Reason Magazine

Site Search

Continuous news, views, and abuse by the Reason staff

Spying on Innocents Abroad

Two former military intercept operators, both Arab linguists, have independently told ABC News that the National Security Agency routinely listens to the telephone conversations of innocent Americans in the Middle East, including soldiers, aid workers, and journalists, when they call people in the United States. "These were just really everyday, average, ordinary Americans who happened to be in the Middle East, in our area of intercept and happened to be making these phone calls on satellite phones," one said. She described the conversations as "personal, private things [involving] Americans who are not in any way, shape or form associated with anything to do with terrorism." The other whistleblower said intercept operators would often share especially risqué or amusing conversations, including calls to spouses and girlfriends, with each other. "Hey, check this out," he said colleagues  at the NSA center in Fort Gordon, Georgia, would tell him, "there's good phone sex or there's some pillow talk, pull up this call, it's really funny, go check it out. It would be some colonel making pillow talk."  As ABC notes, this sort of idle snooping is rather different from the sort of by-the-book professionalism that Bush administration officials have repeatedly insisted characterizes the so-called Terrorist Surveillance Program:

"There is a constant check to make sure that our civil liberties of our citizens are treated with respect," said President Bush at a news conference this past February....

In testimony before Congress, then-NSA director Gen. Michael Hayden, now director of the CIA, said private conversations of Americans are not intercepted.

"It's not for the heck of it. We are narrowly focused and drilled on protecting the nation against al Qaeda and those organizations who are affiliated with it," Gen. Hayden testified.

He was asked by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), "Are you just doing this because you just want to pry into people's lives?"

"No, sir," General Hayden replied.

In June I noted that Barack Obama supported the legislation that gave the executive branch permission to monitor Americans' international communications at will, while John McCain seems to think the president did not need Congress' permission.

[Thanks to Tricky Vic for the tip.]

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

The Friday Political Thread: Countdown to Dow 1000

The Week in Brief
- John McCain and Barack Obama got interrupted by Tom Brokaw, a lot.
- Connecticut destroyed marriage and Western civilization.
- George McGovern joined the vast right-wing conspiracy.
- John McCain really, really wanted you to care about Bill Ayers.
- So, do you own stocks? Oh, too bad.
- Bob Barr started looking better amid the financial ruins. (And the latest Georgia polls show the state tightening up again.)

Below the Fold
- Robert Stacy McCain says last rites for John McCain's campaign.
- Norman Mailer muddles through the politics of the 20th century (and a bit of the 21st).
- The Open Debate Coalition demands a non-terrible Obama-McCain face-off.
- Sean Quinn pummels Michael Barone (who weirdly asserts that Obama's ground game is no better than Howard Dean's).
- Some smart people (including Kerry Howley!) tell McObama what to say.

Ian Anderson's got Politics 'n' Prog taken care of this week. I think he's previewing the next McCain ad about Obama.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Latest Articles on Reason Online

  • McCain's Last Best Hope
    Only the Maverick of old can save his campaign now Matt Welch (10/10)
  • Spoofed!
    The culture war comedy of An American Carol David Weigel (10/10)
  • Kenny Will Live!
    Vladimir Putin's war on South Park Cathy Young (10/10)

Reason Writers Around Town: Matt Welch on McCain's Last Best Hope for Victory

In the final installment of his week-long L.A. Times dust-up with USC law professor Kareem Crayton, Matt Welch argues that it's time for John McCain to bring the maverick out of retirement for one last caper.

Read all about it here. Read the rest of the week's entries here.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

New at Reason: Dave Weigel on the Conservative Comedy of An American Carol

An American Carol, writes Associate Editor David Weigel, is the first Hannity and Colmes comedy, birthed in an echo chamber, with references that only make sense to people who are already die-hard conservatives.

Read all about it here. 

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Take the Nationalization Express

For your daily dose of terror, go to Albert Bozzo at CNBC.com.
"I don't wish to spread alarm on the line people but the big issue confronting the market is I'm afraid the health and sustainability of Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs." Hugh Hendry, Partner and CIO at Eclectica, told CNBC early Friday. "It is unimaginable that they can be allowed to go, I suspect that they will be nationalized at some point today or over the weekend," he added.
Just one guy's opinion, but it's not impossible.
The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008’s vague language gives Paulson almost unlimited power to intervene and leaves much up to interpretation.

In that context, some say cash injections could apply to non-depository institutuons like investment banks, insurers and hedge funds.

“He’s free to just strike deals, to do special deals,” says Lawrence White, a former White House economist and savings and loan regulator, who adds Congress was aware of the powers being given to Paulson and thus pressed hard for an oversight board.

This weekend will be key. The New York Times previews some of the discussions between the U.S. and the European powers. No one is ruling out the "special deals" that would let the Treasury take over banks. 

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Damon Root on the Radio

I’ll be on Sirius Satellite Radio’s NRA News tonight at 9:40 eastern time discussing the 2nd Amendment and the states with host Cam Edwards. Tune in to Sirius channel 144 or watch the webcast at NRA News.com.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

One Book, Two Book, Red Book, Blue Book

As usual, this election is suffering from a two-sets-of-facts problem. Democratic voters know one batch of data, and Republicans another, and only rarely the twain shall meet.

But lest we educated, well-informed readers of reason get on our high horses about the stupidity of people who get their facts from partisan cable news and talk radio, take a look at these charts showing political book buying patterns.

They're from the work of social networking big thinker Valdis Krebs, who used Amazon's "people who bought this book also bought..." feature to gather his data.

red books blue books 2008

That's right: Even folks with book learnin' can't get out of the partisan ghettos. This has been true for years, as the first version of this chart, assembled in 2003, shows. Note that the only linking book is ironically titled What Went Wrong?

red books blue books 2003

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

New at Reason: Cathy Young on Russia's War on South Park

Last month, hundreds of demonstrators gathered in a Moscow park to protest the Russian government’s attempt to crush the television show South Park. For now, writes Contributing Editor Cathy Young, it seems to have ended in a victory for the protesters—at a time when victories for freedom in Russia are a rare treat.

Read all about it here.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

One Reason Why This Is Still a Great Country (South Park 12th Season Semi-Premiere Edition)

Yes, that's a Howard the Duck pinball machine.Sure, things may be going down the crapper in any number of ways: The stock market is tanking faster than the Cubs in post-season play; George W. Bush is still president at least until January; McCain and Obama are very special bums each in their own way; and much, much more.

But as long as there's South Park, there's hope. Or at least incredibly bizarre laughs. Earlier this week, SP returned with new episodes as part of its 12th season. The opener this time included a truly mad plotline in which the most recent Indiana Jones movie was filled with scenes in which creators George Lucas and Steven Speilberg repeatedly rape Harrison Ford, causing post-traumatic stress disorder among South Park's denizens.

Is this "beyond offensive and into some sort of hyper-offensive stratosphere," as some critics have claimed? And that's not even taking into consideration the episode's other plot, which involves Eric Cartman's xenophobic reaction to the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics.

Decide for yourself by watching the full episode online right now (go on, it's Friday and this isn't Putin's Russia).

And don't forget to read the 2006 reason interview with Matt Stone and Trey Parker. A snippet:

Matt Stone: I had Birkenstocks in high school. I was that guy. And I was sure that those people on the other side of the political spectrum were trying to control my life. And then I went to Boulder and got rid of my Birkenstocks immediately, because everyone else had them and I realized that these people over here want to control my life too. I guess that defines my political philosophy. If anybody's telling me what I should do, then you've got to really convince me that it's worth doing.

More here.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Off Track - California Dreamin' of High Speed Rail

Japan and France move over. High speed rail is coming to the Golden State if the California High Speed Rail Authority gets its way. The Authority promises Californians that if they vote for Proposition 1A authorizing $9.95 billion in bonds that they will one day enjoy trains barrelling along at speeds of 197 miles per hour linking all of California's biggest cities. And the trains will make a profit too. Too good to be true? You betcha.

My colleagues over at the Reason Foundation (the non-profit that publishes reason) painstakingly show in a due diligence study that this is all a very expensive fantasy: 

"The current high-speed rail plan is a fairy tale," said Adrian Moore, Ph.D., vice president of research at Reason Foundation and the study's project director. "The proposal suggests these high-speed trains will be the fastest ever; the most-ridden ever; the cheapest ever; and will convince millions of Californians they no longer need to drive or fly. Offering up a best-case scenario is one thing, but actually depending on all of these miracles to happen simultaneously is irresponsible public policy."

Proposition 1A would authorize $9.95 billion in bonds for a high-speed passenger train, but taxpayers should beware that this is just a fraction of the system's total price. The Rail Authority claims the first two phases of the system will cost $45 billion. But even that understates the total price. With the high costs of building in California and the history of cost overruns on rail projects, the final price tag for the complete high-speed rail system will actually be $65 to $81 billion, according to the Reason Foundation report.

And while the Rail Authority forecasts between 65 and 96 million intercity riders by 2030, the due diligence report finds these projections are dramatically inflated. After compiling numerous ridership studies previously conducted for California rail systems, the study demonstrates the state can expect 23 million to 31 million riders a year in 2030.

Any failure to meet the Rail Authority's lofty ridership projections would force ticket-price increases, further cutting ridership, or require taxpayer subsidies to cover the financial shortfall, adding to future budget deficits. The due diligence report finds "the San Francisco-Los Angeles line alone by 2030 would suffer annual financial losses of up to $4.17 billion."

Similarly troubling, the report finds that no existing high-speed rail train is currently capable of meeting the speed and safety goals set by the system's advocates. California will have to use heavier, slower trains than the world's other high-speed rail systems because it plans on using the same tracks as freight trains in some sections, instead of specialized tracks.

Whole Reason Foundation report here.  

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Obama Runs Away for Office and Joins the Circus

you are getting sleepy...A delightful display of cheerful cynicism and despair from The Wall Street Journal's Kim Strassel, who writes in the voice of a carnival barker touting the Great Obama's magic act. Don't look too hard at the image at right, or he'll hypnotize you.

Watch the Great Obama perform a feat never yet managed in all history. He will create that enormous new government health program, spend billions to transform our energy economy, provide financial assistance to former Soviet satellites, invest in infrastructure, increase education spending, provide job training assistance, and give 95% of Americans a tax (ahem) cut—all without raising the deficit a single penny! And he'll do it in the middle of a financial crisis. And with falling tax revenues! Voila!

And this:

For tonight's finale, the Great Obama will uphold America's "moral" obligation to "stop genocide" by abandoning Iraq! While teleported to the region, he will simultaneously convince Iranian leaders to peacefully abandon their nuclear pursuits (even as he does not sit down with them), fix Afghanistan with a strategy that does not resemble the Iraqi surge, and (drumroll!) pull Osama bin Laden out of his hat!

Shouldn't trust the man, though. Look at how much stuff he keeps in his pockets. Got to be a doubleheaded coin in there somewhere.

Via R. G.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Bush: Don't Panic! At Least Not This Week, Anyway

From President George W. Bush's speech today about the economy:

Over the past few days, we have witnessed a startling drop in the stock market -- much of it driven by uncertainty and fear.... This uncertainty has led to anxiety among our people. And that is understandable -- that anxiety can feed anxiety

Gee, I wonder why Americans are feeling anxious just a couple of weeks after THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TOLD THEM WE'RE HEADING FOR "A LONG AND PAINFUL RECESSION"????

More from Bush:

[T]he decline in the housing market has left many Americans struggling to meet their mortgages and are concerned about losing their homes. My administration has launched two initiatives to help responsible borrowers keep their homes. One is called HOPE NOW, and it brings together homeowners and lenders and mortgage servicers, and others to find ways to prevent foreclosure. The other initiative is aimed at making it easier for responsible homeowners to refinance into affordable mortgages insured by the Federal Housing Administration. So far, these programs have helped more than 2 million Americans stay in their home. And the point is this: If you are struggling to meet your mortgage, there are ways that you can get help.

Why does HOPE NOW leave me feeling so HOPELESS? Why is a chunk of my personal income going to bail out people who chose to refinance–not buy an initial mortgage necessarily, but leverage it into an even bigger ATM machine–at the top of an insane housing market? When do I finally get rewarded (through the market correction of prices), not punished (through taxation to artificially prop up those prices), for choosing to rent rather than buy into a bubble?

With these actions to help to prevent foreclosures, we're addressing a key problem in the housing market: The supply of homes now exceeds demand. And as a result, home values have declined. Once supply and demand balance out, our housing market will be able to recover -- and that will help our broader economy begin to grow.

Note this explicit justification for government action. It's now an urgent federal priority to make sure asset prices appreciate forever. Even though housing prices in real terms, even after a two-year plunge, are still up 40 percent since the beginning of 1997.

[W]e're working closely with partners around the world to ensure that our actions are coordinated and effective. Tomorrow, I'll meet with the finance ministers from our partners in the G7 and the heads of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. Secretary Paulson will also meet with finance ministers from the world's 20 leading economies. Through these efforts, the world is sending an unmistakable signal: We're in this together, and we'll come through this together. [...]

And as we act, we will do it in a way that is effective. [...]

The plan we are executing is aggressive. It is the right plan. It will take time to have its full impact. It is flexible enough to adapt as the situation changes. And it is big enough to work.

A score of central governments working in concert to coordinate industrial policy on a perhaps-unprecedented scale? What ever could go wrong!

Exasperated sarcasm aside, I have two questions for the assembled:

1) Is this indeed The End of American Capitalism as we know it?

2) Am I the only tightwad in the world who has always thought it a way-too-risky idea to put any more than, say, 10 percent of your savings into equities markets? Seriously, I'm starting to feel like a jerk here, but when did "retirement" come to = "massive over-exposure into stock-index funds"?

David Zucker, back when he was still funny, predicted Bush's calming ways three decades ago: 

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Membership Has Its Privileges

Chicago may revise its strictest-in-the-country ban on using cell phones while driving—but only because one of the city's aldermen got caught breaking the law.

Chicago motorists who get caught talking on cell phones while driving without a hands-free device would no longer lose their driver's licenses, under a mayoral plan that would have spared a North Side alderman political embarrassment.

Last year, Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) got pulled over and ticketed for yakking on his cell phone while driving. He was forced to hand over his license like thousands of other motorists.

Tunney then called Town Hall District Cmdr. Gary Yamashiroya and demanded to know why officers in an "understaffed police district" with serious unsolved crimes were "assigned to pull people over solely for cell phone violations."

In response, Yamashiroya ordered a police officer -- not the one who wrote the $50 ticket -- to hand-deliver Tunney's driver's license to the alderman's ward office.

Motorists generally get licenses back only after they go to court or pay their fines.

Earlier this year, Chicago Alderman Dick Mell introduced a bill granting a grace period for Chicagoans who may have forgotten to register their guns (this would apply only to the handful of privileged Chicagoans permitted to own a gun).  The reason for Mell's bill?  He himself had forgotten to register his guns before the deadline.

Now you see how Chicago's aldermen could make the city one of the most paternalistic in the country.  They either don't have to abide by the laws they pass, or they can simply pass a new law exonerating themselves should they get caught.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Saving Social Security, Episode 2: Boom Baby Boom!

Worried about the viability of Social Security? Unless you're already collecting it, you should be!

Follow the animated adventures of Sonny, exactly the sort of youth who is set to get screwed by a system designed during The Great Depression, when workers were plenty and retirees rare.

Episode 2 of the series Saving Social Security is titled "Boom Baby Boom" and explains the demographic death grip that will force major cuts in benefits or massive increases in taxes (or both) to pay for the nation's mandatory savings plan.

Created by Lineplot Productions.


Watch episode 1, "Pimp My Walker," by clicking below:

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

A Tale of Two Videos

This is a video from the McCain campaign called "Ayers." It's 90 seconds long, meant for web consumption, and it spent all of yesterday linked from The Drudge Report. As of 10 a.m. today, it had 418,605 views.

Remember "the McCain-Palin mob," the video from a liberal blogger that I linked yesterday? As of 10 a.m., it had 625,561 views.

Two small data points, but the takeaway is that the Ayers attack, pushed hard this week by the McCain campaign, and ampliflied by the media, is not burning up the web. Discussion of McCain's tactics is. That, not Ayers, is the McCain story of the week. (Another new media data point: While "Ayers" has stayed a topic topic in Twitter messages all week, now most Ayers tweets are mockery of McCain.)

Think about Bill Kristol's New York Times column from Sunday. Given a short phone interview with Sarah Palin, he pushed her to talk about Jeremiah Wright. "To tell you the truth, Bill, I don’t know why that association isn’t discussed more," she said. Bam! Zip! Pow! Etc. But if the goal was to launch a new discussion of Wright, it completely failed. As The Politico's Ben Smith wrote on Monday, "Today we have coverage of Palin talking about Wright, for instance, not of Obama and Wright."

I don't know why McCain is doing this. There was a reason that President Bush made a dig at the "angry left" in his Republican convention speech. Voters can get angry, but they don't want to think they're part of a mob. To make a really outsized analogy, historians of the 60s agree that the thuggery of cops on the Edmund Pettus bridge and video of ugly whites attacking blacks had the biggest impact on shifting mainstream white attitudes on civil rights. Obviously McCain supporters aren't attacking Obama supporters, but the unidentified man who yelled "terrorist!" when McCain asked "who is the real Barack Obama?" has gotten more ink than Palin's coaxed attack on Wright.

It's all a bit mystifying because in the Tuesday debate McCain had the makings of a successful anti-Obama attack on the economy. He warned against Fannie Freddie abuses, Obama didn't, Obama is their political project, I'll save your home and he won't. Did he cede some of this battlefield when he voted for the bailout? Sure. But this is still the battlefield that the election's being fought on. It's as if Iranian troops rolled into Iraq at the end of the 2004 election and John Kerry started attacking Bush's National Guard service. Unless the economy rebounds in three weeks, this will not be a referendum on Obama's character, and McCain's attempts to make it that will tempt this kind of backlash.

UPDATE: Another danger in what McCain's doing: Stories like this, where an ex-governor of Michigan bellyaches about the tone of the GOP campaign and un-endorses the candidate. It looked for a while like McCain would split newspaper endorsements with Obama, but he'll probably get hammered there too.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

15-Year-Old Arrested, Jailed for Nude Cell Phone Photos of Herself

What a dumb waste of resources.

The judge has some discretion, here, but by the letter of the law, she could be forced to register as a sex offender for 20 years.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Read This Story About Stocks On Track for Their Worst Year Since 1937 and Then Tells Me What It Means Exactly...

Continuing the less-than-stellar reporting of the financial sector, this AP story has the attention-grabbing headline "Stocks are on track for their worst year since 1937," without really explaining what that means. "Stocks are on track for their worst year since 1937," announces the story (hence the headline), without detailing how or in what ways. Ah well, context really doesn't matter, does it?

GM, the story says, is at its 1950 price, which kind of makes sense given the product that company makes. Ford, another rusted-out industrial-era giant, is tanking too. Which leads to a real problem, even beyond the $25 billion these two welfare kings (along with Chrysler) have already gotten from the feds. It's no secret that the Big 2.5 (sorry, Chrysler, the truth can be so hurtful) are dying to unload their pension and health-care liabilities onto the American taxpayer. Current and future conditions make it likely that they'll get their wish.

Look for a new 'roided-up stimulus package too:

"We have to prop up consumption," Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said in an interview.

The new proposal would be far greater than the $60 billion stimulus package that the House passed in September, Frank said. The Senate has not acted on the earlier bill, which was dwarfed in attention and scope by the sums being pledged to Wall Street companies and commercial banks.

And look for a new drop in the Dow, too. President Bush is going to speak about the market today, and that always seems to take a couple hundred (thousand) points off the index, doesn't it? The AP suggests various factors are to blame for yesterday's big dip (electronic trading, late-day execution of trades) but a humongous chunk has got to be related to the evolving plans of the Bush admin to first push a useless bailout through Congress and then announce plans to nationalize banks via direct purchase of equity. If I could only get out of this damn wheelchair (but I can't, I can't!), maybe I'd be moving into cash or gold coins hawked by G. Gordon Liddy too.

reason on the bailout.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Is McCain Still in the Game? Does He Need a Hail Mary? Marshall McLuhan Has Answers, Dammit! (Though To Questions Far More Interesting Than Those Ones)

Pollster Scott Rasmussen says that Sen. John McCain needs a Hail Mary play to win the election:

"John McCain probably needs an outside event to win the White House," pollster Scott Rasmussen told the Herald. "He's a little bit like a football team in the fourth quarter, down by a couple of touchdowns. You can't make it all up in one play. And you still need a break or two."

More here.

Pollster John Zogby says the election "can still break either way":

"I don't think Obama has closed the deal yet," pollster John Zogby told the Herald yesterday.

Zogby's latest poll, released yesterday in conjunction with C-Span and Reuters, shows Obama and John McCain in a statistical dead heat, with the Illinois Democrat up 48-45 percent.

More here.

This much seems certain: Whoever wins, "Free Minds and Free Markets" lose, as is clear from our for-you-viewing-pleasure 63-second condensation of Tuesday's debate:

And speaking of Tuesday's debate, here's a YouTube clip of media theorist Marshall McLuhan appearing on the Today show in 1976 to comment on the debates between Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter. Hosting the Today show? One Tom Brokaw, who seemed every bit as perplexed by complex thought and the English language as he does today (Edwin Newman, NBC's resident egghead, is also there). It's a really interesting clip, I think, especially because it shows how little has changed in the staging of political spectacle.

In many ways, McLuhan's criticisms of the debate format are more relevant now than ever given that we live in a radically deconstructed media environment. Phoney-baloney pseudo-events such as the presidential debates are even more self-evidently agitprop for, well, phoney-baloney pseudo-events. (Note: The technical difficulties that Brokaw, Newman, and McLuhan refer to resulted in a 27-minute delay during which moderater Harry Reasoner "vamped" while the candidates stood like wooden puppets at their podiums.)

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

New at Reason: Friday Funnies

In the latest edition of Friday Funnies, Chip Bok reveals the roots of the mortgage meltdown.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Reason Writers Around Town: Matt Welch on the Bradley Effect

In the fourth installment of his L.A. Times campaign dust-up with USC professor Kareem Crayton, Editor in Chief Matt Welch uses unscientific anecdotes to suggest that the United States maybe really isn't as racist as all that.

Read all about it here.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Halloween: A Teachable Moment?

fat suitSome (read: me) might argue that Halloween is the greatest of all holidays. No pressure, no big meal to prepare, no presents to shop for, no insane extended family—just pure fun. Booze for grownups, candy for kids, everybody wins.

Every year, news outlets run a few mask-suffocation and razors-in-apples stories in the name of "service journalism." (Now there's a scary costume: service journalist.) Now there's a new addition to the genre: The Don't Feed the Fat Kids story.

Three weeks out, the AP is on the case, with a perfect example of the form. The lede:

It wasn't the gruesome costumes or gory masks turning up at Lisa Bruno's front door that spooked her on Halloween. It was the pudge lurking beneath the costumes.

"The kids were just so huge," Bruno says.

I'm sure you could write the rest of the story in your sleep. Helpful hints: Give toys instead of candy, trick your kids into giving their hoard to you, etc. But this was the line that broke my heart:

Experts do suggest turning the night into a teaching moment about portion size and limits, lessons can that can be reinforced all year.

For Satan's sake, feed 'em broccoli every other day of the year, but leave the mini-Snickers alone! For just one night, consider the fat a creative opportunity. At least you're saving money on the fat suit for that would otherwise be necessary to complete little Timmy's picture perfect William Howard Taft costume.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

New at Reason: David Weigel on the Politics of the Bailout

Anyone could complain about the bailout from a kneejerk populist stance. And everybody's running against the bailout, writes David Weigel, but nobody's serious about killing it.

Read all about it here

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Marriage Propositions Gaining Steam (and no one Cares)

Over at the Corner, Maggie Gallagher is celebrating the growing support for Florida's Proposition 2, California's Proposition 8, and Arizona's Proposition 102, each of which—if passed—would ban gay marriage in those states (and in the case of Florida, civil unions and domestic partnerships as well):

Younger voters are leading the swing against gay marriage, reports CBS News. Why? My best guess is: a lot of them are parents who don’t really want their schools teaching their 5 year olds about King and King (See the latest ad, at www.protectmarriage.com.)...

Meanwhile the Miami Herald is conceding that polls show the Florida marriage amendment commands a strong majority support.

Getting to 60 percent is a big hurdle, but the undecideds tend to break in favor of marriage amendments.

In Arizona the latest poll shows the marriage amendment is up 49 percent to 40 percent. 

It's the Corner, right? No surprise there. But what is surprising is that these developments aren't getting anywhere near as much airtime on the major networks, editorial pages, or blogs as other expressions of convervative bigotry. How is it that chastising Republicans for exaggerating Barack Obama's connection to Bill Ayers (which Michael Moynihan criticizes in the post below) is more important than covering the GOP's efforts at further alienating (to put it lightly) nontraditional families in two of the biggest, most affluent states in the country? (And Arizona—which has me searching to no avail for the appropriate superlative.)

Leave it to Dan Savage—a potty-mouthed, threesome-lovin', sex columnist, for chrissakes—to be the a leading critic of both bans (and of course, Andrew Sullivan):

The six biggest Savage Love donors to either www.noonprop8.com or www.sayno2 .com will see their letters in print, and everyone who makes a donation of at least $25 to either group—send me your donation confirmation e-mail along with your question—gets a personal reply from yours truly. The cutoff date for eligible letters is October 16. And if my readers in Canada want to play along, too, you're invited to send proof of a donation to someone, anyone, running against Stephen Harper.

(Side note: Gallagher is one of the most disillusioned, spiteful, and smug opponents of same-sex marriage in the game. One would think that the author of The Case for Marriage: Why Married People are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially would concede that even gays deserve to be happier, healthier, and better off financially.) 

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

You Don't Need a Conservative Pundit to Know Which Way the Wind Blows

A bit of conservative blowback on the McCain campaign's impotent strategy of making the final weeks of the election about Barack Obama's association with former Weather Underground leader Bill Ayers. First up, George Will:

This, McCain and his female Sancho Panza say, is demonstrated by bad associations Obama had in Chicago, such as with William Ayers, the unrepentant terrorist. But the McCain-Palin charges have come just as the Obama campaign is benefiting from a mass mailing it is not paying for. Many millions of American households are gingerly opening envelopes containing reports of the third-quarter losses in their 401(k) and other retirement accounts -- telling each household its portion of the nearly $2 trillion that Americans' accounts have recently shed. In this context, the McCain-Palin campaign's attempt to get Americans to focus on Obama's Chicago associations seems surreal -- or, as a British politician once said about criticism he was receiving, "like being savaged by a dead sheep."

David Frum, who has been scathing in his criticism of the Sarah Palin choice, is similarly baffled by the "chummy with terrorists" line of attack. At his National Review blog, Frum unloads on Team McCain (after assuring readers that he will indeed vote for him):

American voters are staggering under the worst financial crisis since at least 1982. Asset values are tumbling, consumer spending is contracting, and a recession is visibly on the way. This crisis follows upon seven years in which middle-class incomes have stagnated and Republican economic management has been badly tarnished. Anybody who imagines that an election can be won under these circumstances by banging on about William Ayers and Jeremiah Wright is ... to put it mildly ... severely under-estimating the electoral importance of pocketbook issues.

We conservatives are sending a powerful, inadvertent message with this negative campaign against Barack Obama's associations and former associations: that we lack a positive agenda of our own and that we don't care about the economic issues that are worrying American voters.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

New at Reason: Radley Balko on Obama's Destructive Crime Policy

Sen. Barack Obama has sounded some encouraging notes on criminal justice reform. But in the last month, Obama's line has been a lot less encouraging, such as his endorsement of a failed, familiar policy—more federalization of crime.

Read all about it here.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Send this article to:

Sorry, But You're Not One of the Important Parties

You might remember that lawsuit Bob Barr filed a to keep Barack Obama and John McCain off the Texas ballot because both the Democratic and Republican parties in that state missed the filing deadline to make the presidential ballot.  The Texas Supreme Court dismissed Barr's complaint without comment.

As it turns out, the Libertarian Party missed the filing deadline to get Bob Barr on the ballot in Louisiana, party officials say because state offices were closed the week of the deadline due to Hurricane Gustav.

Refreshingly, state officials in Louisiana cited the mulligan given the two major party candidates in Texas, noted the barrier presented by the unpredictable catastrophic weather, and said it was in the best interests of the Democratic process to include Barr on the ballot.

Just kidding.  You didn't really believe that, did you?