Here’s your sign…

I laughed out loud at this comment by one of the flying monkeys over at uSP:

Oh the Nutroots base will definitely screw it up for Gregoire. Those folks are mostly unorganized anarchy.

Yeah, as opposed to that organized anarchy I keep hearing about, right?


  1. 1

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Will, it’s tough to top this one:

    “Congratulations Speaker Pelosi, now let the bombs fall where they may. My prediction: terror attack on domestic soil passenger aircraft within the next six months. Casualties in the 2-300 range. And, unfortunately, maybe that’s just what we need. It’s obvious people don’t remember what happened 5 years ago. Posted by FullContactPolitics at November 8, 2006 10:52 AM”

    (HA’s ace investigator, Richard Pope, id’d “FullContactPolitics” as former GOP legislative candidate Mark Griswold.)

  2. 2

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Are Americans Stupid?

    Yeah, some of them are, as shown by this letter in Saturday’s fishwrapper:

    “After reading the Nov. 18 front-page story on ‘Miracle Machines,’ I felt quite disturbed by the fact that I had been given half a story ….

    “Where was a responsible attempt to present a case in favor of the machines? Where were interviews with people who have benefited from the treatment? …

    “The case presented in this article against EPFX machines is equivalent to writing an article saying that chemotherapy is a hoax, based on the experience of my Mom, who got cancer several years ago, was treated with chemotherapy, and died within a year.

    “I am not saying that I believe in EPFX machines. To tell the truth, I have never heard of them and I know nothing about them. I’m just saying that I wasn’t given both sides of the picture by this article, and I think it was an irresponsible piece.”

    [Roger Rabbit Note: Writer’s name omitted to spare him from richly deserved ridicule because his identity is irrelevant to the point I’m going to make.]

    Quoted under fair use; for complete letter and/or copyright info see http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ets01.html

    Roger Rabbit Commentary: This letter illustrates what’s wrong with the goddamned MSM.

    The reason they didn’t present a case in favor of EPFX machines is because there isn’t one.

    As for the bozo who penned this letter, anyone who thinks chemotherapy is medically equivalent to a box containing circuit boards that are there solely for decoration is stupid. STUPID! There’s no other word for it.

    To its credit, the fishwrapper made no attempt to present “balanced” reporting of this story. They came right out and said EPFX machines (and their imitators) are a hoax. A fraud. Quackery. The story was about how promoters are ripping off gullible patients, some of whom lost their lives by entrusting their treatment to these thieves.

    Okay, this brings me to the point of this comment. If the media (in this case, the local fishwrapper) are smart enough to call medical quackery and fraud by its right name, why aren’t they willing to call political quackery and fraud by ITS right name?

    When you have a party that’s the political equivalent of an EFPX machine (“just plug it in and the electromagnetic waves will cure your cancer”), why don’t the media report the fraud, instead of bending over backwards to pretend they’re objective by telling a “balanced” story?

    As in the case of the EFPX machines, there’s no “balanced” story to tell. The Republicans are quacks; their agenda is a hoax; they’re guilty of political malpractice; and their objective is to fleece gullible citizens of trillions of dollars. That’s the story — so why isn’t the media reporting it?

    The fishwrapper at least knows medical quackery when they see it. Why are they so blind to the political quackery going on in our country, that’s fleecing 300 million citizens of their liberties and their earnings?

    Goddamned MSM.

  3. 3

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    The kind of people who hook themselves up to these machines are the same kind who vote for the likes of Bush, Rossi, McGavick, and the other GOP hucksters to the gullible.

  4. 5

    Mark Centz spews:

    Anarcho-syndicalism replacing capitalism and the State with a new society democratically self-managed by workers.

    That’s organized anarchy, and thousands died in Spain fighting for it in living memory.

  5. 6

    headless lucy spews:

    When you drive on a two way road, you are experiencing anarchy. We don’t need most of the social ‘control’ that WingNutz™ think are necessary.

    We need to control corporations because they have a flawed and inhumane philosophy that puts corporations before people.

  6. 7

    headless lucy spews:

    Anarchy is ‘free trade’ for people. People should be able to go anywhere in the world, with no restriction, to follow higher wages — just like industrialists go where wages are lowest.

    But, if they REALLY believed in economic freedom, labor could cross borders as easily as capital.

  7. 8

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    I’m not against capitalism. I just think capitalism should share more of what workers produce with workers instead of being such greedy pigs. oink oink

  8. 9

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @7 Ahhh, but the capitalists aren’t against immigrant workers, they only posture and rail against immigration. What CHEAP LABOR CONSERVATIVES are against is immigrant laborers being paid U.S. wages! They’ll look the other way as long as the immigrant laborers don’t vote, don’t join unions, don’t demand schooling or health care, and work for third world wages.

  9. 10

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    What CHEAP LABOR CONSERVATIVES really want is a permanent underclass of docile cheap labor.

  10. 11

    headless lucy spews:

    If labor goes where wages are highest, then the country that is losing all it’s workers will be forced to raise wages. That’s one scenario.

    I’m proposing this idea to see WingNutz™ argue against individual economic freedom. They won’t suffer from the inconsistencies in their ideas, though. I’ll bet a few of our trolls are now seeking ans ‘authoritative source’ that will tell them that economic freedom for poor people is un-free.

    It would never occur to any of them to admit that I have scored points against them.

  11. 12


    Headless Lucy, how about your property’s borders? I take it you wouldn’t mind if people crossed your property’s borders to make a better life for themselves by living both on your property and in your home, with or without your consent?

  12. 13

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    It’s easy to understand WingNuts (TM) if you realize they’re all about cheap labor:

    “When you cut right through it, right-wing ideology is just ‘dime-store economics’ intended to dress their ideology up and make it look respectable. You don’t really need to know much about economics to understand it. They certainly don’t. It all gets down to two simple words. ‘Cheap labor’.

    “That’s their whole philosophy in a nutshell …. I defy any conservative … to show me one single conservative position, belief, principle or policy that has any tendency to boost the earning power of labor.


    “Twenty years ago, cheap-labor conservatives claimed that tax cuts would stimulate the economy, and lead to balanced budgets. They don’t even bother spouting that crap any more. …

    “The purpose behind tax cuts and budget deficits is to bankrupt the government. Conservatives hate ‘social spending’. … They want you naked in as harsh an economic environment as they can create.

    “But here’s the problem. Most ordinary people aren’t so ruthless. Most people think life is for living, not working your ass off until you drop. So if we … provide … social infrastructure for things like a basic retirement, assistance for higher education, unemployment compensation … most people support all of that stuff. Conservatives lose elections when they talk about undoing it.

    “So the manipulative sons of bitches – who don’t really believe in … democracy … – have come up with a ‘stealth plan’ to get rid of our entire social welfare infrastructure. It’s called ‘bankruptcy’, and it is not an accident that the first thing Dubya did when he took office was bring back the deficits Bill Clinton had eliminated.


    ” … I would stress the ‘every improvement in US history’, all the way back to abolition of slavery, and such obvious reforms as child labor laws. Cheap-labor conservatives have never been the friend of working Americans. Ever.


    “Health care costs are outrageously expensive, and threaten people with financial ruin. Also, health insurance is primarily provided by employers …. So if you lose your job, you lose your health coverage.

    ” … [N]ational health insurance would provide … security for working Americans from potential financial catastrophe – … therefore no longer … keeping you … intimidated by your employer.


    “Way back in the late nineteenth century … cheap-labor conservatives … opposed universal public education. You can go to ‘Freeper’ right now and find cheap-labor conservatives who still oppose it … the reason is simple … an ineffective public education system is necessary to create a semi-literate workforce of ‘industrial serfs’ ….

    “When everybody is properly educated, who is going to ride on the back of the garbage truck? Who is going to pick tomatoes? Who is going to digger footers on construction sites? And what kind of wages are … workers … going to command?

    “But wait, there’s more. Let’s consider your average dittohead ‘wannabe’ living in the suburbs. Does he really want his children competing with those ‘brown’ children for a seat in the university? … [Y]ou know how conservatives are about their ‘self-interest’. Well, he can’t very well advocate ‘resegregation’. So here’s what the cheap-labor conservatives came up with. ‘Vouchers’. Some of those ‘brown’ children can escape from failing schools – but not all of them. As for the ones that are ‘left behind’, … there’s a garbage truck with their name on it ….

    “5. ‘LAW’ AND ‘ORDER’

    “According to cheap-labor conservatives, the only legitimate function of government is to protect the fortunes and privilege of the ‘haves’. Economic progress like ‘full employment’, living wages, and first rate education system, all improve the living standards and prospects of the ‘working poor’ and the ‘cheap-labor conservatives’ can’t have that … [which] leaves prison as the only ‘social program’ [they] support. They say [liberals] ‘throw money at every problem’. Well ‘cheap-labor conservatives’ throw prison at every problem.


    “They say they are defending American ‘culture’ – but that ‘culture’ … features conformity, hierarchy, ‘respect for authority’, regimentation and other ‘values’ of the industrial work place. In fact, America was founded by a group of … nonconformists. But that won’t do at all, if you want a docile workforce who will work cheap.


    “This one is amazingly easy to understand. Dividing working people against each other along racial, gender and ethnic lines keeps them from uniting along class lines. Consider the following example. In 1990, the nation was suffering under yet another period of Republican high unemployment. That was the year that Jesse Helms ran his famous … commercial …. ‘You needed that job, but they had to give it to a minority.’

    “This gambit is 150 years old. The cheap-labor conservatives produce a high deficit, high interest rate, ‘structurally sluggish’ economy then tell struggling white wage-earners that the ‘problem’ is ‘unqualified minorities’. It was classic ‘scapegoating’, when the real culprits were the cheap-labor conservatives who liked that sluggish economy.

    “And in case you doubt whether they liked the sluggish economy, consider the eight year tantrum they threw as President Clinton undid the deficits, brought interest rates down, and fueled an eight year economic boom, bringing unemployment to a 30 year low. … [T]hrowing a wrench into that economy was the first order of business after Dubya’s inauguration.


    “Since prison and punishment are generally ineffective to reduce crime, and since the ‘cheap-labor conservatives’ will hear of no economic improvements …, ‘self defense’ is about your only protection from crime. Instead of better schools, full employment and other improvements in social conditions, the cheap-labor conservative solution is ‘buy a gun’.

    “9. THE ‘WAR ON DRUGS’

    ” … The ‘libertarian’ position on this is that what you choose to voluntarily ingest, is your business. And of course, marijuana isn’t nearly as bad for you as say, alcohol abuse. But cheap-labor conservatives don’t give a rat’s ass about your health, anyway. What they do care about is delegitimizing the ‘counter-culture’.

    “If they could do it, they would outlaw deviations from the conformist culture of the ‘corporate middle class’. They can’t do that directly, so they have … a ‘back door’ method. They find cultural practices – like smoking a joint – and punish those. … [T]hey deny education benefits if you have any drug conviction – even for simple possession. They have also encouraged … ‘privatized’ harassment of corporate workers through drug screening, etc. … to keep the industrial work force intimidated.


    “Answer this question, why don’t we have efficient cost effective renewable energy systems? Why didn’t we follow Jimmy Carter’s advice in 1979, and undertake the ‘moral equivalent of war’ for energy independence. The technology has been around for decades. In the case of hydrogen fuel cells, the first one was invented in 1843 ….

    “Energy is like labor in its central importance to the economy. But while conservatives want ‘cheap labor’ they want ‘expensive energy’ in sources they can monopolize and control. … [T]he biggest beneficiary of ‘cheap energy’ is the work force who pay a larger portion of their income for energy. Well, we can’t have that. …

    “Now you know why conservatives bad mouth ‘renewable energy’, and claim that the government ‘has no business’ subsidizing R&D into this technology …. Meanwhile, there is one form of ‘alternative energy’ they like. Nuclear power. Why? Because nuclear power is horrendously expensive, and can be monopolized ….

    “Meanwhile, they support destruction of pristine habitats like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and unlawful invasions of sovereign nations sitting on a ‘sea of oil’ to use the words of Paul Wolfowitz … which proves that the cheap-labor conservatives will do anything … to prevent any improvement in the wage earner’s economic circumstances ….


    ” … [T]he War in Iraq is an aggregate application of a number of … ‘cheap-labor’ policies. First of all, Republican ‘demonization’ notwithstanding, Saddam Hussein was a ‘target of opportunity’. Paul Wolfowitz said so.

    “Saddam sat atop a … ‘sea of oil’ to again quote Paul Wolfowitz. As for global opposition to the US invasion, that was not an ‘unforeseen complication’. It was another ‘opportunity’. In fact, one of the objectives was to demonstrate to the world that the US can do whatever it wants. … The invasion of Iraq is the first step in establishing a US led global corporate empire, with a wealthy corporate elite living off of a global pool of ‘cheap labor’.

    “Don’t believe it? Go to and look at the National Security Strategy of the United States. This remarkable document lays out the ‘cheap-labor’ foreign policy of the United States. … It goes on to discuss which internal policies of other nations the US will ‘encourage’. Guess what those policies are? The very same policies they are promoting here, including ‘free trade’, ‘flattening’ tax rates, shifting taxes away from passive investments, reducing the ‘public sector’, and … paving the way for corporations to dominate other societies.

    “The US military will be the ‘police force’ for this global ‘corporate order’, and Iraq is … the start of establishing the … pre-eminance of that ‘global police force’. … [T]he neocons are … intent on destabilizing international organizations that don’t promote corporate dominance. The conservatives don’t like the World Court, the United Nations or similar organizations. But GATT, the IMF and the World Bank don’t bother them a bit since those organizations undermine the ability of third world nations to establish anything like our ‘New Deal mixed economy’. And don’t forget, the cheap-labor conservatives are busy destabilizing our own ‘New Deal mixed economy’, in favor of an economy that strongly resembles … Argentina.

    “In short, the invasion of Iraq has nothing to do with … weapons of mass destruction. Neither do the cheap-labor conservatives really care about a ‘dictatorial regime’ since they prop plenty of them up, and even supported Saddam Hussein …. The real purpose of the invasion of Iraq is … global … ‘corporate feudalism’. …

    “Anytime a cheap-labor conservative takes a position … look at the details. See if somewhere … there isn’t some way the wage-earner loses out … the conservative position undermines the bargaining power of the wage earner, limits his economic options, harasses the wage earner in some way, raises his cost of living, increases his economic vulnerability or accomplishes some combination of the above.

    Now you … have [a] new tool … to analyze cheap-labor conservative rhetoric, ideology and policy.”

    Quoted under fair use; for complete article and/or copyright info see

  13. 14

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    I can prove Bush is a corporatist and cheap labor is behind his policies with one simple statistic:

    Since 2001, labor’s share of U.S. GDP has fallen from 60% to 50%.

  14. 15

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @12 Who’s saying immigrants should be allowed to come on your private property? Cite please.

  15. 16

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    As usual, BS is full of BS. He’s trying to equate an entire country with “private property.” In America, even illegals and criminals are allowed on the public portions of our country’s landmass. Whatever laws they may be violating, it is NOT a violation to be on public property!!!

  16. 17

    headless lucy spews:

    re 12: Big money crossing borders is exactly the same sort of piracy you so ludicrouly ludicrously describe as happening to my property. Incidentally, all YOUR administration (corporations and fat-cats) has to do to take my property is to declare me a terrorist, throw me in jail — and that would be the end of it. And you were in favor of this — cuz you’re a ‘patriot’….


  17. 18

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Speaking of immigrants coming on private property, eastern Washington’s farmers and growers would like to find more immigrants (legal or otherwise) to come on THEIR property!

    Crops are rotting in the fields and fruit is rotting on trees because they can’t get enough cheap labor to pick it.

    The reason is simple: They refuse to raise wages.

    High gas prices make it unprofitable for low-paid migrant workers to commute long distances from eastern Washington’s sparse housing to the widely scattered farms and orchards. Plus, the housing construction boom created a huge number of higher-paying jobs in cities. So the immigrant work force migrated en masse from the farms to the cities, just as our own grandfathers did in the early decades of the last century.

    If farmers and orchardists want labor to pick their crops, they’ll have to pay better wages. If their business model depends on low-income workers subsidizing the high cost of transportation, and they can’t make a profit if they pay a living wage, well, maybe they should be in some other business.

  18. 19

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    In any case, immigrants coming on private property isn’t much of an issue in the Republican areas of Washington state. The folks there want more, not less, immigrants coming on their private property.

  19. 20

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    It’s ridiculously easy to make the trolls on this board look like the fucking idiots they are.

  20. 21

    headless lucy spews:

    re 12: You are a foot-dragging, philosophical Luddite. I bet I own more property than you. And I have three big dogs and plenty of guns to keep the likes of you off of it.

    That’s how my brand of anarchy works.

  21. 23

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    The BSer is suddenly quiet. Looks like we ran him off.


  22. 24

    headless lucy spews:

    A WingNut™ version of a John Wayne western would have the Duke out on the Texas cattle range working as the secret ally of a British corporation, quietly going around buying up water and mineral rights, and then invading people’s ranches and ruining the land while father’s grit their teeth and take it because of their family responsibilities.

    Yaaaaay! Another family put in penury by the ‘Duke’, corporate lackey.

  23. 25

    headless lucy spews:

    This bespectacled little pissant in charge of the FCC makes NONE of his own decisions.

    He’s a corporate lackey.

  24. 26

    headless lucy spews:

    Tell me, BS, how is being a corporate lackey different in quality and kind to being a communist agent or Nazi SS operative?

    How do their functions and activities differ?

  25. 27

    headless lucy spews:

    Kevin Martin is the American version of a ‘good German’– even down to his obvious contempt for the people he was supposed to be ‘hearing’ at the FCC hearing.

    He doesn’t realize that he’s not one of them, he’s one of us, and when that wall comes down — when he no longer has his government position to hide behind — he’ll have a lot to answer for.

  26. 28

    headless lucy spews:

    If you can judge a man by his progeny, then Colin Powell is a miserable, small-minded, elitist prick.

  27. 29


    So let me see if I got this straight. It’s okay for people to cross borders to make a better life for themselves, as long as it’s other people’s borders, and not yours?

  28. 30

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    #21 headless lucy says:

    re 12: You are a foot-dragging, philosophical Luddite. I bet I own more property than you. And I have three big dogs and plenty of guns to keep the likes of you off of it.
    That’s how my brand of anarchy works.

    No surprise you have big dogs and guns. Make up for what you don’t have.

  29. 31



    Do you mean to ask how is being a receptionist for, let’s say, The Corporation for Public Broadcasting different than SS units that were tasked to hunt down and kill Jews outside of Germany?

    Great point. I really don’t see any difference.

  30. 32

    headless lucy spews:

    re 29: No. You have not got it straight. However, my opinion of you is that you understand exactly what I’m saying, but you are being obdurately obtuse until you can find an authority figure to give you an answer to the question I’ve raised.

    You will then mindlessly hew to your flawed talking point because you trust the SOURCE of the talking point and not its content.

    While I have your attention, though, is it your assertion that Capital be able to cross any border , unimpeded, and do what it will, regardless of the repercussions to the native population?

    If you do, then you have to agree that, yes, labor should be able to cross the same borders with the same impunity.

    Kind of messes up ‘free trade’, doesn’t it? Because that would make it truly free.

    Why would anyone have an interest in proving otherwise?

  31. 33

    headless lucy spews:

    re 31: So, you are saying that the same sort of receptionist in Nazi Germany who works at a company that uses Jews for slave labor is totally disimilar to the receptionist at an agri-business firm whose activities (that are subsidized by the American taxpayer),and which the receptionist understands destroys native agriculture in, say, Mexico — putting millions in starvation and paying triple what they did last year for a tortilla, is qualitatively different?

  32. 34

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @29 In the 40 years since 1968, Republicans held the White House 28 years and Democrats only 12 years, so it was primarily Republicans who let them in.

    Some of them have labored in the fields for low wages for decades, enabling you to buy cheap food, and their families were born here and have spent their entire lives here … and now you want to kick them out?

    You’re a jackass.

  33. 35

    headless lucy spews:

    re 31: “Great point. I really don’t see any difference.”

    If you are going to use reductio ad absurdum as a rhetorical device, then you are going to have to put a little effort into reducing your own brain’s absurdity.

  34. 37

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @36 I agree Stamm is a lightweight. He’s a mental midget even compared to the other trolls.

  35. 38

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    #36 headless lucy says:

    For instance, after reading the definitions, you will realize that Marvin’s comment in #30 is merely an ad hominem argument. All he’s capable of are cheap shots like that.

    I disagree. If it was an ad hominem argument I would have pointed out that you, like your fellow racists hide behind big dogs and guns.
    So, are you ready to tell everyone why it’s hard for you to be around black people 24/7?

  36. 39

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    #37 Roger Rabbit says:

    I agree Stamm is a lightweight. He’s a mental midget even compared to the other trolls

    So says the rabbit that spends his life posting here. Don’t you have any hobbies or anything? Girlfriend? Ever get out of the house for some exercise? Ever think about getting some therapy, ridding yourself of all the hate inside you so your remaining time on earth will be a little happier? Are you an adult child of alcoholics?

  37. 40



    So let me see if I have this right. If I agree with you, I’m wrong. And if I disagree with you, I’m wrong, as well?

  38. 41

    headless lucy spews:

    re 38: “So, are you ready to tell everyone why it’s hard for you to be around black people 24/7?”

    Marvin: Maybe I should include some more information in that statement. But then again, matbe I shouldn’t. You’ll just twist it to mean something else.

    Suffice it to say that in a drug infested, poverty stricken, stree-crime ridden area, it can be stressful to have to exist there on a permanent basis.

    I said: “It can be stressful…” Note, Marvin, if you will, how the verb ‘is’ has been modified to ‘can be’. Anyone can see that your representation of what I said is dishonest.

  39. 42

    headless lucy spews:

    On 8/25/07 I asked Marvin:

    “Isn’t it racist for Steve Sharansky to compare Ron Sims to a murderous African dictator like Robert Mugabe? Why won’t you answer my question?”

    Marvin’s reply was:

    “Comparing a black person to another black person is racist? Ouch!”

    So, in Marvin’s racist mind, comparing one black person with any other black person is a fair comparison, because both people are black. That is the absolutely most racist thing ever said by anyone on HA.

    In Marvin’s mind, you can compare Tooky Williams to Sidney Poitier because:

    “Comparing a black person to another black person is racist? Ouch!”

    Ouch, indeed, Marvin the Moron.

  40. 44

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @39 Ridding my beloved country of corporate fascism is my full-time occupation. Rightwing propagandists are unpatriotic. Only liberal propagandists are patriots.

  41. 45

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @42 “That is the absolutely most racist thing ever said by anyone on HA.”

    I doubt it, but it’s certainly up there with the worst of the racist comments posted on this blog by the righty vermin who infest this place.

  42. 46

    Daddy Love spews:

    Stolen shamelessly from Common Tragedies (http://commontragedies.wordpre.....n-pricing/):

    Jonathan Leape of the London School of Economics writes about London’s experience with congestion pricing in this week’s RFF policy commentary:

    The impact of the scheme exceeded expectations. In the first year of the charge, traffic delays in London dropped by 30 percent, journey time reliability increased by 30 percent, and average speeds rose 17 percent, reflecting a sharp fall in traffic jams at intersections

    The London experience has also shown that it’s possible — and important — to spread the benefits of congestion pricing widely. By committing to plough all the revenues raised by the congestion charge into public transportation improvements, London has ensured that congestion pricing didn’t just improve mobility for car drivers who can pay the charge (the “Lexus lanes” problem) but also increased access to the city centre for everyone.

    As Leape acknowledges, congestion pricing schemes are often criticized for being regressive: the rich can afford to pay and keep on driving, while it’s the poor who must adjust their driving habits. But lowered congestion greatly increases the value of service provided by buses, which are used most by the poor. Leape continues:

    the shift from cars to buses outstripped predictions. Inbound bus passenger numbers increased 37 percent in the first year, about half of whom had previously traveled by car. … A key reason for the surge in bus passenger numbers appears to be the “virtuous circle” for bus transport that can result from congestion pricing. The higher cost of rush-hour car trips and increased bus travel speeds, due to reduced congestion, result in increasing passenger numbers and falling average costs — which, in turn, lead to improved service levels and lower fares that stimulate further shifts to public transport and additional reductions in congestion.

    This is a hugely important point. As anyone who’s ever relied on a bus transit system can attest, the value of the system is strongly related to the density of the service — both the number of routes and the frequency of service along routes. And as Leape points out, as the service becomes more valuable, more people flock to it, lowering unit costs and making it easier to provide even more and better service.

    Mass transit systems are a network good with positive externalities — beyond reducing congestion, buses are a far less polluting alternative than cars — and hence should be subsidized to achieve the socially optimal level of provision. Public roads, on the other hand, are a common pool resource whose value is rapidly degraded when given away for free.

  43. 47

    Daddy Love spews:

    42 HL

    No, no, no, it’s only fair if you compare the DC sniper to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

  44. 48

    Puddybud spews:

    Only from the mind of Leadlice Loocie (TM): “We need to control corporations because they have a flawed and inhumane philosophy that puts corporations before people.”

    Maybe you could start with

    1) The Shaw Group – Screwed the DoD in Iraq and FEMA in Katrina
    2) The Perini Group – Screwed with Veterans
    3) Mattel Corporation – 18.2 Million Chinese made toys recalled

  45. 50

    Puddybud spews:

    Leadlice Loocie ™: None of those in #49 qualify.

    Those are corporations. I suggest you start with those three.

    Any questions?

  46. 51

    me spews:

    “# 20 Roger Rabbit says:

    It’s ridiculously easy to make the trolls on this board look like the fucking idiots they are.
    12/01/2007 at 11:48 am”

    Yes Roger you are the “fucking idiot” and biggest troll on HA!

  47. 53

    headless lucy spews:

    #52: I just don’t know what to say to someone as stupid as you. Your example proves my point.

  48. 54

    Puddybud spews:

    Hey Loocie – I realize taking to someone like me who has made it in America as a black man must torque your chain 24/7.

    So how many blacks did you live with to know it 24/7? Or are they your wrasslin’ charges “coach”?

  49. 55

    Puddybud spews:

    So tell me Loocie – Since you dislike corporations you must be an anti-capitalist. Sooooooooo which are you? Choose one or more:

    1) Socialist like Jacques Chirac
    2) Communist like Mao
    3) Nazi like Hitler

    Which is it?

  50. 56

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    #41 headless lucy says:

    Suffice it to say that in a drug infested, poverty stricken, stree-crime ridden area, it can be stressful to have to exist there on a permanent basis.

    Of course you believe that all blacks live in those conditions. Hint- shut up. You’re exposing yourself more and more.

  51. 57

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    #41 headless lucy says:

    I said: “It can be stressful…” Note, Marvin, if you will, how the verb ‘is’ has been modified to ‘can be’. Anyone can see that your representation of what I said is dishonest.

    You still haven’t answered the question why “it can be” stressful for you. I believe you that you know how stressful it is. Tell us. Do you feel guilty because you live in a lilly white community? That you don’t give the minority children you teach the same care you give the white kids? Tell us, don’t be afraid.
    > #30 Black people can be stressful to be around 24/7. Believe me , I know.
    I would ask if being around poor white people is stressful for you but we already know that answer.

  52. 58

    Puddybud spews:

    Marvin: Lucy recently visited an Issaquah Darcy Moonbat! event. Must live out there few minorities live.