Saturday, April 03, 2004
Anyway, it's pretty much a forgone conclusion, no matter what happens with weapons of mass destruction, the economy, or any number of other issues, BushCo has already hurt themselves beyond repair. They are going to lose a fair election on November 2nd, 2004.
Read the rest at Bark Bark Woof Woof.
Friday, April 02, 2004
Many members of Congress have been pushing for a cut in income taxes, but they've been unsure how to pay for it. Fortunately, I've figured out an answer: with a tax increase. Let's cut income taxes by 10% and finance it with a 50-cent-per-gallon hike in the gasoline tax.John Kerry? Nope
If you have ever been stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic, you have probably wished there were fewer cars on the road. A gasoline tax would help to accomplish this by encouraging people to car-pool, take public transportation, or live closer to work.
Another benefit of a rise in the gas tax would be a reduction in the size of vehicles. Whenever a person buys a large car or a sport-utility vehicle, he makes himself safer, but he puts his neighbors at risk. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a person driving a typical car is five times more likely to die if hit by a sport-utility vehicle than if hit by another car. A gas tax is an indirect way of making people pay when their massive vehicles impose risk on others, which in turn makes them take account of this risk when choosing whether to buy some monster urban-assault vehicle or go with a sensible compact.
Environmentalists should also favor a higher gasoline tax. The burning of fossil fuels such as gasoline is widely believed to be the cause of global warming. Experts disagree about how dangerous this threat really is, and most economists who have studied the subject believe global warming would not be nearly the economic catastrophe that some environmentalists claim. But there is no doubt that a tax on gasoline, or on fossil fuels more generally, would help cut such emissions.
Cutting income taxes while increasing gasoline taxes would lead to more rapid economic growth, less traffic congestion, safer roads, and reduced risk of global warming--all without jeopardizing long-term fiscal solvency. This may be the closest thing to a free lunch that economics has to offer.
Ralph Nader? No way.
Al Gore? Wrong again.
It was Greg Mankiw. And who is he? The chairman of Bush's Council of Economic Advisers. Call me crazy but I don't remember hearing Greg's name in Bush's latest attack ad.
Thursday, April 01, 2004
John Derbyshire at the National Review is upset that the "Homosexualists" have ruined one of his favorite Yeats poems. Particularly, the poem Lapis Lazuli and particularly this line: "Their eyes mid many wrinkles, their eyes, / Their ancient, glittering eyes, are gay."
Derbyshire is all worked up in the way that I always assumed only closeted, repressed "homosexualists" can be. He says, I swear to God, "The problem is, of course, that you can't read this poem as it was meant to be read, because that key word has been trashed." Of course!
That word totally ruins everything. I mean, now I'm totally screwed up about West Side Story, for Christ's sakes. "I feel pretty, Oh so pretty! I feel pretty, and witty, and gay! And I pity any girl who isn't me today!"
But you know, isn't this just one more piece of the puzzle of conservative psychology? It seems to me that he may as well just write: "Some people are Gay, and now I am all hot and bothered about it, so when I encounter the word Gay in its alternate meaning, I myself cannot put the gays out of my head whilst reading my precious Yeats. Thus, the gays are the ones who have ruined Yeats and Marriage for me, and not, in fact, my incessant obsession with homosexuality. At all."
Seems like a stretch for the "personal responsibility" party, doesn't it?
* Go on Ebay and sell your comic book collection. After the bidding ends, inform the winning bidder that they are the winning bidder, but on further analysis it was determined that your item would cost an additional 35%.
Read more at Chris "Lefty" Brown's Corner
Tuesday, March 30, 2004
The Repuglican National Commissariat is pressuring the Federal Election Commission to adopt new rules that would have the effect of redefining many nonprofit groups as political committees, thereby forcing these groups to meet significantly more stringent financial and reporting requirements or to forego many of the advocacy and civic engagement activities at the core of their missions. From all accounts, they are motivated solely by the desire to protect the Dear Leader from any picayune criticism of his divinely inspired policies.
There's an early review of the film, "The Corporation", which interviews Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, and Michael Moore, amongst others, on the issue of Corporate Domination.
And here, a look at my own opinion on why half of the country doesn't want to believe Richard Clarke is telling the truth about the Bush Admin's handling of the terrorist situation, and how it relates to Ben Franklin's dislike for the Bald Eagle (and preference for the Turkey) as our National Bird.