Oh Ziggy, Will the Terrorists Ever Win?

I confess to an unhealthy interest in Ziggy, the rigorously unfunny *sigh* of a comic strip that has darkened the pages of newspapers for decades now. For previous examples of Ziggyania, go here (where Ziggy will blow your mind and make you never want to get email or go to the toilet again) or go here (the latter involving football great Joe Montana, privacy rights, and almost certainly some sort of sexual act that dare not speak its name).

But here is an old Ziggy poster than I stumbled across the other day and can't get out of my mind, and I've already doubled the doses of every prescription and over-the-counter drug I can lay my hands on:

As Silfray Hraka points out, the poster is, by its maker's admission, "suitable for framing." The makers also point out that the poster is on "acid-free" paper, which is a real missed opportunity.

I look at this, and the joy that Ziggy has brought untold hundreds other than me, and think that we may already be living in Robert Nozick's utopia of utopias, where we all get to pick and choose among options we like. Or don't.

Comments

BDB | August 16, 2008, 1:40pm | #

What the fuck? Thats messed up.

joe | August 16, 2008, 1:43pm | #

A: I don't get this.

B: *looks* Ziggy got screwed.

C: Ah! That is clever.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Yahoo Answerer | August 16, 2008, 1:44pm | #

There was a period of time, after the attacks when people would be criticized for not doing "something" to honor the victims of these fresh attacks. Even hardcore rap artists did songs honoring the victims. Even "The Real World" on MTV of all shows did some cheesy reference to them. I think it was because of the attacks that "That's My Bush" was canceled. It was a weird time.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 1:45pm | #

A weird time I hope we never go through again. I'm doing my best to suppressing my memories of 9/12/01 through, oh, mid 2005.

Yahoo Answerer | August 16, 2008, 1:50pm | #

BDB, I agree, I hope we never have to go through anything like that again. It was weired and horrific. I was in the Air Force at the time. My life felt surreal during that period. In some ways it still does.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 1:54pm | #

I was in high school. Life is already weird enough when you're 17, when shit like that is going on it just enters the Twilight Zone.

And yeah this all still seems weird. I think once we 1)get a new President (either one would be vastly more normal), 2) leave Iraq, and 3)this decade ends it will finally feel like that era is behind us. It will feel more like year 2000 America then.

I would say also 4)when we can make jokes about 9/11, but that was the first thing to happen pretty early thanks to Rudy Giuliani and his tragedy pimping.

Yahoo Answerer | August 16, 2008, 2:00pm | #

"I would say also 4)when we can make jokes about 9/11, but that was the first thing to happen pretty early thanks to Rudy Giuliani and his tragedy pimping."

Yea, it is actually a very good thing he did not get the Republican nod. It would have been more of a constant reminder. We need to recover. We need to heal. The one good thing that it would have done is bring some more social tollerance into the party.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 2:03pm | #

Giuliani is only socially tolerant about those things which he will personally tolerant.

IOW Gays and abortions may not push his buttons, but a lot of other things do (hot dog vendors, "vulgar" art, Muslims, etc).

CJ08 | August 16, 2008, 2:19pm | #

Good point BDB, economic intolerance is ALSO social intolerance. Conservatives and many modern "liberals" do not understand that.

matthew hogan | August 16, 2008, 2:23pm | #

From Nick's other Ziggy piece: "a comic strip created by a father and continued by a son that is every bit as unfunny as the English protectorate under Cromwell I and II. . . "

Come on, now, admit it, "Rump Parliament" never fails to get a laugh.

Can't Laugh In Denmark | August 16, 2008, 2:44pm | #

Why were there no riots about this? Why was no one’s life threatened? This is unacceptable!

Occam's toothbrush | August 16, 2008, 2:46pm | #

BDB,

Seinfeld America is never coming back. Let us put that little fantasy to rest right now.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 2:52pm | #

I don't think it will either, but it can get closer to "normal" than the weird clusterfuck of the past 6-7 years.

CJ08 | August 16, 2008, 2:53pm | #

Occam's Toothbrush, of course "Seinfeld America" is not coming back anymore than "I Love Lucy" America is coming back. Seinfeld represents a specific time and place in American history. What we can hope for however is a future without surveillance camera's everywhere, where you don't have to strip naked to get on an aircraft and where the American people are willing to stand up for their liberty and refuse to vote for the "lesser of two evils."

Orange Line Special: "Plus ca change" edition | August 16, 2008, 3:00pm | #

What happened to Weigel?

BDB | August 16, 2008, 3:08pm | #

OLS just go ahead and post your moronic horse shit so I can scroll filter it. I know it must be the highlight if your week.

Tom | August 16, 2008, 3:11pm | #

Don't you (Nick et al.) just get tired of the cynicism? How does it not wear you out? It just strikes me that it must be such a tremendous drain on one's psyche.

The Ziggy poster is cheesy, yes. But what's the point of the snark? Why is the poster worth noting, let alone spotlighting? I don't understand the value in that sort of negativity about something that's ultimately so harmless. It does nothing but inject cynicism into the air, for the sake of cynicism, and that's ultimately just nihilistic and depressing. And I'd imagine it's got to be wearying to you on some level.

joe | August 16, 2008, 3:23pm | #

"Seinfeld America." AKA, the What Now? Decade.

I miss the comfort in being sad.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 3:25pm | #

What are we in now? 24 America?

Occam's toothbrush | August 16, 2008, 3:27pm | #

joe,

The saddest part is that there was no reason that era of depraved innocence had to end...our exile from it was, in the end, self-inflicted.

Occam's toothbrush | August 16, 2008, 3:28pm | #

BDB,

I'm gonna go with "American Idol" America, and weep.

joe | August 16, 2008, 3:29pm | #

I dunno, SOMETHING was going to happen after 9/11.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 3:30pm | #

Occam I hope you meant self-inflicted in a metaphoric sense, not the "9/11 was an inside job sense".

Please tell me you mean the former.

The .COM crash played a part along with 9/11, too.

Occam's toothbrush | August 16, 2008, 3:33pm | #

I'm no Truther. I meant that it was our chosen response to 9/11 that plunged us into this funk.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 3:36pm | #

BTW, I think the next generation marker between Millenials and whatever they name the kids being born now is "Do you remember a world before 9/11?". That, and "did you ever have to use dial-up internet on a regular basis?"

Occam's toothbrush | August 16, 2008, 3:37pm | #

The .COM crash played a part along with 9/11, too.

That's part of it, and SarbOx is another factor unrelated to 9/11, but the resultant fearmongering, the wars and the Patriot Act (especially the banking provisions) were the blows that landed us in our current economic and political straits.

Occam's toothbrush | August 16, 2008, 3:39pm | #

I wish I could say I remember where I was when the first plane hit the WTC on 9/11, but due to my sleepwalking problems I can't be sure.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 3:48pm | #

I wonder, had Florida gone the other way and Gore been President on 9/11, would the Democrats have became gung-ho pro war, pro PATRIOT Act and the Republicans would be the more restrained, pro civil liberties party?

Sometimes I think the two parties just do the opposite of whatever the other one does.

escargot | August 16, 2008, 3:49pm | #

al-Qaeda handed us the football of fear, and the offensive linemen of ambition threw the blocks of deception against the defensive line of prudence. The linebackers of liberty were drawn out of position, and the safeties of constitutionalism lost their footing. Now as the cleats of delusion tear against the grass of reality, only the air resistance of apathy stands between us and the goal line of horror and across it, the end zone of destruction. All the while, the quarterback of intolerance prepares to hold the football of decadence for the kicker of tyranny as he attempts the extra point of oblivion.

James Ard | August 16, 2008, 3:49pm | #

I pray we never go back to Seinfeld America. What a bunch of lemmings we were, tuning in every Thursday to watch some stupid network comedy. Then having to listen to radio jocks rehash the shit the next morning. I couldn't get far enough away from it all.

Occam's toothbrush | August 16, 2008, 3:52pm | #

John Kerry was a big backer of the banking provisions of the PATRIOT act (before they were named that) back in 1998...and one of the main opponents was John Ashcroft.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 3:54pm | #

So I guess somewhere in the Mirror Universe, President Gore is at 28% and a pro-war"remember 9/11" John Kerry is running against a vaguely anti-war Bobby Jindal with Dennis Kucinich on the libertarian ticket.

Occam's toothbrush | August 16, 2008, 3:57pm | #

BDB,

If 9/11 hadn't happened, Ron Paul would be considered a solid Republican by GOP leadership.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 4:07pm | #

I know thats the sad thing. Newt Gingrich used to praise him. The Republicans have really sold their soul to become the Party of War. If 9/11 never happened I'd probably be a liberal-ish Republican. Thats why I fear a John McCain win--it will confirm in their minds the only way to win is to be the Party of War, and damn all the other principles they hold.

James Ard | August 16, 2008, 4:11pm | #

It will also confirm that restricting speech, playing footsie with Democrats and sucking the press's dick is the way to get elected.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 4:12pm | #

Amen James Ard. Amen.

I will never forgive McCain for McCain-Feingold, or for flirting with the anti-gun left in 2000.

James Ard | August 16, 2008, 4:21pm | #

In Fact, about the only good I can find in the terrorist attack was that it cured me of my Seinfeld induced hatred of New York City. I learned that the gang of whiney little bitches didn't represent the entire population.

SIV | August 16, 2008, 4:25pm | #

What happened to Weigel?

Obama Campaign/DNC Media Partner staff meeting?

BDB | August 16, 2008, 4:28pm | #

I'm guessing Weigel is getting to live blog that silly Rick Warren forum tonight.

joe | August 16, 2008, 4:30pm | #

Linebackers of Liberty. I like it. Blitz! Send the house!

BDB, I think the Gore Administration would have sponsored some watered-down version of the USA PATRIOT ACT, and the Republicans would have attacked him for not doing enough. The most civil-liberty-friendly factions of each party would have opposed it, but they would have been barely a fifth or so of the Congress.

In Fact, about the only good I can find in the terrorist attack was that it cured me of my Seinfeld induced hatred of New York City.

You know I'm a city guy. I remember thinking "Those fucking barbarians put our city to the torch!" This Red Sox fan had never thought of NYC as "our city" before.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 4:37pm | #

Joe, at least you Bostonians led by the fearless Mayor Menino kept us safe from those Islamofascists from Aqua Teen Hunger Force.

1/31/07, Never Forget!

joe | August 16, 2008, 4:41pm | #

Well, BDB, as Mayor Menino explained, "Humma numma rawmah grummah safe. Grummah grummah huumah rawrrah mummbah."

FYI, the History Channel is actually running something related to history right now. Like Halley's Comet, this might be the last time this occurs in your lifetime, so don't miss it.

James Ard | August 16, 2008, 4:48pm | #

After the towers collapsed I worried the comedy industry might never recover. It was weeks before I could laugh. When I finally did, it was a deranged, hysterical laugh. After that, things seemed to get back to normal, sort of.

Boston | August 16, 2008, 5:06pm | #

In like two years i havent watched anything on the history channel. There Sherman event was good and a fuck ton better than this Ice Road Truckers and Modern Marvels Bullshit. Though they do usually have "The Revolution" On Demand. Which is nice.

BDB | August 16, 2008, 5:17pm | #

Modern Marvels blows, and double for Ice Road Truckers.

Who the hell wants to watch "CANS! On Modern Marvels!" followed by watching some asshole Canadians drive a tractor trailer across snow?

CJ08 | August 16, 2008, 5:37pm | #

"What are we in now? 24 America?"

Yes, that fits actually. Love it or hate it, that show exists because of the culture, politics and events of our time.

Kolohe | August 16, 2008, 5:41pm | #

Who the hell wants to watch "CANS! On Modern Marvels!"

I do. I like the history of everyday things. They're not as well done as "Connections," but few things are. (And I love "Engineering Disasters" on modern marvels)

But I agree I hate ice road truckers, and deadliest catch, and the lumberjack show, and dawg the bounty hunter, and the DEA show, and 'Cops' & 'the Real World' which started it all. But I loathe them for all the reasons I hate 'reality tv' - for the most part they're not real, they're non-union improv actors.

Kolohe | August 16, 2008, 5:54pm | #

Part of Boston's common cause with the sense of loss 9/11 was due to two of the planes took off from Logan, so it personally effected a non-trivial number of the red sox nation.

And re: I would say also 4)when we can make jokes about 9/11. - this was published 26 Sep 2001.

John-David | August 16, 2008, 6:06pm | #

Gilbert Gottfried got off his infamous plane joke about having to stop at the Empire State Building three weeks after 9/11.

James Ard | August 16, 2008, 6:07pm | #

Let me add the dozens of Bronx citizens that lifted the bus off the pregnant lady to why ILNY. She died, but the seven month old fetus that survived will hopefully achieve greatness.

thedifferentphil | August 16, 2008, 7:08pm | #

I for one feel the need to stand up for Seinfeld. No comedy has ever been as funny as that show. None.

Smappy | August 16, 2008, 7:15pm | #

And yeah this all still seems weird. I think once we 1)get a new President (either one would be vastly more normal), 2) leave Iraq, and 3)this decade ends it will finally feel like that era is behind us. It will feel more like year 2000 America then.

Hey, the way things are going in Georgia, may start to feel like the year 1980 in America.

Smappy | August 16, 2008, 7:16pm | #

Kolohe, the Onion was absolutely priceless after 9/11. It restored my faith in America.

Elemenope | August 16, 2008, 7:27pm | #

I for one feel the need to stand up for Seinfeld. No comedy has ever been as funny as that show. None.

Sorry dude but South Park wins.

David E. Gallaher | August 16, 2008, 7:36pm | #

True that we are each living more and more in our own little utopias, but, whichever one it is, we are forced to go find the one with the hot chicks and spend some time there too. I'm talking about real, live hot chicks... the ones in meatspace, not cyberspace.

Untermensch | August 16, 2008, 8:56pm | #

In honor of the ziggy toilet post in May, here's some good Chinese toilet fun for you. Not sure if it's safe for work or not: Your co-workers might gather round in horror fascination.

Marcvs | August 16, 2008, 9:22pm | #

Damn, has it already been almost seven years? Wow.

Oh, and Ziggy is on par with the crap that passes for humor here on Fridays. So don't get too smug, Reason editors..

joe | August 16, 2008, 10:23pm | #

I for one feel the need to stand up for Seinfeld. No comedy has ever been as funny as that show. None.

I was a big Seinfeld fan when it was on, but it hasn't aged well. Old episodes of Friends are funnier than most old episodes of Seinfeld.

agentalbert | August 16, 2008, 10:35pm | #

I find the absurdity of Seinfeld as funny as ever. It's still the gold standard by which all Sitcoms should be measured. I don't think it was necessarily the [i]funniest[/i] (cough* Arrested Development*), but given its long run and impact, it's the king of the hill.

agentalbert | August 16, 2008, 10:38pm | #

I find the absurdity of Seinfeld as funny as ever. It's still the gold standard by which all Sitcoms should be measured. I don't think it was necessarily the funniest (cough* Arrested Development*), but given its long run and impact, it's the king of the hill.

literalist | August 16, 2008, 11:22pm | #

agentalbert: No way Seinfeld is as good as King of the Hill!

SIV | August 17, 2008, 12:23am | #

Off topic:

BarackObama couldn't be much further from a libertarian judicial philosophy.....

from the Rev Rick Warren forum:

Neither candidate shied away from a question about which current Supreme Court justice they would not have nominated.


Obama's reply: Clarence Thomas.



"I don't think he was a strong enough jurist or a legal thinker at the time for that. I profoundly disagree with his interpretation" of the Constitution , he said.

'nuff said.....

Elemenope | August 17, 2008, 3:07am | #

SIV:

Nice try, but then he followed up with his disagreement with Scalia because Scalia is not willing enough to constrain the powers of the Executive.

Let's cherry pick some more.

ed | August 17, 2008, 7:35am | #

The saddest part is that there was no reason that era of depraved innocence had to end...our exile from it was, in the end, self-inflicted.

Ha ha ha! It's funny 'cause it's supposed to be serious.

Im_Phil_too | August 17, 2008, 8:14am | #

I for one feel the need to stand up for Seinfeld. No comedy has ever been as funny as that show. None.

Have you never seen Curb your enthusiasm? That is the funniest show ever bar none.

Senator Hollings | August 17, 2008, 8:43am | #

Beaver and Buffcoat rule!

CJ08 | August 17, 2008, 9:18am | #

I did not see the Warren Forum because I did not think the concept was appropriate. We are not electing the head of a church, we are electing a president. I will read the transcripts later but I did not want to watch it on television.

Robert Dawson | August 17, 2008, 9:27am | #

LOL< With Dictator Bush at the helm, Anythign is possible.

RD
http://www.anondo.alturl.com

Episiarch | August 17, 2008, 9:58am | #

I for one feel the need to stand up for Seinfeld. No comedy has ever been as funny as that show. None.

As LMNOP stated, South Park is funnier by a mile. There's also Strangers With Candy and It's Always Sunny in Philadelpia.

Larry David comedies, such as Seinfeld and Curb Your Enthusiasm are based on the fact that their main characters are fucking assholes who get themselves into idiotic and embarrassing situations. So are the three shows I mentioned above. The difference is in the craziness; the three above are also absurd, which David lacks. I'm a big fan of absurdity, hence my love for Monty Python.

#70 | August 17, 2008, 10:34am | #

"69 Comments" does not amuse me.

SIV | August 17, 2008, 10:59am | #

El,

Cherry pick? That was the quote from the CNN story.Obama "profoundly disagrees" with the most libertarian Justice's philosophy.Anybody ask Obama about Kelo and Raich? Presumably he agrees with the liberal members of the court on property rights and the commerce clause.

Elemenope | August 17, 2008, 11:04am | #

Calling Thomas the most Libertarian justice is like calling the Joker the evillest villain. It may be true, but it's by accident at best.

Thomas, so far as I can tell, *lacks a judicial philosophy altogether*.

SIV | August 17, 2008, 11:15am | #

This is what Obama "profoundly disagrees" with:

Thomas consistently supports a strict interpretation of the Constitution's interstate commerce clause and supports limits on the power of federal government in favor of states' rights. In both United States v. Lopez and United States v. Morrison Thomas wrote a separate concurring opinion arguing for the original meaning of the commerce clause and criticizing the substantial effects formula. He wrote a sharply worded dissent in Gonzales v. Raich, a decision that permitted federal government to arrest, prosecute, and imprison patients who were using medical marijuana.

Elemenope | August 17, 2008, 11:31am | #

SIV,

So, please explain Thomas' glorious defense of liberty and limited government in Hamdan and Hamdi.

Occam's toothbrush | August 17, 2008, 11:44am | #

Who the hell wants to watch "CANS! On Modern Marvels!" followed by watching some asshole Canadians drive a tractor trailer across snow?

The other night they had a Modern Marvels episode on prehistoric weapons. The title of that show is the most diluted phrase besides "interstate commerce".

Occam's toothbrush | August 17, 2008, 11:48am | #

I for one feel the need to stand up for Seinfeld. No comedy has ever been as funny as that show. None.

It was a Nineties NYC rip-off of Cheers. I know joe will back me up on this.

robc | August 17, 2008, 11:51am | #

lmnop,

exceptions that prove the rule.*

*yes, yes I know.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 12:04pm | #

Clarence Thomas isn't a libertarian. Hes a right wing conservative. I know you like to think the two are identical, SIV, but those of us in the real world think otherwise.

Believing in a unitary executive is not "libertarian".

BDB | August 17, 2008, 12:04pm | #

Oh, and he basically said he wouldn't have nominated Thomas because he isn't very bright. Everybody knows that, but only a black guy could say it.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 12:05pm | #

Now tell us what wonderfully libertarian judges McCain would nominate. Maybe starting by nominating those who will uphold the central "accomplishment" of his career, McCain-Feingold?

SIV | August 17, 2008, 12:17pm | #

Clarence Thomas on McCain Feingold:

Justice Thomas issued a separate 25-page dissenting opinion noting that the Court was upholding the "most significant abridgment of the freedoms of speech and association since the Civil War.

Barack Obama "profoundly disagrees" with Clarence Thomas's interpretation of the Constitution.

CJ08 | August 17, 2008, 12:19pm | #

"Maybe starting by nominating those who will uphold the central "accomplishment" of his career, McCain-Feingold?"

McCain-Feingold was one of the reasons Rush Limbaugh worked so hard to get almost anyone but McCain the G.O.P. nomination. He still is not "enthusiastic" about McCain but he is more and more sounding like a McCain supporter. Limbaugh sounds downright libertarian when he is talking about McCain-Feingold. He says that his own career could be threatened by the bill. I guess what really matters is that he has an "R" beside his name.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 12:19pm | #

I guess John McCain wouldn't have nominated Clarence Thomas, then.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 12:20pm | #

CJ08-

Libertarians like SIV that stay with the Republican Party remind me of the battered wife that stays with her husband because "he really loves me, deep down!"

CJ08 | August 17, 2008, 12:23pm | #

"Libertarians like SIV that stay with the Republican Party remind me of the battered wife that stays with her husband because "he really loves me, deep down!""

I liken statism of any sort to Stockholm Syndrome. Something only a psychologist can truly explain.

Elemenope | August 17, 2008, 12:28pm | #

I guess John McCain wouldn't have nominated Clarence Thomas, then.

No, he would have (for PR purposes), because he doesn't seem to be the sharpest knife when it comes to abstract and/or unexpected consequences.

SIV | August 17, 2008, 12:32pm | #

Just keep cheering Team Blue BDB.
I haven't said anything positive about McCain.
Just observing that Barack Obama doesn't like libertarian judicial philosophy.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 12:36pm | #

He really loves you SIV. I'm sure he won't beat the shit out of you again!

"Just observing that Barack Obama doesn't like libertarian judicial philosophy."

No shit. Hes a Democrat. In other news, dog bites man.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 12:39pm | #

I don't think either of the major party candidates would appoint judges that are "libertarian" (however defined). The fact that Thomas and Alito support a monarchial Presidency and torture gets their libertarian card revoked as far as I'm concerned.

Occam's toothbrush | August 17, 2008, 12:43pm | #

Didn't McCain vote to confirm Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer? Looking up votes at the senate website is as much of a pain in the ass as you'd expect.

And for those who thought Obama's drug use was going to make him more friendly to legalization...in the joint press conference last night he said his drug use was the thing he most regretted in his life, calling it "selfish". We know what Obama and his ilk think should be done about selfishness...

BDB | August 17, 2008, 12:44pm | #

People thought Clinton would be more "Friendly" towards drug use too since he used marijuana (and some people say cocaine when he was Governor).

But he didn't do anything at all to roll back the Reagan/Nixon drug war escalation.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 12:48pm | #

The Reagan drug war escalation is the reason why I don't regard Reagan as a demigod, FWIW. He upped the WOD to "Defcon 1" when before it was merely conventional.

Neu Mejican | August 17, 2008, 12:52pm | #

Sorry dude but South Park wins.

Nah. Not by a mile.

The inane preachy politics of South Park disqualifies it from any awards.

Occasional fits of brilliance amidst poop humor-- arrested development is a good candidate, always sunny wins most brilliantly inappropriate award, but is losing steam.

SIV | August 17, 2008, 12:54pm | #

BDB,
I think Reagan had a little help from an overwhelmingly Democrat Party Congress. Where do you think those mandatory minimums come from?

Clarence Thomas in his diddent from Raich

Respondent's local cultivation and consumption of marijuana is not "Commerce ... among the several States."

Certainly no evidence from the founding suggests that "commerce" included the mere possession of a good or some personal activity that did not involve trade or exchange for value. In the early days of the Republic, it would have been unthinkable that Congress could prohibit the local cultivation, possession, and consumption of marijuana.

CJ08 | August 17, 2008, 12:56pm | #

Lately, I have enjoyed Psych.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psych

SIV | August 17, 2008, 12:58pm | #

*dissent*

BDB writes:

Clarence Thomas isn't a libertarian. Hes a right wing conservative.

We had a few Right Wing conservatives running for President this electio. Ron Paul and Bob Barr for example.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 12:59pm | #

SIV-

Don't you remember how Reagan used to refer to a "working conservative majority" in the Congress? A lot of those Democrats were people like Richard Shelby or Sam Nunn (they are now either, dead, defeated, or Republican).

CJ08 | August 17, 2008, 1:00pm | #

"We had a few Right Wing conservatives running for President this electio. Ron Paul and Bob Barr for example."

I have to agree with SIV on that point. There is a libertarian running this year. His name is Charles Jay. http://www.cj08.com/

BDB | August 17, 2008, 1:02pm | #

Bob Barr holds a mix of right wing (taxes, global warming, gun control) and left wing (drugs, torture, executive authority) positions.

On the former hes like Jeff Flake, on the latter hes Barney Frank.

CJ08 | August 17, 2008, 1:04pm | #

Someone who thinks I do not have the right to invite someone on the other side of an invisible line into my home is not a libertarian.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 1:04pm | #

I'm just saying it comes down to the candidate more than party. You can't say "Republicans are always more libertarian! or "Democrats are always more libertarian!" Thats a loser's game.

I'd vote for Barney Frank (D) over Orin Hatch (R).

I'd vote for Jeff Flake (R) over Ted Kennedy (D).

I'd vote for Brian Schwitzer (D) over John McCain (R).

I'd vote for Ron Paul (R) over Robert Wexler (D).

And so on.

CJ08 | August 17, 2008, 1:12pm | #

"I'm just saying it comes down to the candidate more than party. You can't say "Republicans are always more libertarian! or "Democrats are always more libertarian!" Thats a loser's game."

On that point we agree.

Episiarch | August 17, 2008, 1:16pm | #

always sunny wins most brilliantly inappropriate award, but is losing steam

O Rly? The dance marathon was great, and the two-parter with them finding the coke was great too.

J sub D | August 17, 2008, 3:04pm | #

This has obviously evolved into the weeken political thread. Two points -

1) As much as agreeing with SIV about any-damned-thing, Clarence Thomas is by far the most libertarian justice on SCOTUS.

2) Seinfeld was an above average sitcom. Finding a half dozed better ones is too damned easy. Off the top of my pointy little head -

Both Newhart shows.
Cheers
Mary Tyler Moore
Police Squad
WKRP
Barney Miller
Sledge Hammer
News Radio

I could go on. Obviously, the hard part is stopping at six.

J sub D | August 17, 2008, 3:24pm | #

As much as agreeing with SIV about any-damned-thing,

should read
"As much as agreeing with SIV about any-damned-thing makes my stomach turn, ...,

Episiarch | August 17, 2008, 3:26pm | #

Sledge Hammer

I bought the DVD set. Unfortunately, like many 80's TV shows, it didn't age that well. It was originally pitched to cable and would have been a lot more risque, which would have been great, but then the network picked it up and they had to sanitize it a lot.

CJ08 | August 17, 2008, 3:27pm | #

Cheers became VERY week towards the end. But I would say Frasier, the Cheers spin-off that i m humble opinion was far better than its parent was a very brilliant show. The problem that some people have with Seinfeld is that it was (and still is) different from any other show out there. It is a show about nothing and proudly so. I think that it will be remembered in much the same way Monty Python is remembered (not that I am comparing the styles at all) in the sense it was a show that broke new ground. It cannot be compared to any of the shows you list any more than you can compare a Ferrari with a Rolex watch. It is simply a different concept altogether. You can like it or not, but I have never watched an episode without laughing all the way through.

J sub D | August 17, 2008, 3:48pm | #

You can like it or not, but I have never watched an episode without laughing all the way through.

To each their own.

Some people believe that I Love Lucy is the pinnacle of situation comedy hilarity. I rate Seinfeld as above average, which places it far above Lucy, ahead of Gilligan's Island and about par with Everybody Loves Raymond. IOW, I've never made a point of viewing it.

Bingo | August 17, 2008, 3:49pm | #

Certain right-wingers here need to realize that attacking McCain is not the same thing as supporting Obama.

J sub D | August 17, 2008, 4:06pm | #

Certain right-wingers here need to realize that attacking McCain is not the same thing as supporting Obama.

This applies equally to lefties and Obama.

SIV | August 17, 2008, 4:16pm | #

I got called a McCain supporter for pointing out Obama's stated opinion of Clarence Thomas's judicial philosophy.

Which is, in case anyone missed it,

I profoundly disagree with his interpretation of the Constitution

He could of said Scalia.

joe | August 17, 2008, 4:52pm | #

You're just lying, SIV.

SIV | August 17, 2008, 11:15am | #

This is what Obama "profoundly disagrees" with:

Thomas consistently supports a strict interpretation of the Constitution's interstate commerce clause and supports limits on the power of federal government in favor of states' rights. In both United States v. Lopez and United States v. Morrison Thomas wrote a separate concurring opinion arguing for the original meaning of the commerce clause and criticizing the substantial effects formula. He wrote a sharply worded dissent in Gonzales v. Raich, a decision that permitted federal government to arrest, prosecute, and imprison patients who were using medical marijuana.

No, Obama stated what he disagreed with Thomas about - his sniveling acquiescence before Bush's executive power grabs. The quote you just provided, and oh by the way didn't source, and described in a manner that made it look like it was Obama's statement, actually isn't.

You want to define "libertarian" as "accepting the right of the president to define people as enemy combatants with the stroke of a pen," you go on with your bad self. I don't think anyone's going to buy it.

SIV | August 17, 2008, 5:22pm | #

You are full of shit joe

If I'm lying CNN is too,here is your fucking source. Obama said nothing about Thomas's position on Executive power. He said :

I profoundly disagree with his interpretation of the Constitution

That would be the originalist and libertarian interpretations. That is what Clarence Thomas is known for. If there is any contextual distortion in the quote blame CNN.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 5:42pm | #

SIV, he said Clarence Thomas IMHO because liberals don't like him, and he knew hes the only one who could say (in short) "Clarence Thomas isn't too bright" because hes as black as he is.

Thats why he did it. He just couldn't pass that up.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 5:45pm | #

Anyway the big thing I took away from last night is that Obama comes off as a college professor trying to show how much smarter he is, and McCain came off as a used car salesman selling his political positions (i.e., he basically gave the audience his stump speech bit by bit regardless of the question.)

Neither style is particularly attractive to me.

joe | August 17, 2008, 5:55pm | #

You sourced the quote to Obama, and it wasn't his. That makes you a liar, SIV.

You wrote "this is what he disagrees with," and followed it up with a statement that has nothing to do with anything Obama said. You wrote "this is what he disagrees with" about something that NOT what he disagrees with.

You are a god damn liar. You thought you wouldn't get caught, but you did.

Transcript: WHICH EXISTING SUPREME COURT JUSTICE WOULD YOU NOT HAVE NOMINATED?

A. THAT'S A GOOD ONE. THAT'S A GOOD ONE. I WOULD NOT HAVE NOMINATED CLARENCE THOMAS. I DON'T THINK THAT HE. I DON'T THINK THAT HE WAS A STRONG ENOUGH JURIST OR LEGAL THINKER AT THE TIME FOR THAT ELEVATION. SETTING ASIDE THE FACT THAT I PROFOUNDLY DISAGREE WITH HIS INTERPRETATION OF A LOT OF THE CONSTITUTION. I WOULD NOT NOMINATE JUSTICE SCALIA ALTHOUGH I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY DOUBT ABOUT HIS INTELLECTUAL BRILLIANCE BECAUSE HE AND I JUST DISAGREE, YOU KNOW. HE TAUGHT AT UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO AS DID I IN THE LAW SCHOOL.

Q. HOW ABOUT JOHN ROBERTS?

A. JOHN ROBERTS I HAVE TO SAY WAS A TOUGHER QUESTION ONLY BECAUSE I FIND HIM TO BE A VERY COMPELLING PERSON, YOU KNOW, IN SERVICES INDIVIDUALLY. HE'S CLEARLY SMART, VERY THOUGHTFUL. I WILL TELL YOU THAT HOW I'VE SEEN HIM OPERATE SINCE HE WENT TO THE BENCH CONFIRMS THE SUSPICIONS THAT I HAD AND THE REASON THAT I VOTED AGAINST HIM AND I'LL GIVE YOU ONE VERY SPECIFIC INSTANCE AND THIS IS NOT A STUMP SPEECH.

Q. ALL RIGHT. WHEN I PICK THIS UP IT MEANS --

A. EXACTLY. I'M GETTING THE CUES. I'M GETTING THE CUES. ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT JOBS OF I BELIEVE THE SUPREME COURT IS TO GUARD AGAINST THE ENCROACHMENT OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ON THE POWER OF THE OTHER BRANCHES AND I THINK THAT HE HAS BEEN A LITTLE BIT TOO WILLING AND TOO EAGER TO GIVE AN ADMINISTRATION WHETHER IT'S MINE OR GEORGE BUSH'S MORE POWER THAN I THINK THE CONSTITUTION ORIGINALLY INTENDED.

Zero words about Raich. Zero words about the interstate commerce clause. He does single out one issue in his answer - the expansion of executive power - in reference to Roberts. Thomas has voted with Roberts on all of the executive powers cases, including Hamden.

So, to sum up, Barack Obama was silent on the positions SIV attributed to him, said he wouldn't vote for Thomas because he's not much of a legal thinker, but singled out the issue of executive power as something that concerns him when considering Supreme Court justices.

I made a mistake when I identified the answer about Roberts as being about Thomas. SIV completely made up everything about Raich.

joe | August 17, 2008, 5:57pm | #

Oh, btw, you CNN link doesn't support your bullshit, either.

J sub D | August 17, 2008, 5:59pm | #

Neither style is particularly attractive to me.

Neither candidate is particularly attractive to me. In fact, I find McCain repulsive. In comparison, Bob Barr looks better almost daily.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 6:00pm | #

McCain is repulsive, I'm borderline agnostic about Obama (maybe only mildly disgusted), Barr is great but sadly the first past the post plurality rule won't be changed by November.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 6:01pm | #

The only thing that makes Obama looks better is he taught at the University of Chicago (not exactly a leftist school) and has a Wal-Mart loving, Clintonian, Robert Rubin disciple as his economic adviser.

joe | August 17, 2008, 6:04pm | #

If you're a principled libertarian, you're going to hate them both. The smart move would be for you to vote against the candidate who represents whichever party you think needs to be punished more right now.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 6:05pm | #

Joe, if one is a principled libertarian lives in Wyoming or Vermont it makes perfect sense to vote for Barr.

"Vote against the party that needs to be punished the most" is only good advice in Ohio or Colorado, etc.

SIV | August 17, 2008, 6:06pm | #

BDB,

No solidarity among high-achieving, Ivy league affirmative action admitted students.

Anti-Globalism | August 17, 2008, 6:15pm | #

Ziggy is everything that just sucks about mass culture. Strap a suicide vest on him and send him to Iraq.

J sub D | August 17, 2008, 6:16pm | #

I'm gonna look at the polls come November. If Michigan is close, I'll probably cast a presidential ballot for a Dem for the first time in my life. I voted for Ford so the donkeys haven't exactly enamored me with their nominees for quite some time. Some time = my entire adult life.

The Mondale Dukakis doubleheader was incredible political thinking, wasn't it?

SIV | August 17, 2008, 6:16pm | #

joe | August 17, 2008, 6:04pm | #
If you're a principled libertarian, you're going to hate them both. The smart move would be for you to vote against the candidate who represents whichever party you think needs to be punished more right now.

What would you know about "principled libertarian" joe?

I'll make a case for either.
Obama- possibly will reduce identity politics driven dissension sown by his own Party. His election will encourage Republicans to return to a small government philosophy if they want to win.Remind voters why they don't trust government, particularly one-party rule.

McCain-probably won't expand government(or at least spending) as quickly or profoundly as Obama. Might luck into a few decent judicial appointments as he tries to balance a Democrat Party controlled Senate and a rabid base.

I'll be voting for Barr, or offering a write-in.

Anti-Globalism | August 17, 2008, 6:17pm | #

"The .COM crash played a part along with 9/11, too."

Anyone with a brain could have seen that one coming. I wonder why Clinton let it get so out of control...

BDB | August 17, 2008, 6:17pm | #

J sub D-

I think nominating a black guy with Hussein as a middle name in a year where they could have won easily with ANYBODY else will top that if Obama loses.

J sub D | August 17, 2008, 6:23pm | #

BDB,
I don't think he will. McCain is such a craptastic campaigner, Fritz Mondale would have a shot if he were still alive.*

* I know. It just seems like he's been dead for awhile.

The Angry Optimist | August 17, 2008, 6:23pm | #

The smart move would be for you to vote against the candidate who represents whichever party you think needs to be punished more right now.

Alright, so this Ohioan will vote for the Libertarian candidate, which by definition is "against" the Republicans, in that they aren't getting my vote.

SIV | August 17, 2008, 6:34pm | #

Any libertarian will find a Party that needs to be punished more than the Republicans by < 100 days of an Obama Administration with a Democrat controlled legislature. They won't be spending any time on restoring civil liberties, ending the war,or leaving the states alone on med mj.

Eric Haskell | August 17, 2008, 6:35pm | #

Yeah, I don't vote "against" a candidate.

I view that as throwing away my vote more than voting for a guy with no chance would be.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 6:48pm | #

J Sub, who was worse campaigning? Mondale or Dukakis?

Both were before my time. The worst campaigner in my living memory is a tie between Bob Dole and John Kerry.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 6:50pm | #

"They won't be spending any time on restoring civil liberties, ending the war,or leaving the states alone on med mj."

The Republicans, for the last seven years, haven't spent any time on balancing the budget, reducing government spending, having a "humble" foreign policy....oh, I could go on.

Bush/DeLay was the most craptastic combo ever. Obama/Pelosi his a "high" mark to live up to.

Robert Enders | August 17, 2008, 6:52pm | #

"Family Guy" is not only the funniest show of all time, it is the show that defines our time.

BDB | August 17, 2008, 6:53pm | #

A Republican President and a Republican administration has been the highest spending government in the history of America. They topped fucking LBJ and the Great Society, for God's sake!

prolefeed | August 17, 2008, 8:12pm | #

I don't think he will. McCain is such a craptastic campaigner, Fritz Mondale would have a shot if he were still alive.*

I don't think it much matters to roughly half the country that McCain's kind of a sucky campaigner. This electoral college map at pollster.com has been slowly tilting toward a tight race over the past few weeks. North Carolina went from tossup to barely McCain last week, and now Ohio went from barely Obama to tossup this week. I think as more polls come in, these older results will continue changing toward a tossup map, since the old results were from when Obama held an apparently dominating lead.

Hell, McCain and Obama have been duking it out with TV ads the last couple of weeks here in Hawaii, which is solid Obama country.

I think Bob Barr has a solid shot at holding the balance of power this time around -- note how many tossup states are libertarian leaning.

The Angry Optimist | August 17, 2008, 8:45pm | #

note how many tossup states are libertarian leaning.

Heh. I'll assume that you meant to put a "except Ohio" clause in that statement, prole.

BakedPenguin | August 17, 2008, 9:35pm | #

The whole "who sucks worse - Democrat or Republican - from a libertarian perspective?" question is kind of pointless. Agreeing 18 percent instead of 15 percent is no reason to vote for someone.

I've had liberal friends try to convince me that I should vote for Obama due to the wretchedness of the Bush years. One was stunned when I told him that in 2000, given only a choice between Bush and Gore, I would have voted for Bush. (After eight years of the lying POS drug warrior Bill Clinton, and prior to the actual Bush presidency). Thankfully, I voted for Browne, so I don't have any traumatic psychic baggage relating to that election.

Occam's toothbrush | August 17, 2008, 10:22pm | #

The smart move would be for you to vote against the candidate who represents whichever party you think needs to be punished more right now.

In 2006 I thought the GOP needed to be punished.

This year, the Dems are begging for a spanking of their own, for caving to Bush on the war, wireless wiretapping, etc. You know, the things I thought the GOP needed to be punished for.

Daniel Reeves | August 17, 2008, 10:28pm | #

The answer is to keep voting libertarian and keep whining about how everyone and everything sucks. Unfortunately I don't think my Congressman is going to get back to me on my idea of a Condorcet voting system, so I guess I'll always be cynical.

The Angry Optimist | August 17, 2008, 10:37pm | #

I'm still failing to see how voting Democrat "punishes" the Republicans. Two things are apparent:

A) No matter how many social programs the Rs enact, the Ds whine about how it's "not enough" and
B) No matter how spineless the Ds go on opposing government power, the Rs say their soft on defense and terrorism.

So...when the two parties are so statist and in sync, I fail to see the punishment.

Also, it's just goofy to talk about "punishing" the party in power by voting for the main competitor. If people need punished, punish them, y'know with jail time and fines and stuff...otherwise, vote for the person or party who best represents your interests.

SIV | August 17, 2008, 10:50pm | #

vote for the person or party who best represents your interests

I was TSOL on that in 2004.I guess I could have voted for myself.If Bob Barr says "working families" or comes out in favor of animal rights before the election I'll do it this time.

Art-P.O.G. | August 18, 2008, 1:18am | #

My favorite sitcom is actually The Boondocks. But everything else everybody named (that I've actually seen) was pretty good, too. Except Friends. But I'm originally from suburban Ohio, which might explain why I "get", say, The Boondocks more than Friends. OT, but does anyone here watch Dexter? Love that show.

Elemenope | August 18, 2008, 1:27am | #

Dexter is quite good, though I have to say I preferred the first season to the second.

Currently I've been really enjoying Burn Notice. Bruce Campbell is reliable for a corny laugh regardless of his role or location.

Art-P.O.G. | August 18, 2008, 2:44am | #

Indeed. If there is one flaw to Burn Notice it might be not enough Bruce Campbell. As for Dexter, it's a shame the 2nd season isn't as good because I was thrilled by the first. I really liked Jennifer Carpenter and Michael C. Hall in their roles especially.

Art-P.O.G. | August 18, 2008, 2:46am | #

I mean, I haven't seen the second season yet. I'll definitely watch it anyway.

Anti-Globalism | August 18, 2008, 3:19am | #

What will either candidate do about:

* Our dropping national IQ average
* Environmental destruction
* Rise in crime-ridden city nomanslands
* Our insane drug war

Nothing, that's what. Voting is a distraction. If you want change, get a rifle.

Elemenope | August 18, 2008, 3:32am | #

Nothing, that's what. Voting is a distraction. If you want change, get a rifle.

Who, exactly, is this joker?

mean, I haven't seen the second season yet. I'll definitely watch it anyway.

It's well worth it.

Bingo | August 18, 2008, 3:47am | #

Isn't the IQ average, by definition, 100 points?

Bingo | August 18, 2008, 3:50am | #

Also, the whole "vote from the rooftops!" thing is totally overrated and, outside of a large scale rebellion in 1776, has accomplished nothing for libertarians.

Actually, libertarians haven't accomplished much of anything outside of the single white male demographic. How the hell did the commies get all the sex appeal?

Misogynist but nonetheless true | August 18, 2008, 3:57am | #

How the hell did the commies get all the sex appeal?

Because chicks don't want freedom, they want security.

Elemenope | August 18, 2008, 4:17am | #

Isn't the IQ average, by definition, 100 points?

Last time I checked. In fact, from what I understand, the average has to be adjusted upwards every couple of years because of the Flynn Effect.

But don't tell our "anti-globalist" friend! He won't be happy.

meeko | August 18, 2008, 6:51am | #

I dont understand the statement :

Isn't the IQ average, by definition, 100 points?

(thanks wiki for wording)=>

The most common method is the arithmetic mean, but there are many other types of averages.[2]The average is calculated by combining the measurements related to a set and to compute a number as being the average of the set

Elemenope | August 18, 2008, 6:53am | #

Are you seriously getting pedantic on the difference between the mean, the median, and the mode of a data set? For jeebus' sakes, when people use the word 'average', it's usually pretty clear what they mean in context.

meeko | August 18, 2008, 7:17am | #

No, you do not understand me, i dont really care about math.
I am just asking, why he said that average is 100, why it is not let's say, 90 or 120, but nevermind.

Elemenope | August 18, 2008, 7:23am | #

meeko--

Because 100 IQ is *defined* as the average. If for some reason the average score is higher or lower than that, the test scale is re-calibrated to compensate.

Dave W. | August 18, 2008, 7:37am | #

America got back to normal by mid 2007, which is when I decided that I could and would come back. Nobody dotes on George W. Bush, people aren't Cukoo-For-Cocoa-Puffs over soldiers, Neil Patrick Harris has a show again, etc, etc. It is normal again now. I am really glad it got back to normal, too. America is a good place when it is normal, although it is tough to look at it exactly the same now that I have seen the dark side.

Dave2 | August 18, 2008, 7:47am | #

Voting to punish a party is like sticking a voodoo doll or putting a hex on someone or making a mean-spirited wish at the wishing well. It might feel satisfying but it doesn't actually accomplish anything.

Much like posting on a comments thread.

Episiarch | August 18, 2008, 7:55am | #

So where were you, Dave? Canada? Imaginationland? Mars? Narnia? Dagobah?

Dave W. | August 18, 2008, 8:23am | #

As long time HnR rdrs know, I went to Canada in 2003 when my disgust overwhelmed me. Lived in Toronto. Wasn't going to pay for the war. I am paying for the war now, of course, but at least people's attitudes are better so it makes it less ethically distasteful.

In a sense, I always live in Imaginationland, as you can tell from the imaginitive songs I write (click on my sig to check that out).

Robert Downey | August 18, 2008, 8:47am | #

Personally, I think people are taking this terrorist nonsense WAY too seriously!

RD

http://useurl.us/12m

SugarFree | August 18, 2008, 10:21am | #

"Family Guy" is not only the funniest show of all time, it is the show that defines our time.

If this were even remotely true, it would count as the most depressing observation of all time.

Ironic | August 18, 2008, 10:58am | #

Ziggy once won an Emmy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziggy%27s_Gift

joe | August 18, 2008, 10:58am | #

Voting to punish a party is like sticking a voodoo doll or putting a hex on someone or making a mean-spirited wish at the wishing well. It might feel satisfying but it doesn't actually accomplish anything.

I don't know about that. I think it's pretty clear the Democrats changed between the 70s and the 90s, and it's pretty clear why.

Neu Mejican | August 18, 2008, 11:27am | #

Our dropping national IQ average

Ye (as mentioned above) the average will stay at 100...although it is really more informative informative to talk about an average range. Typically this is 85-115, which will encompass around 68% of people.

And as has been noted, the Flynn effect is a name for the worldwide trend towards higher IQ's. (I took a pre-war IQ test on-line and ended up with a score in the 160 range. I am smart, but no way am I 4 standard deviations above the mean.)

However, it is worth noting that it seems that the Flynn effect is primarily driven by better performance at the lower end of the distribution. Better nutrition, healtcare, and access to education/enriched culture result in better IQ scores. In the US the largest IQ gains have been among the most historically disadvantage groups. This is likely due to affirmative action-like efforts to battle poverty, discrimination, and target high-risk children (think head-start).

So the candidate that will help the US maintain the rate of increase in IQ is the one that will most vigorously support programs targeting at-risk children through programs that provide nutrition, healthcare, and educational access regardless of their parent's ability to pay.

TrickyVic | August 18, 2008, 3:29pm | #

"""" It will feel more like year 2000 America then""""

But with extra domestic surviellence!

If it was 2000 we wouldn't tolerate shit like
http://www.star-telegram.com/national_news/story/837459.html

TrickyVic | August 18, 2008, 3:41pm | #

"""McCain is such a craptastic campaigner, Fritz Mondale would have a shot if he were still alive.*"""

And people are complaining that Obama is getting all the media coverage. No shit. Obama is running around trying to look important, at least getting the media's attention while McCain is running in Fred Thompson mode. Why would the press be interested in covering McCain's VFW tour? If he wants to get elected he needs to go out and show he's working for it. McCain is acting too old.

The media covers things that are exciting. Boring does not translate into ratings.

Clemsonuee | August 18, 2008, 7:07pm | #

I though the IQ test defined a standard deviation as 10. Therefore 68% of people were between 90-110. IIRC all those IQ test's I took back in the day had that distribution. Now I'm not looking back at my math book but if I remember right 68% falls within 1 SD, 95% within 2 SD and 98% within 3 SD.