Patterico's Pontifications

He’s right! It’s a two-party system!

Patterico (fb172b) — 6/17/2016 @ 12:36 pm

Cue Douglas Adams:

“It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see…”
“You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?”
“No,” said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, “nothing so simple. Nothing anything like so straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people.”
“Odd,” said Arthur, “I thought you said it was a democracy.”
“I did,” said Ford. “It is.”
“So,” said Arthur, hoping he wasn’t sounding ridiculously obtuse, “why don’t people get rid of the lizards?”
“It honestly doesn’t occur to them,” said Ford. “They’ve all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they’ve voted in more or less approximates to the government they want.”
“You mean they actually vote for the lizards?”
“Oh yes,” said Ford with a shrug, “of course.”
“But,” said Arthur, going for the big one again, “why?”
“Because if they didn’t vote for a lizard,” said Ford, “the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?”

aphrael (e0cdc9) — 6/17/2016 @ 12:42 pm

if I had to pick I’d choose Mr. Trump

he’s got the razz-ma-tazz and the boppity boopity both

happyfeet (831175) — 6/17/2016 @ 12:52 pm

I’d like to see a list of the U.S. presidents who would not have been elected but for a third party run. Woodrow Wilson and Bill Clinton immediately come to mind, which by itself is enough to make me leery of third party runs.

Andrew Hyman (02b67f) — 6/17/2016 @ 12:53 pm

I’m not always a fan of the humor of Trey Parker and Matt Stone of South Park and The Book of Mormon fame, but they nailed it in 2004 with “Douche and Turd.”

FWIW, I believe that South Park episode “Cartoon Wars, Part 2” was the greatest satirical moment of the Twenty-First Century, and I don’t expect that it will be surpassed in my lifetime. Nothing short of genius.

L.N. Smithee (b84cf6) — 6/17/2016 @ 12:58 pm

Andrew, don’t forget Abraham Lincoln.

BobStewartatHome (404986) — 6/17/2016 @ 1:13 pm

Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party got 180 Electoral votes. The official Democrat, Stephen A. Douglas got only 12. John C. Breckenridge (breakaway Democrat) got 72, and John Bell (Constitutional Union) got 29. Lincoln got just under 40% of the popular vote went, but he wasn’t on the ballot in most slave states. This article includes the state by state breakdown. (in South Carolina there was no popular vote: the state legislature chose the Electors)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1860

I think there were not too many cases of votes being in any way evenly split 3 or more ways. Lincoln got a majority of votes cast in every state he carried except California, which then hasd 4 Electoral votes, and Oregon, with 3. New Jersey had some kind of peculiar system. It had Fusion Democratic slate, and Lincoln got 48.1% to the Fusion ticket’s 51.9% but got 4 Electoral votes to Douglas’ 3.

California: Lincoln 38,733 or 32.3%; Douglas, 37,999 or 31.7%; Breckenridge, 33,969 or
28.4%, Bell 9,111 or 7.6%

Sammy Finkelman (c5cea5) — 6/17/2016 @ 1:37 pm

There was a Fusion Dem ticket in New York and Pennsylvania also, but Lincoln got a majority of the votes cast in both states (John Bell and Stephen Douglas ran separately in Pennsylvania but got less than 7% combined)

Sammy Finkelman (c5cea5) — 6/17/2016 @ 1:41 pm

If enough of us sit home on Election Day, then neither of the two party candidates will be allowed to take the oath of office in January 2017.
I’m not joking.
That’s how it works.

Okay, I’m joking.

Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 6/17/2016 @ 1:50 pm

4.I’d like to see a list of the U.S. presidents who would not have been elected but for a third party run.

Sometimes I pine for the good old days when within an hour of putting out a thought like that someone wouldn’t wiki and google a page of facts. Oh!, the wonder we once had before everyone became a computer expert. Why we could actually go to bed with an unanswered question bouncing around in our heads till we drifted off to sleep. But some day, when the electricity goes off in a cloud of moslem induced plutonium I’ll be king again! Nah, I’ll be dead with the rest of ya. Allahu Akbar!

Rev. Hoagie© (734193) — 6/17/2016 @ 2:10 pm

you’re so

dark

happyfeet (831175) — 6/17/2016 @ 2:15 pm

#4 Andrew Hyman,

Which you kindly care to explain how you believe Woodrow Wilson (1912) and Bill Clinton (1992) won due to third party candidacies?

Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 6/17/2016 @ 2:17 pm

carry on, with the media matters engagement,

http://redalertpolitics.com/2016/06/17/trump-outperforming-romney-2012-swing-states-despite-bad-national-polls/#dTPHVZK45OHslDqG.02

narciso (732bc0) — 6/17/2016 @ 2:17 pm

that’s easy tr and perot, although the last was more about the fact that bush sr, didn’t care to run,

narciso (732bc0) — 6/17/2016 @ 2:18 pm

Mr. Trump’s a good pickle

he’ll vanquish the nasty old woman who smells like stale urine (thank god)

and he’ll do it with élan

happyfeet (831175) — 6/17/2016 @ 2:20 pm

narciso,

Telling me that Perot and “TR” ran in the election does not explain it.

Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 6/17/2016 @ 2:22 pm

well here’s a cautionary tale,

http://www.history.com/news/remembering-the-1912-presidential-election

narciso (732bc0) — 6/17/2016 @ 2:26 pm

narciso,

Wilson and Clinton each won landslides in the electoral college.
There’s no way to know how voters for a third party would have voted if it were merely a two man race. In each election, they had the chance to STOP the Democrat (Wilson, Clinton) by coalescing around one candidate, but they chose not to, which suggests that stopping the Democrat was not the number one priority for third party voters in each of those two elections.

Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 6/17/2016 @ 2:32 pm

According to Michael Lind, “If the Democratic Party had not split and if the votes of Douglas and Bell had been combined, the result would have been a popular vote exceeding Lincoln’s by more than 100,000. But Lincoln still would have won in the electoral college.”

https://books.google.com/books?id=VkZNFlZAZ3UC&pg=PA155

As I recall, Wilson would have lost to Taft in 1912 but for the third party run of Theodore Roosevelt. And Bill Clinton would have lost to George H.W. Bush in 1992 but for the third party run of Ross Perot.

Andrew Hyman (b12b60) — 6/17/2016 @ 3:12 pm

Clinton would have suffered a 4 state only drubbing – MD, NY, HI, and AR – plus DC in 92 assuming all Perot votes went to Bush.

urbanleftbehind (25cb8f) — 6/17/2016 @ 3:16 pm

Rev. Hoagie© (734193) — 6/17/2016 @ 2:10 pm

But some day, when the electricity goes off in a cloud of moslem induced plutonium I’ll be king again! Nah, I’ll be dead with the rest of ya. Allahu Akbar!

The plutonium might actually come from North Korea.

Terrorism is no more only Islamic than slavery was always connected to slave. It’s just that most of the pother forms are no longer extant, for the most part.

Sammy Finkelman (c5cea5) — 6/17/2016 @ 4:02 pm

Well, Sammy I’d be willing to bet on the moslems but since I won’t be here to collect why bother?

Rev. Hoagie© (734193) — 6/17/2016 @ 4:12 pm

The Perot votes that would have gone to Bush – for the most part actually did.

Sammy Finkelman (c5cea5) — 6/17/2016 @ 4:13 pm

he’ll vanquish the nasty old woman who smells like stale urine (thank god)

and he’ll do it with élan

happyfeet (831175) — 6/17/2016 @ 2:20 pm

How close will we get to the election before happyfeet no longer predicts this? Maybe we should start a pool.

Gerald A (76f251) — 6/17/2016 @ 4:16 pm

Actually, no, I don’t have to vote for either one of them. If this was actually a free country, it wouldn’t matter, because neither one of them or any of their henchmen (and -women) in the Federal and State governments wouldn’t be able to do anything untoward against me or mine or my property. Since, however, we don’t live in a free country, I’ll just cling bitterly to my guns and bible … oh, wait. I’m a Buddhist! hmmmm … well, you know what I mean.

Ike (55db8e) — 6/17/2016 @ 4:18 pm

Freedom of Choice

A figure of derision in the primaries
Nobody ever said that life was free
Sink, swim, go down with the ship
But use your freedom of choice

I’ll say it again in the land of the free
Use your freedom of choice
Your freedom of choice

In TVLand
There was a man
He had a mouth
And Roger Stone
He fired him
He picked another
He talked in circles
And he beat Cruz

Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom of choice!
Is what you want!

Then if you got it you don’t want it
Seems to be the rule of thumb
Don’t be tricked by what you see
You got two ways to go

I’ll say it again in the land of the free
Use your freedom of choice
Freedom of choice

Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom of choice

Colonel Haiku (3bf827) — 6/17/2016 @ 4:28 pm

yes yes he beat cruz like a rented-red-haired step-mule

happyfeet (831175) — 6/17/2016 @ 4:30 pm

There is also this, showing how old the problem is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpHCfndib0Q

Kevin M (25bbee) — 6/17/2016 @ 5:58 pm

Here’s how Trump wins: He gives the NY Working Families and CA Peace & Freedom parties $1 billion to run Bernie.

Kevin M (25bbee) — 6/17/2016 @ 6:03 pm

CS, 1912 is easy — Teddy split the vote with the official GOP ticket and even though the3 two GOP candidates got more votes by far than Wilson, he won the electoral votes.

1992 is harder. Some of Perot’s vote would have gone to Bush, but not all of it. Some would have gone to some other protest candidate. Some would have gone to Clinton. Also, one needs to understand that Perot could have won that election had he not temporarily dropped out. He had been ahead.

Kevin M (25bbee) — 6/17/2016 @ 6:07 pm

FYI: An absolutely wonderful dataset for US elections: http://uselectionatlas.org/

Kevin M (25bbee) — 6/17/2016 @ 6:09 pm

If I didn’t deliberately drown in my own vomit back when it was McCain v. Obama, what makes you think I’m going to do it now?

Steve57 (e33d44) — 6/17/2016 @ 6:14 pm

Note in 1912 that the Socialist Debs got 6% of the vote. Wilson swept the South then rolled up narrow pluralities in the north. He won Illinois with 35% of the vote. I’d say that 3rd parties had their effect.

Kevin M (25bbee) — 6/17/2016 @ 6:16 pm

If I didn’t deliberately drown in my own vomit back when it was McCain v. Obama, what makes you think I’m going to do it now?

Both sides suck worse?

Kevin M (25bbee) — 6/17/2016 @ 6:17 pm

you don’t even know what you’re talking about

happyfeet (831175) — 6/17/2016 @ 6:28 pm

Christ, this is almost like the Left Twix/Right Twix dilemma.

Bill H (971e5f) — 6/17/2016 @ 6:33 pm

you don’t even know what you’re talking about

happyfeet (831175) — 6/17/2016 @ 6:28 pm

That’s pretty bold, coming from you.

Bill H (971e5f) — 6/17/2016 @ 6:34 pm

I amputated my left Twix. Voluntarily, without anesthetic.

Sure, I can’t play the guitar anymore, but it was worth it. The Left Twix offended me.

papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/17/2016 @ 6:40 pm

Turns out the Left Twix was necessary for playing Stairway, but not really a factor when playing Taurus.

So I got that going for me. How’s the lawsuit coming? Compelling evidence that they are not the same.

papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/17/2016 @ 6:46 pm

Yes, voting has always been a choice between horribles, but these two are dangerous! Should I vote at all? Should I stay home and watch old episodes of Hitchhikers Guide?

*sigh*

A lizard might be an improvement. Then we wouldn’t have to blame ourselves.

Patricia (5fc097) — 6/17/2016 @ 7:03 pm

Seems like a lot of you are wrestling with a dilemma.

Perhaps in your deterministic world, the fact you have a choice, and that your choice will make a world altering difference is what causes the hesitation.

You have a woman who chose early on to be the doormat in her family’s personal life, tempered by the years into focused hostility, redirected and given expression through her public policy, versus a man who prospered under a plurality of officials sharing that distasteful trait. As the target of their transferred ire, he made good.

Hillary Clinton will direct the glide path of America’s descent into mediocrity, happily accepting the roll of punching bag and dumping ground for the world. It’s what she knows.

What do you do with the guy who gains weight in the POW camp?

I say you you look past his motivations, in favor of his abilities, applied to our future.

papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/17/2016 @ 8:23 pm

I would really like to see Trump dropped in some poor part of Appalachia where they’ve never heard of him, with no ID and twenty one-dollar bills. See if he gets out alive. All he would have to do is not be an a-hole for a few days. Could he do it? Could Hillary?

Kevin M (25bbee) — 6/17/2016 @ 8:35 pm

she’s murdering the hopes of a generation of appalachians, through her bribes to the sky dragon but your quarrel is with trump, as for maverick, what kind of annelid was seen in 2008,

narciso (732bc0) — 6/17/2016 @ 8:52 pm

Trump got 77% of the vote in West Virginia. I think he’d have people dropping what they’re doing to give him a ride.
In fact he did quite well in Tenn, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, New York, North Carolina.

Where does Appalachia start?

papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/17/2016 @ 9:16 pm

“As the target of their transferred ire”

Sesame Street All-Star 25th Birthday: Stars and Street Forever! (YouTube) was a 1994 TV special that aired on ABC to celebrate Sesame Street’s 25th anniversary. It was originally broadcast on May 18, 1994.[1]

An hour long demonizing of Donald Trump by the complete stable of PBS sock puppets, interspersed with notorious Hollywood liberals.

papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/17/2016 @ 9:23 pm

What do you do with the guy who gains weight in the POW camp?

I say you you look past his motivations, in favor of his abilities, applied to our future.

Well said, papertiger. I am resigned that if I am moved to vote, it will be for him.

Patricia (5fc097) — 6/17/2016 @ 10:27 pm

This bullship about TRUMP being DANGEROUS is merely built upon his SECRET NON-ACCOUNTABLE SERVER lodged in a schitter at a 2 bit DENVER Computer host. Not to mention his EVERY SINGLE E-MAIL from 4 years as SECRETARY OF FREAKING STATE, having been hacked by GUCCIFER, China, Russia,North Korea and most 16 year old pimple faced virgins. WHO THE FOCK ARE WE KIDDING? Trump HAS NEVER shown himself to be a psychotic lying alcoholic lying SHREW. RODHAM HAS.

GUS (30b6bd) — 6/17/2016 @ 10:34 pm

Patricia. If you DO NOT VOTE. Some illegal voter will vote and not only cancel YOUR VOTE, but add to the COMMIE total.

Consider the COST of NOT voting.

GUS (30b6bd) — 6/17/2016 @ 10:38 pm

Paul Ryan is the worst person in Washington D.C. May they sharia his buttocks.

mg (31009b) — 6/18/2016 @ 2:08 am

Please watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Amh68ocb5A

mg (31009b) — 6/18/2016 @ 2:15 am

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/06/6_16_2016_17_35.html
My man.

mg (31009b) — 6/18/2016 @ 3:03 am

Hi GUS!

Patterico (fb172b) — 6/18/2016 @ 5:12 am

An annelid is a type of worm, so that tell you what I think of maverick.

narciso (732bc0) — 6/18/2016 @ 5:50 am

Paul Ryan is pervy mitt romney’s overpromoted baby buttboy on the hill

these people are deeply sick

happyfeet (831175) — 6/18/2016 @ 5:59 am

To repeat: debating Trump v. Hillary is liking debating the merits between constipation and diarrhea. You can make points pro and con. But in the end it is all S–T.

Bored Lawyer (65f3b0) — 6/18/2016 @ 8:00 pm

you don’t even know what you’re talking about Mr. lawyer

happyfeet (831175) — 6/18/2016 @ 8:02 pm

Mr. *Lawyer* i mean

happyfeet (831175) — 6/18/2016 @ 8:02 pm

.Well, Sammy I’d be willing to bet on the moslems but since I won’t be here to collect why bother

I meant that the Moslems, even the Iranians, if they delivered a plutonium bomb, would get the plutonium from North Korea. You said “Moslem induced” plutonium, which refers to the plutonium itself.

North Korea has just expanded its plutonium producing capability, while Iran has reconfigured its heavy water reactor at Arak, so that it will only produce a small amount of plutonium. There’s there’s still enough, or enough was produced in the past, to give North Korea some deniability, especially since there was no accounting for what was done by Iran in the past.

There’s deniability, that is, if North Korea doesn’t figure on the ability of the United States, after an explosion, to determine where the plutonium came from. The U.S. government would be able to tell where the plutonium came from by analyzing isotopic composition.

Iran knows that this is possible, but maybe not North Korea, or it could discount it, and figure it would take time and be too technical and it wouldn’t matter so long as they were not connected to the actual execution, while the Iranians, or whoever, would use the isotopic signature to deflect blame, or just create doubt about who did it. North Korea and Iran would both be denying culpability, and blaming each other, or Israel, or the United States itself, or Japan, and in the meantime, there’d be no military response.

I often wonder if the whole Iranian nuclear program has always been just a cover, or in part a cover, for obtaining enriched uranium or plutonium somewhere else. That is, the situation might be that North Korea wouldn’t supply any plutonium or enriched uranium unless Iran could create a plausible case that they had manufactured it themselves, but if Iran did create such a case, that, then they’d obtain double or more of what they produced themselves, and could even afford to give some plutonium or highly enriched uramium away…

Of course, there’s a possible problem smuggling the plutonium out of North Korea undetected, but they’re the biggest source of loose plutonium around. So far, it’s probably still in North Korea.

You do have to wonder if the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, might come in the future to be seen as the “little” one. That would be the case if something more terrible happens in 2023 or so. Let’s hope we’re not between the terrorist attacks.

since I won’t be here to collect

There should be more survivors than victims. You know, we’re not talking hydrogen bombs, and even hydrogen bombs have a limit to the range of destruction. You could be around to collect. How close do you plan on being to Ground Zero??

Sammy Finkelman (7a22e4) — 6/18/2016 @ 9:36 pm

Colonel Haiku (3bf827) — 6/17/2016 @ 4:28 pm

And Roger Stone

I picked up Roger Stone’s new book (The Clinton’s War on Women) on Friday.

This reminds me that if anyone tries to attack the Clintons they run the risk of running into a lot of trouble and having it explode in their face. There is a ton of disinformation out there. Any person attempting to do that would have be very careful when utilizing any previous work and could really have to start from scratch.

Stone’s book has Vincent Foster retruning to the White House after leaving suddenly in midday on July 20, 1993 – and only killing himself there – and yet for some reason they have to take his body as far away as Ft. Marcy Park? They couldn’t find any place closer? It’s absurd. Wouldn’t it make more sense that they put his briefcase back in his office, rather than that that means he returned?

He has Hillary being the person responsible for the assault on the Branch Davidians on April 19, 1993. Now that’s clearly disinformation attempting to trip people up. That is based on a 1999 film, which in turn in based on what an investigator for the House of Representatives heard.

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/hillary_waco.htm

In the film, director Michael McNulty included the account of former House Waco investigator T. March Bell.

“One of the interesting things that happens in an investigation is that you get anonymous phone calls,” Bell explains in the film.

“And we in fact received anonymous phone calls from Justice Department managers and attorneys who believe that pressure was placed on Janet Reno by Webb Hubbell, and pressure that came from the first lady of the United States.”

How stupid can you get? Just because people who don’t give their name claim to be Justice Department managers and attorneys doesn’t mean that they are, or are telling the truth. Just because somebody tells an anti-Clinton story doesn’t mean it is true, and it doesn’;t mean the story is not being actually being spread by the Clintons themselves. This is the oldest Clinton trick in the book: Spread derogatory – but false and disprovable – accusations against yourself, to divert the attention of, and to discredit, people interested in investigating you.

It is not at all plausible that the decision to murder the Branch Davidians came from Hillary, although I suppose it is possible she might have acted sometimes as a cut-out for Bill, particularly since she was outside the formal chain of command. It couldn’t work without Bill letting ot be known she spoke for him. And the idea that Janet Reno was reluctant is totally absurd. She tricked some people at DOJ by signing irders during the weekend.

The order, by the way, were very carefully drafted to protect her and everybody else. It was an order to shrink the containment area. not end the siege, and it authorized firing back if the FBI was fired on, OR injected tear gas. On and after April 19, the FBI claimed it was fired at, something denied by every surviving Branch Davidians (the compound was very quickly destroyed so nobody could disprove that) and congradulated themselves for showing aa lot of restraint and NOT firing (which is actually untue – they did fire shots to keep people from exiting the compound) and instead injecting tear gas, which of course was the plan all along because they knew that CS tear gas would burst nto flames at a certain level of concentration below that at which it was injected, and besides which there were all these lit kerosene lanterns inside.

And Janet Reno said later “This was not supposed to be D-Day” and in fact according to her written orders, that was correct, but that whole day of April 19, before the fire, the FBI was demanding a surrender – and she was against that and listening in and didn’t stop them?

Every person involved was protected with a notional story.

Sammy Finkelman (7a22e4) — 6/18/2016 @ 10:14 pm

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/18/fathers-day-message-paul-ryan-sons-died-step-aside/

mg (31009b) — 6/19/2016 @ 6:51 am

mg @ 60:

How is this different from complaining about murders by blacks, and demanding that ALL blacks be treated differently? You can make a legal distinction, but I can’t see a moral distinction. This is black letter racism, just transferred to a different category of people. If racism is wrong, so is countryism.

Sammy Finkelman (7a22e4) — 6/19/2016 @ 8:55 am

I’ve been thinking about this cartoon a lot lately.

I can’t get past the fact that supporting either of these two is an immoral act, one which betrays your duty to your country.

scrubone (c3104f) — 6/19/2016 @ 1:19 pm

Sammy- this pos is your brother, not mine.
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/06/19/daniel-horowitz-gop-pushing-legislation-written-muslim-brotherhood/

mg (31009b) — 6/19/2016 @ 9:57 pm

@63 No this is not, whatever “pos” stands for.

The Breitbart article links to this:

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/06/gops-muslim-brotherhood-inspired-post-orlando-agenda

David Horowitz might be right -it’s completely plausible to me that the ant-terror legislation that may be going somewhere is all wrong. The big problem is that nobody’s challenging, at least at the details level, the treatment of certain Moslem preachers as allies of anti-terrorism, rather than allies of terrorism.

It is indeed “radical” Islam, but some people considred quite legitimate by the executive Branch – are part of that. That is the crux of the problem.

Those preachers have convinced some people it is bad even to say “radical” Islam – only because they don’t have a reputation as being so radical, so if they properly identified, they could argue it is mainstream Islam being attacked. But it’s not. It is very important taht all this is new and the people doing these acts of terrorism are all, virtually to the last person, “born again” Muslims or converts.

The commentary article links to this:

http://www.rubincenter.org/2013/06/the-u-s-governments-disastrous-muslim-outreach-efforts-and-the-impact-on-u-s-middle-east-policy-blind-to-terror1/

After al-Qa’ida cleric Anwar al-Awlaki was teaching on Islam in the Executive Dining Room of the Pentagon just weeks after three of his disciples had flown a plane into the same building; when the government had to admit that the State Department’s Muslim goodwill ambassador to the Middle East and frequent White House visitor, Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi, had been one of the top al-Qa’ida fundraisers at the same time he was certifying the Pentagon’s Muslim chaplains; and even when attorneys for Sami al-Arian went into federal court demanding discovery documents showing their client’s outreach meetings at the White House, the Department of Justice, FBI headquarters, and the House of Representatives Speakers’ Office; there was not even a moment of pause before the government picked up right where it left off.

And, whle some eople have bene cleared out, it hasn’t stopped.

What I disagree with him is that thers’s aproblem with Syrian refugees.

You have to go after the teachers, not the students

Sammy Finkelman (7a22e4) — 6/26/2016 @ 9:01 am

6/17/2016

You Have to Vote for One of Us!

64 Responses to “You Have to Vote for One of Us!”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out