It's been almost 4 years now, since the day I began this blog. It's been great and I've really enjoyed spending time with you guys, my readers, for all these years.
Although I'm closing up shop here I'll still be around. This blog and its archives will not be removed. I have some grander plans and a move to a new site is the first step on that road.
The new blog has a working title of "Eschew Obfuscation", though that is subject to change.
Come on over and check out my new place. I hope you'll be just as comfortable as you have been here, well, some of you, anyway. The rest I intend to make as uncomfortable as possible.
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
Convention's Over. Thoughts, Part Two. Or An Open Letter To Ken!
Cross posted at Eschew Obsfuscation
From the moment I walked into the Colosseum on Saturday morning, I knew it was Ken Cuccinelli's convention. To most of the delegates, selecting Governor and Lt. Governor candidates and a party chairman was secondary. For them, nominating Ken was job one.
I was impressed with the organization Ken has put together. And I'm sure it will only strengthen in the months to come. Congratulations Ken, from a John Brownlee supporter, on a job well done.
Now the tough part begins. It's easy to get the support of those who reside on the right side of the conservative spectrum. Those who are involved enough to pay real money to travel across the state to attend a political convention. It's a bit tougher to get the more moderate. And tougher still to get those guys that have voted a straight Democratic line forever just because Granddad did.
A wise man once told me that any candidate comes into a race with 20% locked down. It's there. You don't really even have to work for it. That's true for his opponent as well. That means you have to convince the voters in the middle. You're both fighting for them.
So, you have to go out there and convince just 31% of the voters that you're their guy. Sounds simple. Only 31%. Until you realize that that most can't name you or your opponent. Sure, they know the finalists on American Idol, but ask them who represents them in Congress or the General Assembly and you get a blank stare. Or you get the name of the last guy they saw interviewed on CNN. They don't know him, they don't know you, and they don't really care.
Now, I'm here to offer a bit of advice. It's worth every penny I'm charging you for it, Ken.
The 9th district will be crucial to your success. I'm sure you already know that, but it has to be said anyway.
The Fightin' Ninth is full of folks just like I have described.
"Granddad was a Democrat, Dad was a Democrat, so I guess that makes me a Democrat. Sure, in a Presidential election I usually vote for the most conservative guy. I'm a conservative guy myself. But, by cracky, I'm a Democrat and I want my local guys to be Democrats just like Dad was."
Or so it goes.
You have to get more than 25% of these leftovers excited enough about you to tell their friends.
The next part may seem mean. I don't intend it that way. The way to their hearts will not be easy. Especially for a guy whose last name ends with a vowel. Face it, Cuccinelli is not a name heard around here very often. I suggest making "Ken!" a catch-phrase down this way. Perhaps they'll even begin to think Shannon is a sissy name. Stress the "Ken", lose the "Cuccinelli". Or shorten it to Cooch. At least down this way. Nothing personal, just the way folks in the coalfields think.
Oh, by the way, there ain't a lot of Catholics down this way either. We're mostly Baptists and Pentecostals. Regardless of political affiliation, probably as conservative as you, if not more so. Most are a bit leery of Catholics, though.
I'm afraid Brownlee was right when he stressed his prosecutor past. Shannon and his cheerleaders are already using it. And you've painted yourself into a corner on the triggerman thing. You can't switch gears now, so stress public safety any other way you can.
Spend time down this way. It worked for Warner. It worked for Kaine. It can work for you. Get to Martinsville. Not the speedway, though that won't hurt. (There is a great 4th of July event there each year. Attend it.) Get to downtown Martinsville. I suggest a Friday evening attending a T.G.I.F concert. Get in touch with Councilman Danny Turner or City Attorney Eric Monday, they can arrange it and they'll be good guides.
Get to the outlying areas of the ninth. Call Jerry Lester out in Grundy. Work with the Kilgores down U.S.23 from there, you know them, I'm sure. Get by here in Stanleytown, we'll work out an event for you here.
Abingdon, Bristol, Roanoke, and even Martinsville are important, but ignore Stuart, Hurley, Norton, and Bassett at your peril.
The Peach Festival in Stuart. If at all possible, be there.
Floydfest in Floyd. If at all possible, be there.
Poor Boy's Dinner in Galax. If at all possible, be there.
The Fall races at Martinsville and Bristol. If at all possible, be there.
You get the idea. It all comes down to six little words. When it comes to the ninth district, if at all possible, be there.
And finally, I'm here to help, use me any way you can.
From the moment I walked into the Colosseum on Saturday morning, I knew it was Ken Cuccinelli's convention. To most of the delegates, selecting Governor and Lt. Governor candidates and a party chairman was secondary. For them, nominating Ken was job one.
I was impressed with the organization Ken has put together. And I'm sure it will only strengthen in the months to come. Congratulations Ken, from a John Brownlee supporter, on a job well done.
Now the tough part begins. It's easy to get the support of those who reside on the right side of the conservative spectrum. Those who are involved enough to pay real money to travel across the state to attend a political convention. It's a bit tougher to get the more moderate. And tougher still to get those guys that have voted a straight Democratic line forever just because Granddad did.
A wise man once told me that any candidate comes into a race with 20% locked down. It's there. You don't really even have to work for it. That's true for his opponent as well. That means you have to convince the voters in the middle. You're both fighting for them.
So, you have to go out there and convince just 31% of the voters that you're their guy. Sounds simple. Only 31%. Until you realize that that most can't name you or your opponent. Sure, they know the finalists on American Idol, but ask them who represents them in Congress or the General Assembly and you get a blank stare. Or you get the name of the last guy they saw interviewed on CNN. They don't know him, they don't know you, and they don't really care.
Now, I'm here to offer a bit of advice. It's worth every penny I'm charging you for it, Ken.
The 9th district will be crucial to your success. I'm sure you already know that, but it has to be said anyway.
The Fightin' Ninth is full of folks just like I have described.
"Granddad was a Democrat, Dad was a Democrat, so I guess that makes me a Democrat. Sure, in a Presidential election I usually vote for the most conservative guy. I'm a conservative guy myself. But, by cracky, I'm a Democrat and I want my local guys to be Democrats just like Dad was."
Or so it goes.
You have to get more than 25% of these leftovers excited enough about you to tell their friends.
The next part may seem mean. I don't intend it that way. The way to their hearts will not be easy. Especially for a guy whose last name ends with a vowel. Face it, Cuccinelli is not a name heard around here very often. I suggest making "Ken!" a catch-phrase down this way. Perhaps they'll even begin to think Shannon is a sissy name. Stress the "Ken", lose the "Cuccinelli". Or shorten it to Cooch. At least down this way. Nothing personal, just the way folks in the coalfields think.
Oh, by the way, there ain't a lot of Catholics down this way either. We're mostly Baptists and Pentecostals. Regardless of political affiliation, probably as conservative as you, if not more so. Most are a bit leery of Catholics, though.
I'm afraid Brownlee was right when he stressed his prosecutor past. Shannon and his cheerleaders are already using it. And you've painted yourself into a corner on the triggerman thing. You can't switch gears now, so stress public safety any other way you can.
Spend time down this way. It worked for Warner. It worked for Kaine. It can work for you. Get to Martinsville. Not the speedway, though that won't hurt. (There is a great 4th of July event there each year. Attend it.) Get to downtown Martinsville. I suggest a Friday evening attending a T.G.I.F concert. Get in touch with Councilman Danny Turner or City Attorney Eric Monday, they can arrange it and they'll be good guides.
Get to the outlying areas of the ninth. Call Jerry Lester out in Grundy. Work with the Kilgores down U.S.23 from there, you know them, I'm sure. Get by here in Stanleytown, we'll work out an event for you here.
Abingdon, Bristol, Roanoke, and even Martinsville are important, but ignore Stuart, Hurley, Norton, and Bassett at your peril.
The Peach Festival in Stuart. If at all possible, be there.
Floydfest in Floyd. If at all possible, be there.
Poor Boy's Dinner in Galax. If at all possible, be there.
The Fall races at Martinsville and Bristol. If at all possible, be there.
You get the idea. It all comes down to six little words. When it comes to the ninth district, if at all possible, be there.
And finally, I'm here to help, use me any way you can.
Monday, June 01, 2009
Convention's Over. Thoughts, Part One
Yesterday, Sunday, was a busy day here. First I had to see Kilo off safely back to Wise, then off to Church. The afternoon was filled with the first graduation ceremony for our school, V.I.C.A. I got back home just as the race at Dover was winding down, (will Johnson get another championship this year?), then began preparing for other overnight guests on Sunday evening.
Already pretty wiped out from the convention, Sunday evening was spent in my favorite chair, kicked back and relaxing, with "The Fugitive" with Harrison Ford and Tommy Lee Jones.
Now, late in the morning on Monday, the first Monday of my Summer break, I have seen last night's guests off, I have the tractor started and am preparing to spend the next several hours mowing.
But first I want to recap the RPV convention of 2009.
RPV did a stellar job organizing this convention. The facility was great, the only complaints I have, and heard often from others, was that the registration area was very difficult to find, and many units had to climb to the stars in order to find their seats.
Registration was very easy, even though it took me two whole laps around the circular Colosseum before I finally found someone who could give clear directions. (Thanks John Brownlee.)
RPV's organization was once again evident on Saturday morning when Kilo and I found our way to blogger's row. We had the best seats in the house, even though I seldom sat. Kilo did a bit of live blogging, I preferred to visit and look for stories. Besides, what's the point live blogging an event where most of the people interested in the outcome are sitting right in front of you? Those who could not attend for one reason or another, (missed you Norm), could easily keep up with the RPV's own live feed as well as the hundreds of Tweets.
Lynn has a comprehensive list of Virginia bloggers who found their way on and off blogger's row here.
It takes me about 18 hours to mow this place, and I'm at least two weeks behind. I'll add part two later.
Already pretty wiped out from the convention, Sunday evening was spent in my favorite chair, kicked back and relaxing, with "The Fugitive" with Harrison Ford and Tommy Lee Jones.
Now, late in the morning on Monday, the first Monday of my Summer break, I have seen last night's guests off, I have the tractor started and am preparing to spend the next several hours mowing.
But first I want to recap the RPV convention of 2009.
RPV did a stellar job organizing this convention. The facility was great, the only complaints I have, and heard often from others, was that the registration area was very difficult to find, and many units had to climb to the stars in order to find their seats.
Registration was very easy, even though it took me two whole laps around the circular Colosseum before I finally found someone who could give clear directions. (Thanks John Brownlee.)
RPV's organization was once again evident on Saturday morning when Kilo and I found our way to blogger's row. We had the best seats in the house, even though I seldom sat. Kilo did a bit of live blogging, I preferred to visit and look for stories. Besides, what's the point live blogging an event where most of the people interested in the outcome are sitting right in front of you? Those who could not attend for one reason or another, (missed you Norm), could easily keep up with the RPV's own live feed as well as the hundreds of Tweets.
Lynn has a comprehensive list of Virginia bloggers who found their way on and off blogger's row here.
It takes me about 18 hours to mow this place, and I'm at least two weeks behind. I'll add part two later.
Saturday, May 30, 2009
RPV Convention 2009 Is Over
I just got back into Henry County. Let Bailey, my dog, go out into the yard and pee on stuff. He really seems to enjoy doing that. I'm about ready to kick off the boots and let the events of the day filter out.
I spent most of the day on "blogger's row". RPV really set up a great facility for us, with the expected glitches, of course. Nothing serious, just a tripped breaker here and there, but all soon sorted out. Thanks to all those who worked that area.
Even though I spent time on blogger's row, I didn't actually write anything while I was there. I did find a few stories to tell, but that will come later. Tomorrow I'll write up an analysis of the day and tell a few of the stories I came away with.
See you tomorrow, good night all.
I spent most of the day on "blogger's row". RPV really set up a great facility for us, with the expected glitches, of course. Nothing serious, just a tripped breaker here and there, but all soon sorted out. Thanks to all those who worked that area.
Even though I spent time on blogger's row, I didn't actually write anything while I was there. I did find a few stories to tell, but that will come later. Tomorrow I'll write up an analysis of the day and tell a few of the stories I came away with.
See you tomorrow, good night all.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Answers Please, Brian Gentry
A lot of to do going on about the infamous robo call. Yeah, I got it. Yeah, I immediately associated it in my mind with the Cuccinelli campaign. Right or wrong, I'm sorry, That's the way I called it.
Did Ken himself approve it beforehand? Not likely. Did Ken himself approve it immediately after it first aired? Possibly.
Is it a major blunder for the Cuccinelli campaign? Most definitely.
The man(?) behind it seems to be one Brian Gentry. A paid stooge for Bob Marshall in a previous campaign. At least Brian proudly claims responsibility for the weakly supported evidence on the website noted on the call in question.
A couple more questions before I get to my astute analysis.
Brian has called Bob McDonnell a "liberal". Brian claims that John Brownlee is anti-2nd amendment. Brian is an idiot.
Wait. Those are not questions, are they?
No. Those are facts. The few facts that can be discerned from reading Brian's website. There are few facts about John Brownlee on a site that purports to expose Brownlee facts. Many innuendos and suppositions, but few facts.
Back to those questions now.
Question one. Brian is on record as a paid performer for Bob Marshall. Does Brian have an equally long record as a Republican?
Question two. Is Brian a member of any Republican committee?
Question three. And perhaps the most important of all. Is Brian affiliated in any way with either the Cuccinelli or Foster campaigns?
Answers please, Brian. Or Ken. Or Dave.
Did Ken himself approve it beforehand? Not likely. Did Ken himself approve it immediately after it first aired? Possibly.
Is it a major blunder for the Cuccinelli campaign? Most definitely.
The man(?) behind it seems to be one Brian Gentry. A paid stooge for Bob Marshall in a previous campaign. At least Brian proudly claims responsibility for the weakly supported evidence on the website noted on the call in question.
A couple more questions before I get to my astute analysis.
Brian has called Bob McDonnell a "liberal". Brian claims that John Brownlee is anti-2nd amendment. Brian is an idiot.
Wait. Those are not questions, are they?
No. Those are facts. The few facts that can be discerned from reading Brian's website. There are few facts about John Brownlee on a site that purports to expose Brownlee facts. Many innuendos and suppositions, but few facts.
Back to those questions now.
Question one. Brian is on record as a paid performer for Bob Marshall. Does Brian have an equally long record as a Republican?
Question two. Is Brian a member of any Republican committee?
Question three. And perhaps the most important of all. Is Brian affiliated in any way with either the Cuccinelli or Foster campaigns?
Answers please, Brian. Or Ken. Or Dave.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
RPV Convention
It's the last week of school. Friday will be the last day of school, but I won't be there. Not for long anyway. I'll be leaving fairly early on Friday, heading to Richmond where I'll be a delegate to the Republican party's state convention.
Bob McDonnell will be our candidate for Governor. That has been long ago settled.
As delegates, we will have several items to decide. We gotta pick a Lt. Governor candidate. Easy. I'll get to that later.
We need to come together on a choice for Attorney General. This one is a bit tougher, but I'll get to it a bit later too.
And we have to choose a new chairman for the group, chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia.
The recent L'affaire Frederick being still fresh in everyone's mind, this may be the toughest choice as well as the most important of the weekend. In many ways this one election will set the stage for the future of our party in Virginia. Not only will this be a referendum on which of the two candidates, Pat Mullins or Bill Stanley, will lead our party, this is in many ways a referendum on the vision and leadership of our state central committee.
After dumping Jeff Frederick, in a manner that was widely criticized, the state central committee installed Pat Mullins as chairman. Pat may be a great guy. I don't know. The Virginia political expert I rely on to advise me on such matters does not know him either. He's a local unit chairman in the same congressional district as my expert adviser, but still unknown.
Bill Stanley, on the other hand is also a local unit chairman in my expert's district. I've met Bill Stanley. I don't really know Mr. Stanley. But I've met him, he's very likeable, he's a good conversationalist, and he seems trustworthy.
I've received many emails from Mr. Stanley, I suppose you have too. I've received one mailer from Mr. Mullins. I've also received one mailer from Stanley.
In his emails and mailer Mr. Stanley has outlined many innovative ideas and plans. Mr. Mullins has touted his endorsements. Endorsements are good. I'm essentially putting forth some endorsements here today. I like endorsements.
I like ideas and plans better, though.
Right now I'm leaning hard toward Bill Stanley. Before I can fully endorse him though, I feel it is only right that I actually meet Mr. Mullins. That won't happen until Friday afternoon at the earliest, so I'm tentatively endorsing Bill Stanley for Chairman. If that changes you'll be notified early Saturday before the voting begins. No update will mean that Bill Stanley remains my choice.
Now let's move to the easy choice. Bill Bolling is and will be our next Lt. Governor. I see no point in even mentioning his opponent's name. A solid conservative to the core, Bill, with roots in SWVA and a conservative record in Richmond that is unequalled, will leave the convention with 70 plus percent of the delegate vote. Bill Bolling has a proven record to stand on.
Now the tough one.
No question about it, Ken Cuccinelli is my hero in the Virginia Senate. When Ken first announced his intention to run for attorney general, I wholeheartedly supported that move. Remember though, that was when he was a lone candidate in a field that has since grown by two. Two other excellent candidates have since joined Ken in his quest to be our next attorney general.
Dave Foster is a candidate I could, (and will), support in the future. Dave will someday make a great Lt. Governor candidate, a great AG candidate, or even a great candidate for Governor. But not yet. Not quite. It's not that Dave is not ready. Instead, we as a party are not ready for him.
What I mean by that is the reason that John Brownlee has my enthusiastic support for AG.
My history with John Brownlee goes back to sometime in 2002 when he prosecuted my BOS member. You can read about that here.
There is more to my support for Mr. Brownlee than that though. As early as last Summer John assured me that he would not oppose Bolling for the Governor spot next. He promised to hold out if Bill Bolling decides to run for the governorship after McDonnell.
Our party has a line-up that is pretty much unbeatable for the next 12 years if, and only if, our candidates agree to work together.
On Friday I'll be asking both Dave Foster and Ken Cuccinelli their plans for the future should they win the AG nomination. Their answers will be posted here on Saturday morning.
Until then I don't see anyone persuading me to change from my wholehearted endorsement of John Brownlee.
So there you have it. For what it's worth, I'll be voting Saturday for the following;
Bob McDonnell will be our candidate for Governor. That has been long ago settled.
As delegates, we will have several items to decide. We gotta pick a Lt. Governor candidate. Easy. I'll get to that later.
We need to come together on a choice for Attorney General. This one is a bit tougher, but I'll get to it a bit later too.
And we have to choose a new chairman for the group, chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia.
The recent L'affaire Frederick being still fresh in everyone's mind, this may be the toughest choice as well as the most important of the weekend. In many ways this one election will set the stage for the future of our party in Virginia. Not only will this be a referendum on which of the two candidates, Pat Mullins or Bill Stanley, will lead our party, this is in many ways a referendum on the vision and leadership of our state central committee.
After dumping Jeff Frederick, in a manner that was widely criticized, the state central committee installed Pat Mullins as chairman. Pat may be a great guy. I don't know. The Virginia political expert I rely on to advise me on such matters does not know him either. He's a local unit chairman in the same congressional district as my expert adviser, but still unknown.
Bill Stanley, on the other hand is also a local unit chairman in my expert's district. I've met Bill Stanley. I don't really know Mr. Stanley. But I've met him, he's very likeable, he's a good conversationalist, and he seems trustworthy.
I've received many emails from Mr. Stanley, I suppose you have too. I've received one mailer from Mr. Mullins. I've also received one mailer from Stanley.
In his emails and mailer Mr. Stanley has outlined many innovative ideas and plans. Mr. Mullins has touted his endorsements. Endorsements are good. I'm essentially putting forth some endorsements here today. I like endorsements.
I like ideas and plans better, though.
Right now I'm leaning hard toward Bill Stanley. Before I can fully endorse him though, I feel it is only right that I actually meet Mr. Mullins. That won't happen until Friday afternoon at the earliest, so I'm tentatively endorsing Bill Stanley for Chairman. If that changes you'll be notified early Saturday before the voting begins. No update will mean that Bill Stanley remains my choice.
Now let's move to the easy choice. Bill Bolling is and will be our next Lt. Governor. I see no point in even mentioning his opponent's name. A solid conservative to the core, Bill, with roots in SWVA and a conservative record in Richmond that is unequalled, will leave the convention with 70 plus percent of the delegate vote. Bill Bolling has a proven record to stand on.
- A 100% pro-family voting record from The Family Foundation
- A 100% pro-life voting record from the Virginia Society for Human Life
- Endorsed by the Virginia Society for Human Life (2005)
- Supported parental notification and consent legislation, a ban on partial birth abortions and higher patient safety standards for abortion clinics
- Cast the tie-breaking vote to deny state funding to Planned Parenthood
- Fought to restore abstinence education funding that Governor Kaine stripped from the budget
- Led the fight to pass the Marriage Amendment
- Has opposed every tax increase proposed by Governors Warner and Kaine
Now the tough one.
No question about it, Ken Cuccinelli is my hero in the Virginia Senate. When Ken first announced his intention to run for attorney general, I wholeheartedly supported that move. Remember though, that was when he was a lone candidate in a field that has since grown by two. Two other excellent candidates have since joined Ken in his quest to be our next attorney general.
Dave Foster is a candidate I could, (and will), support in the future. Dave will someday make a great Lt. Governor candidate, a great AG candidate, or even a great candidate for Governor. But not yet. Not quite. It's not that Dave is not ready. Instead, we as a party are not ready for him.
What I mean by that is the reason that John Brownlee has my enthusiastic support for AG.
My history with John Brownlee goes back to sometime in 2002 when he prosecuted my BOS member. You can read about that here.
There is more to my support for Mr. Brownlee than that though. As early as last Summer John assured me that he would not oppose Bolling for the Governor spot next. He promised to hold out if Bill Bolling decides to run for the governorship after McDonnell.
Our party has a line-up that is pretty much unbeatable for the next 12 years if, and only if, our candidates agree to work together.
On Friday I'll be asking both Dave Foster and Ken Cuccinelli their plans for the future should they win the AG nomination. Their answers will be posted here on Saturday morning.
Until then I don't see anyone persuading me to change from my wholehearted endorsement of John Brownlee.
So there you have it. For what it's worth, I'll be voting Saturday for the following;
- RPV Chairman; Bill Stanley
- Lt. Governor; Bill Bolling
- AG; John Brownlee
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
School's Out For Summer
School's Out For Ever!
Alice Cooper said it in song years ago.
School's not really out forever, but for the next couple of months school's out for me. I'll be working with a couple of students on their summer school courses, and I'll be working on getting our newest campus in Ridgeway Virginia ready for next year. But I'll have much more time for frivolities like blogging in the next few months.
I'll also be launching a new Virginia political magazine this summer. I'm really excited about this new project. Similar in content to Jim Bacon's excellent "Bacon's Rebellion", but going a few steps further, I have high hopes for this new project. I'll keep you updated on the progress here. I have a couple of well known Virginians signed on as regular writers, but I need more. Please contact me if you would like to apply for a liberally unpaid position as a regular columnist.
Alice Cooper said it in song years ago.
School's not really out forever, but for the next couple of months school's out for me. I'll be working with a couple of students on their summer school courses, and I'll be working on getting our newest campus in Ridgeway Virginia ready for next year. But I'll have much more time for frivolities like blogging in the next few months.
I'll also be launching a new Virginia political magazine this summer. I'm really excited about this new project. Similar in content to Jim Bacon's excellent "Bacon's Rebellion", but going a few steps further, I have high hopes for this new project. I'll keep you updated on the progress here. I have a couple of well known Virginians signed on as regular writers, but I need more. Please contact me if you would like to apply for a liberally unpaid position as a regular columnist.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Part One. Partisan Blogging; Leftist Edition
I've been pretty much inactive lately. Especially when compared to my early years in this blogging thing. I do still read many blogs. I do still get my dander up when folks on either side spread political BS like it was so much fertilizer.
The latest fertilizer spreaders I've noticed are Lowell Feld and that perpetual spreader, Waldo Jaquith.
Blogging.
On the surface, blogging is easy. Real journalism, now that's a bit tougher. I don't claim to do either, let alone one or the other particularly well. Both these characters claim, publicly or privately, to be experts at one or the other. Or both.
Let's examine a couple of recent "posts", as bloggers call an article, and see where they really come from.
Let's start off with Waldo. I'm sure you know Waldo, the cute kid from Charlottesville with a great smile and good hair. He's also got a really good looking wife and a pretty smart brother. I never really learned how to smile for a photograph, and I ain't got good hair. Oh, I got hair, just not much of it anymore, and what's there has gone really, really blonde.
Waldo recently "posted" what he would call an "article" about the "Global Warming Crisis". Yes, apparently Waldo is an Al Gore disciple.
Waldo has discovered an old report from the Global Climate Coalition, an enregy industry-financed group, that he says, decided years ago, that “the scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied,”
Waldo does not include a link to the report he quotes. Oh, he does include a link to the New York Times report on the report, but once there you have to have really sharp eyes to find the link to the actual report.
Here you need to remember the quote from Waldo; "...the scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied..."
There's more.(PDF link) Read the report yourself. NOTE: Unlike Waldo, this is a link to the actual report. Read it yourself.
Waldo could have included this link, but chose not to.
Read the entire report and you find that not only can man's contribution to climate change cannot be denied, you also cannot determine whether man's contribution will add more to global warming, or global cooling.
Read that again. The report does say that man's contribution to global warming cannot be denied. It also says that it cannot be determined whether or not man can contribute to warming or cooling. The report is also very careful to note that, although the hypothetical contribution by mankind to climate change cannot be denied, it cannot be determined how much or how little mankind may be able to contribute.
Sure. We may be able to affect the global temperature, but to what degree, and in which direction, no one can say.
Next, Lowell Feld and the recent Unemployment fiasco in Virginia.
The latest fertilizer spreaders I've noticed are Lowell Feld and that perpetual spreader, Waldo Jaquith.
Blogging.
On the surface, blogging is easy. Real journalism, now that's a bit tougher. I don't claim to do either, let alone one or the other particularly well. Both these characters claim, publicly or privately, to be experts at one or the other. Or both.
Let's examine a couple of recent "posts", as bloggers call an article, and see where they really come from.
Let's start off with Waldo. I'm sure you know Waldo, the cute kid from Charlottesville with a great smile and good hair. He's also got a really good looking wife and a pretty smart brother. I never really learned how to smile for a photograph, and I ain't got good hair. Oh, I got hair, just not much of it anymore, and what's there has gone really, really blonde.
Waldo recently "posted" what he would call an "article" about the "Global Warming Crisis". Yes, apparently Waldo is an Al Gore disciple.
Waldo has discovered an old report from the Global Climate Coalition, an enregy industry-financed group, that he says, decided years ago, that “the scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied,”
Waldo does not include a link to the report he quotes. Oh, he does include a link to the New York Times report on the report, but once there you have to have really sharp eyes to find the link to the actual report.
Here you need to remember the quote from Waldo; "...the scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied..."
There's more.(PDF link) Read the report yourself. NOTE: Unlike Waldo, this is a link to the actual report. Read it yourself.
Waldo could have included this link, but chose not to.
Read the entire report and you find that not only can man's contribution to climate change cannot be denied, you also cannot determine whether man's contribution will add more to global warming, or global cooling.
Read that again. The report does say that man's contribution to global warming cannot be denied. It also says that it cannot be determined whether or not man can contribute to warming or cooling. The report is also very careful to note that, although the hypothetical contribution by mankind to climate change cannot be denied, it cannot be determined how much or how little mankind may be able to contribute.
Sure. We may be able to affect the global temperature, but to what degree, and in which direction, no one can say.
Next, Lowell Feld and the recent Unemployment fiasco in Virginia.
Monday, April 06, 2009
Warner On The Democratic Process, Failing Grade
I've not written much on the Employee Free Choice Act before. I have, however, written about my thoughts on unions in general;
All's fair that ain't ruled unfair. And even then it's iffy.
There is no way to put a pretty face on this blatant power grab by unions and their bought Democratic stooges. If enough workers in a plant, store, jobsite, mine, or whatever can be arm-twisted into signing a card, the union is in.
No democratic election. No secret ballot. No anonymity allowed. You've been arm-twisted, your "vote" has been recorded.
Then the nightmare begins.
The workers and their employer will be forced into a binding arbitration if the employer does not immediately capitulate to the union's demands. Even if this arbitration is so detrimental to the company's business that it results in the demise of the company.
Virginians need to know that Senator Mark Warner has decided that the democratic (small "d") process need not apply to you and your workplace.
Any union, whether it be my old brotherhood the Teamsters, or my Grandfather's UMWA, or your local teacher's union, the VEA, is based on a single flawed premise. All unions are based on the concept that all workers are equal. Anyone who has spent a day on the factory floor, or a night in a mine, or a few miles on the road in a Freightliner knows that just ain't true. Even Dan, my beloved uncle, if he were to be honest about it would tell you that, given a choice, he would rather go down the road with Gary Martin than Roger Potter, two drivers I had the privilege to work with at that time. Yet in the eyes of the union they were equal. Horse hockey!As a former union member, and an engineer working in two heavily unionized industries, I know a thing or two about unions and their organizing methods.
All's fair that ain't ruled unfair. And even then it's iffy.
There is no way to put a pretty face on this blatant power grab by unions and their bought Democratic stooges. If enough workers in a plant, store, jobsite, mine, or whatever can be arm-twisted into signing a card, the union is in.
No democratic election. No secret ballot. No anonymity allowed. You've been arm-twisted, your "vote" has been recorded.
Then the nightmare begins.
The workers and their employer will be forced into a binding arbitration if the employer does not immediately capitulate to the union's demands. Even if this arbitration is so detrimental to the company's business that it results in the demise of the company.
Virginians need to know that Senator Mark Warner has decided that the democratic (small "d") process need not apply to you and your workplace.
L'affaire Frederick
I spent quite a bit of time today on the phone with an RPV executive committee member in whom I have quite a bit of trust.
I will report in more detail on my thoughts concerning the L'affaire Frederick soon, it's being written, revised, re-written now.
H/T to JAB for the title.
I will report in more detail on my thoughts concerning the L'affaire Frederick soon, it's being written, revised, re-written now.
H/T to JAB for the title.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
HB1388 And The Meaning Of Words
Hello Lloyd. Nice to see you drop in. Guess there's nothing much new to plagiarize lately?
Let me back up a moment.
My previous little clip was a critique of a bill recently passed out of the House of Representatives. A bill co-sponsored by Virginia's boy wonder Tom "Terrific" Perriello, HB1388.
A couple of commenters got their panties in a bunch because they have fallen for the talking points and not read the bill for themselves.
Lloyd Snook, an attorney from Charlottesville, even begins his comment with the snide remark, "Didn't read the bill before blogging about it, I guess..."
Yes, James and Lloyd, I did read the bill. Now perhaps you two should go and do likewise. Stop listening to defences of the bill and actually take the time to see what it really says.
Neither Lloyd nor James offer arguments of any substance, just platitudes and talking points.
They both claim that I'm wrong when I say that the bill bans participants from regularly attending church, or teaching in a church youth group, but the bill is quite clear on this point. I would also like to be clear on one point. I am not a lawyer. Don't even claim to be, like Lloyd does.
Here is the actual text from HB1388 (now S277) as passed by the House;
And so it goes until it gets to paragraph 7;
OK.
Besides the fact that the word participant is plainly used in the above quoted section, the bill itself has a section titled "definitions". In that section there is no official definition for "participant", however the word "participant" is used extensively throughout the bill to describe a citizen volunteer "participating" in this endeavor. Organizations receiving funds are typically referred to in this bill as "Organizations" or "Grant Recipients".
So, I suppose if you're tasked with the rather onerous job of defending this mess you must disregard common English language and its generally accepted use in favor of made up stuff which you've been told to say.
A participant is a participant unless he's an organization, then he's a grant recipient. Give me a break, Lloyd. I may not be a lawyer, but I can read the English language.
Let me back up a moment.
My previous little clip was a critique of a bill recently passed out of the House of Representatives. A bill co-sponsored by Virginia's boy wonder Tom "Terrific" Perriello, HB1388.
A couple of commenters got their panties in a bunch because they have fallen for the talking points and not read the bill for themselves.
Lloyd Snook, an attorney from Charlottesville, even begins his comment with the snide remark, "Didn't read the bill before blogging about it, I guess..."
Yes, James and Lloyd, I did read the bill. Now perhaps you two should go and do likewise. Stop listening to defences of the bill and actually take the time to see what it really says.
Neither Lloyd nor James offer arguments of any substance, just platitudes and talking points.
They both claim that I'm wrong when I say that the bill bans participants from regularly attending church, or teaching in a church youth group, but the bill is quite clear on this point. I would also like to be clear on one point. I am not a lawyer. Don't even claim to be, like Lloyd does.
Here is the actual text from HB1388 (now S277) as passed by the House;
Emphasis added;
PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES AND INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS.Section 125 (42 U.S.C. 12575) is amended to read as follows: `SEC. 125. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES AND INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS.
`(a) Prohibited Activities- A participant in an approved national service position under this subtitle may not engage in the following activities:
`(1) Attempting to influence legislation. (No letters to your Congressman, or I suppose, letters to the editor of your local paper.)
`(2) Organizing or engaging in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes....
And so it goes until it gets to paragraph 7;
`(7) Engaging in religious instruction, conducting worship services, providing instruction as part of a program that includes mandatory religious instruction or worship, constructing or operating facilities devoted to religious instruction or worship, maintaining facilities primarily or inherently devoted to religious instruction or worship, or engaging in any form of religious proselytization.Both James and Lloyd claim the above applies to the organization receiving funds, not the participant.
OK.
Besides the fact that the word participant is plainly used in the above quoted section, the bill itself has a section titled "definitions". In that section there is no official definition for "participant", however the word "participant" is used extensively throughout the bill to describe a citizen volunteer "participating" in this endeavor. Organizations receiving funds are typically referred to in this bill as "Organizations" or "Grant Recipients".
So, I suppose if you're tasked with the rather onerous job of defending this mess you must disregard common English language and its generally accepted use in favor of made up stuff which you've been told to say.
A participant is a participant unless he's an organization, then he's a grant recipient. Give me a break, Lloyd. I may not be a lawyer, but I can read the English language.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Tom Perriello's Idea Of Moderate-ism
Jonas Clark, one of the Virginia patriots at UCV, tells us of the requirements for Obama's much vaunted "Volunteer Corp". You remember, he spoke of it so many times during his campaign.
Tom spoke of it often as well, but neither had the courage then, or now, to tell the whole truth of the matter.
Jonas does have the courage to speak of it, but not in the glowing terms you've heard before; He quotes the actual text, as it passed in the House, (with Tom Perriello as Virginia's only Represenative co-sponsoring).
Way to go Tom! That's really standing up for true Virginia values. NOT!
Tom spoke of it often as well, but neither had the courage then, or now, to tell the whole truth of the matter.
Jonas does have the courage to speak of it, but not in the glowing terms you've heard before; He quotes the actual text, as it passed in the House, (with Tom Perriello as Virginia's only Represenative co-sponsoring).
(Italics Jonas')Jonas doesn't tell us this final bit of news, but if you scroll on down the text of the bill, to section 6104, you find that this "Volunteer" group will eventually become required service. Sort of like the draft. Except in the Army you can at least attend the Church of your choice.
SEC. 1304. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES AND INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS.
Section 125 (42 U.S.C. 12575) is amended to read as follows:
SEC. 125. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES AND INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS.
(a) Prohibited Activities-A participant in an approved national service position under this subtitle may not engage in the following activities:
(1) Attempting to influence legislation. (No calling your congressman to tell him/her to vote yes or no)
(2) Organizing or engaging in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes. (No grassroots organizing, no parades, no protests, no Grassfire.)
(7) Engaging in religious instruction, conducting worship services, providing instruction as part of a program that includes mandatory religious instruction or worship, constructing or operating facilities devoted to religious instruction or worship, maintaining facilities primarily or inherently devoted to religious instruction or worship, or engaging in any form of religious proselytization.
[LINK]
Way to go Tom! That's really standing up for true Virginia values. NOT!
SCC and Me. Schedule Conflict
I know. I know. I promised to provide my opinion of the "smoking gun" that was offered yesterday. Sometimes things just don't work out.
This morning I put on a pot of coffee, and nothing happened. Well, not nothing. Something happened, of course. Just what was supposed to happen didn't. The water never got hot and forced its way up that little tube into the nozzle that sprays out over the freshly ground bean fragments, converting them into a damp, dark brown, muddy looking mass while producing a hot pot of morning. Instead, the cold water just sat there. Slowly leaking out onto the counter, an obvious omen that the day would not go according to plan.
I searched through the garage for my old Mr. Coffee backup, as reliable as it is ugly, and tried again. Of course, it worked.
While performing the monthly de-batcherlorization of my kitchen, I spoke again with my SCC friend. He was going to try to fit me in between two other meetings today, one early this morning, the second at 3:00pm at a location almost 3 hours from here.
It couldn't happen. If he made the one hour detour by my house, he would be almost 2 hours late for his second meeting. Can't have that.
We'll try again in the coming days, and once again, I promise. You'll be the first to know.
This morning I put on a pot of coffee, and nothing happened. Well, not nothing. Something happened, of course. Just what was supposed to happen didn't. The water never got hot and forced its way up that little tube into the nozzle that sprays out over the freshly ground bean fragments, converting them into a damp, dark brown, muddy looking mass while producing a hot pot of morning. Instead, the cold water just sat there. Slowly leaking out onto the counter, an obvious omen that the day would not go according to plan.
I searched through the garage for my old Mr. Coffee backup, as reliable as it is ugly, and tried again. Of course, it worked.
While performing the monthly de-batcherlorization of my kitchen, I spoke again with my SCC friend. He was going to try to fit me in between two other meetings today, one early this morning, the second at 3:00pm at a location almost 3 hours from here.
It couldn't happen. If he made the one hour detour by my house, he would be almost 2 hours late for his second meeting. Can't have that.
We'll try again in the coming days, and once again, I promise. You'll be the first to know.
Friday, March 27, 2009
Frederick Kerfuffle Part Deux
Just got off the phone, about an hour or so ago, with a member of the SCC.
It was an interesting conversation, as conversations with this individual usually are. This SCC member is understandably concerned with my position, as stated below, on the Jeff Frederick kerfuffle. (Yes, I'm going to continue to call it a kerfuffle. For now.)
I told my friendly neighborhood SCC member that I too was disappointed. This whole episode has been badly handled from the beginning. Not by that particular SCC member, who is known for handling things well, but by just about everyone else involved.
See, the problem is, most everyone who paid real dollars to travel to Richmond last year, and real dollars to stay at that really nice hotel across the street from the convention, and even more real dollars for food and drink while they were there in support of Jeff Frederick came back from that convention well pleased that their guy had won.
Almost immediately they began to hear rumbles and non-specific gripes from their party elders who had supported Lt. Governor Hager. Some had even been pressured by those same party elders to change their mind at the last minute to vote for Hager.
By the time of the Advance, in December, those rumbles had grown to a dull roar. Yet still there were no specific charges against Chairman Frederick. Just complaints from those whose guy had lost many months before.
Now we come to the point, a few weeks ago, where news reports began leaking that the SCC had decided it was time for Jeff to go. He had been asked to resign, had been told that if he didn't he would be removed in April. But still no specific charges were put forth to the people who had elected him. It still looked to those good people as if the party elders, who had been griping incessantly, were about to exercise their muscle. Strongarm style.
Finally someone had the good sense to release the specific charges to the press. Now the people could at least decide if their party elders were exercising muscle or brain. With Chairman Frederick's release of his response to the charges, one by one, it seemed to most that there was much more muscle than brain at work on the SCC.
Still, as I explained to my SCC member, I knew the SCC had more information than I did. They knew more about the actual situation than the grassroots members knew. But they were not forthcoming with it. For fear of "bad press" I was told, on more than one occasion. By more than one "insider".
My God, how much worse could the press get?
Speaking of bad press, the reply, from some un-named SCC member, to John Gizzi that no thought whatsoever had been given to a possible replacement, was enough for me.
But not yet. Not quite. I've maintained an open mind on this episode this far, I'll keep it open a few more hours. My SCC contact will be visiting me in the morning for coffee. He has what he calls the smoking gun. He has permission to show it, let people read it, let them absorb it, but they cannot copy it.
Fair enough. I'll look at it. I'll absorb it. I'll treat my friend to a cup of great Honduras Coffee and we'll talk about it.
You'll be the first to know.
It was an interesting conversation, as conversations with this individual usually are. This SCC member is understandably concerned with my position, as stated below, on the Jeff Frederick kerfuffle. (Yes, I'm going to continue to call it a kerfuffle. For now.)
I told my friendly neighborhood SCC member that I too was disappointed. This whole episode has been badly handled from the beginning. Not by that particular SCC member, who is known for handling things well, but by just about everyone else involved.
See, the problem is, most everyone who paid real dollars to travel to Richmond last year, and real dollars to stay at that really nice hotel across the street from the convention, and even more real dollars for food and drink while they were there in support of Jeff Frederick came back from that convention well pleased that their guy had won.
Almost immediately they began to hear rumbles and non-specific gripes from their party elders who had supported Lt. Governor Hager. Some had even been pressured by those same party elders to change their mind at the last minute to vote for Hager.
By the time of the Advance, in December, those rumbles had grown to a dull roar. Yet still there were no specific charges against Chairman Frederick. Just complaints from those whose guy had lost many months before.
Now we come to the point, a few weeks ago, where news reports began leaking that the SCC had decided it was time for Jeff to go. He had been asked to resign, had been told that if he didn't he would be removed in April. But still no specific charges were put forth to the people who had elected him. It still looked to those good people as if the party elders, who had been griping incessantly, were about to exercise their muscle. Strongarm style.
Finally someone had the good sense to release the specific charges to the press. Now the people could at least decide if their party elders were exercising muscle or brain. With Chairman Frederick's release of his response to the charges, one by one, it seemed to most that there was much more muscle than brain at work on the SCC.
Still, as I explained to my SCC member, I knew the SCC had more information than I did. They knew more about the actual situation than the grassroots members knew. But they were not forthcoming with it. For fear of "bad press" I was told, on more than one occasion. By more than one "insider".
My God, how much worse could the press get?
Speaking of bad press, the reply, from some un-named SCC member, to John Gizzi that no thought whatsoever had been given to a possible replacement, was enough for me.
But not yet. Not quite. I've maintained an open mind on this episode this far, I'll keep it open a few more hours. My SCC contact will be visiting me in the morning for coffee. He has what he calls the smoking gun. He has permission to show it, let people read it, let them absorb it, but they cannot copy it.
Fair enough. I'll look at it. I'll absorb it. I'll treat my friend to a cup of great Honduras Coffee and we'll talk about it.
You'll be the first to know.
Jeff Frederick Kerfuffle*
I've stayed out of this until now, but the following quote seals it for me;
"No one yet. We haven’t thought it through that far. Right now, getting Frederick out is the main idea."
Sorry, but if that's the "plan" of the SCC, I just ain't gonna go along with it.
I've read the charges. I've read the responses to those charges by Chairman Frederick. I'm reminded of two modern quotes;
"No one yet. We haven’t thought it through that far. Right now, getting Frederick out is the main idea."
Sorry, but if that's the "plan" of the SCC, I just ain't gonna go along with it.
I've read the charges. I've read the responses to those charges by Chairman Frederick. I'm reminded of two modern quotes;
"there's no 'there' there." Gertrude Stein*Kerfuffle; (Noun)1.- a noisy and disorderly incident
And
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Walt Kelly, via Pogo
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Newspapers: Shall We Play The Requiem Now?
By Barnie Day; Another Guest Shot From Meadows of Dan
Not just yet. Let’s at least have a national debate before we bury this one.
The cataclysmic demise is well documented. Going forward, the question is: Is there a model that (1) acknowledges and accommodates the current reality and (2) preserves the critical role of a free and independent press?
There might be—a national newspaper trust that could purchase these faltering papers. (If there is an upside to an 83% devaluation in newspaper stocks in 2008, it is the creation of an incredible buyers' market.)
Sure to God, if such a structure can save swamps, farmland, old buildings, artifacts of importance, odd plant life, long-eared rodents, queer little birds, and a host of other good and worthy considerations, such a thing could be established to preserve an entity that is so very crucial to policy, to government, to Democracy, to our collective well-being, as independent newspapers are.
There is no evidence whatsoever that the industry can save itself. Newspapers are cannibalizing themselves by giving their content to the Internet, and if that’s not bad enough, they’re slashing the only real competitive advantage they have—their reporters, writers and editors. Seems an odd survival strategy, if you ask me.
If newspapers are to survive, then retro, or old school, journalism relieved of profit pressure by trust ownership and subsidy may be the model.
How to fund such a trust? Three ways:
1) A national newspaper lottery would generate significant proceeds. Although 42 states and one or two territories conduct lotteries of some sort, there is no national lottery in the U. S. Lotteries are a form of taxation, but as Jefferson pointed out, the fairest form of taxation in that the burden is laid “only upon the backs of the willing.” This burden would be a worthy one.
2) A voluntary one-dollar check-off contribution on federal income tax returns would raise significant money, too—and give taxpayers a direct voice in how at least some of their money is spent. It wouldn’t be complicated. They could say “yes” or “no” simply by checking or not checking the box. It’s a pity we don’t have more such direct opportunities to say “yes” or “no” with a lot of other spending.
I know the "government" argument. It makes some folks queasy. It does me sometimes, but the granting of tax-exempt status and playing the role of mere pass-through collection/disbursement agent for a lottery and for income tax check-off falls short of "government sponsorship of newspapers."
A national trust would, in fact, come closer to vesting ownership with that teeming miasma otherwise known as "the people"—a good thing, in my opinion—than any other arrangement I presently know of, far closer than family and/or corporate ownership (think Rupert Murdoch) does now.
3) The largest consumer, and beneficiary, of newspapers in the world has to be Google, which means Google, and other search engines, have the most to lose if (when) the newspaper industry collapses. It is an interesting paradox: the primary instrument of newspaper destruction has the most to lose. The implication is that they must dance together.
Google doesn't pay for newspapers' proprietary content, although it does pay the Associated Press under a contract negotiated in 2006.
Let's consider the numbers.
Google performs approximately 235 million searches per day. If ten percent of these searches referenced newspaper print, and if Google agreed to contribute one penny ( 1 cent) for each of these to a national trust, the annual contribution would exceed $85 million. Can Google afford this? Yes. They earned $1.21 BILLION just during the last 90 days of 2008 alone. (I won’t even point out that Google could write such a contribution off as a tax deduction.)
Why propose this? What does it matter? That's the easy one. It is in our national interest that newspapers survive.
Barnie Day is a banker in Stuart, Virginia
Not just yet. Let’s at least have a national debate before we bury this one.
The cataclysmic demise is well documented. Going forward, the question is: Is there a model that (1) acknowledges and accommodates the current reality and (2) preserves the critical role of a free and independent press?
There might be—a national newspaper trust that could purchase these faltering papers. (If there is an upside to an 83% devaluation in newspaper stocks in 2008, it is the creation of an incredible buyers' market.)
Sure to God, if such a structure can save swamps, farmland, old buildings, artifacts of importance, odd plant life, long-eared rodents, queer little birds, and a host of other good and worthy considerations, such a thing could be established to preserve an entity that is so very crucial to policy, to government, to Democracy, to our collective well-being, as independent newspapers are.
There is no evidence whatsoever that the industry can save itself. Newspapers are cannibalizing themselves by giving their content to the Internet, and if that’s not bad enough, they’re slashing the only real competitive advantage they have—their reporters, writers and editors. Seems an odd survival strategy, if you ask me.
If newspapers are to survive, then retro, or old school, journalism relieved of profit pressure by trust ownership and subsidy may be the model.
How to fund such a trust? Three ways:
1) A national newspaper lottery would generate significant proceeds. Although 42 states and one or two territories conduct lotteries of some sort, there is no national lottery in the U. S. Lotteries are a form of taxation, but as Jefferson pointed out, the fairest form of taxation in that the burden is laid “only upon the backs of the willing.” This burden would be a worthy one.
2) A voluntary one-dollar check-off contribution on federal income tax returns would raise significant money, too—and give taxpayers a direct voice in how at least some of their money is spent. It wouldn’t be complicated. They could say “yes” or “no” simply by checking or not checking the box. It’s a pity we don’t have more such direct opportunities to say “yes” or “no” with a lot of other spending.
I know the "government" argument. It makes some folks queasy. It does me sometimes, but the granting of tax-exempt status and playing the role of mere pass-through collection/disbursement agent for a lottery and for income tax check-off falls short of "government sponsorship of newspapers."
A national trust would, in fact, come closer to vesting ownership with that teeming miasma otherwise known as "the people"—a good thing, in my opinion—than any other arrangement I presently know of, far closer than family and/or corporate ownership (think Rupert Murdoch) does now.
3) The largest consumer, and beneficiary, of newspapers in the world has to be Google, which means Google, and other search engines, have the most to lose if (when) the newspaper industry collapses. It is an interesting paradox: the primary instrument of newspaper destruction has the most to lose. The implication is that they must dance together.
Google doesn't pay for newspapers' proprietary content, although it does pay the Associated Press under a contract negotiated in 2006.
Let's consider the numbers.
Google performs approximately 235 million searches per day. If ten percent of these searches referenced newspaper print, and if Google agreed to contribute one penny ( 1 cent) for each of these to a national trust, the annual contribution would exceed $85 million. Can Google afford this? Yes. They earned $1.21 BILLION just during the last 90 days of 2008 alone. (I won’t even point out that Google could write such a contribution off as a tax deduction.)
Why propose this? What does it matter? That's the easy one. It is in our national interest that newspapers survive.
Barnie Day is a banker in Stuart, Virginia
Thursday, March 12, 2009
How To Outspend History In One Short Lesson
Somewhere today I read that Senator McConnell (R-Ky.) has come up with a novel way to explain just how much President Obama and the Democratic Congress has spent in the first 50 days of this administration. His math was pretty straight-forward, coming to roughly 1 billion, (with a "b"), dollars per day.
1,000,000,000.00 Dollars. Every day. For 50 days. Less than two Months.
But that number is still out of reach for most of us to understand.
Let me see if I can bring it into a more readily digested form. Let's suppose, for a moment, that you were there in Bethlehem a little over 2000 years ago when Christ was born.
Now let's suppose that your way to celebrate this great occasion was to begin handing out 20 dollar bills. There were no cigars to hand out at that time, so a paper portrait of Andy Jackson will have to do. (Never mind that there were no 20 dollar bills 2000 years ago either. We're supposin', remember?)
When you're standing on a corner handing out 20 dollar bills, word gets out pretty quick. A line forms. Soon you are handing out 20 dollar bills at a rapid clip --about one per second-- $1200 bucks per hour. I know some lawyers, a few bankers, a preacher or two, and some doctors, but I don't know anyone who makes $1200 bucks an hour.
Anyway. You stand there. Handing out your 20 dollar bills as fast as you can. People file past and collect their 20 bucks and shuffle on their way. You continue to do this until you've spent your own 1.2 trillion dollars. (I know, you don't have 1.2 trillion dollars. Obama and Congress don't either, but that didn't stop them. Did it?)
You finally exhaust your pile of Jacksons about the time that Obama is elected.
Over two thousand years. At 20 bucks per second. Twelve hundred bucks an hour. I know some lawyers, a few bankers, a preacher or two, and some doctors, but I still don't know anyone who makes $1200 bucks an hour. But I know of some folks who can spend it way faster than that.
NOTE:
This exercise, by necessity, is an estimate only. For the first 1500 years or so you will run out of people in the world before you run out of seconds in the year.
1,000,000,000.00 Dollars. Every day. For 50 days. Less than two Months.
But that number is still out of reach for most of us to understand.
Let me see if I can bring it into a more readily digested form. Let's suppose, for a moment, that you were there in Bethlehem a little over 2000 years ago when Christ was born.
Now let's suppose that your way to celebrate this great occasion was to begin handing out 20 dollar bills. There were no cigars to hand out at that time, so a paper portrait of Andy Jackson will have to do. (Never mind that there were no 20 dollar bills 2000 years ago either. We're supposin', remember?)
When you're standing on a corner handing out 20 dollar bills, word gets out pretty quick. A line forms. Soon you are handing out 20 dollar bills at a rapid clip --about one per second-- $1200 bucks per hour. I know some lawyers, a few bankers, a preacher or two, and some doctors, but I don't know anyone who makes $1200 bucks an hour.
Anyway. You stand there. Handing out your 20 dollar bills as fast as you can. People file past and collect their 20 bucks and shuffle on their way. You continue to do this until you've spent your own 1.2 trillion dollars. (I know, you don't have 1.2 trillion dollars. Obama and Congress don't either, but that didn't stop them. Did it?)
You finally exhaust your pile of Jacksons about the time that Obama is elected.
Over two thousand years. At 20 bucks per second. Twelve hundred bucks an hour. I know some lawyers, a few bankers, a preacher or two, and some doctors, but I still don't know anyone who makes $1200 bucks an hour. But I know of some folks who can spend it way faster than that.
NOTE:
This exercise, by necessity, is an estimate only. For the first 1500 years or so you will run out of people in the world before you run out of seconds in the year.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Guest Author Barnie Day; Spring Post
Boss Bird Is Back In TownBy Barnie Day
HEADWATERS OF THE DAN—The kingfisher kept his word and came back yesterday. He left out in mid-October—probably to South America. I don’t know for sure. He keeps his secrets, too.
I was on our back patio, watching the sun come streaking and flaring over the mountains, and he announced his return from his favorite perch, a maple limb that hangs out over our pond. He is an exuberant, raucous male in his flashy prime.
This is his sixth trip back. I don’t know that he’s the same bird, but he says he is. He doesn’t strike me as a liar.
He is always first, always early. There are still slips of snow in fence corners and along the line of trees that flank our driveway. The willow tree is barely budding. The frogs still sleep.
Other water birds come and show proprietary interest—ducks, herons, cranes, plovers, pipers, egrets. Big geese glide in, flaps down, honking loud enough to
wake the dead, and slalom the water as if wearing skis.
In mid-summer, an osprey, heavy enough to sway the pine boughs back and forth, will come to fish—and bicker back and forth with the shrieking crows, and other water dwellers—beavers and muskrats, lizards and water snakes, booming, bellowing bullfrogs—will show themselves—but the kingfisher gets dibs on this pond. He always does.
The Dan is birthed from a clear, cold fissure spring in a swampy place half a mile distant, ponding on my neighbor’s place, then on ours. From here, it meanders back and forth across the Virginia-North Carolina border for maybe a hundred and fifty miles until it joins the Roanoke River and disappears into
Kerr Lake Reservoir, a 50,000-acre Corps of Engineers flood control and hydroelectric impoundment built in the 1950s—a place better known as Bugg’s Island.
This bird is mouthy. He screeches and clacks. He fluffs himself. He buffs his beak against the maple limb. Boss bird is back in town.
I know his exuberance—to splash your face in a spring that is a river’s origin gives rise to such—but I know, too, that he doesn’t preen and brag for me.
A mate is somewhere near. I haven’t seen her yet, but I know that she is here. No doubt, he is promising her the moon. She will settle for something less—a
tunnel dug into the bank across the pond from where I stand, a six-to-eight foot tunnel, and at the end of it, a cubbyhole nesting room.
No, they won’t peck it out—they will dig—more a dance—it with their feet. They bring tiny shovels. The middle toes on each of their feet grow together and
make small scoops just for this. They will raise a small brood of chicks on insects, small fish, and other aquatic life.
In all, there are maybe ninety species of kingfishers spread across three families—Alcedinidae (river), Halcyonidae (tree), and Cerylidae (water) and scattered in woodland and water habitats throughout the world.
This is a Belted Kingfisher, the most common in North America—and here in Meadows of Dan—if you can call such an exquisite creature “common.”
(Photo Credit / Wikipedia)
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
First Patrick, Now It's Augusta County...
Back in January there was quite a dust-up in neighboring Patrick County regarding the new property tax assessments. Everyone thought the new values were unfair, but most importantly, everyone was terribly upset over the impact this had on their tax bill. It's long past time for Virginians to learn just what the relationship really is between their property assessment and their tax bill. I am re-publishing my January article, with Augusta County now standing in the role of aggrieved county.
H/T to SWAC Girl and Yankee Phillip
AugustaPatrick County citizens are up in arms over their latest property assessments. Well, to be a bit more accurate, they are upset over their latest property tax bill. This time of year that is a fairly common complaint all across Virginia. This year it's Augusta Patrick County, next year it may be Henrico. Or perhaps Suffolk. Or any of Virginia's other counties. What the good people of Augusta Patrick County do not know, and I'll wager most Virginians do not know either, is that their new re-assessment did not cause their property tax bill to shoot through the roof.
Yes, I meant what I wrote. Your increased assessment did not cause your property tax to increase. Your Board of Supervisors caused that increase.
The Code of Virginia, (that great big book with all of Virginia's many laws listed in an orderly manner), makes it clear. Any new assessment that causes a tax bill increase of more than 1% requires, yes, requires, a reduction in the tax rate. A rate reduction that will bring all tax bills back into that 1% range.
What the Code of Virginia does not require is that the new tax remain at the reduced rate. Read that again. The new tax does not have to remain at it's legally required lower rate.
My neighbors in AugustaPatrick County; Your tax rate went up, not because of your new assessment, but because your Board of Supervisors cannot control their spending.
I'm sure if you go back and look at the minutes of your Board of Supervisors meetings you will find the quick, quiet, probably unanimous vote to roll back your tax rate. A roll back that brought your tax bill within the legal 1% increase range.
Further searches through those minutes will reveal a vote, equally quick and quiet, unanimous or not, that immediately raised that rate to where it is now.
These two votes could have even occurred during the same meeting. They may have even been concurrent votes. Or even a vote on a single motion to both lower and raise the rate. All the law requires is that the rate be lowered.
Oh, to be sure, there is a requirement that all this be explained on your tax bill. And I'll bet it is. But is it explained in a manner that you can follow and understand? Not likely. Otherwise you guys would not be so upset about your assessment. Or nearly so mad at your idiot assessor.
As a former Delegate, Barnie Day, recently stated in an Op-Ed in the Martinsville Bulletin;
I suggest you ask your Supervisor about this. Ask him why the board can't restrain its spending. Ask him why the explanation is not more clearly explained on your bill.
Just don't go on blaming the wrong guy. Your assessor didn't do it.
H/T to SWAC Girl and Yankee Phillip
Augusta
Yes, I meant what I wrote. Your increased assessment did not cause your property tax to increase. Your Board of Supervisors caused that increase.
The Code of Virginia, (that great big book with all of Virginia's many laws listed in an orderly manner), makes it clear. Any new assessment that causes a tax bill increase of more than 1% requires, yes, requires, a reduction in the tax rate. A rate reduction that will bring all tax bills back into that 1% range.
What the Code of Virginia does not require is that the new tax remain at the reduced rate. Read that again. The new tax does not have to remain at it's legally required lower rate.
My neighbors in Augusta
I'm sure if you go back and look at the minutes of your Board of Supervisors meetings you will find the quick, quiet, probably unanimous vote to roll back your tax rate. A roll back that brought your tax bill within the legal 1% increase range.
Further searches through those minutes will reveal a vote, equally quick and quiet, unanimous or not, that immediately raised that rate to where it is now.
These two votes could have even occurred during the same meeting. They may have even been concurrent votes. Or even a vote on a single motion to both lower and raise the rate. All the law requires is that the rate be lowered.
Oh, to be sure, there is a requirement that all this be explained on your tax bill. And I'll bet it is. But is it explained in a manner that you can follow and understand? Not likely. Otherwise you guys would not be so upset about your assessment. Or nearly so mad at your idiot assessor.
As a former Delegate, Barnie Day, recently stated in an Op-Ed in the Martinsville Bulletin;
Most of the rage, consternation and anguish brought about by the recent real property reassessments is misdirected.The guy who assessed your property most likely got it right. Or at least very close. He or she has no reason to do otherwise, and many reasons not to get it wrong. As licensed, regulated professionals their work is based upon the marketplace, experience, research, and again, the marketplace.
The state does not establish the value of our real estate. The county does not — nor does the town council, the farm bureau, the Boy Scouts, etc.
Simply put, the marketplace sets this value — the marketplace and nothing else. It is a hypothetical expression of what a willing buyer would likely give a willing seller, as determined by the best evidence available — comparable sales, best estimates and so on.
I suggest you ask your Supervisor about this. Ask him why the board can't restrain its spending. Ask him why the explanation is not more clearly explained on your bill.
Just don't go on blaming the wrong guy. Your assessor didn't do it.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
John Brownlee, My Choice For Virginia's Next Attorney General
In 2001-2002 John Brownlee, at the time U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia, prosecuted my Board of Supervisors member from Buchanan County. Yes, my BOS member. The one I voted for. The one I worked to get elected.
But that's OK. He deserved it. He had violated not only the law, but the trust of the people of north-western Buchanan County. He was convicted and, I think, is still serving his time.
In 2005 I moved back to my original home County of Henry. John Brownlee, then still U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia, prosecuted my Sheriff. No, I didn't have an opportunity to vote for, or work for, that Sheriff. But I would have if I had lived here during his campaign.
But that's OK. He deserved it. He had violated not only the law, but the trust of the people of Henry County. He was convicted and has since served his time.
Even after that history, or more accurately, perhaps, because of it, I am proud to be a 9th District delegate to the Republican Convention for John Brownlee for Attorney General.
John Brownlee has proven his commitment to the Rule of Law. His entire life has been committed to the preservation of our American way of life, our freedom, and our honor.
In my classroom I teach my students to stand for truth and do what is right, I expect my government to do the same. I know from experience that John Brownlee will take that same commitment to the Attorney General's office.
Our country needs the direction and forethought of experienced and caring public servants who have been tested and proven. Our Commonwealth needs the trust and experience of a dedicated, and yes, tested and proven, prosecuting attorney to protect the heritage and the future of that Commonwealth. As Republicans, we are truly blessed to have three very good candidates working to gain the nomination for Attorney General. One stands out in that group. As Virginians, we will be equally blessed to have as Attorney General former U.S. Attorney John Brownlee.
A former Army Ranger, John Brownlee has long been dedicated to supporting and defending our country. As U.S. Attorney, John worked tirelessly to defend and protect Virginian values. As the only Veteran, as well as the only prosecuting attorney running for Attorney General, Virginia cannot afford to make any other choice. John Brownlee has my enthusiastic support and I encourage all delegates to the Virginia Republican Convention to cast their vote for John Brownlee.
But that's OK. He deserved it. He had violated not only the law, but the trust of the people of north-western Buchanan County. He was convicted and, I think, is still serving his time.
In 2005 I moved back to my original home County of Henry. John Brownlee, then still U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia, prosecuted my Sheriff. No, I didn't have an opportunity to vote for, or work for, that Sheriff. But I would have if I had lived here during his campaign.
But that's OK. He deserved it. He had violated not only the law, but the trust of the people of Henry County. He was convicted and has since served his time.
Even after that history, or more accurately, perhaps, because of it, I am proud to be a 9th District delegate to the Republican Convention for John Brownlee for Attorney General.
John Brownlee has proven his commitment to the Rule of Law. His entire life has been committed to the preservation of our American way of life, our freedom, and our honor.
In my classroom I teach my students to stand for truth and do what is right, I expect my government to do the same. I know from experience that John Brownlee will take that same commitment to the Attorney General's office.
Our country needs the direction and forethought of experienced and caring public servants who have been tested and proven. Our Commonwealth needs the trust and experience of a dedicated, and yes, tested and proven, prosecuting attorney to protect the heritage and the future of that Commonwealth. As Republicans, we are truly blessed to have three very good candidates working to gain the nomination for Attorney General. One stands out in that group. As Virginians, we will be equally blessed to have as Attorney General former U.S. Attorney John Brownlee.
A former Army Ranger, John Brownlee has long been dedicated to supporting and defending our country. As U.S. Attorney, John worked tirelessly to defend and protect Virginian values. As the only Veteran, as well as the only prosecuting attorney running for Attorney General, Virginia cannot afford to make any other choice. John Brownlee has my enthusiastic support and I encourage all delegates to the Virginia Republican Convention to cast their vote for John Brownlee.
Is Timmy! A Liar? Is Jody A Liar? Someone's Pants On Fire!
Back on November 12, right here in SWVA, WDBJ 7 reported that Governor Tim Kaine simply would not take a cabinet appointment from then President-elect Barack Obama. He was adamant that Virginia's Republican Lt. Governor was not even a part of the decision. Kaine was quoted;
It’s not turning the keys over to Bill Bolling that worries me. It’s that I took an oath to be here for my whole term, and that’s what I’ve done, and I’ve actually communicated that to the President-elect already. We had talked about it a number of weeks back, but we’ve communicated since the election and I’ve made that plain.[LINK]Now we have Democrat Lt. Governor candidate Jody Wagner claiming that Timmy! just didn't mean that. She knows his heart, apparently. Ms. Wagner says;
If we had a Lt. Governor today that was a Democrat, Governor Kaine would have taken a position in the Obama administration...Thanks to my friend Jim Riley for bringing this to our attention. Jim has a few questions for Ms. Wagner and Gov. Timmy! at Virginia Virtucon. He also has this video, after watching it I suppose many of us will have questions for both Wagner and Kaine;
Friday, February 20, 2009
It's Endorsement Time In Old Virginia
I have two serious addictions. Coffee. And a smoke.
After a day of wrangling 11th and 12th grade students, and answering 25 dozen - at least - questions, some inane, a precious few thoughtful and on subject, that is all I long for.
Most afternoons, around 3:15, I can be found caressing a cup of hot coffee and fingering a smoldering cigarette at the cafe closest to my school.
Yesterday was such a day. In the midst of my reverie, my cell phone rang. A quick glance at the screen showed an 804 area code and an unfamiliar number. I answered.
"Hello."
"Alton? This is Matt Wells, with the Bill Bolling for Lt. Governor campaign."
"Hi Matt, how you doing?"
"Oh, I can't complain."
"Come on, Matt. Remember, I know you. I've heard you complain. You do it quite well."
"OK, you got me. But what I really want to know is, can I add your name to a list of 9th District supporters of Bill for Lt. Governor?" (Side note: I've recently moved two miles away, into the 9th Congressional District, and the 16th Legislative District. So long Perriello. So long Ward.)
"Of course Matt. Enthusiastically. Emphatically. Any other superlatives you want to use are fine with me. I love alliteration, please pick one or two that start with 'E'."
"Sure. How about Energetically?"
"You don't really know me, do you Matt?"
Or at least that's a rough paraphrasing of the conversation I had with Matthew on Thursday afternoon.
I do enthusiastically, emphatically, and yes, even energetically endorse Bill Bolling in his quest for the Republican nomination to be our Lt. Governor candidate. My regular readers know my affinity for coal and coalfield people. Coalfield Bill has my complete support.
Previously I've officially endorsed Don Merricks, coming soon will be my endorsements of what I hope to be the final Republican slate in my area; Bob McDonnell for Governor, John Brownlee for Attorney General, Danny Marshall in the 14th House District, Charles Poindexter in the 9th House District, a currently un-named candidate from Carroll County who will hopefully become our standard bearer in the 10th House District, and Bill Carrico in the neighboring House District to our West.
After a day of wrangling 11th and 12th grade students, and answering 25 dozen - at least - questions, some inane, a precious few thoughtful and on subject, that is all I long for.
Most afternoons, around 3:15, I can be found caressing a cup of hot coffee and fingering a smoldering cigarette at the cafe closest to my school.
Yesterday was such a day. In the midst of my reverie, my cell phone rang. A quick glance at the screen showed an 804 area code and an unfamiliar number. I answered.
"Hello."
"Alton? This is Matt Wells, with the Bill Bolling for Lt. Governor campaign."
"Hi Matt, how you doing?"
"Oh, I can't complain."
"Come on, Matt. Remember, I know you. I've heard you complain. You do it quite well."
"OK, you got me. But what I really want to know is, can I add your name to a list of 9th District supporters of Bill for Lt. Governor?" (Side note: I've recently moved two miles away, into the 9th Congressional District, and the 16th Legislative District. So long Perriello. So long Ward.)
"Of course Matt. Enthusiastically. Emphatically. Any other superlatives you want to use are fine with me. I love alliteration, please pick one or two that start with 'E'."
"Sure. How about Energetically?"
"You don't really know me, do you Matt?"
Or at least that's a rough paraphrasing of the conversation I had with Matthew on Thursday afternoon.
I do enthusiastically, emphatically, and yes, even energetically endorse Bill Bolling in his quest for the Republican nomination to be our Lt. Governor candidate. My regular readers know my affinity for coal and coalfield people. Coalfield Bill has my complete support.
Previously I've officially endorsed Don Merricks, coming soon will be my endorsements of what I hope to be the final Republican slate in my area; Bob McDonnell for Governor, John Brownlee for Attorney General, Danny Marshall in the 14th House District, Charles Poindexter in the 9th House District, a currently un-named candidate from Carroll County who will hopefully become our standard bearer in the 10th House District, and Bill Carrico in the neighboring House District to our West.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Thought For The Day
Politicians don't make economic decisions, they make political decisions that have economic consequences.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Ward Armstrong WILL DEFINITELY be opposed....
The only question remaining is which opponent will it be...
Earlier I mentioned a possible candidate who is garnering quite a bit of support here in Henry County from the business community. That candidate is not quite ready to announce officially yet.
Now I hear of another fine candidate from Patrick County who is also developing a following. This candidate, too, is reluctant to officially announce.
I don't know yet when the 10th Legislative District Committee will meet and decide on a method of nomination - Mass Meeting, Convention, or Primary, - though the information I have points toward a likely Mass Meeting. Neither candidate is aware of a specific date or method either. That information is being closely guarded by the few GOP insiders who make such decisions.
I suppose both are waiting for some certainty in the nomination method before making an official announcement.
Earlier I mentioned a possible candidate who is garnering quite a bit of support here in Henry County from the business community. That candidate is not quite ready to announce officially yet.
Now I hear of another fine candidate from Patrick County who is also developing a following. This candidate, too, is reluctant to officially announce.
I don't know yet when the 10th Legislative District Committee will meet and decide on a method of nomination - Mass Meeting, Convention, or Primary, - though the information I have points toward a likely Mass Meeting. Neither candidate is aware of a specific date or method either. That information is being closely guarded by the few GOP insiders who make such decisions.
I suppose both are waiting for some certainty in the nomination method before making an official announcement.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
An Inconsequential Story
The ownership of a blog is not as simple as some would think.
Sure, most bloggers simply regurgitate various news items, as though their readership would never find them through the real media. That's pretty simple. Other bloggers dig deep into some real investigative journalism, but they are rare indeed.
Still others, such as this one, simply provide what is hoped to be thoughtful commentary on a wide array of subjects. Sounds simple, but just which subjects should one cover?
In my case, a subject must mean something to me. Personally. I really don't write this stuff for my readers, though I do appreciate each and every one of you, I write it only for myself.
Through some tools available to all bloggers I know who my readers are. Most of you anyway. I know that many in the Virginia General Assembly, and members of their staff, are regular readers. I have several readers inside the beltway, presumably involved with the Federal Government in some way. I only hope that in some small way I can enlighten and entertain you.
At any given time I have a half-dozen or so article ideas floating around, and typically just as many pieces in draft form. Most never make it to the publish stage. You see, that's the really hard part of maintaining/writing/publishing a blog. Just what does get past the gate and onto the web page?
Right now, for example, I have a couple of stories that I could tell. Stories that may or may not mean anything to you, my reader. It all depends upon who you know, how you know them, and even where you are. A local story could mean nothing to a local reader, yet mean a lot to someone in Richmond, or Washington, if a character in the story is recognized.
Yes, there is a lot to think about before publishing what most readers would see as an inconsequential story. Such as this one.
Sure, most bloggers simply regurgitate various news items, as though their readership would never find them through the real media. That's pretty simple. Other bloggers dig deep into some real investigative journalism, but they are rare indeed.
Still others, such as this one, simply provide what is hoped to be thoughtful commentary on a wide array of subjects. Sounds simple, but just which subjects should one cover?
In my case, a subject must mean something to me. Personally. I really don't write this stuff for my readers, though I do appreciate each and every one of you, I write it only for myself.
Through some tools available to all bloggers I know who my readers are. Most of you anyway. I know that many in the Virginia General Assembly, and members of their staff, are regular readers. I have several readers inside the beltway, presumably involved with the Federal Government in some way. I only hope that in some small way I can enlighten and entertain you.
At any given time I have a half-dozen or so article ideas floating around, and typically just as many pieces in draft form. Most never make it to the publish stage. You see, that's the really hard part of maintaining/writing/publishing a blog. Just what does get past the gate and onto the web page?
Right now, for example, I have a couple of stories that I could tell. Stories that may or may not mean anything to you, my reader. It all depends upon who you know, how you know them, and even where you are. A local story could mean nothing to a local reader, yet mean a lot to someone in Richmond, or Washington, if a character in the story is recognized.
Yes, there is a lot to think about before publishing what most readers would see as an inconsequential story. Such as this one.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Rube Goldberg, Phone Home
By Barnie Day;
Want to experience the audio equivalent of deer-in-the-headlights? Call your senator, your congressman, your governor, your delegate, your state senator, your commissioner, your member of city or town council, or your mayor and ask how the $1 trillion "stimulus" package coming out of Washington sometime around mid-February is going to work, what form it will take, who gets the money, how the dough will be disbursed.
This is not chicken feed we’re talking about. Or is it?
Remember the $600 "stimulus" ($1200 for couples) the government put on your credit card and gave to you in 2007? That was chicken feed.
How ’bout the "stimulus" package of 2008, the one that insisted that things would be alright if banks that got into trouble making bad loans simply made more of them? Remember? That was chicken feed.
How ’bout the Detroit bailouts? You know–that one– where we pay the car makers to re-tool so they can build more cars that people don’t want to buy. Chicken feed.
Virginia’s $3 billion deficit? Pfft! Shoo! Go Away! We’ve got a trillion dollar issue to sort out!
Don’t bother asking if any of this makes sense. We’re way beyond that. We’re in the netherworld, that mind-place that says you can borrow yourself out of debt, that dark warm place some people jam their heads into and shout in a thousand muffled voices, "A trillion dollar deficit is horrible so let’s double it!" (Assuming China will loan us another trillion.)
And don’t bother dragging the economists into it. They’ve all succumbed to lemming-think. Let them sleep.
So what to do? How shall we sort it out? How shall we understand what’s coming?
Herewith, three approaches:
1. Do the math. If it’s a trillion dollars, and 40 per cent goes to tax cuts, that leaves $600 billion in direct government spending-healthcare, bridges, whatever. It won’t be distributed fairly (in politics, the fair leaves in October), but let’s imagine, for the moment, that it will be– say on a per capita basis. That works out to about $1714.29 for each of us, or here in Patrick County $32.5 million–about enough to build another two miles of U.S. 58 up Lover’s Leap Mountain.
2. Go for the audio equivalent of the deer-in-the-headlights, mentioned above.
3. Ask your cat. At least mine had the decency to offer a throaty "meow." (I cheated, though. I was holding a carton of milk when I asked him.)
Want to experience the audio equivalent of deer-in-the-headlights? Call your senator, your congressman, your governor, your delegate, your state senator, your commissioner, your member of city or town council, or your mayor and ask how the $1 trillion "stimulus" package coming out of Washington sometime around mid-February is going to work, what form it will take, who gets the money, how the dough will be disbursed.
This is not chicken feed we’re talking about. Or is it?
Remember the $600 "stimulus" ($1200 for couples) the government put on your credit card and gave to you in 2007? That was chicken feed.
How ’bout the "stimulus" package of 2008, the one that insisted that things would be alright if banks that got into trouble making bad loans simply made more of them? Remember? That was chicken feed.
How ’bout the Detroit bailouts? You know–that one– where we pay the car makers to re-tool so they can build more cars that people don’t want to buy. Chicken feed.
Virginia’s $3 billion deficit? Pfft! Shoo! Go Away! We’ve got a trillion dollar issue to sort out!
Don’t bother asking if any of this makes sense. We’re way beyond that. We’re in the netherworld, that mind-place that says you can borrow yourself out of debt, that dark warm place some people jam their heads into and shout in a thousand muffled voices, "A trillion dollar deficit is horrible so let’s double it!" (Assuming China will loan us another trillion.)
And don’t bother dragging the economists into it. They’ve all succumbed to lemming-think. Let them sleep.
So what to do? How shall we sort it out? How shall we understand what’s coming?
Herewith, three approaches:
1. Do the math. If it’s a trillion dollars, and 40 per cent goes to tax cuts, that leaves $600 billion in direct government spending-healthcare, bridges, whatever. It won’t be distributed fairly (in politics, the fair leaves in October), but let’s imagine, for the moment, that it will be– say on a per capita basis. That works out to about $1714.29 for each of us, or here in Patrick County $32.5 million–about enough to build another two miles of U.S. 58 up Lover’s Leap Mountain.
2. Go for the audio equivalent of the deer-in-the-headlights, mentioned above.
3. Ask your cat. At least mine had the decency to offer a throaty "meow." (I cheated, though. I was holding a carton of milk when I asked him.)
Friday, January 02, 2009
Henry County Is Becoming A Blogging Hotbed
For its population, Henry County is now, suddenly, probably more blogful than any other Virginia county.
For way too long I was here all by myself. Then badrose came on board. Next came Billy Jack, (come on back Billy), and then we got a Lowell Feld imitator in James White.
We now have two new Democratic blogs here in Henry County. Both of these new Democratic blogs are respectful, thoughtful, idealistic, progressive blogs. I enthusiastically ask my readers to go over and check out 220South and Dem-Bones.
I encourage both 220 South and Dem bones to continue and welcome them to the Virginia blog community.
Five bloggers in one low population county? Who can top that?
For way too long I was here all by myself. Then badrose came on board. Next came Billy Jack, (come on back Billy), and then we got a Lowell Feld imitator in James White.
We now have two new Democratic blogs here in Henry County. Both of these new Democratic blogs are respectful, thoughtful, idealistic, progressive blogs. I enthusiastically ask my readers to go over and check out 220South and Dem-Bones.
I encourage both 220 South and Dem bones to continue and welcome them to the Virginia blog community.
Five bloggers in one low population county? Who can top that?
Your Assessor Didn't Do It. Your BOS Did.
Patrick County citizens are up in arms over their latest property assessments. Well, to be a bit more accurate, they are upset over their latest property tax bill. This time of year that is a fairly common complaint all across Virginia. This year it's Patrick County, next year it may be Henrico. Or perhaps Suffolk. Or any of Virginia's other counties. What the good people of Patrick County do not know, and I'll wager most Virginians do not know either, is that their new re-assessment did not cause their property tax bill to shoot through the roof.
Yes, I meant what I wrote. Your increased assessment did not cause your property tax to increase. Your Board of Supervisors caused that increase.
The Code of Virginia, (that great big book with all of Virginia's many laws listed in an orderly manner), makes it clear. Any new assessment that causes a tax bill increase of more than 1% requires, yes, requires, a reduction in the tax rate. A rate reduction that will bring all tax bills back into that 1% range.
What the Code of Virginia does not require is that the new tax remain at the reduced rate. Read that again. The new tax does not have to remain at it's legally required lower rate.
My neighbors in Patrick County; Your tax rate went up, not because of your new assessment, but because your Board of Supervisors cannot control their spending.
I'm sure if you go back and look at the minutes of your Board of Supervisors meetings you will find the quick, quiet, probably unanimous vote to roll back your tax rate. A roll back that brought your tax bill within the legal 1% increase range.
Further searches through those minutes will reveal a vote, equally quick and quiet, unanimous or not, that immediately raised that rate to where it is now.
These two votes could have even occurred during the same meeting. They may have even been concurrent votes. Or even a vote on a single motion to both lower and raise the rate. All the law requires is that the rate be lowered.
Oh, to be sure, there is a requirement that all this be explained on your tax bill. And I'll bet it is. But is it explained in a manner that you can follow and understand? Not likely. Otherwise you guys would not be so upset about your assessment. Or nearly so mad at your idiot assessor.
As your former Delegate, Barnie Day recently stated in an Op-Ed in the Martinsville Bulletin;
I suggest you ask your Supervisor about this. Ask him why the board can't restrain its spending. Ask him why the explanation is not more clearly explained on your bill.
Just don't go on blaming the wrong guy. Your assessor didn't do it.
Yes, I meant what I wrote. Your increased assessment did not cause your property tax to increase. Your Board of Supervisors caused that increase.
The Code of Virginia, (that great big book with all of Virginia's many laws listed in an orderly manner), makes it clear. Any new assessment that causes a tax bill increase of more than 1% requires, yes, requires, a reduction in the tax rate. A rate reduction that will bring all tax bills back into that 1% range.
What the Code of Virginia does not require is that the new tax remain at the reduced rate. Read that again. The new tax does not have to remain at it's legally required lower rate.
My neighbors in Patrick County; Your tax rate went up, not because of your new assessment, but because your Board of Supervisors cannot control their spending.
I'm sure if you go back and look at the minutes of your Board of Supervisors meetings you will find the quick, quiet, probably unanimous vote to roll back your tax rate. A roll back that brought your tax bill within the legal 1% increase range.
Further searches through those minutes will reveal a vote, equally quick and quiet, unanimous or not, that immediately raised that rate to where it is now.
These two votes could have even occurred during the same meeting. They may have even been concurrent votes. Or even a vote on a single motion to both lower and raise the rate. All the law requires is that the rate be lowered.
Oh, to be sure, there is a requirement that all this be explained on your tax bill. And I'll bet it is. But is it explained in a manner that you can follow and understand? Not likely. Otherwise you guys would not be so upset about your assessment. Or nearly so mad at your idiot assessor.
As your former Delegate, Barnie Day recently stated in an Op-Ed in the Martinsville Bulletin;
Most of the rage, consternation and anguish brought about by the recent real property reassessment in Patrick County is misdirected.The guy who assessed your property most likely got it right. Or at least very close. He or she has no reason to do otherwise, and many reasons not to get it wrong. As licensed, regulated professionals their work is based upon the marketplace, experience, research, and again, the marketplace.
The state does not establish the value of our real estate. The county does not — nor does the town council, the farm bureau, the Boy Scouts, etc.
Simply put, the marketplace sets this value — the marketplace and nothing else. It is a hypothetical expression of what a willing buyer would likely give a willing seller, as determined by the best evidence available — comparable sales, best estimates and so on.
I suggest you ask your Supervisor about this. Ask him why the board can't restrain its spending. Ask him why the explanation is not more clearly explained on your bill.
Just don't go on blaming the wrong guy. Your assessor didn't do it.
Thursday, January 01, 2009
What You Are About To See Is Unrehearsed And Uncensored.
Fascinating link I ran across this morning. In the late 1950s Mike Wallace hosted a show, sponsored by Phillip Morris, called "The Mike Wallace Interview". No, I'm not old enough to actually remember it. I was only two years old, besides, I don't think we even owned a TV in 1957.
From Gloria Swanson to Commando Kelly. From Steve Allen to Orval Faubus. From Eddie Arcaro to Margaret Sanger. It's an impressive list. And some amazing, uncensored interviews.
Mike Wallace donated those interviews, and the films, to the Harry Ransom Center at the University of Texas at Austin where the old kinescopes, (16mm films taken of video monitors), were digitized and transcripted. Of Course Mr. Wallace maintained his copyright, or I would love to drop the interview of Dr. Henry Wriston into this page. On August 17, 1958 Dr. Wriston spoke on a variety of subjects, including the Middle East Crisis. Yes, Virginia, there has been a "Middle East Crisis" more or less continuously my entire lifetime. And for many years before that.
"Whether you agree or disagree with what you will hear, we feel that none will deny the right of these views to be broadcast."Given complete freedom by both the network and his sponsor, Mr. Wallace interviewed America's most influential, infuriating, introspective, and even incompetent newsmakers of the time.
From Gloria Swanson to Commando Kelly. From Steve Allen to Orval Faubus. From Eddie Arcaro to Margaret Sanger. It's an impressive list. And some amazing, uncensored interviews.
Mike Wallace donated those interviews, and the films, to the Harry Ransom Center at the University of Texas at Austin where the old kinescopes, (16mm films taken of video monitors), were digitized and transcripted. Of Course Mr. Wallace maintained his copyright, or I would love to drop the interview of Dr. Henry Wriston into this page. On August 17, 1958 Dr. Wriston spoke on a variety of subjects, including the Middle East Crisis. Yes, Virginia, there has been a "Middle East Crisis" more or less continuously my entire lifetime. And for many years before that.
WALLACE: Well, we'll get to the foreign service, if we may, a little bit later in the program, but right now I'd like to stay in the Middle East, if I may. Talking about the Middle East, and I think you'll agree that it's a troubled spot .. now as well as back in the days of the Saracens..There are many other interviews. Some light and fun, some very heavy and thoughtful. Many that will enlighten my younger readers and bring remembrances to those of my generation. I encourage you to go browse through the offerings at The Mike Wallace Interview Collection.
WRISTON: And will be, for another fifty years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)