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

Israel

U.S. Begins To Talk Ceasefire

Plus: Catholic funeral for transgender activist, Donald Trump's props, deep tech in El Segundo, and more...

Liz Wolfe | 2.20.2024 9:30 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Gaza | Majdi Fathi/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom
(Majdi Fathi/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom)

U.S. works to negotiate ceasefire: The United States, via a U.N. Security Council resolution, is urging a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas "as soon as practicable"—using ceasefire language for the first time—as well as rebuking Israel for plans to possibly invade Rafah.

"Until now, the United States alone has publicly and consistently rejected demands for an outright cease-fire in U.N. resolutions on the war in Gaza, siding with Israel in its war against Hamas," reports The New York Times.

The changed language "reflect[s] President [Joe] Biden's shift toward criticism of Israel's prosecution of the war and of its planned offensive into the southern Gaza city of Rafah," per the Times.

About half of Gaza's civilians are sheltering in Rafah, and an offensive there "would have serious implications for regional peace and security," per the language of the draft resolution.

Julian Assange returns to court: The WikiLeaks founder who has been held in London's Belmarsh prison since 2019, and whose lawyers have been fighting possible extradition to the U.S., will have his case return to court this week.

The two-day hearing will determine whether Assange has reached the end of his ability to appeal his case in the U.K. and whether he will be extradited to the U.S., where he faces a possible 175 years in prison if convicted of espionage charges.

Back in 2010 and 2011, WikiLeaks published thousands of documents leaked by whistleblower Chelsea Manning, who was at the time an Army intelligence analyst serving in Iraq. The documents brought information to light about civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan for which the U.S. military had been responsible.

In 2019, the U.S. Department of Justice charged Assange with 18 counts of violating the Espionage Act—a case with huge implications for press freedom, if Assange does in fact stand trial and receive a conviction.

For more on Assange's case, check out this conversation Zach Weissmueller and I had with Julian's wife, Stella:


Scenes from New York: The Roman Catholic Diocese of New York was duped into allowing a funeral mass at St. Patrick's Cathedral for a vocally atheist transgender activist.

"The cathedral only knew that family and friends were requesting a funeral Mass for a Catholic and had no idea our welcome and prayer would be degraded in such a sacrilegious and deceptive way," wrote Fr. Enrique Salvo—who is one of my priests (he splits his time between St. Patrick's Cathedral and the Basilica of St. Patrick's Old Cathedral, where I am a parishioner)—in a statement.

"The pews were packed with mourners, many of them transgender, who wore daring high-fashion outfits and cheered as eulogists led them in praying for transgender rights and access to gender-affirming health care," reported The New York Times. A video circulated of mourners approvingly calling the deceased "mother of all whores" inside the cathedral.

"Several mainstream media outlets had framed the event as a breakthrough occasion and a sign of the Catholic Church shifting its teaching—or at least its tone—on sexuality and human anthropology," reported Catholic News Agency. But many Catholics, contra mainstream reporting, feel as though the funeral made a mockery of our faith.

Both St. Patrick's in Midtown and Old St. Patrick's in Nolita are frequent targets for activist stunts due to the Catholic Church's positions on trans issues and abortion.


QUICK HITS

  • "As of late September, I thought that (i) it had become too late for a full-fledged primary challenge to Biden, and (ii) Biden voluntarily announcing that he wouldn't run for a second term was a close call but probably failed a cost-benefit test for Democrats," writes Nate Silver. "Since then, Biden's situation has become considerably worse…to borrow the poker term, Biden no longer has as many 'outs'—meaning, contingencies that could improve his situation."
  • Germany will decriminalize recreational weed this week, allowing adults to grow up to three plants and possess up to 25 grams of cannabis.
  • "Flying got safer last year almost everywhere except Russia," reports Bloomberg. Someone tell Tucker Carlson, who is possibly still wandering around a Russian grocery store, eyes wide with delight.
  • "What is the 'migrant crisis' in New York and Chicago?" asks Jerusalem Demsas at The Atlantic. "It includes visible signs of disorder like migrants sleeping outside as hotel rooms fill up, anger among native-born Americans that limited resources are being spent on migrants, and an expensive bureaucratic scramble to arrange health screenings, translation services, housing programs, legal services, school placements, school buses, and other needs for newcomers." But some of the problem, Demsas says, stems from the red-state governors busing migrants to these big cities in particular: "When immigrants make their way to a city in an organic fashion, they usually are drawn to a place where they have family ties, job leads, or other connections and resources available. When they're resettled through an official government program, as the displaced Ukrainians were, the federal government coordinates with local governments to ensure a smooth transition."
  • A look inside the deep tech scene in El Segundo:

Along with YCs call for more deep tech applications, this is just the beginning of a broader transition of venture capital towards businesses with defensible moats in atoms-first industries, where AI and ML are in the stack but not the main show. pic.twitter.com/BnGQxfIJnz

— Andrew Côté (@Andercot) February 19, 2024

  • A look at all Donald Trump's incredible props over the years.
  • lol:

Obama's daughter trying to sneak past Nepo baby discourse by not using her last name. Bro you are Obama's Duaghter pic.twitter.com/Z8PtkAYsSh

— McRib (@McR1B69) February 19, 2024

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: Is the Human Brain a Prediction Machine?

Liz Wolfe is an associate editor at Reason.

IsraelPalestineWarMiddle EastRoman CatholicCatholicismTechnologyElection 2024PoliticsJoe BidenDonald TrumpReason Roundup
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (650)

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. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    U.S. works to negotiate ceasefire...

    Looks like we sat in the right roadway.

    1. Moonrocks   2 years ago

      I can see this being diplomatic pressure from Egypt.

      1. A Thinking Mind   2 years ago

        Or our dear friend the President of Mexico, Abdul Fattah el-Sisi.

        1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

          Well then we should make Mexico pay for it.

          1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

            Is that why they are building the wall in Egypt?

            1. YvonneGerdes   2 years ago (edited)

              I'm making over $7k a month working component time. I saved hearing other people inform me how lots cash they could make online so Q I decided to look at it. Well, it turned into all proper and has definitely modified my life. Get this today by....
              Follow Instructions —>>> http://Www.Bizwork1.com

            2. Rob Misek   2 years ago

              So the propaganda is that the US is calling for a ceasefire. Hahaha

              The REAL story, absent from all mainstream news outlets here is:

              “US vetoes Arab-backed UN resolution demanding ceasefire in Gaza

              Vote in 15-member security council was 13-1 with UK abstaining, making it the US’s third veto of such a resolution”

              https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/20/us-vetoes-un-resolution-ceasefire-israel-gaza

        2. R Mac   2 years ago

          chemjeff radical individualist 3 hours ago
          Flag Comment Mute User
          Oh fuck you. I have to work and I don’t have all day to sit around on this forum like you all do.

          LMAO.

      2. Spiritus Mundi   2 years ago

        It is an election year and Biden needs his base back.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          And this year the base is all about Palestinian genocide. I guess we are over BLM and LBGQTRXYZ.

          1. Spiritus Mundi   2 years ago

            That crazy tranny in Texas was all about some Palestine.

      3. Diane Reynolds (Paul. they/them)   2 years ago

        More like Diplomatic pressure from zoomer voters. The elections, like winter, are coming.

    2. HorseConch   2 years ago

      Any chance we do the same in Ukraine, or is our master strategy to sacrifice every Ukrainian male that can be drug to the front lines before endorsing the inevitable agreement that gives Russia whatever it wants?

      1. Rev Arthur L kuckland   2 years ago

        Isreal isn't laundering d money

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          Or ruins of US-funded corona virus "research" labs.

    3. Ron   2 years ago

      when will teh world request a Russian ceasefire, maybe to much money to be drained off yet

    4. buybuydandavis   2 years ago

      ha ha
      I thought the article would be about the NATO Russian War.

      Foolish of me. There will never be enough dead Slavs to satisfy the Ruling Reptiles. They will work to drown Russians in Ukrainian blood to the last drop of Ukrainian blood.

  2. But SkyNet is a Private Company   2 years ago (edited)

    Fuck Judge Engoron

    1. Idaho-Bob   2 years ago

      "Judge" Engoron

    2. ObviouslyNotSpam   2 years ago

      But not the law he rode in on?

      1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

        The law was lawless - t. Constitution

        1. Sevo   2 years ago

          ONS never saw a law he didn't like, especially those open to very wide interpretation.

      2. DesigNate   2 years ago

        Fuck that law too.

    3. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

      Was reading up more on this calculation. And it is dumber than originally thought.

      The amount stems from loan rates with and without collateral. Recourse vs non recourse. The judge used a loan rate never intended to be used by Trump. The banks said they slashed the valuation he provided by 50% and Trumos known assets were far higher.

      Then the next step was to estimate the costs of profit between buy and sale of the property. Of course interest on the loans goes into profit. So the judge used the profit which included lower loan costs. He assumed 100% of the profit in the calculation.

      Basically the judge used 2x the delta between the recourse and non recourse loans.

      This judge is a fucking idiot.

      1. A Thinking Mind   2 years ago

        He’s a motivated partisan hack. He wanted to inflict the maximum damage on his target and didn’t care about the lack of a victim.

      2. Illocust   2 years ago

        And thus the beauty of lawfare.

      3. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

        "This judge is a fucking idiot."

        He knew exactly what he was doing. This is the Administration and Justice department's little plot. His shit-eating smirk was because he knows he's about to become a very wealthy man in his retirement. They won't pay him directly but there will be the book deal, and a seat on numerous well-paying boards and quangos, and million dollar speeches, etc.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          He also demonstrated how "cultured" people do political conflict. None of that crass Trumpy stuff, with name-calling and open favoritism or firing.

      4. Spiritus Mundi   2 years ago

        Lawyers are not known for their prowess in math. Just look at congress.

      5. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

        Yeah however any particular property is appraised Trump's net worth obviously far exceeded the 125 million note in question. It was a no brainer for the banks.

      6. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

        the "reasoning" is irrelevant here.

      7. Longtobefree   2 years ago

        The calculation wasn't all that complex.
        https://babylonbee.com/news/judge-orders-trump-to-pay-whatever-amount-it-takes-to-bankrupt-campaign

      8. buybuydandavis   2 years ago

        Not an idiot.
        A criminal. Another boot in the army of our dictatorship.

  3. Moonrocks   2 years ago

    The two-day hearing will determine whether Assange has reached the end of his ability to appeal his case in the U.K. and whether he will be extradited to the U.S., where he faces a possible 175 years in prison if convicted of espionage charges.

    So we're just going to ignore the sexual assault charges?

    1. ObviouslyNotSpam   2 years ago

      Er, yes. Why would we mention them, considering Sweden has dropped all of them (I don't think he was ever charged, actually), or in any case has decided not to pursue him for any reason.

      What Liz did not mention was the Trump-era computer hacking charge in the original 2018 indictment, however. (And no, Trump's DoJ did not indict him on 18 Espionage Act charges in 2019--they added 17 such charges to the original computer hacking charge.)

      1. DesigNate   2 years ago

        One of the things I absolutely hate Trump on is the Assange and Snowden positions.

        1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

          He was completely rooked by the CIA on those two. It'll hopefully be different now that he's realized Foggy Bottom aren't the good guys.

          1. DesigNate   2 years ago

            I hope you’re right, not that I expect to see him in the White House again. Given everything they’ve done over the last 8 years, there’s no way in hell these assholes are going to let that happen.

            1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

              True. If they can't imprison him and get him off ballots, and they think he might clear their margin of fraud, they're going to kill him.
              They have to. They've gone way to far and they know it.

    2. mad.casual   2 years ago

      Yeah, remember the days of free-swinging, free love Europeans not bound by the stifling mores of Evul Amerikkkun Puritanism and bureaucracy? Back when if you drugged and raped 13 yr. old girl, but were, say, a French-Polish film director, it was the boorish Americans' fault for not appreciating your art and cultural nuance.

      Well, welcome to modern globalism. The days of "He got across the imaginary social construct, there's nothing we can legally do." have been replaced with the much more inclusive, virulent, and universal "Fuck you, that's why."

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

        Both the EU, US, and the rest of the FVEY nations are in a not-so-subtle competition at this point to see who can be the most radical left institution on the planet at this point.

        Lenin and Mao would certainly be proud that the western left has been happily accelerating all of their original programs since about 2008.

  4. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    'The changed language "reflect[s] President [Joe] Biden's shift toward criticism of Israel's prosecution of the war and of its planned offensive into the southern Gaza city of Rafah," per the Times.'

    I guess the DNC did the calculation and they can get more votes from Muslims than Jews.

    1. Idaho-Bob   2 years ago

      I guess the DNC did the calculation and they can get more votes from Muslims than Jews.

      But not more donation $.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        I dunno. Rothschilds vs House of Saud?

        1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

          The Rothschilds care about Jews like the Democrats care about Blacks.

      2. Jerry B.   2 years ago

        As long as they have Soros and Bloomberg in the house, they should be okay.

    2. Illocust   2 years ago

      They're walking a fine line. Trying to marry the stance that's is okay to kill Jewish people for being Jewish in Isreal with they're Jewish voters over here not wanting to be killed. Bayside they are trying to convince the locals that the hatred of Jews is going to stop at Isreal's border. It won't and it hasn't, but people are good at convincing themselves.

      1. Moonrocks   2 years ago

        Such are the perils of building an Intersectionalist coalition.

        1. HorseConch   2 years ago

          I think it's more of an indication that it's a terrible strategy to build such coalition based off of the intersectionality. Trump has built a very diverse coalition, but almost none of it is based on hating the other parts of said coalition.

      2. Ed Grinberg   2 years ago

        "people are good at convincing themselves."
        Right.
        Here's percentage of the Jewish vote given to the Democratic candidate in the last eight presidential elections (source):
        - 1992 (Clinton): 80
        - 1996 (Clinton): 78
        - 2000 (Gore): 79
        - 2004 (Kerry): 76
        - 2008 (Obama): 78
        - 2012 (Obama): 69
        - 2016 (Clinton): 71
        - 2020 (Biden): 68
        Remarkable consistency! Biden could declare that Israel is committing genocide and war crimes, and start bombing them like we bombed Serbia in the 90's -- and he'd probably still get the majority of the Jewish vote!

        1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

          Some ideas are baked in a culture.

          For the Jews living in squalor in the shtetls of the Pale of Settlement in the late nineteen hundreds, socialism and left wing politics were perceived to be the salvation from the brutality of the Tsar. Hundreds of thousands of those Jews fled to America and took those ideas with them.
          The Jews that remained had 80 years of Soviet brutality to disabuse them of the notion that socialism is salvation, but the American Jews never did. That's why you see such a difference between the politics of Ashkenazim in the rest of the world versus those in the US.

          1. Idaho-Bob   2 years ago

            There are notable exceptions

            https://jpfo.org/

          2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

            It's interesting how distrust of the tsar manifested itself in the various minorities in Russia. The Jews tended to turn left while the Germans have tended to turn more right and libertarian.

          3. TheReEncogitationer   2 years ago

            "Late Nineteen Hundreds"?

            While the Soviet Union was in squalor too, I think you meant Nineteenth Century Czarist Russia. Thirty-five years isn't much time to develop much of an ethos, much less one favoring a dead Marxist-Leninist ideology.
            🙂
            😉

          4. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            Because politics is hereditary. Got it.

            1. R Mac   2 years ago

              That’s not what he said liar.

        2. XM   2 years ago

          Many Jews are just white liberals who had Jewish parents or grandparents. Someone like Sarah Michelle Gellar is counted as Jewish. They don't speak Hebrew, eat gefilte fish, or attend a synagogue.

    3. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

      White young progressives + muslims

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        "We're all Muslims now!"

        1. mad.casual   2 years ago (edited)

          “Finally, the shemagh I’ve been wearing for two decades to keep the desert sand my mouth and nose while I walk the streets of Seattle, Portland, Chicago, or NYC actually means something!”

        2. TheReEncogitationer   2 years ago (edited)

          Ackshuyally, that is the position of Islam about all humans at birth. According to the creed, we just forget over time unless consciously raised as Muslim.

          Well, I don't recall being born with a scimitar and a dynamite vest.
          🙂
          😉

    4. CountmontyC   2 years ago

      It's where the votes are located. Most of the Jewish vote is in states that will almost certainly vote blue ( New York) or red ( Florida) so keeping the Jewish voters happy is unimportant to the Biden Maladministration. Michigan is a different story as polls show Trump and Biden are close in an important swing state and Biden can I'll afford to lose Michigan if he is to have any hope of reelection and since the Muslim vote in Michigan is quite large losing that voting bloc would guarantee that Biden loses Michigan.
      As they say in real estate the three most important things are location, location and location.

      1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

        The Arabs typically vote Green when they don't vote Democrat, especially the ethno-marxist Palestinians.

        1. CountmontyC   2 years ago

          Biden is only worried about them not voting for him. He really needs their votes to stand a chance in Michigan.

  5. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    The changed language "reflect[s] President [Joe] Biden's shift toward criticism of Israel's prosecution of the war..."

    The zoomer staffers protesting on his lawn got the attention of his millennials handlers?

    1. A Thinking Mind   2 years ago

      Honestly, that’s probably true. We’re more and more seeing that the people who run the country aren’t elected or accountable.

      1. HorseConch   2 years ago

        Or very smart.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          Or ethical.

  6. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    ...leaked by whistleblower Chelsea Manning, who was at the time an Army intelligence analyst serving in Iraq.

    You can never trust a woman to keep a secret.

    1. Spiritus Mundi   2 years ago

      What is a woman?

      1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

        Is Fist a biologist?

      2. Longtobefree   2 years ago

        Not Bradley Manning.

    2. shadydave   2 years ago

      Funny

    3. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      What about transmen? They are proving better than women at everything, so maybe they can keep secrets.

    4. mad.casual   2 years ago

      The secret was strong enough for a man, but made for a woman.

      1. MK Ultra   2 years ago

        I thought that was a backhand slap.

  7. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    'The two-day hearing will determine whether Assange has reached the end of his ability to appeal his case in the U.K. and whether he will be extradited to the U.S., where he faces a possible 175 years in prison if convicted of espionage charges.'

    Good thing we don't persecute political prisoners like Putin, right?

    1. ObviouslyNotSpam   2 years ago

      I don't think the Espionage Act charges will hold up, but the computer hacking charge seems pretty solid.

      But, given the extradition treaty between the US and UK, there are only limited grounds upon which the UK can refuse the US' request for extradition.

      In any case, Assange's absurd claim that he will be "disappeared" if he stands trial in the US has no basis in fact.

      1. Sevo   2 years ago

        You really are a statist pile of shit, aren't you?

      2. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

        Well as Bill Barr explained, Jeffrey Epstein killed himself.

      3. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

        Rendition and Guantanamoe Bay say otherwise. Highly unlikely, but once you open that door, defendants should certainly be allowed to make the claim in court and have the merits judged.

    2. Medulla Oblongata   2 years ago

      Or prosecute the opposition on trumped-up charges in kangaroo courts.

      1. Super Scary   2 years ago

        Certainly seems like a popular choice nowadays.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          Rule of law was never popular.

  8. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    The Roman Catholic Diocese of New York was duped into allowing a funeral mass at St. Patrick's Cathedral for a vocally atheist transgender activist.

    Taken to heart that the Church is for sinners not saints.

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Hey, there are sins and then there are SINS!!!

      1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

        Trump has only committed venial sins in the state of New York.

    2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

      Something tells me they weren't actually duped; the troon, who was a man and still won't be a woman even after joining the 41%, was feted as the "queen of whores" at the funeral.

      St Patrick's cathedral literally going into Revelation territory there.

    3. TheReEncogitationer   2 years ago

      Scenes from New York: The Roman Catholic Diocese of New York was duped into allowing a funeral mass at St. Patrick's Cathedral for a vocally atheist transgender activist.

      Well if God made man in "his" own image and God is a "he", then didn't God practice Transgenderism when "he" made Eve out of Adam's rib in "his" own image?
      🙂
      😉

      By the bye, except for both make and female humans born with supernumerary ribs, both males and females have the same number of ribs, contrary to the bullshit taught to kids like me in Sunday School.

      "The cathedral only knew that family and friends were requesting a funeral Mass for a Catholic and had no idea our welcome and prayer would be degraded in such a sacrilegious and deceptive way," wrote Fr. Enrique Salvo—who is one of my priests (he splits his time between St. Patrick's Cathedral and the Basilica of St. Patrick's Old Cathedral, where I am a parishioner)—in a statement.

      "I am shocked, shocked that there are unbelievers in God who only attend our Church out of family and social pressure!"
      🙂
      😉

      "The pews were packed with mourners, many of them transgender, who wore daring high-fashion outfits

      How dare they do that! Only Big Papa and the Clergy can do that!
      🙂
      😉

      A video circulated of mourners approvingly calling the deceased "mother of all whores" inside the cathedral.

      According to some Pentecostals, those worshippers are giving the deceased the name of the Roman Catholic Church told in The Book of Revelation.
      🙂
      😉

      But many Catholics, contra mainstream reporting, feel as though the funeral made a mockery of our faith.

      "Our" faith? Is "Our" Liz a Catholic? And what's this "our" business, Kemosabe Squaw?
      🙂
      😉

      1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

        You really need to put down the Skeptic's Annotated and do a little research yourself.

        1. TheReEncogitationer   2 years ago

          So what have I said here that is wrong?

          By the way, folks, I still love Liz. Wise words and duck lips make her better than her professed religion.
          🙂
          😉

      2. Uilleam   2 years ago

        This shtick is tiresome and no one cares that you're angry at God. Get in line.

        1. R Mac   2 years ago

          But he’s so edgy!

          1. TheReEncogitationer   2 years ago

            It takes a laser edge to slice through the fossilized bullshit which is religion. You don't have to be as beholden to it as you are.

            1. R Mac   2 years ago

              I’m agnostic. You’re a bigot.

        2. TheReEncogitationer   2 years ago

          Religion is the tiresome thing and my anger is at the concept of God and the idiocy it spawns. And there's no line for it. Any place is good.

      3. But SkyNet is a Private Company   2 years ago

        Which row were you sitting in?

        1. TheReEncogitationer   2 years ago

          Except maybe for funerals and weddings of maybe relatives, I wouldn't brighten the door of a house of worship and I'd never pray in one.

          And I'd never do any kind of activism in a house of worship. A lack of bodies in a house of worship and a conversion of the building to other uses would be statement enough of what I want.

  9. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    As of late September, I thought that (i) it had become too late for a full-fledged primary challenge to Biden, and (ii) Biden voluntarily announcing that he wouldn't run for a second term was a close call but probably failed a cost-benefit test for Democrats..."

    Nate forgot that time moves in one direction.

    1. Ska   2 years ago

      Time isn't a flat circle?

    2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

      The Democrats have ironically painted themselves into a corner here because the very nature of their primaries and candidate nominations prevents dark horse or alternative candidates from overtaking the establishment pick, thanks to the chaos of the 1968 convention, and then McGovern becoming the choice of dumb New Left 20-somethings in 1972 and subsequently getting his ass kicked.

      The delegates are completely locked in, and even the superdelegates can't cast a vote until the second ballot at the convention if there's something relatively close like what happened with Hillary and Obama in 2008. That's why there was so much concern in 2020, before Clyburn signaled that the fix was in for Biden, that Bernie might have a plurality of delegates by the convention and his idiot Antifa 20-something supporters would cause another 1968 riot or 1972 election blowout.

      Realistically, the DNC needs to figure out a way to convince the dementia-addled President that he actually served 8 years and sideline him in Delaware for the rest of his life, so they can get Newsom, Pritzker, or Buttigieg/Polis (to get a DEI checkbox) in play. I'm sure Harris is waiting in the wings for her shot, but she's just as unpopular as Biden right now.

      1. DesigNate   2 years ago

        If they somehow maneuvered Polis into the top spot, I wonder how many writers here would reluctantly vote for him.

        1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

          He could honestly run as "I'm not Gavin Newsom" and get quite a bit of the left-center and neocon vote that way.

          1. DesigNate   2 years ago

            Fair point.

          2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

            Candidate McDreamy.

  10. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    Germany will decriminalize recreational weed this week, allowing adults to grow up to three plants and possess up to 25 grams of cannabis.

    You know who else aimed to set arbitrary boundaries?

    1. Ajsloss   2 years ago

      The Klingons?

    2. A Thinking Mind   2 years ago

      King Arthur?

    3. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

      Winston Churchill?

    4. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      The babysitter?

    5. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

      Dr. Fauci?

    6. A Thinking Mind   2 years ago

      Hadrian?

    7. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

      Aaron Burr?

    8. TheReEncogitationer   2 years ago

      Obama?

    9. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

      A netminder?

  11. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    'Both St. Patrick's in Midtown and Old St. Patrick's in Nolita are frequent targets for activist stunts due to the Catholic Church's positions on trans issues and abortion.'

    When one flaky tribe full of delusional ideas fights another. Maybe Netflix series material?

    1. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

      Weird, they dont target mosques. I wonder what the difference is...

      1. Jerry B.   2 years ago

        Survival instinct.

    2. TheReEncogitationer   2 years ago

      Didn't Frankie Goes To Hollywood sing about that?
      🙂
      😉

      1. Dillinger   2 years ago

        a point is all you can score.

  12. Moonrocks   2 years ago

    The pews were packed with mourners, many of them transgender, who wore daring high-fashion outfits and cheered as eulogists led them in praying for transgender rights and access to gender-affirming health care

    That's well into creepy cult territory.

    1. Idaho-Bob   2 years ago

      That’s well into creepy cult territory.

      I'm legitimately waiting for a mass murder/suicide event from these transgelicals.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        But unless committed by a MAGA white guy, you will never hear about it.

      2. damikesc   2 years ago

        Well, given their proclivity to mass shootings presently, it is coming.

      3. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

        Need to get that 41% up to 50%, at least.

      4. Rev Arthur L kuckland   2 years ago

        Like Nashville? Or Colorado? Or Joel ostiens church?

  13. JesseAz   2 years ago

    Large investment groups are already announcing they will stop real estate investments in New York.


    Grant Cardone
    @GrantCardone
    CardoneCapital just started to research real estate investments in New York believing it was time to get into the market.
    .
    After the over reach by the judge in the Trump case & penalties imposed of $355M I told them team do NOT waste time in New York.
    .
    We will 2X our efforts in:
    Florida
    Arizona
    Texas
    Tennessee

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      NY losing to Florida and even Arizona is bad enough, but Tennessee?

      1. JesseAz   2 years ago

        Nashville area is booming right now.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          Hee Haw!

          (I just enjoy the idea that Tennessee attracts more people and business than NY)

          1. mad.casual   2 years ago

            Ain't never hung out in the Catskills
            But I've been to jail in Nashville

            I'm pretty sure you convince urban Millennials and younger it was written about Hunter Biden. Get some no name performer like Olivery Anthony to play it on a resonator guitar or banjo or dulcimer and it would probably hit No. 1.

        2. Rev Arthur L kuckland   2 years ago

          They are going to go the way of colorado

    2. ObviouslyNotSpam   2 years ago

      "Grant Cardone is a world-renowned entrepreneur, author, speaker, investor, and coach. He owns and operates seven privately held companies, and a private equity real estate firm, Cardone Capital, with a multifamily portfolio of assets worth over $4 Billion. He is featured on Season 2 of Discovery Channel's Undercover Billionaire, where he takes on the challenge of building a million-dollar business in 90 days. Grant is also a New York Times bestselling author of 11 business books, including The 10X Rule. Cardone uses his massive 15-million plus following to give back via The Grant Cardone Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to mentoring underprivileged and troubled youth in financial literacy and entrepreneurship - especially those without a father figure."

      That's gotta hurt!

      1. Truthfulness   2 years ago

        Any step that hurts New York is a good step.

  14. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    Flying got safer last year almost everywhere except Russia...

    Aeroflot bought up all the out of service Boeing 737 MAX 8's?

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      With the new "fresh air" door plug feature.

    2. Moonrocks   2 years ago

      Flying got safer last year

      Remember three years ago when all the experts came out to say that inflation totally isn't happening?

    3. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

      TSA: See we stop mutinist generals from "playing" with grenades on flights. But if the radical Republicans don't pass the newest spending bill, well all bets are off.

    4. rbike   2 years ago

      We were safer because the 737 neos were grounded

  15. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    'anger among native-born Americans that limited resources are being spent on migrants'

    Hey, somebody has to pay for the elite's virtue porn.

  16. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    But some of the problem, Demsas says, stems from the red-state governors busing migrants to these big cities in particular...

    Almost like that was the fucking point.

    1. Illocust   2 years ago

      It is kinda funny to watch the excuse making. The real question is how long until blue stars try to make it a crime to bus illegals into their state. I've got to imagine they'll try that before realigning their political plank of open borders.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        National borders bad. State borders good.

        1. Moonrocks   2 years ago

          If so, could we build a big, beautiful wall around California?

          1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

            Why punish the inland counties? Keep that wall as close to the coast as possible.

            1. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

              Because of social distancing? Gotta Stop the Spread!

              1. DesigNate   2 years ago

                It's too late.

      2. Nazi-Chipping Warlock   2 years ago

        They already made it a crime to drop them off outside of certain times or places. Subject to seizure of the bus and fines for the driver.

        So, better switch to sending them by plane.

        1. DesigNate   2 years ago

          "So, better switch to sending them by plane."

          It's the Biden way.

    2. HorseConch   2 years ago

      They might have a point of discussion if we weren't allowing in and subsequently releasing millions of migrants. If it were just a few thousand and they were all bused to a blue city causing problems. The reality is that the volume in Chicago and NY at the moment are still a small percentage of the 8 million they have allowed in.

      1. A Thinking Mind   2 years ago

        If they have a problem with it, they should try busing them somewhere else.

        1. R Mac   2 years ago

          Or better yet don’t support open borders.

    3. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

      It's almost like being a sanctuary city isn't that much fun when actual immigrants show up.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        Isn't that the point of virtue signalling? You can look good without having to do any real work.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          Martha's Vineyard syndrome.

      2. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

        It's almost like they forgot that sanctuary cities status was originally about deporting criminals but sparing the victims from deportation.

        1. Michael Ejercito   2 years ago

          I am old enough to remember when it was about protecting victims of and witnesses to crimes.

    4. Fats of Fury   2 years ago

      Biden moved more migrants around the country than Abbott only he flew them.

      1. HorseConch   2 years ago

        Probably by at least a factor of 10.

  17. JesseAz   2 years ago

    New study shows trans suicide rates do not decrease with surgery or pills. Only mental health help correlates to reduced rates.

    Genspect
    @genspect
    NEW study in
    @bmj_latest
    on suicidality and gender dysphoria states:
    .
    "Gender dysphoria per se does not seem to predict neither all-cause nor suicide mortality in gender-referred adolescents.
    "Main predictor of mortality in this population is psychiatric morbidity, and medical gender reassignment does not have an impact on suicide risk."

    https://twitter.com/genspect/status/1759316470675157409

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Hmm, so indulging a crazy person in more crazy does not help?

      1. ObviouslyNotSpam   2 years ago

        Explains Trump...

        1. Sevo   2 years ago

          Doesn't begin to explain TDS-addled shit-piles, TDS-addled shit-pile.

        2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

          Considering that you were the one bringing Trump into this particular part of the conversation, it says more about your Trump obsession and you, than it does about Trump.

          1. Sevo   2 years ago

            Seems it's a deep-seated jealousy; totally irrational and shows a willingness to believe outright lies: "Trump is a CRIMINAL!!!", in spite of being investigated for the last 8 years with not even an unpaid parking ticket.

        3. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

          Define how trump is "crazy" please. Give examples to support your work.

    2. Medulla Oblongata   2 years ago

      Yeah, why is it that if someone goes to a doctor and says "I identify as a quadriplegic, please sever my spine at C6." or "I identify as a double amputee, please take both legs above the knee." or "I feel like a blind person, please remove both eyes." we treat them as having a psychological problem that should be treated and NOT jumping up to do what they want.

      But someone says, "I identify as a woman, please remove my penis and pump me full of hormones." some doctors say "Will next Tuesday work?"

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        Selective delusions?

      2. damikesc   2 years ago

        ...because you'll need meds for the rest of your life and plenty of medical intervention.

        Massive money-maker for medicine.

        Same reason why cosmetics are so behind this as well. Trying to double their market.

      3. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

        “I identify as a double amputee, please take both legs above the knee.” or “I feel like a blind person, please remove both eyes.” we treat them as having a psychological problem that should be treated and NOT jumping up to do what they want.

        Wasn't there someone in the UK a few years ago that the doctors actually accommodated the former? Those people have gone WAY off the deep end on the cultural marxism for several years now.

      4. Longtobefree   2 years ago

        Follow the money.

      5. Nazi-Chipping Warlock   2 years ago

        Missed opportunity mate. Doc should have replied "See You Next Tuesday!"

        😀

    3. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

      Actual "mental health help" (not the therapist-shopping kind to get the "yes this person needs genitial mutilation and hormone injections, stat" letter) typically results in them realizing their issues weren't related to a dumb belief that they were "born in the wrong body," and they stop thinking they need to get Current Year Mengeles to carve them up.

      That's why the troon lobby and their supporter activists in the medical industry (including the Pritzkers) want to de-emphasize that as much as possible, and focus on fast-tracking the stink-ditching instead.

    4. mad.casual   2 years ago

      New study shows trans suicide rates do not decrease with surgery or pills. Only mental health help correlates to reduced rates.

      Not really news to some of us. Pretty much every other year since Windsor, the proportion of teens identifying as LGBTQIA has increased and their claims of attempted suicide rates have climbed. AFAIK, nobody has bothered to sort out actual the LGB from the Ts or other pathologies... rather specifically because the way the LGBTQIA community purged homosexuality from the DSM. To the point that dissociative or ego-dystonic homosexuality cannot generally be clinically diagnosed and/or treated and, moreover (and as expected), the same ideology is pushed on cultures that don't buy the bullshit.

    5. Rev Arthur L kuckland   2 years ago

      So what's the easiest way to jack that number up to 100%? Asking for society

  18. JesseAz   2 years ago

    Rec center in poor neighborhood shut down to house illegals depriving kids who used center for sports. No downside. All profit.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/roxbury-melnea-a-cass-recreational-community-center-migrants/

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Don't those kids appreciate food trucks?

    2. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      Poor people don't need sports when they have all that cultural enrichment.

  19. JesseAz   2 years ago

    Sigh...

    Drug induced male breastfeeding is new subject of The Science.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/18/trans-womens-milk-as-good-as-breast-milk-says-nhs-trust/

    1. Idaho-Bob   2 years ago

      Men even breastfeed better than women.

      Take that feminists!

    2. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      And we made fun of Caligula.

      1. Spiritus Mundi   2 years ago

        Didn't he eat his child, which he cut from the mother's womb?

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          A pro-choice hero?

        2. R Mac   2 years ago

          Child? No, he just ate a clump of cells.

  20. Fist of Etiquette   2 years ago

    Obama's daughter trying to sneak past Nepo baby discourse by not using her last name.

    Oh, God. She's an artist.

    1. Illocust   2 years ago

      Hey, this is a good thing. The art world is a great place for the scions of politicians to sieve their time and efforts, rather than the business or political world, where they can fuck up other people's lives.

      1. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

        Hunter Biden, Ukraine on 101. To be fair if he only started as a struggling artist things would be better... shit now I've got the Czechs and Austrians calling me.

    2. Moonrocks   2 years ago

      Hunter truly was a trailblazer.

      1. Super Scary   2 years ago

        Selling "art" is certainly way faster and more efficient that having to actually go places and make "speeches" for thousands of dollars.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          But which is easier to sync with drunken, coked-out hookers?

    3. damikesc   2 years ago

      "Oh, God. She’s an artist."

      Just imagine --- Hunter is a more successful artist than she will ever be.

      That must sting.

      1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

        I'm sure her dad can funnel bribes by selling her art just as much as Hunter's dad did.

        1. Illocust   2 years ago

          Eh, Obama doesn't need to funnel bribes that way. He enjoys giving speeches and showing up to dinner parties, and he's got enough of a cult following to give legitimacy to any money made that way.

  21. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    'Obama's daughter trying to sneak past Nepo baby discourse by not using her last name. Bro you are Obama's Duaghter'

    Yeah, but who is the mother?

    1. shadydave   2 years ago

      Webb Hubbell

      1. Dillinger   2 years ago

        Chelsea's pop!

  22. JesseAz   2 years ago

    Taking a page out of Covid and using "health crisis" to subvert rights, Ohio dems declare guns a health crisis.

    https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/ohio-democrats-roll-out-gun-legislation

    1. Ajsloss   2 years ago

      Good news is that Republicans have a super majority in both houses.

    2. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      21st century rule: declare a crisis and then assume totalitarian powers. At this point at least 50% of the US population will obey. To support democracy.

    3. Idaho-Bob   2 years ago

      In Kansas City on Wednesday, multiple media outlets reported one fatality and 11 of 22 people injured were children, as previously reported by The Center Square. More than a million people are estimated to have attended the event and security included about 1,000 police officers and FBI personnel.

      999,998 people did not engage in gun violence, and 1,000 po-po's could not prevent it. Yet the American Communist party wants to fuck with concealed carry.

      1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

        Cops still haven't identified the shooters so the only thing we know for sure is that they aren't white men.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          Photos on the web show two young black gangsta types, with appropriate wardrobe. So probably fake.

        2. damikesc   2 years ago

          Ann Coulter seemed to outrage Maher's audience by pointing that out.

          ...but it is 100% true.

        3. A Thinking Mind   2 years ago

          They're minors, so protecting the identities is consistent, but if they were white, we'd have heard about it.

    4. Super Scary   2 years ago

      "The summit promoted five expected pieces of legislation, including:
      • Keeping Our Survivors Safe Act.
      • Declaring Gun Violence a Public Health Crisis.
      • Commonsense Concealed Carry.
      • Universal Background Checks Act.
      • Ohio Task Force on Gun Violence."

      KOSSA? UBCA? None of these make good acronyms. This whole thing is dead in the water.

    5. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Meanwhile, Colorado Democrats are busy trying to outlaw gun possession in just about every public and private place.

      1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

        Colorado just needs to be called the Mass Shooting State now, even after all those dumb laws the Dems passed that they claimed would limit these incidents hasn't actually done so there. That fuckface Tom Sullivan is basically punishing every gun owner in Colorado for that psycho James Holmes shooting his kid.

        Altitude-induced hypoxia, urban mass neurosis, and drug addiction is a hell of a combination.

      2. DesigNate   2 years ago

        But it’s totes Republicans who are the true threat to liberty.

        1. Michael Ejercito   2 years ago

          Will the laws in question eliminate gang violence in the inner city?

          1. DesigNate   2 years ago

            Hahahaha

    6. mad.casual   2 years ago (edited)

      3,000+ fps to flatten the curve!

  23. mulched   2 years ago (edited)

    Correction that the transgender activist funeral was not a funeral mass since no communion/host. It was still a mockery.

  24. JesseAz   2 years ago

    U.S. works to negotiate ceasefire: The United States, via a U.N. Security Council resolution, is urging a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas "as soon as practicable"—using ceasefire language for the first time—as well as rebuking Israel for plans to possibly invade Rafah.

    Israel has announced Rafah as the final stronghold for Hamas. Why is this administration so determined to allow Hamas to continue? Israel has basically said the war is over after they remove the final set of leaders.

    No this is not support of funding Israel. It is support of them ending the war now instead of letting Hamas grow again and starting a new war a few years from now.

    Hamas continues to attack Israeli population centers. They never stopped. Yet many on the left ignore this and demand Hamas survive.

    1. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

      "The changed language "reflect[s] President [Joe] Biden's shift toward criticism of Israel"

      The change is 1000% that Biden knows most people who are pro-Israel are unlikely to vote for him anyways, but supporting the terrorists might get him the youth vote and maybe keep Michigan. There are no foreign policy or moral decisions involved here

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        Or that many Jews and Israel supporters will still vote for Joe, out of habit or reflex against Trump. Which is why Democrats are desperate to keep Trump viable, but damaged.

    2. Illocust   2 years ago

      Ehh, I often don't believe Gouverneur when they pinky promise that this is the last one of anything. For Isreal's sake I hope it really is and they can take down Hamas. Something new will come to take it's place, but that will take time, which will save thousands of lives.

      As soon as the last person who fled Isreal, when the Arab states attacked it, dies of old age. The claim that the citizens of Isreal have no right either live or self govern will lose its last gig lead in the international community.

    3. Minadin   2 years ago

      Hamas's response to the talk about a ceasefire is that they won't agree to anything until Israel completely withdraws from Gaza.

      So, that's their commitment to peace right there. They need to be rooted out and utterly destroyed. Their leaders and spokesmen hiding in exile in friendly foreign nations need to be eliminated as well.

      1. JesseAz   2 years ago

        That is a good point. Hamas has rejected every cease fire and were the last ones to violate it.

        1. DesigNate   2 years ago

          Aren’t they always the ones to violate the cease fires?

          1. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

            Only because Israel = apartheid, genocide, racists.

            -mtrueman

            1. DesigNate   2 years ago

              God I hate that guy.

            2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

              Yep, that's misconstrueman, always misconstruing the facts and the point.

    4. Ed Grinberg   2 years ago

      "Why is this administration so determined to allow Hamas to continue? ... Hamas continues to attack Israeli population centers. They never stopped. Yet many on the left ignore this and demand Hamas survive."

      The title of Dennis Prager's latest column is "It Takes a Morally Confused World to Be Anti-Israel." The answer to the question you posed is that "many on the left" (including "this administration") are morally confused.

  25. Jerry B.   2 years ago

    Found a new term or art in WAPO today. "In-utero children".

    It's in an article about Republicans not supporting pre-natal care.

    Apparently, it will guilt Republicans more than "fetus" would.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/02/20/republicans-prenatal-care-pro-life/

    1. Illocust   2 years ago

      They couldn't just use baby like every other person in the world?

      1. Moonrocks   2 years ago

        Newspeak is a time-honored leftist tradition.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          So is a total lack of logic and morality.

          "See, Republicans are evil because they do not support funds for pre-natal care, while we Democrats are vastly superior since we will spend unlimited amounts to provide abortion services."

    2. Super Scary   2 years ago

      What happened to "a clump of cells"? Or do they only use that term when they want their way?

      1. Medulla Oblongata   2 years ago

        Correct.

    3. mad.casual   2 years ago

      “In-utero children”

      As a Gen Xer, I feel I'm owed All Apologies for the cultural appropriation of my identity to defend every last Heart-Shaped Box or woman who cried Rape Me.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        Sure it just doesn't smell like teen spirit?

        1. Jefferson Paul   2 years ago

          Biden prefers it when it smells like [pre]teen spirit.

          1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

            He likes to come as you are.

  26. (Impeach Robert L. Peters) Weigel's Cock Ring   2 years ago

    For the very first time ever, Jill Biden is starting to face actual scrutiny from the leftie media:

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/02/18/historian_doug_brinkley_on_first_lady_jill_biden_she_likes_power_she_wants_some_sense_of_revenge.html

    This is a line they VERY rarely cross. and it's so freaking obvious why this is happening now: they're becoming more and more desperate with each passing day to try to pressure Biden into stepping down voluntarily because they're absolutely terrified that he's going to lose.

    Frankly, I've been wondering for a while now when people were going to start talking about what a nasty, venal piece of work she is. She has to be one of the worst mothers in America when you look at how completely fucked up and whacked out her entire family is, even by political standards.

    1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

      Possibly getting ready to replace Sleepy Joe before November?

      1. HorseConch   2 years ago

        He's not capable of wiping his own ass. It will be harder than the Fed engineering a soft landing for the d's and media shills to replace him while not letting the rest of the believers in his brilliance know that they have been covering for a pantsshitter in chief for the last 4 years.

    2. Fats of Fury   2 years ago

      Jill Biden, America's own Elena Ceaușescu.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        Edith Wilson II.

    3. DesigNate   2 years ago

      She agreed to him running when the cognitive decline was already obvious 4 fucking years ago. I can’t imagine putting my nana through the political meat grinder of a presidential run when her dementia had started to set in.

  27. JesseAz   2 years ago

    "Flying got safer last year almost everywhere except Russia," reports Bloomberg. Someone tell Tucker Carlson, who is possibly still wandering around a Russian grocery store, eyes wide with delight.

    This is still an odd narrative to me. Why is it bad to talk about anything good on Russia? They arent some satanic evil. There are good things there a d they have a long history. Yes they have. More authoritarian government. But the US is giving them a run for their money with the latest sets of lawfare.

    What is especially funny is Tucker at the start of his videos calls out that be doesn't support Stalin or Putin, that he is just showing some of the good there. He also calls out the people who will rage emotionally against his videos without any introspection of what is shown.

    What is this need to force an enemy and deride everything about them? To many Muslims after the GWOT, they could do the same to the US.

    1. Zeb   2 years ago

      It's particularly striking in contrast to Israel/Gaza where the US seems to be trying to take both sides.

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

      Tucker is a sucker for Potemkin villages. How anyone who's been around as long as him could fall for Russian propaganda is the mystery.

      1. Demosthenes of Athens   2 years ago

        I was recently telling a friend that I'm not a fan of Tucker's new Walter Duranty arc.

    3. TheReEncogitationer   2 years ago

      Well, Germany was "The Land of Poets and Philosophers" too.

      And contrary to Tucker's fawning over trains and train stations, most Americans like their 200+ Horsepower of Haul-Ass surrounding them and taking them anywhere they want to go.

  28. sarcasmic   2 years ago

    John Stossel has TDS and doesn't know shit about economics.

    https://nypost.com/2024/02/18/opinion/the-mainstream-media-dont-treat-conservatives-and-libertarians-fairly-and-americans-have-noticed/

    Milei is for free trade. He opposes protectionist interventions like tariffs.

    Unlike Trump, he’s an economist who’s smart about economics.

    He’s serious about shrinking the state.

    Trump, by contrast, grew our national debt by $7.8 trillion.

    1. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   2 years ago

      Stossel = WEF Globalist Socialist to MAGA.

      1. Sevo   2 years ago

        turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
        turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.

    2. JesseAz   2 years ago

      https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2023-12-13/argentinas-milei-to-seek-15-export-tax-hike-on-some-grains-source

      You remain consistently ignorant.

      1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

        Tariffs are taxes on imports, not exports, dummy.

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

          Sayeth Wikipedia:

          A tariff is a tax imposed by the government of a country or by a supranational union on imports or exports of goods.

          1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

            Interesting. The context is always taxes on imports so I wrongly assumed tariffs were taxes on imports only.
            Regardless the subject was protectionism, and nothing in that article indicates that this is a protectionist measure.
            Also it doesn't raise prices for domestic consumers, unlike the protectionist import taxes that Trump and Jesse promote.

            1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

              "I was wrong but it's ultimately still Trump and Jesse's fault"

              Never change, sunshine.

              1. JesseAz   2 years ago

                He is honestly one of the dumbest people here.

                Think ill bookmark this for next time he claims he understands economics.

                1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                  Grade this, Professor.

                  https://reason.com/2024/02/20/u-s-begins-to-talk-ceasefire/?comments=true#comment-10454194

                  1. JesseAz   2 years ago

                    I did. It is laughable you cry out for others to learn economics when you're so fucking ignorant on the topic.

                    You gish gallop with a few known facts and try to pretend you're an expert. Lol.

            2. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

              The context is youre always ignorant.

              It is protectionist retard. It is to keep goods in the country to protect export of said goods to higher bidders. It reduces the number of applicable buyers of a resource. Reduce number of customers, what happens to prices?

              1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                Or maybe to get revenue from exports. Ever think of that?

                Not all tariffs are protectionist.

                1. R Mac   2 years ago

                  Beautiful.

                2. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

                  God damn youre retarded.

                  It is amazing how you’ve denied that retaliatory tariffs are different from protectionist tariffs for 3 years trying to attack trump to now pretending you know different types of tariffs exist.

                  Even below you see your ignorance on your cries for the return of the old conservatives despite them all using tariffs.

                  It makes your attacks against Trump look even more ignorant as it is based on concepts you dont fucking understand.

                  1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                    Now that you're done talking about me, do you have anything to say about what I said?

                    1. JesseAz   2 years ago

                      I did above. Youre fucking ignorant on the topic dummy. You rely on ignorance to justify your thoughts solely dependent on who you hate. This is one example.

                      You offer literally no posts of any value.

    3. TrickyVic (old school)   2 years ago

      ""Trump, by contrast, grew our national debt by $7.8 trillion.""

      Most of that was passed by a dem controlled congress.

  29. JesseAz   2 years ago

    But some of the problem, Demsas says, stems from the red-state governors busing migrants to these big cities in particular: "When immigrants make their way to a city in an organic fashion, they usually are drawn to a place where they have family ties, job leads, or other connections and resources available. When they're resettled through an official government program, as the displaced Ukrainians were, the federal government coordinates with local governments to ensure a smooth transition."

    Shorter: red states should bear the sole costs.

  30. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

    Hey guys, get them while they last! Trump Shoes!

    https://www.npr.org/2024/02/19/1232438349/donald-trump-golden-high-top-sneakers

    Only $399 a pair. Better grab a pair right away! Trump has legal bills to pay you know!

    And this is totally not a grift or a scam. It is just Trump being an honest businessman.

    1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

      How is his GoFundMe doing? I assume most of the commentariat has done their patriotic duty and contributed money.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        Are you kidding? They are on the automatic donation plan.

        1. DesigNate   2 years ago

          That’s our resident collectivist. (Insert laugh track)

          1. R Mac   2 years ago

            It’s his new favorite lie.

    2. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   2 years ago

      Donnie sure does have his hand out a lot for a "billionaire".

      1. Sevo   2 years ago

        turd, the TDS addles ass-clown of the commentariat, 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.

      2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        You do realize that one gets to be a billionaire by selling something, right? What do you sell, child porn from your mother's basement?

    3. Super Scary   2 years ago (edited)

      Gold shoes? Looks terrible. Trump trying to pull in the sneaker-heads is a move I wouldn’t have seen coming, but he does love his merch so I guess it wasn’t an impossibility.

      1. JesseAz   2 years ago

        They sold out in 10 hours.

        1. Super Scary   2 years ago

          I'm surprised it even took that long since Trump himself was hocking them, but I can't imagine people were tripping over themselves so they could actually rock those things.

          1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

            They're donation bonuses. Just like how other politicians give out a book for hitting 400 dollars.

            But unlike some dry, self-serving book, stuff like this will appeal to his working class contingent.

        2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

          How many pair did you buy?

          1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

            Half as many as your copies of Dreams from My Father.

    4. A Thinking Mind   2 years ago

      $399 isn't that ridiculous in the sneaker market, if they're good shoes. But these don't look like they're made to be worn, they're seemingly collectibles.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        There's a surprisingly big collectors' market for sneakers. Came across a big show for them one day while going to the International Gem & Jewelry Show next door at a local convention center. The jewelry show had a decent crowd, but the sneaker show was a long line, out the door.

    5. damikesc   2 years ago

      How dare he...market a product.

      Capitalism is EVIL!!!!

      So sayeth our resident true libertarians.

    6. R Mac   2 years ago

      Poor Lying Jeffy, they sold out in hours lol.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        How many pair did you buy?

        1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

          Half as many as your copies of 'Promise Me, Dad'.

        2. R Mac   2 years ago

          None, I’m not a sneaker guy. But I’m sure you’ll keep lying and saying I did. It’s what you do.

      2. Sevo   2 years ago

        And whatever passed for chemjeff's brain leaked out years ago.

    7. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

      The real question is why would you NOT buy these?

      Fan of trump? Awesome

      hate trump? Ironically funny

    8. VinniUSMC   2 years ago

      Wow, 1000 pairs of shoes. Trump's gonna be rich now. Thanks for your insight as always, chemtard fatass collectivist.

  31. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

    Here's some welfare that our right-wing 'libertarians' can totally get behind.

    https://www.kcur.org/2024-02-19/kansas-abortion-legislation-2024-crisis-pregnancy-center-child-support

    House Bill 2789 would divert $4 million from the Kansas General Fund each year to a “pregnancy compassion program” intended to steer women with unplanned pregnancies away from abortion and toward childbirth.

    The legislation would expand and rename a $2 million “alternatives to abortion” program that Kansas Republicans created through a budget item last year. It would effectively double the amount of taxpayer money going to maternity homes, adoption assistance groups and anti-abortion counseling centers across the state.

    1. Illocust   2 years ago

      And this is why having friends outside your bubble is important chemjeff. If so, you'd easily be able to see that the proponents of this program see this as a murder prevention program. It comes from a place of saving people from being killed by others.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        And the people who promote Medicaid and SNAP also see those programs as intended to prevent poverty. It's still welfare.

        1. Illocust   2 years ago

          You really don't see the difference between being murdered and poverty? Really truly? Not just making a stupid comparison for the sake of arguement?

          Because if you don't feel like backing down now, I'm gong to bring this up in the future that you truly think people living in poverty are no better off than if they'd been murdered (a hilariously offensive take on the value of poor people's lives)

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago (edited)

            I see that those who promote those welfare schemes, both for crisis pregnancy centers and for Medicaid/SNAP, claim to have good intentions. Their good intentions don’t magically transform welfare into not-welfare.

            you truly think people living in poverty are no better off than if they’d been murdered

            Not what I said, but not surprised that this dishonest take is what you would use to try to defend your welfare scheme.

            I’ll remember this exchange as where you finally declared that you are pro-welfare.

          2. Dillinger   2 years ago

            >>You really don’t see the difference between being murdered and poverty?

            you have taken the unfortunate misstep of attempting discourse with this other poster.

            1. R Mac   2 years ago

              Lying Jeffy managed to both be dishonest and accuse Illocust of being dishonest all in one response.

              It’s truly an amazing skill, if you think about it.

              1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

                Not really so much a skill as the fact that Creamjeff has no sense of shame.

                1. JesseAz   2 years ago

                  Most Marxists don't. They see lies as a valid tool for the cause.

              2. Dillinger   2 years ago

                >>It’s truly an amazing skill, if you think about it.

                yes it's why like once a month I also misstep.

      2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        Besides, we are told over and over again by the border restrictionist crowd that it is totally okay to kick out the 'illegals' and stop new migrants from entering the country because otherwise they just soak up welfare funds. So it should be a no-brainer to stop this Kansas welfare program. Why have more moms addicted to welfare?

        1. Nobartium   2 years ago

          Citizens enjoy an apriori preference from the government.

          They always have, and it's immoral to say otherwise.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            Our Declaration of Independence declares that every human being is endowed with a set of inalienable right. Every. Single. One.

            The government having a preference for citizens does not mean that the government is justified in oppressing non-citizens.

            1. Nobartium   2 years ago

              The DOI isn't the law of the land.

              And everyone fails to live up to their mission statement.

              1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                No it is not the law of the land, it is more like our foundational creed.

                And everyone fails to live up to their mission statement.

                So you are admitting finally that you don't believe in the concept of inalienable rights. Got it.

                1. Nobartium   2 years ago

                  Do you support imprisonment in any conceivable fashion?

                  Do you support punishment after due process?

                  Do you support taxation?

                  Yes? Then you don't either.

                2. DesigNate   2 years ago

                  Are you finally admitting that we should just have a one world government?

                  1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                    That's not the zinger you think it is. I would be fine with a one-world government organized along libertarian and federalist lines. Wouldn't you? Don't you think that it would be great if people who are genuinely being oppressed by their national governments could have some place to turn for redress?

                    1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago (edited)

                      “I would be fine with a one-world government"

                      Zero surprises there.

                      "organized along libertarian and federalist lines.”

                      I’d like to note that your ideas of what comports to libertarianism and federalism is radically different from the dictionary’s.

                      “Wouldn’t you?”

                      FUCK NO!!!

                    2. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

                      "I would be fine with a one-world government organized along libertarian and federalist lines. Wouldn’t you? "

                      No, because of how easily a government can slide from freedom to statism. One world government only exists in sci-fi, fantasy nonsense like star trek, etc for a reason.

                      With one world govt, you truly would have nowhere to escape to. Different governments in different geographical areas makes far more sense.

                    3. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

                      And, one world government under jeff's idea of libertarianism would be more like star trek goatee world.

                    4. R Mac   2 years ago

                      So not government at the most local level, closest to the individual?

                    5. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                      I notice that every single one of you who responded to me ignored my last sentence:

                      Don’t you think that it would be great if people who are genuinely being oppressed by their national governments could have some place to turn for redress?

                      That is because, ultimately, you don't give a shit about the oppressed people of the world. You only give a shit about yourself and your own rights and privileges.

                    6. R Mac   2 years ago

                      Yes, yes, just keep lying about everyone else’s position. It’s working well for you, Lying Jeffy.

                    7. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

                      Do you think people might have ignored that part of your post because it doesn't make sense?

                      Wouldn't it be great if people could turn to a one-world government (singular) for redress against their national governments (plural).

                      Huh???

                    8. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

                      I would be fine with a one-world government organized along libertarian and federalist lines....
                      That is because, ultimately, you don’t give a shit about the oppressed people of the world. You only give a shit about yourself and your own rights and privileges.

                      That was the half the fucking point of the UN, you moron--to provide countries in the post-WW2 international construct with a forum to have their grievances addressed. It quickly got co-opted by oikophobic managerialists like Dag Hammarskold for their own political ends and utopian visions. The WEF functions in much the same way, serving as a training ground for the absolute worst of modern western politicians steeped in marxist theology.

                      Minarchists and libertarians tend to be suspicious of most centralized authority, especially at the global level. And yes, I absolutely put my rights and "privileges" (there's those lefty shibboleths you love to parrot) above those of the rest of the planet.

                    9. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

                      "you don’t give a shit about the oppressed people of the world. "

                      Jeff virtue signaling how much he "gives a shit."

                    10. DesigNate   2 years ago

                      In my dream libertopia, there wouldn't be a government, per se.

                      But here in the real world, it wouldn't take very long for the Putin's and the Clinton's of the world to seize control of that one world government and bend it to their will. So no, I would not like that.

                      Also, if there is a one world government, who the fuck are individual's supposed to turn to for redress?

                    11. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

                      "I notice that every single one of you who responded to me ignored my last sentence"

                      Because it was retarded wishcasting. There's less redress for the oppressed in empires.

                    12. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago (edited)

                      If you don’t respond to every sentence of jeff’s contradictory ramblings, then you don’t give a shit about oppressed people.

                    13. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

                      Don’t you think that it would be great if people who are genuinely being oppressed by their national governments could have some place to turn for redress?

                      People should rely on themselves instead of waiting to be recused or running away. The oppressed must speak out, and then push back. If they sit there and take it, I am not going to bother to give a shit.

                      I would think a "radical" would understand that. I would think an "individualist" would encourage it.

                    14. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                      Wouldn’t it be great if people could turn to a one-world government (singular) for redress against their national governments (plural).

                      Huh???

                      You mean like the analogy between state governments and the federal government when it came to civil rights for minorities?

                    15. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                      Yes, yes, just keep lying about everyone else’s position.

                      I learned it from you.

                    16. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                      There’s less redress for the oppressed in empires.

                      Good thing that I didn't advocate for an empire.

                    17. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                      But here in the real world, it wouldn’t take very long for the Putin’s and the Clinton’s of the world to seize control of that one world government and bend it to their will.

                      So only anarchism will satisfy you then? Because any just government has to be maintained and watched so that it remains just and not tyrannical.

                    18. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                      Jeff virtue signaling how much he “gives a shit.”

                      Says the guy who openly agrees with Trump that migrants are vermin and "poison the blood of the country". Yeah we all know exactly what you think of "those people" and "their problems".

                    19. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                      That was the half the fucking point of the UN

                      The UN was deliberately made weak and had no choice but to become just an impotent debate club. That is what all the people on the right who rage against the UN never seem to understand - they are raging literally against a paper tiger. The UN can't do anything substantive without US approval.

                      Minarchists and libertarians tend to be suspicious of most centralized authority, especially at the global level.

                      It's fine to be suspicious, but suspicion is not the same as outright rejection. After all what distinguishes libertarians from anarchists is that the former recognize the need for a state to protect rights. Right now, there is a whole lot of NAP violations by national governments against their own citizens going on across the planet. What exactly *is* the libertarian solution to that?

                      And yes, I absolutely put my rights and “privileges” (there’s those lefty shibboleths you love to parrot) above those of the rest of the planet.

                      Wait, the word 'privilege' is now a lefty word only? What about the "Privileges and Immunities" clause of the Constitution? Is that socialist Marxism? You're nuts. And yes we all know where you stand, fuck the foreigners.

                    20. R Mac   2 years ago

                      See ML? This takes some sort of skill.

                    21. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

                      The UN was deliberately made weak and had no choice but to become just an impotent debate club.

                      The UN was the organization that fought the Norks during the Korean War, you stupid fuck. It was hardly "weak" in its early days because it had the US at the forefront of the Security Council, while Britain and France hadn't yet fully declined as colonial powers yet.

                      This assertion that it was "deliberately made weak" is ahistorical nonsense spoken in the aftermath of GWOT when it fully became the joke that it currently is today.

                      It’s fine to be suspicious, but suspicion is not the same as outright rejection. After all what distinguishes libertarians from anarchists is that the former recognize the need for a state to protect rights.

                      Which is not the same as a centralized international organization.

                      Wait, the word ‘privilege’ is now a lefty word only? What about the “Privileges and Immunities” clause of the Constitution? Is that socialist Marxism? You’re nuts. And yes we all know where you stand, fuck the foreigners.

                      Oh, this is where you throw in a non-sequiter after your bullshit went pear-shaped. Fuck off, fat boy.

            2. R Mac   2 years ago

              Who said anything about unalienable rights? Oh, that’s right, no one. You’re just being dishonest. It’s what you do.

              1. R Mac   2 years ago

                Inalienable.

                1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

                  You had it right the first time.

                  that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,

                  1. R Mac   2 years ago

                    I was hacked by Tulpa.

                    1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

                      Lord help me, I have missed this place the last 6 months.

    2. Medulla Oblongata   2 years ago

      Maybe if Kansas had fewer abortions, they wouldn't need to import immigrants?

    3. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

      Depends. Are the women Democrat voters, or no?

      If they vote Democrat, they should be steered to Planned Parenthood for an abortion immediately. Can't have these people reproducing, demographic collapse is the best option.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        Lots of kids of politically active parents (on either side) rebel and join the complete opposite side. That may not have the effect you think it would.

        1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

          Then does that mean your parents were actual libertarians who completely distrusted the state, and your rebellion is to become a statist?

        2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

          Lots of kids do lots of things, and the whole Roe period is elegant proof that your assertion was pulled out of your ass.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            You mean, the whole 'Roe' period which produced the conditions necessary to end the 'Roe' period?

            1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

              Nice circular reasoning, fat boy.

  32. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago (edited)

    So, Idaho is asking SCOTUS to affirm their ban on gender-affirming care.

    https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/19/politics/idaho-supreme-court-transgender-care/index.html

    It is not noteworthy that a deep red state is banning this. What is noteworthy IMO is the way they are doing this. They are going after the doctors. This is similar to how they ban or severely restrict abortion - they go after the doctors. They aren't going after the parents of transgender kids, or the women trying to seek abortion. Why not?

    If you are correct and 'gender affirming care' is no different than mutilating children, then the parents who affirmatively consent to such treatment are guilty of child abuse, no? Why not throw them in jail too?

    If you are correct and abortion equals murder, then the woman seeking abortion is attempting murder, no? Why not throw her in jail too?

    1. Moonrocks   2 years ago

      I thought conversion therapy was already banned in all 50 states. I remember a Reason article about it a year or two ago when the last state (I think it was Maine) banned it.

    2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

      They are going after the doctors. This is similar to how they ban or severely restrict abortion – they go after the doctors. They aren’t going after the parents of transgender kids, or the women trying to seek abortion. Why not?

      Because government bans things using the Commerce Clause. They don't make it illegal for you or me to buy this or that, they make it illegal for someone to sell it. Has the same effect, but they can say they're protecting the people instead of restricting the people.

      1. ObviouslyNotSpam   2 years ago

        Federal government uses the Commerce Clause (almost entirely supported by some rather dodgy historical Supreme Court decisions). State governments, not so much.

    3. Illocust   2 years ago

      What's more important, preventing someone from being harmed in the first place, or punishing the perp afterwards? You know the answer.

      You seriously need to get off political boards and make real life friends with different opinions than your own.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        You are discussing strategy, not principle. Even if we were to agree that it is a good strategy to prosecute doctors in order to stop the 'murder' of abortion, *in principle*, the woman is still attempting murder for her decision to get an abortion, no?

        1. Illocust   2 years ago

          The main principle is children shouldn't be hurt unnecessarily. Which you would know, if you tried to get out of your bubble instead of assuming that you already know everyone else's positions because people inside your bubble told you what those other people believe.

          Also you should be aware that if you have more than one principle, there is going to be conflict between them in edge cases. Some principles are going to be deemed more important than others and some principle conflicts are going to be resolved by a third principle.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            Again you are framing the principle as "protecting kids", as Mike Parsons does below. I find that interesting. I thought the idea was for the state to punish violations of rights.

            1. DesigNate   2 years ago

              The state exists to protect the rights of its citizens AND to punish those who violate said rights?

            2. R Mac   2 years ago

              Spiiiiiinnnnn Lying Jeffy!

              1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

                He's the Wheel of Misfortune.

            3. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

              "“protecting kids”, as Mike Parsons does below."

              Protecting them from having their bodies and rights violated by their parents.

              This isnt hard, unless you have the desire to violate the bodies and rights of children, Jeffy

              1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                And that is the emotional manipulation that your team constantly trades in. "Either you support my proposal to 'protect kids' or you are in favor of child abuse!"

                1. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

                  Ya, my side is using the emotional manipulation not the "if you dont let me transition my young child you are literally killing them and also committing trans genocide" side

                  Try again Jeffy. And please respond to the pedophilia question

                  1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                    No, your team absolutely uses emotional manipulation. It is the same as when Team Blue does the same thing "for the sake of the children".

                    "For the sake of the children, we must give them free things, and if you disagree you hate children" - Team Blue
                    "For the sake of the children, we must make narrow rules on how parents must treat kids, and if you disagree you hate children" - Team Red

                    It's just two sides of the same coin.

        2. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

          "You are discussing strategy, not principle."

          The two can align. If the principle is that we have decided to protect kids, then if targeting the doctors directly mutilating them (rather than the parents indirectly doing it) produces the greatest effect, then the end result pushes the principle forward.

          Kids, especially young kids, cant consent to this kind of stuff. An adult who pushed this stuff is abusing them. So I am personally fine with charging them as if they abused the child physically or sexually.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            I thought the principle was to punish violations of rights, not to "protect kids" per se. If you think the principle is that the state has a duty to "protect kids" then that certainly explains a lot of the right-wing culture war. Kick the drag queens out of public spaces, because kids might see them! Take the edgy books out of public libraries because kids might see them even if their parents don't mind!

            So no I don't think the principle ought to be that the state has a duty to "protect kids". That is the parents' duty.

            1. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

              "So no I don’t think the principle ought to be that the state has a duty to “protect kids”. That is the parents’ duty."

              Your position doesn't work morally for a whole host of scenarios, but ill skip all the boring grey area (but relevant) ones and just go for the gusto:

              Child and parent agree they want to be sexually active together. How does your hands off "no ones rights were violated" where everyone got what they 'wanted' work here. In fact, based on your principle pedophilia and incest shouldn't be illegal, am I correct?

              1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                How about this:

                Child and parent agree that child can have a glass of wine with dinner. But the state barges in and arrests the parent and takes the child away from the parent in order to "protect" the child. In fact, based on your principle, parents have no authority and all parenting is done by the state, am I correct?

                1. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

                  Answer my question please, dont deflect with a weaksauce example that is different in scale in terms of consequences by many orders of magnitude.

                  Should parents and their kids be allowed to have sex if they all consent to it? Based on your principles, yes or no

                  1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                    Should the state send parents to jail if they give their kids a glass of wine at dinner?

                    You are taking an extreme example purposefully in order to demagogue the issue. That is my point.

                    We can either argue in good faith and acknowledge that there are gray areas for which there is no clear answer, or we can continue to lob extreme examples at each other in order to provoke a gotcha moment. Your call.

                    1. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

                      I say it should be based on severity and how damaging it is to the child.

                      Glass of wine, fine. Syringe of heroine? Jail

                      So, how about the incest Jeff? You are cool with it right?

                    2. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

                      " in order to provoke a gotcha moment. "

                      I already got it. You have produced plenty of other comments and answers to mine without answering the very simple and straightforward "Yes, pedophilia and incest should be illegal"

                      Your inability to answer the question is the gotcha

                    3. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                      Oh fuck you. I have to work and I don't have all day to sit around on this forum like you all do.

                      Pedophilia and incest should be illegal not because of 'harm', but because kids are unable to consent. "But, what about when kids refuse to eat their vegetables? They don't consent to that either, is forcing them to eat vegetables a violation of their rights?" No, because parents ALSO have a duty to properly raise their kids and meet their basic needs.

                    4. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

                      "“But, what about when kids refuse to eat their vegetables? They don’t consent to that either, is forcing them to eat vegetables a violation of their rights?”"

                      - not analagous, we are talking previously about situations where kids *cant* consent based on mental capacity but *DO* consent based on their desires of the moment. Forcing a wanna be trans kid to eat vegetables is something they *dont* consent to but also, does no harm and objective good. Acquiescing to their desire for hormone therapy is something they *do* consent to, but cant mentally comprehend the actual damage that is about to be done as a result, and it is an objectively destructive thing....
                      ...
                      ...please dont try your hand at analogy any more, this was an absolute step on dick fact plant in the mud situation for you
                      ...moving on

                      "Pedophilia and incest should be illegal not because of ‘harm’, but because kids are unable to consent."

                      As they arent able to consent to hormone therapy. They cannot possibly comprehend the consequences. Thanks for making my point for me

                2. R Mac   2 years ago

                  Haha, Lying Jeffy just compared having a glass of wine with dinner to castration! You can’t make this shit up.

                  1. Jefferson Paul   2 years ago

                    Is that why Sarc now sounds like a whiny bitch?

                    1. R Mac   2 years ago

                      Now?

            2. R Mac   2 years ago

              “I thought the principle was to punish violations of rights, not to “protect kids” per se.”

              See, this has to be dishonesty. No way Lying Jeffy is this dense.

              1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                Wait wait wait. I thought you were supposed to be more libertarian than me. How can you say that the purpose of the state is not to protect rights?

                1. R Mac   2 years ago

                  Lol, I didn’t say that. Another lie from Lying Jeffy.

                  1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                    Yeah I didn't think you were a real libertarian. How many pairs of Trump sneakers did you buy?

                    1. R Mac   2 years ago

                      R Mac 26 mins ago
                      None, I’m not a sneaker guy. But I’m sure you’ll keep lying and saying I did. It’s what you do.

                      Haha, thanks Lying Jeffy. You’re a real peach.

                    2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                      Keep it up, continue to demonstrate you are not a libertarian just another right-wing troll.

                    3. R Mac   2 years ago

                      How does pointing out you lie about me buying tennis shoes make me not a libertarian?

                    4. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                      How is it that you can so devalue the word 'lie' so much as to make the word useless?

      2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        And by the way. In real life I have right-leaning friends and I have left-leaning friends. That is why I believe that neither right-wing nor left-wing people are inherently evil monsters, as they are so often portrayed to be. It's a lot of the people around here, who very clearly only hang out among like-minded people, who need to step out of their bubbles and realize that liberals are not fire-breathing monsters.

        1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

          It’s a lot of the people around here, who very clearly only hang out among like-minded people, who need to step out of their bubbles and realize that liberals are not fire-breathing monsters.

          Or, I know a lot of left-wingers through professional association, and know just how monstrous they actually are when they think they're around other left-wingers.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            Oh, I see. Do they advocate for murdering right-wingers, the way many commenters here advocate for murdering left-wingers? Do they fantasize about starting the next civil war?

            1. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

              Jeff, you have used dehumanizing language-of-genocide numerous times here. Stop pretending to be above the fray.

              1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago (edited)

                Please post where I have advocated for murdering political opponents.

                I am not talking about 'dehumanizing language'. I am talking about literal murder.

                1. Jefferson Paul   2 years ago

                  You've said repeatedly that using dehumanizing language is a gateway to genocide. But when you use dehumanizing language it's not a gateway to genocide?

                  1. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

                    Jeff is Sarc's top how-to-think student.

                    1. R Mac   2 years ago

                      It’s really amazing since they became best buds that sarc has become much more dishonest and Lying Jeffy has become a broken rager.

                  2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                    Hey fuckhead, dehumanizing language used BY PEOPLE WITH POWER, against ENTIRE GROUPS OF PEOPLE, is the problem here.

                    If I or anyone else calls Tucker Carlson a bag of slime, no one is in danger of being genocided.

                    But if Trump or some other demagogue, who has power and influence, keeps telling people over and over and over again that this one group of people are vermin and are not even human, then that is when we are in the danger zone.

                    1. R Mac   2 years ago

                      This explains why you criticize Trump, who is not currently the president, for such language, but not the actual president for his inflammatory language against your political enemies.

                      But we all know why. Because you actually see conservatives as subhuman and you’re a leftist that defends leftists.

                    2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                      Hey look at you being dishonest. 'dehumanizing' is not the same as 'inflammatory'. Good job at moving the goalposts there, troll

                    3. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago (edited)

                      Because you actually see conservatives as subhuman and you’re a leftist that defends leftists.

                      Three lies in one sentence!

                    4. Minadin   2 years ago

                      Not a leftist? Since when?

                      Please give us some examples of some of your policy preferences that you would consider centrist or even right-wing.

              2. JesseAz   2 years ago

                He did it just a few days ago. Jeff and sarc are uber hypocrites. Quite amusing.

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

              Oh, I see. Do they advocate for murdering right-wingers, the way many commenters here advocate for murdering left-wingers? Do they fantasize about starting the next civil war?

              Yes. I told you, these people take the filter off when they think they're solely among their own kind. But it's useful to pretend to be one of them in those settings, so I know what the enemy is discussing.

              But there's plenty of that shit on social media, too.

            3. Minadin   2 years ago

              James Hodgkinson

          2. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

            Ive got far left as well as reliable DNC establishment family, and know plenty bleeding hearts both from school and still a couple friends to this day where we agree to not talk politics.

            When some of these people go ham debating 'culture war' stuff they say some of the worst shit ive heard. One of them, on multiple occasions, is known for starting with the sentence "listen, so this is going to sound very 'Eugenics-ey'..."

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

              I am sorry that you are related to the left-wing version of Misek.

              1. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

                push a progressive on abortion for more than 5 minutes and the same sentiment comes out, they just word it more carefully.

                when they think no one (critical) is listening? watch out

                1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                  Oh, so that is no different than when right-wingers around here discuss immigration - it is not long before it comes out that, deep down, they think that the migrants are inferior and that it is okay if the military shoots them at the border.

                  1. Jefferson Paul   2 years ago

                    but that's WhAtaBoUtiSm!

                    1. R Mac   2 years ago

                      It’s also a lie.

              2. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

                Misek is left-wing.

                1. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

                  *Insert Pam meme*

                  "It's the same picture"

        2. DesigNate   2 years ago

          "liberals are not fire-breathing monsters"

          Have you ever seen a liberal and a dragon in the same room? Didn't think so.

    4. Idaho-Bob   2 years ago

      If you are correct and ‘gender affirming care’ is no different than mutilating children, then the parents who affirmatively consent to such treatment are guilty of child abuse, no? Why not throw them in jail too?

      If you are correct and abortion equals murder, then the woman seeking abortion is attempting murder, no? Why not throw her in jail too?

      Child mutilation and in utero infanticide cannot be committed without a "doctor". You know, the monster wielding the knife.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        Child mutilation and in utero infanticide cannot be committed without a “doctor”.

        Sure they can. It's just messier without a doctor.

      2. Foo_dd   2 years ago

        if you think a woman needs a doctor to abort, then you might be moron ignorant of the fact that it was done for most of human history. they go to the doctor because that is the safest way, not because it is necessary.

        1. Idaho-Bob   2 years ago

          Ok, it is possible for a woman to abort, but American women aren't capable of this, the rest of human history is irrelevant.

          I see you intentionally omitted the child mutilation portion.

          1. Foo_dd   2 years ago

            "....but American women aren’t capable of this....."

            they can't google or read a book? that has to be the stupidest attempt to minimize admitting you were wrong i have ever seen.

            "I see you intentionally omitted the child mutilation portion."

            i see you are a blind partisan unable to process anything independently from the full narrative. ok, fine..... go see how easy it is to buy hormone supplements and blockers. (they are available over the counter.) for children, that is all they do, no matter how much more fun it is for you to say "mutilation." you assertion is even stupider for this than it was for abortion.

            1. Idaho-Bob   2 years ago

              for children, that is all they do, no matter how much more fun it is for you to say “mutilation.”

              Not fun at all you fucking groomer.

              The World Professional Association for Transgender Health said hormones could be started at age 14, two years earlier than the group’s previous advice, and some surgeries done at age 15 or 17, a year or so earlier than previous guidance. The group acknowledged potential risks but said it is unethical and harmful to withhold early treatment.

              https://apnews.com/article/gender-transition-treatment-guidelines-9dbe54f670a3a0f5f2831c2bf14f9bbb

              1. Foo_dd   2 years ago

                hahahaha.... you stupid fucks are so divorced from reality. some transgender group changes their "guidelines" for "some" surgeries and you think that means they are lopping off little boys wangs left and right........ they are not. if you bothered to read what you posted, you would learn that the surgeries they are talking about are elective mastectomies..... which are not exclusively gender affirming care, so your stupid little laws can easily be bypassed for them.

                the fact remains that gender affirming care for minors is just hormone therapies..... shit they can buy off amazon. shit they can do without a doctor. shit that you would be going after the parents for if your assertions of "murder" and "child abuse" had any validity. you expose your bullshit by trying to justify going after only the doctors.

    5. Medulla Oblongata   2 years ago

      I've always thought that "Dreamers"--who had no say in being dragged into the US illegally by their parents deserved some sympathy. Contrarywise, I've thought that once Dreamers sign up for their benefits, we ought to grab up the parents--who came here fully knowing they were breaking the law--and deport them.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        Maybe. And how about residency without any promise of citizenship?

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

          And how about residency without any promise of citizenship?

          THAT is how you create a permanent underclass.

    6. damikesc   2 years ago

      Doctors are the ones performing the butchery and providing the drugs for the butchery.

      It's their job to say no to asinine things.

      ....but they do not because the money is great if you can get somebody young hit with a need for drugs every day for the rest of their lives.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        Oh yes, the whole "evil profit motive" argument.

        First, you are just wrong. Abortion doctors are among the lowest paid among medical doctors.

        https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/Medical-Doctor-Salary
        https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/Abortion-Doctor-Salary

        Average for medical doctors: $273k
        Average for abortion doctors: $76k

        Second, even if the doctors are making money, so what? The profit motive is evil now?

        1. Jefferson Paul   2 years ago

          I know. It's not like the abortion doctors were trying to sell $400 gold shoes online, or anything like that.

        2. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

          Quite a few bits of poor reasoning here.

          1- butchery and providing the drugs for the butchery. - reference to gender transitioning and HRT. This is not related to 'abortion doctors' and importantly, is all elective. The pattern is double mastectomy (elective, plastic surgery) followed by expensive patented drugs (elective). All of these things are very large revenue generators

          2- Even if he was referencing abortion, 'abortion doctors' are OBGYNs who have normal practice and do abortion procedures as part of it.

          3- Even the lowest paid OBGYNS that work part time would easily clear over 100k. Dont get your info from zip recruiter. Physicians that do procedures are reimbursed higher than office docs.

          Your point is 5-6 degrees of separation from a rational argument. You just skewered a strawman in the wrong field on the wrong planet

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            The 'evil profit motive' rationale is stupid coming from people who claim to support capitalism and free market economics. It is a fake argument coming from your team motivated more by assuming doctors are evil monsters chopping off people's body parts for pure profits like some inhuman ghoul.

            1. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

              *If the judges will please note the goal posts were moved 15 yards to the left after the kicker tripped on his dick and landed in a pile of his own bullshit*

              You posted nonsense that didnt track, take the L and keep a little bit of dignity

            2. damikesc   2 years ago

              ...except they are doing precisely that. Nothing indicates a reduction in suicide rates with the butchery.

    7. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

      So, Idaho is asking SCOTUS to affirm their ban on gender-affirming care.permanent mutilation of children who can't even consent to a tattoo

      Fixed that for you you freakin psycho

      1. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

        He's one upping even himself. He doesn't think pedophilia and incest should be illegal because it should be the parents choice and the government should defer to the parents.

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

          lie

          1. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

            ill give you a whiff of credit: after 8 hours and skipping over my responses to reply to multiple other people, you finally realized your position was so bizarre and off base that you came back to half walk it back. Maybe this hill wasnt the one to die on?...thats probably for the best

            Gratz, you are only a half pedo now

      2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        In most places, kids can get a tattoo with parental consent.

        1. Mike Parsons   2 years ago

          honestly, as they should be able to.

          A tattoo doesnt alter one's puberty, mental state, and trajectory in life (well, arguable at least), and therefore shouldnt be an issue, imo

          I will say that face tattoos should still be regulated, however

          Hormone blockers however are statistically shown to put kids on a path to misery, depression, and most likely suicide

    8. Minadin   2 years ago

      How evil is Jeff's Gender- Affirming care? Let's talk to someone who went through the process.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doaHPFWEa7E

  33. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

    Well well well. Republicans in Wisconsin were backed into a corner and forced to sign new legislative maps that the Democratic governor wanted.

    https://apnews.com/video/wisconsin-courts-u-s-republican-party-u-s-democratic-party-redistricting-b52ba96168a64fe999a87cf5f8885fae

    My understanding is that they did this in order to avoid having "worse" maps imposed upon them by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

    Interestingly, the Republican maps that the Wisconsin SC evaluated were all determined to be highly gerrymandered. They didn't even try to present a fair map.

    I am sure Jesse will be along shortly to defend why having legislators pick their voters via gerrymandering is totally fine.

    1. Nobartium   2 years ago

      Gerrymandering doesn't matter, because ultimately it only works if there already exists a population in that location that supports given party X. So long as that group exists, there's nothing you can do to fix it.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        Yes we know. One-party rule is okay if your team does it.

        1. Nobartium   2 years ago

          You can't fix uniparty rules by forcing people to be represented by someone else.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            forcing people to be represented by someone else

            That is what gerrymandering does.

            1. Nobartium   2 years ago

              No, gerrymandering is setting one's self up using a preexisting populace to get one's self elected.

              It utterly fails otherwise.

        2. Moonrocks   2 years ago

          And that's why you never complain when Democrats do it.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            I am opposed to all gerrymandering. I have spoken in favor of having multi-member districts, ranked choice voting, any number of innovations to get rid of the stupid system that we have now.

      2. ObviouslyNotSpam   2 years ago

        Gerrymandering is changing the "location" to suit.

    2. ducksalad   2 years ago (edited)

      About a third of the voters identify as independent or something other than major party.

      But somehow every fucking discussion about districting is about how to divide 100% of the seats “fairly” between Republicans and Democrats.

      I'll stop believing the court cases are completely corrupt on both sides when the interests of independents are explicitly part of the equation.

    3. Medulla Oblongata   2 years ago

      But gerrymandering to create majority black districts is A-OKAY!

      1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

        Mandatory.

    4. DesigNate   2 years ago

      Wisconsin is where the Democrats specifically targeted their SC so they could overturn the halfway decent things the Republican legislature had managed to do over the previous 5-10 years isn’t it?

    5. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Are you against gerrymandering?

      If so, then how would you create districts? Do you support party-blind methods?

      If not, because perhaps of "fairness", how do you reconcile attempts to simultaneously draw super-majority minority districts (to guarantee a minority rep) and spreading minority voters across multiple districts to get 50% plus 1, and elect more minority reps?

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        Are you against gerrymandering?

        Yes.

        If so, then how would you create districts? Do you support party-blind methods?

        Who said there have to be districts?

        1. ducksalad   2 years ago

          "Who said there have to be districts?"

          Congress, in 1967 and numerous times previous to that.

          Supposing a Congress elected by the current method could be persuaded to change, what method did you have in mind?

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            State-wide slates of candidates elected via proportional representation?

            The basic idea is this: Suppose a state is allocated 10 representatives in the House. Each party would then run a slate of 10 candidates. If for example there were three parties, and the vote by party split 60/30/10, then 6 candidates from the first party, 3 candidates from the second party, and 1 candidate from the third party would be elected. That is the basic idea.

            1. DesigNate   2 years ago

              On the surface, that doesn’t sound like a horrible idea.

            2. ducksalad   2 years ago

              Your idea screws those of us who want to vote for *people* rather than cartels.

              We need to be working on methods that weaken party discipline, rather than strengthen it. I'd go for the reverse: remove party labels from ballots; ballot access always individual rather than party based; and a general non-recognition of any "rights" for parties other than the individually held and individually exercised rights of the voters making up the party.

              1. R Mac   2 years ago

                “Your idea screws those of us who want to vote for *people* rather than cartels.”

                That’s the individualist in him.

              2. Jefferson Paul   2 years ago

                Wouldn't that just lead to a weak candidate legally changing his name to that of the leading candidate? I see a scenario similar to the beginning plot of the movie The Distinguished Gentleman.

                half joking

              3. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                The system above doesn't preclude your scenario.

                Another version is more complicated, but permits voters to vote for individual candidates directly. It is basically the German model.

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

                It still has districts, but the influence of the districting process is diluted as voters vote both for individual representatives and for a slate of candidates.

              4. Mickey Rat   2 years ago

                Removing party labels only serves to make political factionalism more opaque to the low-information voter.

            3. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

              Isn't that how things are done in a Westminster type government?

            4. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

              Can you explain how any of this is better than districts. It replaces the problems of gerrymandering with a different set of problems.

              Different yes, better... how???

              1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                It replaces the problems of gerrymandering with a different set of problems.

                No system is perfect, everything has a tradeoff.

                Different yes, better… how???

                As I said, it means voters choose the legislators, and not the other way around. That IMO is better.

                1. damikesc   2 years ago

                  ....except elected partisan judges replace legislators involving maps.

                  Not an improvement

            5. R Mac   2 years ago

              So, in conclusion, Lying Jeffy wants a one-world government with two parties and everyone gets to vote for one of them.

              1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

                So in conclusion, you lie.

    6. damikesc   2 years ago

      "Interestingly, the Republican maps that the Wisconsin SC evaluated were all determined to be highly gerrymandered."

      You'd think the WI SC was an impartial branch and not decided by partisan elections.

      You'd be wrong, but you'd think that.

      "Progressive justices dislike map drawn up by Republicans". Truly stunning.

  34. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   2 years ago

    Wow, even the pro-Trump Daily Mail ran the historian poll that ranked Donnie dead last among all presidents:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13100461/presidenti-joe-biden-poll-greatest-president-trump-lincoln.html?ico=topics_pagination_desktop

    #DeadLastLoserDonnie

    1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

      When did the Daily Mail become pro-Trump?

      1. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   2 years ago

        https://www.allsides.com/news-source/daily-mail

        Best tabloid format around though. I don't care about bias. Much better than Bratfart is.

        1. Sevo   2 years ago

          turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, 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 TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.

        2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

          They're somewhat conservative. True. But Trump isn't conservative.

          1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

            That goes to show you how far left the Democrats have gone when Trump is viewed as "conservative".

            1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

              That goes to show how far left the Republicans have gone when a lifelong Democrat is viewed as a far-right conservative.

              1. DesigNate   2 years ago

                Just because conservatives voted for him, doesn’t mean they think he’s a conservative too.

                1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                  Well he's taken the GOP for a hard left turn on economic issues, which is kind of ironic considering the hatred so many of his followers have for the political left.

                  1. DesigNate   2 years ago

                    It makes more sense when you realize that the Democrats are the party of elitist, white women, and government apparatchiks (their actual base) and abandoned working class people 15 years ago.

                    Working class people hated Clinton for signing NAFTA and for the increased regulations that helped push more manufacturing overseas. It was only natural they would gravitate towards whoever was at least pretending to listen to their complaints.

                    1. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

                      I wish more people knew more about economics.

                      The US is a manufacturing powerhouse. Manufacturing productivity is through the roof. Manufacturing employment not so much. That’s because we’re rich enough to have huge capital investments that make workers much more productive, requiring fewer of them per unit of output (same with farming for example, which once employed 90% of Americans). The jobs that are going overseas are the ones that we had when we weren’t as rich as we are now. The countries that have those jobs will offshore them when they get rich enough. That’s what happens with textiles for example. Shirts are made in this poor country until they get too rich for those crappy jobs, so the production moves to a different poor country. We used to make shirts.

                    2. JesseAz   2 years ago

                      I wish more people knew more about economics.

                      Lol. Oh the irony.

                    3. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      The point out what is wrong with my statement, oh expert in economics.

                    4. DesigNate   2 years ago

                      I know we do a lot of the higher end manufacturing here. A lot that requires less workers thanks to increases in efficiency, automation, and robotics. That's exactly my point though. A lot of those people feel as though they got left behind. Take a tour of the rust belt and you'll see that in many cases, they did.

                      FWIW, I don't know what the solution is, just pointing out how the demographics have shifted.

                    5. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

                      FWIW, I don’t know what the solution is, just pointing out how the demographics have shifted.

                      There isn’t a solution. It’s just progress. What’s the difference between people being put out of work by a machine that can do it more cheaply, or foreigners? There really isn’t a difference. What’s the difference between tariffs and smashing machines?

                      If you think smashing machines is absurd, then you should think protectionist tariffs are equally absurd.

                    6. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      Used to argue with Tony over the difference between taxes to fund courts and the military and such, and taxes to punish rich people and transfer money from Peter to Paul.

                      He didn't see a difference.

                      When I say there's a difference between tariffs for revenue and tariffs for protectionism, a certain person does a Tony and claims there's no difference.

                    7. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

                      When I say there’s a difference between tariffs for revenue and tariffs for protectionism, a certain person does a Tony and claims there’s no difference.

                      I give up. I can't find where you said that. Were you just creating an extra strawman in case you need one later?

                  2. JesseAz   2 years ago

                    I'll try again.

                    Which GOP president didn't utilize tariffs or other powers sarc? I know you rely on ignorance, but your definition of conservative isn't actually reality.

                    What you call conservative is neocon with ignorance to their actual policies and actions.

                    1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      When you equate any and all tariffs with protectionism, are you being dishonest or stupid?

                    2. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

                      Sarc, how retarded are you? I’ve never claimed all tariffs are protective you retarded lying fuck. I’ve differentiated them for years while you ranted with your bumper sticker slogans.

                      What a lying piece of shit you are.

                      You also refuse to answer a simple question that shows your ignorance.

                  3. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

                    Is it a "hard left turn"? It's more of an anti-globalist bent versus the globalist Democrats.

                    1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      No. It's a rejection of laissez faire economics and classical liberal principles.

                    2. Pepin the short   2 years ago

                      He’s never been homeless. You have.

                      Your views on economics mean nothing.

                    3. DesigNate   2 years ago

                      Being anti-globalism isn't necessarily anti-laissez faire.

                      You know, because every country isn't operating a laissez faire economy, and in many cases the globalism being practiced is specifically against it.

                    4. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      I like Don Boudreaux.

                      https://cafehayek.com/

                      He says it better than me. It being that unilateral free trade is still better for consumers than fair free trade.

                    5. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

                      Did you actually read the article this time?

                      A free market is a binary function. It is either free or it is not. As soon as a single entity violates free market, it is now an advantaged market. There are no 90% free markets.

                      Your version of free markets is ignoring free market actions of other entities. Again. You support advantaged markets, not free ones.

                      There are no unilateral free trade markets outside of maybe swap meets. There is none between countries.

                      Your ignorance is ever present.

    2. Sevo   2 years ago

      turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, 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.

    3. damikesc   2 years ago

      Remember --- he dislikes Biden.

      He reminds us incessantly because literally nothing he posts reflects that.

      1. R Mac   2 years ago

        Turd lies.

      2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        Rule #1 of the commentariat: Turd lies.

    4. Jefferson Paul   2 years ago

      Well, this decides it for me then. I was going to vote for Trump in Nov, but this poll of historians ranked him last, so what else can I do? And we know it's a careful ranking, and not at all politically- and recency-biased. Just look, they correctly ranked FDR as 2nd best, behind Lincoln, and ahead of WASHINGTON. And this isn't the same poll of historians that had W in the bottom five in 2005 but somehow is now at 32.

      Yep, I make all my decisions based on what articles SPB2 posts on this site.

    5. DesigNate   2 years ago

      Any ranking that doesn't put the guy whose administration tried to pack the court, argued that wheat grown on someone's property for their own consumption somehow affected interstate commerce, and locked up American citizens in fucking concentration camps near dead last should be roundly mocked by anyone who purports to support liberty.

  35. Rev Arthur L kuckland   2 years ago

    If someone hosted abbq in a mosque people would be saying hate crime

    1. Super Scary   2 years ago (edited)

      Only if it was the superior form of barbecue, NC style pulled pork.

      1. Ajsloss   2 years ago

        I can see you're trying to start a barbecue fight, so I'll take the bait. South Carolina is the superior form. #mustardbase

        1. DesigNate   2 years ago

          Texas or GTFO

          1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

            Agreed. And it partially makes up for TexMex.

          2. Longtobefree   2 years ago

            Baked cow is not Bar-B-Que.

        2. A Thinking Mind   2 years ago

          Mustard base? Ugh, you just engaged my gag reflex. That shit is so gross.

        3. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

          I prefer Kansas City's version, myself.

          1. Dillinger   2 years ago

            also, it's not a New York Strip.

            1. Minadin   2 years ago

              That one really twists my knickers.

              KC or St. Louis style are similar, but one tends to have more beef and the other more pork. Together, they are like a nice blend of Memphis and Texas.

        4. mad.casual   2 years ago

          South Carolina has, for the two weeks since its invention, always struck me as some of the "Sweetest Day" bullshit of all the barbecue/food styles.

        5. ducksalad   2 years ago

          Shouldn't even be talking about sauce.

          Barbeque is meat, not sauce.

          1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

            But a good sauce is needed to use to dip one's good barbecue in. 🙂

            1. Dillinger   2 years ago

              needed is a stretch if the meat is right (twss)

              1. Ajsloss   2 years ago

                Something we can all agree on:
                You don't win friends with salad.

                1. Dillinger   2 years ago

                  "what's that other b for?" "
                  "that's a typo."

        6. Super Scary   2 years ago

          I can agree that the SC stuff is pretty good too. The real problem are the heathens that call beef brisket barbecue.

  36. Sevo   2 years ago

    "The United States..."
    Well, the UN rep at least, but plenty of US citizens aren't. Me included.
    Kill all Hamas, then we can get behind a cease-fire.

    1. n00bdragon   2 years ago

      This. Bothering to negotiate with Hamas is a massive waste of everyone's time. That fact is why what is happening is happening. It's telling that no one seems interested in negotiating with Hamas to stop invading Israel and murdering jews in their houses.

      1. Rev Arthur L kuckland   2 years ago

        Remember the last cease fire hamas agreed to... Then broke 3 hours later?

        Seriously the directors cut of lord of the rings was longer than hamas can keep a promise

  37. Spiritus Mundi   2 years ago

    A video circulated of mourners approvingly calling the deceased "mother of all whores" inside the cathedral.

    What was the cause of death? Aids?

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Can't be. Eradicating AIDS was Fauci's first heroic gift to mankind.

      1. Jefferson Paul   2 years ago

        Because of Fauci's great work in the 80s, I know not to share a cereal box with someone who has AIDS.

  38. shadydave   2 years ago

    "U.S. begins to talk ceasefire"
    What an idiot I am to think this was about Ukraine/Russia. No dummy, it's about the war that is crushing the Democratic party's hopes in Michigan. No need for a ceasefire in the war that's enriching the Democratic party.

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      How many intra-party polls do you think the DNC did?

    2. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

      I suspect they've lost Michigan irretrievably for 2024 at this point.

    3. rbike   2 years ago

      My Republican senators are cashing in too. Iowa makes a lot of those 155mm shells.

  39. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

    But many Catholics, contra mainstream reporting, feel as though the funeral made a mockery of our faith.

    Not this Catholic (non practicing). The Holy See has already done enough mockery of the faithful on its own that its hard to mock even further. Nazi pope + commie pope + kid diddling > "fabulous" trans.

    Also have you seen the vestments color skeme and rules; about as gay as you can get.

  40. Spiritus Mundi   2 years ago

    100% safe and effective with no downsides. Also, the added benefit of glorious food trucks!

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13104577/Migrants-brawl-cops-Randalls-Island-shelter.html

  41. DesigNate   2 years ago

    “When immigrants make their way to a city in an organic fashion, they usually are drawn to a place where they have family ties, job leads, or other connections and resources available.”

    So Jeff works for The Atlantic?

    1. MWAocdoc   2 years ago

      I don't know about Jeff, but you xenophobes make me tired ...

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        Shut down the welfare state, and then we'll talk.

        1. MWAocdoc   2 years ago (edited)

          You shut it down. They’re not listening to me. By the way, Federal welfare is illegal, so if your state is giving welfare to immigrants, talk to YOUR governor!

          1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

            You shut it down. They’re not listening to me.

            Then fuck your "let everyone in who isn't a criminal, because the limits of scale don't exist!" policy, too.

          2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

            By the way, Federal welfare is illegal,

            Nice hair-splitting there.

            1. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 years ago

              Not really hair splitting to observe jurisdictional boundaries. Kind of funny (or hypocritical), to observe one set and not the other though.

          3. Diane Reynolds (Paul. they/them)   2 years ago

            Who cares about Federal welfare, state welfare is NOT illegal for migrants to acquire. Why would a migrant care about federal welfare when xe can just slip into New York's social construct and get free housing?

            1. MWAocdoc   2 years ago

              Excellent point ... and it's exactly why I meant that the "welfare for illegal immigrants" issue has nothing whatever to do with Federal immigration policy. Shipping "illegal" immigrants from states that do not provide welfare to immigrants to states that DO provide welfare to immigrants is not only poetic justice, it's precisely what those states have proclaimed as their policy. If they don't like the consequences, tough luck!

          4. JesseAz   2 years ago

            This comment shows a stunning amount of ignorance to basic reality. For example, California is still using Covid passed spending to supplement their spending on illegal immigrants.

            Youre as retarded as jeff and sarc regarding immigration costs.

            1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

              The stated mission of the source you cite as unbiased gospel is to point out the consequences of immigration. Not to be fair, but to focus on the bad stuff.

              If some leftist organization said its mission was to point out the consequences of, say, income inequality, do you think they're going to say anything positive about capitalism? Or are they going to cherry pick and lie by omission to push an agenda? If you agree that they're not going to be honest, why do you tout an organization that's doing the same thing?

              1. JesseAz   2 years ago

                And sarc enters with an ad hominem attack because he can't say which fact presented is wrong. Then accuses others of potential future ad hominem attacks lol.

                When you and shrike post your leftist bullshit I read it and refute the claims of the article. You do not.

        2. n00bdragon   2 years ago

          We can't have the free movement of people because some element of crappiness continues to exist somewhere in the world? Why is it the welfare that we must accept the continued existence of, but freedom of people to come and go as they please and engage or not in the labor of their choice is unconscionable?

          1. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

            "Why is it the welfare that we must accept the continued existence of"

            It isn't.

          2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

            We can’t have the free movement of people because some element of crappiness continues to exist somewhere in the world?

            Why does the US need to be the world's charity organization?

          3. R Mac   2 years ago

            Moving over property that doesn’t belong to you against the will of the people that own that property isn’t “free movement”.

            1. MWAocdoc   2 years ago

              The same simple solution for that is to ALLOW all visitors to come through established entry checkpoints legally so they won't need to cross private property illegally. But if your goal is to STOP immigrants from coming to the US in the first place, that solution will not satisfy you. In fact, there IS NO solution to stopping immigrants from coming into the US and if that is your goal you will continue to fail massively as you have failed massively in the past.

              1. JesseAz   2 years ago

                All government property is taken from the people dumbfuck.

              2. R Mac   2 years ago (edited)

                Despite Lying Jeffy’s lies to the contrary I’m not against all immigration.

                I also find the topic pointless to discuss with open borders people that have decided to just call everyone that disagrees with them racists and xenophobes.

                1. DesigNate   2 years ago

                  That's why I stopped debating it with Old Mex and Cytotoxic. It's like, I get everyone has their hobby horse, but come on.

        3. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

          Let them work.

          How can any supporter of liberty not be offended at the notion that a human being must get permission from the government prior to being allowed to provide for themselves and their families?

          Requiring government permission and government papers to participate in society, and being excluded from society without those things, vaguely reminds me of Sunday school talks about the last chapter of the holy book.

          1. DesigNate   2 years ago

            US citizens are required to do the same thing….

            (I thought Bush’s work visa program made the most sense, but certain people decided to rally in the streets and burn effigies of him for suggesting it.)

            1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

              Doesn't make it right.

          2. R Mac   2 years ago

            How many have you invited in to work for you?

            1. MWAocdoc   2 years ago

              About a dozen. They are much better neighbors and workers than you are.

              1. R Mac   2 years ago

                I was asking sarc, but thanks for confirming you can discuss the topic in as good of faith as him and Lying Jeffy.

            2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

              I don't make hiring decisions.

              1. R Mac   2 years ago

                I’m sure you don’t. Now go pick up the trash in the breakroom.

        4. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

          Immigrants are incentivized to use the system because it's legal, while working is not.

          People respond to incentives. That's one of the core ideas behind the economic way of thinking.

      2. DesigNate   2 years ago

        Nothing in my post made a judgement about immigration one way or the other. I only noted that that is the same argument Jeff has made on why bussing them to blue states/sanctuary cities is wrong.

        Which is just asinine on its face because these places are getting a fraction of a percentage of what we’re expecting border states to absorb.

      3. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

        The best way to find a liberal hiding out as a libertarian is when they utilize cries of racism or xenophobia on the topic of immigration.

  42. MWAocdoc   2 years ago (edited)

    “When immigrants make their way to a city in an organic fashion, they usually are drawn to a place where they have family ties, job leads, or other connections and resources available.”

    Bingo! There is only one agent to blame for the lack of “organic” resettlement and the impetus for border state governors to force the issue: Federal immigration law. Almost all of these problems could be solved overnight by registering everyone who wants to visit the United States as they come across the border, checking their criminal status and screening for contagious diseases. Anyone who disagrees with this simple solution has an ax to grind with no moral or factual justification.

    1. MWAocdoc   2 years ago

      There was significant social dislocation in communities in Minnesota with the Somali relocations even when there was coordination, so drop that notion right now.

    2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

      Almost all of these problems could be solved overnight by registering everyone who wants to visit the United States as they come across the border, checking their criminal status and screening for contagious diseases.

      According to the commentariat, if you don't support current immigration law then you want open borders. There's no middle ground.

      Anyone who disagrees with this simple solution has an ax to grind with no moral or factual justification.

      Displacement theory. The influx of non-whites will soon make white people a minority, and that's bad. What's worse is that immigrants vote for Democrats, and politics is hereditary for immigrants. That means their children and grandchildren (who are not white) are guaranteed vote for Democrats.

      Can't have that. It will ruin the country.

      1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

        What’s worse is that immigrants vote for Democrats, and politics is hereditary for immigrants. That means their children and grandchildren (who are not white) are guaranteed vote for Democrats.

        Yeah, actual voting patterns and the schools deliberately alienating 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants against the US and white people never happens.

        1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

          Poor immigrants. No agency. So self will. Just brainwashed automatons.

          1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

            Yeah, that's what going to left-wing schools results in.

            1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

              So they're clay to be molded?

              1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

                If they come out as Democrats, it's automatically bad.

                1. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

                  Come out? Like out of the vagina? Out of the closet?

                  1. R Mac   2 years ago

                    Pretty sure it was clear to everyone sober he meant come out of school. You know, what you were talking about? Fucking retard.

                    1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      Back to them being clay automatons to be molded and programmed by the schools, with no agency of their own, and no parental influence.

                    2. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

                      Back to them being clay automatons to be molded and programmed by the schools, with no agency of their own, and no parental influence.

                      Wait, you mean like the kind of parental oversight your buddy chemfat constantly bitches about?

                      Make up your mind.

                    3. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      I ignore those shitfests.

                    4. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago (edited)

                      I ignore those shitfests.

                      BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

                      Don’t make me laugh too hard.

                      BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

                  2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

                    No, someplace the sun doesn't shine. Quit acting like a retard.

                  3. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

                    Come out? Like out of the vagina? Out of the closet?

                    No, like out of the bottle of Ripple you're hammering.

          2. DesigNate   2 years ago

            It’s not just immigrants kids who are being indoctrinated….

            1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

              Effective parenting can mitigate the extent of the indoctrination.

              1. DesigNate   2 years ago

                It can.

              2. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

                I do my best to teach my kid how to think, so she can resist when people try to teach her what to think. But ultimately she's got a mind of her own.

                1. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

                  Sarc's How-To-Think Lesson 1: Logical fallacies such as ad-hominem, goalpost shifting, straw-manning, etc are to be applied only to others; never to yourself.

                  1. R Mac   2 years ago

                    2: Key the neighbors car.

                    1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

                      3: Burn their steaks.

                    2. JesseAz   2 years ago

                      3: when wrong or ignorant on a topic cry put that youre a victim.

                    3. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

                      What should one expect from The One True Libertarian®?

                    4. R Mac   2 years ago

                      4. Serve their mother horse meat without her knowledge because she loves horses.

                    5. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      You fucknuts who keep thinking your clever by bringing up my comment about steaks should read some Anthony Bourdain, specifically Kitchen Confidential. In it he talks about what cooks think of well done steaks. I thought the book was great because I'd seen half of it, and could easily see the other half being true.

                    6. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

                      This is less about steaks than about your attitude, dudette.

                    7. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      The steak thing has to do with me saying that most restaurant cooks view MW a W steaks and something to burn. The girls think it's clever to say I burned steaks when I was a cook. Truth is they all do, but the girls are busy thinking they're clever.

                  2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                    Commentariat Logic Lesson 1: Ad hominems are logical arguments, and anyone who says they're not is wrong about that and everything else.

                    1. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

                      Bzzzzzt

                    2. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

                      Speaking of ad hominem, here was sarc's response to a post from an Israeli source over the weekend:

                      "Israeli news and Israeli policy organizations agree that all Palestinians are evil? I’m shocked!"

                    3. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

                      Well, yeah, nerds tend to invite bullying with their passive-aggressive behavior.

                    4. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

                      Hey BG, do you think MSNBC and the Southern Poverty Law Center are going to give a biased point of view? Yes? I think so too. They’re not going to give the whole picture because they have an agenda.

                      Now apply the same reasoning to Israeli news and policy organizations. Are they going to give Palestinians a fair shake? Be honest.

                    5. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

                      Shorter sarcasmic - when I do it, it's not ad hominem.

                    6. JesseAz   2 years ago

                      Not an ad hominem. But you have one just above. Lol.

            2. MWAocdoc   2 years ago

              The solution to school propaganda is to eliminate the tax-funded public school system. But we seem to be straying far afield from the topic of "problems due to immigration"

              1. Red Rocks White Privilege   2 years ago

                The solution to school propaganda is to eliminate the tax-funded public school system.

                You eliminate it. They're not listening to us.

      2. DesigNate   2 years ago

        Checking their criminal status and for communicable diseases IS current policy and they’re not even doing that.

        1. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

          That’s not being very honest.

          When this is the path to legal immigration, it’s no wonder so many skip the line.

          Just make it simpler (which does not equate to open borders) so there isn’t a huge incentive to skip the line, and let them work when they get here.

          1. Diane Reynolds (Paul. they/them)   2 years ago (edited)

            It is simpler. If you make it to New York or Chicago or Colorado, you get free housing.

            The reason we're seeing millions of border crossing is... because it got a lot simpler.

            1. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

              Alright. Be disingenuous.

              edit: But I don’t disagree that the system is incredibly complicated if you’re trying to do it the legal way.

              Never mind.

          2. DesigNate   2 years ago

            I’m not sure where I’m being dishonest, they’re definitely doing way more catch and release than 4 or 8 years ago.

            But I don’t disagree that the system is incredibly complicated if you’re trying to do it the legal way.

            1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

              I think what MWA was saying, and if so I agree, that making the system uncomplicated would lessen the incentive to skip the line.

      3. JesseAz   2 years ago

        What you two retards fail to notice is the illegal immigrants are crossing within half a mile from legal checkpoints. They don't want to register at ports. And you support this.

    3. mad.casual   2 years ago

      There is only one agent to blame for the lack of “organic” resettlement and the impetus for border state governors to force the issue: Federal immigration law.

      Dude, not even immigrants are falling for your retardation.

      Anyone who disagrees with this simple solution has an ax to grind with no moral or factual justification.

      Anyone, pro- or anti-immigration who thinks the issue is as simple as "Read their papers, check the vaccination records with the state run medical systems in their various countries of origin, and then let them in." is a fucking retard.

      Seriously, this shit was tired and stupid when JFree and WhiteMike or whomever went through it 6 yrs. ago. You sound like some sub-80 IQ kindergarten teacher who thinks the problem with immigration is that everybody won't queue up for you.

  43. MWAocdoc   2 years ago (edited)
  44. R Mac   2 years ago

    El Segundo? I think that’s the last place I remember having my wallet.

  45. Dillinger   2 years ago

    >>U.S. Begins To Talk Ceasefire

    B glued his hand to the Wall with oatmeal.

    1. Longtobefree   2 years ago

      Ceasefire?
      What?!
      When did we get into a shooting war?
      With whom?

      (those short naps are great, but you miss a lot)

  46. Dillinger   2 years ago

    >>"Until now, the United States alone has publicly and consistently rejected demands for an outright cease-fire in U.N. resolutions on the war in Gaza, siding with Israel in its war against Hamas," reports The New York Times.

    I need to know be told what to think here do you reprint the lies because you believe them or because you don't?

  47. Dillinger   2 years ago (edited)

    Dear McRib: spellcheck. and yes I see the irony in my own editing mistake above lol.

  48. Diane Reynolds (Paul. they/them)   2 years ago

    "What is the 'migrant crisis' in New York and Chicago?" asks Jerusalem Demsas at The Atlantic. "It includes visible signs of disorder like migrants sleeping outside as hotel rooms fill up, anger among native-born Americans that limited resources are being spent on migrants, and an expensive bureaucratic scramble to arrange health screenings, translation services, housing programs, legal services, school placements, school buses, and other needs for newcomers." But some of the problem, Demsas says, stems from the red-state governors busing migrants to these big cities in particular: "When immigrants make their way to a city in an organic fashion, they usually are drawn to a place where they have family ties, job leads, or other connections and resources available. When they're resettled through an official government program, as the displaced Ukrainians were, the federal government coordinates with local governments to ensure a smooth transition."

    This blurb is funny, not in a ha-ha way, but in a fucking retarded way.

    First of all, red-state governors are reaping the benefit of absorbing the immigrants in an 'organic fashion'.

    And 2: this narrative fell apart this week:

    When they're resettled through an official government program, as the displaced Ukrainians were, the federal government coordinates with local governments to ensure a smooth transition."

    Turns out, the migrants that the red-state governors are busing in to places like Chicago and NY only make up a small percentage. Due to rules in Canada, turns out Migrants can fly to Canada from Mexico for ~$350. Claim they're there to see the sights for a couple of days, and they're walking south across the border into New York. They WANT to go to New York because they get free fucking housing.

    This argument is now check and mate. And trust me, I really WISH it were the effects of red-state governors, because I like to think that they were singular in changing the narrative. But it looks like the immigrant rush to your sanctuary cities in in fact, pretty "organic".

    1. Diane Reynolds (Paul. they/them)   2 years ago

      U.S. asks Canada to reimpose visa requirements for Mexico to stem surge of crossings at northern border
      Canada imposed requirements in 2008, lifted them in 2016

      The Biden administration has been asking Ottawa to consider reimposing visa requirements for Mexican nationals visiting Canada, CBC News has learned.

      At issue is the sharp increase in illegal crossings from Canada into the United States: Mexicans don't need a visa to travel to Canada, while the U.S. requires a visa for Mexicans to enter. American border officials say some Mexican nationals are using Canada's visa-free rule to fly into the country and then cross south illegally into America.

      The Conservative government under Stephen Harper created a visa requirement in 2009 for Mexicans to stem the flow of asylum claims from Mexico. The Trudeau government relaxed it in 2016.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        The Trudeau government relaxed it in 2016.

        There's your problem: Trudeau, the Gavin Newsom of Ottawa.

    2. A Thinking Mind   2 years ago

      Funny how the flow of people is toward free shit. They say you get more of what you subsidize, so subsidizing illegal immigrants means they flock to your door.

      1. Sevo   2 years ago

        And the mayor of SF can't seem to figure out why paying more to bums means we get more bums!
        Her one lifetime achievement was getting out of public housing and into a rent-controlled apartment; you see she has high expectations of herself.

  49. mtrueman   2 years ago

    "The United States, via a U.N. Security Council resolution, is urging a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas "as soon as practicable"—using ceasefire language for the first time—as well as rebuking Israel for plans to possibly invade Rafah. "

    This is a strange and perverse way of saying that the US is going to veto the UN resolution calling for a ceasefire in the conflict, according to sources other than the New York Times. The US has vetoed several resolutions calling for a ceasefire, so another veto is in keeping with US policy, the desires of Israel, and the Jewish lobby which lavishes funds on the US political class.

    To write about an intention to veto a resolution for a ceasefire as 'working towards a ceasefire' is right out of Orwell. Only worse. Orwell was a novelist. Wolfe styles herself as a journalist.

    1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

      And you style yourself a libertarian and factual. Yet, you're neither.

      1. mtrueman   2 years ago

        Vetoing a ceasefire is not 'working towards a ceasefire,' no matter how the New York Times and Reason want to spin it. They are corrupt, dishonest and you should be more skeptical about the coverage of the conflict. It's been abysmal.

        1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

          What indications exist that Hamas will cease firing? A resolution directed at only one party in a conflict is not a ceasefire, so yes, they are still working towards one.

          1. mtrueman   2 years ago

            "What indications exist that Hamas will cease firing?"

            Israel and Palestinians have had a long history of ceasefires, truces and they have been successful up to a point. The last one was in November last year when a number of hostages were exchanged. What's been lacking is a permanent political solution. That's going to be a tough nut to crack, but the road to peace starts with a temporary ceasefire with continued talks towards a permanent solution. Israel's continued existence depends on reaching such a settlement.

            1. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

              "Israel and Palestinians have had a long history of ceasefires, truces and they have been successful up to a point."

              ...all the way up to the point where the Palestinians start firing again.

              1. mtrueman   2 years ago

                "…all the way up to the point where the Palestinians start firing again."

                Without a permanent solution, more conflict is guaranteed. If the events of Oct. 7th last year weren't convincing, you need to rethink your assumptions. How many more have to die before you're willing to change your mind?

                1. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago (edited)

                  What is a permanent political solution with a group whose stated purpose is to kill all jews and seize all territory in the area for Islam?

                  1. mtrueman   2 years ago

                    "What is a permanent political solution "

                    It's when temporary ceasefires are no longer necessary. That's why it's permanent.

                    Israel and Palestine have negotiated any number of temporary ceasefires. I see no reason why they can't come to a permanent one. A permanent solution will undoubtedly be more difficult to achieve and Israel may have to go through the kind of hell we're seeing in Gaza today before they are serious about pursuing peace. My advice to Israelis: don't let those second passports of yours out of your sight. They may save your lives.

            2. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

              Israel’s continued existence depends on reaching such a settlement.

              Holy fuck, Nancy! The lamentations of the Palestinians are not going to bring down the walls of Jerusalem.

              Regardless of how the modern state came into existence, Israel does not exist based on the whims of any other nation or group of nations. It will take a nuclear holocaust to bring down Israel.

              1. mtrueman   2 years ago

                " It will take a nuclear holocaust to bring down Israel."

                Their downfall will be self induced, more likely. Masada 2.0. I doubt they could bear the ignominy of being defeated by a race of sub humans.

                1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

                  Wow, full on anti-zionist. Thanks for letting us know how you really feel about it.

                  1. mtrueman   2 years ago

                    " Thanks for letting us know how you really feel about it."

                    If you want to discuss things further, don't hesitate to ask. I am not afraid to tell you about how I really feel about things. I already gave my opinion on your hare brained scheme for Israel to provide weapons to Palestinians, if you have any more where that came from, let me know and I will respond as best I can.

    2. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

      Israel is an apartheid state - not Orwellian.
      Israel is committing genocide - not Orwellian.
      Hamas doesn't use human shields - not Orwellian.

      1. Sevo   2 years ago

        trueman claims not to hate Jews and then lists the reasons he hates Jews - not an antisemite.

      2. mtrueman   2 years ago

        Vetoing a ceasefire is not 'working for a ceasefire.'

        1. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 years ago

          Vetoing one cease-fire, and working towards a different one is indeed "working for a ceasefire."

          1. mtrueman   2 years ago

            Is that what the New York Times is telling you? You shouldn't be so trusting. There's a lot of money riding on continuing the genocide, and money talks.

            1. VinniUSMC   2 years ago

              We should trust the musing of rabid anti-Semite mNaziman instead?

              Fuck off Nazi scum.

  50. Jerry B.   2 years ago

    Another "Fani Willis is "Winning" editorial from the Post.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/02/20/fani-willis-disqualification/

    1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

      I won't subscribe, but from the link:

      MONTHLY
      50¢ every week for the first year
      billed as $2 every 4 weeks

      /facepalm

      The WAPO is literally demanding 50 cents for their propaganda. These people cannot be mocked enough.

      1. Michael Ejercito   2 years ago

        Imagine what the comments section is like.

        1. VinniUSMC   2 years ago (edited)

          I’d hate to see what the WaPo comment section looks like now. It was already a shitshow when VC was there.

  51. Dillinger   2 years ago (edited)

    >>”What is the ‘migrant crisis’ in New York and Chicago?”

    nobody fucking cares. ~~ Texas

    >>But some of the problem, Demsas says, stems from the red-state governors busing migrants to these big cities in particular

    oh I see, Demsas is a tool.

  52. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

    If there was ever an argument for a universal right to keep and bear arms by citizens, Gaza should be the poster child. The citizens of Gaza need a way to interfere and disrupt the operations of Hamas if the citizens of Gaza want the destruction to cease.

    A campaign from the US and Israel to distribute guns to the civilian population would do far more damage to Hamas than it could ever do to Israel. If someone launches rockets at Israeli forces from within a neighborhood, the neighbors get their guns and arrest/execute the people responsible. When the Israelis show up, they hand over any prisoners, dead bodies, and military ordinance and the Israelis go on their way. If they don't, the Israelis raze the area from the sky.

    Hamas currently has the ability to use 2 million people as meat shields and for propagandizing. Those people are aware of it, but can do nothing about it currently. There is an added bonus that an armed population is a militia and is therefore fairly targeted by the vastly superior firepower of Israel if they refuse to police themselves.

    We are spending 100s of billions, enough to arm every citizen in the Ukraine many times over while spending nothing to arm to the citizens of Gaza who are clearly the only ones capable of rooting out Hamas. For less than 1 billion, you could provide a firearm and basic training to every adult in Gaza. And we would get to actually observe what a real citizen militia could do in the modern age.

    1. mtrueman   2 years ago

      " And we would get to actually observe what a real citizen militia could do in the modern age."

      I don't think the people of Gaza are as modern as you believe they are. Arab culture takes revenge a lot more seriously than let bygones be bygones Americans. Gazans have all lost friends and family members to Israel attacks, and they will use any weapons you provide them with to settle up old scores before anything else.

      "If someone launches rockets at Israeli forces from within a neighborhood, the neighbors get their guns and arrest/execute the people responsible. "

      This is delusional. It's the Israelis who have Gaza under occupation, and are committing all manner of atrocities against the people of Palestine.

      1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

        This is delusional. It’s the Israelis who have Gaza under occupation, and are committing all manner of atrocities against the people of Palestine.

        You are correct.

        1. mtrueman   2 years ago

          "You are correct."

          I know that. I don't understand how you've come to believe that supplying weapons to Palestinians will result in anything but them being turned on the Israelis who are murdering them in the 10s of 1000s. It's an absolutely hare brained scheme you're touting here, divorced from any reality. Where did you get this idea?

          1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

            It’s an absolutely hare brained scheme you’re touting here, divorced from any reality. Where did you get this idea?

            The Declaration of Independence.

            But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

            1. mtrueman   2 years ago

              Gaza is under occupation. Any weapons in Palestinian hands are going to be pointed at the occupiers, Israel. That's one reason why the Israelis aren't already handing out weapons to the people of Palestine. They know they will only become targets. Israelis aren't stupid. I urge you to forget this foolish notion immediately, and in future ignore those who suggested it to you.

              1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

                I get it. You don't really believe in self-determination. I do. And I believe that God does. He inspires the soul to strive for it.

                it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

                We are bombarded constantly with messages that Islam is a religion of peace and that the vast majority of Palestinians are not terrorists. Let them prove it. Gift them the tools to fix their own problem. 1 million rifles could not overcome the Israeli air force. But they could certainly be used to take out the bastards exploiting the citizens of Gaza as meat shields, drawing fire down on their homes and infrastructure. Set up secure facilities and have the citizens come to attend training and pick up their weapons.

                I urge you to forget this foolish notion immediately, and in future ignore those who suggested it to you.

                Who writes like that? And what conspiracy have you fantasized about that necessitates it not being my original idea? I must be making a tremendous amount of sense for you to flailing this hard.

                1. mtrueman   2 years ago

                  "And what conspiracy have you fantasized about that necessitates it not being my original idea?"

                  You ought to be flattered. I put the blame on your gullibility rather than stupidity.

                  1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

                    How could that possibly be construed as flattering? Even your insults are devoid of reason.

                    One of us is a vacuous fuckwit, but it isn't me.

                    1. mtrueman   2 years ago

                      "How could that possibly be construed as flattering? "

                      You can always overcome gullibility. Widen the scope of your reading, and try to question authority. You're stuck with stupidity.

                      "One of us is a vacuous fuckwit, but it isn’t me."

                      I'm leaning more and more to the idea that you're stupid and happy that way.

                    2. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

                      you’re stupid and happy that way

                      Lets check the thread for the folks that were not playing and see who devolved into unsupported emotional appeals first:

                      I don’t think the people of Gaza are as modern as you believe they are.

                      You. In your first sentence.

                      And direct insults:

                      I put the blame on your gullibility rather than stupidity.

                      You, again.

                      I am going to stick with me not being the vacuous fuckwit. But you did accomplish your goal of inserting the talking point about Israeli atrocities and then deflecting the conversation away from any criticism of your outright lies. Fucking boomers. Where did it all go wrong for you?

                    3. R Mac   2 years ago

                      Misconstueman isn’t capable of the introspection required to question why everyone here calls him… Misconstueman.

                      Here’s a hint misconstueman, it’s because you’re a vacuous fuckwit.

                    4. Jefferson Paul   2 years ago

                      I like the concept of arming the Palestinians in Gaza to overcome the Hamas terrorists. In practice, though, I think what would happen is that the Hamas members would just take or acquire the weaponry for themselves, making them even stronger.

                      I don't know what the solution to this problem is. Hamas will not tolerate Israel continuing to exist on what they see as the land stolen from them. Israel isn't going to just cede the entire state to the Palestinians, and the efforts to destroy Hamas are inflicting collateral damage, killing innocent Gazans--how many is up for debate, as I don't trust the Hamas-reported numbers, and I don't trust Israel and the US-reported totals. This, in turn, is going to radicalize more Gazans to join up with Hamas.

                    5. mtrueman   2 years ago

                      If you think that Israel equipping Palestinians with more weapons will solve their problems, make a suggestion to the Israeli war cabinet. I honestly don't think they'll take you up, so prepare to be ignored.

                      "I am going to stick with me not being the vacuous fuckwit."

                      Hardly surprising, but in the end your assessments of your own intellectual capacity isn't worth much.

                    6. R Mac   2 years ago

                      Where are you on the spectrum, misconstrueman?

                2. DesigNate   2 years ago

                  It's misconstrueman, he's just here to spout nonsense.

                  1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

                    He is here to interrupt the conversation and collect his $0.50. Maybe he works for the WAPO?

                    1. mtrueman   2 years ago

                      If you don't want people criticizing your half baked ideas, don't post them in a public place. You should be grateful that I've taken the trouble to respond. Nobody else has.

                    2. R Mac   2 years ago

                      mtrueman 34 mins ago
                      Flag Comment Mute User
                      If you think that Israel equipping Palestinians with more weapons will solve their problems, make a suggestion to the Israeli war cabinet.

                    3. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   2 years ago

                      You should be grateful that I’ve taken the trouble to respond. Nobody else has.

                      Gaslighting now? You are getting pretty fucking desperate.

                      I posted an idea that occurred to me, as it occurred to me, late in the day on a mostly dead thread. I didn't expect a response. Yet I still managed to get other responses despite you shitting your pants all over my attempt to spark a discussion.

                      Meanwhile, you have continued to respond to an idea you referred to as "delusional" 6 hours ago. So, one of us is engaging in conversation and one of us is engaging with delusion.

                      All I see is a continuing attempt to distract from your lies about Israeli atrocities. Hamas is Palestinian. Palestinians are still firing rockets from neighborhoods, hospitals and schools and pretending that the inevitable and fully justified response by Israel is the cause of the tens of thousands of civilian deaths. Palestinians are 100% responsible for every atrocity that has occurred in Gaza since October 7th.

                    4. mtrueman   2 years ago

                      "I posted an idea that occurred to me, as it occurred to me, late in the day on a mostly dead thread. I didn’t expect a response. "

                      I responded. I still think it's a ridiculous idea and I told you why.

                      "All I see is a continuing attempt to distract from your lies about Israeli atrocities. Hamas is Palestinian. Palestinians are still firing rockets from neighborhoods, hospitals and schools and pretending that the inevitable and fully justified response by Israel is the cause of the tens of thousands of civilian deaths. Palestinians are 100% responsible for every atrocity that has occurred in Gaza since October 7th."

                      I understand you believe all that. You're certainly not alone. Your delusion is that you also believe that normal everyday Gazans share your belief. And based on this belief you are willing to distribute weapons on the assumption that they will be used to eliminate Hamas, something the Israeli military hasn't been able to do after more than 4 months of fighting. It's a crazy idea. Maybe you have other ideas that are not crazy. I'd be curious to see what they are. It's good to think 'outside the box' but you got to admit this one is a stinker. Maybe the next one is better.

  53. AT   2 years ago

    About half of Gaza's civilians are sheltering in Rafah, and an offensive there "would have serious implications for regional peace and security,"

    But the existence of Hamas (and every other Iranian proxy) doesn't?

    Both St. Patrick's in Midtown and Old St. Patrick's in Nolita are frequent targets for activist stunts due to the Catholic Church's positions on trans issues and abortion.

    Activist stunts?

    The word you're looking for is "desecration."

    1. damikesc   2 years ago

      Remember....YOU are rude if you do not play along with their delusions.

      They have no obligation, though, to not be cunts to all other people.

  54. XM   2 years ago

    Ceasefires don't occur when one side in a war is pulverizing the other and. Indeed, a ceasefire is more appropriate in Ukraine, which is grinding into a stalemate that will ruin both nations involved. The Korean War ended in a ceasefire and the commies taking over the upper half.

    What Biden and his Jew hating crew means by "ceasefire" is "Israel needs to stop attacking Hamas because we need to win an election". Ceasefire is meaningless if it's not a prelude to a negotiation, but Hamas is an ununiformed terrorist unit uninterested in serious diplomacy.

    Swat teams won't call for ceasefire when they have a mass murder cornered in a house. They call for a surrender. That's what Biden and the world should be urging Hamas to do.

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

In 16 Years, the V.A. Turned This $450 Million Hospital Project Into a $1.6 Billion Boondoggle

Jacob R. Swartz | 9.15.2025 4:45 PM

Charlie Kirk Would Not Have Wanted This

Robby Soave | 9.15.2025 4:18 PM

Environmental Groups Are Suing To Silence Scientists Who Wrote a Report Questioning Climate Change Alarmism

Jeff Luse | 9.15.2025 3:51 PM

Social Media Didn't Kill Charlie Kirk

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 9.15.2025 12:15 PM

Gamer Radicalism

Liz Wolfe | 9.15.2025 9:32 AM

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

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

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

Take Reason's short survey for a chance to win $300
Take Reason's short survey for a chance to win $300
Take Reason's short survey for a chance to win $300