Let Leviathan finance the defeat of Leviathan

 Limits on government power  No Responses »
Mar 082008
 

Here’s how to get Leviathan to finance the defeat of Leviathan. (I’m reminded by the Couch Potato Entitlement editorial in today’s Wall Street Journal.) When you convert your analog TVs to digital, don’t turn down your $40 coupon(s) on the principle that the government has no business subsidizing private entertainment. You’ll never beat the welfare-police state that way.

No, you should use those coupons. But money is fungible. Immediately send an equivalent $40 (or $80) to defeat the members of Congress who voted for this program.

You could give the money to the Cato Institute, or to the Club for Growth. Or you could send it as a direct contribution to some member of Congress who voted against this subsidity — to your own Congressperson, if you’re that lucky. (I’ll try to find a list.)

One more thing is important. Be sure to let it be known what you’ve done with the money. Tell your Congresspeople. Tell about it on your blogs. Write a letter to the editor. And tell the recipient.

I should warn you that hell hath no fury like that of a welfare pimp towards a recipient who is not properly grateful for government subsidies. Look at how they’ve treated Clarence Thomas. But that’s how you know that this is one of the most effective means of opposing them.

George McGovern for President!

 Free markets, Health care reform, Regulation  1 Response »
Mar 072008
 

Where can I get a George McGovern for President bumper sticker? I didn’t have one on my car back in 1972 (I’m not sure my wife would have approved) but I was a McGovern supporter back then.

Well, mostly I was against Nixon and Watergate, but I was suffering from a bout of leftwingism, too. I got over it in time for the 1976 elections, though suffered some lingering symptoms until Ronald Reagan’s first year in office.

But here is George McGovern at the WSJ, sounding like the type of libertarian-leaning Republican that could make me become a Republican again:

…Under the guise of protecting us from ourselves, the right and the left are becoming ever more aggressive in regulating behavior…

…There’s no question, however, that delinquency and default rates are far too high. But some of this is due to bad investment decisions by real-estate speculators. These losses are not unlike the risks taken every day in the stock market….

…Health-care paternalism creates another problem that’s rarely mentioned: Many people can’t afford the gold-plated health plans that are the only options available in their states.

Buying health insurance on the Internet and across state lines, where less expensive plans may be available, is prohibited by many state insurance commissions. Despite being able to buy car or home insurance with a mouse click, some state governments require their approved plans for purchase or none at all. It’s as if states dictated that you had to buy a Mercedes or no car at all.

Economic paternalism takes its newest form with the campaign against short-term small loans, commonly known as “payday lending.” …

…Anguished at the fact that payday lending isn’t perfect, some people would outlaw the service entirely, or cap fees at such low levels that no lender will provide the service. Anyone who’s familiar with the law of unintended consequences should be able to guess what happens next.

Researchers from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York went one step further and laid the data out: Payday lending bans simply push low-income borrowers into less pleasant options, including increased rates of bankruptcy. Net result: After a lending ban, the consumer has the same amount of debt but fewer ways to manage it.

Since leaving office I’ve written about public policy from a new perspective: outside looking in. I’ve come to realize that protecting freedom of choice in our everyday lives is essential to maintaining a healthy civil society.

Why do we think we are helping adult consumers by taking away their options? We don’t take away cars because we don’t like some people speeding. We allow state lotteries despite knowing some people are betting their grocery money. Everyone is exposed to economic risks of some kind. But we don’t operate mindlessly in trying to smooth out every theoretical wrinkle in life.

The nature of freedom of choice is that some people will misuse their responsibility and hurt themselves in the process. We should do our best to educate them, but without diminishing choice for everyone else.

I’ve been wondering what to do with my vote on election day. Now I think I know. I’ll write in George McGovern’s name!

Monster vs Ken Starr

 Clinton scandals, electoral politics  No Responses »
Mar 072008
 

Ok, I give up. Which is which?

Samantha Power says Hillary Clinton is a monster. This, after one of Hillary Clinton’s people compared Barak Obama to Ken Starr.

So far, it’s all good and wholesome mudslinging. But then (according to this AP article), Clinton said the two cases are different, because “one is an ad hominem attack and one is a historical reference.”

So which one is which?

I’m afraid the distinction escapes me.

I do notice that one of Barak Obama’s unofficial advisors resigned, while Sandy Berger is still an unofficial advisor to Hillary. I don’t understand that distinction, either.

The Great Firewall promotes self-censorship

 Free speech  No Responses »
Mar 062008
 

James Fallows at atlantic.com makes an interesting point about internet censorship in China, in an article titled The Connection has been Reset.

“The presence of censorship, even if easy to evade, promotes self-censorship.”  The point is that a regime doesn’t have to assert a 100-percent effective prohibition in order to accomplish its object.   A moderate amount of government censorship will cause people to censor themselves in order to avoid trouble.

And he concludes:  “How long can the regime control what people are allowed to know, without the people caring enough to object? On current evidence, for quite a while.”

Kalinovski Square

 Belarus, Dissent  1 Response »
Mar 032008
 

I found this while surfing YouTube, looking for Russian video with English subtitles. It does seem to be useful at my stage in learning the language — I understand some words and phrases, but I wouldn’t understand much of what is going on without the subtitles. And it gives some great shots of people and places, including those in villages in Belarus. The narrator gives us a wry look at President Lukaschenko and the political situation in Belarus. It’s entertaining but deadly serious.

I suppose this is the direction in which Putin is taking Russia, and in which we’re following at a long, long distance. Things like McCain-Feingold and extremely high rates of congressional incumbency are only baby steps in that direction, but that IS the direction.

William F. Buckley archives

 Uncategorized  No Responses »
Feb 292008
 

Some freeper made mention of the William F. Buckley writings being online at Hillsdale College’s web site. Here, as a public service, is a link:

Buckley Online

And here is a link to an archive of his Firing Line program at the Hoover Institution.

I used to read Buckley’s column occasionally, was a one-time subscriber to National Review (which I usually would read cover to cover) and am sure I saw a few snippets of him on television. His Firing Line program ran back in the days when I used to be more of a television watcher, so I’m not sure why I never saw it. Or maybe I did see a snippet of it once or twice.

Anyhow, after reading so many eulogies of William F. Buckley, I thought it would be intesting to go back and look at some of his articles from the 1960s. For example, I’m curious as to what he had to say about civil rights back in those days. I have my own memories of those days, but they are probably very much colored by the intervening years. This would be a way to go back in time. I haven’t gotten too far on that project yet, but I’ll make use of the above link.

The Hoover Institution archive has VHS tapes for sale, but also has some video clips online.

Unfortunately the video clips are in Real Media format, and the site says you have to install the latest version of RealOne to view them. Not even William F. Buckley is worth contaminating my computer with such an intrusive piece of software, but my son told me about Real Alternative. I installed that, and it plays the video clips just fine.

More misfortune, though. Only the first five minutes of selected shows are available. From what I’ve heard, I wouldn’t expect the first five minutes to be the most interesting. Still, it was interesting to see a young Bill Buckley from the 60s, and a young John F. Kerry and a young David Broder.

I’ve now seen more video of the young John Kerry than the guy who ran for president. Don’t like him. People like that will cure one of left-liberalism quite easily (though it was other left-liberals, not he, who cured me of a bout of McGovernism in the early 70s).

Speak loudly and carry a big club

 Free markets  No Responses »
Feb 292008
 

Speak loudly and carry a big club to bash our neighbors with. That’s the foreign policy being proposed by Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama.

And I’m glad to see the Wall Street Journal explain it in terms like The Reticulator was using last September.

Why do they hate us? Because we act like a global, unilateral bully, when we do what Clinton and Obama are recommending.

WFB, the original Ann Coulter

 Bash the Messenger  No Responses »
Feb 292008
 

Ann Coulter explains how William F. Buckley was the original Ann Coulter. What she actually says is that he was the original “enfant terrible”, but it’s not hard to get her point.

She explains the reception Buckley got with his first book:

Buckley’s first book, “God and Man at Yale,” was met with the usual thoughtful critiques of anyone who challenges the liberal establishment. Frank Ashburn wrote in the Saturday Review: “The book is one which has the glow and appeal of a fiery cross on a hillside at night. There will undoubtedly be robed figures who gather to it, but the hoods will not be academic. They will cover the face.”

And she reminds us of Buckley’s style:

In a famous exchange with Gore Vidal in 1968, Vidal said to Buckley: “As far as I am concerned, the only crypto Nazi I can think of is yourself.”

Buckley replied: “Now listen, you queer. Stop calling me a crypto Nazi, or I’ll sock you in your goddamn face and you’ll stay plastered.”

But will Ann Coulter someday get the same eulogies that Buckley is now getting?

Paid to stand in line

 Regulation  No Responses »
Feb 282008
 

Comcast is accused of paying people to stand in line in order to pack the FCC hearings on its traffic management practices. (Network World URL here.)

I don’t wish Comcast well in the issue before the FCC, especially given that they do not tell the truth. They claim to be managing traffic, but what they’re really doing is interrupting certain types of traffic.

I’ve had my own experience with Comcast not telling the truth, claiming that they were blocking my outgoing mail because it had been determined that my computer was spending spam, possibly because of a virus infection, and that I needed to install a fix. But they were speaking with forked tongue. They simply decided to block port 25. There are legitimate grounds for doing that, but a company that takes my money for a service ought to tell the truth about what service it’s providing. (I figured out my own way to work around the problem, but it was especially nasty of Comcast to do this to me on a Saturday morning when I had other activities planned, and when none of their people were available to answer questions about what was going on.)

But back to the issue of packing the hearings with people paid to stand in line.

One commenter says it’s a common practice to pay people to stand in line at hearings. If so, that’s a sad commentary on our system of government regulation. If the way to get public input on a decision-making process is to turn people into unproductive drones who stand for long hours in a queue, the system needs reform. One reform would be a market system in which entrepreneurial competitors are not blocked by regulations from offering competing service. Then we could provide public input by voting with our checkbooks.

The sad thing is the cluelessness of some of the commenters who eloquently denounce the hearing-packing practice. Their solution to this sort of government inefficiency? They want more government, namely a takeover of the telecom system by the government. Yeah, that’ll give people a way to provide efficient input into decision-making processes.

Faith in the Operating Room

 Health care reform  No Responses »
Feb 282008
 

A Jehovah’s Witness patient needs an operation, but warns the surgeon that he absolutely does not want a blood transfusion. The operation is one that might come off without the need for blood, but not necessarily. What’s a surgeon to do?

I can see why the surgeon would have problems doing an operation in which he’s not allowed to use all the tools of the trade to keep the patient from dying. The surgeon did the operation, and just barely escaped the need for a transfusion. But what about next time?

This New York Times article tells the story. Some of us would say difficult issues like this are why we need a separation between Health Care and State. There are difficult ethical choices to be made on both sides, and there is nothing the government as health care provider can do that would not make the situation worse.

But it’s interesting to read the comments that follow the article. There are some thoughtful reactions, but also some that suggest a whole lot of people out there are not thinking in terms of how to maximimize individual choice and freedom.

 Older Entries  Newer Entries