If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(National Review)   "To paraphrase Dr. Egon Spengler, let's imagine that the federal government in 1776 was the size of this Twinkie. Today that Twinkie would be 35 feet long, weighing approximately 600 pounds"   (nationalreview.com) divider line 354
    More: Amusing, Federal Register, countries by population  
•       •       •

4365 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Nov 2013 at 1:46 PM (23 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



354 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-08 11:49:42 AM
Considering that the country and the global scene is nothing like it was in 1776 (not to mention the fact that it wasn't until much later that we, as a political entity, could even agree to chip in and fund a standing *Navy*), I'd think this would be a good thing.
 
2013-11-08 11:53:09 AM
It seems like all these derper journalists sport goatees these days.

c9.nrostatic.com

Would you trust this man to pet sit for you?
 
2013-11-08 11:54:52 AM
That's a big twinkie.
 
2013-11-08 11:55:25 AM
There was no American federal government in 1776. In fact, at the time, we were still British-owned. Minor detail of history.
 
2013-11-08 11:56:17 AM
Now let's imagine the twinkie is the USA.
 
2013-11-08 11:56:37 AM
This is the nervous system of a planarian:

upload.wikimedia.org

This is a human central and peripheral nervous system.

farm1.staticflickr.com

Surprisingly enough, more complex organisms require complex means of regulation.
 
2013-11-08 11:57:11 AM
Well, it's true. They didn't even have a nuclear regulatory agency back then. They were a steadfast, hearty people that didn't feel the need to regulate fission reactors.
 
2013-11-08 11:59:10 AM
From a conservative perspective, telling people how to run their lives when not absolutely necessary is an abuse of power.

Jonah Goldberg is absolutely 100% correct about this.*

* Offer not valid for abortion, birth control, gay marriage...
 
2013-11-08 12:01:06 PM
The government thinks you're stupid, or at least ignorant.

I see NRO's pendulum has swung back to Americans being smart and informed again.

Don't worry, Americans will go back to being dumb, entitled rubes right after the Republicans' next policy failure.
 
2013-11-08 12:01:26 PM
Sometimes these people are so wackadoodle they make me giggle. And then I feel very sad for them.
 
2013-11-08 12:03:26 PM
US Population in 1776: 2.5 million
US Population in 2013: 310 million (124 times 1776 population)

Twinkie in 1776: 6 inches long
Twinkie in 2013: 62 feet long

By his logic the Fed isn't large enough.

/or his logic is f*cking idiotic
 
2013-11-08 12:06:37 PM

The RIchest Man in Babylon: US Population in 1776: 2.5 million
US Population in 2013: 310 million (124 times 1776 population)

Twinkie in 1776: 6 inches long
Twinkie in 2013: 62 feet long

By his logic the Fed isn't large enough.

/or his logic is f*cking idiotic


QUOD ERAT DERPUMSTRATUM

farking NRO. idiots.
 
2013-11-08 12:06:40 PM
Obligatory: Link
 
2013-11-08 12:06:46 PM
Um, does that author understand that the country has grown a bit since the 1700s? Are the republicans really this f*cking stupid?
 
2013-11-08 12:06:56 PM
The North American population in 1776 was about 2.5 million currently the population is around 309 million so it has grown at about 123 times in size
A twinkie is 4 inches long therefore a 35 foot long twinkie would be just over 100 times as big. Therefore the US population has grown at a rate slower than the best snack cake related estimates!

USA! USA! USA!
 
2013-11-08 12:08:26 PM

Weaver95: Um, does that author understand that the country has grown a bit since the 1700s? Are the republicans really this f*cking stupid?


Hi there, you must have been in a coma for the last 30 years.
 
2013-11-08 12:08:51 PM

Lando Lincoln: Well, it's true. They didn't even have a nuclear regulatory agency back then. They were a steadfast, hearty people that didn't feel the need to regulate fission reactors.  This article's writer has no dick.


FTFY
 
2013-11-08 12:09:11 PM
gif thread?

img.pandawhale.com

gif thread!
 
2013-11-08 12:09:52 PM
man, america was awesome when women couldn't vote, black people were slaves and you could die from a cut on the finger! USA! USA!
 
2013-11-08 12:10:50 PM
If there was a Twinkie that large Jonah would have either:

A) farked it
B) ate it

We won't discuss option C
 
2013-11-08 12:11:13 PM
IS NRO trying to out-stupid Townhall?
 
2013-11-08 12:11:17 PM

Lando Lincoln: Well, it's true. They didn't even have a nuclear regulatory agency back then. They were a steadfast, hearty people that didn't feel the need to regulate fission reactors.


General George Washington didn't need an Air Force to win wars, so I don't know why 0bunghole thinks he needs one.
 
2013-11-08 12:15:22 PM
In 1776, the federal government's portfolio could have easily fit in a file folder: maintain an army and navy, a few federal courts, the post office, the patent office, and maybe a dozen or two other pretty obvious things.

In other words, "I don't actually know what the federal government did back then. But when I put on my tricorne hat and masturbate to pictures of George Washington wearing women's clothing, this is what I imagine it to be."
 
2013-11-08 12:15:26 PM

Lando Lincoln: Well, it's true. They didn't even have a nuclear regulatory agency back then. They were a steadfast, hearty people that didn't feel the need to regulate fission reactors.


That and a Department of Transportation.  It was like they just drove their cars wherever they wanted, and damn the seat belt requirements.
Without an FAA, their air traffic control must have been a shambles though.
 
2013-11-08 12:17:52 PM

mediablitz: IS NRO trying to out-stupid Townhall?


Once upon a time, National Review catered to a few rational, educated, well-off Republicans.  Recently they've realized (along with others) that the real money is in catering to millions of vitriolic mouth-breathing retards.

So yes.  Yes they are.
 
2013-11-08 12:18:50 PM

Lando Lincoln: Well, it's true. They didn't even have a nuclear regulatory agency back then. They were a steadfast, hearty people that didn't feel the need to regulate fission reactors.


Ok, that was funny.
 
2013-11-08 12:19:10 PM

mediablitz: IS NRO trying to out-stupid Townhall?


Being that stupid is a lot of work.
 
2013-11-08 12:21:42 PM

doyner: mediablitz: IS NRO trying to out-stupid Townhall?

Once upon a time, National Review catered to a few rational, educated, well-off Republicans.  Recently they've realized (along with others) that the real money is in catering to millions of vitriolic mouth-breathing retards.

So yes.  Yes they are.


Let's make a distinction.

The National Review Online has nothing in common with the National Review except for the name. The NRO has its own separate editorial board and has a completely different editorial agenda. They have NEVER catered to the rational people since its inception.
 
2013-11-08 12:28:01 PM
When will we return to the constitutionally mandated 1 representative for every 30,000 people, huh?  I want my 10,100 member congress as promised by the founding fathers!
 
2013-11-08 12:29:37 PM

RexTalionis: doyner: mediablitz: IS NRO trying to out-stupid Townhall?

Once upon a time, National Review catered to a few rational, educated, well-off Republicans.  Recently they've realized (along with others) that the real money is in catering to millions of vitriolic mouth-breathing retards.

So yes.  Yes they are.

Let's make a distinction.

The National Review Online has nothing in common with the National Review except for the name. The NRO has its own separate editorial board and has a completely different editorial agenda. They have NEVER catered to the rational people since its inception.


Kinda like the difference between The Heritage Foundation and Heritage Action, huh?
 
2013-11-08 12:35:12 PM
Let's not forget that it was big-government EPA that turned off the containment unit.
 
2013-11-08 12:38:25 PM

doyner: RexTalionis: doyner: mediablitz: IS NRO trying to out-stupid Townhall?

Once upon a time, National Review catered to a few rational, educated, well-off Republicans.  Recently they've realized (along with others) that the real money is in catering to millions of vitriolic mouth-breathing retards.

So yes.  Yes they are.

Let's make a distinction.

The National Review Online has nothing in common with the National Review except for the name. The NRO has its own separate editorial board and has a completely different editorial agenda. They have NEVER catered to the rational people since its inception.

Kinda like the difference between The Heritage Foundation and Heritage Action, huh?


No.
 
2013-11-08 12:40:22 PM
You know, it's been like 20 years since I've watched Ghostbusters, and I've at least doubled in size. Or at least weight. But I really need to sit down and watch those movies again soon.
 
2013-11-08 12:52:52 PM

Weaver95: Um, does that author understand that the country has grown a bit since the 1700s? Are the republicans really this f*cking stupid?


yes
the republicans really are that stupid. 
and they are still allowed to vote
 
2013-11-08 12:55:18 PM

25.media.tumblr.com

 
2013-11-08 12:58:18 PM
There was no department of energy in 1776!
 
2013-11-08 01:01:17 PM

WI241TH: When will we return to the constitutionally mandated 1 representative for every 30,000 people, huh?  I want my 10,100 member congress as promised by the founding fathers!


THIS
talk about actual representation!!!
plus 99.99999% of the population would HATE CONGRESS
 
2013-11-08 01:11:15 PM

doyner: RexTalionis: doyner: mediablitz: IS NRO trying to out-stupid Townhall?

Once upon a time, National Review catered to a few rational, educated, well-off Republicans.  Recently they've realized (along with others) that the real money is in catering to millions of vitriolic mouth-breathing retards.

So yes.  Yes they are.

Let's make a distinction.

The National Review Online has nothing in common with the National Review except for the name. The NRO has its own separate editorial board and has a completely different editorial agenda. They have NEVER catered to the rational people since its inception.

Kinda like the difference between The Heritage Foundation and Heritage Action, huh?


There isn't really a difference between those two organizations.  Heritage Action is simply the lobbying / active backing arm of the Heritage Foundation.
 
2013-11-08 01:11:17 PM
Washington DC didn't even exist in 1776, it was a swamp.
 
2013-11-08 01:12:46 PM

vernonFL: Washington DC didn't even exist in 1776, it was a swamp.


But there were downsides to living back then too.
 
2013-11-08 01:16:06 PM
The other LIE in the article is ignoring inflation. You need to adjust spending by inflation to compare different decades and centuries.

Maybe use median income as a better yard stick.


plus any solution which doesnt slash DOD in half and increase taxes, (esp on the wealthy, esp on cap gains, inheritance, and all the other hidden income), is just posturing.
 
2013-11-08 01:16:13 PM

God Is My Co-Pirate: vernonFL: Washington DC didn't even exist in 1776, it was a swamp.

But there were downsides to living back then too.


Downsides like not having any twinkies to extrapolate into silly, ahistorical metaphors.
 
2013-11-08 01:19:54 PM
The lesson here is that we should go back to 1776 numbers.

This would mean that we'd need an additional 40% President.

Though we'd not likely be able to do that math anyway.

The RIchest Man in Babylon: gif thread?

[img.pandawhale.com image 500x211]

gif thread!


Why does he want to he Spongebob?
 
2013-11-08 01:20:29 PM
These are conservative intellectuals, people.
 
2013-11-08 01:31:00 PM

I_Am_Weasel: The lesson here is that we should go back to 1776 numbers.

This would mean that we'd need an additional 40% President.

Though we'd not likely be able to do that math anyway.

The RIchest Man in Babylon: gif thread?

[img.pandawhale.com image 500x211]

gif thread!

Why does he want to he eat Spongebob?


Fixed that for you, Weasel, you idiot.
 
2013-11-08 01:39:34 PM
I have Ernie Hudson's signature. My dad got it for me at a policeman's ball. It reads "Hey Contrabulous, who you gonna call? Think you're great. Ernie "Winston" Hudson"

CSB
 
2013-11-08 01:41:49 PM
That little asslicker Jonah Goldberg has admitted in the past to reading Fark.  So why don't you ever come in here and defend what you wrote, you disgusting little sack of horseshiat? Or, yeah, that's right, it's because the insane blather you crank out is impossible to defend logically. And because you're a little pussy, who would have a job at all if his mommy hadn't gotten it for him.

Hope you're reading this thread, you doughy pantload.
 
2013-11-08 01:41:50 PM

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: doyner: RexTalionis: doyner: mediablitz: IS NRO trying to out-stupid Townhall?

Once upon a time, National Review catered to a few rational, educated, well-off Republicans.  Recently they've realized (along with others) that the real money is in catering to millions of vitriolic mouth-breathing retards.

So yes.  Yes they are.

Let's make a distinction.

The National Review Online has nothing in common with the National Review except for the name. The NRO has its own separate editorial board and has a completely different editorial agenda. They have NEVER catered to the rational people since its inception.

Kinda like the difference between The Heritage Foundation and Heritage Action, huh?

There isn't really a difference between those two organizations.  Heritage Action is simply the lobbying / active backing arm of the Heritage Foundation.


And NRO is the Herping/Derping arm of National Review.
 
2013-11-08 01:42:50 PM
The number of civilians (i.e., not counting the military) who work for the executive branch alone is today nearly equal to the entire population of the United States in 1776. The Federal Register, the federal government's fun-filled journal of new rules, regulations, and the like, was about 2,600 pages in 1936 (a year after it was created). Today it's over 80,000 pages.

How locked-down, buttoned-up stupid do you have to be to write something like that when you know it's going on the internet?
 
2013-11-08 01:48:16 PM
Nothing else has changed since 1776.
 
Displayed 50 of 354 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report