Edmund Burke Photo: Wikimedia

Jonathan Adler argues that many self-described followers of Edmund Burke are anything but: “The institutions [David] Brooks would defend today bear no resemblance to the organic institutions Burke sought to protect.  Indeed, they have crowded out and, in some cases crushed, the little platoons upon which social order depends.  So the meaningful question for a true Burkean is not whether to oppose a Jacobin revolution, but what to do after such a revolution has already taken place.”

In the latest issue of A List Apart, Ethan Marcotte explains how to use CSS style sheets to create a web site that scales well to varying screen resolutions. For example, he uses CSS media queries to create a single page that renders well on an iPhone, on a standard monitor and on a wide-screen monitor. I’ve implemented some of his techniques on this page to make an iPhone-friendly version.

Europe’s “current welfare state is unaffordable…The crisis has made the day of reckoning closer by several years in virtually all the industrial countries.”

And last but not least, Google has made several excellent fonts available for free use on other sites through a simple CSS call. OFL Sorts Mill Goudy TT is now the default font for this  site.

Would the Dupont Circle CVS perform better with open windows instead of opaque displays? Photo: M.V. Jantzen

Window-shopping isn’t what it used to be, Philip Kennicott explains in the Washington Post. In an effort to maximize shelf space, all too many D.C. retailers like CVS block their windows, which reduces engagement with passers-by. I wonder: have retailers ever tested whether an engaging, inviting storefront might improve sales and offset revenues from lost shelving? (via GGW).

Ross Douthat says Kentucky Senate candidate Rand Paul is a prime example of why politicians must exercise prudence in addition to principle. Julian Sanchez makes a similar point: “Libertarians need to think harder about how our principles should degrade elegantly, how they can guide us through a fallen world where the live political options seldom afford a full escape from injustice.”

Michael Perkins argues that federal workers shouldn’t get effectively unlimited mass-transit benefits, and suggests instead a benefit that can be spent on any form of transportation. But why stop there? Why not eliminate the benefit altogether and increase salaries accordingly, allowing workers to spend their incomes as they see fit? Not only would this remove the distortions Perkins rightly decries, but it would free workers to choose their own spending priorities.

This Washington Post headline raised hopes, but only briefly, that President Obama had proposed spending cuts: “Democrats cautious on Obama’s spending-cut proposal.” Alas, it refers only to the President’s (important) assertion of budgetary authority—but not to any evidence that he plans any actual reduction in outlays.

And last but not least, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has released a clever ad poking fun at many prominent critics of her state’s immigration law:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6qEQ-KnitQ

Will Adam Smith’s principles prevail? Photo: Wikimedia

The new culture war “is not a fight over guns, gays or abortion,” Arthur Brooks argues, but a battle between free enterprise and statism. Supporters of free enterprise need to make a moral case for their system, he writes, to demonstrate that “earned success” is superior to dependence on government, and not simply hold that free enterprise delivers better material results.

Speaking of dependence on government, the New York Times claims that the insufficiency of one government subsidy, for child care, is driving families onto another government subsidy, welfare. However did people cope before government provided everything?

Renderings of the proposed Purple Line in Maryland show there’s no reason transit has to be ugly (link in PDF). While landscaping may add to the project’s cost, it’s worth remembering that aesthetics matter and that there’s a difference between lowering costs and cutting corners.

The Atlantic is running a special report on the changing American city. Every article is worth a read. Progressives have for too long dominated debates over urban policy; it behooves conservatives to engage this debate head-on and offer real solutions to problems facing cities.

And last but not least, Google has announced it will make its Pac-Man doodle permanently available.

Rand Paul. Photo: Gage Skidmore

Kentucky Senate candidate Rand Paul, son of Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), won the Republican primary on Tuesday in part by smoothing over differences with traditional conservatives, as David Weigel explains. Can this new, libertarian-leaning fusionism prevail in November?

Paul seems to have already gotten himself in some trouble for his  remarks about the Civil Rights Act. Mark Tapscott warns that the liberal-leaning media is likely to jump all over such rookie mistakes.

Cautioning that Paul’s particular brand of conservatism may not be viable outside Kentucky, Daniel Larison outlines the younger Paul’s political beliefs:

‘

First of all, Paul is one of a very few Republican candidates in the country who is truly serious in his desire for fiscal responsibility. In his hostility to expansive government and reckless spending, he does not make exceptions for military spending, and he is appropriately skeptical of government power whether it comes in the form of military adventurism and empire-building or sweeping social legislation and bailouts.

Speaking of sweeping legislation, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget offers a budget simulator that challenges you to push the federal debt under 60 percent of GDP by 2018. It’s curious that many (though not all) of its fixes amount to fiddling around the edges, where more substantial reforms, like tax simplification or paring back of whole spending programs, may be more appropriate. Special challenge: win the game without imposing onerous new taxes!

The Library of Congress’ online catalog includes several great old pictures of Dupont Circle, including this one of the circle before the fountain was installed:

Sean Fieler and Jeffrey bell ask whether we should revisit the gold standard as one way to rein in runaway government.

Last but not least, Reihan Salam explores whether legislation to limit ATM fees will be counterproductive. He cites a fun article on the topic by Thomas Hazlett, who sarcastically asks, “can anyone explain why at a price of $0, quantity supplied is nil?”

The government seems determined to enforce Matthew 26:11. A new poverty metric would count as poor not those living in real destitution but those living in relative destitution.

In the Washington Post, Brian Frosh and Jamie Raskin argue that if progressives want to undo the effects of Citizens United—a bad idea, to be sure—they ought to turn to the states, which retain broad regulatory powers.  (Full disclosure: Brian is a cousin.)

And last but not least, an amusing video of President George W. Bush wiping his hand on his predecessor:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oHOUnQ0gYI

Steven Spruiell offers a three-step guide to socializing an industry: 1) the government subsidizes private firms; 2) the government creates a “public option” to “compete” with the private firms that have grown fat on subsidies; 3) the government federalizes the whole industry on the grounds that the “public option” is cheaper and doesn’t funnel money to private firms. Solution: don’t subsidize industries in the first place.

Apropos of nationalizing firms, Rep. Barney Frank worries that investments in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac might not be terribly sound. Good thing the federal government “invested” so much money on behalf of taxpayers over the past year!

While we’re on the subject of bad ideas, FEMA’s director has proposed federal disaster insurance as an alternative to federal bailouts for those who suffer a catastrophe. Of course, like federal flood insurance, such a policy effectively rewards those who choose to live in high-risk areas. Furthermore, disaster relief isn’t necessarily a federal responsibility at all, as President Calvin Coolidge argued after the 1927 Mississippi floods.

And last but not least, Armor Games offers an addictive distraction from this week’s gloomy politics (via Jonah Goldberg), and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund is raising money for an education center.

Newsweek says neoconservatism is alive and kicking.

CAP responds to Citizens United:  ”Indeed, with hundreds of billions of dollars of corporate profits at stake every time Congress begins a session, wealthy corporations would be foolish not to spend tens of billions of dollars every election cycle to make sure that their interests are protected.” Of course, it’s the fact that billions are at stake whenever Congress meets that’s the real problem. Ilya Somin, meanwhile, defends free speech rights.

And finally, Conan O’Brien stays classy in his final Tonight Show.

Bad news: America’s economy is less free now than it was a year ago.

The Agitator makes the case that donations in response to disaster don’t constitute fundraising as such.

Daniel Larison asks a good question: are illiberal governments necessarily a threat to free governments?

What happens when science becomes politicized? The truth is sacrificed to the “greater good.”