|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
| Unusual NewsIn other news, the AP leads with a headline today about the ongoing Alaska State Trooper investigation surrounding Sarah Palin. Apparently Sarah Palin used the state troopers to procure women for sex . . . wait, that's the wrong campagin. Something about a wife-beating brother-in-law and Palin firing his boss. Anyhow, the headline reads as follows:
Todd Palin had unusual access to wife's staff
The article brings to light revelations about "Todd Palin's extraordinary level of access to a variety of the governor's top aides." (Reading further, it seems that "extraordinary level of access" means "spoke with in an unofficial capacity", but that's a different story)
In the interest of fairness, aren't we the same nation who damn near had Hillary Clinton on the other half of the ticket? A First Lady who practically created a cabinet position for herself? Who used her ties with her husband's political buddies and DNC bigwigs to forge her own political career? I'm not accusing her of anthing illegal, unethical, or even inappropriate. A president can lend his ear to whomever he chooses. But if Todd Palin's access is "unusual" and "extraordinary" you're going to have to come up with a new superlative for Ms. Clinton's relationship with her husband's administration. | | |
| Tax credit with a catchI was perusing the candidates' platforms the other night to get their stance on higher education. Both candidates endorse some sort of provision to expand tax credits to increase access to higher education, but Obama's struck me as just plain weird. Well-intentioned, to be sure, but a bizarre implementation. From Obama's website:
Obama and Biden will make college affordable for all Americans by
creating a new American Opportunity Tax Credit. This universal and fully refundable credit will ensure that
the first $4,000 of a college education is completely free for most Americans, and will cover two-thirds the
cost of tuition at the average public college or university and make community college tuition completely
free for most students.
Sounds reasonable - eases the burden on the taxpaying middle class. Not too different in principle from McCain's proposals. But here's the fine print:
Recipients of the credit will be required to conduct 100 hours of community service.
Have you ever heard of anything like this? A tax credit that you have to earn? It's not a bad deal - $40/hr is way better than your average work-study job - but how do you implement something like this? How do you enforce it? Who enforces it? The IRS?
Anyone else find this strange?
| | |
| Mayor Potter plays book-burnerA few dozen newspapers have been under fire for an advertisement/DVD carried in last week's paper - a one-hour movie entitled "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West" released by some nonprofit foundation I've never heard of. Our local scab, the Oregonian,
is among them. The controversy isn't surprising, given the nature of
the material, but I was disturbed that Portland City Mayor Tom Potter
had personally intervened in attempt to prevent the advertisement from
running. There's a not-so-fine line between a private entity like the
Oregonian being selective about their advertising and an elected
official requesting that political speech be silenced. One is called
"free enterprise", the other is called "censorship". Apparently this
nuance is lost on Mayor Potter. Hence the response from their office
to my complaint:
You are
correct to point out that it is within the Oregonian's rights to carry
the DVD, and we respect that - just as it is the Mayor's right to ask the
Oregonian not to distribute it. As someone who respects the right
to free speech, I am glad we can agree on that point. Thank you,
again, for emailing.
Excuse me? It's absolutely not
the Mayor's right to ask the Oregonian not to distribute it. Acting as
a private citizen? Sure. Acting as an elected official? Hell, no!
Is it the Mayor's right to request that the Portland City Library not
carry books by Ann Coulter? To request that the local movie theater
not screen a Michael Moore documentary? I suppose that technically he
can ask, so long as he does not attempt to legally enforce his request, but it paints him as an enemy of free speech, not a respecter of those rights.
The bulk of the DVD's opponents have shown pretended concern that this
video may incite suspicion and violence against Islam. I can't imagine
that any of these folks have actually watched the film. Mad and I
watched it Friday night. Provocative? Sure. Biased? Absolutely.
Incendiary? Hardly. The first and last sections of the film, nearly
half of the total run time, are long and labored explanations to the
effect of "we're talking about radical Islam,
not the majority of Muslims who are civilized and peace-loving." A
large portion of the film is an appeal to moderate/liberal Muslims to
be more vocal in denouncing their radical brethren, hoping that their
silence is borne of fear rather than sympathy. The majority of the
interview subjects are moderate Muslims. The only incendiary messages
are those pulled from Arabic TV, with children passionately reciting jihad poetry, clerics and government officials calling for death to Americans, and an Arab soap opera depicting the Jewish blood libel. The remainder plays more like a PBS special than an anti-Islamic screed. I suspect that some people will strongly disagree with the content of the film, but you'd have to be a complete dimwit to confuse this with hate speech.
My best to the Oregonian for showing faith in their readers and not caving to the mayor's inappropriate request.
| | |
| Questions for the next debateIn the spirit of "gotcha" journalism, here are Sugar Daddy's proposed questions for the next debate. Keep in mind that these folks will be responsible for determining
budgets and priorities for the National Science Foundation, Department
of Energy, National Institutes of Health, NASA, and various
research-affiliated Defense Department interests to the tune of ~$100 billion or so per year. How would your candidate do?
Q: You both claim to be committed to increased reliance on solar energy. Do you believe that traditional plants or photovoltaic plants are a more effective means to reach this goal?
Q: You both cite security risks associated with nuclear power plants. Which of the proposed phase IV reactor designs do you think will be most secure?
Q: Which hydrogen extraction technology do you expect to be most effective for driving the fuel cell economy? Which will be most environmentally sound?
Q: Even the drastic carbon cuts envisioned by Kyoto are, by the UN's own admission, too little too late. Which of the emerging carbon sequestration technologies do you expect to be most effective in supplementing emissions caps?
Q: Does the future of the electric car rest on improved batteries or ultracapacitor technology?
Q: Name one American researcher whose current research, in your opinion, puts him or her in the running for the Nobel prize.
Q: Name one engineering challenge required to successfully execute a manned mission to Mars.
Q: What options are available to replace the soon-to-be defunct Space Shuttle program?
Q: Which avenues of research should be most aggressively pursued to address the increased prevalence of autism in American society?
Of course, the reason the journalists don't ask these questions is because most journalists don't know anything about this stuff either. Never mind that they're billion dollar questions.
| | |
| Wanted: flip-floppersDear Senator McCain -
Inasmuch as we taxpayers are likely being forced to take on $700 billion in bad debt, how about you hold off on the tax cuts for a season? Keeping them where they're at is good enough for me. And if Paulsen's right and we end up turning a profit on these assets-that-no-sane-financial-institution-would-buy, how 'bout sending some of that scratch back to the taxpayer?
-SD
Dear Senator Obama -
Inasmuch as we taxpayers are likely being forced to take on $700 billion in bad debt (see above), how about backing down on your pledge to raise the long term capital gains tax? I know that you've got it in for the wealthy, but when the market's down you need to give folks incentive to invest. Even Charlie Gibson agrees with me on this one.
And while you're at it, can you explain how raising the corporate tax rate is supposed to keep my job from going offshore?
-SD
Dear both of you -
$700 billion might be a lot of dough, but it's nothing compared to the $45 trillion required to meet the carbon emissions caps that you both support.
-SD | | |
|
