The choice is going to be much easier come Jan 1 of this year, at least for the people of DC. DC will place a tax on plastic bags this year. The thing that makes this so absurd is the stated reasons for the tax.

Starting today, the District of Columbia becomes the first major city in the nation to impose a surcharge on disposable paper and plastic bags commonly used at grocery and retail stores everywhere.

Customers who tote their food or liquor purchases home in the ubiquitous bags will now be required to pay 5 cents for each one they use. The fees will go to a fund for cleaning up the city's Anacostia River.

"I signed this law in July to cut down on the disposable bags that foul our waterways," D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty said last month. "We want everyone to know that you can save the river, and 5 cents, if you bring your own reusable bag to the store instead."

D.C. Becomes Only U.S. City to Tax Grocery Bags

But in many cities -- including New York, Seattle, Philadelphia and Baltimore – voters have rejected attempts to impose bans or fees. Critics of such measures say they would add hundreds of dollars a year to families' grocery bills and amount to a tax.

"Consumers don't need to bear a tax in order to help protect the environment," said Progressive Bag Affiliates director Shari Jackson. "Plastic bags don't belong in roadways, they belong in the recycling bin." Some parts of the country have attempted to find a middle ground between a tax and a ban, opting to mandate plastic bag recycling as a first step towards "going green."

This is surreal. What ever happened to personal responsibility. A bag tax isn't going to stop anyone from throwing a bag out of their window! This is absurd.

Wouldn't it make more sense to offer people money for recycling bags? Why is it that the government is stuck on the idea that, in order to sway public opinion, negative reinforcement must be used. Why not reward people for doing the right thing, instead of punishing them for doing something other than what you want? People can rally behind a movement that encourages individual responsibility, and thus rewards the participants. Nobody can rally behind someone who is whipping them.

Just keep in mind, taxes are being used here as a negative thing to punish those who use plastic bags. Just as you are taxed more based on what you make. The idea is to keep you from making "too much." The message is "don't achieve too much." Why else would you tax people on a sliding scale. The end result is less achievers. Why would anyone want that?

It's a good thing that the IRS isn't invovled in this tax. We would end up with a progressive bag tax. People would be taxed for plastic bags whether they used them or not. It would be just like the income tax. Wouldn't that be great!

The final and most absurd aspect to all of this is the fact that --plastic bags were pushed by the environmental movement in the first place. Paper is more easily recycled; whether it be by humans, or by simply being on the ground and getting rained on. But we needed to save the trees right? I guess we saved "the trees," so that work is done. When is this mess going to stop!

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

Here is a link to the Library of Congress THOMAS.

Here is the PDF downloadable from this site.

Tiger has lost his AT&T contract.

AT&T's logo appeared on the golfer's bag. The company did not comment on its reasons for dropping Woods.

The company was also the host of the AT&T National PGA event in July - something it says it will continue to sponsor.

In a terse statement, AT&T said: "We are ending our sponsorship agreement with Tiger Woods and wish him well in the future."

At least AT&T didn't comment on why they dropped Tiger. That's better than what Gator Aid did.

Soft drink brand Gatorade says it is to drop a Tiger Woods-endorsed product but said it was not related to revelations about the golfer's private life.

PepsiCo-owned Gatorade said the decision to axe the Tiger Focus drink was made a few months ago.

Hat tip to AT&T! Nice job AT&T by not insulting everyone by claiming that your issues with Tiger have nothing to do with his personal life. We all know that's the case.

I guess Gator Aid is worried about offending all of those athletes who cheat on their wives and get away with it...

This gets to my bigger point. This is the same sort of idiocy we are getting out of the government as of late. Every time there is news --which is obviously terror related-- we have these government boobs come out and say that terrorism is not suspected. Then what happens? We find out that the "alleged" suspect(s) have Muslim name(s), were under investigation (by some government agency) and have openly disclosed their feelings about this country.

If we can't count on the government to tell the truth when it's obvious; why in the hell should we trust what they tell us about health care!? Does anyone really believe that this bill is going to do what's promised? I just hope that the American people can put two and two together in time.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

This is an interesting story; it also brings to light a few scary details.

I just have one very simple question. If the "attempted terrorist" was so obvious that --his own father reported him to the U.S. "authorities"-- how the hell was he missed in any screening anywhere!?

COME ON! If "authorities" can't stop a terrorist from boarding a plane when they are tipped off ahead of time; we are in big trouble! This reeks of Fort Hood.

If the TSA consists of "authorities" we are screwed!

Oh, and Terrorists are now referred to as "Man Caused Disaster Engineers."

One last thought; why is it that the terrorists --under investigation-- seem to be those most effective at carrying out their plans? You can't stop a war with law enforcement.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

The climate change talks in Copenhagen are taking a strange turn. First, we have nearly all of the important "developing nations" walk out at some point. First it was African nations, now today we have China and India walking out. It would seem that things are not going quite as planned at the Climate Change Conference.

Then we find out; even if the Climate Change science is not fiction, as Obama said earlier today. the Copenhagen conference will not result in lower global temperatures.

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. It is an honor for me to join this distinguished group of leaders from nations around the world. We come here in Copenhagen because climate change poses a grave and growing danger to our people. All of you would not be here unless you -- like me -- were convinced that this danger is real. This is not fiction, it is science. Unchecked, climate change will pose unacceptable risks to our security, our economies, and our planet. This much we know.

If you have to point out that it is science and not fiction, you are on pretty shaky ground.

As a matter of fact, even if all of the concessions were met there would be no benefit to the climate.

Emissions gap

Meanwhile, a leaked document prepared by the UN climate convention secretariat confirms that current pledges on cutting greenhouse gas emissions are almost certainly not enough to keep the rise in the global average temperature within 2C.

The analysis says that to achieve that goal, global emissions should be kept at or below of 44 gigatonnes (Gt) of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) in 2020.

But if enacted, the current maximum pledges from developed countries would leave emissions 1.9Gt above that figure; minimum pledges would mean missing the target by 4.2Gt.

Unless this gap is closed, it says - for example by developed nations raising their current overall offer to a cut of 30% from 1990 levels by 2020 - global emissions will "remain on an unsustainable pathway that could lead to concentrations equal or above 550ppm, with the related temperature rise around 3C."

The analysis was based on a number of recent studies, notably the International Energy Agency's World Energy Outlook.

Joss Garman of Greenpeace commented: "The UN is admitting in private that the pledges made by world leaders would lead to a 3C rise in temperatures.

"Every politician in Copenhagen is now put on notice. They have one day left to step up or they will forever be remembered as the people who let this happen."

What in the hell is the point of all of this? If global temperatures are not going to be effected, what is all of this about? Lowering, or stopping the rise of, global temperatures is the entire stated point of the Copenhagen Climate Conference right?

If you take a peek at some of the protesters outside of the Copenhagen talks you will quickly find that the climate is not really the target of this conference.

How many "Save the Planet" signs do you see here --without some Anti-Capitalist message? I thought this was about Climate Change! Could it be that the entire Climate Change ordeal is a fraud?

Now, some would say that these people are extremists, and that most of those at the conference do not share these extreme beliefs. The only problem is that many of those involved in the conference have shared the exact same beliefs. Take a look at what Hugo Chavez had to say. Chavez's comments were followed by a standing ovation!

Then President Chavez brought the house down.

When he said the process in Copenhagen was “not democratic, it is not inclusive, but isn’t that the reality of our world, the world is really and imperial dictatorship…down with imperial dictatorships” he got a rousing round of applause.

When he said there was a “silent and terrible ghost in the room” and that ghost was called capitalism, the applause was deafening.

But then he wound up to his grand conclusion – 20 minutes after his 5 minute speaking time was supposed to have ended and after quoting everyone from Karl Marx to Jesus Christ - “our revolution seeks to help all people…socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that’s the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell....let’s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.” He won a standing ovation.

And the Ethiopian President Meles Zenawi – who made a sensible and considered and detailed proposal about how to get financing to help climate change adaptation and mitigation in poor countries? He was far less enthusiastically received.

Revolution!?

What do you think?

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.