The House Minority Leader, John Boehner, gave what was undoubtedly the best speech of his life last night. A last ditch effort to convince Dems to vote against Obama-care, the GOP leader summarized poignantly the awful-ness that was the bill…
Much more on the epic day in Washington and the delightful news of Joe Mauer’s new deal with the Twins on an all new TWG Podcast later tonight...
Two accomplices get arrested for a number of crimes. The police have enough information to assure they both get a two year sentence. But they think they could connect them to another, much bigger crime, so they make both criminals an offer. If one informs on the other, he’ll go free, while the other will certainly get a ten year sentence. However, if both inform on each other, the police will have enough to ensure they both get five years.
The above scenario is commonly given to explain one principle of what has come to be called Game Theory: that when everyone works in his own best interest, it is possible to end up in a far worse position than if everyone had worked in the best interest of the collective. In the above situation it is always in one’s best interest to inform. If the other prisoner informs, you only get five years instead of ten, and if he doesn’t inform, you go free instead of getting two. Nonetheless, when both prisoners follow their best interest by informing, both get five, whereas paradoxically both could have gotten only two if they’d kept their mouths shut.
Conservatives, Libertarians, and Classical Liberals* tend to hate the above conclusion. And perhaps hate is too soft a word. It is an anathema to liberty, and one is a despised Communist merely for thinking it. As we all know, unbridled liberty is the source of all prosperity. America won the Cold War, after all, by each of us concerning ourselves only with our individual prosperity, whereas those collectivists sank into economic malaise, which ruined the Soviets, and would have ruined China if they hadn’t reformed their economic system to be more free-market. At least, this is the prevailing wisdom among modern Conservatives.
The above argument does a serious disservice to the principle of individual liberty and small government. It reduces what is essentially a moral argument into utilitarianism. Classical Liberal thought is based on the idea that people have foundational rights, that these rights allow one to choose to do anything which is not directly belligerent to another person’s rights, and that no one’s rights may be morally infringed for the benefit of any number of others. The utilitarian expresses the last principle differently: that when no one’s rights are infringed, any number of others will benefit. Now, if we were to apply that to, say, our first amendment rights, we would arrive at the conclusion that we are permitted freedom of speech because it benefits society. But from here it is no great leap to conclude that where freedom of speech does not benefit society, it need not be granted. No such conclusion could be drawn from the moral argument, that no amount of benefit to society can ever justify the suppression of speech. For this reason, the moral argument is superior to the utilitarian: it isn’t weakened when the collectivists put forward arguments along the lines of the prisoner paradox.
What then should the response to collectivism? Friedrich von Hayek, perhaps destined to be considered the greatest of the 20th century’s Classical Liberals, wrote extensively on this topic. In his work, the Road to Serfdom, the argument was put forward that the level of regulation necessary to achieve any benefits from collectivism would effectively end human liberty. Our choices would all need to be made for us by central planners, because we wouldn’t comply with the best interests of the collective on our own.
Put another way, let’s return to the first scenario. The reason this situation is regarded as paradoxical is because it is always in one’s best interest to choose the option that leads to prison for five years, whereas it is never in one’s best interest to choose the option that only leads to two years. Even if both prisoners are allowed to get together and talk out their options, and they both see that a better outcome is assured if both of them keep their mouths shut, and they agree to this course of action, it still remains an even better option for each one to double cross the other. If the first double crosses the second, he gets even fewer years than the two he’d agreed to earlier, and if both double cross, he gets five instead of ten. The paradox of this situation is that if each individual is allowed to have any individual choice whatsoever, his best choice leads to the worse result, and his worst choice leads to the better result. In order to obtain the better result, these criminals can’t be allowed any say in the matter, and a central planner must step in and choose to make both of them keep silent whether they want to or not. So long as they have any kind of individual choice, this problem cannot be resolved.
The Classical Liberal’s only recourse then is to try to eliminate any personal involvement in situations where these kinds of paradoxes occur, and they do occur often enough in our economy. When given a choice between an economic disaster or the loss of personal liberty, abstain altogether! I’ve harped on health insurance before, and have said most of what I think needs saying, but I think it provides a good example of how we ought to approach these problems. When health insurance is used as a payment mechanism for general medical care, the quantity of medicine you individually purchase has very little correlation to the premiums you pay, so frugality is not rewarded: you may as well use it to cover as much as you can; your costs will be divided among so many people that it’s hardly noticeable. But when everyone adopts this mindset, the costs of hundreds of millions of people splurging adds up, and premiums are forced to skyrocket just so insurance providers can break even. There’s still no point in being frugal, because that won’t lower your premium by more than a minuscule fraction of a cent, and even if everyone else in the country acted in the best interest of the collective and lowered their consumption, that only returns us to the position we were in at the beginning, where everyone is encouraged to buy lots of medicine for cheap, once again leading everyone to splurge. Just abstain: get catastrophic coverage, a cheap policy with a very high deductible, but pay for day to day expenses out of pocket and you’ll probably be able to save money. (That is, provided Washington gets its act together and allows tax-free personal health savings accounts.)
And, incidentally, this is another reason why the people in Washington trying to pass their insurance regulation “reform” bill (which I still doubt is going to make it into law, although the Dems are apparently more suicidal than I gave them credit for when I wrote after Scott Brown’s election and are trying to go Kamikaze to get it passed) are writing a simple disaster. The use of insurance as a funding mechanism for ordinary, expected health-care expenses puts everyone in the above paradox, which is causing the higher premiums we want to prevent. Abstention from non-catastrophic insurance is the only solution, yet the bill in question makes it illegal to abstain. This leaves us with one of two choices: premiums can go up forever, or a (death) panel of central planners will make our decisions for us, based on our value to the collective. The Democrats swear the latter will never happen, so in other words they plan on reducing premiums by forcing the market to raise premiums. Brilliant.
*Try as I may, I cannot find an appropriate word for the philosophy upon which the idea of a limited government is founded other than Liberal. The word Liberal, from the Latin root meaning “free,” was applied first to the same people as invented the idea of defined and limited government powers as a vehicle for protecting freedom. This Classic Liberalism finds its expression most clearly in modern fiscal conservatives, whereas fiscal liberals, being statist and all too often authoritarian, do not deserve the term. Doubtless calling conservatives liberals and liberals illiberal is confusing, but it needs to be done, as the alternative is becoming more problematic. Fiscal conservatives, being unable to call liberals illiberal, have taken to calling them by names of other historically illiberal groups: socialists and fascists. This is not precisely accurate, and illiberals are all too ready to point out minor distinctions between their views which are supposed to deflect the accusation. A wider, blanket term for statists is required, and that term is illiberal. But to use that term, the fiscal conservative must also become comfortable with calling himself a Liberal.
There’s a new kind of flip-flop in Washington. The power flip flop. One day the Republicans are flying high with their man on Pennsylvania Ave and good footing in both houses. The next, Democrats are on top with a majority in the houses and their man in the Oval office. Then an election spins out of control and into the headlines in Massachusetts and suddenly the top dogs are scrambling to keep their footing again. Up and down and in and out, Republicans and Democrats all vying and campaigning to win their seats and stay in power.
Which, for me, begs the question, are the politicians in Washington too busy being representatives of their parties to be representatives of the people?
Consider. In Massachusetts there was a mad scramble of last minute campaigning by the Democratic party to try to save Ted Kennedy’s seat from the hands of an upstart Republican. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama both put in appearances to this end, though in vain. Why? To get a Democrat back into the house. The desires of the people of Massachusetts seemed irrelevant (note: this is the second time in this paragraph that I have spelled that state correctly on the first try without the assistance of spell check), for when the desires of the people seemed to challenge the power of the party, the party flexed its muscles against them.
Last I checked the purposes and desires of our founding fathers, the goal of representative government was to represent the people of the nation, not some power hungry political party. The shift has been subtle, but its effects can no longer be ignored. No wonder the people of this country, and particularly young people, are disillusioned, cynical and frustrated about the government. They feel like they have no voice in the goings on of our country, and it is beginning to seem that this perception is not far off.
What a radical day it would be if a Democrat or Republican began to run for office in a particular state or district and then dropped out on the grounds of “I cannot accurately represent the needs and desires of this constituency; my opponent will do a better job of that for these particular people than I” instead of scrambling, biting and clawing to win a seat for their party, regardless of the good of the people.
Obama ran under the banner of “change” and said he would be a new day for the American government, would encourage bipartisanship, would consider all interests, and even a few weeks ago derided the “permanent campaigning” of Washington politics. A funny thing from the mouth of a man who scant days before had himself been campaigning for Coakley. He has not brought change to Wasington. He is a democrat, representing the democratic party, and trying to work with republicans representing the republican party.
All America wants to know is when someone will show up in Washington who wants to represent people instead of a party.
GooseRadio Podcast Special – In honor of the beauty of President Obama’s recent speeches – including the State of the Union and his Super Bowl campaign infomercial with Katie Couric – we were really inspired. We thought it was time to pay appropriate tribute to our wordsmith in chief. Therefore, we offer you this special Obama-infused edition of BBMak’s song “More Than Words”.
Sarah Palin addressed the throngs of the Tea Party Saturday Evening in Nashville. Her address was sweet music to the audience. Barack Obama was skewered thoroughly. Come, Share the Experience with us, moment by moment…
8:04 pm – She steps to the podium, like a Queen treading before her troops.
There are 2 massive blocks of ice-esque substance behind her… An Alaska theme? A Narnia theme?!
8:05 – The hair is down tonight. I miss the up-do.
*wishes happy birthday to Ronaldus Magnus*
“America is ready for another revolution!”
8:06 - Her first usage of the phrase ‘common sense conservative’
1st Scott Brown reference! I wonder if the GOP had actually just put the infamous Brown Truck on the ballot if it could have defeated Coakley all by itself. Would have been GM’s first win in some time…
8:07 – She’s very energetic this evening. She makes me feel so old – and I’m 24.
8:09 – Speaking of Brown over Coakley – ‘If there’s hope in Massachusettes, there’s hope everywhere.’
‘Common Sense Conservative’ usage countdown – 2
8:10 – ‘Contested primaries aren’t civil wars’
You know what WAS a civil war? The Civil War!
8:11 – ‘Don’t allow any one leader to define you…’
This becomes an interesting theme. The prognosticators are all saying this speech IS her effort at becoming said leader. Later she juxtaposes the subject of her future with a restatement that the movement shouldn’t have a leader.
8:12 – ‘You Teapartiers are bigger than Obama and his teleprompter.
Urban areas stink!’
‘Common Sense Conservative’ usage count – 3 (she switched the 2 adjectives around that time)
8:14 – ‘Obama is afraid to call war, ‘war’, suicide bombings become ‘manmade disasters’.
8:17 – Here’s the best line of the evening – “We need a commander in chief – not a professor of law, standing at the lectern”
8:18 – Obama is writing letters to dangerous dictators. Machmoud, someone’s talking to you…
8:19 – Obama hates Japan!
*accidentally says ‘Alaska’ when she meant ‘America’*
8:20 – She loses her place momentarily… Think the ‘Alaska, America’ reference got her rattled…
Ok… she’s got it back now… found her place…
8:21 – *makes a talking face with her left hand, Barack Obama’s Washington is Sarah Palin’s hand…* This is truly human drama…
8:22 – ‘Obama should man up and stop picking on George Bush…’
Quotes Barry Goldwater! She’s been compared to Barry!
8:23 – ‘The government is taking over.’
She keeps quoting people. She includes more quotes in her addresses than any political figure I’ve ever heard of…
8:24 – Populism! Wall Street wants to eat you alive!
8:26 – Making fun of Joe Biden’s tough guy image and inability to oversee things!
“How’s that hopey, changey stuff working out for you?!”
Is this wise syntax considering… everything…
8:29 – Obama gave a Democrat party man a government contract to somehow stimulate some portion of the economy.
“Is that hope? Nope.”
8:30 – ‘Washington thinks we are all stupid!’
8:32 – ‘We are freedom lovers, and we are ticked off!’
On dealing with multiple governmental challenges at once – “If you can’t ride 2 horses at once, you shouldn’t be in the circus.”
8:33 – ‘I threw oil barons in jail!’
You know who else should be in jail… the guy in the audience who showed up to this speech in a blue baseball cap…
8:34 – Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy reset button, bequeathed to Vladimir Putin, should be used on B Obama’s health care bill.
8:36 – ‘We need to seize the oil from the sod, and stop giving money to sheiks.’
Also, from John Thune of SoDak – ‘If you’re ever the victim of a shotgun shooting, band-aids are not going to help.’
8:38 – ‘John McCain is an American hero.’
Common Sense Conservative’ Count – 4
8:40 – I anticipate we’re ramping up for a conclusion here. It’s coming rapid fire now…
You are all patriots!
You are all kind!
You are all good!
Shining city on a hill!
Our best days our yet to come!
8:45 – God bless the tea party & God bless America!
Okay here goes. Let me get this out of the way right away, I voted for President Obama. So if that disqualifies the proceeding comments in your mind, that is okay. But I hope it doesn”t. I don”t believe that I have “blindly chosen to remain deceived”. In fact that statement is pretty hurtful in my opinion. But that is a conversation for another time and probably a different forum.
I tried to listen to the speech with an open mind last night, knowing that I (like everyone else) would most likely hear what I wanted to hear. There were some things that I liked and agreed with, there were also some things that I didn”t agree with. The bottom line is that we have heard it all before (or something similar) from our previous President, and the one before that, and the one before that…etc. States of the Union (or is it, State of the Unions) are a lot of applause interrupted by moments of talking about things that sound good, but will most likely not happen. So rather than get into the details of the speech, I will share something that happened while we were watching.
My 12 year old son was going in and out of the room and about halfway through the speech he asked me, “Why www.atoledo.com does everyone hate him so much?” My first response was quick, I said something like, “well, a lot of people don’t agree with decisions he has made…blah blah blah.” He took that as an answer and left the room again. I didn’t think much more about his question until this morning and it kind of shook me that he used the word ‘hate’. Maybe hate is too strong a word and I think (I hope) that even in disagreement, hate is not the emotion felt towards our President. But what I continue to come back to is that in the mind of a 12 year old, hate is what he perceived. That’s at least a little scary isn’t it?
I started playing back the tapes in my head of all the times I may have perpetuated that perception with comments about President Bush, who I didn’t always agree with, or John McCain, or probably, more recently, Sarah Palin. My son’s statement hit me harder today than it did last night. Our leaders talk about not leaving a debt load on the next generation. I wonder if the financial deficit we leave them, might be the least of our worries! It seems like way too much energy is being spent (dare I say wasted) on tearing down those we disagree with and destroying what little common ground we have to work with. We need to find another way to have this conversation, a way that teaches our children how to settle their disagreements in a civil manner.
Last week, my wife and I took our 3rd grade daughter to visit a new school that we were considering for open enrollment. That particular night was mainly intended for incoming Kindergarten kids, but older students were welcome too. In the course of the night, the kids were asked to sit around a table for an activity they would be working on. As the chairs filled up, one little girl was left without a place to sit. The teacher leading the activity pulled a chair next to a little boy and said she could sit down there. The girl looked up at her with a completely serious face and said, “But I don’t like boys that much.” The teacher without missing a beat said, “well, in Kindergarten we sometimes have to sit by boys.” Brilliant! Whether its Democrats or Republicans that you “don’t like that much”, sometimes in life we have to sit by each other.
Pull up a chair…
We now have a good amount of hours between us & President Obama’s State of the Union. With these have come time for pondering just what the address meant, how it was received, and what the future holds. Here now, are the GooseRadio contributors, with their lively post-game reactions to the speech. Also, check out our live blog play by play of the address, and a thoughtful response from the other side of the aisle.
Marshall Mullet – Was Biden agreeing or nodding asleep?
Alex Whitworth – So, it’s not that Americans don’t want national health care, it’s that the great orator didn’t communicate effectively? Sure, that makes sense. You know what? Scratch that, it’s Dubya’s fault. The last eight years…
Tim Shaw – Do supreme court justices have to go to some kind of scowling school? If it’d only been the conservative wing that didn’t like getting called out, that’d be one thing, but Sotamayor and Ginsberg were not amused.
Goose Nissley – I think the Supreme Court scowl is going to get a lot of coverage! I was a bit taken aback by the combativeness in his tone. He tried to continue proffering hope and unicorns in a more intense, almost scowling at times, way. It was a new, and I don’t think very effective, Obama.
Marshall – I agree wholeheartedly. His message was lost in a partisan display of disingenuous-ness. He pointed fingers and then said there was too much finger pointing. The few good points about increasing exports and job creation was lost on a totally hope-less denunciation of everyone not Obama. Or Michelle. I think what we have here is a failure to communicate.
David Gregory – *response not printable on family friendly website*
Carl O’Brien – As Mr. Bennett said, “He simpers and smirks and makes love to us all…” but there was very little substance to all his flatteries. He cracked-wise, flattered those on Main Street, and flirted with Blue Collars while attempting to save us from the highwaymen of the banking business. He made lots of promises but did not speak as to how these promises would come about. How will you increase export? How will cutting discretionary spending cut the deficient when the money saved equals to 1% of the national debt? I heard no answers to the nation’s problems, just a lot of “hope.”
Ryan Howard – Hmm… I, for one, am skeptical that this performance is up to the high and exacting standards of the Tonight Show. I know you’re trying, Mr. O, but some of your stuff is just falling flat.
There’s definitely some quality stuff here, like when you say you believe “the true engine of job creation in this country will always be America’s businesses,” but that earlier bit, when you’re asking for applause? Not as classy.
I think my favorite bit was when you said that China and India have good economies partially because “they’re making serious investments in clean energy.” It might be a bit too highbrow for primetime, though. I’m just not seeing your intended demographic knowing that those two countries snubbed world attempts to push cap and trade on them in Copenhagen last year.
I guess I have two words of advice: bone up on your delivery, and maybe stick to cable, where you can be a little more edgy. Who knows? Maybe in a few years, Comedy Central will invite you to a roast.
Mark Seignious – I’m late to the party once again… is Obama president? When did that happen? State of the Union? He probably said the word “I” like 130 times probably…
Kristina Bjorkman – The State of the Union Address = the day of the year that Congress gets as raucous and rollicking as Parliament. Hooting and Hollering, up and down, up and down.
It is difficult to take talk of bipartisanship and “not a perpetual campaign” seriously, when Obama travels to Massachusetts to campaign for faltering candidates of his party.
In the past few days, Republicans have been feeling an extra ounce of chutzpa with a surprise election victory in liberalisms’ heartland of Massachusetts. In the wake of this shocker, the prospects of Obama-care’s success have receded like so much tide when pulled by the moon (that’s how that works, yes?). Anyway, President Obama has decided to respond in the most serious and potent way he knows. And so, tonight, he is giving a speech to congress. Come join me as we learn how things really is (yes, that was on purpose)…
8:02 PM – Michelle Obama is cloaked all in purple. I’m reminded of Dwight Schrutes’ beet farm.
8:06 – “Madam Speaker, the President of the United States.”
Here he comes – striding & glad-handing like the days of yore.
8:07 – Harry Reid lurking behind the President. I imagine he’s treasuring every moment he has in the capitol these days… come November he’s expected to receive the boot from Nevadans. Call it ‘receiving the Daschle’ if you will.
8:10 – *Prez begins his ‘thank you’s*
8:12 – ‘Times are tough.’
8:13 – ‘George Bush handed me a harrowing, ugly & bludgeoned economy.
I have mostly fixed it.’
8:14 – ‘I have done so many things!’
8:15 – ‘Children write me letters asking me why they have to move…
They need change.
They are angry.
Wall Street stinks.’
8:16 – ‘Let me tell you about these letters…’
8:17 – *Reprising FDR*
‘Government should be decent. Let me teach you how to be decent people.’
8:18 – ‘ Boy, those banks are sure ripping everyone off.
8:19 – ‘Man, I hated that bank bailout… we needed it, but I sure hated it…
Did you remember that it was George Bush’s idea???!
Let me tell you – I have invented a new fee for those banks!
*first split screen shot showing partying Dems doing standing O while Republicans sit and stare at Pelosi’s blingy necklace*
8:20 – ‘I have cut taxes. For parents. For children. For college students. For cartoon characters. For cougars!…’
Obama – “I thought I’d get some applause on that one.”
8:22 – ‘We have created / saved / pulled from the clutches of greed 2 million jobs.’
‘The stimulus bill was awesome and everyone loved it.
Economists all say so. It would have been a disaster without it.’
*Break for extended story time*
8:24 – ‘I have saved the economy. Now we need to pass a new jobs bill.’
8:25 – *The Republicans just gave their first faux cheer after Obama explained that businesses drive the economy. He looked as though he was hoping people would be impressed he’d come to that conclusion.*
8:26 – ‘Let us take from the rich and give to the poor.’
Wall Street is King John? He IS Robin Hood!
8:27 – ‘WE NEED FASTER TRAINS! I have decided to build really, fast, trains.’
8:28 – ‘We will pay people for being green (pilgrim).
This will help us save. See?’
8:30 – ‘George Bush destroyed an entire decade!’
8:31 – I am not a part of Washington. Washington is out to get you. I am for the people. I am just the President. I am not part of Washington…
We need to be more like China.
We are better than China.’
8:34 – ‘Let me tell you about some other things I’ve done… I invested in some sort of solar power that will probably cure cancer…
I have invested in newfangled batteries…’
8:35 – *He wants to drill for oil offshore!!! Wow. Where is this coming from?!*
‘My cap and trade bill will do great things!’
*Ohhh no… we’re back to that again?!…*
‘I know no one likes it.
People who disagree with ’overwhelming evidence’ for climate change obviously didn’t go to Harvard like I did.’
*GOP lawmakers start giggling*
*Obama snarls in their general direction*
8:37 – ‘I will double our exports in 5 years!’
Are you going to knit hats and sell them at a swap meet in Brussels?!?
8:39 – ‘I have given children the ability to read.’
*camera shows Secretary of Education… I’ve never seen that guy!*
8:41 – ‘Time to take college loans out of the private sector and give the responsibility to those who really know what they’re doing – the government.’
This is not socialism. This is the government giving you everything you need. There’s a difference. Really.
8:42 – He’s cleaving to his health insurance reform bill!
‘I know no one like my health care bill. Let me tell you a story from a letter I got…’
8:46 – ‘The more I spend, the more the deficit goes down… see?
I went to Harvard.’
8:49 – ‘Remember when Bill Clinton filled the land with wealth, prosperity, and pride?.
Remember when George Bush destroyed everything and made kind, tender grandmothers who bake cookies cry?!’
8:51 – *Prez proposes spending government freeze for next 3 years.*
8:55 – Super awkward moment: Obama tells Dems not to worry, spending freeze won’t take effect until next year…
Republicans burst out laughing…
Obama, clearly miffed… raises his finger like a bespectacled schoolmarm and lectures to them:
“That’s how budgeting works”
This makes Republicans laugh even harder.
8:57 – ‘I don’t work with lobyists.’
*Republicans laugh yet again*
8:58 – Obama lectures Supreme Court, sitting write smack in front of him, for striking down John McCain’s campaign finance reform bill as unconstitutional.
Supreme Court looks ticked and somewhat spooked. Sorta felt like Obama was pulling a Vito Corleone for a moment and the Supremes might want to worry about sleeping with the fishes sometime soon…
8:59 – “I’m not naive”
9:00 – “We can’t wage a perpetual campaign”
9:01 – Everyone else is motivated by politics. I am the embodiment of the will of people.
9:03 – “I’m not interested in litigating the past”
You certainly can sir. Choosing a dog is a difficult, difficult decision…
9:20 ‘We don’t quit, I don’t quit.’
AND SO IT ENDS!
Not only did President Obama not turn to the center as many had prophesied he would do… had to do tonight. Instead, he rooted his feet squarely into his idealogical ground and told us all (Massachusetts especially) that we were wrong and he was right. After a year of so, very, many, words and Blame It On Bush… methinks the veneer is beginning to wear mighty thin.
The Huckster appearing with Greta Van Sustren on FoxNews there.
Logic would dictate that the former Arkansan executive ought not use the phrase ‘likely the beginning of the reelection of BO‘, if he was intent on gearing up for a run at said BO in a couple years. I think we might have caught a candid window into the Huck’s thought process there. And lived to tell the tale.
There was already a good deal of scuttlebutt to the effect that Huckabee was enjoying his media ventures too much to want to get back into politics. In addition to his Fox News venture, he produces a daily radio commentary for ABC Radio. Also fueling speculation he’d stay away from the race was the recent tragedy in Seattle where a former Arkansas prisoner whose sentence was commuted by the former Governor murdered police officers in the line of duty.
If indeed Huckabee stays out of the fray, one of the key wild cards in the ’12 GOP primary will doubtless be his endorsement. The gravitas he commands in the evangelical movement could be a potent asset for the lucky candidate he selects (if he chooses to). Here’s guessing that nod goes to a hopeful not hailing from Massachusetts, and not named Mitt Romney.
In a non-Arkansan, non-political note… I’d like to offer warm and heartfelt congratulations to our friends at the blog Faith and Geekery as they celebrate their 1 year anniversary of existence this week! The collection of contributors there offers a great window into the intersection of Christian faith and technology, media, and all thinks geeky.
We’ve been pleased to feature FG editor Aaron White in the “Geek Beat” segment of the TWG Podcast and look forward to more of his audio appearances. Happy birthday, noble geeks.