RULES ARE FOR THEE; NOT FOR ME

Heard on WTOP radio this morning: Congresscritters can’t smoke in their cafeterias any more -- but they can still smoke in their offices ....

I can’t smoke in my office. Can you?

Question: is the Oval Office now a smoking area?
Answer: rules are for little people.

A RIGHT TO LISTEN?

The Fairness Doctrine and “localism regulation” may yet die.

During oral argument in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission, Justice Scalia said, "Do you think that there's a possibility that the First Amendment interest is greater when what the government is trying to stifle is not just a speaker who wants to say something but also a hearer who wants to hear what the speaker has to say?"

Apparently listeners have rights, too.

AL QAEDA PRESS CONFERENCE

Two young Americans who left their homes to join an Al Qaeda-linked terrorist group in Somalia held a rare “press conference” in southern Somalia on Sunday, saying they want to be killed "for the sake of God[.]"

I’m sure the U.S. Marines will be happy to assist.

MORE ON GM (GOVERNMENT MOTORS)

According to President Obama, Detroit can't focus on "trying to build more and more SUVs and counting on gas prices being low."

The administration is expected to announce plans to raise fuel efficiency standards to 30.2 mpg for the 2011 model year and pickup trucks, sport utility vehicles, and minivans will need to reach 24.1 mpg.

Now from George Will, writing in the Washington Post:

Yet last week, in an unenthralled summary of GM's "viability" plan, Obama's administration said: "GM earns a large share of its profits from high-margin trucks and SUVs.

And:

The stunning shift in consumer preferences that should make the White House's freshly minted auto experts feel vulnerable has been reported under headlines such as ‘Like a Rock: Hybrid Car Sales Plummet’ (Wall Street Journal, Dec. 9) and ‘Hybrid Car Sales Go From 60 to 0 at Breakneck Speed’ (Los Angeles Times, March 17). Absent $4 gasoline, customers, those nuisances with their insufferable preferences, do not want the vehicles the politicians want them to want ....

So let me get this straight. (1) American auto manufacturers are nearly bankrupt. (2) The only automobiles they make that are profitable are light trucks and SUVs. (3) In order to get federal "bailout" money, they have to quit manufacturing them and only manufacture automobiles that American consumers don't want.

Huh?

Now back to Will:

Has the Car Designer in Chief, a.k.a. the president, considered the possibility that what he calls "the cars of tomorrow" will forever be that? ... His administration cannot be faulted for failing to do well what cannot be done well -- industrial policy, wherein the political class, with negligible experience in commerce, flounders. The administration can, however, be faulted for trying.

Yes.

A TRAGEDY OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES

Oliver North:

It was a remarkable performance, worthy of a Shakespearean tragedy. In the space of 48 hours, the president of the United States seized control of one of the world's largest manufacturing companies and fired its chief executive officer. He followed up by congratulating our representatives for creating the 14th-largest paid entity on the planet - a quarter of a million government-paid "volunteers." [Ed: the Serve America Act.] And then, he departed the capital to receive the cheers of adoring crowds - in Europe.

Continuing:

Short of war, the unintended consequences of government intervention are often [Ed: often? Try always.] far worse than the problem it was supposed to solve. As the U.S. Senate was voting to spend a billion dollars a year to put a quarter-million civilian "volunteers" on the government payroll, Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican, rose to ask his colleagues a salient question that applies as much to the takeover of the auto industry as it does to destroying community volunteerism: "Do you see anything in the history of our federal government that shows we have the ability to effectively manage something like that?"

One question, three answers: No, no, and no.

A SMALL STEP IN “GETTING IT”

Andrew Alexander, the new Ombudsman at the Washington Post, may be on to something.

Newspapers demand accountability and transparency from the institutions they cover. But when it comes to The Post, one of the world's best-known media institutions, the attitude seems to be: Good for thee, but not for me.

Seems rather obvious to anyone who reads beyond the comics. [Shadow: You rarely do any more. Me: yes – too painful.]

A separate question is whether The Post adheres to the [ethical and journalistic] policies in place. In my first two months as ombudsman, I've found a disturbing lack of attention to the standards and ethics rules.

Gee, ya think?

[A] surprising number of staffers told me it's been years since they reviewed them. And several said they simply don't adhere to some of the policies ...."

Policies? We’re the Washington Post! We don’t need no stinkin’ policies.

SMOKE! IT’S FOR THE CHILDREN

Early in February, the president signed a law to triple the federal excise tax on cigarettes -- which will jump from 39 cents per pack to $1.01 today. His administration projects this tax hike will bring in at least $38 billion over the next five years.

The tobacco tax hikes will be used to finance an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP. The expansion, which will cost $35 million over five years, is expected to secure federally funded health care for an additional 4 million children.

Hmm. Let’s see now; the tax hike is projected to bring in $38 billion over five years; SCHIP will get $35 million over 5 years.

I wonder where the remaining $37.965 billion will go?

Obama promised repeatedly that 95% of American families would get a tax cut. So it's especially fitting that he chose April Fools Day to implement his first tax increase -- which will fall mostly on individuals and families who do not make anywhere near $250,000 per year.

Who’s the April fool? Three guesses; the first two don’t count.