Archive for 2009

AUSTIN POLICE want identities of online critics. Because when people criticize the police, the police should know who they are. . . .

UPDATE: Mea Culpa: I should’ve read the actual story, which is much less inflammatory than the Slashdot summary.

CONSUMER-BLOGGING: So a while back, I posted a bleg for information on Sleep Number beds. The reports were generally good, so I bought one. We’ve now had it for a couple of months. I like it a lot. Helen likes it less than I do, but is sleeping better. Also, I’ve stopped snoring. Overall, a good buy, I think, even if it was a bit pricey.

SO, YEAH, BLOGGING WAS KINDA LIGHT YESTERDAY: Helen and I went to Nashville Friday and Saturday to cover the Smart Girl Politics conference for PJTV, and I left the charger for my laptop behind. (I took a charger, just not the right one. Doh!) So I had to limit my online time to keep from running out of battery before I got home.

The conference looked like a good one, and we got some great interviews. I’m currently logging shots before uploading the video to the PJTV studios later today. It should be up next week.

DOUG MATACONIS: “Some libertarians and advocates of limited government and federalism, such as economists Thomas DiLorenzo and Walter Williams have argued that the Confederate State of America was the last gasp of limited government on the American continent in the face of Lincoln-esqe consolidation. However, is that really the case?”

Not so much. I’ve written about this topic before, and this still stands: “One suspects that for a certain sort of infantile mind, pro-Confederacy statements provide the same sort of thrilling sense of nonconformity that Marxism has provided. This, I guess, explains the weird strain of pro-Confederate sympathy that one finds among a certain segment of libertarians.”

REMINDING MEDIA MATTERS THAT Lee Harvey Oswald wasn’t a right winger.

That fact has messed with their minds ever since. You could write a book on it. . . .

Related: Media Matters’ dishonest editing in support of their “smear” argument exposed. “This editing shows the rank dishonesty and flat-out incompetence of Media Matters. Did they think that no one would check the rest of the tape?”

Remember, Media Matters’ sole reason for existence is to give journalists who are already hopelessly deep in the tank a certain degree of comfort in their already-held views. So it’s not about convincing anyone who pays actual attention. . . .