Another Reason Democracy Is Bad

By -
It reveals just how awful we all are. Under a monarchy, for example, would Andrew Sullivan have had any reason to demand that a woman make her medical records public, so that he can "breathe a sigh of relief and move on"?

Gene, are cuss words allowed on Crash Landing?

Comments

  1. Stephan Kinsella11:31 PM

    "It reveals just how awful we all are."

    "We"? speak for yourself, kemosabe.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob Murphy11:58 PM

    Stephan, you're forgetting what an ass you are when you debate argumentation ethics.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Woody12:02 AM

    She's running for public office. If the public demands it, why shouldn't she make her medical records available?

    She's the one who wants to be vice-president, and presumably (since McCain is 72 and has had health issues) wants to be president.
    I want to know why a 44 year old pregnant woman would, after breaking water, forgo local medical care, take a 12 hour jouney from texas to alaska, and deliver a high-risk child at a small Alaskan hospital.

    Women with whom I've spoken, that have delivered under complicated circumstances, seem to think there's something wrong with this picture.

    Maybe we have no right to know, and should just bend over and vote.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous7:46 AM

    I find nothing wrong, ever, with minor harassment of public officials.

    It gives them less time to harass us. In that spirit, let's see her gynecological records, obstetric records and demand a colonoscopy!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bob Murphy10:51 AM

    Woody, does your view have anything intrinsically to do with politics? E.g. if a movie producer demands that an actress sleep with him, you think that's fine? (I'm not talking about whether it should be legal, I'm saying whether you think the guy is a jerk or not.) After all, she's vying for the job.

    Robert, doesn't your view ensure that only people with no self-respect end up in office? Is that a good thing?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous11:00 AM

    OK, if I ever come across someone who is running for office that is going to remove retrictions from my life rather than add more, I would not request a colonoscopy.

    Come to think of it, there is such a man, Ron Paul. Outside of Ron Paul, among the current group, its harassment to all!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Stephan Kinsella11:49 PM

    Bullshit! Eff you!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Bob Murphy12:03 AM

    Bullshit! Eff you!!!

    The fact that you uttered that proves you think I am right.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more