Skalduggery

I can’t wait, I’m leaving soon to visit one of my daughters – I’m going to be a grandfather… again Had to throw that out there – and now that it is out there, I’ve another short tidbit before work instead of a nice focused post. The American Spectator had an article in their September issue that takes aim at our notions of freedom. The title of the article, What’s Your Metric, works on a variety of levels. First it really does get a person to thinking about his method of gauging his current liberty. Second, I’d bet it reveals that many of our personal measures of freedom are woefully inadequate. Like Tom over at Responsibility, the article likes to ask questions. Tom asks a series of questions to provoke thought, and Daniel Oliver opens his article with questions:

HOW DO YOU WATCH FREEDOM? How do you watch it grow? How do you watch it shrink? What’s the metric? What’s your metric? What do you think the metrics of your fellow citizens are? If you have no idea what their metric is, how do you talk to them about freedom with any sense of urgency?

Just those questions make serious thought a necessity if we are to intelligibly discuss our notions of freedom. Some of the metrics mentioned are interesting and raise questions of their own. Milton Friedman’s metric for example, “was the percentage of GDP spent by government.” Naturally it was inversely proportional Another measure offered was by either counting or weighing “the Federal Register or the Code of Federal Regulations.” Oliver then offers that “A better measure is the COST of regulations” (emphasis mine). He then gives us a standard definition to work with:

Freedom House defines freedom as “the opportunity to act spontaneously in a variety of fields outside the control of the government and other centers of potential domination.” Quick: name a field that is outside the control of government?

There’s the rub. It shouldn’t be that hard. I’d encourage you to run over to The American Spectator and read the article – it’s a short and sweet little missive, and well worth the read to get finally to:

Are those imperfect measures? Perhaps. But then, what’s your metric?

Cheers all,

I’m off to work.

Setting up for a personal trip and have very little time to myself – so I figure I’ll link in some interesting bits and pieces! Here’s the first from “Responsibility…”

3.  If Healthcare is the most important issue to the U.S. Economy, (“To say it as plainly as I can, health care reform is the single most important thing we can do for America’s long-term fiscal health. That is a fact.”), why did it only get $18 Billion of the Stimulus Funds?  That is less than 2.5% of the total.  Temporary increases in Food Stamp programs got over $19 Billion.  So, I guess Food Stamps are more important than Healthcare.

Tom’s post raises several questions worth having answers to… Next, from Atlantic Ave., a blog worth visiting often enough to keep up with both great “news” commentary and just how nifty it is to live in New Hampshire. Here’s something a little newsy:

No message is too banal for our talking head of state.

CBS Political Hotsheet: Obama: Sneeze Into Your Sleeve, Not Your Hands

I didn’t read the comments section, but I imagine it quickly devolved into a firefight between the Sleevists and the anti-Sleevists.

libertee23: “How dare the President tell me where to sneeze. I have the right to sneeze wherever I want!”

moveonnow: “You are a domestic terrorist. You obviously want to kill poor people. I bet when Bush told you to sneeze into your sleeve, you couldn’t sneeze fast enough!”

Our president sure is keeping us busy. He likes to talk, even when he’s not saying anything.

and of course, this gem from the same post:

In America, we don’t teach our children to follow the leader. It’s not a top down system.

Those are Thursday’s Tidbits before work… It’s my Monday, so I hope everybody is having a great week!

Cheers all!

If you remember a video I posted/embeded concerning the “Whitehouse Snitch Line,” it’s been removed… Hat Tip to Politico:

Following a furor over how the data would be used, the White House has shut down an electronic tip box — flag@whitehouse.gov — that was set up to receive information on “fishy” claims about President Barack Obama’s health plan.

Read the article – it’s a good read I’ve heard rumor that another line has been set up at a brand new website here… have fun.

Cheers

Take a look at this pdf of Sen. John Cornyn’s letter to the president concerning this snitch line. It’s only a page long and worth the read. I wonder if there will actually be a response? If you’ve the time, I’d urge you to do a little snooping around yourself. This deliberate attack on first ammendment rights is worth investigating… just a little, hey?

Cheers all.

I found this while searching out the flag@whitehouse.gov address, an address provided by Linda Douglass, the communications director for the White House’s Health Reform Office… yet another unchecked partisan czar.

The Weekly Standard Blog has a nifty little email… The MSM, DNC, and both Pelosi and Obama have accused the people showing up at town hall meetings of being “fake.” This isn’t a grass roots movement, it’s astroturf – paid for by righwing interests, insurance companies, ad nauseam. Take a trip over to The Weekly Standard and check out the email they’ve posted.

Cheers!

Deficit Cartoon From The Heritage's Foundry Site. Click on the image and check out the article!

It’s a really short little post… come on, follow the image link and read the post

Drop by Blue Oregon for a look at someone coming to their senses about mandatory minimum sentencing. Ignore the lazy characterizations of opposition parties and focus on a good look at a “law-and-order” type realizing that the mandatory minimums are much too expensive… perhaps Oregon voters jumped before looking. Skim through the comments – I made mine, but it was directed more at some of the rhetoric about the criminal justice system. It’s worth a look!

Just another quickie – Thomas Sowell, hit tip to Neo-Neocon, writes a typically interesting and penetrating article. In an almost J. Swiftian way, he argues for changing the rules of basketball so he can compete equally with Michael Jordan. Though Sowell comes off as self-deprecating about his basketball skills, there is no doubt about his abilities as a writer:

Even under these conditions, you would be better off betting your money on Michael Jordan. But, conceivably at least, we might change the rules some more to make the results come out less lopsided, in order to create “social justice.”

Friends, Christians, and Communists contains my complaint about “social justice,” but read Sowell’s, it’s a lot more fun. Jeff’s comments on hate crime legislation are also worth the read. While your at it, another good read is NeoNeocon’s little screed against the use of “life-stories” in place of real news…

Cheers!