Even the Washington press is beginning to realize how liberal, um, progressive Richard Nixon's domestic policies were. I wonder if it will take them 30 years to admit that George Bush is cut from much the same cloth coat.
George Will has reviewed Brink Lindsey's book, The Age Of Abundance in The Times. I haven't read it yet (the book, that is), but I like Mr. Wills's conclusion.
Lindsey rightly says that “today’s typical red-state conservative is
considerably bluer on race relations, the role of women and sexual
morality than his predecessor of a generation ago.” And “the typical
blue state liberal is considerably redder than his predecessor when it
comes to the importance of markets to economic growth, the virtues of
the two-parent family and the morality of American geopolitical power.”
In “the bell curve of ideological allegiance,” the large bulging center
has settled, for now, on an “implicit libertarian synthesis, one which
reaffirms the core disciplines that underlie and sustain the modern
lifestyle while making much greater allowances for variations within
that lifestyle.” If so, material abundance has been, on balance , good
for us, and Lindsey’s measured cheerfulness is, like his scintillating
A point that we who labor on the margins of political opinion would be wise to consider.
Momentum for tearing down the I-190 along the waterfront continues to gather, but its proponents are ignoring the economic importance of the highway to the entire Western New York region.
We also visited the Riverfront neighborhood [in Milwaukee] near the former Park East
Freeway, an elevated highway much like the Buffalo Skyway, which was
removed and replaced with a surface boulevard. Since its removal,
property values have climbed and mixed-use projects are common. Current
Mayor Tom Barrett met with us and assigned two of the city’s economic
development specialists to showcase the development of neighborhoods,
housing initiatives and business strips.
Look, I think the 190 is a monstrosity, too, and I've little doubt that its removal would be a boon to the neighborhoods it passes through. But we can't simply place a lovely boulevard there and expect it to handle the traffic currently coming into and leaving downtown. Milwaukee had the luxury of an interstate highway very close to the one torn down, I-94/I-43. We don't.
50,000 people work downtown and presumably we'd like to see that number grow, but I've yet to hear any solid plans to provide an alternate route into downtown from the south once Route 5 is converted into a parkway and the Skyway Bridge has been torn down. And now, the new urbanists are proposing another monumental bottleneck for traffic coming from the north as well. Do they expect everyone to take the Kensington?
The most vocal advocates for tearing down expressways don't really care about the problems of suburban commuters. They want to imagine that they'll either move into the city, take public transport or simply put up with a leisurely one-hour morning commute into the city on a stop-and-go boulevard. They're wrong on all counts.
At a time when it appears that downtown Buffalo is beginning to redevelop, it seems foolish to cut off easy access to it. This isn't very "regional" thinking.
Let's not also forget that the Peace Bridge is one of the most important border-crossing points in North America. And ironically enough, its primary access is via the 190 -- the very stretch that would be replaced by the lovely boulevard. Trade with Canada is still one of our great future economic development hopes here.
For years now, the advocates for a new Peace Bridge (who are by and large the same people who want to tear down the 190) have been justifying it for just that economic development potential. Well, force a few tens of thousands of trucks each year to travel through choked city streets for an extra hour to get to New York or Pittsburgh and see what happens. Or better yet, make them head north to the 290, east to the 90 and then back south for 10 miles and we won't even need the old Peace Bridge.
Maybe we could steer them onto the 198? Oh, that's right -- we're going to make that into a parkway, too.
Industry will simply cease using Buffalo as a border-crossing point. Milwaukee and Chicago (as well as Toronto) aren't border cities. Their waterfronts can be entirely devoted to recreation and clever urban streetscapes. At least part of ours will still have to work for a living. This idea has not been thought through.
consumers have been getting burned at the pump because of the weather
to the tune of $123 million, even before gas prices reached the boiling
point, according to statistics released by the federal government.
a federal lawsuit filed in Rome has raised the issue of how the
temperature of fuel when pumped can cost consumers — especially those
in warmer states.
Institute of Standards and Technology data shows temperatures of fuel
at gas stations around the country average about five degrees warmer
than the federal standard temperature of 60 degrees at which gas is
priced to sell.
Georgia gas stations, according to the federal agency that presented
the data, that temperature is 12 degrees higher at 72 degrees.
The physics behind the problem is fairly simple.
At 60 degrees, a 231-cubic-inch gallon of fuel delivers a certain amount of energy.
At 90 degrees, however, the same gallon of fuel expands to more than 235 cubic inches.
consumers are still paying for 231-cubic-inch gallons they are forced
to spend more money — and pay more tax — for the same amount of energy.
practical terms, this means a Roman [Rome, Georgia] who pumped 10 gallons of gas into
his truck at 90 degrees would be able to drive 196.6 miles, if the
vehicle is supposed to get 20 miles per gallon.
In Alaska, with 60-degree gas, someone in Juneau with the same truck would be able to drive 200 miles on 10 gallons.
Nationally, consumers paid more than $2 billion more because of the temperature differences, according to NIST.
My tolerance for frivolous lawsuits goes down as the temperature rises, too.
I'll give the News editorial board partial credit for recognizing that Lewis Libby's sentence was over the top.
It does seem, however, that a very valid point about the rule of law
could have been made without going to the extreme of sending a
previously law-abiding, highly accomplished citizen off to prison for
30 months and fining him $250,000. That’s on top of the implosion of
his career, emotional pain loaded onto his family and what must be
millions in legal fees he now owes.
They're docked points, however, for this piece of spin.
Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald certainly left no stone unturned
in his valid quest for the source of the leak of Valerie Plame’s
identity. Valid because the CIA feared that one of its prized assets
had been compromised just to lash out at a former ambassador — Plame’s
husband, Joseph Wilson — who had publicly questioned the White House
claim that Saddam Hussein had been shopping around Africa for the stuff
to make nuclear bombs with.
Fitzgerald already knew who the "leaker" was before Libby was questioned -- former Clinton administration member Richard Armitage who, you'll notice, has never been charged. He also knew very quickly that Valerie Plame's name couldn't really be "leaked" because she wasn't in a protected CIA job. No crime had been committed, yet he continued to investigate until he found a scapegoat to indict on something so as to provide some atonement for the crimes that Democrats insist the Bush administration had committed.
It's all the more infuriating because Sandy Berger (another Clinton administration member, oddly enough) walks the streets a free man even though he admittedly stole classified documents from the National Archives. Lewis Libby committed perjury to a grand jury and deserves punishment, but his sentence is hardly justice and the Buffalo News isn't telling you the full story.
Sterling Sommer was accredited within the past month, a process the
firm started at the request of one of its biggest client’s, HSBC. About
three years ago, the bank became more interested in
environmentally sensitive practices when its London-based chairman
Stephen Green announced that he wanted HSBC to be “carbon neutral.”
means the $1.8 trillion bank with offices in 82 countries, has found
ways to make up for the carbon dioxide it emits using energy to heat
and electrify its buildings by doing things such as buying renewable
And if you believe that, I've got a sub-par mortgage for you.