Reason Morning Links: Federal Deficit Expected to Soar, GM on eBay, Bleak Outlook in Afghanistan

- Obama faces grim choices in Afghanistan.

- GM to start selling new cars on eBay.

- Last year's record federal deficit may quadruple this year.

- New White House policy for federal websites stirs privacy concerns.

- The Economist takes aim at America's sex crimes laws.

Comments

[Xeones]

Hier ist an interesting article on Canadian socialized medicine.

And, a little morning Godwin: HITLER HITLER HITLER

[LBJ]

"BO: WTF?"? LOL!

[Rich]

... administrations tend to believe that "the harder and faster one falls, the more rapid and steep the recovery."

Yeah, we're building up momentum ... That's the ticket!

[SugarFree]

At least I don't to Africa to have a temper tantrum, I just do it here on the board.

[Rich]

However, SF, you will have to go to DC to have a Tusker with Hillary, the student, and the Pres.

[Kyle Jordan]

"At least I don't to Africa to have a temper tantrum, I just do it here on the board."

Does anyone want to take the bet that one day, Hillary is going to kill Bill? I can just see her snapping and shooting him or more likely, stabbing him repeatedly.

[Art-P.O.G.]

OK, Kyle Jordan, or should I call you Quentin?

12-14 more years in Afghanistan? Anyone want to deploy 9 times to the same country?

[SugarFree]

stabbing him repeatedly

High irony indeed.

[CoyoteBlue]

"The deficit picture is very challenging," White House budget director Peter Orszag wrote on his blog last month.

Un-fucking believable. "Very challenging"

Dooooomed

[Xeones]

Does anyone want to take the bet that one day, Hillary is going to kill Bill?

I saw it written somewhere (might have been here on Reason) that the Clintons have that type of need for each other that goes far, far beyond love, and when one of them kicks the bucket the other will howl by the corpse like a dog. That image really seemed to fit. As to your question, i'd say the odds are about 50/50.

[Kyle Jordan]

"12-14 more years in Afghanistan? Anyone want to deploy 9 times to the same country?"

And correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't some other superpower do this already? How'd it turn out for them?

[SugarFree]

How'd it turn out for them?

Rambo kicked their ass.

[Rich]

Rambo kicked their ass.

*And* their elephant.

[Art-P.O.G.]

And correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't some other superpower do this already? How'd it turn out for them?

But how were the Russkies' PXs? I guarantee you they weren't AAFES quality.

[Art-P.O.G.]

High irony indeed.

Mrs. Clinton sort of seems like the pegging type.

[Pro Libertate]

I have a cunning plan: Partition the country into thousands of little states, each controlled by one family.

I think we can say once and for all that Bill is, in fact, the "smart" Clinton. The SoS is not very politically astute. Next time I see her, I'm going to ask whether she shares her duties with the ex-president.

[Xeones]

whether she shares her duties with the ex-president

Not since Chelsea was conceived, no.

[SugarFree]

Of course Congress needs their own private jets.

[John]

Aghanistan is everything the Iraq critics said Iraq was. It is a fucked up, strategically irrelevent country involved in a local civil war. We need to get out or least come up with a better sollution that just throwing troops at the problem.

[Kyle Jordan]

"Rambo kicked their ass."

Yeah but that was only because they had Col. Troutman. And had Troutman been 10 years younger, he would have went berserker on those commie bastards himself.

[Mike M.]

Some "diplomat" that Hillary Clinton is, flipping out over nothing on some student from the Congo.

[Anonymous]

"the harder and faster one falls, the more rapid and steep the recovery." (...)

Board Member 1: Apparently, despite our best efforts the company is not losing money fast enough.
Dilbert: Excuse me. Did you just say the company wasn't losing MONEY FAST ENOUGH?
Board Member 2: Jeez, Wally, can't you reign this guy in? He's like a loose cannon.
Wally: Dilbert, will you stop embarrassing yourself? If you read Dogbert's book you'd know that a fast-growing company always loses money while it's expanding.
Dilbert: We're not a fast-growing company.
Wally: And we never will be if we don't lose more money.

[John]

I read the Economist article at the newsstand the other day. It is a great article. Sadly, it won't make any difference because you simply cannot have an intelligent conversation in public about sex crimes. Slowly but surely the number of topics you are not allowed to have an intelligent conversation about in public is rising. On certain issues anyone who questions the status quo is immediately dismissed as a kook. No debate or discussion needed. There is only one acceptable public position on it. And that position never changes no matter how unreasonable and outrageous the status quo becomes. The censorship of debate through marginalizing one side is more effective than anything a totalitarian state could dream up because it is seemingly voluntary rather than coerced.

Worse the number of topics now considered out of bounds for debate keeps rising. It started with the drug war. Then came sex crimes. Then after that came the crusade against DUIs. And it shows no sign of ending. People have figured out that it is a great way to win a political argument. Look at the debate of Obamacare. The way its proponents are dealing with that is to declare anyone who disagrees with it a kook. Just like anyone who thinks that perhaps it is a bad idea to spend billions and lock up millions to stop illegal drugs is a kook or anyone who thinks that sticking someone on a list for life after they have already paid their debt to society is a bad idea is a kook, people who think socializing medicine is a bad idea are being declared kooks and nuts and at odds with acceptable opinion. It is becoming our way of debate in this country. And it is getting very dangerous.

[Art-P.O.G.]

I find myself agreeing with you a lot today, John.

[Art-P.O.G.]

Sugarfree,

Are you implying that congresspeople wouldn't want to be trapped on a plane for hours with the hoi polloi?

[SugarFree]

I'm sure a few of them would enjoy the overflowing toilet, but on balance: yes.

[James Ard]

If Afganistan insists on Taliban rule, they deserve what they get. It won't be their first dance with the devil. I say pull out with a firm warning to Taliban leaders that any terror attacks will be their death sentences. Which will be carried out without concern for "innocents".

[Spoonman]

John, another example of that was the Iraq war.

[!]

Rambo kicked their ass.

James Bond paid a visit too.

[Kyle Jordan]

"I find myself agreeing with you a lot today, John."

Same here. I copied John's post because it's very well written and correct in my opinion.

[John]

The case Sugar Free links to is classic example of when the government controls something. The government can never let someone have authority is discretion. No no no. If we had that, someone might be responsible for something. I see that all the time with my government clients. They come to me and want to know what they can legally do about a particular problem. I tell them "well here are your authorities and you have these options under the law, so what do you want to do." They immediately give me a blank look and want me to tell them what to do. What they want is an iron rule that takes away their discretion so that if anything goes wrong they can say "I was just following the rules."

The case of the plane in Rochester is a great example of that. It is a hard job to manage passengers at airports. You have security issues. If you let people off the plane, you miss your window to take off because you can't round them up again. It is a pain to let people off at airports that are not their destination and so forth. So, to avoid having to make a decision, the government lets everyone off the hook and passes a rule that says "no one can get off an airplane unless it is their destination." Then when 47 people end up trapped on a plane all night, they can say "we were just following procedures." This is how government works. Rules relieve the need for common sense and judgment.

Something to think about the next time some progressive tells you government is so much better at running things.

[John]

Thanks Kyle.

[I, Kahn O\'Clast]

I'm not so sure about that John. The public debate on the drug war is clearly shifting - especially in the case of pot but also more generally. And I think all these news stories about the abuses of the sex crime overreach (now spilling beyond the pages of Reason) is a sign that that too has become an open debate rather than a closed one as you opine. Just the other day there was a report on TV about people forced to live under a bridge because they were on the sex crime list. It was a sympathetic piece that took issue with the extent of the problem.

The issue of the health care debate is a wholly different animal. The problem is that those opponents who have grabbed the media's attention are the ones who make silly claims thus deflating all arguments against. Personally I would not be surprised to discover that the left is somehow behind this: having people claim demonstrably false, and silly things, would be a genius strategy for getting this passed. No serious opposition argument is being heard.

And yes, people who claim that the Obama plan will include mandatory euthanasia are kooks.

[Anonymous]

The public debate on the drug war is clearly shifting

Don't be too sure. Consensus may shift without debate.

[Fluffy]

... administrations tend to believe that "the harder and faster one falls, the more rapid and steep the recovery."

This is actually not unreasonable to believe, because rapid and severe declines generally produce dramatic liquidations.

The liquidations are what produce the recovery, not the declines. Productive and valuable assets are transferred from sick firms that are paralyzed by debt to new holders that aren't hamstrung in the same way.

This recovery, however, may not follow that old rule, because although we've had a severe and rapid decline, the last two administrations have pursued a policy of refusing to allow true liquidations [at least, after Lehman]. They set up phony liquidations for Chrysler and GM, they propped up the zombie banks, they froze foreclosures, they bailed out the commercial paper market. So we probably won't get the same kind of recovery bounce a decline like this would have been expected to produce in the past.

On the bright side, we may get an inflationary episode, which will at least look like a recovery in certain ways.

[John]

"I'm not so sure about that John. The public debate on the drug war is clearly shifting - especially in the case of pot but also more generally."

Name one politician of significance in either party who is publicly for legalizing marijuana. I can't think of one. If that is not a marginal position what is? We have had the government completely change hands three times since 1994 and the drug war has not changed one bit.

"And yes, people who claim that the Obama plan will include mandatory euthanasia are kooks."

No, the people who claim that critics of Obama care are critical because they think it means mandatory euthanasia are liars. That is not the argument. The argument is as follows. The plan creates boards of doctors to give mandatory five year counseling sessions about "end of life issues". It combines that with treatment boards of unaccountable bureaucrats that will determine what treatments are available based on a cost benefit analysis, which necessarily includes the age, disability level and quality of life of the patient. You combine those things and people are understandably afraid that the system will go out of whack and end up pressuring the old and the handicapped into euthanasia. That is not an unfounded fear.

[Fluffy]

Sadly, it won't make any difference because you simply cannot have an intelligent conversation in public about sex crimes.

What we have to do is Trojan Horse it.

We hide a rationalization of the entire system of sex crimes law [no more going on the offender registry for public urination; no going on the sex offender registry for statutory offenses that had de facto but not de jure consent] inside of another step up in the brutalization of genuine offenders.

"I'm going to make things even more horrible for pedophiles, and I'm going to make sure they can't hide in plain sight on offender registries bloated with bogus entries" might sell. If you can hide the rationalization of the system beneath enough get-tough rhetoric, you might sneak it by.

[John]

"On the bright side, we may get an inflationary episode, which will at least look like a recovery in certain ways."

Don't worry. The recovery like inflation episode will only last until the Fed comes in and jacks interest rates through the roof to end the inflation and gives us another whale of a recession like we had in 1982. The brightside is that after that double dip, we might be able to get an actual recovery.

[Xeones]

The brightside is that after that double dip, we might be able to get an actual recovery.

Provided, of course, every politician in the country sits on his/her hands and doesn't try to "help." Which will never happen.

[John]

"we hide a rationalization of the entire system of sex crimes law [no more going on the offender registry for public urination; no going on the sex offender registry for statutory offenses that had de facto but not de jure consent] inside of another step up in the brutalization of genuine offenders."

You want to take sex offenders off the list? You want to let them live next door to me and my children and not even let me know that they are sex offenders? You pervert!!

You think Juanita is a troll. There are people out there who think like that. We have turned the word "sex offender" into a scarlett letter. You can't convince people that it includes things like public urination. You have to break the iron clad association of "sex offender" with someone didling five year olds.

[FrBunny]

We hide a rationalization of the entire system of sex crimes law ... inside of another step up in the brutalization of genuine offenders.

The efficacy of that approach makes me so very sad.

[Tomcat1066]

""The deficit picture is very challenging," White House budget director Peter Orszag wrote on his blog last month."

It is very challenging. There's just to many digits for it not to be. What's more, it keeps growing, making it even more challenging.

Remember: Big numbers are challenging.

[Robert Paulson]

John, while your observations of the unhealthiness of stifling debate on certain issues are spot-on, this is certainly not a new phenomenon. It wasn't that long ago that no one dared publicly state they favored decriminalizing homosexual behavior (let alone gay marriage!), and laws against pornography were also sacrosanct.

Not to get all sociology-textbook on you, but every society needs some type of deviance to define itself against, and sexual behavior has always been a popular area to do this with. If anything I think we've become so tolerant of so many diverse sexual orientations that the few remaining taboos, such as pedophilia and ephebophilia, receive the full thrust of social condemnation that was once spread out among many different "sex crimes".

People need to feel morally superior to, and punish, other people. It's always been true and it always will.

[Pro Libertate]

People who love government are deviants and should be shunned with great shunnery.

[Xeones]

Remember: Big numbers are challenging.

Who was it that said that we should start referring to gigantic numbers as "economical" rather than "astronomical?"

One astronomical unit is 93,000,000 miles.

The estimated federal deficit this year is 19,796 astronomical units.

Fuck.

[Tomcat1066]

Exactly Xeones. Fuck is right.

[roy]

...rapid and severe declines generally produce dramatic liquidations.

The liquidations are what produce the recovery, not the declines. Productive and valuable assets are transferred from sick firms that are paralyzed by debt to new holders that aren't hamstrung in the same way.

so true.

[Tulpa]

Xeones,

If a dollar were comparable to a mile in some way, that would make sense.

[dbcooper]

The estimated federal deficit this year is 19,796 astronomical units.

Which is > 0.3ly.

[Xeones]

Upon further consultation with Dr. Wik E. Pedia, it turns out that if you could convert dollars to miles, the federal deficit would reach almost a tenth of the way to Proxima Centauri. Should it ever actually get there, it would not doubt force any intelligent inhabitants thereof to declare war on mankind for being such a bunch of irresponsible dumbasses.

[Xeones]

Shut the fuck up, Tulpa. I'm having fun here.

[Robert Paulson]

administrations tend to believe that "the harder and faster one falls, the more rapid and steep the recovery."

If only they put that belief to the test by jumping out of Air Force One without parachutes...

[Tulpa]

Your right to have fun ends at my delicate unit-conversion sensibilities.

[robc]

The brightside is that after that double dip, we might be able to get an actual recovery.

I think we may have way more than a double dip, due to the amount of money that has been pumped into the system. Its going to take a lot of dips to eat thru that hockey stick.

[Xeones]

Your right to have fun ends at my delicate unit-conversion sensibilities.

Ah, but this is Hit'n'Run, where nobody's right to have fun ends anywhere.

[robc]

Tulpa,

Since time is money, we just need a way to convert time into distance and the conversion is done.

[Warty]

Fuck.

[Pro Libertate]

Based on this discussion, I propose a new denomination of currency, one suited for the 21st Century and its desire for inflation: The light dollar ($9,460,528,405,000). For legacy reasons, we'll also issue the parsec dollar, which equals 3.26 light dollars.

[Warty]

If I pay you minimum wage to run, and you run each mile in 8:16, I'm paying you a dollar for each mile. Therefore a mile is a dollar. Q.E.D.

[J sub D]

? Obama faces grim choices in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan is now Obama's war. I will give him credit for any successes and hold him responsible for any disasters. I'm sure those who voted for him feel the same.

? GM to start selling new cars on eBay.

Since they aren't cutting dealers out of the loop, I don't see this as helping a whole lot.

? Last year's record federal deficit may quadruple this year.

Like Afghanistan, this deficit belongs to Obama. I equally certain that those who voted for him will agree.

[robc]

Keeping an 8:16 pace for an entire AU is pretty damn good.

Im sure the ultramarathoners can beat that though.

[John]

"John, while your observations of the unhealthiness of stifling debate on certain issues are spot-on, this is certainly not a new phenomenon. It wasn't that long ago that no one dared publicly state they favored decriminalizing homosexual behavior (let alone gay marriage!), and laws against pornography were also sacrosanct."

My point was not that it was new only that it is becoming more prevelent. More importantly, it took a societal revolution in the 60s and 70s to change the views on homosexuality and pornography. God help us if we get to a point where only complete societal upheavels change anything.

[Tulpa]

Another way of looking at it is that, if this year's federal deficit were a stack of $1-bills, it would reach halfway to the moon.

If the same thing was done with the national debt, it would reach about a fifth of the way to Venus.

[Tulpa]

That is, a fifth of the way to Venus' orbit, to be precise.

[John]

If you had a trillion dollars, you could spend a million dollars a day for over 2700 years. That is a million dollars a day from the time of Homer until now.

[Xeones]

Word to your biological mother, Tulpa.

[SugarFree]

from the time of Homer until now

The Simpsons have only been on the air since 1989, dumbass. They didn't even have TVs 2700 years ago.

[P Brooks]

"GM and our dealers are reinventing the car buying experience," Mark LaNeve, GM vice president of U.S. sales said.

I am, shall we say, "incredulous".

[I, Kahn O\'Clast]

John, Politicians follow, they do not lead. I think that it is pretty clear that we've moved the debate from OMYGODOMYGODOMYGODDRUGSARELILLINGPEOPLE to a much more nuanced and critical look at the issue. Cover pages on magazines, television news and entertainment programs, etc all point to a softening of the public's view on drugs. Do you think "Weeds" would have had a chance on any television between 1982 and, say, 2000? Fewer and fewer pols make a stink about drugs and more and more have been taking a softer stance. It's a matter of time before pols see the writing on the wall.

Let me state that I have a dim view of socialized medicine, but our current system is not tenable - at least not politically. Regardless of what happens, health care will be rationed (publicly or privately) and that is the concern and your description, and while correct, is NOT what is being discussed at these town hall meetings and on the right wing media-sphere.

I saw a photo of some health reform protesters and in one an older woman holds a sign that reads something like "Obama, GOD decides Life and Death, not your national health care". I would lay money that she's on medicare and seeks medical attention when necessary and does not leave it up to GOD. My fundamentalist Aunt relied on GOD to heal her and died of a treatable malady.

[John]

"Do you think "Weeds" would have had a chance on any television between 1982 and, say, 2000?"

Popular culture never delt with the drug issue. I guess that is why Cheech and Chong movies never made any money. There was lots of discussion of drugs in movies and on cable during the 70s and 80s. Weeds, while apparently a good show, is nothing new in that regard.

"Regardless of what happens, health care will be rationed (publicly or privately) and that is the concern and your description, and while correct, is NOT what is being discussed at these town hall meetings and on the right wing media-sphere."

I have about had it with this inane line of argument. Megan McArdle destroyed it this morning better than I could. She wrote

"You could make this statement about any good:

"We already ration food; we just let the market do the rationing."
"We already ration gasoline; we just let the market do the rationing."
"We already ration cigarettes; we just let the market do the rationing."

And indeed, this was an argument that was made in favor of socialism. (No, okay, I'm not calling you socialists!) And yet, most of us realize that there are huge differences between price rationing and government rationing, and that the latter is usually much worse for everyone. This is one of the things that most puzzles me about the health care debate: statements that would strike almost anyone as stupid in the context of any other good suddenly become dazzling insights when they're applied to hip replacements and otitis media."

"I saw a photo of some health reform protesters and in one an older woman holds a sign that reads something like "Obama, GOD decides Life and Death, not your national health care". "

You saw a photo. That settles it. There are lots of photos of people at anti-war demonstrations celebrating the "Iraqi resistance". Does that mean everyone who is anti-war was rooting for the otherside? Or maybe it just means there was one person at a rally with a sign.

[Xeones]

The federal deficit is the equivalent of almost $100,000,000,000 for every season The Simpsons has been on the air.

[John]

"from the time of Homer until now

The Simpsons have only been on the air since 1989, dumbass. They didn't even have TVs 2700 years ago."

I don't even know what to say to that.

[Warty]

I don't even know what to say to that.

Skoogiglizut.

[SugarFree]

Hey, let's play The Liberal Mantras That Should Be Retired Game!

I'll start:

Price rationing

It's an oxymoron, moron!

[Mike M.]

If you had a trillion dollars, you could spend a million dollars a day for over 2700 years. That is a million dollars a day from the time of Homer until now.

So the fact that our government now spends a million bucks approximately every ten seconds is pretty impressive, in a sickening sort of way.

[Rich]

"The deficit picture is very challenging," White House budget director Peter Orszag wrote ....

The (Random House) definition of "challenging" is:
stimulating and thought-provoking; provocative; intriguing.

[FrBunny]

I'll start:

Price rationing
McMansions

[Tulpa]

The proper term is Goosnargh, Warty.

[I, Kahn O\'Clast]

John, I am in favor of the market rationing health care, full stop. In fact I think that health care should be provided wholly by the private market and that there should be no tax incentives or other gimmicks that hide costs from consumers (like employer provided plans).

Having said this the issue is that a huge swath of the public (wrongly in my view) view health care as a right, in similar vein as primary education or public safety and they think the government should have a huge role in providing it. I disagree, but there it is.

And health care is not like food: there is an endless possible demand and huge market inefficiencies in the provision of it. Insurance is a cartelized racket, pharmaceutical companies shut out competition and fix prices, etc etc. So the supply side of the equation is inflexible. It verges on a case of market failure.

And on the demand side, there is seemingly an endless amount of that. New maladies crop up all the time. Technologies and tests have exploded in number and cost. And due to our litigious society the over use of these, and the costs in terms of insurance all around, continue to escalate.

(oh and cigarettes and gasoline are not rationed by the private market, the government taxes the shit out of both to ration through price. So those are terrible examples.)

[SugarFree]

Price rationing
McMansions
Externalities

[John]

"I'll start:

Price rationing
McMansions"

Let me add

Neocon
Sustainability and or unsustainable
Externality. Sorry if you once heard this word in a college economics class and now apply it to anything your find distastful, you can't use it

[P Brooks]

"Cheap Chinese crap"

"Gas guzzler"

"Fairness"

[John]

You beat me to expternalities Sugarfree

[P Brooks]

Apparently, GM is claiming the VOLT will get 230 mpg.

Won't somebody PLEASE crash an airplane into their headquarters building (during a Board of Directors meeting)?

[Tulpa]

You can't have a serious discussion of libertarianism in the real world without mentioning "externalities". If you retire the word, how do you respond to a liberal who claims that libertarianism doesn't have any way of dealing with pollution?

[Warty]

"Birther". Once it had a valid purpose, but now it's a catch-all smear used by lazy idiots. So goes the circle of life.

[I, Kahn O\'Clast]

As to the photo, John, my point is that the debate is being framed through the media and the poster children for the opposition are the rubes who do not even comprehend the issue at hand. People who have serious economic or political justifications for being opposed to the reform have no stage. It would have been better for us if the morons stayed home. The undecided middle is going to look at this debate and decide they'd rather side with the side that does not look moronic.

[P Brooks]

But- free unlimited health care from cradle to grave is a basic human RIGHT!

[Tulpa]

the poster children for the opposition are the rubes who do not even comprehend the issue at hand.

That would apply to Obama, Pelosi, Biden, etc. as well. The difference is that their office gets them the attention that the lady with the sign can only get by screaming at a town hall meeting.

[John]

"As to the photo, John, my point is that the debate is being framed through the media and the poster children for the opposition are the rubes who do not even comprehend the issue at hand. People who have serious economic or political justifications for being opposed to the reform have no stage. It would have been better for us if the morons stayed home. The undecided middle is going to look at this debate and decide they'd rather side with the side that does not look moronic."

As opposed to the side that has union thugs beating the shit out of some poor guy in St. Louis. I think what you are saying is just class snobery. I don't find the people at those meetings, from the Youtube videos I watched to be anything like that. They ask legitimate questions and no one seems to have an answer. And if they have mistaken beliefs about the Obama plan, perhaps the fact that it is 1000s of pages long and its own propoents haven't read it or have any idea what it says has something to do with that.

[Pro Libertate]

Access to the Moon is my right, too.

[John]

"Birther". Once it had a valid purpose, but now it's a catch-all smear used by lazy idiots. So goes the circle of life."

Whenever someon uses that term around me, I get a puzzled look on my face and ask, "Which birther do you mean, the nuts who think Obama was born in Kenya or the ones who think Palin is the mother of her grandchild? I have a hard time keeping the nuts straight these days". You wouldn't believe the snotty looks I get. But they never have a comeback for it.

[kinnath]

Apparently, GM is claiming the VOLT will get 230 mpg.

No the EPA says that for "city" driving, the volt will achieve 230 mpg.

GM will market the hell out of this statement, but they did not originate it.

[P Brooks]

And free cocktails along the way!

[P Brooks]

Isn't the EPA a wholly owned marketing subsidiary of GovMoto, now?

[P Brooks]

*That would be free cocktails en route to Luna.

[Tulpa]

I can't believe you guys haven't mentioned "tea bagger" as a delenda est liberal mantra. I've always suspected H&R is populated by a disproportionate number of alternative sexuality folks, though, so maybe I shouldn't be surprised.

[Pro Libertate]

Yes, now that GM is government controlled, why should we trust regulators in any way when they are dealing with GM?

[Pro Libertate]

P Brooks,

Thanks for recognizing and expanding my fundamental rights.

[kinnath]

Yes, now that GM is government controlled, why should we trust regulators in any way when they are dealing with GM?

I made a similar point months ago. GM is now majority-owned by the same entity that writes the regulations it must operate under.

Ford's laywers should be working overtime to prepare an endless stream of conflict-of-interest lawsuits against all the regulatory agencies.

[I, Kahn O\'Clast]

John, they have mistaken beliefs because the right wing echo chamber has given it to them. Don't be such a dupe. None of these people thought there would be "death panels" in the Obama Plan until Palin and FOX News started going on about them....

[Tulpa]

Speaking of "tea baggers"...et tu, Weigal?

During the 2009 Tea Party protests against the tax policies of the United States Government, David Weigel of The Washington Independent photographed a protester holding a sign that read "Tea Bag the Liberal Dems Before They Tea Bag You."[8]

[TrickyVic]

"""I have a cunning plan: Partition the country into thousands of little states, each controlled by one family."""

Success!! It already is for the most part. Afghanistan is ruled valley by valley. They are not interested in a national government.

"""We have had the government completely change hands three times since 1994 and the drug war has not changed one bit. """

Why the 1994 reference?

[Hugh Akston]

Social Justice

[TrickyVic]

""""Which birther do you mean, the nuts who think Obama was born in Kenya or the ones who think Palin is the mother of her grandchild?"""

Zing!

I think the Obama birther issue is similar to the Bush didn't win in 2000 arguement. Both make the claim that the President in holding the office illegally. We've never seen the recount, so it might be true.

[Ska]

From Tulpa's link comes this great quote:

If you are planning simultaneous teabagging all around the country, you're going to need a Dick Armey.

[Rich]

free unlimited health care from cradle to grave is a basic human RIGHT!

As is the RIGHT to determine cradle-to-grave spans! 😉

[Tulpa]

Today in irony: I'm currently watching "Life After People" on the History Channel and seemingly every other commercial is about how Obama wants to kill old people.

If I see this on the 1000 Ways To Die marathon tonight on Spike, it will be complete.

[John]

"John, they have mistaken beliefs because the right wing echo chamber has given it to them. Don't be such a dupe. None of these people thought there would be "death panels" in the Obama Plan until Palin and FOX News started going on about them...."

And it is not like there is no corresponding echo chamber on the left. All those people are screaming "obstructionist" and "un-American" and "why can't you accept that we have a black President" are all informed thoughtful citizens.

[Tulpa]

As I said before, the difference is not who has a logical argument to back up their position, it's who has power. Obama's specious logic he backs up his position with is certainly no better than that of the people who think Obamacare means pushing granny off the cliff.

Just like from 9/11 to a few months after the Iraq invasion, incredibly dubious arguments made by the Bush administration were treated as gospel, while anti-war people were portrayed as loons in the MSM.

[R C Dean]

No the EPA says that for "city" driving, the volt will achieve 230 mpg.

For city driving, I'm surprised there is any MPG at all. Can't you run it entirely on electricity in the city?

What we need for these electric cars is a miles per pound of coal rating.

[J sub D]

Yes, now that GM is government controlled, why should we trust regulators in any way when they are dealing with GM?

I made a similar point months ago. GM is now majority-owned by the same entity that writes the regulations it must operate under.

Ford's laywers should be working overtime to prepare an endless stream of conflict-of-interest lawsuits against all the regulatory agencies.

The government buys fleets of vehicles and trucks. It will be interesting to see if the manufacturers mix changes.

[robc]

how do you respond to a liberal who claims that libertarianism doesn't have any way of dealing with pollution?

You type COASE a brazillion times in your response. Not that I would do that or anything.

[P Brooks]

The government buys fleets of vehicles and trucks.

And crushes them.

[T]

The government buys fleets of vehicles and trucks. It will be interesting to see if the manufacturers mix changes.

It sure as fuck did after the original Chrysler bailout under Lee Iacocca. Every TMP car on every Army base in the country was some variation of a shitty K-car.

[R C Dean]

how do you respond to a liberal who claims that libertarianism doesn't have any way of dealing with pollution?

How about:

Shut the fuck up, you crypto-totalitarian tool. If your neighbor's pollution harms you in some detectable way, you can get restitution from him. When was the last time the EPA cut you a check because somebody dumped crap in your stream?