The Democrats’ Self Love, Self Regard, and Self Delusion

I am no David Brooks fan, but maybe I could become one.  Usually, when he tries to be clever, it comes off as forced and a bit off.  Not today.   His column today is really, really good.  Here is a taste of his theme:

When times get tough, it’s really important to believe in yourself. This is something the Democrats have done splendidly this year. The polls have been terrible, and the party may be heading for a historic defeat, but Democrats have done a magnificent job of maintaining their own self-esteem. This is vital, because even if the public doesn’t approve of you, it is important to approve of yourself.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that Democrats have become role models. They have offered us lessons on how we, too, may continue to love ourselves, even in trying circumstances.

Lesson one. Think happy thoughts. Never allow yourself to dwell on downer, depressing ones.

* * *

Lesson two. Always remember, many great geniuses were unappreciated in their lifetimes.

* * *

Lesson three. Always remember: You are the hero of your own children’s adventure story.

Read the whole thing (I’m linking the NYT! may Gaia have mercy on my soul).

Brooks is absolutely right.  The Democrats over-reached and pursued a far left agenda without any support from across the aisle — not because the Republicans refused to be included, but because the temporary Democratic majority and President Obama wanted to and could proceed with their agenda without meaningful input from the Republicans. 

Now that it has bit them in their collective ass (or will in a few days), the “Democrats and their media enablers” (Brooks’s words) are obsessed with Christine O’Donnell, and made up narratives about foreign money and stupid scared voters to avoid having to engage in any introspection about the epic failure of their economic and regulatory agenda and the unpopularity of Obamacare. 

And in doing so, the Democrats have revealed a lot about themselves.  (1) They don’t think much of voters, unless they vote for Democrats.  In 2008, voters were enlightened nad summoned to a higher cause than themselves.  Now, according to president Obama, we are scared sheep doing the bidding of evil forces, both foreign and domestic.  (2) They don’t care much about bipartisanship, unless it means embracing their agenda, with at most a bit of polishing at the edges.  (3) And they don’t want to elevate the dialog of politics; they are embracing the politics of personal destruction.

A local case in point as to the last revelation — Ken Buck.  He seems like a normal and reasonable guy who has admittedly socially conservative views. 

But the Democrats are trying to paint Buck as an evil force wanting to push women back into the stone age, and are even spreading the lie that he refused to prosecute a rape case because he doesn’t like women.  It is one thing to disagree with his judgment not to prosecute because the case couldn’t be won — although that would be hard, since it was shared by the female Boulder County DA and the Sheriff of the county where the alleged date rape occurred.  But since the Democrats can’t reasonably attack Buck’s judgment under the circumstances, they are misrepresenting the facts to attack the person. 

Democrats have been pretty miserable when they had the majority; don’t expect them to be much better once they lose it.

Published in: on October 26, 2010 at 8:22 am  Leave a Comment  

The High Cost Of Government Run By People Beholden To Public Employees

Deroy Murdock at National Review Online reminds us of scary graphs documenting three important things to remember this election season: (1) the insane complexity that Obamacare is going to inject into our healthcare system if it is allowed to stand, (2) the massive increase in federal employment over the past two years, and the disparity of wages and benefits between those who live off tax dollars and those who provide them.

According to the Heritage Foundation, since 2008 nearly 200,000 employees have been added to the federal payrolls:

Second Chart 

Remember this when the Democrats screech that cutting back on federal employment will leave the streets awash in human wreckage and barbarians climbing the (nonexistent) gates.  Were things really so much worse in, say, 2007, when we had at least 200,000 fewer federal employees?  The question answers itself.

Now take a look at the chart regarding government-employee compensation:

Third Chart

If we combine the two charts, we see that, in salary and benefits, the additional federal employees alone have increased the cost of government by over $24 Billion per year in less than two years (198,100 x $123,049 = $24,376,006,900).  Of course, these people have to have something to do, so the actual cost to the private sector will be far beyond just the cost of paying salaries and benefits.

Published in: on October 22, 2010 at 8:49 pm  Leave a Comment  

Unforced Error — John Hickenlooper Reveals His Inner Obama

During a 2009 interview with Eden Lane, who hosts a show called OUTSpoken, a Colorado Public Television show about the LGBT community, gubernatorial candidate John Hickenlooper said that the “knuckle-dragging rednecks on the Western Slope share the same backwards thinking that led to the murder of gay student Matthew Shepard” in Wyoming a few years back.

OK, I might have embellished that a bit.  Here is what he did say:

Eden Lane: For the Matthew Shepard foundation to choose Denver to have as it’s home, I think that might surprise some people since they didn’t live in Colorado, he didn’t go to school in Colorado, there really wasn’t that strong a connection. What do you think is it about the environment here in Denver that allowed them to choose this as their home?

Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper: I think a couple things, I mean, you know, the tragic death of Matthew Shepard occurred in Wyoming. Colorado and Wyoming are very similar. We have some of the same, you know, backwards thinking in the kind of rural Western areas you see in, you know, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico.

Wow, rural voters in four states distastefully characterized in a single sentence; bitter clingers and all that. 

The strange thing is that this is such an unforced error.  The question was a softball that would have allowed Hickenlooper to say nice things about Denver and Colorado — “What do you think is it about the environment here in Denver that allowed [a gay/lesbian focused foundation] to choose this as their home?”  How about: “Colorado has a large and active gay and lesbian community and it is a wonderfully tolerant state.  We are honored that the foundation chose Colorado to be its home.”  How difficult is that?

But it appears that, like Obama, Hickenlooper may not be so enamored of folks outside the urban areas. 

Somehow, I suspect this will get far less play than Ken Buck’s comments about gays and nature v. nurture.  For example, there is not a not a word about it on the Denver Post’s political page.  The gang at the Post’s The Spot blog also seem to have missed it.  And nothing on 9News.  Hmmm.  Why would that be?

Via Hot Air.

UPDATE:  Complete Colorado has it, of course.

UPDATE II:  Curtis Hubbard has posted it at The Spot, and has asked Hickenlooper’s spokesman for comment.  Good job, Curtis.

UPDATE III:  The response from Hick’s spokesman:

“John was making the point that the kind of intolerance that led to Matthew Shepard’s murder is not unique to a single community in Wyoming. It’s something that can happen in any community. He wishes he had articulated the point better to make it clear that any community is susceptible to hatred, but he continues to feel strongly that the intolerance that killed Shepard is backwards and not acceptable,” Hickenlooper spokesman George Merritt said.

The problem is, of course, that Hickenlooper was not talking about “any community” — such as Denver — being “susceptible to hatred.”  He was talking about “backwards thinking” among the particular people who live in “rural Western areas” that makes them susceptible to hatred as the problem.

By the way, it was not “intolerance that killed Shepard.”  It was two assholes who, according to prosecutors, pretended to be gay to gain Shepard’s trust so they could rob him that beat the poor guy to death.  Smearing the entire rural communities of four states with such “backwards thinking” is just wrong.  Hickenlooper owes an apology.

Published in: on October 22, 2010 at 10:42 am  Leave a Comment  

NPR v. Juan Williams Roundup

Lot’s of folks are taking on NPR’s ridiculous firing of Juan Williams.  Here are a few takes on the matter.

Let’s start with the man himself, Juan Williams:

[When Ellen Weiss called to fire him,] I asked why she would fire me without speaking to me face to face and she said there was nothing I could say to change her mind, the decision had been confirmed above her, and there was no point to meeting in person. To say the least this is a chilling assault on free speech. The critical importance of honest journalism and a free flowing, respectful national conversation needs to be had in our country. But it is being buried as collateral damage in a war whose battles include political correctness and ideological orthodoxy.

So much for having an open mind or engaging in an exchange of thoughts.  But this column is just starting to get interesting.  Mr. Williams is about to fight back:

I say an ideological battle because my comments on “The O’Reilly Factor” are being distorted by the self-righteous ideological, left-wing leadership at NPR. They are taking bits and pieces of what I said to go after me for daring to have a conversation with leading conservative thinkers. They loathe the fact that I appear on Fox News.

* * *

Years ago NPR tried to stop me from going on “The Factor.” When I refused they insisted that I not identify myself as an NPR journalist. I asked them if they thought people did not know where I appeared on the air as a daily talk show host, national correspondent and news analyst. They refused to budge.

* * *

Later on the 50th anniversary of the Little Rock crisis President Bush offered to do an NPR interview with me about race relations in America. NPR management refused to take the interview on the grounds that the White House offered it to me and not their other correspondents and hosts. One NPR executive implied I was in the administration’s pocket, which is a joke, and there was no other reason to offer me the interview. Gee, I guess NPR news executives never read my bestselling history of the civil rights movement “Eyes on the Prize – America’s Civil Rights Years,” or my highly acclaimed biography “Thurgood marshall — American Revolutionary.” I guess they never noticed that “ENOUGH,” my last book on the state of black leadership in America, found a place on the New York Times bestseller list.

This all led to NPR demanding that I either agree to let them control my appearances on Fox News and my writings or sign a new contract that removed me from their staff but allowed me to continue working as a news analyst with an office at NPR. The idea was that they would be insulated against anything I said or wrote outside of NPR because they could say that I was not a staff member. . . .  This week when I pointed out that they had forced me to sign a contract that gave them distance from my commentary outside of NPR I was cut off, ignored and fired.

Williams closes with a few comments about Nixon and enemies’ lists.  Suffice it to say here that his comparison of NPR to Nixon is less than flattering.  Do read the whole thing.  I wish Williams had revealed some of this far sooner, but can’t blame him for not doing so and getting himself fired far sooner. 

Next up, Steve Hayes, who notes that NPR claims Williams was fired for “taking controversial positions.”  He then compares Williams’ comments to those of Nina Totenberg.  Again, the comparison is not flattering, either to NPR or Totenberg:

If that’s true, NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg might want to start looking for a new job. Over the past month, in her regular appearances on “Inside Washington,” she has: criticized a ruling of the Roberts Court as scandalous; claimed that Michelle Obama gives people “warm and fuzzy” feelings; called Bill Clinton “the most gifted politician I’ve ever seen;” and lamented that the Democratic Party is diverse enough to include moderates that want to extend all Bush tax cuts.

On last weekend’s “Inside Washington,” which aired October 17, she told us that Michelle Obama is “an incredibly graceful surrogate” for her husband who gives people “warm and fuzzy” feelings.

On October 10, Totenberg compared the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United, the prominent campaign finance case, to Watergate.

* * *

The week before, on October 3, she decried Republicans – a “concerted minority” – for holding up business in the Senate and declared that their willingness to exploit antiquated congressional rules was a “loony way to do business.”

* * *

[W]hen Charles Krauthammer pointed out that 31 Democrats in the House had written to Nancy Pelosi to call for extending the Bush tax cuts, Totenberg wished them out of the party. “When a party actually has a huge majority, it has a huge diversity.  And that is part of the problem that Democrats have.  But would I like it to be otherwise?  Of course.”

And then he reminds us of a few other things, including the infamous comment about Jesse Helms’ grandchildren getting AIDS.  Again, do read the whole thing.  The headline of Hayes’ column is “Is Nina Totenberg Next?”  The answer, of course, is no.  NPR does not care about commentators expressing opinions (it does not even care much about its news staff expressing opinions), but they have to be the right, er, left, opinions.

Now hand the mike to Jeff Jacoby, who disinters another nugget from NPR’s memory hole via the guys at PowerLine:

TO JOURNALISTS OF INTEGRITY, blacklist is the vilest word in the dictionary. Nothing corrupts a free press like conspiring to silence a man. And when the conspiracy results from arm-twisting by extremists, it is not only corrupting, but cowardly.

This is a story of blacklisting at National Public Radio.

Sounds promising.  Let’s read on:

On Aug. 20, NPR’s popular Talk of the Nation dealt with breaking news: the US raids on Osama bin Laden’s terror facilities in Sudan and Afghanistan. One of several guests interviewed by telephone was Steven Emerson, an investigative journalist and a leading expert on Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. Emerson has reported in detail on Islamic extremism, and has focused public attention on the network of terror cells and front groups operating in the United States.

* * *

In short, Emerson was an ideal guest for NPR’s show, and his brief on-air conversation with host Melinda Penkava was unobjectionable.

Unobjectionable, that is, to anyone except the Islamic terrorists and their supporters whom Emerson has done so much to expose. In recent years, he has been the target of a brutal campaign of vilification and defamation. The Council on American Islamic Relations — a radical group that warmly defends Hamas and other terror outfits — has led the way in demonizing Emerson as an anti-Arab racist.

As Mr. Jacoby recounts — using actual email exchanges to back it up — NPR caved to pressure from CAIR and established a policy not to interview Mr. Emerson on its shows again.  That’s right, a policy barring “an expert who testifies before Congress . . . from the airwaves of the radio network Congress subsidizes.”  You know the drill, read the whole thing (so good I’ll link it twice).

Michael Barone also weighs in, noting, among other things, the relative tolerance displayed by two different audiences:

Reading between the lines of Juan’s statement and those of NPR officials, it’s apparent that NPR was moved to fire Juan because he irritates so many people in its audience. An interesting contrast: . . . many NPR listeners apparently could not stomach that Williams also appeared on Fox News. But it doesn’t seem that any perceptible number of Fox News viewers had any complaints that Williams also worked for NPR. The Fox audience seems to be more tolerant of diversity than the NPR audience.  

Yes, it’s funny how the forces of tolerance are always the ones arguing “shut up!”

Remind me again, why are taxpayers funding this “self-righteous ideological, left-wing” media outlet called NPR?  I personally enjoy listening to NPR, but we should no more be forced to fund NPR than taxpayers should be forced to fund Rush Limbaugh’s show.

There are two big winners here: Rupert Murdoch and Juan Williams, probably in that order.  And the biggest loser, of course, is NPR, whose integrity is being examined and taxpayer funding is being questioned seriously for perhaps the first time.

Published in: on October 22, 2010 at 9:58 am  Leave a Comment  

Clueless

The White House is so far beyond parody that it can’t see it in the rear view mirror any more.  White House advisor Valerie Jarrett tells CNN that the Obama Administration completely understands voters’ anger.  At Bush.

Published in: on October 21, 2010 at 5:00 pm  Leave a Comment  

Disney Is Shocked, Shocked To Find That Drugs Were Part Of Keith Richards’ Past

Drudge Reports that Disney may cut Keith Richards from latest Pirates Of The Caribbean flick over shocking revelations in his new book:

[Disney] executives fear the rocker’s shocking admissions in his new book, LIFE, may cause a firestorm and ignite a backlash around the family-friendly Magic Kingdom.

Among the concerns, Richards appears to detail how to safely get stoned: Use ‘high-quality drugs’ in moderation!

Richard writes: “It’s not only the high quality of drugs I had that I attribute my survival to. I was very meticulous about how much I took. I’d never put more in to get a little higher. That’s where most people f**k up on drugs.”

Disney — Have you looked at Keith Richards?  This is not a person I would assume has lived a life of meditation, yoga, and macrobiotic dieting.  Richards invented the sex, drugs, and rock’n’roll lifestyle.  Everyone since has been a pretender.

The only shocking thing is that Richards is still alive.  So most people might just assume he had a few drug-taking tricks up his sleeve, as it were.  It is beyond silly for Disney to now act shocked, shocked to find drugs in the Rolling Stones’ past.

Published in: on October 21, 2010 at 4:28 pm  Leave a Comment  

That’s A Good Question

John Boehner asks: Why are we funding a left-wing network

We shouldn’t be.  We should no more fund NPR and PBS with taxpayer dollars than we should fund MSNBC, FoxNews, CNN, and so on.

Published in: on October 21, 2010 at 3:24 pm  Leave a Comment  

Good Guys: 1 — Car-Jackers: 0

True story in Detroit.

A guy in Detroit stops at a gas station to fill up his Cadillac Escalade.  His girlfriend goes inside to get some snacks or something while her five-year-old daughter stays behind in the SUV.  A would-be carjacker then steps up and shoots the guy while he’s pumping gas, hoping to drive off in the Escalade and the little girl inside.  But the injured Escalade owner has other ideas. 

After being shot, the victim falls to the ground, and from there returns fire with his concealed-carry pistol.  When the smoke clears, the victim is on his feet, and his attacker lays dead.  The victim then has the presence of mind to secure the attacker’s weapon before stumbling into the gas station and calling for help on his cellphone.

The guy is a hero.  Guts, clear thinking, and a concealed pistol saved at least one life and possibly prevented a kidnapping or worse. 

Via Hell In A Handbasket.

Published in: on October 21, 2010 at 1:45 pm  Leave a Comment  

I Guess We Know Who Will Fill Juan Williams’ Slot — George Soros Is Buying 100 Political “Reporters” For NPR

This was news to me.  A foundation founded by hard core leftist George Soros is providing $1.8 million to NPR so it can hire at least 100 reporters to cover local state house politics.  “[The journalists would not be part of typical statehouse coverage, but instead would work on enterprise journalism that looks at how state government decisions play out over years, and extend beyond a single state’s borders.”

So Juan Williams’ (and Mara Liasson’s) association with FoxNews has long been a source of angst among NPR executives, but George Soros’ funding of 100 “enterprise journalists” is not a problem.  I think we know why.

Anyway, remind me again, why are taxpayers funding NPR?

Via Jennifer Rubin at Commentary Contentions.

Published in: on October 21, 2010 at 11:07 am  Leave a Comment  

My Ballot – Part II, Other State Offices

Given the issues and where I live — in deep blue state Senate/Rep districts — this part of the ballot is not all that interesting.

University of Colorado Regent – At Large

Steve Bosley (R).  He is an incumbent with an impressive list of endorsements.  This is not a major issue for me, so that is good enough.

University of Colorado Regent – Dist. 1

Michael Carrigan (D).  I know him and respect him.

State Senate

Tyler Kolden (R).  He doesn’t have a chance, but he has an (R) after his name.  So this is kind of a protest vote.

State Representative

Joshua Sharf (R).   See above.

Published in: on October 21, 2010 at 10:29 am  Comments (1)  

NPR Fires Juan Williams For The Unpardonable Offense Of Being On FoxNews

Juan Williams is an unabashed liberal. I disagree with him on most policy issues, and for many years during which I listened to Williams on NPR I was not particularly fond of him.  I thought his reporting, like most of NPR’s, was tiresomely imbalanced to the left.  And I am sure the fact that NPR is taxpayer funded liberal institution is part of what annoyed me.

Over the years, however, Williams has grown on me and I have come to respect him as a commentator.  He holds decidedly liberal views with which I disagree, but Williams is a rational, fundamentally honest, and articulate proponent of those views.  I especially enjoy the spirited disagreements Williams and Charles Krauthammer often have on the FoxNews All Star Panel.

So this morning, we learn from Instapundit that NPR fired Williams for saying this during a Fox News appearance:

On “The O’Reilly Factor” on Monday night, Williams said, “I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

Here’s a newsflash, NPR — lots of Americans are nervous about people who “are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims.”  People who identify themselves first and foremost as Muslims — as opposed to Americans, other nationalities, or humans in general — are responsible for 9/11, suicide bombings in Israel, Afghanistan and Iraq, the USS Cole bombing, the Fort Hood shootings, and so on.   That is not to say that all Muslims or Muslims who wear traditional garb are involved in or responsible for such things, but all of these things were done by Muslims in the name of Islam by people who view themselves as Muslim above all else.

Moreover, one need only look across the pond to see what happens when you import a large population of Muslims who identify themselves first and foremost as Muslims, as opposed to viewing themselves as immigrants trying to assimilate and become part of their adoptive nations.  See here (A group of [80] Islamic extremists has burst into a mosque near Paris during a prayer service and threatened to kill the local Imam, Hassen Chalghoumi, because of his efforts to improve relations between Jews and Muslims.”), and here, and here, and here.

Meanwhile, NPR unabashedly posts such things as cartoons calling Tea Partiers “tea baggers.”  You see, it is not what you say, but who you are saying it about, that matters to NPR.

Someone remind me, why are taxpayers continuing to fund NPR?

Published in: on October 21, 2010 at 10:22 am  Leave a Comment  

Surprise! Stimulus Weatherization Projects Were A Waste Of Money

Or worse.  In some cases, shoddy workmanship made the homes dangerous to live in:

Specifically, Energy Department inspectors took a close look at the troubled operations of the Community and Economic Development Association of Cook County, known as CEDA, which is the largest recipient of weatherization money in Illinois with $91 million to weatherize 12,500 homes.  (Cook County is, of course, home to Chicago.)

* * *

Department inspectors visited 15 homes that were being weatherized by CEDA and paid for by stimulus funds. “We found that 14 of the 15 homes…failed final inspection because of poor workmanship and/or inadequate initial assessments,” the report says. In eight of the homes, CEDA had come up with unworkable and ineffective plans — like putting attic insulation in a house with a leaky roof. In ten of the homes, “contractors billed for labor charges that had not been incurred and for materials that had not been installed.” The report calls billing problems “pervasive,” with seven of ten contractors being cited for erroneous invoicing. And the department found “a 62 percent final inspection error rate” when CEDA inspectors reviewed their own work.

The work was not just wasteful; it was dangerous. Department inspectors found “heat barriers around chimneys that had not been installed, causing fire hazards.” They found “a furnace [that] had not been vented properly.” The found “a shut-off valve that had not been installed on a gas stove.” And they found “carbon monoxide detectors, smoke alarms and fire extinguishers had not been installed as planned.”

And then there was fraud. At ten of the 15 homes visited, Department inspectors found examples in which “a contractor had installed a 125,000 BTU boiler, but had billed CEDA for a 200,000 BTU boiler costing an estimated $1,000. more.” Another contractor “billed for almost four times the amount of drywall actually installed.” And another “installed 12 light bulbs but had billed CEDA for 20.” (The Department found that CEDA paid almost three times the retail price for each light bulb.) “Billing issues appeared to be pervasive,” the report concludes.

The reason for this fraud and incompetence is simple and predictable — people are spending other people’s money on these projects.  If you are spending other people’s money, you will not care as much what it is spent on or the value received as you will when spending your own money.  As a result, fraud and incompetence are virtually guaranteed in these projects.  There is no one with sufficient incentive and time to make sure it doesn’t happen.

The same people who designed this mess also tell us that they can drive fraud and waste out of Medicare and that Obamacare will be run flawlessly.

Published in: on October 20, 2010 at 5:24 pm  Leave a Comment  

It’s (Almost) Party Time

I am a bit late to the party, with my travel the last couple of days and all, but this is too much fun not to comment on. 

The other day, Sarah Palin told a crowd not to “party like it’s 1773 yet,” and the ever-vigilent left pounced, declaring her (once again) to be an idiot.  See here, for a sample.  By the way, among the pouncers are such luminaries of the neutral media as PBS’s Gwen Ifil.

But here’s a hint, Palin was talking to a Tea Party crowd.  She has been talking to lots of Tea Party crowds in the run-up to the mid-term elections.  “[U]mmm,” to quote Gwen Ifil, when, perchance, did the Boston Tea Party happen to take place?  Perhaps 1773?  Bingo!   The Boston Tea Party  was a party that took place in 1773.  Get it?

So by declaring Palin to be an idiot, the lefty blogosphere (and Ifil) accomplished nothing more than demonstrating their historical ignorance.  I really don’t expect the lefty blogosphere (or Ifil) to have much more knowledge of American history than, say, President Obama.  If they knew history they would likely have slightly different political beliefs. 

But they all have access to Google and Wikipedia.  Willful ignorance is worse than the ignorance that comes naturally from securing yourself inside a comfortable bubble of like-minded folk.

Published in: on October 20, 2010 at 10:02 am  Leave a Comment  

My Ballot – Part I, Federal & State-Wide Offices

U.S. Senator

Ken Buck.  This is an easy choice.

Bennet has had two years to distinguish himself and has not.  He instead marched lockstep with the Obama/Reid/Pelosi crowd, and failed to protect the rights and interests of Colorado voters when he could have, particularly on Obamacare.  This demonstrates that he is utterly spineless.

Bennet as also refused to reveal his intentions on matters of great importance, such as card-check legislation.  This demonstrates that political calculation is more important to him than being straight with Colorado voters as to his intentions.

For the trifecta, Bennet has run a nasty and dishonest campaign.  This demonstrates that retaining his appointed position is more important to Bennet than being honorable. 

Ken Buck, on the other hand, can be counted on to stand up for Colorado citizens and oppose the disastrous Obama agenda.  He will actually vote against increasing spending and taxes, as opposed to Bennet’s pretending that he will just to get reelected.

I don’t agree with Buck on most social issues, but those are not usually the issues that drive my vote.  Moreover, social issues have diminished importance this year.

U.S. Representative

Mike Fallon.  I find my current Rep., Diana DeGette, to be an unimpressive hard-core liberal and Fallon seems to be a common sense conservative.  I have been surprised to see how many Fallon yard signs there are in my deep blue neighborhood, but I still expect DeGette to coast to an easy reelection. 

CO  Governor

Tom Tancredo.  This is a tough one for me.

But it comes down to what I believe are, by far, the most important issues facing state and local governments – the public unions, public employee compensation, and public employee benefits.

As far as I can tell, John Hickenlooper is a fine mayor and a good guy.  But he has said that he would not rescind Governor Ritter’s executive order allowing unions into the state work force, because he doesn’t want to “outrage” unions.  Sorry Mr. Mayor, they need to be outraged.  Rapacious public employees’ unions have destroyed state budgets in several other states, and they absolutely cannot be allowed to do the same thing here.  And setting aside unionization, public employee compensation and benefits have to be brought in line with the private sector. 

Tancredo will hold the line, and hopefully start the long push back.  Hickenlooper has not demonstrated the same resolve.

Secretary of State

Scott Gessler.  This just a default vote.  If I have no strong opinion I either vote (R) or skip it.  This year, I will be voting (R) instead of skipping anything.

Treasurer

Walker Stapelton. 

Cary Kennedy’s signature issue is education funding.  The last thing we need to do is keep dumping more of the state budget into education.  For every additional dollar we spend, we receive no additional performance.  Until and unless there is true educational reform – including a merit-based system for teacher retention, advancement, and compensation – we cannot afford to keep  throwing good money after bad into the education system.

Stapleton, on the other hand, has real world business experience, having actually run a company and had P&L responsibility.  We need more business sense in government, so he is my choice.

Attorney General

John Suthers.  This is a no-brainer.  Suthers runs the AG’s office with admirable restraint and competence.  He  is an outstanding public servant who understands the damage that a crusading Attorney General can cause.

Published in: on October 18, 2010 at 1:47 pm  Comments (1)  

Light Blogging Today

I realized this morning that I have to travel later today.  Erg. 

I kind of forgot about the trip, thinking it was later in the week.  It happens occasionally when I am traveling a lot. 

So anyway, I probably won’t have much time for the news today.  Maybe I will later this evening once I land. 

See you later.

Published in: on October 18, 2010 at 10:51 am  Leave a Comment