Comments on: Sunday Links

By: ClubMedSux

ClubMedSux — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 19:27:51 +0000

Can you expand upon why it would be good to see Lance win? I know very, VERY little about cycling, but I have friends who are active in the cycling community and the overwhelming consensus seems to be that he’s a raging douchebag as a person and a liar and a cheater as an athlete. I can understand the urge to be contrarian, but if this another example of libertarians misguidedly channeling their distaste for the drug war into supporting dopers and cheaters I have to object. The government convicting somebody for choosing to ingest certain chemicals into their own bodies is completely different than a private body, existing to establish and enforce rules of a game, punishing (or seeking to punish) voluntary participants in said game who know that the body’s rules are to be adhered to. If you have another reason for supporting Lance, I apologize for the assumption and would like to hear what the reason is.

By: ktc2

ktc2 — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 14:18:21 +0000

BamBam,

That’s a great link. Thanks.

By: CC

CC — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 13:04:04 +0000

My impression is that the politicans themselves have to be at least decently good parents or their children make them look bad, and that politicians themselves can be quite good. (I’m thinking here specifically of the Clintons, who, say what you will about them, raised a very reasonable daughter)

But yeah, their staffers families suffer much like the families of senior underlings anywhere suffer.

It doesn’t seem like “news” to me, but I’m not sure why anyone would assume that everything in a newspaper is hard news. Seems like a reasonable topic for a feature story to me.

By: BamBam

BamBam — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 04:50:41 +0000

Never go to the police for help, or you will get shot in the head by an electrocution device, and they will make up charges to try and deflect any responsibility (or do I repeat myself):
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/028893.html

By: Bart

Bart — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 01:11:45 +0000

You mean Lance and his Dr. and his drugs, don’t you? Please don’t embarrass yourself by pretending.

By: JJH2

JJH2 — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:22:39 +0000

The possession of nuclear weapons remains the only surefire way to prevent large-scale conventional military invasion by the US or regional military powers. In some ways, the proliferation of nuclear weapons has done wonders for world peace. Unfortunately, the margin of error remains small with potentially disastrous consequences.

By: Dave Krueger

Dave Krueger — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 22:40:23 +0000

#16 Les

Dave, those are good points. But would you agree that the super-powers have way too many nuclear weapons and it would make sense to decrease that number?

I have no problem with the concept of arms reduction. As I said, my gripe is with those who believe the “elimination of all nuclear weapons” is a credible foreign policy goal.

By: Les

Les — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:47:46 +0000

Dave, those are good points. But would you agree that the super-powers have way too many nuclear weapons and it would make sense to decrease that number?

By: Rick

Rick — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:44:43 +0000

Judging from the down votes on Michael Chaney’s comment #6, either some pro-immigration folks have faulty sarcasm detectors, or the nativists have suddenly developed a new appreciation of wit.

By: Michael Chaney

Michael Chaney — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:42:52 +0000

People seem to be having trouble figuring out sarcasm and humor today…

By: Neil

Neil — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:06:59 +0000

Wait a minute, are you being sarcastic about the massacre of innocent people in Colombia being a Drug War victory? Because if you were, you would be implying that by training, arming, and paying thugs to turn in corpses we had some sort of moral obligation to oversee what they do in some way. Which is obviously crazy talk.

We seem to have let slip our dogs of war without any leash, handler, and strapped steaks to any farmer or villager. I suggest Colombians try to pay more acute attention to how it is for the greater good, buncha whiners.

By: Marty

Marty — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 20:07:26 +0000

‘These articles about all the sacrifices politicians make in order to become rich and powerful are really nauseating.’

this article seemed pretty bland and I didn’t think it was particularly flattering. am I missing something?

By: “Wrestling Midgets Killed by Fake Hookers” « ricketyclick

“Wrestling Midgets Killed by Fake Hookers” « ricketyclick — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 19:49:29 +0000

[...] Headline of the day week year-so-far via Balko the Agitator. [...]

By: killfile

killfile — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 19:48:56 +0000

I’ve always suspected that being a good parent and being a politician are mutually exclusive. It seems physically impossible.

By: hamburglar007

hamburglar007 — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 19:00:35 +0000

The invention of nuclear weapons was like opening pandoras box. Unfortunately they will probably be used again in my lifetime. I would much rather see international collaboration to develop technology that mitigates the effectiveness and deadliness of these weapons then a futile effort to rid the world of something that ain’t going away.

By: Dave Krueger

Dave Krueger — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:44:05 +0000

#5 Les

Why isn’t it a legitimate idea?

Because you can’t un-invent something. You can’t turn back the clock. There will always be someone out there trying to get nuclear weapons and you certainly can’t trust any government to give them up once they have them (despite what they claim).

It’s not just unrealistic. Getting rid of all nuclear weapons would actually be worse than what we have now. If you got rid of them, then any country that gets them to the exclusion of all others, would be able to control the world. That’s quite an incentive to re-invent them.

By: Mattocracy

Mattocracy — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:15:26 +0000

So politicians sacrifice a lot so they can fuck up our lives and the lives of their families, huh. Where the fuck is my violin.

By: Mattocracy

Mattocracy — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:13:32 +0000

The one thing the article about immigration fails to bring up is that America has to be a place that innovating immigrants want to come to. I think that incentive is waining.

By: Michael Chaney

Michael Chaney — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:13:13 +0000

What’s the secret behind the American economy’s rich history of innovation?

That’s easy – keeping job-stealing foreigners out of our country so they don’t steal our jobs.

By: Les

Les — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 17:38:44 +0000

Dave, I understand your cynicism, but I don’t trust any government with nuclear weapons. I know it’s an unrealistic dream (you may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one who loves his possessions), but I’d love for governments to get rid of their nuclear weapons. I mean, is that just another kind of gun control? Why isn’t it a legitimate idea?