Mar
15
2007

URLs du Jour

2007-03-15

  • Amy Kane writes from the year 2027:
    It seems crazy now, but when the government began regulating what we eat, drink and smoke—shortly after our red state went blue—there was a minor backlash. Some people complained of a "nanny state" taking away free choice and treating us like dull-witted children.

    "I think the government should stop telling us how to live our lives," said a cranky old-timer in a man-on-the-street interview.

    "All these regulations," said another. "It's like being pecked to death by ducks."

    "Cranky old-timer"—hey, that could be me!

    I have to comment on one of the commenters, who says:

    I can live with the smoking ban, but God help the government entity who tries to take away my potato chips.
    Arguments of the form "I can live with X, but God help the government entity who tries to take away Y" miss the point. By sanctioning X, you've already given away the game to the pecking ducks who might someday decide to take away Y. And also Z.

  • I find it really difficult to listen to politicians; I'd be happier listening to them scrape their fingernails across a chalkboard. Fortunately, we have journalists to listen for us; they will summarize, more or less accurately, what the politician says. But Drew Cline performs above and beyond by noting what Hillary Clinton didn't say at a recent New Hampshire appearance:
    When Hillary Clinton spoke at the NH Democratic Party's 100 Club Dinner Saturday night, what struck me most was that she never once mentioned the War on Terror. Now, I don't expect her to necessarily use that term, but she did not even glancingly refer to the broader war against Islamic extremists in which the country she seeks to lead is deeply engaged. She mentioned Iraq, of course. But only as if it were an isolated war contained within the borders of that nation.
    It's unwise to count on Andrew Sullivan being right about anything these days, but he was on target with a recent comment on Hillary:
    I come back to character, which I've learned matters a lot. I simply see her opportunism and focus-group politics to be disconcerting. This isn't about gender. My long passion for Margaret Thatcher should lay that to rest. But I see in Clinton the antithesis of Thatcher: an instinct always to say what she thinks we want to hear.
    Well, make that half on target. Because, as Drew indicates, the flip side is her instinct to not say what her audience won't want to hear. In any case, Sullivan's conclusion is apt: "America needs better."

  • And I think I need this bumper sticker:

    [Bumper Sticker]

    I'd like to think so, anyway. So humor me. It's from Wondermark. Hint, hint.


Last Modified 2012-10-19 2:30 PM EDT