Yes, I got my letter from the IRS …

Stating that several months from now I may receive a rebate check from those good folks, which I am supposed to stimulate the economy with.

So why is the government sending out letters to some 130,000,000 households, informing all of us what probably everyone in the world already knows from the news reports? It must cost at least a million dollars just to send those letters out, and that's not counting postage, which the Feds don't pay anyway.

There is more than one answer. First, the Bush administration wants you to associate this rebate with the Republican party, this way they can hit you with it twice. Once when you get the check, much closer to convention time this summer, and now with the promise of the check. Second, considering that you are an American and have the strong tendency to spend what you don't yet have, if you know the check is coming, you are likely to run out to the mall and spend the money in advance, thus "stimulating" the economy earlier than this summer. Third, well, you can supply your own rationals here, like "These people are just stupid and do things as wastefully as possible."

By the way, who actually receives the benefit from the "stimulus"? Here's a hint: we live in a capitalist society; money doesn't trickle down, it flows up. From all indications that means Exxon Mobil and Wall Mart will be the biggest beneficiaries of the tax cut. And maybe Microsoft and Dell. $600 - $1,200 is about the price of a new computer, which you could buy at Wall Mart, right after you put some gas in your car so you can get there.

Yesterday's Washington Post had this interesting quote from Christopher Low, Chief economist at FTN Financial: "Unfortunately, you've got the brightest minds of both parties working night and day to come up with solutions, and so far there have been a lot more misses than hits." Interesting. Evidently, Mr. Low thinks "the brightest minds" create an "unfortunate" condition. He's probably right.

An American Success Story:

While feminists are proclaiming that prostitutes are victims, the world's best known member of the oldest profession may have come by her big break in the fame bizz that inspires America's youth: Washington Post writer, David Segal, reported on the massive attention "Kristen-the-governor-slayer" has gotten for her wanna-be-a-pop-star music career in the wake of the Spitzer scandal in yesterday's paper.

I'm sure all of you parents out there who are now pushing your daughters to get an education will appreciate "Kristen's" chosen career path: high school drop-out, run-a-way, prostitute ring. And you thought Britney was the ideal role model for your daughters!

So, let's see, the governor spends a lot of money to lose his career, wreck his family, and achieve enduring ridicule and fame, while "Kristen" receives immunity from prosecution, money, and a jump start to her music career. ("Come on, Jim, this is the exception that creates the rule." Okay, I'll concede that. But for us irony lovers, this is just too good.)

I Blame Al Gore:

Today's New York Times reports that Hillary Clinton's fund-raisers are pressuring party leaders over the Michigan and Florida delegate fiasco. Personally, I think this is all Al Gore's fault. If he'd won in 2000, we wouldn't be in this mess today. More importantly, if he'd just run this time around, the Democratic party would have gotten behind him, and probably Obama would have been selected as his running mate already. No way would he choose Hillary. And McCain wouldn't be sashaying around Israel with a big grin on his face.

Of course if Humphrey had won in 1968, the whole world would be a different place.

How Bad Is the Economy?

It's been a while since the words "run" and "bank" have been used in the same headline, but today's New York Times' lead story does just that. The Fed bailed out Bear, and according to some, if that hadn't happened "a very widespread panic and potentially a collapse of the financial system" would have occurred.

Gail Collins on Bush's pep talk to the New York financial community Friday: "you had to wonder what the international financial community makes of a country whose president could show up to talk economics in the middle of a liquidity crisis and kind of flop around the stage as if he was emcee at the Iowa Republican Pig Roast." Bush had trouble remember Ing Abdullah of Saudi Arabia's name: “the king, uh, the king of Saudi.” As you know, the families are close friends, but that doesn't seem to help. As Collins points out, when your rational for selecting a president is who you'd rather kick back and have a beer with, this is what you end up with.

Regarding Bush's idiocy about solving the nation's monetary crisis by attacking earmarks is "like saying you’re going to end global warming by banning bathroom nightlights."

Bush's reading habits: "[I'm] occasionally reading, I want you to know, in the second term." — George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., March 2005. Wonder if he kept up the habit?