Working in a Security Bubble: No X-rays Please

Wouldn’t it have been better if the Obama administration had implemented the identity systems proposed by the Bush administration years ago.  We are still working on last year’s threat and we are still buying equipment for that.  Imagine when a bomber carries a device in a body cavity: will we have a colonoscopy before each flight.

Also, an experienced radiologist at Colombia University recently explained that the actual x-ray exposure, while small, is more than 10 times that claimed by TSA. This is bad news for the population of 750 million fliers in the US and people who go through screening 100’s of time a year and years from now will suffer cancer.   The numbers are small but real.

While passengers have no choice but to submit to either the detector or what some complain is an intrusive pat-down, some senior government officials can opt out if they fly accompanied by government security guards approved by the TSA.

“Government officials traveling with federal law enforcement security details are screened at airports under a specialized screening protocol, which includes identity verification,” Kimball said. This allows the officials to skip the airport security checkpoints.

via TSA: Some gov’t officials to skip airport security – National Business – MiamiHerald.com.

Progressive’s View of Obama

More and more, it’s becoming clear that progressives who had their hearts set on Obama were engaged in a huge act of self-delusion. Once you got past the soaring rhetoric you noticed, if you actually paid attention to what he said, that he largely accepted the conservative storyline, a view of the world, including a mythological history, that bears little resemblance to the facts.

via FDR, Reagan, and Obama – NYTimes.com.

Better No Tax Cut for Anyone–Save $3.7 trillion in Debt

The argument is simple enough.  Do not reinstate the tax cuts for all taxpayers.  The actual final spending impact is small, the middle class loses $888/family and the group with millions in income get $100’s of thousands/taxpayer.  Better to save the debt and cut the deficit by $3.7 million in tax cuts.

The question is: Is it better to extend the tax cuts for everyone or for no one? The answer is to extend them for no one.

The Bush tax cuts have always overwhelmingly benefited the rich, not the middle class, and that is no less true today than when they were enacted. They were bad policy then and they are bad policy today. Extending the tax cuts would dramatically enrich the wealthy relative to everyone else. 65.5 percent of the total benefit would go to the top quintile by income, 26.8 percent to the top 1 percent, and 14.7 percent to the top 0.1 percent.*

via Dear Mr. President « The Baseline Scenario.

Rubio is Not a Keynesian, After All

This sounds to me like the Marco Rubio of Tallahassee ( and his famous 100 ideas!)–his fight for distant issues and achieved little actual progress in deficit and tax reduction.

From Marco Rubio,

“The past two years provided a frightening glimpse at what could become of our great nation if we continue down the current path: wasteful spending, a growing debt and a government reaching ever further into our lives, even into our health care decisions,” he said. “It is nothing short of a path to ruin …”

…“This means preventing a massive tax increase scheduled to hit every American taxpayer at the end of the year. It means repealing and replacing the disastrous health care bill. It means simplifying our tax code, and tackling a debt that is pushing us to the brink of our own Greece-like day of reckoning.”

Rubio’s warning – and threat to the White House – sounds almost apocalyptic, as if the election campaign continues. Which, in a way, it does.

via President Obama, Marco Rubio face off on tax cuts – CSMonitor.com.

Dear Mr. Rubio,

Most of the debt came from the Bush Administration, the TARP, the Obama stimulus package and the fall in the economy that cut tax revenue; it is almost impossible to make a difference by eliminating “wasteful spending” (all newly elected politicians want to end wasteful spending not affecting their state or district); government overreaching (do forget war spending, the TARP passed by President Bush and a stimulus package a lot of which was tax cuts) that saved the banks, GM, and about 2 to 3 million jobs; the government is already deeply embedded in our health care in medicare and medicaid; the tax decrease in January for the rich will cause a huge increase on our debt and deficit of at least $700 billion without creating jobs.

Yes, we need to deal with the debt caused by mismanagement of the financial system by prior governments, the current government and the need to grow jobs.  Let’s see if you and the others in Washington are willing to cut social security, medicare, medicaid, but, above all raise taxes to pay the bill.

This will be interesting.