I should have given you an award years ago. Your readers have blown up my sitemeter. Thank you for the link and thank them for visiting. I hope they will stop by once in a while. For one thing, they taught me a bit about Conservative and Libertarian and I thought I knew most of that.

Second I could always use such an astute bunch to keep my blog on track.

Once again thanks for the link. I hope you and your readers have a very Merry Christmas, a Happy Hanukkah, and a healthy New Year.

Yours,
TonyC. AKA That Lawyer Dude

Umm.

Wouldn’t lobbyists and the corporations they represent qualify?

Re: “attract”

Perhaps you forget the law of universal gravitation. The attractive force is proportional to the product of the masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. The government is so massive these days, I’m surprised it doesn’t have orbiting objects circling ’round.

Guess that BCS isn’t looking so good now is it UT?

Excellent point, Dave. I’ve always thought this idea was bunk.
Realistically speaking, any officer will get the occasional complaint. Many occur because the complainant is unfamiliar with the law or department protocols. Other complaints are simple misunderstandings.

For example, not long ago my department (I work as a hospital security officer) got a complaint about our response time to a combative patient. A dept. manager, on behalf of one of her employees, said we took about 15 minutes to respond. We knew this was grossly inaccurate (it took 2-3 mins. tops). During the investigation, our radio transmissions (which are recorded) were studied and we were vindicated. It turns out the employee, who was in radio contact with us, just didn’t know how to use a two-way radio properly.

This situation was resolved because we documented our actions thoroughly and handled things in a transparent manner. If police departments are open, and don’t get overly defensive, many of these complaints can be resolved in a manner that satisfies all parties.

Yeah, I don’t think that label fits either. Going back just a few years, I think you would side with Tom Paine rather than Burke. And who would call Paine a conservative? As some of the commenters suggested, that shows how confused ideology is in America. People with your views would be called liberals in Europe. Milton Friedman is often discussed as a “conservative economist,” which also doesn’t sound right to me. Since few of those who call themselves conservatives in America object to the drug war (or the wars on other consensual crimes), advocate non-interventionist foreign policy, or balk at corporate welfare, I would conclude that you are not a conservative.

Alan Greenspan hands-off?

If the economy were a woman, she would have maced Greenspan for all the groping he did.

Like it or not, the NCAA and its member schools are the best parties to decide on their championship system. You not liking the system they have does not give you the right to change it by force, and I’m actually surprised this proposal wasn’t the second “HackWatch” feature. A Republican from Texas endorses government intervention into college football immediately after Texas gets screwed out of the National Championship game? Come on, Radley. This asshole deserves nothing but every bit of scorn and bad karma the universe can dish out. And I’m a Texas fan.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/173514

Your point would be well taken if the FTC did not have a long, long record of abusing whatever power Congress grants it. After all, how will the BCS know what minimum standards are necessary to promote something as a “playoff”? Well, the FTC will have to decide. Which means any proposed “playoff” will be subject to the Commission’s regulatory (and possibly adjudicatory) process.

Furthermore, Section 5 of the FTC Act itself is incomprehensively vague, so once the door is open to regulating the ‘advertising’ of a college football playoff, it’s a very short leap to regulating the content. As has been the case in many industries, the FTC’s unelected antitrust lawyers are never shy about superimposing their “expertise” over any particular product or service.

“will prohibit the marketing, promotion, and advertising of a postseason game as a ‘national championship’ football game, unless it is the result of a playoff system. Violations of the prohibition will be treated as violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act as an unfair or deceptive act or practice.”

Yeah, go after how they advertise and market the name of the game. Next, the baseball championship can’t be called the World Series and the Super Bowl can’t be called Super until after the game was over and only if it was, in fact, SUPER!

The problem, of course, is that capitalism has established such a history of surviving governmental abuse, that our parasitic self-serving politicians now believe it’s indestructible. They no longer see any need for constraint in the burdens they impose on it or the hurdles they throw in front of it and, ultimately, they might just find a way to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.

But, first, they’re going to chew out the auto company executives for being financially irresponsible.