So says one blogger who recently interviewed him. Hat tip to Instapundit for the link. Glenn also suggests a “Dan-Rather-in-Pajamas photoshop contest.”

So here’s my entry.

His blog could be called “Spurious Dan”

From CNN:

New home sales soar: March gain of 13.8% the biggest in 13 years

Existing home sales also rose.

[National Association of Realtor’s chief economist David] Lereah expects 2006 to be the third strongest year on record for home sales.

And this:

Dow near fresh 6-year high

…”All indicators are pointing to strong economic growth. That’s got people excited, especially in an environment of high commodity prices,” Larry Peruzzi, senior equity trader at Boston Company Asset Management, said…

And consumer confidence?

Consumers shrugged off the first increase in gasoline prices and sent a widely watched barometer of consumer confidence to its highest level in almost four years, a private research group said Tuesday.

and still more:

New orders for U.S.-made durable goods surged a much larger-than-expected 6.1 percent in March on hefty aircraft, computer and manufacturing orders, a government report showed Wednesday.

It was the largest gain in durable goods orders since May 2005. Economists polled by Reuters had expected a 1.6 percent increase in overall durable goods orders in March.

So about those gas prices…

High fuel prices and rising interest rates were expected to cool things off, but the most recent numbers show no signs of that.

How long before MSM stops acting surprised about this economy?

Hano Grimm, founder of Blogads, conducted a survey of political blog readers in March. Unfortunately the survey ran during the period that my site was down for several weeks, so I was only able to capture responses from 32 visitors before the crash. Nevertheless, here are the responses (under the blog’s former name, Generation Why?) from those 32. Pretty interesting stuff.

This will be fun.

Not just because Tony Snow will do a great job, but because the Left is sure to begin their incessant whining over his affiliation with Fox News.

How long before conspiracy claims arise on this one?

Update 8:28am: Well, that didn’t take long.

*7 Updates to this post - see below*

Can someone please remind President Bush, Speaker Hastert and Majority Leader Frist that we Americans elected a Republican majority so that we wouldn’t have to live in a Democrat America. It’s beginning to look more and more like we only have one policital party in Washington… and it’s not one I really care for.

Bush, Hastert, Frist and more are acting like Democrats today calling for probes into possible oil company price gouging.

So much for the American dream when we’re hauling business leaders into Congress to justify making profits. If the 8.2% profit margin of oil companies is “gouging”, then why are other industries not being called before Congress to justify their “gouging”?

Banks - 18%
Household & Personal Products - 11.4%
Software - 9.9%
Telecommunications - 9.1%

And there are renewed calls for more regulations or (not suprisingly) more taxes on oil companies.

“If the greedy oil companies won’t invest their billions in profit in delivering affordable (gas), then maybe America needs to take some of those windfall profits and put them to better use,” [Democrat Senate Minority Leader, Harry Reid] said.”

Here’s the breakdown of that “greed”:

I explained the breakdown in greater detail last Fall.

Notice refining costs and profits comprise no more than 18% of the cost we pay. It costs about $2 a gallon for U.S. refiners to turn crude oil into gasoline before transportation and distribution costs are added, said John Felmy, an API economist.

That leaves 20.6 cents - $1.106 per gallon for transportation, distribution and profit.

“When you take all those costs out you’re not finding unreasonable profits for everything we have to do to get (gasoline) to consumers,” Felmy said.

But Democrats never fail to seize an opportunity to raise taxes. Now let me ask you this, if Congress implemented a 50% windfall profit tax on the oil companies, who do you think would end up paying that? Do you think the oil company executives would feel so guilty that they’ve been making 8 cents on the dollar and smile when that’s cut in half? Or would they simply build the tax into the supply chain and end up passing it along to shareholders and consumers?

Of course, Reid’s proposal smacks of the the typical Democrat mantra of “we know better then you how to spend your money.”

The Democrats threaten to take oil company profits and invest them into “rebates” for consumers to make the public think they’re playing Robin Hood - taking greedy profits from evil big oil and giving it to the poor, average American so they can afford gas - completely ignoring the fact that the “rebates” will be offset by the oil companies passing such cost along to those very consumers.

But let’s look at two things higher gas prices bring us:

1. Conservation - people generally don’t buy what they can’t afford
2. Incentive to oil companies to explore - higher gas prices encourage gas exploration into areas previously restricted by cost, or exploration into alternative fuel sources altogether

But if government is taking away the profits and giving them to consumers as “rebates” then consumers have no reason to conserve, and oil companies have no incentive to explore. How do I know this? Because that very scenario played out in the 1970s and early 1980s.

History serves as a helpful teacher on this question. As part of a general effort to combat high inflation in the early 1970s, President Nixon placed price controls on the oil industry and many other sectors of the American economy. Eventually the controls were lifted from other industries, but they remained in place for U.S.-produced oil as the government tried to partially protect consumers from the jump in world oil prices caused by the oil embargo of 1973-74. A so-called windfall profits tax was imposed on the industry in 1980, when again world oil prices rose dramatically as a result of supply disruptions stemming from conflicts in Iran and Iraq. The government began phasing out the tax in 1981.

Although various price and profit control programs did limit income to oil companies, it’s questionable whether they benefited consumers in the long run. Between 1974 and 1980, imported oil prices averaged about 50 percent more than the price for oil produced in America. As a consequence, U.S. oil companies were discouraged from exploring for and finding supplies of oil and natural gas at home. Meanwhile, industrial and individual consumers were shielded from higher prices that might have encouraged greater energy conservation.

Then, of course, the Democrats will be the first ones to come out and complain that Republicans aren’t doing enough about energy conservation or exploration into alternative sources of fuel… maybe it’s this no-win situation for Republicans that has them acting more like Democrats all the time.

Update: Consumers shrugged off higher gasoline prices in April and sent a widely watched barometer of consumer confidence to its highest level in almost four years, a private research group said Tuesday. - The Democrat position on gas isn’t a winner… someone please tell Republicans to stop trying to adopt it as well.

Update 2: Michelle Malkin highlights Neil Cavuto taking Chuck Schumer to task on the gas price issue:

I see Chuck Schumer wants to investigate the oil companies for price gouging. Why doesn’t he ask his fellow politicians to do the same about tax gouging?
After all, oil companies’ profit works out to nine cents a gallon. Taxes total more like 40 cents a gallon.

But you don’t hear Schumer whining about the taxes. After all, that’s an easy source of revenue for a monotonous list of social programs whose failures are legendary. Better to keep funding them through taxes that are killing us, than demanding accountability due all of us.

Senator, if you want to bring gas prices down, start offering solutions and stop playing games…

Update 3: Captain Ed and I are on the same wavelength.

So let’s have an investigation, but let’s not confine it to ExxonMobil’s profit margin. Let’s expand the probe into the bankruptcy of our energy policy for the past thirty years and the handcuffs we put on ourselves that force us to rely on unstable sources of crude oil and gasoline to meet our energy needs. Let’s start getting realistic about those needs and start proposing rational methods of meeting them. Take the shackles off the US energy industry and allow us to shrug off the mullahs that control the world market.

Update 4: Anchoress and I exchanged some emails on the topic. She doesn’t like the Bush-blaming. - Though I’m not blaming or bashing Bush for the gas prices, just that he’s acting like a Democrat in responding to them… instead of just explaining the concept of market forces in simple terms… like I have.

Update 5: Anchoress highlights an article by Henry Payne that clears up some of the blame:

Congress first mandated the production of 4 billion gallons of ethanol this year (increasing to 7.5 billion in 2012). This arbitrary number is to help wean America from its “oil addiction,” as President Bush puts it. In reality, it is a sop to the powerful farm lobby that makes corn-based ethanol.

Second, the energy bill required that ethanol replace MTBE as an additive in gasoline to meet smog rules in urban areas. Because smog is heaviest in summer, oil companies are refining their “summer blends” now. Already struggling to meet the initial 4 billion gallon mandate, the ethanol industry cannot keep up with the additional demand from the MTBE mandate, resulting in shortages and price spikes.
…
Foreign-made ethanol might help supplies, but Congress has protected farmers and gouged consumers by slapping a 54-cent-per-gallon tariff on imports.

This situation “will all clear up by June,” says Mark Griffin, president of the Michigan Petroleum Association, as the summer blend deadline passes and the refineries still off-line from Hurricane Katrina begin producing again.

But now that the GOP and Democrats have recommitted government to intervening in fuel markets, price hikes will become more likely. Republicans have strayed from free-market principles and created a mother of all fuel mandates that is draining their popularity and credibility.

In short, if you’re upset over high gas prices, don’t look at Big Oil — look at Big Government.

Update 6: Proof President Bush reads TexasRainmaker.com!

President Bush on Tuesday ordered a temporary suspension of environmental rules for gasoline, making it easier for refiners to meet demand and possibly dampen prices at the pump. He also halted for the summer the purchase of crude oil for the government’s emergency reserve.

It’s a good first step in the right direction! Less government is the answer…

Update 7: What?!?!?! Democrats are now going to pretend to be Republicans? (hat tip: Anchoress)

Democrats are set to introduce a measure that would create a “federal gas tax holiday” by eliminating the federal tax on gas and diesel for sixty days, RAW STORY has learned.

The measure, proposed by Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ), would reduce the cost of gas by $0.184 per gallon and the cost of diesel by $0.244 per gallon. The move, aides say, will provide $100 million dollars per day in relief.

It must be an election year.
___________________________

Others:
Wizbang has more.
Confederate Yankee poses an oil-for-illegals policy.

From CNN:

Sources close to the White House said Monday that Fox anchor Tony Snow is likely to accept the job as White House press secretary, succeeding Scott McClellan.

The sources said they expect him to announce his decision within the next few days.

I can’t wait to see his first press conference.

SNOW: Next question, Helen Thomas.

THOMAS: Mr. Snow, why did Bu….

SNOW: Just kidding, next question, Carl Cameron.

There is a woman at St. Luke’s Episcopal Hospital here in Houston that needs help.

In January, the 54-year-old underwent open-heart surgery. The next month she developed bleeding on the brain. Now an ethics committee has recommended removing her ventilator and taking her off life support. But her family is fighting to stop that despite not having the law on their side.

Her story was originally posted by her sister, Melanie Childers at the DemocraticUnderground.com. John Hawkins has picked up the story and contacted several people involved.

The hospital ethics committee met the day before yesterday and concluded that Andrea’s treatment (respirator and dialysis) should be discontinued. We have ten days to move her from that hospital or they will “pull the plug” and let Andrea die. Andrea, until a few days ago, when the physicians decided to increase her pain medication and anesthetize her into unconsciousness, was fully able to make her own medical decisions and had decided that she wanted life saving treatment until she dies naturally. We have learned that this is part of the process, when hospitals decided to declare the “medical futility” of continueing treatment for a patient. But, this is not a Terry Schiavo case; not anything like it. Andrea, when she is not medicated into unconsciousness (and even when she is, and the medication has worn off to some degree) is aware and cognizant. She has suffered no brain damage to the parts of her brain responsible for thought and reason, or speech. She has only suffered loss of some motor control. The reason that the physician gave to medicate her so much is that she is suffering from intractable pain in the sacral region (in other words, she has a bedsore that causes her pain). This is not reason enough, in our books, and we are trying, as we speak, to get Andrea’s medication lowered so that she can speak to us.

According to John, the attorney representing Ms. Clarke is Jerri Ward of Garlo Ward, a law firm based in Austin. Ms. Ward has added this information:

I had her look over this post and she did confirm all the details and added a few more. She said that Andrea Clarke is a widower, with a 23 year old son, and she does not want to die…

The deadline for Andrea Clarke is Sunday and Jerri said she’ll be exploring “all legal avenues” in an effort to stop it, but because of the way the law is written in Texas, she’s not confident she can get Andrea Clarke into a new facility before St. Luke’s Episcopal Hospital terminates Andrea Clarke’s medical care.

It looks like there was a call to protest this weekend which Ms. Childers said, “is very likely to be filmed and get news coverage”. To be honest, I haven’t seen anything about the case on the local news.

This doesn’t appear to be a case where the patient’s wishes are unknown or unclear. It appears from the posts that Andrea Clarke is well aware of what is happening and has made it perfectly clear she wants to live.

Here are some contact numbers if you would like to speak your mind on the subject. Maybe a large outcry will help Ms. Clarke’s fight.

St. Luke’s Episcopal Hospital
6720 Bertner Avenue
Houston, TX
Phone: 832-355-1000
Email

Mayor Bill White
City of Houston
P.O. Box 1562
Houston, TX 77251
Phone: 713.247.2200
Fax: 713-247-1067

Citizens’ Assistance Office
900 Bagby, Public Level
Houston, TX 77002
Richard Cantú, Director
Phone: 713-247-2907

Marvin Zindler
ABC Eyewitness News

Pat Gray
Talk Radio Host
KPRC 950AM

Michael Berry
Houston City Councilman

Sam Malone
Talk Radio Host
KTRH 740AM

Chris Baker
Talk Radio Host
KTRH 740AM

My prayers are with Ms. Clarke and her family.

Update: KHOU is now covering the story.

Update 2: I’ve exchanged emails with the attorney, Jerri Ward. I’ve put a call into other attorneys in Houston that might assist with the filings and helping Ms. Ward navigate the Houston courthouse. If any of my readers can offer such assistance, please contact me a.s.a.p. As this case progresses, you’ll no doubt hear a lot about the 1999 Texas Advance Directives Act. It seems to need some major overhauls. I’ve offered my assistance to Ms. Ward, who is serving on the Advance Directives Coalition which is looking at the law to make changes. Here is Ms. Ward’s blog and specifically her post regarding the “Texas Futile Care Statute“.

____________________________________

Others covering the story:
Wizbang | blogHouston | Michelle Malkin | IMAO | Lifelike Pundits | My VRWC | Blue Crab Boulevard | BlogsforTerri | Chez Diva | Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler

A new study being released shows that blacks don’t trust health care providers, and as a result:

Patients with low trust in their providers may be less likely to comply with treatment, receive recommended screening exams or develop long-term, quality relationships with their physicians.

This just adds to the ever-growing list of things in America that blacks don’t trust. And their distrust continues to lead to self-induced problems.

They don’t trust financial advisors either, and as a result:

“Many black investors have “missed out on this incredible bull market,” says John W. Rogers Jr., founder and CEO of Ariel, which manages close to $2.5 billion for individuals and institutions.

They also don’t trust annual flu shots, and as a result:

“Blacks are 6 percent more likely than whites to die from seasonal flu or pneumonia, a common flu complication, according to the CDC.”

They don’t trust birth control products and, well…

Forty years ago, a government report on the state of the black family in America warned that almost one out of four black children were born to unmarried mothers. Recent figures suggest that now, almost 70 percent of black children are born out of wedlock.

But with race-baiting being a profession to many so-called “black leaders”, it’s really no surprise, is it? These race peddlers make their living off of insuring a racial divide in America, which generally consists of preventing education and information from flowing to “their peeps”.

Instead, they promote the likes of ganster rap music which glorifies prostitution, criminal activity and the further distrust of anyone that isn’t black. They promote wild-ass conspiracy theories about “whitey” - and get help from allies in MSM. They denigrate successful blacks by calling them “house slaves,” depicting them in racist fashion without shame, or just simply break the law to try and trash their credibility.

The so-called “black leaders” promote, and actively foster, the distrust while simultaneously maligning success stories of, and preventing real education for, blacks… because it’s profitable to do so. The so-called “black leaders” are truly looking out for some blacks… themselves! This latest study is just another prime example of their success.

John Kerry was actually speaking about the fired-for-leaking-classified-information-CIA-analyst, Mary McCarthy, the Democrat appointee of a man who pled guilty to stealing and destroying classified documents and who also served as Kerry’s own presidential campaign adviser on foreign policy and national security, when he said:

“If you’re leaking to tell the truth, Americans are going to look at that, at least mitigate or think about what are the consequences that you . . . put on that person.”

…but his point supports the Bush administration in the Plame non-scandal, as well Afterall, a bipartisan Senate committee already found that Wilson lied about who sent him and what he found. And despite the fact that the information was declassified, and thus incapable of being “leaked”, the administration was simply “telling the truth” about who sent Wilson to Niger. According to John Kerry, this is a mitigating factor.

But make no mistake, Kerry was firmly against this leak… before he was for it.

I will be on Allman & Smash in the Morning show tomorrow morning at 7:10am Central.

Click here to listen