My comment in WSJ magazine in response to an article about the Fiat 500 C, a small car that may be coming to the U.S.
I hope none of these people complaining about the safety of a small car are also people who quote Benjamin Franklin, “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” A small, economical car can give people a whole lot of liberty.
I saw there were 1200 comments for the WSJ article titled, “Court Strikes at Health Law,” which is the most I’ve ever seen. I tried to post the 1201th with the following:
The headline is stupid, dangerous, and Murdochish. The judges make rulings. They don’t “strike at” things. If they do, the reporters should present their evidence and impeachment hearings should begin.
So Congress wants to ban loud TV ads. I personally have no problem with loud TV ads. It’s the idiots who are on television in between the ads who are too loud for me, so I watch none of it.
Well, I did watch election night coverage once, back in 1982. And I sometimes join my wife in watching Big Ten football or basketball.
The bad part is that sometimes I’m inflicted with television noise in public places where it doesn’t belong: MacDonalds, the jury waiting room, hospital waiting rooms, gas stations. THAT is a public health hazard and it is offensive.
When it comes to banning things, I usually prefer social controls to federal government corruption and bureaucracy. But if government can’t get over its urge to ban things, it should channel its energies in a useful direction. It should ban TV in public places. Governments already ban smoking in hospitals and retail establishments. What’s the point of doing that and allowing a public health nuisance like TV?