May 7-8, 2007
May 07 04:07 Sarkozy to United States: You've Got a Friend May 07 17:31 Sarko Vows to Shake Things Up May 07 17:50 It's Sinking In May 07 20:17 The Coverup Continues May 08 02:41 Penny Wise, Dollar Stupid May 08 04:04 Sen. Murphy Whining About 'Gov. No, No, No' May 08 16:08 Be Very Afraid; Be Very Very Afraid
Prior Years: 2006
Sarkozy to United States: You've Got a Friend
That's great news. Now let's see if President-elect Sarkozy lives up to it.
Sarkozy added that he wanted to tell his "American friends that they can rely on our friendship...France will always be next to them when they need us." But, he added, "Friends can think differently."If I could write out Sarkozy's agenda, it would start with them getting their economy going again and them cracking down on the rioting in the Muslim sections of Paris. Both are high priorities. In fact, they're urgent priorities.
Posted Monday, May 7, 2007 4:08 AM
No comments.
Sarko Vows to Shake Things Up
That's the main point in this ABC article. Here's a glimpse of the article:
Sarkozy's commanding victory is a strong mandate for change. The central theme of his campaign was "la rupture" -- a clean break with the past. He is vowing to shake things up here. "I want to bring back work, authority, morale, respect and merit," he told his supporters. The crowd ate it up.It'll be interesting to see how Sarko responds to the resistance that Sarko will face in shaking things up. It's a guarantee that he'll meet substantial resistance because socialists aren't about to quit even though they've failed everywhere they've tried it.
Sarkozy has dreamt his whole life of this moment. He has long held ambitions to lead his country. The grandson of Hungarian Jewish immigrants who later converted to Catholicism, he is the product of state universities, not the elite schools that normally serve as the breeding ground of French politicians. He may be short in stature, but like Napoleon he is known here as a tough leader, a force to be reckoned with.
"The U.S. can look forward to a real, loyal ally, not submissive, but loyal," said Nicole Bacharon, a political analyst and author of the book "Should We Fear America."It'll be be great having a real Franco-American alliance.
Sarkozy will need to stand his ground here in France as well. He has vowed to cut taxes and bureaucracy in an effort to stimulate the French economy. He has even indicated a willingness to take on sacred cows like the cushy 35 hour work week, perks for which the labor unions have fought hard, but which have tended to drag down the French economy.This will be Sarko's first real test. Let's hope he passes that test. If he does, the world economy will greatly benefit.
Posted Monday, May 7, 2007 5:31 PM
No comments.
It's Sinking In
According to this AP article in the WC Trib, the DFL is starting to back down from some of their most controversial legislation. In this instance, the Dream Act has been removed from the conference committee report:
D-F-L lawmakers are backing off a proposal to offer resident tuition rates to children of illegal immigrants. The measure was part of a broader higher education budget bill. Gov. Pawlenty has said the tuition plan alone would have been grounds for a veto.Contrary to Tarryl's statement last week, it appears as though Gov. Pawlenty saying no appears to be working as a negotiating tool.
The final college spending proposal is more than 325 million above current two-year spending. Sen. Sandy Pappas says the money comes with expectations that public college administrators will keep tuition increases to a minimum. She says tuition should rise at no more than 4 percent a year, although such a cap isn't a requirement.
The bill is on course for final action tomorrow.
Posted Monday, May 7, 2007 5:50 PM
No comments.
The Coverup Continues
I got a call earlier today from the Capitol saying that Tony Sertich is determined to deep-six the investigation into Swansongate. Rep. Gottwalt said that Sertich is attempting to prevent an investigation through a procedural vote. Sertich is getting motion after motion referred to the Rules Committee, which he chairs.
Keep in mind that Sertich wouldn't promise to investigate this scandal:
House Rules Committee Chairman Tony Sertich, DFL-Chisholm, said he would handle the politically charged motion with the "respect it deserves," but he did not promise to conduct an investigation.Based on his actions today, it's obvious that Sertich doesn't think the motion doesn't deserve much respect. It's disgraceful that Sertich would attempt to sweep this scandal under the rug. The lesson that he'll learn is that MOBsters will keep this scandal bubbling up & that it will adversely affect November's elections from the DFL's perspective.
Posted Monday, May 7, 2007 8:21 PM
Comment 1 by Drew Emmer at 09-May-07 10:40 AM
What is the deal with the comprehensive mainstream media blackout on this issue?
If the allegations were against a republican would the press be as dismissive as Sertich?
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 09-May-07 01:45 PM
Drew, You're absolutely right. This 'coverage' is pathetic because of its nonexistence.
I posted something on the Times' message board that you, me & Michael should be people's Swansongate news HQ.
Penny Wise, Dollar Stupid
Par Ridder simply doesn't get it. Like most liberals, they think in terms of doling out pain equally rather than doing something that likely would improve their corporate outlook. Case in point: Par Ridder announced that it's laying off 145 employees. Here's how they justified their cuts:
Publisher and CEO Par Ridder said reducing costs is necessary to adjust to a rapidly changing media environment.Ridder's statement talks about a new paradigm, then talks about a realignment of their assets to meet the demands of "readers & advertisers." Unfortunately, they don't talk about increasing the quality of the Strib's product, which is the 600 pound gorilla in the room that Ridder won't talk about.
"Revenue has been declining since 2004 and we need to respond to that reality, "Ridder said. "The newspaper business model has changed and this restructuring will allow us to align more resources with what readers and advertisers are demanding from us. Through this process we will be increasing resources focused on local content and advertising products, in both print and online."
Here's what appears to be happening ( H/T: Mitch ):
Thursday afternoon at the Star Tribune saw the paper's four metro columnists, Doug Grow, Nick Coleman, Katherine Kersten and Cheryl "CJ" Johnson called in to separate meetings with editors Nancy Barnes and Scott Gillespie and told, in so many words, that the paper was looking to scale back the number of columnists and would any of them care to raise their hands and volunteer for reassignment to the paper's suddenly thin -- and getting thinner -- ranks of street-level reporters?Doug Grow and Nick Coleman are lefty loons who conservatives won't miss in the least. The same can't be said about Kathy Kersten & James Lileks, whose articles have always had a strong following in Minnesota's conservative community. It hasn't dawned on the editors that what the people want...change that... what the people DEMAND ... is for the reporters to report facts & for columnists to base their opinion on verifiable facts.
There were, as far as I can tell, no immediate takers. Later it was learned that quasi-metro columnist, James Lileks, was also given the same message.
The other thing that the people seem to be saying is that they're tired of ultraliberal rants from DFL shills like Nick Coleman & Lori Sturdevant. They're saying that they want to read a newspaper where the product doesn't sound like the DFL's talking points.
Ironically, Doug Grow's column in today's Strib is about how Circuit City's employees weren't protected because they weren't unionized:
There was no union protection for any of the people fired -- or hired.Based on the Strib's giving the boot to their columnists, I'd say that the union's protection didn't help them much.
Maybe this collection of columnists can get Lori Swanson to look into their union's shortcomings.
Posted Tuesday, May 8, 2007 2:41 AM
No comments.
Sen. Murphy Whining About 'Gov. No, No, No'
Writing in this morning's St. Cloud Times, Sen. Steve Murphy complains that Gov. Pawlenty isn't giving in to the DFL's demands for a sizable increase in the state transportation budget. Here's the first of Sen. Murphy's complaints:
Minnesota has $1.7 billion in annual unmet transportation funding needs. It is critical that the state make a real, dedicated investment in our roads, bridges and transit systems this year. By continuing to rely on borrowing to fund our transportation system, we will only put our state further behind and shift the costs of today's projects onto our children and grandchildren.The truth is that needs is a subjective term. Here's what Bill Kuisle, the former Chair of the MN House Transportation Finance Committee, said about defining needs:
The unmet needs that the transportation folks are talking about are a joke. They asked every state DOT district, county, city and transit system to list every conceivable project they could dream up and then to estimate it's cost. This would be like giving social services everything they want. It would be like asking every college in the state what their needs are and then without scrutinizing it, say it is a must to have. There has been no independent scrutiny of these projects on the list and a good majority probably should not happen at this time and may never be needed.Former Rep. Kuisle certainly has extensive insight into the legislative process. He knows the games that bureaucrats & lobbyists play when their legislation is being debated. Here's what I call the 'Phony Bipartisanship section' of Sen. Murphy's LTE:
I am committed to developing a transportation funding package that will begin to address our state's growing transportation needs and encourage the governor's participation in this process. I'm obviously disappointed that he has chosen a hard-line stance rather than engaging in this critical discussion.How do you reach consensus with the legislature is determined to spend the surplus, then increase Minnesotans taxes? The DFL started with a radical budget. They ignored Gov. Pawlenty's budget, instead killing a number of his programs. Then they implemented their budget, which was dramatically larger & which required huge tax increases.
Let's remember that Sen. Murphy is the legislator who said " I'm not trying to fool anyone. There's lots of taxes in this bill." Sen. Murphy's definition of needs is likely substantially bigger than my definition of needs. I'd bet that Sen. Murphy's definition is substantially larger than King's definition based on this post:
If the roads are really "needed" -- and try defining need for me, Sen. Murphy, with something other than the statement of the people whose jobs depend on getting money to fulfill the "need" -- then our future income would be higher with the roads. Wouldn't it then make more sense for the people who will have higher income to pay off the bonds later rather than reduce the consumption and employment of the people who would pay for the roads now?If the choice is between trusting King or Sen. Murphy, I'll trust King every time.
Let's just hope that Gov. Pawlenty keeps dragging the DFL back to reality. Thus far, he's done a great job with that.
Posted Tuesday, May 8, 2007 4:04 AM
No comments.
Be Very Afraid; Be Very Very Afraid
Last night, I watched the videostream of the House floor session. It wasn't a pretty sight. By the time I started watching, they were debating the HHS bill. During the debate, Jim Abeler asked about a commission that hadn't met since it was created. Then Matt Dean talked about how this commission was loaded with single payer advocates. He mockingly asked what recommendation that commission would make. I think he gets his answer in this WC Trib article:
Huntley said this year's bill sets the stage for broader health care reform. "We need to, by next year, come back with a plan that changes the whole system," he said.TRANSLATION: Next year, we'll eliminate private health care & make it HillaryCare.
If you think I don't know what's happening, here's some facts from last night's debate of the HHS bill that support my theory:
Rep. Steve Gottwalt, R-St. Cloud, said that this HHS bill includes:
- $42 million to include adults who don't have children in the MinnesotaCare;
- $66 million on eliminating the eligibility verification for MinnesotaCare; and
- $14 eliminating MinnesotaCare premiums.
To hear the DFL talk about it, you'd think that we were abandoning children in droves. Based on Rep. Gottwalt's statistics, nothing is further from the truth. For all their hyperventilating, the DFL can't justify their HHS budget because they simply haven't proven that they're willing to exercise a modicum of restraint.
Based on this session's history, that isn't likely to change anytime soon. In fact, I'm convinced that the only thing that will stop their insanity is returning them to minority party status.
Posted Tuesday, May 8, 2007 4:08 PM
No comments.
