First off, let me admit to a bias here ,,, I couldn't care less about golf. My personal attempts at mastering pasture pool have been pitiable and the experience leaves me perpetually mystifies as to why anyone would choose to ruin a perfectly lovely summer afternoon in pursuit of an uncooperative white ball. And if I care little for golf on a personal level, my interest in golf as a spectator sport is even less. Televised golf is far beyond my comprehension ... alternating shots of sky and lawn accompanied by muffled applause and mumbled commentary ... it's the Home and Garden Network without fertilizer rates.
And if I don't care about professional golf, I certainly don't care about the personal life of professional golfers ... even when they're playing the role of penitent porn star.
There's a momentary ballyhoo this morning about Tiger Woods' latest public coming-out party. After getting caught with his pants down, the former squeaky clean media darling is trying to recoup lost fortunes -- understandable enough. I just don't know why anybody who doesn't know Tiger -- either in the platonic or the biblical sense -- ought to care.
He's just a man who plays with his putter in public --and we'll pay to see that -- anything beyond that I don't want to see, I don't want to hear about, is none of my, yours, our business.
So until it's tee time, Tiger, just go away. Leave us alone.
Friday, February 19, 2010
And how was your Presidents' (or is that President's) Day?
Y'know, in the great scheme of things, I could really do without President's (Presidents'?) Day. It's a pretty lame holiday when the only thing I have to look forward to is not getting any bills in the mail -- because they're not delivering the mail.
Truth is, we don't even know for certain what the day is supposed to commemorate. Is it to honor the presidency (President's)? Or the august individuals who have held the office (Presidents')? If it is the former, shouldn't we also look into commemorating other positions of significance with their own day of postal abstinence (e.g. Supreme Court Justice's Day, Speaker of the House's Day) in good regard to the Constitutional principle of checks and balances -- perhaps tossing in a Governor's Day as a nod to federalism as well.
If it's meant to honor the occupants of the office -- then I fear the basis for the holiday becomes a bit more dicey. How much honor do we really want to heap onto James Buchanan, John Tyler, Warren Harding and, everyones favorite, Dick Nixon? With that rogue's gallery as a reference -- I'm really not certain just what it is we're celebrating.
I doubt if the situation would have arisen if George Washington and Abe Lincoln had had the foresight to be born in separate months. Taking a day off for both of their birthdays was a bit much in a month that's short on days to start with -- so Congress, back in the day when compromise wasn't a dirty word -- split the difference and made two holidays into one. A good thing for colleciton agencies and junk mailers, but no real plus for the rest of us.
So once again, I failed to put up my President's' Day tree, send out my President's' Day cards, rent a President's' Day costume and go to midnight President's' Day Mass. I didn't have a big President's' Day dinner or set off President's' Day fireworks.
I just looked into my empty mailbox and said, "Oh yeah...President's' Day..."
Anyway, I hope your's was a happy one.
Truth is, we don't even know for certain what the day is supposed to commemorate. Is it to honor the presidency (President's)? Or the august individuals who have held the office (Presidents')? If it is the former, shouldn't we also look into commemorating other positions of significance with their own day of postal abstinence (e.g. Supreme Court Justice's Day, Speaker of the House's Day) in good regard to the Constitutional principle of checks and balances -- perhaps tossing in a Governor's Day as a nod to federalism as well.
If it's meant to honor the occupants of the office -- then I fear the basis for the holiday becomes a bit more dicey. How much honor do we really want to heap onto James Buchanan, John Tyler, Warren Harding and, everyones favorite, Dick Nixon? With that rogue's gallery as a reference -- I'm really not certain just what it is we're celebrating.
I doubt if the situation would have arisen if George Washington and Abe Lincoln had had the foresight to be born in separate months. Taking a day off for both of their birthdays was a bit much in a month that's short on days to start with -- so Congress, back in the day when compromise wasn't a dirty word -- split the difference and made two holidays into one. A good thing for colleciton agencies and junk mailers, but no real plus for the rest of us.
So once again, I failed to put up my President's' Day tree, send out my President's' Day cards, rent a President's' Day costume and go to midnight President's' Day Mass. I didn't have a big President's' Day dinner or set off President's' Day fireworks.
I just looked into my empty mailbox and said, "Oh yeah...President's' Day..."
Anyway, I hope your's was a happy one.
A modest proposal
It's good to see folks can learn from experience ... even if they are members of the Minnesota Legislature.
A couple of DFLers -- Rep. Lyndon Carlson and Sen. Richard Cohen are introducing a bill that will keep future governors -- Republican, Democrat or just plain crazy -- from repeating T-Paw's unallotment performance from last session.
According to a piece in this morning's Strib the proposal would "limit the governor's unallotment power in three ways:
"Governors could unallot only from the part of a projected budget deficit that was not known at the completion of the last legislative session.
"Payment to programs affected by unallotment would have to be reduced proportionately, and formulas or eligibility standards could not be changed.
"The governor could not unallot mor than 2 percent of the general fund budget and could not unallot more than 10 percent of a single general fund appropriation."
In other words, no future governor would be able to take a meat axe to a budget the legislature passed and he signed to satisfy the political whim of the moment while preserving executive flexibility to deal with unanticipated fluctuations in the state economy.
Of course, T-Paw -- continuing to play his favored role as Dr. No -- has promised to veto any bill limiting his authority.
A couple of DFLers -- Rep. Lyndon Carlson and Sen. Richard Cohen are introducing a bill that will keep future governors -- Republican, Democrat or just plain crazy -- from repeating T-Paw's unallotment performance from last session.
According to a piece in this morning's Strib the proposal would "limit the governor's unallotment power in three ways:
"Governors could unallot only from the part of a projected budget deficit that was not known at the completion of the last legislative session.
"Payment to programs affected by unallotment would have to be reduced proportionately, and formulas or eligibility standards could not be changed.
"The governor could not unallot mor than 2 percent of the general fund budget and could not unallot more than 10 percent of a single general fund appropriation."
In other words, no future governor would be able to take a meat axe to a budget the legislature passed and he signed to satisfy the political whim of the moment while preserving executive flexibility to deal with unanticipated fluctuations in the state economy.
Of course, T-Paw -- continuing to play his favored role as Dr. No -- has promised to veto any bill limiting his authority.
Bad for business?
No matter what T-Paw and the T-Party boys say, it looks like paying taxes isn't the only thing that's bad for business in Minnesota ... and it's not a bunch of lefty DFLer types saying it either. Here's the pertinent snippet from Tuesday's Strib:
"Moody's Investors Service lowered its ratings outlook on Minnesota to negative from stable, citing the state's ongoing financial and economic weakness.
The ratings agency also noted the state government's depletion of reserves and a heavy reliance on one-time resources to balance its budget."
It seems like Wall Street likes honest books and an adequate steady income -- and that doesn't come by playing politics with the balance sheet.
"Moody's Investors Service lowered its ratings outlook on Minnesota to negative from stable, citing the state's ongoing financial and economic weakness.
The ratings agency also noted the state government's depletion of reserves and a heavy reliance on one-time resources to balance its budget."
It seems like Wall Street likes honest books and an adequate steady income -- and that doesn't come by playing politics with the balance sheet.
Thursday, February 04, 2010
Here we go again
Well, the Minnesota legislature called itself to disorder right on schedule and we're all set for a show that should rival an all-star Three Stooges revival -- featuring Larry, Maggie and Tim.
I just draw no great confidence from observing that we have a governor who wants to be president, a Speaker of the House who wants to be governor and a Senate Majority Leader who is certain he ought to be governor. I'd feel a lot better if the whole of the state's political leadership didn't go into the session with their resume's out.
Meanwhile there's the small matter of the state budget coming up $1.5 billiion short with another $5 billion worth of red ink on the next go-round ... but who wants to bet they'll spend more time on a new stadium for the Vikings?
And so it goes...
I just draw no great confidence from observing that we have a governor who wants to be president, a Speaker of the House who wants to be governor and a Senate Majority Leader who is certain he ought to be governor. I'd feel a lot better if the whole of the state's political leadership didn't go into the session with their resume's out.
Meanwhile there's the small matter of the state budget coming up $1.5 billiion short with another $5 billion worth of red ink on the next go-round ... but who wants to bet they'll spend more time on a new stadium for the Vikings?
And so it goes...
Friday, July 03, 2009
Pa'in with interest
I suspect we're soon in for another dose of Minnesota Smug ... y'know, that insufferable Keilloresqe condescension that comes over us whenever anybody, anywhere does something more spectacularly bone-headed than we have just managed. Well, here we are ... having just royally screwed up our state budget, along comes the news that California's budget is so totally hashed that they are now sending out IOUs as payment for state debts. Yeah, there ya go -- T-Paw hasn't resorted to that maneuver. Good on you, Timmy. See ya in the White House ...
Weeeeelllll...not so fast. How these things look depend a lot on where you sit. Yeah, California is sending out IOU's, but get one of these IOUs and you can take it to the bank ... give it to the teller and the teller gives you good old American folding green, legal tender, on the spot. Or -- if you're doing fine and feeling flush, hang on to that IOU and the State of California will pay interest -- 3 percent -- on what they owe. In short, the state is paying what it owes ... plus ... holding up its end of the bargain even if Arnold and the Legislature can't get it together.
Compare that to the mess T-Paw and Maggie the K have left us with. Don't kid yourself -- the state's sending out IOUs -- $1.7 billion worth of them -- they're just going to school districts. Instead of paying what it owes our local schools on time, they're pushing it into another budget cycle so it doesn't show up on this year's books -- make believe budgeting on the grand scale. Bernie Madoff should have gone into politics.
Anyway, the upshot is, our schools don't get an IOU, they just don't get paid. Trouble is, they have bills to pay, payroll to make, but don't have the option of saying, just hold on a few months while our books finish cooking. No, the public schools have to go to the bank, take out a loan to pay what they owe ... and with that loan comes interest -- paid by the school district with money that would otherwise have been spent on teachers, books or a trip to the state tournament for a championship football team. Now, thanks to our illustrious leaders, it's doubtful they can afford the football team.
Remember, in California, the state pays interest on its IOUs. In Minnesota, our hard pressed school districts pick up the tab
California dreamin'? We'd best not get too smug, not smug at all.
Weeeeelllll...not so fast. How these things look depend a lot on where you sit. Yeah, California is sending out IOU's, but get one of these IOUs and you can take it to the bank ... give it to the teller and the teller gives you good old American folding green, legal tender, on the spot. Or -- if you're doing fine and feeling flush, hang on to that IOU and the State of California will pay interest -- 3 percent -- on what they owe. In short, the state is paying what it owes ... plus ... holding up its end of the bargain even if Arnold and the Legislature can't get it together.
Compare that to the mess T-Paw and Maggie the K have left us with. Don't kid yourself -- the state's sending out IOUs -- $1.7 billion worth of them -- they're just going to school districts. Instead of paying what it owes our local schools on time, they're pushing it into another budget cycle so it doesn't show up on this year's books -- make believe budgeting on the grand scale. Bernie Madoff should have gone into politics.
Anyway, the upshot is, our schools don't get an IOU, they just don't get paid. Trouble is, they have bills to pay, payroll to make, but don't have the option of saying, just hold on a few months while our books finish cooking. No, the public schools have to go to the bank, take out a loan to pay what they owe ... and with that loan comes interest -- paid by the school district with money that would otherwise have been spent on teachers, books or a trip to the state tournament for a championship football team. Now, thanks to our illustrious leaders, it's doubtful they can afford the football team.
Remember, in California, the state pays interest on its IOUs. In Minnesota, our hard pressed school districts pick up the tab
California dreamin'? We'd best not get too smug, not smug at all.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Republicans' faulty Bible belt buckles
How come righteous Republicans seem to have so much trouble keeping their pants up?
Here we go again -- another crusader against vice and evil caught with his britches around his knees with a wife (his wife, at least) nowhere near to be found. This time we were treated to South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford's little romp on the Pampas with some little Argentine firecracker. It would appear that uncovering a little illicit activity under the covers is going to send another GOP public servant back to the private sector they're supposedly so fond of.
It was just a few days ago Sen. John Ensign of Nevada 'fessed up to getting a little on the side, and who can forget Larry Craig of Minneapolis airport restroom ill-fame. The list of the publicly righteous laid low keeps going on and on.
I guess they don't make those Bible belt buckles like they used to...
Here we go again -- another crusader against vice and evil caught with his britches around his knees with a wife (his wife, at least) nowhere near to be found. This time we were treated to South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford's little romp on the Pampas with some little Argentine firecracker. It would appear that uncovering a little illicit activity under the covers is going to send another GOP public servant back to the private sector they're supposedly so fond of.
It was just a few days ago Sen. John Ensign of Nevada 'fessed up to getting a little on the side, and who can forget Larry Craig of Minneapolis airport restroom ill-fame. The list of the publicly righteous laid low keeps going on and on.
I guess they don't make those Bible belt buckles like they used to...
Monday, June 22, 2009
Gun nuts worthy of the name
And you thought it was just the bleeding-heart lefty civil libertarians that worried about respecting the constitutional rights of bloody minded terror suspects -- but turns out you're wrong on that one too, buppa. It seems that darling of the weaponized right, the NRA, has come out expressing deep concern that your government and mine might be do something to prevent folks who are out to kill us from getting all the guns their evil little hearts desire.
No, folks, I can't make this up. The NRA is on record with it's concern that federal legislation may infringe on the "second amendment rights" of individuals placed on the government's terrorist watch list -- created as a security measure following 9/11. "We're concerned about the quality and integrity of the list," according to the heavy-weight gun lobby -- who raised nary a peep of protest until Sen. Frank Laughtenberg proposed legislation that would bar weapons sales to people on the terror list.
As it stands, a person determined to pose a terror threat is barred from air travel, won't be issued a visa and faces other restrictions -- not among them a prohibition on purchasing, owning, transporting or using firearms. According to the Government Accounting Office, over the last five years, people on the list have attempted to purchase firearms over 1,000 times, with 9 out of 10 purchases approved -- including one for over 50 pounds of explosives.
So, we don't let them on our airplanes, we don't let them in our country, we keep a close eye on them so they don't get a chance to kill us ... with the guns the NRA is so eager for them to buy.
A-yuh -- I guess they're not called gun nuts for nothing.
No, folks, I can't make this up. The NRA is on record with it's concern that federal legislation may infringe on the "second amendment rights" of individuals placed on the government's terrorist watch list -- created as a security measure following 9/11. "We're concerned about the quality and integrity of the list," according to the heavy-weight gun lobby -- who raised nary a peep of protest until Sen. Frank Laughtenberg proposed legislation that would bar weapons sales to people on the terror list.
As it stands, a person determined to pose a terror threat is barred from air travel, won't be issued a visa and faces other restrictions -- not among them a prohibition on purchasing, owning, transporting or using firearms. According to the Government Accounting Office, over the last five years, people on the list have attempted to purchase firearms over 1,000 times, with 9 out of 10 purchases approved -- including one for over 50 pounds of explosives.
So, we don't let them on our airplanes, we don't let them in our country, we keep a close eye on them so they don't get a chance to kill us ... with the guns the NRA is so eager for them to buy.
A-yuh -- I guess they're not called gun nuts for nothing.
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Don't let the door hit ya...
So we learn T-Paw will be moving out of the Governor's Mansion in 18 months. Well, I guess we won't have to count the silverware like we did when Jesse "The Mind" moved on -- I believe they hocked the silver to pay the light bill last month.
That will be his legacy -- the state broker, sicker, poorer than when he took office. It will be hard to miss a guy who accomplished all that.
I first encountered Pawlenty when he was House Minority Leader. He struck me as an affable guy, with a politician's inability to give a straight answer to a direct question.
That was well borne out the day after he announced his candidacy in 2003 -- complete with "No new taxes" pledge. It just happened to be the same day the state revenue department announced the budget was likely to come up over $4.5 billion short. Tim dropped by for a press conference and his response to questions on the looming deficit left me certain that this was a man who cared more for his career than for the people of this state -- and over the years, by and large, he did not disappoint.
I'll make exception regarding his response to the 2007 floods, where he acted with vigor to mobilize aid for thousands of people washed out of their homes. But that compassion seemed to dry up with the floodwaters and this spring, rather than raise taxes a hundred bucks a year on his rich suburban buddies, he's willing to take health care benefits away from 30,000 of our poorest, sickest citizens.
Ahhhh, Timmy, if you're thinkin' of leavin' early, just call -- I'll help ya pack.
That will be his legacy -- the state broker, sicker, poorer than when he took office. It will be hard to miss a guy who accomplished all that.
I first encountered Pawlenty when he was House Minority Leader. He struck me as an affable guy, with a politician's inability to give a straight answer to a direct question.
That was well borne out the day after he announced his candidacy in 2003 -- complete with "No new taxes" pledge. It just happened to be the same day the state revenue department announced the budget was likely to come up over $4.5 billion short. Tim dropped by for a press conference and his response to questions on the looming deficit left me certain that this was a man who cared more for his career than for the people of this state -- and over the years, by and large, he did not disappoint.
I'll make exception regarding his response to the 2007 floods, where he acted with vigor to mobilize aid for thousands of people washed out of their homes. But that compassion seemed to dry up with the floodwaters and this spring, rather than raise taxes a hundred bucks a year on his rich suburban buddies, he's willing to take health care benefits away from 30,000 of our poorest, sickest citizens.
Ahhhh, Timmy, if you're thinkin' of leavin' early, just call -- I'll help ya pack.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Unwarranteed attention
It seems that Chuck Schumer is about to sic the whole United States Congress on the dweebs who've been trying to warranty my Metro.
Several times a month for the last several months I've been getting called by a machine with an urgent tone in it's voice cautioning me that my car's factory warranty is about to expire. Now let me assure you, I've been mighty pleased with the reliable performance of my 12-year-old Metro, but it did come as a surprise to me that GM was still backing a vehicle with well over 100,000 miles on it.
So, when the machine calls, I like to stay on the line. I'm sure to thank the caller profusely for their concern. I tell them all about how happy I am with my car and what good mileage it gets and how little it cost and so on and on and on and then I start asking them about their cars and how long they've had them and ... well I've never had a conversation go beyond finding out about their personal rides. Somehow we get disconnected ... but I always try to engage the next friendly young fellow in a cordial auto related discussion. It's the least I can do, considering how concerned they are about the soon-to-lapse warranty. If Schumer's bill passes I might almost miss those conversations ... who else is going to care about my poor old Metro
Several times a month for the last several months I've been getting called by a machine with an urgent tone in it's voice cautioning me that my car's factory warranty is about to expire. Now let me assure you, I've been mighty pleased with the reliable performance of my 12-year-old Metro, but it did come as a surprise to me that GM was still backing a vehicle with well over 100,000 miles on it.
So, when the machine calls, I like to stay on the line. I'm sure to thank the caller profusely for their concern. I tell them all about how happy I am with my car and what good mileage it gets and how little it cost and so on and on and on and then I start asking them about their cars and how long they've had them and ... well I've never had a conversation go beyond finding out about their personal rides. Somehow we get disconnected ... but I always try to engage the next friendly young fellow in a cordial auto related discussion. It's the least I can do, considering how concerned they are about the soon-to-lapse warranty. If Schumer's bill passes I might almost miss those conversations ... who else is going to care about my poor old Metro
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
