07 Jan 2015

Potpourri

Potpourri 11 Comments

==> I wonder if this is fake, but if it’s real, it’s pretty hilarious. Apparently Jimmy Fallon had a shot with Nicole Kidman but he blew it. (You just need to watch the first 3 minutes.)

==> My article in National Review Online (my first ever?) on why conservatives shouldn’t flirt with a carbon tax.

==> This story has been making the rounds: Apparently Harvard professors are upset at the consequences of ObamaCare.

==> David R. Henderson on the NYPD’s “reverse Washington Monument strategy.” In the end, it all makes perfect sense if the cops are focusing on the politicians, rather than the public.

==> Scott Sumner busts Kevin Drum.

11 Responses to “Potpourri”

  1. Z says:

    It’s probably fake. But I don’t get the fascination with celebrities. I would never go out with Nicole Kidman or Angelina Jolie or whoever. I’m not personally more attracted to them because they are celebrities or whatever. But I suppose value is subjective, so to each his own.

    • Bob Murphy says:

      Nicole and Angelina are going to be so disappointed to read that.

      • Z says:

        Don’t worry, the indifference is mutual.

    • Ben B says:

      So you wouldn’t date them because everyone else likes them for reasons that you wouldn’t like them?

      • Z says:

        No, I just mean the fact that they are famous doesn’t add anything to the equation for me. I would decide if I liked them independent of that factor. The point is, when Bob wrote “Apparently Jimmy Fallon had a shot with Nicole Kidman but he blew it” as if Jimmy is an idiot for blowing it with the great Kidman. From the context, I’m betting a large part of why he wrote it that way is because Kidman is a beautiful famous woman. Famous is a large factor implied here. Outer beauty is also a large factor and the two combine synergistically in the minds of the imbecile masses.

    • Andrew_FL says:

      Have you considered that you have the causality backwards, Z? That they are famous at least in part because (to most people) they are attractive? And not that they are only deemed attractive because they are famous?

      There are cases where I’d agree with you ’cause there are some celebrities people insist are good looking that really…aren’t, as far as I can tell, by what I assume to be conventional standards. But some of them really are pretty gorgeous.

      Although that could be part of a feedback loop of people who parlay their attractiveness into a career they use to pay to improve or maintain their appearance.

      • Z says:

        I don’t particularly find her more gorgeous than the average woman. Maybe she has more money and time to spend on applying the proper amount of makeup and what not, but that’s about it. And I guess I’ve just never been intimidated by beautiful women. Not that I think I’m super attractive, have high self esteem, or am a narcissist, but I just don’t have that inferiority complex around almost anyone. I’m not really a humanist of the secular or religious variety, so I value humanity probably a lot less than almost any of you on this site for most all characteristics, and beauty is one of those.

        • skylien says:

          Z,

          Does ‘Z’ stand for Zombie?

          đŸ˜‰

          • Z says:

            It stands for Zebra Brains.

      • Harold says:

        If attractiveness was the main reason for fame, we would be able to pick future stars early. Whilst attractiveness is certainly a part of it, there are very many equally attractive and motivatedpeople who are not so successful.

    • guest says:

      “I love Kieth Urban, too!”

      BAHAHAH!

      Before this interview, there was only Conan, who was the true heir to Late Night.

      Fallon is the MAN!

Leave a Reply