Amusing Anomalies

Dilbert Comic Strip Archive - Dilbert.com - The Official Dilbert Website by Scott Adams - Dilbert, Dogbert and Coworkers!

I like many people find Scott Adams' comic strip amusing. I also find energy economics and environmentalism amusing subjects as well. In this strip, Dogbert points out to Dilbert that buying an energy efficient automobile will not reduce his dependence of oil from terrorist supporting countries because oil is a fungible commodity and will low cost supply (which is in the terrorist supporting countries) will flow to the market first, because if we don't buy it someone else will.

Dogbert's analysis is correct, but beside the point. What Dogbert overlooks is that the reduction in demand for oil, which is a relatively inelastic product, will have a substantial impact on price. That is, relatively small reduction in total oil consumption will have a relatively large impact on the price of oil. Thus, if the purpose in reducing consumption is to deny terrorist supporting countries funding, the purchase of low petroleum consumming vehicles can have exactly that impact.

Another factor to consider in this analysis, is the fact that a large number of our defense dollars and foreign policy, is devoted to maintaining access to this relatively precious commodity. Our dependence on oil (not foreign oil but oil - remember it's fungible) distorts our economy and foreign policy.

Here's a policy that we'll never hear from the Bush administration. First, we need to add a defense surcharge tax to oil from the middle east, by doing so one recognizes that the actual cost of purchasing that oil is not limited to its market price, but also includes the defense costs that are necessary to secure it. Given that such a tax would induce arbitrage, it might simply have to be turned into a foreign oil tax period. The second thing that might make sense is a new CAFE fuel efficiency standard that makes some sense. With such a standard we can drive down consumption and reduce the amount of funds we provide to countries that support terrorism.

Call it my modest proposal.

Andrew Sullivan The Daily Dish: Send Clinton

Andrew Sullivan offers a novel solution to the current Iraq crisis: "send Bill Clinton". Sullivan points out that Clinton seems to have sufficient credibility to can negotiate with the Sunnis, Kurds and Shiites (unlike the current Commander-in-Chief). Clinton also has the charisma and wisdom to pull off such a stunt. I concur, send Bill. However, I believe it will happen when hell freezes over, President Bush doesn't want to highlight his impotence this clearly.

William F. Buckley Jr. on Iraq on National Review Online

It Didn't Work.

With those three words William F. Buckley, Jr., skewers the bush administration Iraq policy. Buckley is unflinching: " One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed."

The question that is lingering is "what now?"

Sectarian Violence Resurges in Iraq

A Washington Post article reports that previous stories that a day time curfew and demonstrations of unity by Shia and Sunni leaders have quelled rising level of sectarian violence in Iraq were premature. More than two dozen killed around the country as the level of violence continues today.

At this point, people are seriously concerned that Iraq may be erupting into a full fledged civil war. Fox News has become so concerned about the turn in events, that they are trying to see the silver lining in civil war.

The Corner on National Review Online

It seems that conservative bush supporters, in particular John Podhoretz from the National Review, are starting to panic about the impact of the Dubai port deal. The cause of the panic? Well it seems that democrats in congress have polled higher than the president on national security issues 43 to 41-percent. Also, the Dubai port deal is disfavored 64 to 17-percent. The defining quote: "If the White House doesn't handle this well in the next three days, the political consequences could be catastrophic."

Shades of Mel Brooks as Governor Le Petomane in Blazing Saddles "we got to protect our phoney-baloney jobs, gentlemen, we must do something about this immediately!"

dallasobserver.com News RIght Cross

An interesting profile on Bruce Bartlett, former policy analyst in both the Reagan and the Bush I White House. Bartlett was recently fired from his gig at the National Center for Policy Analysis because of his comments that George W. Bush is not a conservative. Here's the quote that probably did him in:

Just in the past few months, I think a light has gone off for people who've spent time up close to Bush: that this instinct he's always talking about is this sort of weird, Messianic idea of what he thinks God has told him to do. This is why George W. Bush is so clear-eyed about Al Qaeda and the Islamic fundamentalist enemy. He believes you have to kill them all. They can't be persuaded, that they're extremists, driven by a dark vision. He understands them, because he's just like them...This is why he dispenses with people who confront him with inconvenient facts. He truly believes he's on a mission from God.

Bartlett has recently had a book published based on that very premise. The book is entitled, Impostor : How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy. I haven't read it yet, but it might be interesting to see how a true conservative looks at George W. Bush.

While I might not agree with Bartlett on many things, I'm sure that I agree with him on this very issue. George W. Bush is not a conservative.

outragedmoderates.org: DoD Staffer's Notes from 9/11 Obtained Under FOIA

One of the things Richard A. Clarke recounted to CBS news' Lesley Stahl was the administrations odd focus on finding something, anything, to justify launching a strike against Saddam Hussein following 911. Clarke identified Donald Rumsfeld as being the ring leader of this effort.

The administration essentially denied Clarke's account. Fortunately, a FOIA request from a blogger, that uncovered notes taken by Stephen Cambone suggest that Clarke's story is more than just a little bit accurate.

According to Cambone's notes Rumsfeld instructed General Myers to find the:

"[b]est info fast . . . judge whether good enough [to] hit S.H. [Saddam Hussein] at same time - not only UBL [Usama Bin Laden]"

The notes also quote Rumsfeld's as saying "Go massive...Sweep it all up. Things related and not".

This is worth of a good read. It gives an inkling of how we ended in the quagmire that is Iraq. A bonus are the pictures of the handwritten notes.

Wi-Fi to Go: The Hot Spot in a Box - New York Times

I find these products or at least the concept amusing. Wi-Fi routers on the go, what more could a person ask for? Well maybe a lower price point.

New Scientist Quantum computer works best switched off - News

Okay I have a sick fascination with quantum theory. Not that I really understand it completely, or even semi completely, okay not very well at all, but I do find Schrodinger's Cat kind of cool.

The brilliant researchers at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign have built a "non-running" quantum computer that really works. In perhaps the understatement of the year, the team member Onur Hosten commented:

"It is very bizarre that you know your computer has not run but you also know what the answer is."

I couldnt' agree more, even if I understood it.

RAGGED THOTS

This blog from Robert A. George, republican seems amazingly perceptive. His take? "Dubai Ports World" is evidently Arabic for...WTF???

I can't do George's commentary justice, read it yourself, you'll be amused as well as informed.

Republicans Split With Bush on Ports

The Washington Post does it's typically fine job dissecting the political implications of the Bush Administration's approval an United Arab Emirates corporate take over of the operations of six U.S. seaports.

A couple of notable points in this dispute. First, the White House disclosed that President Bush was unaware of the proposed takeover until the last few days. Second, having become aware the administration now plans to brief members of Congress more fully on the deal.

My take, the administration has reached new heights of incompetence or arrogance. It's hard to discern which one it is, it could possibly be both. My assessment? the political fallout from this deal is far more interesting than the potential security implications, which i think are relatively minor.

A humorous note, Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.) wrote the President a brief letter. In full it states" Dear Mr. President: In regards to selling American ports to the United Arab Emirates, not just NO but HELL NO!" Another humorous note, David Horsey captures the spirit of this farce in a wonderful political cartoon.

It seems that Republicans are out to spill each other's blood. And on that point, my only question is "where's the popcorn?"

Substantive discussions about the pros and cons of the deal can be found all over the blogsphere.

Bush Continues Focus On Alternative Fuels

Okay I admit it, I'm cynical. So I'm not typically surprised by things this administration does, in broad daylight, with video cameras running. So I'm not surprised by this at all. However, I do think this does deserve some comment.

In summary, Bush's budget cuts force an alternative fuels research company to lay off 32 workers. However, spying a potential photo-op to show that Bush is serious about addressing our dependence on foreign oil, the administration discovers that the elimination of $5 million in funds for that program was an uh...mistake. Funding is restored just before he arrives for the big photo-op. The workers get their jobs back and all is right in the world. Of course the money was transferred from some other program. (to be nameless, probably care for poor children in New Orleans)

The moral of the story, if you're about to lose your jobs, propose a good photo-op for George W. Bush. He'll fix it for you.

Update: The President acknowledges that he's sent "mixed messages" about this program.

The Neoconservative Tragedy - Jacob Weisberg

Update: Previously I posted in this spot an article by the New York Times. I've since discovered that the New York Times makes it very difficult to use links to their website. As a result, I'm substituting another article from Slate (far more user friendly for bloggers) The New York Times Fukuyama Op-Ed is excellent though, published on February 19, 2006, and if you're a member of Times Select (yes the NYTimes makes you pay to get their old articles), you can read it.

This is an extraordinary opinion piece by Jacob Weisberg in Slate magazine discussing Francis Fukuyama's, new book describing the failure of neoconservatism. Fukuyama, a leading neoconservative intellectual, was a supporter of the use of US military power to spread american values throughout the world. In the light of the Bush administration's Iraq debacle, Fukuyama is rethinking the wisdom of such hubris.