It's not just that the penalty is cheaper. The penalty is also predictable several years out. Even if the penalty were somewhat more expensive, many companies would opt for it because they can make their business plans based on it. The cost of insurance might be cheaper now, but there's no way to know how much it would cost several years out.

I'm actually glad to see this. It looks like Obama is using up all his ammunition now. What will he be shooting come September and October?

This really isn't all that new. I've seen lefties say that Deniers should be put on trial for Crimes against Humanity.

He'll still be able to buy one in five years, because there will still be unsold ones on the car dealer lots by then.

That judge isn't actually a Muslim. That aspect of the story was misreported. But that doesn't excuse how he behaved.

That's not chauvinism, that's socialism.

The discussion really should begin with a basic question about just how much protection there should be for intellectual property -- such as just how long copyrights really should last, and how comprehensive copyright protection should be. But it won't.

I think he's already decided. (To kill it.) But he doesn't want to reveal that decision until after the election. It's a cynical move on his part.

It goes even deeper. Since bills to raise revenue have to originate in the House, then if the Dems get the Republicans to agree to tax increases, the Republican-dominated House would be the one to write the new tax proposal. Double win: the Dems would get more money to waste, and the details of who got soaked could be blamed on the Republicans.

But the law mandating a minimum percentage of ethanol in car fuel remains in force, doesn't it?