9 Responses to “Leftover Ones and Zeroes”

1. #1 |  Eric the .5b |  May 28th, 2004 at 5:47 pm

   I’ve read Malkin’s editorials on and off for a few years, now. She really never struct me as libertarian-leaning in the first place…

2. #2 |  Cat |  May 28th, 2004 at 6:03 pm

   I think she’s dead-on with this one. I’m amused by Wonkette in general, including the Washingtonienne thing, but these women ARE skanky.

   I don’t think Michelle said anything that isn’t true. She also isn’t calling for legal action. She isn’t crying “there oughta be a law.” I don’t think it’s anti-libertarian to expect young women to quit pimping themselves out for fame.

3. #3 |  cyclopatra |  May 28th, 2004 at 7:03 pm

   Sorry, mindless link propagation here, but this is the only blog I frequent where I’m sure that most commenters will feel the same sort of amused disgust that I do about these two laws – I can’t even tell what the lawmakers who passed them are trying to accomplish!

   UK bans butchers from giving bones to customers for their dogs (giving them to those same customers for people to eat is OK)

   Minnesota is cracking down on gas stations who aren’t reaping enough profit per-gallon on their gas

4. #4 |  Jon H |  May 28th, 2004 at 9:29 pm

   “I think she’s dead-on with this one. I’m amused by Wonkette in general, including the Washingtonienne thing, but these women ARE skanky.”

   Wonkette talks dirty, but there’s little to suggest she’s *actually* *skanky*.

5. #5 |  MattG |  May 29th, 2004 at 3:55 am

   I found Noah’s column repugnant, and I’m surprised Radley has chosen to link to it.

   I didn’t vote for Bush in 2000 and I won’t be voting for him in 2004, but in this case, he’s done nothing wrong. The Bush people had two choices: they can show the president in campaign literature with an ethnically diverse group of Americans, or with mainly white Americans. If Bush had chosen the all-white route, Noah would’ve complained about that. But now that Bush chosen to portray himself with an ethnically-diverse group, Noah has a fit on that count, too. Bush can’t win. Come on. And the Democrats are real careful about placing minorities in nice-looking positions, too, so it’s hypocritical to boot.

   The real problem here is that the American left, of which Tim Noah is a member, is completely, utterly, 100% out of ideas on improving our inner cities. We’ve thrown countless amounts of money at the cities, with horrifically bad results, and the Left’s solution is to demand even more money and call anyone who disagrees with that an uncaring racist. Which is what Tim Noah is calling Bush here and why.

   The solutions to our inner cities do not involve one more dime of money, and any good libertarian knows what they are: 1) ending the drug war; 2) expanding school choice; 3) easing restrictions on businesses in cities, including lowering the minimum wage and taxes; 4) getting tough on violent crime (as opposed to non-violent drug sales) 5) removing the crippling disincentive of welfare and 6) a change in the dysfunctional culture of our inner cities. None of these requires more money from government; indeed, some of these require *less* money from government.

   Radley, by linking to this despicable piece by Noah, you feed into Noah’s mistaken, ugly implication that those who don’t think additional government money is what’s necessary to cure the ills of our inner cities are cold-hearted racists. If people like Tim Noah are out of ideas for our inner cities, the least they can do is shut up and get out of the way of libertarians who have some real answers.

6. #6 |  brooke |  May 29th, 2004 at 10:25 am

   I’m as generally displeased with Malkin lately as just about anyone–but I really don’t see the problem with her take on Wonkette and Cutler. I think she’s right on. Stuff like this does indeed make the lives of women who would prefer to make it without prostituting themselves more difficult.

   Malkin points out that when she was 24 (or 26, whichever) she wasn’t taking it up the rear for money–I fail to see how that translates into righteous indignation.

   I’m actually a bit surprised about which side some people are coming down on here: do you really want your wife/daughter/sister/mother/girlfriend competing in a world where behavior like Jessica Cutler’s is the norm? I don’t begrudge her her right to have done what she did, not by a long shot. But I don’t understand why we’re demonizing someone like Malkin for being disgusted with it, or for saying, “Hey–maybe that’s not the kind of thing I want my daughter doing.”

7. #7 |  Wolf |  May 29th, 2004 at 9:57 pm

   I don’t understand why you’re taking away some of Malkin’s libertarian street cred on this one, Mr. Balko. Last time I checked you can be a libertarian and make moral judgements (it’s just that you can’t pass a law to outlaw whatever it is you’re moralizing about :) ).

   To quote Mr. Garrison (from South Park):

   “Tolerant, but not stupid! Look, just because you have to tolerate something doesn’t mean you have to approve of it! If you had to like it, it’d be called the Museum of Acceptance! “Tolerate” means you’re just putting up with it! You tolerate a crying child sitting next to you on the airplane or, or you tolerate a bad cold. It can still piss you off! Jesus Tapdancing Christ!”

8. #8 |  FreedomSight |  May 30th, 2004 at 9:32 pm

   Flavored Smokes and Gateway Caffeine

   Yeah, smoking is bad for you. You don’t need to convince me — and one of these days, I will quit. But if people want to do it, then that’s a personal choice. And hey, even though I despise flavored tobacco products, if that’s what someone wants to…

9. #9 |  DougB |  June 1st, 2004 at 7:57 am

   MattG,

   You missed one detail about Noah’s satire…

   It was funny.

---