A Tragi-Comedy

by Don Boudreaux on August 10, 2011

in Politics

In my latest column for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, I expand on a recent comment here at the Cafe in which I describe modern politicians as actors playing for applause – mostly cheap applause.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

comments

78 comments    Share Share    Print    Email

{ 78 comments }

rhhardin August 10, 2011 at 7:42 am

My take is that it’s the news biz business model.

The product of news organizations is not news. It is you. They sell your eyeballs to advertisers.

Nobody wants hard news – think city council meetings – except for one-off events that won’t pay the daily bills.

There is one demographic that’s large that will watch every day though, the 40% of women who like soap opera.

The news business targets soap opera women, with news packaged as soap opera.

No narrative will be broadcast that loses the attention of this audience. If a story is reported correctly and doesn’t meet this standard, it will be rewritten wrong so as to meet it.

The hosts may be as dumb as they look, but the editors are not. They’re in business.

So the entertainment tastes of soap opera women edit every public debate today.

Even nationwide disgust with the media won’t stop it, because the media don’t care except for their demographic business model.

I’d suggest trying ridicule of the target audience, but that’s not politically correct.

Somebody who packs their sentences with “he or she” isn’t likely to do it.

“Their” is available in modern English in the singular, by the way.

Ryan Vann August 11, 2011 at 2:11 am

That’s exactly how it works. news is one giant infomercial most of the time.

Randy August 10, 2011 at 8:05 am

Ever watch CSPAN? Its theater alright, but its really bad theater.

muirgeo August 10, 2011 at 8:39 am

Because I am aware of history and its endless runs of tyranny and dictatorship and of its brutal brutal oppression of masses of people centuries on end I love the government we have. I rejoice in the government I was born into with all it’s imperfections, with all its needs for improvement and even with it’s current display of rule by the wealthy.

Such an essay could only be written by those of us so shielded from the reality of the world around us and its history. Simply by being born into one of the most free and wealthy societies ever only to complain that because you have to give back to keep things going some one must have a gun to your and and you are under great oppression. It seems so childish when held to the light of history. But we are the 4th generation born into wealth and ease without having to toil. So we complain and revolt because we hate our obligations…. we grew up thinking we have none. We grew up thinking we were obliged to all that exist ignorant of those who sacrificed and toiled and gave back. So we formulate a belief in something far far better that NEVER has existed but offers so much more potential and it makes this reality look like a joke. And yet we may some day relearn history as society collapses and perspective takes hold all around the spoiled people we have become.

With all its imperfections I love our government and the freedom and wealth it holds and I love the idea of it’s potential to further improve our society and its people way beyond anything the past could imagine and far removed from the atrocities that are so common around the world and laid out through history.

Randy August 10, 2011 at 9:23 am

Typical politician. You take credit for the things that we have produced – spouting propaganda with every breath.

Re; “we hate our obligations”

I have obligations. But not to any political organization, and certainly not to you.

ccresci August 10, 2011 at 10:15 am

If you had really read history you would see that government has never been a source of wealth or freedom. It is really the absence of government intervention that has precipitated both. History shows that as the wealth of society increases so does the potential power of the State. However, the NEED for the State decreases as individuals and companies are more able to provide goods and services. If, at some point, the State overwhelms the individual this leads to economic sclerosis, corruption and decline.

If you had really read history you would know that the “wealth and ease” we enjoy only came about through productive labor in the absence of government. Did government invent any of the things that make our lives easier? Even the internet would still be a fancy way for academics to mail papers to each other if private industry had not stepped in. In fact, what makes society improve is the search for profits, so that the more “obligations” we have to the State the worse off we become.

I, for one, feel more confident following a clear ideal of individual freedom based on a clear assessment reality than navigating a delusion of government virtue based on a false sense of the past.

muirgeo August 11, 2011 at 3:09 am

“If you had really read history you would know that the “wealth and ease” we enjoy only came about through productive labor in the absence of government.”

There was NEVER An absence of government. When you start making things up so obviously false you have lost the debate.

Kirby August 11, 2011 at 7:12 am

Not in aggregate, but in stupid little bureaucratic regulations and wealth redistribution, like the FDA and SS.

ccresci August 11, 2011 at 4:06 pm

Thanks. Looks like muirgeo knows nothing about the theory of diminishing marginal utility, American history or the writings of Thomas Jefferson.

Randy August 11, 2011 at 9:47 am

There has never been a government. There have always been political organizations. They are often conflated. The conflation is often deliberate.

ccresci August 11, 2011 at 4:27 pm

“in the absence of” means “without” which is the opposite of “within” and thus means “outside of”. Maybe you should be concentrating on what I am actually writing before claiming that I am “making things up”.

NotSure August 10, 2011 at 10:23 am

Logically society came about because the politicians you are defending. Here is a shocking fact, there is no place in the world no matter how poor, that does not have the very same politicians, who only care about gaining power who will say the dumbest and shallowest things.

The real indicator of progress is how much society is protected from politicians, the less a politician can control private property and the basic laws of the land the better.

Greg Webb August 10, 2011 at 10:57 am

George, I love our country because it was intended to protect the rights of individuals by limiting the power of government. And, to a large extent, it does so especially when compared to the governments of other countries.

But, I oppose the so-called progressive movement. It is silly to try to convert our country’s government to a true democracy without Constitutional limitations on the power of government because, like Revolutionary France, it will lead to chaos and ultimately totalitarianism. The tea party is an opposing political movement that seeks to put government back in its proper place and return the country to the values expressed by its founders. And, those founders knew about government tyranny and oppression as well as the effects of rule by the mob because they actually experienced it.

I do not have any obligation to the government. It was created to serve me and not the other way around. It’s funding should be limited to only the resources necessary to effectively and efficiently carry out its expressly enumerated powers and no more.

My obligation to God is to take care of myself, protect and provide for my family, and assist others who are truly in need as I, not some “applause”-seeking politician, see fit. And, my fellow countrymen have the same obligation. Let us not reward the truly greedy in government with the income and wealth that we have earned. And, let each of us take care of our obligations without rationalizing our own desire to avoid those obligations by claiming that someone else has more than we do and claiming that someone else should be doing more.

Ken August 10, 2011 at 3:56 pm

“Because I am aware of history”

HA! Classic! That’s comedy gold right there.

Regards,
Ken

Methinks1776 August 10, 2011 at 4:45 pm

What he means is that he’s aware that history exists. He just don’t be knowin’ nun uv it.

Ken August 10, 2011 at 5:18 pm

+1

Invisible Backhand August 10, 2011 at 10:53 pm

Regards, Ken.

Mesa Econoguy August 10, 2011 at 6:58 pm

“Because I am aware…”

LMAO

Ken August 10, 2011 at 8:00 pm

Ha!!

brotio August 11, 2011 at 12:49 am

:D *LIKE*!

Dan J August 10, 2011 at 11:21 pm

We complain and revolt over obligations……

And that would be the welfare recipients and 51% who do not pay their ‘fair’ share of federal govt. They skirt their obligations. Their obligations to not be a burden to rest of society. They skirt their obligation to pay for the defense.
The 51% who pay no federal income taxes should be ashamed of themselves. The ever growing class of govt dependents, those who fake disabilities to gain SSI, those in welfare, those on 90 weeks of unemployment………. You are a disgrace. You soil your family names.

Kirby August 11, 2011 at 7:15 am

actually, with progressive (HAH! It works in both ways!) taxes (taxes in which the rich pay a greater % than the poor), the amount jumps to about 70%

ccresci August 10, 2011 at 9:23 am

I would only make one change to Don’s characterization, and that is the level of malice involved. The difference between theater and bald-faced lies is that theater is meant to entertain and only lasts for a few hours while lies are meant to defraud and can last forever. For all of the talk these “Government R Us” types give to people being disenfranchised or taken advantage of due to their circumstances it is they who “never let a crisis go to waste”. This is doubly true when the same people caused the crisis in the first place.

SweetLiberty August 10, 2011 at 9:53 am

A democratic government does often represent the will of the majority, but mob rule makes for poor engineering. A retirement safety net may be a desirable goal for the majority, but the reality of a program like Social Security is that the mob constructed a ponzi scheme. People want a safe and secure nation, but the mob uses this desire as a mandate to mettle in every foreign affair, stirring up hornets nests that otherwise would have left us alone.

Despite all their hyperbole and histrionics, I disagree that politicians can be reduced to actors engaging in simple theater. They are doing exactly what their constituents elect them to do – represent their respective mobs. But this cacophony of the multitudes can only evolve into chaos. As the nation crumbles, the liberals will blame the conservatives for lack of regulations and controls, and the conservatives will blame the liberals for the unintended consequences of their interference. Neither side will admit defeat of their ideology and “We the People” will be trapped between the two mob extremes like children in a doomed marriage.

The best outcome we can hope for is a divorce.

nevada doctor August 10, 2011 at 11:18 am

this was definitely an arranged marriage, done at the barrel of a musket.

best to run away and elope with someone of our own choosing.

is it really consolation to tell one’s self the husband our parents forced on us isn’t as abusive and doesnt rob us as much as the other husbands

or should we live for ourselves and take the risk of finding someone we really love and that loves us back

Mike August 10, 2011 at 10:01 am

Bravo! BRAVO!!!

vidyohs August 10, 2011 at 10:34 am

Explanation for why government can be, and is, sold is found here: Art 1, sec 5, para 2, 1st phrase “Each house may determine the rules of its proceedings”.

Denial that any individual participates in its sale can also be found here: Art 1, sec 5, para 2, 1st phrase: “Each house may determine the rules of its proceedings”.

The founders built the finest holding pen ever constructed to contain the animals of government. Then in a fit of insanity gave the key, “Each house may determine the rules of its proceedings”, to the animals.

And, bad things happened.

Duh.

SweetLiberty August 10, 2011 at 11:22 am

I agree that exploited loopholes in the Constitution are a major problem. It’s as if we all set down to play a board game and allowed all players to make up their own house rules as the game progressed. The game has now become unrecognizable – the rules subject to the whims of current policy makers. Uncertainty indeed!

If the original intent of the Constitution was to ensure limited government, a realistic look at our current political free-for-all is evidence of the Constitution’s failure to reign in political forces. The question then becomes, given the chance to do it all over again, is it even possible to conceive of a Constitution that truly binds?

Kirby August 10, 2011 at 6:40 pm

Oh no, en passant works on rooks too.

Invisible Backhand August 10, 2011 at 10:46 am

I actually read it all the way through. Except for style variations, the first half is identical to something Rush Limbaugh would say.

Greg Webb August 10, 2011 at 11:02 am

Yes, it was a wonderful article! And, your attempt to disparage it by associating it with someone you hate because he too advocates for individual freedom is silly and stupid at best.

Dano August 10, 2011 at 12:07 pm

Mr. Limbaugh doesn’t advocate for individual freedom. When he doesn’t approve of a social issue, he wants government regulation.

Prole August 10, 2011 at 3:18 pm

Mr Limbaugh is a social conservative.
That means he favors economic liberty but fears social liberty.
That is opposed to a progressive who favors social liberty but fears economic liberty.
Since liberty destroying legislation is rarely if ever repealed, as the pendulum of power swings back and forth, society’s guts spill onto the floor.

Greg Webb August 10, 2011 at 10:09 pm

Wrongo Dano! Try listening to Limbaugh for two straight weeks, then come back and tell me what he believes in.

Dano August 10, 2011 at 11:25 pm

Please read Prole’s response. Limbaugh never claims to be a libertarian but does claim he is a conservative.. Thus I am right.

Greg Webb August 10, 2011 at 11:57 pm

Nah. I read Prole’s response. Instead of reading what someone else had to say about Limbaugh, try listening to him for two consecutive weeks. You will come away with a different opinion that what everyone says about him. I did.

Greg Webb August 11, 2011 at 12:00 am

Also, I know of no libertarians, conservatives, or progressives who would advocate not enforcing criminal laws and using the coercive power of the state against criminals who commit heinous crimes. And, no they are not all social conservatives.

Methinks1776 August 10, 2011 at 4:51 pm

I always find it interesting that foaming-at-the-mouth Libtards can’t tear themselves away from Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity and Coulter. It’s like they’re secretly right wingers, they just disagree on what issues government should use coercion. Oh, wait….

The Other Tim August 10, 2011 at 8:05 pm

If anything, apart from style variations, it sounds like something John Stuart Mill would have said. Oh, wait, he did say it.

Doc B. : “For some people, democratic government is the embodiment of The People. Government is the great and faithful agent of Us, of Our, of We. The very fact that We all vote (or have the opportunity to vote) means that We control what Our government does. Government is Us acting collectively. Anyone who objects to what Our government does objects to what We do as a People.”

JSM: “As the struggle proceeded for making the ruling power emanate from the periodical choice of the ruled, some persons began to think that too much importance had been attached to the limitation of the power itself. That (it might seem) was a resource against rulers whose interests were habitually opposed to those of the people. What was now wanted was, that the rulers should be identified with the people; that their interest and will should be the interest and will of the nation. The nation did not need to be protected against its own will. There was no fear of its tyrannizing over itself.” -On Liberty, Chapter 1.

I await with bated breath an explanation of how one of the world’s most famous liberals came to hold a view of government belonging exclusively to right-wing radio hosts and their audiences.

John Galt August 10, 2011 at 11:00 am

Political economy was, in effect, a science starting in midstream: it observed that men were producing and trading, it took for granted that they had always done so and always would—it accepted this fact as the given, requiring no further consideration—and it addressed itself to the problem of how to devise the best way for the “community” to dispose of human effort.

American Democracy as it actually unfolded, was an attempt to form a stable looting mechanism with sufficient public support. The founding fathers were mostly men who sought to maintain and improve their condition by means of harvesting the labor of other less powerful individuals.

Leaders will always structure the game to give themselves the maximum unearned benefit they feel their followers will tolerate. We labor under a plantation system and always have, even a slave owner understands that the most productive slaves are the ones that feel they are part of some harmonious arrangement, beneficial to owner and slave alike.

Don’t ignore the unseen of the American Revolution and the fact that it increased the typical American’s onshore government tithe by around 1000% in return for protection from European tithing and rule.

ArrowSmith August 10, 2011 at 11:31 am

Anaracho-libertarian loon.

John Galt Loonocracy August 11, 2011 at 9:18 am

John Galt Loons are small ancient birds. They are specialized fish eaters with dagger-like bills who spend most of their time in privately owned watercrafts. Their lobed feet are set so far back on their body that they are very clumsy among land birds such as public dole pigeons, central planning peacocks, and death dealing delusional eagles cluching infinite arrows of death in their talons.

They consider William Penn’s purchase of Philadelphia from Chief Tamanend as the true founding of this nation and rightful ruling center.

They seek to return to the originally agreed harmonious co-tenancy of advanced technologists and simple hunters, farmers, and street people: “As long as the creeks and rivers run and while the sun moon and stars endure” The treaty never written never broken. The chain of friendship.

This to me is the true America, present in any TV Western or Big City Ghetto Folk.

Let barefoot natives fish the rivers, and plant crops in the public lands. Let junkies proliferate in remote corrugated shanties built with their own shaking hands. Let all imprudent rabble languish in self-imposed poverty away from the public eye and central agora.

Only a vile black soul death eater derives his self worth from some group identity molded by the bloody sculptor hands of jailers, soldiers, policemen, and crony capitalist arms mercantilists.

May you starve, perish, and be interned in one of your countless Versailles Monuments to acronymnphomania, all of which to me are departments of R, I, P.

Greg Webb August 10, 2011 at 11:04 am

Don, thanks for the well-written and accurrate column!

ArrowSmith August 10, 2011 at 11:30 am

Nothing new, the Roman politicians played to the crowds with speeches, games, triumphs. Bread & circuses rules the day as always.

DG Lesvic August 10, 2011 at 12:29 pm

The best description of “government” I have ever seen.

Macauley lives on.

Prole August 10, 2011 at 3:23 pm
DG Lesvic August 10, 2011 at 5:34 pm

Better than anybody’s.

John Galt Loonocracy August 11, 2011 at 9:52 am

the determination of what is best is what sets us apart from animals. take american math as one example:

the arity, adicity, and rank of our founders is the light that illuminates the whole world with its bounty of star spangled amber waves of democratically elected arguments.

let us make war against the godless binary heathen. let us slay the terroristic tertiarians. the quaternarians are human trafficing, drug peddling, slave owning poligamists who must convert to decimentality or perish.

the sacrifice of these enemy quinarians, nullarians, multarians, and others is the price we must pay to solve all foreign and domestic inequalities. This is our one common denominator destiny. E pluribus unary.

do not rebel against our reasonable metric rules of the road that you may live. are not all men created equal with ten fingers and toes. together we will build a fair equal world of tenfold prosperity atop the decimated bloodsoaked lands of intolerance and non-diversity.

DG Lesvic August 10, 2011 at 12:42 pm

By the way, how is your book coming along. Can’t wait to get my hands on that. It will be one of those you’d want to buy extra copies of and give away, especially to schoolchildren. There was a book like that during the Goldwater campaing of ’64 called None Dare Call It Treason. It was printed in cheap paper back and sold millions as lots of people like myself bought up lots of copies to give away.

I can foresee a future like that for your book. I know we here will all go crazy for it, and hopefully ignite a prairie fire.

DG Lesvic August 10, 2011 at 1:00 pm

Of course we all had the maddening experience during the last presidential election of having 20 year olds instructing their benighted elders. They came to our homes and regaled us in check-out counters, and what could you do but say thank you and God bless you? Oh, but if we’d had a copy of your book to slip them.

So I suggest that in addition to the full-length version there be an abridged, very cheap pamphlet version. How sweet that would be.

Benjamin Cole August 10, 2011 at 1:08 pm

We are getting Japanned.

Yes, absolutely the United States can inflate. Sheesh, if we ran five percent inflation for five years, the value of the national debt outstanding would be reduced in value by a little more than 25 percent, while our economy expanded.

Oh shocking, you mean the rates of inflation we had when Reagan was president? Oh, horrors!

BTW, check out the CPI. From July of 2008 to June of 2011, the CPI-U rose from 219.964 to 225.722, or a 2.62 percent increase in three years.

And this July is likely deflation, due to oil prices. Please bloggers, this August 20 (?) when July CPI figs come out, compare them to July 2008. I suspect we will be at about 2.5 percent inflation for the entire three-year period (annual about 0.8 percent). BTW, Dan Boudreaux has written in these very pages that the CPI overstates inflation! If true, then we are about at zero right now.

We are getting Japanned and hard!

Why all the hysteria about minute rates of inflation in the right-wing? It speaks to a type of dementia. The Chicken Inflation Littles are running the right-wing roost.

Ironically (and sadly) it was Milton Friedman who advocated aggressive and sustained use of QE in situations like we face today. He flat out told Japan to inflate. As did Bernanke!

There are times when inflation is good, and now is one of those times.

Okay, call it NGDP targeting–the fact is, inflation would help a lot of property owners and small business borrowers and the US taxpayer too.

All the whimpering and pettifogging about debasing the currency comes from people with an unhealthy attachment to the symbols of money (gold or cash), as opposed to an appreciation of true wealth-building.

PS Milton Friedman thought the gold standard was for idiots.

Sam Grove August 10, 2011 at 4:28 pm
Richard Stands August 10, 2011 at 5:34 pm

Thanks for the link, Sam.

“They stated: ‘Our own conclusion … is that leaving monetary and banking arrangements to the market would have produced a more satisfactory outcome than was actually achieved through government involvement.’ However, they did not argue for a return to a gold standard. In his article on irredeemable paper money, Friedman made this point very clear:

‘Let me emphasize that this note is not a plea for a return to a gold standard…. I regard a return to a gold standard as neither desirable nor feasible — with the one exception that it might become feasible if the doomsday predictions of hyperinflation under our present system should prove correct.’”

So less that it was “for idiots”, and more that governments wouldn’t tolerate it. Friedman seems to be arguing for a version of free banking. Legalizing an alternate gold-backed currency (free from legal tender laws and taxes) to compete with Federal Reserve Notes seems like a worthwhile idea to me. Let market consumers voluntarily choose which best fits their needs.

Seth August 10, 2011 at 1:42 pm

I enjoyed reading your column.

You wrote: “Nor do Government-R-Us-ers explain how to distinguish government actions that actually reflect the will of The People from government actions that violate that will.”

That’s not true. They will tell you the government actions that reflect the will of The People are those they agree with and the government actions that violate that will are those they disagree with.

Chucklehead August 10, 2011 at 2:42 pm

It is one of your best metaphors. A tragicomedy? I would just call it a farce.

Richard Stands August 10, 2011 at 5:09 pm

Political theater in Washington, security theater at the airports, these are enough for so many. Results are not connected. Voters audiences gleefully cheer for the heroes and hiss at the villains. Different audience members pick different heroes and villains.

This is yet another good argument for limiting democratic action to only those very few issues which absolutely require a single enforced answer. Since all government answers – from democracy to oligarchy to autocracy – require some degree of tyranny, the burden of proof should be on those advocating such tyranny: why can’t freedom resolve the issue at hand?

Someone’s personal definition of “fair” outcomes, righteous entitlement, absolute security, national exceptionalism or coerced empathy simply doesn’t excuse the concomitant tyranny.

Ken August 10, 2011 at 6:19 pm

Don,

I think it’s more like sports, rather than theater, but it’s still all very entertaining, though tragically so, even when comical.

The last two administrations have shown just how morally and intellectually bankrupt both sides are. After decades of rhetoric, under the Bush administration, all the sudden republicans embrace “compassionate conservatism”, which seems to be a whole lot like the entire democratic platform. Spending in every government sector went up at the federal level, including all those that republicans had been saying should be eliminated, like the Department of Education. All conservative pundits line up in support of every policy he and the completely republican controlled government makes. They’re cheering for their guy, not any sort of policy victory.

After decades of dovishness and downright dementia about military use under Bush, Obama extends executive power past where Bush had extended it to, even to the point of starting two wars without anyone’s say so other than Obama’s personal wish. After claiming to want to restore fiscal sanity, the democrats drive government spending over a cliff. All liberal pundits line up in support of every policy he and the completely democrat controlled government makes. They’re cheering for their guy, not any sort of policy victory.

You see it in baseball, football, basketball, etc. Players are hated till they put on the fans’ beloved jersey’s, then the players are loved. It’s the same for politics. Partisan voters don’t care about policies, they only care whether their team is making the policies.

Regards,
Ken

Prole August 11, 2011 at 7:46 am

Compassionate Conservative = Anti-abortion Liberal

Methinks1776 August 10, 2011 at 6:38 pm

Here is a perfect example of a member of the congressional brain trust who has the power to compel me to do anything he wants and the power to rob me. It’s watching tidbits like this and the other idiot’s drunken “read the bill? read the bill?…” that make me ever so grateful that there is a surprising number of Americans who think that these asshats should have the power control every minute aspect of our private lives. I doubt they are intelligent enough to regulate their own bowel movements.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jhx32l94kek&feature=related

Ken August 10, 2011 at 8:03 pm

I heard the whole island tipping over thing was an inside joke between the congressman and admiral. I could be wrong; he may be that stupid. But even being an inside joke, saying stuff like that in an official hearing is pretty stupid too.

Regards,
Ken

Methinks1776 August 10, 2011 at 9:28 pm

If it’s a joke, it’s poorly executed, in the wrong place and serves to add to the mountain of proof that those hearings and congress in general are just nothing more than waste and fraud. Or theatre, as Don says. Bad. Very very bad theatre.

ArrowSmith August 11, 2011 at 3:30 am

Ask yourself how much taxpayer infrastructure enabled you to make so much money. Selfish person, you are.

J. W. August 11, 2011 at 12:33 pm

Just because someone has been able to adapt to circumstances as they are does not mean that that same person could not have adapted to circumstances as they might have been.

Infrastructure paid for by tax money does not “enable” people to make money; it only changes the circumstances in which people who can make money will make money.

Methinks1776 August 11, 2011 at 4:28 pm

He’s being sarcastic.

J. W. August 11, 2011 at 5:05 pm

Oh, silly me! I come across that sort of comment so often that I couldn’t tell.

Methinks1776 August 10, 2011 at 7:25 pm

“This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer.”
Will Rogers

Invisible Backhand August 10, 2011 at 11:03 pm

Are you homebound or a shut in?

Greg Webb August 11, 2011 at 12:09 am

She is neither. Methinks1776 is an intelligent advocate of individual liberty and limited government. What are you, Invisible B?

Dan J August 11, 2011 at 12:18 am

Methinks is a bright one. I look forward to a disagreement to challenge.

Invisible Backhand August 11, 2011 at 5:42 pm

Good for her. She spends so much time posting to this blog I thought she was a shut in.

vikingvista August 11, 2011 at 2:39 am

What a totally incongruous insult. Your mind is like a steel…random number generator–no context is so obvious but that you can utterly miss it.

vikingvista August 11, 2011 at 2:34 am

If government R us, then why are taxes necessary? Who among us must strongarm himself to get himself to do what he wants to do? Is government some kind of Dr. Strangelove?

Dan J August 11, 2011 at 2:45 am

I, currently, must forcibly remove myself to my bedroom for rest.

James Earl Jones – moves on to voice a character that can force a person by simply pinching his fingers while holding hand at chest high and directed at the individual.

vikingvista August 11, 2011 at 3:41 am

And if you resist yourself, I hope you are willing to escalate the amount of force you apply to yourself to whatever level is necessary–even if you must hold a gun to your head. Even if you must discharge that gun into your brain in your own self defense (assuming you get into a gunfight with yourself).

Dan J August 11, 2011 at 11:45 am

The battled lingered on and I, eventually, prevailed.

vikingvista August 11, 2011 at 9:22 pm

Sounds like a war of attrition.

electricxbaby August 11, 2011 at 5:01 am

tramadol 984 levitra 4439

John Donnelly August 14, 2011 at 4:23 pm

Don Boudreaux you are too young to be so cynical (and I don’t even know how old you are.)

Previous post:

Next post: