Death of the McChicken
Posted at 2:30pm on Dec. 31, 2007 Just a drop of water in an endless sea.
By Thomas
I thought about calling this And thanks for all the fish, but that's been done. I confess to being tempted with The Wrath of the Valheru, but only because it's the coolest phrase in English ever. I also thought about The Bad Wolf, but that would be lost on the non-geeky.
So, I'm leaving.
Traditionally, diaries such as these tend to focus on how awful everyone's been to the diarist; how the blogosphere is a great, teeming mass of unfairness that stalks the land like a great, teeming, unfair, massive thing; and they tend to be interesting only from an anthropological perspective. We've been blessed with relatively few of even the truly interesting type -- the great kowalski's numerous successes in defying convention notwithstanding -- so I'm hoping this one will at least do all the budding archaeology majors a service.
One last time, please, read on.
Posted in Death of the McChicken | goodbye cruel world | Miscellanea — Comments (92) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 2:28pm on Dec. 31, 2007 And the horses you all rode in on, one at a time, then rotate.
By Thomas
You all have no idea how long I've wanted to write this. For the reasons set forth in my next diary, I can, and am; but I've been saving this up for a while. Pardon the spleen.
Dear Senators Thompson and McCain; Governors Romney and Huckabee; and Mayor Giuliani: You all suck.
Read on to see why. Or don't; I figure only two of you are smart enough to care why a conservative, Mass-going Catholic would personally drive the buggy to take you all to Hell.
Posted in 2008 | Death of the McChicken — Comments (47) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 1:22am on Oct. 21, 2007 I've Never Been So Happy to Apologize (Four Years Later)
By Thomas
Four years ago, Ben Domenech was excited about Bobby Jindal. So was I. He thought Jindal had a good chance at the governor's mansion. I did not.
I was right.
I won't go through the reasons I turned out to be right. I was. A woman who, I believe, is my sister's godfather's (my father's best friend from high school's) first cousin won by suddenly reminding everyone in Cajun country what her maiden name was, and reminded all of Louisiana that Bobby Jindal was not melanin-free (that this was successful in a State with such a strong history of interbreeding (not intermarriage, though) is an irony lost on most) -- and most importantly, manufactured votes in the time-honored way her Party always did, by getting 238% turnout in Orleans and a few other Parishes.
Four years later, I was wrong.
So: Ben (and Orrin): I apologize. You were right, just four years early. You called correctly, if early, something I never really thought would happen.
Erick is 100% right (though the Carter analogy is 100%, the better analogy to the Mary one is Catholics not fearing being burned at the stake after Charles II came to the throne after that psycho Cromwell breathed his last).
For the first time I can remember, I can say my family hails from Louisiana without feeling a little bit of rue and shame as I say it.
And Bobby? God bless, and congratulations.
Posted in 2007 | Bobby Jindal | Death of the McChicken | Louisiana — Comments (3) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 2:45pm on Oct. 18, 2007 Ponnuru, Supply-Side Economics, and the Death of the McChicken
By Thomas
Look, it seems indisputable to me that cutting taxes at times produces less revenue, depending on what the marginal rate was before and after. But that's not the point.
Tax revenue maximization is not the goal of tax cuts; at most, depending on where the curve falls, it is an occasional benefit. There are three good reasons to cut taxes: (1) Taxes are a form of involuntary servitude -- an involuntary servitude that sometimes exists for good reasons, but involuntary servitude nevertheless -- and as such, it is morally good to lower them to the lowest level possible to acquire those other goods we purchase with them, as freedom from involuntary servitude is by definition a good thing; (2) tax cuts help the economy grow, which is by definition at least a morally neutral thing, and has nice political and human upsides to it; and (3) voters like tax cuts, and they certainly like them more than tax increases.
Posted at 6:35am on Oct. 16, 2007 Nope. Absolutely wide of the mark. Except for one thing...
By Thomas
On general principle, I try very hard to avoid disagreeing with my fellow contributors anywhere but in the comment sections of their pieces; generally, it feels unseemly to turn the front page, or diaries, into a back-and-forth on some issue or another. This is just me; Heaven knows others have different perspectives, and have displayed them.
That said, I'm breaking that personal rule this time to take issue with almost everything Erick said here. Before I wander out on this thin-looking tree extension, I'd note that I have no small amount of respect for Erick as both a man and as a thinker. Generally, I don't publicly disagree with him because I have the luxury of seeing most of what he writes as essentially correct. Nothing that I write here changes any of that.
With that said, I think with respect to this specific piece, Erick's wrong in general, wrong in his initial premises, and wrong in most of his conclusions. I'll explain why below the fold, but I do want to ask you to follow me there, because there is one thing I think he's absolutely right about; and that one thing contains within it so much awful truth, I'd like you to not only tell me why I'm wrong, I'd like you to prove it.
Click the link.
Posted in conservative crackup | Death of the McChicken | GOP War | Republican crackup | Republicans — Comments (27) / Email this page » / Read More »
