Originally uploaded by noonespillow.

In the Washington Times Walter Williams writes:

Many think things can be changed by electing different politicians. But I ask: Given the incentives politicians face, why should we expect one politician to differ significantly from another? We should focus less on personalities and more on rules.
The kind of rules we should have are the kind that we would make if our worst enemy were in charge. My mother created a mini-version of such a rule. Sometimes she would ask either me or my sister to evenly divide the last piece of cake or pie to share between us. More times than not, an argument ensued about the fairness of the division. Those arguments ended with Mom’s rule: Whoever cuts the cake lets the other take the first piece. As if by magic or divine intervention, fairness emerged and arguments ended. No matter who did the cutting, there was an even division.
…
We have a set of rules that are known, neutral and intended to be durable. Those rules were created by our founders and embodied in the U.S. Constitution. Those rules have been weakened by a Congress of both parties that picks winners and losers in the game of life. The U.S. Supreme Court, intended to be a neutral referee, has forsaken that role and become a participant. All of this means we can expect a future of bitterly fought elections and enhanced conflict.

Henry Rollins says that he “hates with style and creativity.” I don’t have any style and creativity when it comes to Dick Pound, the head of the World Anti-Doping Agency–I despise him. I despise him because he has an important job, policing doping in sports and yet, he saying asinine things and weaken the importance of his job and the WADA. Here’s the NY Times on Pound:

Thinking about Landis seemed to enliven him. He spoke of the cyclist as if he were some sleazy perp just collared by the vice squad.

If you want to know why endurance athletes dope, then read this article, Drug Test – A Cautionary Tale from Outside Magazine. It sounds like HGH and EPO can produce really impressive results.

A wind turbine, originally uploaded by the_chemist.

The NY Times has produced a couple good articles lately on the realities of our energy situation and global warming. This article discusses the realities of wind energy. Basically wind energy is nice, but wind farms only produce energy when the wind is blowing and the wind doesn’t usually blow during periods of peak energy demand. This means that wind energy doesn’t reduce the amount of fossil fuel power plants we need to build, only how much we need to run them.

There is still hope for good journalism.

On Cafe Hayek, Don Boudreaux post a great letter to the editor for Andy Morriss:

Sir,

Bono is following up on his hug of German Prime Minister Angela Merkel at Davos last January and with a visit to Germany to launch

Rev. Robert Sirico explains why capitalism is moral.