Category Archives: inthenews

We Want to Help You Stimulate US

4 Replies

“Enclosed is an important message from the IRS on the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008. Do Not Throw Away!”

That’s a quote from the back of the envelope from the United States Treasury. A paraphrase of the inside text: we consider you below the poverty line, you have zero adjusted income last year, and still had to pay $180 tax, so we’re throwing you a bone. We deposited $300 in your account 6 days ago. Please spend it all in one place, we think it will stimulate the economy. Not as much as all those rich people who we gave tax breaks will stimulate the economy …

$300 in a $13,794,000,000,000 GDP: I would do the math, but my calculator has an overflow error when I try to figure the percentage.

Benedict – A Breakfast Name

4 Replies

Once again the Bush Administration makes me wonder if there is anyone educated in protocol working there.

Is it correct etiquette to greet a Pope, or any leader of state or leader of religion, with a 21 gun salute? I bet not.

One past slip of the protocol: official announcement of a new Ambassador to Luxembourg did not use it’s full name (as can be found in online US government documents)!

We’re sorry Pope Benedict, and Grand Duchy of Luxembourg – it’s not most of our faults, we voted for someone else.

Live News Cameras . Com

Leave a reply

This looks interesting. Almost like what CNN was to news 25 years ago – on the edge and trying to figure out where they fit.

livenewscameras.com

The deal? 100+ feeds from live news cameras across the country and across the globe. Often (they’re working on 24/7) they have a live person, who will alert you to what channel has something interesting on it. They’re often doing the same thing you’re doing – watching the feeds.

Government Should Serve Citizens

5 Replies

Houston has been promoting the draconian measure of red light cameras in the city “to increase safety”.

While many of us may be annoyed at that last person squeezing through a red light at 20 miles per hour during rush hour, there have not been any rashes of deadly accidents caused by red light runners.

There are lots of accidents in the city every day. But in a world where we allow people to take a test once at 15 years of age, and to drive with cell phones, hamburgers, make-up, and video displays (not to mentioned unmuzzled children) we are to expect some distracted and incapable drivers.

There was a recent study showing a slight rise in accidents due to red-light running, with a shift from side-on to rear-end.

Also, extending the yellow light duration has a much greater safety effect.

Now, the National Motorist Association (via sivacracy.net) shows that in 6 cities (two in Texas), the yellow light duration was shorter than the minimum suggested by state traffic safety organizations. Not really surprising. The only goal of red-light cameras is revenue generation.

Municipalities are given a hard sell by the companies who make them (and administer, for a cut of the profit) shaming or forcing our pliable “leaders” to decide to buy them “for the safety of the people”. Houston has even talked about expanding it to people “rolling the red light to turn right”. This is not a major problem!

Traffic lights, signals, and signs have 2 goals: to facilitate traffic flow, and to do so safely. They are not there to punish us, they are not installed to provide revenue. Any camera to surveil the populace is one too many!

Presidential Preparedness: Who has been Tested?

2 Replies

As I’ve been reviewing past presidents’ experience prior to becoming president, the topic has come up a few times in the media recently. As we head for a Tuesday penultimate in its Superness, it’s been in some of the political coverage.

The question was raised directly by George Will on This Week: Does that experience count for anything? Of course he had to do it such a was as to attempt to show himself to be the smartest Ass in the room. Who was the most “experienced and prepared” president? James Bucannan, generally judged one of the worst. Because it was such an obviously researched and prepared fact and delivered with much smugness, it failed at making Will seem superior. Not that it’s not an interesting data point.

Also in Slate.com this week, John Dickerson broached the subject in Tough Call, Will Clinton or Obama Protect Your Children.

… the essential question the ad asks is a fair one: Which of the candidates do you trust to keep his or her head when everyone around them is lighting theirs on fire, and at a time when your kid’s safety could be on the line?

The answer touches on the elements of experience as we’ve batted them around so far this election—who has broader exposure to the world, who has dealt with more foreign leaders, and who knows more about the military. But the ad also raises a new question the Clinton campaign has been stressing over the last few days: Who has been tested?