"To hold that the Government unconstitutionally discriminates on the basis of viewpoint when it chooses to fund a program dedicated to advance certain permissible goals, because the program in advancing those goals necessarily
discourages alternative goals, would render numerous Government programs constitutionally suspect. When Congress established a National Endowment for
Democracy to encourage other countries to adopt democratic principles, it was not constitutionally required to fund a program to encourage competing lines of political philosophy such as communism and fascism. "
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Will President Obama (pictured on the LEFT, above) summon the courage to resist further taxpayer subsidies of GM, for instance ? Or will he find himself out-couraged by Maud Olofsson ?
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Friday, March 13, 2009
At least as reported, Stewart's criticism does not respond to the points that have brought Cramer so much publicity lately, namely, his criticism of President Obama's economic policies which, according to Cramer, are causing "the greatest destruction of wealth in our lifetime." See Cramer interviewed by Matt Lauer and Erin Burnett, here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c4SyrNdE5E
Maybe Stewart can tell us why a $ 1.7 trillion deficit, mostly directed towards enhancing consumption, plus surtaxes on our most productive citizens, is wise public policy in light of the vote of no confidence the markets have given the President's plan.
Friday, March 6, 2009
3) David Brooks of the New York Times is expressing buyers remorse regarding President Obama. Brooks now apparently thinks President Obama might be a liberal ! More on Brooks' reasoning and the Obama team's response, in a subsequent post.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
For a map of the comet's whereabouts in the night sky over ther next several nights, see the following entry on Flickr.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Barone's argument for decentralization reminds me of a famous judicial opinion that justified so-called "Corporate Social Responsibility," A.P. Smith Manufacturing Company vs. Barlow, 90 A.2d 581 (New Jersey 1953). There several shareholders challenged the corporation's gift of $1,500 to Princeton University. The New Jersey Supreme Court rejected the challenge, holding that, absent countervailing language in the corporate charter, a firm's directors were free to make such gifts. The opinion rested in part on testimony by former executives in other firms, including U.S. Steel, to the effect that corportate support for independent centers of learning helped create the conditions necessary for a thriving free society.
"Mr. Irving S. Olds, former Chairman of the Board of US Steel, opined that . . . . 'Capitalism and free enterprise owe their survival in no small degree to the existence of our private, independent universities' and that if American business does not aid in their maintenance it is not 'properly protecting the long-range interest of its stockholders, its employees and its customers.' Similarly, Dr. Harold W. Dodds, President of Princeton University, suggested that if private institutions of higher learning were replaced by governmental institutions our society would be vastly different and private enterprise in other fields would fade out rather promptly. Further on he stated that 'democratic society will not long endure if it does not nourish within itself strong centers of non-governmental fountains of knowledge, opinions of all sorts not governmentally or politically originated. If the time comes when all these centers are absorbed into government, then freedom as we know it, I
submit, is at an end.'"
Let's hope that Congress rejects this proposal, and not simply because our most productive citizens already pay enough in taxes !