It’s been more than a week since Uncle Sam made you pay through the nose. Well happy Tax Freedom Day!
Every bit of production up until now has been for our glorious socialist dream, comrades. From here on out, we toil in misguided selfish materialism. With any luck, the Glorious Democrat Party will push Tax Freedom Day out past mid-year!
</sarcasm>
Recently, Jim Hunt attacked Rep. Rehberg for his decision to let Chief of Staff Erik Iverson live in Missoula instead of in Washington D.C. But keeping a Chief of Staff in Montana is hardly a new idea. Between 2000 and 2005, Senator Baucus maintained Jim Foley as his “State Chief of Staff.”
But far from being chided for his inability to get things done in Washington, Baucus was lauded for his efforts to keep in touch with Montanans. And Foley’s experience earned him a spot as one of the leading candidates to run against Rehberg in 2008, long before seventh stringer Jim Hunt came along.
So, I guess I’m confused: Why is it good a good thing for Max Baucus to have a CoS who lives in state but a bad thing for Rehberg? After all, Rehberg is basically running a Senate district (same area, same number of constituents) with a much smaller staff. So, it just makes good sense that he would have his Chief of Staff in state and his Legislative Director/Deputy Chief of Staff supervising the D.C. operation.
Besides, as WC pointed out earlier, doesn’t having one of his key aides living in our community signify his commitment to staying in touch with his constituents? And with all these new fangled inventions like telephones, fax machines, e-mail, C-Span and airplanes it can’t be that hard to keep on top of things that are happening in DC.
As for myself, I like that Rehberg’s Chief of Staff lives in Montana. Just like I appreciate the fact that the Representative comes home every weekend and recess. And if Hunt is planning to spend all of his time in D.C. and keep the majority of his staff sequestered inside the Beltway, then he’s going to have a very hard time staying connected to the people that matter, Montanans.
Via Dave Budge.
Go to Welcome Home Montana and check it out.
In my Global Warming Axioms, I stated that the the choices that scientists (people) have made with regard to pseudo-scientific issues like catastrophic man-made global warming runs the serious risk of undermining science (method) in the long run. My concern is that by politicizing something that should be apolitical, scientists undermine the credibility of science. The flaw is human; it always is.
And so when I read that large segments of the public have grown skeptical of science itself, I am not surprised. The left has commandeered the scientific throne for political exploitation. The Nobel Prize was awarded to a politician for his advocacy of public policy. This misuse has dulled the tool for its intended purpose - observation of the natural order of things.
And the scientific community (the people) seem intent on dulling the tool of their trade even further by increasing its political involvement. Great Nobel laureates - once recognized for their accomplishments in scientific method - recently invited McCain, Obama and Clinton to a great science debate, and then mourned their refusal. Unless science has become as much about politics as about scientific method, what business do three politicians have in debating science? Shouldn’t that be the providence of scientists?
Sadly, I find myself more skeptical of all science because I no longer trust the scientists who report it, and I think the damage may not be undone in my lifetime.
Perhaps more sadly is the fact that the real culprits may not be the scientists, but the media who seek out the most extreme positions and then portray it as the consensus. This not only drives scientists to the fringes for recognition and federal support, but it feeds the monster with more and more attention.
Another day, another inaccurate description of the Rehberg-SCHIP affair.
Jay links to a timeline over at Kos (I will not link to that site, ever) stating Rehberg wrote his op-ed on August 10, 2007. Not really a huge issue other than the editorial was published August 3rd in Billings, and is dated August 1 on his website. This of course means Rehberg wrote the op-ed concurrently with his vote, not afterwards.
Not that I expect Kossacks to have an understanding of the Eastern Montana mentality, but the author misses by a wide margin about what happened in Sidney. From my own experiences, and what was published, the lady at the meeting was mad at Denny for opposing the President on SCHIP. Kinda goes against the whole rubber stamp meme doesn’t it?
Lamnidae has recently graduated from commenting to, well, gad-flying with her own little corner of cyberspace. So far the transition hasn’t gone too smoothly but being new ourselves I guess we can forgive a bit of a learning curve.
For one, Brad points out that she needs to source her claims - like that Erik Iverson (diabolical puppet-master) is the highest paid staffer in the House of Representatives. This would be a little easier to accept if, well, the salary she claimed he received weren’t impossible. She seems to be posting from the new jhwygirl / Jay Stevens school of argumentation: “there’s no proof against it so it must be true.”
Most recently though, is an entertainingly clumsy attempt to go after Rehberg for supporting a policy that he says is popular in Montana. Egads! “Elected Representative uses constituents opinion as justification for policy position.” I sure hope the press doesn’t get ahold of this unpinned grenade! If this breaks, I don’t even want to imagine the shock waves that will reverberate through the Republican establishment.
Oh and Lamninate also makes fun of my name while calling Roy Brown a monkey and Jack the Blogger a goofball. I guess she wants to play full contact.
Welcome to the blogs honey. Looks like you’ve learned your name-calling from Wulfgar and your argumentation style from Jay. You should fit right into the evolving irrelevance that has lately settled over Sinestra.
Undeterred by allegations of impropriety in January, the Billings Gazette went full steam ahead today pushing for an $817,000 elementary mill.
Today you have stories on;
I do not have a dog in this fight as I am not a resident of Billings. I cannot imagine though, that when you look at the past troubles the Gazette has been in over unpaid advertising, this latest effort is doing any good for the proponents of the mill levy. The reporting is incredibly one-sided, albeit because opposition to school mills tends to be a silent majority, but I just read this stuff with a wary eye.
Meanwhile out West, I should plug a good write-up the Missoulian had a while back on where Montana ranks nationally in school funding issues. Of interest to me was this blurb;
Gov. Brian Schweitzer has refuted the MQEC arguments, saying the recent increases and policy changes have resolved the education funding problem.
Governor, I humbly submit today’s Gazette as evidence that in fact this issue is not resolved. On a broader note, the school funding issue will not go away until the State finds a dedicated funding stream like Roy Brown is pushing, namely by creating a trust fund from new energy development. Until that time you are going to see pitched battles on the local level between the education groups and their allies and property taxpayers who feel stretched too thin.
*Update: Apparently the Billings Gazette did not get its point across with four articles yesterday so they came right out today and said to care for kids you have to vote yes on the mill before May 6. Good to see our newspapers taking a balanced view on these issues. Also, in case you missed it last night, Gee Guy has an interesting post up with the final tally on what a quality education will cost the state.
Okay, you caught me Jay. I mean, not exactly what you were expecting, but you’re close enough that I know you’re going to figure it out eventually.
The funny thing is, I’ve been writing about that quote since August, as have other bloggers. I wonder why it’s only getting picked up now? Funny that the sh*tstorm came just a few days after Erik Iverson made the same charges against Rehberg’s Democratic opponent, Jim Hunt. It’s like…oh, I dunno…Iverson’s co-ordinating with a bunch of bloggers.
You’re just going to kick yourself when you learn the dastardly truth. I’m actually Erik Iverson. Moreover, Erik Iverson (me) is also every other Montana conservative blogger. Dextra may be Latin for “right” but in the secret GOP Language that Mark T has figured out, Dextra means Iverson.
You do have to hand it me though for being so clever. By getting my imputation of Hunt’s lies printed in the papers, I gave all my pseudonymous blog identities like Wiley Cody a perfectly believable cover story for their interest that would go something like this (if I weren’t Iverson in the flesh):
Reading the story in the paper reminded me how often Jay Stevens was using that line and inspired me to do some research into something that I had long suspected - but never really thought to prove - was another Democrat lie. Seeing other conservative bloggers pick up the same vibe just added fuel to that fire.
I guess I shouldn’t have expected I could get away with it. My whole plan was based on you Dems underestimating my ability to do literally everything at once. You clearly recognize the True Power that I wield. I can sense your fear by how often my name is coming up.
I bet you know that I was secretly behind the Democrat Presidential Candidate visit? And I’m responsible for high gas prices as a way to undermine the new Congressional majorities? And that I caused the sun to rise three minutes early in Missoula today to make it easier to get the snow off my car?
You guys are good! I know because I also write half of the liberal blogs.
This year Patriots Day means Monday at work, but for those in Massachusetts, today is one of the great civic holidays in the country.
Sure for most Bostonians it means drinking outside watching runners needlessly punish themselves. Plus the Sox are home for a matinee at Fenway. But the true meaning of Patriots Day is in celebrating the spark that led to our nation’s independence. So if you get the chance today, crack open a Sam’s and cheers to our founding fathers.
Cody beat me to the punch on Jay’s latest bout of misrepresentation. Here are a couple random thoughts that I would add;
“Montana kids deserve to have their healthcare needs addressed. However, the House Democrat bill has made the welfare of our children a political issue based on a narrow, extremist political ideology”
Compare that quote to this; “based on an ‘extremist political ideology’ to expand government-run health care.” Hmm, one has to wonder where Jay got the end-bit he is putting in quotes, inferring it was part of the original, which it demonstrably is not. Also removed is all context that the use of kids as political pawns is the source of the extremist ideology line.
