It goes to eleven

Why is so damn difficult to find a person who can stand in front of the American people and proudly proclaim a sentiment like this?

...I don ‘t know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, “We must broaden the base of our party”—when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.

It was a feeling that there was not a sufficient difference now between the parties that kept a majority of the voters away from the polls. When have we ever advocated a closed-door policy? Who has ever been barred from participating?

...

Let us show that we stand for fiscal integrity and sound money and above all for an end to deficit spending, with ultimate retirement of the national debt.

Let us also include a permanent limit on the percentage of the people’s earnings government can take without their consent.

Let our banner proclaim a genuine tax reform that will begin by simplifying the income tax so that workers can compute their obligation without having to employ legal help.

And let it provide indexing—adjusting the brackets to the cost of living—so that an increase in salary merely to keep pace with inflation does not move the taxpayer into a surtax bracket. Failure to provide this means an increase in government’s share and would make the worker worse off than he was before he got the raise.

Let our banner proclaim our belief in a free market as the greatest provider for the people.

Let us also call for an end to the nit-picking, the harassment and over-regulation of business and industry which restricts expansion and our ability to compete in world markets.

Let us explore ways to ward off socialism, not by increasing government’s coercive power, but by increasing participation by the people in the ownership of our industrial machine.

Our banner must recognize the responsibility of government to protect the law-abiding, holding those who commit misdeeds personally accountable.

And we must make it plain to international adventurers that our love of peace stops short of “peace at any price.”

We will maintain whatever level of strength is necessary to preserve our free way of life.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.

- Ronald Reagan, 1975

Sarah Palin could have said something like this. John McCain couldn't have said this with any credibility. Hopefully the dumb Repiblician leadership will get their heads out of the sand and understand that our citizens can do great things when government will simply get the hell out of the way.

Do you want a country of citizens who cower feed at the nipples of the government every day, and know little else?  Or do you want a country of citizens who work hard, take responsibility for their actions, and grow and prosper in the freedom that our Constitution guarantees?

Read the whole thing here.

But Islam is a religion of peace!

NAIROBI, Kenya - The United Nations said Tuesday that a Somali stoned to death by Islamist militants after she had been accused of adultery was a 13-year-old girl who had been raped while visiting her grandmother.

“Reports indicate that she had been raped by three men while traveling on foot to visit her grandmother in the war-torn capital, Mogadishu,” Unicef, the United Nations children’s agency, said in a statement.

“Following the assault, she sought protection from the authorities, who then accused her of adultery and sentenced her to death,” Unicef added. “A child was victimized twice — first by the perpetrators of the rape and then by those responsible for administering justice.”

What a lovely country. It's no surprise that in a continent that sold its people to the slave trade that this kind of brutality still goes on.

Here's more blood from an unrelated incident in Kenya:

The thing I keep asking myself is, "What's next?" After hearing of the Obama victory, my only thought for was that my taxes will be going up. Now that the Democrats have made the declaration that things are going to change, it will be interesting to see what those changes are. Here's my tribute to the Obama win.

What does the Obama run say about our country?

1. The Republicians suck at promoting themselves and embracing and promoting conservative values.
2. The MSM still has a stranglehold on the free flow of truth to the populace.
3. A large segment of the population appears to be motivated by government handouts.
4. The Democrats rope in a lot of voters by pitting Americans against each other and talking about how they dislike our country.

I think it's interesting that a candidate with such socialist values has made it this far. I have said it in the past, and I'll say it again: We have lived in such prosperity as a country for so long that most people have forgotten about what it  took to make this country great. Now that we are faced with the possibility of electing a socialist president, we see that a big portion of the populace doesn't seem to know which way is up. They will believe anything. They have not lived through a world war or a depression, and they have no full understanding of history. They're motivated by government handouts and have no clue that this will be their demise, just like a frog being slowly boiled alive.

This is a good time to start getting in line with your fellow comrades and studying up on some basic concepts of Communism so that you can fall in line with the changing of the guard. Here are a few links to get you going. First, start with the basics:

The Complete Idiot's Guide to Communism

How Communism Works

When you're ready to test your newfound knowledge, here's a good practice guide:

Study Guide for the Communist Manifesto

If you're still young here's a great group to get involved with to show your support for the common good:

The Young Communist League

Finally, it's always a good idea to advertise to your fellow comrades that you're on board with the program and not a trouble maker:

Communist t-shirts from Cafe Press

(Unfortually Cafe Press is not yet state-owned, but that may be changing soon.)

You may also want to partake in some continuing education by exposing yourself to artwork that celebrates the fantastic benefits of the Communist state. Here's a great example showing the power of the Communist warrior and how he supports the common good:

A popular talk radio host summed up the 2008 presidential race in a very witty way:

(Paraphrased) If Obama is elected, Obama voters are expecting to get something from the government and McCain voters are expecting the government to take something from them. The reality would be that everyone would have something taken from them, whether it be money, liberty, or rights.

If this man is elected, get ready for every hard-working person to get reamed to the tune of $1,200,000,000,000 dollars total. Take a look at the Obama Spend-o-Meter.

The government has been limp in its battle to stop illegal immigration, but now the environmentalists are getting involved:

 National forests and parks — long popular with Mexican marijuana-growing cartels — have become home to some of the most polluted pockets of wilderness in America because of the toxic chemicals needed to eke lucrative harvests from rocky mountainsides, federal officials said.

Weed and bug sprays, some long banned in the U.S., have been smuggled to the marijuana farms. Plant growth hormones have been dumped into streams, and the water has then been diverted for miles in PVC pipes.

Maybe now there will be more movication to keep this scum out our country. These drug cartels are heavily armed. I wonder if the gun-control people people can get them to drop their weapons?

This article provides some evidence that's really no surprise to a conservative. It doesn't get any more simple than this:

The U.S. tax system is highly progressive. The top 1 percent of income earners, by household, paid 39 percent of all federal income taxes in 2005, whereas the bottom 50 percent paid a little over 3 percent. Further, 32 percent of all tax returns filed in 2005 were from people who paid no federal income tax at all.

Take a look at the graph provided with the story.

Liberals often whine about how some people aren't paying their fair share. NO SHIT! The POOR aren't paying their fair share!

I    am   tired    of    pulling    the    cart    for    the    slackers.

This article bemoans the poor condition of the poor areas of New Orleans, three years after the flooding. Based on how free markets work this makes perfect sense. First, the homes and businesses were destroyed by flooding. Second, the people were either evecuated, left, or died. Third, very few people came back to the poor areas. So what the world do you expect to happen?  People are just going to show up, build homes and businesses, and wait?

The truth is, the Lower Ninth Ward is an unmitigated disaster area, a wasteland, a battle zone, an abandoned community, and a national shame, all rolled into one.

I had to read this twice to see if it was referring to the area before the floods.  Because after decades of local democrat control, that really describes the areas before the water hit.

It was worse than I even imagined. This is a huge area that was once jammed with housing, and people. To be sure, the housing was poorly constructed and living conditions no better. Today, the dominant feature is weeds taller than most people. Buildings are few and far between.

Reconstruction and recovery? Not so much.

You can debate the reasons behind this all you want. But whatever is responsible for this, one thing is clear: This is a significant area of a major U.S. city that will likely never come back.

Oh gee, you think?  At the end of the story, we get this:

This is profound, depressing, and stunning stuff. It's amazing to think that nearly three years after the disaster, a prominent U.S. city still has massive areas that are nowhere near recovered.

The writer of the story must be living in some storybook fairlytale land where a sparkling magic pixie crayon can re-draw all of the demolished developement and destruction.  Sheesh. I agree it's depressing that an area where thousands of people lived is now largely empty, but get over it. The one thing that the writer seems to have totally missed is any knowledge that the Lower Ninth Ward was a dark haven for crime, poor educastion, physical separation, and neglect, and one positive truth is that this has been brought to an end.

Yes it is tragic that people died and so much chaos ensued, but it's no mystery that the area remians so uninhabited today. Once again the MSM shows their stupidity.

Today's Wall Street Journal printed a story about Governer Schwarzenegger's request of the population to discontinue use of fireworks because of the possibility of them causing forrest fires.

Okay, that sounds fair enough, so what's the problem?

"His request is worrying the state's sellers of fireworks - virtually all of which are noinprofits and charities, as mandated by municipal laws.

Many schools, churches youth sports leagues and other groups rely on fireworks sales for a significant chunk of their income."

This sounds exactly like the government scheme where taxes are levied on tobbaco products in order to pay for healthcare for kids. One difference, however, is that these charities aren't forced to sell fireworks as their sole source of income.

In a previous post I pondered about why one could get 50 MPG 20 years ago but today it can only be done in a hybrid car. This article explains a lot.

In a related note, learn about hypermiling. Here's the wikipedia article about Hypermiling.

I have always been confused by the question about if 12 noon was 12 AM or PM. The same goes for midnight; is that 12 AM or PM? Until now I have been able to get by with using the terms midnight or noon to avoid the problem.  Everyone knows that those terms mean.

Recently at work I was confronted by the problem of having to deploy software patches to servers between midnight and 1 AM.  Simple, right? Not exactly, because the damn software forces one to set all of the time fields xx:xx, including the AM or PM.

To put an end to the issue, I hit Google for an answer. I figured I'd find the answer, write it on a piece of paper, and stick it to one of my monitors so I could refer back to it next month.  That's where it got complicated.

An initial quick check of Google gives basically 3 different answers:

1) 12:00 AM and 12:00 PM are not valid concepts.

2) 12:00 AM is midnight

3) 12:00 PM is midnight

Wikipedia's entry is no help.  This entry at Greenwichmeantime.com is worthless. Coolquiz.com is totally useless.

This post has a section that shows:

00.00-11.59 is am
12.00-23.59 is pm

This makes sense, but the problem is that the software application isn't going to let me use 00:00, AND it's going to make me pick AM or PM.  sheeseh.  Crappy software.

After all this reading, now I'm even sure if 12:01 AM or PM is the (almost) the beginning of the new day, or if that's lunchtime.  Urgh.

After more reading, I think I have the answer here that shows that 12:01 AM is the start of the day (just after midnight). Going back to my original problem, I can deploy patches at 12:01 AM or 12:05 AM and know that this is just after midnight. Then I can be assured that the server is going to install the patches at night and not at lunchtime.

The root of this problem, I have always believed, is that the new day should start at 1, not 12.  Who the hell thought that the day should start with the LAST number and not the first one?  The top of the clock should be 1, not 12.  But of course me thinking this only clouds the real truth in my own mind. It's just stupid that the day starts, for example around 12:05 AM and then as the day drags on you have 12:57 AM then 1:03 AM, 4 AM, etc.

Why in the heck does it jump from 12 to 1?  That's the real root of the problem in my mind.

Using military time on the 24 hour clock makes sense.

I finally did find a good article at nist.gov that confirms my thoughts. It provides good information but starts off by saying:

This is perhaps the trickiest time question of them all. The best answer is that the terms 12 a.m. and 12 p.m. cause confusion and should not be used.

The answer to my question is given in this sentence:

If you are making schedules, times such as 12:01 a.m. (one minute after midnight), or 11:59 p.m. (one minute before midnight) also can eliminate ambiguity. This method is used by the railroads and airlines.

How ironic it is that in our modern society we have to resort to a complete workaround for something as basic and important as time.  Yes, the military does it right!

This morning on the drive to work, I was listening to a talk show caller who was originally from communist Vietnam and had been living in the US for 30 years or go. He described some aspects of life under communism and the talk show host advised the man, who was very articulate, to go fourth speak and spread the story of his life in order to warn people of the problems and failures of communism.  He went on to state that one of the greatest threats to American society was the loss of stable families.

After hearing the man's story, I thought of how reading the Wall Street Journal taught me that we live in a world of change.  Then out of the blue, something struck me suddenly and I realized that my revelation pulled so many things together. I realized that because we do live in a world of change, we cannot assume that the wealth and freedom we enjoy here in America will always remain. Because things are always in flux, it might be true that we are on the downside of great prosperity here. I have learned that much change happens on such a large scale that we can not see it until only after it has happened, and I fear this is happening to us.

I don't want push doom and gloom, but we must work hard to resist the people that would seek to tear down this country by promoting like taxes, welfare, racism, laziness, and above all, indifference toward government and dishonest politicians. We must work to see the big picture of the direction of our country. Unfortunately, I believe that modern society has created a large group of people who care not about any of this.

The revelation that the world changes isn't big news, but the concept that our prosperous lifestyle in America will likely change is big news. It's big news especially to the populace who are slowly lead like sheep by the politicians. It's big news to people who enjoy a good life but are ignorant of the efforts to tear down their freedom, one small law at a time.

Perhaps my revelation is only startling to me. I don't know. But when my mind connected the concept of constant change to the concept of our existing prosperous society, it was scary because in mind it made very, very real the possibility of a dark change in the long-term future.

I do not believe we will all wake up tomorrow and see a horrible world. What worries me is that our liberties have been chipped very slowly away for 40 years by a growing government and a population that cares less and less about the facts and truth of what the politicians do. If there is a downturn it come slowly which will make it even harder and longer to reverse, if at all possible. What worries me is that one hundred years from now Americans will look back to 2006 and talk about how great things were.

Did any great nation at the height of its prosperity ever foresee its end?

I guess you have to follow the law, no matter how unusual it is.

Your government at work: The they're scrapping a $20 million 'virtual fence':

TUCSON, Ariz. (AP) — The government is scrapping a $20 million prototype of its highly touted "virtual fence" on the Arizona-Mexico border because the system is failing to adequately alert border patrol agents to illegal crossings, officials said.

The move comes just two months after Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announced his approval of the fence built by The Boeing Co. The fence consists of nine electronic surveillance towers along a 28-mile section of border southwest of Tucson.

Back in February, the fence was being happily promoted:

A high-tech "virtual fence" on part of the U.S. border with Mexico is finally ready for service and the technology can fight illegal crossings all along the frontier, the Homeland Security chief said on Friday.

"I have personally witnessed the value of this system, and I have spoken directly to the border patrol agents...who have seen it produce actual results, in terms of identifying and allowing the apprehension of people who were illegally smuggling across the border," Chertoff said.

And you people want this  government to be in charge of your healthcare? Niiiiiice.

What is the damn problem with installing a REAL fence with REAL guards with REAL guns? I don't care if that offends the Mexicans.

The government continues to work toward taxing you more. This time, taxes on Internet purchases is ramping up.

Two bills are pending in Congress that would allow tax collectors to target out-of-state Internet and mail-order retailers, and their supporters are optimistic about their political prospects.

"I certainly would love to see a floor vote," said Neal Osten, federal affairs counsel for the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), a lobby group for state politicians. "We've heard encouraging words from the Democratic leadership in the House."

Note how no specific politician is mentioned, but a lobbyist for the politicians is named.  Yes, you heard it right: Politicians have their own lobbyists.  That's just great!  Now the damn politicians can hide behind a lobby group.

Once again, taxpayers are faced with the prospect of having more of their money taken by the government which refuses to slow its spending or make any kind of real cutbacks whatsoever. Something has to give.

If this legislation passes, may the heads of the pols who voted for this roll.  Will the voters hold them accountable? Probably not.

This is just priceless. I can't make this stuff up. No, I'm not that funny. Need more proof that the government is out of touch?

San Francisco, CA (AHN)-The city of San Francisco has begun an advertising campaign targeting illegal immigrants, welcoming them to the city the bay, as the country remains divided in fierce debate over the issue.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, who prides San Francisco for its passage of the so-called sanctuary ordinance in 1989, said he wants illegal immigrants to understand that they are always welcome in the city, despite increased raids and deportations by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

This is great news for Texas where I live, and any other state except for CA. Let the illegals flock to the land of Fruits and Nuts and suck up all of the free healthcare and government services there, compliments of Jane and Joe taxpayer.

Can't keep track of illegals? Here are two real-world parts of a solution brought to you by private enterprise:

The 2010 census is quickly approaching, and the government has already screwed up:

WASHINGTON -- Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez and Census Bureau Director Steve H. Murdock told a House appropriations subcommittee Thursday that the government would not be able to use specially designed hand-held computers to collect information for the 2010 census from the millions of people who don't return census forms.

The two officials cited poor communication with Florida-based Harris Corp., the contractor providing more than 500,000 of the devices, as a leading reason for the technical problems that have put the program on hold.

As a result, the 600,000 temporary workers who will go door to door to track down the people who fail to return the forms will gather the data as they have in previous decades -- with pen and paper.

It is now projected that the upcoming census will be $46 PER PERSON, based on a population of 304 million people and a projected cost of 14 BILLION dollars:

Officials said the additional manual labor required because of the technical problems would cost up to $3 billion, boosting the overall 2010 census cost to as high as $14 billion. That would be the most expensive count in U.S. history.

"You've inherited one hell of a mess here," Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.) told Murdock, who was confirmed to the Census Bureau post in December. "Good luck to you."

This is the same government who some people want to run their health care. Damn morons. If the government can't COUNT you can gather some basic information for less than a cost of $46, then how in the HELL are they going to accommodate your health care needs for less than that?  Sheesh.

UPDATE! Fedex can ship a box across the country for what? Maybe $20? Ponder this post above.

More and more lately, I am confused and frustrated by the fact that politicians believe that more government control is good for America. The core of my frustration centers around the idea that if politicians really wanted what was best for America, then they would return power to the citizens and have government step aside. I can only conclude that politicians do not really want what is best for America; they want will bring them the most power. What bring them more power? A populace that is dependent on government services and restrictions. A populace that holds its hand out. A populace that votes for politicians who give the handouts. A populace that buys into whatever subtle lie of the day is put before them by politicians and fostered by the MSM.

If you need more concrete evidence that politicians have totally lost touch with reality, read this article about government voting to raise gas taxes. So let me get this straight: Gas prices are at historical highs, and so it's a good thing to RAISE the prices even higher?

This isn't some back-woods box of clowns, either. Look on Google for many more legislatures looking to do the same thing. If you believe in economic fact, then you know that the higher the price of something, the fewer consumers will buy it.  So while governments raise taxes on gas, the trend to use less fuel will be accelerated and governments will continue to take in less tax revenue.  As it is now, the government already makes MORE money on gas (via taxes) than the petroleum companies do.

This article talks about the decreased tax revenue coming in and how that's pinching the state of Kentucky. Here's the money quote:

"We're very concerned about the impact March receipts may have on budgeted revenues for the year," Budget Director Mary Lassiter said in a statement.

[Gov. Steve] Beshear said it's too soon to say if a special session will be needed or what sort of tax proposals he might make.

"But the national economy does not look good right now," he said. "Four-dollar-a-gallon gasoline does not look good. People are not spending their money because they are concerned about their own financial security."

Okay, so taxpayers can cut back and spend less money, but the &%#ing government can't? They have to squeeze taxpayers harder? I say &#&! them.  Here's the Barney-style breakdown:

Voter & taxpayer is concerned with own financial security and spends less --> votes for politician --> politician refuses to spend less and raises taxes

That is why I hate so many politicians.

If we could only go back to the days of politicians who held office for a time and then went back to the business world or whatever they did before getting into politics.

Colorado ponders lowering the drinking age. It amazes me that politicans waste time on issues like this.  If this becomes law, maybe all of the illegals flooding into their state will enjoy the easier access to booze. Maybe thay'll draw some of them out of Texas.

A remarkable editorial article appeared in the January 2, 2008 Wall Street Journal. Entitled “Bye Bye, Light Bulb”, the article provided facts and commentary on the new light bulb efficiency requirements that will hit us in 2012. Thanks again to my father for clipping this for me, as I have not the time to read the whole paper every day.

“…the energy bill passed by Congress and signed by President Bush sets energy-efficiency standards for light bulbs that traditional incandescent bulbs cannot meet.”

The average uninformed consumer on the street, or any 5th grader, would likely believe that Congress passed this legislation to ban standard light bulbs in the name of using less energy and therefore saving the environment. I will not detail the problems with this whole underlying realm of false logic. What is more important is to ask this:

Why are the liberals not crying that a €26.976 billion company was able to lobby Congress to pass a law that makes it illegal to buy anything else but a product that this company happens to sell?

The answer, if course, is that it’s OK to wipe out the competition if it’s done in the name of ‘green’, even if there’s no scientific basis for any of it.

“Yes, the $3 bulb lasts longer. Yes, it cuts your electricity bill. Mr. Moorehead [of Phillips] says that when every one of those four billion light sockets has an energy-saving bulb in it, the country will be saving $18 billion a year on its electric bill. That’s $4.50 per bulb – and the bulb makers are standing by to make sure a substantial portion of those ‘savings’ get transformed into profits for them.”

Where is the liberal outrage here?  One of the biggest electronics makers in the world pushed to pass legislation in order to enrich itself. If Dick Cheney was anyhow connected with Phillips, I’m sure that we would have heard about how ‘big electronics’ was screwing the consumer and that the poorest amongst us would most deeply hit.

The thing that makes me mad is that we have yet another blinding example of government limiting consumer choice. I’m all for saving energy, but give me the choice!

I thought the liberals were all about choice?

The biggest outrage here is not the two examples of liberal hypocrisy, but Americans getting ----ed again by the politicians who continue to pass pointless laws instead of worrying about how to enforce the existing laws.

Oh, and the new high-efficiency bulbs are full of mercury, whereas the incandescent bulbs are free from this pollutant.  I guess this will be the foundation of another environmental crisis that the liberals and politicians can save us from in a decade. It sounds strikingly familiar to the scenario in which Congress said that banks weren't giving enough loans to high-risk hone buyers which helped lead to the increased default rate on home loans which Congress now wants to fix by enacting more laws.

Thanks again to my elected officials for representing me so well, you clueless morons.

My father was kind enough to clip an editorial from the January 23rd Wall Street Journal entitled, "Hillary and Say's Law". The opening line of the article says,

"But this stimulus shouldn't' be paid for," Hillary Clinton said to Tim Russert in a recent interview, when he reminded her that she's omitted a price tag somewhere. Shouldn't be?"

The article later states,

"Hillary's assertion that her 'stimulus' package shouldn't be paid for denies reality. Somebody has to pay for it."

In the real, factual world, sure, this is true because of the realities of accounting, economics, and math. But the WSJ editorialists have to realize that liberals often avoid facts and the real world. They ignore facts.

The reality here, I believe, is that since this $150,000,000 rebate would be obtained by incurring debt, then Hillary's core belief here is that, yes, it won't be paid for because that debt will NEVER be paid. Does the US debt ever get smaller, or vanish altogether?  No. Therefore Hillary is right.

Two thoughts for today's post:

1) I was driving down a major freeway in Houston today and passed a cluttered shopping center with many different kinds of stores in it. This is a typical sight in Houston, like any other city. One small portion on the large multi-business sign caught my eye: "Solar power". I thought this was neat because it's a sign that solar power is more and more a viable energy source. The fact that someone is running a small business dealing in solar power is a great sign. I have always been fascinated by solar power so this caught my eye.

2) The government has mandated that your analog TV will be useless. You will have to buy a converter box to make it work correctly after February 17, 2009. Will this spur a mass dumping of analog CRT-based televisions? If so, are we prepared to deal with the environmental impact of this? CRT displays contain lead. I hadn't heard any commentary on this prospect but this dawned on my this morning while waiting for the coffee to brew.

The government is providing coupons to reimburse part of the cost of buying a converter box, so this will prolong the life of many CRT-based televisions. We plan to buy at least 2 converter boxes because I have to intent of giving up my analog TVs or getting a cable or satellite connection. Heck, I've had my 19" Viewsonic CRT computer monitor for 10 years now and it still works fine and looks great.

In the grand scheme of things, I suppose it's good that CRTs are on the way out due to their lead content and power consumption, but there is little data to be quickly found on the bad chemicals in LCD display panels, if any.

The continued talk in Washington of an economic stimulus package has proven two points. First, the discussion has forced Democrats to admit that the economy is helped when people actually have more of their own money. From the front page in today's Wall Street Journal:

"...admid broad consensus that the government should do something quickly to prop up the lagging economy. The White House wants tax cuts to help a wide range of individuals and businesses."

"In the summer of 2001, the government mail a total of $38 billion in $300 and $600 one-time rebate checks to two-thirds of U.S. Households. A 2004 study of U.S. economists from the U.S. Labor Department, Princeton University, and the University of Pennsylvania estimated that [...] most of the rebates quickly turned into spending."

"Democrats took the White House silence on the details as a sign that it's willing to give ground. They are working on alternatives, such as a rebate for everyone who files a tax return. Other possibilities are rebating payroll taxes or sending rebates to those who receive the Earned Income Tax Credit or the Child Tax Credit."

So, are the Dems admitting that if people have more money in their pockets that this is somehow good for the economy? This is conformation of what I believe most people know: Give them unexpected cash and people will spend it. There is no need to point out the irony, but I will anyhow: The Democrats have based much of their power on taking peoples' money.  Now they're admitting this slows down the economy.

Of course I'm not stupid. When asked about this, the Dems will likely spout something about being careful not to "overheat" the economy by giving people
"too much" money. Yeah, you don't want the neighborhood junkies to buy "too much" heroine and all end up dead after a day of $600 binges.

Second, the discussion provides proof that the Democrats will use any occasion to pander to specific groups:

"In addition to tax cuts..."

Oh. My. God.

"...congressional Democrats say they also want spending targeted at specific groups such as the unemployed."

Never mind that this would only hit a small group:

"Unemployment remains fairly low at 5% and the overall economy, while slowing, isn't necessarily headed for a recession."

Democrats never think twice about going out their way to give handouts to the down and out. No surprise here.

The other part of the discussion involved paying tax "rebates" to people who did not pay taxes. You don't need a hint about who supports this idea.

"Conservatives question the fairness of giving rebates to people who paid no income tax."

Thank God that someone here is thinking like me.

The one thing that bothers me about the entire discussion here is the idea that the government needs to step in and help people. This goes against my core beliefs. However if a check shows up in the mailbox I will gladly keep it. The bottom line, of course, is that taxes should be kept low across the board and the government should cease to grow larger.