TFP Column: The Lead Dog

Last week I got an early start in my efforts and found myself well ahead of my compatriots in getting it posted.  This week I may even be a little late in getting something together, and find myself further back in the pack in getting published.


Strangely enough, this type of jockeying for position in the Republican Primary is the subject of this week column: "The Lead Dog".  I'm not sure why most of us should care about the results, even at this point (since there are still 33-1/2 primaries to go), but I suppose that your relative position could have some impact on your ability to raise money; regardless of your ability to raise interest in the process.


While primary news may be of dubious benefit to the Glass City, there will undoubtedly be a lot more of interest in this weekend's edition.  Considering that we're talking about Toledo's largest Sunday circulation and Ohio's best weekly newspaper for the third year in a row, the Toledo Free Press; why would that surprise you?

"The Law"

Time and circumstance permit me a very little of the former to share something with you in the middle of the week. However, you're in luck.  Over the years and with the help of some pretty damn smart people that I've been lucky enough to know, I have slowly been gaining a bit of knowledge. Such knowledge, when acquired at all, is usually done by reading the words of much smarter people than me (a list almost as long as that of the National Register). The best of that knowledge was acquired by reading original source material.

Thanks to their advice, I am  able to say that I am becoming a good deal closer to the thinking of such giants as Thomas Sowell, Walter E Williams, Henry Hazlitt, and Milton Friedman (among others) whose books I have read. Many of these scholars and pundits have in turn referenced a writer from the 19^th Century, Frederic Bastiat, in tying their efforts to those of the past. More specifically they reference an essay of his first published in 1850, “The Law”.

With these limitations in mind, I am would like to share some brief part of that which I am currently reading. I hope that you appreciate it in the same way that I have, and promise to come up with something more original for the weekend.

“Since everybody traffics in law for his own profit, we should like to do the same. We should like to make it produce the right to assistance, which is the poor man's plunder. To effect this, we ought to be electors and legislators, that we may organize, on a large scale, alms for our own class, as you have organized, on a large scale, protection for yours.”

“Yes, as long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true mission, that it may violate property instead of securing it, everybody will be wanting to manufacture law, either to defend himself against plunder, or to organize it for his own profit.”

“This plunder may be only an exceptional blemish in the legislation of a people, and in this case, the best thing that can be done is, without so many speeches and lamentations, to do away with it as soon as possible, notwithstanding the clamors of interested parties. But how is it to be distinguished? Very easily. See whether the law takes from some persons that which belongs to them, to give to others what does not belong to them. See whether the law performs for the profit of one citizen, and, to the injury of others, an act that this citizen cannot perform without committing a crime.”

“And this is what has taken place. The delusion of the day is to enrich all classes at the expense of each other; it is to generalize plunder under the pretense of organizing it. Now, legal plunder may be exercised in an infinite multitude of plans for organization; tariffs, protection, perquisites, gratuities, encouragements, progressive taxation, free public education, right to work, right to profit, right to wages, right to assistance, right to instruments of labor, gratuity of credit, etc., etc. And it is all these plans, taken as a whole, with what they have in common, legal plunder, that takes the name of socialism.” 

  

Vote of Confidence: Chapter 10

Through diligent effort, hard work, and superior time management skills, I remain on schedule with posting additions to this effort.  (OK, you got me.  The weather sucked this weekend and I didn't have anything better to do than work on a self-serving bit of nonsense.)

Regardless of the reason however, I am pleased to tell you that Chapter 10 of "Vote of Confidence" has been posted.  For those of you who can't wait to get to the end (or can't wait to get the whole thing over with), I can also tell you that half of the chapters are now up.

Through I have previously described this story as “A twisted tale of Life, Politics, and what some might consider cruelty to animals”. In the spirit of full disclosure however, I have to say that none of these accusations has been proven, and that in as far as I know, no actual animals were in any way harmed (physically or psychologically) during the completion of this story.

I would love to be able to give you some insight into what has gone before or will come after, but that would imply that I know or remember anything about this effort, a rumor which I can neither confirm nor deny. (Besides, not doing so adds a bit of mystery to the whole thing, don't you think?)

Since every writer likes to be read, and since I like to sometimes believe that I'm a writer, I encourage you to take a look at this effort. While I can't promise that you will get any of the time back that you spend in doing so, I can say that you might be a bit surprised.

Professional Political Responsibility

Like many companies around the world, the one that provides me with enough compensation to allow me the indulgence of such petty pursuits as blogging is attempting to increase its ability to serve its customers.  There are many paths to such a goal, and I for one am grateful that the powers that be in my organization have chosen one that doesn't involve flogging, water-boarding, or group retreats (the latter having finally been designated as a 'war crime' offense placed on the UN list of non-sanctioned torture).

Instead they are choosing to follow the path set out in a book called “The Oz Principle” by Roger Connors, Tom Smith, and Craig Hickman.  I will not give away the contents of the book and deprive these gentlemen of their due compensation, but will say that their theory has largely to do with the concept of 'joint accountability'.  I will also say that there is a delicious irony involved with working for a company in Kansas that seeks to follow a path (dare I say 'Yellow Brick Road') having to do with L Frank Baum's Oz stories.

It had been some years I must sadly say, since I had used outside reference material to upgrade my skills or used the tests provided in such a book to judge my own performance.  It reminded me that in attempting to be a professional, that continuing to do so was an not only obligation, but a professional responsibility.  Being who I am and doing what I do, it also set me to thinking in this election year about those we send to Washington, what training they get in seeking the job, what training they get in DC, and what resources they might seek to improve the required skill sets.

Oh sure, I know that freshmen in Congress go through an orientation process before taking up their responsibilities, but I have come to think that this is more like that in college where they show you how to get around campus, teach you some of the basic rules of behavior, and assign an Advisor to you to get you through the early days until you become more familiar with campus life. 

Further training seems to involve little more than enlightenment on how to 'go along to get along'.  If you want to serve on important committees, gain power and influence, and gather support for efforts designed to aid your constituency (and for re-election), you must learn to do as you're told (for such is the reality of party politics).  I at least, have never heard of training, early on or ongoing, that's offered to make them better legislators, or better able to serve the people who elected them. 

As for testing (self or otherwise), the only real ones that legislators seem to take these days are held every 2-6 years (depending on the position).  Rather than being a test of the skills that have been attained or those required for the job however: good judgment, good governance, or legislative ability; they seem more a test of their ability to raise money, obfuscate their voting records and lack of results, and come up with clever sound-bites for their campaign commercials and the nightly news.

Some might see this as a role that the major political parties might play, both to improve the skills of their members and as a way to garner votes through a dissemination of the knowledge of the greater abilities of their membership.  Unfortunately, political parties these days have long given up on promoting the acquisition of talent among their ranks, unless it's a talent in political strategy to be used for political gain in the combination chess match and team sport that they have turned politics into.

Talent in soaring oratory has been set aside in favor of the ability sling mud and spew vitriol.  Debating skills are ignored in favor of the ability to twist an opponent’s statements and cast them in a poor light while re-casting the argument.  The ability to find common ground to serve the electorate is passed over in a never-ending, blind, and almost mindless attempt to gain points in the polls.  

And as for the talent or ability of writing of good laws, why bother when legislated language will be handed to you on a silver platter (much like the head of John the Baptist) by special interest group lobbyists who can thereby assure that their employers will benefit from its passage and implementation.  Legislative legerdemain then seems to mandate that many such laws be combined into 'omnibus legislation' to hide the dirty fingerprints.  Why should any bother to read such legislation when they know if permitted time enough to do so, that none will be provided to understand the ramifications and laws of unintended consequence that will inevitably follow.  And of course why bother to challenge the leadership of your party on legislation that they propose, even when you know they're wrong, when doing so will likely end your ability guide fellow legislators to a potentially better path, if not your political career.

It seems as thought we are to be saddled with professionals politicians for at least the for foreseeable future, (and who are by the way, are compensated at a professional level).  If they are going to make politics their chosen profession, the least that they can do is to act like professionals and seek effective training to keep up the skills required for the position.  They must recognize that running for an election is not part of maintaining those professional skills however (no matter how much time they spend at it), merely a periodic job review. They must come to understand as a professional, that gaining and maintaining their skills is as much an obligation of their position as their duty to serve their elected constituency.  If they need somewhere to start, perhaps they too might read “The Oz Principle”.  It may not relate specifically to the position of professional politician, but there is little doubt that all them could use some training in joint accountability.   

Formatting Errors Under Repair

As it has in so many of its other efforts, Google has been updating the 'blogspot' platform that carries "Just Blowing Smoke".  Either through some mis-communication or an error on the part of yours truly (more likely the latter), many of my older postings are now devoid of paragraph breaks; and look like the longest run-on sentence in the English language.  


While I thought at first that this was limited to just a few posts, it appears to have run rampant through the almost five year history of this blog.


I am going to take it upon myself to go back and clean up each of the over 850 posts; but wish to apologize in advance if you go back looking for something and discover one of these efforts.  It may take a week or so, but I hope that in the very near future that the only thing that you will find to annoy you in these posts is the dismal writing, poor grammar, and worse punctuation contained in here.


Thanks for your patience ...


Update:
As of 2/3, the most recent 200 have been cleaned up; and efforts will continue as time allows.

Silly Bits I

I was getting some grief over the title of some of the previous entries to this blog (Stabilizing the MCP).  Evidently there were some that thought that instead of writing about miscellaneous crap, I was writing like crap instead. (Personally, I was surprised that anyone could distinguish the difference.)  But as Gene Autry once said: "How come you know me so well, when I'm just a stranger to myself."  Nevertheless, from this day forward such posts will henceforth be known as “Silly Bits” in homage to the Monty Python “Ministry of Silly Walks” skit.  (I won’t bore those of you not interested with the entire piece, but for those who would like to travel down memory lane, or have never seen it before, you will find it here.)  Now for the other silly bits:

The National Right to Work Foundation and the National Federation of Independent Business, along with other business groups have filed suit over the recess appointments made by President Obama to the National Labor Relations Board and the newly formed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  It appears that this President didn’t like the tactics used by the ‘Democratically Controlled’ Senate to ostensibly stay in session in spite of the fact that he was a part of the very same tactics being used to prevent his predecessor from making recess appointments when he was in the Senate. 

Having gotten a paper from the Department of Justice saying that he was within his rights to do so (The President’s lawyers agreed with him, imagine that!), the appointments were made in what many are calling a violation of the separation of powers in the Constitution. Speaking on the Senate floor on Tuesday, Republican Senator Rand Paul of KY announced that he was joining the suit.  Now while this might appear to be little more than two male children squaring off in childish comparison of linear measurement, let me say that there are two important things to take note of here.  The first is that this is a serious question of executive authority in this country, and the decision here will be far-reaching no matter which way it goes.  The second is that having long believed that emasculation was a requirement for the national legislature, it could be considered even more startling that a member of Congress in fact has the equipment required for such a comparison (though the fact that it’s Rand Paul goes a long way to explaining it).  

Indiana became the 23^rd state (and first in the Rust Belt) to become a ‘Right to Work’ state.  Similar efforts are under way in Michigan and Ohio, both traditional strongholds of the union movement, as they are in New Hampshire and Montana.  None of these laws prohibit Unions from forming and representing workers; but their passage means that Unions may no longer demand that workers join such a Union nor must they pay dues to the Union in order to work at that profession.  With the Super Bowl coming up in Indianapolis this Sunday, the timing of this bills signing means that the potential for gamesmanship is as likely outside of the field as inside it.  Union representatives have called passage of such laws ‘the beginning of the race to the bottom’ (in spite of the fact that almost half of the nation now has them).  No one knows whether they are right, but regardless of the answer to the question the race is unquestionably on; and those states who will compete in the coming economy had better decide whether they will run in it, or merely stand by in the pits (that's an Indy 500 reference).

For the first time that I can remember, a municipal government representative in the nation has admitted that the placement of red-light cameras were for revenue and not driver safety.  (I guess he’s seen the same statistics that I have and couldn’t say otherwise with a straight face.) As I pointed out in a column for the Toledo Free Press on Tuesday, Toledo’s Finance Director Patrick Mclean said that they wanted to install the new cameras in order to generate $320,000 that the city would use for youth recreation programs that the city could not otherwise likely fund. 

Setting aside the ramifications of any government finally admitting that these red light robo-cops have become a next generation tax collector in a ‘scofflaw tax’, there’s that pesky bit of how these laws are enforced.  You see in these cases, the presumption of innocence central to American justice is tossed out the window.  The evidence that a car you own committed the offense is enough to convict you whether it can be proved that you were driving it or not.  The only alternative to a guilty plea is to rat out whoever else might have been driving; an alternative that seems as unpalatable as paying the $130 fine.

And finally, from the land that brought you the promising beginning (allegedly) of Arab Spring, we have news today that riots broke out once again in Egypt.  This time however, the goals of those taking to the streets seem not so lofty, nor can the cause be deemed worthy of praise.  Apparently this violence broke out as part of a long rivalry between fans of local football (soccer) teams Port Said and Cairo.  When Port Said won the match 3-1, fans of the Cairo team stormed the field.  According to the latest counts released, 73 are known dead and over 200 injured so far in the riots that ensued.

Now I don’t know about you, but I've personally found soccer matches to be so boring that I might consider storming the field at the end of the game myself, but only in protest of the lack of entertainment provided for the ticket price charged.  I do know however, that the next time I hear about football fans turning out into the streets after an Ohio State – Michigan game, turning over a couple of cars and setting a few dumpsters on fire, my reply is going to be:  “That’s nice…” 

TFP Column: Red Light Cameras Are All Wet

For years we heard from the city that it installed red light cameras at intersections in Toledo not to make money, but to promote public safety.  While statistics gathered in other cities said otherwise and questions continued to surface about the ‘presumption of guilt' that was used in processing these offenses, the Glass City’s leaders insisted that this was not in fact a “red light scofflaw tax”.

In a stunning reversal the city’s Finance Director, Patrick Mclean this week declared just the opposite, talking about adding to the city’s electronic intersection guardians as a way to supplement funds for youth recreation programs like the city’s pools.  It seemed therefore appropriate that the topic of this week’s effort for the Toledo Free Press would be “Red Light Cameras Are All Wet”.

In it, I give some of the safety statistics now abandoned, as well as the city's ‘robbing Peter to pay Paul’ concept of financial planning a bit of airing out.  I even manage to do so before City Council takes its vote on it this afternoon.

Being as early in the week as it is, there will be much more going on in the Glass City this week however.  Issues that will best be covered in both the TFP mid-week Star edition, as well as this weekend’s edition of Toledo’s largest Sunday circulation and Ohio’s best weekly newspaper (3 years in a row), the Toledo Free Press.

Vote of Confidence: Chapter 9

Effort made last weekend is paying off this one, as for the first time in a while, I am able to post on this effort in succeeding weeks. Perhaps guilt has finally become a sufficient motivator to force me to diligence in this effort (but I highly doubt it). At any rate, I am happy to say that Chapter 9 of Vote of Confidence is now up.

I have previously described this story as “A twisted tale of Life, Politics, and what some might consider cruelty to animals”. In the spirit of full disclosure however, I have to say that none of these accusations has been proven, and that in as far as I know, no actual animals were in any way harmed (physically or psychologically) during the completion of this story.

I would love to be able to give you some insight into what has gone before or will come after, but that would imply that I know or remember anything about this effort, a rumor which I can neither confirm nor deny. (Besides, not doing so adds a bit of mystery to the whole thing, don't you think?)

Since every writer likes to be read, and since I like to sometimes believe that I'm a writer, I encourage you to take a look at this effort. While I can't promise that you will get any of the time back that you spend in doing so, I can say that you might be a bit surprised.

Respectability Is Overrated

I woke up early this morning (in spite of the fact that it's a Saturday) with the accomplishment of a couple of goals in mind. One of them was to dive right into writing so that I could get a weekend posting up on the blog; which of course proved a dismal failure, since the blank page in front of me didn't appear willing to fill itself with clever literary bits of even more clever thought. This is something that I am often all too familiar with however, being neither as diligent or as talented as some of my fellow bloggers; but I resolved to stick with it.

The second of those goals was to do something about my disreputable appearance. It's all well and good to be a Curmudgeon, but looking like one of the finalists in the 'Aqualung' look-like contest can become rather tedious over time. I had therefore resolved to make my way down to local barbershop early in the day (when few would see me and the work could be done quickly) to have an assessment of the damage done, and what repairs made that could be performed.

Their work complete, I was handed a mirror to see the results of their prodigious efforts. While of course they only had the material at hand to work with, they had managed to produce results; and a certain degree of respectability in appearance had been restored. Being a fixed charge establishment, they were woefully recompensed for their labors, something which I could only attempt to remedy with suitable gratuity.

While such efforts are only 'hair deep' and seldom last, I found that in returning to the accusing blank page that still stared back at me, that I now had something to waste a bit of keyboard effort upon … Respectability.

In this an election year, it certainly seems to be something that many running for office are attempting to exemplify. It's hard enough, I realized, to make a silk purse out of this sow's ear in my own case; without having to overcome a lifetime of public service foibles while trolling the public for votes. Every past error in judgment, every misstatement, and every personal peccadillo will be poked and prodded by the vultures in the media. And if by some chance of fate one should be overlooked (or under-reported) there is little doubt that it will be discovered by the blogosphere and and displayed for all to see anyway.

Who among us is so perfect that we can stand such scrutiny, who of us has not modified our beliefs, our public pronouncements, and our behavior over time. In fact, I would find myself far more suspicious of someone who had not. Someone so rigid, so self-assured, and so righteous seems far more dangerous than one who remains open to learning new facts and new truth, and adjusts their beliefs to compensate for such an education.

As for the appearance or respectability, I have to ask myself if we are seeking true leaders in this country, or merely casting for them. Shall we elect Jimmy Smits, Martin Sheen “The West Wing”, Kevin Kline “Dave”, or Michael Douglas “The American President” simply on their ability to appear presidential? Does a good haircut and a well-cut suit imply the ability to become the leader of the free world? Have we become so shallow that a well-crafted speech, well-performed off of a teleprompter, is to become the measure of choosing a commander-in-chief?

The pictures that I have seen of Washington, Adams (or his son John Quincy Adams), Jefferson, and Madison do not persuade me that they were striking figures of respectability. Tyler and Lincoln's were completely disreputable (if not downright ugly) and they should thank goodness that they ran for office before television. Cleveland and Taft could have stood some time in the gym in order to look more respectable. And as for Ronald Reagan, though I love the man, that haircut of his was absolutely ridiculous. Some may point to Kennedy to make an argument to the contrary, but a serious debate could be mounted on the fact that his respectable appearance was apparently only skin-deep; hiding some correspondingly ugly character traits that it might have been nice to know about. Such thinking recently in fact, might well have seen John Edwards as the resident of the White House instead of the current one, a prospect in light of later revelations that's too horrible to contemplate.

Looking at the current crop of applicants for the highest office in the land therefore, may require voters to look beyond the well-coiffed, well crafted images created by their handlers; or the well written messages of speech writers who probably look like they need to get out in the sun once in a while.  They may actually be forced to look at whether these men have a clear and believable vision to get this country out of the mess that it'sin right now, along with the ability to bring about consensus to follow that vision. 


I am forced to the conclusion that Respectability may in fact be overrated, both in a political candidate … and in myself. While there are other traits that may be sought after and admired, this one may prove mostly vacuous.  When all is said and done, a disreputable appearance may not in fact be an accurate way to judge the character of a man, and may in fact indicate a far greater concern for dealing with reality than creating illusion.

Hey!  This could mean that there's some small hope for me (in life, not office) after all.  Man, I hope those guys at the barbershop can get along without counting on my regular visits for a while ...

Sailing Off Course

So as not to let a writing effort go to waste, I thought I would post the column I wrote earlier in the week for the TFP, one that was ultimately supplanted by my State Of The Union piece.  I hope you get a kick out of it ... 

It seems amazing that something so large could be allowed to go so far off course, permitted to sail so close to potential disaster, and with danger largely ignored, fail to prevent it running aground on a known hazard. It's astonishing that the person allegedly in charge should all but abandon the charges in his care in a cowardly attempt to save his own skin. It's astounding that as more information becomes known, this person should now attempt to blame everyone and everything around him but his own failed policies and foresight. And in spite of all the mistakes made, responsibilities abandoned, and in a total failure of leadership, it appears likely that he will ask to be placed in command once more.

Oh sure, you thought I was talking about the recently unsuccessful attempt by the Carnival cruise ship Costa Concordia (with the assistance of the Island of Islo del Giglio) to prove that two objects could in fact occupy the same space at the same time. I was however, talking about another top heavy behemoth that has been off course for some time now. One which seems often to go out of its way to find things to run into … the ship of state.

As for its captain; he appears to have abandoned the concept of working with the rest of the crew to pick a less dangerous course, in favor of taking up the fight to retain his exalted rank and extravagant privilege instead. In traditions more befitting those of captains like the Bounty's Bligh, this one stood cap in hand before us, pleading the case yet again that the cause of all the untoward events of these last three years of voyaging are the fault of the previous captain, members of a sometimes mutinous crew that has refused to follow his wise orders, and passengers who apparently have not paid enough for the voyage. But after lecturing for months that the only way to maintain a properly working ship is for all to work together to keep it on course, he once again seemed unable to heed his own advice, and there is little doubt that we will see a return to a typical election year's acrimonious invective and rancorous rhetoric.

This is not to say that there isn't some cause for the captain's complaint, or that there hasn't been a sizable element opposing both the course being followed and the treatment of crew and passengers alike. Nor is to say that this crew and its ambitions are either altruistic or above reproach, or that they have shown the ability to steer a better course themselves. Such opposition when it deigns to make an appearance is in fact often both inconsistent and disingenuous. Many of the crew seem far more concerned with maintaining or improving their position in the chain of command than improving the lot of the passengers aboard or reaching a more desirable destination. Few have shown the courage of their convictions when faced down by captain, fellow crew, or passengers.

Swaggering around deck and with little clear idea where they would sail if the wheel were placed in their hands, they appear instead content to merely to complain. When put to the question however, their course in fact seems little different from that of their ill-fated captain, with the amount of sail raised amidst the growing storm as their only point of debate. None seems capable of operating a moral compass or charting a clear course away from the dangerous waters that we find ourselves in, nor avoiding the growing maelstrom around us. Any among them that appear of sound judgment or a with grasp of the real dangers at hand are shouted down by captain and crew alike as rabble rousers and trouble makers by a multitude growing in size, ignorance, and inflexibility.

And what do we hear from this blustering and boisterous majority? Is not the captain in charge? Has he not already told us that the ship of state would be in far worse shape had we not sailed the course he has charted? Have we not already given him our every confidence, that we should now question his leadership? Does he not have an able group who still believe in him?

Perhaps then, we are little more than a Ship of Fools; blind to the faults in captain and crew, ignorant of the dangerous waters we sail in, and oblivious to the rising storm around us. Perhaps it's our fate to continue sailing off course until like the ill-fated Costa Concordia, we too capsize, floundering in rising waters far too deep for us to fathom.