The illustrator for The Flintstones, and many other classic Hanna-Barbera hit cartoons, has died. I’m dating myself, but I remember being allowed to stay up and watch, and if I was good, watching Jackie Gleason and Crazy Guggenheim.
Of course, back then, we didn’t realize that Huckleberry Hound was so gay. But it seems obvious now.
The illustrator for The Flintstones, and many other classic Hanna-Barbera hit cartoons, has died. I’m dating myself, but I remember being allowed to stay up and watch, and if I was good, watching Jackie Gleason and Crazy Guggenheim.
Of course, back then, we didn’t realize that Huckleberry Hound was so gay. But it seems obvious now.
It would be a shame if the Republicans use this ad. It’s so mean. It’s valid, of course, but still…
“Grim” has some thoughts on the dismal state of the federal government. I agree with most of them, including repealing the Seventeenth Amendment, except for this suggestion:
I suggest the elimination of Congressional districts, so that all representatives are elected in a single statewide election. If a state were to have ten representatives, then, a hundred people could run — the top ten vote-getters would take office. That would restore the force of electoral pressure to the House, where it is designed to be. It would increase turnover of Representatives, and cut down on the corruption in the government.
It would do those things, and those are good things, but it would have undesirable consequences as well. Like eliminating the electoral college, it would effectively disenfranchise rural voters, leaving them at the untender mercy of the voters in the big cities who would elect all representatives, and not just their own.
…to the school shooting problem. I predict it won’t be adopted, though.
Andy McCarthy writes about Democrat hypocrisy in the Foley matter:
Oddly, under circumstances where Foley is now gone because he could not last 30 seconds as an elected Republican once his conduct was revealed, we are now observing a frenzied call for Hastert’s head for not doing enough to investigate behavior that actually pales in comparison to Clinton’s. That frenzy, without a hint of irony or embarrassment, is being stoked by some of the very same people who affirmatively minimized conduct that was orders of magnitude worse than Foley’s in order to close ranks around a much more consequential public official who, far from being gone in 30 seconds, was enabled by this support to cling to office for years, finish his term, and remain the Democratic Party’s top star.
And as Dennis Wingo notes in comments, the irony abounds:
The Democrats say the Republicans should have done all the things Democrats won’t let us do to al-Qaida
Bad news for the likes of Hot Air America, though. Billionaire moonbat George Soros is giving up on politics.
Guess he decided that he’s pissed away enough millions on a losing cause that deserved to lose. Too bad he can’t come up with something useful to do with his money. I could have funded some interesting space ventures with what he wasted on Kerry and company.
Arnold Kling writes about his journey from leftism to libertarianism (similar to mine, except his took a lot longer), and the ways in which both philosophies are similar, and those in which they are different:
- Far Leftists and libertarianism have much in common.
- Libertarians know something that Far Leftists do not.
What I believe that Libertarians have learned is what social psychologists call the Fundamental Attribution Error. The error is to attribute behavior to a person’s character when this behavior is in fact based on context. In one classic experiment, the subject is asked to watch a person read a speech that the subject knows that the speaker did not write. Subjects attribute to the person the beliefs contained in the speech.
The Far Left believes that bad policies come from evil motives. In this view, villains, such as powerful corporations, oppose good policies, and political incumbents lack the strength and courage to overcome the villains.
Libertarians believe that context is more important. We believe that government power is inherently corrupting, regardless of who holds leadership positions or how they are influenced. We believe that the market does a relatively good job of channelling self-interest toward socially desirable ends.
This encapsulates my views toward NASA. Contra the strawman views that I’m occasionally falsely accused of holding, it is not a diabolical, hegemonic government agency, run by evil people who want to Keep Humanity Out Of Space (though it’s often hard to figure out just what it would be doing differently if it were). It’s simply a blundering government bureaucracy seeking rent, as government bureaucracies are wont to do, with many good and smart people working for it responding to the incentives within. Sadly, the administrator seems generally to not understand this.
Bush’s refusal to relinquish power diabolically marches on.
First it was low unemployment. Then he made the gas prices fall, no doubt in connivance with his oil buddies. Then he got Rove to turn off the hurricane machine. And now, through machinations unknown, but probably having something to do with Skull and Bones, he’s conspired to bring the Dow within fifteen points of an all-time high.
How much more devastation can we allow this evil man to wreak on our beleagered nation?