control, and won't stop until they have their Leftist "woke" Dictatorship. Yes, Reason supported them in 2022.

  63. The reach of the federal government is absurd, but Biden and the Democrats keep reaching for more control, and won't stop until they have their Leftist "woke" Dictatorship. Yes, Reason supported them in the 2020 elections. What a sorry excuse for a libertarian news and opinion site.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.