New England Patriots win!

Yes, I was happy when the Boston team won tonight.
And I was happy when a Boston team won in October.
But after reading the Boston Globe today, I’m relieved beyond measurement that one Boston team lost in November:

Unlike some past unsuccessful presidential contenders, Kerry won't admit to too many bruises. But tenderness clearly remains around the edges. Asked what hurt him the most during the campaign, Kerry mused about how ''all of us are flawed as human beings" and ''I think I have a strong record" before raising his voice and declaring: ''One thing I know is that I didn't flip-flop on anything."

Kerry added: “Except when I did.”

The dynasty in waiting

In case I don't get back to blogging today, here's my official prediction for the Super Bowl: New England Patriots win convincingly and Tom Brady picks up his third MVP. New England 37 - Philadelphia 19 (sorry Brian!)

The top 10 worst Super Bowl moments

From the American Academy of Actuaries: The Social Security Game

The only article I’ve ever seen lauding Dubya as a great speaker: Birth of a Salesman: Pitching Social Security

Happy Birthday, Ronald Reagan – Jackson’s Junction has a great (and comprehensive) tribute to the late President.

How Social Security’s problems may be affecting the economy today


Here’s an interesting article in tomorrow’s (Sunday’s) NY Times titled “Social Security's Future? First, Consider the Present”:

Start with some facts. The bulk of the people who will be receiving benefits in 2042 will be 70 to 85 years old. Today, those people are 33 to 48 - in other words, they are the core of the nation's work force.

Now say those people just found out that Social Security would pay 73 percent, not 100 percent, of their benefits in retirement. How would that news change their behavior?

The author goes on to suggest that because so many Americans now believe they’re not going to see full Social Security benefits (see graph above), it’s affecting the savings rate and the labor market. How’s this for a conclusion:

Millions of Americans already doubt that Social Security will be around when they retire, and they may have already begun to change their behavior. But that doesn't mean these effects are nonexistent. Rather, it means that doing something about Social Security's seemingly far-off problems could unlock considerable economic gains today.

Wow: the Times they are a’changin’.

From the Heritage Foundation: Social Security Calculator

Hold on, we’re decelerating! – From the Boston Globe: “As President Bush continued to press his case to remake Social Security, key senators from both parties yesterday urged him to delay his push to partially privatize the retirement system, in light of the considerable political stumbling blocks that have emerged.”

No, no, step on the gas. Force Congress to admit there’s a problem and then roll out the full plan and debate. I promise there’s more silent support for Social Security reform then people realize.

Rest in peace, Thelma – A friend of mine from college had to put her dog down this week, but left behind this heartfelt photo gallery.

GMTA, of course – I just noticed that Ramesh Ponnuru made almost the exact same point on E.J. Dionne’s Social Security article that I did: “But I also think Dionne is making a bigger concession than he realizes. If an immediate 20-30 percent cut in benefits in the year 2042 is no big deal, then how terrible can it be to enact a plan that would involve reducing benefits in that decade so that they're 40 percent lower than currently scheduled?” Good question.

The endlessly entertaining Imam

Q.: “How does Allah select souls to send to Muslim parents and to non-Muslim parents?”
A.: “According to the Ahaadith, every child is born with Islam. The parents convert the child to other religions.”

Wow! I was baptized Catholic, raised as a Presbyterian, but I’ve really been a Muslim all this time! Let’s try another one:

Q: “I would like for you to answer this for me if you would. when i was 17 a non muslim who at the time was a friend of mine swore at allah and said a disheartening curse to almighty allah, i did not hit him but instead, i only told him to stop swearing at allah swa. Now i regret it i feel llike killing him. he in his own way sed sorry to me but it was no ordinary apology. sed apologise and simply replied ok. this was his apology. now i still feel as if im not a worthy muslim. what must i di and will i go to hell for my failure and fear of reaction?”

A.: “No, you will not be held responsible for failing to take action against him. Insha Allah, you are a worthy Muslim. Every Muslim has honour in the sight of Allah.”

But if he does it again, slit the pig’s throat. Imam out!

I wonder if Dionne shorts the paperboy too

I can see it now: “What are you complaining for, kid? I gave you 70 cents on the dollar!” Anyway, here’s resident WashPost liberal E.J. Dionne regurgitating the talking points of the DNC in “Feeding the Crisis”:

Bankrupt? Collapsing? That is nonsense. By 2042 (or 2052, according to the Congressional Budget Office), Social Security will still be able to pay between 70 and 80 percent of promised benefits -- which, because of wage indexing, would be higher in real terms than today's benefits.

Truly spoken like somebody who doesn’t have to worry about collecting his benefits. But say you’re a 27-year old worker today and you’re expected to pay into the Social Security fund for forty years. All through your years of labor you receive statements from the SSA telling you what your expected benefit would be and maybe (foolishly) you plan for your retirement using these estimations. Then BAM! by law the benefits are automatically cut by 30%.

Ah but Dionne continues: stop yer whining, crybabies! Even that 70% benefit is higher in real terms than today’s benefits. But isn’t this exactly part of the problem in funding Social Security? Wages typically rise faster than prices such that Social Security payments in the future will be approximately 40% higher in real terms (constant dollars) than they are today. If Social Security benefits were held constant by indexing to prices instead of wages, the system would be solvent well into the 22nd century.

As a columnist for a national newspaper, doesn’t Dionne bear some responsibility to look at the other side of an issue? This one is straight from the office of Ted Kennedy.

Letters to the editor - Jaws finds one poor student of history whining “Who wants freedom? I mean, c’mon!” while Bruce discovers a Kerry voter shocked at one columnist [James Carroll] who belittled the Iraqi election: “Why can't Carroll celebrate the courage and joy of the Iraqis? Why are so many on the left hoping for catastrophe?” Why indeed. Victor Davis Hanson may have some answers.

Back when the Internet ran on vacuum tubes

Karl Zinsmeister has a article in the American Enterprise putting Social Security into historical context:

So: Do you want to base your security in old age on a program engineered at the same time as the Model A and the vacuum-tube radio? Has work changed much since the era when slopping pigs for Auntie Em was a typical job? Does the boundary between state and individual look different now that the USSR has gone from progressive polestar to oppressive flop? Has American finance advanced from the decades when the only choices for ordinary savers were the passbook, the mason jar, or the mattress? Are the retirement goals of Americans still the same as in the days when the Bambino retired? Or is it time for Social Security to enjoy a major-league update?

Bring back the sarsaparilla subsidy, consarnit!

WashPost to Dems: Where’s the beef?

Picking up on an issue I’ve been harping about for weeks, the WashPost upbraids the Democrats for failing to articulate a stand on Social Security in “Bartleby Democrats”:

At least, though, the president did spell out some possible changes and acknowledge that they won't be "easy." The Democrats' general response so far is a combination of exaggerated rhetoric and silence about alternatives. Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) makes an important point about the dangers of "Social Security roulette," but where, exactly, is his responsible alternative for making Social Security solvent? Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry set the responsibility bar low during the campaign, when he vowed that there would be no cuts in benefits on his watch if he were elected president. He had little more to offer on "Meet the Press" last weekend. "I do not believe we have to raise the retirement age," Mr. Kerry said. "I am absolutely opposed to cutting benefits, and I believe we can save Social Security in any number of ways, Tim, other than what President Bush wants to do." And those would be?

To be fair, Tim Russert asserted that Kerry supported raising taxes on the rich to which the sometime-Senator replied: “You can call it what you want.” I’ll call it a “tax hike.”

Commercial-free Viking Pundit

When I first started this blog, I decided to avoid clogging up my page with banner ads and Blogads and other revenue-raising doo-dads. This isn’t a knock on other blogs that use them since I know that their production costs are higher than my free Blogspot page. But as somebody still using dial-up (I know, I know), I’m sensitive to extras that slow down loading times and detract from the political philosophy of my blog. (Side note: I always chuckle at the disclaimer at the top of Country Store: “If some of these ads are foolish, please bear in mind that they are autoselected by Google, not the proprietor.”)

However, since the election, Viking Pundit has been steadily gaining in popularity and I’ve been starting to wonder if I’m missing a golden opportunity by eschewing blog ads. But then the whole sorry spectacle of Andrew Sullivan’s “bloghucksterism” and abrupt retirement put it out of my mind again. See Michelle Malkin’s post on Sully titled “The Real Dish” that would have been better named “Take the Money and Run.”

As for me, I’m going to remain commercial-free, remove Sullivan from my blogroll, and head over to Gay Patriot for all my gay Republican commentary.

And that foot was him

Mr. Big: "I know you're surprised that a big Hollywood star like me would appear in this movie. A lot of Hollywood stars have done exploitation films; like Angie Dickinson in 'Big Bad Mama'."
Jack Slade: "Or Shelly Winters in 'Cleopatra Jones'!"

Farewell Dean Wormer, uh, Adolphus Raymondus Vernon Agopsowicz.

Social Security bookmarks - The Cato Institute has a page set up called the “Project for Social Security Choice” and here’s the topic page from the White House.

Global wrapup: check out today’s Winds of War for the latest from Iraq and the countries vying to be the newest member of the Axis of Evil.