Archive

  • Nepotism

    I keep trying to summon up some rage and bile over the practice of Congressmen employing their families, but I just can't. Businesses employ family members all the time. Politics is an all-consuming occupation. If families can find ways to involve the clan, all the better. Dana Rohrabacher paying his wife $40,000 to manage his campaigns doesn't bother me (and he's my congressmen, by the way). In fact, I'm glad he does it -- hopefully it makes the process a bit less grueling for him. Tom DeLay paying his wife and daughter $500,000 over 4 years also isn't too shocking, that's an average of $62,500 per year per family member which, assuming they actually did jobs, isn't particularly excessive. Now, if there are congresscritters paying their wives and children princely sums in return for occasionally decluttering the congressman's desk, I'll call for the guy's head. But simple nepotism at fair prices is too pervasive, too understandable, and too unthreatening to really raise my blood...
  • Peak Oil

    I realize you guys have been hearing about "peak oil" a lot lately -- kinda like when everyone began talking about Social Security bend points and wage-indexing and ZZZZzzzz. But though you might be bored, you don't have to be confused. At least, not if you go read this quick and dirty primner on the subject . Via The Oil Drum. Update : So long as I'm doing oil links, this tsunami analogy is pretty spot-on. As Grouch & Eligh would say: Time -- time is of the essence. Update 2 : I'm just going to condense today's oil-related posts into this thread, even though they're not all related. Matt, I think, misunderstands something in his piece on Cartel economics: if every OPEC member cut production by 20 percent they'd all be better off. But any given OPEC member would be even better off if the whole cartel agreed to cut production 20 percent, but then your country went around and cheated on the quota. So if you cut the quota, everyone will just cheat, and everything will stay the same...
  • Poverty-Reduction

    And this is why effective sex education and widespread access to birth control are overriding moral issue: Nationally, the teenage birth rate fell 30 percent from 1991 to 2002, the most recent year for which such statistics are available. If the rate had not dropped during the decade, 1.2 million more children would have been born to teenage mothers in the United States. Of those, 460,000 would have been living in poverty and 700,000 would have grown up in a single-parent household, according to the analysis. 460,000. Children. In. Poverty. That's a lot of misery and pain we've prevented, not to mention hundreds of millions of dollars saved in emergency room visits and social programs and, frankly, crime prevention. This impoverished children would be the ones on the public dole and, for many of them, the ones in the public jails. We know that . Keeping young women from getting pregnant is one of the most cost-effective approaches to poverty-reduction, so what a shame that we're...
  • Why OPEC Needs America Fat and Happy

    Kevin's explanation of why oil prices are cause for severe concern is vintage Drum: informative, well-written, and containing a graph. Read it . But I think he gets something wrong in his evaluation of OPEC's incentives: OPEC has the capacity to supply about 30 mbd. Question: what incentive do they have to continue pumping this amount? Economically, they have very little. If they cut production by 20% (6 mbp), that would reduce global supply to 78 mbd. Prices would immediately double to around $100/barrel, maybe even higher, since there would be no other source to make up the shortfall. As a result, OPEC's revenues would skyrocket — not all at once, since most oil is delivered under futures contracts, but soon enough. In addition, most Middle Eastern fields are being overproduced right now, so cutting production would have beneficial long-term effects as well. Kevin goes on to argue that Saudi Arabia used to be a buffer against this because they could simply flood the market with...
  • Yip Yip Yip Yahoo!

    Rush Limbaugh, in his characteristically insane manner, commented today on Al Gore's new televisions station: When does he start up this stupid little network? August? Yip yip yip yahoo. You know what Gore said about this? It's going to be liberal. It's going to reflect the point of view of young people. What the hell is that, Al? What the hell is the point of view of young people? Blow jobs, that's what they're doing out there. They're out there getting oral sex all day long, that's what they're talking about. Yeah, it's a tough life, I gotta say. Why, just this morning I was all "If anyone gives me another blowjob, I'm going to scream!" But then I remembered that I'm getting blowjobs all day and really should just relax and go with it. Anyway, I'd like to stick around and talk about the oft-divorced Limbaugh's oral obsession, but there are blowjobs to be enjoyed.
  • DeLayism

    Drop the Hammer , one of the premier anti-DeLay sites, gets mail. Oh boy do they get mail. And some of it even comes from elected officials, like this one from Councilman Kevin Cole of Texas : Hey ass hole [sic]. Tom Delay happens to be my congresman [sic] and I am happy with the job he does for me and my district. Why don’t you get the F@&* out of our district and leave us alone. Better yet, come speak to me personally and I will show you what I think of you. Kevin Cole Pealrand [sic], TX [Cell Phone # Redacted] Mr. Cole, in addition to being a councilman and all-around nice guy, is also a Baptist deacon, which explains where he get the idea for this letter: And Jesus said unto the Pharisees, "Fuck thee, and all that thee stand for. Thou art hypocrites whose presence at my door would merit a divine ass-whipping. Get thyselves away from Nazareth, lest the Son of Man leave you his bitch." (Matthew: 37:12) But biblically based or not, this is Tom DeLay distilled. Our Majority Leader...
  • Red Eye DeLay

    It's becoming a bit trite to accuse Tom DeLay of snapping his tether to reality, but I'm not going to stop noting it until Tom stops doing it. Yesterday, he gave a short presentation to the GOP Senate caucus, where he unveiled what should be called the "Stoner Defense", a combination of "chill out" sentiment and massive paranoia: As DeLay left a 90-minute luncheon with his party's senators, he told reporters that his basic message was "Be patient; we'll be fine." Giving a preview of the approach he is likely to take when he appears before reporters this afternoon, DeLay dismissed questions about his travel and his relationships with lobbyists as "the Democratic agenda." Attendees said DeLay, in extremely brief remarks, told the senators that, if asked about his predicament, they should blame Democrats and their lack of an agenda. The attendees said DeLay thanked Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) for supportive comments on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday. Yeah man, it's like, nothing. So stop...
  • Poor Headlines in the WoT

    Headlining the New York Times today was a little ditty they like to call " Sharon Asks U.S. to Pressure Iran to Give Up Its Nuclear Program ", and it goes something like this: Spreading photographs of Iranian nuclear sites over a lunch table at the Bush ranch in Texas on Monday, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon of Israel urged President Bush to step up pressure on Iran to give up all elements of its nuclear program, according to senior American and Israeli officials. Mr. Sharon said Israeli intelligence showed Iran was near "a point of no return" in learning how to develop a weapon, the officials said. However, Mr. Sharon gave no indication that Israel was preparing to act alone to attack Iranian nuclear facilities, a prospect that Vice President Dick Cheney, who was at the lunch, raised publicly three months ago. In a conversation lasting more than an hour, Mr. Sharon argued that European nations negotiating with Iran were softening their position and may be willing to allow it to hold on...
  • Chasing the Wind

    I'm tired of invading Iraq for oil, encouraging coups in Iran for crude, futzing around in the Middle East for petroleum. Every time we do it it's the same old map on CNN, the same old cartoons about swarthy dictators, the same old sandy landscapes. Why not be a little inventive? Which is why I'd like to be the first to advocate invading Guatemala for its precious, precious, wind . I mean, that's not really why we'll invade -- it'll be weapons of mass destruction or human rights abuses or something -- but, mmmm, 7,000 megawatts of wind power. Truly, we can't let that fall into the hands of the terrorists.
  • Blogger's Paradox

    Drezner writes : Will I still be blogging in five years? I honestly don’t know, but my suspicion is that if I do, there will be plenty of sabbaticals thrown in. One undeniable effect of having a successful blog is the inculcation of a sense of duty to keep up regular posts. Even the thought of blogging on a regular basis for half a decade exhausts me. However, the thought of not blogging about the interesting ideas or information that comes my way bothers me even more. The will-I-be-doing-this-in-a-decade thought experiment is a favorite parlor game of mine and I have to say, Drezner gets it exactly right. Blogging -- particularly solo-blogging -- is an intense sport, and I have trouble imagining this level of output stretching off into the future. But the trouble I have with that absolutely pales in comparison to the cognitive disruption I get when I try to imagine not blogging at all.

Pages