Tuesday, May 26, 2009


We have a conceit in this country that we debate things from "both sides". But, of course, any question has multiple facets and nuances, and very often when we're looking at "both sides", we're looking at the same thing, trivially distinguished.

Look at the political parties: They argue only about what the government should exert its force over first, not whether it should exert its force at all. The Dems bitched about the effect the War on Drugs had on civil liberties, but once in power, they didn't repeal those laws. Same with the War on Terror. Both parties bitch about spending when they're not in power, but they never actually reduce spending when they are.

From Britain comes the story of Caroline Cartwright, "remanded in custody"--I think that means "sent to jail while the state figures out what evil to do with you"--for having noisy sex.

Of course, making noise can get you into trouble, that's not new. What's new, is what this Reason article points out: The previous injunction against the woman having noisy sex applied to the entire country. She couldn't go anywhere in England, no matter how remote or soundproofed, and legally have noisy sex.

This is a "liberal" government at work.

Greg Gutfeld repeats the old saw that conservatives want to control your private life and liberals want to control your economic life, but inevitably, all "progress" leads to a goverment that controls everything.


  1. Regarding the old saw: did you see the chart, or table, or whatever it is, at this post at ChicagoBoyz?

    How Sex Sells the Loss of Freedom.

  2. I did, in fact.

    But it's a sleight-of-hand. They'll take away sex as soon as it ceases to be a useful way to rally people.

  3. That would be shortly after the stuff they are PUTTING IN THE WATER SUPPLY takes effect. My tin foil hat is not going to help with this one.


Grab an umbrella. Unleash hell. Your mileage may vary. Results not typical. If swelling continues past four hours, consult a physician.