I usually don’t watch the local news. But last night I had the T.V. on ABC watching the end of Monday Night Football. And since I wanted to find out the weather forecast, I just left it there.
I was a bit startled as the anchor breathlessly dove in with the lead story: Authorities are investigating a possible “terrorist attack” on a water supply affecting hundreds of people camping in the Cherokee National Forest.
“Wow,” I thought, “this must be a huge story.” Have biological agents been found? From Iraq? Are people being rushed to the hospital? Have any died?
The answer is “no,” to all of the above. The dramatic potential terrorist attack in this case turns out to be someone who “jammed rocks and sticks into the reservoir” which supplies the campground.
I call that kind of thing “vandalism.” But given the media’s need to hype things up for ratings, I guess people throwing rocks into the water must now be viewed as possible terrorists.

You may or may not agree with PETA’s political agenda, but I don’t think you can fault PETA’s effectiveness in attracting attention to its causes. At least not this one.

Perhaps the defendant has courtroom skills I’m unaware of, but I’m guessing this is a bad idea:

Sniper suspect John Allen Muhammad won a surprise request Monday to represent himself at trial and he delivered a rambling opening statement in which he spoke about the meaning of truth.

Elsewhere, we have yet another ten commandments case underway (via How Appealing). This part amuses me:

Jon Graham, worship pastor of Barrow’s Bethlehem First Baptist Church, said there are no plans for organized support today. But he said his church is encouraging aid for the Barrow legal defense.
“We are trying to raise $250,000,” he said. “We’re not there, but we have got a lot of folks saying they’re thinking about it, praying and deciding how to give.”

Think about this solely from an economics standpoint. Let’s assume you’re someone who has a burden that people read or learn about the ten commandments. Let’s say further than you had a $250,000 budget to advance your cause. How would you do it?
I could be wrong, but I’d say you won’t get the most bang for your buck using all that money to see that a plaque gets hung in a courthouse somewhere. Imagine, instead, that you use it instead to mail a nice brochure out to people in the county. If you did a mailing at $1 per address, you could reach 250,000 households. Which I suspect is a lot more people than would see any display in the courthouse for a long, long time.
But then this really isn’t about teaching people about the ten commandments, is it? It’s about a religious political agenda. And therein is the problem.

Got $29.99 to invest? How about purchasing real estate . . . on the moon?
Yes, it’s hard to believe, but thanks to the fine folks at the Lunar Embassy, your dream of owning a lunar acre can come true.
For this low price, will you receive: (1) a deed for your tract; (2) a moon map to locate it; (3) a registration card (registration is key step which will enable you to participate in up-coming Moon elections); and (4) mineral rights to your land (in case oil or some mineral is discovered there).
Not pursuaded yet?

The Moon is a symbol of hope, romance, achievement, wonder, and mysticism. There is nothing more symbolic and romantic on Earth one can give to a loved one. When you buy property on the Moon, please enjoy it, because that is what this really is all about. You can look into the night sky and say, “I own a piece of that”!

Don’t wait. Join the “over 2,000.000+ people” (sales figure precisely measured to 1/1,000th of a person) who could be your neighbors on the moon–if only there was a way to get there. Satisfaction with your moon acre is guaranteed or your money back.
Via spam.

So says U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow, following up on his July comment that the U.S. economy was “coiled like a spring.” That’s a nice line for the economic cheerleaders, though I suspect most job seekers have yet to feel a bounce from the alleged uncoiling.
But the comments Snow made which will draw the greatest attention are those regarding U.S. interest rates:

AMERICAN interest rates are set to rise over the next few months, one of President Bush�s most senior officials told The Times this weekend.
However, far from being a dampener on the economy, John Snow, the US Treasury Secretary, said that Washington would welcome such a move because it would underline the strength of the country�s growth prospects.
. . .
Asked about the impact of such rapid growth on interest rates, Mr Snow said: �Interest rates are the price of capital. As profits increase, there is going to be a need for a capital-rationing process.
�I�d be frustrated and concerned if there were not some upward movement (in rates).� He rejected the widely held view on Wall Street, that the Fed never raises interest rates before a presidential election. �It is amazing how you get this sort of mythology without any factual backing,� he said.

The article states that Snow “refrained from discussing monetary decisions, which are left to the Federal Reserve Board.” But the article is somewhat ambiguous on whether Snow was speaking merely about the direction of interest rates, or also about monetary policy. If the outlook was on the latter, says Brad DeLong, it’s misguided for three reasons:

(1) The Federal Reserve might not follow the prediction, leaving the forecaster out on a limb;
(2) If the forecast turns out to be true, it appears as if the Fed isn’t truly independent and may be succuming to political pressure; and
(3) The comments might undermine current Fed policy.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the bond market, which has already experienced tremendously volatility over the past several months.