I can personally attest that at least one segment of their economy is working- telemarketing. Capital One has called me from a Newfoundland extension three times in the last two days.
Quote of the Day:
Anything that makes your mother cry is fun.
Something else bizarre. When I click on the permanent link of older posts (older is a relative term- in this case from five days ago), it takes me back to when my page was the other names it has been, which is odd.
I have got to figure out why I am only allowed to post a certain number of column inches before it cuts me off. Really annoying have to write in word, then post in reverse order pieces of one thing so it appears on the right order on the blog.
The real allegation, which Mr. Bush did not parry because he cannot, is that the tax cuts have pushed the federal budget from surplus back into deficit, thereby squeezing the government’s ability to beef up military spending and homeland defense while taking care of the nation’s other needs — notably, the long-term shortfalls in Social Security and Medicare and the immediate gaps in health insurance for more than 40 million Americans.
Bush can parry this. Quite easily.
A.) The tax cuts have not taken place and have not caused the recession, much to the consternation of Daschle and WaPo.
B.) The tax cuts are not actually taking monies recieved, and then giving them to people in the same fashion as the ridiculously sized transfer payments we call social security and welfare and farm aid, etc. Instead, a tax cut is reducing the amount of money you will take in the future. Decreasing taxes is not causing a net loss in goverment monies. It is just creating a situation in which there is less future net gain by the government. Some might say that is the same thing, I would disagree.
C.) Daschle et al. love to glibly state that they showed fiscal responsibility during the Clinton years, when they were actually in the minority and it was a Republican House and Senate that passed those bills (which, sorry vast right-wingers- were not actually fiscally responsible- they were ENORMOUS growths in the budget every year, something you ‘fiscal conservatives’ should be exceptionally embarassed about).
D.) If the government can not afford to pay for ‘the nation’s other needs ,’ it seems to me they should spend less in non-critical areas. When I have a budget shortfall in my personal life, I do not have the option of going to my boss and forcing him to pay me more. I spend less.
Just watched A knight’s Tale, which means it is time for a Ten Second Movie Review:
A Knight’s Tale– Medieval people seldom bathed. Bad guys wear black armor. Heralds are effeminate and frequently found naked. Chicks dug Heath Ledger back then too.
Off to go finish Being There by Jerzy Kosinski while watching the last Sunday Night NFL game of the season.
Best 200 word or less (O.K.- I am estimating- I did not really count) discussion of atheism on The Fly Bottle.
New link added for Damian Penny’s Daimnation!, which also has a clever name and decent commentary…
Happy Fun Pundit, while geefully shouting ‘Yee-Haw!’ (I love that title) has been bamboozled with his story on the Presidential IQ thing that went around about 6 months ago. He is not the only one to fall victim to this hoax, as this was widely documented in the Opinion Journal (free registration required) and some large media outlets had mucho egg on their colective faces.
*Update* (8 Jan 02)Seems I just misinterpreted Steve, ‘the man of mystery’ and his eclectic writing style. Oh well. It was nice chatting with the folks at HappyFunPundit.
Quote of the Day:
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.
H. L. Mencken
As you may have noticed (actually, there is no way anyone has noticed- I think I have two readers- Thanks mom and dad!), there have been some name issues. This lil hole in the web was originally title The Curmudgeon’s Corner, only for me to find out that the name was astonishly uncreative. There are 900 other similar sites with the name. I then tried a hick talks politics, but hated it. I am not a hick, and I don’t just talk about politics. After much more thought than I should have wasted on it, I have decided on the new name of this site. It is not changing again.
My beloved Steelers have beaten the despised Browns, 28-7, finishing the regular season with a 13-3 record. A thoroughly enjoyable afternoon, indeed.
After the game, several of the talking heads on either FOX or CBS seemed overly eager to state repeatedly that the “Steelers are backing into the playoffs, whatever the hell that means. I guess homefield advantage, top-seeding in the playoffs, and a first round-bye makes them slouches.
Predictably, I commenced screaming at the idiot box, volunteering loudly and obnoxiously to show them my backside, since they seem to be so fond of alluding to the Steelers backing into things. No takers, as of yet.
Time to catch up on some reading, and then for tonight’s movie, which I have not yet chosen.
This is the third time I have tried to post this. For some reason it claims I am not an authorized member of the team. I am giving it one more go, and then to hell with it.
At any rate, Canada is sending some troops to Afghanistan, which is chummy and neighborly. When I read this, all I could think of was a hysterical article by Mark Steyn in the National Post on September 24, 2001. Mar Steyn is adelight to read, and I would recommend reading him if you do not do so already. The name of this article is ‘Canada’s War is Already Over, and here is an excerpt (the National Post Website is screwy and hard to link to):
The word from both countries is that this “coalition,” on the battlefield, will be an Anglo-American affair: The U.S. is not interested in letting anybody else into the inner sanctums of joint command. The minimum entry qualifications are that a) you have a professional, modern military and b) you share America’s war aims. The French meet the former but not the latter. The Mexicans the latter but not the former. The British meet both. The Canadians meet neither.
This is a simple truth, and we should be mature enough to acknowledge it. When Mr. Chr
We like Christopher Hitchens. This is a prime reason why. I am having a hard time thinking of someone with a better track record of exposing people for the frauds that they are, whether they be on the left or right of the political spectrum, or if they are just plain upside down confused.
Thanks to the unmatchable instapundit himself, Glenn Reynolds, for the Hitch article.
Glenn also has a great deal of info on the Stephen Ambrose plagiarism scandal. As usual, Instapundit is being reasonable (something that frequently eludes yours truly), and provides insightful analysis with well documented sourcing to provide a reasonable overview of the actual situation. My personal hope is that it was just an accidental mistake on Ambrose’s part, because I love his work (yeah- I know you elite snobs think he is a pop-historian- bullocks to you, I say).
The plagiarism issue brings up another question. As I am new to this whole blogging, I am wondering if there is an ethical standard for posting links? Is it appropriate to link information on your sight that has aalready appeared on other blogs? I think so, provided you give credit to the people who originally found the info and documented it. I try to always do that, unless I think I am the first to mention something (not that anybody is reading this anyway). A perfect example for me is what took place this morning on Little Green Footballs.
I am sure this ettiquette has been discussed before, but again, I am new to this scene. However, if linking to other blogs in the manner I have discussed is a breach of nettiquette, the Question for the Day is:
Is it possible to have a blog without ever linking to Instapundit.
My beloved Steelers just took the lead v s. the Browns. BBL.
I am awaiting a scathing rebuke of the Majority Leader from the fuzzy folks at Common Dreams. I will be waiting a while.