Polemics vs Reasoned Argument

As the Congress considers import taxes as part of its general tax reform agenda, toy sellers are expressing their concern: they import most of what they sell; their products are manufactured overseas.  Import taxes are surely a thing worth discussing and debating thoroughly, whether they’re essentially cost of goods sold neutral, as Doug Holtz-Eakin argues (the dollar will rise from the tax change and economic growth, and so the dollar cost of imports will fall; the cost of goods sold will simply emphasize taxes more and import costs less), or they’re dangerously like protectionist tariffs, as others argue.

Arguments that are carefully emotion-laden while devoid of facts, though, are inappropriate.  Here’s an example from Steve Pasierb, President of the Toy Industry Association:

We are fully prepared to work productively or be a royal, boisterous, media-friendly pain in the backsides of people who would take away children’s happy birthdays, steal Christmas, and destroy quality US-based jobs.  And no one wants to have to explain to their children why Santa was put out of work.

Such Leftist “feel my pain” three-hankie argument has little credibility and less validity in the sort of reasoned discourse necessary in an economic debate.

It Takes One to Know One?

Several municipalities in New Jersey have taken to painting a blue line down the middle of their Main Streets as a show of support for their police and police departments.  The image below is an example of that.

President-On-The-Way-Out Barack Obama’s (D) Department of Transportation has decided to take a dim view of this move.

There are many appropriate and fitting ways to recognize service to the public that do not involve the modification of a traffic control device, which can put the road user at risk due to misinterpretation of its meaning[.]

The Democrats are projecting again.  Only they would think Americans are so dumb that we’d misunderstand a blue line, when road markings for traffic control are yellow or white.

One can hope that DoT Secretary nominee Elaine Chao will be able to correct this departmental culture.

Snowflake as Murderer

Dylann Roof has been convicted of the murders of nine good men and women, people he butchered in his rampage through a Baptist church.

Now he’s crying over the…unfairness…of the penalty phase of his trial.  At the risk of repeating things known to those of you following along at home, Roof is defending himself during this phase, and he’s chosen to offer neither witnesses nor mitigating evidence during this phase.

In the punishment phase of a felony trial, the prosecution has to go first, which gives the defense the better position of having its presentation fresher in the minds of the jury.  In Roof’s trial penalty phase, the prosecution has presented a number of witnesses, who’ve offered “heart-ripping testimony,” to use The New York Times‘ phrase, concerning the devastation Roof’s rampage caused.  As the prosecution finished its examination of each of the 20 witnesses (so far, as of the date of the NYT‘s piece), Roof was offered opportunity to cross-examine; he declined—”no questions”—each time.

Roof ultimately argued the unfairness of this phase:

It is not fair to allow that much testimony to be heard by the jury when I am not presenting any evidence—from my family or anyone else—in mitigation.  If I don’t present any mitigation evidence, the victim-impact evidence will take over the whole sentencing trial and guarantee that I get the death penalty.

That’s just a bit of too bad.  The prosecution isn’t bound by the decisions, tactical or otherwise, of the defense.

Full stop.

Some Folks Get It

Whether or not the attack on Pearl Harbor was treachery or straight-up war, or whether our dropping nuclear bombs on Japan at the other end of that war was butchery or straight-up war, it’s more than three generations ago; the folks responsible are mostly gone.

No apology needed, said 96-year-old Alfred Rodrigues, a US Navy veteran who survived what President Franklin D Roosevelt called a “date which will live in infamy.”

“War is war,” Rodrigues said as he looked at old photos of his military service. “They were doing what they were supposed to do, and we were doing what we were supposed to do.”

This sailor who was there understands the thing.

It’s past time to move on, especially for the press, whose interns seem to have been having trouble—ever since Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s visit to Pearl was set up—finding things for their scribes to write about.

More Obama Fiat

And the failures just keep coming.

This time, it’s President Barack Obama’s (D) effort to sabotage the oil industry as thoroughly as he’s done the coal industry.  Obama’s latest bit of I Know Better And Congress Be Damned is an Executive Order that is intended to ban

federal offshore drilling and mineral leases on some 3.8 million acres from Virginia to Maine and 115 million acres off the coast of Alaska, including some of the world’s great untapped repositories of hydrocarbons.

And he’s bragging that he thinks the move is permanent.

It’s a laughable as it is delusional.