Comments on: Jive Blogging

By: Greg N.

Greg N. — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:46:53 +0000

Libetarian, you must not have seen the live blog over at thestalwart.com. No offense taken, of course, but you – and everyone else – ought to check it out.

By: Libetarian

Libetarian — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:31:03 +0000

This live blog of a debate is head and shoulders above any other live blog of any other debate. This site is now on my favorites.

By: The Uncredible Hallq » Yesterday’s debate

The Uncredible Hallq » Yesterday’s debate — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 20:35:29 +0000

[...] but I don’t get Obama’s general lashing out at corporations and foreign countries (Will Wilkinson nails this last point: “Borrowing from slopes to payoff camel jockeys mortgages our children’s future!”) [...]

By: GilM

GilM — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:27:48 +0000

Laura,

I understand not wanting to watch the debates. But, I'm sure that I get more enjoyment from Will's version because I've seen the actual comments that he's parodying. I'm not sure if that's enough to make it worthwhile for you, but it's something to consider.

Maybe scanning a transcript would be a good compromise.

By: Laura

Laura — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 13:10:28 +0000

I'm so glad I read your liveblogging instead of watching these pointless debates. This was much more edifying (and entertaining!).

By: kirkla

kirkla — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 11:55:21 +0000

“I stand for agreements larded with political demands irrelevant to trade, thereby ensuring less trade, and fewer gains therefrom.”

First, I am not sure targeting the lives of labour leaders is irrelevant to trade, seems like a handy way to ensure artifically cheap labour to me; an unfair subsidy to firms. But, Will, I am more interested in whether you think there is ever a time where trade should be used to exert influence. What other effective ways would there be in the world to exert political influence besides trade and military force?

By: Gherald

Gherald — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:35:26 +0000

Total independence is impossible, but I think it's certainly possible to become “less dependent”, and that's obviously what we should do…

Politicians campaign on “independence” because it's easier to sell it to voters that way, not because the sane ones think we'll ever become FULLY independent.

By: Michael Drake

Michael Drake — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:22:14 +0000

Will, these are effin'* brilliant. You should ditch the policy analysis and become a full-time live blogger.

* That's Real American for “effing.”

By: The Uncredible Hallq

The Uncredible Hallq — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 04:57:09 +0000

I think the reason libertarians dislike energy independence is because they understand that money talks, so buying energy from other countries is always going to work as long as it's there to be bought. It's not such a bad thing. I understand that during the Cold War, we thought we could leverage the fact that the Soviet Union was buying a lot of food from us. Ultimately, they bought food elsewhere and we suddenly couldn't sell our food.

By: GilM

GilM — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 04:50:54 +0000

David,

You might want to check out this interview, or this short commentary.

By: David

David — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 03:42:14 +0000

I might describe myself as a former liberal leaning towards libertarianism. While I'm certainly not an expert on economics, I'm frustrated by the matter-of-fact statements made by libertarians completely ridiculing the idea of “energy independence”. Can anyone explain why they consider this idea to be fallacious or undesirable? I don't see the kind of geopolitical security which we enjoy as a result of our trade relationship with China to be equally applicable to relationships with most developing, oil producing countries.

On the other hand, I appreciate the fact that renewable fuels are not yet economically viable, but if the government spent serious money on research and development it is possible that they could be. Fifty years ago, the technology of the electronic digital computer seemed equally far away and was only possible due to the combination of brilliant scientists like Alan Turing, and massive government spending.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 02:06:50 +0000

Yup, you're correct. There is a very loose connection between Autism and Down's Syndrome, but I'm a little doubtful that McCain had this in mind. I think he was just going for the idea that once you have a special needs child, you become an expert on all special needs children.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/09/how-will-sar...

By: Tim Lee

Tim Lee — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 02:03:33 +0000

Central time zone is unAmerican.

By: Ron

Ron — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:37:29 +0000

Great work, Will. You're really a liberal, did you know that?

By: someone

someone — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:14:32 +0000

Doesn't Palin's kid have down syndrome, not autism? I don't think that autism can be an issue “she knows so much about.” Figuring out it's cause is a non-sequitor, considering that little Trig doesn't have it.