354 Comments

I again suggest a high level vomit emoji because sad weak poop is practically a compliment.

Expand full comment

It's the "and whatnot" that really ties the whole thing together.

Expand full comment

I'm glad I don't know him. I'd be too tempted to walk up to him and, without saying a word, knee him so hard in the groin that he could taste his balls, and then give him a sharp elbow to the back the head as he doubled over.

"Hey, asshole! I survived severe child abuse, and grew up to be a prosperous, tax-paying, job-creating citizen. But if somebody doesn't pull me away from you and right now, you might not survive today."

Expand full comment

Shouldn't he be on trial in South Carolina?

Expand full comment

Thanks, started it on Twitter, but that's such a S-hole now, I deactivated and only Discus now.

Expand full comment

I hate being reminded I live in a world with Psychotic Sociopaths like this asshole.

Expand full comment

It is fucking crazy to be fervently against abortion but fine with actual children dying preventable deaths. I mean, being fine with children dying by itself is fucking insane, but wouldn't allowing women to choose to get an abortion be a greater "benefit to society" in his extremely fucked up worldview?

Expand full comment

Whenever someone says something awful in passive voice ie “It’s been argued that…” they know what they are saying is awful and want to put it out there without actually having to take responsibility for it. Gross, I hope his own children, if he has any, learn what he said.

Expand full comment

In Idaho, they take that right to starve your child as freedom of religion (because of their "sincerely held religious beliefs").

Expand full comment

I have the feeling these guys would read A Modest Proposal, and not recognize the satire.

Expand full comment

Obviously that whole censuring thing is working, he’s clearly learning from his mistakes.

Expand full comment

So it is an infringement on a parent's rights to make them supply food to a born child but not an infringement on their rights to make them supply in utero sustenance to an unborn child through the continuance of a pregnancy?

Even in the purely economic terms they prefer, this makes no sense because someone who is pregnant will have to spend more on food to avoid starvation because of their increased caloric expenditure to support the fetus - "eating for two" costs more just as paying to feed a baby does.

Either I just haz confuzed or they just haz cynical misogyny...

Expand full comment

"libertarian society" oxymoron?

Expand full comment

thats disgusting

Expand full comment

Surely, Eastman has got a very bright future in the Republican Party.

AND HOW; seriously, this guy checks all the seditious asshole loon boxes:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

(Also, he’s married with two daughters [shudders] so somebody should prolly call CPS.)

Expand full comment

Not so sure people want that trip to Anchorage.https://www.facebook.com/wa...

Expand full comment