Better Late Than Never on Weed, Kamala
Plus: A judge may recognize a poly romance, the Nobel Prize goes to economists "for research on banks and financial crises," and more...
In the wake of President Joe Biden's drug policy announcement last week, Kamala Harris crowed that the Biden administration is "changing the federal government's approach to marijuana." According to Harris, "The bottom line there is nobody should have to go to jail for smoking weed."
Her statement was met by ample applause. I wonder how many of the people cheering know about Harris' history on this issue.
During Harris' tenure as California attorney general from 2011 through 2016, nearly 2,000 people went to state prison for having drugs that Harris now scoffs at locking people up for. And as a prosecutor in San Francisco, Harris helped ensure that people who may previously have been eligible for drug diversion programs were instead imprisoned.
It's great that Harris has come around about locking people up for smoking weed. But it would be nice if she occasionally acknowledged and grappled with her drug-warrior past.
Now….people can change. But this still funny https://t.co/zALOfoc1v7 pic.twitter.com/Rm1dCr8m9F
— O'Shea Jack(Nichol)son (@OsheaJacksonJr) October 9, 2022
On Harris' watch as attorney general, 1,974 people were admitted to state prisons for marijuana or hashish possession, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
Harris also opposed California's ballot initiative to legalize marijuana in 2010 and, as recently as 2014, laughed when asked if marijuana should be legal.
And while Harris' record on this issue as San Francisco's district attorney is complicated, it's definitely not as progressive as she's implied.
While running for the office, Harris promised to use treatment and diversion programs rather than incarceration for nonviolent drug offenses. But once elected, Harris was much tougher on drugs than her predecessor had been, as I noted in this 2019 Harris profile:
By 2005, Harris was also turning against the city's decade-old Drug Court, which allowed some people arrested on nonviolent possession and small-time sales charges to go to a city-run addiction treatment program as an alternative to incarceration. Successful completion could lead to the charges being dropped. In an op-ed that year in the San Francisco Examiner, Harris complained that people had "learned how to manipulate the system—by simply claiming to be addicts." She proposed barring anyone who had previously sold any quantity of any drug from the Drug Court, and the chance it offered for lesser sentencing, even if the current arrest was for mere possession….
Harris got her way, and then she got more. By 2006, defendants were "ineligible if they do not have a drug addiction" and excluded, even if they were wrestling with addiction, if they were carrying a gun when arrested. "The approach of my administration vs. the prior administration is I don't think drug crime is a victimless crime," she told the Examiner's editorial board in 2006.
During Harris' time as District Attorney, her office "won 1,956 misdemeanor and felony convictions for marijuana possession, cultivation, or sale, according to data from the DA's office," according to the San Jose Mercury News.
Local lawyers remember Harris' time as D.A. in conflicting ways, the paper reports. Some suggest she really did try to avoid sending people to jail or prison for low-level drug offenses. Others recall things differently:
Despite the substantial number of convictions, many of the people who were arrested for marijuana during Harris' tenure were never locked up or never even charged with a crime, according to attorneys who worked on both sides of the courtroom.
"Our policy was that no one with a marijuana conviction for mere possession could do any (jail time) at all," said Paul Henderson, who led narcotics prosecutions for several years under Harris. Defendants arrested for the lowest-level possession would typically be referred to drug treatment programs instead of being charged, and weightier charges for marijuana sales would routinely be pleaded down to less serious ones, he said….
Not all defense attorneys agree. J. David Nick, who represented several dozen marijuana defendants during Hallinan and Harris' tenures, said he remembered Harris as more aggressive in charging marijuana sales cases than her predecessor, who was already declining to prosecute many of those arrested.
"Some of the cases that [her predecessor] Terence Hallinan would have just declined to prosecute, (Harris) said no, we're going to prosecute these as felonies," he said, attributing the change to a desire by police to crack down on dealers.
Other activists point out that marijuana convictions still impact defendants' lives even if they aren't incarcerated.
"Just because you didn't rot your life away in prison doesn't mean it wasn't a big deal to get a conviction," said Dale Sky Jones, a Bay Area marijuana activist. "Your ability to keep your job, get another job or get housing with that conviction on your record is all hurt by that."
FREE MINDS
A judge may recognize a polyamorous relationship. A New York City judge in an eviction case has ruled "that it's possible for two men to both claim partnerships with a third man," The Advocate reports. The case involves a now-deceased man named Markyus O'Neill who lived in an apartment with Scott Anderson.
Anderson claims that he was in a "familial" relationship with O'Neill, which would allow him to stay in the rent-controlled apartment. But a third man, Robert Romano, claims that he and Anderson had been together for 25 years.
"Based on the affidavits presented by each man, Housing Court Judge Karen May Bacdayan wrote that it appears Anderson 'loved both of them in different ways,'" reports The Advocate. The judge granted a full hearing on the case, citing the 1989 New York Court of Appeals decision Braschi v. Stahl Associates Company. Braschi was "the first appellate decision in the United States to recognize that a same-sex couple living together could be considered a family, as it was later formalized in new regulations by the Division of Housing and Community Renewal and the legislature," notes Gay City News.
"What was 'normal' or 'nontraditional' in 1989 is not a barometer for what is normal or nontraditional now," wrote the judge. "Should a person who would not meet the requirements for succession to a rent-stabilized apartment after Braschi was decided in 1989, now, 33 years later, be evicted when they may qualify, as was concluded in Braschi, under a more inclusive interpretation of a family?"
FREE MARKETS
This year's Nobel Prize in economics has been announced. It's going to Ben S. Bernanke, Douglas W. Diamond, and Philip H. Dybvig "for research on banks and financial crises." Bernanke, of course, has some hands-on experience with such matters, having chaired the Federal Reserve from 2006 to 2014.
This year's Nobel prize goes to Bernanke, Diamond, and Dybvig "for research on banks and financial crises."
What is their most famous work and what should you be reading to get up to speed? ???? pic.twitter.com/hugqoCry9V
— Brian Albrecht (@BrianCAlbrecht) October 10, 2022
Read Reason's 2009 profile of Bernanke's philosophy here.
QUICK HITS
• Amsterdam, a star-studded film about a real fascist plot to take over American government in the 1930s, "is a tedious, tendentious, borderline-unwatchable warning about the rise of fascism in the United States," writes Reason's Peter Suderman.
• The New York Times looks at the failure of California's bullet train.
• America's biggest political division isn't left versus right but highly political people versus everyone else, suggest Yanna Krupnikov and John Barry Ryan in The Other Divide: Polarization and Disengagement in American Politics.
• No, state legislators can't ban interstate abortion travel, explains Reason's Damon Root.
• "Germany is importing coal from South Africa, which is ironic because, just one year ago, Germany gave South Africa $810 million in exchange for an agreement that South Africa not use coal," tweets Michael Shellenberger.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Two words:
Fuck Joe Biden
Or fuck Shits and Giggles.
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I did not ever think it would even be achievable , however my confidant mate got $13k only in four weeks, easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail.
For more detail visit this article.. https://becomeamillionaire99.blogspot.com/
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35400 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of (aos-08) greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs
Just open the link——————–>>> https://smart.online100.workers.dev/
I just worked part-time from my apartment for 5 weeks, but I made $30,030. I lost my former business and was soon worn out. Thank goodness, [res-29) I found this employment online and I was able to start working from home right away. This top career is achievable by everyone, and it will improve their online revenue by:.
.
EXTRA DETAILS HERE:>>> https://workopportunity23.blogspot.com
…Kamala Harris crowed that the Biden administration is “changing the federal government’s approach to marijuana.”
Crowed or cried?
Caw-caw-ed?
Or best yet, piffled between puffs.
Either way, Krunkt Kackling Kammie should serve the sentences of every person she helped prosecute and convict for victimless drug offenses…consecutively, back to back to back until her THC-laced bones turn to dust!
And while Harris’ record on this issue as San Francisco’s district attorney is complicated, it’s definitely not as progressive as she’s implied.
Oof.
Look, she’s slept and incarcerated her way to the top. She can afford to stop both now.
Fuck that bitch. (Not like Willie Brown did though) She should serve time equal to the combined total of every sentence for pot she won a conviction on.
Indeed. I said the same above, though later than you.
I guess vindictive Minds think alike. 🙂
Sociopath.
You mean those can actually rise up the political ladder?!
Almost exclusively.
Sociopath is the path of least resistance to power.
Kamala can’t acknowledge her past positions because she’s never held any principled position. She’s always been whatever is most politically expedient. Acknowledging that she’s changed her mind or her position requires her to establish a foundational principle, and she can’t do that if she needs to pivot in the future. She’ll just rely on her past being ignored and swept under the rug.
There’s nothing wrong with changing positions. When I was in my 20s I defended the invasion of Iraq because I bought into the narrative at the time. But I no longer support regime-changing actions regardless of the party in power, nor massive invasions or nation-building policies. I don’t suddenly condemn the war in Iraq but push for military involvement in the Ukraine, like some Washington warhawks.
It’s great that Harris has come around about locking people up for smoking weed. But it would be nice if she occasionally acknowledged and grappled with her drug-warrior past.
Maybe Reason editors can set an example and show how one can admit they’ve been wrong for the last decade on numerous takes.
Maybe Reason editors can set an example and show how one can admit they’ve been wrong for the last decade on numerous takes.
SleepyJoe in particular.
It’s easy to admit you were wrong factually. You just claim you didn’t possess the information necessary at the time. It’s harder to acknowledge that you were wrong in principle which caused you to ignore the truth when it was available.
Unfortunately Reason doesn’t like to argue from Principle. They generally argue questions of fact. That leaves them forever in an argument about whether their facts are right or not.
Take a look at Soave or Suderman’s pushback against pandemic-era infringement of freedom. Those articles are dominated by discussions of what the science says and how- if looked at thusly- the science doesn’t support locking kids out of school/closing restaurants/forcing masks on everyone.
Almost every discussion of Qualified Immunity, or No Knock Warrants, or Housing restrictions (or whatever) is focused on a study that shows harms, rather than a real, principled discussion of what respects rights and what violates them.
It isn’t that I hate facts. Nor do I disagree with the notion that we should highlight the tragedies that result when rights are violated. But if all you do is focus on the numbers, pretty soon you are merely arguing pragmatism, which is a terrible way to run a nation.
This is because they don’t care about liberty. They approach policy from a progressive standpoint. A policy is good if it appears, from a particular vantage point, to reduce harm. It’s bad if it appears to do the opposite. Unfortunately, whether a policy will encourage the wrong people is usually part of the harm calculation.
You haven’t begun to see social security fraud like you’re going to see if the government starts recognizing poly marriages.
As a libertarian, I’m all for allowing legalized poly marriages.
As a practical, married person, all I can think is oy! what a mess. Marriage between two people is complicated enough.
Real libertarians don’t need to start takes with “as a libertarian.” You do because even you dont believe you are one.
It is like a comic who starts his impression with “this is my impression of” because it is so terrible.
Wouldn’t the libertarian position be that the government should not be in the business of regulating or licensing marriages of any sort?
Yes.
How so? What will govern the allocation of assets when a marriage disintegrates? Uncle Scam is more about making sure both taxpayers are made as whole as can be expected, so that tax revenue will not be impacted rather than any of the pleasant stuff like the nuptials and where the couple bangs for the first time
Just because government gets involved in the resolution of a divorce dispute doesn’t mean that they need to be issuing licenses for marriage. Multi-way contracts are already common and government isn’t anywhere near most of them.
“What will govern the allocation of assets when a marriage disintegrates?”
It should be treated like any other mutually agreed upon contract.
Holy Christ. Do you have kids?
What does that have to do with divorce mechanisms? Do you stop being a parent then?
Nope. But it does get more complicated when one or both remarry, have kids or have kids from a previous marriage. New inheritors. In a lot of states when a spouse dies the remaining spouse gets all of the assets. A stepparent could inherit their spouses assets and then cut out the dead parents children and leave all to their ilk, unless it is spelled out or set up in trust etc. It does add complexity.
You’re asking me what do children have to do with divorce proceedings like they are a fucking sofa or collection of commemorative plates?
Unmarried people have children. And they can have custody battles over the kids just like married people. Having the government license a religious act initially doesn’t solve the problem of custody battles after the fact.
Yep. And that is super, super easy.
So now we can admit it was just religious persecution against Mormons because it’s fine for gays.
You say that like it wasn’t pointed out that poly-marriages were more historically traditional than gay marriages in the 90s and early 00s and people saying that weren’t just told “Fuck ’em”, but described as bigots.
Yep. It sure is weird how “people should be free to marry whoever they love” stopped at gay.
The system will be broke and scuttled before it gets to that point. We can only hope. The fast it is, the quicker we can get a private alternative.
The faster it is. Edit was too quick for me.
Anderson claims that he was in a “familial” relationship with O’Neill, which would allow him to stay in the rent-controlled apartment.
It’s about time sugar-daddies were given proper legal recognition.
So, anyone is eligible now.
This will never end. Whenever insurance or inheritance is up for grabs, these new “legal” agreements will pop up asking for others to pay up.
And the crazy thing is that this is about an eviction case. Is the survivor still paying rent or not? That seems like a more relevant issue about whether he can be evicted than whether he was the tenant.
Controlled rent.
Seems there’s a more obvious remedy than recognizing a guy as married to two other dudes.
Another sugar subsidy
A judge may recognize a polyamorous relationship. A New York City judge in an eviction case has ruled “that it’s possible for two men to both claim partnerships with a third man,” The Advocate reports. The case involves a now-deceased man named Markyus O’Neill who lived in an apartment with Scott Anderson.
I remember people claiming arguments saying the gay marriage ruling would lead to this were making slippery slope arguments.
Weird how actual analysis and logical thinking turned out to be real and wasn’t a slippery slope fallacy.
So let’s just apply this to a philanderer. If a rich guy puts his mistress up in an apartment, without his wife’s knowledge, does she get to file claims against the man’s estate even if she wasn’t acknowledged in the will? She had a “relationship” with him that may have been ongoing.
This is a can of worms that should not be opened.
No, it has to be some dude on dude action.
I’d apply this standard in this case:
Does a roommate, not on a lease, get the same eviction protection in NYC?
This is why governments only role on marriage should be in contract enforcement. And require contracts to state the rules of 2 people, or more, incorporating.
A lot of states used to have clauses in their constitutions limiting marriages to two people (usually as an anti-LDS measure).
This seems like the right answer. How about having the state be less involved in setting the terms of people’s relationships?
Also, the case is mostly about rent control, which shouldn’t be a thing. So this particular problem could easily be solved another way too.
This is where the philosophy hits the embedded reality.
A contract should be a contract. I don’t care who you split your household with, it can be four friends who want equal ownership of a great big house or a traditional nuclear family, the issue is just a contract addressing ownership and inheritance of assets.
But lots of other laws and systems have been based on the notion that marriage is only for a man and a woman intending to breed and revolves around the welfare of the children they’ll bring into the world. Then job based health insurance got extended to family (again, based on the nuclear family from 50 years ago) and social benefits passed to surviving spouses etc…
Gay marriage was an issue because it was a civil union not focused on biologically producing children. There’s less impetus there, but if a gay couple wants to share a house and adopt they can now pass that to the child. But it was a legal PITA, you know, back when HIllary and Obama were still against gay marriage.
Recognizing poly marriage is an even bigger quagmire. I still think it should be fine and tough shit for the existing rules, figure it out. But if you allow it there are repercussions.
Obviously, my personal take is to strip away restrictions that conflict when you run into them. Rent control is stupid, and shouldn’t exist. Family exemptions for rent control are stupid, work-provided health insurance is stupid, and countless other things that just fuck up natural markets. Marriage for the sake of passing wealth to children or dividing ownership of real property doesn’t need to be “marriage.” A civil contract will do. Simplify it all and then the only people who suffer are the poor bastards stupid enough to get married to two or three other people when they go to court to dissolve the union.
Found a libertarian.
Common law courts or private arbitrators could resolve contract disputes.
I remember people claiming arguments saying the gay marriage ruling would lead to this were making slippery slope arguments.
Some of us even said it would be more efficient, objective, and impartial to cut to the chase and just move to the end of the slide in a rational manner rather than put our hands over our eyes, pretend we’re doing some people some good, and just seeing where the slippery slope takes us.
They also said the plague, ww3, and grooming school children wouldn’t happen if gay marriage gets legalized
The Plague and child-grooming existed before, and WWIII came and went with The Cold War, silly.
And since we now have an Edit button, what’s your excuse for not capitalizing WWIII and your name and using the term “libritarian”?
Are you trying to be the next e.e. Cummings? 😉
Ackshuyally, when that debate was taking place, I was one of the ackshual Libertarians who said: So what if it means legal Polyamory or Polygamy? If it’s between consenting adults sapient beings, the State has no business in it except upholding contracts and stopping abuse.
Good on New York for the ruling, though I still wouldn’t live there for many other reasons. Central Park is still too shitty and crime-infested for a Poly Family Grokking.
I’m pretty sure that’s what the libertarians were saying. Why on earth does ‘You can marry whoever you love’ stop at one person? There’s no logical reason at all, just the idea that people think polyamorous relationships are ‘icky’ – exactly like people thought gay relationships were ‘icky’.
It does get sticky when you have implied contracts that result from a union, which is where the New York court is running into problems. So this guy claims he was living with the deceased: what’s to stop loads of people from claiming they were in a de-facto relationship with a moneyed individual?
It’s a can of worms. It would make more sense to abolish marriage as a legal construction and instead make it purely a social/religious institution, and details of shared property can be accomplished via contracts.
>what’s to stop loads of people from claiming they were in a de-facto relationship with a moneyed individual?
This is where allowing unrestricted civil partnerships would be beneficial.
You don’t have to be married, traditionally, but if you are a “partner” of the deceased it will be registered. You’ve got a contract that’s registered, just like a marriage license will be registered. You are now a civil partner and can prove it, if not you’re just a couch surfer and out on your ass.
I don’t know if that’s the best way, but it’s one take.
Get the government out of marriage. Just abolish it as a legal construct. If you want to get married, contact your church, not a notary public.
If you want your spouse to have an agreement about shared assets, estates, and child-rearing, THEN you involve the lawyers.
I saw a comedian once who did the bit about a couple. Asked who on earth said “Oh, I love you. You’re my everything. I love you dearly. Let’s get the government involved!”
And the lawyers do what? Haggle over laws you just stripped out?
Salad days for divorce attorneys
“Can of worms”? Is that where a bunch of frat guys pile in a garbage can as deep as possible and frot and circle-jerk? Kinky! 🙂
A New York City judge in an eviction case has ruled “that it’s possible for two men to both claim partnerships with a third man…”
The benefits of being in a Top Ten Victim Class.
I would extend it to women too…provided that alimony and palimony no longer exist.
If you want to live off of your vagina, The Brothel License Board is down the hall from the Justice O’ Piece, Honey! 🙂
Reason Rundown
Gay marriage was legalized this way.
NYC judge rules polyamorous unions entitled to same legal protections as 2-person relationships.
Masterpiece Cakeshop back in court for refusing to make polyamorous gay bestiality wedding cakes in 3, 2, 1…
I laughed only because it’s true.
Funny, New York chased the LDS Church out for doing exactly that. Now they want to allow one to be married to more than one person?
When does Joe smith’s family get an apology for his lynching?
Honestly, are you guys TRYING to summon KAR?!
What do we do, say his name three times?
KAR KAR KAR?
Screw that bigoted asshole.
Grapejuice! Grapejuice! Grapejuice!
(Johnny Carson explaining the joke: “You see, the Mormons didn’t drink alcohol…”) 🙂
Reason Rundown
Democrats are operating a series of 51 ‘fake news’ websites pushing left-wing stories in toss-up states in a bid to turn the midterms in their favor
alternatively, for the Shrikes and White Mikes sure to be yelling about sourcing,
Democrats’ swing-state local news ploy
Remember, it’s not fake news when they do it.
I raise the same question here that I do every time: What makes them “fake news” sites? Who determines what is or is not fake news?
Twitter blue checks
POLITFACT!!!!!!!!!
All 51 are run by a company named Local Report Inc. operated by Media Matters. Read the linked Axios report if you don’t like the Daily Fail’s terminology.
So what? Sinclair broadcasting also owns and operates a ton of local news affiliates. Does the fact that they’re all owned by a single entity make them all fake news sites? Or is just news with left-wing editorializing?
Freedom of the press is universal-people are allowed to publish and share information even if it’s a bullshit creepy manifesto. If they’re publishing defamatory lies, that’s a tort to be settled on an individual case, but it doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be allowed to exist.
people are allowed to publish and share information even if it’s a bullshit creepy manifesto.
Not if PayPal has anything to do about it.
Nobody says that they shouldn’t be allowed to do it. Don’t put words in my mouth.
It simply demonstrates the hypocrisy of the Democrats complaints as they are doing exactly what they’ve accused Fox News and Russian Agents of doing.
“Each follows a similar template: aggregated local news content and short write-ups about local sports teams and attractions — interspersed with heavily slanted political news aimed at boosting Democratic midterm candidates and attacking Republican opponents.”
This is exactly what they have been yelling about since 2016,.
Pretty sure the unfunny British cunt with the HBO show did an episode dedicated to Sinclair media doing this exact thing, and how terrible and dangerous it was.
I agree. Fake News is just an attempt to steal a base. It is intellectually lazy. It’s like when people describe a person as “Climate Denier”.
The more appropriate term would be Propaganda.
• No, state legislators can’t ban interstate abortion travel, explains Reason’s Damon Root.
Can they allow the kidnapping of minors to perform trans surgery without parental consent? Asking for California.
If you don’t support your eight year old taking life-altering hormone injections and cutting off parts of their body, you are an abuser. They aren’t a child trafficking ring, they’re a child abuse prevention network.
We have come for your uncool niece
The New York Times looks at the failure of California’s bullet train.
An honest look? Has rail been edged out of the progressive water carrying priorities?
No, this is defending Brandon from a challenge on the left from Newsome.
Biden saves rail traffic by brokering a deal with the unions, Newsome can’t even manage to get a highly subsidized line from Bakersfield to Nowhereville built.
Newsome: How many of you who sit and judge me, ever hopped the train to Bakersfield?
They are carrying so much water at this point, what difference does it make?
Californian progressives have a new boondoggle in mind: electric vehicles and charger stations everywhere! Woohoo!
That is, when they’re not at each other’s throats:
https://kcra.com/article/nury-martinez-resigns-as-los-angeles-city-council-president-after-racist-remarks/41576304
The uni-party really needs to keep their eye on the ball, what a bunch of JV asshats.
They probably want it to be electric. To keep the grid more evenly loaded year round.
Reason Rundown
Army National Guard misses recruiting goals again, force levels drop
It’s almost like people don’t want a job fighting “domestic terrorist” parents or taking orders from some angry trannies.
+3
It is no longer enough to simply fulfill your duty to Big Brother after he provides you with an education and training. The time has come when you must love him to serve.
It’s pretty clear that the GI bill isn’t necessary to get college paid for, which is why I joined.
Why the fuck would anyone go in?
No, state legislators can’t ban interstate abortion travel…
CROSSED STATE LINES
So the nationwide abortion limit at 15 weeks is just regulating interstate commerce. Maybe abortion is the Trojan Horse that will make liberals clamor for overturning Wickard.
Hahahaha…just kidding, they’ll just twist themselves in knots to justify why this is so much different.
Reason Rundown
PayPal Pulls Back, Says It Won’t Fine Customers $2,500 for ‘Misinformation’ after Backlash
Every trial lawyer in America sighs and puts down the new Porsche brochure.
This episode however tells us about the dangerous mentality at PayPal, and the need for anyone regularly using them to find a reliable alternative ASAP.
UPDATE: Or maybe not. Volokh, the last bastion of occasional libertarianism to be found at this rag says PayPal Still Threatens $2500 Fines for Promoting “Discriminatory” “Intolerance” (Even if Not “Misinformation”).
Yeah they claimed it was a mistake, but wording like that doesn’t show up out of nowhere. SOMEBODY at least THOUGHT it was a good idea to write it up.
Reason Rundown
Tulsi Gabbard: FBI and Intel agencies committed treason trying to steal our democracy.
And the RINOs and GOPe knew it was happening both times and sided with the FBI and the Democrats because orangeman and also the working class is yucky.
Trump and Tulsi should run 3rd party in 2024, where’s my popcorn?
Germany is importing coal from South Africa, which is ironic because, just one year ago, Germany gave South Africa $810 million in exchange for an agreement that South Africa not use coal…
You know who else played the long game?
My mom’s bridge club?
Newman and Kramer battling over The Ukraine?
Reason Rundown
#JOURNALISM
A CNN reporter wrote a dishonest hit piece where they wrongly used quotes about a different bill to attack Republicans regarding alleged hypocrisy related to the infrastructure bill. A day later, the President is promoting and parroting that dishonest and error-filled piece. [video]
Reason Rundown
Surveillance State USA
Biden quietly unleashes spymasters in dramatic Executive Order…
“The Executive Order of October 7, 2022 (Enhancing Safeguards for United States Signals Intelligence Activities), establishes enhanced safeguards for United States signals intelligence activities that supersede the safeguards for personal information collected through signals intelligence established by Presidential Policy Directive 28 of January 17, 2014 (Signals Intelligence Activities) (PPD-28)” – White House
So, what was so problematic about the Presidential Policy Directive 28 that Biden Admin had to repeal?
“The collection of signals intelligence shall be authorized by statute or Executive Order, proclamation, or other Presidential directive, and undertaken in accordance with the Constitution and applicable statutes, Executive Orders, proclamations, and Presidential directives.
(b) Privacy and civil liberties shall be integral considerations in the planning of U.S. signals intelligence activities. The United States shall not collect signals intelligence for the purpose of suppressing or burdening criticism or dissent”
I’m sure that Reason(s) will be all over this EO. I believe we’ll see 134 articles in 3 months from Sullum for sure.
Maybe I’m wrong, but this might be the worst EO yet.
Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus comes to mind. Certainly this seems in the running.
Reason Rundown
The “nitrogen war” in Netherlands, an anticipation of times to come
“This plan as announced in practice means that, in certain areas, farmers have to reduce their nitrogen emissions by 70%,” he continued. “That means they simply have to quit.” . . .
“It is not very rational to curb the Dutch agriculture if you realize that they have the highest production per acre in the world and therefore the environmental load per kilogram food is lower than elsewhere,” Simon Rozendaal, a Dutch journalist and chemists said. “So, in a sense Dutch agriculture is a benefit for climate as well as biodiversity. This will definitely affect ordinary civilians and is part of a global agenda, so everyone around the world, especially Western countries, should be aware that this is something that is not just about the Dutch government. This is part of the ‘2030 agenda,’ this is part of the ‘great reset.’”
Remember, every single bit of this is a test run for implementation in the US. Don’t say “I don’t give a shit about what happens in the Netherlands, Sri Lanka or New Zealand”, because the end game is you. Pay attention.
At first, they came for the carbon…….
What is really nuts is that we have seen the direct impact of these terrible policies in places like Sri Lanka, and yet the Elites still push forward. They aren’t even trying to cloud the facts any more. They are just saying, “Yeah it was bad but it is worth the cost.”
Sri Lanka should be a warning for us all. No, we won’t end up starving in the developed world, necessarily. But millions of hard working americans will be unable to afford good meat, and will be rendered back to consuming whatever Soylent nonsense the Elites think checks the right “Socially Conscious” boxes. And that is all part of the plan.
Just eat the bugs already.
and live in the ‘windowless bedroom’ (read: 250 sq foot apartment, or box would also be acceptable)
Or if they push the cannibal agenda more the elites could end up on the menu. Long Pig.
I’m not eating any cricket until I’m sure it’s humanely raised, and has at least one cubic meter of space so it can hop around.
Serious question: what is it the problem with Nitrogen? Nitrogen is an inert gas and composes approximately 80% of the atmosphere.
It’s a water pollutant. Excess nitrogen runoff kills marine life when it hits rivers and lakes due to oversaturating and lowering the oxygen content (causing them to die of hypoxia).
It’s something that does need to be managed but banning fertilizer isn’t really an answer.
but nothing to do with gLoBaL wArMinG then.
No. Temporary algae overgrowth causing hypoxia in nearby small streams and still waters mainly. It’s a problem that only affects certain localities and needs to be managed on a local level.
Banning fertilizer and dairy farming isn’t just overkill, it’s insanity.
First they came for the nitrogen, but I didn’t complain, because I don’t breathe nitrogen.
Then they came for the oxygen…
b>Reason Rundown
Pro-abortion students accuse pro-life club of ‘endangering’ pregnant women.
I can’t think of anything that endangers a woman’s pregnancy more than pro-abortionists.
Reason Rundown
UK environmental group dumps feces on memorial to veteran
Reason Rundown
Canadian parliamentarian in parliament: “Enough with the woke sh*t!”
How long until Benito Trudeau suspends the parliamentarian’s bank account?
Despite the substantial number of convictions, many of the people who were arrested for marijuana during Harris’ tenure were never locked up or never even charged with a crime…
All she wanted was to rack up convictions. But I’m sure those convictions came at no cost for the convicts.
Just paying their fair share.
Reason Rundown
Safe, Legal and Medium Rare.
AZ’s Democrat nominee Katie Hobbs endorsing abortion up to the moment of birth live on national television
But pieces of shit like Shrike call opposition to this “extremist”, and Jeff insists it never happens.
“No one is asking for late term abortion”
I propose a law, all progressives must abort all of their space. It’s a win win, they get abortions and the world gets less progressives
Kelly is running ads saying Masters supports the GOP bill to ban all abortion despite there being no bill doing so.
Reason Rundown
Top-drawer blue check trolling
Kanye West Wears ‘White Lives Matter’ T-Shirt
<
Apparently West got his account suspended from Facebook for that.
Facebook supports genocide, as long as it’s against whites, jews, or ugyers in china
fucking love Ye.
Exactly how many of these people have wandered off the plantation?
Reason Rundown
Misek smiles
Berkeley Law “Jew Free Zone” Updates
Is Berkeley’s new motto, Arbeit macht frei?
Their new school song is a bit on the nose
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1zY1orxW8Aw
Nobody expected them to replace the old one.
https://youtu.be/LnF1OtP2Svk?t=106
Come To Berkeley Where It’s Always SPRINGTIME
Herr Misek is putting together the brochures, otherwise he’d be a smartie and join our little party here…
Reason Rundown
Satellite Temperature Data Show Almost All Climate Model Forecasts Over the Last 40 Years Were Wrong
Coincidentally, all the computer modelers erred in just one direction. How very strange, what are the odds.
Trueman informs us that we should be listening to the settled science on this.
He also admitted he knew nothing about the science but was logical to accept the models as fact. Pretty amazing.
Further, he claims (without evidence) that it ‘would cost trillions of dollars’ to build nuke power plants, while ignoring the economic impact of returning to an 18th century level of energy production.
Don’t forget that trueman was not being ironic here:
mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
“Spouting nonsense is an end in itself.”
“Further, he claims (without evidence) that it ‘would cost trillions of dollars’ to build nuke power plants”
Hopefully someone added that:
– if the climate apocalypse is truly coming, does it matter how much it costs to SAVE HUMANITY?!
– if nuclear actually would cost trillions, even if it doesnt save humanity, wouldn’t it be worthwhile being that it has an extremely small carbon footprint?
And the more rational (not meant to combat retarded left wing thinking) point of:
– Wouldn’t energy independence be a goal worth investing in, in a world where multi-trillion dollar budgets are put forth to fund crazy amounts of wasteful stupid shit? How much did we send to fucking Ukraine this year?
Anyone unwilling to consider nuclear has already conceded the argument that climate change is real and dangerous. There is no world where CO2 emissions are an imminent threat to our existence but the people screaming about this put zero effort into a very effective way of reducing CO2 emissions.
The resistance to nuclear is 100% about controlling the population, limiting their energy use, and because they absolutely know in a world where we reduce carbon emissions to the lowest they could possibly be, nothing about the climate would change at all. This is something they cant let people see.
The Washington Post once ran a story figuring out how much it would cost to build a series of nuclear power plants in Antarctica, to pump the water from the melting glaciers back to the interior of the continent for refreezing, to combat rising sea levels due to global warming (estimated at 30 cm in the next 100 years). (I’m not making this up.)
As opposed to just building sea walls one foot higher in coastal cities, over the next century.
Fake news. There was a hurricane in Florida.
Exactly. If you deny climate change, you’re denying that Hurricane Ian happened. Was it just a hoax? A conspiracy? What kind of a nut are you to deny science? We had live video of climate change happening right in front of our faces.
Heck, where I live the climate changes FOUR times a year! Alarming, no?
Duh! The models always looked like they were designed by first year high school science students.
High school students? We should base policies on the scientific endeavors of 9 year olds, like we did with plastic straws.
https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-08
Lol
Reason Rundown
Yowza: L.A. city council members caught on leaked audio making racist, mocking comments about colleagues
Not White Mike/Chemleft phony misspelling “racism” accusations either, rather calling a white councilman’s black child a “monkey” and “fashion accessory” level racism.
Or this: “I see a lot of little short dark people,” Martinez said of that section of Koreatown, employing stereotypes long used against Oaxacans in Mexico and in the United States.
“I was like, I don’t know where these people are from, I don’t know what village they came [from], how they got here,” Martinez said, before adding “Tan feos” — “They’re ugly.”
Martinez gets branded “white” instead of “Latinx” in 5..4..3..2..1…..
Evidently she’s stepped down
The approach of my administration vs. the prior administration is I don’t think drug crime is a victimless crime…
Did she back that statement up with anything but senseless babbling and inappropriate cackling?
Reason Rundown
“Have you come here to play Jesus, to the lepers in your head”
The very bad reason white Democrats want to defund the police
i think it’s even worse than that. It’s right out of the Bolshevik playbook. Unleash violent criminals onto society, constantly let them go free. Then arrest regular systems (i.e. non-regime members) for defending themselves.
See the bodega guy who defended himself in NYC a few months ago getting charged by the DA but NOT charging the assaulters.
Reason Rundown
Build Large Mansions
BLM founder funnels even more cash into mansion
Blacks Love Mansions.
As Flava Flav once said, “We ride limos too.”
Obviously, the best way to stick it to The Man is to buy his mansion.
Reason Rundown
Jennifer-Ruth Green takes aim at political opposition after Politico illegally obtains and publishes records of a sexual assault against her while serving in Iraq
The second a black person leaves the DNC ideological plantation they become a “N**ger” and are treated accordingly.
Sarc will be by shortly to call her a token and then claim he isnt a racist.
Good I hope she gives them the gawker treatment
Reason Rundown
Culture of corruption
NYC Mayor, buddy, appoint girlfriends to high-paying jobs
Don’t laugh, this is how vice presidents are made
“Ricky! I wanna be in the
showgovernment!”Nice
b>Reason Rundown
SNL Mocks the Current Devastating State of America
SNL is as woke and Democrat as it gets. A political message mocking Biden is obviously impossible to ignore. Probably means that a post mid-term replacement is lined up.
I figured after foregoing jokes about him pooping his pants at the Vatican, something which would have been guaranteed SNL material on any past President, then nothing would do it.
Didn’t a bunch of the 90s snl people call out snl for this already? Dana cadvy flat out said its not funny because they start with the punchline Republicans bad democrats good and work backwards
So brave.
<Reason Rundown
A victory for sanity in the battle against mail-in voting madness.
Delaware Supreme Court Strikes Down Universal Mail-In Voting, Same-Day Registration
So how many states are we up to that’ve had rulings against election changes made in 2020?
No “significant” evidence
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/delaware-supreme-court-takes-one
This follows along with Wisconsin ruling that ballot drop boxes are illegal and Michigan finding that the Secretary of State illegally changed election rules for 2020. Similar cases had similar results in Pennsylvania, where universal mailing of ballots was declared illegal AND that Pennsylvania’s Secretary of State had no authority to arbitrarily change election deadlines. Ditto in Virginia, where the rule allowing mail-in ballots to arrive late WITHOUT A POSTMARK was determined to be illegal. (No giant integrity hole there, no siree!)
—-
Five states. And wouldn’t you know it? Most were the known 2020 swing states.
If the election had gone the exact same way except for Trump, the libs would still be screaming their heads off about it.
Isn’t same-day registration biased against people who procrastinate? Shouldn’t you be allowed to register and vote a few days to a week after Election Day, as long as the final tallies haven’t been posted?
“The New York Times looks at the failure of California’s bullet train”
Im going to assume instead of the correct answer of “govt always does things incompetently, at an astronomically increase cost, to the point it is almost incapable of getting things done”, the lefties will have landed on, “if only we were able to govt harder, and also the Republicans are bad, and but Trump”
But think of the millions of people that need to get from Bakersfield to Mercedes super fast (super fast being 1 hour longer than driving)
that’s Merced.
Ctrl+F “florida” = 0
Ctrl+F “hurricane” = 0
Ctrl+F “desantis” = 0
No updates on the number of fatalities that are clearly 100% the fault of our least favorite governor?
#LizCheney2024
How much longer will we allow him to harness the climate to kill innocent citizens and commit the crime of sending poor immigrants to the hellscape known as Martha’s Vineyard?
Hi enb
No mention of kamala Harris falsifying evidence to keep a guy she didn’t like on death row?
How about her being called out for telling other DAs to falsify evidence or testimony to get guilty verdicts?
At least mention that the back page legal fiasco started after kamala won an election where the founders donated to her political rival.
The people at reason did a great job of bringing these issues to light before orange man bad. Now we have an evil retarded progressive cunt ENB carrying water for the evil retarded cunt kamala.
Hey instead of talking about how she should acknowledge her drug worrior past how about calling for her perjuring, murdurous self in prison? (my personal belief is that if a da lies to get an innocent person the death penalty then that is murder)
A judge may recognize a polyamorous relationship.
I’m sure Brigham Young would’ve loved to hear about that. Congress forced the LDS Church to give up polygamy so Utah could become a state, and then Congress delayed statehood till 1896.
its OK if the religion pushing it is the one that is sanctioned by the US govt elites.
If Democrats are “coming around” on weed, does that mean that Republicans are duty-bound to demand extra harsh penalties for pot crimes?
After all, when Democrats embraced police reform, Republicans discovered that there were no problems in any police departments anywhere.
Seems to be a reflexive reaction. Whatever Democrats support must be opposed in principle. Doesn’t matter what it is.
Ideas!
Let me know when you have one.
Wicked burn, bro.
It’s a new one.
Yet you’ve never responded with an idea. And you never will.
Hard to respond with an idea to a shitty trolling attempt.
Piss off, trollboy.
sarcasmic
August.12.2021 at 4:45 pm
I so don’t care anymore. 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.
sarcasmic
September.10.2021 at 12:14 pm
I like to stir shit up. So what.
Why anyone bothers to respond to that steaming pole of shit is a mystery to me.
As long as you do, that asshole will continue trolling here.
Him an sqrls say the same thing every time
“comment hidden because user muted
Maybe it’s hypocritical, but I get a slightly sadistic kick out of mocking the retard.
Translation: “Ignore sarc’s argument because of these things he said over a year ago. He’s a liar except for these cherry picked comments which are the only truths he ever told.”
You didn’t make an argument, you trolly piece of shit. You trolled.
What was this “argument” you claim you were making?
That partisans must oppose the other side, no matter the issue, because the other side is always wrong on everything. As a result neither side has any principles. If they did then they could agree on things. But they can’t, because their only guiding principle is opposition to the other side.
No, this is what you said: “Seems to be a reflexive reaction. Whatever Democrats support must be opposed in principle. Doesn’t matter what it is.”
You weren’t crying about partisans, you were inveighing against Republicans. You were deliberately trolling and you know it.
translation: “You weren’t saying a general statement about partisans! You were being mean to Republicans! Waaah! That means you’re a Democrat, which means you’re wrong!”
Thank you for confirming my point.
“Thank you for confirming my point.”
How? What point? How do you figure changing my words into your little fantasy is a translation?
Do you think this is like a telephone where there’s no record of what was said? Everyone can still read what was posted, Sarcasmic.
I’ve said it before, but dealing with Sarcasmic is like arguing with a cartoon character.
My point was that partisans change their mind based not upon principle, but upon what the other team says.
Is what I said incorrect?
Who cares when you can attack me personally? Right? That’s all you do. Don’t like what someone says? Dredge up quotes from a year ago and attack the person. What were they talking about? Who cares? We’re attacking him, not what he said.
Not only that, but if you find yourself opposing something you supported, or supporting something you opposed, simply because of something said by someone you hate, then you may be in need of some introspection.
Of course you now oppose introspection because you hate the person who suggested it.
“Is what I said incorrect?”
It’s a flat out fucking lie. In fact, I challenge you to provide me with one actual example.
“Who cares when you can attack me personally?”
Don’t act like you’re the martyr here, you drunken heap of garbage. You deliberately try to start shit here every-single-fucking-day. You don’t get to pretend your a victim when we punch back.
“Not only that, but if you find yourself opposing something you supported, or supporting something you opposed, simply because of something said by someone you hate, then you may be in need of some introspection.”
Which nobody here has actually done. You’re throwing out the phony accusation without a cite or lick of evidence to back your claims.
Fucking lying troll.
I don’t say anything about anyone personally. I don’t start off by naming you and your girlfriends.
I point out how the right has no moral high-ground anymore. I point out how disappointed I am with the people I once reluctantly allied with politically. I point out how they’re more and more like the repugnant leftists they hate.
What’s your response? SARC’S A LEFTIST! HE VOTED FOR BIDEN!
Fuck, you’re such a self-pitying whiner for someone who constantly tries to start fights.
And yes, you’re more of a troll than you are a lefty, but I still have absolutely no doubt that you voted straight ticket Democrat.
He only says this to cover for his stupidity. It always comes put after his idiocy is called out.
You never answered me when I asked if you sneer when you type.
Do you fap when you type?
No. Unlike you I don’t keep razorblades near my monitor to clean up a jerky mess.
Who was that guy bitching and whining that everyone else was making up stories about him?
Oh yeah, you.
It’s like you can’t remember what you just wrote. Is it the booze?
It’s really funny how you consistently accuse me of doing what you are doing.
Explain how exactly that happened here, you idiot. Have you given up and are just throwing out accusations now?
Giving up? No. You’ve turned this into a conversation about me personally, just like your idol we know who he is. So rather than roll around in the mud with a pig that will enjoy it, I choose to move on.
Thanks again for confirming everything I said.
What conversation, you retard?
Anyone can look at this thread and see that you started with a troll and then proceeded to throw shit.
Read your own posts FFS. No where is there a coherent argument or even point.
As usual, you wanted to start a fight but once people started punching back, you began crying that you’re being bullied.
I make statements about generalities. You take it personally and respond personally.
That says a lot more about you than me.
sarcasmic 1 hour ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Let me know when you have one.
sarcasmic 1 hour ago
Flag Comment Mute User
You never answered me when I asked if you sneer when you type.
sarcasmic 32 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
No. Unlike you I don’t keep razorblades near my monitor to clean up a jerky mess.
sarcasmic 25 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
It’s really funny how you consistently accuse me of doing what you are doing.
sarcasmic 26 seconds ago
Flag Comment Mute User
I make statements about generalities. You take it personally and respond personally.
sarcasmic 1 hour ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Yes, you and your buddies who I described in that comment are indeed sad. So sad. Very sad. So very sad.
FOR FUCK’S SAKE SARCASMIC, READ YOUR FUCKING POSTS BEFORE LYING ABOUT WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
Look, R Mac just provided a handy roundup of your insanity today. They didn’t disappear just because they weren’t convenient for you anymore.
You’re looking to R Mac as an arbiter of the truth? I’ve got the twat on mute because he’s never contributed to a conversation other than providing a snide remark for you and your girlfriends to swoon over.
“You’re looking to R Mac as an arbiter of the truth?”
HE JUST QUOTED YOU VERBATIM, YOU FUCKING RETARD!
No add ons, no commentary, just a list of your idiot twaddle here today. Are you trying to pretend R Mac invented what we can all clearly see you posted?
Haha bitches! Back to the top of sarc’s list!
To take this logic a bit further, if “true” libertarians are Republicans, and Republicans have a moral obligation to oppose anything the Democrats support, then to be a “true” libertarian one must support prison time for minor marijuana crimes.
Republicans definitely have to take an opposing stand. The ultimate rule is Teams Blue and Red have to oppose each other in every conceivable topic.
You certainly can’t concede that the other side might be right on something. Because that means they could be right about other things as well. Best to oppose them on everything. That way you don’t have to think or use any personal judgement. Throw poop and make howling noises like the rest of the monkeys and you’re assured a good place on the social ladder.
Sad.
Yes, you and your buddies who I described in that comment are indeed sad. So sad. Very sad. So very sad.
The irony of you not realizing you jeff and sarc only call out team red. Because you are team blue.
Do you agree with Democrats that low-level marijuana crimes should be forgiven?
Can you mouth the words “I agree with the Democrats on this”?
I don’t think you can. I think your jaw will clench and your lungs will refuse air. I think you’ll pass out or bite your tongue off before saying those words.
I agree much more with the position of Nancy Mace, (R) S.Carolina.
I agree much more with the position of Matt Gaetz, (R) Florida
https://420intel.com/articles/2021/10/25/10-notable-republicans-congress-backing-cannabis-legalization
translation: “I can’t agree with a Democrat, but if a Republican says the same thing I can agree. Judge the person, not the idea.”
Now watch Sarcasmic come out against weed now that he’s found out that most Republicans are in favor of legalization too (and he’ll do it while puffing a joint).
No, I like Mace’s proposal because it’s simpler. It just eliminates the offense, and doesn’t add many new taxes or fines or regulations.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5977/text
Especially ridiculous on Mother’s Lament’s is kind of like a Pinocchio who can never become a real Republican boy.
Imagine thinking this was clever.
He’s just mad because he can’t use the usual lazy slurs he’d normally invoke when people mock his party.
Is this a joke about gender-affirming care / mutilation?
ML is Canadian. This is all vicarious. But unlike him I don’t argue that people are wrong because of where they live. (How many times has he and others said I’m wrong because of where I live? Lots.)
“But unlike him I don’t argue that people are wrong because of where they live.”
You mean like Dee was just doing?
Doesn’t dee call out ML for being a Canadian? Lol.
The Pinocchio dig was directed at ML’s Canadieness (spelled with an e not an a).
“How many times has he and others said I’m wrong because of where I live? Lots.”
I’ve never once said that, you delusional, lying fuck. Give me one instance when I’ve ever criticized you for being from Maine.
Nobody else has either, you fucking cartoon.
You and your girlfriends have stated on many occasions that because I live in a lily-white state, that I blah blah blah. I can’t say blah blah blah because blah blah blah lives in a white state. Try to be honest for a microsecond.
No we haven’t you lying twat. Nobody here has.
You had to throw in some blah-blahs because you couldn’t even manufacture an example.
What a douche you are. So desperate to wallow in phony self-pity you have to actually invent persecution.
(How many times has he and others said I’m wrong because of where I live? Lots.)
The main one I recall are in relation to immigration, because your experience in ME is very different than someone who lives in a border state, like AZ or TX or even California. It is a different experience that one has to live around to understand.
The second would be your lack of exposure to a Cuban sandwich in spite of the time you spent in the restaurant biz.
Your hand on the pulse of the lobster roll market was acknowledged, even though you would not reveal your go to place for the best rolls at the best price and whether you are a mayo or melted butter on the toasted roll guy.
Can’t think of any others.
And they’re all ad hominems. I’m wrong on immigration because I’m not a rancher. I’d never had a Cuban sandwich and that means I don’t know anything about restaurants. I’m somehow wrong about lobster rolls because I don’t want say where I eat out.
Really?
Boy, you are so hostile you think you are constantly under attack.
Nothing in my post attacks you personally, in fact you found a way to twist the words to fit your narrative. Weird. And read it before you go on the defensive. I don’t respond to much of what you write cuz it’s the same, schtick on a daily basis. It’s dull.
But let me help you here. The first one, not ad hominem. Your experience in ME cannot match the experience in the border states. That’s a simple fact. Not a criticism. Unless you tell me you spent a number of years living in a border state, which you have never claimed. I have. As have lived on the west coast and spent many years in the Northeast. What NE people perceive of the border states and what goes on in reality are very different. That is literally being played out in the news these days. Have you lived in the border states? If not, your experience living in ME has an effect on perception.
It’s odd to not know about a Cuban sandwich when you live in New England and the Cuban originated in Florida. It’s an interesting history. Many New Englanders have traveled to Florida and back so the fact you haven’t heard of the sandwich is odd. That is all. Again, not an attack on you but surprising since you clearly have spent some time in the food industry.
Lobster rolls – if you read it my post says you are on point with lobster rolls. Being from Maine that makes sense. Being from Maine you would also have more access to lobster. The fact that you won’t give up your go to place was a little dig, but made in jest not as a personal attack on you.
You are ultra sensitive lately, so I’ll keep my thoughts to myself.
“But let me help you here. The first one, not ad hominem.”
I’ve never seen anyone so reliably misuse “ad hominem” as Sarcasmic. I’ve explained until I’m blue in the face but he always gets it wrong.
“The Pinocchio dig was directed at ML’s Canadieness (spelled with an e not an a).”
Well, sort of. The dig didn’t have anything to do with his being Canadian per se. It has to do with his being such a fanatical supporter of Republicanism when he himself cannot be a Republican.
So like Pinnochio. He can never be a REAL Republican. I guess you mean he cannot vote in an American election as a republican because he can certainly adapt any traits that will make him lean politically to the right and vote accordingly in his own elections. Right?
I think that the Republicans are greedy, corrupt, useless shits. You’re (deliberately) conflating my hatred for the Democrats with Republican support.
The Republicans are currently the only realistic possibility of keeping the Democrats from power, so I hope that they win. If anyone else could do it I’d root for them too.
But you actually know this. It just doesn’t suit your narrative.
Sure, but it’s just not the same. 🙁
“Do you agree with Democrats that low-level marijuana crimes should be forgiven?”
What bill have they put forward that does this?
Pretty sure dems have had control of both houses and the presidency for almost two years and pot is still illegal. It’s almost like they’re just spewing some shit before midterms to trick simple minded people.
This is the problem with sarc. He reads a headline and that is it.
He can’t bother to read a bill or understand it.
That’s your new strategy. Instead of responding directly and being mocked with “You… you… you… you ” because your goal is to discredit the person not what they say, you’re doing the same thing only it’s third person “He… he… he… he…”
Not to be mistaken for the giggling that people with actual brains do when they read your ad hominems and feel pity for your buddies who think such arguments are solid gold.
So did you read the bill or understand it, Sarc?
Not to be mistaken for the giggling that people with actual brains do when they read your ad hominems
Observations of regular behaviors and insults are not and never will be ad hominem attacks. The pretentious and incorrect descriptions of logical fallacies are most infuriating as they reveal a lack of any intention to engage in honest discourse.
Meanwhile,
is the least logical statement to be found in all of today’s comments.
Dissemble. Deflect Distract.
“Dissemble. Deflect Distract.”
Nice mantra. Great way to attack the person instead of what they said. But my logic is sound.
It has been made abundantly clear in these comments that to be a “true” libertarian one must be a Republican.
It has also been made abundantly clear that true Republicans oppose everything Democrats do as a matter of principle. Doesn’t matter what it is.
It follows that to be a “true” libertarian, one must oppose Democrats when they forgive low-level marijuana crimes. To do otherwise is to be a leftist.
What logic? “It has been made abundantly clear,” is fallacious. “to be a “true” libertarian one must be a Republican,” is fallacious. “true Republicans oppose everything Democrats do as a matter of principle,” is fallacious. “It follows that to be a “true” libertarian, one must oppose Democrats,” is fallacious. The whole thing is a field full of strawmen in which no crops have been planted.
Meanwhile, Democratic National Committee delegates voted 105-60 against including marijuana legalization in the party platform on Monday.
You may not have planted any crops, but the field is well fertilized.
Great job Chuck, now sarc’s going to misuse “fallacious” multiple times a day.
So if Dems are now pro nuclear war, maybe Repubs can be the peace party again.
“The New York Times looks at the failure of California’s bullet train.”
Pay-walled.
Not that some of us would want to read a local New York paper anyway, much less even pay for that rag.
New York times knows alot about failing
I can summarize it for you:
Everyone on earth knew that the initial price estimates were a joke. Everyone knew it was a corrupt boondoggle and lots of friends would get rich but no one would ever, ever actually ride a bullet train. And just now finally some journalists have figured that out as well.
And just now finally some journalists have figured that out as well.
You forgot the part where it is politically expedient for this information to be brought to light at this time. The NYT does not call out a boondoggle unless it generates political pull.
And while Harris’ record on this issue as San Francisco’s district attorney is complicated, it’s definitely not as progressive as she’s implied.
If you took Kamala Harris’ history, and renamed her to ‘Tom Cotton’ or ‘Josh Hawley’, I suspect the language wouldn’t be quite so gentle, here.
every single journo-shitlib in the country running interference for the democrats. It’s definitely gotten worse in the last ten years and seems to be accelerating.
Running interference or actively working for The Party and providing propaganda under the guise of “journalism”? They make Pravda seem honest.
Under Kennedy’s off the charts and absurd ‘marriage’ decision, there is no impediment to anyone of age marrying anyone else of age; if it’s a father daughter marriage all they might have to demonstrate is that one or both are incapable of procreating. Left pushing hard on next target, and will eventually get age of consent down to acceptable levels …acceptable to NAMBLA that is.
Buttplug smiles.
And that one Libertarian weirdo in Arizona.
Me? JesseAZ? Tucille?
https://twitter.com/njhochman/status/1578201837639024643
Haha. Well, his timing could use some help.
I had hopes for Victor, then went straight pedo freedom. It was weird.
There’s a lot of unforced errors in Libertarian politics. Not the least of which is age-of-consent is voted on as it’s legislatively pronounced. It’s 18 in Arizona, and I know no one, literally no one, who has that as a major political concern that has to be dealt with in any way. So, he’s wrong on the grounds that it is in fact voted upon, but no one seems to want to vote to change it.
I see some people talking about bringing all age-of-majority stuff in line (so, drinking, military, adulthood, in general being brought 18) but not anyone really stressed out about this one.
So, just a bizarre thing to even bring up.
Wait, he talks about ideas of freedom and the like not being up for a vote, including bodily autonomy, but then he suggests the age of consent should be up for a vote. Unfortunately, not being a ‘pure’ libertarian, and becoming less so in my crotchety old age, if you believe that the uhh, age of consent is a bullshit social construct that serves only to lay a bummer head trip on young people, then that should *checks libertarian notes* not be up for a vote.
There are so few people in this country that have a beef with the age of consent being 18 when navigating 99.999% of public life, to throw that into the pot of hot issues to talk about in 2022 seems like… I dunno, purposely stepping on a rake in the grass.
There are lots of things about the technicalities of the drinking age vs major age of consent that annoy me. Picayune issues like why I couldn’t take my 7 yr old daughter (at the time) into a bar where they served food and sat at the counter. She could drink a pepsi and eat a burger or some wings. I would never expect them to “accidentally serve” her alcohol or anything stupid like that… but this late breaking TikTok creeper trend that’s starting to push when children can have consensual sex with an adult (and I fully admit he said nothing about that directly– but sorry folks, that’s under the umbrella for ‘age of consent’) then I get very, very turned off.
I mean, for fuck sakes, look at what’s happening with Mermaids in the UK right now. The darling of woke celebrities, and it’s found out that the director was attending and giving talks at pro-pedophilia groups, and suddenly tweets are being deleted across the globe. No normies are comfortable with this shit. So… again, I don’t know the context here, he might have been talking about gun ownership or entering into a business contract or something, but let’s just… get off that for now.
And as BUCS notes below– I’m no lawyer so age of consent vs age of majority… maybe there’s a legal difference. Maybe I’m talking about age of majority stuff, and age of consent is the sex thing. If so… Jesus… let it go.
Government should be out of the marriage business entirely.
Democrats pounce?
https://notthebee.com/article/lauren-boebert-successfully-baited-tons-of-blue-checks-into-accidentally-mocking-bidens-ive-got-two-words-gaffe
Oops.
It was damn funny on Twitter this weekend. The Blue Checks got to show off how retarded they are.
The Blue Checks got to show off how retarded they are.
Hashtag: Evergreen headlines
made in america!
Two words.
How many admitted they’d been had? How many even realize it?
Most are so self-unaware that they probably never even realized it.
“This year’s Nobel Prize in economics has been announced….”
The prize is The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel. It was not part of the original Nobel Prizes established by Alfred Nobel, is not a Nobel Prize, and should not be referred to as a Nobel Prize.
Anybody that give a shit about the Nobel prize is a retard.
Second only to caring about the Pulitzer
Or the Oscars.
This year’s Nobel Prize in economics has been announced. It’s going to Ben S. Bernanke…
At least Obama has someone he can laugh at now
>>A judge may recognize a polyamorous relationship.
how can he not? also, obligatory Futurama Polygamist Attorney scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCK5CLpjjJE
also, can’t decide what’s the better The Wall song? Thin Ice or Waiting for the Worms
Both.
true.
Worms….
Even though it was overplayed in the past, it’s “Comfortably Numb”
Victoria Police chief Shane Patton admits to being “bruised” by the work his force had to do to enforce COVID lockdowns.
Bruised, he is.
I vas just followink ordahs.
Maybe this fall as flu season kicks in again, we can get some coverage here at Reason on this.
Imagine for a moment if the BLM riots had met with this swift and violent reaction from police?
They did in a few places. You just didn’t hear about it because the riots didn’t last long. They tried it in Lancaster, PA and ended up being arrested on the spot and held without bail. There was exactly one night of BLM rioting in Lancaster.
It was similar in most places. We had one wild night of some idiots trying to loot, but they got caught rather quickly. The only really odd thing was the mayor actually throwing one of the attempted looters.
Chicago on the other hand…
They did SOMETHING in downtown Tucson. I think some windows did get busted, but they fell apart as they couldn’t actually find any black lives to make matter here in Southern Arizona.
For awhile they thought they found one, but turned out it was just a very indigeno day laborer.
Tucson police refused to stand idly by, which was surprising. The Tucson police department also blatantly refused to enforce any covid “mandates”, in direct contradiction to local government desires. So not totally lost.
It’s almost like some places are governed by Party activists and were more invested in the 2020 presidential election than they were in representing their constituents.
What’s up Peanuts?, (also Trump Cultists, Qanon lovers, and even the 1-2 libertarians that post here).
Happy Columbus Day. Especially for you Wops.
Hello resident pedo!
How’s the CP business treating you?
What is your obsession with QAnon? Still disappointed that it isn’t a child porn source or something?
Turn yourself in for your crimes against children.
Isn’t it Indigenous Peoples Day today?
Let’s see, you have a racist insult against Italians in there; calling people who follow Trump, cultists; a strange obsession with QAnon; and somehow managed to still be an asshole at the same time.
He’s decided to try to point to Qanon to cover for him posting links to child porn and getting his account banned.
No one has ever banned me despite me using nearly the same screen name for nearly a decade.
But you’re an idiot who can only post the same shit. You are too stupid to engage me in a debate.
Of course Briggs got his sorry ass handed to him the last time he tried.
No one has ever banned me despite me using nearly the same screen name for nearly a decade.
And why is it you can’t use that original screen name?
Gee, I wonder why….
Oh yeah, that’s right, it’s because you post dark web links to hardcore child porn there, Buttplug2. It’s why you’re Buttplug2 and not just Buttplug.
Awww, happy belated Columbus Day to you too, you morbidly obese Ron Jeremy lookin’ Jewish incel.
But no matter how great Columbus Day was, it won’t be nearly as happy as it will be in exactly four weeks from now!
The New York Times looks at the failure of California’s bullet train.
They knew it was going to be a boondoggle. We knew they knew it was going to be a boondoggle. They knew we knew it was going to be a boondoggle.
Here is the funniest part
The company’s recommendations for a direct route out of Los Angeles and a focus on moving people between Los Angeles and San Francisco were cast aside, said Dan McNamara, a career project manager for SNCF.
The company pulled out in 2011.
“There were so many things that went wrong,” Mr. McNamara said. “SNCF was very angry. They told the state they were leaving for North Africa, which was less politically dysfunctional. They went to Morocco and helped them build a rail system.”
Morocco’s bullet train started service in 2018.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/09/us/california-high-speed-rail-politics.html
Virtually any backwater country in the world has better government than Democrats can provide. Democrats have become the dumbest group of people maybe in the history of human civilization.
I don’t know enough about this to say. I’m definitely open to California being just a fucked up state. NRO has a long write-up about this train debacle today as well.
That Morocco got it done quicker might not always be a sign of a better government though. My biggest concern being one of Eminent Domain protections. Despite Keto vs. New London, America still has a lot of protections against land grabs. A lot of the world does not have this much. Is Morocco one such place? I have no idea.
They told the state they were leaving for North Africa, which was less politically dysfunctional.
Pretty damn sad when places in the third world are more functional than what’s supposed to be a state in a first world country.
The most populous and Progressive state.
You forgot the world’s fifth largest economy.
Some of the main problems with high speed rail in this country would happen in any state, but somehow California makes each of them worse.
You aren’t going to save money by using existing track for high speed rail.
You can’t do grade-level crossings.
You can’t stop in every po-dunk municipality between actual major destinations (terminals).
You can’t share the tracks with freight lines.
High-speed rail needs to be significantly faster than taking AmTrak or a bus for it to be worth the extra cost. We should be looking at times that are similar to commercial flights. This is what separates a service like MegaBus from a competing service like Greyhound. If I take a Greyhound bus from St. Louis to Chicago, it stops at anywhere between 4 and 7 intermediate destinations on the way to the main one. Making it something like a 7.5-hour trip. MegaBus stops at 0. 5 hour trip.
It’s because we don’t have the right number of Zen Fascists in charge yet
Reason’s Cathy Young in 2015
Polygamy Is Not Next
https://time.com/3942139/polygamy-is-not-next/
Like all arguments made by reason writers, that one had an expiration date. Every time you think maybe one reason writer is the most dishonest of the lot, another one does something that makes you reconsider. There may not be one answer to the “Most Dishonest and Disgraceful Reason Writer” but Cathy is always in the conversation.
a lot of stuff the left is doing logically ends at age of consent conversations.
The Shackford et al “Trans issues are not pushing grooming” stuff wont age well
Um, it hasn’t aged well. We’re well past the “Ok, it’s happening, but it’s not as bad as you say” stage.
there really seems to be no limits on what a useful idiot can write off as “a moral panic” (in today’s favored language) that ends up being a completely legitimate concern oh and also of fucking course it lead to what everyone with a brain thought it would
Everyone with any brains could see that polygamy was the logical result of government recognized gay marriage. Justice Kennedy’s “you have a right to be with the ‘one you love’ but not the ‘two or three you love'” opinion in Ogberfell was always absurd on its face and nothing but a limited, modified hangout on the way to government recognized polygamy.
The question is whether Young was so stupid she couldn’t see that or so dishonest she could see it but was happy to tell an absurd lie to further the cause. Either way Young is one of the more worthless and dishonest writers reason has ever employed. Shackford, however, might be even worse.
Exactly the case.
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/catch-up-day-open-thread
In NYC, a judge ruled in favor of extending legal protections to polyamorous relationships. I’ve always thought that it was EXTREMELY strange to say ‘People should be able to marry whoever they love’ but not to extend this to multi-partner relationships. And in the ensuing years that I brought this contradiction up to gay marriage supporters, they have acknowledged the disparity but always found some excuse why polyamorous relationships “are different”.
From what I can gather, these people feel poly relationships are ‘icky’ — the exact same way the public thought gay relationships were ‘icky’. And before that, the exact same way the public thought inter-racial relationships were ‘icky’. In fact, the marriage license arose in the United States as a way to keep inter-racial relationships illegal.
But a relationship making you feel icky isn’t a valid reason to keep it illegal. This is (yet another) argument in favor of getting government completely out of marriage. The state doesn’t need to license a marriage in able to be able to mediate a divorce.
And in the ensuing years that I brought this contradiction up to gay marriage supporters, they have acknowledged the disparity but always found some excuse why polyamorous relationships “are different”.
Well from a legal perspective, they are quite different. Most of what drives marriage policy in the United States is the attendant benefits that come with it. If those benefits are suddenly to be extended to Spouse * x (where X is an unlimited and unknowable #) then that changes the benefits equation dramatically. It really can’t even be understated.
Think about this, just in the realm of this particular court case. A land owner who was renting the apartment is shackled by rent control. Based on the rules of rent control, that applies to Spouse * 1. This judge just walked into the middle of the rules and said, “No, the strictures and regulations (and limitations to the land owner) are now extended to Spouse * X, where X is determined not by any legal standing such as a marriage or declared domestic partnership, but a guy that showed up and said, “What about me?”
Considering he was supporting “Cuties” at the same time it didn’t age well the moment he said it.
The real tragedy is “cutie” is what I used to say to describe dogs I saw, babies dressed up in fun outfits, and certain small types of oranges.
Now, the word is tainted. Is there no word that I can keep for innocent reasons? I used to have a gay time every weekend. Me and the Girlfriend out enjoying the life of young raconteurs.
Now all my gay times just end in me crying in a shower.
“I used to have a gay time every weekend.”
You date back to, like, the 1930s, when people still used “gay” in that sense?
Yeah, I was frozen in the 1920s after falling into a lake in winter while attempting a flagpole sitting.
you didn’t just bounce off the ice?
Fell through a hole made by some ice fisherman who were set up near the flagpole.
As good a movie premise as most of them.
If you happened to meet The Flinstones, that modern stone-aged family back in the 60’s you were encouraged to have a gay, old time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s13X66BFd8
As Fred and Barney did from time to time.
Oh, look, another ‘tolerance’ monger that can’t resist a joke implying that two grown male friends who are both married with kids must secretly be buggering each other. Didn’t even bother to provide a humorous anecdote about their fraternal organization.
It is called ‘projection’, White Mike. But I suspect your buddy Sarcasmic will never fuck you and you are too old for SPB.
Would you call that homophobic humor to make a joke insinuating a gay relationship between two male characters?
I think I would call it a form of homophobia-the implication being that straight men are not allowed to have male friends without accusations that they’re secretly fornicating.
Objectivity is homophobic?
The lefties enjoy the implication that all close relationships are based on sexual attraction. It justifies their perversions. “Sex = love” has always been an integral step in the grooming process.
It’s Broke-Rock Mountain all over again.
LOL
Stealing jokes from Slate?
Yabba dabba do..n’t go there.
Slippery slope remains the undefeated champ.
That said, why is legalizing polygamy a bad thing? who cares.
Also, government shouldnt haven anything to do with any marriage of any kind.
In honor of Columbus day I think we should all pause and think about the native americans, the ask the epa when they are going to fine their asses for their ancestors hunting all of the mega fauna to extention, the ask the doj if they are going to demand they pay reparations to what’s left of the Toltec they genocided
Give the sacred Badlands back to the Cheyenne who had it stolen from them by the Sioux.
Will the Cree also pay reparations to the other tribes they enslaved?
Will the Comanches for their genocide against the Tonkawas? Oddly, woke leftists never seem to want to talk about these issues.
That’s because all native Americans are the same,
Who’s going to pay the Anastazi?
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-dec-20-me-55814-story.html
“What was ‘normal’ or ‘nontraditional’ in 1989 is not a barometer for what is normal or nontraditional now,” wrote the judge. “Should a person who would not meet the requirements for succession to a rent-stabilized apartment after Braschi was decided in 1989, now, 33 years later, be evicted when they may qualify, as was concluded in Braschi, under a more inclusive interpretation of a family?”
That’s an interesting way of looking at the law.
Also, you know where this is going, right? That this has absolutely nothing to do with “loving who you want” but has to do with getting state pension benefits for
1multiple spouses, right? Right?This, it’s a judge ruling this whay because she thinks she should be allowed to dictate how people run their business
Reason for Rent Control if it advances polyamory.
Hey guys, swing over to Spiked-Online for some Libertarian coverage of the Paypal issue, which I don’t believe Reason has even thought about, let alone discussed.
Kind of makes me wonder how much of the benefit of something like Bitcoin simply is that it’s still so highly unregulated. The biggest technical problem I’ve seen with people trying to set up their own payment stuff is that there is 200 years of labyrinthine regulation to follow.
Some of it is probably reasonable (even if I still question it) but I have to imagine that it mostly just causes issues like this where PayPal is hard to build against. Same as a lot of banks.
Though, there are competitors now. Visa and Mastercard are the two financial Duopolies I’m actually aware of.
Real talk though. What did they THINK was going to be the reaction?
This was probably the reaction they expected.
That’s being charitable
someone unironically thinking this was a good look is the most concerning thing
Also, the amount of useful idiots that think “surely this will only ever be used against my opponents” is also concerning.
And, no one in a leadership position thought ‘maybe we should run this past legal’.
If they had actually implemented and tried to act upon this policy, I could easily see them being sued into oblivion. You don’t just get to unilaterally change a contract and then steal people’s money.
They 100% ran it past legal. Probably 1000% ran it past legal. A corporation doesn’t wiggle its little finger on even minor “company policy” decisions (whether you’re a tech company or not) without running it past legal. That’s what your legal department does. It spends all day going over policies and procedures and making sure everything is legit. And when you work for a large corporation, that’s a full time job for at least a couple of lawyers.
I’m in manufacturing and we have a legal department with two full-time lawyers. These are internal lawyers… not outside counsel, but regular employees who show up in the office like everyone else does, and constantly review and go over policies and internal documents to make sure they pass muster. If Paypal DIDN’T run this past their legal department, then I want even less to do with them than I did before, because they’re wholly incompetent.
Side note edit: The hollywood version of a lawyer is you wear a suit and spend all day in front of judges, litigating cases in courtrooms dramatically shouting “I just want the truth!”. But there are a jillions people with law degrees who never see the inside of a courtroom, but work for big companies and hang out at the water cooler cracking wise, just like other employees. The guys who wear suits and and wingtips and bill by the hour are “outside counsel”.
And god help the last clinging particles of libertarianism if it turns out an action WOULD be technically legal, because under “section 230” it is generally agreed that a corporation fining people for “misinformation” falls under the category of ‘moderating in good faith”.
I’ve withdrawn every red cent from my personal PayPal account and shut it down over the weekend.
I recommend that everyone does the same.
This was like some of the biggest tech news of the last 48 hours. The fact that Spiked can do a 3000 word article on it, with a clear viewpoint of condemnation and Reason hasn’t even done a brickbat on it tells you where Reason’s editorial priorities are.
We got a mention about Poly relationships FINALLY being recognized by a judge, though!
Fact Check:
Spiked article is NOT 3000 words!
Verdict: PANTS ON FIRE
Not just that, recognized so that they can qualify for continued rent controls. It’s spitting in the face of Britscghi.
Yeah, no shit. Hooray for Libertarian Moment! POLY relationships now benefit from rent control!
This whole goddamned rag has gone full Libertarian Marxism: Be free, do what you want, man, and the collective will support you.
This is because Reason writers mostly have no problem with this action. Most of them support it even.
Walk Back Better
Yes it is. And what makes it serious is this attitude combined with an damned near unbreakable monopoly in most cases.
Fascism Is Spreading — And It’s a Sign of Civilizational Collapse
Why Democracy’s Dying, or Four Words That Should Chill Everyone: Fascism’s Returning to Europe
Fascism’s returned to Europe.
Not even fascism-lite, the way that Trump obliquely peddled it, and it took American intellectuals far too long — the better part of a decade — to understand that yes, this really was fascism, something they were afraid to contend until Dark Brandon — Joe Biden’s fearless, give ’em hell alter ego came out and said it.
What’s happening in Europe is a fascism harder and more serious than even Trumpism.
Europeans are politely pretending like they are not now in a very great deal of trouble. But then ugly, brutal, shocking facts speak for themselves, and if you think I exaggerate, let us consider the facts. Sweden used to be a nation that was a model for the world, beloved of liberals, championed as an ideal of progress. Now? In a political shockwave, it’s second largest party is the “Sweden Democrats” — an organization literally born of Neo-Nazism.
Gentle, sane Sweden. Who’s second largest party is now rooted in Neo-Nazism. Sure, it’s taken pains to change that image in recent years. But reality is, you know, reality. One can hardly expect something born of Neo-Nazism to be anything but explicitly fascist, which is what the Sweden Democrats are, pitting Swedes against one another, scapegoating minorities for the woes of the “real” Swede, unleashing a tide of hate and vitriol that makes Trumpism look tame. Becoming the second largest party in the country, the Sweden Democrats will now exercise determining power the nation’s future. Sweden’s future is to be decided by a party born in Neo-Nazism, who have the backing of a huge, huge portion of the country.
https://eand.co/fascism-is-spreading-and-its-a-sign-of-civilizational-collapse-c509828bae5d
Sarc walks into a bar and grabs a seat next to spb. Spb already a few drinks in says “did you see that house, I built that house, but do they call me sbp the house builder? No! And did you see that store on the corner? I built that store, do they call me spb the store builder? No! And this bar, I built this bar with my own hand, do they call me spb the bar builder? No! …. But you post child porn 1 time…”
Wow, the great libertarian essayist Umair Haque sure is popular around here. It wasn’t long ago that chemjeff linked to one of his pieces. The fundamental point of that one was that LITERAL FASCISM is about to overtake the US — unless we help DARK BRANDON stop it.
#LibertariansForBiden
Haha, Dark Brandon. It cracks me up.
Dark Brandon is so dreamy.
Stop calling everything you dislike ‘fascist’
I agree. The term has been wildly overused.
A good old-fashioned national pride conservative is no “fascist”.
It got overused because racist and nazi stopped working.
What ever happened to Episiarch?
Exodus 3.0 I think. Yeah, I’ve been here that long.
Same with Warty too, I guess
Was that the one with Snoopy’s mom? Or is that a different Exodus?
I love the history of Reason comments.
I was just a lurker during the exodus to glibs. Also, I miss John’s typos.
Tim Cavanaugh called John a “staunch spelling refusenik”.
God I miss Cavanaugh.
Highly entertaining and sometimes those spelling errors would be all to on the nose.
JesseAZ is very John like…
If I recall he used to make spelling errors that changed the meaning of the message in… meaningful ways.
I heard he did something unspeakable and everyone hates him now because he is an asshole.
Did he beg for money then run off with it? I think I recall vaguely something like that happening over at the Glibs. I look at them like once a year though.
I don’t know the details, but he pissed off a bunch of people sometime around the founding of Glibs. I really never look at glibs, so I don’t know if he ever showed himself again.
Glibs was basically another failed experiment in getting libertarians to band together…
I was at Glibs as well. I don’t have any complaints, it just felt like it was a little Clique-ish, and I never do well in those environments, because no matter WHAT the group emphasis is, I’m never one of the cool ones.
No criticism at all of course. Its just that all too common problem of getting a bunch of libertarian individualists to stay banded together. Like a convention for introverts.
I may be remembering this wrong, but as I recall, most of the people… or at least the ones I recall who ran off to Glibs were more in line with the eye-rolling at the very… very… VERY early onset of wokeishness in the culture. There was a previous exodus where the left-leaning libertarians more sympathetic to woke ran off. Ie, libertarians that might cheer a rent control scheme that recognized polyamory… or would have supported crazy-pants soros-funded police reform regardless of how retarded it got because we have to fight the prison industrial complex at all costs… for instance.
But who knows. I’m an old fuddy duddy that stuck around because… I dunno, where else am I gonna go? Plus, there are some top shelf commenters here I always stop and read. I don’t use the mute feature because I don’t believe in it, but it would be nice if reason had a ‘highlight’ feature. That I’d use.
Happy indignant persons day America!
Joe and the Whore in ’24!
Did Willy Brown go downtown on KH? She wasn’t a bad lookin’ broad back in the day, she’s just dumber than a potted plant. And that voice, it’s like fingernails on a chalkboard. When Biden sent her to South Korea that must have struck terror in the hearts of the Norcomms. SK must have been like WTF? KH is a prime example of the Peter principle: She rose to the level of her own incompetence.
KH is annoying – not stupid.
MTG is fucking stupid. Jewish space lasers and all the nonsense she spews.
KH spews clutter and that annoying hyena laugh. KH stammers around trying to find the least offensive thing to say and winds up saying nothing.
At least MTG can put together a coherent sentence. KH does no such thing, and rarely do you to either, pedo.
Ah, Donald, never change:
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-george-bush-secret-documents-chinese-restaurant-bowling-alley-2022-10
Trump then falsely claimed that former President George H.W. Bush, ‘took millions and millions of documents to a former bowling alley pieced together with what was then an old and broken Chinese restaurant. They put them together. And it had a broken front door and broken windows. Other than that it was quite secure.’
“Trump also questioned why Bush, among other presidents, was not being prosecuted. The former President died in a Houston hospital from a blood infection in 2018 after his wife, Barbara, died months earlier.”
So, WTF is he even babbling on about?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-bush-classified-documents-chinese-restaurant-b2199285.html
What are you babbling about? Other than Shreek, who is a pedophile and SQRLY or whatever his name is, who is a certifiable lunatic, your posts make the least sense of anyone on here. Chemjeff is just a dishonest prick. You seem to be genuinely confused most of the time but not actually crazy the way the other leftists on this site are.
I’m most offended that the article felt the need to explain what a 7-10 split was. Don’t talk down to me, Business Insider.
Harris is a politician and a hypocrite, but I repeat myself.
Ben Bernanke, Nobel Prize winner?
Apparently, studying a problem you helped create now counts as a major accomplishment.