TheAgitator.com
Watch Me Bloviate on the Nanny State
Wednesday, June 24th, 2009So as I mentioned over the weekend I had the privilege of speaking at the Denver-based Independence Institute’s annual “Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms” party. It was every bit as fun as it sounds. The event consisted of panel discussions followed by drinks and top-notch cigars on Friday, and a trip to a local firing range on Saturday, where I discovered to my surprise that I’m a not-terrible shot.
As part of the festivities, I participated with a number of panelists in a discussion of the Nanny State on Denver’s PBS television station. Video of that discussion below, broken into three parts.
Good use of the word “Bloviate.”
Am I the only one who finds it funny that a “free-market” think tank has a talk show on PBS?
What kind of Cigars?
Ever have a PG (Paul Garamarian)? One of my favorites.
heh, that is amusing. Of course it is a free market and as such if somebody wants to charge be $0 to broadcast my show vs somebody who wants to charge me >$0, it is the proper free market decision. Would certainly have been funny if that issue were brought up. Maybe Radley could have gotten the host to lobby for the cancellation of his own programming.
Amusing and entertaining.
@Ben, I think it’s pretty awesome they’re using subsidized television to bite the government on the ass.
For a moment I thought that the guy with the beard and tie was Radley.
It’s so depressing seeing the very people who are fighting for our freedom having little recourse but to laugh at how unrealistic any reform really is. Laughter in place of tears. I don’t intend to imply any criticism here (Radley is one of my heroes), but rather to point out the somber reality that libertarian activism rarely takes any form but that of unheeded and ironic commentary, the terrier yapping at the angry bear.
Why won’t anyone take us seriously!?
Kevin “Why won’t anyone take us seriously!?”
Feeling you there brother! I guess its a lack of exposure to any ideas other than the mainstream liberal/conservative stuff. Libertarian ideas are radically new to most people in this country. But truth has a way of striking a chord with people and we need to get the word out. I tell as many people as I can about this blog for example. People NEED to hear this stuff. Its just going to take time.
I could hardly believe the wood smoke law, the 20% opacity within 15 minutes or a letter would be mailed to the entire neighborhood.That’s the craziest damn thing.
Maybe freedom is a finite thing in the universe. As some people get freedoms, others lose there’s. We’ll let gays get married, but we get put teenagers in jail for sexting. We’ll legalize marijuana, but only if we get to outlaw tobacco instead. We’ll give poor people cheap loans to buys houses, just so long as we can bulldoze them down later and build multi-use government subsidized developments.
@Lorraine:
You must be new here.
I think some of this anti anti-corporatism is misplaced. I’m about Radley’s age (not old (I hope) but not a starry-eyed college kid either) and lean to the conservatism side of libertarianism, but I really hate the corporate nature of our economy. There’s just no logical reason a corporation like GE should produce utility turbines and late night comedy. They do because they lobbied and recieved laws that benefit gigantic corporations over every smaller business (and they’ve had some good CEO’s). Also, I think young people are rightly concerned about corporations because, let’s face it, corporate recruiters are just below rapists and lawyers on the creepiness scale. If you’re 22, about to graduate, meet with several fortune 500 companies, and they’re all represented by three middle-aged dorks wearing matching company polos and bestowing the amazingness of their corporate values, it’s reasonable to conclude that all these guys are assholes. I think this is really a case of younger generations seeing work environments as an extension of personal liberty. The extent to which they want government to enfore that is up for debate, but I don’t see it as particularly troubling.
On opacity, I deal with it on every job. In-situ opacity monitors are incredibly inaccurate for obvious reasons. A decent opacity probe will cost at least a grand and requires a technical degree and a fair amount of experience to interpret the results. Does the city really plan on hiring an environmental technician or engineer for $100/hr to come test a wood stove? I’m shocked . . . shocked that a city would pass a health law without thinking of how it could be justly enforced.
That rant didn’t seem so long when I typed it.
Nutrition facts labels as an example of onerous nanny-statism? Hmm.
Nice job, RB.