Would It Also Be High-Speed Rail?

I can forgive the gaffe here -- I'm sure the media would never obsess over it if a Republican said it.  Right?  Actually, maybe that's an aspirational goal -- we're such a great country that we can build an Intercontinental Railroad!

A Little Class Warfare For Breakfast

Before I get started on a mini-rant, let me say something about the subject of this rant.

Elizabeth Warren was my bankruptcy professor in law school.  She was a terrific teacher -- unlike most of my professors, I didn't have a problem attending her class... and it wasn't just because she had an attendance policy.  And she's a nice person, she really is.  I enjoyed our discussions during office hours.  And she will have absolutely no reason to remember me, and is a hell of a lot more accomplished (then again, that last part is not saying much).

With that said, she's completely wrong here. Let's start with the video.



Okay, allow me to retort, Professor...

1. Last I checked, the factory owner in your hypothetical does pay taxes.  We're apparently arguing about whether he or she needs to pay a greater share of their income to pay for all of those wonderful services that government provides pursuant to the social contract you're referencing.  Guess what?  The factory owner who's making more income already pays more in taxes than the non-factory owners who make less income do, both in terms of total income and as a percentage of the income.  I know, Warren Buffett's secretary and all that crap might have convinced you otherwise, but go see the AP factcheck on that point.

2.  She's also missing an extremely important point here regarding what the factory owner contributes to society.  To wit, he or she is now producing goods that are a benefit to society.  He or she is purchasing good and services from suppliers and vendors.  He or she is employing people who now have jobs and are not a burden on the social safety net.  Those employees earn paychecks and spend money that in turn helps stimulate the economy.  The factory owner and the employees pay taxes -- employment taxes, income taxes, sales taxes on things they purchase... and those taxes help pay for government.

Get it?  Because of the factory owner's work and business, the factory owner is already providing additional benefits to society -- they are paying it forward in a far more important way than they do via additional taxes. 

Do they get credit for these benefits that they provide to society?  Perhaps the answer is that these benefits also come with costs in the form of an increased need for regulations, and that the increased activity leads to greater usage of public resources (by other people who are also presumably paying into the system).  But none of this is addressed in the silly analysis we see on the video.

3.  Why is it that every time we hear a liberal story about the services government provides, it's focused on the essential services that conservatives will happily concede as duties of government (fire service, policemen, roads), but not on all the insane services government now provides (and largely does a crappy job providing) that people find far more questionable?  And does government have a responsibility to spend our taxpayer dollars with care and account for it?  If they don't do so, doesn't the factory owner have an even greater reason to take offense to claims that he or she is not paying their fair share, if government seems to be wasting the money that the factory owner otherwise might have used in a productive manner?

4.  I'll let Jonah Goldberg handle the next point...

Of course conservatives believe in a social contract, albeit a more bare bones version than the one liberals believe in. Insinuations otherwise are a red herring. But you can believe in a social contract and also believe the Left is pursuing class warfare. The suggestion that one contradicts the other is entirely bogus.

Going from this video, Ms. Warren thinks the deficit Bush created is terrible because it put our kids in greater debt but the deficit Obama has created is fine, even though it does the same thing. And something called “the social contract” requires us to look the other way as we pile up ever more debt on policies that haven’t worked until now. Again, I’m sure that sounds great to people who want to hear liberals “fight back.” But I think she’ll have to try harder if she wants to persuade people who don’t already agree with her.

That last part is key.  Warren's articulating a form of class warfare that is poisonous to the social contract she's allegedly trying to defend.  There's an argument to be made that the factory owner should want to give back to society, sort of a moral obligation one may feel they should fulfill (think about when people return to their hometowns to "give back" through charitable endeavors).

But Warren is arguing that the factory owner owes that obligation to everyone else.  To begin with, it's not always true.  Maybe this factory owner doesn't owe it to society -- maybe his factory (now using masculine pronouns because I'm sick of using he or she) is actually a home office where he created some fabulous new app that allows us to determine just how many jobs President Obama will destroy every month.  And maybe he was home-schooled in the Alaskan wilderness and lives in a small privately-policed community located on an offshore island that's still a U.S. territory.  I suppose he should be thankful for protection from marauding bands of pirates or something.  However, he's already paying into the system, as noted above.  You're saying that he owes more simply because he's been successful -- you're punishing that success by obligating him to do something.  That's an affront to personal liberty.

5.  When you tax something, you tend to get less of it.  Do we want less successful people?  Fewer factory owners?  Fewer rich people?  Fewer people getting jobs?

Sorry, I just lapsed into a general description of the Obama Presidency.  Unrelated, I'm sure.

6.  Last point, which is unrelated to the substance:  I'll let Allahpundit take the floor...

The reason this is a viral hit on the left, of course, is because they think most of their political problems boil down to “messaging.” Their platform is foolproof — genius top to bottom — but the sheer ingenious complexity of the scheme means they have trouble explaining it to the common voting yokel.

I think the world of Elizabeth Warren as a law professor.  But she's not convincing anyone near the right-hand side of the political ledger to support more income redistribution with shoddy arguments like this.  She might win her race against Scott Brown (it is Massachusetts, after all), but she won't sell this policy around the country, and the problem isn't messaging.  After all, three years ago, I remember hearing how the liberals had a fabulous law school professor who could explain anything to anyone and get them to buy all of the brilliant liberal programs they had lined up.  And if he couldn't convince people to embrace bigger government, maybe the messaging wasn't the problem.

Wonder what happened to that guy?

24 Years Later, It's Still A Classic

An oral history of Leonard-Hagler?  The fight was one of the best fights I've ever seen, and reliving it here is a great read.  Bottom line -- it's a shame boxing now sucks.  Seriously, I'm pretty sure Mike Tyson got more press for being at Charlie Sheen's roast then any boxer's gotten for a real fight in years.

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.

Mahmoud Achmadinasshole was speaking at the UN today, and it made me think of John McCain's "Bomb-bomb-bomb-bomb-bomb-Iran" line.  Then I got in my car and heard this song... anyone wishing someone would drop something, even a water balloon, on Achmadinadouchebag? Anyway, the Gap Band is a bit of a classic, and Phillies fans remember it as the Citizens Bank Park theme song for home runs by Pat Burrell.

For the record, I'm pretty sure that this is the first blog post to mention the psychotic leader of Iran, the Gap Band, and a former Phillies left fielder in the same paragraph.  I'm all about setting records.



You're welcome.

A Bridge Over Troubled Waters

Seriously, who's planning President Obama's events?  The competence of the adminsitration's political arm is becoming worse than the competence of policy team...

The 48-year-old Brent Spence Bridge spanning the Ohio River near Cincinnati isn't much to look at. But for President Obama, it's become a rallying cry for his $477 billion jobs plan.

He referred to it in his Sept. 8 speech to Congress, saying "there's a bridge that needs repair between Ohio and Kentucky that's on one of the busiest trucking routes in North America." And on Thursday he plans to use Brent Spence as the backdrop for another pitch for his jobs bill, which includes $27 billion in "immediate" highway spending.

But while local officials are delighted with Obama's attention, Brent Spence might not be eligible for that jobs bill money.

"Will funds be available for this bridge? We don't know at this point," said a spokesman for Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio, whose district is in the area.

Although some press accounts have described Brent Spence as "crumbling," and the White House says it's an example of "ur gently needed" repairs, the bridge isn't falling apart. In fact, it's designed to last for decades more.

It is, however, "functionally obsolete," which in this case means it's too small to handle the daily traffic load. While designed to handle 85,000 cars and trucks, it now carries more than 150,000, leading to regular backups.

So the plan isn't to do extensive repairs on the bridge, but to build an entirely new one right next to it and keep the old one in use.

The problem is that construction work on the $2.3 billion bridge isn't scheduled to start for three or four years, according to the project's official website.

That would appear to put it outside the "immediate" timetable in Obama's jobs bill, which requires the Transportation secretary to "obligate" all the highway funds "not later than two years after enactment" of the bill.

The bridge failed to get any money from the previous $830 billion stimulus because it wasn't a "shovel ready" project.

The headline at Hot Air was even better:

"Obama pitches jobs bill in front of bridge that won’t benefit from jobs bill"

Hey, but at least they provided an example of the traffic problems on the bridge...

Nothing like a presidential visit to make bad traffic worse.

Ohio and Kentucky transportation officials had warned motorists to expect long delays Thursday afternoon around the time President Barack Obama visited Cincinnati, and the forecasts were timely.

An hour after Obama's speech at a concrete company by the Ohio River, southbound traffic was crawling through Cincinnati toward Kentucky at 10 mph. Northbound lanes, however, recovered quickly while some side roads were snagged badly by a visit that lasted less than two hours.

Look at this way -- with the way things are going, in 16 months, President Obama won't be President anymore, and he won't need to snarl up traffic to go visit any place.

Next Flavor -- Chef's Chocolate Salty Balls

I was at the grocery store last night, and the clerks were joking about not being able to keep this flavor on the shelves...

Pete Schweddy was wrong. Some people can resist his balls.


Conservative parent group One Million Moms, which is an affiliate of the American Family Association, is threatening to boycott Ben & Jerry's over what it says is the ice cream maker's "vulgar new flavor."


The group is urging members to contact the company and let it know that if it continues to distribute the new limited-edition "Schweddy Balls" flavor they will no longer buy its products.


“The vulgar new flavor has turned something as innocent as ice cream into something repulsive,” the group writes on its website. “Not exactly what you want a child asking for at the supermarket.”

Trust me, if my kids start asking for Schweddy Balls, they've developed their dad's sense of humor.  Meanwhile, there's a million other things I'm going to worry about before I worry about my kids getting a funny hah-hah out of juvenile humor like this.

Reason #1467 I Don't Live In California

And I thought I hated my homeowner's association...

A southern California couple has been fined $300 dollars for holding Christian Bible study sessions in their home, and could face another $500 for each additional gathering.

City officials in San Juan Capistrano, Calif. say Chuck and Stephanie Fromm are in violation of municipal code 9-3.301, which prohibits “religious, fraternal or non-profit” organizations in residential neighborhoods without a permit. Stephanie hosts a Wednesday Bible study that draws about 20 attendees, and Chuck holds a Sunday service that gets about 50.

The Fromms appealed their citations but were denied and warned future sessions would carry heftier penalties. A statement from the Pacific Justice Institute, which is defending the couple in a lawsuit against the city, said Chuck Fromm was also told regular gatherings of three or more people require a conditional use permit, which can be costly and difficult to obtain.

I know, it's not their HOA, it's just another asinine local governmental body thathas too much time on its hands and too many lawyers telling them they can't bend the rules, lest they face a lawsuit from whatever busybody neighbor called the cops and complained in the first place.  I don't care if the Fromms want to have weekly orgies in their homes -- they shouldn't need to go through an expensive licensing process to do so.  If their guests are keeping the noise to a minimum, and in compliance with all local parking regulations, why should anyone care?  And if the problem is the latter, ticket and tow them.

My solution, since this is California: tell them everyone's getting together to smoke pot.  Or have the whole congregation marry one another, and assert that you can't keep a family apart.

I Shudder To Think What They Would Pay For A Good Bagel

Now I know why DOJ is having so much trouble winning cases -- they can't even convince someone to sell them muffins for less than $16 each.

Bubba The Frenemy

James Taranto poses an intruiging question about whether Bill Clinton wants Barack Obama to win re-election, and notes a key point...

Clinton was re-elected in a time of prosperity, not anemic growth and 9% unemployment. Whereas Clinton failed to persuade a Democratic Congress to pass health-care "reform," Obama succeeded. Clinton moved to the center and worked constructively with House Republicans, while Obama has hewed to the left.


And if Obama is re-elected, he will likely be the first Democrat since FDR to attract a popular-vote majority twice--a feat Clinton managed not even once.


If Obama is still president on Jan. 21, 2013, Clinton will have gone from Houdini to has-been. The only thing that could be worse for him is if Michelle Obama is elected in 2024 as Jeb Bush's successor.

I'm going to ignore that last line so I don't throw up.  In the end, I think the conflicting advice Clinton has provided Obama is not part of his egotisitical attempt to undermine Obama.  Clinton could have made all these inconsistent lines of attack work because he was a better politician than Barack Obama.  Of course, that's no saying much nowadays, but it's an essential truth.
I'm just glad they referred to Bubba as a frenemy.  Too many other people have relationships with him that constitutue "friends with benefits."

Interesting

Mickey Kaus parses Obama's statement from Monday and finds reason to believe that if pressed, he'll back down on tax increases to try to get a grand bargain...

There’s been some speculation that Obama’s veto threat, if he holds to it, makes the work of the elite deficit-reducing “supercommittee” impossible–it “guarantees that the supercommittee’s recommendations will not be approved.”  Since Republicans aren’t going to agree on raising “serious revenues” from the wealthy, the argument goes, they aren’t going to get Medicare cuts past Obama and nothing substantial will get done.

People who think this* should read the statement more closely. There is lots of room for substantial Medicare cuts that won’t trigger a veto, even if they aren’t accompanied by  revenue increases–as long as the cuts aren’t structured so clumsily as to directly cut “benefits” for the non-affluent.

That also means Obama hasn’t chosen a Trumanesque “run against Congress” strategy over a statesmanlike “grand bargain with Boehner” strategy. He’s still trying to keep both strategies in play. I suspect he still wants a grand bargain even if he gets stiffed on his tax increases on the rich. Monday’s speech looks like mostly a show to please the left.

It would be great if Obama backed down, although it might send the left into conniptions.  The proposal he rolled out was not only unrealistic for Republicans to even consider, it was effectively DOA with Senate Democrats (which is why his last budget proposal went down 97-0).
The real question is whether any of this matters.  The optics of battling Congress or posturing as a leader who got a great compromise on entitlements and the deficit is effectively irrelevant if the economy doesn't turn around.

Even David Brooks Throws In The Towel On Obama's Deficit Proposal

David Brooks admits to being a sap for Obama...

When the president said the unemployed couldn’t wait 14 more months for help and we had to do something right away, I believed him. When administration officials called around saying that the possibility of a double-dip recession was horrifyingly real and that it would be irresponsible not to come up with a package that could pass right away, I believed them.

I liked Obama’s payroll tax cut ideas and urged Republicans to play along. But of course I’m a sap. When the president unveiled the second half of his stimulus it became clear that this package has nothing to do with helping people right away or averting a double dip. This is a campaign marker, not a jobs bill.

It recycles ideas that couldn’t get passed even when Democrats controlled Congress. In his remarks Monday the president didn’t try to win Republicans to even some parts of his measures. He repeated the populist cries that fire up liberals but are designed to enrage moderates and conservatives.

...He talks about fundamental tax reform, but I keep forgetting that he has promised never to raise taxes on people in the bottom 98 percent of the income scale.

That means when he talks about raising revenue, which he is right to do, he can’t really talk about anything substantive. He can’t tax gasoline. He can’t tax consumption. He can’t do a comprehensive tax reform. He has to restrict his tax policy changes to the top 2 percent, and to get any real revenue he’s got to hit them in every which way. We’re not going to simplify the tax code, but by God Obama’s going to raise taxes on rich people who give to charity! We’ve got to do something to reduce the awful philanthropy surplus plaguing this country!

Welcome to reality, Mr. Brooks.  Brooks represents that creature liberals pretend to love, the moderate Republican... and if he's not buying President Obama's BS, then you know this is utter crap.  It's designed to do one thing -- try to win a second term.  What Obama plans to do with that second term... well, most Presidents are far less effective in their second term than in their first.  It's scary to think just how ineffective Obama could be if given the chance.

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.

I had no idea that this song created a massive copyright fight with the Rolling Stones.  In any case, it's a great song with a great video -- simple but in keeping with the song. And it really does get stuck in your head.




You're welcome.

Maybe Everyone Should Pay the Same As That 47%

Sometimes, you don't need anything other than the headline to summarize total hypocricy.  Or you can break it down to show that the President's lying about the percentage of taxes versus cuts.  of course, this is nothing more than a campaign document.  He's better at that than governing, so maybe this will work.  Of course, that leaves us wondering if he thinks people will ignore the economy, since he's doing it.

AAAATTTTTTTTAAACCCCKKK WAAAATTTTTCCCCCHHH

Best ad ever.



"How can you trust liquid rock?"

Random Things That Annoy Me

Because life is full of annoying crap, and this is my place to complain about it.
I've been receiving free copies of Newsweek in the mail, unsolicited, for the last two months or so.  I would even use Newsweek to line a birdcage (the magazine's already loaded with crap).  But today, they sent an invoice offering to continue to send me issues if I pay up.

Personally, I want them to pay me, for the time I had to spend dropping their magazine in the trash every time it shows up.

I'm Sure They'll Do A Craig Kilborn Profile Someday

The Esquire profile of Jon Stewart is really terrific.  It confirms by belief that Stewart knows he was being a dick in his famous Crossfire! interview, but he gets away with it because he's a well-meaning dick.  What's really funny is that he's slowly morphing into that which he tries to abhor -- a power broker with a base that adores him, which in his case includes the mainstream media.  I also enjoyed this passage for obvious reasons...

Oh, well: another night, another show about Fox News. It's been like that, over at The Daily Show, ever since Obama was elected. Stewart just doesn't have the material he used to have when George W. Bush was in power, nor the nightly foil. (Audience members still ask him to "do Bush" during the introductory Q&A.) He's been accused of making halfhearted jokes about Obama in an attempt to keep the show ideologically balanced, but that's not the problem, not really; the problem is that Democrats, with their perpetual disarray, are not as funny as Republicans, with their reality-bending unity, and that Stewart is left to nurse what is probably the most potent comedy killer of all: disappointment. According to one former writer, the creative atmosphere  at The Daily Show has gotten "doomier" since it became clear that Obama wasn't going to fulfill his promise — and that Jon Stewart was not in a position either to help or to savage him. "You can see the strain in his interviews," the writer says. "It used to be, 'Hey, we're a comedy show.' Now it's, 'What we do is so hard.' And it is hard. One of the reasons I finally left is that we were running out of targets. I was like, 'Do we really want to make fun of Fox & Friends again? Really?'"

Why isn't Stewart in a position to savage Obama?  Is it because he can't hammer Obama without disappointing his audience. or because doing so hurts because Obama's such a disappointment?  There was a time when comedians found it difficult to mock Obama, because they thought he was "trying to do something good."  It's good to see comedians, including Stewart, have found a way past any initial reluctance to attack the One, because the material is in such great supply.

The funniest thing about the disappointment in Barack Obama?  Someone as cynical and world-weary as Jon Stewart bought his shit.

Have Another Donut

I didn't know it was possible, but Michael Moore is even dumber than I thought...

During a talk to promote his new book, Here Comes Trouble, liberal firebreather Michael Moore told an audience of college students at Bunker Hill Community College to “reject this vision of America that has been thrust upon us,” and that to fix it “will require a rumble.”

According to his blog, Moore was urging a “nonviolent rumble of citizen participation,” although it’s unclear whether he made such a disclaimer during his remarks.

Since I don't care about the civility issue, I could care less what Moore is referring to when he calls for a "nonviolent rumble of citizen participation."  I just think the phrase is moronic.  What the hell does that mean?  Will it be a West Side Story style rumble, with dancers pulling their punches?

Wait -- let's take that back.  The last image I need is one of Michael Moore dancing.

Cartman's Evil Plan Proceeds Apace

Nobody wants Ginger kids anymore, except for maybe Ireland.  Thanks, South Park.  Even the daywalkers are screwed.

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.

This song is actually on my playlist, and I actually like it.  No smartass commentary right now, except to note that the name "Carolina Liar" would be a great fit for John Edwards.



You're welcome.

Hey, Let's Try One More Idea Everyone Will Ignore

President Obama continues his campaign to propose legislation for no reason other than to set up his campaign theme...

President Barack Obama, in a populist step designed to appeal to voters, will propose a "Buffett Tax" on people making more than $1 million a year as part of his deficit recommendations to Congress on Monday.


Such a proposal, among suggestions to a congressional supercommittee expected to seek up to $3 trillion in deficit savings over 10 years, would appeal to his Democratic base ahead of the 2012 election but likely not raise much in revenues.

Whew -- at least we know the real goal of the proposal is to get him re-elected, not to do anything crazy like raise revenues.  That campaign theme gets torched by Ed Morrissey...

What happens when the cost of risk equals the cost of relatively risk-free income?  People stop taking risks and shelter their capital.  When capital stops being risked in new ventures, economic growth slows and stops, jobs either never get created or start disappearing, and we get stagnation or recession.  That capital doesn’t sit on the sidelines forever, either; eventually capital moves to other markets, which means that even when conditions improve, we won’t see that capital return to our markets.  On top of that, the vacillation on tax policy and hostility towards capital holders amplifies the incentives to move capital out of the US.

That’s why the “new AMT” won’t end up generating anywhere near what the Obama administration will claim.  It’s a nakedly political act designed to bolster Obama’s class-warfare demagoguery and credentials, and it’s a policy that will inevitably lead to a deeper economic crisis in the US.

Well, at least we know the country is in shape to weather another economic crisis -- we're getting plenty of practice.

The BCS is BS

In keeping with the last post, friend of the blog RB sends along this little clip of joy that skewers the BCS brilliantly...


What If Everything Worked Like BCS: The Spelling Bee from sanjeev tandle on Vimeo.

The commercial tie-ins are fabulous, but the really nice touch is the line about Mr. Cotton and Mr. Holiday. Looks like the teachers union and tenure can be blamed for one more thing.

I Never Trusted That Stupid Giant Orange

I know why Syracuse and Pittsburgh left the Big East for the ACC.  College sports are inherently corrupt, and pretty much flat-out insane right now.  It's survival of the fittest, football pays the bills, and the Big East was always a basketball conference first and foremost.

Still... here's a parting gift for the Panthers.  Here's hoping you get a moment like this in basketball every year.




As for founding Big East member Syracuse... it turns out to be utterly true that you indeed cannot spell sucks without SU.  Here's my parting gift to them -- an oldie but a goodie.  May Keith Smart haunt your asses forever...



I'm starting to wish I'd rooted for Kansas in 2003.  As for the rumors that U Conn and Rutgers are headed out the door as well, may they rot in hell... eh, they're already located in different portions of the underworld anyway.

And finally, for arrogant ACC Commissioner John Swofford, who thinks he'll someday put the ACC Tournament in New York... 2 thoughts.  One, no one will care about your tournament in New York the way they cared about the Big East.  Two, the SEC will continue to clean your clock in football, until you figure out how to cheat like they do... at which point I hope the good football programs (like Va. Tech) bail for the SEC and leave you high and dry.

I Would Have Preferred The Monorail

Rex Murphy turns a phrase pretty well -- I'm not sure I agree with the conclusion, but this is some damn fine prose at the end...

To the degree the press neglected its function as watchdog and turned cupbearer to a styrofoam demigod, it is a partner in the flaws and failures of what is turning out to be one of the most miserable performances in the modern history of the American presidency.

As much as I hate the left-wing media bias that gave Obama a complete pass in 2008, it was predictable from day one, and they're not entirely at fault.  The blame for Obama's margin of victory lies with the press, but the blame for his win needs to be shared with President Bush, Senator McCain, and the GOP in general.  They all screwed up enough that the public was ready to accept just about anyone the Democrats nominated, even if he was a seemingly likeable but ultimately unprepared and overrated guy with an allegedly golden tongue.  And hell, the public chose to buy the monorail from the guy they'd never met...



Yes, I know that's a tenuous link, but you can never link to the monorail song enough.  Actually, the monorail was arguably a greater success than Obama thus far -- Springfield only spent its surplus on the monorail and didn't go into debt for it.

The real irony?  The media so bought into the Obama myth that they set him up for failure by building expectations so high that even a President of real substance would have been hard-pressed to be anything other than a mild disappointment.  Obama's incompetence has made him a spectacular failure thus far, at least insofar as one measures him compared to what was expected.  His campaign gets some blame for that... but the media's decision never to test him meant he came into the job even more woefully unprepared.

No, Seriously, I Think This Is A First

The headline cracks me up -- I have trouble believing anyone is really pining for Hillary Clinton.  I mean, has Bill ever even pined for Hillary?