Profile in Courage

The news of Benazir Bhutto's assassination was tragic, but, unfortunately, not unexpected.

Surely she knew, that the odds that she would be killed during her campaign to become Prime Minister of Pakistan, were great. Still, she chose to take her chances and to argue for democracy and against both the terrorism of al-qaeda and the despotism of Musharraf.

I heard a radio commentator make an essential point about the nature of her courage versus the level of politics in this country. Bhutto dared to challenge the powers that be in Pakistan at the risk of (and, ultimately, the cost of) her life. Our politicos do not dare utter a word that has not been polled and "focus-grouped" to insure it is what our voters want to hear.

No American presidential candidate will challenge the value of ethanol in front of Iowa voters for fear of loss of votes. What could we expect if, like Benazir Bhutto, their lives were at stake?

Update: Mark Steyn comments on Bhutto's death in the National Review Online.

The Devil is in the Details

Today's Democrat & Chronicle contained a "speaking out" essay by Michael Shacket. His essay dealt with school funding, and the dearth of detail in the information made public regarding school budgets.

He put the torch to one of the claims always made by school district supporters (which I have generally found questionable), that school budgeting is the most open budgeting process in government. Shacket correctly points out that there is a lot of information withheld from the public regarding school budgeting.

He laid out a great proposal for the type of information that school districts should make available if they really want their taxpayers to be well-informed voters:

"Teacher and administration contracts: More than 70 percent of every school budget reflects negotiated (not mandated) salaries and benefits. The terms of these contracts are hidden from the taxpayers. What is the total dollar effect and budget percentage increase associated with these contracts alone? Contracts should be available on the district's Web site.

Reserve funds: Reserve funds are like savings accounts where taxpayer money is accumulated for either capital or contingency purposes. The amount in these "savings accounts" is often in the multi-millions. However, budgets do not show the financial status of these funds.

Budgeting by school building: School budgets combine money into categories that the public does not understand. What, for example, is "General Support?" Everyone can identify physical buildings. Budgets should reflect all costs associated with each school.

Metrics: While budgets reflect dollars, the associated basic metrics are not presented. For example: How many teachers and students are in each building by grade level? How many buses are in use? How many administrators and support staff members are in each building?

Comparison to previous years: Budgets normally present dollars last year and forecasted for next year. The previous three years of both dollars and metrics would show trends.

Educational outcomes: A Monroe County Schools Report Card is published annually that identifies educational outcomes by school including percentage graduating, SAT scores and the results of standardized state exams. Web sites should include the previous three report cards.

Tables: Districts often use pretty, but uninformative, PowerPoint slides to present budget data. Simple tables would provide clearer data."

Kudos, Mr. Shacket. I hope that the school district leaders, who are currently spending our money on lawsuits to preserve sales tax revenue, will pay attention and give their constituents the information they need to make informed choices.

So This Is Christmas

Well, Christmas has come, once again.

Not surprisingly, I ate more than I should have at our annual Christmas Eve feast (despite the vow that "this year it would be different"). My brother and sister-in-law outdid themselves in providing the "seven fishes"; the polenta with scallops, shrimp, and tilapia in a spicy marinara sauce being the piece de resistance. My niece's boyfriend, being the newcomer to the festivities, could only shake his head in awe at the spread (and, one assumes, our ability to consume it).

All of the presents have been opened. Most Christmas wishes seem satisfied, at least at our house. I cannot help but reflect on our good fortune. My family has been blessed by God in so many ways. Still, I know there are those who have not been so lucky and for whom Christmas is a time when want is felt more keenly.

Because of that, I want to be sure that my kids understand how fortunate they are and that they understand the need to share their gifts with others who may not have as much as they do. Without being sappy about it, I want to find a way to convey that message to them so that charity and humility will remain part of their make-up.

In any event, accept my best wishes for a Merry Christmas to you and your families.

Another Dead Rabbit

This headline offers more proof that there is an inverse relationship between intelligence and fertility: Jamie Lynn Spears Says She's Pregnant.

Spears, the 16 year old "baby sister" of troubled pop star Brittany Spears, revealed that she was 12 weeks pregnant in an interview with OK! magazine. The father is her long-time boyfriend Casey Aldridge.

Obviously, this is not a funny story, however, you have to laugh at the following quote from the interview, if only so that you don't cry:

"What message does she want to send to other teens about premarital sex? 'I definitely don't think it's something you should do; it's better to wait,' she says. 'But I can't be judgmental because it's a position I put myself in.' "

Maybe she can't be judgmental, but I can. Jamie and Brittany are poster children for what happens to kids who achieve fame too early in life and obviously without the appropriate adult family guidance.

Boy, Mrs. Spears must be so proud!

Pointless Punditry

We are 15 days from the Iowa caucuses and less than two months from "Super Tuesday" (Feb. 5th) and the newspapers, magazines and blogs are full of polls and opinion, telling us who is up and who is down. Huckabee and Obama are hot, Rudy and Hillary are not. McCain and Edwards may be making a comeback.

Maybe we should all give it a rest!

I mean, how many ways can you analyze these races? We are going to have actual votes in a couple of weeks. I love politics but some of the arcane analysis is getting to be too much. There are so many pundits, columnists, bloggers, and commentators and every one of them has an opinion. Each one has been trying to find a new angle, a nuance that no one else has thought of.

I have one. Let's just be quiet and let the votes come in.

Return on Investment

Tonight, the Seventh & Eighth Grade Band held their annual Holiday Concert. The Band, consisting of over 120 musicians, is divided up into a Concert Band and a Symphonic Band. My daughter, Evelyn, an Eighth Grader, plays the Euphonium in the Symphonic Band.

Each group played four pieces. The music was wonderful. While I know that I am biased, these kids sounded as good as any high school band. I have been listening to them for the past 4 years; they are quite talented.

In addition to my pride and pleasure at seeing and listening to my daughter play, there was another reason I wrote about tonight's concert. I am sure you have read a lot about the F.A.I.R. plan and the effects it may have on schools. I have written about that topic both here and on the Gates blog. I have indicated my belief that Gates-Chili is a wonderful district for our kids to be going to school and that we should not be reluctant to pay the tax bill that goes along with getting a quality education.

My belief that the money we spend on school taxes is largely well-spent was justified again tonight. First, the sight of so many kids being able to experience the joys of playing music is awesome. Also, the families of those kids are clearly being enriched by that experience, as well.

Tonight, though, I want to focus on the Band conductor, Christopher Oldfield. His love of music, his enthusiasm, and his energy, are infectious. He clearly loves music and he loves teaching and conducting young musicians. We all hear stories about jaded teachers who really feel that teaching is just another job. Well, spend a night at one of these concerts, see a Chris Oldfield giving a heart-felt, enthusiastic effort, and you will agree that if there are a few teachers like him at Gates, then our investment in our schools is being returned many-fold.

More D&C Condescension on Consolidation

The Democrat & Chronicle reverted to its condescending best form today with its editorial entitled "high taxes, duplicated services are connected". The editorial opens with this thoughtful and reasonable premise:

"Frankly, New Yorkers continue to talk out of both sides of their mouths on getting the high cost of living in this state under control."

Not satisfied with one insult to its readers, the editorial went on to opine:

"New Yorkers, who support 4,200 taxing entities statewide, need to either start supporting streamlined, more efficient government operations or stop whining about the high taxes they pay."

Quite frankly, there is little reason to accept the D&C view that local government is too expensive. I am a fairly typical New York taxpayer. The dollar amount of taxes I pay to the Town of Gates comprises less than 8% of the total dollar amount of taxes I pay for State Income taxes, County taxes, School taxes, and Town taxes combined. That does not include sales and excise taxes paid to the State.

From the Town of Gates, I get a Police Department which responds within scant minutes for emergencies, provides a four or five car, 24/7 road patrol, and which takes reports in person, a Highway Department that paves, repairs, and plows my streets, picks up my leaves in the fall and my yard debris every week, a Recreation Department that provides beautiful Town Parks and recreation programs for youths and senior citizens, a library that has been seen as second to none in the suburbs, and provides dozens of other services, as well.

All of that for less than 8% of my total tax expense! I'd say that I get 60- 70% of the services I value and enjoy from my Town government. That's quite a return on my investment.

The D&C doesn't get it. We "whiners" aren't whining about paying for the host of services we get from our local governments. We want the State to stop spending lavish amounts on numerous programs and projects of dubious merit and for which we get little value for our money.

The other big thing the D&C seems to forget is the thing called "the consent of the governed". We are entitled to have the government and services we want. Citizens have a big say in the nature and cost of local government, which is generally low cost and high value. We have virtually no say in our State government, which is a Byzantine, bloated, and dysfunctional entity. Don't lecture us about our local government until the really costly levels of government clean up their acts.

The D&C criticised the people of Holley for agreeing to spend $1.00 per day to have local police. That's only about 20-25 cents more than it costs to buy the D&C every day. Given a choice, I know which one I'd give up.

A High Degree of Doubt

Last week the news was full of stories on the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE). As you surely heard or read, the CIA announced that it had a "high degree of confidence" in its prediction that Iran had ceased its military nuclear program in 2003.

There were so many reactions to this news that its difficult to write about all of them. A couple things stand out for me. Perhaps first, is the obvious question of how the NIE in 2007 can conclude, with a high degree of confidence, that Iran halted its military nuclear program in 2003, in light of the conclusion contained in the 2005 version of the NIE, (which also came with a high degree of confidence), that Iran was developing military nukes.

It is also quite humorous to listen to critics of the Bush Administration use the NIE as a weapon against the President. These same critics blasted Bush for listening to "faulty" intelligence about Iraq; now they completely endorse a conclusion from the same intelligence community they loved to bash. Given the many errors in past NIE's, why should we accept this one as gospel?

Still, I don't understand the criticism. If its true that Iran stopped its military nuke program in 2003, there is only one explanation for their change. its the same reason Moammar Qaddafi had for giving up his nuke program; to wit: the US and its allies had just toppled Saddam Hussein and a big US army was sitting in the Middle East. The Bush Administration should be taking credit for Iran succumbing to its pressure and should be pointing out that with bad actors like the Iranians, "you get more with a kind word and a gun than you do with just a kind word".


Meanwhile, several commentators questioned the motives of the CIA officials responsible for these conclusions. If you have time, take a look at these PowerLine posts (J. Hinderaker, 12/3, S. Johnson, 12/4, P. Mirengoff, 12/4, S. Johnson, 12/5, S. Johnson, 12/9), and Norman Podhoretz' analysis and John Bolton's takedown of the NIE. I don't know if there is a full-blown rebellion against George Bush in the career State Department and CIA ranks, but the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson affair, the many leaks of classified anti-terror programs, and now, the NIE about-face, certainly gives one reason to wonder.

For what its worth, here is Israel's view as reported by the AP:

Defense Minister Ehud Barak said "it's apparently true" that Iran stopped pursuing its military nuclear program in 2003. "But in our opinion, since then it has apparently continued that program," Barak told Army Radio. "There are differences in the assessments of different organizations in the world about this, and only time will tell who is right." Asked if the new U.S. assessment reduced chances that the U.S. will launch a military strike on Iran, Barak said that was "possible." However, he said, "We cannot allow ourselves to rest just because of an intelligence report from the other side of the earth, even if it is from our greatest friend."

I guess Israel doesn't have quite so high a degree of confidence in the CIA.

My personal view is that we have a political system that is badly broken. Our political and governmental figures no longer care for anything but their short-term success and their personal aggrandizement (whether that be in terms of political power, or the acceptance of their socio-political views. The views of the people are all but ignored in this current game. We are treated as spectators rather than those being served.

Until we take back government from the current crop of callous, self-interested politicos, no work will be done on the multitude of serious problems facing us. Instead we will continue to have these games of "gotcha" where the stakes may be our very lives.

Tuba Christmas

We were at Midtown Plaza on Saturday and nostalgia was in the air. We were part of a big crowd who went there for the 25th annual Tuba Christmas. It will be the last one to be held at Midtown.

My daughter Evvy participated in the event, playing her Euphonium which was decorated with Christmas stars. Its really fun to hear all the various shaped and sized tubas playing entire songs. Generally, the tubas don't do the whole melody. The conductor, Glenn Hall, practiced with the group (it was upwards of 250 tubas this year) for about two hours. When they played, it seemed like they had practiced together much longer.

One side note. There was as big a crowd in Midtown as I ever recall seeing. I think it is evidence that if you give people a good reason, they will go downtown. Its too bad that the people who run things in Rochester never took the time to learn this lesson. If they had, maybe Midtown would not be going the way of the dinosaurs.

Rudy Rebuts Charges Of Hiding "Booty Call" Expenses

Rudy Giuliani spent much of today dismissing claims that he hid the cost of police protection related to trips he took to visit with Judith Nathan while he was still married to Donna Hanover.

Giuliani called the story a "debate day dirty trick" in this interview with Katie Couric of CBS. He stated that all of the expenses were proper and the effort to bring them up five years after the fact amounted to a "political hit job".

The accounting for the expenses may well have been totally legitimate, but unfortunately for Rudy, it isn't how the money was paid, it was the circumstances under which the expenses were incurred that is most objectionable. If it becomes clear that the money for police protection was spent for trips with no purpose other than to pursue an affair with Nathan, Rudy will have a problem.

And, if so, he will deserve his fate.

More F.A.I.R. Journalism

I wonder if Democrat & Chronicle reporter Jill Terreri gets a stipend from the Monroe County School Boards Association.

I commented on her report in Sunday's Democrat on the effects of F.A.I.R. on school districts. As I noted, her "news story" was basically a rehash of the school districts' position papers on the topic. There was nothing new or newsworthy in the story.

Today, Ms. Terreri managed to go herself one better. She reported that neither Maggie Brooks nor any administration representative attended a "non-partisan" forum on the issue in Brighton. Surprisingly, the representatives of the Brighton School District are against the plan and taxpayers expressed concerns that school taxes might increase as a result. Thank goodness for this report. How would we have ever guessed what happened at the forum without the D&C?

Seriously, I can't believe these two stories were considered news. At best, they are repetitions of old news and information on this issue. At worst, they amount to pro-school district, anti-Brooks propaganda. Worse, this report wasn't even the first report on the issue. The RochesterTurning Blog had the story first (referring to a WXXI report). So it wasn't even fresh propaganda.

To use an old line: calling the D&C a fish wrapper is being unfair to fish wrappers.

D&C Goes Metro .... Again

My son and I look at the newspaper together most mornings. He thinks the funniest section is the comics. I, on the other hand, get most of my amusement from the editorial page.

This morning the D&C had its 7th or 8th or umpteenth (I've lost count) piece on government consolidation/metro government. Today they used their editorial entitled "No more one-shots" as their vehicle for promoting their number one agenda item. Ostensibly, this editorial was calling on the Brooks administration to be careful about selling off County resources to get one-time cash infusions to close the remaining budget gap this year.

But, of course, the D&C editorialists could not pass up the opportunity to throw in a metro pitch. The editorial goes on to propose that the County government needs to look for savings through "major government consolidations". Specifically mentioned were "public safety services" and "fire districts", which, by the way, in the opinion of the D&C, "are too numerous" in Monroe County.

So lets see, Monroe County will save money through "major" consolidation of public safety services and fire districts. I really wish the editorial had gone on to explain how that would work. To the best of my knowledge, the County does not provide fire fighting services directly. So how could consolidation (elimination?) of fire districts help the County reduce its budget?

What about public safety services? Well, we have a Sheriff's road patrol, the RPD, and six towns have their own police. If all public safety services are consolidated into a larger Sheriff's department, the County would have to spend more money. Of course, as an alternative, there could be a new "government" entity (the Rochester Regional Metro Police District?). Presumably, all county residents would pay for that service, but, I guess the County budget would be reduced since there would no longer be a Sheriff's road patrol. I have serious doubts as to whether the cost per taxpayer would go down; I am certain police service in Gates (and in the other towns with local police) would be dramatically reduced.

The D&C can't bring itself to tell the truth. Their real concerns about County budget issues; the F.A.I.R. plan; local government consolidation; "smart growth" vs. "urban sprawl"; and on and on, and on, are really all about one thing; to wit: saving the City of Rochester from the utter failure of all of its operations over the past 30+ years. Metro government is the only way
the City of Rochester can afford to continue. Metro government's purpose is to suck up suburban resources and reallocate them to the City.

It would be a fair issue for a debate. Too bad the D&C is afraid to debate that issue honestly.

What Passes For Journalism

The Democrat and Chronicle ran a story today headlined "Suburbs left with school deficits" (Here's a link to the online version).

From that headline, you'd probably think the D&C story was going to provide some objective evidence refuting County Executive Brooks' claim that increases in state aid to school districts would offset losses in Sales Tax revenue under the medicaid intercept plan. You'd be wrong!

The story starts with a brief account about the experience of the Schumachers and their worry that the Brooks plan may threaten music programs in the Penfield School District. Mrs. Schumacher is credited with this insight: "It's robbing Peter to pay Paul". The story goes on to quote several school officials who offer various self-serving criticisms of the plan. To show that the story has "balance", the report also contains a quote from the County Attorney in support of the plan (although its not clear why a County Budget official was not sought out for an explanation of the plan's effects).

The most amazing thing about the story to my mind was the inclusion of a chart labelled "F.A.I.R. Impact", outlining the "potential tax increases" needed by each district to cover the sales tax shortfall. As you would expect, the chart was prepared by an independent entity like the Center for Governmental Research .... er, ah, no, ... actually, it was supplied by the Monroe County School Boards Association (the group coordinating the lawsuit against the County).

No mention was made in the story of the views of independent or objective reviewers of the plan, like the Rochester Business Alliance, whose President called the Brooks plan "reasonable" or the afore-mentioned CGR which pronounced the plan "responsible".

What was the purpose of the story? Surely it was not to provide the public with information it could use to weigh the relative merits of the plan and its critic's views. I would call it a propaganda piece, but that would give the reporter credit. I think the reporter actually thought her story was a "real" news article. She was wrong.

Where were the editors? What's become of journalism?

Is the Crisis the Story or is the Story the Crisis?

TV, newspspers and the internet are full of stories about the impending financial crisis. The stories questioned whether or not consumers and markets will surrender to their fears about high gasoline prices, the falling dollar and the sub-prime mortgage crack-up.

As I watched the reports, I could not help but wonder how much of the anxiety consumers may have been feeling was caused by the media roiling the waters. One story on NBC had the correspondent at the Woodbury Outlets in Central Square, NY. The pictures showed parking lots full to bursting and shoppers lined up, even pressed up against the doors of the various stores, waiting for the 4,5, or 6 o'clock openings. A shot of the toll booths on the NY Thruway at the Woodbury exit showed a lineup of cars that gave the appearance of refugees fleeing from an advancing army. When the doors opened, the customers stampeded through to get at their bargains, in the manner of groupies at a rock concert.

Later in the NBC report one "expert" discussed his concerns about the possibility that a drop in consumer spending could lead to recession. He actually said that "some consumers are choosing between filling their gas tank, paying their mortgage or buying Christmas presents". Frankly, if anyone in that situation decides to buy presents, he or she should be hospitalized. Seriously though, is that what passes for expert analysis?

Later, on Kudlow & Co., somewhat more credible analysts were asked their views. None of them gave rosy forecasts, however, they made a number of points about why we should not quite yet take the pipe. One analyst pointed out that because of changes in incomes and the uses of oil in the US economy, gasoline prices would have to approach $6.00/gallon to have similar recessionary effects as occurred in the 1970's. Others gave similar notes tempering fears of the effects of the weakness of the dollar and the mortgage banking industry.

As I noted, they were not suggesting that there were no problems, but they pointed out that there were still many strengths in the US economy that should not be underestimated. They also worried that bad news itself could lead to bad results. This is something I learned in economics class. If people believe something is going to happen in the economy, their actions tend to cause it to happen.

As such, I wish the mainstream media would stop reporting the economy like the National Inquirer reports the "news". We may find that if the media keeps predicting the worst, we may get it.

All's F.A.I.R. In Love, War and School Taxes

Here's an example of school propaganda on the Brooks Sales Tax front.

Note the money quote:

"The County justified their 50% cut in education's portion of sales tax dollars by highlighting new state aid to education. But, this year's state aid was provided with the expectation that the new money would be targeted in specific ways to improve academic results and schools are being held accountable by the state for how this money is used".

Most districts are claiming that the plan will hurt them this year, but many districts, like Gates-Chili set aside money ($1.7 million in Gates' case) on the chance that the County might go this route. Were they going to give it back if the intercept didn't happen?

Moreover, I have learned that if a taxpayer contacts the County budget office, he/she will get an analysis (with actual dollar amounts) showing the "impact" of the Brooks plan on the School District the taxpayer lives in. Contact Bill Carpenter at the County Office Building.

I have really grown tired of people talking about how "open" the School budget process is and how its the only government budget the people get to vote on. Everyone knows that those votes are almost meaningless given the power of school boards to impose an "austerity budget" (there's an oxymoron for you). Further, if the schools wanted a vote that truly reflected taxpayer's views, they'd have the budget vote on election day when there is real turnout. They won't do it because they'd never pass a budget again. They much prefer their special vote when they can motivate support among families with kids in school.

By the way, schools aren't the only government that has public voting on its budget. Fire districts also have budget votes. Those votes are held in December and even fewer people (around 200-300) vote in them. Interestingly enough, these districts which have so-called "voter input" in their budgets have had spending increases far above the inflation rate and far above the rate of spending increases in Town budgets.

The fact is that the schools have been spending money without much restraint. The Comptroller's recent report exposes that fact. The Brooks plan was the right move for the County, the City of Rochester, and town governments. The "burden" shifted to the school districts is one that they should bear, namely proposing reasonable budget plans with spending rates that can be justified to taxpayers in their districts

Repoman's Turkey Tips

Okay, I'm really reaching for a post here, but I wanted all of you loyal readers to know that I am a many-faceted "renaissance man".

Nothing can mess up Thanksgiving like an un-thawed turkey. I can attest to many T-Day mornings soaking a frozen bird in cold water to try and speed up the process. I have mis-judged the amount of defrosting time so often that my wife doesn't even let me give my opinion anymore. Today's Democrat & Chronicle had an article in the "Living" section that may be of some use (as opposed to its news and opinion reporting). Among other things, the story includes the "Butterball Turkey Talk Line" number (800-288-2372 or http://www.butterball.com/). The turkey hot line saved us a couple of times.

For those of you with the responsibility of carving the bird, America Online has a video describing the proper technique. My father always carved; I've struggled the last few years trying not to hack the turkey to pieces. This video may help.

You will have to talk to Paula about the cranberry sauce. She has her own recipe and I don't know if she'll share it.

Have Ego, Will Travel

New York City Mayor, Michael Bloomberg, in apparently unimpressed with the candidates running for President, according to this report in the New York Daily News.

Bloomberg, in New Orleans for a municipal government conference, criticised all of the candidates as being "incapable of leadership". When asked if he had any particular candidate in mind, he indicated that he was dissatisfied with all of them.

Well, I guess he's satisfied and impressed with himself. Bloomberg is rumored to be considering an independent run for President. He seems to have all the necessary tools: a huge ego and an even bigger bankroll.

His recent public pronouncements seem to be laying the groundwork for jumping in.

Now For Something Completely Different

Just for fun, take a look at this video (courtesy of Dave DiCaro by way of Jib Jab).

The title is "Night of the Living Democrats". It stars Laura Bush and Joe DiCaro as the good guys and a number of evil zombie Democrats as .... themselves! The best part is the cameo by none other than "the Gipper", who, as always, sends the Dems packing.

Its great fun!

"Steamroller" Gets Rolled

The blogosphere is filled with reaction to Elliot Spitzer's about-face on driver licenses for illegal aliens. NRO had two that I found particularly interesting.

The first is by Mark Krikorian and is entitled "an offer he couldn't refuse". Kerkorian wonders if Hillary Clinton had anything to do with the Governor's retreat. After all, it was her four-way flip-flop on the Spitzer plan that precipitated her recent debate fiasco. She could not have relished the idea of defending Spitzer's plan during the presidential campaign.

The second article is by John Derbyshire. His piece is about what he characterizes as the Great Elite Back-Down Issue. His view is that immigration has been the biggest issue separating the elites from the rest of us. The reaction of us "average Joe's" has surprised "clueless" members of the elites and has forced them to back away from their position on the subject.

There are many more columns and editorials about Spitzer's debacle. Maybe next time, he'll try a little harder to get a read on what the people want before he takes the plunge.

UPDATE: On the lighter side, here's the Scrappleface entry on the topic.

Election Over, D&C Returns To #1 Agenda Item

Namely, local government consolidation.

Yesterday's Op-Ed piece on the "courageous" effort in the Village of Holley to consider the abolition of its police force contained another dig at Gates residents, who were previously admonished by D&C editorialists for wanting to have both our own police force and lower government expenditures. This time the paper effectively denigrated the Gates Police as being of little use beyond unlocking cars in the Wal-Mart parking lot.

I have it on good authority that the Chief of Police and many of his officers are none too pleased. I expect that we will soon see a rebuttal (if the paper will print it). The D&C did not print an LTE from the president of the Gates Keystone Club critical of last year's anti-Gates PD editorial.

The D&C just doesn't like dissenting voices, particularly on the government consolidation issue. Jim Lawrence and Tom Tobin are determined to push this point as far as possible.

This is their signature agenda item, as I have previously noted. Expect more of the same. Lots more.

D&C's Editorial Is Only "FAIR"

Actually, that gives them a lot of credit. In fact, the editorial opinions of the D&C are usually pretty poor. The editorial criticising the Brooks intercept plan was typical.

As is so often the case, I found it difficult to understand the D&C's position on the FAIR plan as stated in the editorial.

First, the primary criticism of the plan seemed to be that it is too pessimistic with regard to the growth of the area economy. That's funny, I would have thought that being conservative on economic assumptions was a good idea for government. Pie-in-the-Sky (or Ferries-on-the-Lake) has not worked out that well for us.

Next, I found amusing that the D&C called for further belt-tightening by the County government. What should be cut; please D&C tell us, since the D&C editorialists usually complain whenever any County program is threatened with cuts. Meanwhile, they included one brief sentence on school spending; this despite last week's Roch. Business Journal report showing that 47 of the 50 highest paid public officials in Monroe County are school officials, and the Comptroller's report showing school taxes rising twice as fast as inflation.

Finally, I was amazed at the facile way in which the editorial board dispensed with the support of the plan by Sandra Parker of the Roch. Business Alliance and the Center for Governmental Research. The D&C generally treats the RBA and CGR as the Oracle at Delphi on governmental matters. But on this point, they don't know what they're talking about?

I don't get it.

Actually, I do. Parker and the CGR didn't get the memo; the D&C doesn't want to support Ms. Brooks or anything she does that will really cut the county deficit. They know that the only real answer is consolidation of local government. Nothing else is acceptable.

The Edmund Fitzgerald

I've been a Gordon Lightfoot fan since my college days at SUNY-Albany. Emily Wright turned me on to Gordon.

He has had a number of hits over the years, but he may be best known for his 1976 ballad "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald". Today is the 32nd anniversary of the loss of the ship. I came across this video tribute to the lost ship and crew on Fark.com. The video has some actual footage and has Lightfoot's song as accompaniment.

The Fitzgerald was launched in 1958 and was the biggest ore freighter on the Great Lakes until the early 1970's. The boat was built by Northwestern Mutual Insurance Co. of Wisconsin and named after the company's chairman, whose father had been a Great Lakes ship captain.

Some people believe that the Fitzgerald was a jinxed boat and bad luck dogged it from the beginning. When Mrs. Fitzgerald went to christen the boat by breaking a champagne bottle over the bow, it took her three swings to break the bottle. Upon launching the vessel in the water, the boat was slightly damaged as it hit the dock, and finally, at the ceremony one of the onlookers suffered a heart attack. The boat suffered an unusual number of minor wrecks and mishaps during its 17 years of service.

Apparently, controversy still remains about the actual cause of the wreck. There is no question, however, that Lightfoot's hit song has made the Edmund Fitzgerald the most well-known Great Lakes' shipwreck.

The People Have Spoken

Well, the votes are in.

The lowest voter turnout since 1964 contributed to Gates having some of its closest races in recent memory. The Gates GOP maintained control of the Town Board, while Democrat Mark McIntee also held his seat. As such, Supervisor Esposito will continue to preside over a Town Board with a 4-1 Republican majority.

Long time councilman Greg Hart finished third in the balloting for the Board, thus losing his seat. He has given long and honorable service to the citizens of Gates and was a worthy heir to his father, former Supervisor Jack Hart. Greg has been a friend and a colleague for a long time and I'll miss him as a Board member. I'm sure, though, that he will remain very active in Gates politics.

Judge John Pisaturo won his 7th term on the bench. I'm particularly pleased about his re-election, since his opponent used his censure over charging excessive speeding fines as a means to unfairly attack his judicial qualifications. Town voters, fortunately, did not buy into it.

The new face on the Town Board belongs to Chris DiPonzio. Chris led the balloting for the Board and brings both youth and business experience to Town government. He also has a fine political pedigree; his mom, Betty DiPonzio, was a long time Board member, and was one of the most popular elected officials in Gates. I'm looking forward to working with Chris (who is also a good friend and former golf partner).

That brings me to Supervisor Ralph Esposito. As I have previously written, I know no finer public official than Ralph. His political and governmental skills are simply unmatched by anyone I have ever dealt with in the public arena. His experience, competence, and accomplishments make him the best possible choice to run the Town of Gates. His steady hand has brought us through fiscal challenges and given Gates residents a quality of life which is second to none. I am honored to serve with him.

Going forward, it will be interesting to watch both political and governmental developments in Gates. For example, we will learn if Councilman McIntee is going to revert to the cooperative bipartisan spirit that he evidenced in the early part of his first year in office, or if he will continue to be the posturing partisan that he became as the election neared. The GOP majority treated him with respect during the past year; he lost some of that respect due to recent actions that seemed to be political antics. Frankly, he should expect little leeway from us if he continues to try to score partisan points rather than to govern cooperatively.

From a purely partisan view, elections have become more difficult for the GOP in Gates, due to ever declining Republican voter enrollment. The Gates GOP needs to come up with a plan to deal with that problem, as well as the problem of low voter turn-out. We have to accelerate efforts to register new GOP voters and get those we do have to actively participate in the party.

Clearly, the days of easy wins for the GOP are long gone.

Rudy Closing In?

Those of you who are regular readers (those 3 or 4 of you), know I'm a fan of Rudy Giuliani. I continue to think he remains the GOP's best hope for holding the White House in 2008.

Apparently, I am not alone in my thinking. Rich Lowry, writing in the National Review Online suggests that Rudy has had staying power despite predictions to the contrary. His article opens on that note:

"Rudy Giuliani’s downfall in the Republican primary fight has been much predicted, but little in evidence. He just got the endorsement of the Christian conservative leader Pat Robertson and has stubbornly stayed atop national polls all year long".

Lowry says that Rudy has shown himself to be a proper heir to Ronald Reagan, calling him "an urban cowboy". Lowry also notes that Rudy has another attribute that I think may be the most important of all; he's likeable, and, as my wife likes to point out, Americans vote for the candidate they'd most like to have a beer with. Lowry said: "At this basic level, Giuliani tugs on Republican heartstrings. There is no substitute in politics for being liked, and Republicans simply like Rudy".

Lowry concluded with this observation:

"Giuliani’s best selling point in the primaries is that — whatever his media coverage says — he’s not something new under the sun. He’s an archetype that Republican voters know and love — the gun-slinging sheriff, just with a different ZIP code".

Meanwhile, Robert Tracinski, of TIADaily.com, writing in RealClearPolitics, pointed to Giuliani's appeal to the religious right and the possible effect he could have on their influence in the GOP:

"I have argued that Giuliani's candidacy is a test of the priorities of the right. And there you have the priority list: Islamic terrorism first, small government second, judges third.
And if this is how Pat Robertson looks at the election, how many other religious voters will do the same?
That's why this endorsement is so significant: it is a precise and thorough validation of the premise behind Giuliani's candidacy.
The potential implications reach far beyond Giuliani's presidential prospects. Up to now, most Republican politicians have based their campaigns on an opposition premise: that to win the support of the Republican "base," it is necessary to conform to the agenda of the religious right. Call it the Mitt Romney Theory. But if Giuliani wins the nomination, and then goes on to win the general election, how many Republican politicians will feel emboldened to adopt Giuliani's position?
What we may be witnessing is a significant political retreat by the religious right".

Finally, I have noted many attacks on Rudy from both right and left. As I have previously noted, critics only criticize candidates that they are worried about. I think they better keep worrying.

Lieberman's Lament

This one's for you Rubes.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I) Conn., was very critical of the Democratic party regarding its approach to national security issues, in a speech he gave at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, as reported by the New York Sun.

Lieberman accused his Democratic colleagues of abandoning the principles of FDR, Truman, and JFK, regarding national security. He called them out on the concept that they view George Bush as the greatest threat to American security:

"Since retaking Congress in November 2006, the top foreign policy priority of the Democratic Party has not been to expand the size of our military for the war on terror or to strengthen our democracy promotion efforts in the Middle East or to prevail in Afghanistan. It has been to pull our troops out of Iraq, to abandon the democratically elected government there, and to hand a defeat to President Bush."

Lieberman is now virtually an outcast from the mainstream of the Democratic party, which has shifted quite far to the left since he was Al Gore's running mate in 2000. He was particularly critical of his 22 Democratic Senate colleagues who voted against his resolution naming Iran's revolutionary guards and Quds force, terrorist organizations. Lieberman also railed against liberal web commentators who he claimed pushed a theory that his resolution would give the President a "back door" OK for war against Iran:

"There is something profoundly wrong-something that should trouble all of us — when we have elected Democratic officials who seem more worried about how the Bush administration might respond to Iran's murder of our troops, than about the fact that Iran is murdering our troops." He added, "There is likewise something profoundly wrong when we see candidates who are willing to pander to this politically paranoid, hyper-partisan sentiment in the Democratic base — even if it sends a message of weakness and division to the Iranian regime."

Sen. Lieberman is a voice in the wilderness of the Democratic party on this topic. I think great past Democratic leaders, who were strong on defense, like Harry Truman, John Kennedy, Scoop Jackson, and Sam Nunn, would hardly recognize today's Democratic party. One of these days, some Democrat is going to have to deal with a military crisis. How will they handle it?

I'm Not Sure Walsh Is A Republican, But He's Not A Conservative

So say Tom Cook and Jim Quinn, Conservative Party Chairmen of Monroe and Wayne Counties, respectively, as quoted by the Syracuse Post-Standard.

Cook only recently learned that Congressman Walsh was actually a RINO:

"I was shocked when I began analyzing his record," said Cook, the Monroe County chair for 28 years. "It's only when he did the anti-war thing that I began looking into it."

If Tom had read this blog he would have learned the facts on Walsh much sooner.

Cook was quite vehement, however, in his denunciation of Walsh, saying:

"This guy writes me a letter and says he's not a conservative," Cook said Wednesday. "Never in my 28 years as chair has anybody ever written me a letter to ask for an endorsement and say he's not a conservative. He's pro-life, which is nice, but we're not the Right-to-Life Party."

Mr. Quinn also expressed his dismay at Walsh's faulty conservative credentials:

"We've always had a cool relationship with him regarding his voting record," Quinn said. "The flip-flop on the war in Iraq was the straw that broke the camel's back."

It is not completely clear whether or not the loss of support of Cook and Quinn will assure Walsh gets no Conservative Party endorsement. There are 10 Counties in Walsh's district. The State Conservative Chairman, Michael Long, has yet to weigh in and the Onondaga County Chair, Austin Olmstead offered a note of possible support.

The issue is critical for Walsh who narrowly won re-election in 2006. His margin of victory was less than the approximately 7,200 votes he got on the Conservative line. As I pointed out in July, its quite clear that Walsh doesn't understand who his supporters really are.

Good News Is No News?

That is the sub-title of a Times of London article about the very real success that's been occurring in Iraq since General Petraeus took over and changed our military strategy.

The article points out how little of this "good news" makes it through the "conventional wisdom" of the press who have been convinced that Iraq is a hopelessly lost cause. The Times also points out that many Democrats in Congress and running for President have invested a lot into the Iraq "quagmire narrative".

There may be problems for Democrats in 2008 if Iraq does turn around and the Democrats look like the party that wrote off the military too soon. Americans hate to lose; that could cost defeatist Democrats at the polls.

UPDATE - 11/8: Here are the links to the New York Times and Washington Post articles I cited in the comments section. For some reason, the links did not work on the comments page.

Hillary Debate Update: "Meanies" Ganged Up On Her

Hillary responded to what her campaign called "piling on" with this ad.
(Video via Real Clear Politics)

Maybe Hill's not as tough as I thought. Or maybe, as PowerLine claims, she knows that Democrat girls will stick by her. They discuss how Hillary may be able to play the "feminist" card in the primary season, but that the general election may be different.

You can review their analysis here and here.

Edwards Ad Mocks Hillary Debating Herself

John Edwards took a shot at Hillary Clinton in this campaign ad.

Hillary did have a hard time dealing with some of the more controversial questions. And, I'd say that Tim Russert won't be getting tickets to the inaugural ball if she wins the White House.

(Video via Real Clear Politics)

Desperate Gates Dems Launch 11th Hour Attack

Politics in Gates reached a new low yesterday as the Gates Democrats' mailer hit homes across the town.

Half of the mailer was a hit piece aimed at Town Justice John Pisaturo. This is the second such attack on him focusing on the fact that he was censured for giving overly large fines to speeders.
The piece says that "Judge Pisaturo broke the law" by handing out those large fines. This is becoming a typical tactic; implying that a crime was committed when the issue is compliance with an administrative or regulatory aspect of a statute. Further, why do the Democrats think hammering speeders is such a bad thing? Maybe drivers would slow down in Gates if they knew they were going to get the biggest fines possible.

The other half of the mailer was more of the same old "chicken little" criticism. The Democrat mailer used out-of-context "facts" along with quotes from editorials from 15-16 months ago in an effort to distort Ralph Esposito's record and lead people to unjustified conclusions. This has gone on for five years now. Ms. Swanton and the Democrats have been criticising Mr. Esposito and the GOP, but during all of that time, they have never offered a concrete, positive proposal for changes in Gates' government. Ms. Swanton focused on Ralph's car; Mr. McIntee on some secretarial salaries. Five years and the best they can do is "save" the Town a few thousand dollars?

A quick look at the latest mailer leads to an inescapable conclusion; the Democrats know they are losing this year so they will say anything in a last ditch effort to salvage their campaign. Most residents of Gates are reaching the conclusion, as the D&C and G-C Post did, that all Swanton and her gang can do is criticise the current administration; they have no positive plan or real ideas for running the town.

Further, their brand of politics is disgraceful. This is not like the pointed, rather witty ads they ran two years ago. Those ads went to the edge but usually didn't cross it. This year's campaign has gone far beyond the pale. I believe the Republican campaign has been positive and fair. We have campaigned solely on what we have done over the past few years and made virtually no references to our opponents.

Too bad the Democrats chose the dark side. I say shame on them.

Repo-Dad Vindicated

My kids are going trick-or-treating as pirates this year. They are big fans of Jack Sparrow and Pirates of the Caribbean.

While we were out running errands last week, my 13 year-old daughter asked me to stop at Wal-Mart so that she could try to find an accessory to her costume. Well, she found it. It was part of a costume packaged as "Pirate Wench". She only wanted a part of the costume to add to hers, but I refused to buy it.

I told her that I would not buy a costume for a 13 year-old that characterized itself as "Pirate Wench". I said that she should keep looking. She found two other female pirate costumes. One was "Glam Pirate", the other "Pirate Hottie". I was quite stunned, but, as I looked through the costumes, I realized that most of the costumes for girls were sexually suggestive. Needless to say, we did not buy anything.

As I related this story later to several of my friends and co-workers, they did not seem surprised that this was the case. In fact, some of them appeared to believe that I should have bought the "Wench" outfit since my daughter was not planning to wear any of the suggestive parts.

I was beginning to think that maybe I was crazy, but then I stumbled upon this Newsweek column. I guess there is a trend out there to dress up little girls as "hotties"! Kids as young as 6-8 years old!

Yikes! Have parents lost their minds completely? Any parent buying this stuff needs to have their head examined.

Give Him His Due

John McCain has has taken a number of positions over the years which have made it difficult for me and many of you with conservative viewpoints, to strongly support him for the presidency.

One thing we should all do, however, is respect him deeply for his service in the military and his courage and exemplary conduct while a prisoner of war in Viet Nam.

This McCain campaign ad, via PowerLine, (give the video some time to load) shows the real distinction between McCain and most GOP candidates versus Mrs. Clinton and the rest of the pygmies on the other side. Frankly, McCain is only my third or fourth choice among GOP candidates. He is, however, head and shoulders above all of the Democrats seeking the office.

Esposito Endorsed By D&C, G-C Post

Supervisor Ralph J. Esposito, was endorsed for re-election by both the Democrat & Chronicle and the Gates-Chili Post.

The endorsements in both newspapers credited Esposito with strong leadership pulling Gates out of fiscal difficulties. Both editorials had similar remarks about Sue Swanton, Ralph's Democrat opponent, suggesting that she failed to offer anything new in her campaign and that she had no plan for governing.

We in Gates are very fortunate to have Ralph Esposito as our Supervisor. He is actually underemployed as a Town Supervisor. Frankly, I do not know anyone with greater governmental skill and political acumen than Ralph.

He deserved the endorsements and he deserves re-election on November 6th.

McIntee Against Hwy. Equipment Before He Was For It

Since Mark McIntee has made it to the top of my "list", I thought I'd mention the fact that most of his self-proclaimed concern about spending in the Gates budget is really just posturing.

First of all, for all of the things he has questioned, he actually has not voted against even one spending item. He repeatedly points to the fact that he voted against bonding to buy highway equipment. Okay, but the following month, he seconded the motion to buy the equipment. Voting to purchase the equipment, using the money you voted against borrowing, seems inconsistent, to say the least.

I assume Mr. McIntee would try to say that we needed the equipment but he did not want to borrow to buy it. But borrowing was the only way to get it. Obviously, he was trying to have it both ways. He made similar inconsistent remarks regarding the Highway Union contract, wondering out loud if the Town could afford the contract, but then voting for it.

Now he's trying to take credit for being the fiscal watchdog of the Town Board. As Ralph Esposito likes to point out, given McIntee's record of voting with the GOP majority over 99% of the time, he is either the worst watchdog in the history of watchdogs or perhaps there really wasn't much to watch out for.

Not That There's Anything Wrong With that!

On the lighter side:

Many Harry Potter fans were very surprised to learn that Professor Dumbledore is gay.

Scrappleface has some additional revelations which you might give you a chuckle. It turns out that U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald of Valerie Plame "fame", has vowed to learn who "outed" Dubledore. He apparently won't rest until he finds the leaker.

McIntee Continues To Have Trouble With His Memory

I guess Mark McIntee needs to see a doctor about his repeated memory lapses.

First he claimed that despite seeing me on the afternoon of the Gates Budget workshop, he "forgot" that he had a question about fund balances that he intended to raise at the workshop.

Today I read his letter "explaining" his "no" vote on the preliminary budget. Among other things he stated..."[W]hen Town Attorney DiCaro looked up the law, it could not be determined at that time whether showing these fund balances was required since the majority of our funds have a negative balance". I guess he "forgot" that I gave him a Memorandum explaining that he was reading the statute too literally.

If I wanted to be charitable, I could assume that McIntee was referring the the 30 second period he gave me to read the law when he suddenly "remembered" that he was supposed to ask his fund balance question. My response was that the relevant section said what Mr. McIntee said it did. But I had previously reviewed the budget and found no legal problems with it. Mr. McIntee certainly did not express any reason for his "no" vote, nor did he try to amend the budget or ask for a delay in the vote. Any of those reactions might have been consistent with a genuine concern that the preliminary budget was flawed.

Based upon his "memory lapses", last minute inquiry and unexplained vote against the budget, my honest feeling is that Mr. McIntee was acting according to his pre-arranged script.

Hanson On Democrats

As you few regular readers know, I find Victor Davis Hanson to be a very brilliant and compelling writer.

Among the things I like most about him is his intelligent yet plain-spoken manner. He does not try to convince his readers by using bombastic prose; he just spells out his views in a way that anyone could understand.

His "Works and Days" Blog is one of my favorite places. The following take on today's Democrats/Liberals is vintage Hanson.

Democrats
By habit I remain a registered Democrat, largely because my parents and grandparents were agrarian populists in outlook. I also try to vote and support (even as our district boundaries keep changing) one Democrat, Jim Costa, our local Democratic congressman, who is cut from the Scoop Jackson mold. Central Valley Democrats used to be considered mainstream center-right people in a way unimaginable now. We forget that a long time ago, Democrats were considered sort of tough, practical minded, a world away from the blueblood golf course crowd, receptacles of conservative values in a way the elite Republicans were not. That’s ancient history now.
I throat clear like that because of the steady insanity shown by the Democratic political class. Now Congressman Stark accuses President Bush of enjoying the deaths of our soldiers in Iraq; this follows Harry Reid’s letter trying to intimidate and silence Rush Limbaugh. And, of course, we witnessed a litany of insanity voiced by Sens. Kerry, Durbin, and Kennedy about Iraq and our soldiers, who were libeled as everything from terrorists to Saddamites to Nazis by those three. Congressman Murtha pronounced Marines guilty of war-crimes before they were tried. Sen. Obama asserted our troops killed innocent civilians, while Sen. Reid and Clinton essentially called Gen. Petraeus a fabricator (“suspension of belief”).
When we factor in the “Betray-us” ad, the Hollywood antics, and the university embarrassments, whether denying Larry Summers a right to speak at UC Davis or welcoming in Ahmadinejad at Columbia, one is forced to ask, “What happened to liberal thinking and the Democratic Party?” Why do dissent and criticism almost immediately devolve into elemental rage, whether Durbin screaming that our soldiers are Nazis or Moveon.org that their leader is a traitor? Why do deans, media heads, and politicians show such bad taste?
Plenty of explanations come to mind: the Democrats were out of power and frustrated with their impotence, and show a furor at being out of the loop for years. There is also something to the changing demographics of the party, which now includes a number of rich and mega-rich supporters, who apparently feel, that unlike a hardware store owner, or an accountant, they have made it, are exempt from mundane worries, and have enough money not to care about taxes and climbing entitlements.
Among this very elite, liberalism is now a sort of entrée for business, entertainment and leisure, a social requisite, like being a petty Christian official in the Medieval World, always taken for granted and not often examined.
Among this new influential class, clustered in universities towns, and progressive cities like Seattle, the Bay Area, the southern California Coast, Boulder, New England, and the suburbs of Washington, hating George Bush, or assuming that Western industrial rapacity is heating up the planet for profits, or that Iraq is a war for Halliburton is all akin to having oak floors, leather furniture, a stainless steel, granite kitchen, a glass of white wine after work at a fern bar, or driving a Prius to campus—manifest symbols of taste, erudition, and culture. Championing social causes at a distance also provides the upscale a sort of psychological penance: e.g., something like ‘I wouldn’t dare live or tutor in East Palo Alto, but will play the radical at Stanford’s picturesque campus as spiritual recompense.’
NB: the Kerry and Gore and Michael Moore lifestyles at odds with their professed rhetoric. I doubt should the obese Moore need heart surgery that he will go to Havana, or that Gore will plug his mansion into wind turbines or fly commercial, or that Kennedy will allow a windmill on his vacation home horizon.
Other factors that explain why Democratic leaders appear so ill-mannered are the legacies of the general uncouthness of the 1960s. One sees that in Cindy Sheen talking about her womb, or Moveon.orgs tasteless ads, or the language of a Bill Maher, or the sort of placards you see at campus protests, or the web postings on the leftwing sites.
In the 1960s, there was a general assault on manners, language, habit, protocol—anything deemed “plastic” or part of the “establishment” responsible for classism, imperialism, racism, and sexism. We forget that those who embraced it an early age (I saw the very tail-end of that dying movement as a freshman at UC Santa Cruz in 1972), did not just fly off to Mars.
Instead their coarseness was imprinted deeply upon their souls and the culture at large. And as we watch that generation age, whether in Congress or in films or at our universities, we see people inherit great positions of power—deans, bureau chiefs, senators—even as their small 1960s essences remain trapped in aging bodies. So just rent the DVD Woodstock, add 40 some years to those bodies, and, presto, imagine them all with suits and ties running universities, newspapers, foundations, and government, torn between the enjoyment of the lavishness that democratic capitalism provides them and their very abstract disdain for it.

What's My Real Concern?

I blogged earlier this week about a commenter on the Gates Blog with the handle "concerned_about_gates". I previously speculated that "concerned" was Doug Ross, the Gates Democrats' "idea man".

Today on the Gates Blog, Ross "outed" himself by reporting, point for point, (as "concerned"), the arguments he made at the Fair Campaign Committee meeting. I now have to wonder what kind of "idea man" he really is. He appears to be the only person around (except, perhaps, for Ms. Swanton and Messrs. McIntee and O'Hare) who thinks the Gates-North Gates issue is a relevant distinction. I assume that I also have to give him "credit" for the "brilliant" tactical move of seeking "redress" in the Fair Campaign process after having his candidates refuse to sign the Fair Campaign Pledge.

It makes me wonder if an "October Surprise" is on tap from the Dems?

Entitlement Madness

Mark Steyn is fast becoming one of my favorite columnists. He is a naturalized citizen, hailing originally from England. His wit and insight make him a fine and persuasive writer. His conservatism has the erudition and credibility of William Buckley and George Will.

He has been writing volumes about the S-CHIP debate. He has been quite critical of what he views as Democrat chicanery and demagoguery. His articles have had a simple premise. Is there a limit to what independent people should expect the government to do for them?

This recent article truly resonated with me. He tries to point out that the road the Democrats want to take us down in America, is the very same road that Europeans have already taken and found leads to the edge of a cliff. Its worth reading.

Concerned_About_Gates (Gates' Democrats, That Is)

Concerned_About_Gates took a couple late swipes at me and the Gates GOP on the Gates Blog. He waited until there were a couple of other negative comments before he added his two cents. I guess he wasn't confident enough to be the sole naysayer. This was his rather lame jab at me:

"Repoman aren't you the Town's attorney? For how many years? Why should anything MCIntee brought up be a surprise? Aren't supposed to know the law? It's not like we haven't had deficit budgets before".

Obviously, I am the Town Attorney. I never made a secret of that fact on the Gates Blog. Further, and despite his/her uninformed and disparaging remarks, the issue was not my legal work for the Town of Gates. The issue was Mr. McIntee’s political grandstanding.

The simple fact is that Mr. McIntee found or was given a copy of a Town Law section that he or someone else erroneously construed to believe that the proposed budget was defective. Given that information, Mr. McIntee had two choices. He could raise the issue in a timely fashion and get an answer to his concern or he could wait until the budget vote was pending and raise the issue for the purpose of political point scoring. He chose the latter.

Mr. McIntee saw me at the Town Hall that afternoon. We spoke about the upcoming meeting. His claim that he simply forgot about the issue is hard to believe.

Concerned appears to believe that attorneys should have all relevant statutes committed to memory. I would suggest that attorneys who give legal advice without resort to their law books had better keep their malpractice policies paid up to date. I do not try to memorize the numerous laws that affect the Town. I do, however, know where to find the law books with the correct answers.

The morning after the meeting, I researched and prepared a memorandum for Mr. McIntee. I explained how he had read the requirement incorrectly. I pointed out to him that in prior years, fund balances (surpluses) had been included in our budgets as those funds were being applied to current year expenditures. Even though we have greatly reduced our deficit, the Town still does not have a surplus. As such, there is no fund balance to apply in this year’s budget.

Had Mr. McIntee asked me about the fund balance issue in the afternoon when we spoke, I could have given him, and the rest of the Board, an answer at the workshop. Moreover, the whole thing is really a tempest in a teapot. The workshop was dealing with the preliminary budget. The final budget will be approved at the public budget hearing. Thus, even if Mr. McIntee was correct, a minor omission such as that which “concerned” (no pun intended) him could be remedied then. But, once again, it’s quite obvious that Mr. McIntee did not want a resolution, he wanted a headline and a faux controversy.

Clearly, Concerned , and others in the anti-Ralph legion, are trying their hardest to oblige him.

Well, knock yourselves out! Most residents of Gates see right through you!

Grasping At Straws

The Democrats in Gates must be getting desperate.

Their long-running "Chicken Little" routine doesn't have any traction now that the deficit is being slashed and the 2008 budget has no tax increase. Their latest gambit to get a good headline fell flat, as the Fair Election Committee rejected their flimsy unfair election practice complaint.

The Dems claimed that the GOP ads were misleading in the reference to a Money magazine article touting Gates as the 16th most affordable community in the country. Apparently, the Money article was focused on "North Gates" which is apparently only a little more than half of the Town. Of course, there is no way to determine where "North Gates" actually is. Further, the Fair Campaign Committee correctly ruled that it was nonetheless appropriate for the Gates good government team to take credit for their part in making the area one of the most affordable places in the U.S.

An interesting sidelight came to my attention as I read the Committee's decision. It appears that of all the candidates involved in the matter, only Ralph Esposito had signed the Fair Campaign Pledge. So apparently the Democrats felt free to use the committee to hold the GOP to fair practices, but was unwilling to bind themselves to do so! Wow, what chutzpah!

Its not surprising though. The Democrat's campaigns against Ralph Esposito and the the Republican Town Board members have relied on misrepresentation, distortion, and innuendo. Sue Swanton has been claiming that the financial sky is falling for 5 years. She and her Democrat colleagues have tried to turn the fact that Gates has a budget deficit into a fiscal crisis rivaling the Great Depression.

The fact is that Ralph and the Town Board have handled the difficult situation brought on by Kodak's departure very adeptly. They have managed to maintain vital, quality of life services for Gates' residents while raising taxes on average by less than $200.00/ household since Kodak moved out.

Sue and the Democrats have never offered a serious alternative plan of any kind. I noted today in the paper that Sue's plan for balancing the budget continues to call for "quality circles". Sue needs to update her pop management library. Quality circles went out of vogue about 20 years ago.

I can only hope that two weeks from tomorrow, the residents of Gates will once again see through Swanton's nonsense and opt for Ralph's experience and competence.

Check The RINO Family Tree

This guy has to be related to Jim Walsh:

Rep. Vern Buchanan (R from FL) will vote to override the President (on S-CHIP). What an apologist. His staff said: He doesn't like the tax increase and doesn't like the amount of expansion but... Since he only won by a few hundred votes, he can't afford to lose many supporters. (From National Review Online)

I assume that Congressmen Buchanan and Walsh will be vying for the chair of the RINO caucus, if they get re-elected. I'd say however, that their misunderstanding about who their supporters really are, will more likely lead to their forced retirement.

Betting On Hillary: Update

Two posts on the PowerLine Blog amplify some of the points I made about Guiliani's problem with religious conservatives increasing the likelihood of a Hillary presidency.

First, Paul Mirengoff reported on a story by Robert Novak dealing with Guiliani's support among that group. Novak found that it was stable, so far. Mirengoff wonders, as I now do, what percentage of those voters will "sit out" the election rather than cast a vote for pro-choice Rudy.

Next, Scott Johnson posts about the possibility that some Republicans will reluctantly conclude (ala Charles Krauthammer) that they could live with Hillary as President. His view is that such a belief may be misguided and self-defeating.

All The News That's Fit?

The decline of the New York Times from America's newspaper of record to left-wing fish-wrapper continues apace.

Times' columnist Frank Rich reached a new low in his op-ed piece today. He basically stated that Americans who support the Bush Administration are like the Germans who did nothing while Hitler and the Nazis committed their countless horrors while launching war and genocide across Europe.

Comparing Bush to Hitler, the GOP to the Nazi party, and Americans to Germans who sat next to concentration camps and protested that they knew nothing, is beneath the dignity of most left-wing "fever-swamp" bloggers. But here we have the spectacle of a (prominent?) columnist writing in a (great?) newspaper, equating Americans to Nazis!

Are there any editors at the Times? Do they even read their own paper? Can anyone with a rational mind wonder why the Times' circulation continues to plummet?

Consolidation Questions

Did you note the poll accompanying the Democrat & Chronicle's front page story on Maggie Brooks?

One of the questions was:

"If it meant a substantial savings in your tax bill, would you support or oppose merging some layers of county municipal and township governments?"

70% supported merger under those circumstances. Gee, what a surprise. I mean, after all, even I would agree to that statement. But I'd have to say a follow-up question would have been warranted. Something like this:

If you said "support" to the question above, would you still support merger if it meant significant reductions in local services, such as, police service?

If that follow-up had been asked, the 70% of support would have evaporated quite quickly. I wonder why they asked the first question but not the second? Oh, yeah, the D&C commissioned the poll and their metro government agenda would not be furthered by asking the right questions.

If I Was A Betting Man....

I'd place my bet on Hillary Clinton becoming the next President.

I came to that conclusion this week after reading the reaction to two Tony Blankley columns. Blankley wrote columns on October 3rd and October 10th regarding the need for Republicans and Conservatives to be pragmatic rather than stand solely on principle regarding their choice for presidential nominee.

Lest you get the wrong idea, Blankley was not suggesting that the GOP abandon core principles in a cynical quest for power. He was pointing out that Republicans, having missed their chance to govern according to those principles, might want to temper principle with pragmatism in light of their worsening electoral prospects. Further he was focused on the presidential campaign and the specific pronouncement by "Christian Conservatives" that Rudy Giuliani was "unacceptable" to them. Blankley believes that Rudy is the one GOP presidential candidate who has an actual shot at beating Mrs. Clinton.

The reaction to his columns convinces me that Hillary will, in fact, be elected. The clear majority of respondents who expressed deep religious views (largely on the abortion issue) made it clear that they would either not vote or vote for a third party candidate, if Rudy was the nominee. Obviously, this was no representative sample of "values voters", but if only a one-third or more of them abandon the GOP if Rudy is the nominee, White House interns will once again have to look over their shoulders.

I must say that I cannot understand the logic. One comment asked of Blankley..."would you vote for a candidate with whom you agreed on everything except that he supported legalized rape and murder? Of course, not". My response to that would be that the answer would be "Of course, not", only if the other candidate (with whom I disagreed on every other issue) did not also support legalized rape and murder.

If Rudy faces Hillary, you have two pro-choice nominees. If you refuse to vote for Rudy on that basis, you still get a pro-choice President and that President will have many other views you will find noxious. Eight years of Hillary Clinton appointments of liberal judges to the Federal Judiciary will guarantee us an irreversible trip down the road to socialism and political correctness. Unfortunately, it appears that some Conservatives will hold out unless they get a nominee who is "pure". What the are going to get is the leaner, meaner version of the Hill and Bill show.

My gloom about my revelation of Hillary's certain ascendancy to the White House was ameliorated somewhat by this column by Charles Krauthammer. In it, Krauthammer explains why he and other conservatives might be able to live with President Hillary. He discusses Hillary's recent change of heart on NAFTA:

"The [Washington] Post editorial noted "a perverse kind of good news" in Hillary's free-trade revisionism: "There's little chance that her position reflects any deeply held principle." And there lies the beauty not just of Clinton on free trade but of the Clinton candidacy itself: She has no principles. Her liberalism is redeemed by her ambition; her ideology subordinate to her political needs.
I could never vote for her, but I (and others of my ideological ilk) could live with her -- precisely because she is so liberated from principle. Her liberalism, like her husband's -- flexible, disciplined, calculated, triangulated -- always leaves open the possibility that she would do the right thing for the blessedly wrong (i.e. self-interested, ambition-serving, politically expedient) reason."

Oh well, at least she didn't win the Nobel Prize!

Maggie's Plan vs. ...... What?

The controversy surrounding Maggie Brooks' plan to close the Monroe County budget deficit has been percolating for over a week now. While there has been some criticism of the proposal, I've been struck by the almost complete lack of substance in that criticism.


Let me start out by saying that the cries of foul regarding the way the plan was "announced" and rammed through the County Legislature are wholly deserved. Its too bad that Maggie and the county GOP apparently did not have enough confidence that they could hold their caucus together through a period of public discussion.

Having said that, I'd say its time to really focus on the merits of the plan. No one really disputes that Medicaid costs have been the biggest fiscal problem facing the county. Taking action to remove Medicaid from the mix makes a lot of sense. Moreover, despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth by school district leaders, our schools are, in fact, in the best shape of any part of government to take a little (1%-2%) hit.

The schools are, quite frankly, awash with money. The Greece Schools built a multi-million dollar TV studio, Fairport is putting in artificial turf athletic fields, and our own Gates-Chili District had a spare couple hundred grand to give every student their school supplies (in addition to the massive rebuilding project).

Let me admit that I voted for both the current budget and the capital improvement. I want the district to have every penny it needs to give my kids the best possible education. I think, however, that it is fair to say that since the advent of the STAR program, schools have felt very little need to take a hard look at spending. Many taxpayers have been lulled to sleep by the big STAR credits they receive. As such, they care a lot less when the latest school budget looks a tad bloated.

Further, I'm really tired of all of the hypo-critics out there. Their basis for attacking the plan is that the short notice of the plan stifled the kind of "open community discussion" that should is needed to properly analyse the plan. Where were these critics when Maggie tried to raise the sales tax? I don't remember any of them calling for David Gantt or Joe Morelle to explain why the sales tax plan was "DOA". That plan was rejected out of hand. Why should Maggie expose herself to that kind of "debate".

They also use the same excuse for their failure to offer any viable alternative plan to solve the budget crisis. Lee Strong will tell you the Democrats do have a "plan". Yeah, the Democrat plan is largely platitudes. The items which have fiscal implications use methods that Maggie has been criticised for (i.e., one-time shots and burden shifting). Their plan relies heavily on creating a "police district" which will shift a big portion of the cost of the Sheriff's road patrol to towns without police departments. They also have a number of items that look good only on paper, and require a lot of "faith" that underlying assumptions will come true.

As I have said many times previously, if the Brooks' plan is so bad, and the Democrat's ideas so good, why couldn't the Dems get anybody to trumpet those ideas during an election campaign against Maggie? That's why all this caterwauling rings quite hollow.

Consolidation = Redistribution

I can only marvel at the growing array of editorialists and pundits who are working towards the elimination of smaller municipal governments. The Democrat & Chronicle used most of its editorial page on Thursday to explain, once again, that consolidation is the only way to cut the cost of government and that anyone who doesn't agree is a self-serving politico or a fool who just won't face reality.

I wish a real debate and discussion of the hidden agenda behind the consolidation drive could be had. The D&C, the Center for Governmental Research and countless other experts, keep telling us that consolidation and regionalism are the only smart ways to go.

Why?

The "obvious" reason is that there would be "great" cost savings from the elimination of duplicative services. Certainly, there is some truth to that. I am sure that there are administrative expenses that could be eliminated by consolidation. I would, however, like someone to at least offer us some numbers. I question whether the amount of savings would justify the loss of "self-determination" that we have in our own localities.

Further, there is never any discussion about the reduction in services that would come from consolidation. During a recent blog post on this topic, consolidation supporters criticized a fire district in Greece for building a new station. The argument that there were enough stations in the general vicinity, so that the residents in that area could have had sufficient service if a regional approach was used. A similar point was made about how "everybody understands" that the Brighton Police Department is unneeded with a Sheriff's Department available for the entire county.

Really? So who gets to decide how many police we have protecting us, or how many fire halls serve us or how often the streets are plowed or our debris is picked up? Today, in Gates, the residents of Gates decide. In the consolidation scenario, someone else will.

This brings me to the hidden agenda. The real reason for consolidation and regionalism is so that the productive, successful and viable parts of the region can subsidize the broken, failing parts. For example, today there are 4 or 5 cars patrolling Gates on an average shift. If we go to metro police, will we still have 4 or 5 cars in Gates? Of course not! The former Gates officers will be working their metro duties in the high crime areas of the City of Rochester.

You see, when consolidation supporters say the cost of local government is too high, they don't mean you will save a lot of money under a regional government. They mean that YOU spend too much money on "lavish" services you really DON'T NEED. That money should be spent where its really needed. Its just not fair that Gates has its own police or that the Brighton schools spend extra money on pupils, when there's more crime in the City and RCSD students aren't doing well on their tests.

I wrote about this previously here and here. The supporters of metro are really supporters of saving and expanding the power base of failed policies and politicians. Little more needs to be said than to point out that ex-mayor Bill Johnson has a prominent place on Gov. Spitzer's Commission looking into consolidation. We ought to let him have another crack at our money, right?

Seriously, though, get ready for a big consolidation push. Be ready for it. Ask the right questions. How much will local services be cut (my guess, a lot)? How much will total taxes be reduced(me again, not much, I'd bet)? Ask why we can't decide to have an extra cop, fireman, or teacher in our town, if we are willing to pay for it. Ask what percentage of our total taxes are town taxes versus state and county taxes. Ask why we aren't first doing something about the real problem with over-taxation, which is our State Government.

The reason is that consolidation supporters don't really think you PAY too much; they think you HAVE too much. They want to spread the wealth to those who NEED it, and that isn't YOU, if you live in the suburbs.

Wishful Thinking

According to IMAO, if Fred Thompson was President of the U.S., terrorists would not have to travel to visit "ground zero". Ground zero would be wherever the terrorists were.

If so, Fred's got my vote!

Liar, Liar, Pants On Fire

I read two columns in the past week which touched on a point I've wanted to blog about. That is the current tendency to brand our opponents as liars, or evil incarnate.

It is no longer possible to simply disagree with our opponents, we must castigate and destroy them. The MoveOn.org ad slandering Gen. Petraeus is perhaps the pinnacle of this phenomenon. Or maybe that was Hillary calling Dick Cheney "Darth Vader".

Bush lied to get us into Iraq. He wasn't merely wrong about WMD, he made it all up. Gen. Petraeus knows Iraq is hopeless; he's just shilling for Bush, the way Colin Powell did.

Whatever happened to the idea that "reasonable people of goodwill may differ". I think it is our current brand of hyper-partisan, win at all costs politics. If you can't use reasoned argument to defeat someone, attack his motives, his background, his family. Call him names, call him a liar. The Clintons named this "the politics of personal destruction". They coined the phrase in self-defense; they became its best practitioners.

Kathleen Parker and Suzanne Fields both wrote columns on this point. Read them in full if you can. Here are a couple key points, first from Parker:

"Politics is ever the enemy of judgment, and perspective gets lost in the hysteria that inevitably builds when large numbers of politicians and media gather too tightly in a room. The whir of cameras and the flash of bulbs alter the human ecosystem somehow and interfere with the brain's circuitry, it would seem."

Fields was even more direct:

"There is no greater lie than to falsely accuse a person of being a liar. The slander by MoveOn.org, the smearing machine of the Democratic lunatic left, rises to the highest office of the land, falsely accusing the president of lying about weapons of mass destruction in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, which was not a lie but a mistake based on the intelligence gathered by several nations of the coalition. A mistake is not a lie; an accusation of mistake has no power to destroy a reputation.
Lying in politics is not new, but what is new is the thundering silence from critics of policy who know better and who say nothing. In time truth generally wills out, but when media is instantaneously ubiquitous, a lie, in the words of a senator of the previous century, runs halfway around the world before truth can get its boots on. A lie distracts debate, inhibits rational discussion, curtails the free expression of ideas and reduces honest differences of opinion to vicious tirades. And it lives forever in the infinity of the Internet, even after exposed as a lie."

On the blogs, Fields last point is very evident. George W. Bush is not just a bad President who bungled Iraq, he is the worst, criminal, lying President in American history. People like me who supported him in any way are fools, morons, or worse.

I wonder what it will take to restore a modicum of civility and honor to politics?

Thompson Is In: Update

There is an interesting piece on Fred Thompson written by Tom Bevan in Real Clear Politics. It is a nice assessment of Thompson's appeal and chances.

Read the whole thing but Bevan concludes with a few words on why it isn't too late for Fred:

"The other good news for Thompson is that right now his show is the only new one around, while the other candidates have long since gone into reruns.
Just after Thompson finished speaking in Mason City, I asked a group of people attending the event whether they felt Thompson waited too long to run and "missed his moment." Not a single one felt he had, and one man opined that the problem wasn't that Thompson had gotten in too late but that the other candidates had gotten in too early. "We're bored to death of those guys," the man said, while the others nodded in agreement.Thompson may be playing catch up from a fundraising and organization standpoint, but as far as voters are concerned there is plenty of room for - and interest in - adding another show to the Republican line up. We'll know soon enough whether Thompson can keep them tuned in."

This Just In!

In a surprise development, Congressman Jim Walsh has changed his position and decided he is against the War in Iraq. Reports from Washington indicate that Walsh (RINO-26th Dist. NY) will also announce that he will oppose any further funding for the War.

This position switch marks the 27th or 28th surprising about-face for Walsh since his electoral "near death" experience last November. Sources close to Walsh say that his re-election chances are the furthest thing from his mind and that this decision resulted from many sleepless nights poring over opinion polls while pondering what courageous stance would be most popular in his district.

Thompson Is In. Is It Too Late?

Former Sen. Fred Thompson has finally thrown his hat in the ring. He has a lot of things going for him, particularly a really down-home manner and resonant voice. When he articulates his views, he sounds confident, forthright, and reassuring.

The big question, as noted in the accompanying cartoon, is whether he has waited too long. Winning primaries takes grass-roots organization as well as money. Fred may be able to raise money, but its not clear he can put together a deep campaign organization fast enough.

Pinched Nerve Checks Blogger

My "pain in the neck" has proved to be a real impediment to blogging. I just wanted you two or three faithful readers to know I haven't quit, I'm just on a medical hiatus.

They Were For It Before They Were Against It

Check out this Victor Davis Hanson post from National Review Online.

He is predicting how many Democrats will deal with good news from Iraq. He also "warns" that Sen. Obama is not hedging his bets and that may harm his presidential bid if the Petreaus report is upbeat.

Lord Stanley's Cup Visits Gates

I've been on a sports kick for the past week, so I thought I'd mention the fact that I got to see (and touch) the Stanley Cup today.

As you probably know, members of the winning team each get a day with the Cup. they can do whatever they want with it. It turns out that my brother lives across the street from a guy who is the Mighty Ducks equipment manager. He brought the Cup to Gates.

He had it in the house on Fisher Road and a bunch of friends and neighbors got to see it and take pictures with it before he took it to Rookies Pub on Buffalo Road. My wife has a picture where she appears to be drinking from the Cup. I was less sacrilegious; I just touched it.

Its pretty cool up close and personal.