Analytics

Showing posts with label populism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label populism. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 30, 2024

Post #6602 M: Dumb BLEEP of the Week; Peter St. Onge On Who's Taking Your Money

Quote of the Day

I will charge thee nothing but the promise 
that thee will help the next man thee finds in trouble.
Mennonite proverb 

Dumb BLEEP of the Week

Peter St. Onge On Who's Taking Your Money

What's wrong with populism?

Choose Life

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Michael Ramirez via Townhall

Musical Interlude: Duets

Patti LaBelle, "On My Own"  ft. MICHAEL MCDONALD

Friday, September 15, 2023

Post #6407 M: McClanahan on Did New Mexico Governor Grisham Violate the Constitution? ; Stossel on The Philly Soda Tax Scam…5 Years Later

 Quote of the Day

In shallow holes moles make fools of dragons 
Proverb  

McClanahan on Did New Mexico Governor Grisham Violate the Constitution?

Stossel on The Philly Soda Tax Scam…5 Years Later

What Is Populism’s Place in American Conservatism?

Choose Life

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Tom Stiglich via Townhall

Musical Interlude: #1 Hits of 2020

Roddy Ricch, "The Box"

Sunday, October 9, 2022

Post #5931 M: McClanahan on American Populism; Tuttle Twins Episode 11; Why Did We Declare Independence?

 Quote of the Day

There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, 
and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. 
I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with.
John Swinton 

McClanahan on American Populism

Tuttle Twins Episode 11

Why Did We Declare Independence?

Choose Life

Musical Interlude; #1 Hits of 1994

Boyz II Men, "On Bended Knee"

Sunday, June 9, 2019

Post #4137 M: Tom Woods on Tucker Carlson's Populist Rant; Save the Planet: No Kids?; Nuclear v. Renewable Energy

Quote of the Day

If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, 
and will promote the General Welfare, 
the Government is no longer a limited one, 
possessing enumerated powers, 
but an indefinite one, 
subject to particular exceptions.
James Madison  

Tom Woods on Tucker Carlson's Populist Rant



Political Humor: Save the Planet: No Kids



Nuclear v. Renewables


Choose Life









Political Cartoon


Courtesy of Gzry Vzrvel via Townhall


Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Bryan Adams, "Let's Make a Night to Remember"

Monday, May 13, 2019

Post #4101 M: Is Big Tech Too Big?; Tom Woods on the Zombie Construct of Socialism


Quote of the Day

I've had a perfectly wonderful evening. 
But this wasn't it.
Groucho Marx 

Is Big Tech Too Big?



Post Drug Prohibition



Tom Woods on the Zombie Failed Concept of Socialism



Choose Life









Political Cartoon


Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Natalie Cole, "Sophisticated Lady"


Monday, July 2, 2018

Post #3725 M: Overcharged Health Care is a Result of Bad Government Policy

Quote of the Day

My father taught me to 
always do more than you get paid for 
as an investment in your future.
Jim Rohn  

The Next Mexican President:
A Leftist Version of Trumpism


Government + Healthcare = Overcharged



Choose Life: Sibling Love



General/President Grant




Political Cartoon

Courtesy of  Bob Gorrell via Townhall


Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Elton John, "Chloe"

Sunday, March 25, 2012

If I Were President

I am too direct to be a successful politician. I have too many enemies: academic, professional, political, and others. I won't go into specifics for obvious reasons here, but let me point out that Jesus Christ was executed by the Romans only three years into His ministry.

(Before going further, no, I'm not comparing myself to Jesus: I would probably have been executed by the second day of my ministry.) Jesus Christ resisted any political agenda and did not encourage insurrection against the Roman occupiers. But you see progressive revisionists engaging in presentist spin: they choose to gloss over His disciples complaining that Jesus' words asked too much of people; you hear of the complaints of others: "He's a glutton and a drunkard; He associates with the wrong sort of people--rich people, Roman tax collectors, ..." He has connections in Jerusalem to get room and board during the busiest time of the year, Passover, at the same time He's talking about the difficulty of a rich man to go to heaven. There's a description of a crowd agitated enough to want to stone Him, and He manages to escape. Judas indirectly accuses Him of hypocrisy, for letting a woman anoint Him with expensive ointments, instead of giving the equivalent money to the poor. Others are concerned that Jesus has lost His mind and send His mother and other relatives to have a quiet intervention with Him. There is discussion about disciplines deserting Him; He makes it difficult for prospective disciples to join Him ("go give away all that you have"). He tweaks orthodox rules for the Sabbath, creates a public disturbance at the Temple (the money changers), and makes audacious claims of authority, over and beyond the typical rabbi. Now, for all the Biblical criticism in terms of the orthodox Christians whitewashing the Gospels,  we see enough of a picture emerging to understand how Jesus managed to make enemies: this was no mere benevolent, meek-mannered man Whom went about kissing babies, petting lambs and preaching love and spreading the wealth around.

I think one of the benefits of never having had a decent mentor, job security (including tenure) or line authority (except on one occasion) is that I learned to stand on my own two feet in the free market of ideas. I can't rely on organizational authority to compel the actions of others; I have to rely on my power of persuasion. I realize that I've said enough in nearly 1200 published posts to irritate almost everybody (including my own mother, whom probably won't be happy with my description of Jesus). My daily readership has widely varied over the past month (but be honest, I will continue to publish even with zero readers).

Many people are probably confused by things like why I would support Mitt Romney when my ideas are much closer to Ron Paul's, and why do I have little use for the likes of Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, Sarah Palin, or Newt Gingrich? (I loathe populism in any form; I hate political spin and finger-pointing.) I have seen 16 months (at least) of nonstop Romney bashing by pretentious populist conservatives, whom seemed more focused on gimmicky predictable political messaging. My own preference is for politicians whom are willing to step up and engage in straight talk; there is no way to finesse a $1T deficit, a $15.6T national debt and another $50T in unfunded entitlement liabilities. I'm not suggesting that a Presidential candidate serve up a fast ball like spending cuts down the middle of the plate for Obama to knock out of the ballpark; we already know that Obama has failed to demonstrate the kind of political courage I'm describing here. I want to hear everything is on the table, that any likely compromise will require a combination of spending cuts and tax hikes. I want to hear politicians talking about eliminating redundancy in government operations and privatizing assets and nonessential government functions.

But what of Romney? I have been in situations where I've had to face political realities and have had to implement decisions I've disagreed with. The idea that Mitt Romney could ram a conservative agenda through a Massachusetts state legislature up to 90% Democrat, a frivolous rallying call for populist conservatives trying to manufacture an issue over tepid state growth rates, is patently absurd--and Santorum and Gingrich know it. I also think it's pathetic that the populists are trying to blame Romney for a piece of legislation that not a single Republican in either Congressional chamber voted for; in fact, Sen. Scott Brown, who voted for RomneyCare, ran as the 41st Senator against ObamaCare.

If someone asked me, granted, Ron: suppose it was politically feasible for you to be elected President: would you, and what would you do? Well, for one thing, if I ever did get elected President, it wouldn't be some power trip to hear "Hail to the Chief", ride in Air Force One, hobnob with other world leaders, etc. It wouldn't be with the idea of seeing my name in the history books, to have buildings, ships or infrastructure named after me.

No, I'm not interested in adding more laws to the books, but in liberating individuals and business from statist serfdom. I want to reform laws that send a disproportionate number of people to prison for victimless crimes. I don't want our nation's children dying in foreign lands because of our undue meddling in international affairs. I want to see us stop throwing good money after bad on morally hazardous, ineffective social and entitlement programs. We need to live within our fiscal means and pay off the debts of spendthrift Congresses and Presidents. I see a restoration of individual liberty and traditional values and institutions, a sound currency rescued from the clutches of megalomaniac central bankers.

Yes, when I dream of what it would be like to be President, I don't think of grand state dinners or giving the State of the Union Address, of saluting the troops, sitting in the Oval Office or boarding Air Force One. I think of something different, a Fourth of July on Ellis Island, of meeting and greeting the people I work for,  newly minted American citizens of every race, religion and tongue. I would assure them that the promise of America sometimes is difficult to see, but it never has left. It is still there for those of us whom want it and believe. Yes, dreams still do come true in America, and her beacon of liberty has never dimmed (we just don't look high enough): it's still the best place on earth, and we have been the lucky ones to inherit her promise. Yes, I love the America we see: her land, her people, her flag and tradition. But I love even more the America we don't see: her enduring ideas and promise.

I even have the first line of my speech on that day:

"I believe in America, 
as beautiful as her children, 
as limitless as their dreams and ambitions,
as worthy as her founding ideals,
as good as the hearts of her people."

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Miscellany: 3/20/12

Quote of the Day


I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Grandpa, Tell Me 'Bout the Good Old Days....



Don't Tell Me Words Don't Matter (Barack Obama)

From 1/16/08 newspaper interview: "Domestic side: What are decisive differences. Rough ideological agreement in Dem party. Clinton, Edwards & I agree on health care. Philosophical difference on mandates. I opposed, wanted to emphasize cost savings."  Maybe we should call it ObamaDoesn'tCare...

Progressive Hypocrite of the Day: David Axelrod
"Well, first of all, let me say there’s been a coarsening of our political culture. I don’t think that language is appropriate, no matter who uses it. And I think whoever you are in politics, you ought to be willing to say so. I was disappointed that Governor Romney didn’t stand up more forcefully when Rush Limbaugh said what he said." - David Axelrod, Obama Reelection Communications Director
"The Mittzkrieg in Illinois isn't terribly inspiring." - David Axelrod, Obama Campaign Civility Consultant
The following photo is NOT a genuine picture of Axelrod as he sent out his Romney tweet, but as a supporter of the massive 2009 stimulus package, he no doubt believes in the broken window fallacy:

David Axelrod can neither comprehend nor control a world where access to Photoshop is universal.
Allegedly Photoshopped  David Axelrod
Tip of the Hat to Tim Cavanaugh 
Romney Wins Illinois, Double-Digits Over Santorum

With 99% of the vote in, Romney won 47%-35%. The Huffington Post estimates (at least) 41 delegates to Romney and 10 to Santorum. Based on the WSJ delegate count, this leaves Romney with 561 votes, just under a dozen shy of passing the halfway point to the nomination. There's no way Santorum can put lipstick on a pig here: Gingrich pulled in just under 8% of the vote, showing another example on Romney beating both Santorum and Gingrich combined, almost winning a clear majority in a multi-candidate field.

The anti-Romney faction has been irrationally speaking of a brokered convention. It's not going to happen. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that Romney ends up with 1000 delegates, 144 shy of the nomination. Given the fact that Romney has consistently polled better than any of his 3 competitors against Obama, and he has won over 40% of the cumulative vote to date, it is difficult to believe that the GOP would turn to an untested candidate.

But, in fact, Santorum failed to follow up after his hat trick in early February and he failed to make any headway out of Alabama and Mississippi; in fact, Romney was leading by about half of his current margin at the time. Today's Gallup daily tracking poll showed Santorum closing to within 4, and the latest poll (I'm not sure I believe it) has Santorum winning by double digits in Louisiana and Romney tied with Gingrich. It will be tough for Romney to pick up Louisiana, but Santorum could have a bad month in April with only Wisconsin and Pennsylvania probably on his side, and Romney could blunt incidental wins with a strong second padding his delegate lead, already better than 2-1 over Santorum, a distant second.



Obama Opens Reelection Bid 
With Major Fiscal Accomplishments
  • first-time downgrade of US debt
  • second time (WWII first) US Debt > GDP 
  • "The National Debt  ($15.566 trillion).has now increased more during President Obama's three years and two months in office ($4.939 trillion) than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency ( $4.899 trillion )." - CBS News (my edits)
Courtesy of usgovernmentdebt.us

For Those Who Don't Understand 
The Need for National Austerity Now

We have already seen cites and states having to deal with zero-sum between operational expenses (say, police, teachers, etc.) and unsustainable, grossly underfunded pension obligations.The same thing holds true with interest expenses on the massive debt. What's particularly alarming here is that we have interest rates at historically low rates.Sooner or later, we are going to revert to historical averages, which will explode interest payments and cannibalize off funds for government services.

Courtesy of usgovernmentdebt.us



Newt's Desperate Populist Last Gasp: $2.50/Gallon Gas

Ronald Bailey/Reason, "Newt's Despicable Gasoline Price Promise": Thumbs UP!

It would be harder to imagine a better example of a pandering pseudo-conservative than the raising of unrealistic expectations of a government's ability to manipulate the law of supply and demand. The price of gas is correlated to the price of oil, and the US is finding itself in a bidding war with rapidly developing nations like China and India for available oil exports. The only things that might drop oil prices (off the top of my head) are (1) significant stabilization in the volatile Middle East, Africa and other oil-exporting regions, (2) a global recession, or (3) materially significant new finds or new technology-enabled recoverable oil supplies.

A President can provide positive leadership on energy price stabilization in at least 3 important ways: (1) general economic policy, (2) a constructive, noninterventionist foreign policy and (3) supply-side reforms.

General economic policy would guided by two importing overriding principles: (1) a robust free market philosophy that explicit disavows government intervention (subsidies, tariffs, and other protectionist policies) and (2) shoring up a fiat currency by scaling back (or better yet, eliminating) megalomaniac central banks and currency manipulation (e.g., printing money, anti-cash or hard currency (gold, silver) policies, etc.) and government competition for economic resources (among other things, government living within its means and limiting its spending and revenues as a percentage of the economy, limited deployment of personnel, etc.).

Supply-side reforms include, but are not restricted to: (1) lowering or eliminating barriers to production, e.g., obstructionist environmental regulations, inefficient permit or patent/trademark approval processes, restrictions on access to federal properties likely to contain large supplies of oil and gas (e.g., Alaska, offshore/continental shelf, oil shale properties in the Western US, etc.), (2) scaling back discriminatory, crony or dysfunctional tax/regulatory policies (e.g., "windfall profits", percentage depletion (after cost recovery), etc.), and (3) eliminating any relevant crony barriers of entry for smaller operators or substitute fuels



Political Humor

Just in time for the Illinois Democratic Primary: no doubt David Axelrod went about canvassing reliable Chicago Democratic precincts....

Courtesy of patriotpost.us

"Santorum said when he's in the White House he'll tell his attorney general to prosecute people who distribute any content that is deemed obscene. Will he appoint a team to watch porn all day? If so, he could solve the unemployment crisis." - Jimmy Kimmel

[Santorum is currently looking at TSA staffers...]

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Groups

The Cars, "Who's Gonna Drive You Home". This concludes my Cars series. Tomorrow I'll start my Little River Band series.

Tuesday, March 13, 2012

Miscellany: 3/13/12

Quote of the Day


To be able to practice five things everywhere under heaven 
constitutes perfect virtue... 
gravity, 
generosity of soul, 
sincerity, 
earnestness, and 
kindness.
Confucius

Santorum Narrowly Wins in Alabama and Mississippi
Romney Blows Opportunity to Seal the Deal

[LATE NIGHT EDIT: I'm reporting on CBS News primary/caucus tabulations, e.g., the Hawaii race. I've been tracking results all night before publishing. Romney has maintained a consistent lead all night, down to as little as 3 points over Santorum, but some major precincts have reported for Romney and he's now leading Santorum 46%-26%. I expect the caucus to be called shortly. In fact,  just after I wrote the last sentence, I see that CBS News has in fact called the race for Romney.]

I knew that Romney was in trouble when I looked at the Gallup Tracking Poll this morning and found that Santorum had managed to cut  Romney's lead in half to about 5 points (mirrored by a Reuters GOP beauty count poll). The news is a mixed bag for Romney: Santorum's wins were not predicted by the polls I had seen; in fact, Romney led by nearly 8-9% in  a couple of polls late last week (Rasmussen in Mississippi and Alabama Education). I should note that that those were oddball polls, with probably Gingrich leading most by a narrow margin in a majority of relevant polls. Still,  Romney placed a strong third with 29% of the vote or better.

The good news, if there is good news from Romney here, is that no one really expected Romney to carry these states, and because of the proportional delegate rules which Romney easily qualified for, he added to his delegate total to 476 delegates (by WSJ count), more than 200 ahead of Santorum's 246, and we still have Hawaii and American Samoa to report in this evening (this post will publish before those results), but based on what we've seen to date, Romney has been doing very well picking up delegates outside the continental US.

The other good news, in a sense, is that Gingrich did a credible enough job in the two primaries to justify continuing the campaign. Rick Santorum has already been complaining that Gingrich is getting in the way. Romney has arithmetic on his side; for example, for all the bragging rights Santorum has for tonight, he only cut into Romney's delegate lead by 10 delegates. Until we get into the latter winner-take-all states--which will likely favor Romney, Santorum won't be able to pick up much traction.

I think at this point Gingrich is playing for influence on the party platform and possibly to make a deal for the VP slot. Most pundits would rule this out of hand, noting how Gingrich went after Romney following the Iowa campaign attack ads. Romney should probably seriously consider putting Gingrich on the ticket: Gingrich is the anti-Palin, very articulate, and Gingrich has a reputation as an idea, vision guy whom is broadly acceptable to the GOP base.

Do I really need to comment on the fact that Romney AGAIN was caught paying more attention to Obama than his main competition? How many times is he going to let Santorum or Gingrich resurrect their candidacies at his expense. Santorum is SO UNACCEPTABLE to me that I almost wish I was running the Romney campaign so I could do the honors of crushing his candidacy. Gingrich has been slowly but surely using some of the attacks I've been urging, like pointing out after he left, the GOP let spending get out of control, and Santorum is part of it.

So Romney: let me give you some advice. First, there is no doubt Santorum's sweep of today's doubleheader, no matter how slight it is (just like Santorum's narrow wins in Iowa and Colorado), will give him a boost going into the Missouri caucuses and next week's Illinois primary. YOU NEED Illinois; right now you have a narrow lead.

I don't have any special insight into Illinois today--I haven't lived there in 8 year. But let me quote from a mischief-making Illinois Democrat thinking of doing what Democrats unsuccessfully tried to do in Michigan and Ohio, namely, vote for Santorum in order to embarrass or defeat Obama's strongest opponent, Mitt Romney (now do you understand why I'm frustrated the Romney campaign has failed to put away a politically embarrassing, unqualified, sure-loser Rick Santorum whom is wrong on almost any issue involving economics or individual liberty?):
Throughout my life, Illinois has been the home of what are now called “moderate” Republican officeholders: Charles Percy, Jim Thompson, Robert Michel, Jim Edgar. These were solid conservatives of the Sinclair Lewis model, more in tune with bankers and businessmen than with bishops and Birchers. In short, Mitt Romney’s kind of people.
The Maryland primary is coming up soon; I've never been involved in Maryland politics either, but former Governor Bob Ehrlich seems to be the "moderate" GOP type so that Sarah Palin was motivated enough to support his opponent for renomination in 2010. Several months ago Romney and Gingrich were battling it out for bragging rights at the straw poll. I haven't seen local support for Santorum (I live less than an hour's drive from Gettysburg, PA), but I'm sure that he's picked up some support locally since the straw poll.

Romney has to be very careful with Santorum, and I think he needs to bring out the heavy artillery. The polls in Santorum's own home state were close before Santorum's hat trick in Colorado, Missouri, and Minnesota. It's like the GOP in Pennsylvania have forgotten all about Santorum's landslide defeat to Casey in the 2006 election or the fact that Santorum supported Specter's GOP renomination over fellow conservative current Senator Toomey. I think Romney has to rebound in Illinois in order take the fight to Santorum in Louisiana where Santorum has a slight lead. Romney should have a good election in the Northeast Super Tuesday later next month (except for maybe Pennsylvania). And Romney looks good right now in California and Utah.

On the better news front, the latest Gallup Romney vs Obama trial heat shows Romney up by a few points, Rasmussen has them at a tie, and ABC News has Romney up by 2.

A final note for Romney's general campaign against Obama this fall: the Obama campaign is fearful of one thing, something I have stressed in past columns: ROMNEY NEEDS TO THROW BUSH UNDER THE BUS, AND LINK OBAMA'S POLICIES WITH BUSH'S. This is like Politics 101. Obama renominated Bush's guy to the Fed. He nominated one of the Fed governors under Bush to become his new Treasury Secretary. He's used Bush's military commander--whom now happens to head the CIA. Obama's been a big spender, just like Bush. Obama's had anemic economic growth: so did Bush. Bush added to entitlements, so did Obama. I could go on and on. What Romney needs to do is to distance himself away from Bush, nicely, and say something like the intent was good after the 9/11 tragedies, but Bush turned too much to government intervention--including during the economic tsunami and TARP legislation. (Romney has a bit of the problem there because he supported TARP at the time, but he could argue that he was trying to get McCain elected.)

Let's Play Whack-A-Mole, GOP Edition

The conservative talk show host/comedian Dennis Miller occasionally interviews lawmakers; one of them, with a particularly droll sense of humor is Thad McCotter, a Michigan GOP Congressman whom made a brief, quixotic run for the Presidency last summer. McCotter, like Santorum and Sarah Palin, is someone I would classify, in my own blunt style, as a "weasel conservative", or more politely, an unprincipled populist-infused conservatism. For example, I absolutely loathe Santorum whom claims the mantle of a conservative, but has voted against free trade, has supported union-friendly policies, supports forms of industrial policy, helped push through a new, unpaid for Medicaid prescription drug benefit and grabbed all the federal earmark money he could get for Pennsylvania instead of trying to pay down the Bush deficits. It takes some audacity for Santorum to claim the conservative title over someone he himself had endorsed as a conservative in 2008.


McCotter although allegedly one of the first to brand TARP legislation as socialistic reengineering, wanted to pass price-gauging legislation during 2008's energy bubble, has supported card check and public sector collective bargaining agreements, and how about his supporting a pet owners' tax deduction in spite of conservative calls for SIMPLIFYING AND LOWERING the income tax burden.


So, in any event, I'm listening to Miller's recent podcast interview with McCotter, when McCotter, yes, the very same guy who condemned TARP, came out strongly in favor of government loans propping up the auto industry and talking about them in terms of investment. Spoken like a true believer in crony capitalism!


Anyway, what started up this rant was a wonderfully sarcastic open letter to GOP Congressman Dave Camp  from Don Boudreaux of Cafe Hayek; Camp is engaging in anti-China trade, protectionist-populist nonsense, whining that Chinese are unfairly subsidizing certain industries/goods, and he wants to remedy the situation by slapping a tax on relevant Chinese goods. (I'm sure that lower-income Americans everywhere are grateful for this idea of a regressive tax on competitively-priced goods enabling them to stretch their dollars...)


I'm paraphrasing Boudreaux's brilliant free market defense (thumbs UP!). First, Boudreaux wants to remind Camp that Uncle Sam does his own subsidizing of exports and engages in corporate welfare: before we start casting stones, shouldn't we look at we are doing and not be hypocritical in tax policy.  Second, Boudreaux points out under zero-sum conditions, one exporter's subsidy is another exporter's tax hike. This additional tax amounts to an indirect subsidy to American competitors: does Camp propose to slap a tax on domestic products to make the trade fair?


Boudreaux is basically saying here that pick-and-choose tax policies are inefficient: it's like squeezing a balloon. You can't help one industry without handicapping others. It all washes out in the end.

Political Humor

"With daylight-saving time, we lose an hour of our lives. It's like a Kardashian marriage." - David Letterman

[It's like listening to a Barack Obama speech.]

"President Obama today released his NCAA bracket. He is a huge basketball fan. But privately, White House aides are worried that if he spends so much time on this, it could affect his golf game." - Jay Leno


[President Obama was initially confused when reporters asked him about March Madness; Obama thought they were talking about GOP voters choosing between Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich.  When asked whom he thought would win the non-Romney bracket, Obama said, "I will."]

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Groups

The Cars, "Let the Good Times Roll"

Saturday, March 10, 2012

Miscellany: 3/10/12

Quote of the Day


New ideas are as valuable as any others, 
but they should not be adopted simply because they are new.
Robert Heller

Those Poorly Paid Public Servants

These statistics were initially presented last year in  The Fiscal Times:
  • In 2009, 347 Texas state employees > $400,000, 53 > $600,00
  • In 2010, 35 New York state employees > $400k 
  • In 2010, 171,689 Federal employees  > $150,000 
  • 1n 2010, doctors at veterans hospitals and prisons $179,500 (up over 50% since 2005)
Blair Briody presented the following examples; I should note that some of the examples are from one or 2 years earlier, figures may also include overtime and bonuses, and at least one (the coach) has moved on. (It's possible some of these compensation packages have improved in the interim.) I should note that California's recycling program includes hiring people, at least in one case, with past ethics and mental illness charges. No doubt if you ask these people whether they think they deserve making more than Obama at $400K, they'll answer like Babe Ruth did: "I had a better year" (but then--who didn't?). So while cities and states struggled to find the revenue dollars and dollars to cut, these fine public officials want you to know they earned every cent  they got...

So here's the list:
  • $1.2M to a former New York obscure university basketball coach, 
  • $847K for a Texas medical center  fundraiser, 
  • $814K Chancellor for the University of Texas system, 
  • $784K for a California prison doctor, 
  • $737K for a California prison psychiatrist,
  • $721K for a NY state hospital CEO,
  • $622K for a California prison dentist, 
  • $560K for the CUNY chancellor, 
  • $480K for Chief Investment Officer Texas retirement system, 
  • $343K Florida state insurance director.
Leah Konen wrote a different piece over 6 months ago on pensions. She notes that, for instance, in Georgia, the state refuses to release identification on pension recipients (so much for transparency!)

Examples include:
  • $200K/year for a retired Santa Clara County, CA fire chief. (Plus, double-dipping with more lucrative consulting gig after retirement) (5000-plus > $100K/year)
  • $313K/year for some state of Georgia retiree (1100 > $100K/year)
  • $147K/year for Atlantic City, NJ fire chief  (plus, some 160 lucky retiring public safety officials won $13.7M in unused sick pay! Um, Gov. Christie?)
  • nearly $100K/year to the late Congressman Rostenkowski after he was convicted in 1996 of embezzlement charges
  • $232K/year for former vice chancellor of UMass medical school
  • $119K/year for California county pest control administrator
  • $191K/year for NY power authority executive
  • $297K/year for California superintendent/teacher
Political Potpourri

Rick Santorum continued his strong showing in the Midwest taking the Kansas caucus, which was expected given earlier success in adjacent Iowa and Missouri. This blog is not a friend of Santorum for a number of reasons I discussed in my popular Valentine's Day post. But to free-market conservatives like myself, Rick Santorum's opposition to NAFTA and support for protectionist tariffs against foreign steel imports are unforgivable, and he and Specter grabbed all the money they could in federal earmarks, hardly fiscal conservatives.

Romney finalized his Wyoming win and various American territories to up the WSJ's unofficial  delegate count to 454, more than the rest of the field put together, the second tier led by Santorum's 217. Romney is holding steady at +13 over Santorum in the Gallup tracking poll. Romney's next test is Tuesday, with primaries in Alabama and Mississippi (plus Hawaii and American Samoa caucuses). I have not read any reports from these states so I cannot relate to the Romney campaign strategy, but I do believe Romney has a strong possibility (note that I did not say PROBABILITY) of sweeping all 4. I have seen one poll in Alabama with Romney carrying a 9-point lead and  another in Mississippi with an 8-point lead. (I should note that other Alabama surveys show almost a 3-way tie.) I'm sure the Romney campaign remembers the last week of the South Carolina campaign where Romney had a strong lead which collapsed. Wins in both states, which is definitely doable, would largely put to rest talking points about Romney's appeal in the Deep South. If I was running the Romney campaign, I would be pushing the electability argument like crazy, especially after Rasmussen's poll released today stressing a comparable lead (to Gallup) of a dozen-point lead over Santorum--and a 5-point lead over Obama, Romney's strongest lead over Obama I can recall for several weeks.

A strong performance Tuesday (with over 100 delegates at stake) puts Romney in a strong position. He would then be close to the halfway point of the delegates he needs for the nomination and boost his chances to take Illinois, where he currently has a lead. He already has more delegates than the other 3 candidates combined, and he has superior organization in the upcoming states. I expect Romney will probably lose a few primaries or caucuses (like Missouri) until the end of April, but all he needs to do is get his fair share of delegates. Santorum hopes to get Gingrich to bow out, but Gingrich has already been on the record saying he intends to pursue the race at least through Texas.

Now if I was in the Santorum campaign, there's an old saying: be careful of what you wish for: you just may get it. It's a lot easier for Romney to combat one opponent than two, the Romney campaign has probably held back some of their most effective material to use against him, the Romney campaign is better funded and organized, and Santorum is behind and running out of friendly real estate. There is no question that Santorum would be a weaker candidate: he's the embodiment of a third Bush term: a Big Spending, Big Defense social conservative whose gaffes and record turns off the very moderate and independent voters needed to defeat a personally popular but abysmal President.

Santorum will point out that he runs close to Obama and almost as well as Romney. I agree the polls say that, but you have to look at the context of the polls: Obama currently has poor approval ratings, but an improving economy works against the GOP. Romney can play the experienced administrator/Washington outsider campaign that Santorum can't: he can run against the Congress in the way that Obama can't.

It's Sad: A Cartoon Understands Gas Prices 
Better Than Bill O'Reilly...



Musical Interlude: My Favorite Groups

Paul McCartney & Wings, "Coming Up". Technically, this is from a McCartney solo album just before the Wings disbanded, but it's included on some Internet Wings discographies.