Partly, I suppose, this comes out of his whole men's-rights schtick about how women are oppressing men, which he recently took to such lengths ("When people talk about 'reproductive freedom,' they generally mean women’s reproductive freedom") that he ticked off his usual fellow traveller Ann Althouse, leading to a spat and resulting in a rare long Perfesser post full of paranoid gas ("we give women a pass on sexual behavior that would be considered predatory if it were done by males"), whining ("noting the unfairnesses involved, is not 'victimology' — though given how successful women have been in obtaining power via victimology, no one should be surprised if men start to give it a try"), and just plain bullshit ("When Rush Limbaugh suggested that Sandra Fluke should at least pay for her own birth control..."). Someone who actually thinks this way is bound to consider abortion some kind of illegitimate special right because men can't have one.
Mainly, though, it's a reminder that for libertarians abortion is an agree-to-disagree thing you shouldn't concern yourself over too much, despite the unprecedented current attacks on it, while you should fight to the death for the non-negotiable right of companies to hire workers for five cents an hour if they can get away with it, and to fill the air and water with pollutants pretty much at will. In other words, it's a maximum-liberty movement for adherents who are overwhelmingly male and don't believe they'll ever be in any financial difficulty, and who think empathy is a river on Gor.
UPDATE. Speaking of bullshit libertarians, here's David French, whom we saw last year raving against gay marriage and, I swear to God, Griswold v. Connecticut ("Think for a moment of the awesome power of the sexual revolution over law and logic. Is there a single legal doctrine that can stand against the quest for personal sexual fulfillment?"). Now he's arguing for a "libertarian military." Whereas maximum sexual freedom is an outrage, military-style libertarianism is dead butch -- liberty means more killing and less building, and isn't that was Hayek and Rand were all about?
In my (admittedly anecdotal) experience, thoughtful military libertarians tend to advocate something we haven’t really tried in our more than decade-long fight against Islamic jihad — the relatively brief application of truly overwhelming destructive force against identified enemies.
That’s why I wonder if a libertarian military might be more lethal, even on smaller budgets. A trimmed-down bureaucracy, an increased emphasis on the destructive rather than nation-building capabilities of the force under arms, and doctrines designed to inflict maximum (non-nuclear) destruction on enemy forces rather than transforming and democratizing communities — all of this could add up to a more lethal (yet smaller) military.Normally you have to tell one of these guys about someone buying a Big Mac with food stamps to get his bloodlust roaring like this. I know there are a lot of guys out there who are like, "oh yeah, libertarians, Drew Carey right, free the weed," and God bless them, but when it comes to the professional-grade stuff libertarianism still just a niche brand of conservatism.
French also makes an avatar for the free-markets-free-fire military of Rand Paul, whose idea of a proper army probably involves grey uniforms.
adherents...who think empathy is a river on Gor.
ReplyDelete...not gonna even try to follow that act. *flicks lighter*
That top link seems to be more of a "Hurr-hurr, dumb libs worship Europe but wait until they hear this!" A classic on the wingnut "humor" circuit.
ReplyDeleteThe bit about "predatory" behavior links to another post about woman going off birth control to trick men into having children. Paranoid, yes, but at least he didn't bring in spermjacking (Look it up. Hell, his wife has probably written about it). Aside from that omission, it's a textbook argument from the MRA subgroup "Men Going Their Own Way." MGTOWs (yes, that's the acronym they willingly use) believe that women - or, usually, just American women - are all plotting against them, and the only way they can survive is by cutting them out altogether.
The more I think about it, the more Glenn reminds me of an MGTOW. The only thing that doesn't fit is...well, he's married. Maybe he gets cred for finding one of the "good ones."
I suppose these nitwits want to go back to a more Medieval scheme, where men were noble knights and protected the honor of fair maidens who swooned to obey them. Instead of our modern world where all your Sandra Flukes are oppressing the daylights out of Rush Limbaugh by causing him to lose a sponsor, what with the way they run around needing to be called sluts because of how brazenly they testify in favor of medical coverage. Glurg. But toss the nitwits into a Wayback Machine and whip them back to 1350 AD, and I bet they'll just be a passel of jerks too fat to fit into armor, spending feast night in the corner, burbling into their chalices about how all this chivalry is just a tool used by maidens to oppress true men.
ReplyDeleteMedieval is right up their alley. Boil the Libertarian view down to its moving parts, and it's not much more than feudalism with no Church and therefore no noblesse oblige. Any peasant could work his way up to being a lord, right?
ReplyDeleteHolee Shit - I never thought I would agree with Annie Wineboxhouse on anything. But her response to Ol Perfesser Dickhead at http://althouse.blogspot.com/2013/07/a-somewhat-dismissive-response.html is actually about what I would have said. And srsly the commenters at Instastoopit are actually fantasizing that a woman would retrieve a used condom from the trash in order to impregnate herself JUST TO GET CHILD SUPPORT from the resulting pregnancy?? Oh, the levels of stoopit are so very, very strong with that. I am almost taking to mah fainting couch and clutching mah pearls for a bit just to get over it.
ReplyDeleteWell, yes: if we can put away six or seven hogsheads of lovely filth this summer, it ought to bring enough at the fall market for a down payment on a starter manor.
ReplyDeleteI'm curious as to what Reynolds thinks he means by 'male reproductive freedom', and if he's considered that the reason it doesn't get brought up much is not due to a conspiracy of feminism but because the two things that conservatives can't leave alone, pregnancy and medical birth control, simply don't exist for men*. Men already have the right to buy condoms and ED pills, and socially it's more acceptable for us to engage in casual sex. I think Reynolds and co. have their own sexual frustrations confused with those of all men as a whole. Yeah, sorry gents, but you don't speak for your whole gender.
ReplyDeleteSo given the lack of any concrete policy complaint, I'm assuming 'male reproductive rights' for Reynolds means something like 'sex without any consequences whatsoever, legal, financial, or social.' So yeah, he hasn't lost his libertarian cred-that's the way they think everything should be for them. Some actively see women as inferior beings, but most just see them the way they see anything that gets in between them and their imagined paradise of rich male intellectual businessmen ruling the world: a distraction that they're entitled to be rid of.
*-If male birth control pills ever become a thing, I wonder how Reynolds and co. will react: sorrow that men have surrendered to the feminist ballbusters, or joy that they have a weapon of their own against all those 'spermjackers?' Either way, it will be gross and uncomfortable.
Yeah, just like Megan McArdle pretends she's pro-choice, but spouts anti-choice boilerplate, seems unaware of standard pro-choice arguments, and opposes actual pro-choice measures. Oh, and is for ultra-libertarian transvaginal probes.
ReplyDeleteOr there's Reynolds himself, who pretends he's anti-torture but says he finds the anti-torture crowd so sanctimonious he might change his position (as covered here at Alicublog). Because, y'know, when it comes to war or inflicting pain on people, spite should be your guiding principle. The man is a friggin' law professor, who rails against big gummint while sucking off the public teat. Hell, Reynolds' commitment to the rule of law and general morality is so strong he could make it as a conservative Supreme Court justice.
(But he claims he's not conservative. Funny how so many glibertarians like McArdle and Reynolds just lie about their actual positions… but will still complain that others won't engage them on the merits. They know some of their true positions would meet with wide disapproval, and they're too cowardly to own up to them, so McArdle does her disingenuous, sloppy hack jobs and Reynolds does this passive-aggressive aggrieved white man bullshit. Heh indeedy, such is blogging.)
"When Rush Limbaugh suggested that Sandra Fluke should at least pay for her own birth control..."
ReplyDeleteI was trying to compose a parody of this, but gave up after realizing that you pretty much had to go full-metal Godwin to have even a chance.
Not sure if I'm a MGTOW, and I don't think the wimmins are plotting against me personally - but, hey, I let them do their stuff and I'll get on with mine and if we occasionally meet in the middle then great. :)
ReplyDeleteThumbs up to that link. A very sensible, well-argued viewpoint.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with all of it, but a whole heck of a lot of it.
Mainly, "male reproductive rights" means not having to pay child support. See also "paper abortion".
ReplyDeleteIf you are meeting in the middle, even occasionally, you are doing all right.
ReplyDeleteChivalry nostalgia is a staple of the genre. How can anyone say women were oppressed when men paid for dinner and opened doors for them? When you think about it, weren't women better off back in the supposedly oppressed era than now when they have to open their own doors? Etc.
ReplyDeleteAbortion, government spying on everybody, and wars are three big government things I find the glibbertarian is not very concerned about. Unlike Steve Forbes, Jr.'s taxes, which are totally too high!
ReplyDelete~
Gee, is it somehow possible that "libertarianism" is really nothing more than conservatism with an extra syllable? 'Cause I sure find it difficult to see any daylight between the stated positions of these supposedly disparate groups.
ReplyDeleteOh, there ARE other libertarians out there. Some are "Yay, for military spending, only, no other gubmint stuff". Some are basically anarchist capitalists by default (Screw government, I wanna be ruled by big business!).The only subgroup of libertarians I feel some sort of kinship with is civil libertarians. And by civil, I don't mean their manners. But all in all, your interpretation is pretty much spot on.
ReplyDeleteA libertarian is a guy who wants to be left alone to keep turning his cultural capital into cash, and Glenn Reynolds is a shining example.
ReplyDeleteWell, seeing as raising a child is a very inexpensive, undemanding affair, these women are no doubt reaping great profits from that monthly $430 check.
ReplyDeletePrecede the phrase "male reproductive freedom" with the adjective "white" and it becomes clearer.
ReplyDeleteWomen aren't some alien species, you know.
ReplyDelete"#WARONMEN: Female lawmaker seeks to regulate men’s reproductive health"
ReplyDeleteSo wait, a woman turning the tables is a "war on men?," but no matter how many times conservatives pass the same sort of legislation, the "war on women" is just a liberal meme? Does he have ANY self-awareness at all?
though given how successful women have been in obtaining power via victimology, no one should be surprised if men start to give it a try
Ah, so that's a definite "no."
a woman would retrieve a used condom from the trash in order to
ReplyDeleteimpregnate herself JUST TO GET CHILD SUPPORT from the resulting
pregnancy??
Yeah, such women should be ashamed of attempting such a deceitful thing, which they might well regret for the rest of their lives. Thank goodness abortion is legal.
That's a pretty fine distillation of libertarianism. nicely done.
ReplyDeleteWell, two out of three, anyway. An awful lot of the glibbertarian crowd are openly antichoice.
ReplyDeleteEver read Manboobz? Appearently, to a lot of weirdos out there, an alien species is EXACTLY what they are. By all evidence -I- should be their target. Lives alone, male, 33, suffering from depression. It's just... I can actually form words and sentences when confronted with the Kryptonite of vaginapressence (if it wasn't a real word before, it is now, and a term I can easily see them using). They are saddest sadsacks ever. And i've seen some sad sacks. here's my own hermit hint on how to talk to girls: Say hello, introduce yourself, and act like a decent human being. For some reason this is EXTREMLY HARD for some guys.
ReplyDeleteThe thing about chivalry in the 13th century was that in return for men being regarded with awe by the womenfolk, the men were more than occasionally required to actually put their lives on the line to protect them. The Ole Perf wants the awe in return for a few lawyerly, cleverly worded "Heh, Indeedys".
ReplyDeleteAny woman who fought her way through the old coffee grounds and pizza crusts to find that condom has by God EARNED that child support check!
ReplyDeleteThat Gor reference really brought me back.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the internets, they are wrong about that particular waterway - perhaps they were thinking instead of the Vosk or Laurius.
Yes, someone has painstakingly listed the waters on the planet of Gor: http://www.worldofgor.com/reference.aspx?rpID=3
Yeah but Ole Perfesser is just an MRA because his wife made him be one.
ReplyDeleteI remember a scholarly book on crime through the ages from a few decades ago, and there may have been a lot less of women swooning over men in Sir Philip Sydney's time than we've been led to believe.
ReplyDeleteWomen tired of men nearly as rapidly as men tired of women, and a knife in the ribs was the usual means of dispatch, with poison a close second.
Even Mrs. Dr. Ol' Perfesser may one day come to the conclusion that he's a smug, irritating git and she's tired of looking at him.
Not to mention running full-tilt smack-dab into Poe's Law.
ReplyDeleteInterestingly, though, doctors often ask married men for their wife’s permission before they’ll perform a vasectomy. When people talk about “reproductive freedom,” they generally mean women’s reproductive freedom.
ReplyDeleteWow. This guy's a lawyer? If a doctor asks a wife's permission before performing a vasectomy this is the doctor's choice as a private professional in a private setting, there is no legal requirement whatsoever -- in fact, HIPAA laws forbid the doctor from even mentioning it to a patient's wife unless the husband's already given written permission to do so. What the fuck does this have to do with "freedom?" There is zero government involvement here, and you'd think a anti-consumerist glibertarian like the OP would be on the side of the doctor, who's only covering his ass against a possible (but far-fetched) lawsuit. Not to mention the fact that asking for such permission is rare enough to be a men's rights urban legend and thus typical bullshit, as is comparing abortion rights to.. oh fuck it..
What makes even ridiculous is the notion that there are vast numbers of men out there who want a vasectomy but whose wives won't let them have one -- like having to ask the Mrs. for permission to buy a Hummer -- as if it's his idea.
Also, for the lulz: "Houseplants of Gor".
ReplyDeleteAh. well, conservatives own the victim brand. I think it's in their bylaws. They're cheerily orgasmic about "old white men" used an epithet, because, gawd knows they don't get nearly enough opportunities to piss and moan about how badly they're treated.
ReplyDeleteThis guy is a perfect example. Why, I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that he's been victimized by women all his life. I'll bet they even laugh at him sometimes....
Well, THAT'S gotta suck! After spending a hard day slaying dragons and defending his lady's honor from the predations of scalawags and ruffians by penning strongly worded blog posts, Sir Lord Ole Perf comes home to a meal of shank of mutton a la rat poison.
ReplyDeleteFinally. Yes, this. DMOP writes columns and books about the war on men, doesn't she? Then again, I was going to start invoking projection, but in the Perf's case maybe it's all a cry for help. The war on men--it's coming from inside the house!
ReplyDelete'I would be happy with a European-style abortion regime, but the radical pro-abortion crowd insists on making this a zero sum game,' is a pretty standard trick in fake pro-choice/"moderate" anti-choice playbook. See also: NARAL is the left wing equivalent of the NRA.
ReplyDeleteWhy can't we have austerity like the Greeks.
ReplyDeleteThe wimmins are plotting against me. That's my best explanation and I'm sticking to it.
ReplyDeleteNo contraception after the first trimester of marriage.
ReplyDeletecomment contains facts not in evidence.
ReplyDeletePinochet is their ideal Libertarian model, although, if you Google "Chilean model", ahh, not so bad.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.google.com/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=950&bih=513&q=chilean+model&oq=chilean+model&gs_l=img.12...0.0.0.3467.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0...0.0.0..1ac..17.img.BVgQlMNXPSQ
What's Herman Cain doin' in there?
ReplyDeletegagooglygooglin' Chilean models, duh.
ReplyDeleteA civil libertarian is a liberal
ReplyDeleteThe law in its infinite wisdom, prevents both men and women from getting abortions.
ReplyDeleteI know. I was being even more generous than usual.
ReplyDeleteIt's rare for any wife to give her husband a hummer let alone allow him to buy one somewhere else.
ReplyDeleteOh, there ARE other libertarians out there.
ReplyDelete[Excitedly unpacks brochures on libertarian socialism and mutualism]
The only subgroup of libertarians I feel some sort of kinship with is civil libertarians.
[Dejectedly returns brochures to tattered file folder]
Yeah, I was actually toying with "Fred Phelps became a martyr to political correctness when he suggested that the secular liberal approach to homosexuality was not self-evidently true." Then I thought, that's hardly a parody, is it? The magnitude of the lies are hardly distinguishable, and maybe Reynolds is even guilty of the grosser insult to his readers' intelligence.
ReplyDeleteI was arguing with one online yesterday.
ReplyDeleteHe said of course he supports 'abortion on demand', is opposed to wars, and government spying.
Nonetheless, he always supports Republicans, because that 4th thing is the one that matters to him. It's the Rand-Reason crowd...
~
"...an increased emphasis on the destructive rather than nation-building capabilities of the force under arms..."
ReplyDeleteOh Christ, THIS again. And we "lost" Nam because the hippies made us fight with one hand tied behind our backs. Still, ya gotta love the pipe-puffing, thoughtful tone--even as he calls for "truly overwhelming destructive force against identified enemies."
Because if there's one thing we do with identified enemies, it's mollycoddle them. Bring back the good old days when we had the guts to destroy a village in order to save it.
Not so fast, my mummytroll. Speak to me.
ReplyDeleteSET LASERS TO... oh, um, hi!
ReplyDeleteThat's the best setting ever.
ReplyDeleteFrench: Is there a single legal doctrine that can stand against the quest for personal sexual fulfillment?
ReplyDeleteEvangelical Christians are not the greatest source of support for rape laws. 'Scuse me, ANTI rape laws.
Eh, it's all right. I don't really lug around a file folder full of anarcho-syndicalist pamphlets.
ReplyDelete[Discreetly nudges tattered file folder under desk with foot]
And though I have occasionally piped up (mostly at Crooked Timber) to note that libertarianism is more than just American Republican right-libertarianism, the inevitable counterargument is, "And all those other types of libertarian could fit into one lecture hall." Since I'm apparently less of an optimist than, e.g., Kevin Carson, mutualist and Wobbly, I'm forced to concede the point.
Wether you do or not, the kinds of politics your'e talking about are so far removed they may as well be one of those rings around Saturn. And i... just... LIKE YOU OKAY.... wow,
ReplyDeleteYeah, shock-n-awe was just a polite tap on the shoulder.
ReplyDeleteLibertarian military?
ReplyDeleteI guess our Mr. French is a mite too young to remember fragging.
Even in the context of his rather simple-minded view of the subject, we dropped 7.2 million tons of bombs on Vietnam (three and a half times all the bombs used in all theaters in WWII).
Or, Shock and awe? What exactly does this bloodthirsty twit want? More raw carnage in the streets for even less good reason? I looked at his bio, and from that, all I can say is, yup, that's exactly what he wants.
Dumb mothafuckahs like French will be the ruin of us all.
I've been reading Althouse and commenting there for a couple of years. The commentariat conservatives were in a state of self delusion. Wanna be libertarians, most of them. They were nothing more than plain old regressive conservatives. The bigotry was rank. Misogyny was rampant. The comments were becoming increasingly vicious regarding gays and women, to the point in which even Althouse could no longer take it. I salute her for her courage in pushing back to the majority of her readers, male conservatives, probably realizing that she would be in danger of blowing up her comments section.
ReplyDeletePerhaps she thought it was worth doing so, as so many of her commenters needed a wake up call. She laughed at their scrunched up faces, the faces of imaginary victimhood.
Never in my life have I expected to read the phrase "thoughtful military libertarians". Never.
ReplyDeleteFairytales have their place, and, yeah that's a wrong one.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I'd have congratuled her "courage", too. If it wasn't for the fact that she's been a shithead for years. You know how things get "rank"? When they're left to linger.
ReplyDeleteTrue, but better late than never.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't make any more sense now than it did when you first read it, does it?
ReplyDeleteI love the idea of a libertarian military. Could you imagine boot camp? It would be like the last act of Hamlet mixed with Meet the Feebles. The three or four survivors would only live long enough to slip on blood or banana peels.
ReplyDeleteYeah, but only on point, right?
ReplyDeleteJesus, speaking of libertarian bloodlust, take a gander at the comments to French's piece. It's a nuke-em-all orgy of people they'd love to obliterate without a second thought. I haven't seen the little dicks of soi disant libertarians this engorged since the short-lived rumor that Salma Hayek was Friedrich's granddaughter.
ReplyDeleteShe's NOT???
ReplyDeleteForget it, Rand Paul, I'm canceling the check!
~
No. I was the only female liberal over there. I fought these jerks on a daily basis.
ReplyDelete"Thoughtful military libertarians"
ReplyDeleteYKUTW.IDNTIMWYTIM.
That sort of post attracts the keyboard commandos like flies to fresh shit.
ReplyDeleteYou're braver than I. Reading stuff like that is really dangerous to one's mental health.
Hope it's true, but if it is, how the hell did you stand it?
ReplyDeleteI'm a scrappy old broad, that's how. And I have an overdeveloped sense of right and wrong.
ReplyDeleteThey literally seem to view women as a commodity or a resource. Not just in the usual sense of sexual objectification (though that's certainly part of it), but as a sort of durable consumer good like a house or a car. The ones who haven't Gone Their Own Way entirely talk about how they just want a girlfriend, any girlfriend, and they'd be happy, so why is that so much to ask?
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't seem to occur to them that even if they suddenly had a girlfriend, their view of women as interchangeable accessories is probably going to doom that relationship from the start. Indeed, it doesn't seem to occur to them that their girlfriend needs to have an opinion about their relationship at all, or even consent to it. But when it inevitably ends they'll suddenly realize that they have to find another girlfriend, which is something we who have a, let's say healthy, view of dating get used to, but that they seem ill-prepared to conceive, let alone accomplish. They all seem to hold a middle school view of first relationships well into adulthood.
Ann has a tendency to ban people.
ReplyDeleteDear men who feel the need to tell women what to do,
ReplyDeleteShut up.
Thank you in advance,
BG
thoughtful military libertarians tend to advocate something we haven’t really tried in our more than decade-long fight against Islamic jihad — the relatively brief application of truly overwhelming destructive force against identified enemies.
ReplyDeleteYou know what this war needs? More atrocities and war crimes. That would be thoughtful.
Well, one way to see what would be wrong with a libertarian military would be to compare and contrast two movies - Fight Club and Blackhawk Down. Go ahead. Tell me how effective your combat units will be when every soldier follows the libertarian dictum that selfishness is the highest value. Protecting the soldier next to you is for sissies. That should really stoke morale and team spirit.
ReplyDelete"Of course I support your adorable little womanly rights, but my first priority is straight white man rights. That's just rational!"
ReplyDeleteDude should be forced to spend some time in Laos or Cambodia. When some poor farm kid gets their leg blown off by a bomb we dropped on their country illegally 40 years ago, I guess that's just part of making the great omelet of freedom, not a tragedy like slightly raising income taxes.
ReplyDelete"Someone who actually thinks this way is bound to consider abortion some kind of illegitimate special right because men can't have one."
ReplyDeleteSure. And there are parallels. For example:
Gay sex is an illegitimate special right, because only gay people get to have it. Straight people might want to have gay sex, but aren't allowed to have it, under penalty of no longer being considered straight. This is the way gay people control the access to gay sex, and it's unfair, I tells ya. If gay people were in earnest about wanting things to be all even-steven, they'd let straight people have all the gay sex they wanted to have, yet allow them to stay straight. That's the way you prove earnestness, that's the way you prove consistency, that's the way you prove devotion to your cause.
The way things are now, only gay people get to be gay, and that's an obvious injustice. Are we going to allow them to enforce this awful cartel?? No, no, ten thousand times no!! Let's have all the gayness evenly distributed; let's see if our gay brothers and sisters will stand for that. Then we can talk terms...
Welcome to the Club. The overdelevoped old broads club of morals. wait... I think I messed that up. Welcome to the truffles and morels club. Dang it! I never can get the handshake right. Well, welcome in the stewpot, whoever you are, there's coffee for everyone, but I tend to hog the booze. Anyways, here's the welcome song: " You're always welcome in our house and we hope you will stay. You're always welcome in our house and we KNOW you will stay!",
ReplyDeleteYeah, I was talking about American libertarians. And the kinds you mention... eh... in the u.s.... eh... I think maybe a lecture hall is being slightly ambitious.
ReplyDeleteOkay, well. At least they don't think empathy is a river on Dune.
ReplyDelete{ducks}
Now she's shut off the comments on her blog, again. (Well, aside from Meade, her obnoxious-commenter-turned-Altspouse.) Very likely the nicest thing she's ever done, if not the only nice thing.
ReplyDeleteHey, if any straight men want to have sex with me, I'm more than happy to let them.
ReplyDeleteWait, *why* was a female liberal voice "needed?" Or any liberal voice? I understand the morbid appeal of wading in the slime, but in the end you're filthy and you haven't convinced anyone of anything. I would no more have commented at Althouse than I would at Stormfront. Either way, it's an unpleasant experience with no clear purpose.
ReplyDeleteI want to have this comment bronzed to put on my mantle so I can read it over and over while I warm my bones on a cold winter night.
ReplyDeleteWell thanks, I think, lol. I will stay, but only if I get to argue with someone, got in the habit over at Althouse, but it would be like arguing with myself. Well a rolling stone gathers no moss or fungus, and I will roll by daily, great blog!
ReplyDeleteWell, a critical self-examination would force me to admit that for an ostensibly straight guy (married 22 years) I'm pretty goddam gay. Flagrant, if I'm given half a chance.
ReplyDeleteEcho chambers need to be invaded, by dissenting voices. I guess it takes a certain personality type, such as mine.
ReplyDeleteMy girlfriend and I have been together for almost five years and well, you know, and with some regularity. Should I be worried that she'll stop as soon as we're married?
ReplyDelete"Reading stuff like that is really dangerous to one's mental health."
ReplyDeleteI think you are right.
Say hello, introduce yourself, and act like a decent human being. For some reason this is EXTREMLY HARD for some guys.
ReplyDeleteFor some guys it's hard because they're hard. Only enough blood to operate one brain and all that.
"Enlightened self interest" in a nutshell.
ReplyDeleteAre you walking all the way into the kitchen to throw that thing away, or are you making coffee and eating pizza in the bedroom?
ReplyDeleteIf I am not mistaken, when a person, or even me, comments, the website gets a "hit" and the "hit" is the same no matter what you say. Anotherwords, if you comment a million times on how terrible and wqorthless a website is, you will help move it up in the web stats.
ReplyDeleteWhy give them the "hit" since that's the only meaningful thing anyone can leave there?
I'm guessing the libertarian's egg timer was broken.
ReplyDeleteNah, I'm being genuine. I'm weird, and CAN be a shithead. But not tonight.
ReplyDeleteOkay, this is killin' me. Please give me a cheat code.
ReplyDeleteI know you're joking, but some of those MRA assholes actually try to use that as a "legitimate" argument. Never really sure how that's supposed to work. "I'm so horny, I can't get laid!". Seriosuly, if men couldn't keep a conversation going while having a hard on, how do you explain all the comments I've ever made here on Alicublog.... yeah, let THAT one marinade in your dreams.
ReplyDeleteWhat sort of mindless characterizes the vile neocon Glenn Reynolds as a Libertarian?
ReplyDeleteOh, right, Liberals.
No, he does.
ReplyDeleteWell, self interest, anyway.
ReplyDeleteInigo Montoya.
ReplyDeleteThe prepare to die-speech don't fit.... HEEEY, you messin' with me!
ReplyDelete"I was talking about American libertarians". Yes; yes, you were.
ReplyDeleteIn America, a "libertarian" is a stoner afflicted with the defective gene that causes Conservative Personality Disorder, as opposed to the nerds and jocks afflicted with the same gene who make up the mainstream GOP. Where I live, by contrast, "libertarian" and its cognates in various Romance and Germanic languages connotate bowling-ball-shaped-bomb-throwing anarchism. Somehow I suspect that Reynolds would not be comfortable spending an evening with the Libertäre Jugend I spent part of my ill-spent youth with.
"When people talk about 'reproductive freedom,' they generally mean women’s reproductive freedom")
ReplyDeleteWhen you get down to the nitty-gritty, is there any other kind of reproductive freedom?
If gay people were in earnest about wanting things to be all even-steven, they'd let straight people have all the gay sex they wanted to have while remaining perfectly straight.
ReplyDeleteHey, that worked for Larry Craig... and Ted Haggard... and George Rekers... need I go on?
Of course, the problem here is identifying enemies. Fuck, we briefly applied truly overwhelming destructive force against the Iraqis, who never initiated hostilities towards the U.S. throughout their history.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I'm well versed in the American version. Wich should be obvbious. We've both pretty much covered all permutations of its selfish hide now, I think.
ReplyDeleteIn my language, what you mention would be "revolutionaries".
Ha ha, the joke's on you. He's already converted it to bitdollars, or whatever response to "fiat currency" is in vogue.
ReplyDeleteIt's Bitcoins and it's an endlessly hilarious pyramid scheme of one smart libertarian bilking all the others. It's like a microcosm of idiocy and Russian money laundering.
ReplyDeleteWhere were some of you folks?
ReplyDeletePersonally, I'm of the "don't give two shits, won't give her hits" school of thought. The opinions of a knuckleheaded Midwestern law school lecturer really weren't worth my time. Life's too short to swim around the fetid pools of the right-wing blogosphere without getting paid serious Sorosbucks.
Is there any facet of libertarianism that isn't a scam?
ReplyDeleteNot the U.S kind, no. But seriously, look up Bitcoin.. it is so fuckin' funny.
ReplyDeleteThe vaultsuit IS tempting....
ReplyDeleteJust picture how it would look on your floor.
ReplyDelete"We oppose fiat currency! That's why we're converting all our cash into virtual coins that have value because the guy who invented them says so!"
ReplyDeleteI'm not gay, alright?! It's just the guys I blow at the gas station who are gay!
ReplyDeleteThe best part was a cheap net-tvshow that was savagely mocked. The whole bitcoin saga just has me rollin'.
ReplyDeleteHmmm.... three MIGHT not be crowd!
ReplyDeleteYeah, but ABOUT those ribbons,,,,
ReplyDelete"Think for a moment of the awesome power of the sexual revolution over
ReplyDeletelaw and logic. Is there a single legal doctrine that can stand against
the quest for personal sexual fulfillment?"
Sure: there's the long-standing legal doctrine (much revered among conservatives and "libertarians"), non potes si me fastidit ("it's not allowed if it squicks me out").
The best defense against these sperm-burglars would be swallowing the used condom post-coitus.
ReplyDeleteIf that day comes, she'll just change the programming on his sexbot, thereby turning it into a killbot.
ReplyDeleteSet lasers to steal sperm? WHAT YOU SAY?!?
ReplyDeleteHit the road, spermjack, and don't you come back, no more more no more..
ReplyDeleteDon't you mean "git the load, spermjack and don't you come back, no more more no more.."
ReplyDeleteTry not to be so hard-on yourself.
ReplyDeleteMe? I'll just be over here poking my mind's eye out.
FUCK! Beaten at my own game.
ReplyDeleteYou're THAT big?
ReplyDeleteDon't knock yourself, I couldn't even play the game in your native tongue.
ReplyDeleteBe careful or I'll introduce you to my native tongue!
ReplyDelete(I have just discovered that everything i say sounds gay. And rhymes. I'm good with that.)
At one point you had to email your comment to Meade and he decided if it was worthy. This is via MBouffant at Thers place - I don't actually have the intestinal fortitude to *follow* Annie.
ReplyDeleteUmmm, thank you for that mental image??
ReplyDeleteDon't read further downthread....
ReplyDeleteThey won't be given the chance to fit into armor. They'll be mucking out the stables.
ReplyDeleteHence the meme (h/t Sadly, No!, isn't it?): never get out of the boat.
ReplyDeleteThere you go. Just think of us as not that different from you - just with innies instead of outies. I'm an old widder lady now and my dating days are behind me but that approach totally worked in my (if I may say so) hawt younger life.
ReplyDeleteDon't say your dating days are over, I know this 33 year old guy from Denmark who'd fall head over heels for you.
ReplyDeleteEEeEwwwww.. outies are weird!
ReplyDeleteHey, ya big bald bastard...I can't stop thinkin' of you and me and Triplanetray makes three.
ReplyDeleteYou need four to play bridge, make room for the widder lady!
ReplyDeleteNever was a cardsharp, I'm more of a dicey risk.
ReplyDeleteWelcome to Deadwood... Can be combative.
ReplyDeleteLOL. Too late.
ReplyDeleteHey, don't blame me for anything the big bald bastard says!
ReplyDeleteOh my, bridge? For a little, you know, hard foldin' money? I might just consider it. I mean, cards are sooo confusin' to ladies of my age. ;-)
ReplyDeleteAnd here I am, alone once again, rollin' my dice. (Don't read anythin' into that, now!)
ReplyDeleteAll right, all right ...
ReplyDelete"Inconceivable!"
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
aghh.... the weird behatted troll keeps messing with me!
ReplyDeleteOh, now now. They have value because of the processor cycles they represent. And since in the physics sense, those processor cycles are work, we see that bitcoins in fact are a modern-day expression of the labor theory of value. Ergo, bitcoin enthusiasts are communists.
ReplyDelete"Is there a single legal doctrine that can stand against
ReplyDeletethe quest for personal sexual fulfillment?"
That's what Clarence Thomas said.
Here are many, many instances of Reynolds saying he's pro-choice, usually with a "but."
ReplyDeleteThey're worse at it than Stalin. Woah, i just made an inverted Godwin!
ReplyDeleteOK, you intrigued me enough to look up Bitcoins. After spending 20 minutes or so reading that stuff it's still incomprehensible . SO CLEARLY A SCAM!! But if you hang in there until 2140 you can clean up! Or something.
ReplyDeleteActually, it should be obvious to anyone that I'll use all the words available, and STILL only barely make sense.
ReplyDeleteAt the risk of violating Godwin's Law, I think he's describing the Waffen SS. Unfortunately, he thinks he's talking about the Continental Army.
ReplyDelete"Kill them all; the free market will know its own."
ReplyDeleteWhy are all these homosexuals sucking my cock?
ReplyDeleteIt's funny that two of his three identified Bible verses are most likely forgeries ie not written by Paul but attributed to him to and are more about supporting the developing church hierarchy than anything else
ReplyDeleteyes
ReplyDeleteinverted Godwin
ReplyDeleteClipArt that and add it to the OBAMA SUTRA!
What the fuck is a libertarian military? One where the privates don't have to follow orders from the sargeants?
ReplyDeleteThese shitheads are always screaming about slippery slopes to totalitarianism created by fucking efficient lightbulbs and low-flow toilets. What do they think belligerent militarism and an obsessive fixation on "enemies" might lead to? Slopes don't get more slippery than that.
ReplyDelete:)
ReplyDeleteReading anything from you is dangerous moose pie
ReplyDeleteI am glad you say so. I would have said queer but what the hell
ReplyDeleteYour joke is really some Jew bag
ReplyDeleteOh, come on, if you're gonna be offensive, don't be boring about it, And most of all don't be unfunny and void of all sense, Not a high bar,
ReplyDeleteAre you liberal
ReplyDeleteFuck no. Liberals are the feathers on my... right wing!
ReplyDeleteI knew I loved you for a reason. Don't speak with Quad B or Chutney Love. 2 fookin liberal jerk offs
ReplyDeleteYeah, i'm actually to the left, they're nice people and you're a plain boring shithead.
ReplyDeleteRemember when Mcardle said she supported Obama but didn't vote for him because she lost her library card or some such bullshit?
ReplyDeleteLibertarians are Republicans who are too ashamed to admit it. Cowards, basically.
You're such an asshole, Roy. You don't even address the basic points Glenn raises. You just diss him like the jerk you are.
ReplyDeleteGlenn hasn't raised his point in years.
ReplyDeleteHave you been reading Noel Coward, Donald? I think I see the effect on your style.
ReplyDeleteNow he's arguing for a "libertarian military." Whereas maximum sexual freedom is an outrage, military-style libertarianism is dead butch...
ReplyDeleteThere is an oddly retro feel to French's screed. To begin with, his ideas about a smaller, cheaper, more lethal military sound a lot like the ideas of Rumsfeld. In addition, there is already a large "libertarian" wing of the military that sees plenty of action, so it is unclear why French doesn't just join it. I'm sure they could use some lawyers who are familiar with the armed forces. Why doesn't he notice that his dreams are already the reality?