Yup. I’m in a very exclusive beta for Twitter’s much talked about new feature lists. How exclusive you ask? Well… I have no idea actually but it seems pretty exclusive given that only 311 of the 3,867,501 who follow Ashton Kutcher have made a list that includes him (click to enlarge):

Well, now that you know how awesomely special I am, here’s the full pictorial break down of what Twitter Lists feature is going to look like (if they don’t change them) when they launch to everybody. First the home page (click to enlarge):

A close up of the new sidebar (click to enlarge):

The new page for people you follow (click to enlarge):

What happens when you click on the new lists button you ask? Why this of course (click to enlarge):

And what do these lists look like you say? Ok. First of all… stop asking pushy ungrateful questions. I’m trying to be nice and show you Twitter’s cool new feature and with each screen shot all I get are more and more questions!!2111!! Secondly… this is what the lists look like (click to enlarge):

Though I have only been using the new feature for a couple of hours this is the internet so I feel the need to express my opinion of it right now. Essentially I think, like everything with Twitter, its a great and innovative idea but its still too buggy. It takes several tries to actually get somebody into one of my lists which is annoying and slows things down A LOT. Once (or rather if) they work out the bugs it should be another great addition to a great service.

Many people on the Left wrongly blame the current recession on the Bush Tax Cuts. They say our budget problem came from these tax cuts “for the rich”. However, as seen in this chart , the immense deficits we are facing come from excessive amounts of government spending, mainly in entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Meanwhile, instead of reeling in this out of control spending, in the past year, our federal government has increased the budget deficit four times the amount it was in the last fiscal year.

In another attack on low taxes, opponents have claimed the government needs the money from tax dollars (you know, since they spend it so very well). What these people do not understand is that tax revenue is not related to tax rates. As show in this chart, in every decade since the 1950s, with average top income tax rates ranging from 36.7% to 90.5%, the tax revenues hovered around 18% of the total Gross Domestic Product. So, now you might ask why don’t we just increase the GDP instead of worrying about tax rates. Good question! Well, the worst way to curb economic growth is to take money away from people. Therefore, with low taxes and decreased government spending, we should be able to not only work our way out of this tough economic period, but also pay off some of our ridiculously high national debt.

But what taxes truly help the economy? While in the past decade we have tried give Americans stimulus checks, they did not create new wealth for the country. Many people simply took the money, and either saved it or paid off debt, neither of which help the economy. On the other hand, reducing marginal tax rates actually helped the economy. In the 1920s, reducing the top income tax rate actually increased the income tax revenue, as seen in this chart. Also, in the 1960s and 1980s, lower marginal tax rates led to increased investment, higher economic growth, and increases in the GDP.

In addition, reducing the capital gains tax actually “pays for itself”. A capital gain occurs when a person invests in either stocks, bonds, or real estate, and that investment turns into a profit. So, a capital gains tax, in general, is a tax on productive behavior, a driver in the economy. The Bush Tax Cuts reduced the tax and that reduction paid for itself, and then some. As seen in this chart, after the 2003 tax cuts, capital gains tax revenues exploded to what the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office predicted. I mean, that makes sense, right? Giving incentives for people to be more productive pushes them harder. And the investments they made are great for businesses who need the investors’ money to grow their business and grow the economy.

Despite these statistics, the Left still opposed to what they call, “tax cuts for the rich”. However, even that statement isn’t true. In 2000, the bottom 40% of the country in terms of income paid 0% of the country’s income tax revenue. Since then, that percentage of people that pay no income tax has increased to 47%. So, how do you give tax cuts to those who don’t pay taxes? Correct, subsidizes. Lawmakers of the Bush Tax Cuts expanded the child tax credit, expanded the earned income tax credit, and lowered the initial tax brackets. The result? That same group of people that paid 0% federal tax now pay -4% federal tax, meaning they receive money. Because of this, the burden of the taxes has shifted to the highest 20% of the earners, as seen in this chart.

With less than two years before these tax cuts expire, we need to make sure they are, at least, renewed. While letting them expire wouldn’t dramatically increase tax revenue, it would harm economic growth at a time that is least affordable. As Brian Riedel, an expert budget analyst says, “Lawmakers should remember that America cannot tax itself to prosperity.” If only they realized…

UPDATE: Shocking new Obama accomplishments discovered!!

UPDATE: I’m humbled by this Michelle Malkin link and while I feel that I don’t deserve it I’m going to accept it anyway…

In case you missed it here it is:

Its crazy isn’t it? It really looks like the military is just picking up some guy and taking him away at first glance… but a second look reveals that the men in the video are wearing different kinds of camouflaged fatigues that many have claimed aren’t up to military standards. Plus the fact that two police officers can be seen at the tail end of the video doesn’t help clear up the situation. And, of course, this picture taken by a University of Pittsburgh photographer doesn’t help matters:

Well… I was really confused about what actually happened in this video so I decided to do a little leg work and find out for sure. First I was able to confirm, through a spokesperson, that the men in the video are NOT from the Pennsylvania National Guard who are on the ground assisting the police in crowd control but are NOT carrying weapons or making ANY arrests.

Next, given that the people in the video aren’t from the Pennsylvania National Guard, I wanted to see what the Police had to say about the video. So I contacted the Pittsburgh Police Department and they gave me the number for the G-20 Joint Information Center which handles press requests on G-20 related security questions.

The G-20 Joint Information Center, which can be reached at 412-402-7630, issued this statement to me which explains exactly what is going on in that video:

The individuals involved in the 9/24/2009 arrest which has appeared online are law enforcement officers from a multi-agency tactical response team assigned to the security operations for the G20.

It is not unusual for tactical team members to wear camouflaged fatigues. The type of fatigues the officers wear designates their unit affiliation. Prior to the arrest, the officers observed this subject vandalizing a local business. Due to the hostile nature of the crowd, officer safety and the safety of the person under arrest, the subject was immediately removed from the area.

So, yes, the video is real. However, it wasn’t the military and the guy wasn’t being kidnapped. Instead he was being arrested for vandalism.

Obama: “bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla *head swivel* bla bla bla *head swivel* bla bla bla bla”

Obama: “bla bla bla bla cleavage bla bla bla in this body bla bla bla”

Obama: “bla bla bla bla eat your vegetables or no dessert India bla bla bla bla”

Obama: “bla bla bla bla bla UN sucks bla bla bla bla UN will save the world bla bla bla bla”

Obama: “bla bla bla bla cold war dead bla bla bla Russia bla bla bla bla test ban treaty bla bla bla”

Obama: “bla bla bla bla peace bla bla enduring peace bla bla bla bla peace bla peace bla UN”

Obama: “bla bla bla bla no Israeli settlements bla bla occupation since 1967 bla bla bla bla Palestinians want peace bla”

Obama: “bla bla bla bla *teleprompter slip up* bla bla bla bla”

Obama: “bla bla bla bla bla wealthy nations killing environment bla bla bla growing nations also evil bla bla bla”

Obama: “bla bla bla bla great depression bla bla greed bla bla excess bla regulation bla bla bla”

Obama: “bla bla change bla bla bla bla bla real change bla bla”

Obama: “bla bla bla bla *pause for half hearted clapping from the audience* bla bla bla”

Obama: “bla bla bla bla bla I admit that America sucked before I was president bla bla bla bla”

Obama: “bla bla bla bla bla thank you bla bla bla *sit down for a second in big ugly chair then get up and leave*”

First, I want to take this time to thank everybody for the outpouring of support that I’ve received up until now. I can’t say thank you enough.

Second, I think it’s important to note, as Ed Morrissey and Instapundit do, that POLITICO easily could have taken a much more civil and decent approach to this if they were really concerned about people confusing my site with theirs… I most certainly would have been open to working with them to figure something out. Now, instead, I’m going to have to wait for legal council to advise me how to go forward.

Third, there are some people saying that they want to buy up something + politico domains to stick it to POLITICO. Obviously I can’t control what you do but personally I don’t think its a great idea. They may very well come after you legally as well… Plus there already are many sites which use something + politico that prove the point anyway.

Fourth, there is a growing call to boycott POLITICO. I just want to make sure that everyone knows I didn’t come up with or push that idea. In my view I just want to put out the facts of what’s going on and let people react as they see fit… and I certainly don’t feel that anybody owes me anything or ought to react in any particular way to what’s happening to me.

Five, given that I don’t believe anybody owes me anything I feel like I should thank everybody again for caring about what’s happening to me and showing their support for me in whatever way they can. It has been extremely heartening.

Six, there have been some people who have expressed interest in donating money to help me defend myself against POLITICO. Again I really appreciate the support but right now I’m looking into pro bono representation (which I have some leads on right now) so I don’t feel right taking donations that might not go toward my defense. If I can’t get pro bono representation I will check out prices from other lawyers and give you guys a number to work towards.

I’ll bring you guys more updates on this situation as soon as they happen… again, thank you so much for your support

They replay this same argument several times and then “demand” that I, within 10 days, stop all use of the label “The College Politico”, literally give them control of my domain name “thecollegepolitico.com”, and write them a letter declaring I will permanently cease and refrain from all future use of “The College Politico” or anything similar to POLITICO.

Just to explain, in case anybody was wondering, when I created my blog I had no intention to draw any relation to POLITICO. I was simply trying to find a snappy way to describe myself, hence The College Politico. And apparently, at least according to POLITICO’s attorney’s, I was too dumb to realize that the noun politico (originating in 1630 according to Websters) wasn’t a word which describes somebody in politics but rather a piece of property owned by a news conglomerate.

I certainly didn’t create it with any odd intention of somehow tricking people into thinking I was affiliated with POLITICO… and I honestly cant see how anyone who visits my site could ever get the idea that I was in any way affiliated with POLITICO. I mean the sites aren’t remotely similar in lay out or content (or enjoyability for that matter). Other than the commonly used noun politico what do we have in common? It’s my understanding, at least, that POLITICO is now and always has been a news organization.

In fact, the trademark they hold for POLITICO and CAMPUS POLITICO is only applicable in newspaper reporting about capitol politics or “news and information via the internet” about, essentially, capitol politics. Is that what I do here at The College Politico? It’s really hard for me to say yes or no because that’s such an absurdly broad net… is my opinion on news considered news and information? I wouldn’t say so… would you?

Another, perhaps more interesting, question that arises from POLITICO’s trademarks is the specific nature of them. You see, they don’t just own POLITICO and CAMPUS POLITICO, they own WALL STREET POLITICO, HOLLYWOOD POLITICO, MOBILEPOLITICO, LA POLITICA, EL POLITICO, and POLITICO TV. Now if they really believe, as they argue, that use of the term politico is a violation of their trademark then why do they keep trademarking such specific phrases including the term? It’s also interesting that someone was able to claim the trademark for PR POLITICO.com well after POLITICO had been trademarked… how does that work in all of this?

Quite frankly though I question their ability to trademark a commonly used term like politico and if I have the resources I would like to challenge it. They most certainly didn’t create the term politico or define it so why in the world should they have specific right to it?

In my opinion this seems like an ugly attempt to intimidate me into handing over a brand which I’ve worked extremely hard to build. A simple google search shows that the term “Politico” is used in a myriad of other politically focused sites which makes me feel as though they are singling me out.

Unfortunately, I’m not a lawyer and I have next to no money to spend on one. That’s where I really need help… does anybody know a good lawyer that might want to help me out for little or no money? Or will I have to give up fighting before I’ve even started?

UPDATE: I want to make sure that I say thank you to everyone who has posted about this and is supporting me… here is the list so far (I’ll update it if more people jump in):
Patterico
Ace of Spades HQ
Instapundit
HotAir
Vermontaigne
Riehl World View
Instapundit (making a point about the word pundit)
Stop the ACLU
Freedom & Liberty
The Sundries Shack
NewsBusters (it should be noted that they are merely reporting the facts and that I write for them)
Daily Pundit
Doubleplusundead
Blogs For Victory
The Minority Report (cross posted at Seeking Liberty)
Yid With Lid
Submitted to a Candid World

I also want to thank everybody whose given me support on twitter, through email, and in comments. I can’t express how much gratitude I have for all the kind words. Thank you.