Cross-posted to FreedomDemocrats .

During the Presidential campaign, Gene Healy at Reason wrote up an article about the Cult of the Presidency -- describing the unreasonable faith that many Americans place in the Presidency and its occupant* (covered by John here ). Despite the hypocritical right-wing hand-wringing over the implications of Obama's effectiveness in mass politics, Obama cannot take credit for inventing the Cult of the Presidency.

A number of recent events have vividly illustrated one long-standing aspect of the Presidential cult -- the idea that the President is the ultimate arbiter of cultural worth and the representative of a national consensus on cultural issues. These events showed that Americans expect the President to be the ultimate representative on issues as broad as military valor , piousness , and athletic accomplishment .

With regard to the Cramer vs. Stewart affair, Will Wilkinson offers some commentary based on this great piece by Glenn Greenwald .

Greenwald's main point:

...there's absolutely nothing about Cramer that is unique when it comes to our press corps. The behavior that Jon Stewart so expertly dissected last night is exactly what our press corps in general does --

...

While I'm not one to dwell on presidents, I found this by Jeff Hummel a little interesting...thought you all might too. I'm sure we've all seen rankings of the presidents. The usual suspects are always near the top: Lincoln, FDR, Washington, Wilson and maybe JFK. They say it takes crises to make a great president. Uneventful times, by this logic, tend to hurt a President's stature in the eyes of historians and political scientists who look to assess a value on the men who served in the White House. The times make the man in this sense.

I'd been lightly following this Clive Crook story from afar without reading the actual article. Then I saw, via Will Wilkinson , that it's still growing and that Clive's original article even got responses from the two high profile macroeconomists mentioned in the article: Barro and Krugman.

Hat tip Peter Boettke .

Hayek as a special on Meet the Press in 1975 discussing inflation, employment, stimulus, recessions and economic policy and monetary policy. A Gem. Well worth a listen. Much of the discussion is so very relevant to what we are seeing today. His answers with the benefit of hindsight only serve to make him more correct and more brilliant than he might have seemed live in 1975.

If this is true , it's a real downer for my hopes of Obama's economic outlook as president.

NOTE FOR FIRST TIME READERS: This post is not representative of the typical content on this site. The views expressed in the primary content of the diary are those of the author and should not reflect on any other members of the SwordsCrossed community. Some members of the community have expressed the desire to make an "affirmative statement that [this] diary does NOT reflect their sense of decency and appropriate discourse, nor that of many/most members of the SC community." Thank you.
-- Signed, The Author (On behalf of the site administrators and any offended community members.) [I concur with this statement. - Ender]

As many here at Swords Crossed are aware, I am a steadfast advocate for following the Golden Rule. So much so, in fact, that I assume that my political opponents are all honorable people who, themselves, likewise follow the Golden Rule. As such, I feel duty bound to treat Democrats and "liberals" the same way that they are treating people on my side of the political aisle. The logic being, of course, that since my opponents are following the Golden Rule that they must be treating me the way that they, in fact, want to be treated themselves.

I was surfing around the web looking for a piece of humor to mirror the satirical humor so often found on the liberal side of the web but from a right wing point of view. I found this piece from a random blogger who shall remain nameless on a website that shall likewise remain nameless, which fits the bill perfectly.

The author, not unlike myself, is angry about how cruel satirists can be when making their points. As such, the piece that follows targets left-wing satirists and their art by demonstrating the cruel realities of how their pieces are perceived by their political opponents.

See Story

Hat tip to Tyler Cowen .

Ben Casnocha summarizes a speech by the NYT's David Brooks. See link for Quick Time video version of speech.

* "I'll be brief because many of you are academics, and you're not here to hear me talk, you're here to hear yourselves talk."
* He likes Edmund Burke.
* People learn when there's an emotional connection.
* All factions of conservative movement united around distrust of government - this ain't enough.

I'm sure most people have probably heard Thomas Jefferson's oft-cited quote about government and newspapers:

"Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."

Yes. One of my favorite quotes from our third President. I can't say I disagree. :)

On that note, one would think Jefferson was a big fan of the press....perhaps not.

Consider:

Along with the Spitzer story, the Wright story is one that I've noticed being forced into the role of a big deal and exciting story while personally finding the Celebrity Rehab Reunion far more interesting...and I didn't think that was possible. :)

I really don't care in either case. But I don't pick the news cycles.

Anyway, Ezra Klein stuck a cord of incredible common sense on this matter and asks a good and simple question: (emphasis mine)

Well, probably not. But that's OK. He doesn't have to be. But it he's awfully libertarian-esque these days. I'll tell you one thing, though: Few things about politics bring a real smile to my face. But one of those things that does is when liberal concerns and sensibilities on outcomes are channeled through classical liberal/libertarian policy views. Not only does it bring a grin to the face of a libertarian like me but it also resonates with voters if given a chance...not only does it resonate, it's 100% correct! How about that?

Hat to Arnold Kling at EconLog

Ibsen Martinez writes about life in Chavez's Venezuela and follies of his policies.

Hat tip to Arnold Kling for pointing to this:

Austrian School Economist Peter Klein of the University of Missouri shares two great quotes from great thinkers that embody some of his views on democratic governance (and I wholeheartedly agree):

the typical citizen drops down to a lower level of mental performance as soon as he enters the political field. He argues and analyzes in a way which he would readily recognize as infantile within the sphere of his real interests.

A recent discussion about limited resources and economic growth and their relationship as it affects our sustainability got me thinking about a book I just finished last week: The Logic of Life by Tim Harford .

Politicians lie from time to time...some more than others. We all know that. Some others don't lie...they just don't tell the truth. And others do neither, they are just "equivocal". Yet others make claims and statements that look REALLY, REALLY bad when seen through the lens of history. Whether they are lying, not telling the truth, being equivocal or simply saying things that they don't necessarily agree with, it really doesn't matter. It still is worth a mention when we see one that jumps out with neon lights.

While all economists have an ideological bias...whether slight or pronounced, most whose blogs I read or come across tend to lack an overt partisan bias that overshadows their writing.

Oh wait...he was. :(

My, my, how he speaks differently when he isn't at the Fed .

Click ahead to about 3:50 for a passage and then to about 6:00. If you stand his rambling, double speaking, Greenspan-ese, start earlier.

David Frum is is trying to be cool . Yep, he sees other yawning beltway insiders taking silly pokes at Ron Paul that look like they took about 5 minutes of research....from reading other such pieces...and decides to join the fun. After all, other pundits are doing it, right?

Well, some people took notice of Frum's foppishness.

First, Tom Woods has a short piece called David Frum: I'm Smarter than Ron Paul

Woods:

My picks for "Person of the Year". These are NOT my predictions for Time Magazine, which will probably choose "Mom & Apple Pie". These are, in order, MY picks. It was tough to order 1 through 5 because any of them would be good choices.