Author: Redactor

Categories
ideological culture too much government

Dead Doctrine

Take off your hat, crank up a dirge, and get out the shovel, for it’s time to put the last bit of dirt over the Fairness Doctrine. It’s dead.

The FCC killed it on Monday. Buried it.

“Our extensive efforts to eliminate outdated regulations,” explained FCC Chairman Julias Genachowski, “are rooted in our commitment to ensure that FCC rules and policies promote a healthy climate for private investment and job creation.”

A total of 83 regulations were deleted in the efficiency-​minded campaign.

And it’s nice to hear of it. Couldn’t have happened to a more deserving … target.

Actually, it’s been a score of years since the old dinosaur of speech regulation “fell into desuetude,” as President Grover Cleveland might have put it. (Ol’ Grover was not exactly a punchy writer.) And hurray for its death and burial — let’s hope it shall not rise from its coffin, like Dracula in a cheap horror flick.

For the “Fairness Doctrine” was an attempt to regulate speech rather than let speech remain free. It  helped further solidify the two-​party system in America, and the very idea that there were only “two sides” to any political question … when it is obvious that a whole spectrum of possibilities exists for nearly any proposal or issue.

The Founding Fathers were right: Congress should “make no law” abridging the freedom of speech.

Interestingly, the regulation received its death blow not from Congress, but from the Federal Communications Commission.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 

Categories
ideological culture initiative, referendum, and recall media and media people

What the Media Misses

The big news story last week became the media’s non-​coverage of the Ron Paul campaign. After Jon Stewart of The Daily Show successfully brought out the full nature of the media prejudice, it became the story.

That’s how bias backfires. Trying to keep Ron Paul out of the headlines led to putting Ron Paul in the headlines.

How easily a conspiracy of silence turns into a deafening noise.

Media bigots think they are doing a public service when they pick winners and throw out losers before almost anyone has even heard from the challengers. They consider it their job.

Undoubtedly they look at Ron Paul’s platform and say to themselves “This guy doesn’t fit into the normal left-​right spectrum, or even neatly into his own party. That makes him unelectable. So we won’t talk about him.” This points to media’s true power: establishing what’s worth talking about.

Trouble is, by rushing to judgment against Paul, they miss the day’s major story: Paul’s appeal transcends usual party lines. It’s not just a tiny cadre of libertarians on his side, it’s conservatives and liberals and exes of both persuasions; it’s centrists who’ve never heard anyone talk about the Federal Reserve before; it’s peaceniks who are serious about ending America’s wars.

It might even be that strong core of American society that still respects honesty and consistency.

The media has missed this elsewhere, too: In repeated recalls and initiatives around the country.

Cover the big story, folks. Not just your own spin.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets ideological culture tax policy

Greed and Bigotry on the Campaign Trail

On the video page featuring Mitt Romney’s notorious “corporations are people” comment — the one I clicked to, anyway — every comment was negative, with jokes like “Did you hear that S&P downgraded the Tea Party credit grade to KK+?” and economically illiterate whoppers like “Corporations do not help anyone except those who own them or do what they say.” It’s saddening to see ignorance and bigotry so self-​righteously maintained by everyday Americans.

Yes, bigotry.

For Romney was right: Corporations are made of people. Those who roil with hatred for corporations, singling them out for more regulation or greater taxation, are attacking actual living, breathing people, who, as Milton Friedman pointed out, are made up of three classes of just plain folks: the owners, the shareholders, who are people; the corporation’s hired workers and managers, who are people; and served customers, that is, people who have chosen, sans duress, to buy stuff from the corporations. 

Economist Steven Horwitz, writing in the Buffalo News, cited one study that estimated that “45 percent to 75 percent of the burden of a corporate tax increase is borne by workers,” and noted that, if profits fall, fewer dividends would go to stockholders.

And “stockholders” are often nothing other than workers’ retirement funds. 

Yeah, soak the older people. That should make corporation-​haters feel good.

Setting aside “some other people” to hate is exactly what anti-​corporatists are doing. It’s bigotry. And it’s ugly … and de-humanizing.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

Millions for Chickens

The U.S. government doesn’t have all that much money. A few weeks ago, the big “funny” news story was that Apple, Inc., had more cash on hand than did the federal government. As August began, the big unfunny news story was the debt ceiling deal, wherein our leaders raised the debt ceiling in return for … increased spending.

So, in this environment you might think that boondoggle market-​fixing programs would be anathema. But you would be wrong. Our beloved federal government announced on Monday its plan to buy $40 million of excess chicken products.

Prepare yourselves, kiddies. It’s not government cheese that will be pushed on you, soon.

You may remember similar buy-​out programs from years gone by. I have this vague recollection of vast storehouses of frozen chickens, and the precarious value of same. 

Why the buy-​out? To prevent well-​connected business folks at Tyson (or similar businesses) from having to brace themselves against lack of demand, pulling back on the number of chickens raised.

Our government: Protecting big business and assuring the needless slaughter of birds. What strange boasting rights.

Amusingly, in the article that prompted this commentary, the author uses the relative pronoun “who” to refer to the birds in question. 

Birds aren’t people, and require a “that” … the “who” in the story are our ninnies in government, though “who” suggests owls, and our D.C. (“dumb cluck”) folks aren’t wise enough to merit such comparison.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

Liberals Against Fracking

Fracking — not just for Battlestar Galactica nerds any longer.

Colloquial for “hydraulic fracturing,” fracking is a process of forcing water deep into oil shale to bring up natural gas. Combined with horizontal drilling (that is, and I’m not making any of this up, drilling somewhat sideways to avoid topside damage), fracking promises to be the next big breakthrough in energy development.

Just so long as government doesn’t mess it up.

Well, there’s debate about this. Gasland, a recent documentary, cited numerous examples of contaminated well water. And yet, last week Judge Nancy Freudenthal reversed federal government regulations against fracking, dismissing Gasland-promoted harms as “speculative.”

Anti-​factual? Anti-science?

Not according to science writer Ronald Bailey, who has argued that fracking itself is harmless. Things can go wrong in any industrial process, and in cases where substantial damage has occurred because of negligence or incompetence, major judgments against energy companies have been awarded to their victims.

Just as things are supposed to go, in a free society.

But folks leaning to the left prefer the “precautionary principle,” at least when it comes to business. “[T]he new reality,” according to a Washington Examiner editorial, is that “those who are now seeking to stop history — or at least the development of new energy technologies — are liberals, led by President Obama.”

Had the Examiner used “progressive” instead of “liberals,” the irony of today’s Progressives being against progress might have unearthed one of this age’s sadder political truths. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
media and media people political challengers

The Ron Paul Problem

Prior to the Iowa Straw Poll, its credibility and repute were proclaimed throughout the land. The Washington Post characterized it as “arguably the first major vote of the 2012 presidential contest.”

Then came Saturday’s results in Ames: Michelle Bachman and Ron Paul finished first and second, respectively, with Paul only 152 votes and less than a percentage point behind Bachmann, no other candidate coming anywhere close.

So, mainstream analysts now call it a three-​way race — with Mr. Paul not one of the three!

A story in USA Today postponed mere mention of Congressman Paul till the 13th paragraph: “Candidates Ron Paul, Jon Huntsman, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Herman Cain are also seeking the Republican presidential nomination.”

On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” GOP strategist Mike Murphy laments that “If 75 people had changed their minds, [Ron Paul] would have won the Iowa straw poll, which would have kind of shaken up the race and it would have put the straw poll out of business forever.”

Out of business? Forever? What sort of electoral contest should or would be abolished if a certain candidate wins?

Murphy’s statement generated neither rebuttal nor even any notice from the folks on the program.

“One reason the bipartisan establishment finds Paul so obnoxious is how much the past four years have proven him correct — on the housing bubble, on the economy, on our foreign misadventures, and on our national debt,” wrote Washington Examiner columnist Tim Carney.

In other words, time to ignore him.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.