Morning Links

Wednesday, March 30th, 2011

Digg it |  reddit | |  Fark

28 Responses to “Morning Links”

  1. #1 |  TomG | 

    half-serious – I’ll have to send Mitch Daniels some Lysander Spooner essays.
    “…by no means an anarchist”. Around certain quarters that I respect, that can be taken as an insult.
    But it sounds like he’s got a good start.

  2. #2 |  TomG | 

    Richards, I meant. Although Daniels could use the material also :)

  3. #3 |  Michael Chaney | 

    I’ll have to admit to being let down, Radley. I read your morning links and I’m not pissed off. What gives?

  4. #4 |  Marty | 

    I’m glad Obama’s around to clarify that some wars are dumb…

  5. #5 |  How Can A 13 Year Old Make Money Fast – Great Job Ideas That Any 13-Year-Old Can Do and Make Great Money With | Fastest Easiest Money | 

    […] Morning Links | The Agitator […]

  6. #6 |  André | 


    Fri-day, Fri-day,
    Freedom nut-kick on Fri-day
    just to spoil the mood for the
    week-end, week-end.

  7. #7 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    Stood behind Phil Helmuth at the Wynn last week during one of their Hold’em tourneys. I watched for about two hours and you can’t help but notice the distinct generational differences. When I was watching the field was dominated by old guys and very young guys. None of the young guys said more than a couple words in two hours. Several of the old guys never shutup for two hours.

    Having played online, I can get up to 4 hands going at the same time. I don’t want to think about the time it takes to get used to playing over a dozen. And I must admit the little images of coins lose stop representing real money…just like poker chips IRL.

    Radley has mentioned before that these tourneys are extraordinary to watch. You’re a foot away from the action.

    A note on Vegas: 20 years ago the food, hotels, (ahem) “ballet”, and shows were cheap and they made their money on your gambling. Today the food, hotels, and shows are NYC prices or higher. I’m “betting” that the % of tourists gambling is down. For years they used to knock the conventioneers for coming to town with a $100 bill and one clean shirt and not changing either. Nice switch to figure out how to still get the money in the bank.

  8. #8 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    Only slightly more humorous than watching Democrats hypocritically defend Obama’s wars and the new action in Libya is the Republicans hypocritically blasting Obama.

    Let’s go to Republican subsidiary FoxNews where the following just took place: In response to claims that Libyan “rebels” had alligned themselves with Al Queda back in 2007. Michael Scheuer (Fmr CIA Counterterrorism Analyst) just said on FoxNews that “They issued a statement after being tortured in Kadaffi’s prisons for the past 15 years. Statements from prisons of Kadaffi or Mubarek probably are not reliable instruments to base US security on.” Then he quickly got back on FoxNews talking points and railed against Obama and Clinton.

    Funny thing about torture…

  9. #9 |  Andrew S. | 

    From the “is this protectionism or just an incredible overreaction?” file: the Judiciary Committee of the Florida House of Representatives has passed out of committee HB7095, which would, among other things, “limit the dispensing of controlled substances to pharmacies with a significant presence in Florida”

    Why can’t I get the state to limit my competition? Wonder how much CVS,etc. are paying lobbyists for this one.

  10. #10 |  JTN | 

    The poker article is interesting and mostly accurate, but the stuff about younger players playing some brand new style (aggressive play and treating your money as if it were only points) isn’t actually new at all. You can find that stuff in Doyle Brunson’s Super System, and that’s from the ’70s. There have been some small changes in strategy since then (in part due to new rules), but mostly it’s the same.

  11. #11 |  David in NYC | 

    “Helen Staudinger, 92, wanted a kiss.

    But authorities say after her 53-year-old neighbor refused, the central Florida woman aimed a semi-automatic pistol at his house and fired four times.”

    Horray for Second Amendment remedies!

  12. #12 |  M. Steve |,-a-Nation-Adrift-in-Chaos-Without-Trust-or-Confidence-

    Given the stinging commentary in the link above, I had a fancy to go visit the Daily Kos and see how the people there are reacting. Man, that comment section is an interesting case study in cognitive dissonance. The commenters who want to actually *gasp shock horror* hold their executive accountable for betraying his supposed ideals are being shouted down by the “Obama can do no wrong” chorus. It would be mildly amusing if I didn’t have knowledge that these people have voting rights, and outnumber me in my home state.

  13. #13 |  CyniCAl | 

    “A student of history, Richards believes in absolute adherence to the Constitution.”

    Funny, so does anyone else who has an opinion on what the Constitution means.

    As Butler Shaffer wrote, “Those who quote the Constitution are like a dog who brings its leash to its master.”

    At any rate, an Agitator endorsement is merely the precursor to a sex/corruption scandal. Poor Mitch Richards, to have that lurking in his future.

  14. #14 |  David in NYC | 

    @M. Steve —

    I had the great misfortune of having the commenting monkeys fling all manner of feces at me over at RumpRoast for having the temerity to use the term “President Hopey-Changey” in a comment suggesting that he wasn’t going to resuce the unions in Wisconsin. How does that saying go: you don’t defend the President you do have, you defend the one you think you have? Something like that.

    Or, as John Kenneth Galraith put it:

    “Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.”

  15. #15 |  Michael Chaney | 

    “A student of history, Richards believes in absolute adherence to the Constitution.”

    Funny, so does anyone else who has an opinion on what the Constitution means.

    That’s far from true. Plenty of people have an opinion of what it means, and they think it’s an outdated document that no longer applies.

    A Constitutional federal government would be great. And about 1/10 the size of the current federal government.

  16. #16 |  M. Steve | 

    @David in NYC

    It makes an unfortunate sort of sense. For so, so many of the 18-35 Young Liberal crowd, after 8 years of “oppression, torture, war, and bad things”, they tied their personal identities to this empty suit, who spoke in grand platitudes, promised the Sun, Moon, and Stars, and represented everything that the current regime wasn’t.

    Unfortunately, these poor dupes either weren’t old enough or experienced enough to understand that the failures of the GWB presidency were systemic failures, failures endemic to the current system. They simply believed that a Bad Man was in office, and a Good Man would come a save them. BHO played the role beautifully, and brought a large portion of my age demographic along for a wild ride.

    Unfortunately for these ideal knaves, he became what any rational person could have envisioned him becoming. He has broken promises left and right. Obamacare not only lacks any semblance of fiscal sanity, but it is also a stunning rejection of the left’s earnest, but foolish, desire for Single Payer. He’s put Wall Street people in charge of every important position in his administration, and now he’s bombing brown people, just like his predecessor. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

    The problem is, at this point, there’s no going back. In order to see what’s really happening, these young people would have to sit down, and take a long, hard look at themselves. They allowed themselves to be hoodwinked, and their political beliefs, based not in sound philosophical grounding but instead what feels good, along with their naiveté led them down the primrose path. It would take an incredible amount of self-awareness and strength of self to arrive at this place of understanding. For most of them, it will be much easier to “get busy on the proof”, dig in their heels, defend their POTUS and party to the death, and make themselves look silly in the process.

    What comes next will be a mass purging of the non-True Believers from the ranks of the Democratic party. If libertarians are smart, we’ll be standing somewhere nearby, holding signs like “we like gay people, too!” and “when we say no war, we mean it!” and “just say NO to (the War on) Drugs!”. This is the best possible opportunity we will have to convert people to the side of liberty; hopefully we can seize it.

  17. #17 |  boomshanka | 

    Does anyone know what kind of support there is from Democrats for the war in Libya? Quinnipiac released a poll conducted before his speech but I can’t seem to find numbers divided by party affiliation.

    I hazard a guess that a substantial number, including myself, are against it. And if the eventual Republican nominee isn’t an insane person I believe he’ll pay politically, though I admit there’s slim chance of that.

  18. #18 |  EH | 

    M.Steve: I think maybe you’re overstating your case.

  19. #19 |  RWW | 

    “I had a father and mother who really instilled some good, old-fashioned values in me,” he said, such as “love of this country — but not blind love. Not a love that is blind attachment to flag and government, but to the values and principles that came out in 1776 and more importantly 1787.”

    I’ve had it up to here with quasi-libertarian Constitution-worshippers. But he would, sadly, be a step in the right direction.

  20. #20 |  André | 

    RWW: Agreed and agreed. The constitution has plenty of what I consider to be flaws, even ignoring the slavery issue altogether. The electoral college means that neither presidential candidate spends very much time in our most populous state, California, and tons in Iowa, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and other “swing states”. That’s not what I think democracy is supposed to look like. Does anybody really believe the populace in Iowa should be treated differently, or is in any way more important than California?

    I have a great deal of respect for the constitution and particularly the Bill of Rights, but not being able to see beyond its flaws is just a different flavor of the blind love he says he doesn’t have.

  21. #21 |  Mattocracy | 

    @ Andre,

    I have a very different opinion about the electoral college. I’m glad that states like California, Texas, and New York don’t dominate our politics. It realy empowers the more purple states and keeps our politics from being more partisan than it already is.

  22. #22 |  Mark | 

    The article on Richards does not tell the whole story. It’s a mainstream news profile of a guy who does a bit more than simply “worship” the Constitution.

    Here is a start.

  23. #23 |  Yngvar | 

    Even the ACLU is losing patience over the constant persecution:

    «MANSFIELD — The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio expressed disappointment and concern over a decision by Mansfield City Schools to withdraw permission for a controversial speaking event that had been scheduled Monday at a school building.

    The event, organized by the Mansfield North Central Ohio Tea Party Association, included a presentation by Usama Dakdok, characterized by some as “anti-Islam.”»

    And its all for the children, natch:
    «We think we followed our policy and did what was best to protect our children, who are in and around our building in the evening».


  24. #24 |  CyniCAl | 

    #15 | Michael Chaney | March 30th, 2011 at 5:45 pm
    “A student of history, Richards believes in absolute adherence to the Constitution.”

    “Funny, so does anyone else who has an opinion on what the Constitution means.” — CyniCAl

    “That’s far from true. Plenty of people have an opinion of what it means, and they think it’s an outdated document that no longer applies.” — Michael Chaney

    I think we’re talking past each other here, Michael. The people you mention are firm in their belief of what the Constitution means — just as firm, and as correct in their own opinions, as those who you credit for “strictly adhering” to it, whatever that means.

    You see, there are no normative opinions. All opinions and interpretations of written words are subjective.

    In fact, the only people who have a contrary opinion about the Constitution and what it means are those like me who find it unintelligible, and designed specifically for the purpose of it being able to mean whatever the powers-that-be want it to mean.

  25. #25 |  RWW | 

    The constitution has plenty of what I consider to be flaws…

    Its biggest flaw is its existence. It is fraudulent from its first word (“We”), it was an outright usurpation, and the men who ratified it were committing an act of unmistakable villainy.

  26. #26 |  CyniCAl | 

    I’m not a religious man, but I’ll throw an “amen” to that.

  27. #27 |  Roberto | 

    Here’s wishing Richards a successful election, followed by a meteoric rise to the U.S. Senate.
    Re: Elections. Here’s my proposed amendment XXVIII:
    Votes of the electoral college shall be allotted thusly: Two votes per state assigned to the overall winner of the election in that state; one vote per congressional district assigned to the overall winner in that district.

    This would have the entire nation follow the method of Nebraska and Maine.

  28. #28 |  JOR | 

    “You see, there are no normative opinions. All opinions and interpretations of written words are subjective.”

    Well, that’s your opinion.