We’re borrowing money from China so that we can give them aid?
As a certain former congressman used to say, beam me up, Scotty.
We’re borrowing money from China so that we can give them aid?
As a certain former congressman used to say, beam me up, Scotty.
Some interesting new research. I found this particularly salient:
Libertarians scored lower than both liberals and (especially) conservatives on sensitivity to disgust. The authors suggest this tendency “could help explain why they disagree with conservatives on so many social issues, particularly those related to sexuality. Libertarians may not experience the flash of revulsion that drives moral condemnation in many cases of victimless offenses.”
I’m not sure what they mean by “sensitivity to disgust.” If they mean that we don’t get disgusted, it doesn’t apply to me. But if they mean that, unlike some people, we don’t use it as the basis for morality, and especially for lawmaking, I think that’s right. I am quite repulsed by male homosex, but that doesn’t mean that I think that makes it immoral or subject to criminal sanctions, because I recognize that my reaction is a natural one for a heterosexual, and that many people are disgusted by different things. The fact that some are disgusted by the thought of eating bugs doesn’t make it immoral, and shouldn’t be, even to them.
The more people viciously attack Sarah Palin, the more I want to see her win if for no reason other than to spite them.
No big deal. But when Glenn Beck points it out, he must be censored.
[Update a couple minutes later]
We want peace, and we will cut off your hands if you say otherwise.
Some people seem to be born without a sense of irony.
[Update a while later]
Frances Fox Piven’s violent agenda:
A leading light of the Democratic Socialists of America claims she is not a socialist and, after urging the unemployed to emulate the Greek rioters, claims she is not inciting violence. . . . Calls for the escalation and manipulation of violent rioting have long been central to Piven’s strategy.
It’s historically the strategy of leftists, from Lenin, to Hitler to Mao.
Or rather, on the speech about it, I agree with George Will (and Bryan Preston):
Between Jefferson and Woodrow Wilson, no one delivered this in person. They sent the report to Congress in writing. But, now we’ve turned this into this panorama. In which an interminable speech, every president, regardless of party — tries to stroke every erogenous zone in the electorate and it becomes a political pep rally, to use the phrase of Chief Justice [John] Roberts last year. If it’s going to be a pep rally with the president’s supporters of whatever party standing up and bringing approval and histrionic pouting on the part of the other, then it’s no place for the judiciary, no place for the uniformed military, and no place for non-adolescent legislators.
I wonder what the reaction would be if the president didn’t make the speech? Not that this president would ever pass up an opportunity to make a speech, of course. It’s his only area of semi-competence.
[Update a few minutes later]
The Republicans who agreed to take part in this are like hacky sacks: easy to kick around and they get played by liberals.
I was never into proms myself, but I can see how a politician would be desperate if he couldn’t get a date.
Iowahawk seems to have gotten into Keith Olbermann’s drug stash. It’s not a pretty sight.
Noam Chomsky says that the Republican win in November was the death knell for the human race.
Hokayyy…
This is definitely another bubble that’s due to pop.
Man, Iowahawk has been on a roll, lately.
I just did a brief podcast at CEI.