Things I ponder while driving to work

I'm an unwilling consumer of NPR news while driving to work, and a few things I hear raise a few ponderables:

Trent Lott wants to put a $750,000,000 earmark in an emergency spending bill, a bill ostensibly in support of Iraq and Katrina rebuilding expenditures, to destroy a recently rebuilt (at a cost of $250,000,000) railroad and replace it with a highway. This highway has apparently been a dream of his for quite awhile. My question is why something like this wouldn’t be included in a more appropriate bill, say something like the equally bloated highway bill? Could it be that Federal spending on this highway can’t be justified and the only way to get it is by hiding it in a “veto-proof” spending bill? Is this kind of self-serving abuse of trust what we mean by leadership?

I’m hearing a lot of griping about gas prices. How much did a loaf of bread or a gallon of milk cost in 1972? How about 1996? Why aren’t we hearing about price-gouging from dairy farmers? And this proposed $100 tax refund to taxpayers – is the definition of taxpayer “someone that actually pays income tax?” If so, expect to hear about “another tax cut for the rich” from 50% of the country. If not, here’s yet another back door welfare program. I’ve also heard that Congress passed a law mandating increased usage of grain-based ethanol in gasoline, which obviously benefits the farming industry. Does this mean we can get rid of the expensive farm subsidies now?

I’m curious about these Mexican Reconquistas and their claims that they own parts of the Southwest United States and will be taking those areas back. Back where? Are they talking about annexing those lands to Mexico? That wouldn’t make much sense – it’s not like Mexico is land-poor, so their economic problems must be arising from other factors. How long would it take for the newly annexed areas to be just as blighted as the rest of Mexico, and the Reconquistas are pouring out of California (or whatever they re-name it to) and striving to take back North Dakota? Or do they think that can "conquer" those areas but still retain the benefits of an American economy? I can’t see that happening since the “conquered” people would simply move out, leaving the newly reclaimed lands to be managed by lettuce pickers and landscapers.

Again, these are just random point and apropos of nothing in particular.  Might be fun to discuss, though.

Comments

[rob]

With all the corruption of our national morality coming out of California, I'm not too sure giving it back to Mexico would be a bad idea at this point...

[Hogarth]

Rob -
Good point! Maybe we can can talk them into taking Massachusetts as well.

[rob]

Yeah, like we would be that lucky...

[brutal]

I get to stand there, brutal blowjobs before walking hand as they tied the.