Just Say No

The Racine Redevelopment Authority delayed a decision on an 18 month option request by Brent Oglesby concerning city owned property at State and Silver Streets, very near to the proposed KRM stop. This decision should be very easy folks - deny this request outright. Read JT article Here

The property in question may soon increase in value if KRM becomes a reality. Brent Oglesby will then be allowed to buy the property at the pre-KRM price and essentially pocket the difference. I see no benefit to taxpayers here. What's more, Brent Oglesby is a member of the Racine City Plan Commission, ie, he is an insider and this gift to him would certainly not look good. And lastly, on what basis would the city think that Oglesby would be able to pull off a major development project? He has no financing and no experience in property development. Additionally, what the article fails to mention is that Oglesby does have business experience. He has had two business failures in Racine, a restaurant (I liked his food) and a newspaper .

I suspect that Oglesby would probably walk if KRM doeasn't materialize. And if KRM does happen, he would be in a great position to cut a deal or be bought out by an actual developer. This would be a sweet deal for Oglesby and a raw deal for Racine taxpayers.

I can't blame Oglseby for trying. Perhaps I will put in a similar request. I have a property company already and I have some development experience.

Debate Challenge for Racine Aldermen

I happen to know that several Racine aldermen read Free Racine. Alderman Helding and Alderman Maack have even commented on the site. So I know they are out there.

What perplexes me is a reluctance on the part of Racine aldermen to publicly defend policies that they voted for and presumably support. For example, I have criticized the city council for a liquor licensing policy that discriminates against black drinkers. Also, I have stated that the city's UNIT (Unified Neighborhood Inspection Team) practice of relabling a fine as a fee deprives citizens of a constitutional right to defend themselves in court.

These are serious charges. If I were on the city council, I would take any such charges seriously - as I would have taken an oath to defend the constitution. If the charges were meritless, I would provide my reasons for concluding so. If the charges had merit, I would introduce legislation to correct the problem. Ignoring the charges alltogether demonstrates a lack of seriousness and or a lack of political courage.

I hereby challenge any and all Racine Alderman to an online debate about either or both of the concerns that I have brought forward.

Election Musings

A few friends of mine were musing the other day about election opponents for John Lehman or Bob Turner. I was not there but my name came up as a potential opponent of Bob Turner. And it was quickly detirmined that in liberal Racine I had no chance of winning, at which time they began considering a moderate Democrat for the task.

Now I happen to agree with my friend's assessment of my chances of winning, being slim to none. Their assessment was that I was too far to the right - not for them - but for Racine voters.

I am a bit of a radical, I will admit. But what am I radical about? I am radically in favor of freedom and radically opposed to those things that threaten our freedoms.

Does this make me unelectable in Racine? Perhaps so. Should I moderate my views on freedom to appeal to a wider audience? Sure, if I want to live a life as a political slut. No thanks.

Support Slipping Silently

Liberals and conservatives alike know that I like to talk politics. Hardly a day went by without somebody pointing out what a boob President Bush was at the time.

I realized yesterday that no liberals are talking to me about President Obama. None. The subject never comes up. Never.

I heard all the time during the election that he was going to be a great president. I think I would be hearing from liberals if they were pleased with Obama thus far. But I hear nothing.

I wonder if support for Obama is silently slipping among liberals. I suspect that it would be a bit of an embarrassment to admit as much to a conservative. Liberals have invested heavily, psychologically and otherwise, in Obama. It is going to be a hard fall.

Elephant in the Alcohol Licensing Committee

I can't say I am terribly surprised that the Chuns were denied a beer license for their would be convenient store. The city's effort to transform Sixth St into an artist haven has failed miserably. A few art shops have moved from 6th to Main Street and those that remain on 6th appear to be on life support. Meanwhile, 6th has been slowly becoming a night life destination, especially with the opening of Park 6. And with that has come problems.

So it was not surprising that the only significant opposition to the beer license came from a handful of merchants and shopkeepers. No doubt they have been affected by misbehaving bar patrons and they have had enough.

But I believe that there is more to their opposition than this. I strongly suspect that the perception, if not the reality, is that Park 6 customers are primarily responsible for an increase in obnoxious behavior. And for those of you that are not familiar with Park 6, it is a dance club that, on weekend nights at least, is packed with black people.

Now just to be very clear, I am NOT suggesting that opponents of the Chuns are racists. What I am suggesting is that there may well exist a correlation between black people/alcohol/dance music and misbehavior that is significantly higher than, say, a correlation between octogenarians/tea/bingo and misbehavior. So the merchants are trying to prevent badly behaving people from coming in to the neighborhood. It just so happens that they worried that the future customers of the Chuns would be of the troublemaking variety, like they see in Park 6 customers.

I have been to numerous alcohol licensing meetings and it is quite amusing to watch. Would be applicants must talk in code. They say things like "Ours will be a high end establishment. We won't become a hip hop club" or "We won't sell 40 ounce cans of Malt Liquor." I wish one of them would come out and tell the committee exactly what the committee seemingly wants to hear, something like "You can be damned sure that I will actively discourage young black people from entering my establishment."

The problem I have with the alcohol licensing process is that, in an attempt to preempt problems, the city in effect quietly discriminates against a whole goup of people, in this case young black people. And while there is arguably a strong correlation between dance clubs and misbehavior, it is entirely unfair to the majority of black people who go to clubs and who behave themselves.

Rather than discriminate against young black people who like to drink beer or listen to rap music, the city should instead focus on the smaller group of people, whatever their color, that misbehave. Let people drink beer and listen to music. And let us also lower our tolerance for bad behavior.

Action Alert

Sometimes our problems are so big (wars, health care, recessions etc...) and the deciders so far removed from our lives that it seems that their is little if anything we can do.

This is one reason I am attracted to local issues. You might know the players involved, you can call your alderman and there is a good chance he will return your call, you can speak before the city council etc... In other words, you can have an impact.

On Monday August 10th, you can can do something. A wonderful family from Barrington Illinois want to relocate to Racine to open a convenient store on 6th street in downtown Racine. They will be unable to open the store without approval from the city to sell prepackaged beer. They will be before the licensing committee at city hall at 5 pm on Monday August 10th and they need support from everyday people in the Racine area.

There will be opposition. Certainly there is a correlation between excessive alcohol consumption and various social ills. In downtown Racine on any given weekend there are serious problems that require frequent police intervention. So there is a fair amount of pressure on public officials to curb the sale of alcohol in Racine.

On the other hand, any honest observer of downtown alcohol fueled problems will realize that the problems are coming from the bars, not the few establishments that sell prepackaged beer. In the last few years downtown has lost the Century Market and Brauns liquors, neither of which contributed to any problems downtown.

So the gist of the problem here is that future sellers of packaged alcohol, like the Chun family from Illinois, may now have to pay the price for the problems created by current irresponsible bar owners and patrons. This would be most unfair and I dare say unAmerican insofar as decent upstanding citizens will be barred from starting their own business here in Racine. And we do need new businesses in Racine.

I know, this is a small matter that barely affects you or me. But there is an important principle at stake, namely that law abiding citizens ought to be able to open a business and sell a legal product.

You may have no ability whatsoever to affect the health care debate or influence policy in Iraq, but you could help a decent hard working family relocate and invest in Racine. A few words of support for the Chun family on Monday August 10th, 5 pm at city hall will go a long way.

Unconstitutional Neighborhood Inspection Team

I received a bill from the City of Racine the other day. I was being charged $100 for an inspection of my property and $87 or so for labor and administration for the removal of materials from my property. I called up the UNIT (Unified Neighborhood Inspection Team) to find out what this was all about. The gentleman on the phone looked at my file, and then described the materials and their location - on a fresh slab of concrete. I told him that the fresh slab of concrete was not my property and would they please remove the charges against me. He told me that the UNIT inspector would get back to me. A day or so later there was a message for me on my answering machine at work desribing the process for contesting the charges - I needed to write a letter to the head of Public Works to plead my case.

There are a few things wrong with this. First there is the presumption of guilt. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Then of course it is up to me to prove my innocence by appealing to the same branch of government (executive) that is charging me. Whatever happened to separation of powers? What about the right to a fair trial?

UNIT may be very effective in cleaning up neighborhoods, but they still need to be constrained by our constitution. So while I am a bit perturbed by the mistake made by UNIT, I place the blame squarely with our elected alderman and mayor. Why? Because they knowingly put in place a program that violates the constitutional rights of Racine citizens. And they have all sworn to uphold the constitution.

Facts Be Damned

The JT weighs in on the Harvard professor/Cambridge cop flap today. You can read it here.

After some common sense suggestions such as "know the facts" and "words have consequences" the JT shifted gears and wrote "Did Gates react strongly because he thought he was being targeted, was just another black man denied simple respect in a nation with a history of poor race relations, especially where police are concerned? Had the police officer already seen enough obnoxious citizens that day, and was he running low on patience, even though he appears to otherwise be an exemplar of good race relations?"

So after lecturing the president regarding the facts, the JT then enters pure speculation mode. Notice the speculation involves putting the professor in the best possible light, that he "was just another black man denied simple respect etc..." Are there any facts to support this? No, the known facts suggest otherwise.

And again, the JT speculates about the cop, a good guy that was having a bad day and lost his patience. Notice that this puts the cop in a poor light on the day in question. Is there any evidence to support this? No.

The JT concludes with "perhaps this will become the genesis for an honest re-examination of police race relations instead of a recitation of old stereotypes."

Right. The JT, in contradiction of the known facts, makes up a scenerio that includes the old stereotype of the cop having a bad day and taking it out on the oppressed minority. And then they have the nerve to call for a re-examination of old stereotypes.

Helding for Socialized Health Care

I have to take issue with Greg Helding with such regularity that I am concerned that he might think its personal. It isn't personal Greg. It is all about policy. The following quote is from the Racine Post article on a local health care forum. Read it all here

Alderman Greg Helding (above) discussed the potential impact of health care reform on the local level. Helding estimated 20 percent of the city's budget pays for employees' health care. Switching to a single-payer system that charges an 8 percent payroll tax would save the city millions of dollars it could use for additional street maintenance and city services, like police.

This year alone the city is expecting an 11 percent increase in its health care costs, Helding said. Over time health care costs could grow to 10 times the amount of the city's property tax levy, a number that is simply unsustainable, he said.

"(Health care) costs us a lot of money and it's increasing rapidly," Helding said.

Greg has it partly right. We are spending a ton on medical care for city employees. My guess is the reason for that is that virtually everything is covered ( viagra etc...), there is little co-pay or employee contribution towards premiums etc... Thus we have created incentives for employees to overuse the health care system since others are paying the bill. Of course this is a recipe for the financial disaster that is looming in Racine and no doubt elsewhere. But Greg Helding thinks that nationalizing the idea that is bankrupting Racine would be a good idea.

Not a good idea. Our local politicians over the years have offered benifits to municipal employees that are now obviously unsustainable. Faced with this looming disaster that they created, they now want to foist the bill on to federal government/taxpayers. The problem of course is that every local or state government entity that has been irresponsible will be doing the same. Not sure how any savings will miraculously appear out of such a maneuver.

Customer Always Wrong at Jimmie Johns

I normally don't write negative posts about local businesses, but I am going to make an exception here. Today I went to buy a couple of turkey sandwiches from the Jimmie Johns at Highways 31 and 20. My son wanted only turkey and lettuce while my wife wanted turkey with everything. They had a sub that was a bit cheaper that included just meat and cheese. I asked if I could substitute lettuce for the cheese. No I could not. This seemed kind of odd and slightly annoying. Fine, just turkey then and the turkey with everything. So the employee starts making the turkey with everything and he puts gobs of lettuce on it. I stopped him and asked if he could take that lettuce and put it on the other sub. No, he couldn't. Now I am getting seriously annoyed. This kid wouldn't take five seconds to scoop the lettuce off one sub and put it on the other, but I could order a side of lettuce. So I walked out and took my business to the Cousins Subs down the street. An employee on break outside the Jimmie Johns said that this was their policy. This seems extremely odd to me, but if it is indeed their policy, my policy will be to shop elsewhere.

Dickert Sighting Update

Not exactly earth shattering news here but in a follow up to a previous post it now turns out that Mayor Dickert did visit my store last week. And what's more, I was in the store at the time. I was in my office but the mayor opted not to have my employee call me from my office. Perhaps he thought I was working and didn't want to interrupt. Or perhaps he had another reason for visiting besides talking to me. I have no idea. All I know is that I have been hoping to meet with him about ideas for improving the city but have had no luck.

JT Welcomes Crude Sexual Insults

The Journal Times, following the lead of the Racine Post, is now accepting the use of the term "tea baggers" in its letters to the editor. Serial letter writer Earl Christianson used the term today in describing a person who introduced him as a socialist.

Anyway, to the best of my knowledge, teabagging involves, er, scrotum and face contact - sorry readers and there goes my pg rating.

Now again, to the best of my knowledge, the political rallies that generally involved protest against excessive government spending did not, I repeat NOT, involve any scrotum and face contact.

It has been a while since I have attended any left leaning political parties but I suppose it is now permissible to suggest, in crude detail, all manner of sexual activities that occur there. Just not on my site please. But by all means share your crude thoughts with the Journal Times.

Got Plans?

Subject: Communication from the Director of the Racine County
Planning and Development Department and the Principal Planner for
the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission
transmitting to the City of Racine for formal consideration of the Draft
Multi-Jurisdictional Comprehensive Plan For Racine County.

Got that? Planners plan to announce their plans tonight to planners who no doubt will plan some planning meetings to consider the plan. It is tonight at the city council meeting. I can't attend the meeting as I already have plans.

Call Me

I called Mayor Dickert a month or so ago, shortly after he took office. I had hoped to speak with the mayor about a range of issues, mostly relating to economic development. The mayor was out of town, I was told, attending conferences etc... and he would get back to me. Fine, I thought, we have a new mayor, everyone wants his ear, he is busy. A few weeks later I left a message asking if I might be able to set up an appointment with the mayor. A week or so passed when I received a call from a gentleman from the mayors office who apologized and chalked up the mistake to inexperience. The mayor was out of town with family and he would get back to me soon. A few more weeks have now passed and I have yet to hear from the mayor or his office. I could call again but then I would feel like a stalker.

I am not all that keen on private meetings with public officials anyway, so I will share with readers some of what I had hoped to discuss. There was a businessman interested in purchasing a prominent (and empty) downtown building. He wanted to renovate it and had talked to me several times about my own experiences in rehabbing a downtown building. Like any sensible person risking his own money, he was exploring said risks, some of which involve the city and their approach/attitude toward development. I thought it might be wise for him to meet with Mayor Dickert. Of course no meeting with Mayor Dickert took place, the building was not purchased, I haven't heard from the businessman and I now wonder what might have been. Presently I am trying to help another family start their business in downtown but the game is rigged such that his venture is now entirely dependent on approval by our politicians. I am referring to the Chun family who hope to move to Racine and open a convenient store that also sells beer.

Meanwhile, news is that the mayor is busy attending conferences and hoping to bring businesses to Racine. That is all well and good I suppose, so long as some time remains, to return calls from the businesses that already exist, and to meet with folks eager to open businesses in Racine.

Equality Extremism on the Left

I have been arguing a bit with Kay and her pals over at Kay's Blue Racine. Initially I took Kay to task for insinuating that Van Wanggaard is a white supremicist because he used the Norwegian word for "welcome" on his campaign web site. Anyway, the discussion gradually came around to campaign financing and of course they all want public campaigns. But if you are going to level the money/financial support aspect of campaigns, why stop there? Make a law ensuring that each campaign gets an equal number of public campaign workers, working equal numbers of hours on identical campaign strategies. Of course, to be fair we need equal amounts of positive and negative press stories. There goes freedom of the press. But if we really want fairness, we need to ensure that each candidate gets equal numbers of votes...

But doesn't all this equality undermine the whole point of elections, which are contests to detirmine the inequality of support between prospective candidates?

Free Racine/LiberTEA Racine Social Gathering

All are welcome on Friday July 24th to the third annual Free Racine social event. And since there is considerable overlap between Free Racine and the goals of LiberTEA Racine, what the heck, let's combine the two for an evening. I will be a guest bartender at Asiana, one of my favorite restaurants downtown, on the evening of the 24th. Asiana is located at 423 6th Street in downtown Racine. Among the attendees, I hope, will be the Chun family, who are hoping to get a beer license for their prospective pantry to be located accross from Asiana. As you may know, LiberTea Racine has agreed to help the Chuns get their license and we may need your help. Anyway, the purpose of the evening will be to fill Asiana with customers, to fill yourself with excellent food and drink, to fulfill the goals of LiberTEA Racine, and to get your fill of me for another year. Let me know if you might attend. Thanks, Denis.

No Freebies for Government Employees

Racine Aldermen Aron Wisneski and Terry McCarthy have proposed a program wherein local government employees would be given land and lower taxes if they built a home on the property and lived their for five years. Read about it here.

Sorry aldermen but this is just plain wrong. If you are going to offer opportunities for free land and lower taxes, offer it to everyone. Otherwise it would appear to all that you are just rewarding your own.

On a positive note, at least you are implicitly acknowledging the problem of high taxes in Racine. And Wisneski is getting somewhere by showing interest in "studying the possibility of creating small TIF districts where homebuyers could receive benefits for moving into the city if they make improvements to the home."

This is something I have advocated numerous times on this blog. Instead of punishing people who improve their properties, in the form of a big tax increase, they should give them a tax break for several years on the improvements. Offer the program to everyone to ensure fairness.

Confrontation and Response

Yesterday before the Landmarks Commission meeting I asked commission member Bob Hartman if I might have a moment of his time. I had to hoped to ensure that my previous remarks at a public meeting were not misconstrued. Too late for that I discovered. I did not deserve a moment of his time he said with barely constrained anger.

Let me back up a bit. A few weeks ago I spoke at a public hearing concerning the south side historic preservation ordinance. Since it was often stated that the proposed ordinance would be modelled after the downtown Design Review Commission ordinance, I thought it would be worthwhile to share my experiences with the DR commission at the hearing. I had hoped to thread a needle, so to speak, in that I had intended to express my disagreement with the coercive aspects of the Design Review Commission, namely that I was compelled to obtain their permission, while not offering any criticism of Bob Hartman or his work. I had hired BH in part because I was offered an incentive to do so by the Downtown Racine Corporation. I thought then and I think now that BH's work was just fine and I had hoped that I would have been able to make that clear. However, my ten minute or so prepared statement had to be pared down to three minutes, so I was concerned that I was not as clear as I had hoped to be. Hence my request for a moment of BH's time.

So when Bob did consent to my request, he expressed his anger over my supposed accusation that I was compelled to hire BH. I was taken aback by this accusation, knowing full well that I did not hold that view then, now or ever. When given a chance to speak, I indicated as much and offered an apology if that was indeed what I had said.

My quasi-apology did not result in a more amiable conversation as BH apparently had other concerns on his mind. BH strongly suggested that I would have been unaffected by the proposed ordinance. He challenged my assertion that I would have been better off without having been subjected to the cost and effort associated with the Downtown Review Commission. And finally he said that I was confrontational, despite Mayor Dickert's admonition that speakers be respectful etc... I asked him to elaborate on the charge that I was confrontational but all he could muster was an exasperated response suggesting that it was quite obvious that I had been confrontational. "How so?" I implored at which point he said I should sit down (as we were approaching the meeting. At this point I admittedly had no more patience for his behavior and I told he has no right to tell me to sit down. And that was that.

So I share this with readers because I want to address BH's charges today as he offered me no opportunity to do so yesterday.

As to whether the proposed ordinance affects me personally, I must say that it is none of his business why I take an interest in the proposed ordinance. I of course have every right to attend public hearings. I find it curious that BH apparently thinks that only those with a direct stake in legislation should be concerned about said legislation. Of course citizens should be involved with issues that may not concern themselves directly. Slavery was an issue that didn't affect large numbers of Americans. Genocide in Germany had little affect on most Americans. Now my point is not to equate my political activism with fights against slavery or genocide - rather, it is to point out the obvious need for people to be concerned with the plight of others. So BH, I wanted to help people who would be inconvenienced and financially harmed by your ordinance proposal.

So am I worse off for having been forced to appear before and acquiesce to the demands of the Downtown Review Commission? Yes I believe so. Now BH's work was just fine but I am quite certain that collaboration between my wife and our contractor would have accomplished the same result, saving us time and a few thousand dollars. BH quite obviously disagreed with my assessment.

And finally, was I confrontational with BH at the public hearing? Frankly I don't even know what specifically he was referring to and he refused to tell me, making a response rather difficult.

So there it is folks. At least one member of a commission that would have had significant power over south side homeowners demonstrated that he was hypersensitive to criticism, real or perceived. Furthermore, he was completely dismissive of my points of view, namely my interest in the ordinance and my perception that I would have been better off without the Downtown Review Commission.

In a nutshell, he knew better than me on everything and he was rather belligerent. Is this somebody that should have power over your important decisions concerning your home?

And lastly, Bon Hartman is welcome to chime in here. I hope he will.

Triumph for LiberTEA

Yesterday the City of Racine's Landmarks Commission unanimously voted to "receive and file" (or kill, in other words) the proposed historic homes ordinance which would have compelled certain south side homeowners to obtain permission from the commission before beginning certain renovations and home maintainance projects. The vote is a victory for home owners and property rights advocates. LiberTEA Racine, along with numerous outspoken property owners in the affected area deserve credit for defeating this intrusive, unnecessary government power grab.

So while a pat on the back is deserved, we must remain vigilant. All or nearly all of the commission members suggested that a key problem was their poor communication, suggesting to me at least that they perceived the problem as a commuication problem rather than a substance problem. When given the opportunity to speak I suggested that the people opposed to the ordinance understood quiet well what the proposal was all about, that there was no communication problem but rather there was a clear and obvious rejection of the merits of their proposal. So I suspect that some version of this ordinance will be back. I wil keep you posted.

Catching Up

Sorry readers for the lack of postings of late. My excuse - working a fair amount and enjoying summer when not working.

Yesterday I rented a Jet Ski at North Beach. Great fun I have to say. Perhaps readers recall the recent fuss over Jet Ski rentals at the beach led mostly by neighbors concerned about noise. Much ado about nothing IMHO as you can't even hear them if you are standing on the beach. Besides, the vast majority of Jet Skiiers are not renting them at the beach anyway.

Also fun is kayaking on the mighty Root River. Kayaks can be rented at the 6th Street and the river, Thursday through Sunday for the absurdly cheap (and subsidized) price of $5 per hour.

Cory Mason's Employee Forced Submission Act

From the folks who support the Employee Free Choice Act now comes forced unionization. Our own Cory Mason is apparently the driving force for this gem. The Journal Sentinel has the story.

I guess forced participation in unions is the new freedom.

Obama on Public vs Private Health Care

I just caught a bit of President Obama's news conference wherein he stated, essentially, that if private sector health care is so good, affordable, etc... then it ought not have any problem competing with a public sector option.

So we have a president that ignores or doesn't understand the key difference between public and private sector economic activity. The difference of course is the source of revenue. Private businesses must earn their income by providing a product or a service that someone voluntarily chooses to purchase while the government just takes the money that they need, from the private sector.

I am slightly embarrased that we have a president say and apparently believe something so silly.

Having it Both Ways

The Journal Times editorial today suggests that those opposed to low-income housing on Sixth Street are unreasonably fearful. The correlation between low incomes and crime happens only in those discredited high rise apartments that "are now being turned into ruble."

Ordinarily, when the JT or other liberals want to help the poor with your money, they argue that decreased poverty will result in decreased crime. This argument suggests a correlation between low incomes and crime. However, now that they want to bring low-income government dependents into downtown, they deny any such correlation. The apartments "would be homes for people whose luck may have changed, or people trying to work their way up from a hard life." Any concerns about crime are dismissed as unreasonable, fearful, and harmful.

Just thought I would point out once again the inconsistency associated with liberal thought.

LiberTEA Racine Chooses Issues

LiberTEA Racine has selected three issues to pursue. They are, not in any particular order:

1) Opposition to the proposed Historic District Ordinance.
2) Support for the Choi's/Chun's effort to open a convenience store with a liquor license.
3) Opposition to Alderman Mozol's proposal which would extend aldermanic terms to three years, from two.

LiberTEA Racine is seeking to promote liberty in the Racine area. We will focus on local issues where we believe we have a reasonable chance for success. And We will be non-partisan.

Note that each of the above issues involves a loss of or potential loss of personal liberty at the hands of Racine government officials. The Historic District Ordinance would take home improvement and major maintainence decisions out of the hands of individual property owners and put them into the hands of government bureaucrats. The Choi's/Chun's are unable to sell a legal product, as they are the first victims of a new ordinance that outlaws the sale of packaged alcohol without a 2/3s (3/4ths?) vote by the city council, among other restrictions. And lastly, an extension of aldermanic terms would substantially chip away at the rights of voters to choose their own representatives.

LiberTEA Racine will focus on these issues initially. If you care to join us, look for our Calls to Action that will be a part of our Web site (under construction) and the blog, LiberTEA Racine.

It's Good to be the King

If you are the mayor of Racine, you get to spend taxpayer money on art. No need for oversight of any kind apparently. No approval from commissions, no design review committee, no permits required, no building inspections, no votes by the council.

But if you live on College Avenue and want to put new windows in your house, well...

RUSD Test Results Form Letter

An insider at RUSD headquarters has forwarded to me the following test results response form letter. Take a look.

For immediate release to media.

The (insert test name) results are in and we are very excited here at RUSD headquarters. We have shown improvement in (choose one: 5th grade math scores, 8th grade reading scores, graduation rate) at several of our schools. We believe (insert latest reform effort here) is beginning to pay dividends. We remain concerned with (choose one: truancy, 8th grade math scores, 5th grade reading levels) at this time. We are (choose one: cautiously optimistic, hopeful) about our prospects for continued improvement. Yet we recognize that we have (choose one: more hard work to do, a tough road ahead of us).

Sincerely,

(insert latest superintendent name here)

Government Causing Housing Problems

As city officials experiment with various punitive measures to address the declining condition of housing stock in Racine, they would be wise to consider their own role in creating the problem.

Consider that despite a declining population in Racine, the city has within the last several years approved two large and partially low income/rent subsidized projects, the Mitchell Wagon Lofts and Belle Harbor. Agencies abound to subsidize or pay outright the rent for these and other low income residences. No doubt about it, Racine officials love to help/enable the poor with your money.

Of course, someone has to pay for all this generosity. Said generosity is paid for in taxes. Racine's property tax rate is 50% higher than neighboring Wind Point, as an example. At some point, some people will decide that the costs, financial and otherwise, associated with a "give us your poor and huddled masses" government policy is too great to bear. So they will try to sell their home for which there are no buyers. This home is destined to become a rental property because of Racine's government, as buying a home and paying taxes is too expensive while all kinds of help is there for low income renters.

So the city adds a few hundred newly constructed, subsidized and TIFed housing units for the poor. Then what happens? They leave the neighborhoods for the good stuff. The landlord who owns a property or two in Racine is now competing, essentially, with the government that was instrumental in financing the new and better low income housing. They still have mortgages and taxes to pay, so something has to give. Perhaps they stop maintaining the property or they take in a marginal tenant. And this is the situation we find ourselves in now.

Harsh ordinances and fines will fix this problem, right?

CityBank (of Racine) Failures

The Journal Times has an article today, curiously titled "Staying afloat," about a non-profit housing agency that is sinking fast.

The Racine Mutual Housing Association is a nonprofit organization that provides rental housing at below-market rates, according to the JT. Yet 95% of their clients are behind in their rent payments. The city will now allow RMHA to skip their payments to the city for the next ten months. Presently, the group owes $193,000 plus interest (interest amount not specified in the article) on a $200,000 loan made several years ago.

City Development Director Brian O'Connell said the group needs sound fiscal judgement to balance its compassion. In showing patience with struggling tenants, "they've put the whole organization at risk" O'Connell said.

The same might be said of the city. The city needs sound fiscal judgement to balance its compassion. In showing patience with struggling borrowers (several years, barely a dent in principal) the city is putting all the taxpayers at risk.

The best judgement of all would be for the city to leave banking to bankers and fire the bureaucrats who are wasting our money.

On Property and Policy

City officials always seem to be promoting a solution to this or that problem. Seldom do they discuss why the problem exists in the first place. How can you solve a problem if you don't know why it exists?

Consider the various proposals to keep area homes in good condition. So why are some home owners allowing their properties to deteriorate? We need to know the answer to that question before we can shape policy to address the problem.

Are the property owners in question just bad people who don't care or are they making rational investment decisions? If your answer is the former, then you might like spanking them with fines, new ordinances etc... but perhaps they are acting rationally.

What rational person would allow their property to deteriorate and decrease in value? Well, first we must understand that spending money on home maintainence is just one of millions of investment choices available to us. Are new windows a smarter investment than car repairs, school tuition, a 401K contribution? Perhaps some property owners have detirmined that property improvements in Racine are not a good investment.

Property taxes are high in Racine. Property improvements cost money AND result in even higher property taxes year after year. Property owners can't pick up and move their homes to avoid the high taxes but they can gradually divest from Racine. They can allow their properties to decline in value while choosing to invest their money elsewhere - where they think they will get a better return.

We can villify them, harrass them, or fine them and hasten their exit from Racine. But nobody is taking their place - we have a declining population.

A far better idea is to ask whether such people are behaving rationally, and if so, we should respond with rational policies to address the problem.

Catching Up, Random Thoughts

I have now been to two meetings concerning the historic district ordinance proposal. At both meetings, the powers-that-be insisted that they were there to discern what the people wanted. If this were the least bit true, there wouldn't be a third meeting. They would just scrap the idea that the people clearly don't want.

If you haven't been to a First Fridays, (every first Friday evening of the month, downtown Racine) you will be amazed at the amount, and quality, of the people congregating downtown. I remember well the genesis of this event. It was an idea starting with former first lady of Racine Joyce Smith. I admit I was very skeptical, wondering why a Friday instead of a whole weekend. I still think downtown Racine should have a weekend festival. Anyway, Joyce Smith was right and I was wrong about First Fridays.

For a place nearly devoid of development, yes I am talking about Racine, one must wonder why the city is looking at increasing the cost and the uncertainty of development projects via a new ordinance.

Even the liberal Journal Times opposes the historic district ordinance. I guess that makes us LiberTEA Racine folks a bunch of flaming liberals.

Q and A with Earl Chrisianson

Unglued local lefty Earl Christianson had some questions after attending last months tea party demonstration at city hall. He asked them in a JT letter to the editor. Here are a few and I will try to answer them:

Earl: Was violent or nonviolent action being advocated by the lady peddling campaign type pins containing a picture of president Obama within a circle and a line slashed accross the photo?

Answer: Yes.

Earl: How couild parents ignore the heart-wrenching sight of three preschool age children trying to navigate the uneven grass? One child carried a protest sign in one hand and held a toddlers hand with the other. Every couple of steps the toddler fell and a third child struggled to pull the youngster up.

Answer: I was there, but I didn't see any toddlers walking on the grass holding hands, but be assured Earl, had I seen any such disturbing behavior I would have instantly called child protective services and pressed for a full investigation into the matter.

Earl: Finally, why are unknown persons, operating through straw organizations, involved in this covert operation? What's the agenda?

Answer: Earl, these folks were under the mistaken assumption that it was permissable to assemble peacefully without a written published agenda. I could tell you the agenda Earl, but then I would have to inflict a violent or nonviolent action upon you. It is best that you just pretend you never saw that rally Earl, and please, try to get that disturbing image of children walking hand in hand out of your mind.

Low Income Housing Venture a Waste of Money

Another day, another proposal for low income housing in Racine.

This time the proposal is for downtown Racine on 6th Street. The Racine Journal Times has the story. The building in question is a former YMCA owned by Emily Hill. Linda Ring Weber, Executive Director of The Housing Authority of Racine County wants to convert the building into 10 to 12 low income apartments.

This makes no sense whatsoever. Turning a gymnasium into housing will be extremely expensive. There would be a water hookup fee of a few thousand dollars per unit and let us not forget the prohibitively expensive sprinkler system that would be required. Well, prohibitive for the private sector anyway.

These are the reasons why large downtown buildings have not been coverted to apartments. The cost is way too high, water taxes and requirements are very expensive and taxes on the improvements sap any potential for profits.

Now only government has the resources remaining to build in Racine. My guess is this will cost over $2 million if it is completed. And this will be money spent unnecessarily. The Housing Authority already has an office and Racine has a surplus of low income housing.

Instead of wasting this money on real estate development, the Housing Authority should instead spend the money on housing its clients in the empty homes that already exist.

Walden School and Sustainability

Walden Students are learning about sustainability according to a small article in todays Journal Times. Good for them.

According to the article, the class was initially developed by the Keystone Center for Education and funded by Sustainable Racine.

The first thing these students should be taught - I am not holding my breath - is the manner in which these organizations are sustained, or not. These organizations are sustained by donations. And these donations were made possible by wealth creation. And wealth creation is best achieved in countries with free economies.

Walden students are to "develop and ultimately implement a project that will enhance the sustainability of Racine's future." Great! My hope is that these projects will reflect an understanding that "sustainability" is best achieved in a capitalist and free country. We shall see.

And Sam Braun, I will be counting on you for the sensible insiders perspective.

Socialism and Poverty

David Riemer thinks we can end poverty. Riemer is the director of policy and planning at Community Advocates of the Public Policy Institute.

Riemer argues, in a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel commentary on Sunday, that "potential policy packages must be well-conceived and evidence-based, shaped by the poor themselves and rigorously tested..." Among his suggestions are to "raise the minimum Supplemental Security Income and Social Security payments to the poverty line plus $1... a WPA-like transitional jobs program.... and a somewhat higher minimum wage plus an increased earned income tax credit."

Additionally, we need to attack racism, greatly improve the health insurance system, improve the health and education of children etc....

The common thread to all this of course is increased government power and massive income redistribution, or, to be less delicate, socialism.

I wonder if Mr Riemer is interested in the evidence-based and rigorously tested outcomes of the myriad of socialist experiments throughout the world in the last hundred years or so. If he was, he would realize that socialism is not a solution to poverty but one of its main causes.

Owner or Renter

Yesterday I happened upon some folks from the proposed historic district of Racine whom I have known for quite some time. For several minutes we discussed the pros and cons of the proposed ordinance. The three of them were mostly favorable towards the idea, though they acknowledged some potential pitfalls and at least one of them was uncomfortable with the coercion necessary to achieve results.

All in all it was a rational discussion until one of them suggested that we can't own history, and that we can only rent it. Naturally I pounced all over that thought, asking from whom was she renting. She didn't answer that question but it isn't too difficult to figure out. We share our history collectively, we take care of it collectively, and any issues involving our history would be resolved via the collective, ie government.

I believe she has perhaps inadvertantly touched on the central issue here. Who's homes are these? What does ownership mean? Are we caretakers, renters from society, or owners? What do these differences mean with respect to the proposed ordinance?

My own view is that ownership means something and that the history worth preserving here is the historical understanding of ownership. And we should vigorously resist the city's latest attempt to chip away at that foundation.

Fact or Fiction?

Driver: How fast was I going officer?
Officer: 15 over.
D: I suppose I am going to get a fine?
O: No Ma'am, we don't give fines or tickets anymore.
D: Excellent, then I will be on my way. Nice day officer.
O: Not so fast Ma'am. I need to issue you a vehicle speed inspection fee of $100.
D: A what?
O: We call them v-sifs for short. They're fast, less paperwork, more efficient, just easier all the way around for the city.
D: That's bull#$&*@! I will see you in court.
O: No ma'am you won't. The beauty of the v-sif is that you no longer get to contest the charges, er, the fee, in court. Like I said, we've got a real efficient operation here thanks to the aldermen and the mayor of Racine.
D: Well, what about my rights? What about the three branches of government? Can you just do away with the judicial branch? Ever hear of due process? Don't we have a constitution?
O: All good questions ma'am. But as an officer I am part of the executive branch, as you know. I enforce the laws. You might want to take up your concerns with the mayor.
D: Oh sure, the new mayor. He was just sworn in, right? And he swore to uphold the constitution, right?
O: Ma'am, I just noticed that you pulled over by parking meter. I am going to need to issue you a p-mif of $20. It's like the v-sif but for parking meters. Real efficient, easy, less paperwork...


Question: What is the difference between this scenerio and the "fees" issued by UNIT (Unified Neighborhood Inspection Team) other than that the offense is not happening to you?

Historic Designation Meets Resistance

I went to a public meeting tonight on the subject of turning the near south side of Racine into a historic district. What this would mean for property owners in the area is that alterations to their property would have to meet the approval of a commission, much like the one already in place downtown. Window replacements, roof reshingling, fences, porches, you name it, the decisions will no longer be made by the owners.

The reaction from the audience ranged from skeptical to hostile for the most part. Simply put, these folks didn't want to turn over the decisions regarding their property to the government.

Not everyone was opposed to the idea. One woman spoke in support and was generally well received until she said that not everyone is cut out for owning a historic home and that perhaps they should sell. She was shouted down, deservedly so imho.

Also speaking was Bob Hartman, a member of the Landmarks Commission that I believe is pushing this idea. Bob is a nice fellow but I believe he should have told the crowd that he stands to make money if the area becomes a historic district. How so? Well, Bob is a designer and would likely be on the commission, just as he is downtown. So he would probably get referrals to do the designs that would help his clients make it through the committee. Seems like a conflict of interest to me but at the very least Bob would likely profit from this move and I think he should have indicated as much to the audience.

Anyway, I am happy to report that a large number of property owners on the south side will not be handing over their property rights to the city without a big, loud fight. I just might like to join them.

Teachers Union Using Adult Dupes

I started a bit of a fight over at the JT blog when I suggested that children shouldn't be used as pawns in political battles.

There was a protest organized by the Racine teachers union at a recent board meeting. They were lobbying for federal stimulus funds for more librarians. Several children, as young as nine, participated.

One of my detractors on the JT blog, 4kidsandacat had this to say:

Denis Navratil is assuming that parents are using children to achieve a political objective. How is having desire to have a librarian at a school full time considered a political objective? I don't get that, sir.

Well 4kidsandacat, desiring a librarian is not political. I have desired a few in my day as well. But the little darlings in question didn't just desire a librarian. They participated in a staged political protest organized by the local teachers union with the political objective of securing federal funds for more librarians. Does it get any more political than that? And 4kids, if you "don't get that" then you are as much a dupe as the kids. At least they have the excuse of being kids.

Racine Teachers Using Children in Political Fight

The Racine teachers union (aka Racine Education Association or REA) is now using elementary students to help fight their political battles. The REA and their child allies rallied at a RUSD Board meeting yesterday "in hopes that Unified will use federal stimulus money to bring more librarians to the district's elementary schools" according to the front page article intoday's Journal Times.

From the article:

"Speakers included Racine Public Library Director Jessica MacPhail, parents, a school librarian, Racine Education Association (REA) President Peter Knotek, a Unified alum and three elementary school children.

“We love to read,” said Maddy Bragulla and Sophia Formolo, both 11-year-old students at Schulte. The two spoke together at the meeting, asking board members to think of children before money.

Children also were outside before the meeting. Sam LaGuardia, a 9-year-old student at Schulte, held a sign reading, “We can’t access our school library without a librarian!”

“It’s confusing to all the other kids because they’re like, ‘is the library open or not?’” Sam said. “I’d like to go the library more often because we can check out more books and learn more interesting things.”

The rally was organized by the REA through flyers and word of mouth, Levie said."

I suppose that we are to believe that Sam and Maddy and Sophia were not coaxed by Unified teachers. Every nine year old I know just loves to scour the agendas of public meetings, looking for those issues that will prompt him to demand mom or dad to drive him to the meeting so he can hold up his hand made sign.

Does the REA have no shame? Stop using our children as political props. Fight your own battles.

Prevailing Values

One David Backman wrote a letter to the Journal Times on Sunday concerning pending legislation about prevailing wage law.

He writes: The current discussion to strengthen the state's prevailing wage law intends to protect and sheild workers from unscrupulous business or communities that look to make a profit off of their hard labor. Prevailing wage is about providing a skilled, trained workforce and a whole lot more. It really underscores a set of values that many in the construction industry hold dear - maintaining wages, providing health benefits, producing training and apprenticeship programs, caring for your workforce.

So these are Mr Backman's values?. Businesses should not make a profit but Mr. Backman should get skilled training, good wages, health benefits and caring from businesses. In his final paragraph Backman calls for taxing the oil companies. "Better them than me." he says.

Get everything you can. Demonize business. Screw the other guy.

No thanks Mr Backman. I hope my values prevail.

LiberTEA Racine Launched, Attacked

LiberTEA Racine, a group of local citizens forming to protect and recover our liberties, has launched a blog, libertearacine.blogspot.com. A web site will soon follow.

Pete at the Racine Post, a great reporter known the world over for his objectivity, has the story at http://news.racinepost.com/2009/05/libertea-racine-erects-its-blog-outpost.html

Note that Pete, in the first line of his story, uses a crude sexual reference in describing our group. Later he desribed the launch as a manifesto, a word normally reserved for Karl Marx or wackjobs like the unibomber. Pete later backed down a tad, saying he was quoting from the blog - an obvious false statement by the way - and you can check that out yourself if you like by reading the blog.

The launch of the LiberTEA Racine blog led to immediate attacks in the comments on the Racine Post. Those who oppose liberty are a potent force in Racine and they will obviously attempt to portray us in the most negative light possible.

We need to prove them wrong and stay true to our mission of protecting and recovering liberties with an issue oriented local focus and with non-partisan, active and responsible civic involvement.

Let our opponents be the naysayers who will need to explain why they are opposed to liberty.

On Efficient City Government

I spoke with 15th District Alderman Robert Mozol yesterday about his proposal to extend the terms of Racine aldermen from two years to three. At this time, the proposal has been referred to the committe of the whole, according to Mozol.

I asked him how his proposed change would benefit Racine residents. His answer, paraphrased, was that Racine residents would benefit from a more efficient government. It takes time for an alderman to learn the ins and outs of city government, and that extra year would help aldermen get things done. A very small amount of money would be saved with fewer elections, though, to be fair to Mozol, he did not emphasize this point.

I disagree with Alderman Mozol for the following reasons, listed in no particular order:

1) If an alderman hasn't sufficiently learned the ropes after two years, he probably wouldn't be an efficient leader in his third year anyway, so voters should retain the right to replace him rather than live with his inefficiencies for yet another year.

2)The proposal, with respect to improving efficiency, would only affect first term aldermen. Do we want really want to reduce voter input by 50% so that a few slow learners can stay in office an extra year?

3)Our system of government was designed - think checks and balances - to be inefficient so that impulsive mistakes are not made.

4) Why is efficiency so important anyway? 6 year terms would be more efficient still. Elections are less efficient than appointments. Or we could do away with aldermen altogether and just have a mayor that issues orders. That would be more efficient still. My point is that perhaps we shouldn't be so enamored with efficiency in government.

5) Presently, a small percentage of voters elect our aldermen. Most aldemen continue on to a second term unopposed. Most residents have little or no input in city government between elections. Wouldn't government serve us better with more citizen input rather than this proposal which would reduce it further?

6)Veteran political observers well know that impending elections can have a dramatic effect on legislation. What this means, in other words, is that politicians will legislate differently, and often better, when they know that voters are watching more carefully. A local example, I suspect, was the West Racine low income housing proposal. This was sailing through the development office, committees etc... and then Becker got busted, an election ensued, and the proposal was shot down, unanimously if I recall correctly.

Sorry folks, I have been a bit wordy. I will wrap this up as efficiently as I can. Alderman Mozol's proposal is a bad idea for Racine.

On Nature, Nurture, and Homosexuality

I was telling a story the other day at a dinner party, not meaning to start a political discussion. Anyway, when my son was three, my wife enrolled him in a class called something like Beginning Movement. When the time came for me to bring him to class, his third time, it was clear to me that he didn't want to go. I dragged him there (not literally) and watched as several young girls pranced happily about in pink dance outfits. My son was not enjoying himself. I asked him if he wanted to leave. There was no waffling with his answer - we bolted out of there and never returned. End of story.

Or so I thought. An openly gay man at the party was certain that my three year old was incapable of deciding for himself whether he liked to dance around with little girls. Rather, I had poisened his mind to the idea and my son was simply trying to please dad. He was certain that he was correct and brushed aside my opposing point of view.

Afterwords, as I mused over this discussion, I realized that what the man was saying was that environmental influences - ie my supposed bias against dancing - were the sole cause of my sons rejection of dance. In other words, he was not predisposed - ie born with - a distaste for dance.

Yet I have heard the same individual claim that one's sexual orientation is predetirmined. And this view is commonly held by gay people and woe to those who challenge them.

Anyway, I am by no means certain on the whole nature/nurture question though I strongly suspect that both play a role in our development. And that is a perfectly acceptable point of view, until it is applied to people who are gay.

On Resource Allocation

I like this sentence from today's Wall Street Journal:

"But you can only allocate a scarce resource in two ways: market prices or brute force."

Is there another way?

Seeds of Liberty

On Saturday, a dozen or so local citizens met (including yours truly) to explore the idea of forming a group dedicated to preserving our liberties from the near constant encroachment by government.

Though nothing has been formalized, nor any spokesperson chosen, it is my understanding that we have agreed to a basic concept. We will be issue driven, active and non partisan in an effort to preserve or recover our liberties.

Let me break this down a bit further:

Issue driven: We will focus on issues that affect our liberties. The purpose here is to take on issues and win! It is not about getting anyone elected although if that is a byproduct of our efforts, so much the better.

Active: We do not intend to be a group that gathers to preach to the choir. We want to be active. We want to do things to advance our causes. We want to actively protect our liberties.

Non partisan: We are not affiliated with the Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Constitutional or any other political party. However, we will coordinate with any or all of the above if, on a particular issue, they share our goal of protecting our liberties.

Look for more information on this subject in the not to distant future and consider helping us take on issues that should matter to us all.

Congratulations John Dickert

I know, I am several days late. I always seem to be out of town on election day. Anyway, congratulations are due to John Dickert. As I may have mentioned in a previous post, I have known John since grade school. I believe him to be a person of good character and I do not doubt his enthusiasm for Racine. These attributes will serve him well.

No doubt John will now have many new "friends" jockeying for position and influence. I won't be among them. But John can count on me to offer a fair and impersonal critique of his moves in office.

I am pleased that among John's first comments was a nod to businesses. I would happily advise him on ways to make Racine a more business friendly environment. For starters, a recognition of the effects of high taxes and overregulation would be helpful. And the election is over, you can stop the demogoguery about "slumlords" and recognize that they are small businesses providing a valuable service under very difficult circumstances.

Good luck John and remember the unions tried to defeat you. You owe them no special consideration.

Pay to Play?

I was watching the Chris Matthews show the other day as he and his liberal guests were analyzing the Arlen Spector defection. It was assumed that in return for a challenger free Democratic primary Spector must have agreed to push Obama's impending health care plan.

Didn't that used to be called "Pay to Play?"

Going Green

I heard a radio advertisement for the Racine bus system. Ride the bus, go green, save the environment etc... was the essence of the ad. The only problem is that riding Racine's bus system is NOT environmentally friendly. A huge bus transporting one or two passengers is terribly inefficient and wasteful.

Go green. Run away from the bus!

On Stimulus and Job Losses

The 1st Congressional District Democrats have elected a new chairman, one Mark Pienkos.

From the Racine Post:

"Refering to yesterday's news that Chrysler's engine plant will close as part of the auto company's reorganization, Pienkos said, "Kenosha is losing jobs. Paul Ryan needs to answer for that."

"It all comes down to his stimulus vote," said Pienkos, a school superintendent. "Paul Ryan voted against this bill, against the 500,000 people per month who are losing their jobs."

Now wait one second Mr. Pienkos. Ryan's vote on the stimulus package matters not. It passed without his vote. The (mislabeled) stimulus package passed and was supposed to save or create millions of jobs. If it isn't working, as you suggest, wouldn't it make more sense to blame the people who voted for a very expensive stimulus bill that isn't stimulating?

More Clarity Needed

Mayoral candidate John Dickert has a letter to the Racine JT editor today wherein he seeks to clarify his position about inpecting Racine properties when they sell. Dickert states that the proposed ordinance would not be aimed at residential properties. Instead, his plan "deals with the multifamily slum properties that seem to be growing in Racine." However, Dickert adds "I have made it very clear that if you are a good landlord or tenant, you will not be affected by my proposal."

I want more clarity. Who will decide which landlords are good and which are bad? I want to see the ordinance that tries to define a "good" landlord or a "slumlord."

On Advancing a Freedom Agenda

What is the best approach to take in advancing a freedom agenda in Racine? Is it to elect leaders who will protect and expand the freedoms that have been gradually taken from us? Or is grass roots issue driven activism a better idea?

I am beginning to think that the latter is a better idea. For starters, let us face the facts. We have elected exactly zero individuals who are looking out for the freedom of individuals in Racine. Our alderman respond to political pressure only with little if any regard for the rights of individuals. It is easy, politically, to disregard the rights of individuals, one victim at a time.

An active and committed group could provide political support, one issue at a time, to those individual victims of government excess. If a group, looking out for the rights of individuals, began to have success here and there, it could be a force to be reckoned with. Additionally, members of such a group could then run for office and point to actual achievements. And the electorate, seeing exactly what a candidate has pursued and accomplished, will have a better idea of how a candidate may perform in office.

Or, to put this all another way, I am beginning to think that we have to create the demand for better representation, one issue at a time.

Community Organizer Needed

In my last thread I wrote that at some point we will need to fight for our freedom here in Racine. And Colt has invited me to do just that, regarding Racine's new liquor license policy. I have had a few days to mull this over.

My concern with a political fight in Racine is that the Racine aldermen respond only to political pressure. Forget about reasoned arguments, appeals for property rights, individual rights, the constitution etc.... it is all about pressure. On the alcohol licensing issue it seems that we would be facing the seemingly odd alliance of Focus on the Family and the Tavern League, both of whom apparently supported this ordinance. Can we get a large enough mob - remember this has nothing to do with sound arguments - to influence the city council? If we can't get a big enough, angry enough mob organized, we will just embarass ourselves.

What we need is a first rate community organizer. Any volunteers?

Liquor Lunacy

Racine's new liquor ordinance requires license applicants to prove that their establishment will "substantially improve the tax base."

Yes, the city has outlawed moderate and incremental improvements to the tax base. If you aren't going to sell a *!%#load of liquor, don't waste their time.

Rather than have would-be business owners prove that they will generate enough taxes to sate the insatiable, our aldermen should have to prove that vacant commercial properties generate more in taxes than those buildings housing viable businesses.

And a slightly tangential point. Note that the purpose of business, as evidenced by this ordinance, is to generate funds for the city. For all you saps like me that thought you were self employed, hah! You work for them now.

At some point we will need to fight for our freedom in this city.

City Council Power Grab

I don't even know where to begin in criticizing Racine's new liquor ordinance. But let us start with the facts. The ordinance, which passed last night with only aldermen Shields and Coe dissenting, pertains only to establishments that sell liquor for off premises consumption. In other words, it does not apply to bars and restaurants. New establisments would need to be at least 1000 feet from another establishment and 300 feet from any place predominantly attended by those under the age of 21, including schools and churches. The total number of such establishments shall not exceed 60, though there are presently 66 in the city. And finally, license applicants "will have to show that they will substantially improve the city's tax base and have a greater impact than simply adding another convenience store" according to the JT article on the subject. A two thirds vote of the city council would be needed to circumvent the new rules.

Or, in other words, do not even think about opening a convenience store or grocery store in the city of Racine without seriously sucking up to the city council.

The first casualty of the new ordinance is one Caroline Chun who had wanted to open a convenience/liquor store on 6th Street. Start grovelling Ms Chun.

6th Street was at one time the recipient, or victim, of the city's attempt to create an arts district. The city's micromanagement of 6th Street as the Heart of the Arts has been an obvious failure. But their latest venture, called the Vacant Building Initiative, is off to a great start.

Free Campaign Advice

John Dickert has a plan. Like most people, I suspect, I don't know what it is nor am I inclined to find out. But I know it is a ten year plan.

If I were Bob Turner, I would immediately announce an eleven year plan. I would then denounce Dickerts short term strategies while stressing the importance and superiority of a long term vision for Racine.

On Racine's Tea Party

In my ten or so years living in Racine as an adult, I have been to countless rallies, town hall meetings, council meetings, listening sessions, public hearings etc... but Saturday, at Racine's Tea Party, was the first time I felt a connection to and general agreement with the fellow attendees. It was a good feeling.

Downward Spirals

I was listening to a pro-KRM/RTA radio program the other day on WRJN. One of the interviewees argued that local transit is in a downward spiral. Costs have gone up and local revenue is down. This is followed by service cuts and fare increases, which results in fewer riders and less revenue, which is followed by service cuts and fare increases etc...

OK, if liberals can understand this spiral, why can't they understand the tax increase spiral. Government takes our money to provide services that we don't need. Because they take so much, we have little left to spend or invest. With less investment, we have less growth, less jobs and more "need" for government "help". So government comes to the rescue, taking more and more from the productive and rediricting the money to the people in need. The productive become less so, tthey either create less wealth to tax or they get frustrated with diminishing opportunity and they leave for a friendlier economic climate. Meanwhile, word gets out that Racine government will take care of your needs. More needy people show up. More productive people head out, less tax revenue is generated etc...

I agree that there is a downward spiral with respect to transit. I think it reflects the fact that the vast majority of people don't want it. But there is also a downward spiral in Racine with respect to taxes. Why don't liberals seem to understand the downward spiral caused by high taxes?

Informed Decisions

The Regional Transit Authority wants you to make an informed decision about transit, or at least that is what their flyer says. You be the judge.

According to the RTA, KRM will raise property values and create 4,700 construction jobs with a $560 million impact on the local community. KRM will reduce traffic congestion and reduce pollution. Furthermore, the RTA suggests that KRM will provide property tax relief.

This sounds great I have to admit.

Now I invite you to make an informed decision about smoking crack. When you smoke crack, you are the life of the party. You will feel energized and euphoric. Crack smokers tend to lose weight. Smoking crack is an environmentally friendly activity compared to eating hamburgers. Crack smoking creates jobs and valuable business experience for young entrepreneurs. And recent studies suggest that sustained crack usage will often completely eliminate problems associated with old age.

Make an informed decision and enjoy some crack today!

Closing Gaps

The easiest way to close achievement or wealth gaps is to discourage achievement and wealth.

KRM BS #2

Tim Sullivan, chief executive of Bucyrus (Milwaukee Journal commentary, Sunday, April 12) wants to hire "the best talent from within our communities" to help his growing company. His problem though, is that "a large portion of the region's employable population are unable to work in South Milwaukee because they can't get to work."

I am not buying the claim that a large percentage of the best talent in our communities can't get to South Milwaukee for a job. Perhaps they are just not that interested in a job that doesn't pay well enough for them to afford a car.

KRM BS

Racine Mayor Tom Friedel has made the preposterous claim that KRM will "connect our residents with the nearly one million jobs that currently exist within one mile of the proposed KRM stations."

Here is the problem. According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (via Milwaukee 7 web site) there were only 640,000 jobs in all of Racine, Kenosha and Milwaukee counties in 2007.

To KRM supporters: Does the end, a train, justify the means, lying?

Turner vs Dickert

What is the difference between Democrat John Dickert and Democrat Robert Turner?

The most obvious difference is that Dickert is white and Turner black. And based on the election returns from the primary, it sure seems as though Dickert won the white vote while Turner won the black vote.

But besides race, what separates these two in the minds of voters?

I don't know, but I will suggest some possibilities and I hope others will chime in with their ideas.

Turner has held elected office for a long time. This can be an asset or a liability depending on what he did or didn't do in office. My guess is that Turner has done some things for some constituents or he wouldn't keep getting reelected. But who are they and what has he done for them? One vague clue is the rumor that unions will be plowing a sizeable amount of cash into the Turner campaign.

As for John Dickert. First, full diclosure. I have known John since grade school. I like John Dickert personally and so far as I am aware he is a good and decent person. My issues with Dickert are purely ideological, as they would be with Turner. Dickert has embraced just about every big government and big private sector scheme mentioned in Racine over the past few decades. Examples: Imaginarium, KRM, Point Blue, and some may recall the effort to turn the YMCA into a college for animation that would produce 20,000 jobs with a trillion dollar economic impact etc... OK, lets just say that Dickert can get caught up in grandiose schemes to save Racine. On the plus side for me at least, Dickert has had to earn some of his keep in business so he is not reflexively anti-business like so many on the left.

If I could, I would vote for John Dickert. And then I would hope that he would fail to grow the size of government.

Natural Born Tyrants

Several local second graders have all the answers to Racine's problems. The following are a sampling of their proposals, if they were mayor of Racine.

"If I was mayor, I would take all the smokes away from the stores and say no more smoking."

"If I was the mayor, I would make sure the gas prices were low..."

"If I were mayor, I would help people with problems and give free ice cream. Chuck E. Cheese will be free, and no smoking or you are going to jail."

"I would ban people from smoking in Racine. I don't want anyone to die if I was mayor. I want to take care of people."

Now my point here is not to poke fun at second graders. Rather, it is to poke fun at grown up liberals, if there is such a thing, because their political philosophy hasn't matured from the well intentioned, utopian thinking common among children. No wonder liberals keep wanting to lower the voting age.

Collusion or Partnership

A friend was telling me recently about an article that he read about the failure of the free market. To bolster his case perhaps, he noted that Henry Ford was once working with legislators to undermine the efforts to build railroads. If true, Ford was not engaging in free market activity. Rather he was colluding with government to protect his industry from competition. Or, to use more modern lingo, Ford and government officials were forming a public-private partnership.

Prediction for Mayoral Race

Certain to be wrong, but here it is anyway:

1) Dickert
2) Harding
3) Turner
4) Karas
5) Helding
6) Plache
7) Spangenberg
8) Shakoor
9) Hill-Driver
10) Fay
11) Charon

Campaign Fun

I love local politics and I support Jody Harding for Mayor of Racine. Yesterday I ventured out for the first time, knocking on doors for Jody. I didn't even do this when I ran for Racine County Executive a few years back. So I was a bit apprehensive.

Some observations. The people were very nice, mostly. One lady admitted that she was confused as there were so many choices. I set out to help her. I asked what part of the political spectrum she was on. She said that she was a public school teacher and therefore liberal. I noted that she had many options, ten in fact, and that JH was probably not for her. I suggested John Dickert.

I met a retired city employee who seemed to enjoy talking. He indicated that it made little sense financially to continue working for the city. I suspect that he will get another job elsewhere and really rake it in for a while, enjoying a salary and a pension.

Not everyone was nice. One man congratulated me, sarcastically, when I introduced myself and indicated my support for Jody. He wouldn't take the informational flyer but he did take the time to tell me that I had interrupted a dinner, that he had guests, and that he was voting for Pete Karas. Another member of the tolerant left.

Media Lovefest for Obama

I caught a bit of Larry King and Chris Matthews last night as they and their guests discussed the Obama trip to London. All of them couldn't stop themselves from gushing at how beautiful Michelle Obama was, how brilliant were her fashion choices, how heartwarming it was to see a couple so obviously in love etc... and Chris Matthews couldn't quite catch himself in time... yes, he was starting to get that tingling sensation running up his leg again.

I wanted to puke. These people should be embarrassed to present this lovefest as news. And MO is not that good looking. BO is handsome, but MO, not so much. It would be fascinating to show and contrast the TV coverage of BO's first European trip with GW's first trip. Did they gush about how much the Bushes love one another, the attractiveness of Laura, her brilliant fashion decisions etc? Somehow I doubt it, but their must be some explanation other than media bias.

Responding to Incentives

I know of a married couple that intends to sell their house. And they are smart. They intend to wait until this summer, when some new government incentives (and disincentives) kick in. As I understand the program, first time home buyers will be eligible for an $8,000 tax break as well as 4% interest rates.

All righty then. Our government will soon be implementing a program that give advantages to first time buyers, coupled with disadvantages for those who have previously purchased a home.

So what should a home seller do? Well, the home sellers that I know intend to target first time home buyers in their marketing efforts. Now these folks don't really care whether the buyer of their home is a first time buyer or a hundredth time buyer. What they want is to sell their house for as much as they can. And they think that they can get the most out of first time buyers. And in my view, they may well be correct.

The net result of this new government favoritism toward first time buyers? First time buyers will be able to bid up the price on homes because they have a significant, government provided subsidy. This will artificially drive up the price of homes. Thus second time home buyers will have to pay more for a house.

Why the government should punish people because they have owned or currently own a home is beyond me.

On Elitism

A very good question was posed to me recently that I didn't have an answer for. It was, wouldn't you want elites to run the country?

I guess my answer would depend on the meaning of elite. If by elite we mean people of extraordinary ability, then perhaps so. If we mean people of exceptional character, then perhaps so. If by elite we mean people that graduated from the right school and associate with other elites, then perhaps not.

I want elites in the private sector. I want someone who is certain that he can cure cancer or design an I-phone that I will purchase. In the private sector, elites will succeed and become wealthy by producing something that others will want or need. If they fail, it is their problem. Well, it used to be only their problem.

The public sector is a different matter. Elites by their very nature, are not humble. They think they know better than the common folk. They think they can direct our lives better than we can. They will be inclined to think they have all the answers. They will grow the size and scope of government while diminishing the liberty and responsibility of the electorate. The problem as I see it is that while someone might just be elite enough to know how to cure cancer or design a great I-phone, there is nobody elite enough to direct the lives of millions of people.

Being elite and therefore lacking in humility, they may think they can. They can't, but they will try. And they will fail. And this is why elites are dangerous people to elect.

Question of the Day

Every few months, Racine Horlick social studies teacher and social activist Al Levie is in the news. This time he led a hundred or so public school students (during school hours) and many adults to Madison, to lobby for drivers licenses and in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, er, undocumented immigrants.

Can a teacher properly teach a subject AND lead his students in partisan political lobbying on the same subject?

Redefining Racism Part 2

Kevin Lockett (see comments on most recent post) is an advocate for the new definition of racism (prejudice plus privilege plus power) as it acknowledges "the history of racism and the power structure in this country" and it acknowledges that racism is not just an individual problem but also a collective problem. Read his own comments please, but as a shortcut I have tried to accurately depict his viewpoint.

I have a few issues with his argument. First, there is the the problem of circularity, ie using the word racism in the definition of racism. Secondly, his definition mistakenly focuses on this country only, though racism is a phenomenon that can and does exist in most if not all countries.

It seems to me that the most charitable explanation for the redefinition (including the power element) is to accomodate or account for the differing expressions of racism. I do understand this argument. A great example is anti-semitism. This could range from a mildly harmful attitude to death in a gas chamber. But the range of actions that might flow from a mindset (anti-semitism or racism) is not sufficient, imho, to justify changing a definition and confusing an already difficult issue.

Why not change the definition of love or compassion? Certainly people and nations have varying degrees of power or ability to respond lovingly or compassionately to a problem. Take the problem of AIDS in largely black sub Saharan Africa. Should we change the definition of compassion such that it acknowledges the history of concern that Americans have demonstrated for the plight of Africans suffering from AIDS? Aren't we, US citizens, more loving than those loveless Ecuadorians?

So my point is that if we are to change the definition of bad attitudes, like racism, to reflect the varying ability of people or nations to act on said bad attitudes, then we should do the same with good attitudes.

Maybe then, Kevin Lockett will rejoice in the news that he lives in the most loving and compassionate nation that has ever existed.

Redefining Racism

Martha Barry, racial justice programmer at the YWCA of Greater Milwaukee, defines racism as "prejudice plus privilege plus power to oppress." The mission of the YMCA of GM is to "eliminate racism and empower women."

Let's take a look at that definition of racism. Prejudice plus privilege plus power. Prejudice alone does not make one a racist according to Barry's definition. One must also have privilege and power.

So what is privilege? Can a black person have privilege? Can a woman? Do all white people have privilege? Where does it come from? Can it be transferred to someone else? Can it be eliminated? Who should eliminate it? Can privilege be eliminated without the use of power? Since power is a component of racism, and racism is bad and should be eliminated, should we elimate power? Given the association of power to racism, why would the YWCA want to empower women?

As for me, I will stick with Webster's definition of racism which is "the assumption that the characteristics and abilities of an individual are detirmined by race and that one race is biologically superior to another."

By redefining racism, Barry by definition lets members of certain races off the hook for being racists. The goal of the YWCA seemingly is to shift power from one race to another. If successful, would this end racism? Aren't we just changing who the racists are? Or are we to assume that a newly empowered and privileged race, lets say black people, would be less likely to be racist than whites?

Perhaps newly empowered blacks and women wouldn't be as racist as white people. But if we assume that upfront, aren't we believing that blacks and women are morally superior to whites and men, since they will be able to resist the temptations of power while white people, or empowered and privileged people, continue to oppress?

Is the YWCA meeting the Webster's definition of racism?

Greg Helding, Conservative?

Racine mayoral candidate Greg Helding has called for the demolition of the "infamous" Jacato Drive apartments, according to a recent article in the Racine Journal Times. From the article:

“It is high time to solve this problem once and for all,” he stated in a news release. “The law allows the city to proceed against the buildings as a public nuisance.

It is often said that Greg Helding is one of two conservatives running for mayor, the other being Jody Harding. Is Greg Helding's proposal conservative?

Not in my view. Conservatives believe in limited government, the rule of law, personal responsibility, and property rights, among other things.

Let us consider the GH's proposal in light of the beliefs or values typically held by conservatives.

1. Limited government. GH's proposes to take and destroy private property owned by people neither accused of or convicted of any crime. This is unlimited government power. Indeed, this is abuse of power and conservatives should not stand for it. Oh, and it would be very expensive with court costs, lawsuits, razing costs, relocation costs etc...

2. Rule of law. This is the idea that laws should be fairly, rather than arbitrarily, applied. GH's proposal to demolish nuisance properties would be arbitrarily applied. How do I know this? I am willing to bet that the three buildings that require the most police responses are Horlick, Park, and Case. Will these buildings be destroyed? No, of course not.

3. Personal responsibility. There are people committing crimes in Racine, to be sure. Rather than hold the criminals responsible for their own behavior, GH instead proposes to destroy the property of the people who have not been accused of any crime. Why not hold criminals responsible for the crime problem?

4. Property rights. GH's proposal is just another of a series of proposals and policies that undermine the rights of property owners in Racine.

Many of GH's proposals are not conservative. Indeed, he has seemingly embraced and or proposed virtually every big government idea at City Hall. I take no pleasure in saying so. GH understands conservative thought but it seems to me that he no longer embraces conservative ideas. If he believes otherwise, he is most welcome to chime in here.

Where are the Protesters?

Does anyone protest against the war in Iraq anymore? There used to be weekly protests here in Racine, letters to the editor etc... but not any more. Did something change? Is the war over? Did we win? If anyone can fill me in on what happened in Iraq, I would greatly appreciate it.

To Blame or not to Blame

A commentary in today's JT by local liberal activist Sister Michelle Olley has me scratching my head.

On the one hand she says:

Billions of people are caught in the unrelieved miseries of poverty, hunger, homelessness, disease, illiteracy, family disintegration and injustice while the tax evaders, risky investors, irresponsible spenders, overly compensated CEOs etc. wash their hands and insist that they are not responsible for the starvation, infant mortality, crime etc.

And then this:

When we start blaming each other for some problems, we can't focus on working together to bring about the best outcomes. To blame rarely enhances our understanding of the troubling situation and often hampers effective problem solving.

I blame Sister Michelle Olley. Her overly simplified attack on business and excesses by people in business have left her unfocused while hampering her "understanding of the troubling situation" that we find ourselves in.

Re Public School Curriculum/Political Agenda

In my ten years or so of observing local news, I don't ever recall hearing of a public school teacher being fired for anything other than criminal conduct. So I am rather intrigued by the recent firing of a World History teacher at Park being fired for departing from the curriculum. The full story can be found at journaltimes.com.

From the article:

After a meeting with Park and Unified officials Nov. 18, Pinter was given a formal reprimand. According to the written reprimand, the meeting was held “to discuss concerns over the appropriateness of teaching religious concepts and topics” in the class.

“The information that you have presented to your students crosses the line in terms of what should be taught in this course and goes way beyond the level of interest for this topic,” Park’s directing principal, Dan Thielen, wrote in the letter.

Pinter said worksheets he prepared that included scriptural verses were based on the district-sanctioned textbook, and he has used them before. It wasn’t an attempt to sway students’ beliefs, he said.

“I would never say this is the way it is,” Pinter said. “I say Muslims believe this. Christians believe this. I never say I believe this.”

He said he didn’t touch on Christianity again and thought the episode was over. Then in January the district alerted him that Thielen recommended he not be renewed “based on poor classroom management, failure to follow the District’s curriculum and ineffective teaching.”

A bit later in the article, a school board member who voted for Pinter's dismissal said that the case "focused on the teacher’s failure to follow the curriculum."

Now it may well be that Pinter is a lousy teacher. But I can't help but notice the double standard here. If a teacher teaches about world religion in a world history class, he gets fired for departing from the curriculum. But if a history teacher at, say, Horlick High School manages to get his student riled up enough to fight for the "rights" of illegal immigrants and to pester locals into passing another school referendum, then that teacher is following the curriculum?

Well at least we are getting some insight into the curriculum at our public schools, namely, left wing political movements.

Coming Clean

OK, I will come clean. My last thread, "Experts Warn of Split White Vote" was a lie. I made it up as an experiment. I wanted to see what kind of reaction I would get.

A few days ago, I came upon a local site called Insider News. The Insider News is a newspaper and web site that caters primarily to Racine's black community, so far as I can tell. Anyway, I found a thread entitled "Experts Warn of Split Black Vote." That thread is now gone, replaced by a similar, longer thread entitled "Will the Black Vote Split." You can read it at racineinsider.blogspot.com.
Anyway, the relevant paragraph is still there. It reads:

"Some black community leaders will not say it publicly, but they are concerned a crowded field including three well-known black candidates in the Racine mayoral campaign could split the black vote and throw the race to a white candidate."

Sound familiar? I basically used the same wording except I switched white for black and posted:

"I am aware of some white community leaders that won't say it publicly, but they are concerned that a crowded field in the mayoral race, including several well known white candidates, could split the white vote and throw the race to a black candidate."

Frankly, I find it rather disturbing that there are community leaders who openly (well, depending on the race of the listener) espouse racial solidarity in an election. Disturbing, but not surprising.

Thankfully, the Free Racine readers who did react displayed a negative reaction to the faux news regarding white solidarity. Not so over at the Insider News. Electing a black candidate apparently trumps, for some, electing the best candidate. How sad.

Experts Warn of Split White Vote

I am aware of some white community leaders that won't say it publicly, but they are concerned that a crowded field in the mayoral race, including several well known white candidates, could split the white vote and throw the race to a black candidate.

Please share your thoughts or comments.

On Emotions and Laws

"I see the same slippery slope, but I'm confident that society, legislators, Chief Executives and Judges can handle it just fine."

The above quote is from Rich Preston, a new participant here at Free Racine. It is regarding our disagreement on gay marriage. I contend that the same argument used to change the definition of marriage (basically that the present definition discriminates) can be used to change the definition further to include polygamy (aren't we then discriminating against those oriented toward multiple spouses?) or other combinations or permutations.

But RP is confident in society, judges etc... that marriage would not change any further. Or perhaps he is confident that it will change further but that that too is good. Perhaps Rich will clarify.

We have tampered with our legal system to such an extent that it will increasingly become nonsensical. Take for example the results of expansive interpretaions of the Commerce clause (regulating interstate commenrce) and the judicialy created right to privacy. So now we have a right to abort a child in a public hospital because of a right to privacy, but we don't have the same right to smoke a joint in our own home, with pot from our own garden (not an admission of guilt here, FYI) because it violates interstate commerce regulations.

Now this is not a screed against abortion or for pot smoking but rather an observation that if an abortion in a public place is protected on privacy grounds, why wouldn't smoking pot in a private place be likewise protected.

Such oddities will continue to happen when we endorse illogical laws based on emotional considerations. And RP is right that the elites in society will handle this type of nonsense. The rest of us will have a more difficult time navigating a leagal system that makes no sense.

Observations on Abortion, Government Health Care

Consider the following letter to the JT by one Mrs. William Hansen:

In answer to Linda Peterson's comment (Feb. 26) on abortion: You think abortion is wrong? Well, so is starving babies, shaking babies, abandoning children, having children you can't afford to feed, clothe or house. Life is precious, but so is a good one.

Now I did not read Linda Peterson's letter that Mrs. Hansen was responding to, but I am willing to bet that she did not advocate for the starving and shaking of babies.

To think that there is actually a person out there that thinks that an opponent of abortion is therefore an advocate of child abuse and torture.

Coming soon, a bureaucrat may one day decide whether Mrs. Hansen's life is precious enough to save.

PC Nicknames

I went to a basketball game last night featuring the Hawks vs the Crusaders. I wonder how long it will take before the matchup is Doves vs Toleraters.

Theory of the Day

The amount a local or state government spends touting opportunities for businesses is proportionate to the number and degree of business-hostile policies that they have enacted.

Right to Bare Arms

I don't know why people are making a fuss about Michelle Obama's apparent preference for sleeveless shirts.

Econ 101

The Sheperd Express has announced that Charlie Sykes is this weeks "Jerk of the Week."

"Charlie Sykes, who is still arguing that this package will not stimulate the economy because it is a variety of Democratic programs. Charlie either doesn't understand Economics 101 or he does and chooses to misinform his listeners. So Charlie, are you dumb or just a liar?" asks the SE.

And, argues the SE, "If people were paid to dig a hole and bury a newspaper, it would have the same stimulus impact (as Obama's plan) because these shovelers would then spend their wages and create more jobs." Why bother with the shoveling? Why not just give people vouchers so that they spend it?

Count me among those that don't understand Econ 101, if this is how it is being taught these days. Sure, I understand that spending stimulates, but the SE seems to be making the leap that any spending will be good for the economy.

How can this be so? What the SE fails to account for is the fact that the money paid to dig holes will have to be paid back. And where will that money come from? Money spent will either be wasted or it will be used to generate wealth. If it wasted, how will we pay the money back?

In the long run, whether government spending is good for the economy depends on whether it is well spent. The same is true in the private sector. If I make a wise investment I will generate additional wealth. If I spend it on a stimulating substance, say cocaine, I will certainly harm my own financial situation.

The idea that any spending will automatically help the economy in the long run makes no sense to me. Any Obama defenders want to take a shot at explaining this to me, in plain English please?