Reason Podcast

Can We Just Light Twitter on Fire After This Past Weekend?: Podcast

Covingtongate, Buzzfeed's bomb, Baby Hitler, Kamalamentum…maybe it's time to pull the plug.

|

||| MSNBC
MSNBC

On Day 4 of the Great Covington Kerfuffle, your friendly neighborhood Reason editors—Katherine Mangu-Ward, Nick Gillespie, Matt Welch, and Peter Suderman—staggered into the recording booth for the Editors' Roundtable version of the Reason Podcast, and tried to squeeze out any available lessons about journalism, social media, and getting through this great thing called life.

Along the way we talked about Buzzfeed's investigatory implosion, the latest in government shutdown, Kamala Harris' official announcement that she's running for president, the wonderful things we learned at LibertyCon, and (of course) Baby Hitler. It might not be the podcast America needs, but certainly the one it deserves.

Subscribe, rate, and review our podcast at iTunes. Listen at SoundCloud below:

Audio production by Ian Keyser and Mark McDaniel.

Relevant links from the show:

"The Media Wildly Mischaracterized That Video of Covington Catholic Students Confronting a Native American Veteran," by Robby Soave

"If You Still Think Nick Sandmann's Smile Is Proof of Racism, You're Seeing What You Want to See," by Robby Soave

"Twitter Suspends User Who First Spread Covington Catholic Video," by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

"Will Donald Trump Be Impeached Over a Hotel?" by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

"If You Want to See the Future of Political Trolling—and Elections—Look to Alabama," by Nick Gillespie

"Trump's Dreamer-for-Wall Proposal Isn't a Good Faith Deal," by Shikha Dalmia

"Kamala Harris' New Book Tries to Massage Her Record as a Prosecutor, But the Facts Aren't Pretty," by C.J. Ciaramella

"Rather Than Running for President, Maybe Joe Biden Should Just Launch an Apology Tour," by Scott Shackford

"Justin Amash: The Libertarian Party Shouldn't Nominate a 'Squishy' Republican in 2020," by Matt Welch

Don't miss a single Reason Podcast! (Archive here.)

Subscribe at Apple Podcasts..

Follow us at SoundCloud.

Subscribe at YouTube.

Like us on Facebook.

Follow us on Twitter.

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.

179 responses to “Can We Just Light Twitter on Fire After This Past Weekend?: Podcast

  1. Editors’ Roundtable version of the Reason Podcast

    At one of these things, will you guys decide to stop calling yourselves Editors and maybe go with Overseers instead?

    1. Commisars

    2. Louts and wenches.

  2. You’ll never guess who is blaming the Covington kids and their community.

    You’ll. Never. Guess.

    1. Read the comments. He thinks a “three point sign” at a basketball game is a white power symbol. His jaw must hurt from deep throating a collapsing progressive narrative for the past three days

      1. Balko lives in a filter bubble of hate and retardation:

        Radley Balko
        ?
        Verified account

        @radleybalko
        3h3 hours ago
        More
        I’ve also seen the blackface photos. The photos of the basketball team flashing white power signs. The tomahawk chop videos. The other video in which they’re screaming at a woman. Are all of those fake, too?

        1. It is a bunch of kids wearing black shirts because black is one of the team colors. The “white power sign” is of a kid at a basketball game putting his hands up the way a referee does after a three point shot.

          Balko is a first class shit bag. Everyone knew Weigal was a shitbag. But I honestly thought Balko was an honest guy and liked a lot of the work he did on police abuse. But my God was I wrong about that. His post reason carreer has shown him to be maybe the most dishonest piece of shit ever to be employed by reason.

          What he is saying there is straight up slander. I hope he is one of the people the school sues the shit out of.

          1. WHITE POWER is worth THREE POINTS, OK?

            1. The only good thing is that he gets destroyed in the comments. None of his followers are buying this bullshit. If he were capable of shame or embarassment, he would be feeling a lot of it after this performance.

          2. Good fucking Lord, just Google search “Covington Catholic blackface”. In the basketball game photos, there are a couple kids in black masks, as well.

            Not saying they’re the raciest racists since Jim Crow came to Lynchburg, but it’s not as simple as kids in black shirts.

            You constantly purport to understand progs/Dems, John. You should know they’d overreact about that.

            1. They are wearing black masks at a basketball game. That is not black face. What possible reason is there to think it was racist? Moreover, why on earth should we accept the claim that it is from someone idiotic enough to claim people all weaing black shirts is racist and that someone putting up a three point sign is giving the white power sign.

              Do you really think a few pictures of someone wearing a black mask makes Balko look any better here? And beyond that, none of that has anything to do with what happened on the mall. I don’t care if the whole school is a bunch of secret KKK members. That doesn’t make it okay to assume they were guilty of this. Balko of all people should know that.

              1. Do you remember the kerfuffle over the NY Post cartoon that was published during the Reign of Obama? The one with the cops shooting a monkey, and commenting on a stimulus bill?

                As I recall, you and Lil Joe from Lowell went back and forth over that, and he was outraged that you wouldn’t recognize the racial implications that he saw in the picture.

                This is the same thing. Because you constantly post about how Progs/Dems think, you of all people should know that.

                1. Actually I missed that one. But this is not the same except that in both cases liberals saw racism where none existed.

                  1. John,

                    And I’m guessing Balko and Joe would say “In both cases John won’t see the racism where it obviously exists”.

                    Seeing racism EVERYWHERE is a big part of the progressive worldview. Accept that they believe that (even if you don’t), and you have a starting point for dialog. Otherwise you’ll only talk past each other.

            2. There is no possible way to prepare for overreaction, willful misunderstanding, or intentional mischaracterizations.

              Yes, it’s what the proggs do. And it is that simple.

              Nobody appears in blackface. That is a term that has specific meaning and specific connotation.

              You know that.

              1. ThomD,

                I’m sorry, but if you concur that progressives overreact, willfully misunderstand and intentionally mischaracterize events, how the fuck can you be surprised that they do those things about this?

                Of COURSE they’re going to ignore your definition of “blackface” if it fits their narrative!

                1. When did I say I was surprised?

                  More importantly, why do you characterize my criticism as surprise?

                  Noting that a stopped clock is wrong is not what I would call being surprised.

            3. I went to a blackout game way back when I was in college, University of Colorado vs. West Virginia. I proceeded (with friends) to paint out bodies black, to include our faces, and also proceeded to get blacked out drunk. Blacked out for the black out while blacked out.

              Guess we were racist too?

              Have you fuckboys EVER done anything sports related your entire pathetic lives? It is like we have a pack of debate team fuckboys wanting to proclaim their fuckboy-ness by blasting kids doing clearly normal man related activities.

        2. Time and again Balko demonstrates that he is only a sneering, godawful, dishonest piece of shit

      2. Woke Mr. Clean will do anything to please his friends at The Post.

        1. Woke Mr. Clean

          You should workshop that nickname a little.

          1. I prefer an unenlightened dirty Mrs.

      3. Balko also keeps saying ‘blackface’ when what happened is all the fans at the basketball game came dressed in black. It’s called a ‘blackout.’ Just like the University of Kentucky fans, who all dress in white for a ‘whiteout.’

        Dressing in black is not blackface. This is common sense. To the extent that he keeps repeating that libel he is demonstrating malice.

        1. What? They didn’t even paint their faces? They wore a school color?

          Sigh.

          1. Yes, some painted their faces (and more( black

            1. If there is a photo of anyone with their face painted I have not seen it.

              Do you have a link?

              1. Let me just preemptively add that if you cannot distinguish someone painted in school colors from someone wearing blackface, the problem is not with them.

    2. That’s sad. Balko used to be great.

      1. He’s fallen for every race hoax since (at least) the Jenna Six. There’s absolutely nothing unusual about this.

      2. Nah. he wasn’t. He’s been involved in some good things, but only when it feeds his white savior complex.

    3. Is it your mom? Please tell me it’s your mom.

  3. and tried to squeeze out any available lessons about journalism, social media, and getting through this great thing called life.

    I liked WaPo’s headline about how Buzzfeed screwed the pooch at a time when journalism is under the most scrutiny. I didn’t read the whole article, but it seems that the Washington post seems to glide past the point that the fucking semi-retarded tweens manning the news desk at Buzzfeed can print any fake fucking news they want. But when every major old news outlet, including but not limted to the WaPo repackages and trumpets Buzzfeeds shitty school newspaper articles, they’re not just part of the problem, they are the problem.

    1. Oh, and the main picture WaPo had for this story? A picture of Donald Trump. Not the editors of buzzfeed, not anyone involved in this ridiculous fake news shit. No, it’s still all about Donald Trump.

      1. They’ll tell you everything you need to know, if you just pay attention.

    2. They all repeated the story and thought saying “if true” somehow made repeating it okay. The entire media from National Review to the Washington Post and everything in between took the Buzzfeed story, repeated it verbaturm, added the caveat “if true” and then proceeded to have orgasms over how this was going to be the end of Trump.

      None of them ever gave a single thought to being skeptical about the article or examining the question of whether it was in fact true. And all of them totally ignored the glaring problems with the Buzzfeed story that should have made any reasonable person skeptical of it from the start. It wasn’t just that it was Buzzfeed, thought that was certainly an issue. it was that the story didn’t make any sense. Why would Trump tell Cohen to lie about a land deal everyone knew about anyway? And even if he did, why would he do it in a way that would leave a record? Even if the story had been true, the most it would have resulted in was Cohen, a guy who has already pled guilty to lying, claiming without evidence Trump told him to lie to Congress. And oh by the way no one gives a shit when you lie to Congress anyway.

      And that was going to be the end of Trump? How stupid does one have to be to beleive that even if you did somehow think Buzzfeed was telling the truth?

      1. Seeing something posted as “X if true” is generally an indicator that it isn’t since its most often used when a commentator is sympathetic to the narrative presented but the sourcing is suspect enough that they’re still a bit suspicious even with confirmation bias lulling them into acceptance.

        1. Bingo. Either you think it is true or you don’t. If you do, then there is no reason to say “if true”. The only reason you would put a qualifyer like that on your story is if you know it is not true but want to repeat the slander without the responsibility of actually making the claim.

  4. It’s the poor carpenter who blames his tools.

  5. The nuttiness is nothing new unfortunately though… Just proves how loony the Left can get and how partisan this nation truly is now!

  6. what would news chicks read to us if no Twitter?

      1. is that a thing?

        1. It’s a thingie.

  7. You know what’s funny, I’ve lost track of how many major, and I mean major stories CNN has had to retract since 2016.

    1. If you didn’t know better you would think Trump is having his people leak false stories knowing that the media will believe anything that damages Trump for the specific purpose of the story later being disproven and the media further humiliated. I am not saying that is what is going on. But if that was the case, I don’t see how things would be any different than they are.

      At some point you would think the media would learn to stop believing everything that fits their narrative and prejudices no matter how outlandish it is. They seem to be unable to do that.

      1. They seem to be unable to do that.

        They can’t help themselves. They just can’t. You could put down a giant mousetrap with a three ring binder titled “Trump Dossier” on the mechanism, and they’d get killed every… single… time.

        1. If only it was that easy.

      2. Hey, that’s what 4chan does. How do you think the OK sign being white supremacist code became a thing?

        1. Do you mean 4chan puts out bullshit knowing that the media will believe it and make fools of themselves? That sounds about right. Next thing you know, they are going to be claiming that Trump is guilty of campaign finance violations because he didn’t declare the in kind contributions of 4chan users trolling the media.

          1. 4chan is crowd sourced trolling. Weaponized autism.

            And it is beautiful.

            1. “Weaponized autism” was my nickname at Wallbrook

          2. Do you mean 4chan puts out bullshit knowing that the media will believe it and make fools of themselves?

            Yup.

            1. And they got a ton of people to bite on the “it’s ok to be white ” thing.

              1. Exactly. Everyone knows it’s not ok to be white.

            2. I want a t-shirt with that screencap printed on it.

              Because it’s a thing of beauty.

  8. This episode has really shown that the Mises critics of the LP and the beltway libertarians was pretty spot on. Turns out they were right all along (with a couple of exceptions).

    1. Also, Robby deserves a raise. Dude’s being called a “white supremacist” by Kristen Powers and other insane people in the journalist class for doing their fucking job

      1. I go away from the news and the internet for a few days only to come back to find Robby Soave to be the most reasonable person in the media. It was a bit of a shock. But a pleasent shock at least.

      2. I don’t remember Powers being crazy, but I haven’t seen anything from her since the current president was elected. I guess Trump just drove pretty much everyone over the edge.

        1. She helped destroy the country of Libya as well as launch a war against Serbia that destroyed pretty much all the good will we had with Russia all because she felt guilty over not advocating the US do something in Rwanda and in the Balkans in the mid 1990s. I think crazy and stupid are a pretty good way to describe Powers even before Trump.

          1. ^^this.

          2. Lol!

            Wrong Powers

            Never change.

            1. Kristen powers is some talking head. I don’t keep a scorecard at home who these people are. I assumed it was Samantha Powers because she is someone that you have a reason to have heard of. I have heard the name Kristen Powers but I honestly have no idea why or why anyone knows who she is.

              I plead guilty to not knowing or caring who most of these people are.

              1. Samantha or Kristen or both?

        2. Her IQ took a nosedive around 2016. She probably thinks her anti-PC rhetoric led to Trump. Now, she’s trying to make amends with the progressive movement.

          She’d probably burn every copy of The Silencing if she had a chance. Fortunately, e-books are forever.

          1. She did argue against the widespread sexism that Palin received while disagreeing with Palin’s politics.

        3. I’ll argue it is the transfer from FNC to CNN.

          Note S.E Cupp has ALSO gone a bit batshit crazy since she moved over.

          You have to follow the CNN rules.

          1. S.E. Cupp was always a phony and a dingbat. She pretended to be a conservative and batted her eyes and raised her skirt up just long enough to get a good gig on a major network as a professional conservative concern troll. I always expected her to turn out to be a typical lunatic prog.

            1. She bashed Ron Paul, endorsed Rand Paul, and now bashes Rand Paul.

              So, yes.

      3. Remember when Kirsten Powers fucking criticized left-wing mob politics?

        Now, she’s Queen Woke. No doubt a form of penance, because she thinks her “rhetoric” led to Trump.

      4. Kirsten Powers has a great rack, but she has totally lost her shit.

    2. What is the Mises criticism of the LP and beltway libertarians?

      1. That they’re milquetoast, desperate to be liked, easily swayed by progressive narratives, and afraid to put forth any libertarian idea that progressives don’t already agree with.

        1. Okay, so what is the alternative vision?

          1. Refusing to cave-in to bullshit narratives? And not crafting your beliefs to fit into someone else’s beliefs? Or pretty much just doing the opposite of everything that Nick Sarwark does.

            1. Even if we agree that there must be a pragmatic wing of the Libertarian Party, it’s still valuable to have a hardcore holding their feet to the fire.

            2. So don’t watch any porn, shave all your pubes, make fun of midgets, and stop listening to Andrew Heaton’s podcast?

        2. Correction: they are also desperate to be liked by “respectable” conservatives, hence all the crocodile tears for the Weekly Standard

          1. The only tragic aspect of The Weekly Standard’s demise is the fact that Bill Kristol is still around.

            1. Or that it was in existence for as long as it was. Take away P.J P’Rourke’s review of “It Takes a Village” and that one piece ripping on Canada (“Great White Waste of Time” I think) and it had little value.

            2. Lol

              1. Ps – it was a good lol. Kristol is a dunce.

        3. Because the Mises crowd is totes not afraid to alienate their Bircher donors.

          1. Rothbardians and Russiaphobic Birchers? Does not compute

            1. Or should I say Reconstructionist donors?

              1. You could, but it would just solidify your appearance as a committed leftitarian.

  9. The Buzzfeed Bombshell marks the beginning of the end of Drumpf’s regime. The walls are closing in.

    1. Come on, man. You can do better than that!

    2. So? Walls don’t work, so how can they close in?

      1. That’s the genius of OBL

  10. Reason has no dog in the identity politics wars vs. the MAGA hats? KMW might want to let the writing staff in on that.

    1. Am I the only one that has the feeling Robby was the recipient of some uncomfortable looks and behind that back sniping from the rest of the staff over his standing up for the Maga Hatted Papist Deplorables? I find it hard to believe that Suderman and Dalmia were not shocked and appalled along with probably Welch.

      1. You didn’t imagine that. It happened. Robby has got massive balls.

        1. The same goes for ENB. She called the kid with the “smirk” creepy-looking.

          1. The fact that we have to pretend like ENB was ever a libertarian shows that the word has no meaning. She loves collective guilt and stereotypes and hates facts that disrupt her narrative.

            1. There’s a lot of overlap between the “boofing” truthers during the Kavanaugh hearings and the “OMG- that’s a white power sign” crowd

              1. “boofing” truthers

                Wait. Are you suggesting that “boofing” actually means farting?

              2. It’s called bigotry.

                Only seeing what you expect to see.

                Remember when Charles Johnson, and others insisted that the state flag of Tennessee was a neo-nazi flag? (That was back in the early days of the TEA parties.)

          2. She called the kid with the “smirk” creepy-looking.

            It’s very telling that this Tweet matters to you.

            1. Using your public platform to bash a kid is creepy.

              1. I don’t know if I’d characterize it as bashing, and while I do think statements like that are pointless, whining about stupid Tweets is stupid.

                1. Welcome to the comments!

                  Tea or coffee?

                2. “stupid tweets”

                  Redundant.

                3. If you take away whining about stupid tweets, what would be left for SIV?

                  1. If you take away whining about stupid tweets, what would be left for SIV?

                    Women wearing various forms of hosiery?

                    1. By women, do you mean female poultry?

                    2. Capons, then?

                    3. Theys is like, for mountain climbing, right?

          3. The same goes for ENB. She called the kid with the “smirk” creepy-looking.

            You need to preface the story with your general distaste for the students before you defend them on cold, detached principle.

          4. How do we know it was a smirk? He could very easily have been wincing from the indian’s body odor. That guy looked like he isn’t much for showers or deodorant.

          5. Umm, the kid’s facial expression *is* creepy looking.

            Doesn’t mean he deserved to be vilified in national news, or that Nathan Phillips wasn’t drumming in his face instead of asking him to step out of his way, or that the Black Hebrews weren’t reprehensible.

            As much as I think this whole thing is stupid, I have to admit he looks like he is smirking and his facial expression is creepy looking.

            1. The kid said afterward it was a forced smile because he did not understand what Philips was doing.

        2. He’s the Senator Lindsey Graham of cosmotarian magazines

      2. You’re so wrong about Welch. He’s being entirely sane on this one.

    2. Your inner Catholic alter server is coming out. The Papists are fierce when defending their own.

    3. I kept thinking KM-W could turn this shit-show around. I was wrong. Turn the whole mag/website over to Charles Oliver or cease publication.

    4. Yes. I always assumed it would take a year or two for some media outlets to get it together and start acting like professionals, and I hope Reason moves in that direction, but they are going to have to make some personnel changes for it to happen.

      1. I’m going to be here, down in the fucking trenches, mocking Suderman until that day comes.

        1. Thank you for your service.

        2. Target rich environment.

        3. Robby should be on the podcast. Suderman should be at Vox

  11. I am starting to think that this whole affair is just one more sign that there is a real market failure when it comes to the delivery of news. Unfortunately, when it comes to news, “pleasing narrative” is a very suitable substitute good for “truth”, so much so that the market for actual facts is rather quite small.

    The story with the short misleading video went viral because it confirmed so many peoples’ narratives about MAGA hat wearing kids being assholes towards Native Americans. The story supplanted the truth in many ways.

    I am not sure how to solve this market failure.

    1. There is no market failure. Just accept that the corporate press is as biased as an ideologically aligned press. The only difficulty that you’re having is accepting that.

      1. Where is the market for facts?

        1. You read sources that provide some substantiation and then you make a judgement call. Sorry, but it has always been that way. This is the same media that sold the Gulf of Tonkin incident and Iraq WMD- they have always been trash.

          1. True, best you can do is diversify your info sources and read between the lines. Soewhere hidden in that will be some facts you can evaluate yourself.

        2. The primary function of Internet news sites is not to disseeminate facts. It is to strengthen tribal cohesion.

          1. That’s part of the problem that I’m describing. Because there isn’t much of a market for facts, that’s how the Internet news sites evolved. They evolved in the direction to what their consumers wanted.

            1. The market hasn’t failed simply because it doesn’t give you what you want.

              1. Well, where *is* the market for facts?

            2. That’s only a ‘market’ in the sense that people are exchanging thoughts.

              But they really don’t trade them – ie. give up one in order to gain the other. They keep both and add more.

              So, in that sense, there can be no market failure in the manner you seek to employ the term.

              It’s a misapplication of the term.

          2. Um, selling ads is real near the top of the list.

            1. This and only this

        3. There isn’t one because there’s no demand for facts. People want their existing worldviews to be reinforced, and facts that do that are the only facts that matter, even if they’re not facts at all.

    2. That is a pretty good assesment. The problem for journalism is that when craigslist came along and all of the ad revenue went away, newspapers stopped having big staffs. This had a particularly bad effect on the quality of reporting. It used to be that reporters started out literally writing obituaries for large newspapers and then moving on to the local beat before finally on to the national beat if they were good enough. This mean national reporters were all well trained and experienced. Now none of that happens. You become a national reporter by first blogging and drawing attention to yourself. So most media people are the liberal arts majors who know nothing that Ben Rhoades described them. Worse, they got to their positions not by learning how to report facts on the local beat but by being enough of a self promoter to draw clicks on the internet. And that is accomplished as you describe by confirming people’s narratives and giving a pleasing truth. That is what they do because that is all they have ever done and all they know how to do. And I don’t know how you fix that.

      1. Well the market failure part is not so much that there are journalists who specialize in pushing narratives, but also that narratives supplant the truth.

        If there was a robust demand for the facts, then the narrative-hustlers wouldn’t have a job. But there isn’t. Lots of people want narratives *instead of* facts. It’s not all just the journalists’ fault.

        I really do think this is a market failure. Here is a necessary good that is vital to all – the truth – that the market cannot provide in any adequate way.

        1. I think there that there is a market for facts. The problem is that there isn’t a mechanism for training people to write the facts. I am hard on journalists but actual factual journalism is a real skill. It is not easy to figure out what is going on and then write that in a truthful and easily readable way. It takes training and skill. And it is a different skill than writing polemics and spin.

          Even if you wanted to report just the facts, you would have a hard time finding journalists who are competent enough to do it. Worse still, the people who run these organizations have decided that spin and narrative is what sells. So the whole industry has collectively walked away from actual news as a product. Not being in the business, I am in no position to say that is a bad business decision. But, I would like to think that it is and at some point the market will correct by someone actually reporting facts and cleaning up. But that may be just me being optimistic.

          1. There is a market for information. People will even pay for bad information, if only to know what others ‘know.’ There is also a market for propaganda, but generally the people paying are not the people consuming…

            That’s the heart of this problem. It’s not the lack of a functional marketplace, it’s that what we are discussing is largely comprised of the latter.

    3. I’ve heard it described that journalism prior to CNN was a net loss. A public good that broadcasters assumed the costs for, paid for by other areas. Not-for-profit was the operating motif, and it is only recently that news became a source of revenue. Of course I imagine a goodish portion of this is things were better back when.

      Reason actually does pretty good journalism, aside from their editorial bits, as well as a handful of smaller organizations. The drawback is that they are at least a day behind the 24 news cycle, and have to answer to who ever funds their paychecks as well.

      1. 60 Minutes changed that well before CNN.

      2. I can attest to that. I worked in a newspaper circulation department and handled thousands of customer complaints. I had complaints every day about papers being delivered missing the store ads, or the comics section, or the crossword puzzle. Never once a complaint about the actual news content.

  12. Maybe they should only allow adults on Twitter. Of course then there would be no Twitter.

    1. *** rising intonation ***

      What about fake IDs?

      1. You can tell by the content.

  13. Ha, this former altar boy honestly appreciate’s Gillespie’s description of Catholicism’s relationship with the Bible.

    1. What was his description? Something backhanded?

      1. “They don’t care about the Bible…” I want to say around the 13:45 mark. It’s the kind of thing a Catholic (lapsed or not) says when he’s self-aware enough to take the piss out of the Church. It was a joke kind of in a Protestant voice.

        1. For hundreds of years they performed services in la language no one understood.

          But let’s not accuse them of trying to hoard information…

  14. Really disgusted to see Reason taking the side of the white supremacists! Ever since The Weekly Standard folded, life’s been tough for Resistance-supporting liberal-tarians like me. I thought Reason would fill the void.

    But this is the last straw! Reason is canceled!

    1. That’s a pretty spot on WokeHat

      1. It really is. Woke-hat or Dope-Hat has had a very hard few months. It is really tough to have to tow the FBI and the IC lion every day.

    2. Here’s me calling for physical violence against children. This is what True Libertarianism looks like. Not that racist trash Ron Paul and Tom Woods advocate for.

      Is The Washington Post hiring? I need to get my resume in order.

      1. Does he go by Patrick Nonwhite rather than Popehat now? Did people calling him Dopehat and Wokehat finally get to him or something?

        1. Patrick is the other contributor. He use to be the less retarded WokeHat

          1. Saying people deserve to be beaten because of their hat and look on their face is some very thoughtful comentary. Dopehat is forever reminding everyone how he went to Harvard and is a 1st Amendment Lawyer. His favorite move is to accuse anyone who questions him or gives an argument he doesn’t like but can’t answer of being beneath him and crazy. You see he is the thoughtful one.

            Funny how all of these thoughtful people who claim to be everyone’s better always turn out to be brutish louts.

        2. We share a head but have two faces. Like Janus from Roman mythology.

      2. umm, NonWhiteHat =/= Popehat

        1. I stand corrected. That would be my partner, Wokehat.

          We think so much alike that I forget we’re not the same person.

  15. FAT SHAMING AT THE 29 MINUTE MARK.

  16. The amazing thing that should upset everyone is that so-called “respectable journalists” called for violence against kids and attempted to dox them off of a contrived narrative and they will not lose their jobs, let alone get kicked off Twitter.

    They’re fucking vile and they should be treated with contempt

    1. The ones who are now backing off are all now blaming the activists for fooling them. That is good as far as it goes but it doesn’t get any of them off the hook as far as I am concerned. Even if the activists had been telling the truth and those kids had yelled all kinds of vile things at the Indian guy, why is that a national story or anything of interest to anyone except those involved. Suppose the kids did act like complete jackasses. They are high school kids. They do that sometimes. I don’t see how any decent person could think that them doing that makes it okay to make them national villains and join the Twitter mob trying to ruin their lives. If they did that, report it to the high school and let them and their parents deal with it. But no way do they deserve to be made into national pariahs unless actually assauled someone or committed a crime, which was never alledged.

  17. “You red-assed honky fools are receiving some bad info from the Prince of Lies and suckin’ it up like a pork-eatin’ Edamite, AMEN!” ~ Isaiah Jakome ben-Wilkins, Keeper of the Hebrew Israelite Temple

    1. If enjoying some tasty edamame is a sin, cast the first meatball.

      1. I think that few things express the absurdity of our times than that there really are a group of black supremacist Jews. Talk about shit you can’t make up.

        1. Life’s rich tapestry!

        2. Saw report from AP where they barelu mentioned that they were being vulger in one sentance but basically glossed over their part in the whole thing and definitely didn’t mention any of the specifics of what they were saying. Might distract from the narrative.

          1. Never again will the media let the facts get in the way of the proper narrative.

  18. All the news that fits, we print.

  19. Maybe you could, I dunno, stop using social media?

  20. Start working at home with Google. It’s the most-financially rewarding I’ve ever done. On tuesday I got a gorgeous BMW after having earned $8699 this last month. I actually started five months/ago and practically straight away was bringin in at least $96, per-hour. visit this site right here…………… http://www.mesalary.com

  21. Start working at home with Google. It’s the most-financially rewarding I’ve ever done. On tuesday I got a gorgeous BMW after having earned $8699 this last month. I actually started five months/ago and practically straight away was bringin in at least $96, per-hour. visit this site right here……………… http://www.mesalary.com

  22. Start working at home with Google. It’s the most-financially rewarding I’ve ever done. On tuesday I got a gorgeous BMW after having earned $8699 this last month. I actually started five months/ago and practically straight away was bringin in at least $96, per-hour. visit this site right here……………… http://www.payshd.com

  23. After the third time the guy said “fucking” in 30 seconds, I shut it off.

  24. Start working at home with Google. It’s the most-financially rewarding I’ve ever done. On tuesday I got a gorgeous BMW after having earned $8699 this last month. I actually started five months/ago and practically straight away was bringin in at least $96, per-hour. visit this site right here…2citypays.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.