Political Commentary

Snuck It Under The Radar

I get very irritated when people, even intelligent people, who I respect greatly, use the phrases “tax cuts” and “tax-rate cuts” interchangeably, and one of the things that I’d do if I were King would be to outlaw this.

But because so many are unfamiliar with the difference, the administration has managed to pull a fast one on the Beltway. They are going to require an analysis of tax proposals by scoring them dynamically, rather than (absurdly) they’ve done in the past, statically. What does this mean?

In the past, any time the CBO or GAO did an analysis of a proposed change in tax rate changes, they assumed that said rate changes would have no effect on the growth rate of the economy, either in the general economy, or in the specific economic sphere in which the tax change would take place. Anyone familiar with economics knows that such an assumption is…to put it gently…nonsense.

We can’t necessarily know what the effect of a tax rate change will be on an economic sector, but to assume that it will be nil is ridiculous.

So, people who are “scoring” (that is, attempting to estimate what the revenue effects of a proposed tax change will be) will now have a more difficult job–they will have to attempt to estimate what the effect of the tax change will be on the affected economic sectors when coming up with their estimate of revenue change for the federal government.

Will they get it right? Who knows. But at least now, they’ll have to make the attempt, instead of absurdly assuming that the effect is zero. It will also provide one more thing to argue about when we attempt to reduce tax rates, but since it will also have that effect on attempts to increase them, that’s a wash, in my opinion. At least it will force a debate on the subject, and make it a respectable topic of discussion.

Media Criticism

The Big Lie Continues

AP continues to promulgate the myth:

Wilson’s revelations cast doubt on President Bush’s claim in his 2003 State of the Union address that Niger had sold uranium to Iraq to develop a nuclear weapon as one of the administration’s key justifications for going to war in Iraq.

Of course, it wasn’t possible for Joe Wilson to cast doubt on such a claim, because President Bush never made such a claim, in the SOTU or elsewhere, but that never seems to stop these people. Why do they continue to think they can get away with this, when anyone can go read that speech?

We’ve been over this many times, but apparently, it’s necessary to do so again. Here are the sixteen words:

“The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”

That’s it. It doesn’t say that uranium was sold to Iraq, it doesn’t say Niger. It says that the British government has learned about attempts to purchase uranium from Africa. Africa is a big place. Nowhere in the speech does it claim that the attempts were successful, and nowhere in the speech is Niger mentioned. The sentence, as written in the AP story, is completely false, but many persist in believing it, because apparently it confirms their prejudices. In their minds, it’s “fake but accurate.”

We need to call out Ms. Locy and her editor on this.

As to the story about Libby testifying that Cheney told him to release classified info, I’ll wait for some actual facts to come out, rather than rumors from unnamed sources.

[Update in the afternoon]

Powerline says that the story about Libby leaks of classified info is much ado about not much:

The NIE has been declassified since the summer of 2003, and we have quoted from it many times since then. These proceedings from the House of Representatives show that the NIE had been declassified no later than July 21, 2003. So it’s not exactly a mystery whether “that happened in this instance.” There are only two alternatives here: either AP reporters are too lazy to spend 30 seconds on Google to educate themselves as to what happened during the ancient history of 2003, or they write articles that are deliberately misleading.

Or outright false, as demonstrated above.

[Saturday morning update]

I’ve still received no response from the AP on this matter.

[Monday update]

They’ve redirected that URL to a new version of the story, absent the misstatements.

Space

AST Conference Blogging

Unfortunately, I haven’t been to the FAA Commercial Space Transportation conference (held every February) in a few years. The years that I have the time, I don’t have the money, and the years that I have the money, I can’t find the time (the latter, which was the case this year, is a better situation). Funny how that works.

Anyway, while I didn’t go, Clark Lindsey did, and he’s got a report from yesterday’s festivities.

Space

Imminent Test Firing?

The count is back on (if you can believe the blog–he says not to, probably to cover his keister). If there were no problems, the test should have occurred by now.

[Update at 4:05 PM EST]

Close, but no cigar:

A few seconds before the engine ingited [sic], the count was held.
They are now safing the vehicle and we will find out soon if they will restart the count and take it all the way to ignition.

It’s sounding like a good thing that they did this test before launch. I think they’re finding out how hard building and flying rockets is.

[Update about 4:30 PM EST]

They’ve recycled the count to T-15 minutes.

I find the fact that they can take the engine all the way to ignition and recycle to a fifteen-minute count a testament to the simplicity of the system (none of this having to empty tanks and recycle to the next day stuff). I’m not sure what it says about reliability at this point, though.

[Update at 4:50 PM EST]

They’ve stopped the count again, but this latest post expands on my comments above about repeated launch cycles, and how far the technology has allowed us to come in that regard. It also provides some explanation of the issues they’ve been encountering today.

Once again, though, it points out that they weren’t ready for prime time when it came to launching (and that these test firing rehearsals were a good idea). That’s what test flights are for, and so far, while they haven’t launched, they haven’t lost anything, either, except some time. Hopefully, this “shakedown cruise” will reveal a lot of things that will give them better schedule reliability in the future.

[Another update a couple minutes later]

It really is a family affair. Note the last name of the commenter to this latest post.

[Update a few minutes later, for those not following the Kwajrocket blog]

They’ve emptied the propellant tanks and are analyzing data, but it doesn’t sound like they’ve yet given up on an engine firing today.

[Late night update]

Two to four weeks (sorry, no permalink–just click on the link to “New Launch Date Update.”)

Space

Problem At Kwaj?

They were supposed to have their engine test a few minutes ago, but they’re on a hold at T-1.

[Update a few minutes later]

They haven’t restarted the count, yet, but Kimbal has some pictures up. Keep checking the main page of the blog for updates.

[Update at 4:05 PM EST[

Close, but no cigar:

A few seconds before the engine ingited, the count was held.
They are now safing the vehicle and we will find out soon if they will restart the count and take it all the way to ignition.

It’s sounding like a good thing that they did this test before launch. I think they’re finding out how hard building and flying rockets is.

War Commentary

Shut Up, He Explained

That’s what the head of Hezbollah says that President Bush and SecState Rice should do:

In Beirut, Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah urged Muslims worldwide to keep demonstrating until there is an apology over the drawings and Europe passes laws forbidding insults to the prophet.

The head of the guerrilla group, which is backed by Iran and Syria, spoke before a mass Ashoura procession. Whipping up the crowds on the most solemn day for Shiites worldwide, Nasrallah declared:

“Defending the prophet should continue all over the world. Let Condoleezza Rice and Bush and all the tyrants shut up. We are an Islamic nation that cannot tolerate, be silent or be lax when they insult our prophet and sanctities.”

“We will uphold the messenger of God not only by our voices but also by our blood,” he told the crowds, estimated by organizers at about 700,000. Police had no final estimates but said the figure was likely to be even higher.

You know, people who talk about upholding things with their blood often get an opportunity to do so (and often futilely).

Biting Commentary about Infinity…and Beyond!