Friday, November 18, 2005
An Argument Against Too Much Federalism
In this post I argued for federalism. I'm still not sure what Breyer would say against my arguments, but based on what I've read so far, he might say that pushing too much power down to small electoral bodies exposes them to the problem of factionalism. Representation over large groups of people dilutes factionalism by making a representative beholden to a wide variety of special interests, whereas a smaller district can easily be captured by a particular special interest group. This is a good argument. One way to solve the problem is by random appointments, like we do for juries. Ancient Athens had many randomly selected positions. Frank Herbert believed that many of our political decisions should be subject to jury review. Now that's active democracy!
Thursday, November 17, 2005
Bend It
I just realized I have a new favorite movie, Bend It Like Beckham. And every time I watch it I end up with the most wonderful music running through my brain.
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
Active Liberty, Obtained
I got Active Liberty : Interpreting Our Democratic Constitution, Stephen Breyer's new book, from the library and started reading it. Breyer believes he should interpret the Constitution in ways which promote active citizen participation in our democracy. Good thesis. I'm all for it. I will be interested to find out how he supports it. I have to wonder why he isn't more of a Federalist, though. The less power in Washington and the more at the statehouse the easier and more effective my democratic participation will be. In fact less power in the statehouse and more power at the county, city and even school board levels the more power I have. One school board per school is good, too.
When the Constitution was drafted, the entire population of our Republic was less than some cities today. Lot's of place were governed by town meetings, where everyone, not just a few aldermen, got to vote. I'd say that means we need even less power in Washington, not more.
When the Constitution was drafted, the entire population of our Republic was less than some cities today. Lot's of place were governed by town meetings, where everyone, not just a few aldermen, got to vote. I'd say that means we need even less power in Washington, not more.
What Does Losing Mean?
When will Congress and the President take the War against Islamic Fascism seriously?
This article, by an unknown author, not Major General Vernon Chong, describes the price of losing. The price of losing this war is no less than the price of losing the Cold War and being ruled by totalitarian Communists. Most Communists believed in communal living. And we all know that most people who lived in communes were peaceful. The price of losing this war is no less than the price of losing World War II and being ruled by totalitarian Fascists. Most Fascists were Christians. Isn't Christ the Prince of Peace? Aren't most Christians peaceful people? Of course Hitler, master of a Christian nation, murdered slightly more Christians than Jews. And Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot killed more of their own people than of us. And the Islamic Fascists are killing more of their own people, too.
Hitler, with a tiny fraction of the world's Christians behind him, plunged the world into chaos and murdered fourteen million people. Do we really want a tiny fraction of the world's Muslims to do the same? Let's fight little wars now, not big wars later. And let's not lose.
This article, by an unknown author, not Major General Vernon Chong, describes the price of losing. The price of losing this war is no less than the price of losing the Cold War and being ruled by totalitarian Communists. Most Communists believed in communal living. And we all know that most people who lived in communes were peaceful. The price of losing this war is no less than the price of losing World War II and being ruled by totalitarian Fascists. Most Fascists were Christians. Isn't Christ the Prince of Peace? Aren't most Christians peaceful people? Of course Hitler, master of a Christian nation, murdered slightly more Christians than Jews. And Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot killed more of their own people than of us. And the Islamic Fascists are killing more of their own people, too.
Hitler, with a tiny fraction of the world's Christians behind him, plunged the world into chaos and murdered fourteen million people. Do we really want a tiny fraction of the world's Muslims to do the same? Let's fight little wars now, not big wars later. And let's not lose.
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Monday, November 14, 2005
The Real Story About The War
TigerHawk revisits and updates Den Beste's strategic overview of the War on Terror. These were the reasons I favored the campaign in Iraq before it started, and I still do. My biggest fear was that Bush would go to the U.N. and get talked out of it. I shouldn't have worried.
Fish Cookies
Sunday, November 13, 2005
Keep Raking Lads! They're Gaining On Us!

Saturday, November 12, 2005
More Government Spending Less Happiness
Juan Non-Volokh links a study by three Swiss economists which found that people are less happy when their government spends more. I don't know if it is true, but I have observed that American conservatives are less happy when their government spends more.
Friday, November 11, 2005
What is the Arm of Decision in the War on Terror?
Steven Green thinks that he knows where victory will be won or lost in the War on Terror. He says Bush doesn't know. He says Congress doesn't know. He says our public thinkers don't know. He says the media knows - but they don't want you to find out. I'm not sure. Does the Media know they are losing the war?
Thursday, November 10, 2005
Fooling Yourself About Bush
People fool themselves all the time. I fool myself all the time. For example, I fool myself about how much I'll get done each day. And I fool myself about how easy it will be to get up in the morning every night before I go to sleep. If you think Bush either lied or exaggerated the Iraqi threat you are fooling yourself. Norman Podhoretz examines the mountain of evidence.
Via Rand Simberg.
Via Rand Simberg.
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Righteous Rudy #2
Today I wish Rudy would require Shamim Siddiqi of Flushing, Queens to annually sail a New York garbage scow to the Carolinas, until he can make the connection between the garbage in his head, and the garbage on the scow, remove the former, and consign it to the latter.
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
Righteous Rudy #1
Ten years ago, Rudy Giuliani kicked Arafat out of the Lincoln Center. In what I hope will be a lighthearted continuing series, I will be nominating more individuals for attention by Rudy.
Today, I wish Rudy would forbid FAMS spokesman Dave Adams from visiting the concession stands at Yankee Stadium. No bratwurst for you, Dave!
Today, I wish Rudy would forbid FAMS spokesman Dave Adams from visiting the concession stands at Yankee Stadium. No bratwurst for you, Dave!
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Rudy Giuliani Is Looking Even Better
I didn't know about the time he kicked Arafat out of the Lincoln Center. Maybe if he becomes President he can kick Mugabe out of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. That would be sweet.
Rosa Parks Has Gone To Heaven
I hope Peter has delegated the task of leading her to her mansion to the white man who asked her to give up her seat after he volunteered.
Monday, July 25, 2005
The Translation Theory of Constitutional Interpretation
Lawrence Lessig describes (in 103 pages) a theory for interpreting the Constitution: Fidelity In Translation (PDF). I've just read the first few pages, but it is an interesting idea.
Lessig points out that we have changed the way we read the Constitution. Yet he also points out that sometimes following an underlying principle means doing things differently:
Lessig points out that we have changed the way we read the Constitution. Yet he also points out that sometimes following an underlying principle means doing things differently:
For we all know that sometimes fidelity to an original meaning requires doing something different, and that, in those cases, doing the same thing done before would be to change the meaning of what was done before. Take a simple example to make the point: If a diplomat is ordered to Ãbe politeà while in Iraq (where belching after eating signals approval) and belches loudly at the end of her meal, it would not be fidelity to her order to belch loudly at the end of her next meal with the British Monarch, even though (in an importantly impolite sense) she would have done the same thing as before. Change hereÃbowing rather than belchingÃis fidelity. We all know that this diplomat must do something different in Britain if she is to do the same thing as in Iraq. She must change her act to remain faithful to the original commandÃnot to change her act would be to manifest infidelity.I look forward to reading the whole thing.
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Durbin Should Have Waited For The Facts
Dick Durbin should have waited for the facts before he popped-off about the American military. See, Dick, the American military is on our side. You are supposed to give the military the benefit of the doubt, not the detainees.
More interesting is what is not in the report. Schmidt and Furlow found no substantiation for Sen. Richard Durbin's allegation that terror suspects were chained for hours and forced to defecate on themselves, nor that Gitmo interrogators kept their prisoners in hot or cold rooms, two claims he made on the Senate floor. They also found no verification that the military denied prisoners food or medical necessities, a favorite charge of the Left.Congratulations, Dick. Unlike thoughtful, measured Senators, like Brownback or Lieberman, you have earned a reputation of thoughtlessness. When you are quoted I'll think something like this: "Hmmm, Durbin. Not a careful thinker. Likes to throw tainted red-meat to his base. I'll wait till I hear from someone I can trust."
Thursday, July 07, 2005
United We Stand
Ara Rubyan is right. The leaders of this country must unite against terror. But in a democracy the voters are the leaders. With that in mind, I apologize for comments I have made which are divisive and I invite anyone to call me out, both for past, present and future behavior. The one mind I can be sure of changing is my own.
Would Welfare Reform Work for Africa?
This African economist thinks so. Africa doesn't need aid. It needs capitalism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)