One Step Forward, Several Dozen Back

The Economist suggests that if Bush is eager to wrap himeself in the (thus far ill-fitting) mantle of Reagan, he might want to break the glass case around his veto pen and block the bloated corporate tax bill just passed by both house and senate. The hefty tax cuts included may sound nice, but it shouldn't take over 900 pages, the size of the Senate version of the bill, to cut tax rates: The bill is packed with market-distorting provisions designed to assist specific industries and firms, "offsetting" tax increases elsewhere, and multi-billion dollar bailout for tobacco growers.

Comments

[Isaac Bartram]

"...and multi-billion dollar bailout for tobacco growers."

Got to keep them paying that settlement money. 🙂

[Isaac Bartram]

Whenever I watch politicians I am reminded of the end of Huckleberry Finn where Huck and Tom want to free Jim. huck favors the simple approach (Why don't we jes bust down the door?) while Tom insists on a sophisticated plan.

Why do we keep electing Tom Sawyer to Congress?

[Matthew Cromer]

Some very interesting stuff, Julian, but where are your thoughts on the Putin press conference?

I'm also waiting on that review of Hayes _The Connection_ from Reason. I'm sure you all can't wait to refute the ridiculous claptrap about Saddam and Al Qaeda in that book and it's a short book -- I read most of it over a lunch hour. So what's the delay?

I suspect the reason we aren't hearing anything is you guys have figured out we were right about Saddam and Al Qaeda and are trying to figure out how the war was still immoral and stupid anyway.

Good luck!

[Jason Ligon]

I'm sympathetic Matthew, but maybe you could relax on this for a while?

[clueless]

matthew..........can ya give it a break..you're lookin like an asshole that can't keep to the topic....and yep..my mail addy works........does yours?

[Julian Sanchez]

Plenty of other people are already writing about the Hayes book, and since nobody seems to be taking it very seriously anyway, I don't know what the point would be.

[Warren]

Huh? Even congress is beginning to wise up to the fact that the emperor has no cloths. Every single justification for the Iraq war was a complete fabrication. At this point only the dangerously delusional believe otherwise.

[clueless]

warren...i agree wholeheartedly.....now if we could just convince matthew to stop highjacking topics that have little or nothing to do with the war..and stop using the board as his own little AIM.....it might free up the load on reason's crappy and slow servers.....

D

[Matthew Cromer]

I'd be glad to keep to the topic -- where is the thread here at H&R referring to Putin's press conference?

[Gary Gunnels]

Matthew Cromer,

When you own or otherwise run the site you can make those sorts of decisions.

Putin has claimed that Iraq made some inquiries; there is no specificity as to when those inquiries were made, what the substance of them were, etc. Until those sorts of issues are answered, Putin's claim leaves us with little to discuss.

[thoreau]

I think I'd support an automatic veto for any piece of legislation that requires 900 pages.

[clueless]

matthew,
is that is your justification?
your final response... as to why you posted THAT ...in this thread?
gosh!...and to think......that you would want us to actually take your opinions seriously when you attempt to make a point? You can't have it both ways....you either are an moron......or you you are not.....it's up to you to present us with a hint.

[db]

"I think I'd support an automatic veto for any piece of legislation that requires 900 pages."

Hear, hear!

I'd support a requirement for a 90/10 majority for passage of bills in both the House and Senate, too. And a reduction of the sessions to two months, July and August, and prohibit the use of air conditioning in the Capitol during the summer.

It's the only way to be sure that we don't get all the government we pay for.

[thoreau]

Matthew Cromer-

How many times do we have to tell you: Just because we support the right to take speed doesn't mean we support the decision to do so? 🙂

[Matthew Cromer]

I'll drop it -- but I am very disappointed that H&R links all the bad news on Iraq but refuses to link anything that makes the war in Iraq look like the right decision.

Since REASON is one of the main sources of information that confirmed my tentative decision to become a libertarian years ago, I have a special place in my heart for the magazine, albeit mostly as it was rather than as it is today.

I do appreciate that they allow the Youngs to continue to post their writing that doesn't toe the party line.

[JDM]

I don't understanding the whining about Matthew's posting. He's got a point, this is a big story, whatever comes out of it.

It's not like he's stomping all over threads that have any long discussion going on, you can scroll past him.

Is it really so important to you that all of the posts linked to this thread involve only the topic originally posted? If so, you probably did well in school.

Threadjacking can be annoying, but he has no other recourse here...

[MB]

OK, JDM, we'll all play by your and Cromer's rules. Fuck the original post, let's talk about Just War Theory, the designated hitter, parental consent for abortions, seatbelt laws, the Mars mission, favorite movies, Thai cooking, stereo equipment, etc. What other recourse do we have?

[ABC]

My favorite movie is "Donnie Darko".

[Brent Smith]

*Has* Bush tried to "wrap himself in the Reagan mantle"? There's a link on the georgewbush.com page to an "in Memoriam" page, but it really doesn't seem like a "help me continue the Reagan legacy" sort of thing. What other examples are there?

[thoreau]

Season 4 of 24 is supposed to deal with Islamic terrorists.

I have a really good recipe for mango pork that I posted a few weeks ago. I have another one for pot roast marinated in soy sauce.

I wonder when the new Eminem CD comes out.

Any bets on whom Kerry will pick as a VP candidate?

There weren't any threads started on these topics, so I have no other recourse but to start talking about them here.

[JDM]

"There weren't any threads started on these topics, so I have no other recourse but to start talking about them here."

That's true, though they are hardly major stories related to a topic that normally accounts for about half the posts the H+R bloggers make.

I too get the feeling that if the news were that Putin warned Bush that Saddam was actively working *against* terrorist attacks before the invasion, that maybe, just maybe, we'd have seen a post or two, and more than a few comments, with or without all due caveats about Putin's reliability.

[JDM]

thoreau,

Didn't you post that mango pork recipe? I don't recall any of the Reason staff starting a thread about it, nor do I remember anyone jumping all over you for it...

[JDM]

"One Step Forward, Several Dozen Back"

heh.

[thoreau]

I posted my recipe in a thread about food and obesity.

[Mo]

JDM,
I responded to Matthew in another thread and he didn't respond. I'll repost it here and see if he bites:

Wait, weren't the Russians set to profit from Iraqi oil contracts under a Hussein regime? If the Iraqis were planning terrorist attacks against the US, why did they oppose the UN Resolution for war? (I know I answered my own question)

If what Putin is saying is true, that means he knew Iraq was planning attacks on the US, but opposed us doing anything about it. Either Putin is full of shit or he's opposed to our self-defense. Either way, we shouldn't trust him. If the French had the same intel, I'd be pissed at them as well (and there'd be calls for invasion at the fringes :D).

Putin's fishing for some payback and if I was the Bush administration, I'd leave him hanging. The UN vote was far more valuable than this "defense" over a year after the war.

With friends like Putin, who need enemies.

[Mo]

Also, what's with the Friday Morning Quarterbacking? This information would've been nice, oh say a year and a half ago, before the war. Why no mention? The UK's sketchy intel was mentioned in the SOTU, but no mention of actual planned attacks. Why does the administration seem as surprised by these revelations as everyone else?

If this is legit, it's a big deal, but the way this has been handled, the fact that it shocked high level members here and the timing all point to Putin being full of it.

[JDM]

"I posted my recipe in a thread about food and obesity."

So not the best example, then. Posting about the identity of GG/JB (same!) would be a better example. It's sort of a meta-post to the H+R clack about the issue of posting itself. Those could fairly go into any thread GG posts to, but where do you go if you want to post about a non-posting?

Maybe I'm just more of an anarchist at heart than a pack of supposed libertarians, or maybe libertarians have more of an instinct for grass roots order than an obvious statist like myself.

[Andrew Lynch]

Julian, in other words, the bill is another incomprehensible piece of worthless legislation. Why don't you just say what you mean?

[kevrob]

Reaching a compromise with the Senate will not be easy, lawmakers and aides said yesterday. Lobbyists advised clients not to expect a final bill until September at the earliest and probably not until after the elections.

Seems like that veto pen won't be needed until after the conference committe report, and another vote by each house. There's many a slip...

Kevin

[Matthew Cromer]

Mo,

The Russians publically opposed the Iraq war. Why they warned us privately about terrorist attacks I cannot be certain -- but it wouldn't surprise me if Putin feels Russia and America are natural allies in the WOT given the Chechnya angle.

[MB]

Cromer's load: blown.

[sigmund]

This is one weird thread. As for me, I think that Putin should veto the tax bill.

[b-psycho]

Too bad if Bush actually did veto that bill simple-minded people would think he was being a hypocrite somehow.

By now I'd be willing for him to veto ANYTHING just to show he realizes that's within his power. This ain't Cuba, disagreement is a good thing...

[Ironchef]

A sitting President signing a bloated bill for special interests/corporate lobbyists? Well I never.