Skip to content

This am a day for dissing Perry

Like everyone else, I’m still laughing at Rick Perry’s debate blunder. Like fine wine, it gets better with age. But, in truth, it tells us little about the man, as it’s something that could happen to anyone. Well, maybe that’s not quite true, in that it was so obvious that he was parroting a poorly memorized talking point about which he truly cared not a whit. Truth be told, there probably would have been five agencies on the list if his handlers thought he could be trusted to remember them. Their mistake was to trust him to remember three.

What’s more instructive about this episode is the damage control methodology. It would be naive to think that anything Perry said the next day was not doped out in advance. Here is a sample of what we got: “This ain’t a day for quitting nothing

So, we have come to the point that Perry’s strategists have decided that the best way to deal with his gaffe is to double down on the stupid. Maybe in Texas stupidity sells. It sure looks that way from this vantage point and after all, Perry had his memory lapse in the middle of making a statement that, even had he completed it, would have been a monument to simplistic mentation (calling it “thinking” would dignify it too much). But I’m not sure that most of the country is looking for a president who talks like this guy:

Apparently the Republicans disagree, witness Karl Rove’s attacks on “Professor” Warren, the implication being that Massachusetts people share the Southern cracker dislike for learning.

Of course maybe I’m overthinking this. Perry began his classic brain fart by saying “It’s three agencies…”, rather than saying “There are three agencies” like a pointy headed liberals would have done. Maybe he’s not revealing his utter contempt of the American people by trying to appeal to anti-intellectualism. Maybe he’s just stupid.

The Republican Way

Well, last night was a pretty good night, nationally. Perhaps the most satisfying outcome was in Ohio, where the Unions overwhelmingly defeated the forces of evil. But, that victory, satisfying as it was, illustrates the fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans. After a shellacking like that Democrats would allow that the people have spoken, and never again would they broach the subject. The lesson they take from every defeat is that they should become more like Republicans. The idea of plugging on and changing the national conversation on the issue-the idea of not giving in, never occurs to them. The idea of unapologetically advocating for their principles has become foreign to them.

Not so the Republicans. When they lose, they claim its because they weren’t conservative enough, and then proceed to do whatever it takes, including ruining the economy, to get back into a position where they can advance their agenda. Consider Kasich’s reaction:

At a news conference Tuesday night, Mr. Kasich congratulated the winners and said he would assess the situation before proposing any new legislation. “It’s time to pause,” he said. “The people have spoken clearly.”

When asked about the people’s message, Mr. Kasich said, “They might have said it was too much too soon.”

So, they’ll be back. They always come back. We thought we beat back Social Security privatization in 2005, but they merely restrategized, co-opted a few more media outlets, and came back for more. The American Taliban couldn’t even sell their personhood Amendment to the brain dead in Mississippi, but they’ll be back, repackaged perhaps, but with the same poison in the new package. That’s politics the way it should be played. For Republicans there are no final defeats, but thanks to the way Democrats behave, for those same Republicans, there are lots of final victories. Sooner or later the Republicans will achieve their goal of rolling back the New Deal completely, leaving the lower 99 to make their own way in a Galtian paradise where the rich get richer and the poor get children.

For the Democrats it’s a bit different. Their motto: If at first you don’t succeed…., forget about it.

Could it be

Michelle Bachmann is calling Romney a “frugal socialist” and Ron Paul has let it be known that he’ll not be endorsing any Republican candidate that’s not him. I hereby encourage them both to take the next step and run as independents. Besides guaranteeing an Obama win, they could provide so much entertainment value. Should they run, Obama should insist that they be included in the debates.

Sometimes it only takes 51 votes

Why is it that I’m absolutely positive that it won’t take 60 votes to pass this:

Senate Set to Vote on Neutering Net Neutrality

Give Obama credit for threatening a veto; more if he follows through.

Occupy Wall Street takes to the air

In Defense of Mitt

This is a fun article at the Washington Monthly about the fact that Mitt Romney is now flip flopping on whether he has flip flopped. Steven Benen asks if Mitt Romney has any core beliefs at all, to which he gives the obvious answer: Yes, that Mitt Romney should be president.

But I come not to beat on Mitt, but to defend him.

There are two issues here; flip-flopping and core beliefs. Cleary Mitt is guilty of the former, and has none of the latter. But in neither is he alone. His flip flops draw attention because he has flipped so profoundly and so often on the major issues of the day. Most politicians stay away from flip flops on issues like abortion because it is in their own best interests to stand pat, in order to secure their own base. Mitt has had an unusual career, having made the mistake of starting off in a liberal state where his current positions would have left him bereft of votes. Thus we have flip flops on issues about which most politicians need never turn somersaults. But on the peripheral issues where we see flips all the time; you know, like torture, Guantanamo, civil liberties issues, etc., he flips no more or less often than other politicians we could name, though in truth he makes it worse by doing it so starkly.

As to core convictions, well here it is unclear that Mitt is any different than any run of the mill Washington politician. After three years of his presidency, I’m not sure I could identify even one of Obama’s core beliefs. Where he has stood pat, it is primarily because there have been no pressures of any importance pushing him to move. And Obama’s among the best. Core convictions, I would assert, tend to marginalize political players in Washington, or turn them into the butt of jokes. Mitt’s problem is that he is so bad at pretending that he believes anything. He is an utterly unconvincing actor, and after he wrests the Republican nomination from a very reluctant Republican party, he will have a lot of trouble convincing the broader electorate that they can believe anything he says. Not that they should…

So, pity poor Mitt.

Socialism Works

You don’t have to take my word for it. From the New York Times, discussing the second pathetic response by CL&P here in Connecticut to a storm and the resultant power outage:

There’s even a near-perfect model of how Connecticut Light and Power could have done the job better. Norwich, Conn., a city of 40,000, has owned its own electric utility, as well as those for sewage, gas and water, for 107 years. Norwich Public Utilities’ customers pay, on average, a bit less than Connecticut Light and Power’s. Yet after this past weekend’s snow dump, power was out for only about 450 of its 22,000 customers — and for no more than an hour. As of Thursday morning, nearly half a million Connecticut Light and Power customers were still waiting for the lights to go on.

That’s not luck, either. After Irene hit, just 13 percent of the city’s customers lost their power for more than a day. Within three days, the whole of Norwich had been restored. It took more than a week for Connecticut Light and Power to fully restore power.

That makes it seem odd that Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has tended to appear alongside Connecticut Light and Power’s Mr. Butler and to support the utility, even though far more customers lost power than should have and restoration proceeded too slowly. There’s solid numerical evidence to justify Mr. Malloy’s berating Connecticut Light and Power and calling for Mr. Butler’s head on behalf of the citizens of his state.

In contrast to Connecticut Light and Power, Norwich’s electric unit last year increased operations and maintenance spending by 11 percent, to $2.9 million. Put another way, in 2010 Norwich allocated about $132 a customer to this line item in its accounts. Connecticut Light and Power reported maintenance, unadjusted for deferred expenses, of $96.5 million, or around $78 per client.

It helps that the Norwich utilities are not slaves to the profit motive — though they hand 10 percent of gross revenue to the city. Last year, before paying this slice to the city, the electricity division made just a 3.6 percent operating profit margin on its $52.3 million of revenue. The Connecticut Light and Power division of Northeast, meanwhile, booked $3 billion of revenue last year and reported an operating margin nearly five times the size of Norwich’s. But it surely also helps that Norwich Public Utilities’ general manager, 12 linemen and five commissioners live in the community, drive the local roads, see the overhanging branches and bump into their customers at the Norwichtown Mall. That’s a rare kind of accountability.

Absent more help from the governor, the example of Norwich and similar municipally owned utilities in Groton and Wallingford, Connecticut communities fed up with the lights going out might consider emulating Boulder. Citizens of the Colorado college town this week voted to study a plan to buy back their local utility assets from a Minnesota-based mega-utility, Xcel Energy.

Unfortunately, not all of us in Groton enjoy the blessings of a publicly owned utility. Only the City of Groton gets electricity from Groton Utilities. We Town residents must make do with CL&P, though we are able to buy into Groton Utilities’ cable service in lieu of Comcast. I won’t start in on a rant about the Town/City dichotomy; that’s another subject and a case study in parochialism overcoming common sense.

There are several things that are signs that indicate that a particular service is better delivered by the state. Is it something that appears to be best done by a single source (the natural monopoly). Is it a service or product that is essential to life. That changes, of course, with the times, but nowadays I’d certainly include water, power, health care and internet in that classification. Is it something that requires very little innovation, considering the current state of the art. I wouldn’t want to let the government develop the operating system I use on my computer. We’d still be using the C prompt if that were the case. But there’s not really a whole lot of creativity necessary to run a utility company or a health insurance company. In fact, in the case of insurance, the less creativity the better. Better to stick with the actuarial tables and leave the derivatives, etc. to the gamblers on Wall Street. It’s also a fact that the very companies that deliver the goods and services better handled by the state are the least responsive to their customers.

One thing I should add. The comparison of CL&P in the recent storm, as opposed to Irene, is a bit unfair. I work in Norwich, and it got very little snow and therefore very little destruction. It would have been better for the Times to look at Wallingford’s performance in the recent storm. But the contrast for Irene was spot on, both for Norwich and Groton (City, not Town, alas). Each had almost 100% of its customers back on within a day.

Dog bites Man

I was absolute stunned when I read this headline in the Boston Globe (article culled by the Globe from the Washington Post):

Big corporations use loopholes to dodge taxes, report says

I simply can’t believe American corporations would do something like that. Shakes my faith in my fellow man.

Friday Night Music-The Hollies

Just returned from a pre-election get together/fundraiser at Groton headquarters, and have since been scrambling trying to find something to put up for this feature.

I don’t think I’ve done the Hollies before, but who knows.

I spent a bit of time researching to try to make sure that the lead singer on this version was the same one that actually sang on the hit single. That was Allan Clarke, Graham Nash having left to join a group there is no need to name. This recording was made in 1975 after, according to Wikipedia, Clarke had rejoined the group after having gone his separate way for awhile, and the voice certainly sounds right.

That period of the 70s was the period when it seemed it was de rigger for rock singers to perform bare chested. Anyway, it’s a good song.

Where’s Harry Truman when you need him?

A poll taken in Florida shows that 49% of the people there believe that Republicans are deliberately sabotaging the economy. This is an extraordinary statistic, because while this has been happening in plain sight, it has until very recently been considered impolite for our lords and masters who style themselves Democrats and/or pundits to take notice (Paul Krugman always excepted). That means, of course, that a distracted and anxious populace has come to the conclusion pretty much on their own.

Angry Black Lady at Balloon Juice, who wrote the post to which I’ve linked, has this to say:

Got that? Near­ly half the respon­dents, includ­ing 52 per­cent of inde­pen­dents and near­ly a quar­ter of Repub­li­cans believe that Repub­li­cans are sab­o­tag­ing the econ­o­my. If Repub­li­cans “stay the course,” those num­bers will only rise.
The ques­tion remains, how­ev­er, will vot­ers pun­ish Repub­li­cans for this behav­ior in the vot­ing booth?

Even more suc­cinct­ly, are vot­ers going to fuck up this elec­tion?

Well, maybe, but the voters are going to be faced with concrete choices in 2012, and with actual campaigns, which will choose what issues they care to stress. It’s not just voters that fuck up elections. If Harry Truman were in the White House we know what he would do with an issue like this, because it’s precisely what he did do in 1948. The question is whether the modern Democratic party, weighed down by its allegiance to Wall Street and its overall timidity, can push at this. If 49% of the people believe this unprompted, a little skillful campaigning ought to be able to push that to 60%, which ought, even given the American electorate and the incompetence of the Democrats, make for some surprises come November, if only the Democrats were willing to risk hurting Republican fee-fees.

That requires some action at the top, and that presents the question of whether Obama can convince the American people that he feels any sense of real urgency about this issue, assuming he’s willing to make and stick by the charge of deliberate sabotage. Maybe a “no more Mr. Nice Guy” line of attack against a do nothing Congress might do the trick, but can he really convince anyone, at this point, that he won’t revert to form once he’s safely re-elected? After all, he has to convince people that he not only disagrees with what the Republicans are doing, but that he will do something about it if he’s reelected. What evidence is there for that? And given the fact that the Democrats practically embrace their filibuster created impotence, why should anyone believe that voting Democratic will make any difference?

Still, it’s a splendid opportunity and it will be interesting to see how the Democrats throw it away.

Speaking of Harry, a musical bonus: