Thoughts from Maharrey Head

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I talk about freedom of speech in light of Kathy Griffin's photo with Trump's severed head. To visit the show notes page, click here: http://bit.ly/2qEKxrm

Comedian Kathy Griffin sparked the brouhaha of the week when a picture of her holding the likeness of Pres. Trump’s severed head surfaced. Social media went nuts. Condemnation and outrage cascaded down from the right. Even the left seemed to try to distance itself from the image. Griffin apologized, and CNN fired her from hosting its New Year’s Eve gala.

The picture raises some important free speech issues. While I didn’t hear anybody from the right calling for government action to punish Griffin’s gruesome display, there was almost universal pleasure in CNN’s decision to can her. The mantra goes something like this. “Yes, she has a right to free speech, but there will be consequences!”

Let me say this emphatically: If you want “consequences” for free speech, you don’t really believe in free speech.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I channel John Stuart Mill and talk about why censorship – whether achieved through government, private entities, or social pressure, is dangerous for liberty.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I talk about the preamble to the US Constitution - what it tells us and what it doesn't.

In this episode of Thoughts form Maharrey Head, I talk about how Donald Trump proves we shouldn't let the president hold the leash restraining the dog of war. To visit the show notes page, click here: http://bit.ly/2qBlI2j

In a recent Facebook post, I suggested that with all of the trouble swirling around his administration, it was time for Trump to bomb something. Not three hours later, he did.

Randolph Bourne famously said, “war is the health of the state.” It is also the health of a presidency.

The founding generation understood the dangers of placing the power to make war in the hands of the president. The Constitution specifically prohibits this. As Thomas Jefferson said, it places “one effectual check to the Dog of war, by transferring the power of letting him loose from the executive to the Legislative body.”

Trump – and virtually every other modern president – proves the founding generation’s wisdom.

Now if we would only follow it.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I discuss the president and the dog of war.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I talk about the absurdity of "Red Team" vs. "Blue Team" politics. Click here to visit the show notes page: http://bit.ly/2pG6KDU

This week’s political brouhaha erupted when Pres. Trump fired FBI director James Comey in the midst of an investigation into Russian ties – or something. The firing caused a total freakout on the left – just months after the same people called for Comey’s head because of his probes into Hillary Clinton’s shenanigans.

Another “pass the popcorn” moment in American politics.

Meanwhile, a lot of Republicans have decided that nobody should do anything to limit the actions of the federal government. You know, the same people who screamed bloody murder about everything Barack Obama did for 8 years. Their guy is in charge now, so full steam ahead.

This is what politics has devolved to in America. Everything my team does – good. Everything their team does – bad.

In this episode of the podcast, I talk about the absurdity of this red team vs. blue team mentality.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I talk about the "provide for the common defense" clause in the Constitution. To visit the show notes page, click here: http://bit.ly/2pdwYh4

May 5, 2017

Michael Maharrey

Thoughts from Maharrey Head

Leave a comment

{ Edit }

“10 Minutes Closer to Freedom”

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I talk about the “provide for for the common defense” clause in the Constitution.

Progressives have long used “general welfare” as an “anything and everything” clause to justify all kinds of unconstitutional overreach, from federal meddling in education to national healthcare. The right generally scoffs at this bastardization of the Constitution – and rightly so. But more and more, I’m hearing conservatives and Republicans use the term “provide for the common defense” in the exact same way. They essentially turned these words into a right-wing version of the general welfare clause.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I explain why neither phrase justifies expansive federal power.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I explain why the recent federal court decision on Pres. Trump's sanctuary city order was a win for the Constitution. You can visit the show notes page here: http://bit.ly/2oEHqCZ

Earlier this week, U.S. District Judge William Orrick slapped an injunction on Trump’s executive order relating to so-called sanctuary cities. The EO set the stage to punish cities that refuse to participate in immigration enforcement by withholding federal funding. Santa Clara County and San Francisco, California, challenged the EO in federal court on a number of grounds. Orrick agreed that the administration overreached and stopped enforcement of parts of the order.

Conservatives were outraged by the decision. Social media erupted with condemnation of Orrick and complaints about “liberal, activist judges.”

But in fact, at least one aspect of the judge’s decision was a huge win for the Tenth Amendment, separation of powers and an important legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I break down with the judge’s ruling and explain why conservatives should cheer it as a victory for the Constitution. Along the way, I point out the danger of basing you constitutional principles on policy preferences.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I talk about "fake news." To visit the show notes page, click here: http://bit.ly/2plPwjy

There’s been a lot of talk about “fake news” over the last several months. But what exactly is fake news? Why the sudden obsession with rooting it out? And can we really be sure what we get from so-called “mainstream” sources is “real” news?

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I talk about the media, the concept of fake news, and how it’s used to marginalize unapproved opinions.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I talk about outrage culture. To visit the show notes page, click here: http://bit.ly/2ounn6w

I'm outraged!!

Aren't you?

Last week, video of security dragging a United Airlines passenger off a flight sparked outrage. The backlash caused United stock to stumble. Social media continues to churn the story to this day.

But that wasn't the only source of outrage last week. Trump press secretary Sean Spicer whipped everybody into a frenzy when he suggested the Nazis didn't use chemical weapons. And then there was the actual use of chemical weapons. Outrage over a Sarin gas attack allegedly launched by the Syrian government led the U.S. to lob cruise missiles at a government airbase in Syria.

Watching reaction to these three events unfold, I noticed some commonality. There is a definite outrage culture growing in society. Don't get me wrong, there are certainly good reason to become outraged. But outrage culture grows out of a group-think mentality and it has some perverse consequences. Namely, it encourages emotional reactions instead of thoughtful response. That often ends poorly.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I talk about outrage culture, and try to apply a little critical thinking to the various outrages of the past week.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I answer listener questions on topics ranging from the federal government's constitutional power over immigration to the NHL playoffs. To visit the show notes page, click here; http://bit.ly/2oJEjt3

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I talk about the size and scope of society, and why it matters. For the show notes page, click here: http://bit.ly/2ohgiZo

Whenever I talk about political or social issues, at some point somebody in the conversation will say, “We need to …”

“We need to provide healthcare.”

“We need to educate our kids.”

“We need to take care of the poor.

This raises an important question: who’s we? In other words, how should we conceive of our society? What is its scope and scale?

Americans generally think of “we” as the United States – all 320-plus million of us. But is this really a good conception of society? Can you really have a functioning society made up of so many millions of people spread out over thousands of miles? Or should we perhaps consider viewing things through a narrower lens?

Over the last 100 years, the federal government has taken on more roles that used to be carried out at the state and local level. The founding generation believed this type of micromanaging government wouldn’t work if imposed over a large area. In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I talk about the scope of society, and I make the case that for most things, we need to think more locally.