Today, the blog reports on the Senate’s attempt at again getting a US Constitutional amendment forbidding gay marriage (yawn!). This Amendment is naturally touted as being the only way that the Federal government can truly protect marriage from the invasion of gay people that want to ruin marriage for nice heterosexual couples like me. Of course, it affects me little whether Dan and Dave can get married or not but that’s not really the point of this post. What the Economist points out is who two of the most staunch defenders of the amendment are: Larry (”I just have a wide stance”) Craig and David (”mmm…hookers”) Vitter.

Yes, because those two are shining examples of why Dan and Dave shouldn’t marry. I realize that anyone can sponsor legislation and the more sponsors the better, but come on people. Do you really want these two schmucks connected with your attempt at saving marriage?

ShareThis

It’s great that a lot of people donate at Thanksgiving and Christmas, don’t get me wrong, but hunger knows no season (sorry, Salvation Army) and food banks are traditionally stretched during the summer. Why? Because kids that normally get free or reduced-price breakfast and lunch at school don’t get those services during the summer. This leads to a bigger strain at food banks where people turn to when they can’t afford those meals.

If you ate breakfast this morning be thankful for that and think about those that didn’t have that option. If you think that you can’t give because of high gas and food prices, imagine all of those that make less than you. If you give up $4 lattes for one week, you can provide food for a family for a couple of days. Stay in one night and donate that $20 to the food bank to do the same thing. Go to the grocery store and pick up a few items on sale and drop them off at the pantry.

If you don’t know where to donate, the National Hunger Clearinghouse has a page for searching for food pantries in your area. While this is more for people looking for help, contacting these agencies and offering help certainly won’t be refused.

Please give what you can to help those that can’t.

ShareThis

Put me firmly on the side of not understanding why the Obama campaign would opt out of the Federal funding system. Well, I mean I understand why just not why.

You have a candidate that has (correctly) campaigned on getting money out of politics and campaigning. So, what does he do when he’s facing whether or not to actually get the money out? He opts out of the Presidential Campaign Fund to take private money instead. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

The Obama campaign has just handed an issue bow-tied and gift-wrapped to the McCain campaign. Both candidates had strong records on campaign finance reform. Obama refused money from PACs in the primary and has said he will forego PAC money in the general election. McCain was cosponsor of the McCain-Feingold Act, which was a valiant effort until it was gutted by the FEC.

Now, Obama can no longer run on the campaign finance platform because not only has he made himself a whore for campaign donations, he’s actually gone farther than any candidate since Nixon in refusing to abide by the limits set by the Presidential Campaign Fund because $83 million is simply not enough to run 3 months of a Presidential campaign (from the convention to the election). The Obama campaign believes (probably correctly) that it can raise more than $83 million and so it will take the PR hit (it thinks) to get its hands on the money.

I think that the campaign didn’t think this through. Whatever money is tied up in the Presidential race will (potentially) be lost in down ticket races. If someone is going to give $100 to a campaign, would they give it to a Presidential campaign or their local Congresscritter? For someone that was supposed to be good for down ticket campaigns it’s not very bright to steal their money by foregoing free money just because you can. I’d be pissed if I was a Democrat fighting in a Republican district. This may be the first chance in two decades to win the seat, but they can’t do it without cash in the current system. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Maybe it’s a bigger deal to me than most? I’m willing to concede that, but I’ve had my doubts about Obama since voting for him (albeit reluctantly) in the primary. Now, we’ve got a big issue that he’s campaigned hard on and when it comes down to brass tacks, he not only turns into the typical politician but is willing to go further than anyone else has in complete contradiction to his stated beliefs. To say I’m not impressed is an understatement. I’m leaning more and more to Mickey Mouse for President.

On a slightly related note, I have to give McCain credit for his recent campaign speeches. He’s certainly not taking the GWB route of only talking to friendly audiences. In the last two days, he’s campaigned for offshore drilling in the place where the worst offshore oil rig spill happened 40 years ago and he’s campaigned for the Yucca Mountain nuclear disposal site while in Nevada. He might be turning into President Bush in his policies, but at least he has the guts to go in front of people that might not totally approve of the message.

ShareThis

It started when Steelman, who is great for Treasurer but slightly to the right of Genghis Khan otherwise, accused Hulshof of voting to cover Viagra for Medicare patients and calling into question his conservative credentials. She mentioned it several times during a speech at the Lake of the Ozarks. Hulshof’s campaign shot back that Steelman voted to give Viagra to sex offenders while in the Missouri Senate. Steelman responded that she voted for the Medicaid budget which included Viagra only because it was required by the Federal Government, which of course includes Hulshof.

The latest from the campaigns can be summarized thusly:

Hulshof: Nuh-uh
Steelman: Uh-huh
Hulshof: Nuh-uh, Nuh-uh, Nuh-uh
Steelman: Uh-huh, Uh-huh, Uh-huh
Hulshof: Nuh-uh times infinity
Steelman: Uh-huh times infinity PLUS ONE!

Now, if I remember my argument technique correctly from childhood, it would seem that the next step is a debate as to whether or not infinity plus one really exists and whether infinity to the infinity power is truly the highest number available.

Actually, the Steelman campaign has already decided what the debate will be, posting a pretend exchange between the campaigns in response to the latest “uh-huh” ad. (I’m not kidding)

I really hope that at some point the campaigns get down to business. The three people running are all on the far ends of the spectrum. Jay Nixon, the Democrat-in-waiting, was Attorney General when Missouri was granted statehood (at least it feels that way) and was excellent in that job but has moved so far to the left that I can’t even see him anymore. As I mentioned, Steelman is to the right of Genghis Khan and Hulshof is shaking hands with him. It will truly come down to whether the urban or rural areas vote more in November as both parties have picked candidates that play to the extreme part of their base. Of course, that leaves moderates (hey, you guys do remember us that make up 40% of the electorate, right?) without much choice.

Maybe that’s why we haven’t gotten anywhere with actual issues, nobody wants to bring them up and show how extreme they really are. Until then, we’re stuck with who voted to give Viagra to the least desirable group.

ShareThis

– deems a taxpayer eligible for any state tax credit program even if a conflict of interest exists due to a relationship of any degree or affinity to any statewide elected official or member of the General Assembly, when the related person holds an equity interest of less than 2% in the taxpayer;

– allows a corporation, firm, partnership, trust, association, or other entity to receive state-authorized tax credits, abatements, exemptions, or loans even if a conflict of interest exists due to a relationship of any degree or affinity to any statewide elected official or member of the General Assembly, when the related person holds an equity interest of less than 2% in the entity that will receive the state benefit;

– requires every state agency charged with administering a tax credit program to make public the name of each tax credit recipient and the amount of tax credits issued to each recipient;

– requires any tax credit program applicant who purposely and directly employs unauthorized aliens to forfeit any tax credits issued but not redeemed and to repay all tax credits that have been redeemed during the time the unauthorized alien was employed by the applicant;

– allows information regarding state tax credits claimed by a member of the General Assembly or any statewide elected public official to be disclosed to the public; and

– requires members of the General Assembly and statewide elected public officials to disclose on financial interest statements whether they, their spouses, or dependent children claimed any state tax credits on their most recent state income tax return. 

While this won’t cure everything, it does give some statewide guidelines. Earlier, each credit granting agency (and there are seemingly hundreds buried in the Missouri government) had their own rules. The Executive agencies generally didn’t give tax credits if a public official owned more than 10% of the project. Treasurer Steelman’s office denied tax credits to any project that had any public official’s name as a part owner.

It also requires that Legislators at least disclose the tax credits that they do receive, though I doubt anyone actually reads the financial disclosure forms that Legislators have to file (I certainly don’t). At least it’s one step closer to transparency in the system, as long as the legislators stay in the system.

ShareThis

I’m sure ExurbanKevin has slathered himself in the ritual Aqua paint for the event. There will be a ton of details everywhere about what happens in Cupertino today. It amazes me that a product launch has become a huge media spectacle. Forgot the media’s liberal bias. How about its Mac bias?

ShareThis

 Back next week.

ShareThis

It’s a long line of stories that seem to be the reversal of the long line of stories about the power of the Religious Right of the last decade. Now that the Democrats are ascendant, the media has to come up with a meme that will fit with their worldview.

Ms. Banerjee, who appears to be the religious correspondent from the Times given her other stories, does an okay job but why do we need these stories? Is it really that surprising that someone can be Christian, live in the Midwest, and be a Democrat? I realize we’re not as smrt as those that happen to live near an ocean (must be the salty air or something) but we can think for ourselves. It should be no more surprising than finding someone that is Jewish, lives in New York, and is a Republican. Where are the stories on that? I mean if we are going to play stereotypes they can go both ways.

I would prefer the story have focused on some of the quotes rather than the fact that they happen to not be Republican. I agree with a lot of what was said by the Baptists in the article (you won’t find me saying that a lot) that we need to be out in the world rather than retreating from it as a lot of the older generation would prefer. They mention that any political agenda should be about more than abortion and gay marriage, but why not expound on that?

I’m not a huge fan of media bias (and it cracks me up to no end that Hillary’s supporters are claiming that the reason she lost is because of liberal bias) so I’m going to blame the tone of the story more on the editors lack of knowledge than an overall bias. Just to clear the air, yes, there are people in the flyover that aren’t GOP-programmed killing machines.

As the Presidential race heats up, we’ll see more articles from places that NYT reporters hoped that they would never be sent (”Send me to Baghdad, just not St. Louis!”). I hope that they all don’t take the condescending tone of this piece, but I’m not going to hold my breath.

ShareThis

I know that you are unlikely to listen to me as I’ve never voted for you, routinely called your adventure in Iraq a travesty, and referred to your Administration as a bad joke on the American people. But I believe that for the good of the nation, we can agree on one thing. Don’t let George Ryan out of prison.

The former Governor of Illinois was convicted of using his office as an ATM machine and filing fraudulent tax returns to cover it up. He received trips, money, and campaign contributions from state contract holders. He, without remorse, steered contracts to friends and associates. He was among the most corrupt officials Illinois has ever had, and when you consider that 4 of the last 7 Illinois Governors have served prison time that’s really saying something (and Blago will likely make it 5 of 8).

But most importantly, you cannot let the deaths of the Willis children go unpunished. The Willis family was simply driving down the highway when a piece of metal flew off of a truck and into their van. The van exploded trapping their six children inside. All six children were killed in the accident. The truck driver should never have been on the road. He bribed an official in the Secretary of State’s office to get his license. Governor Ryan was Secretary of State at the time and it was later learned that there was a statewide system of bribes for driver’s licenses and that the bribe money was going into Governor Ryan’s Gubernatorial campaign fund. It simply defies logic that he would not have known about the systematic rot. Given what we know of his term as Governor, it seems prescient.

As far as I (and many other Illinoisans) are considered, Ryan deserves to spend the rest of his time in prison. Commuting his sentence, as his lawyer former Illinois Governor Jim Thompson suggests, would show that you can do whatever you please as long as you have friends in high places to bail you out. I’ve criticized your Administration for doing the same thing several times and I hope that in the last months of your Presidency you consider the message that sends to historians about your Administration.

I have no sympathy for George Ryan, as this letter suggests. Governor Thompson claims that it is punishment enough for him to lose face and that he shouldn’t have to do prison time. For the sake of the Willis family and all the others that were hurt as a result of Governor Ryan’s actions, I plead with you to let Mr. Ryan face his punishment. Send a message that Governors and public officials should not be for sale. Talking tough about crime and punishment is one thing, actually letting justice rule is another.

Please Mr. President, let Governor Ryan serve his time.

Sincerely,

Kirk Walsh, Registered Voter

ShareThis

PFA Program Requests Down Since $40,000 Application Fee Spike

The number of requests for the prefiling agreement program at examination level has dropped off significantly since 2007, says Lori Nichols, deputy director for prefiling and technical guidance in IRS’s Large and Mid-Size Business Division. “We’re not exactly sure what’s driving that,” she says. “We thought maybe that it would be a more popular program, particularly in light of certainty for tax issues,” she says. Since 2007, the application fee has jumped from $10,000 to $50,000, she notes

ShareThis