You can always find something that’ll raise your eyebrows.
- Brian Mooney has an interesting story on the state legislature’s magic trick of “cutting” $11 million from its budget without actually, you know, cutting anything. It’s complicated (and I’m not sure I completely get it), but basically, it appears that the vast majority of the “cuts” came from a reserve fund (I believe “slush fund” is the technical term), and that reductions in spending from the reserve fund will not revert to the general fund to be used for other purposes (like helping towns buy fire trucks). Go read the whole thing, and if you can clarify the details for us, please do so.
- Mitt Romney joins the hilarity at CPAC, an event which sensible conservatives like Rick Moran realize is the first stop on the road to nowhere:
The theme of this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) should be “Cocooning our way to Irrelevancy” or perhaps “How to lose the next 5 elections in 10 easy steps.”
From my point of view, it really is that bad. With the exception of some effort to bring conservatism into the 21st century communications-wise, the program appears to be an excellent panacea for what ailed conservatism in about 1980. It’s as if the debacles of 2006 and 2008 never happened. Does it matter that the very same people who helped get us clobbered the last two election cycles are running seminars and roundtables at the conference? Not if you’re a movement still in denial that it will take more than “message tweaking” and better utilization of the internet to bring conservatism back and make it relevant to a large portion of Americans again….
[N]o matter how you want to add up the numbers, the 30% of so of the nation that identifies itself as “conservative” will always fall short of 50% + 1. I hate to break this news to my fellow conservatives; you can use any kind of mathematical hocus pocus you wish but there just aren’t enough of us to only allow “true conservatives” a place at the table.
This Moran fellow sounds pretty sharp. We’d better hope that Republicans continue not to listen to him. đŸ˜‰
- It’s so interesting what you sometimes randomly run across while Googling something unrelated. This is apropos of nothing in particular; just thought it should be noted.
Jeff Jacoby in 2008:
The color of Obama’s skin is irrelevant to his character and to his fitness for office. Would that its significance to his campaign were nil.
Jacoby in 2006:
Race is a poor reason to vote for or against any candidate.
Jacoby in 1994:
[Marc Draisen for Lt. Gov.] gets my vote.
As does Augusto Grace for the secretary of state nomination. It’s been 30 years since the Massachusetts GOP nominated a black man for statewide office. About time the Democrats did likewise.
Yes, you read that right: in 1994, Jacoby (a) took a Democratic primary ballot (presumably because he lived in Brookline and there weren’t any Republicans running), and (b) voted for Augusto Grace for Secretary of State because he was the black candidate. Weird.
- The award for the most content-free column of the year might well go to former MA Governor William Weld, who somehow talked the Globe op-ed editors into running this totally pointless piece. The argument seems to be that when Reagan took office, the country faced challenges, and when Obama took office, the country also faced challenges. Wow — that’s really deep, man.
- Finally, the Herald reports that the Patrick administration is considering cutting costs by publishing certain legal notices on the internet rather than in newspapers. Hey, we’ve got ad space available! đŸ˜‰
He lost me here:
<
p>
<
p>David Frum worked for the Bush administration, was an ardent cheerleader of the Bush administration at National Review, and then went on to become an advisor on Giuliani’s presidential campaign. Ignoring what being an advisor to the Giulini campaign must imply about one’s political advice, is Rudy “9/11, 9/11, 9/11” Giuliani someone who you would consider to be the sensible alternative the right needed? Frum thought so, Patrick Ruffini (who runs TheNextRight) thought so, and I’d guess that Rick Moran thinks so as well.
<
p>From my own brief look at the CPAC agenda it seemed to be worse than last years. Last year there were at least a few interesting panels.
http://www.economist.com/blogs…
<
p>
<
p>It appears that this year Larison, Douthat, and Poulos were replaced by Joe the Plumber.
Here is some more news from Boston.com
http://www.boston.com/news/nat…
and it has do with my search for common ground on smart spending. I understand how earmarks are very important for states to get funding for projects that are crucial to helping the states move forward but they often vary in importance and some are absolute nonsense.
<
p>For example, these I find acceptable and reasonable:
From Boston.com “The Bay State lawmakers have inserted provisions ranging from $30 million to improve commuter rail service to Fitchburg, to a $254,000 project for a local study of obesity, … a Globe review found.”
<
p>These I find unnecessary and should not be funded by taxpayer money at this time; “…$190,000 to renovate a Stockbridge theater,…In a case of several senators working on behalf of another, Kerry and several of his colleagues inserted an earmark for $5.8 million for the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate, to be built next to the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library in Boston. ….Separately, Kerry also engineered an earmark of $22 million for an addition to the Kennedy library, according to his staff.
<
p>Don’t get me wrong, I love the Kennedys, and I think these are great projects but I think these projects should be privately funded or put on hold, at least until Massachusetts regains some financial stability. If the state of Massachusetts wasn’t in such a state of disarry I might be more supportive of it, but come on, don’t we need transportation overhaul and education support and help for the homeless. Why not earmark $22 million for homelss shelters and $5.8 million for some much need road repairs or for school books or some other project to help the citizen of Massachusetts.
<
p>Am I completely wrong here, or does this make sense to anyone else?
<
p>Not good news for those in the print media, but probably more efficient. Given our society nowadays, seems to make sense to me. Sorry Globe, Herald, and CNI.
<
p>Will say that looking at my local paper, think that the emphasis on foreclosures is not so dire in this state (and does lead more credence to the 5 state problem – CA, AZ, NV, MI, and FL are the epicenters). Looking at the few foreclosures in the local rag and their length (about 2/3 of a tabloid page), figure I’ll know when it’s a problem in MA when our newspapers quadruple in size. Haven’t seen that yet.
<
p>It looks (to me) like the legislative version of searching the couch and other upholstery for loose change and then calling that ‘revenue’. It’s a private kitty that seems to depend on government inefficiencies to provide the lege with it’s own under-the-radar ‘rainy day’ fund.
…just saying.
is still dead.
seems obvious to me. It is a big flag waving toward Pres. Obama saying, “I’ll be bipartisan, Mr. President! Appoint me to something! Is that Ambassador to Mexico job open again? Please, please, please.”
Wouldn’t mind Mitt in the Treasury on deck circle.
<
p>First we have the mid-year 9c budget cuts of all that was supposedly unnecessary, local aids cuts announced and tax increases. Meanwhile state headcount at end of F/Y 2008 was 83,363, and today it’s 83,671.
<
p>Looks like Legislature’s not alone when determining who feels the pain: government takes care of government.
It is basically a slush fund.
<
p>My sources inside say that the cuts amount to a reduction in the slush fund, a freeze on travel, an overall hiring freeze except for emergency circumstances, and a pay freeze.
I hate to be stuck defending Jacoby, but a man is allowed to change his mind over 15 years.
I was so pissed at JJ’s column that tried to cast Southern Whites as victims that I blogged it on Daily Kos.