He was piped aboard

Captain Crabby was piped aboard the SS MinnPost today for a piece in the Community Voices section entitled So what happened to Minnesota's progressive attitude? Writing mere editorials at the Pioneer Press must crimp Captain Crabby's style, because he obviously needed to vent. Feel better now, Captain?

The apparent trigger for the Captain's fulmination was Dane Smith's observations about Minnesota's chintzy observation of its 150th birthday in Scrimping on the Sesquicentennial: A sign of the times. Here's the lede paragraphs:

Yet another casualty in our decade-long experiment with downsizing and disinvesting in the public sector — which is a historic deviation for Minnesota — turns out to be the celebration of our own history.

Media reports in recent months have drawn attention to the bare-bones budget for the Minnesota Sesquicentennial, the 150the anniversary of statehood. Kevin Duchschere's recent assessment of the sad situation in the Star Tribune notes that only $750,000 has been appropriated, compared with $8.5 million that Wisconsin spent on its sesquicentennial in 1998 and an inflation-adjusted $8.5 million that Minnesota spent on its centennial in 1958.

Then Dane went on to quote, of all people, Nick Coleman!

Captain Crabby, also known as Captain Fishsticks, also known as Craig Westover, is having none of it. In a spittle-flecked screed that is twice as long as Smith's original piece, the Captain delivers a stinging rebuke of the notions that progressive taxation and universal public education are good things:

Take the income tax, a progressive idea. When did it morph into a weapon of mass desperation? When did the progressive idea of the wealthy helping to provide for the needs of the community become the reactionary idea that wealth is evil? Where did the notion arise that we should tax the rich not just to meet the needs of the community but to supply its wants, desires and whims as well? When did the term "public good" lose all definitional credibility?

Why are the progressives that fought so hard for children of color to receive a good education now standing in the doors of failing government schools telling the children and grandchildren of those children that if their families are poor, they can't have school choice? Call me crazy, but defending a failing system against educational opportunity for kids doesn't sound all that progressive.

O Captain, my Captain! (with apologies to Walt Whitman) Spot has a question for you. Have you been taking your benzodiazepine? Spot didn't think so.

It's almost bedtime for Spot, so no links here, but the income tax is not nearly as progressive now, at the federal level, as it was in the Eisenhower administration. And it is not as progressive as it used to be in Minnesota, either. Everything that the government does is of more benefit to the wealthy than the poor: transportation, banking, securities regulation, the creation of artificial persons (corporations, LLCs, etc.) enforcement of private property rights, even national defense (protecting US investment abroad). It is only the most unctuous, self-absorbed scrubs like Sticks that fail to see that. Progressive taxation is simple fairness, not redistribution of wealth.

And the notion that Sticks is worried about the education of po' folks is beyond laughable. All he really cares about is subsidizing private and parochial school education. Believing that Sticks and his ilk care for any but themselves requires a suspension of disbelief of enormous proportion.

Spot is glad to see you're writing on the 'net again, Captain; he never gets around to the Pioneer Press.

Technorati Tags: MinnPost, Craig Westover, progressive taxation, public schools, Minnesota, Dane Smith

As opposed to the old one

Katie's latest, A new witch in the I-35W bridge collapse witch hunt, is just her plaintive cry to Make the Whole Thing Go Away! She trumpets a presser by Mark Rosenker, the head of the NTSB who said, boy, it was a design flaw! Nobody couldda seen that coming:

Last week, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued interim findings that should prompt the witch-hunt crowd to pack it in. (A final report is due within six months.) The "critical factor" in the collapse was a "serious design error" that dates from the bridge's construction in the mid-1960s, said NTSB chairman Mark Rosenker at a news conference.

"It is important to understand that bridge inspections would not have identified the error," Rosenker said. In fact, he said, the National Bridge Inspection Standards don't include procedures that would detect such a design flaw.

Who is this god, Rosenker, Spotty?

Funny you should ask, grasshopper! He is—how can Spot put this diplomatically?—a Republican politico of many years standing. Katie's own newspaper, not that she always reads it, says so:

Rosenker, 61, brought a lifetime of experience in the military, electronics, communications and politics when President Bush appointed him to the safety board in 2003. By then, he had worked on most of the Republican presidential campaigns since Richard Nixon's 1972 reelection.

When he was sworn in as board chairman in 2006, Vice President Dick Cheney credited him with overseeing some of "those secure, undisclosed locations where I've been known to spend some of my time."

Wow, I wonder how that got past Doug Tice?

It is surprising, grasshopper. Maybe Mr. Tice had the day off! Anyway, Katie is shocked that some people won't let her friend Mr. Rosenker have the last word.

Who dares to question this Rosenker, Spotty?

Well, Jim Oberstar, the chairman of the US House committee that oversees the NTSB, for one:

What some Minnesota Democrats -- particularly Rep. Jim Oberstar, chairman of the U.S. House Transportation Committee -- have alleged is that Rosenker overstepped his mandate Tuesday by ruling out the role of rust and corrosion while announcing a preliminary finding of a design flaw in the bridge.

Oberstar called it "an inappropriate, unfortunate and uncharacteristic statement by a board chairman," though the congressman stopped short of ascribing an explicit political motive to Rosenker.

Do you suppose the congressman could haul Rosenker's, er, backside, in front of the Transportation Committee?

I suppose he could, grasshopper.

Anyway, who's the witch?

Isn't that obvious? It's the NTSB itself. Katie is especially put out that the Minnesota Legislature - controlled by those evil DFLers - hired a local law firm to do an independent investigation. Katie concludes her column, shaking her head in sadness:

You can expect that the Legislature's law firm will find some heads to hand to the villain-hungry crowd. But someday the howls will die down, as lawyers and legislators turn their attention to another supposed scandal. Then the men and women who care for our bridges will finally be left to work in peace.

Why yes, of course, Carol Molnau deserves her repose! Katie's suggestion that we just leave the poor state bridge inspectors and maintenance workers alone is a red herring. As has been chronicled over and over, MnDOT knew that bridge was sorely "deficient" but passed on efforts to fix it. And money was clearly the most important reason. That wasn't the fault of the workers; it was the fault of the Administration.

Somehow, Spot finds Katie's concern about a bunch of AFSCME workers rather incongruous. Don't you?

Technorati Tags: Katherine Kersten, I-35 bridge collapse, NTSB, red herrings, Jim Oberstar, MnDOT, Carol Molnau

Sorry, Charlie!

Charlie at Across the Great Divide recently commented on Garrison Keillor's commencement of a lawsuit against his neighbors to restrain their building of a garage/addition that, according to the suit, would deprive Keillor of "light and air." Here's the Star Tribune on the lawsuit, as quoted by Charlie:

The lawsuit, filed Monday in Ramsey County District Court, claims the addition would "obstruct the access of light and air to the Nilsson-Keillor property" and "impair or destroy protected historical resources."

Charlie tut tuts a little about the tiff, suggesting perhaps, my heavens, people, can't we just get along and be neighbors? And Charlie intimates that maybe Keillor is overstepping his, er, boundry, when he complains about something happening next door, especially since Keillor's house is bigger to begin with.

For their part, the neighbors, the defendants—who Spot saw in a televised news report, so he has no link to offer—express shock and dismay, saying that they have done everything according to the zoning ordinance and just "want the whole thing to be over." Doubtless, this is true. But of course, compliance with the zoning ordinance is not the end of the story.

Spot doesn't know the merits of Keillor's case, nor has he seen the complaint, but Keillor is undoubtedly seeking to vindicate an ancient right: the abatement of a common law nuisance. Nuisance is one of the oldest torts out there, and a cause of action for nuisance may lie if "the right of quiet enjoyment [of real estate] is being disrupted to such a degree that a tort is being committed." Simply complying with a zoning ordinance does not mean you can't commit a common law nuisance.

In fact, zoning laws arose in the first place in recognition of the fact that the commencement of private litigation every time a building went up was a very inefficient method of land use regulation. As property became more urban, parcels smaller and landowners with competing interests more numerous, the Invisible Hand developed a bad case of arthritis. The adoption of zoning ordinances, however, has not eliminated the tort of common law nuisance. So for Keillor's neighbors to say "we complied with the zoning ordinance" is an incomplete answer; it does not eliminate the possibility that tort was committed against Keillor.

Air and light is something that is sometimes protected under what is called the Ancient Lights Doctrine. "Light and air" might also be called, in this modern age, access to solar and wind power.

This is one of the issues in the McMansion controversy that exists in Spot's hometown. Spot has written about it before, and the issue is featured in Spot's Car Ride Take IV. Here's a case from Spot's hometown that cries out for a common law nuisance lawsuit, even though the zoning ordinance was apparently complied with:

Spot predicts that the resurrection of the law of common law nuisance is the future of the McMansion issue.

Technorati Tags: Edina, McMansions, zoning, common law nuisance, Garrison Keillor

George Babbitt runs for mayor of Edina!

The Edina Sun-Current had an item this week about Scot Housh's decision to run for mayor of Edina:

"Watching [current Mayor] Jim [Hovland] as he's now decided to move into the congressional race made me start thinking about it," Housh said. "I felt the time was right for me to step forward and make a definitive statement."

Housh was first elected to a two-year term on the City Council in 2000. He was re-elected to four-year terms in 2002 and 2006.

An executive vice president with insurance broker Willis, Housh served on the Park Board before he was elected to the City Council.

In a "not so fast, Junior" statement, Mayor Hovland replied:

Hovland, who is seeking the DFL endorsement for the 3rd District, said he would drop out of the congressional race if he does not get the endorsement.

"If I didn't get the endorsement, I could still consider running for mayor," Hovland said.

You will remember, boys and girls, that Scotty has been a champion of every grand—or perhaps grandiose—real estate scheme to come down the pike since he was elected. One of the questions that ought to be asked of Scotty is how much insurance business he does arising out of all of the building activity occurring in Edina, both commercial and the in-fill residential activity.

Technorati Tags: George Babbitt, Scott Housh, Edina, Willis, insurance, Jim Hovland

Drinking Liberally Thursday (tomorrow) night!

Regular time (six to nine) and regular place (the 331 Club). Be there or be square.

Be sure to mark your calendars for DL a week from tomorrow night, the 24th of January, when Brian Melendez, chair of the DFL party, will be there for a question and answer session about the DFL caucuses and party endorsements. We expect Brian around seven that night.

Technorati Tags: DFL, Drinking Liberally, precinct caucuses, political party endorsements

Now listen up, boys!

No levity tonight, boys and girls. In fact, girls, you may be excused if you like; it's the boys that Spot wants to talk to.

A lot of you—that is, a lot of us—have some explaining to do regarding our treatment of Hillary Clinton.

Aw, c'mon Spotty, isn't she the most calculating woman you've ever seen? Besides, she's a candidate for president! And you have to admit she is pretty tough, too; she can take it.

Grasshopper, whether she can take it or not is not the issue; this is about you, not her.

What do you mean by that?

This is about your sense of fair play and your willingness to treat everyone, even a girl, equitably.

Well, we do that!

Really?

Sure! It's just that there are so many other people—ok, most of them are men—out there for whom she is such a polarizing figure; we just can't support her for president. It affects her electability; it's not because she is a woman; well, directly, anyway.

So, in other words, the fact that there are so many misogynists, sexists, and male chauvinists out there that you adopt their attitudes vicariously?

Of course not. I guess. But you have to admit she is calculating.

Spot is not aware of any cases in the history of the United States where someone ran for president by accident. Are you?

No.

Would you even want a president who didn't seem to really want the job? The British sense of amateurism has its place, but not in the presidency of the United States. Don't you think that she is qualified to be the president?

Yes, she's qualified. But she's such an insider, such an establishment inside-the-beltway kind of a candidate.

Who is telling you this, grasshopper? Is it Senator Obama, or (former) Senator (and vice presidential candidate) Edwards, or perhaps Congressman Kucinich?

But she has the support of the Democratic Leadership Council; they're the ultimate insiders and we don't think they're very progressive.

Hillary Clinton is the first really serious woman candidate for president in the history of the country. Do you think that the first woman president or first minority president we'll ever have will win as a quixotic outsider?

Well, probably not.

Hillary Clinton would not be a serious candidate if she was not an insider. You can take it from Spot that the first woman or minority president in the country's history will be a party insider. Which is why Hillary Clinton will almost certainly beat Barack Obama for the nomination.

Okay, we don't like some of her policy positions.

Now we're getting somewhere. Which ones? And compared to whose?

We'll have to get back to you on that, Spot.

All right. But Spot has a little reading for you to do while you reading policy positions. It's Bob Herbert's column in the New York Times today, Politics and Misogyny.

Technorati Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Democratic Leadership Council, misogyny

The tragedy of identity politics

Ring. Ring. Hil? This is Bar.

Barbara Bush?

No, me! Barack Obama.

Perhaps even stranger. What's up?

I want to call a truce.

Ok, what's the gimmick?

Oh Hil, you cut me to the quick! There's no gimmick. I just want to bury the hatchet.

Right. What's the gimmick?

You know what I'm talking about. This isn't doing either of us any good. And I'm sorry for criticizing you for emphasizing the role of Lyndon Johnson in getting the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed, instead of Martin Luther King. I know that you were talking about presidential leadership. I played the race card. It was a cheap shot; I'm sorry.

Apology accepted. And?

Why do you think there has to be an "and?"

There is, isn't there?

Well, yes, but I'm sorry you won't just accept the apology in the spirit in which it was offered.

Fine. What's the "and?"

Well, maybe you could let up on the questions about "likeablility" and stuff.

I think I brought up the question about why some people, especially some men, don't like me exactly once, in that New Hampshire debate.

I know, but when I responded that you were "likeable enough" it made me look petty.

[chuckling] Yeah, it really did, didn't it? What's the "and stuff?"

Well, playing the woman card. You, well, sniffed a little in New Hampshire; I've never seen you do that before.

And that's playing the woman card?

Maybe.

Well it wasn't. But if you're trying to suggest it's a mistake to play identity politics, you're right.

Good.

Even though there are a lot more women than blacks in the U.S.

Come on, Hil, I thought we were getting somewhere.

Just kidding. We should both pledge not to play the race or gender cards. One of us will need all those voters in the fall.

Great! I'm glad we had this conversation. Even though you started it.

What? I did not!

Did too.

Did not.

Did too.

Did not.

Witch.

Muslim.

Honkey.

[click] [click]

 

That was perhaps a little cheeky, even for Spot. But playing identity politics is a dangerous game. Simply trying to aggregate enough identities to your side may even work sometimes, but it's tribalism, not political philosophy. One of the tribes in the Republican party, the evangelicals, is providing an excellent example of that now.

Technorati Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, identity politics, evangelicals, tribalism

Even when she has a point, she's annoying!

A severe woman, dressed in black, sits at an Underwood typewriter. Her dark eyes glitter and there are beads of perspiration on her upper lip. There is a rising color in her neck and face. Her respiration is quick and shallow as she pecks away with an arrhythmic staccato.

She writing a sex scene in a romance novel, right Spot?

Good guess, grasshopper, but wide of the mark. It's Katie, writing today about the just but sorry fate of a group of Eden Prairie high school students who were featured drinking on a Facebook page:

We used to think of Eden Prairie as a quiet corner of suburbia, aspiring to be what its name implies: An idyllic refuge from the commotion of big-city life. Sure, its tangled freeways can be maddening to outsiders, but we've still viewed it as a tranquil place to live, work and get an education. Until last week.

That's when Eden Prairie High School administrators called a long line of students to the office to discuss compromising photos that had shown up on Facebook.com. Some of the photos appeared to show the students at boozy, underage drinking parties. Forty-two students were interviewed and 13 were disciplined, receiving suspensions from sports and other activities.

Facebook has, boys and girls, ripped the Bedford Falls face off of the Eden Prairie Potterville. And Katie couldn't be happier.

Some of the kids railed about the invasion of privacy and ruined scholarship chances; parents sighed that teen-age drinking was inevitable.

Katie is having none of it. You see, Katie is a empty nester, and her chance to deliver this lecture to even a mythical child must have been really cathartic:

You broke the law, and some of you broke your word. As an athlete, you signed a pledge not to drink or possess alcohol, and to be 'fully responsible' for your actions and their consequences. What is there about this you don't understand?

If you think breaking the law and breaking your promise have no consequences, well, you've learned something.

Don't give me the 'everyone does it' line. That never worked with my mom, and it won't work with the Highway Patrol.

And drop the privacy-rights stuff. There's a camera in every cell phone these days. If you do what is right and don't drink illegally, you'll have nothing to fear from other people's cameras.

Yes, you're 17 years old now, but there's a lot you don't know. The stakes here are higher than losing two weeks with the lacrosse team.

Imagine what would happen to your privacy and life prospects after you've driven off the road, paralyzed yourself or killed a friend. Alcohol lowers your inhibitions, and makes it easier to discard your principles. It can lead you to abuse someone else, or become abused yourself. The consequences could transform your life.

Oh, and about your concern that the school's penalty was too harsh. You'll soon think of that as a Hawaiian vacation compared with going without car keys until the last snow melts this spring in Eden Prairie.

Spot's favorite sentence is "Alcohol lowers your inhibitions, and makes it easier to discard your principles."

You mean like deciding to rob a gas station or burn down a school on the spur of the moment?

No grasshopper. Spot thinks that Katie had something else in mind.

Anyway, Katie just seems a little, well, cheerful, about meeting out punishment, don't you think? Irresponsible use of alcohol is a societal problem that goes far beyond young people drinking before they hit 21, and it is illegal until you get there, boys and girls. But Katie is just having too much fun for Spot's taste.

There's one other thing that bothers Spot. It is this:

And drop the privacy-rights stuff. There's a camera in every cell phone these days. If you do what is right and don't drink illegally, you'll have nothing to fear from other people's cameras.

Here, Katie embraces the National Surveillance State with open arms. "If you do what is right" you don't have to be worried about the National Surveillance State. Remember, someone might be watching; someone probably is watching, and maybe it isn't only your friends! It's important to Katie that you be afraid, very afraid, boys and girls.

Update: Katie hasn't had so much fun since she wrote about spanking.

Technorati Tags: Katherine Kersten, National Surveillance State, Eden Prairie, underage drinking, cell phone cameras

Spot's Car Ride Take IV

Here's a version of Spot's Car Ride with comments. Thanks for the patience.

Technorati Tags: Edina, McMansions

Drinking Liberally tomorrow (Thursday) night

Six to nine at the 331 Club, as usual.

What is maybe not so usual is that Spot suggests a couple of questions for discussion, maybe even debate:

If you're male, and you prefer another candidate to Hillary Clinton, does that make you presumptively a misogynist?

Is your answer to that question different than it would have been last week? If so, why?

Technorati Tags: Drinking Liberally, Hillary Clinton, misogyny

This one's for the Wege

"People feel that the media is piling on Hillary Clinton; they're coming to her defense with their votes."

Spot's car ride

Recently, Spot got to go for a car ride and he saw some of the new McMansions here in Edina. Here's some of what he saw. It deserves a narration, which it will get, but in the meantime, enjoy the ride:

Technorati Tags: Edina, McMansions

 

Update:

Please see the new version with subtitles! You can find it at a post above called Spot's Car Ride Take IV. (There have been a couple of cuts that Spot would rather not talk about.)

Rachel's pity party

Katie's column yesterday was about Rachel's Raw Deal. Spot wrote about it in Flogging a dead horse. The column produced outpourings of grief from the expected places, but Avidor wrote about one that deserves more attention. It's by Drew Emmer at Wright County Republican:

This morning Katherine Kersten wrote a brilliant piece about how U.S. Attorney Rachel Paulose was run out of town on a rail. As is typical of the leftist press they didn't bother to vet the facts and play the role we used to expect from the media. Had teh [sic] media done its [sic] job the hardest working US Attorney we've had in decades might still be showing up for work in Minnesota.

Paulose was hot on the trail of uncovering a significant corruption issue in Minnesota. Amazing how expendable the U.S. Attorney becomes when there is big money on the line.

Boy, Spotty, it sounds like they got rid of Paulose just in the nick of time!

Well according to Drew, but Drew exposes a laughable ignorance of the Paulose fiasco from coronation to humiliation.

But what to make of his statement that "Paulose was hot on the trail of uncovering a significant corruption issue?" Our boy Draw obviously has no first hand information about ongoing investigations at the US Attorney's office, so a couple of alternatives present themselves.

First, and frankly the more likely, Drew is just full of so much doo doo. He was so carried away by the drama of Katie's prose that he made the statement up "out of whole cloth" as lawyers like to say.

Second, Drew has a source of this information. If so, it is, directly or indirectly either someone in the U.S. Attorney's office or perhaps a grand juror. In either case, such a leak would be a serious matter, worthy of investigation by federal authorities. Spot will remind Drew that there isn't even a federal journalist source shield law, just some guidelines at the Justice Department. When the alleged leaker is one of its own, Spot doubts that the guidelines would be much of an impediment to an investigation.

Spot calls on Drew Emmer to say whether it is alternative one or alternative two that is true.

Technorati Tags: Drew Emmer, Katherine Kersten, Rachel Paulose, US Attorney, public corruption

Flogging a dead horse

What does that mean, Spotty? Flogging a dead horse. It sounds kind of useless, not to mention icky.

Where did you hear that, grasshopper?

Oh, somebody said it about Katie's column today praising the now departed Rachel Paulose. Apparently, Friday was her last day on the job:

Last Friday, Rachel Paulose walked out of the U.S. attorney's office in Minneapolis for the last time.

Ah, yes, the former and little lamented, in a lot of circles anyway, US attorney for Minnesota.

But Katie said that she did a really good job, and some other people thought so, too.

On the other hand, there are others, including several people who worked in the office, who thought she was a venomous little witch:

When Paulose took over the office, she told several of the career officials there that she demanded total personal loyalty. At least one replied that loyalty was owed to the Constitution, not to her. Many of the allegations [against Paulose] raise the possibility that Paulose crossed the line while seeking to punish personal disloyalty.

That's City Pages quoting Eric Black. But let's get back to flogging dead horses. It's a metaphor, grasshopper.

For what?

Doing something entirely useless. You can't make a dead horse walk or run faster or pull harder by flogging it.

Oh, I get it! Sort of like the futility of writing glowingly about a person who already lost her job!

Exactly, grasshopper.

Technorati Tags: Katherine Kersten, Rachel Paulose, witches, US attorneys, dead horses, Eric Black

Running away II

Alternate title: DON WAN HUCKABEE!

You'd think these guys were being chased! Well they are, in a way. In his last post, Spot observed that the Republican establishment was really frightened of Mike Huckabee's traveling evangelical freak show, especially after the Iowa caucuses, and how it was working hard to discredit it. Ironic, in view of how the Republicans have courted the evangelicals for years. Spot used Power Line as Exhibit A for how the party insiders were trying to get the anti-Huckabee message out.

There was a final candidates' debate this weekend before the New Hampshire primary. Guess how Power Line scored it? C'mon, guess. That's right.

Here's Paul:

Mitt Romney, in my view, was the winner. His answers were crisp, knowledgeable, and poised. He was solid on each substantive issue and effective in defending his so-called attack ads. My guess is that he's cemented himself as the choice of Republicans in New Hampshire, but still faces the prospect of having independents override that choice.

Mike Huckabee looked to me like tonight's loser. Scott has already shown how weak Huckabee was during the debate on taxes.  . . .

Crisp? You pickin' a candidate or a head of lettuce, Paul?

And as Paul intimates, Scotty came to the very same conclusion: Mittens won and Huckabee lost:

I score this round (on immigration) for Romney and am calling the event for Romney. I thought that Giuliani and McCain came in tied for second, a few points behind Romney. For an extraordinarily attentive account to check against mine, I recommend Michelle Malkin's here.

Note the link to another member of the Republican talking points Play Doh extrusion machine, Michelle Malkin.

A Romney adviser also passed this cautionary tale on to the boys at Power Line:

With Mike Huckabee’s victory in Iowa, however, the Republican party is now entering what might be called its Jesse Jackson moment.

If Huckabee goes on to win more primaries he will have a reasonable claim to the nomination. He may, of course, lose New Hampshire, New York, California and Michigan. But let’s suppose that he manages to win enough primaries in the southern and border states to make the results in those three states [by Spot's count, that's four states] irrelevant. It’s all a question of numbers. In spite of itself, the party might end up with him as its nominee, and with it, heading down the shortest road to disaster since the Goldwater debacle of 1964.

Romney's advisor is trying to make the point that the Republicans may have to pay the price for courting evangelicals just as the Democrats did with blacks.

They did, Spotty? Has this clown ever seen a picture of Barack Obama?

Apparently not, grasshopper. Obama won in Iowa, the "whitest place south of the North Pole," according to the CNN's Jack Cafferty. Spotty say that now, Johnny and Scotty and Paul, since you've invited all the snake handlers,  medicine show peddlers, and all the other magical-thinking nut balls into your home, you're going to have to live with them. Have fun.

Technorati Tags: Mke Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Republicans, snake handlers, evangelicals, Barack Obama, Democrats, Power Line

Running away

Talk about your existential crises! There were two really good ones that Spot noticed today. Republicans are running hard from both of them. The first was the national Republican crisis, occasioned by Mike Huckabee winning the Iowa caucuses on the Republican side. The Republican establishment is beside itself; the beast that it has fed and nurtured since Nixon's Southern Strategy has gotten off its leash and threatens, nay promises, to lead the party into exile for a generation.

All the people who are into the apocalypse are about to create one! Live by the evangelical nut job; die by the evangelical nut job. This stuff about red heifers and pale riders and lakes of fire was just fine, but now it's pretty clear that these people want to own the Republican party. And it has the party scared. Want proof?  Here's one of the most reliable party organs today:

Remember the attack ad against Mitt Romney that Mike Huckabee said he wasn't going to air, but played for reporters so they could publicize his attacks on Romney? It turns out that Huckabee did air the ad -- at least 10 times on four different stations in Davenport and Cedar Rapids, according to FactCheck.org.

Moreover, FactCheck found that Huckabee's attack ad contains several "misleading claims" about his rival. For one thing, the ad says Romney's record as governor of Massachusetts includes "no executions." That's true, but the reason is that Massachusetts doesn't have a death penalty. Indeed, Romney tried but failed to get the death penalty reinstated.

In a less egregious but somewhat misleading claim, the ad also holds Romney accountable for the fact that his state's health care program covers abortions. But Romney didn't make the decision to provide abortion coverage for a $50 co-pay. Rather, the health care legislation Romney signed provided that an independent agency would implement the law and would “develop criteria for plans eligible for premium assistance payments.”

Meanwhile, FactCheck blows the whistle on another Huckabee ad in which he touts his record as a "tax cutter." Among other problems with the ad, Huckabee's tenure as governor actually resulted in a $505.1 million net increase in taxes.

That's Paul at Power Line (no link; you can find it if you really want to, boys and girls). Poor Mittens: he had to be the governor of a state with no death penalty. Come to think of it, that's gonna hurt Governor Pepsodent in any bid for national office, too!

And then Johnny Rocketseed chimed in with this (again, no link):

I caught the first few minutes Hugh Hewitt's radio show driving home from the airport a little while ago. I won't say that Hugh sounded suicidal, but he certainly wasn't happy about yesterday's Iowa caucus results. Hugh attributed today's stock market drop to the prospect of an Obama administration.

That strikes me as a little premature. For what it's worth, I'm not sure the Iowa results changed the landscape much on the Republican side. I'm pretty sure McCain will win New Hampshire, which means that Romney's "slingshot" strategy will have failed, but I don't think it follows that Romney's candidacy is dead. As Paul and Scott have said, Huckabee isn't going much farther, and Thompson shows little sign of life. Which means that there are still three credible Republican candidates. Of the three, Romney might well emerge from the early primaries in the strongest position.

Wishin' and hopin' and dreamin'. How does that song go again? (Spot also notes that Johnny thinks it is important for you to know that he was coming from the airport, implying that he was, of course, off doing important things. Johnny is, Spot regrets to say, a blowhard.)

The second existential crisis happened a little closer to home. It is the defeat of Ray Cox by Kevin Dahle in the special election in Senate District 25. The local Republicans certainly think it was a upset, and a lot of DFLers thought so, too. Some Republicans got up extra early to start the finger pointing:

THE FIRST-EVER MINNESOTA DEMOCRATS EXPOSED “MAN NOT IN THE ARENA” AWARD GOES TO…

By Michael B. Brodkorb | January 4, 2008

Drew Emmer of the Wright County Republican. By his own admission, Drew did nothing to help out with the Republican effort in the SD 25 special election but he wasted no time this morning pointing out how everyone else stumbled.

The comments to Mikey's post are compelling. Well, maybe just entertaining. Spot's favorite was the comment exhorting Mikey to "remember the 11th commandment." Spotty thinks the 11th commandment is going to be recognized more in the breach that the observance this election cycle!

You know what the 11th commandment is, don't you, grasshopper?

No clue, Spotty.

Ronald Reagan came up with it, or perhaps more likely somebody working for him: Never speak ill of another Republican.

Thumps of the tail to Phoenix Woman and Charlie.

Technorati Tags: Mike Huckabee, Kevin Dahle, Ray Cox, Power Line, 11th commandment

The Spotty™: Visual Arts Division

The first Spotty™ of 2008 introduces a new category: visual arts. The Spotty™ goes to Spot's friend and DL drinking buddy (she doesn't drink much, but never mind) Tild. The graphic is contained in Tild's post Katie Kersten: More Than A Seasonal Creep. Indeed! This one is especially pleasing to Spot, because Tild is also the designer and artist of the handsome Spotty™ award medallion that appears on his posts that announce a new Spotty™ award winner. Like this one:

Tild's muse for the graphic she created was Katie's column about the University of Minnesota's uncertain navigation of the issue of Christmas or holiday parties at this public university, and Spot's imagining of a conversation about that column that Katie had with boss Doug Tick Tice. (God, that was Freudian.) Spot is too modest (yeah, right Spotty) to reprint all the nice things Tild said about Spot's post, but here's just a bit:

I’ve been thinking that Katie was much too modest about her little “seasonal creep” bon mot.  As Spot has so ably pointed out in 2007, creepiness of Kersten’s caliber transcends the limits of a single season.  In actuality,  Katherine Kersten is….

That paragraph introduces the winning graphic:

Now, it took Spot a little while to get used to the notion of sharing cherub duties with Swiftee, but on reflection, it does have sort of a yin and yang feeling to it that Spot likes. It's a wonderful HOLIDAY treat for Spot.

Spot does have a word of warning for you, boys and girls. When you go over to Tild's post, linked above, if you click on the winning graphic, it will send you back here to the Cucking Stool. You risk being caught in an electronic whirlpool from which you may never, ever emerge! Be careful!

Remember, boys and girls, a Spotty™ is awarded to the author of an op-ed piece, a letter to the editor, a blog post or comment, and now a graphic, that Spot wishes that he had authored himself.

Update: Tild now takes her place in the pantheon of Spot's blogroll, too.

Technorati Tags: Katherine Kersten, Spotty award, Tild the blog, Swiftee, creeps, cherubs

Wherein Michael Brodkorb again reveals himself as a doofus

The GOP's favorite slime-slinger, Michael Brodkorb, recently proclaimed in his usual breathless manner that Secretary of State Mark Ritchie was somehow "hiding" information about the upcoming caucuses here in Minnesota. Given the hyperventilating that Mr. Brodkorb's been doing about Mark Ritchie, I wanted to check out whether the information about caucuses was indeed hidden on the site.

I went to the Secretary of State home page, and right there on the top was a link entitled "Voting and Election Information" link, complete with a little illustration of a button that said "vote." So I clicked it and lo and behold at the very top of the list of links that came up was one for "Caucus information." This link led me to this document, providing accurate dates, how to contact parties to determine locations, frequently asked questions, even a handy-dandy list of definitions and terms.

This - shockingly enough - didn't strike me as "hiding" anything, so I tried to post a comment on Mr. Brodkorb's post explaining that the information was far from "hidden." The fact that the comment was not allowed does speak volumes about Mr. B's penchant for never letting the facts get in the way of a pretend outrage, especially when it comes to Mark Ritchie.

Now, unlike elections in the State of Minnesota, precinct caucuses are not administered by any governmental unit. They are set up, funded, administered, and conducted by the political parties, not the Secretary of State or any of the county elections administrators. So our outraged friend purposely gets lost on the website of the people not running the caucuses, can't find the thing he's hoping to not find, treats this as some startling revelation, proclaims his incorrect conclusion, and then deletes comments that point out that he's again wrong on a simple fact.

Michael, you'll find in life that those who want to be lost often are.

Update: Charlie really does his homework on this one. And he repudiates his own name-calling, unlike me.

Further update: Having gone back to the SoS website and following the simple instructions in the comment he wouldn't post, Mr. B now finds the information and proclaims loudly that he, Brodkorb caused Secretary of State Ritchie to post the caucus information!

Judge Easterbrook of the Seventh Circuit wrote this week a legal opinion upholding a finding of fraud against the purveyors of the“Gold Deluxe” Q-Ray Ionized Bracelet and explored that old logical fallacy: post hoc ergo propter hoc to analyze the claims of the charlatans who sold the junk bracelets. Recognizing that merely because one thing happens after another does not mean the second thing is caused by the first thing, the wise judge described it this way: "the 'testimonial' of someone who keeps elephants off the streets of a large city by snapping his fingers is the basis of a joke rather than proof of cause and effect."

Mr. Brodkob's eventual location of the caucus information after he roared his outrage falls squarely into the "joke" category, not the "cause and effect" category.

Mitch the whiner

Make that the insufferable, incessant, retching whiner Mitch. Dear God, deliver us from Mitch, the man who thinks that sackcloth and ashes are a fashion statement. Mitch the hot dryer vent of human beings, taking the crease out of your slacks and the curl out of you hair. Mitch, the man who sells a line of custom hair shirts. Mitch . . .

We get the picture, Spot. Why the rant?

Poor Mitch put up a post today lamenting the problems of the core cities:

The inner cities have their issues. If you’re in Minnesota and reading this, you know about them; you’ve either fled them, are paying for them via your taxes, or are - like me - living among them.

Where does Mitch live, Spotty? The near north side of Minneapolis?

Actually, grasshopper, he lives near Hamline University in St. Paul. But Mitch is so put upon, so besieged by something called "local government aid" that he can't stand it.

Wait a minute, Spot. I thought that LGA in effect took money from guys like you, Spot, and used it to provide services to core city residents like Mitch. Right?

Well, yes, that's right.

Why is he complaining and not you, Spot?

An interesting point, grasshopper. Perhaps it is because Spot recognizes that the entire metropolitan area is a community. Or perhaps it is just the nature of whiners. Regardless, Mitch, Spot says that you should get out of the house more: clean your garage, shovel your walks, mow the grass; you need the exercise.

Technorati Tags: local government aid, Minneapolis, St. Paul, whiners

His paw is in a sling

Boys and girls, you ol' friend Spot injured a typing paw (two typing paws and a nose; it usually goes pretty fast) in a gruesome accident here in the doghouse. While he heals up—and Swiftee, Spot will heal to write again, sorry—he won't be posting too much. Spot did want to call one thing to your attention, though. It comes via Mercury Rising.

Apparently El Presidente Bush signed the Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007. But as he often does, Bush included a signing statement—much like crossing your fingers behind you back when you don't mean what you're saying—that Spot reproduces with Phoenix Woman's highlights:

Today, I have signed into law S. 2271, the “Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007.” I share the deep concern of the Congress over the continued violence in Darfur perpetrated by the Government of Sudan and rebel groups. My Administration will continue its efforts to bring about significant improvements in the conditions in Sudan through sanctions against the Government of Sudan and high level diplomatic engagement and by supporting the deployment of peacekeepers in Darfur.

This Act purports to authorize State and local governments to divest from companies doing business in named sectors in Sudan and thus risks being interpreted as insulating from Federal oversight State and local divestment actions that could interfere with implementation of national foreign policy. However, as the Constitution vests the exclusive authority to conduct foreign relations with the Federal Government, the executive branch shall construe and enforce this legislation in a manner that does not conflict with that authority.

GEORGE W. BUSH
THE WHITE HOUSE,
December 31, 2007.

PW charitably calls this "weaselly."

You notice the sleight of hand, don't you, boys and girls? First, the statement says that foreign policy is up to the federal government, but then it says that it is up to the executive branch to decide what that policy is.

Of course, by adopting the Sudan Accountability Act, Congress already announced the foreign policy on the subject. The signing statement is a claim the the executive somehow makes foreign policy in a vacuum without any role for the Congress. This has Professor Organ Failure, John Yoo, and "unitary executive" written all over it.

Technorati Tags: Sudan, Darfur, Mercury Rising, foreign policy, signing statements