Parenting Blue

The following is my comment, awaiting moderation, to Steven over at Blogging Blue who wonders about his now three year old black son's safety in light of the Trayvon Martin death:

Steven, you worry about your son as all decent parents do. And his race may well contribute to different treatment from others, sometimes good treatment, sometimes not. My suggestion is that, over time, educate your son – explain to him that, unfortunately, people sometimes make assumptions about others based on what should be irrelevant characteristics. And that there is nothing whatsoever he can do about other people’s irrationality. As such, he should not dwell or obsess about others real or perceived attitudes towards him, as this will lead to a dead end of bitterness and excuse making. Rather, he should focus on his own development and decency. He may win over some who are obsessed with his blackness, some he may not. But again, its their problem, not his. It is true and unfortunate that he may be treated poorly by some, but then, who is always treated perfectly? People discriminate all the time. As a shorter man, I, now happily married, sometimes jokingly note that nearly all women are heightists, ie, they won’t date someone shorter. It would be foolhardy for me to claim victim status and set out to end this discrimination. Now I am not equating racism with heightism except to suggest that one should not dwell on something that you have no control over. And lastly, I would suggest that you not react hysterically to the Trayvon story any more that you should swear off flying after a plane accident. You cited statistics stating that a black boy is more likely to be shot by a white person that a white boy is. Perhaps true but as a parent I trust you don’t have a preference about who is to shoot your son, rather, you just don’t want him shot, period. As such, you might want to look into just who it is that is shooting the most black boys. Hint, it isn’t white people. And some day, your son will need to try to understand why violence is more of a problem, statistically speaking, among black people here in America. And here, unfortunately, I suspect you will fail your child.

Racism or Elitism?

RUSD Superintendent Ann Laing stepped in it a bit by making racially insensitive remarks about black families. Since she is a card carrying liberal, she will get through this episode unscathed. And she has apologized. Read the story here.

Basically, Laing insulted black families by pointing out that many were the ones most "prone to enroll their kids in the fly-by-night schools that cropped up after vouchers existed." She went on to add that black families "don't know how to make good choices for their children. They really don't. They didn't have parents who made good choices for them or helped them learn how to make good choices, so they don't know how to do that."

I have some sympathy for Sup Laing because I suspect she is right in many cases. Her mistake is to lump all black people together and assume, or at least incorrectly state, that all black families are basically dysfunctional. That is certainly not true or fair.

Of course much of the case against vouchers and for a monopolistic public school system rests on claims like Sup Laing's. Yes, the public is too stupid to make good choices on education. Therefore we need to limit or hopefully one day eliminate other educational options for children. And this will dramatically improve the funding and the educational outcomes for all our darlings.

I don't agree with the liberal line on public education, but what do I know, I'm just a white guy without an education degree.

Conditional Freedom

Racine's Becker era conditional-use law has been used to club another would-be business out of town. This time the victim is a funeral home that would have occupied the former Women's Club in downtown Racine. Opponents of the funeral home most often cited parking and traffic concerns as their reasons for opposition.

The conditional-use requirement essentially allows the city to circumvent their own zoning laws and make any potential business subject to a political process before opening.

The problem with the politicization of entrepreneurship is that the real reasons for opposition may not be so innocent. I am making no claims about the hearts and minds of the particular opponents in this case, but it is not a stretch to suggest that in some cases opponents won't want a particular type of person to open a business. That is, there might be discrimination on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, political persuasion etc... or to block a potential business competitor. There will always be ample "legitimate" concerns to mask the real reason for the opposition.

It is disheartening that the city has a law that invites and empowers discriminatory opposition. Prior to the conditional-use requirement, a persons race, gender, religion, sexual orientation etc... was not a factor in whether they could open a business in Racine. Is this progress?

Nuisance Schools

The City of Racine is looking to crack down on nuisance properties, namely those that require frequent and costly services from the police department.

My guess is that the three biggest offenders, though not all in Racine, are Park, Horlick, and Case high schools. Somehow I doubt the new ordinance will apply to those offenders.

We Don't Need...

"We don't need another WallMart."

The problem with this point of view is the assumption that one has or should have the power to prevent another from pursuing an opportunity, that the process of opening a business should be entirely politicized.

"We don't need another black family in the neighborhood."

Can we see the potential problem with empowering people to frustrate or deny opportunities or freedoms to others?

Other Than Wise

The following paragraph, found in this Journal Times article, is why I worry about sending my son to college:

Jennifer Correa, assistant professor of sociology and anthropology who spoke on the history of lynching, urged students to be “race conscious” — to be aware of other racial groups’ ideas and beliefs — and to challenge the notions of “whiteness.” Just like you define “good” by defining “bad,” she said “whiteness” is defined by “the Other,” referring to anything different. In order to address institutional racism, she argued society must first challenge the notions attached to “whiteness” like being civilized and superior.

First of all, do we really understand "good" by first defining "bad?" How did we first define "bad" without a definition of "good?" And isn't it silly to think that we understand "whiteness" by first defining the "other?" If the "other" is defined in part as "anything different," wouldn't we have to understand that which it is different from? So right off the bat we are working with a nonsensical premise.

And we are told to be "race conscious" while challenging notions of "whiteness." I wonder what Correa is conscious of when she sees me, a white man, since the notion of me being civilized must be challenged.

My head is spinning. I am going to lie down. But first, can anyone define "up" for me please?

City Discriminates Against Unmarried Heterosexual Couples

The city of Racine just extended benefits to the same sex partners of city employees, so long as they have registered as domestic partners with the state. But state law discriminates against opposite sex couples as only same sex partners may register as domestic partners. And the city of Racine in turn discriminates against unmarried opposite sex couples by denying them benefits that they are now extending to same sex couples.

Registry Abuse Prediction

The city is not just hurtling toward financial disaster with misguided TIFs but with a proposal to extend health benefits, read all about it here, to those on the state's domestic partnership list.

A little anecdote might just illustrate the future that awaits us. Someone dear to me had a friend who worked for an airline. The airline extended some flight benefits for any partner of the employee. Though the two were merely friends, the former flew many times for nearly free, courtesy of the airlines domestic partner policy.

Big deal you say. There are only a handful of people - 57 or so in the entire county - who are on the domestic registry list. How many of them work for the city? One, maybe two?

Yes, but here is the problem. As soon as benefits are extended, and they surely will be, you can say goodbye to city employees with single coverage. A single employee will be sitting on, ie wasting, a $900 per month or $11,000 annual benefit. How long before said single employee offers to sign up for the domestic registry with the chronically ill acquaintance that offers him $4,000 per year? Before long everyone working for the city will either be married or will have a domestic partner, and our costs will skyrocket. Mark my words.

Planning Omissions

I went to a Racine Planning Commission meeting last night to learn more about the Porters project and the TIF proposed to help with the financing. But that was not the only issue before the commission.

It seems that there are some folks who want to utilize (purchase or rent?) the Women's Club building on the outskirts of downtown. The one and only controversy discussed was over parking and traffic congestion that might result when the proprietors have a funeral procession departing from their establishment. Apparently this was the second time wrangling over the issue and this time the proprietors proposed routes which seemingly would have been different from those used by a neighboring funeral home. We also learned that in the last five years, they have only had about five funerals that did not go from a church directly to a cemetery. In other words, unless they change their modus operandi, they will have very infrequent funeral processions. Even so, they spent close to an hour discussing this phantom problem before deferring action until such time as the proprietor can relieve the concerns of the committee. How exactly to successfully address the "problem" of a once a year funeral procession on public streets was left unsaid.

Regarding the Porter's project, it was a love fest from start to finish. The project itself looks great and I wholeheartedly endorse the Waters family using their own money or that of investors to move forward. Fearing the TIF would sail through the committee like a funeral procession on an open road, it was up to me apparently to suggest that a TIF is a serious investment by the public, with considerable risks to the taxpayer, and that the risks should be fully explored before the matter is voted upon. But alas, with no discussion beyond praise for the Waters family, they voted unanimously to approve the TIF. The matter now heads to the full council.

Letter to JT Editor

Yours truly has written a letter that appears in today's Journal Times. Here it is:

Is that really a ‘right?'
State Rep. Cory Mason, D-Racine, recently argued that Gov. Scott Walker deserves to be recalled because he has taken away people's rights.
Mason is not referring to the rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of the Declaration of Independence or of the rights delineated in the United States Constitution and the amendments.
Rather, he is bemoaning the curtailing of the privilege of collective bargaining granted to government employees unions.
These privileges included the power to compel membership among government employees, to forcibly remove money from their paychecks, and to have special powers to shape employment contracts in their favor. Note that the rest of us do not enjoy such "rights."
One wonders if Rep. Mason would vigorously defend my right to form a taxpayers union. Would he support legislation enabling me to compel membership upon all taxpayers, accepting without proof my assertion that all taxpayers would benefit from my representation? Would I enjoy the "right" to take money from the taxpayers with help from Mason? Would Mason casually accept the distorted political environment that resulted in me using the forcibly extracted money to remove him from office?
Denis Navratil

Cranley Discovers Use For Founders

I reprint Sean Cranley's letter to the Journal Times here in its entirety as it merits a few points for discussion:

Citizens, Burlington schools are under Tea Party assault with four TPs challenging incumbents John Anderson and Susan Kessler in the Feb. 21 board primary.
TPs are “taxpayers,” money-focused victims. “Citizens” pay dues for a civilized society. Public education provided by people of goodwill who built this country facilitated our success. They would have one requirement: Pass it on.
John Adams: “Laws for the liberal education of the youth, especially of the lower class of the people, are so extremely wise and useful, that to a humane and generous mind, no expense for this purpose would be thought extravagant.”
Thomas Jefferson: “I have indeed two great measures at heart, without which no republic can maintain itself in strength: 1. That of general education, to enable every man to judge for himself what will secure or endanger his freedom. 2. To divide every county into hundreds, of such size that all the children of each will be within reach of a central school in it.”
James Madison: “The liberal appropriations made by the Legislature of Kentucky for a general system of Education cannot be too much applauded. A popular government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”
Citizens, vote Tuesday for rational balance, not the extremist selfishness of the TP taxpayers.
Sean Cranley


Note that if you run for office with an agenda that differs from Sean's, it is now an assault. Is anyone actually fooled by such a nonsense argument? Sean makes no actual claims or arguments about their agenda. They are simply dismissed because of an alleged association with the Tea Party. Weak Sean, very weak.

Let's use Sean's playbook. Why would anyone be persuaded by the ranting of slave-owning, slave-raping, old, white, one percenters? Sean apparently yearns for the good old days on the plantation and the joys of raping slaves. Talk about extreme selfishness!

Even mimicking Sean's methods leaves a bad taste in my mouth, so I will take on his apparent argument. Everybody from the founders quoted to parties on either side of our present political divide recognize the importance of education for all children who desire an education. To suggest otherwise is simply dishonest. Certainly there are huge differences of opinion as to the best means to ensure an educated populace. My guess is that the founders quoted where not championing an increasingly federalized education system, overtly hostile towards Christianity, and run by unionized government employees. If Sean really thinks our founders would applaud our current public education system, well, he is even more deluded than I thought he was.

Rights restored

Representative Cory Mason recently argued that the recall of Governor Walker is necessary because he took away people's rights, namely those belonging to government unions.

A stronger case can be made that Governor Walker has in fact restored rights. For example, people have a right to associate with whomever they wish, or, to not associate with whom they would rather not. But government workers were forced to be dues paying union members. Their rights have been restored.

Or how about the right to equal protection of the laws? In what sense are we protected equally in the political process when one and only one favored constituency - that is, government unions - gets a special seat at the table when negotiating with government? There are times I wish I could be part of a taxpayers union that forcibly withdrew money from the accounts of all taxpayers, that in turn funneled said money to promote conservative policies and politicians, that gained power to uniquely influence government in our favor etc.... and then I realize that that would be wrong. Governor Walker has restored an equal ability to petition government to all concerned parties.

Tax Breaks for Thee but not for Me, or You

This post may not win me any popularity contests in downtown Racine and perhaps I shouldn't blog with steam coming out of my ears, but here goes.

The Journal Times has a story about a $5.5 million redevelopment of the Porters building that you can read here.

As Free Racine readers may know, I have noted numerous times over the years that the tax burden is so great in Racine that redevelopment is a very risky proposition without some tax breaks. I have advocated an incentive plan that would reduce the tax burden on property improvements for anyone wishing to improve their property, suggesting a tax break of five years or so. I called it a microTIF (TIF standing for tax incremental financing).

Here is the problem with the proposed Porters redevelopment. They are getting a 20 year break on taxes. Assuming our current tax of $25.47 (per thousand of property value) and the assessment of the Porters improvement of $5.5 million doesn't change over 20 years, the developers will save $2.8 million over twenty years (5500 X 25.47 X 20 = $2,801,700).

Now that is all well and good for the developers of Porters. For the record, I know and like Micah Waters and I hope my opposition to this sweetheart deal is not considered personal as I can assure you it is not.

As it happens, I have a ready comparison of redevelopment projects, the Porters project with my own that does not include a twenty year tax break. The bulk of the improvements at my property at 416 Main Street were for two residential units. After my improvements my property value increase was deemed to be about $300,000. That adds about $7,600 annually to my tax burden. Had I gotten the same deal and property tax rates and my property assessment remained constant, I would save over $150,000 over twenty years.

The Porters folks and building owners like me will be in the same business, competing for tenants. Because Porters won't have to pay property taxes on their $5.5 million improvement, they will save roughly $140,000 per year, or an average of about $3,255 per their 43 residential and retail units. This amounts to a $271 monthly advantage for Porters over the rest of us who are required to pay our taxes. This is a huge difference that will enable them to offer deals to renters while maintaining a healthy profit margin. By comparison again, had I the same deal with the city, I could lower my rent or pocket $317 per month per rental unit.

The bottom line is that taxes are too high for development to occur in Racine. While the city apparently recognizes that fact sporadically, the result is that well connected developers get great deals that virtually ensure financial success, while the rest of us get to pay the taxes.

I feel like a sucker.

Melding of Church and State

Separation of church and state is a cherished principle for progressives except when President Obama wants to dictate to the Catholic Church.

Brandt Discovers Right Wing Recall Plot

Former Journal Times Editor and current treasurer of the Committee to Recall Wangaard, Randolph Brandt, has discovered our vast right wing conspiracy to discredit the recall effort. Read all about it here.

Brandt is referring to the felony shenanigans of one Mark Demet. Demet was discovered by one Ken Brown (full disclosure:friend and co-right-wing-conspiritor) to have forged the signature of his own brother, multiple times, as well as his own mother, and some neighbors etc.... on recall Wangaard petitions. Brandt claims never to have heard of Demet but his committee nonetheless accepted his fraudulent petitions. But now it seems Brandt has discovered our plot.

According to the JT article, "Brandt questioned if possibly the man was intentionally trying to discredit the recall process by having relatives come forward and say they didn't sign."

Thank you Mark Demet for taking one for the conservative team! Well done on posing as a loopy liberal for all these years! You almost had me fooled. The cash we have promised can be found in the prearranged location and per your instructions. No doubt this will more than compensate for the hit you will take to your reputation, your record, and your pocketbook. I doubt you will see jail time, but if so we will surely see that you have ample supply of cigarettes. It was a heroic and selfless act Mark that will greatly help our cause. Thank you sincerely from me and from all your friends at the Committee to Discredit the Committee to Recall Wangaard.

Lukewarmers

Remember global warming? Why aren't liberals constantly bringing up the subject anymore, especially as the whole country is enjoying a mild, or shall we say, warm, winter?

OK, there are still true believers out there, but the sane among the left are probably a bit embarrassed for having bit on that issue. But they are not about to publicly announce a change of view, as that would be too embarrassing for most. Rather, they are just going to ignore the "issue" and hope it goes away. Kind of like those people who fell for the hopey changey Obama stuff the first go around.

A Wall Street Journal letter writer, one Irwin Romaner, makes an excellent point. The true believers argue that global warming is real and therefor their policy preferences must be followed. Romaner disagrees as follows:

Even if climate change is real and human caused, the global-warming argument rests and falls on a much broader set of assumptions:quantitatively serious global warming is in fact taking place and will continue to take place; global warming is a bad thing; it is entirely or mostly human caused; it is within "our" (the U.S. and Western Europe but not India and China's) technological capability to substantially fix the problem; and, it can be fixed cost-effectively. Every one of these assumptions is very much open to question, and if any one of them is answered in the negative, the whole global warming enterprise falls apart.

As I contemplate assumption #2 - global warming is all bad - and a vigorous bike ride in February in Wisconsin, well, a part of me wishes the lukewarmers were right.

On Proof and Election Fraud

Sean Cranley seems to think I am dodging him on the voter ID issue. Not so Sean. The thing is, like most issues, we see them very differently. You would like to believe that voter fraud is virtually non-existant, hasn't been proven to be a problem to your satisfaction and is therefore unnecessary. I on the other hand don't view "proof to Sean's satisfaction" as the standard before proceeding with legislation. As a lifelong observer of human nature, I find it incredible that anyone would believe that voter fraud wouldn't occur. So the same people willing to slash the tires of vans lined up to take Republicans to the polls wouldn't vouch for the identity of someone willing to vote for a Democrat? The dead never voted in Chicago? Republicans, whom you otherwise regard with unconcealed scorn, are greedy power hungry sob's, no, they won't cheat will they Sean? Look at the article in today's Journal Times Sean. It appears as though a Dem is in a bit of trouble for forging the signature of his own brother and mother in the recall Wangaard effort. But he wouldn't cheat in an actual election, right Sean?

So Sean and I disagree. How do we resolve such issues in a representative government? We elect representatives who in turn vote for legislative changes. We have done so and now we have a reasonable law that requires a valid ID for voting purposes. The law makes it as easy as possible to comply with the law. Similar laws have survived legal challenges. So there you have it.

But Sean wants proof of a problem. Though I doubt he has the same standard for other legislation. For example, despite liberals protestations, man made global warming hasn't been proven, nor has it been proven to be a problem on balance if true, but somehow I doubt Sean required proof before jumping on that bandwagon.

And finally, why must we adopt your standard Sean? Why don't you prove that voter fraud doesn't occur? Prove that Dem operatives throughout the state are not rounding up volunteers to drive around to various polling stations to vote multiple times. Prove it ain't so Sean.

Rampant Racism Indeed

Random thoughts on the Parkside hate crime stories and the JT coverage of said stories.

For those of you who have missed the stories, check out the JT on line for the last few days. In a nutshell, the JT reported hate crimes at Parkside, including two noose incidents and a list of black people who were going to die in a day or two. Oops, it turns out that the incidents were perpetrated by a black female student at Parkside reportedly wanting to bring attention to the problem of racism.

Kind of like raping someone to bring attention to the problem of rape. Or selling guns to violent drug lords to bring attention to the problem of gun violence.

The Journal Times had a collective leg tingle at the prospect of writing a story about threats to black people. If you want attention, there is no better way to get it unless you stop giving money to Planned Parenthood.

Watch the JT slowly slink away from this story now that the perpetrator has been found to be black. The slinking began today with a below-the-fold story that claims racism is still a problem at Parkside, despite the "hoax."

About that hoax thing. Is a threat suddenly transformed into a "hoax" if committed by a black person? Does a threat remain a hate crime if the perpetrator is white? The underlying crime, threatening black people, is still the same.

Would the police, the university, and the media be so careful in withholding the name of the perpetrator if he/she were white? They want to protect her they say. Wow, if someone threatened to kill me and the police knew who it was, I think I ought to have that information, you know, for my own protection.

If someone is arrested, it is public information, is it not? Can we conclude that the perpetrator has not been arrested? Are there two standards of justice depending on race? What is it called when officials treat one race better than another? I think that is called institutional racism.

Beer Summit

The fourth annual Free Racine beer summit will be held at the Ivanhoe in downtown Racine next Wed, Feb 8th, at 7 pm until whenever. All are welcome.

The Racist Left

The voter ID law is considered racist by the unhinged, not because voting requirements differ by race, but because the law will have a disparate impact on minorities, supposedly.

Very well, but if a greater negative impact on minorities is the standard by which a policy is deemed to be racist, then the public school system and minimum wage laws are also racist as they result in lower test scores, graduation rates, and lower employment rates among minorities.

Indeed the entire liberal progressive agenda has been nothing but a disaster for minorities, and is therefore racist, by the standard created by liberals.

What Voter Suppression?

OUR VOTING RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK.

So says the Racine Mirror, a local free paper. This "aggressive attack" includes a "voter suppression measure," that is, a voter ID requirement. If you care to join the battle for voter rights or would like assistance overcoming the "aggressive attack" on your rights, you may call the Racine Branch of the NAACP.

Luckily, I have not found the recent ID requirement quite so sinister. I recently took a trip to the DMV to assist a lovely lady in exchanging her drivers license for a state ID. The entire process took about a half an hour and was free. Granted, the "whites only" line at the DMV was most helpful. Thanks Governor Walker!

Benefits, End or Extend?

Great news!! Racine evidently has resolved all its fiscal challenges such that we can now contemplate adding domestic partnership benefits for city employees.

Racine has in recent years seen a 50% drop in property values without a commensurate reduction in property values or property taxes. The population has been in a fairly steady decline for a few decades, leaving fewer to bear the tax burden. Is this really the time to consider adding a huge new entitlement to partners, boyfriends, girlfriends, roommates etc....of city employees? Obviously not.

But what about basic fairness? Should the city discriminate against unmarried couples and in favor of married ones? Is marriage an institution that we should favor over other relationships?

It seems to me the city has two separate questions to address. First the alderman must determine whether marriage is an institution that should be treated favorably relative to other relationships. And If their answer is no, it should not be assumed that the proper course of action is to add benefits for unmarried partners. Another option would be to eliminate benefits for anyone other than the employee.

I am sure the latter option would bring out some unlikely defenders of marriage. Might be fun to watch.

Levie's Disturbing Vision

RUSD activist/indoctrinator Al Levie has a commentary in the JT today that should concern anyone interested in ensuring a fair and balanced education for children attending our public schools.

Levie assumes that the ideals of our country can be summarized in a few quotes from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Abraham Lincoln, and that equality of economic outcomes and "concerns of humanity over narrow individual wants" should be our goal as a society. The problem with Levie's assumptions and his more specific objectives -next paragraph - is that they can so easily run afoul of our actual priorities as they have been enshrined in our constitution.

Levie pledges to "redouble my efforts in the struggle for social and economic justice. Concretely, that means fighting to roll back the power of the corporate elite in our society, making the ultra-rich pay their fair share in taxes, fighting for adequate funding for our public schools, restoring collective bargaining for public employees, fair and humane immigration reform, and restoring the voting rights for all people living within our state and country."

Now to parse Levie's vague and flowery language.

Rolling back the power of corporate elites means curtailing the rights of free speech guaranteed in our constitution. In Levie's vision, it is just fine for one organization, a union, to forcibly remove cash from the paychecks of members forced by virtue of their profession to be members, and to use that money for political speech, but that it is not ok for corporations to similarly participate in the election process.

Fair share taxes and adequate funding for public schools are of course never quantified. The reason this is so is because enough is never enough. As a nation we pump more money into public schools than virtually every other nation and all we get is Levie's indoctrinating our children while failing to teach the fundamental skills needed to compete in society. Of course Levie doesn't want people to have to compete as he has a utopian vision for society. Anyway, while it is debatable whether Levie's tax-hell vision runs afoul of our constitution, it certainly runs afoul of economic realities and would leave us all much poorer, though perhaps equal.

Restoring collective bargaining for public employees means creating or recreating an inequitable system that grants powers to union bosses not available to other citizens. Wouldn't you just love to bargain over your property taxes? Thanks Governor Walker for restoring equal protections for the rest of us.

Fair and humane immigration reform of course is code for open borders and citizenship for people who violate our immigration laws. Levie is a big proponent of the DREAM Act which would elevate illegal immigrants above citizens insofar as the former would be granted in-state tuition, despite being unlawful residents of said state, while the latter citizens would pay out-of -state rates.

And lastly, restoring voting rights probably refers to Levie's efforts to ensure that people can vote without producing a valid identification. This of course enables voter fraud which disenfranchises legitimate voters.

Be concerned for our public school children, be very concerned.

County Board Corruption

The Journal Times gets one right in this commentary opposing the Racine County Board's two tiered health insurance compensation program.

In a nutshell, the board has eliminated health insurance for any new county supervisors while keeping it for incumbent supervisors. This is no small matter insofar as the insurance is worth far more than the monetary compensation. So the board has created considerable incentives for themselves to continue as supervisors while creating disincentives to any challengers. Not only is this wrong, I have a hard time believing it could be legal.

If nothing else, we should vote out anyone who is benefitting from such a corrupt program.

Fire Away!

Mitt Romney has come under fire for saying he likes to fire people. Perhaps he will back away from the notion, but I think it needs an unapologetic defense.

We all fire people every day. Every consumer choice involves hiring one while in effect firing everyone else. Would anyone want it any other way? If you hire someone to mow your lawn and they show up late and do a lousy job, you wouldn't want to be stuck with that employee.

Now lets take a look at the people whom we can't easily fire. Tenured teachers are one example. Many civil servants have great job security. Yet not all off these folks are performing well, but we are stuck with them. Are we better off for this?

The more people there are that we can't fire, the less free we are. Enjoy what remains of your right to fire, and hire.

Crime Season

Don't you just love the change in seasons? In Milwaukee my ilk are steeling cars to celebrate.

Now I enjoy a good joy ride just like you, but the onset of colder temps means its time to climb into the attic and get out the box of ski masks. I'm not a skier of course, I just can't wait to paw through my favorite accessory. There is nothing quite like enjoying the fruits of a well planned liquor store robbery. It hardly even seems like work.

And then there is spring. Don't you want to just get out of the house after a long winter? Well your victims do as well, and that means easy pickins and less hassles. Now stop your snickering. Until you have walked a mile in my shoes.... through snow drifts....with a flat screen, you just don't understand the hardships of winter.

Summer is my favorite time of year as I enjoy a more direct relationship with my victims. Summer is assault time baby. And purse snatching. And pistol whipping etc... And after a day of fun you can usually find a good after-bar melee. But summer has its dark side too. No doubt somewhere along the way you have been cold cocked in a bar fight or someone "forgot" to pay his protection tax. But that is what fall is for.

Harvest time! Time to get reaped for what you've sown. Nothing like ushering in revenge season with a well, er executed, drive by on a cool crisp evening. Settle a few scores and settle in for a long winter.

With what liquor should I pair my roasted chestnuts?

Look Who's Shredding Now

"Shredding the constitution" was one of the more promiscuously used phrases employed during the Bush administration. I can't wait to hear the howls of protest from the purists on the left over these transgressions.

Union Ethics Part 2

This story is still evolving but does seem to shed some light on the union mindset. It seems a few dozen of the usual suspects - can't wait to learn their names - were ticketed for illegal demonstrations in a residential area. They were oh so cleverly dressed with top hats and what not to evoke a 1%er image while they harassed Paul Ryan and others at a private fundraiser. By a stroke of luck we have union fingerprints on this illegal behavior as the limo driver -staying with the 1% theme - indicated that he picked up the rabble rousers at a union hall. I think it will prove a tad difficult for them to distance themselves from this illegal activity.

So once again we have an organized disregard for the law no doubt coupled with an ends-justifies-the-means ethic. No thanks.

Union Ethics

I was listening to the Ed Schultz show the other day. His guest was a union leader of national renown who's name I don't recall. Anyway, the guest was speaking favorably about many "occupy" offshoots, including a movement to "occupy" homes slated for foreclosure. The stated justification for the occupation was because the banks were unable to prove ownership of the homes.

Perhaps so, but then I somehow doubt that the "occupiers" had any proof whatsoever that the home belonged to them either. So what you have is a double standard endorsed by the union thug. Banks must have impeccable proof of ownership absent any clerical errors or they lose their property to a mob with no reasonable claim of ownership.

Another reason why the union thugs lost me years ago. Envy is the only reason to side with them on this issue and most others. No thanks.

Amuse a Liberal Today

Root Riven Siren is laughing aloud at the following tweet:

Coming across each Walker ad- it's like discovering vomit on a morning sidewalk. Repulsive discovery.

Who knew it was so easy to amuse a liberal? Coming across a Walker ad- it's like discovering a turd in your breakfast cereal. Ha ha ha. Or like finding maggots in your genital cyst. Ha ha ha, I am hilarious. Go ahead, lol with me. I know it, you know it, I am a laugh riot. Or finding a decomposing rat....

Try it yourself. Show me you are as funny as a liberal. Coming across a Walker ad - it's like.....

Merry Christmas

Apologies to my readers for the lack of content recently, I have been crazy busy. That will taper off soon enough and I can get back to commenting on the passing scene. So Merry Christmas to all, Sean included. Who says conservatives aren't inclusive?

On Race, Talent, Christianity, etc...

People seem to either love or hate Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow, I suspect because he is overtly Christian-y. But then again, Green Bay star Reggie White was also overtly Christian-y, and he was universally loved and respected as a player, though he harmed his image later with some ridiculous statements, if I recall correctly.

So my question is why the difference in treatment? Is it that White was regarded as a better player or is race somehow a factor? Any theories?

Local Lefty Echo Chamber

With Kay's Blue Racine switching to an invitation only format - me not invited - and RootRiverSiren screening and then not publishing a recent comment of mine, it seems the local left is committing to an ideological echo chamber style of blogging. For people so sure of the superiority of their ideas, this seems a bit strange. And for those of you who wonder why I put up with Sean Cranley, it is because, unlike much of the local left, I am actually up for debate and discussion and Sean sadly is my only current detractor.

So about that RootRiverSiren comment. RRS has been relentlessly focused on the recall-related misdeeds committed, allegedly, by Republicans. And she is upset that Democrat spokesman Graeme Zelinski has not denounced the perpetrators. I couldn't help but notice that the Zelinski photo had a picture of labor leader Samuel Gompers and the following quote: Reward your friends, punish your enemies. My comment was that Zelinski's sin was insufficient adherence to the Democrat ethos promoted in the photo.

Sadly, an opportunity was missed. The comment might have sparked a defense or explanation of the Gompers quote and the role or appropriateness of reward and punishment in politics. Instead, an inconvenient criticism was swatted away and its back to the one-sided demonization of Republicans. A sad state our local lefties are in. Too bad.

Tax Time?

A friend was recently asked the following question on a graduate school entrance exam: Would it be appropriate for a school to require parents to volunteer at their children's school?

My answer. First differentiate between private and public schools. The former should be free to create whatever innovative programs that might help the institutions mission and if parents don't like it they can send their children elsewhere. Regarding a public school, the oxymoronic notion of required volunteerism is truly horrifying insofar as the precedent it would set. Seeing as public schools are government institutions, the uncompensated work required would be a new type of tax, a time tax.

If this idea gained traction in the public schools, I suspect it would be only a matter of time before our Saturdays were spent assembling windmills and solar panels, for the good of society of course.

And there is another word for forced work without pay. I can't remember all the details but I thought our country had resolved that issue already.

Rights Versus Rights

I was talking with a few recent college grads on the subject of rights. They were proponents of what I think are categorized as positive rights, things such as a right to a college education and the right to health care, proper housing etc... I on the other hand am a proponent of the basics, life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, otherwise known, I think, as negative rights.

The rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, don't demand anything of others except the respect of those rights. In other words, for me to exercise my right to live, all that is required of others is to respect that right by not killing me. My right to liberty simply requires you not to enslave me.

Among the problems with the rights proliferation favored by my young friends is that they can't be accomplished without chipping away at the basic rights favored by liberals (true liberals that is) like myself. For example, the right to a college education necessarily demands much of others. Colleges must be built, professors must teach, and this all costs money. Thus, your right to an education requires others time and money to provide that right. And in the process, one's own rights to liberty and one's own right to pursuit of happiness are diminished by the demand to provide a college education for someone else. And I am willing to bet that the advocates of rights proliferation are far more likely to be squishy on the most fundamental right, to life. What good after all is the right to a college education for the aborted/killed baby?

And on a tangential note, isn't the notion of a right to a college education rather silly if you think about it? One must have the intelligence and the drive to earn a college degree. How can those be guaranteed? It is a bit like me demanding the right to bench press 400 pounds or the right to be a pro bowl defensive lineman.

And lastly, to the extent that a right to a college education gains acceptance, we will see a commensurate increase in muddled thinking on rights.

Card Check Versus Secret Ballot Recall

Methinks we just might be witnessing the important difference between the secret ballot and card check. Presently we are amid the card check segment of the recall election. So we have some awkward moments like a Unified teacher asking for signatures at the family Thanksgiving party. I would guess there are those who might just sign to avoid a confrontation. What they do at the polls absent the pressure is anyone's guess. But this much we do know. We won't have anyone refusing to sign the recall who subsequently votes against Walker in the election. So the Dems can gloat about the number of recall signatures they can get. I doubt they will be so pleased with the election results.

The Reasonable Union Myth

Continuing with the recall theme, I spoke with a woman who stated that the unions were offering all the concessions that were needed, such that Walker's subsequent "gutting" of union collective bargaining "rights" were a needless and largely personal attack on workers rights.

I didn't ask but do wonder whether her or anyone else really believes this narrative. My own belief is that unions have reliably demonstrated a pattern of conceding nothing unless it helps members and or union leadership. And this is how they should behave insofar as it is an organization created to empower its members.

The reality is that unions offered benefit and pension concessions as a tactical move to stall and hopefully prevent the needed curtailing of their political power via the forced unionization of government employees and the subsequent steady flow of dues money. And this was the right move for the union insofar as they were negotiating from a position of weakness and this was a desperate attempt to forestall the more damaging attempts to end the forced unionization of members and the restriction of certain bargaining opportunities.

But for anyone to conclude that the unions were simply looking out for the people of Wisconsin and offering reasonable concessions to ease the strain on the state budget - rather than a calculated attempt to retain as much power, money and influence as possible - well, such a person is either ignorant, delusional, or both.

Ad Hominem Recall

I have talked to more than a few folks eager to recall Governor Walker. Invariably there is an intense personal loathing of the man. He is arrogant, he is condescending, he is power hungry etc... Some of these same folks will acknowledge that the cost of government employment was such that something at some point needed to be done. They want to recall him, it seems, primarily because of the manner in which he did what he did.

I will admit that I haven't spent much time listening to or observing Governor Walker, and that I generally like his policies, but what I have seen of him would not cause me to dislike him personally. He presents as a low key and reasonable person to me.

My own theory is that, upon scrutiny, Walker's signature policy move of limiting government union power was far from draconian, even for those directly affected. Thus, the emphasis for recall proponents needs to be on Walker's personal attributes, and any negative qualities must be relentlessly exaggerated or fabricated.

I don't think this recall will be successful as a result of such a week argument in its favor.

And one further point. Opponents of President Obama who frame their argument mostly in personal terms are often considered racists by the left. Indeed, the personal or ad hominem argument is rightfully considered one of the weakest forms of persuasion. Yet this is the primary method used by the recall folks. And they get away with it with little criticism.

Serve and Protect......Yourself

The City of Racine has responded to the new law allowing the concealed carrying of firearms by banning said firearms in city buildings. Mayor Dickert issued an executive order and the city is now placing signs reading: No Weapons Or Firearms Allowed On These Premises.

But the fine print is hilarious. It reads: "Although weapons are banned from this municipal facility, the City of Racine cannot ensure the protection of visitors or its employees from individuals who unlawfully enter with weapons and does not offer protection against the actions of violators."

According to the Journal Times article, city attorney Scott Lettney said the disclaimer was in part based on advice from the city's liability insurer. "We're just trying to protect (the city) to the extent we can" said Lettney.

City residents, however, are on their own, defenseless.

And just in case you haven't gotten the message, I will spell it out for you. The city will not protect you. The city will not allow you to protect yourself. But the city will protect itself, from your lawsuits, when you are injured or killed as a result of city policy.

Name That Species

Today I noticed a huge group occupying private property, I believe, without permission. When asked what they were protesting, they produced a lot of noise but no coherent message whatsoever. They consumed everything in sight without paying. Indeed the very notion of an exchange of goods for an honest days work was foreign to them. And they were defecating and fornicating freely and shamelessly.

But unlike their human counterparts, they left peacefully when confronted by authorities.

On Sex and Drugs

I was asked recently whether sex ed should be taught in schools. My answer was that if a school could, or would, address the full range of thoughts on the matter, then sure. And by full range of thoughts, I mean the major philosophical/religious traditions and their contributions on the subject. But as it is in non-religious schools, those contributions must be (or at least are) ignored. That leaves largely a non-judgemental, you-are-going-to-do-it-anyway, so-let's-be-safe approach.

Why not take the same approach with drug and alcohol use? Should children learn which vein to stick the needle in? Or how to make meth without starting a fire? And to drink a few glasses of water after binge drinking to minimize dehydration?

If adults can't or won't make moral judgements, should we be surprised that children and young adults can't or won't as well?

Newt Gingrich Pinched my Ass

I am concerned about Newt Gingrich's recent rise in the polls. I don't think he can win in a head to head matchup with President Obama. Oh yah, and he pinched my ass at a Tea Party event last year.

Questions Worth Asking

Lately I have been hearing more than usual about the problem of bullying and subsequent suicides of gay youths. As always I am attuned to the possibility of political agendas. So I have done a bit of sniffing around on the internet on the subject. I now have more questions than answers. I suppose I should not ask the questions, but I will anyway.

Is there an increase in suicides among gay youth or simply an increased focus on the issue? Does bullying cause an increase in suicide? If bullying leads to greater numbers of suicides, why aren't we seeing or hearing about suicide among young Asians, as they are subject to the greatest amount of bullying among young people? If gay suicide is on the rise, what does that say about the effectiveness of the LGBT outreach programs that have proliferated over the years? If gay suicide is not on the rise, why is the coverage of the problem on the rise, as it seems to be?

After reading a few articles, I am able to reach at least one conclusion about the media coverage of the issue. That is, it is to be assumed true that the suicides are caused exclusively by external factors, primarily bullying or more broadly a lack of acceptance by portions of society. Don't even dare to ask whether there is anything inherent in homosexuality that may cause internal angst, confusion, despair etc... that may lead to or contribute to a decision to end ones life prematurely.

By no means do I claim to know whether or why suicide is a growing problem among gay youths. But it seems to me that if as a society we need to explore and address a problem, we should be sure consider any and all potential factors that may contribute to the problem. Avoiding difficult or politically incorrect questions may help a political agenda, but will it help a youth in crisis?

A Progressives Predicament

Proposition A: Force should be used as sparingly as possible.
Proposition B: Governments must ultimately use force to ensure compliance with laws.
Proposition C: If you agree with Propositions A and B, it follows that you would want a smaller government, creating fewer rules and using less force against the citizenry.

Unless you are a "progressive." "Progressives" will tend to agree with Proposition A but work to enlarge the scope and power of government.

Thus "progressives" are either confused, illogical, or insincere about their support of Proposition A.

Progressing to Pedophilia?

Yesterday I picked up a copy of the Wisconsin Gazette. They bill themselves as "the voice of progress for Wisconsin's LGBT community."

I find an article entitled "Gay military strategist key to Washington's victory over British" written by Victoria A. Brownsworth as a special to the Wisconsin Gazette for National Gay History Month. Read it here.

I will summarize. The article touts Benjamin Franklin as a gay-friendly founding father because he recruited gay military strategist and "extraordinary advisor" Baron Friedrich von Steuben to help with our war versus the British. According to the article, Franklin gradually overcame his reluctance to recommend Von Steuben for the job. He came with a bit of baggage. For example, a letter written to Von Steuben's former boss reads "It has come to me from different sources that M. de Steuben is accused of having taken liberties with young boys which the laws forbid and punish severely...." Nonetheless, Franklin wrote the recommendation and "Von Steuben arrived in February 1778 with his 17-year-old French lover, Pierre Etienne Duponceau. The rest - thanks to Franklin - is history."

So the only mention in the article of Von Steuben's homosexual activity involved sex with boys. The article quite evidently does not distinguish between homosexuality and gay pedophilia. Throughout the article, Von Steuben is simply described as "gay." And the article generally portrays both Franklin and Von Steuben favorably.

Frankly, I find this disgusting. A 17-year-old French "lover" of a 47 year old man would be considered by decent people as a victim, not a lover.

So I am left wondering why the voice of progress in the Wisconsin LGBT community would print articles about pedophiles and pedophilia in such a positive light. Is that what they intend to progress towards?

Undocumented Americans

We have all heard of the plight of the hard working undocumented Mexicans in our midst. But little to no attention is given to the problem faced by undocumented Americans. This is their story.

Most Americans just assume freedom is a birthright. That is what Jim (last name withheld) thought. And then his freedoms were systematically denied by, get this, his own government.

Jim was literally put in a cage for years. But Jim was not to be denied his freedom. He is free now, albeit without the proper government documents. And his plight continues.

Jim is literally being hunted by armed government officials. Sometimes Jim wishes he had it as easy as the Mexicans. He would gladly pay full tuition to a university if the government would just call off the dogs - yes, they actually do chase him with dogs.

Jim just wants the freedoms that the rest of us take for granted. If ours was a just society, we would call him a freedom fighter. But no, Jim is ridiculed. They call him insensitive and stigmatizing slurs like "fugitive" or "jailbreaker."

Shame on America!

An Untimely Excuse

That Racine's 14th annual Racine Unified analysis has revealed 14 consecutive years of educational failure should surprise exactly nobody.

Nor I suppose should we be surprised by the reasons offered by the experts. Especially comical is the explanation offered by Racine Educational Association president Pete Knotek, who cited "the elimination of collective bargaining" as "an external factor that hinders our program."

How exactly has a 2011 law that affected not a single union contract at Unified somehow managed to cause 14 years of educational futility? I wonder which 2025 legislative actions are the cause of this years dismal performance?

I guess it would be too much to consider the possibility that the single most potent force in public education, that being the union, could impact education quality.

Secret Communication!!

Crisis time ALEC members! Sean Cranley knows too much.

Now is the time to implement phase two before Sean can derail our plans. All members of the super secret Disposal of Troublesome Opposition Command meet at the black helicopter landing pad for further instructions. And is Koch ready with the genetically modified submission agent for the water supply?

It's go time guys. Corputopia is just around the corner. But first we must stop Sean Cranley!

Journal Times Exceeds Expectations

Unified taking less from taxpayers than expected is the headline in the Racine Journal Times that might as well have been written by the RUSD public relations department. Then again, perhaps it was.

I am noticing a trend. When Unified wants, say $10 million extra dollars, to "educate" the same number of students, but receives only $5 million, it is a budget cut. When they "expect" to raise taxes by, say $10%, but only raise by 6%, they would like us to believe there has been a tax cut. And the Journal Times is usually right there helping promote the dishonesty.

Next, when they expect student achievement to decline by 10%, but only does by 5%, we can rejoice in the gains made by our students.

The Journal Times should be embarrassed to print such a headline as it demonstrates once again their willingness to carry water for Racine Unified.

I have come to expect bias from the Journal Times. And sometimes, they even exceed my expectations.

Protest U?

The JT has an article today about the Original Root Zen Center's Peace School for four to eight year olds. While sitting in a circle, the "children clap and drum while repeating peace phrases, or mantras, such as 'Sharing toys, Sharing books, Sharing hearts.'"

Everything you need for a life of protest you can learn in kindergarten.

Think Danny Think

The following letter appears in the Journal Times:

Who am I? I am a patriotic Christian. To some that would make me a Republican.
I feel our country can’t solve the words problems through war. That would make me a Democrat. I feel our elderly should not be taxed out of their homes, and have to decide wether to eat, or buy prescription drugs. That would make me a Democrat.
I feel our tax system is too complex and our government to big. That would make me Republican. I do not feel our teachers, police and firefighters are overpaid. That would make me a Democrat.
I don’t see a candidate for president who feels as I do. Who am I ? By Danny Fugate.

Hmmmm. Well, for starters Danny, you are confused, but I think, no wait, I feel you know that already. That would make you a Democrat, or worse, an OWSer. You use "feel" four times and "think" not at all. That would make you a Democrat. You are right that you can't solve word problems through war. Try a dictionary or a thesaurus. I feel this also makes you a Democrat.

But all is not lost Danny. You "feel our tax system is too complex and our government to (sic) big." Nothing wrong with feelings, but they can impair your thinking. Feelings without thought can lead you to conclude that people shouldn't have to make difficult choices. But difficult choices are exactly what await this country. And neither your feelings nor mine will change that fact. Think about it Danny.

Stoking Hatred

Dennis Prager asks an excellent question. Why is class hatred morally superior to race hatred?

Our schools go to great lengths to address, and probably exaggerate, the problem of hatred inspired by differences in skin color. Why not address hatred based on differences in income or accumulated wealth?

Rather than address this problem, the left, led by our president, instead stokes this hatred. This will not end well.

Searching for Mrs. Right

Like all conservatives, I am drawn to Herman Cain because he proves I'm not a racist, and he will get my full support unless we find a black, disabled, Muslim, lesbian, public-school-teaching conservative willing to run for president.

My Brilliance Shared

I have a brilliant new business idea I would like share. As Free Racine readers may know, I own a retail business. On any given day, I probably have ten or so folks enter my store for the very first time. From now on I am going to charge them $500 each just to step into my store. That's $5,000 every day from now on. I can retire in a few years.

I can almost hear you skeptics out there. Nobody is going to pay the money, you say. I won't get any new customers and I will lose business, you say.

No worries. Let's suppose you are right. I have a Plan B. I will raise prices on existing customers by 50%. Problem solved!

OK, I have a confession to make. I have stolen this brilliant idea from the Racine Water Department.

A few years back, I rehabbed a commercial building and built two apartments above my retail store. In order to become a customer of the Racine Water Department I had to pay about $2,500 per unit for the water hook-up. Full disclosure: I had the total fee reduced to $2,500 because of previous water use in my building - should have been reduced to $0 but wasn't. Anyway, Racine didn't actually hook up anything - my plumber did at my expense. The $2,500 was a penalty for being an entrepreneur in Racine. But I had it easy. I later learned that new businesses that used significant quantities of water were subject to a prohibitive introductory water use penalty. Perhaps you heard of the laundromat that didn't open because of the fees or the car wash that didn't open because of the fees. How many businesses didn't open because of the Water Department business model? How many jobs have been lost? Who knows? Who cares?

Have you looked at your water bill lately. It is going up. Why? Well, recently I heard Mayor Dickert on the radio mention that we have not been using enough water to keep the water rate steady. So they need to raise the rate.

Only in government can you get away with such a ridiculous business model.

Occupy Racine

Why no Occupy Racine? Where are the Unitarians, the illegal alien lobby, the clueless Horlick students, the Peace and Justice hippies, you know, the usual suspects? Let's get this party started! How about Monument Square, directly across from an evil bank? Sean, you in? I'll bring the hummus.

Remedial Lesbian Indoctrination 101

The JT has a story, here, concerning a teacher who claims that she has been discriminated against because she is a lesbian. I am going to take the unusual position of siding with Unified on this one based on the contents of the article.

The claims themselves seem rather minor and are in any case disputed by Unified. A student who allegedly threatened the teacher was allowed to stay in her classroom but when a heterosexual teacher complained something was done. The lesbian was punished for being late for work while the heterosexual teachers saw no consequences. Yet, concerning these complaints, there appears to be no evidence that the different responses where because of her sexual orientation. Maybe it is because she is blonde.

An attempt was made to resolve the differences with the help of a state mediator. One of the terms not agreed to by the teacher was a requirement to "refrain from making any references to your personal sexual orientation to students." According to the teacher, the request itself is discriminatory because they would never ask that of a straight person.

Perhaps not, however... the teacher went on to stress the importance of discussing her sexual orientation when students inquire. "I had kids that came out and were kicked out of their houses and they need to know that, one, somebody related; and, two, that somebody wasn't going to be judgmental and they were just going to help them find a safe place." and I also had quite a few kids that struggled with suicide issues and depression and family acceptance."

Perhaps now is the time to mention that the teacher in question is a middle school remedial reading teacher.

I have no way of knowing whether said teacher is offering sound advice to confused middle schoolers or is grooming them and/or pursuing a political agenda. Regarding the grooming comment, I suppose that could upset some readers, so I will put it to you this way: would you want your presumably heterosexual fifth grade daughter talking about her sexual thoughts with the 45 year old male math teacher or would you alert the authorities? Anyway, it is not her job to deal with this stuff so she should be stopped. Maybe if she did her job instead of talking about lesbian stuff the kids could read at grade level.

Department of Mysterious Verification

Feel free to call me a crank if warranted. Yesterday I went to the DMV to get my son his temporary drivers license. One acceptable form of ID was a valid passport. I presented them with an expired passport which they would not accept. I was not happy. I understand that an expired passport would make my son ineligible to enter another country or return to this one, but why it was not an acceptable form of identification at the DMV remains a mystery. Is expired synonymous with invalid?

On Double Dipping

The JT has an interesting article, here concerning a proposal to eliminate, or at least minimize, the practice of "double dipping" by government employees. "Double dipping" basically is the practice of "retiring" (in quotes for a reason), receiving a pension, then returning to work for the same or another government entity, and receiving a salary and a pension at the same time.

Retired people, by definition, are no longer working. As such, retirement benefits should be reserved for retired people, not working people. Working people receiving retirement benefits from government is hardly different from employed people receiving unemployment benefits, healthy people receiving disability benefits etc.... The only reason this is not considered outright fraud is because the beneficiaries in many cases are writing the laws that allow the double dipping for themselves. Yes, the fox has written the laws on hen protection.

I will now consider some of the rather weak justifications for continuing this practice.

Former and current police chief (does that make sense?, I say choose one or the other) Kurt Wahlen said "It is not like I just retired and get to draw on money from the state....It was money set aside." Yah, set aside for when you retire. You are working, therefore you are not retired. Therefore no retirement benefits. Pretty simple really.

And then there is current and former (or is it former and current?) government employee Tom Christensen who feels the proposal "treats public workers unfairly" because " a private sector worker could receive their retirements while working a new job." First of all, government has no business regulating the pay and benefits of private sector businesses. They should only concern themselves with government employees. A comparison then between private and public makes no sense. But if you want to compare the two, I am willing to bet that there aren't any private sector employers willing to pay wages and retirement benefits to the same person simultaneously.

State Senator Van Wangaard is receiving a pension as a retired police officer and a wage as a senator. He does not consider his a "double dipping" situation. He has the strongest argument in my view as at least he is elected to his job. We could toss him out of office if we don't like it. At the very least he should recuse himself from a vote on this matter as he (if I understand the issue correctly) would directly benefit from the proposals demise.

And State Rep Robin Vos seems rather lukewarm to the idea when he says "But if someone is retired for a year and they are asked to work in a different position in a different agency, I don't know why I should care." I will tell you why you should care. You should care because taxpayers are tired of getting ripped off. We don't want to pay unemployment for the employed, disability for the abled, welfare for the wealthy, or retirement for the not retired. You should care!

Media Bias?

A thought experiment for Sean Cranley. Suppose former Attorney John Ashcroft testified before Congress on an important matter, say, an operation that allowed firearms to "walk" to Mexican druglords. Well call it Operation Daft and Curious. Now suppose Attorney Ashcroft claimed, in say May of 2003 that he first heard of Daft and Curious a few weeks prior to his testimony. Now suppose Ashcroft was sent memos concerning Daft and Curious beginning in August of 2002.

Do you think this might have, just maybe perhaps aroused the interest of the mainstream media at the time?

Obama's Successes

Ages ago, after enduring endless rants about President Bush, I would ask, "Has he done anything right?" It was about the only legal technique to silence a liberal at the time.

With the tables turned and with an unpopular Democratic president, I will ask the same question. Has President Obama done anything right?

My own answer is yes, I love that he has whacked Osama, and today the Yemenese/American Al somethingorother and remember the Seals taking out the pirates? Not nearly enough to garner a vote from me, but its something.

On Saving Jobs

Perhaps you have heard that Democrat Governor Bev Perdue has suggested canceling the 2012 elections. Some partisans are seeking to make this a big issue of course. As for me, I think she is merely trying to help beef up Obama's "jobs saved" numbers.

First Friday Follies

First Fridays has been a success beyond, I am sure, even the most optimistic prognosticators. So let us destroy it.

A little background. To the best of my recollection, the idea of First Fridays was introduced by former mayor Jim Smith's wife Joyce, who had witnessed such an event in Michigan. I for one thought it a bit silly to have on a Friday as I thought a full fledged street festival or two would have been a better idea. Anyway, First Friday's began several years ago as an effort to get folks downtown to beef up exposure and sales at downtown businesses. Fastforward to today and we routinely have thousands of people flocking to downtown for First Fridays. For the most part the crowd is pretty upscale and largely devoid of troublemakers. And the crowds have increased in part because the city, wisely in my view, has opted to look the other way with respect to open intoxicants on the sidewalks. People just like to walk around with a beer now and again. Regarding sales, as a downtown retailer, I can attest to the fact that First Fridays is not just a drinking event. People buy stuff and that was the whole idea.

But leave it to a handful of the perpetually disgruntled to have an axe to grind. The crowds are too big! Someone has been sneaking in alcohol in a cooler! Someone might get drunk and cause trouble! We might get sued!

The solution to these minor or hypothetical problems is of course to crack down on the open intoxicants on the street according to the pd's - the perpetually disgruntled's. The pd's are seeking meetings with the mayor, the chief of police or whomever else might work to undermine the event. If they are loud and determined enough, they might just force the hand of law enforcement, who may then crack down on the open intoxicants. Before long the crowds will dwindle, the enthusiasm will be gone, the event will wither away along with the customers and the sales. But hey, at least we won't get sued!

Who is Zea?

I encountered a woman the other day wearing a "who is Zea?" T-shirt. So I asked. She turned around, showing the rest of the shirt. Zea is the Zion (Illinois) Education Association. The lady then volunteered that they wear the T-shirt every Friday at school and that it helps not having to think about what to wear that day.

Perhaps it is time for the Zion school district to consider a dress code for teachers. A teachers union is not an innocuous organization. Right or wrong, teachers unions engage in negotiations that, by definition, have two (or more) sides. As such, they can and do lead to contentious exchanges in a given locality.

Why should such an organization be allowed to not-so-subtly propagandize to a captive audience of school children?

Why Not Vigilance?

I am glad its 9/12. I can't stand looking at pictures of the burning World Trade Center, people jumping to their deaths etc... still too raw and probably always will be.

Why 9/11 inspires some Americans to lecture us about religious tolerance is a mystery to me. There is only one religion that should use the occasion to lecture its members about religious tolerance and that religion is Islam. It was people inspired by their Islamic faith - correctly interpreted or not - who hijacked airplanes and used them to kill innocents. The battle for tolerance must be fought within the Islamic religion and I stand with all Muslims who condemn the evil perpetrated on 9/11. And I will be damned if I will have tolerance for those who thank Allah for 9/11.

I propose we stop talking incessantly about tolerance on 9/11. It would be far more appropriate to talk about vigilance. We need to physically stop anyone or any group that would perpetrate 9/11 style evil against us. We must also be vigilant in confronting the philosophical underpinnings or justifications for such evil. And those justifications and religious rationalizations are found to varying degrees among far too many Muslims in this world. Vigilance rather than tolerance is the proper response to such a threat.

Economic Development 101

I have to give Racine mayor John Dickert credit for scrapping the money hemorrhaging artist relocation program. Read all about it here.

That said, I think he should also scrap the equally doomed NSP, aka the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. Instead, the mayor is doubling down. According to the JT article: "The next step, the mayor said, will be to move Neighborhood Stabilization Program efforts into the Uptown area next year. Those federal funds may be used to buy foreclosed homes and either rehabilitate them or raze them and rebuild."

The artist relocation program and the NSP house flipping program are virtually identical schemes. They use federal money to buy up distressed properties. They pour lots of money and time into them and then sell them at a huge loss.

There is simply no way that this will work. The city must comply with all sorts of regulations that mom and pop house flippers can avoid, thus driving up the costs well beyond the properties potential selling price. The city further ensures losses by insisting on home ownership, thus reducing the potential number of buyers which in turn puts downward pressure on the sale price.

Top down, government directed economic development just doesn't work, locally or nationally - consider stimulus packages 1 - ? If we must spend our federal money on local redevelopment efforts, it would make far more sense to keep the government out of it as much as possible.

Here is a suggestion. Don't interfere with development efforts. Recognize that developments of all kinds will result in investment, therefor jobs and ultimately higher property values that you can tax. Recognize also that developers aren't developing in large part because they know full well that you will tax the hell out of them. Alleviate this reality based fear with a check, courtesy of unwitting taxpayers from everywhere. Put simply, reduce the cost of investing, those costs that you have driven through the roof with high taxes and a hypermeddling - yah I made that word up - economic development team. Do this and we might get some actual development in this town.

Cognitive Indifference

The Obama administration, via the Eric Holder Justice Department, sued to block an AT&T and T-Mobile merger. In so doing, they offered a great rationale in favor of breaking up the government monopoly on education by saying the merger "would result in tens of millions of consumers all across the country facing higher prices, fewer choices and lower quality products for mobile wireless services." So there is the proof that they know the damage caused by monopolies, but Obama and the left nonetheless is intent on keeping the government education monopoly rolling. This might cause some on the left to experience cognitive dissonance, but then again, that condition presupposes cognition.

Actually, in this regard, I don't really think the left is being stupid. Rather, I think they know full well that the government education monopoly results in "higher prices, fewer choices and lower quality." This is not "for the children." It is for the left to keep as much power as possible. I would have more respect for the left if they were merely stupid, but consigning children to education wastelands while using them to maintain political power is unconscionable.

Burglars Welcomed

The JT has an article today about a would be candy business and a controversy over their burglar bars.

To summarize the articles contents, there is a proposal for candy store in the inner city that has come before the city council. The building that would house the candy store has burglar bars. The city council has voted to approve a conditional use permit allowing the burglar bars while Mayor Dickert has promised to veto approval, noting that "bars are a horrible example of what the city should be."

I am of the opinion that the government should not concern themselves with how business or property owners protect their property from criminals. Will the city pay for the losses when the candy store is burglarized? Of course not.

The larger problem is, as I have stated numerous times in the past, the conditional use permitting requirement. In bygone days, property uses were constrained only by zoning decisions. When I opened my business in Racine several years ago, there was no conditional use permit required. I was setting up a business in an area zoned for business and I was not required to grovel to local politicians. This is how it should be.

However, we now have a conditional use permit requirement. This allows all business property decisions to be subject to political considerations. Risks abound when opening a business as it is, but the conditional use permit greatly magnifies said risks. Typically, there is considerable time, energy, and money expended prior to any business venture. In Racine now, even legal businesses in properly zoned areas are prevented by government from opening. Why bother considering Racine as a place to invest?

Of course property owners and politicians have divergent interests. Politicians, in this case are interested in combatting a perception of crime. The business owner is interested in combatting actual crimes. To politicians, burglar bars harm their fight against the perception of crime. To a property owner, burglar bars help their fight against actual crime. As you can clearly see, the needs of the politicians are quite different from the needs of this property owner. And now, thanks to the conditional use permit, property owners can now be used to fulfill the needs of politicians. That is not why people buy property and it will of course undermine a property's value.

Now on to this crime perception problem. If there were no crime in Racine I could fathom an argument outlawing burglar bars, video surveillance, heck, even locks. But crime exists and government has no business preventing people from efforts to deter crime. The city should join in this effort to combat actual crimes and, to the extent they are successful, the image problem will go away.


Perhaps the real problem with burglar bars for politicians is that they are a visual reminder of the politicians failure to control crime. But then, when your policies create incentives for criminals, what should you expect?

Cranleyism Is Here!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fascism is here, says Sean Cranley in a JT commentary. If you manage to ignore the usual blather - comparisons to Mussolini etc..._ that make up 95% of the screed and search hard for the scary facts, well, here they are: Robin Vos is apparently chairman of ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) Wisconsin and he attended their national convention.

There is so little "there" there that it is no wonder Sean has to hyperventilate about fascism, secret organizations run by scary corporations intent to "take power away from the people and enact laws favorable to mega-global corporations" blah blah blah.

Last time I checked, people, via voluntary association with others, still have the right to petition their government. That is what ALEC and virtually every other lobbying outfit does. It is true of course that some such associations have undue influence that is harmful to society - government unions come to mind- but the real problem with ALEC is that Sean disagrees with their agenda.

To which I respond with a big Hitleresque yawn.

Flexible Founders

A day or so ago one Nikki Fisher submitted a letter to the JT editor asserting a "founding fathers' mandate of free education for all." And today, I challenged this assertion at root river siren, here, scroll to "In Defense of Teachers" thread. Read the lefty responses for fun. I especially enjoyed Sean's efforts, including his citing of section 16 of Jefferson's Land Ordinance of 1785 for "establishing a mechanism for funding public education."

You won't find anything remotely approaching a mandate for a free public education from our founders, as none exists. But the exercise will provide a window into the essence of leftiness, wherein you can twist, fabricate, exaggerate, etc... until you have convinced yourself that what you wish to be true is indeed true, actual truth be damned.

Bush To Blame

I nearly laughed out loud when listening to Don Rosen's radio program this morning. He and another liberal were talking about Obamacare while trying to figure out any reasons why conservatives were against it. All they could come up with was that they opposed it because Obama favored it. Really Don?

Here's one. How about the breathtaking assertion that the federal government, for the very first time, can force individuals to purchase a product from a private company.

I have a question or two for Don Rosen. Why is it that you are unable to accurately summarize a conservative argument? Did George Bush do this to you?

A Homophobic Nightmare

I was selling my wares this weekend at a Chicago street festival well known as the biggest party for gays in the midwest. My tent was positioned directly opposite the events premiere concert stage. Unbeknownst to me, someone from the cast of Glee was to perform there. Everything was going along just fine until the concert started, at which point the crowd suddenly and dramatically overwhelmed the area, and I found myself in the way of thousands of Glee fans. My booth was surrounded and the pressure from the massive crowd nearly upended my tables and I seriously considered the possibility that my entire display would be overrun by the crowd. Alas I and my merchandise survived and, while this was not by any stretch an ideal situation for commerce, I am now able to amuse myself by having survived what must surely be a homophobes worst nightmare - being crushed to death by a horde of Glee fans.

Money Relocation Project a Smashing Success

Racine's ballyhooed Uptown Artist Relocation Program, now in its fourth year, has relocated zero artists. It has relocated, as in lost, over $400,000 in taxpayer money. Yes, the city bought a building for $120 K, renovated it to the tune of $400 K, and flipped it for $111 K to some folks who will open a Chinese restaurant.

A horrific failure? Not according to program director Brian O'Connell. "We're getting a lot of the things we got into the Uptown project for" O'Connell told the RJT.

What were getting is zero artists and a $400,000 plus loss. If the city views this as a success, what, I wonder, would they consider failure.

Classism, Ageism, Racism?

The Journal Times today reports a new RUSD policy wherein a photo ID is required to attend a football game. Why would RUSD want to discriminate against the poor, the elderly, and minorities?

Broke Teacher Fallacy

If I had any hair I would have pulled it all out listening to WRJN's Don Rosen this morning. Before I tuned in, apparently a public employee explained his or her financial burdens caused by Governor Walker's controversial bill limiting union bargaining power. Said employee now paid X number of dollars more for benefits than before the passage of the Walker bill. According to Mr Rosen this "lost" money would not be spent at local businesses etc....., harming them and also lowering the take for government, meaning fewer services etc....

I had to call into the show, but before I got through another caller made a valiant effort to educate Mr Rosen, to no avail. I likewise was unsuccessful.

Mr Rosen commits a common mistake. He was only able to grasp the consequences of the money not in the hands of the public employee. He was unable to consider the additional money not confiscated by government that remained in the hands of taxpayers.

I believe there is even a name for this mistake. I think it is called the broken window fallacy. If someone were to throw a brick threw my window, I would no doubt spend money having my window replaced. This would be good for window makers and installers. The window installer would go to the restaurant perhaps after getting paid and this would be good for the restaurant etc....

What Don Rosen apparently fails to realize is that the money spent for my window otherwise could have gone for other purchases, helping other businesses etc... Likewise he fails to realize that the money not spent by taxpayers for the public employee is money that might be spent in restaurants etc...

It isn't exactly a wash. It is better for people to spend their own money as they are more likely to spend it wisely compared to those spending other people's money.

Good Point

Leave it to the great philosopher/economist Dr Sowell to make a great point missed by everyone else. That is, our debt ceiling laws do not in fact put a ceiling on our debt.

An Explanation

I thought I should take a moment and explain the lack of activity, on my part, with this blog. I suspect it is somewhat temporary, but I just haven't been thinking about politics too much lately. Rather, I have been enjoying the good weather, I have been riding my bike in an effort to drop some pounds (15 so far), I have been playing tennis with my son, work has picked up etc.... so I have been ignoring the blog for a bit. But carry on please and I will get back into it again when the spirit moves me.

Facts and Opinions

The Journal Times yesterday "separated facts from the spin" on school vouchers. This fact checking exercise found that it is indeed true that school vouchers "would cause property taxes to increase by $10 million in the program's third year when enrollment caps cease." Unified officials would lose roughly $10 million in funding because of school vouchers, yet, despite losing 4200 students or roughly 20% of the student body, they would find $0 savings, thus requiring a $10 million tax increase.

This "fact" tells us little to nothing about vouchers and all you need to know about Racine Unified. How is it possible that RUSD could lose twenty percent of their students and be unable to save any money? Consolidate, close a few schools perhaps. Reduce staff maybe. No and no apparently.

Is Unified management incompetent? Well yes, if you believe their goal is to provide the best education for children in the most cost effective manner for taxpayers. But I have long since recognized that educating children is a secondary objective for Racine Unified. The primary objective is to maximize the number of Unified employees and their wage, benefit and retirement haul. Once you realize this fact, you will also realize that Unified is extraordinarily competent in achieving its objectives.

So yes, it is a fact that Unified could lose twenty percent of its students and still demand the same $'s from the taxpayers. And it is my opinion that we should not give billions of $'s to so corrupt an organization.

On the Limits of Secular Morality

In my most recent post Sean writes "Both religion and morality are both the result of evolution, they're genetic. The difference between religious and secular morality is superficial."

I have heard some variant of this point on countless occasions and have often wondered and asked why an adherent to the secular world view would be motivated to behave morally. After all, there is no higher authority than the government, so why not do whatever suits you so long as you don't get caught? Inevitably the response is that via our logic we conclude that, if we want to be treated well by others, we will first treat others well. The golden rule in other words. Let us for the sake of argument ignore any religious connection to the golden rule and let us assume it is simply a product of the evolution and logic of mankind.

The golden rule absent God will not work. Suppose you were in the market for a gold watch. Suddenly a man appears before you on the street with just the watch you were looking for. He offers it for $1,000, roughly 20% less than the sale price at the established jewelry store. Just cause he is a swell guy, he offers a 5 year warranty when the jewelry store offers only 3 years. According to the golden rule, if you want to be trusted you should trust others first. You should buy the watch, but you violate the golden rule instead.

Another example. You are a wealthy individual with good credit. You have just been diagnosed with an incurable cancer and have but a few weeks to live. You have no heirs to worry about. Similarly, since you are about to die, you have no concerns in the least about how others may treat you in the future that doesn't exist for you. The golden rule has been rendered pointless for you. Time to screw some people who have wronged you. So you burn down the house of an ex. You blow up a business. You buy a very expensive car or two on credit and you trash them. The golden rule was useful for a while but not anymore. Why not have some fun?

If someone can explain how the golden rule can work absent a higher authority that serves to constrain our base impulses, please have a go at it.

Competing Morality

I am still scratching my head over the pronouncement, in the Racine Journal Times yesterday, by "public school officials," that school vouchers are "morally wrong."

From what moral system does this pronouncement flow? Since this is the public schools with their exquisite sensitivity about the separation of church and state, I am quite certain that this is not stemming from a traditional religious morality.

That leaves us with a secular progressive, godless based morality, and indeed, according to that system of morality, vouchers would be "morally wrong." Wrong because it weakens the state, which wants to be the ultimate authority on all issues, moral or otherwise. Wrong because it violates the belief that the state, given proper resources, will best prepare students for the future - a secularly progressive future.

Let us not kid ourselves. The public school system teaches religion all day long. It is a secular progressive religion and the state is the ultimate source of all that is good. And it doesn't want its religion having to compete against any others. Is it any wonder they thing vouchers are "morally wrong?"

News Story Feels Unfair

The Journal Times has an uncanny knack for finding the sympathetic illegal alien like Christian, who "feels" it is unfair that he won't get a tuition subsidy to UW Parkside if Republicans get their way.

I am still waiting for the article featuring a hard working American citizen from, say, Zion Illinois, who, through no fault of her own resides on the Illinois side of the border and must pay full fare at Parkside, and who "feels" that it is unfair that illegal aliens get a tuition subsidy while she does not.

Abominable Commentary

A JT editorial yesterday criticized, as boneheaded, state Representative Robin Vos' vote to do away with regional transit authorities in our area.

From the editorial: The unelected "abomination" criticism from Vos that transit authorities would spend tax money, even though those boards were not elected, feeds into the recent rise in anti-taxing frenzy - including an advisory referendum in Racine County on "new taxes" for transit or rail that was defeated by a large margin.

So we have a representative who opposes taxation without representation and who recognizes that taxes for rail or mass transit are very unpopular, all while acting in accordance with the wishes of his constituents. What an outrage!

The JT I suppose would rather our representatives dismiss the concerns of rubes, ie the public, while returning to pre-revolutionary days when taxes were foisted upon us by royalty.

I prefer Robin Vos' vision.

Journal Sentinel Policy Discussion

A Sunday editorial by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel laments "that teachers have been singled out for much venom these days." A better idea according to the MJS: "Lets debate policy. There is plenty of it to debate. Let's not dump on teachers."

So this intro was followed by a robust policy discussion, right? Uh, no. Instead, we heard about the commanding presence of Ricardo Pimentel's teacher who scared him into college, and about the feared and stern Mrs. Peer recalled by board member Mabel Wong and so on and so forth.

It is true that singling out teachers for venom is one way to avoid a substantive policy discussion, but then again, so is anecdotal praise. How about that policy debate then MJS?

There is plenty to debate as the MJS noted. Do our current policies allow us to efficiently identify and remove subpar teachers while rewarding the best ones? Does tenure create the incentive to improve as a teacher? Does a backloaded compensation arrangement discourage people from becoming teachers? Can we afford the amount we are paying for public education? Would competition in education reduce the cost and improve performance?

Oh, I almsot forgot. Mrs. Peer was actually a softy and "her sternness gave way to smiles."

Uncivil Warfare

Recently I was having a conversation with a long time and very liberal acquaintance. We were discussing his difficulty, indeed the near impossibility, of maintaining positive relationships with conservative/Republican/Walker supporters. After it was essentially established that he now socializes entirely with liberals, he noted that he has had multiple conversations comparing our current divisive political climate with the Civil War.

When all your friends agree that a policy that raises the meager public employee contributions towards their health insurance and pensions is like a fight over slavery, well.... I can't think of a better argument for broadening your circle of friends.

In one sense he is right. A civil war will start brewing with uncivil behavior.

What Rude Looks Like

I have to admit that Sean's (at Kay's Blue racine) post announcing the Palin rally didn't really register with me. He wrote "More cowbell, less Palin."

Of course now I know that the protester class used cowbells and other noisemaking devices to drown out Sarah Palin's speech.

Misbehaving in a crowd can be kind of fun for the immature I suppose, but how exactly will this behavior win over the all important moderate voter?

Mysterious Activity Downtown

The Journal Times has a story today concerning an alleged fight outside a downtown bar. The owner of the bar claims that there was not a fight while sworn officers claim otherwise.

Perhaps it was urban kinetic activity.

Liberals Please Think

It is such a simple concept and life would be much easier if liberals understood.

The money that is spent on public sector employees is good for them insofar as they can afford their mortgage, groceries etc.... but simultaneously bad for the rest of us who then have less money to pay for their own mortgage, groceries etc...

It baffles me that so many liberals can't seem to understand this.

Quibbling with the JT

Generally speaking I think the Racine Journal Times has improved of late insofar as they are not as blatantly political as they had been. That said, I have to quibble a bit.

Yesterday the JT had an otherwise excellent story about the AFSCME union threatening Union Grove businesses with boycotts if they didn't put a "We Support Workers Rights" poster in their windows. The print addition headline was "Businesses asked to pick sides." Asked? How about forced?

Today they ran a short story about one charming Katherine Windels who threatened the lives of Republican lawmakers by "putting a nice little bullet" in the head, along with a couple of bomb threats. They forgot to mention that Windels is a teacher. Unimportant detail? I hardly think so. One mitigating factor in the JT's favor is that it was an AP story.