Should We Replace The Progressive Income Tax?

I know I am a few days late for tax day, but here is an explanation of two proposed alternatives to our current income tax. This video is presented by the Cato Institute’s Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation and his hosted by Dan Mitchell. Last month I posted a 3-part series by the same folks discussing the Laffer Curve. You can see those here.

Wildly Popular 'Iron Man' Trailer To Be Adapted Into Full-Length Film

I know it’s a joke, but did you ever notice how often the trailer is so much better than the movie? But I will take my chances and see Iron Man on opening weekend. After all, I went to high school with the director. More importantly, it looks awesome.

Is Denis Diderot Spinning in his grave?

In an example of political correctness gone wild, Bridget Bardot, the beautiful 1960’s sex kitten is on trial in France for "inciting racial hatred." Amazingly she has four previous convictions for the same thing. Read about her latest prosecution in Time Magazine.

The current charge against Bardot was lodged by the Movement Against Racism and for Friendship between Peoples (MRAP), citing a letter Bardot wrote to French officials in 2004 in which she alluded to Muslims as "this population that leads us around by the nose, [and] which destroys our country." The former actress-turned-animal rights crusader had written that letter to protest the ritual slaughter of sheep during the Muslim festival of Eid-al-Kabir.

Her previous prosecutions are described thusly.

In 1997, for example, Bardot was first convicted on the charge of "inciting racial hatred" for her open letter to French daily Le Figaro, complaining of "foreign over-population", mostly by Muslim families.

The following year she was convicted anew for decrying the loss of French identity and tradition due to the multiplication of mosques "while our church bells fall silent for want of priests." Darkening Bardot's public image in both cases was her marriage to an active supporter and political ally of French National Front leader Jean-Marie Le Pen.

In 2000, Bardot was again convicted — this time for comments in her book Pluto's Square, whose chapter "Open Letter to My Lost France" grieved for "...my country, France, my homeland, my land is again invaded by an overpopulation of foreigners, especially Muslims." And in 2004, another Bardot book, A Cry In the Silence, again took up the question of immigration and Islam — ultimately running afoul of anti-racism laws by generally associating Islam with the 9/11 terror attacks, and denouncing the "Islamization of France" by people she described as "invaders."

Obviously, everything Bardot said and wrote would be protected by the First Amendment. Ironically, it was great 18th Century French philosophers who inspired many of the ideas embodied in our constitution, including freedom of speech. Denis Diderot., who was persecuted for his Encyclopédie had this to say on free speech.

“All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings”

While I think it is healthy to consider others’ feelings before you speak or write, we have an absolute right to be offensive. The government should never punish a person because a person or group is offended. The First Amendment is not a defense to criticism of course. It often seems a person says something offensive and then starts repeating “Free Speech, First Amendment, Free Speech First Amendment.” But that is only a defense if the government is coming after you. The proper response to offensive speech is more speech. Say or write something offensive and you will be criticized. That’s what the First Amendment is all about, a free exchange of ideas and the right to try and convince others.

Would I offend anyone if I said this is one reason the United States of America is far superior to France? Too bad.

The Candidate To Do Shots With

"Hillary Clinton was shown at a bar in Indiana drinking a beer, and doing a shot of whiskey. Hey, and it worked. Today, Ted Kennedy switched back." --Jay Leno

"Did you all see that? She took the shot with the beer chaser. Did it like an old pro. To give you an idea how much she drank, when the phone rang at 3 am, slept right through it." --Jay Leno

"So what is the drink of choice for this hard scrabble Archie Bunker-type? [on screen: Clinton requesting Crown Royal whiskey]. Yes. Nothing says blue collar like whiskey in a velvet pouch. You know it's the only alcohol with both crown and royal in the name. Got a word to fanciness ratio of 1-to-1. Bar keep, your gayest whiskey, please. I've had a heck of a day in the mines. By the way, when you finish the bottle of Crown Royal, you can still use the pouch to hold your broken dreams." --Jon Stewart

Is Hillary Hunting The Wrong Game?

"In an effort to try and connect with some of the rural voters in Pennsylvania, Hillary said she has gone hunting, and once shot a duck. Personally, I like Cheney. He shot a lawyer." --Jay Leno

"Barack Obama had said small town Americas cling to things like their guns because they're bitter. That is ridiculous. You don't cling to your gun because you're bitter. You shoot your gun because you're bitter. Then you cling to it because it's so nice and warm." --Stephen Colbert

The 61st Anniversary

Today is the 61st anniversary of Jackie Robinson's first game in the major leagues. It was on April 15, 1947 that Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier in our national past time. He did more than integrate a sport, he helped integrate America.

Recipe for Depression

My brother said something the other day that I found a little disturbing. He said “Democrats are better for the economy.” Of course he was only 10-years old when Jimmy Carter left office. The economy did do fairly well during Bill Clinton’s presidency, but I am not sure that he deserves most of the credit for it. To be fair, while Clinton’s tax hikes did not help the economy, his free trade policies did. Still. In my opinion, the single largest factor responsible for the 1990’s economic growth was technology creating massive gains in productivity. Maybe Al Gore deserves credit for the growth since he invented the Internet. Well maybe not.

But what about today? Since it appears we may be in (or heading towards) a recession, how will the Democrats improve the economy? The economic plans of Clinton and Obama appear to involve turning away from free trade and raising taxes. The last President that I recall doing both in the face of an economic downturn was Herbert Hoover. It didn’t work so well for him (or the rest of the Country).

Michael Barone makes this point on NRO in Uncle Sam Pays? Sure — Whatever.

On fiscal policy, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton want higher taxes, at least on high earners. They want to let at least some of the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010, as scheduled. On trade, they oppose new free-trade agreements and want to renegotiate NAFTA with Canada and Mexico.

As it happens, another president embraced such policies in a time of economic slowdown and financial market turbulence. Herbert Hoover raised taxes on high earners sharply and, ignoring a letter from 1,000 economists, signed the Smoot-Hawley tariff in 1930. The results were not pretty. Until now, his example has not commended itself to Democrats. One wonders whether voters will agree that tax increases will stimulate the economy.

He also talks about Carter memories.

Almost all voters in 1992 and a large majority in 2000 had vivid memories of the 1970s, when we had both economic stagnation and double-digit inflation — stagflation — and thanks to government price controls, motorists had to wait an hour in line to fill up their gas tanks. Those experiences put the advocates of bigger government on the defensive.

This year, half the voters are too young to have been behind the wheel in a gas line or to have been paying rapidly rising monthly bills with a paycheck eroded by inflation. They have lived all their adult lives — all their lives, in the case of the millennial generation, born since 1980 — in an era when we have had low-inflation economic growth 95 percent of the time.

I think McCain really should start challenging Clinton and Obama on the economy, especially on trade. Point out how many jobs were CREATED as a result of NAFTA and other free trade agreements instead of how many lost. Since Clinton and Obama are still battling for Democratic primary voters, they will find it difficult to backtrack from harmful protectionist positions.

Baracky

A liberal friend of mine asked me last night if there was time to turn me into an "Obamican" (Republican for Obama) before the election. I said sure, so long as Obama turns into a conservative first. It's hard not to like Obama, but I think his policies would be a disaster. I put this video here not as an endorsement of Obama, but as something that I think was really clever and well done.



Anyone else notice Hillary is the black guy?

A Wooden Computer

According to PC World Magazine, Fujitsu is working on a laptop with a wooden case in an effort to be more “green.” You can read all about it. Fujitsu to Show Laptop With Wooden Case.

Could this be the environmentally friendly laptop PC of the future? Fujitsu will unveil later this week a laptop PC with a case manufactured from wood rather than the more traditional plastic or metal.

The laptop, which is only a prototype, uses cedar wood for the case and also makes use of bio-plastics for parts. Bio-plastics are plastics produced from renewable sources such as vegetable oil rather than petroleum used in traditional plastics.

The laptop PC carries the names of Fujitsu and Monacca, a Japanese design team that specializes in wooden products. Monacca has a range of furniture and bags made from wood on sale via its Web site and recently launched a desktop calculator with a distinctive large, round wooden case.

Sounds cool, but I am not sure I would want to carry it around. By the way, the photo I posted here is not an actual photo of the Fujitsu laptop (at least I don’t think it is).

Lewis Black On Celebrity Politcal Endorsements

The Limits Of Diplomacy

On Tuesday, while questioning General David Petraeus and US ambassador to Baghdad Ryan Crocker, Barack Obama called for a "diplomatic surge" including talks with US foe Iran, to help stabilize the situation in Iraq. "We should be talking to them as well," said Obama, adding “I do not believe we are going to be able to stabilize the situation without that"

As a lawyer and a politician, I am sure Obama knows an awful lot about negotiating deals. Both sides come together, negotiate hard, and each come away with some, if not all of what they want. But that assumes both parties actually want to reach an agreement.

It has been said that the only thing worse than war with Iran, is a nuclear armed Iran.

Iran is determined to become a nuclear power and the super power in the Middle East. Sure they want the United States out of Iraq, but only so that they can take control there. While the U.S. wants to draw down its forces in Iraq, leaving Iran in charge is not an acceptable outcome. Leaving a nuclear armed Iran in charge is a recipe for nuclear war.

Some argue that a nuclear armed Iran would not be a disaster, pointing out that deterrence prevented a nuclear exchange throughout the Cold War. But the doctrine of Mutual assured Destruction assumes that both sides are rational actors. I am not sure that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad qualifies as rational.

I am one of the last people to equate religious fundamentalism with mental illness, but Ahmadinejad, while not necessarily mentally ill is not rational. At the very least his public statements do not indicate he is. Consider his calls to destroy Israel. The US Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) completed a study last year that indicated Israel would survive as a country after a nuclear war with Iran, albeit with horrific losses, but that Iran would be utterly destroyed. Download the report here. But would this be a real deterrent?

I believe that Ahmadinejad believes that if it ever did come to an all out war with the United States, much less Israel, Iran would prevail because it was God’s will. If millions of Iranians die in the process, well that was God’s will too.

I doubt a good hard talking to by Obama is going to dissuade Ahmadinejad. A credible threat of force might not dissuade Ahmadinejad, but it might dissuade others around him. It might be necessary to use force against Iran. Ironically, the more willing we are to use force, the less likely it is we may have to use it. The threat of force is only effective if it is believable and it is only going to be believable if we are actually willing to use it.

Can diplomacy prevail? It can. But remember, as Karl Von Clausewitz said almost 200 years ago, war is the continuation of diplomacy by other means.

The Success of Mark Penn

"As her campaign strategist, Mark Penn is widely credited with catapulting Hillary from her virtual shoo-in to second place." --Jay Leno