Transportation Update

Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood came before the White House press corpse with his new solution to sequester, which sounded like something out of a disaster movie.  In an apparent spirit of bi-partisanship, or maybe thuggish Illinois politics, he urged them to go see the movie Lincoln:

"I suggest my colleagues on the Republican side go see Lincoln," LaHood said, noting that in the Spielberg film, people on both sides talked to each other.

That led him into chiding them for not coming to the table but he wouldn't admit urging any of them to raise taxes to allow Obama to win another issue.  One has to wonder if he's been getting together with Powell and Hagel for beers to ponder strategy and reminisce about the good old days of the GOP when they were all Democrats.         

At least it was a lively interview, unlike Carney's usual pompous dreck. When asked about effects on Amtrak he said 'none'.  That's interesting, since the DOT doesn't just house the FAA but also has regulatory control over the nation's highways, waterways and railroads.  Won't freight trains suddenly fly off the tracks across the country if taxes aren't raised?  Won't barges crash into bridges?  Won't Grandma and Grandpa fly off the road as highways suddenly crumble and bridges collapse unless the stubborn GOP does their patriotic duty and raises taxes for the second time in three months?

And to what level should taxes be raised anyway?  Does the administration want to balloon the top federal marginal rates above 40 percent?  If so, to what level?  And why does Obama only want to
"strengthen the middle class"?  Doesn't he care about strengthening the lower class?       

Finally, people like Carney and administration flaks and the president himself keep calling tax increases 'revenue increases'.   So why didn't they call the Bush tax cuts "Bush revenue cuts"?   Why is the word revenue only used by Democrats when talking about tax increases but not cuts (yes, it's rhetorical)?