What Annoying Song is Stuck in My Head Today?

If I need to suffer with a song stuck in my head, why shouldn't you have to do the same? Sometimes they're good, most times they're bad... but no matter what, they make you suffer. So I like to share the suffering whenever it happens.

Wojr steals a page from my book to post a classic from Schoolhouse Rock... which immediately puts another favorite song in my head. Thanks to the Simpsons, we have a pretty good sumamry of how to amend the Constitution, which includes Bart's biting view on what to do with Generation X in a side conversation with Lisa. Call it a gift to Wojr when he's on vacation, posting great opinions on airline service from his Treo.

Here's Amendment to Be...

Random Movie Quote of the Day

Like all American males, I love being able to quote ad nauseum from popular movies. I figured I should share whenever a random quote pops into my head.

I spent the weekend in Fort Lauderdale for a wedding, and Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgandy became our guide to the weekend. Here's to you, guys...

Bartender: You know, times are changing. Ladies can do stuff now and you're going to learn how to deal with it.

Ron Burgundy: What? Were you saying something? Look, I don't speak Spanish.

This has been your Random Movie Quote of the Day.

Return of the Fat Man

Michael Moore's new movie is an indictment of the U.S. healthcare system. The good news -- I only have to watch previews unless I'm actually interested in suffering through his tripe. The bad news -- he's sure to get plenty of press from the usual idiots, who probably believe that the world would be a better place if we lived with Canadian or Cuban healthcare.

In the end, I'm wondering who's going to benefit from this movie. Moore's Bowling for Columbine, essentially intended to spur efforts at more gun control, has done zip for the cause of increased interest in gun control laws. And we all remember how Fahrenheit 9/11 prevented the re-election of President Bush, right? Maybe it's time to invest in some health care stocks.

Life's Not Fair, and Neither Is the Press

It's good to know that Congress has a solution to the fact that many Americans oppose things like the immigration bill. No, their solution isn't going to be an attempt to convince us they're right -- it's an attempt to bring back the idiotically named "Fairness Doctrine"...

Why do liberals like Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., keep trying to tell the rest of us what political opinions we must listen to in the media?

Feinstein says she is “looking at” reviving the Fairness Doctrine to counteract the decidedly conservative bent of talk radio. Former President Reagan and a Democratic Congress repealed the Fairness Doctrine in 1987.

She wants to bring it back because she thinks “one-sided programming” pushes the American people into “extreme views” — such as their current opposition to the Bush/Kennedy/McCain immigration bill. She wants “an opportunity to present the other side” by forcing radio stations to offer more liberal fare.

Of course, nobody thinks a revived Fairness Doctrine would only be applied to radio. It wouldn’t be long before we would hear liberals demanding that broadcast TV and the Internet be made “fair,” too.

What Feinstein really wants is for federal bureaucrats to decide what political opinion programming we should hear. She presumes to know better than listeners what is “fair.”

As liberal talk radio host Alan Colmes noted tonight, the Fairness Doctrine basically left radio hosts trying to write down whom they spoke with, what they said and having government regulators review it. Colmes opposes the doctrine in part because it would lead to bad radio -- and he's right, because every time a conservative or liberal radio host said something entertaining and pointed about one of the idiots in the Senate, we'd have to listen to a response from said Senators (think John Kerry, or Trent Lott). But more importantly, the Fairness Doctrine is an offense against free speech.

Of course, incumbent Senators love limiting free speech, since it prevents us from saying anything nasty about them. Think about McCain-Feingold as a good example. Luckily, efforts are already underway to kill the doctrine. This comment from Dick Durbin sums up why any self-respecting American should oppose the Fairness Doctrine...

“It’s time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine,” said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). “I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they’re in a better position to make a decision.”

And we all know having a government bureaucrat judge whether we're hearing both sides of the story is what America was built on. Oh, wait, it was built on allowing free speech. Then again, Durbin believes the Constitution is a living document, so maybe he thinks the First Amendment got up and moved away.

In the meantime, maybe we can apply the damn doctrine to Hollywood as well, so i can stop seeing previews for Michael Moore movies.

Immigration Follies

Great. As if the immigration bill wasn't enough of a farce, it's now got earmarks as well.

The Heritage Foundation has a searchable version of Harry Reid's hopefully dying clay pigeon here. I'll say more about this bill and the farce of a process attempting to enact it at some point when I've figured out whether Congress and the President are playing chicken to see who can earn lower approval ratings.

Let's Just Tax The Liberals

Warren Buffett gets it wrong...

Warren E. Buffett was his usual folksy self Tuesday night at a fundraiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as he slammed a system that allows the very rich to pay taxes at a lower rate than the middle class.

Buffett cited himself, the third-richest person in the world, as an example. Last year, Buffett said, he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent.

Buffett said that was despite the fact that he was not trying to avoid paying higher taxes. "I don't have a tax shelter," he said. And he challenged Congress and his audience to see what the people who "clean our offices" are taxed, to loud applause.

A populist tone permeated the 70-minute talk with the billionaire investor and philanthropist in Manhattan on Tuesday night. The talk, given to about 600 Wall Street bankers and money managers, raised at least $1 million for Clinton's presidential campaign, the Associated Press reported.

The event comes as public frustration has grown over executive compensation and disparity in pay. It also comes as Congress debates changes to the tax code that would decrease take-home pay for managers of private-equity firms and hedge funds, pools of money for wealthy families and institutional investors. The rich can take advantage of tax loopholes, including one that allows those managers to pay the capital gains tax rate of 15 percent instead of the ordinary top income tax rate of 35 percent.

Only in America do we describe something that is intended to be in the law a loophole. Carried interest charges are not taxed at the capital gains rate because of a loophole -- the law specifically treats such charges as capital gains, and there are legitimate policy reasons for doing so. That isn't to say the policy is right or wrong, but it's not a "loophole." Good balanced reporting by the Post.

Meanwhile, Buffet doesn't get the real problem. The issue shouldn't be that Buffet pays a lower tax rate than his secretary -- it's that anyone, including his secretary pays 30% of their income over to the federal government. Or as Instapundit noted, most of us would rather have Buffet's tax rate than he have ours.