A dangerous trend—I say film them.
The totalitarian impulse is alive and well.
From Reason: “It benefits special interests, hurts consumers, and harms the planet. What could be worse?”
Read it all—what the Feds are doing is completely irrational.
A website from The Pew Research Center: It’s all about how demographics are changing the U. S. “that will put stress on our politics, families, pocketbooks, entitlement programs and social cohesion.” Oh, joy.
There’s a reason teenagers are so reliant on technology: They don’t have the freedom their parents did. We seem to live in a state of fear about our children (and lawsuits)—”don’t go out alone,” playgrounds are now dangerous, “don’t talk to strangers,” etc., etc.
(Hat tip: Maggie’s Farm)
An excellent piece on the angst of privileged Dartmouth students by Victor Davis Hanson, with an entertaining, but highly unlikely final recommendation of more appropriate “demands.”
Life is tough for those young one-percenters….
Found at Blacklisted News:
Many countries are planning to create their own communications infrastructures to bypass the U.S. altogether. For example, economic powerhouse Germany is rolling out a system that would keep all data within Germany’s national borders.
Can anyone blame them?
The U.S. is trying to not only protect U.S. businesses, but also keep the NSA’s hand in the cookie jar by arguing (wait for it…) that closing borders to the NSA would violate trade law.
Oh, that should work.
Not so well, according to political humorist P.J. O’rourke, who asks, “Who Really Actually Wants This Bill of Rights?” (“Really Actually?” Channeling his Valley Girl voice?) He goes through each one and closes with this gem:
Alexander Hamilton was the Founding Father most in favor of a strong central government. And we’ve certainly got that. But Hamilton argued against a Bill of Rights, for fear it would make the central government too strong.
In Federalist Paper No. 84, Hamilton said the Constitution was “merely intended to regulate the general political interests of the nation.” He contended that a Bill of Rights “would contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted.” He asked, “why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?” He warned against “a Constitution which has the regulation of every species of personal and private concerns.” And we’ve certainly got that.
Indeed. Read the whole thing. (Above emphasis mine.)
From Christopher Cantwell, self-declared anarchist, atheist, asshole: I wouldn’t write this, because I simply have different ideas about the subject. Nonetheless, it’s kind of a fun/snarky read.