Mr. Dilettante
It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood.Mr. Dhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13920907647566015611noreply@blogger.comBlogger2859125
Updated: 2 hours 28 min ago
Vikings to Amorphous Parcel of Land Somewhere East of the Metrodome?
There really hasn't been a lot of news on the Vikings stadium front these days, despite the kabuki going on in various locales:
Appealing for City Council support for a new Vikings stadium, Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak surrounded himself with construction workers on Monday and said the project would create more jobs than any "single action that you can take."
Rybak and Barb Johnson, the City Council president, did little to disguise that the press briefing was an overt attempt to apply political pressure for the project, which does not appear to have the backing of a council majority. Rybak did not directly answer when asked whether he had majority support for a city subsidy package and chose instead to remain optimistic about the project's political chances.In other words, they are talking about a project in which there is no land secured, no money secured and the political support needed to make it happen is, at best, theoretical:
"The momentum is on our side at City Hall," Rybak said. "We need to get the last couple of votes there."
But Rybak and Johnson were joined by just one other member of the 13-person City Council at Monday's briefing, Diane Hofstede.
"It's no slam dunk," Rybak said. "Clearly, we have issues."
No kidding. We could call the new stadium the Hallucinationdome, perhaps. Oops, we shouldn't forget the corporate sponsorship. Perhaps it could be the Wells Fargo Hallucinationdome or something.
Meanwhile, back in Ramsey County, "work" continues on a stadium:
On Tuesday, Ramsey County is expected to consider a $20.6 million contract for soil cleanup at the former munitions plant in Arden Hills -- the Vikings preferred stadium site -- that would cap the cost for hazardous material abatement, demolition and remediation. The action would move the county closer to buying the 430-acre site from the federal government for $28.5 million.
Ramsey County already is seeking bids from architects for the stadium.
But both actions do not deal with a larger issue: How Ramsey County would raise $350 million locally for the project.Yeah, that money thing is pesky, isn't it? I will say this -- getting the remediation figured out for the Arden Hills site is a necessary task for the county, regardless of whether or not this project goes forward. The land will be developed in some way, eventually. Whether the land will (or should) become Zygi World is another matter, but in any event the work will need to take place.
Nothing has really changed, of course. The bottom line is the same as it has always been -- the Vikings will pay a certain amount of money to build a stadium and the state of Minnesota will have to pick up the rest. The "local portion" of the money is not going to materialize in either Minneapolis or Arden Hills. There's no reason to believe that the Minneapolis City Council is going to ignore its own charter and there's equally no reason to believe that the citizens of Ramsey County will agree to tax the snot out of themselves. So it's up to the state to come up with the money in either event. All the posturing and kabuki press conferences in the world won't change that.
Appealing for City Council support for a new Vikings stadium, Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak surrounded himself with construction workers on Monday and said the project would create more jobs than any "single action that you can take."
Rybak and Barb Johnson, the City Council president, did little to disguise that the press briefing was an overt attempt to apply political pressure for the project, which does not appear to have the backing of a council majority. Rybak did not directly answer when asked whether he had majority support for a city subsidy package and chose instead to remain optimistic about the project's political chances.In other words, they are talking about a project in which there is no land secured, no money secured and the political support needed to make it happen is, at best, theoretical:
"The momentum is on our side at City Hall," Rybak said. "We need to get the last couple of votes there."
But Rybak and Johnson were joined by just one other member of the 13-person City Council at Monday's briefing, Diane Hofstede.
"It's no slam dunk," Rybak said. "Clearly, we have issues."
No kidding. We could call the new stadium the Hallucinationdome, perhaps. Oops, we shouldn't forget the corporate sponsorship. Perhaps it could be the Wells Fargo Hallucinationdome or something.
Meanwhile, back in Ramsey County, "work" continues on a stadium:
On Tuesday, Ramsey County is expected to consider a $20.6 million contract for soil cleanup at the former munitions plant in Arden Hills -- the Vikings preferred stadium site -- that would cap the cost for hazardous material abatement, demolition and remediation. The action would move the county closer to buying the 430-acre site from the federal government for $28.5 million.
Ramsey County already is seeking bids from architects for the stadium.
But both actions do not deal with a larger issue: How Ramsey County would raise $350 million locally for the project.Yeah, that money thing is pesky, isn't it? I will say this -- getting the remediation figured out for the Arden Hills site is a necessary task for the county, regardless of whether or not this project goes forward. The land will be developed in some way, eventually. Whether the land will (or should) become Zygi World is another matter, but in any event the work will need to take place.
Nothing has really changed, of course. The bottom line is the same as it has always been -- the Vikings will pay a certain amount of money to build a stadium and the state of Minnesota will have to pick up the rest. The "local portion" of the money is not going to materialize in either Minneapolis or Arden Hills. There's no reason to believe that the Minneapolis City Council is going to ignore its own charter and there's equally no reason to believe that the citizens of Ramsey County will agree to tax the snot out of themselves. So it's up to the state to come up with the money in either event. All the posturing and kabuki press conferences in the world won't change that.
Categories: Dominated
The Maltese Frog
You gotta convince me that you know what this is all about, that you aren't just fiddling around hoping it'll all... come out right in the end!
-- Humphrey Bogart as Sam Spade, "The Maltese Falcon"
So do you remember Douglas Kmiec? He is the former Reagan hand who is quite noisily Catholic and was leading the charge to get Catholics to support Barack Obama in 2008. For his many labors on behalf of The One, Kmiec was rewarded with an ambassadorship to Malta, a post he held until last year. It didn't always go so well for Kmiec, who was involved in a fatal traffic accident that killed a nun, and who was essentially forced out because the State Department felt he was too busy writing polemics and not spending enough time meeting with the fourth undersecretary of Sidney Greenstreet, or whatever it is they do in Malta these days.
Despite all that, Kmiec has remained loyal and has been willing to carry water for Obama, even as rumblings concerning Obamacare's potential impact on Catholic healthcare were becoming increasingly dire. As recently as November, Kmiec let fly with a defense of his benefactor in the pages of the National Catholic Register:
At present, however, both political parties are remiss in not reminding the body politic how the principle of religious liberty actually operates. This has permitted some media voices, like the Washington Post's Michael Gerson, to perceive religious hostility where there is none. There is no violation of religious liberty when HHS announces a temporary (or permanent) regulation requiring all employers -- religious or nonreligious, Catholic or not -- to provide employees with an insurance benefit for artificial contraception. Yes, it would be more congenial if the HHS administrative process adopted the Catholic view of contraception over that of other churches, but that declination was a choice the church herself since Vatican II has conceded belonged to Caesar. Had the HHS regulation gone farther and demanded a religious employer to affirmatively endorse or require the use of artificial contraception or any other choice contrary to its own teaching or face a penalty, that would violate the principle of religious liberty.
While there is no constitutional violation of religious liberty in the HHS regulation requiring that coverage allow for the informed choice of all consumers, and therefore, HHS is not duty-bound to allow a Catholic employer exemption, why HHS went out of its way to promulgate an unduly narrow religious exemption intruding upon religious employer hiring policies and their ability to be of service to Catholics and non-Catholics alike illustrates a type of blunder-headedness on the part of some Obama subordinate officers playing into the hands of single-issue Catholics and other partisans. The intrusive exemption shows more disrespect for faith than the president's own value commitments.In other words, Kmiec was hoping that his friends would stop making him look bad.
Well, as we know, the decision came down. The mandate is in place and now Kmiec is stuck:
Kmiec, who served in the Reagan administration, noted that he urged Obama last year to grant an exemption, explaining that such a move “would be an opportunity to be more sensitive to religious freedom than the law requires.”
Asked whether he will back Obama in 2012, Kmiec replied in an email, "Until I have an opportunity to speak with the president, I am for now (unhappily) without a candidate."
It turns out that Michael Gerson was right after all. So the Maltese Frog wants to speak with the scorpion he carried across the river. Good luck with that, Mr. Kmiec. I do hope that the president does take your call.
I certainly wish you would have invented a more reasonable story. I felt distinctly like an idiot repeating it.
-- Peter Lorre as Joel Cairo, "The Maltese Falcon"
-- Humphrey Bogart as Sam Spade, "The Maltese Falcon"
So do you remember Douglas Kmiec? He is the former Reagan hand who is quite noisily Catholic and was leading the charge to get Catholics to support Barack Obama in 2008. For his many labors on behalf of The One, Kmiec was rewarded with an ambassadorship to Malta, a post he held until last year. It didn't always go so well for Kmiec, who was involved in a fatal traffic accident that killed a nun, and who was essentially forced out because the State Department felt he was too busy writing polemics and not spending enough time meeting with the fourth undersecretary of Sidney Greenstreet, or whatever it is they do in Malta these days.
Despite all that, Kmiec has remained loyal and has been willing to carry water for Obama, even as rumblings concerning Obamacare's potential impact on Catholic healthcare were becoming increasingly dire. As recently as November, Kmiec let fly with a defense of his benefactor in the pages of the National Catholic Register:
At present, however, both political parties are remiss in not reminding the body politic how the principle of religious liberty actually operates. This has permitted some media voices, like the Washington Post's Michael Gerson, to perceive religious hostility where there is none. There is no violation of religious liberty when HHS announces a temporary (or permanent) regulation requiring all employers -- religious or nonreligious, Catholic or not -- to provide employees with an insurance benefit for artificial contraception. Yes, it would be more congenial if the HHS administrative process adopted the Catholic view of contraception over that of other churches, but that declination was a choice the church herself since Vatican II has conceded belonged to Caesar. Had the HHS regulation gone farther and demanded a religious employer to affirmatively endorse or require the use of artificial contraception or any other choice contrary to its own teaching or face a penalty, that would violate the principle of religious liberty.
While there is no constitutional violation of religious liberty in the HHS regulation requiring that coverage allow for the informed choice of all consumers, and therefore, HHS is not duty-bound to allow a Catholic employer exemption, why HHS went out of its way to promulgate an unduly narrow religious exemption intruding upon religious employer hiring policies and their ability to be of service to Catholics and non-Catholics alike illustrates a type of blunder-headedness on the part of some Obama subordinate officers playing into the hands of single-issue Catholics and other partisans. The intrusive exemption shows more disrespect for faith than the president's own value commitments.In other words, Kmiec was hoping that his friends would stop making him look bad.
Well, as we know, the decision came down. The mandate is in place and now Kmiec is stuck:
Kmiec, who served in the Reagan administration, noted that he urged Obama last year to grant an exemption, explaining that such a move “would be an opportunity to be more sensitive to religious freedom than the law requires.”
Asked whether he will back Obama in 2012, Kmiec replied in an email, "Until I have an opportunity to speak with the president, I am for now (unhappily) without a candidate."
It turns out that Michael Gerson was right after all. So the Maltese Frog wants to speak with the scorpion he carried across the river. Good luck with that, Mr. Kmiec. I do hope that the president does take your call.
I certainly wish you would have invented a more reasonable story. I felt distinctly like an idiot repeating it.
-- Peter Lorre as Joel Cairo, "The Maltese Falcon"
Categories: Dominated
Caucus Time
Tuesday is caucus night in Minnesota and I'll be going to mine, which takes place at Mounds View High School.
What I don't know, even yet, is who will get my support. It's a difficult decision among four flawed candidates:
What I don't know, even yet, is who will get my support. It's a difficult decision among four flawed candidates:
- Mitt Romney is not consistent and while he's less apologetic to be a Republican than, say, Jon Huntsman was, his only real conviction seems to be that Mitt Romney ought to run things.
- Newt Gingrich is a loose cannon. He's a great guy for generating ideas, but the job description is leading the executive branch of the federal government, not running a public policy seminar.
- Ron Paul is correct about monetary issues, but his foreign policy isn't realistic. You can regret, as I do, the extent to which the United States has become an overextended imperial power, but you can't just walk away from the empire.
- Rick Santorum seems the sort who has no issue with big government, so long as it can be directed to his interests.
Categories: Dominated
The Road to Damascus
Things continue to get worse in Syria. If this dispatch from the Telegraph is accurate, things could get even more ugly:
In his first full-length newspaper interview, General Mustafa al-Sheikh, who has taken refuge in Turkey, gave an apocalyptic insider's view of the state of the regime – despite its attempt to reassert control this weekend.
He said only a third of the army was at combat readiness due to defections or absenteeism, while remaining troops were demoralised, most of its Sunni officers had fled, been arrested, or sidelined, and its equipment was degraded.
"The situation is now very dangerous and threatens to explode across the whole region, like a nuclear reaction," he said.I'm going to hope that he was using "nuclear" metaphorically.
We have no good options here. There's neither the will nor the wallet for the United States to get involved with this mess, which is now pretty much a full-blown civil war, and frankly I don't see that it would lead to anything other than more death for American soldiers, without any chance of making things better there.
So what do we learn from this? I suspect that events are in the saddle, much more so than they have been in the postwar world. If you think you know what's going to happen, you are almost certainly wrong.
In his first full-length newspaper interview, General Mustafa al-Sheikh, who has taken refuge in Turkey, gave an apocalyptic insider's view of the state of the regime – despite its attempt to reassert control this weekend.
He said only a third of the army was at combat readiness due to defections or absenteeism, while remaining troops were demoralised, most of its Sunni officers had fled, been arrested, or sidelined, and its equipment was degraded.
"The situation is now very dangerous and threatens to explode across the whole region, like a nuclear reaction," he said.I'm going to hope that he was using "nuclear" metaphorically.
We have no good options here. There's neither the will nor the wallet for the United States to get involved with this mess, which is now pretty much a full-blown civil war, and frankly I don't see that it would lead to anything other than more death for American soldiers, without any chance of making things better there.
So what do we learn from this? I suspect that events are in the saddle, much more so than they have been in the postwar world. If you think you know what's going to happen, you are almost certainly wrong.
Categories: Dominated
Benster and D Pick Your Game -- There's Only One Left Edition
Welcome back my friends, to the show that never ends. First, we need to do a bit of housekeeping. I noticed that my 2nd cousin Dan, who often comments on the blog, was mad at me for not picking the Pro Bowl.
He did mention something about that, yes.
Well, while I don't want to start a family feud with my own kin, I need to explain something to our beloved cousin. I don't pick fake games! This is also why we never pick Iowa State games, or Lawrence University games, in this venue. Well, we might pick Lawrence if they play Beloit, but we'd prefer to avoid that.
What do you have against Iowa State?
Nothing, although I've noticed that Dan is a Cyclone fan so we need to give him a little grief, like we do to Gino. But now we have to turn our attention away from cheap shots and instead consider the football game in Indianapolis. So I heard that it was the New York Football Giants playing the New England Patriots. So many ways to approach this. But I have the best way, the way of the Benster. Watch me work!
New York Giants (+3) vs. New England Patriots, at Lucas Oil Stadium, Indianapolis, Indiana. Did someone say Indiana? Well, time to break out R. Dean Taylor!
Oh, how can you refuse it? Lord, I can't go back there. Of course I've not spent a lot of time in Indiana, but that doesn't stop me from knowing how to pick this game. This New England team has an amazing offense, but also has a terrible defense. I don't know if you've noticed this, but they are so short on defense that they've been running out a wide receiver named Julian Edelman as a nickel back. Edelman is a poor man's Wes Welker and might be able to contribute on offense, but do you think he'll be able to cover Hakeem Nicks? Or Victor Cruz? Heck, I'm not sure he could cover Pablo Cruise. The old dude told me to stick that one in there -- I don't usually listen to lame stuff like that. But anyway, back to my brilliant commentary. If Rob Gronkowski can't go full speed, the Patriots are going to have problems. Welker is a great player, but he can't do it by himself. Tom Brady is still awfully good, but it looked to me like he was a step slow against the Ravens in the AFC Championship game. And the Giants get after quarterbacks. Giants 27, Pats 10.
All of those points are spot-on. But it's funny -- everyone I've seen has been picking the Giants, yet the wise guys in Vegas still are giving the Giants 3 points. What do they know that we don't? I think what they know is that the Patriots have two things going for them. First, this is probably the last, best chance this particular team has to get the glory, since Brady is getting up there in age. Second, Bill Belichick is pretty good when he has an extra week to gameplan an opponent. I'm not confident in this pick, but I think Brady gets one more ring. Patriots 31, Giants 24.
Well, that's it for this season. It's been a fun season, although I'm not sure why, all of a sudden, this post has been filled with bad 70s soft rock. I mean, we don't like this stuff very much at all. By the way, don't click on any of those links that the old dude polluted my comments with. He's a very mean old man. Seriously, I beg of you, don't click on those links. Or this one. It's like listening to Lite FM and you really, really don't want to do that. Ben out!
He did mention something about that, yes.
Well, while I don't want to start a family feud with my own kin, I need to explain something to our beloved cousin. I don't pick fake games! This is also why we never pick Iowa State games, or Lawrence University games, in this venue. Well, we might pick Lawrence if they play Beloit, but we'd prefer to avoid that.
What do you have against Iowa State?
Nothing, although I've noticed that Dan is a Cyclone fan so we need to give him a little grief, like we do to Gino. But now we have to turn our attention away from cheap shots and instead consider the football game in Indianapolis. So I heard that it was the New York Football Giants playing the New England Patriots. So many ways to approach this. But I have the best way, the way of the Benster. Watch me work!
New York Giants (+3) vs. New England Patriots, at Lucas Oil Stadium, Indianapolis, Indiana. Did someone say Indiana? Well, time to break out R. Dean Taylor!
Oh, how can you refuse it? Lord, I can't go back there. Of course I've not spent a lot of time in Indiana, but that doesn't stop me from knowing how to pick this game. This New England team has an amazing offense, but also has a terrible defense. I don't know if you've noticed this, but they are so short on defense that they've been running out a wide receiver named Julian Edelman as a nickel back. Edelman is a poor man's Wes Welker and might be able to contribute on offense, but do you think he'll be able to cover Hakeem Nicks? Or Victor Cruz? Heck, I'm not sure he could cover Pablo Cruise. The old dude told me to stick that one in there -- I don't usually listen to lame stuff like that. But anyway, back to my brilliant commentary. If Rob Gronkowski can't go full speed, the Patriots are going to have problems. Welker is a great player, but he can't do it by himself. Tom Brady is still awfully good, but it looked to me like he was a step slow against the Ravens in the AFC Championship game. And the Giants get after quarterbacks. Giants 27, Pats 10.
All of those points are spot-on. But it's funny -- everyone I've seen has been picking the Giants, yet the wise guys in Vegas still are giving the Giants 3 points. What do they know that we don't? I think what they know is that the Patriots have two things going for them. First, this is probably the last, best chance this particular team has to get the glory, since Brady is getting up there in age. Second, Bill Belichick is pretty good when he has an extra week to gameplan an opponent. I'm not confident in this pick, but I think Brady gets one more ring. Patriots 31, Giants 24.
Well, that's it for this season. It's been a fun season, although I'm not sure why, all of a sudden, this post has been filled with bad 70s soft rock. I mean, we don't like this stuff very much at all. By the way, don't click on any of those links that the old dude polluted my comments with. He's a very mean old man. Seriously, I beg of you, don't click on those links. Or this one. It's like listening to Lite FM and you really, really don't want to do that. Ben out!
Categories: Dominated
Who are the real RINOs, anyway?
My friend and unwitting mentor Mitch Berg has had an interesting go of it in recent days. He wrote a piece and a followup piece concerning how disgruntled Republicans might consider dealing with the likelihood that Mitt Romney, who is at best unsteadily conservative, might become the standard bearer for the Republican Party in this election cycle. The first article was later picked up on the big conservative website HotAir and has received, as of this writing, over 480 comments.
As is always the case with Mitch's work, the only real thing to do is read the pieces in their entirety, but I want to riff on one particular issue. In the second piece, Mitch talks about the etymology of the all-purpose epithet "RINO," with tongue somewhat in cheek:
First, “RINO” has become a synonym for “Not as conservative as me”, whoever you are – and by that definition, most of you are RINOs. Sez me.
Just so. Because Mitch's counsel is to stay involved in the process no matter what, he's getting labeled a RINO by some dyspeptic conservatives who haunt the comments sections at his place and at HotAir. These purists don't want to deal with the tainted RINOs who conspire to keep the true conservative voice and vision from gaining success.
So what is a RINO, anyway? The traditional meaning of RINO is "Republican in Name Only." In most cases, the individuals who get tagged with the name are those Republicans who tend to be moderate, like Romney, John McCain, Orrin Hatch et al.
They are called RINOs because they aren't always reliably conservative on any number of issues. It's fair to say that they aren't always reliable, because history proves this out. What tends to frustrate conservatives is that the Romneys and McCains of the world wield a lot of influence within the party and have tended to frustrate conservative aspirations. But why does that happen, anyway? Let's think about the reasons, which are pretty obvious:
OK – so let’s say Romney really is as bad as you all want us to believe he is. And let’s say he’s inevitable. Your choices then are “stay home” or “do what you’d do if Obama was going to win – try to negate his power and influence by taking control of Congress”. Why, precisely, should you not then be working to flip the Senate and extend our lead in the House/ Because the opportunity is there, folks, to not just flip Congress completely against either Obama or a hypothetical “moderate” Romney, but flip it to a version of the GOP that, so far, has been pretty Beltway-proof, and fairly dedicated to the mission for which they were sent to GOP by the Tea Party and a newly-resurgent conservative movement in the first place; to govern like conservatives. Keeping them that way is our job. Provided we don’t “stay home” and “teach everyone a lesson”. Because the only “lesson” you “teach” by staying home is that you’re unreliable and marginal. Don’t be that.And that is the point. If you aren't willing to put in the effort, and aren't willing to do what it takes to hold moderate Republicans to a conservative standard, they have no incentive to listen to you. The John McCains and Mitt Romneys are going to stay in the arena, no matter what. It's what they do.
And guess what -- because they are in the arena, they get to define what the Republican Party means. Conservatives who sit around and kvetch and impose purity tests? Well, they get squat. Unless pressure is brought to bear, the McCains and Romneys will do what they see fit, which isn't necessarily following a conservative course of action. And they do this because, all too often, the people who have their ear are moderates, or even liberals. It's human nature to pay attention to those who pay attention to you. Moderates and liberals stay in the game.
Yes, some conservatives stay in the game, but too often conservatives go back to their plows like Cincinnatus. There's nothing inherently wrong with that -- politics are a necessary evil, at best, for many of us. But we have to own the reality; conservatives aren't effective when we leave the battlefield. We need to understand that the only way you can make change, and sustain change, is to get in the arena and stay there. The way you can control the Mitt Romneys of the world is to make sure they understand you are vigilant and that you aren't going away.
So how do you do that? Well, if you are in Minnesota, you have a precinct caucus to attend on Tuesday. If you live in HD50B, you should go to Mounds View High School. I'll be there and if you live in our district, which includes New Brighton, Arden Hills and portions of Shoreview and Fridley, you should be there, too. To do anything else makes you, well, a RINO.
As is always the case with Mitch's work, the only real thing to do is read the pieces in their entirety, but I want to riff on one particular issue. In the second piece, Mitch talks about the etymology of the all-purpose epithet "RINO," with tongue somewhat in cheek:
First, “RINO” has become a synonym for “Not as conservative as me”, whoever you are – and by that definition, most of you are RINOs. Sez me.
Just so. Because Mitch's counsel is to stay involved in the process no matter what, he's getting labeled a RINO by some dyspeptic conservatives who haunt the comments sections at his place and at HotAir. These purists don't want to deal with the tainted RINOs who conspire to keep the true conservative voice and vision from gaining success.
So what is a RINO, anyway? The traditional meaning of RINO is "Republican in Name Only." In most cases, the individuals who get tagged with the name are those Republicans who tend to be moderate, like Romney, John McCain, Orrin Hatch et al.
They are called RINOs because they aren't always reliably conservative on any number of issues. It's fair to say that they aren't always reliable, because history proves this out. What tends to frustrate conservatives is that the Romneys and McCains of the world wield a lot of influence within the party and have tended to frustrate conservative aspirations. But why does that happen, anyway? Let's think about the reasons, which are pretty obvious:
- Say what you want about John McCain's fidelity to principle, but there's one thing that is absolutely true about his political career -- he's always shown up. His dedication to the art of politics is beyond dispute.
- Same thing goes for Romney and Hatch. They have stayed involved in the process. Romney, bless his heart, has been running for president without interruption for the past 6-8 years.
- As Mitch points out, the power goes to the people who show up. There's long been a tendency among conservatives to only get involved in politics when something riles them up. I've referred to this in the past as the Cincinnatus model, after the early Roman stateman who came to the aid of Rome then left office after he'd defeated the rival tribes that were threatening Rome. A lot of conservatives aren't especially interested in politics for its own sake, but get involved only when a threat emerges. It is this spirit that animates the Tea Party.
- Although I write about politics a lot, I tend to keep it at arms length. I participate sporadically at the local level, but I've never been to the state convention and really don't have any desire to do much past the BPOU level. I suspect a lot of people feel the same way and the evidence backs that up -- ask anyone involved in politics at the state level how much help they get to move their agenda and you'll hear any number of laments.
- Do I personally feel guilty about my lack of involvement? Sometimes, yes, but not enough to change what I do. I'd rather do things with my kids, or read a book or listen to music. While I do not like the way the larger world works and use this blog and other venues to raise my voice in protest, my own little corner of the world tends to be pretty pleasant, most of the time.
- So riddle me this -- if you are like me, a conservative who only dabbles in politics, on what basis do you have the right to label others as RINOs? Mitch makes the point quite clearly:
OK – so let’s say Romney really is as bad as you all want us to believe he is. And let’s say he’s inevitable. Your choices then are “stay home” or “do what you’d do if Obama was going to win – try to negate his power and influence by taking control of Congress”. Why, precisely, should you not then be working to flip the Senate and extend our lead in the House/ Because the opportunity is there, folks, to not just flip Congress completely against either Obama or a hypothetical “moderate” Romney, but flip it to a version of the GOP that, so far, has been pretty Beltway-proof, and fairly dedicated to the mission for which they were sent to GOP by the Tea Party and a newly-resurgent conservative movement in the first place; to govern like conservatives. Keeping them that way is our job. Provided we don’t “stay home” and “teach everyone a lesson”. Because the only “lesson” you “teach” by staying home is that you’re unreliable and marginal. Don’t be that.And that is the point. If you aren't willing to put in the effort, and aren't willing to do what it takes to hold moderate Republicans to a conservative standard, they have no incentive to listen to you. The John McCains and Mitt Romneys are going to stay in the arena, no matter what. It's what they do.
And guess what -- because they are in the arena, they get to define what the Republican Party means. Conservatives who sit around and kvetch and impose purity tests? Well, they get squat. Unless pressure is brought to bear, the McCains and Romneys will do what they see fit, which isn't necessarily following a conservative course of action. And they do this because, all too often, the people who have their ear are moderates, or even liberals. It's human nature to pay attention to those who pay attention to you. Moderates and liberals stay in the game.
Yes, some conservatives stay in the game, but too often conservatives go back to their plows like Cincinnatus. There's nothing inherently wrong with that -- politics are a necessary evil, at best, for many of us. But we have to own the reality; conservatives aren't effective when we leave the battlefield. We need to understand that the only way you can make change, and sustain change, is to get in the arena and stay there. The way you can control the Mitt Romneys of the world is to make sure they understand you are vigilant and that you aren't going away.
So how do you do that? Well, if you are in Minnesota, you have a precinct caucus to attend on Tuesday. If you live in HD50B, you should go to Mounds View High School. I'll be there and if you live in our district, which includes New Brighton, Arden Hills and portions of Shoreview and Fridley, you should be there, too. To do anything else makes you, well, a RINO.
Categories: Dominated
Light Rail and Its Discontents
You want to be a pinata? Write an op-ed of the sort that David Osmek wrote for today's Star Tribune:
Right now, we are paying over $15 million each year to keep the Hiawatha Line operating. Adding in the amortized costs of building the line, it's more than $56 million in taxpayer dollars each year. Yes, some of the costs were federally funded, and other revenue streams are bearing some of the burden. But with trillions of dollars of deficit spending, do we really want to add to the debt that future generations will pay for decades to come?No, actually I don't. Osmek, who is critical of light rail spending, marshals a series of statistics to buttress his argument. You may or may not agree with the idea that building these trains is a public good, but there's no doubt it's an expensive proposition and will never, ever come close to making enough money from its operation to cover the costs.
A lot of people don't want to hear that, of course. And the comments directed at the article are pretty silly. Consider this example, which is actually one of the more reasoned responses:
Very weak reasoning. Of course this assumes that gasoline prices will stay the same forever, and that gasoline will remain readily available for the lifetime of the rail system. It also requires that we not consider any of the direct and indirect costs of automobile travel and petroleum usage, and that those costs will never be considered. It further assumes that current financial conditions will never change, and that all public policy decisions should be measured first and foremost against current financial conditions.Every one of these assertions is wrong, of course. No one assumes that gasoline prices will stay the same forever -- the retail prices change nearly every day in the Twin Cities. As for availability of gasoline, we have an adequate supply for many years into the future and there's potentially a lot more available than we even realized -- the recent discoveries in North Dakota are just one example. But my favorite assertion is the last one, which seems to imply that policy decisions shouldn't be measured against current financial conditions. What would be a superior measure?
The thing about roads is this: everyone uses them. Unless you grow it yourself, the food you eat likely arrived at the market via truck. The furniture in your home did, too. You can't haul grain on a light rail train. And unless you live close to a light rail line, you likely have to consume some gasoline to get to the station.
The reason fixed rail transit works better in places like Chicago is that the city and the suburbs grew along the existing rail lines. You can cavil and kvetch all you want about how spread out the Twin Cities are, but the suburbs have grown where the highways are. That's not going to change. Imposing light rail lines will benefit certain communities, but it's a nonfactor for most people in the metropolitan area. We all enjoy having other people subsidize our lifestyle choices, of course, whether we want to admit that or not. That's human nature. But it doesn't change the need for someone to tell us the truth. And David Osmek deserves credit for laying out a plausible analysis. Read the whole thing.
Right now, we are paying over $15 million each year to keep the Hiawatha Line operating. Adding in the amortized costs of building the line, it's more than $56 million in taxpayer dollars each year. Yes, some of the costs were federally funded, and other revenue streams are bearing some of the burden. But with trillions of dollars of deficit spending, do we really want to add to the debt that future generations will pay for decades to come?No, actually I don't. Osmek, who is critical of light rail spending, marshals a series of statistics to buttress his argument. You may or may not agree with the idea that building these trains is a public good, but there's no doubt it's an expensive proposition and will never, ever come close to making enough money from its operation to cover the costs.
A lot of people don't want to hear that, of course. And the comments directed at the article are pretty silly. Consider this example, which is actually one of the more reasoned responses:
Very weak reasoning. Of course this assumes that gasoline prices will stay the same forever, and that gasoline will remain readily available for the lifetime of the rail system. It also requires that we not consider any of the direct and indirect costs of automobile travel and petroleum usage, and that those costs will never be considered. It further assumes that current financial conditions will never change, and that all public policy decisions should be measured first and foremost against current financial conditions.Every one of these assertions is wrong, of course. No one assumes that gasoline prices will stay the same forever -- the retail prices change nearly every day in the Twin Cities. As for availability of gasoline, we have an adequate supply for many years into the future and there's potentially a lot more available than we even realized -- the recent discoveries in North Dakota are just one example. But my favorite assertion is the last one, which seems to imply that policy decisions shouldn't be measured against current financial conditions. What would be a superior measure?
The thing about roads is this: everyone uses them. Unless you grow it yourself, the food you eat likely arrived at the market via truck. The furniture in your home did, too. You can't haul grain on a light rail train. And unless you live close to a light rail line, you likely have to consume some gasoline to get to the station.
The reason fixed rail transit works better in places like Chicago is that the city and the suburbs grew along the existing rail lines. You can cavil and kvetch all you want about how spread out the Twin Cities are, but the suburbs have grown where the highways are. That's not going to change. Imposing light rail lines will benefit certain communities, but it's a nonfactor for most people in the metropolitan area. We all enjoy having other people subsidize our lifestyle choices, of course, whether we want to admit that or not. That's human nature. But it doesn't change the need for someone to tell us the truth. And David Osmek deserves credit for laying out a plausible analysis. Read the whole thing.
Categories: Dominated
The Numbers
There's been a spirited (and sometimes dispiriting) argument going on concerning which of the collection of flawed candidates on offer should carry the Republican banner in 2012 against President Obama.
If the latest projections from the Congressional Budget Office turn out to be accurate, it may not matter very much:
The Congressional Budget Office on Tuesday predicted the deficit will rise to $1.08 trillion in 2012.
The office also projected the jobless rate would rise to 8.9 percent by the end of 2012, and to 9.2 percent in 2013.
These are much dimmer forecasts than in CBO's last report in August, when the office projected a $973 billion deficit. The report reflects weaker corporate tax revenue and the extension for two months of the payroll tax holiday.Wait, the payroll tax holiday? I thought that was money that went into the lockbox. Anyone remember the lockbox?
Actually, the key number is the unemployment number. That's the one that will drive the debate this year, along with the price of gasoline over the summer. As horrific as numbers in the trillions are, they are so huge that they end up being abstractions for most people. The numbers the average person experiences are the ones that matter, which is why, even though the Republican field has turned out to be weak, I think Obama is in a lot more trouble than some of my Democratic Party friends seem to understand.
If the latest projections from the Congressional Budget Office turn out to be accurate, it may not matter very much:
The Congressional Budget Office on Tuesday predicted the deficit will rise to $1.08 trillion in 2012.
The office also projected the jobless rate would rise to 8.9 percent by the end of 2012, and to 9.2 percent in 2013.
These are much dimmer forecasts than in CBO's last report in August, when the office projected a $973 billion deficit. The report reflects weaker corporate tax revenue and the extension for two months of the payroll tax holiday.Wait, the payroll tax holiday? I thought that was money that went into the lockbox. Anyone remember the lockbox?
Actually, the key number is the unemployment number. That's the one that will drive the debate this year, along with the price of gasoline over the summer. As horrific as numbers in the trillions are, they are so huge that they end up being abstractions for most people. The numbers the average person experiences are the ones that matter, which is why, even though the Republican field has turned out to be weak, I think Obama is in a lot more trouble than some of my Democratic Party friends seem to understand.
Categories: Dominated
Vikings to _______? II -- Landshark
Now that they've been effectively forced to seek a solution in Minneapolis, the Vikings are wandering the streets looking for a place for shelter:Minneapolis and Minnesota Vikings officials said Monday they're scrutinizing a parcel of land next to the Metrodome in hopes of continuing to play at the old stadium while the new one is under construction.
Even as the owner of a major technology center on the site insisted that he's not selling, Vikings' Vice President Lester Bagley said they want to see whether building at the Dome location can be done without having to spend the $48 million it would cost for the team to play up to three seasons at the University of Minnesota.Of course, one of the owners of the land has no interest in selling:
So far, Bagley said he hasn't seen "a viable proposal" that would allow the Vikings to build southeast of the Dome. That's partly due to Minneapolis entrepreneur Basant Kharbanda, who owns the 511 Building, a telecommunications center of high-tech firms that's considered the Twin Cities' portal to the Internet.
Kharbanda said Monday that he's not selling the property and that he would take the city to court if necessary to protect his high-tech tenants.
Relocating those firms, he said, "is not possible technically and would take too much money to do it. For that amount of money, the Vikings could refurbish TCF stadium and play there."And if you think relocating tenants from a high-tech building would be expensive, imagine the cost of moving an electrical substation:
The city's analysis is planned for release later this week, Lutz said. But he said it was clear that the 511 Building and the other major building in the way, Xcel Energy's Elliot Park substation, "would be high-ticket items."
Xcel Energy officials met Friday with city officials to provide information on the substation, which supplies power to businesses and homes in the downtown area.
"At this point we haven't even started an analysis of what it would take [to move the substation] and what the impact could be. We haven't said it could or couldn't be moved. We'll do our part to accomplish that," said Xcel spokesman Tom Hoen.Remember, the idea behind forcing the Vikings to concentrate on the Dome site is that it would supposedly be easier to get the bill done and get something, anything built. You have to wonder how much longer the Vikings, and the public for that matter, are going to be willing to put up with this charade.
Even as the owner of a major technology center on the site insisted that he's not selling, Vikings' Vice President Lester Bagley said they want to see whether building at the Dome location can be done without having to spend the $48 million it would cost for the team to play up to three seasons at the University of Minnesota.Of course, one of the owners of the land has no interest in selling:
So far, Bagley said he hasn't seen "a viable proposal" that would allow the Vikings to build southeast of the Dome. That's partly due to Minneapolis entrepreneur Basant Kharbanda, who owns the 511 Building, a telecommunications center of high-tech firms that's considered the Twin Cities' portal to the Internet.
Kharbanda said Monday that he's not selling the property and that he would take the city to court if necessary to protect his high-tech tenants.
Relocating those firms, he said, "is not possible technically and would take too much money to do it. For that amount of money, the Vikings could refurbish TCF stadium and play there."And if you think relocating tenants from a high-tech building would be expensive, imagine the cost of moving an electrical substation:
The city's analysis is planned for release later this week, Lutz said. But he said it was clear that the 511 Building and the other major building in the way, Xcel Energy's Elliot Park substation, "would be high-ticket items."
Xcel Energy officials met Friday with city officials to provide information on the substation, which supplies power to businesses and homes in the downtown area.
"At this point we haven't even started an analysis of what it would take [to move the substation] and what the impact could be. We haven't said it could or couldn't be moved. We'll do our part to accomplish that," said Xcel spokesman Tom Hoen.Remember, the idea behind forcing the Vikings to concentrate on the Dome site is that it would supposedly be easier to get the bill done and get something, anything built. You have to wonder how much longer the Vikings, and the public for that matter, are going to be willing to put up with this charade.
Categories: Dominated
Anderson Gets Molnaued
Back in 2008, as a state senator, Ellen Anderson voted to oust Carol Molnau from her position as head of MnDOT. The vote then was a party line 44-22 vote, in which every member of the DFL majority sent Molnau from office.Today, Ellen Anderson got Molnaued:Minnesota Republicans took the rare step on Monday of voting to remove an appointee of DFL Gov. Mark Dayton.
By a 37-29 party-line vote, Republicans voted against confirming Ellen Anderson, a former longtime member of the Senate, as Dayton's appointee to chair the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission.Back in 2008, then-Gov. Tim Pawlenty had to swallow hard and deal with the decision. Dayton took a different tack:
The vote means Anderson must leave the post. Dayton, angry at the vote and calling Republicans "too extreme to lead,'' immediately hired Anderson as an energy advisor on his staff. He must now search for a new chair of the PUC.
Now, I'm of two minds about this. First, I fully suspect that whomever Dayton selects will be just as much of a problem child as Anderson was in this position. Second, elections do have consequences and Mark Dayton is the governor and should, barring anything extraordinary, be able to appoint lieutenants of his choosing.
Having said that, I have no sympathy for the outrageously outraged Dayton or any of his colleagues in the DFL. The vote against Molnau was shameful and an exercise in raw political power, mostly done for the hell of it as far as anyone could tell. The pretext was that the 35W bridge had collapsed during Molnau's tenure at MnDOT, but as was later demonstrated, that collapse was the result of a faulty bridge design that took place some 30 years before.
Republicans have been all too willing to play by Marquess of Queensbury rules -- the primary reason that Mark Dayton is in the governor's chair is that the Republican Party, at Tom Emmer's direction, didn't unload on Dayton's very troublesome history, while Dayton's hired goons had no hesitation in running dozens of scurrilous ads that scored Emmer.
The only way Republicans are ever going to be praised in this state is if they lose, graciously and perpetually. Perhaps the Republicans in Minnesota are finally learning that hearing the praise of your enemies is far less enjoyable than hearing their lamentations and vows of revenge.
By a 37-29 party-line vote, Republicans voted against confirming Ellen Anderson, a former longtime member of the Senate, as Dayton's appointee to chair the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission.Back in 2008, then-Gov. Tim Pawlenty had to swallow hard and deal with the decision. Dayton took a different tack:
The vote means Anderson must leave the post. Dayton, angry at the vote and calling Republicans "too extreme to lead,'' immediately hired Anderson as an energy advisor on his staff. He must now search for a new chair of the PUC.
Now, I'm of two minds about this. First, I fully suspect that whomever Dayton selects will be just as much of a problem child as Anderson was in this position. Second, elections do have consequences and Mark Dayton is the governor and should, barring anything extraordinary, be able to appoint lieutenants of his choosing.
Having said that, I have no sympathy for the outrageously outraged Dayton or any of his colleagues in the DFL. The vote against Molnau was shameful and an exercise in raw political power, mostly done for the hell of it as far as anyone could tell. The pretext was that the 35W bridge had collapsed during Molnau's tenure at MnDOT, but as was later demonstrated, that collapse was the result of a faulty bridge design that took place some 30 years before.
Republicans have been all too willing to play by Marquess of Queensbury rules -- the primary reason that Mark Dayton is in the governor's chair is that the Republican Party, at Tom Emmer's direction, didn't unload on Dayton's very troublesome history, while Dayton's hired goons had no hesitation in running dozens of scurrilous ads that scored Emmer.
The only way Republicans are ever going to be praised in this state is if they lose, graciously and perpetually. Perhaps the Republicans in Minnesota are finally learning that hearing the praise of your enemies is far less enjoyable than hearing their lamentations and vows of revenge.
Categories: Dominated
Vikings to Metrodome? -- No Need to Be Coy, Colvin Roy
You remember how all the momentum was for the Metrodome site for the Vikings? And how it was Minneapolis, and not Ramsey County, that had the funding mechanism in place that could provide the chimerical "local contribution" that would fund a new stadium?
Good times, good times:City Council insistence that public funding for a new Minnesota Vikings stadium must go before Minneapolis voters put the brakes on Mayor R.T. Rybak's plan for the Metrodome site Thursday.Sandra Colvin Roy, whose stance on the mayor's stadium plan was previously unknown, became the seventh member of the 13-member council standing against the proposal absent a citywide referendum. That vote is required under the city's charter if the city spends more than $10 million on a stadium, but the mayor and council President Barb Johnson would like the Legislature to override it.And guess who makes Colvin Roy worry about the machinations? "Looking across the street at Occupy Minnesota and thinking about what's going on in our country right now, some of the discussions that are happening relative to government -- can we trust them or not? -- I cannot countenance going around that referendum," Colvin Roy said Thursday during a hearing.Well, hell, let's just give Occupy a suite in the new place. That should solve the problem.
So there needs to be a referendum to secure funding in Minneapolis, too? Somewhere in his bunker in Ramsey County, Tony Bennett must have a smirk on his face about this development.
I've made this point before, but it needs to underscored. The "local share" business is a myth. No local electorate will be willing to impose a tax on itself to pay for a playpen for billionaires. The only way this deal gets done is if the state picks up whatever share the Wilfs aren't willing to provide. R. T. Rybak can use whatever flimflammery he'd like, but he has no more leverage to find imaginary local funding than Bennett and his bobos on the board have in Ramsey County.
If we're going to have a Vikings stadium, it's going to be up the legislature and to Mark Dayton. And if the cost is $700-750 million, which it probably will be no matter where they build the thing, it's going to be a tough sell. The good news? The NFL has decided that the Vikes can't move to L.A. this year. After that? Well....
Good times, good times:City Council insistence that public funding for a new Minnesota Vikings stadium must go before Minneapolis voters put the brakes on Mayor R.T. Rybak's plan for the Metrodome site Thursday.Sandra Colvin Roy, whose stance on the mayor's stadium plan was previously unknown, became the seventh member of the 13-member council standing against the proposal absent a citywide referendum. That vote is required under the city's charter if the city spends more than $10 million on a stadium, but the mayor and council President Barb Johnson would like the Legislature to override it.And guess who makes Colvin Roy worry about the machinations? "Looking across the street at Occupy Minnesota and thinking about what's going on in our country right now, some of the discussions that are happening relative to government -- can we trust them or not? -- I cannot countenance going around that referendum," Colvin Roy said Thursday during a hearing.Well, hell, let's just give Occupy a suite in the new place. That should solve the problem.
So there needs to be a referendum to secure funding in Minneapolis, too? Somewhere in his bunker in Ramsey County, Tony Bennett must have a smirk on his face about this development.
I've made this point before, but it needs to underscored. The "local share" business is a myth. No local electorate will be willing to impose a tax on itself to pay for a playpen for billionaires. The only way this deal gets done is if the state picks up whatever share the Wilfs aren't willing to provide. R. T. Rybak can use whatever flimflammery he'd like, but he has no more leverage to find imaginary local funding than Bennett and his bobos on the board have in Ramsey County.
If we're going to have a Vikings stadium, it's going to be up the legislature and to Mark Dayton. And if the cost is $700-750 million, which it probably will be no matter where they build the thing, it's going to be a tough sell. The good news? The NFL has decided that the Vikes can't move to L.A. this year. After that? Well....
Categories: Dominated
Guilty Pleasures Part Eighty-Four -- Chief of Staff Fearless Maria Offers Random Dance Moves
Hey everybody, Fearless Maria is back in town! And I'm now the Chief of Staff of the MOB! Take that, Learned Foot!
Well, Foot is due some courtesy, since he's Secretary of State for Life.
Well, tell me this, Mayor Dad -- if I'm Chief of Staff, do I get to boss him around? Because I'm prepared to boss him around. I am. Then again, I heard he's a lawyer so I'd better be careful.
Yes, it is a good idea to be courteous to lawyers.
But do I get to boss him around? C'mon, Dad -- let me boss him around! I never get to boss anyone around! Well, that's a bit of hyperbole -- I do boss around Ben from time to time when he has it coming. But who cares? I just want to get on with the post, so answer my question, buddy! Do I get to boss Learned Foot around?
Yes -- I think you can boss him around. How far it gets you is another matter, of course.
Okay, then. As long as I have the power, I'll use it wisely and won't pursue it for now. So now, this is a Guilty Pleasures. And no, this is not Zombie Fearless Maria. I didn't die, or even retire. I just haven't gotten around to doing a Guilty Pleasures in a while. Sometimes the Mayor gets too busy writing about the Vikings stadium. Sometimes my English teacher is too busy assigning me big honking essays. Which I ace, of course, because I'm Fearless. And just pure awesomeness.
And modest.
Hey, I thought you told me that it isn't bragging if you can back it up. So let's back up the Wayback Machine and play some music from the time of the Phoenician sailors! Yes, I'm getting into my Social Studies classes and I think some of the stuff that Dad finds is at least that old. Like this song:
That's Wilson Pickett, doing the Land of 1,000 Dances. So Dad, what the heck is a bonie maronie, anyway? Or the mashed potato?
I think those were old dance crazes. Ol' Wilson goes through a lot of them on his list.
Well, he's sure wearing a lot of leather, too. His hair is fine and his outfit is kinda silly, but it was 1966, so that's just how things were those days. Right, Dad?
Well, I turned 3 in 1966, so I'm not entirely sure. I know I didn't wear a leather jumpsuit.
So did you wear a leather onesie? No, I don't think Grandma would be that cruel. I suppose you were eating more mashed potatoes than doing the mashed potato dance. But by the time the next some came out, you might have had some dance moves:
This one is called "Give It Up or Turn It Loose." That's what they told you in kindergarten, right, when you were hogging the sand table. Or maybe when you were hogging the magazines in the school library.
I don't remember what magazines they had in the school library at Jackson Elementary. I think it might have been "Highlights for Children" or something like that.
So, you're telling me your childhood was lame? That explains a few things. I'm surprised that James Brown can crack some of those moves in his suit. He looks fine, and so does his band in a weird sorta way, but the wall behind the band is pretty silly. Kinda like a messed up Target symbol or something. And the song is fun.
The JBs were quite a band.
No, that can't be right. I don't see Justin Bieber anywhere in that video, Dad! He wasn't even born yet! And he's horrible anyway. So let's move on the next one:
That's Sly and the Family Stone, who seemed to have misplaced their copy of "Hooked on Phonics" when they named this song "Thank You (Falettin Me Be Mice Elf Agin)." Did they leave their copy at Jackson Elementary School for you to read, Dad?
I don't remember seeing them there, but it's possible, Maria. This song actually came out around the same time as the James Brown song, but this performance is later on, around 1974 or so. Sly was starting to lose it around this time, but the band could still play.
He was definitely messed up in his outfits. I mean, really -- what did he do, just close his eyes and grab it out of the high school drama department dress-up box? The rest of the band looks slightly strange, but it was 1974 so I guess they were actually normal. The song, obviously, is great, although I could think of a lot of people who would completely frown on that spelling effort. I'm hoping my teachers don't see that I wrote this post and think I've forgotten how to spell. Which I haven't. In fact, I'm very precise, Dad!
That's why you're Chief of Staff, Maria.
Yeah, that and because you really couldn't trust that Red Squirrel guy with that much power. Anyway, let's get on to the next one. Hey, it's a Soul Train video!
That's the O'Jays, singing "For the Love of Money." And look, they are wearing blinding white tuxedos! Ah, the horror that their wives must have gone through trying to wash them after they all got stained from the wine people were throwing at them, because they were so good! Although I guess that Soul Train guy -- what's his name, Dad?
That would be Don Cornelius.
Yeah, that guy -- the guy who always wore the suits with the lapels as wide as Snelling Avenue and patterns as bright as the Great Coral Reef. Yeah, that guy. He must have edited out the wine throwing part. I suppose they are technically well dressed, because the suits don't look bad or anything, but if they'd have been wearing yellow ties, then I would have been concerned. There are definitely some fun dance moves going on, too -- especially the people waving around the giant dollar bills. You did grow up in a strange time, Dad!
Why yes, Maria. Yes, I did.
Glad you snapped out of it, though! All right, we're going to pass over the disco era because it's kinda boring anyway and we'll break out some 80s. Hey look, it's one of our favorites!
Ah yes, the Bangles continue to "Walk Like an Egyptian." And you can tell it's the 80s, because they all have really HUGE HAIR! Their outfits are okay, a little strange but not strange enough to rant about, although if they used that much hair care product, I wonder if the other ladies in town had to do without for a week. I bet they had hair mousse in the 55-gallon drum size! And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why we have a hole in the ozone layer!
That could be the reason. I hadn't thought of it, but maybe we should blame the Bangles.
Well, we have to blame somebody, Dad. This is politics -- you're the mayor and if you don't blame somebody, they're going to blame you! And I've seen your hair -- I don't think the mousse is going to help you very much.
I actually tried mousse once during the 80s.
Don't tell me things like that, Dad. I'm going to have nightmares imagining you with Flock of Seagulls hair.
It was a nightmare. But I haven't done that for a very long time now. And there's no photographic evidence out there that shows me in a moussed-up state.
Since we already know what's in the hair, let's find out what's in the heart!
"Groove Is in the Heart!" Deee-Lite! Strange, strange, strange. But I always want to make sure that Dad gets a Bootsy Collins fix and there it is! It's a fun song, but the gigantic platform shoes are a bit much to take, as well as yellow pants with green and yellow dress shirts. Or some kinda shirt. Maybe it was just a bath towel -- it's hard to be certain. But the song does make me want to move my feet.
And that's not a bad thing.
No, it's not, Dad. But now we need to move on to the voting. So let's have you pick your favorite in the comments section! Remember, be nice, please! You wouldn't want to get on the bad side of the Chief of Staff! Or the Mayor. But just between you and me, the Mayor is a pushover compared to me. I'm Fearless Maria and don't you forget it! Peace out!
Well, Foot is due some courtesy, since he's Secretary of State for Life.
Well, tell me this, Mayor Dad -- if I'm Chief of Staff, do I get to boss him around? Because I'm prepared to boss him around. I am. Then again, I heard he's a lawyer so I'd better be careful.
Yes, it is a good idea to be courteous to lawyers.
But do I get to boss him around? C'mon, Dad -- let me boss him around! I never get to boss anyone around! Well, that's a bit of hyperbole -- I do boss around Ben from time to time when he has it coming. But who cares? I just want to get on with the post, so answer my question, buddy! Do I get to boss Learned Foot around?
Yes -- I think you can boss him around. How far it gets you is another matter, of course.
Okay, then. As long as I have the power, I'll use it wisely and won't pursue it for now. So now, this is a Guilty Pleasures. And no, this is not Zombie Fearless Maria. I didn't die, or even retire. I just haven't gotten around to doing a Guilty Pleasures in a while. Sometimes the Mayor gets too busy writing about the Vikings stadium. Sometimes my English teacher is too busy assigning me big honking essays. Which I ace, of course, because I'm Fearless. And just pure awesomeness.
And modest.
Hey, I thought you told me that it isn't bragging if you can back it up. So let's back up the Wayback Machine and play some music from the time of the Phoenician sailors! Yes, I'm getting into my Social Studies classes and I think some of the stuff that Dad finds is at least that old. Like this song:
That's Wilson Pickett, doing the Land of 1,000 Dances. So Dad, what the heck is a bonie maronie, anyway? Or the mashed potato?
I think those were old dance crazes. Ol' Wilson goes through a lot of them on his list.
Well, he's sure wearing a lot of leather, too. His hair is fine and his outfit is kinda silly, but it was 1966, so that's just how things were those days. Right, Dad?
Well, I turned 3 in 1966, so I'm not entirely sure. I know I didn't wear a leather jumpsuit.
So did you wear a leather onesie? No, I don't think Grandma would be that cruel. I suppose you were eating more mashed potatoes than doing the mashed potato dance. But by the time the next some came out, you might have had some dance moves:
This one is called "Give It Up or Turn It Loose." That's what they told you in kindergarten, right, when you were hogging the sand table. Or maybe when you were hogging the magazines in the school library.
I don't remember what magazines they had in the school library at Jackson Elementary. I think it might have been "Highlights for Children" or something like that.
So, you're telling me your childhood was lame? That explains a few things. I'm surprised that James Brown can crack some of those moves in his suit. He looks fine, and so does his band in a weird sorta way, but the wall behind the band is pretty silly. Kinda like a messed up Target symbol or something. And the song is fun.
The JBs were quite a band.
No, that can't be right. I don't see Justin Bieber anywhere in that video, Dad! He wasn't even born yet! And he's horrible anyway. So let's move on the next one:
That's Sly and the Family Stone, who seemed to have misplaced their copy of "Hooked on Phonics" when they named this song "Thank You (Falettin Me Be Mice Elf Agin)." Did they leave their copy at Jackson Elementary School for you to read, Dad?
I don't remember seeing them there, but it's possible, Maria. This song actually came out around the same time as the James Brown song, but this performance is later on, around 1974 or so. Sly was starting to lose it around this time, but the band could still play.
He was definitely messed up in his outfits. I mean, really -- what did he do, just close his eyes and grab it out of the high school drama department dress-up box? The rest of the band looks slightly strange, but it was 1974 so I guess they were actually normal. The song, obviously, is great, although I could think of a lot of people who would completely frown on that spelling effort. I'm hoping my teachers don't see that I wrote this post and think I've forgotten how to spell. Which I haven't. In fact, I'm very precise, Dad!
That's why you're Chief of Staff, Maria.
Yeah, that and because you really couldn't trust that Red Squirrel guy with that much power. Anyway, let's get on to the next one. Hey, it's a Soul Train video!
That's the O'Jays, singing "For the Love of Money." And look, they are wearing blinding white tuxedos! Ah, the horror that their wives must have gone through trying to wash them after they all got stained from the wine people were throwing at them, because they were so good! Although I guess that Soul Train guy -- what's his name, Dad?
That would be Don Cornelius.
Yeah, that guy -- the guy who always wore the suits with the lapels as wide as Snelling Avenue and patterns as bright as the Great Coral Reef. Yeah, that guy. He must have edited out the wine throwing part. I suppose they are technically well dressed, because the suits don't look bad or anything, but if they'd have been wearing yellow ties, then I would have been concerned. There are definitely some fun dance moves going on, too -- especially the people waving around the giant dollar bills. You did grow up in a strange time, Dad!
Why yes, Maria. Yes, I did.
Glad you snapped out of it, though! All right, we're going to pass over the disco era because it's kinda boring anyway and we'll break out some 80s. Hey look, it's one of our favorites!
Ah yes, the Bangles continue to "Walk Like an Egyptian." And you can tell it's the 80s, because they all have really HUGE HAIR! Their outfits are okay, a little strange but not strange enough to rant about, although if they used that much hair care product, I wonder if the other ladies in town had to do without for a week. I bet they had hair mousse in the 55-gallon drum size! And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why we have a hole in the ozone layer!
That could be the reason. I hadn't thought of it, but maybe we should blame the Bangles.
Well, we have to blame somebody, Dad. This is politics -- you're the mayor and if you don't blame somebody, they're going to blame you! And I've seen your hair -- I don't think the mousse is going to help you very much.
I actually tried mousse once during the 80s.
Don't tell me things like that, Dad. I'm going to have nightmares imagining you with Flock of Seagulls hair.
It was a nightmare. But I haven't done that for a very long time now. And there's no photographic evidence out there that shows me in a moussed-up state.
Since we already know what's in the hair, let's find out what's in the heart!
"Groove Is in the Heart!" Deee-Lite! Strange, strange, strange. But I always want to make sure that Dad gets a Bootsy Collins fix and there it is! It's a fun song, but the gigantic platform shoes are a bit much to take, as well as yellow pants with green and yellow dress shirts. Or some kinda shirt. Maybe it was just a bath towel -- it's hard to be certain. But the song does make me want to move my feet.
And that's not a bad thing.
No, it's not, Dad. But now we need to move on to the voting. So let's have you pick your favorite in the comments section! Remember, be nice, please! You wouldn't want to get on the bad side of the Chief of Staff! Or the Mayor. But just between you and me, the Mayor is a pushover compared to me. I'm Fearless Maria and don't you forget it! Peace out!
Categories: Dominated
Show Me the Money
I don't really want to know how much money Debra Bosanek makes. But you have to wonder.
Bosanek has become something of the anti-Joe the Plumber in recent days because she is supposed to symbolize the downtrodden middle class worker who is getting jobbed on her taxes, especially in comparison to her boss. Bosanek is Warren Buffett's secretary and she and ol' Warren have been making the rounds in recent days, complaining about how unfair it all is.
As usual, there's more to the story. First of all, most executive secretaries make pretty good coin and I would imagine that Bosanek is no exception. A columnist for Forbes estimates that for Bosanek to pay the tax rate she claims to pay, she must earn well north of $200,000 a year. If this guy is correct, she might make closer to $400,000 a year:
If she’s really paying a marginal rate of 35%, she’s earning over $379,150 per year in taxable income, which places her in the top 1% of income earners nationally. If this is true, Ms. Bosanek is anything but an average citizen. An average citizen–say someone who earns the median salary of a secretary to a CEO, which is $67, 791, according to a 2011 survey conducted by Certified Compensation Professionals–pays a much lower effective tax rate on taxable income than Ms. Bosanek. Assuming this average citizen took about $15,000 in deductions, she would pay an effective tax rate of 17% on taxable income of $52,791, the same rate Mr. Buffett claims to be paying.
I would not be surprised if she did make that much. Buffett could afford to pay her that much and probably would, since a CEO's secretary typically has the same skill set as a department manager, or even director-level employee in most companies. As has been pointed out elsewhere, there's really no way to know if the assertions that Bosanek and Buffett are making are true unless they both are willing to release their tax returns.
My guess is that the 35% number actually counts the payroll taxes that go to FICA and Medicare, although calculations of the effective income tax rate do not typically lump in those numbers.
Another point worth making: even if you closed the loopholes and really stuck it to the uber-rich, we aren't really talking about a lot of people, as Jonathan Karl of ABC News reveals:
The Top 400 tax filers – the very richest Americans – do pay a lower rate of just 18.11 percent of their total income. Why? Many of them are hedge fund managers and people like Buffet — their income is pegged how much their investment fund grows. For some reason, this income is counted as so-called “carried interest” (even though it is not interest at all; it’s more like a performance bonus) and is taxed at the lower 15 percent capital gains rate.
It’s a loophole for hedge managers, pure and simple. But while it may be an outrage that these uber-rich hedge fund managers pay such a low rate compared to the rest of us, there are just not many of them out there.
But the top 400 tax filers represent a tiny sliver – just .00028 percent of all filers. The vast majority of those earning over $1 million a year pay at a higher rate, which is why the average tax rate for this group, according to the Tax Foundation, is 29.1 percent of taxable income. And, yes, this number includes income taxes, payroll taxes and capital gains taxes.
Either way, I don't think Ms. Bosanek has much to worry about. Buffett has plenty of money coming in these days.
Bosanek has become something of the anti-Joe the Plumber in recent days because she is supposed to symbolize the downtrodden middle class worker who is getting jobbed on her taxes, especially in comparison to her boss. Bosanek is Warren Buffett's secretary and she and ol' Warren have been making the rounds in recent days, complaining about how unfair it all is.
As usual, there's more to the story. First of all, most executive secretaries make pretty good coin and I would imagine that Bosanek is no exception. A columnist for Forbes estimates that for Bosanek to pay the tax rate she claims to pay, she must earn well north of $200,000 a year. If this guy is correct, she might make closer to $400,000 a year:
If she’s really paying a marginal rate of 35%, she’s earning over $379,150 per year in taxable income, which places her in the top 1% of income earners nationally. If this is true, Ms. Bosanek is anything but an average citizen. An average citizen–say someone who earns the median salary of a secretary to a CEO, which is $67, 791, according to a 2011 survey conducted by Certified Compensation Professionals–pays a much lower effective tax rate on taxable income than Ms. Bosanek. Assuming this average citizen took about $15,000 in deductions, she would pay an effective tax rate of 17% on taxable income of $52,791, the same rate Mr. Buffett claims to be paying.
I would not be surprised if she did make that much. Buffett could afford to pay her that much and probably would, since a CEO's secretary typically has the same skill set as a department manager, or even director-level employee in most companies. As has been pointed out elsewhere, there's really no way to know if the assertions that Bosanek and Buffett are making are true unless they both are willing to release their tax returns.
My guess is that the 35% number actually counts the payroll taxes that go to FICA and Medicare, although calculations of the effective income tax rate do not typically lump in those numbers.
Another point worth making: even if you closed the loopholes and really stuck it to the uber-rich, we aren't really talking about a lot of people, as Jonathan Karl of ABC News reveals:
The Top 400 tax filers – the very richest Americans – do pay a lower rate of just 18.11 percent of their total income. Why? Many of them are hedge fund managers and people like Buffet — their income is pegged how much their investment fund grows. For some reason, this income is counted as so-called “carried interest” (even though it is not interest at all; it’s more like a performance bonus) and is taxed at the lower 15 percent capital gains rate.
It’s a loophole for hedge managers, pure and simple. But while it may be an outrage that these uber-rich hedge fund managers pay such a low rate compared to the rest of us, there are just not many of them out there.
But the top 400 tax filers represent a tiny sliver – just .00028 percent of all filers. The vast majority of those earning over $1 million a year pay at a higher rate, which is why the average tax rate for this group, according to the Tax Foundation, is 29.1 percent of taxable income. And, yes, this number includes income taxes, payroll taxes and capital gains taxes.
Either way, I don't think Ms. Bosanek has much to worry about. Buffett has plenty of money coming in these days.
Categories: Dominated
8th Grade Reading
You can read various critiques of President Obama’s State of the Union address out on the interwebs, but there is one critique out there that is, frankly, pretty lame. It is the idea that there is something risible about the speech being written at an 8th grade level.
I write for a living. Writing at an 8th grade level is a good approach, in most cases. Too many people confuse complexity with intelligence. Truth be told, needless complexity is usually a mask for something else, including incoherence or deceit. At the level of attention that most people can offer, communicating at the 8th grade level is usually where you want to be. Reading need not be the intellectual equivalent of calisthenics.
I write for a living. Writing at an 8th grade level is a good approach, in most cases. Too many people confuse complexity with intelligence. Truth be told, needless complexity is usually a mask for something else, including incoherence or deceit. At the level of attention that most people can offer, communicating at the 8th grade level is usually where you want to be. Reading need not be the intellectual equivalent of calisthenics.
Categories: Dominated
Remembrances of Things Past
As time passes, it's easy to forget things that have happened. Memories blur and things that aren't necessarily true can ossify into conventional wisdom. Now that our man Newt is back on the scene, part of the conventional wisdom is that he was ethically challenged and was forced to resign "in disgrace" because of the evil deeds he did.I've heard these things in recent days, but a lot of it didn't jibe with my own recollection of events, although I didn't quite remember why. Writing for the Washington Examiner, Byron York gives us a trip down memory lane:Given all the attention to the ethics matter, it's worth asking what actually happened back in 1995, 1996, and 1997. The Gingrich case was extraordinarily complex, intensely partisan, and driven in no small way by a personal vendetta on the part of one of Gingrich's former political opponents. It received saturation coverage in the press; a database search of major media outlets revealed more than 10,000 references to Gingrich's ethics problems during the six months leading to his reprimand. It ended with a special counsel hired by the House Ethics Committee holding Gingrich to an astonishingly strict standard of behavior, after which Gingrich in essence pled guilty to two minor offenses. Afterwards, the case was referred to the Internal Revenue Service, which conducted an exhaustive investigation into the matter. And then, after it was all over and Gingrich was out of office, the IRS concluded that Gingrich did nothing wrong. After all the struggle, Gingrich was exonerated.York's piece should be read in full, but a few things are worth calling out. First, the role of Gingrich's chief accuser, Ben "Cooter" Jones, the onetime "Dukes of Hazzard" actor who found his way to Congress but lost his seat due to redistricting. Jones had an axe to grind and he wasn't particularly subtle about it, as York reminds us:There's no doubt the complaint was rooted in the intense personal animus Jones felt toward Gingrich. In 1995, I sat down with Jones for a talk about Gingrich, and without provocation, Jones simply went off on the Speaker. "He's just full of s--t," Jones told me. "He is. I mean, the guy's never done a damn thing, he's never worked a day in his life, he's never hit a lick at a snake. He's just a bulls--t artist. I mean, think about it. What has this guy ever done in his life?…Gingrich has never worked. He's never had any life experience. He's very gifted in his way at a sort of rhetorical terrorism, and he's gifted in his way at being a career politician, someone who understands how that system works and how to get ahead in it, which is everything that he has derided for all these years. So I think he's a hypocrite, and I think he's a wuss, and I don't mind saying that to him or whoever. To his mother -- I don't care."
At that point, Jones leaned over to speak directly into my recorder. Raising his voice, he declared: "HE'S THE BIGGEST A--HOLE IN AMERICA!"And if what York asserts is true, why then has the impression of Gingrich being a world-class scoundrel hardened, at least on this issue? Let him explain how the game works:Back in January 1997, the day after Cole presented his damning report to the Ethics Committee, the Washington Post's front-page banner headline was "Gingrich Actions 'Intentional' or 'Reckless'; Counsel Concludes That Speaker's Course Funding Was 'Clear Violation' of Tax Laws." That same day, the New York Times ran eleven stories on the Gingrich matter, four of them on the front page (one inside story was headlined, "Report Describes How Gingrich Used Taxpayers' Money for Partisan Politics"). On television, Dan Rather began the CBS Evening News by telling viewers that "only now is the evidence of Newt Gingrich's ethics violations and tax problems being disclosed in detail."
The story was much different when Gingrich was exonerated. The Washington Post ran a brief story on page five. The Times ran an equally brief story on page 23. And the evening newscasts of CBS, NBC, and ABC -- which together had devoted hours of coverage to the question of Gingrich's ethics -- did not report the story at all. Not a word.All the news that's fit to print, of course.
There are plenty of things to dislike about Newt Gingrich, including his philandering, his egomania and his tendency to misunderstand that bloviation isn't an adequate substitute for principle. At this point he'd not be my choice to lead this nation. Still, in a time when dishonesty is firmly in the saddle, York's article is a useful reminder of why dishonesty works so well. I'll say it again -- no matter what you think of Gingrich otherwise, you really need to read the whole thing.
At that point, Jones leaned over to speak directly into my recorder. Raising his voice, he declared: "HE'S THE BIGGEST A--HOLE IN AMERICA!"And if what York asserts is true, why then has the impression of Gingrich being a world-class scoundrel hardened, at least on this issue? Let him explain how the game works:Back in January 1997, the day after Cole presented his damning report to the Ethics Committee, the Washington Post's front-page banner headline was "Gingrich Actions 'Intentional' or 'Reckless'; Counsel Concludes That Speaker's Course Funding Was 'Clear Violation' of Tax Laws." That same day, the New York Times ran eleven stories on the Gingrich matter, four of them on the front page (one inside story was headlined, "Report Describes How Gingrich Used Taxpayers' Money for Partisan Politics"). On television, Dan Rather began the CBS Evening News by telling viewers that "only now is the evidence of Newt Gingrich's ethics violations and tax problems being disclosed in detail."
The story was much different when Gingrich was exonerated. The Washington Post ran a brief story on page five. The Times ran an equally brief story on page 23. And the evening newscasts of CBS, NBC, and ABC -- which together had devoted hours of coverage to the question of Gingrich's ethics -- did not report the story at all. Not a word.All the news that's fit to print, of course.
There are plenty of things to dislike about Newt Gingrich, including his philandering, his egomania and his tendency to misunderstand that bloviation isn't an adequate substitute for principle. At this point he'd not be my choice to lead this nation. Still, in a time when dishonesty is firmly in the saddle, York's article is a useful reminder of why dishonesty works so well. I'll say it again -- no matter what you think of Gingrich otherwise, you really need to read the whole thing.
Categories: Dominated
Old Country Buffett
President Obama thinks it's a shame that Warren Buffett's secretary pays at a higher marginal rate than her boss does. Of course, the reason for the disparate treatment is that Warren Buffett, like most rich people, makes his money in ways that don't count as traditional income.
And sometimes Warren Buffett makes makes money in other ways, too:
Warren Buffett's Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC is among U.S. and Canadian railroads that stand to benefit from the Obama administration's decision to reject TransCanada Corp.'s Keystone XL oil pipeline permit.
With modest expansion, railroads can handle all new oil produced in western Canada through 2030, according to an analysis of the Keystone proposal by the U.S. State Department.
"Whatever people bring to us, we're ready to haul," Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffett's Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said in an interview. If Keystone XL "doesn't happen, we're here to haul."And it should be quite a haul, too. Read the whole thing.
And sometimes Warren Buffett makes makes money in other ways, too:
Warren Buffett's Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC is among U.S. and Canadian railroads that stand to benefit from the Obama administration's decision to reject TransCanada Corp.'s Keystone XL oil pipeline permit.
With modest expansion, railroads can handle all new oil produced in western Canada through 2030, according to an analysis of the Keystone proposal by the U.S. State Department.
"Whatever people bring to us, we're ready to haul," Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffett's Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said in an interview. If Keystone XL "doesn't happen, we're here to haul."And it should be quite a haul, too. Read the whole thing.
Categories: Dominated
Vikings to _______?
As the lege gets ready to start up, Mark Dayton gives Zygi and the boys the news they don't want to hear:
Gov. Mark Dayton told the Minnesota Vikings on Monday that the only workable site this year for a new stadium is the Metrodome, apparently bringing the team's long search for a new home back to where it started."The governor spoke to Mr. Zygi Wilf this afternoon and told him that if we are going to get a stadium bill passed this year, it will have to be at the Metrodome site," said the governor's spokeswoman, Katharine Tinucci.And now Zygi is coming back to Minnesota for a "come to Jesus" meeting. The question is, who gets to be Jesus in this one:
Vikings spokesman Lester Bagley said the team is upset by the news, which came just the team appeared to be shifting from its preferred site in Arden Hills to the so-called Linden Avenue location near the Minneapolis' Basilica of St. Mary."We were told by the governor's office that Linden Avenue is not workable, at least in the short term," said Bagley, the team's vice president of public affairs and stadium development. "All I can tell you is that our ownership is extremely frustrated with the situation."
I'll bet. We're at the point now where Wilf is getting what is called "Hobson's Choice" -- what is on offer, or nothing. If you read between the lines, what Bagley is telling you is this -- if the Metrodome site is the only option, the Vikings are going to pursue other options. My guess is that is what Wilf will tell Dayton tomorrow. And that is when it gets interesting.
Gov. Mark Dayton told the Minnesota Vikings on Monday that the only workable site this year for a new stadium is the Metrodome, apparently bringing the team's long search for a new home back to where it started."The governor spoke to Mr. Zygi Wilf this afternoon and told him that if we are going to get a stadium bill passed this year, it will have to be at the Metrodome site," said the governor's spokeswoman, Katharine Tinucci.And now Zygi is coming back to Minnesota for a "come to Jesus" meeting. The question is, who gets to be Jesus in this one:
Vikings spokesman Lester Bagley said the team is upset by the news, which came just the team appeared to be shifting from its preferred site in Arden Hills to the so-called Linden Avenue location near the Minneapolis' Basilica of St. Mary."We were told by the governor's office that Linden Avenue is not workable, at least in the short term," said Bagley, the team's vice president of public affairs and stadium development. "All I can tell you is that our ownership is extremely frustrated with the situation."
I'll bet. We're at the point now where Wilf is getting what is called "Hobson's Choice" -- what is on offer, or nothing. If you read between the lines, what Bagley is telling you is this -- if the Metrodome site is the only option, the Vikings are going to pursue other options. My guess is that is what Wilf will tell Dayton tomorrow. And that is when it gets interesting.
Categories: Dominated
No Exit/Il miglior fabbro
I did something I hadn't done before in this cycle, which is to watch one of the Republican presidential debates from beginning to end. Since that represents two hours of my life I'll never get back, herewith I present a quick synopsis and a recommendation.
7:24PM There is only one explanation for this debate: NBC News wanted to show off the GOP contenders as the world’s Most Boring and Irrelevant White Guys. On tomorrow night’s NBC News primetime program, the second coming of Black Jesus.Compare and contrast, dulled audience.Maybe not the nicest way to put it, but that's about it. I strongly recommend clicking the link -- he's really good and makes at least a half dozen other observations that ring true.
- The overall impression I got was similar to the sensation I got when I saw a production of Sartre's "No Exit" during my college years. You saw a bunch of unpleasant people in a version of hell that is entirely of NBC's making. If you look up "unctuous" in the dictionary, there's a picture of Brian Williams next to the definition.
- Mitt Romney does a lot better with the attacking when he hires the job out to surrogates. I really don't know if what he said about Newt Gingrich is true, but he came off as desperate and irritating.
- Newt Gingrich went into his "well I declare, I don't know what you're talking about, Mitt" mode for most of the debate, which was effective because it seemed like Mitt didn't know what he was talking about.
- Rick Santorum continues to come across as an earnest statist with no real reason for being on the stage. He's not going to be president.
- Ron Paul is mostly correct in what he says, but he's still got that crazy uncle persona going and I think Stephen Green's observation is spot-on: "Is Ron Paul shrinking or are his suits growing?"
7:24PM There is only one explanation for this debate: NBC News wanted to show off the GOP contenders as the world’s Most Boring and Irrelevant White Guys. On tomorrow night’s NBC News primetime program, the second coming of Black Jesus.Compare and contrast, dulled audience.Maybe not the nicest way to put it, but that's about it. I strongly recommend clicking the link -- he's really good and makes at least a half dozen other observations that ring true.
Categories: Dominated
No SOPA, or PIPA Longstocking
At least for now, SOPA and PIPA are not happening. These two bills were both ostensibly aimed at stopping the problem of pirated intellectual property, particularly movies and music. The problem was that, in designing a mechanism to shut down primarily overseas websites, the law was likely to put the clampdown on a lot of what happens on the Internet.
Hollywood wanted SOPA (the House version) and/or PIPA (the Senate version) to pass and it hired former Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, the one-time Friend of Angelo who played a major role in ensuring that corruption in the financial industry was undisturbed, to protect its interests. Didn't work out so well. And now Dodd is very angry at the Obama administration in particular, and Democrats in general, for not staying bought:
Hollywood's top lobbyist and former Sen. Chris Dodd is threatening to cut off campaign funds to President Obama's re-election effort because of anger over the White House appearing to side with tech companies in a bitter fight over anti-piracy legislation.
In an exclusive interview with Fox News, Dodd fired off a warning to Obama -- his former Senate Democratic colleague in this election year -- "don't take us for granted."
"Candidly, those who count on quote 'Hollywood' for support need to understand that this industry is watching very carefully who's going to stand up for them when their job is at stake," Dodd told Fox News. "Don't ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don't pay any attention to me when my job is at stake."This is actually pretty amusing, because to me backing away from SOPA and PIPA is one of the best things the Obama administration has done since it first came to power. This was bad legislation and would have had the potential to hurt a lot more people than it would have benefited. It's also amusing because it's highly unusual to hear a lobbyist be so out front about the fact that he's trying to buy votes.
I suppose Dodd is confused because while he was a scoundrel whose vote was always negotiable, he had the moral probity to stay bought. And I suppose it's difficult to remember the proper pecking order among mendicants for who gets what from the Obama administration. Hollywood gives a lot of money, but they didn't get the Solyndra treatment in terms of tilting the playing field their way. If you think you are a winner, it's gotta hurt to be a loser in the poker pork game.
Meanwhile, our two august Senators, Klobuchar and Franken, were staunch PIPA supporters. As far as one can tell in the gauzy, feel-good Lifetime Channel world that is Amy Klobuchar's career, she stayed bought. Wonder if the money will keep coming now.
Hollywood wanted SOPA (the House version) and/or PIPA (the Senate version) to pass and it hired former Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, the one-time Friend of Angelo who played a major role in ensuring that corruption in the financial industry was undisturbed, to protect its interests. Didn't work out so well. And now Dodd is very angry at the Obama administration in particular, and Democrats in general, for not staying bought:
Hollywood's top lobbyist and former Sen. Chris Dodd is threatening to cut off campaign funds to President Obama's re-election effort because of anger over the White House appearing to side with tech companies in a bitter fight over anti-piracy legislation.
In an exclusive interview with Fox News, Dodd fired off a warning to Obama -- his former Senate Democratic colleague in this election year -- "don't take us for granted."
"Candidly, those who count on quote 'Hollywood' for support need to understand that this industry is watching very carefully who's going to stand up for them when their job is at stake," Dodd told Fox News. "Don't ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don't pay any attention to me when my job is at stake."This is actually pretty amusing, because to me backing away from SOPA and PIPA is one of the best things the Obama administration has done since it first came to power. This was bad legislation and would have had the potential to hurt a lot more people than it would have benefited. It's also amusing because it's highly unusual to hear a lobbyist be so out front about the fact that he's trying to buy votes.
I suppose Dodd is confused because while he was a scoundrel whose vote was always negotiable, he had the moral probity to stay bought. And I suppose it's difficult to remember the proper pecking order among mendicants for who gets what from the Obama administration. Hollywood gives a lot of money, but they didn't get the Solyndra treatment in terms of tilting the playing field their way. If you think you are a winner, it's gotta hurt to be a loser in the poker pork game.
Meanwhile, our two august Senators, Klobuchar and Franken, were staunch PIPA supporters. As far as one can tell in the gauzy, feel-good Lifetime Channel world that is Amy Klobuchar's career, she stayed bought. Wonder if the money will keep coming now.
Categories: Dominated
Victory Speech - Updated
We were going to do a press conference, but it was obvious from the get-go that being elected Mayor of the MOB isn't really news. And staging a press conference did present the remote yet uncomfortable possibility that some leftyblogger might actually show up at my house. That would likely disturb my neighbors and would be rediculous. So here's my speech:
Thanks to everyone for your support. It reflects two things -- that you might have actually enjoyed something you read here; and your evident good taste in rejecting the other candidates. That is the greatest victory, of course. It's also a sign of your courage, since Ecker is heavily armed.
What is my goal for my tenure as MOB Mayor? To endure as much ridicule as possible. And to encourage all MOB bloggers to write as much as they can. Unlike my predecessor, the honorable J. Roosh, I will keep writing. We need all bloggers to be writing as much as they can. Even dashed off tripe can add to the debate, as this blog has proved conclusively for the past six years.
We will have more to say at the MOB Party, which will take place on Saturday, Feb. 25 at Ol' Mexico in Roseville. In the meantime, my chief of staff Fearless Maria is in charge of processing applications for the various lucrative patronage positions that are now available. Know that the following positions are already filled:
Everything else is up for grabs. And if nothing else, we can trust on everyone to be grabby.
Update (01/23/12). We have added two additional positions to the team:
Watch this space for additional updates.
Thanks to everyone for your support. It reflects two things -- that you might have actually enjoyed something you read here; and your evident good taste in rejecting the other candidates. That is the greatest victory, of course. It's also a sign of your courage, since Ecker is heavily armed.
What is my goal for my tenure as MOB Mayor? To endure as much ridicule as possible. And to encourage all MOB bloggers to write as much as they can. Unlike my predecessor, the honorable J. Roosh, I will keep writing. We need all bloggers to be writing as much as they can. Even dashed off tripe can add to the debate, as this blog has proved conclusively for the past six years.
We will have more to say at the MOB Party, which will take place on Saturday, Feb. 25 at Ol' Mexico in Roseville. In the meantime, my chief of staff Fearless Maria is in charge of processing applications for the various lucrative patronage positions that are now available. Know that the following positions are already filled:
Everything else is up for grabs. And if nothing else, we can trust on everyone to be grabby.
Update (01/23/12). We have added two additional positions to the team:
Watch this space for additional updates.
Categories: Dominated
Active forum topics
Recent blog posts
Monitoring Cato
Monitoring Heritage
Monitoring Townhall
Monitoring Club For Growth
Monitoring Dominated Sites
- I Agree With Keith Ellison
- Love the One You're With?
- The Best Election System Anywhere. The Best Election System Anywhere. The Best Election System Anywhere.
- Where Used Car Salespeople Fear To Tread
- Time To Stand Up For Stand Your Ground
- The Ice We Skate
- Why I’m Caucusing For Santorum
- Vikings to Amorphous Parcel of Land Somewhere East of the Metrodome?
- Will The Circle Be Unbroken
- Into The Vortex
Monitoring Foes
Monitoring He Whose Name Must Not Be Spoken
- Newt Gingrich's claim that George Soros 'approved' Mitt Romney - Washington Post (blog)
- Newt Gingrich’s claim that George Soros ‘approved’ Mitt Romney
- Mike donated $311M in 11 - New York Post
- Soros Warns Of Chaos, But Supports People Creating It - Investor's Business Daily
- This Year's Most Generous Billionaire Philanthropist Has Been Dead Since 2006 - Forbes
Syndicate
User login
Fearless Leaders
Richard Mellon Scaife
Rush Limbaugh
Ann Coulter
Iowahawk
"I'm leading who, now? I have no idea who or what you're talking about."
Inspirations
Milton Friedman
William F. Buckley, Jr.
Ronald Reagan
"Yeah, we have a lot of fans. So what?"
Implacable Foes
Flash
Penigma
AngryClown
"Of course they're real! And they're in cahoots with the aliens, too!"
Apply To ScaifeNet
Do you want to be the next ScaifeNet leader or foe?
Or, do you want to see if ScaifeNet can fulfill your need to be controlled?
Apply today!