MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Roseanne Reboot Is Dead. Will Real Time with Bill Maher Be Next?: Reason Roundup

Plus: vegetarian fried chicken, lab-grown diamonds, Chinese tariffs, and a Kardashian at the White House

Nancy Rivera / Splash News/NewscomNancy Rivera / Splash News/NewscomCensors against censorship. ABC's decision to drop the wildly successful new reboot of Roseanne has spawned a social-media race to the bottom from outraged-about-liberal-outrage conservatives. The network's move comes in the wake of series star and creator Roseanne Barr making what appeared to be racist remarks about former Obama staffer Valerie Jarrett. Roseanne said Jarrett was like a cross between "the Muslim brotherhood and Planet of the Apes."

Ignoring the long and ugly history of white people describing black people as simians, prominent #MAGA cheerleaders began pretending the offensive part of Roseanne's statement was simply a matter of any person describing any other person as an ape. Armed with this self-serving interpretation, folks like Turning Point USA leader Charlie Kirk began pouting about a 2014 joke by Bill Maher on his HBO series.

In a segment discussing Donald Trump's insistence that then-President Obama was foreign born, Maher had joked that he would pay Trump $5 million to prove that he hadn't been born to an orangutan.

Led by Kirk, Twitter conservatives began calling for Maher's show to be canceled along with Roseanne. The idea seemed to be based on a theory that this would make liberals see the error of their outrage-mongering ways. But the general tenor of liberal responses was more one of eyerolling amusement.

Some pointed out why Barr's and Maher's comments were not alike. Others noted that ABC and HBO are very different outlets and argued that it's silly to see ideological bias in the different business decisions they respectively make. But the biggest refrain from liberals was, more or less: "Great!" The host hasn't been a darling of Democrats and progressives for quite some time.

What Maher has been is one of few mainstream left-of-center types with a no-nonsense attitude toward free speech. In calling for his demise, conservatives are trying to silence the very type of principled speech warrior they consistently tell (but not show) us that they believe in.

But at least Kirk and company aren't calling for the government to intervene in this Twitterized TV-culture war. That's more than we can say for some other Republican "free speech defenders" this week.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has been speaking out against the alleged "censorship of conservatives" on social media, which earned him a head pat from Eric Trump. It seems Eric Trump is so outraged by the prospect of private companies playing favorites with speech that he wants to give the federal government more control over these companies—you know, for freedom! Because if there's one thing that says Principled Defender of the First Amendment, it's using state force to punish private businesses for not promoting the speech you like in the way you like.

FREE MARKETS

Vegetarian KFC and lab-grown diamonds. Sure, KFC's new vegetarian "chicken" options might make a lot of folks roll their eyes. The same goes for De Beers' new lab-grown diamond line, which is drawing some well-deserved scoffing after the company insisted for years that lab-grown diamonds were inferior. But one needn't be in the market for a diamond ring or soy drumsticks to see both developments positively. This is the beauty of free markets in action—a Poptart flavor for every taste, cruelty-free bling, and a vegan chicken-combo meal in every strip mall.


QUICK HITS

Photo Credit: Nancy Rivera / Splash News/Newscom

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

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ABC's decision to drop the wildly successful new reboot of Roseanne has spawned a social-media race to the bottom from outraged-about-liberal-outrage conservatives.

    At least they seemed okay with the cross-dressing teen.

  • Bee Tagger||

    Kim Kardashian heads to the White House today to talk prison reform with the president.

    she's running

  • Rhywun||

    Away, I hope.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    You don't like to see her go but you love to watch her run away?

  • Leo Kovalensky II||

    They do respect her but(t)
    They love to watch her strut

  • Rhywun||

    Away, I hope.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Nobody wants to see that.

    Ok, some people probably want to see that.

  • Lowdog||

    I definitely want to see that. Preferably with a thong on only.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    I don't get the appeal. Too big and misshapen..But the again, I don't like big butts and I cannot lie.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Ugh.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    How about this instead: fill two clear plastic bags with cottage cheese and chocolate syrup. Shake them until well mixed, put them in a thong, then shake them in your face.

  • Lowdog||

    Cuz I'm not gay?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The Supreme Court has declined to hear cases involving San Francisco's street advertising regulations and Arkansas' ban on pill-induced abortion.

    They're on their coffee break.

  • buybuydandavis||

    They're getting old. Dinner buffet starts at 5 sharp.

  • Bee Tagger||

    Good news! SCOTUS says cops can't enter your driveway to search for vehicles without a warrant.

    A new law that every house must have a rubber-stamping device installed next to their mailbox.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Kim Kardashian heads to the White House today to talk prison reform with the president.

    Reality television summit for the ages.

  • Jerryskids||

    There's a comment to be made about her vast knowledge of criminals caught up in the justice system, but it's probably racist.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    HobbitSummit 2018.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    SCOTUS says cops can't enter your driveway to search for vehicles without a warrant.

    Unless a dog tells them to.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The Founding Fathers almost didn't include the dog exception to the 4th Amendment.

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Police dogs hereby allow the government to search without a warrant

  • Ron||

    I've heard that there is a suit claiming that since dogs are a part of the police force that they, the dogs, should also not be allowed to sniff around without a warrant. I hope the suit is successful.

  • Zeb||

    Cops do like to insist that their dogs are police officers.

  • WoodChipperBob||

    Unfortunately, the argument that will succeed is, "if a cop smells weed in your car, he can search it, so even if the dogs are members of the police force, a cop dog is just a cop with a better sense of smell."

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Police dogs tend to be used as a work-around of the 4th Amendment.

    I have been stopped on interstates late at night. The cop asks to search the vehicle which I refuse unless he has a warrant. The cop summons a police dog who walks around the vehicle and "hits". The cops use this as an excuse and search the vehicle. They find nothing of course and get mad.

    I sue and get a settlement.

    In my state, I must be have a hidden tag on my license number because the police dont even stop me anymore.

  • BYODB||

    Fun Story: For a while in my youth I worked for a former game warden who would often tell jokes and anecdotes about how he would get calls from the cops to come and search a vehicle with his 'drug dog' since the laws surrounding when and how a game warden can search a vehicle are more lax.


    He thought that was great, and I couldn't have been happier when he failed in his bid to become Sheriff even though he was otherwise a likeable guy.

  • Vernon Depner||

    If they are part of the police force, then defendants should have the right to cross-examine the dogs in court.

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    Their cop handler will be their interpreter. You ok with that?

  • buybuydandavis||

    Makes sense. They're the dog's interpreter in the field when he just knows you're a criminal too.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Police dogs receive taxpayer funded equipment. Police dogs in some jurisdictions receive extra legal protections for injuries caused by criminals. Police dogs receive qualified immunity from injuries they cause.

  • General_Tso||

    Can pensions be far behind?

  • Vernon Depner||

    And dog-cop marriage?

  • Bee Tagger||

    a felony charge for allegedly running afoul of campaign finance laws.

    is it safe to assume that anyone who gets caught up in campaign finance laws probably did something else that they're actually in trouble for?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Violating one of the various 1st Amendment carve-outs isn't enough for you?

  • Citizen X||

    Kim Kardashian heads to the White House today to talk prison reform with the president.

    Sometimes you read a sentence that your brain doesn't have a place for, and it's like getting bit on the stomach by a horse.

  • sarcasmic||

    I'm sure FOX will pick up her show. Put it between Hannity and whatever is before or after. Is he still on?

  • Tom Bombadil||

    They really should from a business standpoint. It's the definition of easy money.

    And if they were really smart (or had any smart writers), the 'obnoxious loud mouth spouting off racist (and other) stupidities' could be examined thoroughly on the show a la All In The Family.

    Rosanne could be redeemed through her character. Free speech issues could be intelligently addressed. There is no downside.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Rosanne could be redeemed through her character.

    That's pretty much exactly what the reboot of the show was supposed to do, then at the end of the first season she proved it didn't work.

  • Tom Bombadil||

    No. Rosanne's original character did not need redeeming.
    The reboot was supposed to make money and be 'surprising'.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Her character didn't, but she and her deplorable fans did.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Lefties watch Rosanne.

    Rosanne is not a conservative.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Lol, better tell Charlie Kirk.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Lefties watch Rosanne.

    Rosanne is not a conservative.

    At this point this has got to be an act.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Yes, it's Tulpa.

  • Libertymike||

    Hail, given all of the realities I set forth above concerning the conduct of black men, why doth thou protest my assertion that the same constitutes evidence that black folk are more racist than white folk?

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Uhh because you still haven't explained why impregnating people is bigoted?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Rosanne is trying to get as many people as possible to watch her crappy show.

    She has been out of show biz for so long that she was blindsided that her brand of jokes are considered offensive by lefties now.

  • Zeb||

    I think the show is dead. Costars were quitting before the network cancelled it.

    Which is silly. I like to separate the artist from the art. I don't really care if the creator of something is a shitty person. If it's good entertainment, it should stand on its own.

  • chipper me timbers||

    That's wrongthink Zeb.

  • Bee Tagger||

    "Every flip-flop in international relations simply depletes a country's credibility,

    Ouch, take that alternative timeline president john kerry!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The misguided crusade to ban brothels in Nevada continues.

    It's like they want incels in Nevada!

  • Vernon Depner||

    Nevada did brothels wrong. They made them very expensive boutique establishments in out-of-the-way locations. What America needs is good, clean, and affordable neighborhood whorehouses that men in need can visit regularly and conveniently.

  • Eidde||

    Coin-operated...I think I'll stop there.

  • crufus||

    What America needs is AI powered sex robots.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    "Every flip-flop in international relations simply depletes a country's credibility," Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said of the White House going back and forth about new tariffs on Chinese imports.

    Have you written the book on negotiating?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    #MAGA cheerleaders = Butt-hurt snowflakes.

  • Tom Bombadil||

    #MAGA cheerleaders - Butt-hurt snowflakes = 0.

    Republicans - Democrats - 0.

    MAGA - Snowflakes = Reps - Dems.

    MAGA + Dems = Snowflakes + Reps.

    MAGA + Dems
    -------------------- = 1
    Flakes + Reps

    What am I missing?

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    (Republicans x MAGA) / (Democrats x Snowflakes) = -i

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    The random bold face and copypasta.

  • Leo Kovalensky II||

    You're missing an enemy list. All sane people make an online enemy list.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    e^(pi*i) + 1 = 0

  • Citizen X||

    a social-media race to the bottom

    Ideally everyone would calm the fuck down and notice that waging Kulturwehr is dumb as shit, but i guess that's not in the cards, is it.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Never

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Never. There has to be something to fight about. Humanity is just too warlike.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Maher had joked that he would pay Trump $5 million to prove that he hadn't been born to an orangutan.

    DNA test in order.

  • sarcasmic||

    They didn't have artificial insemination in the 40s or whenever he was spawned.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Who's Maher?

  • Texasmotiv||

    It funny because I always thought Maher looked like a proboscis monkey.

  • Alan Vanneman||

    "what appeared to be racist remarks"

    Appeared to be racist? Get yourself some glasses, honey. They are racist. I thought "Reason" was against candy-assed pussy-footing. Guess I was wrong.

  • sarcasmic||

    I thought her comment was funny. Can't stand the woman. Hated her show. Never watched the reboot. But the comment made me larf.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    I think the whole kerfluffle is hilarious.

    Paraphrasing George Carlin - I'm lucky to be American because I get a front row seat in the political circus shitshow.

  • sarcasmic||

    I saw GC live in the 90s. All I remember was him saying "You ever notice at those anti-abortion rallies? You'd never want to fuck any of the anyway!" Still have the ticket stub. Says "If you are easily offended, please do not attend."

  • Michael S. Langston||

    I absolutely love Carlin and think he's one of the best ever, but his leanings, like that of any other human, biased him a great deal. Which can be seen where many of his jokes, even very memorable ones, are logically faulty.

    Example is the assumption in the joke you recalled: lack attractive females in the SoCon arena. Now I'm not a SoCon, but I think the hotter ones are conservative these days (though maybe not as open to random encounters) and it's been that way for some time now - at least a few decades....

    /OCD

  • Ecoli||

    Would it still be racist if Roseanne didn't know Jarrett is black? I didn't. Look at her photograph. She is white. I am vaguely aware that she was/is some sort of "adviser" to our illustrious former president, that is the extent of my knowledge about her. That is enough for me to be quite suspicious of her.

    Is any mention of lower primates racist now? That probably is a pretty good guiding principle for any public speaker: "never say monkey, gorilla, or make any reference to any sort of primate". That would be particularly hard on Jane Goodall, but you have to break eggs when you make an omelette.

    I have never been even mildly amused by Roseanne, and I never understood her appeal. Likewise with Lucille Ball. I just chalk that up to a hole in my mind.

  • Zeb||

    Yeah, it's not obvious that she is black if no one tells you. But I guess the one drop rule is still alive. In her Wikipedia picture, it looks like she has freckles.

  • Libertymike||

    It is obvious that:

    (1) she is ugly;

    (2) she aided and abetted a mass murderer

  • Bee Tagger||

    Because if there's one thing that says Principled Defender of the First Amendment, it's using state force to punish private businesses for not promoting the speech you like in the way you like.

    I enjoyed the Fifth Column's discussion of 1st amendment vs a more general concept of "free speech." In light of that, threatening government involvement is clearly bad but maybe its not necessary to paint in a negative light the idea of persuading companies to not favor certain kinds of speech.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    maybe its not necessary to paint in a negative light the idea of persuading companies to not favor certain kinds of speech.

    Makes sense to me.

  • John||

    Let me ask you, what is the purpose of a market? Isn't it to provide for whatever consumers demand and have the ability and willingness to pay for? The reason why markets are better than central planning is that they provide me with whatever I am willing to pay for in contrast to central planning where having the money isn't good enough. I have to get a planner to agree to give it to me.

    If corporations are persuaded to not allow certain kinds of speech that the media or their leadership or whoever don't like and this results in people having the money and the willingness to pay for that speech but the market not providing it to them because of the decisions of what amounts to an oligarchy, how is that a properly functioning market?

    I am not sure what you do about such a situation, but it certainly isn't anything free market supporters should see as a good thing or anything anyone who believes in freedom should be encouraging.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    how is that a properly functioning market?

    In a properly functioning market, you go do it yourself. A properly functioning market is not required to provide you with something, all it has to do is not block it from being created. Nobody owes you anything.

  • John||

    I can't go do it myself if someone else owns all of the platforms. Moreover, I can't produce art if I am not an artist. And if I am an artist and no one will provide me a platform for my art even though people are willing to pay to see it, how am I free in any meaningful sense?

    You don't really understand how markets work or how they are a means not an end in themselves. Stop worshiping the market like it is some kind of religion.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Poor you, it's always somebody else's fault. How can you even get by in the world if everything isn't spoon fed to you?

    And please tell me why you think saying "your stupid" wins arguments.

  • Rhywun||

    But the general tenor of liberal responses was more one of eyerolling amusement.

    What do they say about history and who writes it?

    The host hasn't been a darling of Democrats and progressives for quite some time.

    To be fair to conservatives, the last time Maher was watchable was over a decade ago.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Maher has always had an underlying current of misogyny in his personal attitudes from ehen I regularly watched Politically Incorret. He was annoyed that in an age of readily available contraception and abortion women did not embrace casual sex in the way that a man (Bill Maher) would.

  • Vernon Depner||

    They never will. Sex between a man and a woman is not an even exchange. The woman always brings more to the table, and is less likely to be satisfied with the experience. A smart woman realizes that and negotiates for more compensation than just a fucking.

  • Citizen X||

    and is less likely to be satisfied with the experience

    I do my part to compensate for the failings of other men, ladies.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Citizen X knows to keep it short. So women have more time for pinterest.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Agreed, but Maher expressed a frustration withn and inability to understand that, while demanding women serve his male sex strategy.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    Agreed, that due to biological differences, men are more easily satisfied than women, but the trade is even: sex for sex. Also the potential for a negative encounter is equal - just because he finished, doesn't mean it was good.

    Either way - if every women demanded additional compensation due to an assumed belief on the outcome, they are being fraudulent in the encounter (not that men are honest either... ) . Just saying, better to just set expectations and demand what you want. Otherwise, men should just negotiate fees and pay directly.

    IE - if all women act as prostitutes, why would men have any incentive to do anything other than pay directly?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The poor ones are leaving. The rich are staying. The country is literally geographically dividing on class lines. Concerned about income inequality? Look at land use regulations. https://t.co/JecT1AcyUC
    — Cathy Reisenwitz (@CathyReisenwitz) May 29, 2018

    Aaaaack!

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Who is Cathy Reisenwitz?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Only the creator of everyone's favorite self-titled comic strip.

  • Citizen X||

    Garfield?

  • Eidde||

    Funky Winkerbean?

  • Palin's Buttplug||


    Vicente Fox Quesada

    .@realDonaldTrump, I repeat once again: Mexico is NOT paying for your #FuckingWall. You want it? you pay for it. Why waste American people's money? Having so many more priorities: education, health, infrastructure and a good relationship with both of your neighbors.

    You're tweeting to a fucking half-breed orangutan, pal.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Mexico is paying for the wall. Illegal Mexican immigrants pay taxes in the USA and Congress is spending that money on the wall.

    Thanks hombres.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    That's adorable that you act like all money earned by the national of a given country belongs to that country.

    I wonder if you feel the same way about Americans.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Aw, I know it sucks that Trump was right....again.

    Mexicans from Mexico paying for America's wall.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    If money isn't fungible anymore, are you going to stop bitching about Planned Parenthood getting Medicaid reimbursements?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Planned Parenthood gets taxpayer money too.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Want to try re-reading my comment?

  • Zeb||

    But so are Americans from America.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Yup. National security is an enumerated power and taxes can be collected.

    We just have a president who is listening to most Americans and making sure the rest of the World knows that Americans decide what immigration policy America wants to have.

  • Zeb||

    I never said they can't build the wall. Just that they shouldn't.

    Anyway, I was responding to your claim that Trump was right and Mexico will pay for the wall.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    You're right that Americans who don't want the wall are also paying for it.

    Mexico is paying for the wall one way and another.

  • Sevo||

    "You're tweeting to a fucking half-breed orangutan, pal."

    She lost, turd.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    So a president of a large country uses hash tags like #FuckingWall, and your issue is with who the comment is directed at?

    Or asked another way - if Trump hash tagged #BUILDFUCKINGWALL would your comment be solely about his policies or might you comment on the language and lack of any discernable thought in the comment as well?

    As Vicente may be preaching to the choir, but like other idiot outbursts, his tweet doesn't provide useful commentary and says far more negative things about himself, then it says about Trump or the policy Vincente is against.

  • Mock-star||

    I see that Mexico is engaging in 2020 election meddling early.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    What Maher has been is one of few mainstream left-of-center types with a no-nonsense attitude toward free speech. In calling for his demise, conservatives are trying to silence the very type of principled speech warrior they consistently tell (but not show) us that they believe in.

    No..... what conservatives are doing is encouraging the left to destroy themselves and eat their own.

    "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake. "
    -Napoleon Bonaparte

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The same goes for De Beers' new lab-grown diamond line, which is drawing some well-deserved scoffing after the company insisted for years that lab-grown diamonds were inferior.

    he went to jared
    should have got a press and coal
    pressure makes diamonds

  • Eidde||

    Maybe they should get some former SNL guys to say "There's only one real diamond company...(raises beer glasses in a toast) De Beers!"

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Your comment in reply to mine is like graffiti on the Mona Lisa.

  • Libertymike||

    The craven virtue signaling continues....

    Meanwhile, nary a word regarding Louie FarraCON's remarks on Sunday. The "minister" called for an end to the white man describing the white man's nature as "not being in harmony with the nature of man."

    Comparatively, Roseanne's tweet is but a tempest in a tiny teapot.

    Once again, we are reminded that black folk are far more bigoted and racist. My assertion is predicated upon all of my life's experiences and the following pesky facts which make the virtue signalers most uncomfortable:

    (1) Black men are far more likely to rape white women than white men are to rape black women.

    (2) Black men are far more likely to rape Asian women than Asian men are to rape black women.

    (3) Black men are far more likely to perpetrate crimes of inter-racial violence than white men.

    (4) Black men are far more likely to commit crimes of inter-racial violence than Asian men.

    (5) Black men are far more likely to make babies out of wedlock than white men.

    (6) Black men are far more likely to make babies out wedlock than Asian men.

    Notwithstanding all of the above, the virtue signalers are obsessed with Valery Jarrett being accurately described as ugly. Let's face it, Valery Jarrett is not exactly the picture of pulchritude.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    (5) Black men are far more likely to make babies out of wedlock than white men.

    (6) Black men are far more likely to make babies out wedlock than Asian men.

    And...you think this proves black people are more racist and bigoted than white people?

    Oh, wait, nevermind, you're just trying to make the puppets dance.

  • OpenBordersLiberal-tarian||

    If anything, it proves the GOP's war on reproductive health service providers has a disparate impact on communities of color.

    #StandWithPP

  • Hail Rataxes||

    You really did a better job with MNG. I don't feel like your heart is in this one.

  • Libertymike||

    Hail, I am the same anarcho-free enterprise-individualist guy who has posted here for over a decade.

    That I refuse to be taken by the rainbow coalition racket does not thereby mean that I am not a consistent champion of the NAP.

  • OpenBordersLiberal-tarian||

    Once again, we are reminded that black folk are far more bigoted and racist.

    Black people cannot, by definition, be racist. Because racism is top-down, systemic / institutional, and based on privilege, which POC don't have in a white supremacist country like the US. Didn't you learn this in college?

    (1) Black men are far more likely to rape white women than white men are to rape black women.

    Citation? The US is a white supremacist rape culture, so I'm pretty sure the opposite is true.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    There is not American race.

    Americans come in all races and creeds.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    There is not American race.

    He never said there is.

  • JuanQPublic||

    Black people cannot, by definition, be racist.

    It's difficult for any reasonable person who has a remedial understanding of human history to read this with a straight face. Your ideological dogma does not change the fact that any human being can be racist - that is, any human can be antagonistic and/or prejudiced toward another based on their ethnic background.

    Furthermore, with just a glance at human history, one can easily see that the oppressed and the oppressor are not mutually exclusive in many cases. To say that any one of a certain "race" "can't be racist" is ridiculous.

  • Zeb||

    It's parody. Just ignore it.

  • BYODB||

    OBL is a satire shit poster who is the embodiment of Poe's Law.

    The reason why OBL is so successful is that they just post things that the left honestly believes and ascribes it to libertarianism. I suspect it's to poke fun at Reason's clear bias towards leftist causes.

    For example, the far left does indeed believe that black people and minorities in general can not be racist. That is because they literally rewrote the definition of racist to preclude them being racist.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    I saw a comedian from the south do a great joke on racism. He said something to the effect of, I love NYC, everything is more intellectual. Including your racism. In the South they say I hate Mexicans. In NYC it's about how much better the Dominicans are than the Cubans.

  • ChuckNorrisBeardFist||

    Dictonary:

    rac·ist ˈrāsəst
    noun
    1.
    a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

    adjective
    1.
    showing or feeling discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or believing that a particular race is superior to another.

    You really are a special kind of idiot. As for the white men raping black women, we both know it would be on the news constantly. What about Asian men? You left that out.

    Do you have any black friends? Blacks will admit they are more racist than anyone.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    Blacks will admit they are more racist than anyone.

    Thanks for revealing your own racism.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Meanwhile, nary a word regarding Louie FarraCON's remarks on Sunday. The "minister" called for an end to the white man describing the white man's nature as "not being in harmony with the nature of man."

    It doesn't matter what he says, it matters what he does. Just like when Trump says retarded things.

  • Citizen X||

    Collectivism is totally part of libertarian philosophy.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Has libertymike always been this race obsessed bigot, or is this a new thing?

  • Hail Rataxes||

    There was probably an original, real Libertymike, before Tulpa starting wearing his handle as a skinsuit.

  • Citizen X||

    It comes and goes. To be fair, he is from Boston or thereabouts, so a certain amount of dumbshit racial ideas are a given.

  • Libertymike||

    No, as I informed Sparky last week, I hail from Newport.

    Just for shits and giggles, did you know which colonial seaport was the largest slave emporium in the colonies during the middle of the 18th century?

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    He likes to think of himself as a great thinker and knower of things. Except when negroes and (((Jews))) are involved.

  • Libertymike||

    Do you like to consider yourself a great thinker and knower of things?

    Don't you think it normatively a positive for one to pursue knowledge and bolster one's ken?

  • Nardz||

    If you actually use the word Jews, I don't think the ((())) is necessary

  • Libertymike||

    He was virtue signaling his love of ((( them ))).

  • John||

    Mike isn't a bigot. You are just a coward who can't see facts you don't like. Everything he said was true. You can't be racist for saying something true.

  • Libertymike||

    Thank you.

    Just to be "inclusive," the white man has given us bolshevism, communism, Fabianism, Keynesianism, Leninism, national socialism, progressivism, socialism.

    And the administrative state.

    And the income tax.

    The Sparky's and the Chippers and the Citizen Xs appear to forget that I have made a veritable plethora of such posts over the years.

    In fact, I make such posts on alt-right / dissident right outlets and get roundly booed. I guess the truth is an equal opportunity racist.

  • BYODB||

    Those who are intellectually lazy can't comprehend how stating a statistical fact doesn't collectivize an entire race unless you, as the listener, leap to that conclusion on it's own. I.E. You are being blamed for their own interpretation of the data.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""'I.E. You are being blamed for their own interpretation of the data.""

    The way of many liberals. It's not about your intentions. It's about their perception and then pretending their perception was your intent.

  • JuanQPublic||

    Once again, we are reminded that black folk are far more bigoted and racist. My assertion is predicated upon all of my life's experiences and the following pesky facts...

    This is just as ideologically warped as the "race X can't be racist because of systemic oppression" assertion. The glaring thing that claptraps on both the "social justice" and "ethno-nationalist" share is a deeply misguided attribution of behavioral features to racial identity by way of inductive reasoning horse manure.

  • Libertymike||

    Don't let your ideological blinders prevent you from observing facts.

  • JuanQPublic||

    Don't let your ideological blinders prevent you from observing facts.

    Anyone can observe facts. The problem is those who conveniently place those facts into a fictional narrative and/or context.

    Once again, we are reminded that black folk are far more bigoted and racist.

    Then rattling off statistics about violence, instead of using, say, polling data.

  • Libertymike||

    What is the fictional narrative into which I have placed the facts?

    My assertion that black people are more racist than white people is not without factual support. That I cite some such factual support for my assertion is a problem because....

  • Zeb||

    A lot of those things could be mostly down to socio-economic factors. And I'm not sure how out of wedlock births demonstrate bigotry and racism. But I think that your observation that black people tend to be more racist and bigoted is pretty true as far as I can tell. Though it's a hard thing to nail down.

  • Libertymike||

    Freddie G. Sanford was more of a bigot than Archie Bunker. Nevertheless, I have always loved both men.

  • BYODB||

    Finding a Democrat willing to denounce the shit that comes out of LF's idiot fucking mouth is like trying to find the Holy Grail. I.E. it probably doesn't exist.

  • Bubba Jones||

    Am I the only one amused by the fact that Wanda Sykes was one of the first to bail on Roseanne?

    I suppose the problem isn't being offensive, the problem is being offensive to the wrong team.

  • ||

    Am I the only one amused by the fact that Wanda Sykes was one of the first to bail on Roseanne?

    What's the big deal? Since when is it a crime to say porchmonkey?

    Half of me wants to lament that the bit isn't funny considering that she isn't acting, the correct half knows that it only makes it funnier.

  • John||

    Juice made the point yesterday about the tweet not being racist. I didn't agree with him but now I think maybe he has a point. Jarrett isn't black. She is Iranian. If Rosanne had said that about John Kerry or some white guy associated with Obama, no one would have cared. I understand that given the history of calling black people monkeys, doing it now is considered to be racist. Once again, however, Jerrett isn't black. So what is the problem? Is it that the media and Progs are so stupid they assume anyone who is not obviously white and associated with Obama must be black?

  • lap83||

    Apparently she is part African American. I didn't know that until yesterday. Would it be surprising if Roseanne didn't know? You can't tell by looking. I guess we need to have detailed knowledge of every important person's family tree so we don't make racist comments by accident

  • sarcasmic||

    Apparently she is part African American.

    Charlize Theron was born in Africa.

    I think you mean black.

  • lap83||

    I guess so. Even though she has the same skin color as Roseanne

  • lap83||

    Anyway I just meant that she had an African American in her family tree. Obviously you can't be partially born somewhere else

  • sarcasmic||

    Anyway I just meant that she had an African American in her family tree.

    Don't you mean a black person? What if that African in her family tree never stepped foot on American soil?

  • Eidde||

    I'm still working on my outrage-tweet that you mentioned African-Americans and trees in the same sentence.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Apparently she is part African American. I didn't know that until yesterday. Would it be surprising if Roseanne didn't know? You can't tell by looking.

    Yes, you can. At least, unless you're the most provincial retard on the planet.

  • John||

    So you look at someone and think you can tell if they are "black"? You really don't know many black people do you? And you sure as hell don't know many people of other ethnicities. I would call you a racist but sadly, I think you really are this ignorant and think anyone with dark skin is "black" as in of black African descent. At some point, you need to stop priding yourself on your ignorance and at least try to do better.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    I'm not the ignorant one, you mendacious fuckstick. Jarrett is black.

  • John||

    You just think anyone with a darker skin tone is African. Yeah, you are not ignorant. Not at all.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Hey Rataxes, have you even seen an albino African person?

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Fun fact, she is black.

  • John||

    Really? She was born in Iran. Is her father black? If so, then why do we have this Jim Crow era one drop rule? What makes her black rather than Iranian?

  • sarcasmic||

    I am hopelessly attracted to Persian woman.

  • sarcasmic||

    *women*

  • John||

    Me too.

  • sarcasmic||

    You're hopelessly attracted to all women.

  • sarcasmic||

    Seriously though, Iranian woman make my toes tingle. I don't know why.

  • John||

    Iranian are amazing. So are Lebanese women. When Lebanon had all of those demonstrations a few years ago, there seemed to be an endless supply of beautiful women at them.

  • sarcasmic||

    Not just looks, but they have been some of the most formidable personalities I have ever met. Turns me on.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    What makes her black rather than Iranian?

    Uhhh perhaps the fact that she was born in Iran to two American black people?

  • Ecoli||

    She was born to two American black people? How did she turn out so white?

  • Hail Rataxes||

    I don't know, how did you turn out so blind?

  • Ecoli||

    Seriously, you think by looking at her photo it is obvious that she is a negro?

  • Ecoli||

    Hail, I am impressed! You can spot that "one drop" at 100 yards in a dust storm!!

  • Ecoli||

    Is Bill Ayers black? Just checking in case I want to criticize him? I would not want to offend.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Both of her parents are listed in Wikipedia as African-American. Now, I know you're thinking "Wikipedia, really?" but I'm not invested in tracking down her exact lineage.

    That being said, to be asking whether she is black or Iranian is just stupid.

  • John||

    No. I am sure it is right. But she also has other races in her and she grew up in Iran speaking Farsi. I she "black"? I suppose but I her being so just shows the absurdity of such labels.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    How many black Americans do you think don't have European ancestry?

    Seriously. Look at yourself. This is sad. Go take a walk.

  • John||

    A lot do. And that is why people like you who think that you can tell who is who by skin tone are retards. And the fact that they are still "black" says that culture and background play a role in being so. This is why Jerrett growing up in Iran effectively as an Iranian is so relevant.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    And the fact that they are still "black" says that culture and background play a role in being so. This is why Jerrett growing up in Iran effectively as an Iranian is so relevant.

    Except she didn't grow up "in Iran effectively as an Iranian." She lived in Iran until she was five, as part of an expat family of black Americans.

    You are quite simply dead wrong on all parts of this issue. Ask yourself why you even thought she was Iranian and not black. Is it because you have only been consuming fucking insane right-wing media about this? Did that actually erase your memory of the fact that she was a black Chicago Democrat for her whole career, and that's why she was close with the Obamas and ended up in the Obama admin?

  • John||

    Sure Hail, she worked for Obama, and only the Darkies did that, right? Just stop it. Really. We have gone from talking about race in the abstract to you just being a flat out racist who thinks that anyone who doesn't look like you or is associated with Obama must be black.

    That kind of garbage never accomplishes anything or goes anywhere. Just step back from the ledge and stop making racist generalizations about everyone.

  • Leo Kovalensky II||

    Black is a color. Her skin is not. She might be African or of African descent, but black she is not.

    If we've learned anything from DNA sequencing, it's that race is such a complex thing that it's impossible to tell by looking at someone what race they are. Jarrett was actually on some genealogy show. The full episode is available online if you'd like to watch it.

  • John||

    Exactly. It takes a Hail Retax level retard to think that you can tell someone's ethnicity strictly by looking at the color of their skin or that in the day and age of DNA testing biological ethnicity even means that much anymore.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Yes, I'm the retard, because I correctly identified Jarrett's race along with 99% of all the people who have ever met or interacted with her.

  • John||

    Yes you are a retard. Just because you got lucky doesn't make you less of a retard. The next person who looks like her that you assume is black likely won't be. The fact that you don't understand that is just further proof of how profoundly stupid you are.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Jesus fucking christ John get help

  • John||

    I don't need help. You need to stop being such a retard. If you keep running around assuming everyone who isn't lily white must be black, you are going to get your ass kicked one of these days. Being stupid and prejudiced is no way to go through life.

  • Ecoli||

    What about all the people who never met or interacted with her, ya know, essentially everybody?

  • John||

    Those people should know she is black by looking at her Ecoli. That is Hail's position here. She doesn't have lily white skin, therefore you should know she is black. Remember, everyone but them is racist.

  • Ecoli||

    Hail has a lucrative future if he has the sense to capitalize on it: he could work for the KKK spotting all those darkies trying to "pass". Sort of like those dogs that can "smell" cancer.

  • Vernon Depner||

    I've seen her picture in the news many times and have seen her on television, and I had no idea she considered herself Black.

  • Ecoli||

    Is it enough to consider yourself black? As I recall, many were outraged when Rachel Dolesol did it.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Yes, I'm definitely the racist, because I'm the one who isn't pretending not to know an extremely prominent black woman is black.

  • Ecoli||

    I guess everybody else is racist because they were not interested in Valerie's blood line and didn't bother to "check her credentials".

    We live in a complicated world. Thankfully, we have correct thinkers such as yourself, Hail. Otherwise, how will we know who we are supposed to hate.

  • Vernon Depner||

    "Enough" for what purpose? If a person is perceived by others to be Black, then they are living a Black experience and will have something in common with everyone else who is perceived to be Black. If someone is descended primarily from African slaves brought to America, then they are part of the Black American subculture. If someone I interact with tells me they identify as Black, I'm not going to ask to see their Ancestry.com page—it's not a big deal to me. If their appearance makes that claim implausible, I might have doubts about their mental health, but as long as they treat me right, then, again, no big deal.

    The outrage about Rachel Dolesol was about the way she had used her claim to be Black to advance herself professionally and socially. She had a job she would have been very unlikely to get, and she assumed a leadership role in her community she would not have had, if she were perceived as white. If she had been working a cash register at Walmart, no one would have cared much that she called herself Black, but instead she profited from her masquerade.

  • BYODB||


    If someone is descended primarily from African slaves brought to America, then they are part of the Black American subculture.

    And if they immigrated from Africa last year, are they still part of the Black American subculture?

    Asking for a friend, since it's often pretended that every black person in the U.S. is literally descended from slaves owned by the founding fathers. No new black people have come to the U.S. since the emancipation proclamation, don't you know.

  • Vernon Depner||

    "And if they immigrated from Africa last year, are they still part of the Black American subculture?"

    No. They're African-American.

  • Rhywun||

    A lot of the kerfluffle isn't about just "color" or even "race". It's also about culture. A black African can never be an "African-American" because he wasn't born here.

  • ||

    A black African can never be an "African-American" because he wasn't born here.

    I saw the Black Panther movie last night. I'm not intimately familiar with the source material (aside from being generally familiar with Lee and Kirby's work), but if it wasn't a hilarious frappe of SJW-y nonsense that ultimately undermines the cause, I don't know what is. It was a practically a comedy in this regard. I seriously think if you put devout klansmen in charge of making the movie about the only thing that would change is that the tribal women would be topless.

    The rest of it, a black American being villain and Africans betraying their people for their nation and their tribe. It was so shitty from a racist standpoint that even the plot felt like a classic European feudal/lineage story in blackface. I totally understand why it's so popular. No matter what your concept of race or racism is, it caters to is at the most superficial level.

    Not to say that the film wasn't good. It was a pretty good comic book movie (esp. as originally penned by white men for a black audience in the '60s). But the fact that this has been widely heralded as a watershed film for black cinema is a pretty big insult to a lot of people. The racial and cultural plight of black people digested to the point that Brits, Spaniards, C. Americans, Germans, Canadians, and Aussies can all appreciate it equally.

  • Vernon Depner||

    You've got it backwards. ONLY a black African who emigrates to America is an African-American. They can never be an Afro-American or Black (as we have traditionally used that term) American because they are not descended from slaves. The Black subculture in America is made of people descended from African slaves.

  • Tony||

    No it's pretty much just you who are stupid.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Jarrett isn't black. She is Iranian.

    Please stop embarrassing yourself.

  • John||

    Please stop lying and either add to the conversation or shut the fuck up.

  • Juice||

    Well, actually I said most would take it as racist, but I doubt it was intended that way. Not exactly the same as declaring it to be not racist. To be clear.

  • John||

    True. But I think you have a decent point. When you look at Jerrett it is not obvious that she is African American. Though her parents were she, according to Wikipedia "On the television series Finding Your Roots, genealogical research and DNA testing indicated that Jarrett also has French, Scottish, and Native American ancestry.[6] As a child, Jarrett spoke Farsi, French, and English.[7] "

    So is someone who isn't genetically all black and grew up in Iran speaking Farsi black? Maybe. But I don't see how you can say it is unreasonable for someone to assume she isn't.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    So is someone who isn't genetically all black and grew up in Iran speaking Farsi black?

    Apparently you're just going to ride this horse until it dies under you.

  • John||

    Why don't you try answering the question and thinking for once? Life is so much more interesting when you think about things rather than emoting and snarking.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    Maybe you'll try it sometime. I won't hold my breath.

  • John||

    I do it all of the time. You are just too stupid to understand what I am saying. You just run around and emote. You seem completely unwilling to think about an issue or come to any conclusion that is not dictated by your politics and petty prejudices.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Why don't you try answering the question and thinking for once?

    Why don't you try not being so fucking stupid that this is the only line you can come up with anymore? Although it does perfectly capture your insufferable doucheyness and completely retardation. You are broken fucking person and I almost feel sorry for you because of it.

  • Libertymike||

    Unlike you, who lost your head, and became the headless horseman, crestfallen that you will not have the Katrina van Tassel of your dreams.

  • Zeb||

    According to current American conventions about race, she is black. I think it's silly to insist that mixed race people must be identified as black if they have any known black ancestry, but that seems to be how it works. The one drop rule endures.

  • Zeb||

    According to Wikipedia, Jarrett was born in Iran to American parents of African-American extraction.

  • Bubba Jones||

    I am confused. If it isn't a "natural" diamond, with whatever mystique that is supposed to have, then why not just use cubic zirconium?

  • sarcasmic||

    carbon

  • Juice||

    Or why bother at all?

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Fun Fact: diamond was the first mineral to come into existence after the Big Bang. It could be one of the most common mineral in the universe.

  • BYODB||

    Since it's just compressed carbon, yes. Diamonds burn, in fact, but good luck getting it started.

  • Jerryskids||

    "Every flip-flop in international relations simply depletes a country's credibility," Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said of the White House going back and forth about new tariffs on Chinese imports.

    First they got a black guy as their leader, then they got a white guy as their leader - who can fathom the inscrutable behavior of the wily round-eyes?

  • Citizen X||

    From a Confucian perspective, America politics must look insane.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    From a Confucian perspective, given the preponderance of revolving doors, everyone should be in Bangkok by now.

  • Eidde||

    I don't get it, but it sounds dirty.

  • JuanQPublic||

    From just about every vantage point, American politics look insane.

    But yes, definitely from a Confucian perspective.

  • ||

    The Supreme Court has declined to hear cases involving [sic] Arkansas' ban on pill-induced abortion.

    Huh. I admit to a bit of schadenfreude about CT's prognostication. Not that I want to see abortions (or guns) banned, but firmer ground on the 4th and a refusal to hear a case that's not actually in the Constitution/BOR is at least a bit of compromise.

  • JuanQPublic||


    Ignoring the long and ugly history of white people describing black people as simians, prominent #MAGA cheerleaders began pretending the offensive part of Roseanne's statement was simply a matter of any person describing any other person as an ape.

    It's certainly possible, but when looking at the large body of crackpot comments (including other "ape" comments regarding certain people) she has made, it certainly falls in line with a larger pattern coming from her. Either way, there's no way Roseanne is so dense that she couldn't see how "planet of the apes" would be interpreted. Even the most charitable of translations of her comments as a whole can't ignore this.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Every flip-flop in international relations simply depletes a country's credibility," Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said of the White House going back and forth about new tariffs on Chinese imports."

    Again, no mention of the fact that 1) the announced tariffs haven't yet gone into effect 2) the tariffs aren't scheduled to go into effect until after the provisional date for Trump's summit with Kim, 3) past announced tariffs have not been implemented in return for China's continued cooperation on North Korea, etc., etc.

    ENB, how's it feel to be a purveyor of propaganda for the CCP?

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Do you think your question should be directed at Bloomberg which is where that quote is from?

  • Ken Shultz||

    Did the Bloomberg article offer any context?

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    There's a link you could click on to find out.

  • Poor and Dumb||

    They wrote this article here too?

  • John||

    Making it so nations feel they can not change their position without losing their credibility is a recipe for war. It amazes me how people do not see that.

  • Ecoli||

    Agreed. For example, the US entered into a treaty that makes cannabis illegal, and that is always trotted out as a reason to continue the idiotic drug war.

    Lots of dumb decisions are made, but apparently we are supposed to just shrug our shoulders and maintain the status quo... just because.

  • John||

    "But we must do it to save national credibility" is always the last justification given for going to war when all other arguments have failed. Making a fetish out of national credibility does nothing but make small conflicts big ones by making them about national credibility as a whole rather than the actual interests and issues involved.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "But we must do it to save national credibility" is the message of the White House press corps to the general public, and it's saying that Trump's credibility--with the White House press corp--is already shot.

    This is the way they covered Reagan, too.

    Everything he did was denounced as insane and stupid. Trump has no credibility with the White House press corp--and that's what they project to the world.

    If and when Trump disarms North Korea without a trade war with China, they'll keep on with the narrative, too--just like they did when Reagan won the Cold War without an ICBM ever being fired--sans the press' stupid predilection for appeasement.

  • BYODB||

    Reason authors simply can not admit that there's a connection between Chinese tariffs and North Korea. They seem incapable of admitting there's even a possibility that trade is being held hostage for their cooperation with their little bastard nation.


    Not that I'm in favor of tariffs, but Reason as a whole appears incapable of realizing that there might be reasons that Trump would do this which makes their reporting on his subject about as facile as it can be. Unfortunately, this is looking more accurate across the board with their 'articles'. The comments are usually better researched and more articulate, and if not for the commentary from the peanut gallery I wouldn't keep coming here.


    So thanks, mysterious strangers, for having more reason than a publication titled "Reason".

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    The Trump who originally cancelled his tariffs after ...
    a) A half-billion dollar bribe from China to enrich himself?
    b) Ivanka receiving trademarks for her products in China, negotiated by her while trade negotiations were underway?

    Did you miss that he wanted to save jobs ... in China ... until his own party stared him down in Congress?
    THAT Trump?

  • BYODB||

    I like how your comment has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with my post. Did you just imagine that I said something entirely different, or like reason are you incapable of reasoning?

    Trump is using trade policy to attempt to achieve denuclearization with North Korea. Do I think it's possible that Trump is getting his beak wet on the side? Absolutely, because this is what every politician does.

    Notably, you could point to guys like McConnell who also have a tremendous conflict of interest with anything related to China yet somehow they're still making decisions that directly enrich themselves. It seems to me that, at best, we hope they don't actively fuck over we the people in their search for riches.

    I think Trump is a whole lot of unpleasant things, but he didn't need to become President to become filthy god damn rich. He already was before taking office, which is a notable departure from most politicians who strangely only become filthy rich after taking office and opening a charity of some sort.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    I like how your comment has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with my post.

    Proven facts versus your bloviating.

    he didn't need to become President to become filthy god damn rich.

    ????

    which is a notable departure from most politicians who strangely only become filthy rich after taking office

    So it's okay for him to exploit the office for personal gain if he's already rich. Who knew?

    Did you also celebrate his announcement that he would cancel the tariffs he claims will save American jobs ,,, to instead save jobs in China?

  • Michael S. Langston||

    Not sure what OneLoneIdiot thinks here, but I agree. Reason used to write articles which analyzed more than just soundbites.

    But TDS....

  • Mongo||

    I want to sodomize Kim K's ass with a De Beers dildo while hurling racial epithets at her.

    There, I said it.

  • Nardz||

    (Slow clap)

  • Napoleon Bonaparte||

    So how come Roseanne isn't being celebrated for being "edgy", "pushing the boundaries", and "challenging taboos"? Or does that only count when it's insulting to white people and/or Christians?

  • John||

    Because liberals are hypocrites. But that is okay. It works to conservatives' favor. Celebrity idiots like Rosanne or George Clooney or whoever don't advance their cause. You don't want Rosanne to be the face of your politics. All the double standard does is keep celebrities from being conservative and that is a good thing. If you are a conservative, you don't want John Oliver or Jimmy Kimmel to be the face of Progressivism. Once in a while you hear a conservative saying that conservatives need a "Dailey Show". Such people are on crack. Why on earth would conservatives want a show that goes on national TV every day and explains how conservatives hate most of the country? That is exactly what the Daily Show does for Progressives. It doesn't persuade anyone and just convinces Progs that they have no need to persuade anyone on the other side and that it is okay to hate anyone who disagrees with them.

  • Tony||

    It's edgy to make a joke from the 17th century?

  • Poor and Dumb||

    They had Planet of the Apes in the 17th century?

  • Tony||

    It's edgy to make a Planet of the Apes reference?

  • Tony||

    If you don't get why it's OK to call Trump the spawn of an orangutan but it's not OK to call a black woman the spawn of ape+terrorist, you are a fucking moron and you shouldn't be governing things or operating moving vehicles or talking or breathing.

  • lap83||

    "why it's OK to call Trump the spawn of an orangutan" Because everyone knows you're too dumb to come up with a less childish criticism? OK, we'll give you a pass on this one

  • lap83||

    "but it's not OK to call a black woman"

    This is why everyone around here accuses progs of being racist, in case you we're wondering. The second you learn someone's race, they are just a token example of that race. Valerie Jarrett is not a person, just some black woman

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    Is she an ape? Was it Roseanne who tokenized her -- and her mother -- as apes? And Susan Rice as a male ape? Do you have an actual doctorate in Whataboutism?

  • Zeb||

    We are all apes.

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    Not only is it not ok, it's problematic.

  • Ken Shultz||

    I wouldn't defend Roseanne's tweet as anything but racist. I just question equating making a racist tweet with actually discriminating against minorities. There are plenty of people out there who would say racist things--and also be furious at the government for discriminating against minorities. They're quite sane is believing that the things they say are different from actually discriminating against minorities. It's the snowflakes who imagine that tweeting something obnoxious and actually discriminating against minorities is the same thing. They're the ones who are insane.

    Notice, I don't have to pretend that Roseanne's tweet wasn't racist to denounce the snowflakes for being authoritarian and irrational.

    With that out of the way, I'm not convinced Maher's stupid tweet about orangutans was racist. Orangutans are native to Indonesia. The allegation from Birthers was that Obama was born in Indonesia. Orangutans can't supply copies of their birth certificates either. Maher's statement may have been idiotically insensitive, but I'm not sure it was necessarily racist. What he appears to have been trying to say wasn't about race at all.

  • Zeb||

    I'm not convinced Maher's stupid tweet about orangutans was racist

    It's racist against people (and apes) with red hair.

  • Ecoli||

    I have heard that Valerie is the third in the Obama's poly amorous love life. Is she? Inquiring minds want to know.

  • Vernon Depner||

    It was my understanding that the Obamas' love life does not include women.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    The insanity runs deep in Trumpland.

  • Ecoli||

    Is Jarrett culturally appropriating Iranian culture? I am trying to decide if I should be outraged.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    She was born in Iran. But the appropriation was entirely Roseanne's psycho tie that Jarrett can only be Muslim.
    And both Jarrett and her mother are apes.

  • Ecoli||

    But, should I be outraged? Is she appropriating Iranian culture? It is so hard to know how I am supposed to feel now days.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    Since you insist ... How can she appropriate the culture she was born into?
    Especially when she's done nothing to give even a false impression that she is doing so.

    So ... no ... you should not be outraged by something that never existed.

  • Ecoli||

    Thanks for helping me navigate that mine field, OLL. I will call on you to hold my sweaty hand the next time I face such a difficult decision about who to hate.

    The problem is that Jarrett is the child of Americans, and born in Iran. You see the difficulty, an American who has a claim to Iranian culture, even though she left Iran at age five and seems American. She might be a shitlord. We can't take chances with such an important issue.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    Maher is an idiot. But does not have a long history of bigotry like Roseanne does. (And Trump) She also did an ape assault on Susan Rice. "Susan Rice is a man with big swingijng ape balls." This is one sick fuck

    The orangutan line seems quite legitimate, if we recall that Trump and his birther freaks still keep saying that Obama has not proven himself to be an American, which is the psycho lie that Maher was calling out Turnabout is fair play. And defense is not offense.

    Trump's conspiracy cult even says that communists had placed fraudulent birth announcements in both of Hawaii's major newspapers .. so the cabal was plotting to make him President from the day he was born! Diabolical bastards.

  • BYODB||

    The Birther movement was literally a creation of the Clinton's, so it's both amusing and sad that opposition groups picked it up.

    Another reason we should all be glad she lost her bid for President.

  • Ecoli||

    Actually, it was Obama himself that claimed to have been born in Kenya. Hillary picked up on it for a few news cycles.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    Was that before or after he confessed to being gay?
    Hillary never used it.
    Do your puppet strings ever burn your ears?

  • Ecoli||

    Is he gay too. That is the trifecta of victimhood!

  • Tony||

    Nah only straight white Christians are victims because cake.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    You can never be free until you can force someone else to do something for you. - The Tony amendment to the constitution.

  • Vernon Depner||

    Try to keep up. Gay males no longer count as victims. They're part of the patriarchy now.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    You still believe that crazy lie!

    Inconvenient proof

    More proof

    Still more

    Your humiliation

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Both of those stories comport with what we here at FactCheck.org wrote two-and-a-half years earlier, on Nov. 8, 2008: "This claim was first advanced by diehard Hillary Clinton supporters as her campaign for the party's nomination faded,

    Frustrated that you're not getting credit?

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    That was truly pathetic bullshit.

  • BYODB||

    No offense, but you're using sources who have simultaneously found a truthful claim both truthful and a complete lie based upon who said it and when so I'd prefer using my own memory of that particular election.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    That's why I ALWAYS provide links to proof ... and you ALWAYS bloviate and bullshit, NEVER with any sources.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    I found this gem while checking out the claim. It's from Politifact.

    ""According to Avlon, Linda Starr, a Clinton volunteer in Texas, was key to spreading the rumor. She connected with with Philip Berger, an attorney and Clinton supporter, who sued to block Obama's nomination. The suit was thrown out.

    But this is not the same thing as Clinton or her campaign promoting the theory. There is no evidence that they ever have done so. Clinton has dismissed the allegation when Trump made his accusation last September in an interview with CNN's Don Lemon.""

    Go figure, they are saying that it's not Clinton if it's someone who was a volunteer for her campaign. Funny how they fail to understand that when it comes to Trump and people connected to his campaign.

    Article

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    But with Trump it actually applies -- or should be investigated.

    Remember Trump saying absolutely nobody in his campaign had any contact with Russia ... which is now a proven lie with three guilty pleas and a criminal indictment?

    Aware that he Mueller investigation is the most successful ever? More indictments than the Iran-Contra, Clinton and Nixon investigations combined? In 1/4 the time?

    You seriously believe that so authoritarian an executive was literally surrounded with corruption ... but was unaware of it? i.e. incompetent?

    Unaware that he lied about the purpose of the Trump Tower meeting? A lie exposed by his own son? Do you recall he confessed to obstruction? His attempt to force out Sessions would likely be criminal intent?

    Are you one who whines that the Mueller investigation should be shut down, because it's been over a year with only 17 indictments and five guilty parties ... but the Clinton investigation, with NOTHING in 3-1/2 years, should continue?

    MIGHT it be possible that Trump could runs out of wacko conspiracy excuses, with all five so far exposed as lies?

    Why has EVERYONE who attended the FBI briefing demanded by Trump said there was nothing there. Trey Gowdy has trashed EVERY Trump claim on that,saying the hearing made him MORE convinced that the FBI acted as it should have, and did not target Trump? Judge Napolitano also says nothing there.

    He did tell us that you'd even defend him from even murder, with witnesses.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    If the number of indictments had anything to do with 'success' you might might have a point. But given lack of context, such as 13 indictments are against individuals/entities which are not under US jurisdiction, your comment is irrelevant and meaningless.

    This is not to mention that your comment has nothing to do with the one replied to.

    What is it really with you posting the same comment dozens of times? Unless someone is paying you for regurgitating talking points, it appears like you're trying to convince yourself it's true.

    OneLoneIdiot strikes again.

  • WoodChipperBob||

    "What Maher has been is one of few mainstream left-of-center types with a no-nonsense attitude toward free speech. In calling for his demise, conservatives are trying to silence the very type of principled speech warrior they consistently tell (but not show) us that they believe in."

    Are you seriously calling Bill "It's OK for me to call Sarah Palin misogynistic names, but Rush Limbaugh can't call some other woman similar things" Maher a "principled speech warrior"?

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    Umm, defending free speech includes practicing it. Maher has frequently defended the free speech of conservatives, which makes him morally superior to you on that. Which is just part of what free speech means.

    Your quotation marks are also dishonest. And that's NOT what he called out Limbaugh on. Maher makes potty mouth jokes. Limbaugh used "slut" to attack Sandra Fluke's testimony and character ... and the dumbfuck actually said that taking a pill every day means having sex every day!!! (That explains his many ex-wives)

    P.S. If you judge anyone on free speech -- by a single comment, and lie about it -- you prove Elizabeth's point.

  • John||

    Maher called a married and faithful woman a slut and a whore and that is totally okay and not like Limbaugh wondering why the snowflake law student needed birth control so badly unless she planned to screw a lot of men.

    Thanks for confirming the charge that progs have no standards and think no behavior no matter how file is objectionable just so long as it is done in furtherance of the cause.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    You repeated Rush;s fuckup!!! "A lot of men" -- humiliating yourself/
    And admitted Rush's was more than potty mouth name-calling. -- and lied about what he said -- both confirming and strengthening my point.

    Libertarians aren't progs. Left and right are obsolete. Have been for quite some time.

    That's three strikes. Your out!

  • John||

    If she wasn't going to be with a lot of men, why was she so desperate for birth control? Rush ridiculed her absurd claims. You just don't like it because you are Progressive and as such are a humorless prick.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""If she wasn't going to be with a lot of men, why was she so desperate for birth control?"'

    I can think of one huge reason in particular why a woman sleeping with only one man would be desperate for birth control.

    You don't really think Rush was right do you?

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    Rush made a TOTAL fool of himself on that. He actually thought that taking a pill every day means having sex every day.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    Libertarians aren't progs

    Agreed, but you're a progressive.

  • Ecoli||

    Fluke was a useful idiot on the left, defending a ridiculous proposition: that women could not afford to pay $9.00 per month for birth control pills, hence the federal had to spend many times that amount to pay for their birth control.

    That didn't make her a slut, but she certainly deserved mockery and ridicule. My outrage meter barely registered.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    You're as sexually ignorant as Trump, if you think the pill is the only birth control.

    which clearly sailed over your head.

    Read it again,

    My point was that calling a hypocrite like Maher a "principled speech warrior" flies in the face of the evidence that he's not.

    Read it again:
    If you judge anyone on free speech -- by a single comment, and lie about it -- you prove Elizabeth's point"

    How do you feel that it's not within the bounds of free speech to point out that Maher was hypocritical?

    Now you lie about me calling out your hypocrisy.
    Umm, defending free speech includes practicing it. Maher has frequently defended the free speech of conservatives, which makes him morally superior to you on that. Which is just part of what free speech means.

    And your tribal bigotry.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    oops. Only the first line is responding to Ecoli

  • WoodChipperBob||

    I defend the free speech of pretty much everyone. I actually have no problem with Maher calling Palin misogynistic names in his comedy routine if that's what makes the people coming to see him laugh. But that's not the point I was making, which clearly sailed over your head. My point was that calling a hypocrite like Maher a "principled speech warrior" flies in the face of the evidence that he's not. He called out Limbaugh's misogyny and then defended his own. To be a "principled speech warrior" you need to consistently defend speech, not just when it's selling your product. How do you feel that it's not within the bounds of free speech to point out that Maher was hypocritical?

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    clearly sailed over your head.

    Read it again,

    My point was that calling a hypocrite like Maher a "principled speech warrior" flies in the face of the evidence that he's not.

    Again:
    "If you judge anyone on free speech -- by a single comment, and lie about it -- you prove Elizabeth's point."

    How do you feel that it's not within the bounds of free speech to point out that Maher was hypocritical?

    Now you lie about me calling out your hypocrisy.
    Umm, defending free speech includes practicing it. Maher has frequently defended the free speech of conservatives, which makes him morally superior to you on that.
    As PROVEN here, when Maher defended Trump here. Versus your tribal bigotry..

  • John||

    You don't seem to be able to make a coherent point. You don't do well being challenged do you?

  • BYODB||

    I don't know who OLL is, but they smell sort of like Hihn.

  • Mock-star||

    Thats what I'm thinking as well.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    There are so few of us libertarians here, we must look like yet another master conspiracy hiding under your beds. Understandable for your IQ level.

    But I SWEAR, George Soros only pays me $10 per comment.

  • WoodChipperBob||

    Either you're intentionally ducking under the point so it sails over, or you're a little slow. Because what you failed to get the first *and* second times is that I didn't judge Maher by a single comment (and I also didn't lie about it). The bit in quotes between Bill and Maher was what we call an *example*. I could write an article about the various reasons why I don't consider Maher a "principled speech warrior" - but since there's a character limit in the comments section and Reason isn't paying me to be here, I pointed out one memorable example of him not being a "principled speech warrior". I guess you think I should give a bunch of examples and provide links for all of them. Which I would do, if I were writing an article about why I don't think "principled speech warrior" applies to Maher, rather than just making a quick comment here.

    Maher pointing that liberals are being hypocrites when they complain about Trump doing something they lauded Obama for isn't "defending the free speech of conservatives" - it doesn't come under the heading of defending speech at all.

  • WoodChipperBob||

    And I'm not sure where you're getting "tribal bigotry" from, unless you think my tribe is "non-hypocrite" (which I readily admit it isn't, because I'm aware that I'm probably just as guilty of hypocrisy as everyone else, and like everyone else, I can't recognize my own hypocrisy).

    And on the subject of hypocrisy, *YOU* took my *single comment* and judged me on it, which is exactly what you criticized me for (but of course, you were wrong that I was judging Maher on a single comment) But if you think you have other examples of me failing to defend free speech, I'd be pleased if you point them out, because if you give me evidence of me being hypocritical, I can use it to try to fix myself.

  • Ecoli||

    Unlike Roseanne, Maher is sometimes actually funny. He is such a smarmy, douche bag, that I can't bring myself to watch him though.

  • Poor and Dumb||

    Because if there's one thing that says Principled Defender of the First Amendment, it's using state force to punish private businesses for not promoting the speech you like in the way you like.

    I know what she's going for here, but as constructed, this doesn't make any sense.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    Yeah, I winced at the phasing too, Should not have had to read it twice .. when her point was so perfect. But who's surprised that a Trump is so blatantly authoritarian?

  • BYODB||


    Armed with this self-serving interpretation, folks like Turning Point USA leader Charlie Kirk began pouting about a 2014 joke by Bill Maher on his HBO series.


    I don't know jack or shit about this Charlie Kirk guy, although I think I might have seen him on one of Turning Point's little web advertisements, but it's also true that guys like Bill Maher say things all the time that would have probably ended their careers if they weren't so popular to a wide audience. You won't hear about Chappelle getting taken off the air for the same joke, so this is more or less a sign of how broken our society is. So much for MLK's colorblind society.


    Roseanne and Gifford have something in common: neither of them were funny and both of them got the boot for it. Frankly, if I were working for ABC I'd have pulled the plug on Roseanne too. It instantly became a damaged brand, and they don't need this type of publicity for a family oriented channel. I may intensely dislike their programming, but hey it's their programming and I wager they know their audience.

  • John||

    I am curious to see if the show is picked up by another network. I really don't see why anyone who was watching it before would not watch it now. It might be radioactive and no one will watch it. But I don't see why it necessarily would be and I don't see how ABC could know that the day it happened.

    ABC just rolled over to the mob. Now, that doesn't mean that the show isn't radioactive and all of this would have killed the show's ratings had it stayed on the air. But it doesn't mean it is either.

    And I don't think you can say that a Network that employs Keith Olberman and Jimmy Kimmel is that concerned about its "family friendly image". If Rosanne had said what she said about Condi Rice or Clarance Thomas, she would still have a show.

  • JuanQPublic||

    The problem for those who are constantly looking for the next thing to be outraged about (the minority but the loudest right now) is that outrage fatigue eventually sets in. When everyone is outraged by virtually everything, it ceases to have any meaning, and eventually becomes a comedy of errors.

  • John||

    Pretty much. It worked just so long as only the left used these tactics and was allowed to make the rules and apply them as they saw fit. But once the right got into the act and started using the left's rules against them, it just became chaos.

  • BYODB||

    Judging by past experience, there's a good possibility that Netflix might buy it since notably Netflix hasn't met a terrible fucking idea that they weren't willing to buy as far as I can tell.

    That said, given how rampant progressivism is, I suspect that few if any media distributors of any clout or notability would pick up a show with a lead that just compared an Obama Acolyte to a monkey. More or less the exact same thing killed Michael Richards career in just under an hour, and he was on one of the most widely beloved sitcoms of the past thirty or forty years and was pulling down something to the tune of a million per episode in the 90's.

  • JuanQPublic||

    So how come Roseanne isn't being celebrated for being "edgy", "pushing the boundaries", and "challenging taboos"? Or does that only count when it's insulting to white people and/or Christians?

    There's definitely enough hypocrisy to go around, and the double standards undoubtedly exist. We're seeing a torrent of hypocrisy right now from both "sides": the many using the "social justice" angle and the "nationalist" collectivists, to prop up their righteousness.

    They actually have far more in common than different, namely being puffed up with identity pride, authoritarianism, the need for a nanny state to regulate personal adult behavior, and the reflexive need to shut others up and/or destroy their reputation.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    Amen.
    Overall, not here. It's disgusting how many here defend Roseanne for saying Jarrett is a monkey, also her mother, both African-American women. (Her father also)

    Did you notice that the head of the network is an African-American woman?
    Nutjobs will see that as proof of yet another conspiracy!

  • John||

    No one is defending Rosanne you dickhead. They are merely pointing out the double standards at play here. Why don't you try arguing with the points people actually make rather than what you imagine and want them to be?

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    No one is defending Rosanne you dickhead.

    For calling me a dickhead, I will now prove you full of shit!

    You've defended her at least four times on this page. Here's one of the wackiest -- because it's shared by so many other sad sacks.

    Juice made the point yesterday about the tweet not being racist. I didn't agree with him but now I think maybe he has a point. Jarrett isn't black. She is Iranian.

    OMFG She's both! (African-American is a race.)
    And Iranian was the basis of Roseanne's Islamophobic bigotry.

    I did a quick page search and.found 23 posts making the same ignorant claim as as you. Skin color is not a race, and shame on all of you for saying otherwise.

    Racism is as bad as claimed by the left. Per the evidence on this page alone.
    Will you provide even more proof?

  • John||

    Saying it is not necessarily racist is not saying it is good. And why don't you read the entire post. Which part of "calling a black person an ape" do you not understand? You are a dickhead. But you make up for it by being profoundly ignorant. But you are really angry as well. So there is that.

    Between Tony and Hail, we have plenty of stupid people here. You don't need to add to the chorus. Go fill some other blog up with stupid. We are all full up.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    You are a proven liar. But continue more bullshit.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    You're an idiot with reading comprehension problems.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    That was to OneLoneIdiot - not John.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Considering the racist was booted in less than 24 hours, it's quite the stretch to maintain the narrative that racism is rampant. Then again your fellow traveler Farrakhan does help your cause.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    Who said racism is rampant? You admit she's a racist. So the Farrakhan line is full out psycho bigotry by you also

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    J.D. Evermore on Twitter

    I just heard Trump's base is so upset about ABC cancelling Roseanne that they're gonna boycott A's, B's and C's, which will make their tweets even more indecipherable
  • Nardz||

    Your life seems sad and lonely.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    Excluding your ilk is a blessing. not loneliness.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "Led by Kirk, Twitter conservatives began calling for Maher's show to be canceled along with Roseanne. The idea seemed to be based on a theory that this would make liberals see the error of their outrage-mongering ways."

    Nope. The idea is to make the Left play by their own rules. No more rules that only apply to the Right.

    Case in point:
    "Some pointed out why Barr's and Maher's comments were not alike."

    Because "it's not racist when we do it".

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    Reason still signalling over the Roseanne tweet. As I said before, clearly the individual bears a certain resemblance to a sixties movie character, and any assumption that it refers in this context to "black people" is racist. Any perceived resemblance is purely subjective, but assuming racism, as Mr. Nardz said, is often racist in itself.

    The arguments over the specifics of the woman's heritage are beside the point, and move into the territory of obsessive categorizing and labeling that identity politics devotees seem so fond of.

  • OneLoneLibertarian||

    As I said before, clearly the individual bears a certain resemblance to a sixties movie character,

    ... who was playing an ape. Shame on you.

    Saying that an African-American woman, and her African-American mother, are apes is incredibly bigoted. But you essentially blamed it on Political Correctness, just as President Trump defends his own blatant bigotry.
    Just like progressives, you blame the victims.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online