Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Defense Spending

Biden Is Set To Sign $858 Billion Pentagon Budget—One of the Biggest Ever

Plus: North Carolina strikes down voter ID law, more turmoil at Twitter, and more...

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 12.19.2022 9:43 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
troops boarding plane | Photo by <a href="https://unsplash.com/@actuallyjoel?utm_source=unsplash&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=creditCopyText">Joel Rivera-Camacho</a> on <a href="https://unsplash.com/?utm_source=unsplash&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=creditCopyText">Unsplash</a>
(Photo by Joel Rivera-Camacho on Unsplash )

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is expanding the military budget enormously. Pentagon spending is set to hit levels not seen since the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The national military budget that President Joe Biden is expected to approve this week comes to a whopping $858 billion.

That's $45 billion more than even Biden was requesting, and it's a 10 percent increase over last year's $778 billion authorization. (You can find a summary of NDAA-approved spending here.)

"If approved at this level, the Pentagon budget will have grown at 4.3 percent per year over the last two years—even after inflation—compared with an average of less than 1 percent a year in real dollars between 2015 and 2021," reports The New York Times.

83 Senators voted to pass a $858 BILLION defense budget this week.

That's $2.3 billion a day.

$97 million an hour.

All being funneled to an agency that has never passed a SINGLE audit and can't account for over HALF its assets ????????????

— Rep. Barbara Lee (@RepBarbaraLee) December 17, 2022

This stems in part from a scramble to stockpile weapons after so many U.S. munitions have been shipped to Ukraine. This year's NDAA would authorize $800 million for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative—"an increase of $500 million above the President's budget request," the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee points out.

"The Ukrainian military has run through years' worth of the missile production capacity of Western suppliers in a matter of months," notes the Times. More:

Lockheed Martin, the nation's largest military contractor, had booked more than $950 million worth of its own missile military orders from the Pentagon in part to refill stockpiles being used in Ukraine. The Army has awarded Raytheon Technologies more than $2 billion in contracts to deliver missile systems to expand or replenish weapons used to help Ukraine.

An analysis from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, commissioned by the Times, found that inflation-adjusted military spending is set to reach its highest level "since the peaks in the costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars between 2008 and 2011, and the second highest in inflation-adjusted terms since World War II—a level that is more than the budgets for the next 10 largest cabinet agencies combined."

Antiwar.com lays out some more of the spending particulars.

This ignominious plan passed the Senate by a bipartisan vote of 83–11 last Thursday, having already passed the House. The measure now awaits Biden's signature.

Meanwhile, Congress is scrambling to pass an omnibus spending bill to fund the federal government through next September. The $1.7 trillion proposal is expected to include even more funding for Ukraine, with the White House seeking $37.7 billion for this purpose.


FREE MINDS

North Carolina's Supreme Court has struck down a state requirement that voters must show photo identification. The court held that the 2018 law was passed "to target African-American voters who were unlikely to vote for Republican candidates."

"Given the rarity of voter fraud in North Carolina, a less restrictive law could have been sufficient to deter voter fraud and promote voter confidence in elections had this goal been the law's only actual purpose," states the court's ruling.

It also ruled against North Carolina's redrawn Senate electoral map. The Wall Street Journal editorial board accuses the majority in this case—all Democrats—of partisan-minded shenanigans on this front:

The Democratic Justices cast aside their earlier ruling that maps that complied with statistical tests would be "presumptively constitutional." The Senate map complied, but the Justices struck it down anyway because of the "contextual factual finding" that Democrats didn't vote for it.

In sum, the Democratic Justices gave themselves unchecked authority over redistricting. As Republican Chief Justice Paul Newby explained in a dissent, the majority's vague criteria for judging maps "ensures that four members of this Court alone understand what redistricting plan is constitutionally compliant."


FREE MARKETS

Another turbulent weekend for Twitter. The company announced Sunday that it would ban linking to or promoting a number of other social media sites, including Instagram, Facebook, Truth Social, and Mastodon. But by the end of the day, Twitter appeared to have reversed course, deleting the tweets that had announced this change and removing the new policy from its website. Twitter CEO Elon Musk posted Sunday night that going forward, he would not make any major policy decisions without putting it to a poll first.

Musk then posted a poll about whether he should step down as CEO.

This weekend also saw further fallout from Musk's decision to ban an account that tweeted about his private jet trips and journalists that mentioned the account. Musk said he was motivated to do so out of concern for his children, claiming that the jet location sharing had allowed a stalker to approach his car at a gas station. But geolocation data suggests the car was nowhere near the airport where his jet landed and that the alleged incident happened nearly a day after any his jet's location had last been shared. (Cathy Young has a good thread on the situation here.)

The Washington Post talked with the alleged stalker, who seems to have some delusions about Musk and the musician (and mother of two of Musk's children) Grimes. "There's no indication in videos shared with The Post that Musk's children were present," the paper reports. The alleged stalker—Brandon Collado—"claimed he was making Uber Eats deliveries and visiting a friend when he pulled into the gas station and said Musk's security worker then confronted him without reason. Collado said he believed that Musk was monitoring his real-time location."

Los Angeles police said over the weekend that no crime report had been filed. "South Pasadena police were called to the gas station, according to the business's manager, but made no arrests," reports the Post.


QUICK HITS

THREAD: There has been a fair amount of discussion about how, even with the changes, the #KidsOnlineSafetyAct (or #KOSA) would be weaponized against LGBTQ+ folks & especially queer and trans youth.

But there's another huge problem with the bill: it would censor abortion content.

— Evan Greer is on Mastodon and Bluesky (@evan_greer) December 16, 2022

• "The House Jan. 6 committee met Sunday to finalize its plans to issue at least three criminal referrals for former President Donald Trump," NBC reports.

• Two tech trade groups, NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association, are asking the Supreme Court to review an appeals court decision upholding Texas' social media law.

• Oberlin College will pay $36 million to a bakery that students and faculty accused of racism.

• A Wetumpka, Alabama, court recently sentenced two women to two years of probation, $100 in fines, and 10 days in jail for feeding stray cats (though the jail sentence was suspended). "I have never seen or heard of a case more absurd than this," lawyer William Shashy told The Washington Post.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Canada Threatens Free Speech in the Guise of Nationalistic Obsessions

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason.

Defense SpendingReason RoundupMilitaryDefenseGovernment SpendingPentagonCongressweaponsUkraineBiden AdministrationPolitics
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (491)

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.

  1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

    I thought the other guys were the war mongers?

    1. mad.casual   2 years ago

      Of all the egos that have had a hand on The Button, it's time the GOP moved passed the one that was truly dangerous.

      1. Nardz   2 years ago

        https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/1604871630613753856?t=xivCfCT7G32lsTnvkoJP1g&s=19

        1. TWITTER FILES: PART 7

        The FBI & the Hunter Biden Laptop

        How the FBI & intelligence community discredited factual information about Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings both after and *before* The New York Post revealed the contents of his laptop on October 14, 2020

        [Thread]

        1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

          They're coming out at a nice clip now.

        2. AshleyMason   2 years ago (edited)

          I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..

          HERE====)> http://www.earnbigmoney69.blogspot.com

        3. JessicaBarron   2 years ago (edited)

          I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..

          HERE====)> http://WWW.RICHSALARIES.COM

      2. CE   2 years ago

        You mean the hand that stayed away from war in Syria and fired Bolton rather than escalate to war in Iran? The hand that Russia and North Korea were afraid to upset? Or the one on the button now, that invited Russia into Ukraine and made no serious attempt to negotiate a peace?

    2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

      Here's the key point that Nolan Brown cited:

      This stems in part from a scramble to stockpile weapons after so many U.S. munitions have been shipped to Ukraine. This year's NDAA would authorize $800 million for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative—"an increase of $500 million above the President's budget request," the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee points out.

      So most of this increase is actually being driven by our involvement in an ongoing conflict that isn't even pertinent to our own security, other than the possible benefit of bleeding Russia dry enough that the whole country collapses out of sheer stubbornness by Putin to not admit that his military has no battlefield counter to American missile and rocket capabilities.

      Granted, that might not be the worst thing in the world, but it definitely isn't being driven by spending on MILCON or readiness requirements.

      Meanwhile, per the Treasury, spending on Medicare and Medicaid services topped $2 TRILLION last year--no, that's not a typo, it's right on Table 5, page 14 of the Treasury's September 2022 statement.

      1. rev-arthur-l-kuckland   2 years ago

        But we also dwindle our stockpile for when the ccp attacks

      2. Agammamon   2 years ago

        Indirectly it is - we need to replenish munitions we've given away.

        We already had very 'shallow magazines' because of unrealistic assumptions about munition consumption in a real war and Ukraine has basically emptied them all by itself.

        1. gihixo   2 years ago (edited)

          Sᴛᴀʀᴛ ᴡᴏʀᴋɪɴɢ ғʀᴏᴍ ʜᴏᴍᴇ! Gʀᴇᴀᴛ ᴊᴏʙ ғᴏʀ sᴛᴜᴅᴇɴᴛs, sᴛᴀʏ-ᴀᴛ-ʜᴏᴍᴇ ᴍᴏᴍs ᴏʀ ᴀɴʏᴏɴᴇ ɴᴇᴇᴅɪɴɢ ᴀɴ ᴇxᴛʀᴀ ɪɴᴄᴏᴍᴇ… Yᴏᴜ ᴏɴʟʏ ɴᴇᴇᴅ ᴀ ᴄᴏᴍᴘᴜᴛᴇʀ ᴀɴᴅ ᴀ ʀᴇʟɪᴀʙʟᴇ ɪɴᴛᴇʀɴᴇᴛ ᴄᴏɴɴᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴ… Mᴀᴋᴇ $80 ʜᴏᴜʀʟʏ ᴀɴᴅ ᴜᴘ ᴛᴏ $13000 ᴀ ᴍᴏɴᴛʜ ʙʏ ғᴏʟʟᴏᴡɪɴɢ ʟɪɴᴋ ᴀᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ʙᴏᴛᴛᴏᴍ ᴀɴᴅ sɪɢɴɪɴɢ ᴜᴘ… Yᴏᴜ ᴄᴀɴ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ʏᴏᴜʀ ғɪʀsᴛ ᴄʜᴇᴄᴋ ʙʏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴇɴᴅ ᴏғ ᴛʜɪs ᴡᴇᴇᴋ:) GOOD LUCK.:)

          OPEN>>  GOOGLE WORK

      3. CE   2 years ago

        And who knows where they ended up, after Ukraine shipped them out for cash?

    3. Liberty_Belle   2 years ago

      "That's $45 billion more than even Biden was requesting"

      Well, if he isn't asking for it ... then who the hell is handing out free cash ?

      1. Liberty_Belle   2 years ago

        "Senators supported the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, an annual must-pass bill setting policy for the Pentagon, by an overwhelming 83-11 bipartisan majority.

        The no votes came from a mix of liberals who object to the ever-rising military budget and fiscal conservatives who want tighter controls on spending. "
        ------------------------------------
        https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-senate-backs-record-858-billion-defense-bill-voting-continues-2022-12-16/

        It's getting so I can't figure out which side I'm supposed to be against.

    4. Utkonos   2 years ago

      You know who else was a warmonger?

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        Custer?

    5. Wizard4169   2 years ago

      Spoiler alert: It's always the other guys. That's why calls to throw the bums out never get far. It turns out my congresscritter is an upstanding public servant just looking out for their constituents. It's all those other bums that are the problem.

  2. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

    Again, tell me something that Joe Biden has made better. (Except the bank accounts of Mr Koch)

    1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

      https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/10/06/granting-pardon-for-the-offense-of-simple-possession-of-marijuana/

      1. R Mac   2 years ago

        “As 16 drug policy reform groups noted in an open letter, his order "did nothing to address the thousands of federal cannabis prisoners currently incarcerated in federal prison." Nor did it help federal marijuana offenders who have been released from prison but continue to bear the lifelong burden of felony records.”

        https://reason.com/2022/12/05/bidens-marijuana-reform-leaves-prohibition-untouched/

        The Whitehouse pulled a PR stunt before the midterms and Lefty Jeffy laps it up like a good little toady.

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

          It didn't go far enough, that is true. But it was nonetheless something that Biden made better.

          Does Biden deserve credit for his marijuana pardons?

          1. JesseAz   2 years ago

            How is a non effective change better? Do you think this was more of a change than First Step Act?

            1. Sevo   2 years ago

              "...Do you think..."

              There's your problem with that lying pile of lefty shit, right there.

              1. JesseAz   2 years ago

                Point taken.

                1. JohnDixon   2 years ago (edited)

                  I am making $92 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $16,000 a month by working on a laptop, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply.
                  Everybody must try this job now by just using this website.. http://Www.onlinecash1.com

          2. NOYB2   2 years ago

            Well, he deserves credit for undermining the rule of law and abusing his pardon power.

            He has still failed to pass meaningful reform.

          3. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

            Are you shitting me? After 2 years that’s all you could come up with, an empty gesture? LOL

            1. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

              pretty amazing he even offered that up in earnest. Literally not one person was set free.

              1. R Mac   2 years ago

                I don’t call him Lefty Jeffy for nothing.

            2. Nardz   2 years ago

              https://twitter.com/Aristos_Revenge/status/1604898572280901632?t=gNg_QRNrD6IxjuGSXuxnrw&s=19

              I would argue that Biden has set the tone that Democrat presidents will no longer actually exist as individuals now.

              Nobody hates or loves Biden at a personal level because it's implicitly clear to everyone that on some level he is not in charge.

              He's just the face of a nameless and faceless collective of millennial and gen X bureaucrats making decisions on behalf of boomer and silent shotcallers.

              He's the figurehead of a collective, and he can avoid emotive "responsibility" for anything similarly.

              It's sort of like how nobody will be held responsible for COVID, because you can't put the CDC or NIH in jail. They are organizations, and organizations are a collective shit shield for a group of people acting in concert.

              In this way, Biden is like a living organization. His personality was sandblasted out by dementia and now he's a political fleshlight for theater kids.

              1. R Mac   2 years ago

                True. But coulda done without the fleshlight imagery.

          4. Agammamon   2 years ago

            No, it was nothing. You can admit that.

            1. R Mac   2 years ago

              He can’t though.

          5. CE   2 years ago

            Yes, of course.

    2. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

      Biking safety awareness?

    3. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Increased demand for unscented shampoo?

    4. Kungpowderfinger   2 years ago

      Speaking of Mr. Koch, why is he so upset with Musk? Does he think the DOJ censoring the news at Twitter was a move in the right direction for “Free Minds”?

      1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

        Judging by the coverage in his mouth piece publication it would appear so.

    5. Foo_dd   2 years ago

      none of them ever make anything better.... they just make things worse in different ways.

  3. sarcasmic   2 years ago

    The court held that the 2018 law was passed "to target African-American voters who were unlikely to vote for Republican candidates."

    This just shows that stores selling alcohol and tobacco aren't carding black people.

    1. ElizabethSpaulding   2 years ago (edited)

      I get paid more than $100 to $500 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this I have earned easily $21k from this without having online working skills . Simply give it a shot on the accompanying site…

      Here is I started...................>>> onlinecareer1

    2. Agammamon   2 years ago

      It's amazing how much misery for Blacks over the last couple of centuries has come from Democrats that think they're subhuman and incapable of even the basic tasks we take for granted.

    3. CE   2 years ago

      If true, that could be viewed as a reasonable argument. But how many people in NC have no ID?

  4. JesseAz   2 years ago

    This is the return to normalcy the editors here craved.

    1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

      On the matter of military spending, there is scarcely any difference between Team Red and Team Blue.

      1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

        I'm actually surprised it went up like that because programs are getting cut left and right.

        1. Idaho Bob   2 years ago

          The skimming hasn't stopped.

        2. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

          Domestic spying hardware is expensive.

          1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

            Tinfoil hats are cheap.

            1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

              So you're saying the DHS and FBI spying on Americans en masse is a conspiracy theory?

              1. R Mac   2 years ago

                Wait until he hears about wikileaks!

            2. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago (edited)

              The left bought all the remaining stock.

              I half kid with my above comment. But if you think military is not invovled in domestic spying, guess again.

              An interesting question is why is that level of budget necessary in peacetime?

              https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/militarization-domestic-surveillance-everyones-problem#:~:text=National%20Guard%20units%20and%20civilians%20working%20at%20military,prohibiting%20U.S.%20military%20personnel%20from%20enforcing%20criminal%20laws.

              First, military agencies are conducting domestic intelligence collection against Americans, and providing that information to law enforcement officials. The National Security Agency scoops up domestic telephone calling data, as well as the content of U.S. international communications (“inadvertently” grabbing tens of thousands of purely domestic calls each year in the process). The FBI has direct access to this material, and can use it for general criminal purposes through so-called “back door searches.”

              Military officials also collect domestic intelligence for “force protection.” A military unit that was caught spying on anti-war protesters under this authority was disbanded in 2008, but the Defense Intelligence Agency picked up its “offensive counterintelligence” duties and re-established an intelligence database in 2010. National Guard units and civilians working at military agencies have been caught illegally spying on domestic protesters, and more recently, engaging in undercover law enforcement activities in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, a law prohibiting U.S. military personnel from enforcing criminal laws.

              Second, military agencies and personnel participate in formal and informal information sharing programs on the federal and state level, including between FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces, state and local law enforcement intelligence fusion centers, and information sharing networks like the Navy’s Law Enforcement Information Exchange (LInX), and the FBI’s eGuardian program. Though there are legal limits to the type of work military officials can do within these programs and the information they can share, there is little to no oversight conducted to ensure they follow the law.

              Third, military intelligence tactics and attitudes rub off on law enforcement personnel assigned to intelligence matters. Most nations outlaw espionage, so foreign intelligence activities have to be carried out through stealth and deception. Avoidance of the law and contempt for the truth can become habitual among intelligence officials, but they simply have no place in a democratic government’s interactions with its own citizens. Yet, throughout the history of domestic intelligence operations in the U.S., law enforcement officials have gone to the military intelligence toolbox in selecting their methods.

              1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

                Another thing to consider is how many high level intelligence people leave an agency to go into the private intelligence business.

                1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

                  Yeah, just look at the former glowies on Twitter's staff before Musk started cleaning them out.

                  Glowies aren't loyal to the US, they're loyal to the glow.

            3. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

              ""Tinfoil hats are cheap.""

              Remember when black helicopters was a tin hat conspiracy at the very time the National Guard was flying Blackhawk helos in the black color scheme to assist law enforcement in find pot plants?

              They use to fly over my house on the way to their patrol areas.

              1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

                Conspiracy once had meaning. Now it's becoming a term to shutdown conversation. Hunter's laptop for a semi-current example.

      2. JesseAz   2 years ago

        You have the both sides talking point down. It is spending in general. Once again democrats took a one time spending event and made it the new baseline.

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

          Did you miss the headline? The topic IS specifically about military spending. And yes on this issue, it really is BOTH SIDES.

          1. JesseAz   2 years ago

            I'm just pointing out your constant ability to both sides everything. It is a true skill.

            1. HorseConch   2 years ago

              Not sure how skillful it is when everyone ignores him anyways. He's like dealing with Mike, but he puts more effort into is rants to change the subject at hand.

              1. Quo Usque Tandem   2 years ago

                Deflecting is what trolls do. When they're not projecting.

                1. R Mac   2 years ago

                  It’s -ecting all the way down.

      3. NOYB2   2 years ago

        For two simple reasons: (1) military spending is a legitimate function of government, and (2) neocons invaded the Republican party a few decades ago.

        Trump and a few others tried to reverse (2) and got abused for it. Hopefully, future Republicans will be able to turn us "isolationist" (i.e., interact with the rest of the world through commerce and travel).

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

          (2) neocons invaded the Republican party a few decades ago.

          Oh give me a break. Being "pro-military" is not exactly a position foisted upon those rube backwater conservatives by the evil neocons. Team Red has been in favor of ever-expanding military budgets since the Cold War. Team Blue *used* to be more skeptical of that, but now they are fully on board as well.

          And see Jesse? Even fellow Team Red traveler NOYB2 can bring himself to admit that BOTH SIDES really are responsible for massive military budgets. Why can't you?

          1. VULGAR MADMAN   2 years ago

            When was team blue more skeptical about military spending?
            When they were fighting Korea? Or maybe Vietnam?

            1. mad.casual   2 years ago

              Korea?

              Going back to Wilson it's been "Team Writes Checks" v. "Team Cashes Checks".

            2. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

              When team red was in office?

              1. TJJ2000   2 years ago

                ^This one......................

                1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

                  Much like the anti-war protesters that went away when Obama was elected. Bush was a war criminal, but Obama kept the wars going and he was cool.

          2. NOYB2   2 years ago

            Team Red has been in favor of ever-expanding military budgets since the Cold War.

            Both parties have been in favor of ever-expanding military budgets since the Cold War because there was a genuine global threat against the US.

            Team Blue *used* to be more skeptical of that, but now they are fully on board as well.

            Socialist youth opposed Western military spending because that's what their ideological masters in the USSR and China talked them into.

            US Democrats were always on board with it.

            Even fellow Team Red traveler NOYB2

            I'm not a "fellow Team Red" traveler. It doesn't take a Republican to oppose your abject idiocy, Chemjeff.

            1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

              Yeah, you don't start seeing this skepticism of military spending by the Democrats until the New Left took over the party, and even then they'd fight tooth and nail to preserve that spending in their own districts. Pat Schroeder, who reliably voted against any kind of defense spending program while vigorously working to get steady funding for Lowry Air Force Base, which was in her district, comes to mind.

            2. Utkonos   2 years ago

              Remember the Peace Dividend? Weren’t the 90s quaint?

          3. Agammamon   2 years ago

            You think the Democrats were ever skeptical of increasing war?

            Balkans conflict ring a bell? 20 years in Afghanistan thanks to Obama.

        2. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

          No, Trump did nothing of the sort. He worked with Democrats and the Neocons to end the sequester to get military spending increased.

          "As soon as I take office I will ask Congress to fully eliminate the defense sequester and will submit a new budget to rebuild our military. It is so depleted. We will rebuild our military"

          - DJT Tweet

  5. JesseAz   2 years ago

    Denver mayor seeing influx of illegal immigrants declares a crisis for the city. City services are flooded and at risk. Over a million illegal immigrants. Wait. Make that under a thousand. Less than most border towns see weekly.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/emergency-declaration-migrants-denver-influx-mayor-michael-hancock-volunteers-crisis/

    Should have just bought them pizza and then deported them like MV.

    1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

      Buy pizza futures!

      1. Utkonos   2 years ago

        I’ll take a slice of that action!

    2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago (edited)

      This seems to be the new tactic by Democrat-run sanctuary cities to try and force some kind of open borders policy and for massive federal spending to accommodate the migrants. In El Paso’s case, it’s certainly warranted since that is a main point of entry, but Denver is trying to get some cheddar from Uncle Sugar to deal with their own issues.

      Keep mind that Denver’s had a MASSIVE influx of immigration, illegal and otherwise, over the last 20-odd years. Lots of schools on the Front Range that were legitimately ethnically diverse or majority white by huge margins in the 1980s and 90s are running anywhere between 25-75% Hispanic now, with correlated increases in free breakfast and lunch programs by Front Range school districts. Throw in the spike in housing prices over the last 7 or so years, and the concurrent homeless crisis ever since weed was legalized and the city became a magnet for drug addicts, and there’s really nowhere for these people to stay.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if the Front Range cities end up dramatically reforming their zoning laws to start installing Tuff Sheds on empty lots and dead commercial strips so these people have a place to stay. I’m sure turning swaths of American cities into Brazilian favelas wouldn’t have any negative social consequences whatsoever.

      1. Ersatz   2 years ago (edited)

        but Denver is trying to get some cheddar from Uncle Sugar -talk about a culinary mixed metaphor!

        all in ref to a side of pork

        1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

          Honey-baked hams.

      2. Utkonos   2 years ago

        What do they do with all the homeless during the winter?

        1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

          Usually they go to places like the Denver Rescue Mission.

    3. DRM   2 years ago

      I'm a resident of El Paso. My father has been spending his retirement doing volunteer work for the hungry and homeless, and all such institutions here are absolutely slammed by the mass migration that started with Biden coming to power . . . and we can see the numbers gathering in Juarez in anticipation of the ending of Title 42.

      And those idiots in Denver are declaring an emergency over the "great strain" of a few hundred people? Those morons in NYC and DC were complaining about a few busloads Abbot sent them?

      And our Democrat-controlled Congress could fix this pretty easily, if the Democrats actually cared in the slightest for these people. Fort Bliss is 1.1 million acres of mostly empty land. Setting up shelter, basic sanitation, food distribution, and security on it might manage to run into the billions of dollars, but that's a rounding error in the federal budget. They could even pass some actual laws to deal with the influx instead of sitting back and having the Federal executive and the judiciary argue about emergencies and delegations and technicalities.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        Send the illegals to a military base? Who do you think you are, Martha's Vineyard?

      2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

        There's a lot of ex-military bases in the west that could be converted to shelters. Sort like a big camp where everyone could be concentrated, so they can be monitored for potential illnesses or MS-13 gang ties.

        1. DRM   2 years ago

          There are four choices here:

          1) Don't let any more people across the border into El Paso.
          2) Ship the people who cross the border to other places in the US that have shelter capacity not as utterly overwhelmed as El Paso.
          3) Actually take steps to expand shelter capacity here in El Paso, which, as a simple function of available publicly-owned land, means "on Fort Bliss".
          4) Leave people to die on the streets of El Paso in the coming freezing weather.

  6. Knutsack   2 years ago

    I may not agree with every move Musk makes and, frankly, think some of them are stupid in certain cases, but, man, it is so delicious to watch all this chaos.

    This has echoes of Trump's presidency.

    1. Idaho Bob   2 years ago

      "This has echoes of Trump’s presidency."

      Only because the leftists are losing their shit and are unable to control Musk.

      1. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

        they have a complete stranglehold on literally every public institution, nearly all of government except perhaps the Supreme Court, all of HR and corporate governance and this one minor setback on the least-used, lease-profitable social network is giving them aneurysms

        They cant even tell the different between antifa aggros and journalists doxxing an enemy's location to aid a violent attack, and getting suspended for mocking jokes and scientific debate.

  7. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

    The blockbuster 10k page report on how trump almost destroyed the US is out soon.

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/house/jan-6-committee-final-public-meeting

    1. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

      I'll wait for the movie; Hollywood wouldn't distort the facts, right?

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        You mean more distortion?

        1. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

          I've every bit of faith our solemn elected leaders persued justice with no regard towards the politics. Never before has this country seen such stalwart defenders of the Republic assembled. If they...

          I gave up. Yeah their shit heels.

      2. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   2 years ago

        I'd guess there won't be many facts at all for Hollywood to distort.

      3. Kungpowderfinger   2 years ago

        I’ll wait for the movie

        I hope Amy Schumer plays Liz Cheney.

        1. Fats of Fury   2 years ago

          Will Miss Piggy do?

      4. rev-arthur-l-kuckland   2 years ago

        If they distort the j6 commission report would we get the truth?

    2. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago (edited)

      I’m sure front and center is a video of him saying to protest peacefully. While the J6 committee can ignore that, I don’t think the DOJ can. The J6 committee can ignore all exculpatory evidence that could be presented in his defense. A trial can’t.

    3. CE   2 years ago

      I would say "this time they've got him", but I'll leave that to them.

      If China or Russia were trying to stack up tenuous criminal charges against one of the leading opposition candidates, or trying to impeach a former ruler so he couldn't be reelected (even if that's what the people wanted), would that be viewed as stamping out a threat to democracy, or a tyrannical move to prevent free and fair elections?

  8. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    All about Twitter, and not a word from Reason's sex editor about PornHub and their troubles regarding non-consensual and underage content. Also, regarding sex workers on Twitter.

    https://www.themarysue.com/twitters-latest-policy-change-just-landed-a-major-blow-to-sex-workers/

    However, and most relevant to sex workers, Twitter now prohibits free promotion to “3rd-party social media link aggregators” like Linktree. Linktree and its fellow aggregators are commonly used by sex workers as a centralized resource list, directing clients to a full catalog of accounts on adult social media platforms, such as OnlyFans, ManyVids, and Chaturbate. Whether intentionally or otherwise, Musk’s company has effectively pulled the plug on one of the most important tools sex workers can use to promote their online presence on Twitter.

    You're slacking, ENB.

    1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

      Anything about YouTube, ENB, or is it all Twitter, all the time?

      https://news.yahoo.com/you-tube-removes-porn-hub-channel-over-multiple-violations-093037178.html

      On Friday, the anti-pornography group National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) wrote on its blog that it had flagged content that it believed violated YouTube policies. "After review, YouTube alerted NCOSE that they had terminated the channel for violations of their Community Guidelines." MindGeek, meanwhile, said that performers and sex workers are marginalized groups and called YouTube's "haphazard and arbitrary enforcement... dangerous and harmful."

      1. Anomalous   2 years ago

        YouTube is all about the haphazard and arbitrary.

    2. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

      what's wrong with non-consensual content? It's just one of the myriad sexualities and fetishes we must respect in others.

  9. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

    Well well well. Some people in the so-called "Freedom Caucus" had some anti-freedom ideas in mind.

    https://talkingpointsmemo.com/feature/mark-meadows-exchanged-texts-with-34-members-of-congress-about-plans-to-overturn-the-2020-election

    Mark, in seeing what’s happening so quickly, and reading about the Dominion law suits attempting to stop any meaningful investigation we are at a point of � no return � in saving our Republic !! Our LAST HOPE is invoking Marshall Law!! PLEASE URGE TO PRESIDENT TO DO SO!!

    Reading through these texts, it's a bit disturbing to see Members of Congress citing Newsmax and Revolver as authoritative sources, and blithely repeating fringe conspiracy theories as fact. They clearly have the critical thinking capacity of your typical fringe Internet nutter.

    1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

      The fact that conspiracy theories can't be proven is proof that they're real. Just ask Nardz.

      1. VULGAR MADMAN   2 years ago

        Conspiracy theories? You mean like Russian collusion?

        1. HorseConch   2 years ago

          No, I'm sure he's referring to all the nuclear secrets that he had at Mar-a-Lago to sell.

      2. defaultdotxbe   2 years ago

        I once had a conspiracy theorist tell me (about a different conspiracy theory) that "the evidence of a cover-up is that it's covered up."

        I can honestly say I've never seen logic to tightly circular before, its beautiful in a way.

        1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

          Long time ago I had a nutter roommate who worked graveyard and listened to Coast to Coast. Not only did he listen, but he believed it all. Yeah, circular logic is circular.

          1. VULGAR MADMAN   2 years ago

            And you believe CNN.

            1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

              It's on in the background at work. It "educates" him, taught him everything he knows.

        2. mad.casual   2 years ago

          Sounds like your conspiracy theorist "friend" is going to wind up dead of auto-erotic asphyxiation.

        3. Wizard4169   2 years ago

          Pretty standard for conspiracy theorists. Once you're fully invested in a conspiracy theory, the very lack of evidence becomes evidence. The fact that you can't find real evidence just proves how powerful "they" are, and how good they are at covering their tracks.

    2. NOYB2   2 years ago

      They clearly have the critical thinking capacity of your typical fringe Internet nutter.

      That's still a lot better than yours.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago (edited)

        Oooo sick burn! It totally justifies Members of Congress throwing around wild conspiracy theories and citing Newsmax!

        I remember when Members of Congress who cited loony conspiracy theories like "9/11 was an inside job" were laughed at and ridiculed. Now, Members of Congress who cite loony conspiracy theories are considered "heroes of liberty".

        1. VULGAR MADMAN   2 years ago

          You mean like the election denier who is set to be the new house minority leader?

          1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

            THAT'S DIFFERENT!

          2. R Mac   2 years ago

            No response Lying Jeffy? Hmmmmmm?

            1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

              Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, Lying Jeffy?

        2. JesseAz   2 years ago

          What about posters her who claim they are individualist that spent 5 years pushing trump russia conspiracies? And each time the president blew his nose supported impeachment? The individualist here that supported the executive actively and publicly undermining the president such as leaving troops on Syria and lying to him?

          Oh. That's you.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            That would be the strawman in your head, Jesse.

            But do go on and continue to deflect for Team Red when their Members of Congress are citing conspiracy theories to justify overturning an election.

            1. JesseAz   2 years ago

              It is amazing watching you and sarc lie about your prior stances. It truly is.

              1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                I can't speak for jeff, but the only time I "lie" is when I disagree with the voices in your head.

                1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

                  Sometimes you disagree with something you posted only two posts up, Sarcles.
                  I've never seen anything like it. The memory span of a goldfish, it's like you've had a head injury.

                2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                  Speaking of liars, the Canadian Cunt left a grey turd on my post. How cute. Go shove a poutine up your ass, ass.

                  1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

                    Cope and seethe you malignant troll.

        3. damikesc   2 years ago

          They're about to violate laws in having a Congressional committee submit a criminal referral over nothing more than insane hyperbolic opinion by the MSM and DNC (BIRM)

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            Which laws?

            1. damikesc   2 years ago

              Congress has never been permitted to pursue criminal referrals against anybody given that they do not have anywhere near the limitations that actual law enforcement has.

        4. NOYB2   2 years ago

          It totally justifies Members of Congress throwing around wild conspiracy theories and citing Newsmax!

          Ah, our state-worshiping imbecile thinks that "members of Congress" are some superior species of human being, as opposed to actual representatives of the people!

          Members of Congress don't need any more justifications to "throw around wild conspiracy theories" than your or I.

          It is when they act in their official capacity and in violation of the Constitution and their oath that we can legitimately criticize them and hold them accountable; you know, like the last two impeachments and the Jan 6 hearings.

          1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

            Ah, our state-worshiping imbecile thinks that “members of Congress” are some superior species of human being, as opposed to actual representatives of the people!

            Well, chemtard is someone who thinks people should never criticize "the experts."

            1. R Mac   2 years ago

              He also thinks the FBI and other federal agencies telling Twitter to censor people is just them exercising their first amendment rights.

    3. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

      Yes jeff. Challenging elections through courts was unheard of prior to 2020.

      Are you an idiot? Also nice choice of sources for the most neutral poster here.

      This is much worse than democrats trying to use the courts to disallow candidates from even running for office like the Elias group is doing.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        there you are, deflecting for Team Red, even when they are demanding literal martial law

        1. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

          How is calling out the idiocy of your post deflecting? They went to courts to try to fix what they perceived as illegal election actions. Over a dozen courts have now agreed those changes in 2020 were illegal. Are you even aware of that?

          Are you now supporting government illegally changing election rules if it helps democrats win?

          And no i don't support marshal law over elections. But im fine with legal challenges dumbass.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            here you go, trying to change the subject.

            One more time:

            Mark, in seeing what’s happening so quickly, and reading about the Dominion law suits attempting to stop any meaningful investigation we are at a point of � no return � in saving our Republic !! Our LAST HOPE is invoking Marshall Law!! PLEASE URGE TO PRESIDENT TO DO SO!!

            that was YOUR TEAM, Jesse, that was demanding martial law to stop the peaceful transition of power. and you can't bring yourself to criticize it, instead you deflect and try to change the subject to lawsuits.

            Why can't you just say that imposing martial law to stop the peaceful transfer of power is bad?

            1. NOYB2   2 years ago

              Why can’t you just say that imposing martial law to stop the peaceful transfer of power is bad?

              The US has engineered the use of martial law to stop the peaceful transfer of power in other nations. Martial law would have been preferable to the peaceful transfer of power to Hitler. Are you saying martial law is always bad?

              1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                and now you're trying to justify advocating for martial law in this country. wow unbelievable

                1. NOYB2   2 years ago

                  You made a generic statement that "imposing martial law to stop the peaceful transfer of power is bad". I countered your statement with examples from history.

                  I do not believe that imposing martial law in response to the 2020 election would have been justified. But it's a free country and it is perfectly legitimate for people to discuss such possibilities.

                  You operate from such a totalitarian mindset, Chemjeff, that you want to demonize people for speech.

        2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

          Obviously someone (Jeffy) was asleep in 2000.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            In 2000, which Member of Congress again demanded that the president impose martial law in order to stop the peaceful transfer of power?

        3. NOYB2   2 years ago

          People say all sorts of things in their texts.

          What matters is what they did: they challenged election results in court and were considering challenging them in Congress. Both of those are legitimate, much as Democrats disagree.

    4. Agammamon   2 years ago

      Guy references a Tekken character - even capitalizing the name - and, to leftists, it's an imminent threat and not a joke.

    5. CE   2 years ago

      "Marshall Law" -- does he mean like in the old West, when they had a Marshall?

      Or martial law, like closing off the Capitol with barbed wire and putting thousands of National Guardsmen there to stop protests about election integrity?

      1. Utkonos   2 years ago

        Marshall Law to enforce the Martial Plan?

  10. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    And yet Texas seems to be forced to handle far more with less whining.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/we-are-urgent-need-help-nyc-mayor-starts-freaking-out-over-impending-wave-illegal

    New York City Mayor Eric Adams on Sunday warned that the city should brace for more than 1,000 new migrants arriving every week, which will coincide with cuts in critical city services, as a key Biden administration policy on immigration is set to expire this week.

    1. Super Scary   2 years ago

      At least those migrants are going to enjoy an authentic New York slice before being rounded up by the military. None of that Domino's shit the ones in MV got.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        Dominos? I thought the Peoples' Republic of MV had laws against corporate vendors.

        1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

          OK, then a Domino's knock-off.
          /somehow, that sounds even worse.

  11. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/new-york-times-falsely-reports-percentage-covid-19-deaths

    The New York Times falsely reported that about three out of every 100 people diagnosed with COVID-19 die, a falsehood the outlet later acknowledged.

    1. mad.casual   2 years ago

      In fairness, the longitudinal studies on the immortality of the other 97 has yet to be concluded.

      1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

        On a long enough timeline...

    2. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

      The reason the MSM are constantly griping about misinformation is because they dont like the competition.

      1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

        What does misinformation or disinformation even mean these days?

        I've never considered opinions as "information". So if someone holds the opinion that sniffing Biden's ass would cure Covid, why should I care? Dude's opinion is only that.

        Calling opinions information is a path to fascism.

        1. Utkonos   2 years ago

          Judging by the News Alerts” that pop up on my phone daily, MSM hasn’t a clue that there is a distinction between information and opinion. (Oh, except Time. Their headlines fairly scream “Objectivity!”)

  12. JesseAz   2 years ago

    FREE MINDS
    North Carolina's Supreme Court has struck down a state requirement that voters must show photo identification. The court held that the 2018 law was passed "to target African-American voters who were unlikely to vote for Republican candidates."
    .
    "Given the rarity of voter fraud in North Carolina, a less restrictive law could have been sufficient to deter voter fraud and promote voter confidence in elections had this goal been the law's only actual purpose," states the court's ruling.

    So much missing from this I assume ENB is one of those people who believe minorities are too dumb to have ID.

    USSC has already ruled voter ID is not a burden.

    The 4-3 state Supreme Court lost most of their spots and it becomes 5-2 conservative in January, why they rushed the ruling.

    Majority of minorities also agree with Voter ID laws.

    This is just a means for democrats to maintain insecure elections.

    Voter fraud is only rare if you solely go by convictions as it is rarely pursued. And when it is, evidence like who voted is not there. Person A shows up votes as Person B. Person B shows up later and is told they already voted, which is wrong. Person A is long gone so no arrest. Idiots declare no voter fraud due to no conviction.

    1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

      USSC has already ruled voter ID is not a burden.

      This is just a means for democrats to maintain insecure elections.

      Here is a thought. Perhaps many, if not most, of those people who believe voter ID is a burden, genuinely believe that SCOTUS is wrong, that it is a type of burden, one that shouldn't apply for *rights* like the right to vote.

      I am personally fine with voter ID, but I do recognize that it is a burden to obtain one, and the burden should be as absolutely minimal as possible. But at least I understand the good-faith argument that others are making on the other side. Why don't you try that Jesse?

      1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

        I am personally fine with voter ID

        No you're not. Everyone says you oppose it, which means you're lying.

        1. VULGAR MADMAN   2 years ago

          Does your ass ever stop bleeding?

          1. R Mac   2 years ago

            He’s a broken man and that’s all he’s got left.

        2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

          He's fine with voter ID as long as his fat ass doesn't have to waddle into a DMV to get it.

          1. EISTAU Gree-Vance   2 years ago

            If someone like Jeff is “fine with voter ID laws”, just think how shitty the people who oppose them must be.

            I mean, who are these people?

      2. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

        Weird how you cut this one off

        Majority of minorities also agree with Voter ID laws.

        The fact you think obtaining one is a burden shows how inept and infantile you are.

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

          But it is a burden. It costs, at a minimum, time to gather records and go to the ID office to get that ID. That cost represents a burden. It is a relatively small burden IMO. But the burden is not zero.

          1. JesseAz   2 years ago

            Jeff. If that is a burden to you, how do you wipe your own ass? It costs money to buy toilet paper, money to pay the water bill, and time to shit and wipe.

            Such a burden.

            Maybe if life is that hard you should end yours.

            What a child you are.

          2. Presskh   2 years ago

            Obtaining an approved voter ID is not a “burden” that is race-based, gender-based, or locality-based. It is a statewide mandate only intended to ensure election integrity and does not unfairly target black voters, unless you believe blacks in NC are too stupid and/or lazy to get one.

            1. SRG   2 years ago

              I think you don't know enough about how voter ID requirements can be gamed. Alabama tried a voter ID law which meant that voters without driving licences could get IDs at the local DMVs. Seems reasonable? They then shut down or drastically reduced the hours of DMVs in Democratic counties. IIRC they were forced to reverse this, but it's one instance of how states attempt to make getting voter ID a burden.

              Another is the approach tried in Texas - choose acceptable or unacceprable forms of ID depending on the class of voter more likely to vote for or against you. Government worker or student IDs for state universities0? Nope. Expired CCW licences? No problem.

              The burden is designedly not equal.

              1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

                Alabama passed a voter ID law in 2011. In 2015 due to budget cuts they closed some rural DMV locations that had issued less than 9000 licences and ID cards in 2014 but had over a half million registered voters. The metro area near my house has a population of a quarter million people and our (black) SOS has closed at least three offices around here that I know of. Alabama closed inefficient offices will low demand. To claim it was racist is just silly.

              2. JesseAz   2 years ago

                It is cute you think the gop controls cities run my democrat mayors with democrat staff.

                Do you think through your own bullshit shrike?

              3. Minadin   2 years ago

                How do they cash a check or buy anything?

              4. EISTAU Gree-Vance   2 years ago

                There’s one now.

          3. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

            Of all the things in life you should have to show an ID for, this is the one.

          4. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   2 years ago

            How many people in this country do NOT have an ID? Darned few, I reckon. If someone is so little involved with society that they never need ID, why are they bothering to vote?

            1. SRG   2 years ago

              A few million.

              You're suggesting that if people aren't sufficiently social by your criteria, they lose their constitutional rights.

              1. JesseAz   2 years ago

                Voter ID is not a burden. No matter how poorly you think of minorities.

              2. Zeb   2 years ago

                No one is stopping them from getting an ID and voting.

                You have to make some effort to register to vote too. Is that an undue burden? If expecting someone to go get an ID is an unreasonable burden, why isn't voter registration? Shouldn't people just be able to walk in and vote?

                This is why I don't think it's appropriate to call voting a "right". It is rather a privilege of citizenship.

              3. Super Scary   2 years ago

                " sufficiently social"

                Like purchasing cigarettes, alcohol, renting a house, applying for food stamps, getting insurance - any number of other things you typically need an ID for?

              4. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   2 years ago

                No, I'm saying that if people are so disengaged with society that they never need an ID, then they have no need to vote either.

                The combination of socially disengaged and active politically is an oxymoron.

            2. rbike   2 years ago

              When I was 18, I let my driver's license expire for almost 3 years. I technically did not have any valid ID. I used the expired license to buy alcohol (legal age was 19 at the time) and for for all other ID purposes. 1983-85 is sure different than today.

          5. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

            ""But it is a burden. It costs, at a minimum, time to gather records and go to the ID office to get that ID.""

            If it is a burden that usurps your ability to participate in rights. Then no ID should be needed to exercise your 2nd amendment.

            If showing ID to exercise a right is ok, then that can be applied to all rights.

      3. NOYB2   2 years ago

        Perhaps many, if not most, of those people who believe voter ID is a burden, genuinely believe that SCOTUS is wrong, that it is a type of burden, one that shouldn’t apply for *rights* like the right to vote.

        They sure believe that I need an ID to exercise my right to associate, travel, engage in commerce, and many other essential activities. So, it isn't credible that this is their sincere belief.

        The reason they don't want voter ID is not because their voters don't have IDs, but because they want lots of illegitimately cast ballots to be counted.

        I do recognize that it is a burden to obtain one, and the burden should be as absolutely minimal as possible

        That burden is easy to remove: make obtaining an ID a prerequisite for becoming an official resident of the state. That is, make an ID a prerequisite for being eligible to vote, not just voting.

        1. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   2 years ago

          Yes, let's require everyone to have an ID. Paperzzz, pleazze.

          How very libertarian of you.

          1. NOYB2   2 years ago

            In a libertarian society, government doesn't dole out benefits based on your identity. We don't live in a libertarian society.

            The massive social welfare state with unlimited government power that we actually have needs to be administered according to its own, non-libertarian principles, and that includes government identification.

            It is not inconsistent with libertarianism to want a non-libertarian government to be at least functional according to its own logic and principles.

            1. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   2 years ago

              Great. So let's just go all the way with wanting the Biden government to go all the way.

              One of the main complaints about Reason has been their lack of interest in ideals, principles, liberty. Instead they focus on what feels good or what seems like pragmatic sense for an authoritarian government. There's no need to do Reason's work for them.

              1. NOYB2   2 years ago

                Great. So let’s just go all the way with wanting the Biden government to go all the way.

                Not at all. We can and should try to push society in a more libertarian direction.

                One of the main complaints about Reason has been their lack of interest in ideals, principles, liberty.

                Maybe that's your main complaint. My main complaint is that they are effectively just a propaganda rag for progressive causes.

                Likewise, promoting libertarian policies piecemeal and haphazardly (selective tax breaks, eliminating government IDs, etc.) just promotes authoritarian and corrupt purposes.

        2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

          They sure believe that I need an ID to exercise my right to associate, travel, engage in commerce, and many other essential activities. So, it isn’t credible that this is their sincere belief.

          Or, that they do not view all of these rights as equivalent. That they have different qualitative preferences for which rights are more important than others.

          There is a good-faith explanation, other than "they want to defraud the system".

          1. NOYB2   2 years ago

            There is a good-faith explanation, other than “they want to defraud the system”.

            That's a meaningless distinction because it's not "fraud" if they make it legal. Ballot harvesting is legal now, even though it used to be fraud. 16 year olds and non-citizens voting is fraud now, but won't be if Democrats have their way.

            Democrats and progressive have a "good faith" belief that anybody who doesn't have stuff should be able to vote for politicians who give them stuff, and that's why they are trying to extend the franchise to more and more such people.

            1. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

              Many states have in fact banned ballot harvesting, even fighting leftist suits to allow it. Arizona for one. Yet we still saw batches of ballots dropped off in boxes.

      4. mad.casual   2 years ago

        Perhaps many, if not most, of those people who believe voter ID is a burden, genuinely believe that SCOTUS is wrong, that it is a type of burden, one that shouldn’t apply for *rights* like the right to vote.

        Now do the RTKBA.

      5. Agammamon   2 years ago

        When I don't don't need an ID to buy a machine gun - then we can talk about ID for voting.

        Until then get your ass to the DMV.

    2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

      The fact that stories like that are only heard on Republican talk news is further proof that the media is run by Democrats. They must be deliberately hiding those stories. It's the only explanation for why the rampant election-changing fraud you refer to never makes the news.

      1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

        Yawn.

    3. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

      Voter fraud is only rare if you solely go by convictions as it is rarely pursued.

      Okay, Jesse, then what is your suggestion for how the extent of voter fraud should be measured?

      1. NOYB2   2 years ago

        You can't measure voter or election fraud in the US because elections are designed to make it impossible to detect most forms. That's no accident.

        That's why statements amounting to "there is no voter fraud because we don't see it in the courts or on audits" are so cynical and adding insult to injury.

        1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

          No widespread corruption.

          1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

            No unofficial corruption.

        2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

          So then how do we know if there is "massive voter fraud" or not?

          1. defaultdotxbe   2 years ago

            Because my preferred candidate didn't win, that can only be because of fraud.

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

              That appears to be the operative definition around here, yes.

              Oh also, the post-modernist definition, which is: if enough people BELIEVE there is massive fraud, then that belief is enough to conjure that fraud into existence, therefore harsh measures are justified to stop this fraud which has now materialized due to the mind-thoughts of the millions of believers in the presence of massive fraud

              1. JesseAz   2 years ago

                This is why you're a leftist joke.

                More people believe the elections are fraudulent than are valid. Your solution is to call them sore losers instead of doing things that can allow people to believe voting is valid.

                Fraud has existed for over 200 years, with many examples in history. But Jeff thinks fraud doesn't exist at all so why bother looking for it.

                And if you disagree because you're not ignorant, it must be do to being a sore loser. What a leftist fuck.

                1. JesseAz   2 years ago

                  I'll even add a third of democrats don't think 2020 was clean. They must be sore right wing losers too. Lol.

                  Jeff. Youre a pathetic. Leftist.

                2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                  I must admit I've never seen someone attack strawmen with your stamina. You never relent. It's amazing to watch.

              2. NOYB2   2 years ago

                Oh also, the post-modernist definition, which is: if enough people BELIEVE there is massive fraud, then that belief is enough to conjure that fraud into existence,

                No, Chemjeff, it is the simple rational belief that a democracy must have auditable election procedures under which it is possible to prove that no substantial fraud was present during the election.

                When election procedures are as insecure as those in the US, and are getting worse, the rational, default assumption is that this is deliberate and that fraud is likely already widespread.

                1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                  Dude, it's little more than sour grapes. For the last couple decades just about every loser has declared voter fraud, and the other team dismissed them as crybabies. It's only fraud when your team loses. Otherwise the election results are totally legit.

                  1. NOYB2   2 years ago

                    Well, "Dude", that's obviously the way you think.

                    It's not the way I or many other people think. We have called for election reform regardless of the winner.

                    And like about half of Americans, I'm not even bothering to vote anymore.

                    You people deserve to go to the hell of your own creation in the handbasket of your own creation. People like you truly are the deplorables of this country.

                    1. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

                      Well, “Dude”, that’s obviously the way you think.

                      I go by what I see and hear.

                      We have called for election reform regardless of the winner.

                      You realize that makes you a leftist right, because only leftists question elections where Republicans win.

                      And like about half of Americans, I’m not even bothering to vote anymore.

                      Ditto.

                      You people deserve to go to the hell of your own creation in the handbasket of your own creation. People like you truly are the deplorables of this country.

                      What "you people" and "people like you" are you referring to?

                    2. NOYB2   2 years ago

                      We have called for election reform regardless of the winner.

                      You realize that makes you a leftist right, because only leftists question elections where Republicans win.

                      Basic logic error. Try again.

                      What “you people” and “people like you” are you referring to?

                      Native born Americans. Entitled, self-righteous fools. Take your pick: you're one or both.

                    3. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      Basic logic error. Try again.

                      I'm going by the logic of these comments.

                      Native born Americans. Entitled, self-righteous fools

                      You got me. I was born here. It was my idea too. I said, before I was born, "Hey, I want to be an American!" Totally my fault.

                    4. JesseAz   2 years ago

                      Sarc is trying so hard to project here.

                      Most of the people here have called for election integrity for over a decade.

                    5. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      Most of the people here have called for election integrity for over a decade.

                      *snort*

                    6. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      Most of the people here have called for election integrity for over a decade.

                      Show me one, just one, comment on Reason by a Trumpian calling for election integrity before Trump claimed fraud.

                      You can't because, like posts where I support the political left, no such comment exists.

                    7. NOYB2   2 years ago

                      I’m going by the logic of these comments.

                      Nope, sorry, you are going by your own faulty logic.

                      I was born here. It was my idea too. I said, before I was born, “Hey, I want to be an American!” Totally my fault.

                      I didn't say it was your fault that you were an entitled, self-righteous fool; you clearly can't help it: you're a product of your society and how your parents' generation raised you.

                    8. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      Ad hominem for the win!

              3. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

                Try this. There are only two constructive reasons to have elections with universal suffrage.

                The first is based on the hope that when everyone contributes to making decisions, the outcome will be better. Unfortunately, as cognitive science has shown, most voters are far from rational. And the current process is at least distorted enough to preclude constructive outcomes.

                The second reason is the hope that people who feel like they had their say in a reasonably honest election will agree to accept the outcome and cooperate. Thus any election uncertainty decreases the likelihood that those on the losing side will agree.

                IMO the rabid push to make sure everyone gets to vote with the least amount of effort almost by definition degrades the security of the election, and thus the resistance from losers to accept the outcome.

              4. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

                While I do not believe the election was stolen. I can see why people would think it could have been.

                Would the party of get rid of Trump by any means necessary resort to cheating after all other means failed? The hatred against Trump is a level I have never seen in my lifetime. Cheating would not be beyond them.

                1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

                  They might view cheating as a necessary evil to save the country.

                  1. SRG   2 years ago

                    ...which of course goes in the other direction as well.

                    1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

                      Sure, but do they have the level of motivation that comes with people who are against Trump?

                    2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                      Did you see what happened on Jan. 6, 2021?

                2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                  Would the party of get rid of Trump by any means necessary resort to cheating after all other means failed?

                  Would the party of "Biden is a Marxist communist who is going to confiscate our guns and destroy America" resort to cheating after all other means failed?

                  1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                    Would the party of “Biden is a Marxist communist who is going to confiscate our guns and destroy America” resort to cheating after all other means failed?

                    Absolutely! The only way to beat a cheater is to be a better cheater. Moral high ground is for losers.

                    1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

                      ""Moral high ground is for losers.""

                      Politics 101?

                  2. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

                    ""Would the party of “Biden is a Marxist communist who is going to confiscate our guns and destroy America” resort to cheating after all other means failed?""

                    What other means have failed? Two impeachments? Russian propaganda?

            2. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

              No, also when the president doesn't get more votes than they think they should have after winning. So they setup a commission to investigate and then find nothing.

            3. NOYB2   2 years ago (edited)

              Because my preferred candidate didn’t win, that can only be because of fraud.

              Yeah, that’s what drooling idiots like you actually believe: "it’s all partisanship."

              You’re so ignorant of voting and election procedures that the charade that happens in the US actually convinces you.

              1. defaultdotxbe   2 years ago

                When you say "charade" are you referring to 2016 or 2020?

                1. NOYB2   2 years ago

                  Yes. And the 2000 election. In fact, I'm referring to every US election over the past hundred years.

                  They have all been a joke, no matter the winner.

          2. Idaho Bob   2 years ago

            81 million votes for a drooling idiot.

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

              I know, right? It really goes to show how badly Trump's demeanor turned off so many people.

              1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

                Idiot.

          3. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

            Are you accepting of any fraud?

            In 2020 Ga had thousands of double voters. This could be people forgetting they mailed in ballots (unlikely). This could be people voting in person and had someone else vote as them for mail in.

            Do you think this is fraud, yes or no?

            Your entire defense here is that until someone can prove fraud exists we shouldn’t put any mechanisms in to determine fraud. Just like you are against any actual audits and only stupidly point to recounts that don’t actually determine vote validity.

            Your only purpose here is to make sure nobody can tell there is fraud.

            I could simply point to the Jimmy Carter Voting coalition as an example fo what should be done. Whose measures the US violates.

          4. NOYB2   2 years ago

            We don't know whether there is "massive voter fraud".

            It is the job of election officials to prove to voters that there is not and cannot be, and the job of politicians to prove to voters that they are legitimate.

            As a voter and citizen, I am under no obligation to take this on faith.

        3. sarcasmic   2 years ago

          That’s why statements amounting to “there is no voter fraud because we don’t see it in the courts or on audits” are so cynical and adding insult to injury.

          You do realize that that statement is a total strawman, right? I don't think anyone claims that there is zero voter fraud. Just that there isn't enough evidence to even remotely suggest that there's enough fraud to change the outcome of an election.

          By the way, why is it always assumed that only Democrats engage in voter fraud? Republicans have completely lost the moral high ground over the last decade. They can no longer claim that they won't stoop to the tactics of the the people they hate.

          1. VULGAR MADMAN   2 years ago

            All you can do is repackage what people smarter than you have said .

            Stop being such a faggot.

          2. NOYB2   2 years ago

            You do realize that that statement is a total strawman, right?

            No, it's not a strawman. I'm saying that election procedures must be designed so that election officials can prove that there was no fraud.

            By the way, why is it always assumed that only Democrats engage in voter fraud?

            I've made no such assumption; I have called all US elections illegitimate, regardless of winner. I don't vote anymore.

            However, historically, Democrats have clearly been the dominant source of election fraud, election manipulation, and voter fraud in the US. And it is Democrats who have pushed for insecure election procedures.

            Republicans have completely lost the moral high ground over the last decade. They can no longer claim that they won’t stoop to the tactics of the the people they hate.

            Good for Republicans! Let's hope they'll be able to restore some balance that way. Maybe then, finally, Democrats will stop their opposition to securing elections.

            1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

              No, it’s not a strawman.

              You're arguing against the assertion that there is no fraud. That's a strawman because nobody says that.

              I’ve made no such assumption;

              I didn't claim that you did.

              Good for Republicans!

              Really? You think it's grand that nobody respects Republicans for having standards? I don't. It just makes them that much more like the amoral slugs on the political left.

              1. NOYB2   2 years ago

                You’re arguing against the assertion that there is no fraud. That’s a strawman because nobody says that.

                No, I'm saying that your discussions of how much fraud there is is a strawman. I'm saying that unless election officials can prove that there is no substantial fraud, elections should be considered illegitimate. Under current US election procedures, it is impossible to prove that.

                Really? You think it’s grand that nobody respects Republicans for having standards? I don’t. It just makes them that much more like the amoral slugs on the political left.

                That's because you suffer from the delusion that it is possible to achieve good government if you just put the right people in charge.

                Social democracy necessarily turns all participants into what you call "amoral slugs". That's why the LP is such a farce: it either loses or it becomes non-libertarian.

                In the system we have, we have the choice between amoral slugs who want to turn us socialist and amoral slugs who want to lower taxes for productive members of society. Take your pick, or don't.

                1. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

                  Under current US election procedures, it is impossible to prove that.

                  That’s called switching the burden of proof. It’s a logical fallacy. All someone has to do is keep saying “Not good enough” and the proof will never be accepted.

                  That’s because you suffer from the delusion that it is possible to achieve good government if you just put the right people in charge.

                  I think you get worse government when you put people in charge who don’t even pretend to have any morals.

                  In the system we have, we have the choice between amoral slugs who want to turn us socialist and amoral slugs who want to lower taxes for productive members of society. Take your pick, or don’t.

                  There’s more to liberty than deficit spending.

                  1. NOYB2   2 years ago (edited)

                    That’s called switching the burden of proof. It’s a logical fallacy.

                    We are talking about actual, physical elections. Physical elections need to be auditable and verifiable. It's no more a "logical fallacy" to demand that than it is a "logical fallacy" to demand that your bank account balances.

                    All someone has to do is keep saying “Not good enough” and the proof will never be accepted.

                    Not at all. We know how to make procedures auditable and verifiable, in banking, in accounting, in legal contexts, and in voting.

                    I think you get worse government when you put people in charge who don’t even pretend to have any morals.

                    If you think that people who pretend to have morals but don’t are better than people who are honest about what they are doing, you are a fool. You’re also a fool if you think that government is ever moral, rather than a naked exercise of power.

                    1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      It’s no more a “logical fallacy” to demand that than it is a “logical fallacy” to demand that your bank account balances.

                      You can't just say "I believe the balances are wrong! Prove they're not! Prove it! I don't believe you! Prove it!" You'll be looked at like a fool because that's exactly what you would be. Yet that's what is currently happening with elections.

                      We know how to make procedures auditable and verifiable, in banking, in accounting, in legal contexts, and in voting.

                      None of those things are anonymous. Voting is. I don't see how to really make elections "fraud proof" without linking the vote to the voter.

                      If you think that people who pretend to have morals but don’t are better than people who are honest about what they are doing, you are a fool. You’re also a fool if you think that government is ever moral, rather than a naked exercise of power.

                      I don't vote. Let that sink in for a moment, then tell me I trust some politician over others.
                      When I said "moral high ground" I meant that Republicans could use things the left does as examples of bad behavior and then with some truth be able to claim they don't do that.
                      Maybe that doesn't mean anything to you, but it's important to some people. Unfortunately the right can no longer make that claim.

                    2. NOYB2   2 years ago

                      You can’t just say “I believe the balances are wrong! Prove they’re not! Prove it! I don’t believe you! Prove it!”

                      Sure you can. Specifically, you can say "I never made those withdrawals. Prove that I did." Your bank needs to produce proof that you did.

                      I don’t see how to really make elections “fraud proof” without linking the vote to the voter.

                      Your ignorance isn't my problem. I've explained how this works elsewhere often enough, and you could also get off your fat, lazy ass and look at how other nations handle this.

                      Maybe that doesn’t mean anything to you, but it’s important to some people.

                      It is important to many people, which is why the Hitlers and Chavezes of the world keep getting elected: they ran on a pretense of having morals.

                    3. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

                      Sure you can. Specifically, you can say “I never made those withdrawals. Prove that I did.” Your bank needs to produce proof that you did.

                      That’s the accuser starting with evidence. In the case of elections the accuser is demanding evidence. That’s why I keep pointing out the fallacy of switching the burden of proof.

                      …which is why the Hitlers …

                      Godwin for the win!

                    4. NOYB2   2 years ago

                      Sure you can. Specifically, you can say “I never made those withdrawals. Prove that I did.” Your bank needs to produce proof that you did.

                      That’s the accuser starting with evidence. In the case of elections the accuser is demanding evidence. That’s why I keep pointing out the fallacy of switching the burden of proof.

                      The accuser doesn't have evidence; the accuser is just saying "I didn't make those withdrawals, prove me wrong." The accuser is demanding proof from the bank that the bank's actions were justified. That's because the banks actually has the physical records.

                      The institution that collects and keeps the records needs to be able to prove things on demand. In the case of banking, that's the bank. In the case of elections, that's the government.

            2. defaultdotxbe   2 years ago

              I’m saying that election procedures must be designed so that election officials can prove that there was no fraud.

              Ignoring that you can never prove a universal negative, what procedures would you put in place to facilitate this?

              1. NOYB2   2 years ago

                Ignoring that you can never prove a universal negative

                We're not trying to prove a "universal negative", we're trying to make sure that all legitimate ballots are counted correctly, and no illegitimate ballots are counted.

                what procedures would you put in place to facilitate this?

                For starters, in-person voting on paper ballots, sealed and transparent ballot boxes, and public counting of all ballots. There's a lot more details; other countries have worked this out pretty well.

                1. defaultdotxbe   2 years ago

                  "proving there was no fraud" means proving a negative. Because no system is foolproof (especially one to accommodate over 150 million voters) there will always be the possibility of fraud you did not catch, therefore it can never be fully proven that there was "no" fraud.

                  Presumably any system you would put in place would require the elimination of the secret ballot, this is not something I would ever support.

                  1. NOYB2   2 years ago

                    “proving there was no fraud” means proving a negative

                    You're confusing abstract logical arguments with a simple, practical issue.

                    I can "prove" that I own a property. I can "prove" that I am a US citizen. "Proving that there was no fraud" means proving for 150 million votes that each vote was cast by an eligible voter and proving that each vote was counted. The term "proof" here refers not to the mathematical/philosophical sense of the word, but to the legal sense: there is an audit trail and the evidence is stored securely and can be reexamined at any time.

                    Because no system is foolproof (especially one to accommodate over 150 million voters) there will always be the possibility of fraud you did not catch, therefore it can never be fully proven that there was “no” fraud.

                    Sealed ballot boxes can be archived for ten years and be produced and recounted at any point in time. That's legal proof.

                    None of those mechanisms of legal proof of the validity of elections are widely used in the US today.

                    1. R Mac   2 years ago

                      Well done. To bad you’re arguing with morons that aren’t actually listening to what you’re saying.

              2. JesseAz   2 years ago

                Are you fine with magical vote bumps in the middle of the night? Jimmy Carter had a commission going over ways fraud occurs. The US and UN have used his measures to help validate countries wr consider corrupt. The US now violates most of those principles.

                It is common now that we don't even know the total number of votes counted until a week after elections. Arizona has a current election this year where the county recorder responsible for the county elections had to figure out why 16k votes appeared on the SoS website he couldn't account for.

                The very first step in any vote is knowing the total votes BEFORE the count starts. This simply doesn't happen anymore.

        4. Kungpowderfinger   2 years ago

          Voter fraud is only rare if you solely go by convictions as it is rarely pursued

          Likewise, criminal corruption in congress is rare.

          1. JesseAz   2 years ago

            Great example.

            And jaywalking never happens either.

      2. JesseAz   2 years ago

        Well first you need some type of metric yo ide tiny fraud, such as verifying the person who is voting is who they say they are.

        Are you an idiot jeff? Or just so blindly partisan you say stupid shit like above?

        1. JesseAz   2 years ago

          "To identify" missed edit window.

        2. NOYB2   2 years ago

          Lack of voter ID is the least of the problems with American elections.

          The use of electronic voting, mail-in voting, commercial plastic bins (instead of sealed urns), etc. are much more basic problems.

          Large numbers of votes can be conjured up out of nowhere or made to disappear with nobody ever being able to prove that it happened.

          1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

            Anything that attaches your name to your vote is bad. It would allow the FBI to go after people who voted against the party.

            1. NOYB2   2 years ago

              I agree. Fortunately, you don't have to attach your name to a vote in order to make elections properly auditable.

              1. defaultdotxbe   2 years ago

                So if I hand you a stack of ballots to "properly audit" how would you do so without names attached?

                1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

                  What is "properly audit"?

                  Let's go back to the days of the lever machines. How could you "properly audit" those? I dare say we never could "properly audit" a vote. Autonomy in voting is nothing new. This is why the voting process matters and why mail in ballots are problematic.

                  1. defaultdotxbe   2 years ago

                    That would something NOYB2 would have to answer. Everything he has stated so far seems to focus on monitoring of the voting and counting, but that is not the same thing as auditing.

                    1. NOYB2   2 years ago

                      I've answered that. If you don't follow my description, look at how voting is handled in other countries. Many European nations do a much better job than the US.

                2. NOYB2   2 years ago (edited)

                  So if I hand you a stack of ballots to “properly audit” how would you do so without names attached?

                  If you can "hand me a stack of ballots", you already have destroyed the audit trail.

                  The way this is traditionally handled is that ballots are cast in sealed, numbered, tracked ballot boxes. Each ballot box contains both the votes cast and the voter information, but separated from each other. That way, you can recount all the ballots, and you can verify that all the voters in that box were legitimate, at any time. If there are any discrepancies, the officials responsible for handling the boxes face stiff criminal penalties. Furthermore, ballot boxes can only be unsealed for any reason in public, with multiple officials and an unlimited number of observers present. Audits are performed both randomly and on demand.

                  Over the last few decades, people have developed other mechanisms by which each voter can individually verify their votes without anybody other than the voter being able to determine how anybody voted.

      3. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

        ^ It's very easy.

        If there were relaxed voting procedures due to a overblown pandemic including mass mailin balloting and ballot harvesting, fraud occurred. It's that easy.

      4. Minadin   2 years ago

        Penny Hubbard.

        https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/9029

  13. Sandra (formerly OBL)   2 years ago

    "The House Jan. 6 committee met Sunday to finalize its plans to issue at least three criminal referrals for former President Donald Trump," NBC reports.

    You know what, Democrats? If you're so principled you want to send Trump to prison even though a Trump 2024 candidacy virtually guarantees another 4 years of a Democratic White House, go right ahead.

    #WallsClosingIn

    1. Jerryskids   2 years ago

      The House Jan. 6 committee met Sunday to finalize its plans to issue at least three criminal referrals for former President Donald Trump

      They're having trouble finding the exact statute that makes it illegal to be a poopy-head. They're pretty sure it's in there somewhere.

      1. Anomalous   2 years ago

        They are so frustrated that the Constitution prohibits bills of attainder and ex post facto laws.

        1. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

          Textual Progressive Originalisming!

    2. mad.casual   2 years ago (edited)

      You know what, Democrats? If you’re so principled you want to send Trump to prison even though a Trump 2024 candidacy virtually guarantees another 4 years of a Democratic White House, go right ahead.

      Again, your own double-edged sword. If the charges are relatable or maybe better conceptualized as, if Trump could make them seem relatable, I think you’d have another Trump v. Clinton on your hands. Arguably, more so because at least the disgusted Clinton voters could pretend that the server was wiped with a cloth, that she has a vagina, and that Trump was crazy to assert he was being spied on. The longer they wait to bring charges, the more it’s going to look like, even to die hard Team Blue voters, that they’re voting for Putin over Navalny or Zelensky.

      Maybe more of them than ever would turn out to vote, maybe fewer. Maybe more Trump voters would turn out to vote if Biden’s DOJ actually brought charges against him, maybe not.

  14. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    Con Artist in Chief.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-everything-biden-says-made

    In between false claims about the economy and the border, Joe Biden fills in many of his appearances with stories about himself that are just completely made up.

    If you thought Bill Clinton was a pathological liar, Joe Biden asks you to hold his beer.

    1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

      He’s Italian now.

    2. Jerryskids   2 years ago

      Don't blame dementia for that, he's always been a pathological liar. Or have you forgotten what tripped up his Presidential ambitions in 1988?

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        Yep. Just ask Corn Pop about Joe Biden's lies.

      2. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

        Yeah, I think all the dementia is doing at this point is making it hard for him to remember which lie to tell and how.

    3. Kungpowderfinger   2 years ago

      If you thought Bill Clinton was a pathological liar, Joe Biden asks you to hold his beer.

      Look, Reason’s focused on Musk lying about his family’s location according to a Washington Post article, leave The Big Guy out of this.

  15. ditek   2 years ago

    DFS ADAWE RWWEAWERFAWE WERE R

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Did you just have a stroke?

      (If so, hang up and dial 911. Your call is important to us. Please stay on the line.)

    2. Dillinger   2 years ago

      Fetterman?

  16. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    Pentagon spending is set to hit levels not seen since the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Community outreach costs money.

  17. NOYB2   2 years ago (edited)

    This stems in part from a scramble to stockpile weapons after so many U.S. munitions have been shipped to Ukraine.

    “Scramble” makes it sound like it was unplanned. In fact, this was the explicitly stated plan: ship old weapons to Ukraine so that there would be big orders for US defense contractors to replace and modernize those systems.

    Ukraine is a proxy war fought with US weapons at the behest of US arms manufacturers and other special interests.

    As for Barbara Lee, her only regret is that the government handouts aren’t going to some other special interest group: she wants to carpet bomb and destroy US inner cities with the money instead.

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      But if we bomb our own cities, we create jobs building weapons AND houses. That's a win-win and our national wealth will double, right?

      1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

        The new gentrification.

    2. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   2 years ago

      The military has peculiar requirements for freshness. They need enough weapons stockpiled to sustain a war while ramping up replacement production, yet they can't rely on old stale weapons which might not work. I don't know what lifespan of, say, an AA missile or artillery shell is, but I doubt it's still good after 10 years in a warehouse. Batteries go bad, who knows what happens to propellant or explosive or electronics. Do mice and spiders get in, does ammunition taken out and carried on planes and in ships and tanks get cycled back to warehouses?

      What they ought to do is cycle through that stockpile in training. I have seem reports of this little Ukraine war going through 10-100,000 shells a day; that's tens of millions a year, and surely enough for every artillery unit to fire a few dozen every month for practice.

      But then Congress screams about the expense. Then along comes an opportunity like this to get rid of the oldest inventory and buy fresh stocks, why would the military not take advantage of it?

      1. NOYB2   2 years ago

        But then Congress screams about the expense. Then along comes an opportunity like this to get rid of the oldest inventory and buy fresh stocks, why would the military not take advantage of it?

        Because we don't have any business supporting either side in foreign wars, period.

        Because the blowback from supporting other countries in foreign wars is staggering.

        Because supporting other countries in foreign wars makes America less safe.

        1. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   2 years ago

          Principles pop up when favorable, stay muted when not? How does this compare with wanting government IDs for everything and everybody because you want the government to be consistent;y authoritarian?

          1. NOYB2   2 years ago

            Principles pop up when favorable, stay muted when not?

            Not at all. I'm applying principles consistently. Not engaging in foreign wars is a good thing for liberty.

            How does this compare with wanting government IDs for everything and everybody because you want the government to be consistent;y authoritarian?

            There is no inconsistency. I merely want to require unlibertarian government IDs for unlibertarian government handouts and government powers. As unlibertarian government handouts/powers diminish, so does the need for unlibertarian government IDs.

            You object to the use of government IDs for government handouts/powers; that's not a libertarian position, it's the position of a Marxist hell-bent on destroying the country.

      2. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

        say, an AA missile or artillery shell is, but I doubt it’s still good after 10 years in a warehouse. Batteries go bad, who knows what happens to propellant or explosive or electronics.

        No idea on how the military deals with this, but fun fact, WWI shells keep going off and occasionally killing people.

        1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

          Ah ya beat me to it.

          Of course the reliability of smart weapons to be smart might dimmish faster.

          Who would spend millions per unit on something with a short lifespan? Yeah, we would.

          1. defaultdotxbe   2 years ago (edited)

            I think its less a question of whether it can go off, but rather a question of whether it will go off, reliably, when you want it to.

            I mean, if only 1 out of 100 WW1/WW2 era unexploded shells goes off, that’s a problem. If only 1 out of 100 shells issued to a forward artillery unit goes off, that’s a different problem, but still a problem.

        2. Utkonos   2 years ago

          That damn Kaiser—still on a roll, is he?!

      3. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

        People are concerned about the detonation of an old WW2 era munitions when they are found.

        1. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   2 years ago

          And how much electronics are in old WW II bombs and mortar shells? Batteries?

          VT fuses did have batteries of a sort. Everything else as mechanical.

          1. Agammamon   2 years ago

            Stuff isn't just put in the back of a warehouse and left there.

            There's ongoing maintenance and refurbishment.

            1. Agammamon   2 years ago

              Fuck, even MRE's get inspected every few years to see if they're still edible . . . I means 'servicable'.

              1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

                Did an environmental assessment on a national guard facility locally - they were building a new service garage. They had a few pallets of MREs in a warehouse. I joked about them being pallets of toxic waste to the guy taking us around. He and another member of the national guard with us laughed.

      4. JesseAz   2 years ago

        Most armaments are contracted at a 30 year life with a specific reliability. This sometimes requires 5 or 10 years for maintenance to replace some items.

      5. Agammamon   2 years ago

        The lifespan of an artillery round or missile is measured in *decades*.

        We still have 105mm tank rounds stockpiled from back when the M1 used a gun that small - we even use them today with the Stryker MGS.

    3. Agammamon   2 years ago

      We ain't shipping old weapons to Ukraine.

      We're shipping Javelin, HIMARs, etc to Ukraine. Those are very modern, very capable systems.

  18. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    North Carolina's Supreme Court has struck down a state requirement that voters must show photo identification.

    It would be nice if they extended the ban on showing papers to all areas of existence.

    1. NOYB2   2 years ago

      Sure, just after we privatize most of society. In a libertarian, free society, private actors are perfectly free to ask for your papers on condition of remaining on private roads, private sidewalks, private parks, private shopping malls, etc.

      1. Zeb   2 years ago

        Private papers.

        1. NOYB2   2 years ago

          Yes, privately issued "papers", combining your credit score, a social media score, your "legal" (arbitration) history, your places of residence, your net worth, and your medical history. Far more extensive than anything government can do right now.

          1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

            Just give everyone a side arm.

            1. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

              That is only active when it has a 5g connection and is licensed to the owner yearly.

            2. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

              Give?

          2. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

            Yeah, but all facilitated by bitcoin.

      2. defaultdotxbe   2 years ago

        Private gyms, private warehouse clubs, private golf courses...

  19. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    War is hell and a bitch. Why stop WWIII anyway?

    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/ukraine-attempted-decapitation-strike-russias-top-general-even-us-tried-stop-it

    US officials cited in the report say that Ukraine's military and intelligence attempted to assassinate General Valery Gerasimov, Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, even after American officials urged against such a brazen action of unpredictable consequences, on fears it would invite uncontrollable Russian military escalation.

    1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

      Wait. I thought the going theory around here is that the US is cynically using Ukraine as a proxy in its struggle against Russia, that Ukraine is fighting a war that is not in its own interest due to American pressure. But now this report says that the Ukrainians wanted to prosecute the war more aggressively, against American advice? Really? Hmm.

      1. NOYB2   2 years ago

        (1) Just because "this report" says something doesn't mean it reflects reality. The US may well want Ukraine to do this yet publicly deny it.

        (2) Zelensky isn't "the Ukrainians"; escalating the war with Russia is in Zelensky's personal interest.

        1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

          Jeff is not a deep thinker.

          1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

            Jeff just posts what he's told.

      2. JesseAz   2 years ago

        Are you aware there can be multiple things true to a single event?

      3. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago (edited)

        It is.

        Why do you think the US is essentially trying to manage this war?

      4. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

        ""that Ukraine is fighting a war that is not in its own interest..."

        Really? If Russia invaded part of the US would it be in our interest to fight back?

        This is a bit like Afghanistan in the 80s. Russia invades, we supply the home country with weapons to fight back.

        1. defaultdotxbe   2 years ago

          Hopefully without those same weapons being used against us 20 years later when we decide its our turn to invade.

    2. Illocust   2 years ago

      Assainating military leaders should be the normal course of action for wars. The fact is not, shows the effectiveness of MAD as a styrene policy.

    3. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      I would prefer that heads of state and their minions pursued war with direct, personal fighting and left the rest of us out of it.

  20. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    Another turbulent weekend for Twitter.

    If by turbulent you mean fun then, yes, it was very turbulent.

  21. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    Just for Buttplug and his penis obsession.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/brits-erect-penis-headed-putin-statue-throw-eggs-bellend-year

    The effigy, located in the West Midlands town of Rowley Regis - on Bellend Road, was dubbed "BELLEND OF THE YEAR," PA News Agency reports.

    The photos are priceless.

    1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

      I learned a new word today.

    2. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Move the "part" to the side and it could be Trump's hair.

    3. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      "A town of Putin-hating Brits have erected a golden penis-headed statue of the Russian president, and have set up a table from which residents can throw "free eggs" at it."

      The UK isn't even at war with Russia. Meanwhile actual génocidaires like Xi get a UK trade deal.

      Fucking clown world.

    4. mad.casual   2 years ago

      IDK, this falls a bit into the "The Left can't meme." bin for me.

      I'm not so egomaniacal that I would want a 6 ft. tall gold penis statue of myself made and would be duly insulted by it but, if I were so egomaniacal, that is what I would want it to look like.

      Something more like Jerry Smith's 'Mytholog' from the Big Trouble in Little Sanchez episode seems like it would be more generally insulting.

    5. Fats of Fury   2 years ago

      They must be wealthy if they can afford to throw eggs.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        Especially at the $5.09/18 eggs the store I go to most often was selling them for this weekend. The dozen was about $3.70 or so.

        1. Utkonos   2 years ago

          Food fights might just be criminalized throughout Europe in the near future.

  22. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    The House Jan. 6 committee met Sunday to finalize its plans to issue at least three criminal referrals for former President Donald Trump...

    Put it on an NFT, then it might be worth something.

  23. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    Oberlin College will pay $36 million to a bakery that students and faculty accused of racism.

    Ha!

    1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

      Not will pay, but has paid.

      https://www.thecollegefix.com/oberlin-college-finalizes-36600000-payment-to-bakery-it-defamed-as-racist/

      "Gibson’s Family bakery has received its $36.6 million damages payment from Oberlin College after the liberal school in Ohio worked with students to protest and smear the small business as racist."

      Reason can't even get that right.

  24. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    Hmm, an actual libertarian and former Reason contributor.

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/12/19/the-truth-about-covid-mccarthyism/

    There were two viruses that the authorities wanted to control in 2020 and 2021. The first was the virus of Covid-19. The second was the virus of dissent. Throughout the pandemic, experts referred to lockdown scepticism and Covid misinformation as their own kind of disease, as a contagious malady that might sicken the masses’ minds as surely as Covid sickened their bodies. British politicians referred to a ‘pandemic of misinformation’. We must protect people both from ‘physical disease and the “disease of misinformation”’, scientists insisted. ‘False information has plagued the Covid response’, said one academic. Plagued – what a striking choice of verb. And if contrary ideas are an infection in the body politic, then it’s clear what the cure must be: censorship.

    1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

      Wonder if Bonnie read that. Nah.

  25. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    I have never seen or heard of a case more absurd than this...

    Courts giving cover to what the cops did.

  26. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    Of course, now progtards care about BigTech censorship, when they're caught in their own lies and hoisted by their own petards.

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/12/18/oh-so-now-you-care-about-big-tech-censorship/

    Welcome, comrades! What took you so long? Only, of course, these people still don’t care one bit about free speech and are only really outraged now because, for once, it is people they know, like and agree with who are being censored.

    1. R Mac   2 years ago

      They wrote an article about ENB?

    2. JasonAZ   2 years ago

      It was a massacre, don't you know? A MASSACRE!!! Poor, Twitter addicted progressives were temporarily suspended from Twitter.

      You know, the whole "mean tweets" type makes a lot more sense now. Seriously, progressives Twitter addicts, looking right at you ENB, need an intervention.

      1. Utkonos   2 years ago

        I love the one cite she posts above where the hyperlink is the words “Now On Mastodon” I clicked that and it took me right to—-wait for it—-A TWEET!!!

  27. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/12/18/the-trans-movement-is-built-on-fear-and-intimidation/

    The film that so offended them is Adult Human Female – a documentary about how trans ideology took over British institutions and why this poses a danger to women’s rights. spiked caught up with its directors, Deirdre O’Neill and Michael Wayne, to discuss the controversy surrounding their film.

    1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

      Did it star Miss Information ?

      1. JasonAZ   2 years ago

        Well played. Slow clapping...

      2. Longtobefree   2 years ago

        Great burlesque stage name!
        She starts naked and gets dressed.

        1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

          And is a dude.

          1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

            And you pay for it to cover up.

            1. Sevo   2 years ago

              "Put it ON! Put it ON!"

      3. Fats of Fury   2 years ago

        All trannies are Miss Information.

      4. Utkonos   2 years ago

        What’s everyone got against Miss Information? Don’t DIS her!!!

    2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

      The irony of all this troon simping by the left these days is that it's rooted in the same intellectual frameworks of post-World War II feminism.

  28. ditek   2 years ago (edited)

    Im making over $13k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do.
    🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
    HERE====)> http://www.richsalary.com

  29. Moderation4ever   2 years ago

    "Twitter CEO Elon Musk posted Sunday night that going forward, he would not make any major policy decisions without putting it to a poll first."

    Does this seem like a good idea? It seems like he wants to make Twitter a commune where all the members vote on running the place. Is it a business to make profit or something else?

    1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

      Maybe we should take a poll.

    2. defaultdotxbe   2 years ago

      To be fair, Musk never said the polls would be in any way binding.

      I think it will most likely be like the comment period on executive agency rulemaking. "Here's what we are going to do, get your bitching and moaning out now so you can STFU when we actually do it"

    3. JasonAZ   2 years ago

      You and progressive keep talking about "saving our democracy!!!" despite the fact we live in a Constitutional Republic. As such, you should be applauding this very democratic decision.

      1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

        Democracy is not kind to the minority.

    4. Kungpowderfinger   2 years ago

      Musk said he was motivated to do so out of concern for his children, claiming that the jet location sharing had allowed a stalker to approach his car at a gas station

      WTF Mr. Tesla?

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        Maybe it was a washroom stop? Snacks, drinks?

        1. Kungpowderfinger   2 years ago

          I don’t see Elon hitting the Slim Jim’s and Corn Nuts.

          But to be fair, they’ll arrest you for taking a leak at one of his Supercharger stations 😉

    5. JesseAz   2 years ago

      It helps identify the bots. Apparently there was a surge of like 500k votes in under a minute yesterday.

      Wouldn't be shocked if he does this to identify bot activity.

    6. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

      Does this seem like a good idea? It seems like he wants to make Twitter a commune where all the members vote on running the place. Is it a business to make profit or something else?

      Build your own Twitter, certificate authority, backbone provider, content delivery network, internet telecom provider and cloud services company.

    7. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

      Is it a business to make profit or something else?

      Twitter has only made a profit in 2 out of the last 12 years. What the fuck does that matter now, other than your allies are on the receiving end of your censorship double standards for once?

  30. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    Must be a real bitch to lose a grip on censoring information.

    https://nypost.com/2022/12/18/democrats-scramble-to-save-censorship/

    Schiff is a calculated propagandist, who lies under oath as easily as breathing, and knowingly peddles misinformation to Congress and to media outlets like CNN and MSNBC, whose gullible hosts keep bringing him back on their shows to mislead their audiences.

    1. R Mac   2 years ago

      “gullible hosts”

      Yeah, no.

    2. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      "Schiff is a calculated propagandist, who lies under oath as easily as breathing, and knowingly peddles misinformation"

      Is Jeffy actually Schiff? ...oh wait, Jeffy only tries to be calculating.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        Schiff is Jeffy with half a brain. Jeffy is Schiff without a working brain. I think that's the difference.

      2. HorseConch   2 years ago

        Jeffy is a prolific liar, but he's not very skilled at it.

      3. R Mac   2 years ago

        Jeffy admitted he’s fat.

  31. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    Wait a minute, I thought this stuff only happened in the gun-happy US, if you ask the progtards.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/vaughan-condo-shooting-1.6690582

    Six people, including an alleged gunman, are dead after a shooting at a condo tower in Vaughan, Ont., on Sunday night, York police say.

    1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

      Had one like it in Australia too.

      1. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

        Yeah, but they take them seriously there and are working on gun control measures.

    2. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      Just what Trudeau needed to justify his latest gun grab attempt.

    3. Fats of Fury   2 years ago

      Maybe he was part of the HOA.

  32. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    'This stems in part from a scramble to stockpile weapons after so many U.S. munitions have been shipped to Ukraine. This year's NDAA would authorize $800 million for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative—"an increase of $500 million above the President's budget request," the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee points out."

    Could we fund this with a retroactive tax on little Ukraine flags and emojis?

    1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

      What if nobody made any more weapons?

      1. Longtobefree   2 years ago

        Democrat contributions plunge! Chaos ensues!

  33. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

    North Carolina's Supreme Court has struck down a state requirement that voters must show photo identification.

    this is so obviously idiotic, and so obviously an attempt to setup election rigging, that i have to wonder if there is something even more nefarious at play.

  34. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    The so-called Thursday Night Massacre.

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitters-thursday-night-massacre-journalist-bans-mocked-social-media

    Media’s use of the term "Thursday Night Massacre" to describe the banning of multiple journalists’ Twitter accounts was heavily mocked over the weekend after a Wikipedia article on the topic was discovered.

    Read, laugh, mock.

    1. Illocust   2 years ago

      Seems they are holding strong to the claim that data they had to decode because it was specifically meant to not be publicly availble is somehow publicly available. Won't even add to the article to specify how it was gathered, which would make the publicly available claim look patently ridiculous if it was beside it.

      1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

        Funny how they had time to get all investigative about this but not important things.

      2. Mickey Rat   2 years ago (edited)

        I was listening to The Fifth Column Podcast this morning and in a exchange about this between Moynihan and Welch it was claimed that real time information about a controversial figure's location was “journalism”. Why? Who knows.

        1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

          Perhaps "journalism" is where the intel community is hiding. Claiming to be journalist is a great way to get around various amendments in the Bill of Rights.

    2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

      I'm honestly surprised that Molly White, aka GorillaWarfare, Wikipedia's schizoid rad-left editor, wasn't involved in putting that article together.

    3. Utkonos   2 years ago

      “Thursday Night Massacre “ They’re diverting from Twiitergate. Fight Nixon with Nixon! (The winner gets a free trip to China!)

  35. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    'North Carolina's Supreme Court has struck down a state requirement that voters must show photo identification. The court held that the 2018 law was passed "to target African-American voters who were unlikely to vote for Republican candidates."'

    What about those racists at the airport?

    1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

      African-American voters who were unlikely to vote for Republican candidates.”‘

      Sounds racist.

    2. damikesc   2 years ago

      I bet you cannot enter the NC Supreme Court building without ID...

    3. Jerryskids   2 years ago

      What about those racists in the EU, where Voter ID is the norm? Oh, that's right, there are no African-Americans in Europe.

      1. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

        Or Canada, that requires two forms of ID to vote.

        1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

          One in French and one in English?
          /Except Quebec - then French only.
          //Yes, I went there.
          ///Not sorry, eh.

          1. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago (edited)

            According to my Canadian lawtuber, in his province he needed his regular Canadian ID and some kind of other documentation, such as a recent hydro or power bill that showed your address was really what it was, because ID (like driver’s licenses) go stale on address.

            So one shows that you are a Canadian citizen, the other shows (reasonably) that you live at the address and within the political district in which you're voting.

      2. Mickey Rat   2 years ago (edited)

        If they are eligible to vote in Europe, then they are likely no to be able to be defined as ” -Americans”.

    4. R Mac   2 years ago

      Black people can’t afford to fly silly.

    5. Illocust   2 years ago

      Or who sell alcohol, or rent apartments, or sell cigarettes, or sell guns, or let you drive vehicles,or open bank accounts, or give you government jobs, or give you welfare. The list goes on and on. You can't function as anything but a homeless person without government ID in the modern world.

      1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

        So much racism...

      2. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

        Black people steal their alcohol, cigarettes and guns.

    6. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

      Black people don't fly... or swim.

    7. Fats of Fury   2 years ago

      What good is photo id if some groups all look alike

  36. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    "Oberlin College will pay $36 million to a bakery that students and faculty accused of racism."

    Reparations?

  37. Moderation4ever   2 years ago

    The military budget is absurd as always with Congress giving more money than either the military or the President wants. This article spends a lot of time on Ukraine use of up our supplies, but those weapons seem to have been well used holding the invading Russians at bay and force them to retreat in some areas. What about some of the high-end weapons like the new B21 Raider a bomber that cost 692 million per unit? The thing I cannot even figure out is where you would even use a weapon like that? There a lot of planning for the WWIII when we are more likely to face small state to state fights. Handheld missiles and drones seem to be a better use of money.

    1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

      Since when is fiscal responsibility important during war?

    2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

      The thing I cannot even figure out is where you would even use a weapon like that?

      I did a little digging into weapons systems that aged out before being used in combat, and what I came up with was surprising. Between the 70s and the 90s there were quite a few. Since then there's always been some terror or proxy war to test out the new toys.

      1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

        Yeah, most of the shit that was used the last 20 years actually came out from about 1965-1985. Drones only became a thing starting with Operation Allied Force, and we've never employed V-22s on a mass basis because they're a pain in the ass to keep maintained.

    3. Agammamon   2 years ago

      You know the b2 and b21 and b1 all carry conventional payloads, right?

      Among those possible payloads is something like 10,000 pounds of JASSMs - one bomber can punch a pretty large hole in someone's air defence zone.

  38. Sevo   2 years ago

    "COVID in California: No rush in Bay Area to put on face masks again"
    [...]
    "Most in Bay Area seem to prefer maskless faces, but S.F. appears more willing to cover up..."
    Most in Bay Area seem to prefer maskless faces, but S.F. appears more willing to cover up

    The found a hippy-dippy grocery store where ~60% wore masks; the image showed two masked, one face, but one of the masks was not covering the nose, i.e, no mask, just a signal.

    1. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

      I was walking around SF just the other day and let me assure, it's the most masked up city in america. Just astonishing. Mothers walking their kids around all masked up outside.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        Hey, would you want your wife and kid mistaken for Republicans?

        1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

          More like "your wife and your wife's kid" if you're in San Francisco.

          1. Agammamon   2 years ago

            Your husband's wife.

    2. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

      Idiots.

    3. Anomalous   2 years ago

      They don't work. You can still smell the human waste on the street.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        They'll never work that way anyway. If they want to get rid of that wondrous fecal odor, they'll need full face respirators with organic vapor/HEPA filters.

        https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/p/d/v000057495/

        1. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

          You can still smell the human shit as you walk by but it will totes block a virus!

  39. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

    "The House Jan. 6 committee met Sunday to finalize its plans to issue at least three criminal referrals for former President Donald Trump," NBC reports.

    The walls are closing in! You've got him this time!

    Meanwhile 100billion went oversees with 10% marked for the "big guy"

  40. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

    Oberlin College will pay $36 million to a bakery that students and faculty accused of racism.</I.

    Notice the studied neutral voice here compared to the other things. Making it sound as innocuous and uneventful as possible.

    The cathedral is cracking and the desperation is palpable.

  41. Jerryskids   2 years ago

    Meanwhile, Congress is scrambling to pass an omnibus spending bill to fund the federal government through next September.

    Well, not all of Congress is scrambling, just the Democrats and a handful of RINO Republicans who fear waiting until January when Republicans take control of the House and we all find out we've been fucked again by thinking it made a difference which party you voted for.

  42. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   2 years ago

    DESPITE REPORTS, GOP HAS NOT ‘TURNED ON TRUMP’ FOR CALL TO TERMINATE THE CONSTITUTION — FASCISM ISN’T A DEALBREAKER FOR TODAY’S GOP
    .....
    Trump’s open embrace of fascism and antisemitism has been mainstreamed on the American Right. So even if Trump were to be ousted from the movement because Republicans finally decided that he’s no longer useful, the fascist and antisemitic tendencies in their politics would remain—their lies about a secret cabal that “indoctrinates” children, sexualizes and molests them; about “coastal elites” who suppress free speech of “real” (meaning White, conservative, Christian) Americans; and the moral panic over LGBTQ, especially trans, people and Critical Race Theory all harken back to versions of the antisemitic conspiracy theory of Cultural Marxism which has a long tradition amongst the Christian Right.
    ...........
    The antisemitic narratives at core of the ramped-up moral panics peddled by Republicans can be found in the century-old antisemitic Russian forgery, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” In its current form it’s the lie that Jews use Civil Rights (or any kind of Social Justice cause) to bring Bolshevism, communism, socialism—pick your poison!—to the US, and that they use Black people to divide the country and usher in their Bolshevik/communist/socialist dystopia. You can hear echoes and variations of this story every day on Fox News.

    https://religiondispatches.org/despite-reports-gop-has-not-turned-on-trump-for-call-to-terminate-the-constitution-fascism-isnt-a-dealbreaker-for-todays-gop/

    1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

      Rather ironic being posted by a guy who got his old "Sarah Palin's Buttplug" handle here banned by Reason and scrubbed from the comments sections due to his posting of hardcore child porn dark web links.

      Tell us more about this banning, Buttplug, and which cock you sucked to get back on here.

      1. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   2 years ago

        Lying is one of your McCarthy-like tactics. Only white Christians can be real Americans and everyone else is a commie child rapist.

        You're Joe McCarthy ver. 2022.

        1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

          Nice projection there, dude. Now, please tell us how you managed to get back here after your ban.

        2. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

          Peak Buttplug.

          "Only white Christians can be real Americans"

          Why Young Men of Color Are Joining White-Supremacist Groups

          THE NEW FAR-RIGHT
          Patriot Prayer’s leader is half-Japanese. Black and brown faces march with the Proud Boys. Is the future of hate multicultural?

          1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

            Somehow, I get the feeling that Mr. PlugUpHisAss doesn't seem to like me. Such is life, to be despised by a mere object stuffed in a rectum.

            1. Sevo   2 years ago

              That's spelled "turd".

      2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

        A lack of evidence is proof of a crime.

    2. Super Scary   2 years ago

      "FOR CALL TO TERMINATE THE CONSTITUTION"

      This didn't happen.

      1. Sevo   2 years ago

        Well, don't forget; turd lies. It's what turd does.

      2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

        He didn't call for the termination of the entire Constitution, just the 'termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.'

        No big deal.

        1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

          Talk to Turdo up there. He's the dork who posted it that way.

    3. Sevo   2 years ago

      turd lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
      If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
      turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.

  43. Longtobefree   2 years ago

    "Biden Is Set To Sign $858 Billion Pentagon Budget—One of the Biggest Ever"

    Those gender studies and Critical Race theory courses aren't cheap!

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      What about the new rainbow-camo uniforms?

  44. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

    A Wetumpka, Alabama, court recently sentenced two women to two years of probation, $100 in fines, and 10 days in jail for feeding stray cats (though the jail sentence was suspended). "I have never seen or heard of a case more absurd than this," lawyer William Shashy told The Washington Post.

    oh it gets way worse than this, you just haven't looked that hard.

  45. Longtobefree   2 years ago

    "A Wetumpka, Alabama, court recently sentenced two women to two years of probation, $100 in fines, and 10 days in jail for feeding stray cats (though the jail sentence was suspended). "I have never seen or heard of a case more absurd than this," lawyer William Shashy told The Washington Post."

    I submit for your consideration this preceding story - - - - - - - -

    North Carolina's Supreme Court has struck down a state requirement that voters must show photo identification. The court held that the 2018 law was passed "to target African-American voters who were unlikely to vote for Republican candidates."

  46. Jerry B.   2 years ago

    “Oberlin College will pay $36 million to a bakery that students and faculty accused of racism.”

    Oh, dear. They may have to lay off some administrators.

    Just kidding. They’ll cut the salaries of TAs, and raise tuition and fees.

    1. Longtobefree   2 years ago

      And open a lobbying office to push loan forgiveness.

    2. Ska   2 years ago

      Eh, their endowment fund earns more than that annually. So just cut nonconforming economists.

  47. Dillinger   2 years ago

    >House Jan. 6 committee met Sunday to finalize its plans

    lol now do one.fucking.thing on the Biden crimes.

  48. Dillinger   2 years ago

    >>two years of probation, $100 in fines, and 10 days in jail for feeding stray cats

    took one in to get fixed just last week what do I get for that?

  49. Dillinger   2 years ago

    >>Oberlin College will pay $36 million to a bakery that students and faculty accused of racism.

    how is this possible I was led to believe all bakers are racist bigots

    1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

      Racist and homophobic, apparently.

  50. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

    Here are the 4 Republicans who voted against allowing unvaccinated military members who were fired to get their jobs back

    Spoiler: Bill Cassidy, Susan Collins, Mike Rounds and Mitt Romney.

    Every single one of them held up here before as being "principled" by Buttplug and Chemjeff.

    1. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

      Well, you can't argue they're not principled. You know who else was "principled"?

      1. Fats of Fury   2 years ago

        Seymour Skinner?

    2. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

      Mitt Romney is truly the apotheosis of a "cuck" republican. What a fucking tool.

      1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

        At one point it was going to be either him or Obama. Talk about a Sophie's choice.

      2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

        Note that he was basically anointed by the neocons as the 2012 candidate, and is still held up as a pargon of virtue by independent "conservatives" who left the party after Trump snatched it out of their grasping fingers.

        1. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

          and dont forget he was vilified so badly by the Dems as a troglodyte caveman conservative they even claimed he wanted to put black people back in chains. He was worse than Hitler.

          1. Dillinger   2 years ago

            dude put his dog in a dog cage. monster.

    3. Eeyore   2 years ago

      All of those my body my choice Democrats. Wow. So many standing up for personal body autonomy.

      1. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

        Um, if you don't take the vaccine, then you'll spread COVID to other people, so this isn't just about YOUR body. And remember, your mask doesn't protect you, it protects me.

        1. Eeyore   2 years ago

          The eugenisisits also have some arguments about how forced euthanasia protects the people from the unclean.

        2. Longtobefree   2 years ago

          To quote Luke Skywalker, "everything you just said is wrong".

          1. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

            Since when? It wasn't wrong in 2020, 2021 or 99% of 2022. And I haven't heard anyone come out and say "it's wrong" despite a whole lot of late-game shifting of strategy. Science resettles. Get over it.

      2. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

        No shame in hypocrisy anymore.

        1. Super Scary   2 years ago

          Yep. They can just scream "whataboutism!" and walk away the victor in their minds.

      3. Kungpowderfinger   2 years ago (edited)

        All these Democrat senators don’t expect healthy young people in the military to get jabbed because of The Deadly Pandemic. They expect signaling of unquestioned loyalty by the very bodies that will ultimately be used to enforce their bullshit schemes, like the next US plandemic response or war with Russia.

        It appears that four Republican senators feel the same. No surprise which ones, looks like the RNC found their primary candidates to loose the next presidential election early this time.

        No surprise either that none of the four cucks (and that includes you too Suzie) are veterans. No doubt that there’s veterans amongst the Dem senators, and they’re ok with mandating experimental treatments on the troops.

        Fuck the lot of them.

    4. Fats of Fury   2 years ago

      40 to 54. I wonder which 6 were missing?

  51. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

    North Carolina's Supreme Court has struck down a state requirement that voters must show photo identification. The court held that the 2018 law was passed "to target African-American voters who were unlikely to vote for Republican candidates."

    ...The fuck out of here.

    1. JesseAz   2 years ago

      Most of the judges got voted the fuck out last election.

  52. ElizabethSpaulding   2 years ago (edited)

    I get paid more than $100 to $500 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this I have earned easily $21k from this without having online working skills . Simply give it a shot on the accompanying site…

    Here is I started...................>>> onlinecareer1

  53. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

    The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is expanding the military budget enormously.

    My favorite part about this is how Bernie Sanders knuckled under and supported the war machine. The one thing you might have imagined he would stand on principle. Nope. Fucking worthless scumbag like all the rest.

    1. NOYB2   2 years ago

      Sanders supported the USSR. He likes war machines, as long as they are socialist.

    2. NOYB2   2 years ago

      Sanders also buckled under on Yemen.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        Yeah, Senator Sanders was chicken. Put that in your bucket to take home.

    3. Agammamon   2 years ago

      Sanders supported the USSR. Oh and he has no principles.

  54. mad.casual   2 years ago (edited)

    “to target African-American voters who were unlikely to vote for Republican candidates.”

    Uh, wow. “Our voters are just as bright and just as talented as Black Republicans.”

    It's like a Charlie Brown cartoon except Lucy just swaps Black Democrats with the football at the last second so that Charlie Brown can kick them in the nuts every. single. time.

    1. NOYB2   2 years ago

      Yes, note in particular the absence of a comma in that statement.

    2. NOYB2   2 years ago (edited)

      ...

  55. Super Scary   2 years ago (edited)

    “Evan Greer is on Mastodon”

    How strange is it that he made it a point to change his Twitter name to that, but he appears to be still tweeting just fine? He’s even paying the 8 bucks for his check mark. What's wrong with Mastodon?

    1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

      Mastodon is allowing these retards to be even more terminally online than they already are.

    2. Eeyore   2 years ago

      she/they

  56. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

    Uh-oh. Turns out, one of the new Republican House members may not be who he claims to be.

    https://archive.vn/1aJ7S

    1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

      Ok, I can play "boaf sidez" here. Elizabeth Warren, anyone?

      1. Fats of Fury   2 years ago

        Or Joe Biden.

    2. NOYB2   2 years ago

      When you have a credible source for that story, please share it. The NYT is about as credible as the communist party newspaper.

      Besides, why would you care? Biden isn't who he claims he is, AOC isn't who she claims she is, etc. I thought Democrats liked people choosing their identities over facts.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        At this point, I think Pravda has more credibility than the New York Times. At least with Pravda you can get the truth by reading between the lines. With the NYT, you don't even get that much.

  57. Cyto   2 years ago

    The latest Twitter file dump confirms what we all knew.... there is a left wing deep state that uses state power to control the media and influence elections. They detail how the FBI pressured Twitter and planted false stories throughout the press to cross-pollenate and reinforce their control.

    They also detail how former FBI personel employed at Twitter were able to swing objections by internal Twitter staff toward helping Biden win the election.

    So, ENB..... you guys know these people. Taibbi and Bari run in your circles.

    Are you going to do any original reporting? Is anyone trying to talk to FBI handler Elvis in San Francisco? Is anyone trying to run down who planted the false story at the Washington Post that was reported today?

    We saw the same operatives for the DNC making the Sunday rounds this weekend, flinging lies in every direction and demanding more censorship online. Is anyone at Reason making calls to run this down? Any attempts to get an insider to explain why Schiff gets a free pass in interviews when he again and again lies about FBI actions? Anyone trying to find a deep throat at Facebook or the NYT?

    If Project Veritas can get stories about the NYT newsroom being run as a wing of the DNC, surely Reason can find a source.

    Reason does lots of rip and run hot take think peices about other people's reporting... but a revalation that everything those right wing nutjobs have been saying about social media is true. And we have a notable paucity of reporting on this issue. I promise you that the FBI having a tens of millions of dollars program to control political speech in America is a much bigger story than Trump releasing an NFT. Yet you would be hard pressed to know it from reading the pages of Reason online.

    In fact, you could be forgiven for getting the idea that Twitter has suddenly begun a raging campaign of censoring legitimate news reporting for the first time ever, just this week, and that this is the biggest story going.

    Isn't anyone there clamoring to use their connections to the Substack crew to do some original reporting about the stories uncovered in the Twitter files?

    1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago (edited)

      We won’t see it from anyone but Nancy Rommelman here. It’s far easier to sit in a cube or an office, maybe at home at a computer and play a little solitaire on the screen, and then type a short report using information gathered by someone else. No one here writing for Reason seems to care, to be curious, to investigate further, to be offended in a stereotypical libertarian fashion about the FBI and the rest of the security state apparatus influencing and controlling social media such as Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Google, etc. Not one. The only editor here who has written anything on The Twitter Files to date is Robby, and even then it’s tepid. It’s a rather sad state of affairs, really, when a supposedly libertarian publication will not lift a finger to investigate the connections between social media and the security state.

      Liberty doesn't die in darkness; it dies in the light, in public, surrounded by people who couldn't care less whether it lives or dies as long as they are safe and sound and spoon-fed bullshit.

      1. Cyto   2 years ago

        "people who couldn’t care less whether it lives or dies as long as they are safe and sound and spoon-fed bullshit."

        I would have lost a bunch of money betting against that when I was young and idealistic.

        But when even a libertarian magazine thinks a fake "Russian election interference" story is a huge deal and discuss it with great passion while yawning at proof that the FBI has been controlling political coverage in the US for partisan purposes.

      2. mad.casual   2 years ago

        Liberty doesn’t die in darkness; it dies in the light, in public, surrounded by a large group of people who couldn’t care less whether it lives or dies as long as they are safe and sound and spoon-fed bullshit, a smaller group of people trying to save it, and an elite group of journolists pushing back on the second group asking why they've always got to be hassling with democracy and getting so insurrection-y.

    2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

      One of the most surreal bits of info out of these dumps was that the FBI wanted Billy Baldwin's account censored. What in the hell did Alec's obscure brother do to warrant that kind of attention?

      1. Cyto   2 years ago

        Be a conservative Christian and a member of a notable family

        1. Utkonos   2 years ago

          Maybe his portrayal of Emperor Nero in that St Peter movie hit too close to home for some (very important) people’s comfort?

        2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

          I thought it was Stephen who was the conservative.

    3. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

      After ENB joined the pro censorship choir and Robbie wrote a handful of paragraphs, Reason followed the lead of the MSM and decided to ignore the situation altogether. Nothing to see here. Move along.

  58. Utkonos   2 years ago

    What, nothing about Trump and the J6 walls closing in?
    Heck, NR at least has something posted
    https://www.nationalreview.com/news/january-6-committee-refers-trump-to-department-of-justice-for-criminal-prosecution/
    Hot takes, anyone? (C’mon, you know you want to!)

    1. Utkonos   2 years ago

      Personally, I have no hot take but I do have a question for NR editors: Is “architect” really a verb?

      1. Longtobefree   2 years ago

        Yep.
        Verb
        architect (third-person singular simple present architects, present participle architecting, simple past and past participle architected)

        (transitive) To design, plan, or orchestrate.
        He architected the military coup against the government.

        1. Utkonos   2 years ago

          Interesting. Thank you. Mrs culpa for my initial nose-wrinkling upon reading it.

          1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

            Still sounds dumb.

    2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

      Wait. Sullum hasn't posted an article yet today. I'm sure he'll have a nice dose of TDS for us.

      1. Utkonos   2 years ago

        I haven’t checked Volokh yet either…

  59. Cronut   2 years ago

    "A Wetumpka, Alabama, court recently sentenced two women to two years of probation, $100 in fines, and 10 days in jail for feeding stray cats (though the jail sentence was suspended)."

    Just out of curiosity, because ENB is generally dishonest and nothing from the Washington Post can ever be trusted, I googled this.

    They were NOT arrested for feeding cats. They were arrested for trespassing after being told repeatedly to STOP feeding the cats in that location, because the cat food was drawing rodents and other assorted wildlife that were causing damage to city vehicles parked in that location. The city had already tried to get them stop several times, and the mayor finally said, "Fuck it. Arrest them."

    It's still ridiculous. But, as I suspected, ENB is dishonest in her framing. I doubt she even read the original stories on the incident.

  60. Wizard4169   2 years ago

    Jail time is probably a little excessive, but the cat thing isn't entirely unreasonable. Feral cats do a lot of damage, so encouraging them is not a good thing.

  61. averae   2 years ago (edited)

    Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,500 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,400 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
    .
    .
    Just open the link———————————————->>> http://Www.RichApp1.Com

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

How Trump's Tariffs and Immigration Policies Could Make Housing Even More Expensive

M. Nolan Gray | From the July 2025 issue

Photo: Dire Wolf De-extinction

Ronald Bailey | From the July 2025 issue

How Making GLP-1s Available Over the Counter Can Unlock Their Full Potential

Jeffrey A. Singer | From the June 2025 issue

Bob Menendez Does Not Deserve a Pardon

Billy Binion | 5.30.2025 5:25 PM

12-Year-Old Tennessee Boy Arrested for Instagram Post Says He Was Trying To Warn Students of a School Shooting

Autumn Billings | 5.30.2025 5:12 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!