Wearing that is like flying the Confederate flag.

Cute, Sam, but I haven't voted Republican in "every election," or pretty much in any election. I have voted Democratic far more times in my life than Republican. (Indeed, I'm still a registered Democrat from back in those college days when I was young and naive. Though, come to think of it, embarrassingly enough I continued it after college, voting for Clinton in 1996.) I think I've voted three times for Republicans (never for president), and one of those was for mayor because the candidate was my next-door neighbor.

One of the reasons I've yet to hunt you down like an animal is that I can always trust you to be literal minded like this. It's oddly endearing. (You do realize that "you voted R on every election for the last 20 years" is not actually well denied by "nuh uh, I voted for Bill Clinton in the 1990s!", right?)

Back to the point at hand: you want to broad-brush every college sophomore who ever wore a Che t-shirt as morally identical to Pol Pot, but throw your hands up in the air and scream "false equivalency you rogue!" any time anyone notes that your actual voting and rhetorical behavior *in the world* supports and is supported by the most vile of racists and throwbacks across the nation.

I like your cartoon Sam, but DMN is more of a (1,1), (1,3), (6,1), (6,3).

Although (6,1) does not make him a racist which is what the cartoon implies.

or a Lenin shirt, or a Soviet Flag, or an Enver Hoxha shirt.

I was hoping people would try to figure out which 20 boxes I did fit.

I was hoping people would try to figure out which 20 boxes I did fit

I highly recommend the film "Good Bye, Lenin!" -- funny and touching.

David? David has the entire first row maxed out. Totally rolled 20s on row 1.

My nerd detector just went off.

Well, it would be easier to guess which 4 you don't self identify with. You've already given us one. I'd say that you are not a stoner, are not a lefty, and that you don't practice statutory rape.

There's never been a more perfect sendup of the Stalinist / Leninist mindset than Judy Davis's acidic portrayal of a woman who gives birth to Stalin's final love child in Children of the Revolution.

That cartoon is actually quite offensive. Libertarians are woefully misunderstood.

and I highly recommend the film "Good Bye, Lenin!" -- funny and touching.

Boo ####### hoo. Try harder, then.

The way I see it, politicians and government are inherently corrupting, so it only makes sense to limit their size and influence. Given my experience as a civil servant, and from observation of what is going on around the world, I don't see how anyone could argue otherwise, but I would be open to a reasoned argument to the contrary.

The way I see it, politicians and government are inherently corrupting, so it only makes sense to limit their size and influence. Given my experience as a civil servant, and from observation of what is going on around the world, I don't see how anyone could argue otherwise, but I would be open to a reasoned argument to the contrary.

That cartoon is actually quite offensive. Libertarians are woefully misunderstood.

I never used to consider myself a libertarian, but I certainly do now. Anyone I've spoken to who has actually had an open mind and was capable of rational thought agrees with more libertarian principles than they had realized

Let me be explicitly clear, I don't expect anyone to care if I'm offended by a cartoon.

I do sympathize with the cartoon creator, though. Leftist "political" humor is almost always singularly unfunny and cringe-inducing, leaving as the only mystery whether the problem rests with leftism or leftists. That's a tough obstacle for anyone to overcome.

Yeah I'd say the principles of libertarianism sometimes produce positions I agree with, and sometimes they don't.

I mean, who doesn't find some form of agreement with a thought process that essentially comes down to "leave me, my money, my body, my relationships, et al alone and let me make up my own mind". I don't care if you're conservative, liberal, 'moderate' or haven't ever had so much as a single thought about ideology or government -- there's certainly some aspect of life you'd just assume no one else had any influence over but you.

Good comedians typically have some level of self-deprecation and good satirists typically have some affection for the subject of their satire. A lot of political "humor" lacks both of those elements, which is why it's not funny. It has nothing to do with ideology.

Yes, and for liberals, those aspects are two: sex and drugs.

I just think its sad that people actually believe libertarians are advocates for pedophilia and segregation.

This is a good point. The sticky issues of politics are always the ares where the rights of the individual to be left alone conflict with the rights of (one or more) of the family, the neighbors, the community, the state, the nation, etc., and somebody's rights have to give.

The problem with Libertarians is that many don't recognize that those other groups have rights, so the arguments become futile. Strangely, they ascribe rights to corporations, but not other collectives.

Yes, and for liberals, those aspects are two: sex and drugs.

Not the way Hutcheson defines it. Blech.

As you know, Snapper, the rights flow from those of the individual. Corporations are formed by people who agree to be members of the group; but collectives such as "neighbors" and "the state" are not people who have agreed to be similarly bound (*). Corporations don't take from anyone (or if they do, they're subject to punishment); collectives such as "the state" do.

Making things up on the internet is both fun and easy. Find where I was offended because someone made fun of a liberal. Until then, keep up with the tiger blood, winning-boy.

As you know, Snapper, the rights flow from those of the individual. Corporations are formed by people who agree to be members of the group; but collectives such as "neighbors" and "the state" are not people who have agreed to be similarly bound (*). Corporations don't take from anyone (or if they do, they're subject to punishment); collectives such as "the state" do.

When the ACLU supported the rights of Nazis to march through Skokie, were they pro-Nazi? Or merely supportive of the right of all peoples to exercise free speech?

Do you understand the distinction?

If so, why do you pretend otherwise?

As you know, Snapper, the rights flow from those of the individual. Corporations are formed by people who agree to be members of the group; but collectives such as "neighbors" and "the state" are not people who have agreed to be similarly bound (*). Corporations don't take from anyone (or if they do, they're subject to punishment); collectives such as "the state" do.

In general, conservativism and comedy go together like peanut butter and gravel. That's not said as a criticism; the two fields just aren't deeply compatible.

#458 is dead on. From what I recall, Colbert is/was a Sunday school teacher as well. Not one snapper would agree with, I doubt, but religious.

Leftist "political" humor is almost always singularly unfunny and cringe-inducing

Some of my favorite comic strips are unquestionably left leaning or straight left. Some of (say) Doonebury or Bloom County (or Outland) is indeed cringe-worthy and/or tired but a lot of it is in fact pretty funny (at least in my opinion -- I know a lot of people can't stand either. And it often has nothing to do with where they stand on the political spectrum, though I think righties are more likely to despise either of the strips)

Absolutely, though at times his cholera wins out over his wit. I've heard he hasn't been well lately

Ditto Tom Wolfe's Radical Chic sendup of Leonard Bernstein's Black Panther fundraising party.

I've heard he hasn't been well lately

I've heard he hasn't been well lately

Cancer

#435 P. J. O'Rourke is a fave.

Colbert is a good example, and I think it's clear that while he disagrees with conservatives, he doesn't hate them. It's why he's actually funny, while Miller, or Limbaugh/Olbermann when they're trying to be funny, simply aren't.

You mean actual bodily rights of the human animal, as opposed to abstracted, disembodied "rights" of some vague, theoretical, legally constructed entity wrapped up in the psychology-masquerading-as-math that is economics?

Yeah. Sure. Put me down with that. And hell, throw in rock and roll while you're add it.

The problem with Libertarians is that many don't recognize that those other groups have rights, so the arguments become futile. Strangely, they ascribe rights to corporations, but not other collectives.

So before Castro, was Cuba a Carribbean vacation spot like the Bahamas or Jamaica? I only know it as this island with the embargo. In fact, I remember when I was in my 20's and I heard that you could get Cuban cigars in Canada and Japan and I was surprised. It had never occurred to me that other countries didn't have an embargo.

His earlier stuff is fantastic; Holidays in Hell and Parliament of Whores in particular still hold up very well ...

As I understand it, pre-Castro Cuba was the premier tourism destination in the Caribbean. I can't find a cite for that, however.

"Jersey City Jerseys"

Let me be explicitly clear, I don't expect anyone to care if I'm offended by a cartoon.

Wait, you mean you were actually offended by that cartoon, and not just having us on? For my own sense of faith in the human race, please tell me it's the latter.

Do you s'pose a person could find a game-worn Jersey City Jersey jersey on eBay?

I was offended by that cartoon as much as I'm offended by people who think Bush or Obama were/are good presidents, let's put it that way.

Who would you consider to have been a "good President"?

Nobody since Kennedy for sure, but IMHO Bush and Obama are unequivocally the two worst.