Over at the More than Zero site, Mindles H. Dreck has one of the best satirical skewerings of Paul Krugman yet.

Mr. Dreck's (I presume that's the way he should be addressed) "brilliant satirical skewing" of Krugman makes no attempt at all to actually answer Krugman's point in that column -- namely, that the American kook Right is even bigger than the French kook Right (due, presumably, to the extent of Christian fundamentalism and the South's remaining whiffs of nostalgia for racism), and that it's an important part of Bush's governing coalition. (Tom DeLay's speech, menioned by Krugman, includes the statement that anyone who doesn't belive in creationism and biblical literalism is immoral, which roused the Houston Chronicle to call him a "theocratic fanatic" in an editorial. As for John Ashcroft --also mentioned by Krugman -- his affectionate tribute to the Confederacy in Southern Partisan magazine compares very nicely to Le Pen's "the Holocaust was a detail of history" comment. The difference, of course, is that le Pen isn't yet France's Ministrer of Justice or the effective leader of its Parliamentary majority. (Mr. Dreck sounded rather apologetic when I pointed all this out.)

And, by the way, despite all the downright hysterical attacks Simberg and other conservative/libertarian bloggers make on Krugman, I have yet to see one of them lay a finger (or even try to) on his main objection to Bush: that his tax cut is outrageously imbalanced toward the rich, and indeed the super-rich.

[Postscript: when I sent the above comment to Simberg himself, his reply was -- so help me God -- "Hate to break it to you, but the rich get tax cuts because they're the ones who pay most of the taxes. This kind of stuff is simply laughable." Brilliant! By that reasoning, why not have the richest American and the poorest American pay exactly the same total amount in taxes? After all, the rich surely deserve tax cuts exactly equal to the greater amount they pay -- and surely Bill Gates and someone who makes $10,000 a year work equally hard for every dollar they earn. This kind of stuff is laughable, all right, but Simberg's the butt of the joke.]

This post, too, is laughable.

I would love to respond in a coherent fashion to Mr. Moomaw's apparent horror that 'the rich' are bing given tax cuts, but first I have a question for him. Could you define your terms? Specifically, who are 'the rich'? At what income level would a family of 4 be considered 'rich' to you? $40,000 per year? $75,000? $150,000? And how much of a reduction in their tax rate causes you difficulty? 1%? 5%? More?
I'm also curious to hear how the governmet is supposed to give someone who makes $10,000 per year a tax cut....when that person does not pay taxes under our current system. His personal exemption and other deductions will eliminate any tax burden he may have.

ttprtv Hi, Nice! http://t3453734783est0.com [url=http://t3453734783est1.com]test1[/url] test2