This is www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=10132438's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=10132438's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=10132438
Recent Activity
Interesting--and a sign of a need for well-considered legislation--but I wonder why the release writer can't get simple facts straight re: the pre-2004 legality of sale of high-capacity magazines. The mistake is much more minor than many problems ordinarily seen in firearms articles but given the long history of Just Making Up the "facts" it is probably creating distrust at the margins.
1 reply
Original intent is dead and has been dead for years. Why, after everyone else has moved on, are leftists concerning themselves with original intent? That isn't even what's usually meant by originalism anymore, and certainly isn't what informs e.g. Clarence Thomas's jurisprudence.
Toggle Commented Jan 26, 2011 on Bringing out the big guns at Blog For Arizona
1 reply
Fact check: Those magazines (not "clips") were never outlawed. Manufacture and importation were prohibited but they were widely available, for about $5-$10 more than the current price. The reporter got it right.
1 reply
Dupnik is right about Arizona but that does not excuse his grossly unprofessional conduct. From the start he either deliberately attempted to create a link in the public mind between the political Right and the spree shooter or appeared as though he was attempting to do so. From Sheriff to rookie deputy we need lawmen committed to facts and professionalism. That means no grandstanding: Arpaio and Dupnik both need forced retirements.
1 reply
Any comment from Rebecca Rios? Wasn't she carrying in the Legislature when Lori Klein was a mere rabble-rouser?
1 reply
Are you a pervert or sexual deviant of some sort? Are firearms sexual to you? Is sex, to you, some form of either self-defense or aggression? Why else would you write something like that? Sicko.
1 reply
Michael Bryan FTW!
Toggle Commented Sep 30, 2010 on WTF Were They Thinking? at Blog For Arizona
1 reply
I won't bother to remark on the loony conspiracy theory/populist nonsense, but will just remark that saving frees up credit. Contrary to the Zombie Vulgar Keynesian view (that even unreconstructed neokeynesians would find laughable), mere spending is not the solution to every economic downturn.
1 reply
And FWIW I do think the GI takes Barry G's name in vain, despite their having had his approval to use it. I didn't know the man personally, but I get the impression that he did not approve of throwing bad argument after good or of deliberately "cooking the books" in pursuit of an ideological end. He was certainly not the sort of coward who viewed responding to real problems as an existential threat to free enterprise. When I think of Goldwater I think of liberalism in the true sense, albeit with a Burkean streak, advocated by someone with a long view and the integrity it takes to be respected on both sides of the aisle. GI at its best represents this but more often than not is a caricature.
1 reply
I just came across this, looking for something else. Krugman was a great scholar and his contributions are incontrovertibly important. It's a shame what happened to him when he turned into a commentator: he became the economics equivalent of a global warming denialist. From misrepresenting the work and positions of others, overplaying the differences between Harvard economists and those at Chicago, Virginia, and George Mason (this "freshwater/saltwater" nonsense) and dumbing down his position to support Democrat politicians, he's become a rather pathetic hack, dishonest by scholarly standards. A pathetic hack with a Nobel Prize, yes, but when public positions are divorced from scholarship, Nobel Prizes should mean nothing. Krugman was in no position to argue that the "stimulus" was actually stimulus in the economic sense, yet he argued for the "stimulus" as though he was arguing for the concept of stimulus. Every bit as bad as (g)libertarians who resurrected the old, circular Treasury Argument. Friedman's contributions to economic science are also incontrovertibly important and those who attempt very lightly to discount or caricature them do so at risk to their own credibility. (I'm not accusing anyone here of that.) He also did a much better job than Krugman of keeping his advocacy in line with what was supported with scholarship, of not overstating his position, and of not dumbing it down to support politicians and political parties. ("Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon" turned out to be a bad approximation--Chicago schooler, retired Congressional staff economist, and nowadays Arizonan Joe Cobb can explain why and how very well--but it was sensible at the time.) He was also, like Hayek before him and like Tom Palmer and Will Wilkinson today, a humanitarian and a good liberal. The Ayn Rand types who prefer Friedman the icon to Friedman the man would be furious if they were less ignorant of what he advocated. (And they'd call Hayek a "socialist" and "collectivist"!) The "voluntaryist" Murray Rothbard types already defame him as much as Naomi Klein does.
1 reply
History aside, there's a still-abstract-and-academic *wholly contemporary* argument to be made that letting illiterates vote is possibly a bad idea. For an idea of it, turn to Bryan Caplan's work on the Survey of Americans and Economists on the Economy. His book is not without its flaws--especially that facile four-part categorization--but one of the more interesting bits of political nonfiction to come out in recent years. Of course, Caplan's findings also support a claim that education is possibly a public good (in the true sense and not the wanker's sense of the word) after all. And as Caplan notes, it's also an argument for a cultural shift reducing the scope of government, the breadth of things that are objects of legislation rather than individual choice. Meshes (perversely) nicely with Richard Thaler's work.
1 reply
He's also a voice for fiscal responsibility, a reliable defender of civil liberties, and a stand-up guy in general. I've found Aboud to be a bit "flaky". Regardless, this is good news.
1 reply
You spotted that too...I had to roll my eyes on seeing it this morning. What still amazes me is how much their supporter base lets them get away with being slobs. It does not do a credit to the position.
1 reply
The East Valley Tribune was part of Freedom Newspapers and thus a less-famous sibling of the Sacramento Bee and the Orange County Register. If you've seen the Register lately you'd probably have noticed three things: it's very thin, layout is a kludge (the mix or serif and sans serif typefaces for headlines is like a poke in eye), and to call coverage and reporting mediocre would be generous. I wonder if, without tremendously crappy papers like the Register, Freedom could have kept the Trib afloat until it was again profitable what dragged the Trib down. Also interesting is whether or not Freedom Newspapers' blatantly ideological stance--they make the Chicago Tribune's leftish position and support for Daley and by extension Obama look enlightened by comparison--contributed to the decline. This is the chain that would send professional Ayn Rand fan and maybe-philosopher Tibor Machan around to "educate" staff when they got editorial stances "wrong." That sort of micromanagement is bad enough, but if someone sent someone from far outside the analytic tradition and its associated honesty and humility--and who aside from elderly libertarian ideologues gives a rat's ass about Tibor Machan?--to "educate" me I'd feel my intelligence being insulted with each word. As an occasional reader I felt that, too; the opinions page was dominated by the trashiest and most reactionary sort of libertarianism. East Valley Tribune was better than their California papers in this regard, but it certainly had its bad days.
1 reply
They're missing an opportunity for one of the world's greatest bumper-stickers: "Sure I'm a 'teabagger': leftists can suck my balls."
Toggle Commented Oct 30, 2009 on Tea Party Temper-Tantrum at Blog For Arizona
1 reply
Going to post what you received?
1 reply
The Ron Paul/Lew Rockwell nutjobs and Chris Simcox's run for office aside, I don't think we're seeing a resurgence of early '90s paleoconservatism, a dressing up of old-fashioned bigotry with the language of (classical-)liberalism. It looks like mere frustration to me. Buchanan may be trying to put a paleocon spin on this but it seems more an attempt to run it up the flagpole and see who salutes. So far, no takers. Maybe the angry white men all moved back to Harrington, England. Hmmm...
1 reply
P. J. O'Rourke does political satire. Michael Moore on a good day does satire. Peter Bagge does satire. Satire would require you to be witty. Wit would require you to have the capacity for analytic thought. If I were to say "AZ Blue Meanie is a pederast", that's not satire. May or may not be a lie, but it ain't even funny.
1 reply
Cute. Like many grad students, I've given a few "milk money" ideas a shot. Writing for Helium.com was one--it turns out that compared to Examiner.com or just regular 'blogging it's a low-paying gig. I was also a candidate for Pima County Supe way back in 2004. Got talked into it late one night. Sat on ACLU-AZ's Board of Directors for a few years, too. Frustrated writer? Hardly. Get real! That's almost as ridiculous as accusing Jeff Flake of graft. Overworked scientist who writes occasionally as a hobby is more like it. But since I am not an anonymous coward, you could fairly easily find this information, and more. Or even show up at my doorstep and ask me. But it's easier, I suppose, to construct a more convenient Ben Kalafut. That's your modus operandi, really--perhaps I should be honored that as a mere "engaged citizen" I get the same treatment (douchebaggery?) you give the big shots. I don't know what they were thinking when they brought you on to this 'blog. You're a total discredit to your cause, blustery and nonanalytic, a sort of left-wing Roy Warden without the cojones to get arrested. And in such respectable company that becomes all the more clear.
1 reply
@ "Meanie" I can't define satire, but I know it when I see it, and false accusations of graft or embezzlement, at least written in your style, are not it. But writing something stupid and hiding behind the claim that it was supposed to be satire, now that looks like self-parody. Maybe you should hang it up--your co-'bloggers are running what looks to me like a respectable and honest operation which you discredit with this wild nonsense.
1 reply
He has plenty of past public antics to be ashamed of, ranging from his being kicked out of Carol West's office after basically asking for Chicago-style favors, to his involvement in a partially tax-funded "charity", to his rent-seeking conduct when being considered as a temporary replacement for Grijalva on the Board of Supes, that will come out again if he runs for Senate. Should we at some point allow that someone has grown beyond these things? Maybe--that Glassman's were in his mid-to-late 20s and not when he was, say, 19, should be held against him. It'll take a few more years as a City Councilman for him to prove that he's not a pissant--and having this stuff dragged up again might not do him any favors, nor would the potential for him to exhibit his arrogance.
1 reply
Let me get this straight: (1) There's no cost-of-living adjustment in Social Security benefits (etc) because there's no increase in the cost of living. (2) Some would like nevertheless to give Social Security benefit recipients a "bonus" to somehow "make up for" this. (3) Jeff Flake opposes this sort of intergenerational transfer Therefore (4) Jeff Flake is taking vacations using money that belonged to seniors. What? How? We have words for that sort of thing. Dishonest, and slanderous. The accusation you are making is that Flake took his vacation not spending his salary or other wealth but rather from something extra from the public purse and that somehow that's why seniors didn't get COLA. That's what that "your COLA money" bit means. I've noticed here that the real people--Safier, Bryan--tend to make better, more analytic posts than the anonymous coward "Meanie". But maybe hiding from libel suits will become another reason, in addition to not being associated with epic analytic thinking fails, that "Meanie" is hiding behind a pseudonym.
1 reply
Two years isn't enough to prove that he's still not an overgrown fratboy.
1 reply
Will we read here of the good and bad or just the bad?
1 reply
That's hilarious and will be linked. It doesn't diminish Horne's position on Obama, however, which is correct despite Horne's position on Horne being dead wrong.
1 reply