No matter how nuanced Lum’s political positions may be, what I get out of this post is that Lum wants us to read about how this guy got b*tch-slapped for looking for dirt on Obama, and then read the pro-Obama, anti-conservative rants that make up the rest of the page. That smells rather strongly like flak for the Dems.

I’d still read someone’s blog if they supported a different football team–until the blog contained more posts about the (ugh) Chicago Bears than whatever it was that drew me to the blog in the first place. And all along I’d be wishing the writer wouldn’t talk about the Bears so damn much.

And, for the record… Go Packers!!

@pharniel–please stop posting until you read something, *anything* about economics. I don’t even know where to begin. Oh! I know, with your assertion that “tax cuts further drained” the treasury. On the contrary, the treasury has received *more* money since the tax cuts were implemented. Why? Because if people are allowed to make more money, they (surprise) have to pay more taxes! If I have to pay 12% of my income to the government and I get a $15,000 raise, the government gets more money–even if it doesn’t raise taxes. I only get that raise if the company I work for can make money. Said company has a real tough time making money if the capital gains tax is increased (so less people buy its stock) or if it has to spend more to comply with new regulations and/or other taxes. Monopolies are bad, but creating an environment where businesses can’t make a profit is much worse.

Competition is good, once the failing schools realized that they can be closed, they will have to perform. I am sick and tired states wasting money on bad schools. I was asked once by a friend to pick the most expensive laptop and accessories to reach $3000, so the grant can be spent for his wife. His wife is a public school teacher, the grant is state money.

@Mandalla – you are correct, there are plenty of good private schools. I am also aquanted with the montessori method, growing up in a montessori home (my mother was a teacher for 35 years and was montessori trained, and the last in her district to practice the technique for lower El).

You are correct, there are plenty of excellent private institutions in our country, especially in places you’d never suspect. However, most of the 90′s my state spent a ridiculous amount of money to ‘prove’ how bad the public school system was, with the intent of allowing private unregulated corporations and individuals to run their own ‘charter’ school.

To my mind subcontracting education to private industry to my mind is like subcontracting the army. it’s a bad plan.

It makes me sad that that is your only view of private schools. Please look up “Montessori” for for just one example of an alternate, and quite popular private school system (not endorsing them, just one off the top of my head).

I personally attended a private school and I guarentee you that I received a better science and history education than what I would have from the public schools in my area.

Democrats and Republicans are a little like a split in the Bolsheviks.

One half wants everyone to be “equal”. Take the money from those who know how to use it, and starve everyone.

The other half wants more control over population movements, and silencing those who disagree with them.

Extreams are bad, no union is not good, but too much union is bad.
No checks and balances is bad, too much checkes are bad too.

“Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.”
— Thomas Paine

In the current state, I believe raise tax is bad. The government as a corporate is making more money on gas taxes than the oil companies on their profits, do you think that is normal?

If the US government is a efficient one, I would say go ahead. However with a lot of money wasted on pork, I would say let the people spend it where they want, instead of government waste it on pork projects and special interests. Don’t you agree?

There is no such thing as a “free market”. I sometimes worry people are so paranoid about government interference that they happily sell their souls to their corporate overlords. If the government follows your wish of abdicating all responsibility, I’m sure there are many transnationals eager to fill the power vacuum.

We need a government and the government needs to raise funds via taxation. As such, if they can trade income tax for gas tax, why would you be opposed? We’re not talking government subsidies of one particular fuel tech here, we’re talking about the gas tax offsetting other existing taxes. This fulfills your wish of higher gas prices while also stimulating parts of the economy not reliant on gas prices. Is this not better than waiting a few years for higher gas prices and not having the corresponding stimulus?

No matter the USSR or China, the problem is the government directed solutions. They take the greed out of the system, and people fighter for power instead. Where free market stimulates productivity, power constrains on it, the worst will show as starvation. (I am not talking about build more factories or farms, let the market decide that).

And last, lower taxes does not mean we need to drill for gas. People are different. I for one don’t want to drill, I want the gas price to raise (but not through taxation) so we can seek clean alternatives. Again let the market decide which alternative are better, not government subsidies. Government intervene will bring out the product with the best political power, not necessary the best for us.