Team USA sponsor Liberty Mutual to air ads during the Olympics

Posted on by

Screen-grab from Liberty Mutual ad.

By Chris Reidy/Globe Staff/February 6, 2014

Liberty Mutual Insurance, the large Boston-based insurance company, is getting ready to air new TV ads tied to its Olympic sponsorship of Team USA.

The ads, which were created by the companys long-time ad agency Hill Holliday of Boston, feature Olympic athletes from the past who overcame personal setbacks to go on to later triumphs. A subplot of the ads is that Liberty Mutual can help its customers come back from their own setbacks, such as natural disasters and car accidents, so they can move on with their lives.

For every setback, theres a chance to come back and rise, Paul Alexander, the companys chief communications officer, said. And insurance can be the bridge between the setback and the comeback.

This is Liberty Mutuals first Olympics, said Alexander, who noted that Liberty Mutual is the only Boston-based company to be a Team USA sponsor.

After debuting on NBC during the Opening Ceremonies of the Winter Games, the broadcast spots will continue to air throughout the Olympic Winter Games coverage on NBCs family of broadcast networks and will be supported by a significant number of additional broadcast assets, including billboard and bumpers, to promote Liberty Mutual Insurances status as official partner of the USOC and Team USA, Liberty Mutual said.

Some other insurance companies use their advertising to boast of having the lowest rates. Liberty Mutual, in contrast, sees its target audience as adults between 35 and 54 who are willing to pay a little more for better coverage and service, Alexander said.

Liberty Mutuals Olympics ads are not just about trying to sell insurance; they are also about trying to energize the companys employees. Over the past 12 months or so, the company as organized a series of employee events at which past Olympians put in appearances.

Its about building pride, excitement, motivation, and engagement, Alexander said of this effort. With these events, weve touched 30,000 of our 40,000 employees.

Here is the original post:

Team USA sponsor Liberty Mutual to air ads during the Olympics

Thoughts on Cass Sunsteins criticisms of libertarianism …

Posted on by

Harvard Law Professor (and recent OIRA head) Cass Sunstein has had some columns lately on Bloomberg View that seem to be squarely in my wheelhouse as an originalist and a libertarian. The most recent one is Resist the Sirens Call of Originalism. Before that was How to Spot a Paranoid Libertarian.

The columns have a striking similarity, in that they both attack extremist or caricatured versions of originalism and libertarianism, and appear to concede that the moderate version has some virtues.

Paranoid libertarianism, says Sunstein, is defined by five characteristics: 1, a belief that government will inevitably abuse its authority in any given area; 2, a presumption of bad faith by government officials; 3, a sense of victimization; 4, a refusal to engage in tradeoffs; and 5, an enthusiasm for slippery slope arguments. (These characteristics seem overlapping to me.)

Yet so far as I can tell, Sunsteins criticism of the category has nothing to do with non-paranoid libertarians, or with those who identify as classical liberals. For a good example on the other side, see this recent column by Richard Epstein, who distinguishes classical liberalism from libertarianism.

It is a little less transparent, but the same thing seems to be going on in Sunsteins column on originalism. Sunsteins three objections to originalism are 1, that the Constitution itself may not embrace originalism since it uses abstract terms; 2, some things (like wire-tapping) were unanticipated by the framers; and 3, originalism would deeply unsettle modern law, unless it embraces precedent, in which case it doesnt count as originalism.

Objections 1 and 2 are simply not true of most sophisticated originalists, who acknowledge that when a constitutional provision was intended to have broad or evolving scope, the originalist thing to do is to give it broad or evolving scope. (This also makes it easy to accommodate new situations.)

To be sure, originalists do sometimes argue that people like Sunstein are far too quick to assume that a provision is broad and abstract, but this a difference in application, not theory. Serious originalists ought to agree with Sunstein that a provision should not be interpreted to be more originalist than it was originally intended to be.

Objection 3 brings us back to a recurring theme of my recent originalist posts. Critics of originalism dont get to just declare that embracing precedent which nearly all originalists do, to differing extents is not the originalist position. Or if they do wish to define originalism so as to exclude most of its practioners, then they ought to be clear that they are attacking only an extreme version of the theory.

So it seems to me that the upshot of Sunsteins columns ought to be: extreme originalism and paranoid libertarianism are bad, though regular originalism and libertarianism are (apparently?) fine. Yet I fear that by the fallacy of mood affiliation, readers may think Sunstein has also struck a blow against regular originalism and regular libertarianism.

Visit link:

Thoughts on Cass Sunsteins criticisms of libertarianism ...

Libertarianism | graalbones

Posted on by

The idea that one may get along without the help of others is so obviously false that its affirmation amounts to a confession of some form of ignorance at best. One cannot grow to adulthood without help from others. That should settle the matter. Apparently however, some adults believe themselves capable of getting along without the help of others. To this I would simply say Show me. Can the entrepreneur get along without customers, or the industrialist without workers? The simple truth is, they cannot. Yet somehow I dont expect the simple truth to be taken seriously, which is a sign of something. They tend to regard their customers or workers as interchangeable parts. They tend to think that they are therefore more needed than in need. But this is not the normal state of affairs. Yes, the addict needs the dealer more than the dealer needs him. But non-addicts do not need the dealer at all. Likewise, those not addicted to convenience can do without the vast majority of what the industrialist and the entrepreneur have to offer. Now all of this is rather obvious. What blinds us to it is our addiction to convenience. (I say our to include myself as such an addict. My only advantage is to have recognized the problem.)

Like Loading...

. Bookmark the

.

Go here to read the rest:

Libertarianism | graalbones

Rand Paul tries to sell social conservatives on libertarianism

Posted on by

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul is, from all indications, planning to run for president in 2016. Yet while Tea Party Republicans love Paul in part for his known affinity for libertarianism, that same reputation poses a bit of an obstacle for Paul when it comes to wooing social conservatives, who tend to see libertarianism as morally bankrupt and depraved. If Paul wants to have any shot at being the GOPs nominee in 2016, hell have to either win over, or at least placate, these still-vital members of the GOP coalition.

Thats the context you need to understand to interpret Pauls recent speech for the American Principles Project(APP), a right-wing activist group that holds very conservative views on abortion and same-sex marriage.

While speaking to the APP, the anti-choice Paul tried to assuage his audiences fears by insisting that libertarianism and social conservatism can work together in perfect harmony. To some, thats sort of still a bad word, Paul said of libertarianism. To others, its a word that may expand the party.

Libertarian doesnt mean libertine, Paul continued. To many of us, libertarian means freedom and liberty. But we also see that freedom needs tradition.

Paul then tried to tie his support for prison reform as fundamentally Christian in nature. I think there are things we can and should talk about, as Christians, who believe in forgiveness, Paul said.I think the criminal justice system should have some element of forgiveness.

Hoping to seal the deal, Paul then played his trump card: implicitly comparing himself to Ronald Reagan.

Everybody else told Reagan to shut up, too, he said. They said, Shut up and wait your turn.

Go here to see the original:

Rand Paul tries to sell social conservatives on libertarianism

The Libertarian Solution, Sundays at 2pm EST on the …

Posted on by

President Obama has embraced the notion that lies and misinformation are more important than honesty and truth when ideology is at stake. Lies are antithetical to truth and should be rejected immediately regardless of political ideology. When criteria permits dishonesty there is no rational basis for discussion. Case in point with the healthcare debate or the Afghanistan War. Read Article

The Competitive Enterprise Institute has released it's 2013 10,000 Commandments report and the highlights are... interesting. Read Article

The common response to raising prices in a disaster scenario is one of disgust, that shopkeepers are greedy, out for themselves, and taking advantage of the situation in order to line their own pockets. But increased prices in such situations are actually a good thing. Read Article

America just keeps getting fatter and fatter, and politicians keep proposing (imposing) more and more solutions to the problem. Raise taxes on unhealthy foods. Have bureaucrats prepare our lunches. Take away happy meal toys. But what's the real (obvious) solution (that they blatantly ignore)? Read Article

So called health care inflation plagues us and brings the public to give the government the power to "fix" the problem. Now with the Republicans in power, no doubt Obamacare will continue, though in some altered form. Are health care costs really skyrocketing? Read Article

Continued here:

The Libertarian Solution, Sundays at 2pm EST on the ...

Paul: 'Libertarian' isn't 'libertine'

Posted on by

Sen. Rand Paul on Wednesday outlined his vision for the future of the Republican Party, offering a conservative case for embracing the libertarian-leaning wing of the GOP, of which he is a pillar.

Paul, a Kentucky Republican and possible 2016 presidential contender, outlined several more libertarian issues that could help the party move forward during a speech at a patriotically themed gala in Washington.

To some thats sort of still a bad word, Paul said of libertarian. To others its a word that may expand the party.

(PHOTOS: Highlights from Rand Pauls filibuster)

In the speech sponsored by the American Principles Project, a deeply conservative organization with a special focus on social issues, Paul offered up jokes and wry commentary. But he also sought to bridge the oft-perceived gap between libertarians and strict social conservatives.

Libertarian doesnt mean libertine, he said. To many of us libertarian means freedom and liberty. But we also see that freedom needs tradition.

He added: I dont see libertarianism as, you can do whatever you want. There is a role for government, theres a role for family, theres a role for marriage, theres a role for the protection of life.

Paul stressed that the value of marriage is economic, as well as moral and religious, and that those virtues can be communicated through families and communities as well as through the government.

(QUIZ: Do you know Rand Paul?)

He also singled out criminal justice reform as one area that could help the Republican Party expand and improve its brand.

Read more:

Paul: 'Libertarian' isn't 'libertine'