12/30/2005
Tussing and Volek
by Matt Singer on 3:55 pm.
David Crisp aptly summarizes the issues in my dad’s Tussing opinion. Humorously, his commenters have some rather bizarre commentary. First, an anonymous commenter offers to funnel $10,000 in inkind contributions to Tussing backers in the ‘07 elections. Even if contributing to a candidate in each ward, no one would be allowed to give even $1,000. The contribution cap is $130. This person may be looking to do independent expenditures. That would be a better idea if they want to, you know, follow the law.
Next, another anonymous commenter thinks that my father has “render[ed] the ‘employee’ argument completely irrelevant.” My father did no such thing. He actually wrote that he believed filing for elective office likely amounted to seeking employment, something Mayor-Elect Tussing agreed to not do. However, as he makes it clear, legal action at this point is 50-50 (and damn expensive) at best because of a 9th Circuit ruling holding a right to run for office. There is no such right. If such a right arises under the 14th Amendment, I’m running for President. He did note that voiding this agreement would also likely lead to reinstatement of Tussing as police chief.
The problem with reading my father’s report to your own liking is that he really did look at the law and offer sound legal advice, which often tends to be of the six of one, half-dozen of the other variety.
I think Crisp should feel fine patting himself on the back.
| Comments (0) | Permanent Link | Categories: montucky |
Douché
by Matt Singer on 3:46 pm.
Today’s GOP E-Brief is out and they are idiots. Why would I say that? This is one of their headlines:
Baucus as guilty as Rehberg, BurnsAlso, the GOP muses about Lindeen’s nat’l security cred:
By the way, where does Lindeen stand on fighting terrorism?She probably stands upright, unlike Representative Fall Off His Horse.
| Comments (18) | Permanent Link | Categories: gop e-brief watch, republicans |
Our President Breaks the Law…
by Gerik on 12:46 pm.
…and the Justice Department looks for the leak that brought his feet to the fire! This has got to be the ultimate spin. We have a paper tiger chasing its media tail here and the VRWC gets a story about leaking classified NSA operations to the press.Â
Lets be clear. I think it is inappropriate that the whistleblower in this case is being showcased in the press as under investigation. Granted the story pays lip service to the broader context of this illegal wiretapping scheme, but it looks like the White House is off and running with an investigation that is meant to distract us from the issue at hand.Â
Now the reason this is a problem to me is twofold. First, the NSA wiretaps are illegal. Second, our chief executive has confirmed and discussed the wiretaps publicly. Now correct me if I am wrong, but if public scrutiny regarding this issue is unacceptable and serves as a threat to national security why on earth would the adminstration acknowledge the wiretaps? And why on earth is an investigation of the leak relevant? Its not. What is relevant is that W. and his team of crackpots broke the law. I hope Arlen Specter serves up a dose of justice in his new year investigation that includes impeachment.
| Comments (9) | Permanent Link | Categories: illegal wiretapping, overreach, republicans |
Tax Policy and Lazy Reporting
by Matt Singer on 10:24 am.
Sirota highlights a move by the Schweitzer Administration to treat non-residents the same as residents for capital gains purposes in Montana, a move that will increase revenue in Montana without directly impacting Montanans.
Unfortunately, the Charles Johnson article he points to isn’t exactly helpful. The opening paragraph summarizes that a number of business interests are expressing outrage at the rule change, followed by 6 paragraphs of various spokespeople attacking the rule.
Finally, in the 8th paragraph, the revenue director responds, saying that the rule change is simply the proper implementation of a law passed in 2001.
Then, Johnson goes on to describe the type of property transfers being affected.
Now, that’s all good and well and Johnson does a good job of explaining the property deals that will be impacted for those interested enough to read to the end.
But the opening of this article is awful he-said, she-said reporting. Even worse, it devotes seven straight paragraphs to one side of the issue and only one to the other and then makes absolutely no effort to explain the 2001 law being used to defend this rule change.
What did the law say? Is it really clear and unambiguous? The chairman of the Senate Taxation Committee is endorsing this rule change and Jim Elliott is usually a pretty sharp (and pretty process oriented) character. I think he’d have a problem with usurpation of legislative authority.
But not only does Johnson fail to pass judgment on the claims being made by the two sides, he fails to provide anywhere close to the amount of information needed for citizens to pass judgment. I have no idea what to think about this issue. I’ll be dropping a line to the Department of Revenue to find out more.
Original reporting about tax policy. That’s what keeps my readers coming back.
| Comments (2) | Permanent Link | Categories: montucky, taxes |
L’Affaire Tussing Over?
by Matt Singer on 10:11 am.
My dad has offered his take to the city on what should be done about Tussing. I think his stance makes sense. I think Ron Tussing basically did violate the spirit and possibly the letter of that agreement. A lawsuit now, though, is an uphill fight for the city and a sure way to only spend more public money.
That said, I’m hardly an expert in this matter, nor am I a lawyer. Most amusing to me in this process has been watching people approach my father and give him advice as to what he should do and how he should advise the council. Typically, these were people who hadn’t even begun to read the case law or possibly even the settlement agreement.
Of course, most people are legal pragmatists, which is why I think it may be correct that it is bad politics for Democrats to assail the President for spying on Americans without warrants. That said, I still think standing up for the rule of law is the right approach in principle and should be done.
| Comments (0) | Permanent Link | Categories: montucky |
12/29/2005
Fork John Kerry
by Matt Singer on 5:06 pm.
Bob Brigham takes a look at how Kerry is using the money and emails he collected in the name of defeating Bush: by furthering his own stature in the Senate.
He’s specifically raising money for one relatively safe incumbent (Maria Cantwell) and one very safe incumbent (Debbie Stabenow). Somehow, I think this positioning just may have something to do with the relatively early contests in Washington and Michigan.
All I know is that at the beginning of this year some foolish Kerry advisors apparently thought their problem was keeping their 2.7 million campaign email list united around their guy. Look, folks, Kerry had his chance. He wasn’t robbed like Gore. He didn’t come close. He ran against the worst President in history and lost.
A little accountability would be nice. I’m not saying kick him out of the Senate. Kerry is a great Senator. Hell, he probably would have been a decent President. But running him again for President and hoping that he’ll win?
Right. That sounds like the definition of insanity to me.
| Comments (16) | Permanent Link | Categories: '08 |
I Doubt This Happened, but
by Matt Singer on 4:56 pm.
did Mike Dennison misquote Charles Johnson in this story. And did Johnson, Dennison’s boss, get to look it over before it went to press?
| Comments (0) | Permanent Link | Categories: cultural |
“The Last Best Place”
by Gerik on 3:29 pm.
David Lipson has the trademark. Courtney Lowery has the story. What do you think? What do William Kittredge and Annick Smith think?
| Comments (2) | Permanent Link | Categories: general |
Upgraded to 2.0
by Matt Singer on 12:30 pm.
I’ve upgraded this site to 2.0. Most of the changes appear to be in the back-end, but they are nice improvements.
All in all, I’m pretty impressed.
| Comments (0) | Permanent Link | Categories: general |
New WordPress
by Matt Singer on 10:32 am.
This site is using WordPress software in its 1.5 release. WordPress 2.0 was apparently just released. I can’t find a list of upgrades and changes, though. The changes between 1.0 and 1.5 were pretty significant.
Is there anything in particular to make this upgrade worthwhile?
| Comments (0) | Permanent Link | Categories: general |
Physician, Heal Thyself!
by Matt Singer on 10:29 am.
While you’re at it, heal your damn strawman, too.
Honestly, the Independent Record harping about blogs is hilarious.
Pogie grabs this quote:
For the most part, I just don’t get blogs. They make sense in certain scenarios, but when it comes to your average Joe blog — “Today, I fed the cat. Then, I made coffee.†— who wants to write them and who wants to read them?Where the hell are these average Joe blogs?
I don’t read them. And that’s not just because I limit my blog reading largely to political blogs. The non-political blogs I read also tend to be more than Bob Graham style diaries.
Traditional media idiots.
| Comments (1) | Permanent Link | Categories: general |
Mini Hiatus
by Matt Singer on 10:15 am.
Blogging will continue to be light as I pull together some disparate threads at the end of this year. Discussions in comments continue to be lively, so that’s good.
I’m making both a bit of a job change and geography change soon. With those, I’ll also be changing my blogging up a bit (and may be writing in a few other locations as well soon).
Regardless, hope the holidays find all of you well and consider this an open thread.
| Comments (11) | Permanent Link | Categories: general |
12/28/2005
Server Status
by Matt Singer on 11:24 am.
I think my hosting provider is acting up a bit, so emails are taking a while to get through and access to the site may be a bit patchy.
| Comments (1) | Permanent Link | Categories: general |
Billings Readers Check It Out
by Matt Singer on 10:04 am.
Billings blogger Mike Erickson got a nice Gazette writeup on his Computers4Kids program. His cancer is also in remission. Sounds like a great holiday for Mike. Good.
| Comments (1) | Permanent Link | Categories: general |
Jeebus
by Matt Singer on 10:01 am.
Kurdish leaders have inserted more than 10,000 of their militia members into Iraqi army divisions in northern Iraq to lay the groundwork to swarm south, seize the oil-rich city of Kirkuk and possibly half of Mosul, Iraq’s third-largest city, and secure the borders of an independent Kurdistan.U.S. leaders are saying that these soldiers are following orders adequately, giving them little reason for concern.Five days of interviews with Kurdish leaders and troops in the region suggest that U.S. plans to bring unity to Iraq before withdrawing American troops by training and equipping a national army aren’t gaining traction. Instead, some troops who are formally under U.S. and Iraqi national command are preparing to protect territory and ethnic and religious interests in the event of Iraq’s fragmentation, which many of them think is inevitable.
The soldiers said that while they wore Iraqi army uniforms they still considered themselves members of the Peshmerga — the Kurdish militia — and were awaiting orders from Kurdish leaders to break ranks. Many said they wouldn’t hesitate to kill their Iraqi army comrades, especially Arabs, if a fight for an independent Kurdistan erupted.
Of course, if I was dealing with a foreign presence preventing me from splitting off and the best way to get them to leave was to demonstrate competence and feign loyalty, I think I just might do it, too.
Worth noting, I’m not surprised by this development because I think it is necessarily awful. Frankly, I think having an independent Kurdistan may be the best we’ll get out of this mess. I’m surprised because of how frank the Kurdish officials are about their intentions, with several Iraqi soldiers willing to go on the record regarding their willingness to start a civil war and kill their fellow soldiers who are Arab.
Historically, Knight Ridder has done some amazing journalism in Iraq. It looks like they may have nailed another story.
| Comments (3) | Permanent Link | Categories: foreign |
12/27/2005
Not Every Day
by Matt Singer on 3:35 pm.
That I find myself in agreement with Thomas Sowell, but I have to say that I think he may be on to something here. He’s calling for increasing Congressional pay to $1 million per year to simply remove the incentive for bribery. I’ve got a different idea. How about we give $1 million per year salaries to candidates who accept public financing for Congress?
The truth is that $535 million per year for Congressional salaries and an additional $500 million or so for public financing would have incredible long term savings as lobbyists find fewer and fewer politicians suckling at their teats.
Of course, a better solution would be to find some candidates with integrity.
Heh. Right.
| Comments (3) | Permanent Link | Categories: political |
Meth Ads as Trigger
by Matt Singer on 12:10 pm.
I was talking to someone recently who fed me a little information about the meth ads currently playing in Montana. Apparently patients in rehab who see the ads are finding them to be triggers. In other words, among people already on meth, the ads are likely to continue the addiction.
I honestly found the same impact from many of the “anti-smoking” PSAs run by tobacco companies when I was a smoker. I thought it was pretty funny that the tobacco corporations had been “forced” into running them in that legal settlement. In other words, they had the government force them to resume TV advertising. Brilliant.
I’ve also heard that brain function drops hugely for people quitting meth at first and doesn’t recover fully for two-and-a-half years. That’s a damn tough recovery period.
| Comments (8) | Permanent Link | Categories: general |
12/26/2005
Back wha?
by Matt Singer on 9:58 am.
The Gazette has a headline this morning titled “Montanans back Alito confirmation” that goes on to tell us that 45% of Montanans support Alito’s confirmation with 38% undecided. Now, this is a tough sort of poll to summarize in a headline, but it seems to me that 45% support is hardly backing, unless Montanans are also “backing” Bush right now, since he clocks in at 47% approval in Montana.
Now, it’s true that the confirm-don’t confirm numbers lean in Alito’s favor, pretty favorably. But it also appears to me that the support is soft with many Montanans thinking they don’t know enough to make up their minds yet. “Montanans lean in favor of Alito” or “Few Montanans Oppose Alito” both strike me as better poll summaries.
But, hey, what do I know?
| Comments (13) | Permanent Link | Categories: general |
12/23/2005
Happy Holidays
by Matt Singer on 11:22 am.
Tomorrow, as part of my personal war on Christmas, I’ll be eating pasties with the family and exchanging gifts.
The day after, I’ll extend this by eating turkey with other members of my family and more gift-giving.
Pretty heinous I know.
Merry Christmas to y’all who celebrate it.
Happy Hannukah to y’all who celebrate it.
If I’ve got any readers who celebrate Kwanzaa, a Joyous Kwanzaa to you, too.
And to my Canadian and British readers, enjoy Boxing Day.
I’m probably done blogging for the day.
Have a good one.
| Comments (14) | Permanent Link | Categories: general |
Read This
by Matt Singer on 10:47 am.
Mike has some round-up thoughts on the Israel discussion. I think I agree with almost all of it. I angered Mike here by expressing some disappointment with his choice of terms in discussing Montana’s Native population. Fair enough. I didn’t make those comments to please him. He still is an honest, decent guy. I disagree with Tony on that front. On that note, I’ll still continue to read both of them.
As for Mike’s contention that the “Palestinian” cause in America is typically a way of cloaking anti-Semitism. I’d agree with two caveats. First, I think the tendency for criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism to be similar veins is far more common in places with smaller Jewish populations. I’ve met several Jews from New York quite critical of Israel who are still concerned about the manner in which critics of Israel discuss the issue here in Montana (and in Eastern Washington).
Quite understandable.
The second caveat is that it is worth remembering that Semitic does not mean Jewish. The Palestinians are also Semitic. And I do think it is worth remembering that their cause is not also worth sympathy.
I truly believe that most of the people on both sides of this issue in the Middle East are good people. It’s simply that on the Palestinian side, there are those who really would look to recreate the Holocaust. And on Israel’s side, I think there are also some who would not shed tears if the Palestinians were to disappear tomorrow.
It is a recipe for tragedy.
Update — Some clarification in the comments.
| Comments (28) | Permanent Link | Categories: foreign |
