David McElroy

If you haven’t yet seen John Stossel’s show from this week, please check out this six-minute video clip in which Michael Strong and his wife, Magatte Wade, discuss the basic idea behind free cities. Stossel’s show on Fox Business Channel this week was called “If Libertarians Were in Charge” and discusses various ways in which freedom would affect how we live. (You can see other clips from the show at the link, but the one I most want you to watch is the one about free cities right here.) In particular, Strong and Wade suggest that Native Americans and Africans could reduce or eliminate poverty if they would turn to freedom and away from stifling regulation.

I have no sympathy for Anwar al-Aulaqi. From all appearances, this native of New Mexico was a bad guy who was involved in trying to recruit fellow Americans to carry out criminal acts inside the United States. But we’re supposed to be a nation of laws. The U.S. government proved that isn’t the case when it assassinated him this week.

After Barack Obama ordered him killed, government spin masters have gone into overdrive to justify it. Before he was murdered, he was just a radical cleric working to recruit others. Now that he’s dead — and government officials need to justify it — he’s being referred to as the “chief of external operations” for al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen. Whoever made that up deserves some sort of prize for spin.

Most politicians were busy praising the Obama administration for al-Aulaqi’s death Friday, because it’s the popular position to take. In quote after quote from politicians talking about how it was a big step forward in the “war on terror,” nobody mentioned the simple and obvious point that the man was a U.S. citizen, deserving of the protections of our laws and Constitution — even though he’s turned against the country.

Keep Reading

When discussing NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, I have trouble deciding whether “arrogant” or “condescending” is a better word to describe him. Based on his latest statement at the UN last week, it’s only fair to use both, at a minimum.

What do you believe government’s “highest duty” is? If you still believe coercive government is legitimate, what is its top priority? When he’s not being hugged by giant hotdogs, Bloomberg apparently believes it’s government’s primary duty to make sure you that you make healthy decisions for your life, including forcing you to eat as he thinks you should eat:

Speaking on the government’s role in diet and health last week, Bloomberg told the UN General Assembly, “There are powers only governments can exercise, policies only governments can mandate and enforce and results only governments can achieve. To halt the worldwide epidemic of non-communicable diseases, governments at all levels must make healthy solutions the default social option. That is ultimately government’s highest duty.”

Bloomberg has been known for years for his efforts to force restaurants to cut down on the amount of salt they use, even though there’s never been a real scientific basis for the recommendation to cut salt intake. But once food nannies get something in their minds, the actual facts don’t matter. All that matters is forcing you to obey them.

Keep Reading