Why Rudy

I'm warming up to Rudy, more and more, despite the DAWG stuff.

But here's another reason.

Taranto recounts the story of professor at a prestigious university telling him, at a party, back in 1993 that someone needed to "assassinate" Rudy Giuliani.

If he drives liberals that sort of batshit, pro-assassination crazy, he can't be that liberal, can he?

There was a Giuliani Derangement Syndrome in NYC through the nineties. That fact alone should be somewhat comforting to conservatives fearing his nomination.

America Supports You

I've been meaning to link to this site for a while....

http://americasupportsyou.mil

It's a great place to start if you're looking to help the troops out abroad.

Who's he think he is -- Edwards?

John Fund, in OpinionJournal Politoical Diary:

Al Gore's Energy Policy: Less for You, More for Me

Only hours after basking in the warm glow of Hollywood's cultural elite, Al Gore took two nasty PR hits that tarnished his Oscar victory. It was revealed that acting Cuban President Raul Castro had lavished praise on the former vice president's anti-global warming film and even required that it be shown in primetime on Cuba's official television networks. Not exactly the endorsement a potential Democratic presidential candidate would want.

Then it was revealed that Mr. Gore's sprawling mansion in Nashville was consuming 20 times the power of a typical American household, and that its consumption had actually increased since the release of the Gore film, in which the former vice president can be seen telling audiences they should curb their use of electric power.

The Tennessee Center for Policy Research obtained public records that showed Mr. Gore's mansion in the tony Belle Meade neighborhood has been consuming a monthly average of 18,414 kilowatt-hours, nearly twice what the average American home consumes in an entire year. His electric bill averaged $1359 a month in 2006 and his gas bill was $536. His heated pool house alone consumed more natural gas than his entire main living quarters.

Mr. Gore's office responded with a lame statement claiming that his energy consumption was appropriate because he obtained all of it from a local "powerswitch" program that used 100% renewable fuels, whatever that means. His office also claimed that his home was in the midst of a renovation that would include the addition of solar panels to his roof.

No doubt the controversy over Mr. Gore's power gluttony will fade away, but it illustrates a classic example of how liberals who believe the rest of the world should lower its expectations for the good life often find it hard to follow that advice in their own daily routines.

UPDATE: Wizbang compares it to that evil George W. Bush's home:

The 4,000-square-foot house is a model of environmental rectitude

Geothermal heat pumps located in a central closet circulate water through pipes buried 300 feet deep in the ground where the temperature is a constant 67 degrees; the water heats the house in the winter and cools it in the summer. Systems such as the one in this "eco-friendly" dwelling use about 25% of the electricity that traditional heating and cooling systems utilize.
A 25,000-gallon underground cistern collects rainwater gathered from roof runs; wastewater from sinks, toilets and showers goes into underground purifying tanks and is also funneled into the cistern. The water from the cistern is used to irrigate the landscaping surrounding the four-bedroom home. Plants and flowers native to the high prairie area blend the structure into the surrounding ecosystem.
No, this is not the home of some eccentrically wealthy eco-freak trying to shame his fellow citizens into following the pristineness of his self-righteous example. And no, it is not the wilderness retreat of the Sierra Club or the Natural Resources Defense Council, a haven where tree-huggers plot political strategy.
This is President George W. Bush's "Texas White House" outside the small town of Crawford.

Anna Nicole Smith

You thought ThreeSources would not weigh in on the already weighty news matters of the time? Two thoughts:

1) How can lefties really worry about the impact of FOXNews? Trust me, they are always way too busy chasing after (Chandra Levy/Laci Petersen/Natalee Holloway/Anna Nicole Smith/&c) to really promote any kind of conservative political vision. There’s only 24 times seven in a week and some woman is always missing in a country of 300 million.

2) I was jarred out of complacency by this TCS story Douglas Kern also wonders "Who is this odd, dead, clownish blonde woman whose ghost has apparently taken the international mass media hostage?" But he follows it with a compelling point about free will.

But would Smith have wanted her life any other way? Suppose an angel had descended upon our heroine back in 1991, and said to her: "Look, your life can go in two directions here. If you walk away from this doddering old man now, you can spend your days working jobs that involve hairnets and nametags, bounce around in dreary relationships with an uninspiring array of greasy working-class schlubs, bear a few kids by a few dads, enjoy a few years of cut-rate Peyton Place drama for the six or seven years that your looks hold out, and then putter along doing nothing of relevance until Social Security kicks in, so you can watch daytime TV for hours on end in your battered old trailer until your heart gives out at age 93. Then again, if you go with the old guy, you'll achieve worldwide fame, huge amounts of money, and a marriage that will make you a billionaire in theory. Adolescent males around the globe will be ogling your naughty pictures on the Internet for years, perhaps centuries. You'll star in your own TV show, endorse products for nationwide advertisements, travel the world, have sex with the world's most eligible bachelors, take the best drugs, and live a life of hedonistic bliss punctuated only by occasional moments of family tragedy, until you die suddenly of acute celebrity-itis at age 39. Which will it be?"

UPDATE: Spelling fixed Nichole/Nicole

Golden in CA

Michael McClellan has a a good piece in TCS Daily "Why Giuliani Is Golden."

He encounters California Republicans who, like me, value McCain's military service and respect his dedication to the war -- but, also like me, don't trust him and cannot completely forgive him for past actions. I think this point captures it:

Given their disparate ascents to the national stage, Giuliani's enduring image is more conservative than McCain's. At the risk of oversimplifying, it is perhaps fair to say that Giuliani's image is loudly conservative and quietly moderate, whereas McCain's image is loudly moderate and quietly conservative. These disparate images have taken hold among California Republicans, and Giuliani's image is blowing McCain's out of the water.

TEDTalks

I've just discovered a very bad time sink at the exact wrong time in my life, but have y'all see TEDTalks?

I found this one on Classical Values (H/T Insty) and it is awesome. Here's the description:

Steven Levitt is an economics professor at the University of Chicago and the best-selling author of Freakonomics. In this talk, filmed at TED2004, he goes inside an inner-city gang to examine economic principles at work in the real world. (Recorded February 2004 in Monterey, CA. Duration: 22:00)

The editorial slant looks distinctly left of center, but they advertise a talk by Bjorn Lomborg that we're worrying about the wrong thing with Global Warming, and they have a couple talks by his VicePresidentness himself, Mr. Albert Gore, Jr.

I prefer blogs to podcasts and most video because I find it easy to read a column while I wait for a machine to reboot or a program to compile. Double-digit minutes of devoted attention are productivity sappers. But there are a pile of these TEDTalks I have to see.

I wanted to post about this one and not the series, because it speaks to something that was very important to me before 9/11. I took some of the same ideas Levitt takes from the research from the novel "Clockers" by Richard Price. The problem is the lure of money in illegal drug sales as recruitment for gang membership.

Levitt points out that it's "the worst job in the world" but also that the idea of rising in the organization to a senior level is pretty alluring against other inner city opportunities. The drug war is government intrusion into economics as surely as ethanol subsidies. Levitt points out how the economics changed with the introduction of crack cocaine.

Whether you agree with my libertarian view of the drug war or not, this is a fascinating, entertaining, and smart piece on application of economic principles. At the end, you even enjoy economic principles translated into gangspeak.

jk defends President Clinton

Mark the date, these planets may not align for another decade or two.

Extreme Mortman joins a chorus of folks who are overwhelmed by President Clinton's sizeable remuneration from speaking engagements. Mortman at least gets a great riff out of it:

Now whether or not you agree with the thrust of Gore’s global warming message, there’s some charm in internationally crusading for a cause you believe in.

Contrast Gore’s nobility with Bill Clinton. We learned in Friday’s Post story about Clinton’s multi-million dollar speaking gigs that, “Two-thirds of the former president’s speaking money has come from foreign sources.”

Wonder if, instead of Gore, it were Clinton on stage accepting an Oscar tonight, he’d charge a speaking fee.

I also remember Bill Clinton's causing a lot more trouble when he was receiving his modest government salary. A little industrious earning seems to have been good for him -- and us.

Obamanomix

Thomas Sowell shows again today why he cannot ride on the same plane as Walter Williams. Dr. Sowell is not sold on the economic agenda of Senator Barack Obama.

Senator Obama is being hailed as the newest and freshest face on the American political scene. But he is advocating some of the oldest fallacies, just as if it was the 1960s again, or as if he has learned nothing and forgotten nothing since then.

He thinks higher teacher pay is the answer to the abysmal failures of our education system, which is already far more expensive than the education provided in countries whose students have for decades consistently outperformed ours on international tests.

Senator Obama is for making college "affordable," as if he has never considered that government subsidies push up tuition, just as government subsidies push up agricultural prices, the price of medical care and other prices.

He is also for "alternative fuels," without the slightest thought about the prices of those fuels or the implications of those prices. All this is the old liberal agenda from years past, old wine in new bottles, a new face with old ideas that have been tried and failed repeatedly over the past generation.

Senator Obama is not unique among politicians who want to control prices, as if that is controlling the underlying reality behind the prices.

I Cannot Support This Guy

Unless Hizzoner Mayor Giuliani comes out this week for Nationalized Oil, he has my support all the way. His competitors for the GOP 2008 nomination have disqualified themselves.

McCain's tiresome California rant against the Bush Administration sent me packing last week. I was going to purchase the domain readytosettleformccain.com but I'm not -- hit GoDaddy, it's up for grabs if you want it,

I don't care if Governor Romney is Mormon, Rosicrucian or Zoroastrian. But his --let me be fair, here -- insane health care boondoggle portends poorly for his belief in markets and liberal economics.

Sally Pipes writes in the WSJ Ed Page today (paid link) that RomneyCare is more than 150% over budget, not meeting its goals, and premiums are 150% of estimations as well.

When then-Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican, introduced a universal health-insurance plan in the Bay State early last year, it was widely acclaimed. But less than a year after passage, RomneyCare is in the intensive care unit, soon to be wheeled into hospice.

The first signs of trouble appeared last August. In a filing to support general obligation bonds, officials projected that the new plan would increase state government health-care spending by $276.4 million in 2007. That's $151 million more than what the public had been told the plan would cost. Meanwhile, the state's new bureaucracy, busily signing up people for free care, has run into trouble finding affordable plans for those who have to pay. The premiums for subsidized plans would consume up to 6% of a person's income -- prompting calls from activists and echoes from politicians that they should be exempted from the individual mandate. So much for universal coverage.

Reality fully hit in late January of this year, when private insurers submitted bids to the bureaucracy that would administer the new program. The average premium for the unsubsidized plans was not $200 per month -- as Mr. Romney promised from the stump -- but rather $380. That's more than 15% of the target audiences' income -- and for a plan with a $2,000 deductible and a total cost

They Don't Make Democrats Like This Anymore

Senator Lieberman, in a guest editorial in the Wall Street Journal (free link)

But we must not make another terrible mistake now. Many of the worst errors in Iraq arose precisely because the Bush administration best-cased what would happen after Saddam was overthrown. Now many opponents of the war are making the very same best-case mistake--assuming we can pull back in the midst of a critical battle with impunity, even arguing that our retreat will reduce the terrorism and sectarian violence in Iraq.

In fact, halting the current security operation at midpoint, as virtually all of the congressional proposals seek to do, would have devastating consequences. It would put thousands of American troops already deployed in the heart of Baghdad in even greater danger--forced to choose between trying to hold their position without the required reinforcements or, more likely, abandoning them outright. A precipitous pullout would leave a gaping security vacuum in its wake, which terrorists, insurgents, militias and Iran would rush to fill--probably resulting in a spiral of ethnic cleansing and slaughter on a scale as yet unseen in Iraq.

I appeal to my colleagues in Congress to step back and think carefully about what to do next. Instead of undermining Gen. Petraeus before he has been in Iraq for even a month, let us give him and his troops the time and support they need to succeed.

They Will Hold Their Manhood Cheap

...that they did not fight with Prince Harry on St. Crispen's Day.

I join Bret Stephens of the The Journal Editorial Report in applauding a particular UK troop deployment:

[Paul] Gigot: Next, on the heels of the British government announcing it will withdraw some troops from Iraq, comes news of a notable deployment. Bret?

Stephens: Yes, well, once upon a time, there was an English prince, who went by the nickname Harry--most of us know him better as Henry V--who had what you might call a misspent youth and then found his place in history on the battlefield called Agincourt. Well, today, there's another English prince, also called Harry, also with something of what you might call a misspent youth, who is now, by his own choice, going to be deploying to Iraq to lead a squad of soldiers in southern Iraq. And I think a lot of people wonder what the purpose of an aristocracy is, especially when most European aristocrats spend their time disgracing themselves on the pages of HELLO! I think young Harry is showing what that purpose is. It is to set an example. And I think he's made the British very proud.

Murtha Stumbles

Those are the words of WaPo staff writers, Jonathan Weisman and Lyndsey Layton, not me. They point out that the plan was to unite Democrats and divide Republicans. But...

But a botched launch by the plan's author, Rep. John P. Murtha (Pa.), has united Republicans and divided Democrats, sending the latter back to the drawing board just a week before scheduled legislative action, a score of House Democratic lawmakers said last week.

"If this is going to be legislation that's crafted in such a way that holds back resources from our troops, that is a non-starter, an absolute non-starter," declared Rep. Jim Matheson (Utah), a leader of the conservative Blue Dog Democrats.

Murtha's credentials as a Marine combat veteran, a critic of the war and close ally of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) were supposed to make him an unassailable spokesman for Democratic war policy. Instead, he has become a lightning rod for criticism from Republicans and members of his own party.

I'm thinking some "Don't blame me, I supported Irey" T-Shirts might be good right about now...

Quarter Century

A little personal item on the weekend if I may...

For 24 years, my wife and I celebrated the "anniversary of our first date" on February 25. Today, the 25th anniversary, I realized that what I really celebrate is my last date. Twenty-five years ago, I realized very quickly that I had found her and I never went out with another woman. If there is one thing I don't miss, it would be dating.

We married a year and half later and have done the for-richer-for-poorer, as well as the sickness-and-in-health bits.

Cheers!
jk

Hope!

Fiscal HAWK Mark Sanford...

- South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, who has yet to offer an endorsement in the 2008 Republican presidential contest, said today that he would not completely rule out accepting the number two spot on the ticket.

"Anybody who says they wouldn't look at something of that magnitude isn't being honest," Sanford said in an interview from his Capitol office.

Sanford, who won a convincing re-election last fall, cautioned that because of his four young sons (or "family dynamics," as he put it), he is unlikely to continue in elected office past 2010, but said he still wants to remain in the policy arena.

"We want to look for a way we can continue to advance ideas," said the former maverick congressman and wonk in an office that included a healthy stack of books.

A World Without America

UPDATE: If, like jk, your browser barfs on YouTube's schockwave player, here's a link.

Ten Largest Databases

Business Intelligence Lowdown: Top 10 Largest Databases in the World

There are currently organizations around the world in the business of amassing collections of things, and their collections number into and above the trillions. In many cases these collections, or databases, consist of items we use every day.

Nonsensical Ideas

Must read

Democracy Midwifed

There is another casualty of the partisanship that has turned the Iraqi liberation into "Bush's War" and formed a solid line of Democrats in opposition. We're missing the political twists and turns as a new nation is birthed in the fecund Mesopotamian crescent.

The Wall Street Journal (news pages) reports today that Ahmed Chalabi has a new position in the government.

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- In his latest remarkable political reincarnation, onetime U.S. favorite Ahmed Chalabi has secured a position inside the Iraqi government that could help determine whether the Bush administration's new push to secure Baghdad succeeds.

In a new post created earlier this year, Mr. Chalabi will serve as an intermediary between Baghdad residents and the Iraqi and U.S. security forces mounting an aggressive counterinsurgency campaign across the city. The position is meant to help Iraqis arrange reimbursement for damage to their cars and homes caused by the security sweeps in the hope of maintaining public support for the strategy.

Put me in those polls where a majority of Americans still see and demand success. Give General Petraeus a chance. Then, instead of sniping at the administration from the sidelines, watch an inchoate nation unfold, real time.

Nancy Polling

The Trekmedic is polling.

Squeaker of the Mouse Nancy Pelosi has spoken effusively about her children and grandchildren and how they've shaped her management style. Yet, she is the de facto head of the Democratic Party, which supports abortion on-demand and every level of government involvement.

Sirius/XM Merger Powerpoint

Power Corrupts. Power Point corrupts absolutely.

I hate to advise sitting through a power point you don’t have to, but brother ac sends a link to the Sirius / XM merger presentation. I found it very interesting.

McCain Chooses DAWG, jk chooses Giuliani

Blog brother AlexC was disappointed with Mayor Giuliani’s acceptance of global warming.

I looked for a brick to throw at the TV last night, when Senator McCain was waltzing around the Golden State bashing the President. The LATimes sez McCain slams Bush on global warming, Iraq policy

"I would assess this administration's record on global warming as terrible," McCain said, recalling that he got "no cooperation from the administration" at Senate hearings on the subject. He pronounced himself "very happy to see the president mention global warming and a renewed commitment from the administration to this issue." But he added tartly: "It's long overdue."

He can believe what he wants, and he can certainly criticize an unpopular president in the geographic locus of his unpopularity. But the grandstanding, self-righteous McCain was on display yesterday -- and I really don't like that guy. I will, of course, support Senator McCain should he win the GOP nomination, but I will not support him in the primaries.

Giuliani 2008.

Liberalism from Liberals

It's always a shock, but sometimes the "progressives" can surprise you with a little liberalism.

David Greenberg writes in TNR that perhaps the left should not be the cheerleaders for prosecutorial abuse, even would it net them the head of Scooter Libby.

But I think my fellow liberals, partaking in some hypocrisy of their own, have failed to grasp the true toll of this inquisition. We're supposed to be champions of the First Amendment and foes of overzealous prosecutors. For most of the postwar era, we were the ones who demanded greater exposure of government secrets, sharper skepticism about blanket claims of "national security," and stronger support for reporters against the assaults of the organized right. In keeping with those convictions, we should have protested this overwrought case from the start. In fact, applauding it actually benefits the Bush administration--and future regimes of its ilk--by further sanctifying secrecy and demonizing the press.

I don't think liberals have totally forsaken their values. In cases like the wiretapping story, they've summoned their time-honored revulsion at government attempts to squelch information. But, regarding Libby, the left has acted differently. It has succumbed to an antipathy toward an unsavory White House operative and a few unloved journalists and has cheered on a crusading prosecutor's misguided tribunals. Everyone should have a moment to gloat. But we all would do well to recall that, if today it is Dick Cheney's henchman who stands in the dock, tomorrow it may be someone else's--John Edwards's, Hillary Clinton's, or Barack Obama's.

The Tax Bite

This is an interesting calculation.

Taxes take a bigger bite out of the Big Apple than any other urban area in the nation, according to an analysis released Wednesday.

The Independent Budget Office report said local government taxes absorb $9.02 of every $100 of taxable resources here. The rate is 47 percent more than the $6.16 average for the most populous U.S. cities.

"No other large city comes close," the report said.

After New York, Philadelphia rated next highest, with $7.16 per $100, and Los Angeles followed with $6.88. Of the nine cities, Dallas had the lowest rate, with $5.20 per $100.

To reach those numbers, analysts estimated each city's gross taxable resources, made up of city household incomes and business surpluses , in other words, the main spending power used to pay taxes. For New York, that number is $502.1 billion. The portion of tax capacity being used by government was calculated using direct municipal taxes, estimated state collections within a city, and any overlapping local governments like counties.

I disappointed my Dad, too.

Ian at Benevolent Misanthropy posts this sad story, noting that it is neither surprising nor unique.

A father killed his wife and four daughters in their sleep because he could not bear them adopting a more westernised lifestyle, an inquest heard yesterday.

Mohammed Riaz, 49, found it abhorrent that his eldest daughter wanted to be a fashion designer, and that she and her sisters were likely to reject the Muslim tradition of arranged marriages.

Sorry for the flippant headline. My father was indeed devastated when I left school to pursue a musical career. But he knew the wise words of the Lebanese poet Kalil Gibran, "Your children are not your children."

Sarb, Ox & Spitz

Jonathan Pearce at Samizdata.net:

Last year, more than 350 companies went public in Europe, selling $86 billion of stock, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. In the U.S., 235 companies raised $48 billion in IPOs. In 1999, 507 companies went public in the U.S., selling a combined $63.93 billion of stock. Not one of the 10 largest stock issues of 2006 was listed in New York.

The Power of Arbitrary

Greg Mankiw gets off a good one at the expense of former Clinton Labhor Secretary and weekly Kudlow Guest, Robert Reich.

Robert Reich says that, as a requirement for free trade deals, we should tell developing countries to "set a minimum wage that's half their median wage." The proposal raises two questions in my mind:

1. Does Reich pay his nanny, cleaning person, and gardener more than half the median wage of members of his family?

2. If not, should I refuse to buy his books?

A current ballot initiative in my hometown questions whether land (pretty close to my house) will be annexed into the city to house open space and a Lowe's store. Opponents have a lawn sign" "No on A: Enough is Enough."

I see those signs and ask "who put you in charge of enough?" Business developers will invest their own capital, believing enough is not yet enough.

40%

In case you were wondering what our effective tax rate is.

In a study for the National Bureau of Economic Research, Boston University economists Laurence J. Kotlikoff and David Rapson have found that our all-in marginal tax rate is 40%, give or take a bit. Yes, you read that right: 40%.

Most workers will pay about that much on each dollar of income when all taxes -- federal and state income taxes, sales taxes, taxes for benefit programs, etc. -- are considered.

As a consequence, a 30-year-old couple earning only $20,000 a year has a marginal tax rate of 42.5%, while a 45-year-old couple earning $500,000 pays at 43.2%. There are some exceptions: A 30-year-old couple earning $50,000 a year, for instance, pays 24.4%, and a 60-year-old couple making $150,000 a year faces a tax rate of 47.7%.

The average marginal tax rate on incomes between $20,000 and $500,000 is 40.3%, the median tax rate is 41.8%, and the standard deviation of all of those rates is 5.3 percentage points. Basically, most of us pay about 40%, plus or minus 5.3 percentage points.

Secular Schools

Arnold Kling has an excellent piece today in TCS. The man who brought us the superb coinage "Folk Marxism" now chooses to be called a "Civil Societarian" rather than a libertarian.

To excerpt the article too heavily is to risk reducing it to a few of its parts. I encourage people to read the whole thing.

A recurring theme is the "religiosity" of progressivism.

As far as I can tell, there is no way to draw the line between church and state in public schools. To me, the only way to separate church and state in schooling is to have private schools. Getting government out of the schooling business would return schooling to the realm of civil society, where values and ethics may be taught without inhibition.

The religion of the public school system tends to be a mixture of environmentalism, political correctness, and worship of big government. Many private schools preach the same thing, so perhaps little would change if we had a system of all private education. However, if there is any chance that students might delve more deeply into issues of ethics and social problems, it would be in a setting that is not constrained by government bureaucracy.
[...]
Liberals worry that religious conservatives will impose a Christian theocracy. That threat is both obvious and far-fetched. Instead, I wish that liberals could recognize the dangers that their own religion poses to civil society. Price controls on pharmaceuticals would represent a much more serious war on science than denial of funds for embryonic stem cell research (although I personally would not oppose such government funding).

We need to love something larger than ourselves. Many people love God. Perhaps civil societarians can love our ideal of a civil society. I am happy to love the flag and the republic for which it stands. Just not in public schools.

Sirius-XM Merger

I suggested last month that an XM-Sirius merger would not be approved by a Democratic 110th Congress and I am not giving up on that speculation.

Against prescience points, however, I am hoping for the deal to succeed. I don't think either firm is strong enough to compete and innovate by itself. A strong satellite provider could bring new offerings to the market. (Maybe I'll even get my beloved Luna back.)

The real issue is whether our beloved Federal government will continue to meddle in business, based on ghosts of Theodore Roosevelt and robber barons. The WSJ Ed Page joins me (paid link, sorry) in realizing that the market is too complex for regulators to understand.

Beltway critics of the deal see a media monopolist around every corner, scheming to limit the public's access to content. And it's true that the merger would create a lone satellite radio company. But a pure monopoly is one that exists in a market where there are no close substitutes. By contrast, a combined Sirius-XM would have to compete not only with free broadcast radio but also with MP3 players, online radio and even music channels offered by cable providers.

Heaven only knows what the cellular companies will bring to the party. They're already gearing up to provide more video options, but there's nothing stopping Verizon or Cingular from coming up with a device that includes a couple of dozen radio stations to compete with satellite.

Which is why the real danger here isn't the creation of a "monopoly," unless you define the market in a way that has no resemblance to the real world. The bigger concern is that regulators will repeat the satellite television mistake and in the process reduce consumer choice. "The reason for this merger is not to exclude others from the market," says Adam Thierer, who follows telecom issues at the Progress & Freedom Foundation. "It's to make sure they can compete in the broader market against the various players they face -- serious competitors that have satellite radio providers scrambling for their lives."

IBD Poll

Among many great reasons to be depressed, it's hard to top the polls showing that Americans do not believe they can win in Iraq, do not feel we can win in Iraq, and do not care whether we win in Iraq.

I suspect it has been finely inculcated, yet still stand silenced (not my normal state) when I hear my countrymen are willing to allow another Vietnam outcome. I risk cherry-picking a poll, but Larry Kudlow references an Investor Business Daily Poll that tells a different story.

Speaking of Investors Business Daily, they posted tremendous polling data last Friday on Iraq that you won’t read about in the mainstream media.

Contrary to common wisdom, most Americans want to win in Iraq.

The poll was conducted by IBD’s polling partner TIPP. This is Raghavan Mayur’s company and they are very accurate pollsters.

Based on 915 respondents, the IBD/TIPP poll revealed that as of February 7th, 66% believe that it's “very important” or “somewhat important” to win in Iraq. That includes 85 percent of Republicans, 63 percent of Independents, and 53 percent of Democrats.

It goes on to say that 58 percent are “very hopeful” or “somewhat hopeful” of a U.S. victory in Iraq.

Victory or Blow?

Headline: Court blow for Guantánamo prisoners

Prisoners at Guantánamo Bay cannot challenge their imprisonment at the US detention facility, a US appeals court said on Tuesday, delivering a significant legal victory to the White House.

The DC court of appeals ruled 2-1 that recent legislation precluded inmates at the Cuba-based prison from contesting their detention in US civilian courts.

Congress passed the Military Commissions Act last year after the Supreme Court ruled that the original structure of the military commissions created to try prisoners at Guantánamo Bay was unconstitutional.

While the MCA restructured the commissions to comply with US and international law, it also stripped detainees of habeas corpus – the right to appeal against their detention in the US civil court system.

In dismissing the case, Judge Randolph Raymond wrote that the detainees had provided arguments that were "creative but not cogent" and that accepting them "would be to defy the will of Congress".

Sticking It To the Man

I wonder if liberals and Democrats who look for tax deductions while demanding higher taxes are hypocrites.

In any case, CNN Money lists 10 ways you can save some cash come April 15th.

Let's hear it for fat dudes

Arthur C. Brooks has written a book examining trends in charitable giving. I read a review over the weekend, and today he has a guest editorial in the Wall Street Journal called "Worth the Weight."

As we all know, happiness tends to be reflected in the way we treat others. Perhaps not surprisingly, therefore, overweight people are more likely to behave charitably than people in the normal BMI range. This is particularly true for men. For example, while 68% of men in the overweight category gave money to charities in 2001, only 62% of men in the normal range gave (although giving falls back considerably when we move into obesity). Overweight men were also the most likely to volunteer their time for various causes and charities.

Not only are they more likely to give, overweight men also give away more dollars each year than men in the normal range do -- in total, as well as to most individual types of causes, from religion to poverty relief. This is not entirely due to the fact that overweight men earn more money (although that is also true). Imagine two men who are identical with respect to income, education, age, race, family status and religious affiliation. The only difference is that the first has a BMI of 23, while the second is a portly but still-respectable 27. On average, the heavier man will give about 5% more money away than the thinner man each year. Your optimal BMI may be between 18.5 and 25 for doctors, but not for fundraisers; in fact, the top average giving level occurs at a BMI of about 28.5. For a six-foot man, this translates into a gentlemanly 211 pounds.

Sinking Hillary

Somehow I think this idea is going nowhere.

If Hillary Rodham Clinton wins the presidency, some top Democrats would like to see her husband, former President Bill Clinton, appointed to serve out Hillary’s unexpired Senate term.

“As a senator, he’d be a knockout,” said Harold Ickes, who was once a top White House aide to Bill Clinton and now gives behind-the-scenes advice to Hillary. “He knows issues, he loves public policy and he’s a good politician.”

Some Democrats and political analysts say Bill Clinton would thrive in the world’s greatest deliberative body, much like Lyndon Johnson did before he became president.

“President Clinton would excel in the Senate,” said Paul Begala, who helped Bill Clinton get elected and served in the White House as a top aide.

“Why not?” Begala added. “He excelled as attorney general and governor of Arkansas, he excelled as president and he’s been a model of the modern Senate spouse.”

McCain vs Roe vs Wade

Too late.

Republican presidential candidate John McCain, looking to improve his standing with the party's conservative voters, said Sunday the court decision that legalized abortion should be overturned.

"I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned," the Arizona senator told about 800 people in South Carolina, one of the early voting states.

McCain also vowed that if elected, he would appoint judges who "strictly interpret the Constitution of the United States and do not legislate from the bench."

56-34

The Senate failed to pass a non-binding chicken sh*t resolution on not supporting the surge in Iraq.

The Senate gridlocked on the Iraq war in a sharply worded showdown on Saturday as Republicans foiled a Democratic attempt to rebuke President Bush over his deployment of 21,500 additional combat troops.

The vote was 56-34. That was four short of the 60 needed to advance the measure, which is identical to a nonbinding resolution that Democrats pushed through the House on Friday.

"The Senate, on behalf of the American people, must make it clear to the commander in chief that he no longer has a rubber stamp in Iraq," said Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., in the final moments before the vote.

In unrelated news, there's a non-binding cease fire in place in Iraq.

A coalition of major terror groups operating in Iraq today announced a symbolic, non-binding ceasefire in response to House Democrats’ passage of a non-binding resolution rejecting President George Bush’s troop surge plan.

Al Qaeda in Iraq, the Shiite Mahdi army and representatives of a Sunni car-bomb cartel said they would continue to fully fund martyrdom operations, with help from their friends in Iran, Syria and elsewhere.

Redrawing the Red-Blue Map

I referenced this in a comment. This is an interesting speculation from Brian Carney in the OpinionJournal Political Diary today:

The prospect of a 2008 presidential contest between New York Senator Hillary Clinton and former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani would, if it came to pass, have some interesting implications for national politics next year. In particular, Mr. Giuliani is currently outpolling Mrs. Clinton head-to-head in New York and New Jersey, putting into play two states that have anchored the map of "Blue America" since the 2000 election. Pennsylvania, which voted for the Democrat in the past two election cycles, also polls narrowly in favor of Hizzoner.

On the other side of the ledger, there are reasons to expect Mr. Giuliani to do less well than President Bush did in the Rocky Mountain States and the Southwest. One big wildcard here is California, where no good interparty polling on head-to-head matchups seems to be available yet, but where Mr. Giuliani's reputation for social liberalism -- a reputation he is currently running away from -- could conceivably put that state back into the swing category.

With almost two years to go, much of this could change. But the early polling suggests that on Election Night 2008, the constellation of red and blue states may look quite different than it has in the previous two cycles. This has ramifications for where candidates spend their time and their money in the coming campaign. It also means the big media markets on the coasts will get a lot more candidate attention than they have in recent contests. Expect to hear more soon about the death of the old red state/blue state trope as the battlegrounds shift for '08.

UPDATE: Noemie Emery at The Weekly Standard has a longer article on this topic: The Rise of The Metro Republicans

The War Vote

I got an email today from my Congressman Jim Gerlach where he writes...

Saying that it undermines the country’s support of troops fighting the War on Terror, Congressman Jim Gerlach (PA-06) announced today that he will vote against a controversial resolution introduced by the House Democrat Majority that criticized the President’s call for a surge in U.S. military involvement in Iraq.

“I will vote against this resolution because I reject the status quo,” Rep. Gerlach said. “The Democrats’ resolution offers no new direction on Iraq. Their resolution doesn’t say that 20,000 additional troops are not enough – so we should send more. And it does not call for our troops to come home. Rather, by neither requesting more troops nor calling for our troops to return home, the Democrats are defending the status quo. The status quo is not an option and neither is defeat. While I don’t agree completely with the President’s plan, I believe we must fight harder and smarter because surrender in this case only serves to make our enemies stronger, and endangers the lives of American troops.”

I think the Democrats are going to pay for this non-binding resolution... The leftists are going to demand their pound of flesh, and a non-binder isn't enough. The Democrats in the House and Senate were hoping to take a position without having to really have it count.

The Republicans should have amended this thing to make it binding.

Rudy & Global Warming

The other day at Pa Watercooler, blogger Dale Light pointed out that Rudy Giuliani had jumped on to the global warming bandwagon.

Well...

The former New York mayor has been banking a whopping $100,000 per speech to corporations, trade groups, and university audiences, according to his standard appearance contract. The document, a copy of which you'll find below, notes that Giuliani, 62, requires private air transportation to his gigs. But, the contract states, any old plane won't do: "Please note that the private aircraft MUST BE a Gulfstream IV or bigger." Such a jet sells for about $30 million, in case you're wondering.

I think now, I'm still holding out hope for Sanford and Gingrich.

Broad Swath?

WaPo staff writer Paul Kane writes a by-lined news piece (I think this is a news article, not an opinion piece, who can tell anymore?) on the Republican Reps likely to support the Democratic non-binding resolution.

Broad Swath of GOP Defecting on Iraq Vote

From the moderate suburbs of Delaware to the rural, conservative valleys of eastern Tennessee, House Republican opponents of President Bush's latest Iraq war plan cut across the GOP's ideological and regional spectrum.

Numbering a dozen or more, these House Republicans have emerged as some of the most prominent opponents of the plan to increase troop presence in Iraq. They admit to being a ragtag band, with no scheduled meetings and little political cohesion.

"We aren't organized at all," said Rep. Jim Ramstad (R-Minn.), whose district includes suburbs of the Twin Cities. "It's about as diverse a group as is possible."

Borrowing time from House Democrats, these Republicans have gone to the floor to condemn the latest attempt at stabilizing Iraq, which they see as mired in civil war, and have vowed to support a Democratic-driven resolution condemning the buildup.

There are 202 GOP seats. A dozen is less than six percent. If a few of those are from safe seats, does this really constitute a broad swath? One hundred percent of the Democrats vote against victory, six percent of Republicans join them. I don't see it as bipartisan.

Senator Lindsey Graham has not been my favorite Senator, but he scored some points today with his assertion that "I will do everything in my power to ensure the House resolution dies an inglorious death in the Senate."

UPDATE: Seventeen "White Flag Republicans" vote for the "rebuke." Hat-tip: Hugh

El Camino del Serfdom

Meat, sugar scarce in Venezuela stores

CARACAS, Venezuela - Meat cuts vanished from Venezuelan supermarkets this week, leaving only unsavory bits like chicken feet, while costly artificial sweeteners have increasingly replaced sugar, and many staples sell far above government-fixed prices.

President Hugo Chavez's administration blames the food supply problems on unscrupulous speculators, but industry officials say government price controls that strangle profits are responsible. Authorities on Wednesday raided a warehouse in Caracas and seized seven tons of sugar hoarded by vendors unwilling to market the inventory at the official price.

Hat-tip: Everyday Economist

Screw TNR!

If I may recount: TNR comes out boldly for the Iraq war, then turns tail and attacks the mission when it gets difficult, piling on to support antiwar candidates and help pull the President’s party out of power.

Now, its editors are crying into their 1945 Château l'effete that It's becoming obvious: No one is going to save Darfur

Precisely because neither of these [UN] options ever seemed likely to work, we have argued over the past year that nato intervention is the best way to end the genocide. We still favor that approach, but we have no illusions that the Bush administration will ever undertake it. Last week, speaking at a panel in Washington, D.C., John Prendergast of the International Crisis Group urged Western governments at least to weigh the possibility of military action against Sudan--but then conceded, "It's a laughable concept as we sit here today." True enough. At this point, we would be happy to see the West take any action that has even the remotest chance of stopping the genocide. Some efforts, such as a no-fly zone over Darfur or a naval blockade of Port Sudan, could, at least in theory, be undertaken unilaterally or by a small group of countries. Other proposals, such as travel bans that target government leaders or sanctions against Sudanese oil, would require broad consent from the international community to be effective.

Unfortunately, none of these measures seem likely to happen any time soon. For one thing, when it comes to Darfur, we have shown time and again that we simply lack the will for substantial steps of any kind. For another, China--a major consumer of Sudanese oil and a longtime supplier of equipment to Khartoum's military--would almost certainly foil efforts to punish Sudan economically.

And so the West either isn't going to act or isn't going to act strongly enough, and the plight of Darfuris will become more dire by the day. Indeed, as recent reports of attacks on aid workers piled up, one humanitarian group, Médecins du Monde, decided to pull out of Darfur. If others follow, millions of displaced persons could soon be without water, food, or medicine.

The UN is powerless and disinterested, and TNR wants the administration to organize a coalition of the willing. Let's nuke China and free Tibet while we're over there.

Former TNR Editor Peter Beinart's book is subtitled "Why liberals, and only liberals, can win the war on terror and make America great again." I respect Beinart (and Martin Peretz) but his old magazine disproves his thesis almost once a week.

Nationalize The Media!

I guess the fairness doctrine has come to the Wall Street Journal Editorial Page.

A guest editorial by Steven Rattner, former NYTimes journalist and current managing principal at Quadrangle Group, LLC, issues the usual dire outlook on Newspaper readership:




Curiously, Rattner never mentions the word "bias." He seems concerned that everybody is just getting too stupid to appreciate all the wonderful journalism that's out there. Check out his list:

We should also bear in mind that for that sliver of America that seeks quality news, it is arguably more available today than ever before: There is this newspaper, now published six days a week; the national edition of the New York Times home-delivered across the country; the Economist (with its U.S. circulation of 600,000); the NewsHour, the BBC and Charlie Rose on public television; and for the true junkies, C-Span. Not to mention the more rarefied Internet precincts.

He doesn't recognize bias, and he's not so hot on Schumpeterian Gales:

But for newspapers, the challenges are mounting, including advertisers fleeing not only to follow lost readers but also because they believe that newer forms of media can be both more cost-effective and just plain more effective. For example, classified ads, which can represent a third of a typical newspaper's revenue, can be delivered online faster (instantaneous), more conveniently (searchable) and cheaper (sometimes free via Craigslist). Not much imagination or boldness is required to predict that classifieds could completely disappear from newspapers.

Not-for-profit status might be one possibility. Instead of having billionaire moguls as proprietors, we could try to turn them into philanthropists who found nonprofit organizations to buy and operate their local papers. At least one such example exists: the St. Petersburg Times, owned by the Poynter Foundation as a result of a bequest by Nelson Poynter.

Purchasing major newspapers would be costly and perhaps impractical, so a hybrid model may make more sense. We could create a pool of money (possibly from a license fee similar to how the BBC is funded). News organizations with an expensive but important project in mind could apply for funding, much the way producers in the public television world have for the last 40 years. Philanthropy could also play a role here, as Joan Kroc did when she left NPR a $200 million kitty.

We've had experience in the past -- the New York City subways come to mind -- with businesses that began as conventional, for-profit corporations, and, for one reason or another, were later rendered unprofitable while still being viewed as essential services. It's time to apply some creative thinking to newspapers and, for that matter, to serious journalism in other media. Then we need to convince Americans that they should pay attention to it -- and pay for it.

Proves they’re fair.

UPDATE: Free link

How Many Republican Defeatists?

I guess that's the last remaining question in the House. I'm relearning what a friend the "cooling saucer of the Senate" is to a minority party. Even with all our squishes and RINOs, the Senate GOP stalled the defeat resolution under Sen. McConnell’s bold leadership.

But, as they say, you can pass a Ham Sandwich in the house (if the majority party is not hallah or kosher) and we will soon see a bill "supporting the troops" but denigrating their mission and attempting to withhold the tools for victory. How many House GOP members will join the pusillanimity club? The WSJ Ed Page issues a warning: (free link)

All of this is something that House Republicans should keep in mind as they consider whether to follow this retreat. The GOP leadership has been stalwart, even eloquent, this week in opposing the resolution. But some Republicans figure they can use this vote to distance themselves from Mr. Bush and the war while not doing any real harm. They should understand that the Democratic willingness to follow the Murtha "slow-bleed" strategy will depend in part on how many Republicans follow them in this vote. The Democrats are themselves divided on how to proceed, and they want a big GOP vote to give them political cover. However "non-binding," this is a vote that Republican partisans will long remember.

History is likely to remember the roll as well. A newly confirmed commander is about to lead 20,000 American soldiers on a dangerous and difficult mission to secure Baghdad, risking their lives for their country. And the message their elected Representatives will send them off to battle with is a vote declaring their inevitable defeat.

Cause and Effect

Over at the Friends of Science Website, they have a very good primer on climate change (video).

The video discusses (briefly) the invalidity of the “hockey stick” graph that is shown so much (discussed by two Canadians, Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick); research that shows that increased CO2 levels follow, not lead, temperature change; the common fallacies you hear about climate change; the real causes of climate change (which are being studied so their effects can be measured).

It shows you science (i.e., rigorously validated knowledge of the real world) not hype (i.e., in this context, emotional claims driven by fear or power-lust).

Their site has a good summary of the scientific background to climate change. And a good list of technical articles, websites, and books on climate change.

There is more great information on the site…it’s one to be bookmarked and studied, and passed on to friends and family.

This, of course, is an important topic, a major issue of the day -- because, fundamentally, "man-made global warming/climate change" is an attack on reason: man's means of survival. It's the irrationality -- the lack of evidence for their position; the disregard for fact; the disregard for causation; the disregard of reality (by appealing to fear or artificial, ill-informed computer models); the disregard for induction; the appeal to intimidation, fear and threats -- of the climate fear-mongers that needs to be attacked more than any other part of this issue. They are not out for science and reality, they are out for control.

Abracadabra

The idea of "man-made global warming" has to be defended scientifically, like any other claim about the physical world. It must meet the canons of induction, for example.

The argument for "man-made global warming" is complex, of course, backed by many sub-arguments, a wide variety of data, a wide variety of research and experiments.

But let's look at one canon of induction they use: Method of Difference. (This is one of Mill's Methods. See A System of Logic by John Stuart Mill for the original presentation of the methods. See also a text book on logic such as Practical Logic (Prentice-Hall, 1950) by Monroe C. Beardsley.) This is a critical component of their argument.

Beardsley outlines the Method of Difference as follows (p. 455):

Given: (1) Two cases, one positive and one negative;
(2) The only difference between the two cases being that a single factor is present in the positive case and absent from the negative case.
Then: That factor is the cause.

So (1) man pumped CO2 into the atmosphere, and the earth warmed; man did not pump CO2 into the atmosphere decades ago, and the earth was cooler. (2) the only difference was the CO2 levels put in the atmosphere by man. Wal-la!! Man is responsible for burning the earth!!

That is fine as is...but it is missing something: context.

As Max Black points out in his Critical Thinking (p. 301, Prentice-Hall, 1952):

Nevertheless, the method, in spite of its great usefulness, is subject to grave dangers. Suppose a person watching a conjuring performance were to argue in this way: 'The magician has just said "Abracadabra," whereupon a live rabbit appeared. A minute ago he had not uttered the magic formula, and there was no rabbit to be seen. Since nothing has changed except that the spell was pronounced, the appearance of the rabbit must have been due to the utterance of the word Abracadabra.' This is a mistaken use of the method of difference. And the mistake is obviously due to the assumption expressed by the words 'nothing else has changed.'

That "nothing else has changed" in terms of climate is false. There are a myriad of factors which have not been researched or evaluated: the sun's irradiation of the earth, cosmic rays, the earth's magnetic field, the affect of clouds.

Then what about another big part of their argument for "man-made global warming:" "Computers say so."

On his website, a scientist by the name of Art De Vany points out, in a post on climate change, that:

The computer models of the climate simulate the weather for centuries. How close do you think they come to the real thing? Not very close at all. It is not possible. Period. None of these models is to be trusted

…

In the conclusion of my assessment I pointed out the similarities of current climate models to the large scale economic models of the past, the Penn model, the Social Science Research Council model, the Data Resources model and so on. Not one of these models is believed or in operation today in any real sense. The DRI model was a commercial venture by a group of Harvard economists. Initially, it was purchased and its forecasts were subscribed to by a large number of corporations and government agencies.

It did not survive the commercial test of making better forecasts and is gone. So, too will be the fate of the climate models. They reflect primarily the assumptions and the predilections of the model builders (as the Penn model did of Lawrence Klein and his tinkering with the model). They are completely non-scientific enterprises. In the case of the commercial product, they did not survive the market place.

The UN and government sponsored models face no similar market test. They survive on funding by the same groups, the UN and other government agencies, who stand to gain if the dire forecasts are believed by the public. Funds will flow. The media have little interest one way or the other. What ever will sell stories. And scary stories sell.

The models have no credibility -- they do not conform to reality. What's more, statisticians have attacked Michael Mann's methods and results, showing the "hockey stick" is invalid.

The only point of using a computer in physics, is to do complex calculations to see if your theory fits reality. When it fails at that, your theory is invalid.

Reality is the standard of truth, computer outputs are not.

Saying man caused global warming is like saying Abracadabra caused a rabbit to appear. It is merely a conjuring trick.

Goyim Continue to Run ThreeSources

Attila at Pillage Idiot suggests that "Maybe we DO control the media," looking at this headline in the Washington Times:

"Joo named chairman of Times; McDevitt to become president"

Better Living Through Chemistry

Two days on steroids, and the S&P is back over 1450.

"Missing Militant"

As congress debates whether or not to surrender the nascent Iraqi state to Islamist militants, the mere suggestion of a more muscular approach has apparently dislodged one of the largest such cockroaches:

Anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr fled Iraq for Iran ahead of a security crackdown in Baghdad and the arrival of 21,500 U.S. soldiers sent by President Bush to quell sectarian violence, a senior U.S. official said Tuesday.

But there's not much time to waste for Democrats, for whom any discernable success of the muscular approach would be anathema:

The long-awaited floor debate on Iraq is the first since Democrats took control of Congress in the November midterm elections. It also comes as the war approaches the four-year mark with more than 3,100 U.S. troops dead.

Democrats made clear the nonbinding resolution was the beginning of a longer campaign to bring the Iraq war to an end.

"A vote of disapproval will set the stage for additional Iraq legislation, which will be coming to the House floor," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said.

UPDATE: Terri at Ithinkthereforeierr has more reports of Islamist's bad news.

Happy Valentine's Day

Perry at Eidelblog has a nice riff on why we buy $100 roses.

Even outside of sitcom absurdity, we guys will spend much more for the most prized flowers on Valentine's Day than we would any other day of the year. Those who understand free market processes know there's nothing wrong with that. As I've explained previously, when prices are left free to adjust, then markets will eventually clear, given time. It's dependent on the quality of participants' information, of course, but as the quality approaches perfection, then markets will clear perfectly. In reality, information is not perfect, and because information has a cost, both buyers and sellers will settle on prices where, they judge, the cost of improving information won't exceed the benefit. A common example in the real world is advertising something for sale in additional venues, which certainly improves information for potential buyers, but in the end it may not yield an increased profit as great as the cost of the additional advertising.

Happy Valentine's Day.

Hayek Lives

The good folks in Niger may soon have exports beside yellowcake Uranium, if they will continue to empower their farmers to practice good stewardship of the land. Virginia Postrel writes about a NYTimes article. Postrel says "Given the inaccurate photo caption about planting trees, I expected to read about a foreign-aid program that provided seedlings. Instead, it turns out that the farmers figured out what to do the old-fashioned way--by using their powers of observation and what they had on hand."

I think, however, that she may have "buried the lede" a bit:

Another change was the way trees were regarded by law. From colonial times, all trees in Niger had been regarded as the property of the state, which gave farmers little incentive to protect them. Trees were chopped for firewood or construction without regard to the environmental costs. Government foresters were supposed to make sure the trees were properly managed, but there were not enough of them to police a country nearly twice the size of Texas.
But over time, farmers began to regard the trees in their fields as their property, and in recent years the government has recognized the benefits of that outlook by allowing individuals to own trees. Farmers make money from the trees by selling branches, pods, fruit and bark. Because those sales are more lucrative over time than simply chopping down the tree for firewood, the farmers preserve them.

A Crush

When a candidate can tell you something you don't want to hear, it could be good or bad.

Rudy gives more fealty to the DAWG than I'd like, But I enjoy hearing the man speak.

It's a good test case for the kind of crap we'd have to endure during a Giuliani campaign/administration. I can take it.

UPDATE: The commenters on Pajamas Media are not so forgiving as I. This could be an unfortunate litmus test in 2008.

Religion vs. Self-Interest

How long will the President's opponents deny the Laffer Curve (religion) at the expense of having more money to spend on their programs and power aggrandizement (self-interest)?

Larry Kudlow passes along some information from Michael Darda that Larry calls "A Revenue Gusher."

Treasury data for January released yesterday afternoon showed that tax receipts continue to roll in at a rapid rate, which has reduced the fiscal deficit to $191.9 billion or 1.4% of GDP, well below the 2.3% average since 1970. At the current pace, the budget could move back into balance as early as May 2008.

Good News From Colorado

Good news from Colorado has been fairly scant of late for a Republican voter. We got our asses kicked in 2004 and 2006, and the legislation is changing. But John Fund, in OpinionJournal's Political Diary, has some good news about our new Democratic Governor, Bill Ritter:

"The unions just leaned on him too much and the business community was for once united in opposition," is how Jon Caldera of Colorado's Independence Institute explains the startling decision of Democratic Governor Bill Ritter to veto a bill that would have made it easier to force Colorado workers to pay union fees.

The news is not only a victory for freedom of association and freedom of speech, but also shows the limits of liberalism even in a Rocky Mountain state that has recently moved from bipartisan "purple" to Democratic "blue."

When the Democratic state legislature steamrollered the bill through, business leaders protested that it would repeal a Colorado law requiring that, once a company's employees approve a union, they have a second, secret-ballot vote on how dues will be assessed, with a 75% supermajority required for approval. Governor Ritter said he believed the bill would have had a negative effect on the state's business climate and was viewed as unfair by many of the nine-tenths of the state's workers who don't belong to a union.

The Ritter veto doesn't augur well for the chances of federal legislation being pushed by Democrats in Congress that would repeal the tradition of holding secret-ballot elections for union representation in favor of a "card check" system in which union leaders would simply collect cards signed by members. Once 50%-plus-one of workers at a company had turned in their cards, the union would be automatically certified.

"Governor Ritter heard the debate in Colorado and decided that the union agenda this time was just too much for him to embrace," says Mr. Caldera. "It shows the power that grass-roots activism can have even when liberals control the policy process."

It's Like Blogging on Steroids!

What is it? Well, blogging on steroids.

I am getting a five-day IV dose. I suppose if I win a blogging award, you'll have to put an asterisk by my name.

Last time I did this (~three years ago) they made me talkative -- will this round make me blogative? Sadly, the only place they could start an IV this morning -- in a grueling jackbaueurian torture session -- was in my main typing wrist. I dunno, maybe I'll podcast.

Socialist Paradises

Really. I had it so wrong. AlexC emails a link to Cuba: making poverty history that celebrates the economic achievements as well as the unparalleled freedom, human rights and self-direction available the island nation.

The only thing resembling a gulag in Cuba is in the US’s illegally-held enclave at Guantanamo Bay where the Bush administration has built its notorious concentration camp.

Contrary to the impression given by the Western media, Cuba does have competitive elections. Much is made of the fact that there is only one party, the Cuban Communist Party (PCC). The PCC does not, in fact, endorse candidates in elections. While party members can, and do, run in elections, so can non-members. In any given electorate there may be one, or more than one, PCC member standing or there may be only non-members as candidates.

jk Goes Green

I must buy this car. The fate of the planet depends on it.

Well Toyota plans to sell the FT-HS somewhere in the mid 30k range which, if correct, has me sold as I type this down. The goal of the rear wheel drive(thank god!) hybrid powertrain is to produce 400 horsepower and achieve 0-60 mph in around 4 seconds. This is accomplished with by combining a 3.5-liter V6 and an electric motor in a similar manner to the Lexus GS450h.

Let It Snow

The Philadelphia area (in fact the whole northeast) is bracing for it's first big snowfall of the year. While not the scale of our square-state friends, it's still a big deal for the news.

Lately we've been upgraded from "a lot of snow" to a mess.

As of this morning, the weather service saw this set of scenarios for Philadelphia:

Tonight: A “slight chance” of snow.
Tomorrow: Snow in the afternoon, accumulating an inch or so.
Tomorrow night: Snow gives over to sleet and freezing rain.
Wednesday morning: Freezing rain, then rain.
Wednesday afternoon: Chance of snow.

The suburbs, South Jersey and Delaware are likely to suffer a similar fate.

Heavy snow, however, could still sock much of the rest of Pennsylvania. Areas west of a line roughly from Allentown to Lancaster are under a "Winter Storm Watch," with snow possible from Tuesday through Wednesday evening.

"From a forecaster's perspective, it's frustrating," Mike Gorse, a Weather Service meteorologist in Mount Holly, said yesterday. "The computer models just aren't agreeing."

WSJ Ed Page on "The Carbon Prize"

The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page joins me in supporting Sir Richard Branson's $25 million prize for finding an engineering solution to atmospheric carbon dioxide instead of a return to caves.

True, the judges for Mr. Branson's challenge hail from the Apocalypse Now crowd; Al Gore joined Sir Richard for Friday's announcement. But the billionaire Briton is plunking down his own money for the prize, rather than asking middle-class taxpayers to pony up, à la the Kyoto Protocol and other top-down schemes favored by environmentalists and European politicians