Archive for March, 2013

Energy “Manhattan Project”: The “Carbon Tax And Dividend” (March 25, 2013)

Posted in Awards / Incentives, Economics, Economics Nobel, Gay Politics, Global Climate Change, Global Warming, Supreme Court, Taxation on March 25, 2013 by

. . .

C1         “The ‘Manhattan Project’ wisely collected all the talent in one location under one command to develop the atomic bomb.  The project required the right mathematical formulas and the right raw materials to be assembled by one team under one governmental authority.  Some say the solution to our energy challenges is to create a Manhattan Project under one authority with one energy czar.  However, the solution is not to establish a government agency but rather to enlist and unfetter the market mechanism.  Rather than subsidizing a company that is politically connected or sports a flashy marketing campaign, let the market decide.  Let not one but one million citizens work on it.  The proposed ‘carbon tax’ provides a tax on carbon and thus rewards those who can reduce or avoid the production of carbon and taxes those who cannot.  The funds collected by the tax are returned as a dividend to the public to maintain revenue neutrality.”

C2         “The ‘old cap and trade scheme’ created undesirable property rights that would be unworkable and undesirable.  A carbon tax and dividend sounds workable and desirable.”

C1          “Friedrich van Hayek would have endorsed the carbon tax and dividend mechanism.  He surely is rolling over in his grave because we as a society have not adopted it.”

C2         “I know that I for one want Fred to rest in peace.”

. . .

[See the website]

Bumper stickers of the week:

A planet is a terrible thing to waste

Sign outside the Supreme Court:  “Supremes:  You can hurry love.”

“Iraq” Is Arabic For “Vietnam” (March 18, 2013)

Posted in Iraq, Vietnam on March 18, 2013 by

. . .

[See the “e-ssays” collected under “Iraq” in the “Categories.”]

. . .

Bumper stickers of the week (on vehicles in the parking lot of an Unitarian church conducting a seminar for members of the military considering conscientious objector status in 2007):

Ford F150:    Kill them all and let God sort them out

Prius:             Coexist                       Dissent is patriotic

Dodge Ram:   God bless our troops especially our snipers

Volvo 122 S Estate Car:   War is not the answer             Give peace a chance

Chevy Silverado:  When it absolutely positively has to be destroyed overnight – U.S. Marines

. . .

The Sea Change Is Now A Tsunami (March 11, 2013)

Posted in Constitution, Courts, Equal Protection, Gay Politics, Law, Society, Supreme Court on March 11, 2013 by

. . .

LS1      “An amicus brief is a ‘friend of the court’ brief filed by someone who is not a party to a case that provides information and argument that may or may not have been advanced by a party to the case.”

N1        “Sounds like a legal way to lobby a court constituted of legal lobbyists for private interests.”

LS1      “In effect.  Before the Supreme Court writes its opinion, it is interested in the opinions of the Owners and others.”

N1        “Who would have guessed.  First the housebroken Republicans came out of the cloak room.  Then the business community came out of the board room.”

LS1      “They realized that inequality is less economically efficient than equality.  Surreal that one can drive from one state in a state of marital bliss to another state and enter into a state of marital banishment.”

N1        “That is bad for business.”

LS1      “No bandwagon has been boarded by as many people in as short a period of time.  Everyone now wants to influence the bench to allow all adults to walk down the aisle.  The train is leaving the station.”

N1        “They say the Supreme Court does not pay attention to the weather, but the Justices do pay attention to the climate.”

LS1      “You don’t need a climatologist to see which way the wind blows.”

N1        “But you do need courage.” 

. . .

[See the “e-ssay” titled Fukushima Daiichied (March 12, 2012) on the anniversary.]

[See the “e-ssay” titled Less Government Regulation Series: Love and Marriage (May 19, 2008).]

[See the articles at,, and]

Bumper stickers of the week:

“Gay marriage?  Here’s the way I see it.  If I had to get married, then THOSE PEOPLE have to get married.  Fair is fair.”

My wife keeps complaining that I never listen to her . . .  or something like that.

Can someone file an “enemy of the court” brief?

Hate is overrated.

Has Scalia Gone Feral? (March 4, 2013)

Posted in Judges, Law, Move To Amend, Politics, Supreme Court on March 4, 2013 by

. . .

LS2      “Scalia has gone feral.”

LS1      “In the past, he demanded that the Court and the courts construe congressional language in a statute or provision literally – or as he defined literally – even in the face of clear contrary legislative intent and then took great delight in often perverse or unintended consequences or interpretations.”

LS2      “Now he is transforming the High Court into a MegaCongress to proclaim what he thinks animated Congress when it passed legislation.  In the face of crystal clear Congressional language and equally clear legislative intent regarding the Voting Rights Act, he appointed himself to second guess Congress and impose his personal prejudices on the populace.”

LS1      “At least he is blatant and blunt about it.  In his capacity as the Law Czar, however, he surely will not allow a person to bring and maintain a claim to instate the Move To Amend legislation on the ground that Congress would have passed the legislation except for the overweening influence of corporations.”

LS2      “That’s a new possibility.  Introduce a bill in the Supreme Court and let them pass judgment.  Two can play that game, yet only one person is allowed to play the game in the American legal game.”

. . .

LS2      “His great contribution to legal thinking is a grand sophistry.  ‘Originalism’ is an admixture of equal parts hypocrisy, dishonesty, perversity and absurdity.”

LS1      “And risibility, but it is a serious matter.  He is becoming even more grating and obnoxious.  Sarcasm is the first cousin of anger.  He is angry.  Ergo, he is sarcastic.”

LS2      “Sourcaustic.  In contemporary patois, Scalia is a bully of the worst kind.  A bully and a coward.  He uses the bench as a bully pulpit and then cowers behind the guards and security detail.”

LS1      “If someone asked him to step outside, Scalia would soil his panties and then curl up in a fetal position and cry for help.”

LS2      “He should take senior status and take over a hate radio show on Anger Mongering (AM) radio.”

LS1      “A festschrift of his proclamations does not require more than a few hundred words.  He is worth a footnote perhaps but much less than a chapter.  Someone, probably a former fawning law clerk, will spawn a 900 page idolatrous hagiographic piece.”

. . .

LS1/LS2  “He fails to realize that civility is not unconstitutional.”

. . .

[LS1 = Legal Scholar 1; . . . ]

[See the “e-ssays” titled One Gun Per White Adult Male? A Flintlock Musket? The “One Man, One Gun” Decision (October 4, 2010), Are Courts Irrelevant? Are Courts Illegitimate? (October 3, 2011) and The Supreme Court – Unrepresentative And Illegitimate: The 33.3 Percent Solution (October 1, 2012), three of the “First Monday in October” commentaries on the Supreme Court.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

I don’t like some lawyers because some lawyers are not likable.

Do Supreme Court Justices get rabies shots?