Falling out of the clown car, down the stairs and into the electric eel pond

William,

Do you have any opinion whatsoever with respect to Rand Paul.

He is in your above graphic on the RHS.

As for kicking butt, our only hope is in 2016, as we are stuck with two chambers chuck full of Deniers for the next two years.

I am really hoping that the R's nominate RP. I'm actually quite giddy just thinking about it. Then the D's could dig up Richard Nixon and nominate his corpse, as Nixon would now be considered to the left of all the D's (Bernie Sanders is an I, he was the mayor of my hometown, Burlington, VT, he ran at that time under the Socialist Party, 2 (or 3) terms).

The corpse would probably beat his living 1972 electoral results (KY still has fewer EC votes than MA had when Teddy ran for POTUS).

Signed,
Sicko

Sane response, yes it is sane, by Libertarian standards.

http://raikoth.net/libertarian.html#coordination_problems

We need a King of the Atmosphere.

[Declaring a King is drastic; that implies ownership, which that FAQ either doesn't realise, or deliberately evades -W]

Arguably, we are “kicking their butt”

That may be true in other parts of the world, but given who is running things on Capitol Hill these days, that isn't true of the US. The one part of the world that has seen persistent negative temperature anomalies the past two winters happens to include both Washington and New York, which is what led to Inhofe's snowball stunt a few months ago.

@1: I don't expect Rand Paul to win the Republican nomination for President. For one, the money people in the Republican party seem to be backing other candidates (though they have not yet agreed on a candidate). For another, Paul's senate seat is up for election next year, and while some states allow a candidate to appear on both the President/VP line and the Senate line, Kentucky is not among those states. So Paul will have to decide between persisting in his Presidential run or defending his seat--and the Democrats have a plausible potential candidate for that seat in Gov. Beshear, who is term-limited in his current office. I expect Paul to drop the Presidential run no later than the week of the New Hampshire primary. Jeb Bush and Scott Walker are the ones who so far have attracted interest from the money people, and if that remains true, one of those two will win the nomination. Bush should be easy to beat in the general election, for obvious reasons, but underestimate Scott Walker at your peril.

What is the root of most land ownership?

I should give an answer, but should be obvious to anyone that thinks. Not all Libertarians, however. So here are some clues. Who owns your house, and why? Does it trace back to William the Conqueror? How did William the Conqueror get title? An arrow in the eye of Harold Godwinson is one account.

Cripes Phil, does Eli have to say it?

William,

Well in other news (meaning off topic), the ATTP RPSr thread has gone into some sort of partial Limbo.

That is all.

(please delete this post too, as you see fit).

Actually, on 2nd thought, it's nighttime across the pond, posts are probably now turned off (given its relative contentiousness).

This latest salient from Team Cuccinelli lacks the gravitas of Mary Baker Eddy's witchcraft & telepathy lawsuit against Daniel Spofford, of Salem, Massachusetts, for practicing mesmerism, on Christian Scientist, Lucretia Brown, who in 1878 said that he had bewitched her.

As this was before the discovery of tin foil hats, Eddy organized a 24-hour watch on spofford, instructing 12 students to think about him for two hours each to block malicious mesmerism. Though she arrived at the court with 20 supporters, Judge Horace Gray dismissed the case.

The attempt to have Spofford tried did not end of the dispute. In October 1878 Eddy's husband and another student were charged with conspiring to murder Spofford. A barman said they had offered him $500 to do it; but the charges were dropped when a witness retracted his statement. Eddy attributed the allegation to a plot by former students to undermine sales of the second edition of Science and Health, just published.

Clearly a case in which the Wiki has outdone the Brittanica.

"Declaring a King is drastic; that implies ownership, which that FAQ either doesn’t realise, or deliberately evades -W"

Ownership's root is the use of force or the threat of use of force. Declaring a King requires only a successful use of force or the successful threat of force. Ownership follows. See William the Conqueror, etc. Etc.

It's too bad, in some ways, that there isn't a large low altitude tropical country, nuke armed to the teeth, paranoid, slightly crazy in a few other ways and realizing that their future as a nation completely depended on preventing large amounts of climate change.

Is that what Eli was suggesting I say?

Actually, in thus case, I despite all the GMU / Cuccinelli connections, i'd guess this was yet another dubious Wegman/Said moneymaking idea, likely one that GMU/Kochs had nothing to do with. As a result, some useful documents public that weren't.

They would have been wise to have watched Monty Python Holy Grail scene *before* attacking the rabbit (not Eli, although he has teeth too).

Well, to be honest Eli was more into property is theft which has a nice effect on libertarians, and of course, as Harold would point out good title cannot be found.. Yet Phil has an excellent point.

{property is theft is a pretty slogan but once people own houses and money they tend to give up such conceits -W]

Phil, would you settle for Pakistan when the wet bulb temperature goes above 37 C in the Indus Valley?

King Harold got the point. As well as the shaft. But lost the title.

Pakistan? Who knows what the future holds?

John Quiggen's second lesson at Crooked Timber the one the Weasel has not learned

"To understand the central issues in economic policy debates, we need not one lesson, but two. The first lesson, implicit in Hazlitt’s One Lesson is:

Lesson 1: Market prices reflect and determine opportunity costs faced by consumers and producers.

The second lesson is the product of more than two centuries of study of the way markets work, and the reasons that they often fail to work as they should:

Lesson 2: Market prices don’t reflect all the opportunity costs we face as a society."

[Eli, please try to keep up. The prior post was all about externality costs. What you're presenting as a shiny new idea that others are unaware of is in fact the bleedin' obvious -W]

> they tend to give up such conceits -W]
Some memories last longer.

(Off topic) Arctic sea ice is starting to look interesting. Record low extent for the date, with warm temperatures forecast for the next week over much of the Arctic Ocean. Not much noise from the Nevenish crowd, at least yet. Will be interesting to watch.

Coordination problem seems to be ignored, as is typical for Libertarian types. Consider Russia vs Pakistan, for example. The possible gains from 2C of climate change seem to me to be substantial to Russia, and the possible loss from climate change seems to be to be substantial for Pakistan. I can see why Pakistan might agree to impose an internal carbon tax, even if all other countries didn't. Russia, on the other hand...

After a pretty miserable May I reckon Yorkshire stands to gain a lot from 2C of climate change!

[You're one of the few people who had free choice of where to live, so don't complain -W]