Prosecute Climate Deniers

For John, BLUF:  Or is that "persecute"?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

It is The Daily Caller (Reporter Michel Bastasch), but still, it is based on a Press Release from the Institute of Global Environment and Society (IGES).  The article is headlined "Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics" The lede plus one:

The science on global warming is settled, so settled that 20 climate scientists are asking President Barack Obama to prosecute people who disagree with them on the science behind man-made global warming.

Scientists from several universities and research centers even asked Obama to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to prosecute groups that “have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change.”

I would have said it was all a very sophisticated put-on, except we do have Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, mentioned in the Press Release, writing an OpEd on this back on 29 May 2015, in The Washington Post, "The fossil-fuel industry’s campaign to mislead the American people".  The Huffington Post liked it.

I still wonder if this Press Release is a hoax, but the invocation of RICO is chilling to me.  This is a lesson in why we need to reduce the number of laws on the books and stop being a "Ham Sandwich Nation".  The RICO statute was a strong tool against the Mafia.  It was a strong tool against the tobacco manufacturers, in the mistaken belief, it would seem, that we can stop people smoking by prosecuting other people.  Didn't work.  Then there was the plan to use RICO against abortion protestors.  The use of the law to punish differences of opinion can be ruinous.  The suggestion that "climate deniers" are like "holocaust deniers" is an indication of people who have no sense of proportion.

Hat tip to Drudge.

Regards  —  Cliff

Vaclav Havel vs the Bureaucracy

For John, BLUF:  Too many bureaucrats with good ideas for you.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

This item is not straight forward, and it recommends more reading, but Vaclav Havel is an important thinker and leader from the last century.  The headline is "Vaclav Havel’s ‘The Power of the Powerless’ Endures; His history-changing thoughts define the West's struggle today."

The source is PJ Media and the writer is Mr J. Christian Adams.  It was published on 10 August.

Commended to you.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The First Amendment stops at the Canadian Border

TRIGGER WARNING:  Bad language at the link.
For John, BLUF:  Politeness has a price.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Canada has human rights commissions.  They are supposed to make sure everyone plays nice and acts like polite Canadians, or emigrates to the United States (e.g., Mark Steyn).

Here is an open letter to the Alberta Human Rights Commission, "Dear Alberta Human Rights Commission".♠  And it goes down hill from there, but in a humorous way.  Well, it does start out slowly…

I'm informed that your Commission (via your proxy) considers the word "crazy" an insult.

… and then quickly picks up speed.

This is not by Mr Ezra Levant, but is about him.  Yes, he is back.  The former publisher of the Canadian Western Standard.

He writes:

Here we go again.

This October I will be prosecuted for one charge of being "publicly discourteous or disrespectful to a Commissioner or Tribunal Chair of the Alberta Human Rights Commission" and two charges that my “public comments regarding the Alberta Human Rights Commission were inappropriate and unbecoming and that such conduct is deserving of sanction.”

Because last year I wrote a newspaper editorial calling Alberta’s human rights commission “crazy.”

Have you ever heard of a journalist being prosecuted for being disrespectful towards a government agency? A journalist in Canada, that is — not in China or Russia.

I remember seeing a video, a while back, in which a Canadian Human Rights Commission lawyer reminded Mr Levant that Canada doesn't have a First Amendment, like that was a plus for Canada.  That European view that the People benefit from the Government protecting them from themselves.  Bonapartism.

The Social Justice Warriors strike again.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  From the Blog Small Dead Animals.

A Reason for Charter Schools?

TRIGGER WARNING:  Comments on Public Schools.
For John, BLUF:  This is probably you, John.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Writing in The Washington Post, Columnist Jay Mathews asks "Why are American schools slowing down so many bright children?".

The lede.

Vicki Schulkin, a Northern Virginia parent, knew her son Matt was bright but did not think this was a problem until some of his teachers began to bristle at the erratic working habits that sometimes accompany intellectual gifts.

Further down in the article we have this:

At the Belin-Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development at the University of Iowa’s College of Education, this is old news.  In 2004, it published an extensive report, “A Nation Deceived: How Schools Hold Back America’s Brightest Students,” with research showing that children like Matt were poorly served.

Now the center has done a follow-up, “A Nation Empowered: Evidence Trumps the Excuses Holding Back America’s Brightest Students.”  Its 345 pages have encouraging stories about gifted children like Matt being allowed to accelerate their learning.  But authors Susan G. Assouline, Nicholas Colangelo and Joyce VanTassel-Baska remain frustrated with school administrators and legislators impeding students who would do better in more challenging classes.

Could this be your school?  Maybe read the linked reports.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

A Small Misunderstanding

For John, BLUF:  Up with teachers, down with bureaucracy.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

On City Life this AM, with seconds to go, Mr George Zaharoolis said I was against the teachers.  He said this after I had texted in that I thought there might be some value in Charter Schools.

Mr Zaharoolis is mistaken.

I am for teachers.  I am against a lot of the Administrivia that impedes education, that impedes teachers in doing what they should be trained to do.

That is why I like Charter Schools.

Regards  —  Cliff

Waterloo—200 Years On

For John, BLUF:  This was shortly after we concluded the War of 1812 with the British.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Battle of Waterloo was 200 years ago today.  It was an important turning point in history.  If the Duke of Wellington (UK) and Gebhard von Blücher (Kingdom of Prussia) had lost, Bonaparte would have likely gone on to rule Europe as Emperor and democracy would have been delayed for decades in those lands.  Put another way, tyranny would have reigned.

From The Wall Street Journal, a few days back, is an article by Mr David Marcelis, titled "When Napoleon Met His Waterloo, He Was Out of Town".

It seems that at the 200 years mark the Belgian village of Braine-l’Alleud wants credit for the French emperor’s defeat.  After all, they have the big monument, a pyramid-like manmade hill, with a lion on top.

According to Belgian Historian Bernard Coppens,

Most of the Battle of Waterloo took place a few miles south, in Braine-l’Alleud and Plancenoit.

The battle got its name because the victor, the Duke of Wellington, penned his official report from his Waterloo headquarters.

More than a hundred places world-wide are its namesakes. ABBA’s “Waterloo” ranks among the best-selling singles ever.  It abides in English, French and other languages as an expression for one’s final, insurmountable challenge.

But, regardless of where it happened, the important thing was that Bonaparte was defeated and the French Revolution, and the struggle for Democracy across Europe, could continue.  We ourselves, here in the United States, benefited because of the refugees from the 1848 Revolution, who came here in time to help fight and win the American Civil War.

Regards  —  Cliff

All Hail the Barons at Runnymede

TRIGGER WARNING:  I give praise to Englishmen for helping to bring forth freedom and liberty.
For John, BLUF:  We owe those Barons a lot!  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Today is the 800th Anniversary of the Magna Carta. Here is Columnist George Will, of The Washington Post, writing about "The 588-year path to limited government".  This is the line from the Barons meeting with [Evil] King John at Runnymede to Chief Justice John Marshall publishing the US Supreme Court Ruling in Marbury v. Madison on 24 February 1803 read aloud at Stelle's Hotel.  That was when it was established "the power to declare a congressional act null and void."

Incidentally, fittingly enough, it was Americans who erected the first monument to the Magna Carta at Runnymede.

It wasn't so much that we can trace a direct solid line as it was that the Barons established a principle and those who followed them continued to establish that principle.  If we do not continue in that tradition, freedom will be lost to overpowering government.

All Hail the Magna Carta.

Regards  —  Cliff

Metric Isn't Always the Answer

For John, BLUF:  Measurement should allow people to understand their environment.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

"America Uses Fahrenheit.  The Rest of the World Uses Celsius.  America Is Right.  The Rest of the World Is Wrong.".

Well, the source is Mother Jones.  The writer is Mr Ben Dreyfuss.

The accompanying chart at the Link is an excellent example of how the American system is superior.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

State Budgets and Deficits

For John, BLUF:  .  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Former Paul A Volcker is worried about how the individual states are dealing with their future liabilities, like pension funds.  Here is his ideas as reported by Ms Mary Williams Walsh in The New York Times—"Volcker Sees Hidden Peril in State Budgets".

Paul A. Volcker, the former Federal Reserve chairman widely credited with taming inflation in the 1980s, has found what he considers a new economic scourge to battle:  shoddy state budgets that he contends push costs into the future for other generations of taxpayers to pay.

When the states live beyond their means in this way, Mr. Volcker said on Monday, their budgets may seem balanced every year, but they are in fact piling up hidden mountains of unpaid bills.  The invisible mountains grow bigger every year and eventually become crushing — something that seems to be happening in several states this summer as lawmakers find themselves at a loss to close their deficits.

“The never-ending sense of crisis leads to stop-and-go funding of vital programs,” Mr. Volcker said in his first report on state finances since establishing the Volcker Alliance, a foundation devoted to rebuilding public trust in government at the federal, state and local levels.

I commented on someone's Facebook page that I thought our Commonwealth was headed in the proper direction.  I noted how I was concerned that Mr Volcker might be pushing us in the direction of a more uniform way of doing business across the fruited plain and that such a thing would undermine what makes the United States different, our test lab of different ideas, the individual States.  I suggested we didn't want to end up like France, for example.

Now comes The Boston Herald, with an article by Reporter Joe Battenfeld, "Hidden junket funds:  How Deval Patrick secretly diverted millions to off-budget accounts".

Former Gov. Deval Patrick’s administration secretly diverted nearly $27 million in public money to off-budget accounts that paid for a $1.35 million trade junket tab, bloated advertising contracts, and a deal with a federally subsidized tourism venture backed by U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, a Herald investigation has found.

The maneuver to fatten the hidden “trust” 

accounts with millions from state quasi-public agencies allowed Patrick to skirt the state Legislature and evade state budget cutbacks during the recession, the Herald found.

PDF:  Tracking ex-gov.'s money stash

State lawmakers never approved the funding plan, and it’s not clear who even knew about it, but it is clear who orchestrated the end-around the budget and got state agencies to contribute.

“The (Patrick) administration asked us to,” said Katie Hauser, spokeswoman for the Massachusetts Convention Center Authority, which kicked in the largest amount to the trusts, $23.5 million.

Senator Harry Reid?  The man who, on the floor of the US Senate, lied about Governor Mitt Romney?♠  That Harry Reid?

Hat tip to an unnamed Facebook friend.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  There are six things that the LORD strongly dislikes, seven that are an abomination to him:  haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.  —Proverbs 6:16–19

Metrification

For John, BLUF:  One of the evils inflicted on us by the French Revolution and Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Just because your High School Chemistry teacher liked the metric system in the lab doesn't mean that you have to like it driving your car or going to the grocery store.

Regards  —  Cliff

China the Model?

TRIGGER WARNING:  I wouldn't think this needs a Trigger Warning, but just in case, I bring into question the idea that the UN and UN officials are always right.

For John, BLUF:  I am guessing that since many people see themselves as just workers, or academics, their form of government and the economic model don't seem that important.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Elizabeth Price Foley, posting at the Instapundit, gives us a look at one opinion on climate change, "Australia PM advisor says climate change a UN-led ruse.  (PM being the Prime Minister.)  There is also the original article, but it is a pay to play site.

Figueres [executive secretary of the UN’s Framework on Climate Change] is on record saying democracy is a poor political system for fighting global warming.  Communist China, she says, is the best model.  This is not about facts or logic.  It’s about a new world order under the control of the UN.  It is opposed to capitalism and freedom and has made environmental catastrophism a household topic to achieve its objective.

Figueres says that, unlike the Industrial Revolution, “This is a centralised transformation that is taking place.”  She sees the US partisan divide on global warming as “very detrimental”.  Of course.  In her authoritarian world there will be no room for debate or ­disagreement.

Make no mistake, climate change is a must-win battlefield for authoritarians and fellow travellers.  As Timothy Wirth, president of the UN Foundation, says:  “Even if the ­(climate change) theory is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.”

Having gained so much ground, eco-catastrophists won’t let up.  After all, they have captured the UN and are extremely well funded.  They have a hugely powerful ally in the White House.  They have successfully enlisted compliant academics and an obedient and gullible mainstream media (the ABC and Fairfax in Australia) to push the scriptures regardless of evidence.

Of course Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe would tell you it is beyond stupid to believe that some UN official (in this case Ms Christiana Figueres) would say the Chinese system of Government and Economics is better than that of the US.

Regards  —  Cliff

France Beats Belgium

For John, BLUF:  Some people just never forget and never move on.  I bet it is the result of the Flight of the Wild Geese.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

From NPR we have "France Wins Battle Against Belgium's Plan For A Waterloo Coin"

Many are calling it the second battle over Waterloo — and this time, France won.  A two-euro coin commemorating the bicentennial of Napoleon Bonaparte's defeat will not be widely released, after France objected to what it called a "negative symbol."

The poor French.

Regards  —  Cliff

Sun Setting on California?

For John, BLUF:  Sometimes the "do gooders" ruin it for everyone.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

From the Web Presence, New Geography, we have the Executive Summary of a new report on "California's Social Priorities, A New Report".  The full report, in PDF Format, can be found here.

The quick summary of the report from Chapman University is that the Golden State is a little tarnished and needs to recalibrate its priorities.

The Instapundit's take is special interest groups abusing environmental law to achieve narrow personal goals.  Yes, that can be a problem.  One we see even here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Hat tip to the Instapundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Adjust Speed Limits?

For John, BLUF:  I am sure you drive at only 55 mph on Route 3, but the others not so much.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Should we be more open to adjusting speed limits?

Yesterday I was on (Massachusetts) Route 3, a limited access highway, or "freeway", for a short distance, northbound, and traffic was doing about 78 mph on a road posted for 55.  Later I was heading South and traffic was doing about 65.  And later than that I was northbound from I-95, again on Route 3 and traffic was back to about 78 mph.

Maybe 78 is an unsafe speed.  I am sure there are statistics that show more cars in collisions and going off the road at 78 than at 55.  Further, there are probably statistics showing that fatalities and serious injuries are more frequent in accidents when going 78 than going 55.  Yet the drivers seem to feel comfortable at 78.  Is there some sort of heuristic here that provides insight to the drivers, allowing them to feel safe at 78?

Whatever the drivers think, the Commonwealth Government believes the speed limit should be 55.

I believe the Department of Transportation should conduct an experiment, in which it first studies current speeds on Route 3, in various sections, at various times, and then raises the speed limit to 65 mph and then again studies current speeds in various sections, at various times.  I am guessing the speeds observed will be lower, making the road, I would think, safer.

While there is often a lot of loose talk about how dumb the public is, in some ways they are pretty smart and are able to judge for themselves what is safe and unsafe.  In the case of Route 3, I believe we should let the public be part of the decision.

Regards  —  Cliff

More On FCC and The Internet

For John, BLUF:  The question is what could possibly go wrong.  Time will tell.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

We have addressed this one already, yesterday, here, where Craig H left a pretty thorough comment on whey he thinks some are over-reacting.♠  However, Mr Robert McDowell, a former member of the five member panel of the Federal Communications Commission, writing in USA Today, calls the FCC Internet ruling wrong.

Thursday marked the largest government intervention into the Internet ecosphere in American history.  By equating the dynamic 21st century Internet to the telephone system of 1934, the Federal Communications Commission has thrust powerful but antiquated utility-style regulations onto the U.S. tech economy. . . .

The FCC’s power grab discards the bipartisan light-touch regulatory framework laid out during the Clinton administration.  That hands-off approach made the Net the greatest deregulatory success story of all time.

History teaches us that utility-style regulation raises costs to consumers, reduces investment and innovation, and creates uncertainty due to the politics-driven nature of “mother may I innovate” government mandates. Regulation only grows.  Now the Internet cannot escape that fate.

The ultimate result of more government encroachment will be something akin to the sagging European Internet market, where investment in broadband infrastructure is only one-fourth of America’s due to heavy-handed regulations.  Even worse, this new power grab could trigger expanded intergovernmental powers over the Web through existing telecom treaties, jeopardizing Internet freedom.

What many in Silicon Valley don’t understand is that, according to the Supreme Court’s 2005 Brand X decision, nearly any “tech” company that builds a telecom-style network to deliver its content and apps has the potential to be captured by the FCC’s new rules.  If the agency tries to exempt some companies but not others, it will be choosing the politically favored over everyone else.

Then Professr Reynolds comments:

Well, that’s the whole point of this exercise, one suspects.  I mean, isn’t it always?

On the other hand, Mr Gideon Lichfield, writing for Quartz, thinks the is the right move, and will protect the Internet from Government interference. Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Craig H is a thoughtful (as opposed to dogmatic) person from the high tech sector with a libertarian bent.

The Internet Diminished

For John, BLUF:  A solution in search of a problem.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Here is the White House on "Net Neutrality", a topic recently in the news from the Federal Communications Commission decision, 3 to 2 to make the Internet a Utility.  And here is what the FCC thinks it said.  And here is the trace of the story by the Newspaper of Record, The Old Grey Lady

Here are some notes I cribbed from someone else:

On the contrary, I think this is the deathknell for free and open Internet.  Because instead of being the global "Internet"—with a capital "I"—so-called "net neutrality" treats the internet as an "internet" US utility to be regulated by the nationstate.  This is important as China and Russia push their concept of "internet sovereignty."  If the US can regulate their internet, why can't Russia and China regulate their Internets?

What is the problem that the FCC was trying to fix here?  Are Internet speeds getting slower?  Has unfair competition caused the Internet economy to dwindle in United States?  Did Congress change the law to allow regulation of the Internet?  Or, did three unelected appointees make a decision to unilaterally expand federal power?

The idea of a free and unencumbered Internet, one that could be used to support the Arab Spring or some [name the color] revolution in some nation facing oppression, is going away.  In a lot of ways it never existed, in that strong nations, with money and technological savvy, have been limited search engines and social media.  But, the Internet was a global concept, struggling to be free.

Now the US has signed on to the idea that the internet is a domestic utility, to be used by each nation as that nation sees fit. Remember, it isn't the first order consequences one needs to worry about, with its obvious goodness.  The problem is the second and third order effects.  The ones few anticipate.  Unfortunately, there are few Daniel Patrick Moynihans and the few there are tend to be shouted down by all the Progressive do-gooders who are going to make our lives better.

Another way to look at it is that every solution contains within itself the seeds of a new problem.

Regards  —  Cliff

Overregulation Disincentivizing

For John, BLUF:  Nebby neighbors are the spark that lights this kind of fire.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

From The Atlantic we have "The Danger of Being Neighborly Without a Permit", by Writer Conor Friedersdorf.  It is all summed up by this subhead line, "All over America, people have put small "give one, take one" book exchanges in front of their homes.  Then they were told to tear them down."

The power to require permits is the power to prevent something from ever existing. This lovely movement would've never begun or spread if everyone who wanted to build a Little Free Library recognized a need to apply and pay for a permit. Instead they did good and asked permission never.

I think the author captures the essence of the problem here.

This is what conservatives and libertarians mean when they talk about overregulation disincentivizing or displacing voluntary activity that benefits people.

Hat tip to the Althouse blog.

Regards  —  Cliff

What Does He Really Mean?

For John, BLUF:  Yes, Congress should subpoena him.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

What is happening out there in the real world?  Here in Massachusetts we are ignoring Jonathan Gruber.  What if he represents the view of bien-pensant?  Will the People find out and rise up against the Progressives in the bureaucracy and the legislatures?

Regards  —  Cliff

The Stupid Ones, Per MIT

For John, BLUF:  Washington is such a cesspool.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Because it is important I am just quoting the whole thing from Law Professor and Blogger Ann Althouse:

MIT prof Jonathan Gruber is sorry he was transparent about the lack of transparency in getting Obamacare passed.

He wants us to know that he was speaking at an academic conference and "off the cuff," when he said:

This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes.  If [Congressional Budget Office] scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies.  Okay, so it’s written to do that.  In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in -– you made explicit that healthy people pay in and sick people get money — it would not have passed… Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage.  And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter, or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass.  And it’s the second-best argument.  Look, I wish Mark was right that we could make it all transparent, but I’d rather have this law than not.

He wants his old lack of transparency back. He revealed what he liked so much about it.  Now, why can't he have it back?  Well, Professor Gruber, it just doesn't work that way.  Once you've let us see that you mean to deceive us, we won't get fooled again.  Oh... unless you're right, and we really are stupid.

Yes, apparently amongst the Professors at MIT the ends justify the means.  How disappointing.  Sort of like Professor Martin Heidegger.

Many Comments.  Here is one:

Mr MIT from Boston actually just admitted the Dem Congresspersons that voted for an unread bill were the stupid ones, and the Tea Party uprising that he distains as uneducated, racist, right wingers was 100% right when it understood the bill from the gitgo and rebelled.

Hat tip to Ann Althouse.

Regards  —  Cliff

Siri Helps Out

For John, BLUF:  Machines are very, very patient.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Over at The New York Times a Ms Judith Newman talks about her son Gus, who has autism, and how the iPhone App Siri is helping out.  The title of the article is "To Siri, With Love:  How One Boy With Autism Became B.F.F.'s With Apple’s Siri".  Here is the lede:

Just how bad a mother am I?  I wondered, as I watched my 13-year-old son deep in conversation with Siri.  Gus has autism, and Siri, Apple’s “intelligent personal assistant” on the iPhone, is currently his B.F.F.  Obsessed with weather formations, Gus had spent the hour parsing the difference between isolated and scattered thunderstorms — an hour in which, thank God, I didn’t have to discuss them.  After a while I heard this:

Gus:  “You’re a really nice computer.”

Siri:  “It’s nice to be appreciated.”

Gus:  “You are always asking if you can help me.  Is there anything you want?”

Siri:  “Thank you, but I have very few wants.”

Gus:  “O.K.! Well, good night!”

Siri:  “Ah, it’s 5:06 p.m.”

Gus:  “Oh sorry, I mean, goodbye.”

Siri:  “See you later!”

That Siri.  She doesn’t let my communications-impaired son get away with anything.  Indeed, many of us wanted an imaginary friend, and now we have one.  Only she’s not entirely imaginary.

The Siri technology was developed by SRI International, where Mr William Mark is the Vice President for Information and Computing Sciences.  He noted:

See, that’s the wonderful thing about technology being able to help with some of these behaviors.  Getting results requires a lot of repetition.  Humans are not patient.  Machines are very, very patient.

Technology holds promise of helping us in many areas.  We just have to be careful about it being imposed irresponsibly.

Why my concern about misuse?  Because misuse and abuse are inherent in Government, and I don't mean one party or the other.  Both.

In today's Washington Post is an OpEd by Mr Ajit Pai, a member of the Federal Communications Commission, titled "The government wants to study ‘social pollution’ on Twitter".  It is about a Government Study being done by Indiana University, named, with a node to Steven Colbert, Truthy.

… and its purported aim is to detect what they deem “social pollution” and to study what they call “social epidemics,” including how memes — ideas that spread throughout pop culture — propagate. What types of social pollution are they targeting? “Political smears,” so-called “astroturfing” and other forms of “misinformation.”

Here is Mr Pai's pitch:

Truthy’s entire premise is false. In the United States, the government has no business entering the marketplace of ideas to establish an arbiter of what is false, misleading or a political smear. Nor should the government be involved in any effort to squint for and squelch what is deemed to be “subversive propaganda.” Instead, the merits of a viewpoint should be determined by the public through robust debate. I had thought we had learned these lessons long ago.

And, he is correct.  No business.

And, this is why seats at the FCC are divided up by political party, and on the local License Commission and Election Commission.  Diversity of thinking and interest.  Not perfect, but a fair approximation.

Regards  —  Cliff