Smoke 'em if you can afford 'em

Here we go again. Big gov'ment is strapping on its size 13 moral-superiority clodhoppers 'n' is getting ready to start trompling all over the rights of a maligned minority 'cause it's the "right thing to do". That's right, they's raising the taxes on tobacco products. Again. When it takes effect on Wednesday, it will be the single largest federal tobacco tax increase ever. The tax on a single pack o' smokes will go from 39 cents to just over a dollar. ($1.01, to be precise.) Taxes on cigars 'n' pipe 'n' smokeless tobacco will be increased, as well. The tax on chewing tobacco, fer example, will increase from 19.5 cents to 50 cents per pound.

Course, the claim it's all fer a good cause. Ain't that always the excuse they trot out when they decide to infringe on the rights o' some minority group er the other - that it's fer the "public good"? This time, they say they're going to use the tobacco taxes to help finance a major expansion o' health insurance fer children. While that may be a good use to put their extorted funds towards, in actual practice the idea is just plain stupid.

Now, I know you're prob'ly thinking, "Stupid? Ain't that rather a harsh word to use, Random?" Well, that's as maybe. But when it's the right word, it's the right word, 'n' I ain't going to shy away from using it. It is a stupid idea. Just look at the thing logically, which, obviously, the gov'ment ain't doing. They's claiming it's a win-win situation. First off, they's raising money to help fund child care. I admit, that's a good thing. Then, they claim that it will provide further incentive fer tobacco users to quit their bad habits, which will improve their health.

Let's just leave the health "benefits" o' less tobacco use aside fer right now 'n' concentrate on the
consequences o' diminished tobacco use among the general population. The first thought that springs to mind is: less tobacco use means less tobacco purchases which means a decrease in the revenues from tobacco taxes which means less money fer child health care. That's a lose-win, the children lose but the tobacco users "win" 'cause they're "healthier". If, on the other hand, there isn't a decrease in the number o' tobacco users, er if it even increases 'cause folks want to raise that money fer the kiddies, then it's a win-lose 'cause the tobacco users get singled out fer an unfairly disproportianate tax increase. On the third hand, we have the most likely scenario, which is a lose-lose fer ever'body. There will be a decrease in the number o' tobacco users, which will mean a decrease in the tax revenue fer the kiddies, which will mean another unfair tax increase on tobacco, which will mean fewer tobacco users, which will mean a decrease in the tax revenue fer the kiddies, which will mean another unfair tax increase on tobacco, which will mean fewer tobacco users... 'n' so on.

If they want to tax someone to raise money fer child health care, tax the deep pockets, not the folks already struggling with their finances. Make the petroleum companies pay fer it. I'd be willing to bet real money that more deaths in this country can be linked, either directly er indirectly, to the manufacturing 'n' use o' petroleum products than the manufacturing 'n' use o' tobacco. Er they could go after the drug companies. They're the ones who are, probably, most responsible fer the skyrocketing cost o' healthcare in this country, anyway. Make 'em put back some o' what they've taken. If they really want to make some money 'n' a tangible differ'nce at the same time, legalize the illegal drugs 'n' tax them.

Now there's a win-win. Maybe even a win-win-win er a win-win-win-win. They'd get more money fer the younguns that way than they could ever dream o' getting from tobacco users. If drugs was legal, they could regulate their manufacture 'n' quality, which means less deaths 'n' health problems from bad drugs. It would also pull the rug out from under the drug cartels 'n' the gangs running drugs in this country. That would mean less violence, less criminals, less folks in jail, safer neighborhoods, 'n' healthier environments fer the children o' drug families.

If they insist on placing the burden on the shoulders o' the tobacco user, then I say the tobacco user's in this country should stand up 'n' make themselves heard. I don't mean standing up in shouting 'bout how unfair it is er writing letters to congressfolks er any o' that, 'cause ain't no one going to listen to 'em if they's just using words. I mean they should speak with their wallets. What I'd like to see happen is fer ever' tobacco user in the country to quit buying tobacco products fer at least six months. Turn off that tax tap 'n' see what the gov'ment does when the tobacco users say, "No, you cain't have my money!" Maybe then they'll see the light 'n' actually try something intelligent fer a change. I know, asking the gov'ment to do something intelligent is like asking a chicken to lay hard boiled eggs. I can still dream, though. Least, until they find a way to tax that, too.

Stop the Presses!

I am so proud o' my local newpaper. They have finally reared up on their hind legs 'n' shown some backbone, some leadership, some strength, some courage, some intestinal fortitude, some outright (please forgive my use o' local slang) cajones. The local paper today decided to thumb its nose at the conventional wisdome on what constitutes news 'n' how it should be reported. Forget that we got troops fighting overseas. Forget that we got personal, local, state, national, 'n' international financial crises. Forget the climate problems. Forget that we got a new President in office who seems intent on getting more done in his first month in office than most other folks have managed to get done in their first year.

Forget all that stuff. The local editors 'n' reporters have decided that the single biggest item o' news they could report in today's paper, at least in terms o' space dedicated to it (at least a quarter to a third o' the front page, with a big ol' pi'ture to boot), was a nice little piece 'bout folks getting their pi'tures taken. O' course, it weren't just any ol' pi'ture taking event. It's this new project the city has undertaken to help "beautify" a new underpass into the downtown area they's spending $26 million on to complete. What happened was, they've contracted with this group o' photographers to go 'round town fer a few months 'n' take pi'tures o' folks that they are then going to put on tiles to be used to cover panels at the entrances to the underpass.

'N' that's just how they reported it. They didn't bother wtih anything that would have taken away from the charm 'n' feel-good nature o' the story. They didn't bother to comment on the downturn in American ingenuity er the failure of American technoloy that is forcing 'em to send the photos down to Brazil 'cause America ain't got the know how ner skills to prduce tiles that would be UV-proof. Ner did they bother to question why the town elders decided that, in this time of economic downturn 'n' budget deficits, it was more important to spend this money on "make-up" instead o' using it fer infrastructure er to help the indigent er fer education er something important.

No, sir. They seem to feel that, if we just start ignoring er downplaying all the negative stuff going on, it'll all just go away. Keep it light. Keep it uplifting. That'll help sell papers 'n' make us feel better. Course, it could o' been worse. They might have gone with a celebrity update er, worst of all, a sports story.

Anyone fer Thirds?

Well, it looks they finally made it official. Maybe. Seems the powers that be decided they'd better give Oprama a second shot at the swearing in yeste'day to make sure it took. I reckon they woke up like the rest of us 'n' found that the market was still down, unemployment was still up, the troops was still out o' the country, folks was still in deep financial troubles, 'n' they wasn't no heavenly choirs singing "Hallelujah" 'n' figured that, maybe, Oprama weren't officially President yet since they messed up the oath the first time 'round. So they dragged ol' Mr. Chief Justice John Roberts out o' bed, made him dress back up in his black gown, 'n' had him try it again in the White House Map Room.

There were witnesses there, including some members o' the press, but they didn't 'low no cameras in the room, so they ain't got no real proof that what they said happened actually happened. Also, they claim that there weren't no Bible used this time. So maybe it didn't take the second time, neither, since ever'one woke up today to find that the market was still down, unemployment was still up, the troops was still out o' the country, folks was still in deep financial troubles, 'n' they wasn't no heavenly choirs singing "Hallelujah". Maybe they need to take a third run at the thing 'n' make sure they get ever' little thing right including having a Bible (I got a Gideon I can loan 'em if they's desperate) 'n' having pictures taken 'n' doing it in front o' the whole country with all the right words spoken in all the right order.

The whole thing has got me wondering if Mr. Chief Justice John Roberts got that memo that Jr. was supposed to have sent 'round 'bout how he didn't want any o' his folks pulling any shenanigans during the change-over. After all, Mr. Chief Justice John Roberts is one o' Jr.'s appointees, so maybe he's just fooling around, trying to complicate things 'n' either just make Oprama look bad er out-'n'-out invalidate his claims to office. Look fer all this to come back up when the Republicans decide to start talking impeachment after they decide enough time has passed to bring it up.

Course, none o' this stopped, er even slowed down, Oprama's acting like President. In his first day in office, he put a stop to trials at Guantanamo, claimed he was going to close the detention facility there withing a year, imposed new limits on lobbyists including banning them from giving gifts to anyone serving in the administration, froze the salaries o' White House aides making more than $100,000, met with the Joint Chiefs o' Staff 'bout changes in how to handle the campaigns in Iraq 'n' Afghanistan, presided over the White House meeting on the economy, 'n' talked by phone with leaders in the Middle East. 'N' that was just some o' the things he did.

President er not, looks like maybe, just maybe, this feller has finished cutting his bait 'n' is ready to start doing some actual fishing. I don't care so much 'bout all his fancy talking. It's his doing that I'm concerned 'bout. 'N', from where I'm sitting, his doing in one day so far has given me more hope than all his talking did in the past 12 months.

The Changing o' the Guard

Just a few quick thoughts on the inauguration 'n' speech 'fore the pundits, spin-doctors, nay-sayers, 'n' other assorted 'n' sundry "experts" ruin it for ever'one.

Firstly: Oprama seemed like an eager little beaver, didn't he. He just couldn't wait to light into the oath 'n' get it over with so he could get to officially call himself president, could he?

Secondly: Why has he got such a problem with saying that he will "faithfully" perform his duties?

Thirdly: What has he got against the brave soldiers who have fought 'n' died fer their country since the end o' the Korean war?

Fourthly: A campaign 'n' nomination acceptance speech that were compared to/paralleled President Jack's - a train trip 'n' Bible that were last used by President Lincoln - an inauguration on the day after MLK day: coincedences, smart politicking, er eerie omens/premonitions o' bad things to come?