Waived as I drove by the Dome.  Pretty sure Drew n the boys were tucked inside, safe and sound, dreaming of Lombardi Trophys.

Alabama and Mississippi are really nothing more than one BIG piney woods.

Off topic:  It's a SERPENTINE draft.  NOT a "snake draft."  When you say snake draft you sound like a HUGE idiot.

Serpentine.

That is all.

except - posted from the McD's in Natchidoches La.

Locdated an oasis in DFW.  Sofa.  Multiple power outlets.  WiFi.  Ambient noise from escalators.  Only the damned 24-7 Catoon Network todsturb my idyl.  Thankfully it was alot of classic Hanna Barbara into the night, once the Powder Puff Girls ended.  A little Top Cat.  Notable absence of Magilla Gorilla.  Must soon leave the safe harbor, like Sherman leaving Atlanta ... in search of Boaz, Alabama.

Don't know when I will be able to write again.  The horror.  The horror.

OK, I promise not to call him Frank anymore.  Much.  Francis.  Or Francis I.

The Ryan Budget is out .... best two takeaways from Rob Long:

Is it too draconian?  Will it plunge the country into depression with its savage austerity?  Not mathematically likely:

Our opponents will shout austerity, but let's put this in perspective. On the current path, we'll spend $46 trillion over the next 10 years. Under our proposal, we'll spend $41 trillion. On the current path, spending will increase by 5% each year. Under our proposal, it will increase by 3.4%. Because the U.S. economy will grow faster than spending, the budget will balance by 2023, and debt held by the public will drop to just over half the size of the economy.

And here's may favorite part, which I dare not dream of:

The current tax code is a Rubik's cube that Americans spend six billion hours—and $160 billion—each year trying to solve. The U.S. corporate tax is the highest in the industrialized world. So our budget paves the way for comprehensive tax reform. It calls for Congress to simplify the code by closing loopholes and consolidating tax rates. Our goal is to have just two brackets: 10% and 25%. House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp has committed to pass a specific bill this year.

I know, I know: I'm cynical. It's highly unlikely that this kind of tax reform is going to happen.  But I'm happy that this budget is out there. And I'm happy that Ryan is on the offensive.  Especially since polls are suggesting that congressional Republicans now have the advantage.

Traveling again this weekend – west, then east. Allow me to reiterate a point I've made before. Your luggage does NOT need a seat. As I approach my golden years I fervently believe that seniors and/or the handicapped should get those seats ahead of your backpack. PAY ATTENTION PEOPLE!

Now. Feet. Feet, IMHO are inherantly ugly. God got down to the bottom of the human form and knocked off early. MY feet are ugly. It is only through long years of intimate association that I can deal with my own feet and I do NOT expect others to. Now some people DO have nice feet. My wife's feet are OK. I have a former employer whose former wife had pretty feet. It CAN happen. But not very damned often. And not to most people. And this trip for some inexplicable reason there have been WAY too many naked feet. Correction: way too many UGLY naked feet – or is that a redundancy?

Side note. Traveling on the DST change date is always a challenge, made even more confusing by traversing multiple time zones. I set my clock ahead when I turned in last night, after setting my alarm clock. Got to the airport in a timely fashion this morning. Minor inconvinience going through the TSA checkpoint. It's the sequester, y'know. We kept federal wine tastings in 40 states last week, Michelle gets here $9k ball gown for the Oscars and POTUS gets his private golf lessons, but we gotta lay off TSA workers. And people wonder why I kvetch about gubmint doing what gubmint is S'POSSED to be doing! Anyway – got to ORD with a three hour layover. Unable to bleed wireless signal from the Admirals Club so I read a lengthy article on the philosophy of gun control and napped. Unfortunately not all travelers were as well preparred., When I went to bed last night my flight to STL had over a dozen available seats. When I went to my gate prior to boarding I discovered a standby list of 20 names and I was 15^th. Not good. Seems a BUNCH of folks from Chicago overslept and missed the earlier flight to STL and were now hoping to board THIS flight, and a higher priority than I. And I ended up #1. I was the first person NOT to make the flight. Not happy. So now I wait for two hours, and will get to STIL about an hour later than I planned. Home by 9pm? And in the air by 6am again tomorrow.

say what you will but I LOVE the 70's.  They were my decade.  I started Jr. High in 1970 and graduated college in 1980.  Beautiful symetry.  So here's my top 10 from the decade.

but in a whole NEW way!  Nanny Bloomberg blames wealthy jet-setters for the booming homeless problem in NYC.  If an ELPH had said this ... well, you know.

"You can arrive in your private jet at Kennedy Airport, take a private limousine and go straight to the shelter system, walk in the door, and we’ve got to give you shelter,” the billionaire mayor fumed on his weekly WOR radio show.

“That’s what the law is. I didn’t write the law.”

Luckily for Bloomberg his idiot streak makes him a sacred cow in the media, so this story is likely to die away quickly. We're Bloomberg a conservative Republican, the media would kill themselves to make this a career-ender.

Bloomberg's disregard for the homeless isn't anything new, either. Last year, Hizzoner banned private food donations to New York City homeless shelters.

Found this over at WUWT on one of my daily visits.  Mr. Watt prefeaced it thus:

"It is one of those seminal moments where I think a bridge has been created in the climate debate, and I hope you’ll seize the moment and embrace it. This video comes with my strongest possible recommendation, because it speaks to a real problem, with real solutions in plain language, while at the same time offering true hope.  Every once in awhile, an idea comes along that makes you ask, “gee why hasn’t anybody seen this before?”. This one of those times. This video below is something I almost didn’t watch, because my concerns were triggered by a few key words in the beginning. But ... I stuck with it, and I’m glad I did, because I want every one of you, no matter what side of the climate debate you live in, to watch this and experience that light bulb moment as I did. The key here is to understand that desertification is one of the real climate changes we are witnessing as opposed to some the predicted ones we often fight over.

Allen Savory

A year ago I had a conversation with a student regarding POTUS O's "diversity" appointments to the SCOTUS.  I observed that all nine are either Catholic or Jewish, all nine graduated from one of two colleges and they all live withing 50 miles of each other.  And both of POTUS O's appointments have left wing leanings and agree on almost every major issue facing the US.  Not really "diverse."

And now he's done it again.  In nominating “the first openly gay black man,” “the first Asian American lesbian” and “the first South Asian” to judgeships, The Post reported March 4, President Obama is “moving quickly to change the face of the federal judiciary” [“Obama remolds federal bench,” front page]. According to White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler, “Diversity in and of itself is a thing that is strengthening the judicial system.”

Preferring candidates “for no reason other than race or ethnic origin is discrimination for its own sake,” Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. wrote in his controlling Regents of the University of California v. Bakke opinion. “This the Constitution forbids.” In Grutter v. Bollinger, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s majority opinion held that the diversity the court approved “is not to be achieved for its own sake” but “is defined by reference to the educational benefits that diversity is designed to produce.”

But the courtroom is not a classroom; its purpose is to produce justice. What judicial benefits does the president intend to produce by attempting to “change the face” (and presumably the aggregate sexual preferences) of the federal judiciary? How will the justice dispensed by an openly gay black man, an Asian American lesbian or a South Asian be different, much less better, because of his or her race, ethnicity or sexual preference?

The fact that race, ethnicity or sexual preference should not disqualify anyone from service on the federal bench does not mean they should be qualifications or even “plus factors” for that service — unless, that is, we now want justice not to be blind but to be seen through race-, ethnicity- and sex-tinted lenses.

Can they read?  No one's sure.  Do the have a requisite judicial temperment?  No one knows.  Does it matter?  Guess not, because they have all the right boxes checked.

Y'all know I'm no fan of Keynsianism.  While I was reading Fighting Keynes with Keynes and following the link I stumbeld upon a stark realization.

Y'all know I'm ALSO no fan of the 17th Amendment.  The whole checks and balances thing was set up when the Senate was appointed by the state legislatures.   Now that it's a state wide popularity contest much of the check and balance in checks and balances is severely missing, because the whole Constitution was written for a different set of assumptions.

So here's the lighbulb moment.  Keynes' General Theory was written for the Gold standard - NOT for a fiat money system.

So why don't more Misesians make this point?  Or any anti-Keynsians?