Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
John Hawkins writes at Townhall.com:
Relying on big government to help you out would be like relying on the Girl Scouts to spearhead an invasion of Iran. It’s the wrong people, in the wrong place, doing the wrong job. Whether Democrats or Republicans are in charge, our government is barely functional. That’s certainly not a shocker. Anyone who has had dealings with the federal government can tell you that it’s slow, stupid, expensive, belligerent and incompetent. But, here’s the $64,000 question: WHY is the federal government so slow, stupid, expensive, belligerent and incompetent? It’s not a mystery.
The first four items on the list don’t concern me too much. I think everyone knows about them, including the liberals. When they’re pointed out, the liberals’ rebuttals all seem to be nothing but a bunch of bluster, just radio-static, “I can’t hear you la la la” as they say.
But, Reason #5 made a bigger impression on me. Especially with the last sentence:
5) There’s a lack of responsibility: The late, great Milton Friedman once said,
“When everybody owns something, nobody owns it, and nobody has a direct interest in maintaining or improving its condition. That is why buildings in the Soviet Union — like public housing in the United States — look decrepit within a year or two of their construction…”
Similarly, when no one is held personally responsible for the failure of a government program, nobody has a direct interest in maintaining or improving its condition. Who’s responsible for Benghazi? The IRS targeting of the Tea Party? Fast and Furious? The trillion dollars we wasted on the stimulus program? The National Debt? Obamacare — oh wait, there are still people pretending Obamacare isn’t a failure.
But, that’s just it. Between the multitudes of politicians and bureaucrats tied into every decision, a biased media and raw partisanship, there’s a fog bank around every program, decision and calamity created by the government. That’s why ultimately, you’d be much more likely to be fired from a government job for saying something racist or making a nasty crack about gay marriage than wasting a billion dollars or getting people killed with your incompetence. [bold emphasis mine]
Thing I Know #408: You can’t aspire toward success if you won’t spot the fails. When everything an organization or person does is defined as success, very few things done by the organization or person will ever genuinely be one.
Ironically, this is the very same problem the Republican establishment has with winning elections. They nominate their “mainstream” candidates who often don’t stand for anything at all, or if they do, the public can’t see it. The mainstream candidate predictably loses. If you ask the power-brokers in the Republican party, in the wake of that defeat, what could & should have been done differently the answer would come back: Nothing, everybody ran a great campaign, and better-luck-next-time. That’s not the attitude democrats would’ve taken, anywhere, if Barack Obama lost His bid for re-election. It isn’t the sentiment any of them had after John Kerry lost in 2004. They blamed Republicans for fixing the Diebold machines, in public, but in private they reorganized and looked for new opportunities, new candidates who were most certain to win-every-argument. And then the knock-down-drag-out between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama happened. It was a very hot contest, because for democrats it was a contest that needed to happen.
It’s fascinating that each side is running electoral campaigns the way the other side governs, if & when it’s in power.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
“…there’s a fog bank around every program, decision and calamity created by the government.”
I thought plausible deniability was the POINT of professional political science?
- CaptDMO | 05/12/2014 @ 09:17Moving the goal posts.
Changing (or redefining through “usage”)the vocabulary.
Theft of services alibi.
“It’s fascinating that each side is running electoral campaigns the way the other side governs, if & when it’s in power.”
So how does that pidgin war “capture” thing, by urban roof top “keepers”, work again?
Milton Friedman: When everybody owns something, nobody owns it, and nobody has a direct interest in maintaining or improving its condition. That is why buildings in the Soviet Union — like public housing in the United States — look decrepit within a year or two of their construction
For an artistic rendering of this principle, see The Fireman’s Ball, by Miloš Forman.
- Zachriel | 05/12/2014 @ 09:43