I just came back from an early morning deposition, and boy am I fired up. There are some aspects of being a lawyer that really get the blood pumping, and for some reason this deposition riled me up (in a good way). You feel like all of your senses are at full range, and your brain has all hands on deck. Hopefully everyone's profession has this ability to make you feel like a "full self" in some aspect of their performance, and I just thought I would share mine. Now, while I drink my coffee, listen to some classical music to cool my bloodlust, and ponder how I can still be at the top of my bracket pool with Kansas as Champs, let's get down to some links:
The Jets and the Sharks will be meeting at a grocery store and/or coffee shop near you.
The City that brought you Hairspray and Natty Boh is the "serious city" when it comes to Google.
Fascinating academic freedom issue with regard to a UMD Environmental Law Clinic suing Eastern Shore poultry farmers, and the legislature's decision to possibly withhold funding. This may not go easy with some of my readers, but I think we have courts to decide the merit of such actions. The legislature swinging their purse strings to force the law clinic out of this case is clearly in breach of the protections in place for academic freedom. Otherwise we are dancing into the dangerous territory of using the law school as a political tool of the legislature, that may be used to prosecute favorable causes at the expense of what Justice really is all about: the protection of the unfavorable and the minority. Whether it is "justice" to bring suit against chicken farmers is not for me, or the legislature to decide. And if it is just, what is the basis for withholding funding?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the measure to cut funding for legislator scholarships was offered by Senate Minority Leader Alan Kittleman. I think this is a brave move, by someone that has a lot to gain, as an incumbent, by keeping these scholarships in place and a lot to lose by taking this tool away from his fellow legislators. What I don't get is why Senator Kittleman did not get one mention in this entire piece by the Sun.
A local developer goes to war with the Archbishop, suggesting parishoners withhold contributions during mass until the Archbishop agrees to reconsider his decision to close local schools, include Cardinal Gibbons. Wow.
Very sad.
Today's Howard Section (still not online) has a piece on Ken Ulman's description of himself as a "conservative manager" [EDIT: As noted in the comments, Ulman does not refer to himself as a "conservative manager," but rather promotes his "conservative management." I find this a matter of semantics, but wanted to clarify.] Ken is welcome to describe his term however he wants, but I just don't see how "conservative" in any way applies to a term in which new government programs were created and we have fundamentally changed the master plan for downtown Columbia. Trent Kittleman's response is that there is a "spending mentality" that the county needs to get out of, but I think the unstated issue is "How much do you want your county to change, and how fast?" Conservative is a good friend of mine, Ken, and you, sir, are no conservative. Trent, by all appearances, is in favor of CB 58 & 59, but looks to scale back the creation and maintenance of new government programs, that will over-extend our budget, and make anticipated revenue cuts all the more painful to endure. We still have a $13 million shortfall that has not been addressed. We have debt maintance costs that could certainly be lessened. I would invite Trent to develop these ideas, specifically with respect to what spending she would cut, to provide a response to what appears to be the Ulman campaign slogan of "Look how well I maintained the status quo...considering the downturn that no one could have ever planned for."
Later in that same piece, the Dems take some pot-shots at Delegates Miller & Bates, calling them "obstructionist" and "out of line with Howard County and this district." There was no particular vote cited, but presumably the "R" next to their names was enough to substatiate this assertion by the reporter taking these statements. In that same piece, these same Dems say that Howard County is centrist. Well, let's do some political math, if Howard County is centrist, why would we ever want to pull two Republican delegates that provide balance to Annapolis, advocate for economic development and lower taxes, and stand up against the kind of spending that put us $1 billion at odds with state revenue? Do we become more centrist by electing Democrats to fill those seats?
Larry Carson lets us know how he really feels about John Bailey: "Bailey, a Montgomery County history teacher and until now a seemingly enthusiastic Republican, says he's really a centrist at heart 'trying to bring in more moderates." Surprisingly, Joan Becker was quoted as taking a hard stance on Bailey: " 'When you do things for political reasons, you're not well received. ... He's on his own right now.'" Furthermore, she says another Republican will run in the district against Bailey, should he win the Democratic primary. That's meaner than what Liz Bobbo had to say "'I don't know what to make of it.'" I have no idea who the prospective 12B GOP Candidate may be, but I will tell you, Joan, and that prospective candidate, that John has a good deal of Republican support no matter what the Central Committee's position may be.
Freemarket makes the federalist case for the legalization of marijuana.
Hedgehog covers an e-mail sent out by TAG yesterday regarding the stratification of those approached by the referendum gatherers. Hand tremors are nothing to joke about, but they also are nothing to list as a reason for not signing a petition. Instead, I think everyone would be much more interested in knowing how many signatures have been gathered. I believe "transparency" is a goal we all can strive for.
Dear HowChow, I think you need to consider the fact that most of us care more about what you say than what the Baltimore Sun says. I know my wife and I do.
Wordbones catches some rays.
That is all for now. Morning links are so much easier when I'm not staring at the clock saying "I need to get to work before 8:30!!" I'm quite certain I have provided more than enough to raise the blood pressure of some of you readers, so let's have a fun Saturday of bickering, shall we?
You misread the article about Ulman, assuming it didn't change before going online this morning. He doesn't describe himself as "conservative manager", as you say. Rather, as mentioned in the story, he was reading a quote from one of the ratings agencies.
ReplyDeleteThis is from a county press release from last month about the AAA rating: "Moody’s reported that the, 'Conservative management and comprehensive policies position the County to manage through near-term budgetary pressures.'"
Here's the link to the press release -- http://howardcountymd.gov/News/News_20100216.htm
"Conservative management" are Moody's words, not his.
Also, what new government programs were started as a result of the downtown Columbia legislation? I know you're generally supportive of TAG, but they're not complaining about "giveways" in the form of government programs. The "giveways" they're complaining about are zoning entitlements.
Politics, unfortunately, is all about generalities. Governing requires details. It would be nice to hear from those seeking to govern -- and those promoting their candidacy -- some specifics about their approach.
Thanks for the comment. I've edited accordingly. However, I do think promoting his "conservative management" is a semantic stone's throw from "conservative manager." Always attempting to meet the "low bar of respectability" for blogs, I noted the difference.
ReplyDeleteFrankly I'm sick of people saying that because I don't dismiss TAG or CCD as looneys that I am somehow a "supporter." As long as we're taking a magnifying glass to language, I said "new government programs were created AND we have fundamentally changed the master plan for downtown Columbia." I never said the redevelopment resulted in new government programs. I also never said anything in the article suggesting the redevelopment was bad. I just said it was not "conservative." If I was Ulman's PR guy (wink) I would be promoting phrases like "dynamic growth" or "confident steps into the future." Moody's can write what they want, but, as noted in an earlier post, Moody's had Lehman Bros at A1 in June of 08. Lehman was bankrupt by September.
I would love greater detail from challengers, but I also understand that they don't have access to the same data as our electeds. That doesn't give them carte blanche to throw mud, but I don't think we can slam them for not having specifics.