In a rare display of prolificity (is that a word?  If not, it should be!), and in the nick of time (since the week is nearly over), I'm posting twice in one day and getting in my weekly random musings...


The CNN/YouTube debate from the other night might not have made much news from the candidates (other than intensified bickering between Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney), but it provided plenty of news about the hosts.  Often derided by Republicans as the "Clinton News Network" for perceived leftward bias, CNN lived up to its derision by allowing a question from a Hillary Clinton supporter.  It also turns out that other questions, all of which were supposed to be from Republicans, came from others affiliated with various Democratic candidates.  At best, CNN looks sloppy and incompetent; at worst, it appears to be an agenda-driven advocacy group lacking journalistic objectivity.  Democrats refused to appear in a Fox News debate due to a perceived rightward bias (and loud chatter from the liberal grassroots); CNN's performance lays the groundwork for analogous action by Republicans in the future.
________________________

For those fans lucky enough to have access to the NFL Network last night, the Dallas vs. Green Bay matchup was everything it was advertised to be.  It had the feel of a playoff game, and with good reason:  these teams are by far the class of the NFC, and both entered the game with 10-1 records, with the winner likely to have home field advantage throughout the playoffs (including the predicted rematch in the NFC Championship).  The game itself played out like a heavyweight boxing match, with big play after big play, punch and counterpunch.  Terrell Owens seemed at times to run wild, and Tony Romo threw the ball deep time after time.  In the end, Dallas won, but the game was certainly entertaining.
________________________

Flying under the radar isn't all that bad.  Just ask Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, who has seen himself morph into a target since claiming his "top tier" status.  Now that he matters in the polls, people are examining his record as Governor of Arkansas and finding that although he talks "conservative", his record is one of increased taxes and increased spending.  He is running on a platform that includes advocating replacing the income tax with a national sales tax, yet he never attempted to make the conversion in his own state despite serving over 10 years as governor.  His platform also includes leftist populist anti-free market rhetoric and calls for increased government intrusion into trade and the marketplace.  He is definitely not a candidate of liberty.  Here's hoping that the flurry of examination will result in his returning to the second tier of candidates.
________________________

As part of his plan for government health care, John Edwards wants to band pharmaceutical advertising for 2 years following the release of a new drug.  Never mind that getting approvals for new drugs is already an over-bureaucratized, incredibly expensive process.  Never mind that the incentive for drug companies developing new drugs is to make a profit, and advertising informs the public that new drugs are available.  Never mind that people might benefit from new drugs.  No, instead of promoting new drugs as a great benefit, Edwards instead chooses to follow the playbook of bashing drug companies and playing into fears.  Apparently, individuals and their doctors aren't capable of looking at the information and choosing the best treatment; rather, the government needs to intrude.  It is a typical anti-market response for Edwards.  One expects he'd not be so enthusiastic about, say, a 2-year ban on excessive lawsuits of drug companies.
________________________

Speaking of Edwards, he's come out in favor of "localization", which, among other things, places a premium on buying locally-grown produce and locally-manufactured products.  The theory is that doing so would decrease transportation of goods, thereby reducing greenhouse gas and other emissions.  However, the theory seems to ignore that crops tend to be grown in areas where they are most efficiently produced; encouraging crops in less efficient locations can result in an increased reliance on pesticides and fertilizers.  I don't know what the "break even" point is as far as total environmental impact, but I seriously doubt that Mr. Edwards has calculated it either.  In general, however, the free market tends to gravitate towards greater efficiency of resource allocation.
________________________

United Nations AIDS researchers have admitted to overstating the size of the AIDS epidemic.  They have cut the estimate of new infections by 40% and the number of global HIV-infected people by 7 million (approximately 20%).  This is simply a shining example of why government "studies" are to be viewed suspiciously:  they are incentivized towards showing a problem to be more widespread than it is, thus necessitating more government "action" and, of course, more government funding of additional research.  It plays into the hands of non-governmental organizations as well:  the more dire the problem, the more funds they can raise.

Of course, I'm sure there are no other worldwide "crises" that are likewise being overstated by a "consensus" of scientists...
________________________

I am still predicting that Ron Paul is this election's version of Howard Dean in 2004.  He is simply relying too much on people who have no history of participating in the election process.  He's raising money, he's got internet "meetups" and Facebook hits and MySpace friends — just like Howard Dean in 2004.  He's working the "new media" better than any of his competitors — just like Howard Dean in 2004.  There's a buzz about his campaign — just like Howard Dean in 2004.  He's got lots of college students fired up — just like Howard Dean in 2004.  I'm guessing that his support will crash when it comes time to brave the cold Iowa night to sit in a caucus and will flame out completely in New Hampshire — you guessed it, just like Howard Dean in 2004.

I do doubt, however, that we'll get a "yeeeeeeeoooooooooowwww" from him at his concession speech.
________________________

I have mentioned previously how no major industrialized country has a national sales tax (although many in Europe do employ a value-added tax, which is similar although much more complicated and intrusive).  There are, however, several countries that have implemented a version of the flat tax, similar to that on which Steve Forbes campaigned in 1996 and 2000.  Countries like Poland, Czech Republic, Russia, and Hungary have seen huge success and economic expansion since moving to a flat tax system.  Perhaps we should concentrate on models that work.  Our tax code is certainly too intrusive, too inefficient, too restrictive.  It holds our economy back.  Politicians enjoy power too much to relinquish it, though, so don't expect a flat tax in America any time in the near future.  Unfortunately.
________________________

Has anyone noticed the writers' strike?  I haven't.  I've read about it in the news, but I haven't noticed at all.
________________________

Go Vols tomorrow in the SEC Championship Game!