Hats, Rabbits and Campaigns

In 1976 President Ford in a debate with future President Carter claimed that Poland was close to free.   While there were many things that may have doomed his re-election bid this may have been the final straw.   Yesterday in a press conference President Obama may have had a similar moment - he commented 

"The truth of the matter is that, as I said, we've created 4.3 million jobs over the last 27 months, over 800,000 just this year alone. The private sector is doing fine. Where we're seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government—oftentimes, cuts initiated by governors or mayors who are not getting the kind of help that they have in the past from the federal government and who don't have the same kind of flexibility as the federal government in dealing with fewer revenues coming in.

"And so, if Republicans want to be helpful, if they really want to move forward and put people back to work, what they should be thinking about is, how do we help state and local governments and how do we help the construction industry."  (Highlights added)

What struck me and a lot of other people was how fundamentally wrong the President's perceptions are on the economy.   

"We've created 4.3 million jobs" - No economy, even this moribund one, is static.  Based on population growth of our society, one would expect that the economy would create jobs.   The problem is that this economy is not creating enough jobs.  8.2% unemployment (you will remember that when the first stimulus was adopted the President's advisors argued that if we passed the measure unemployment would not rise to 8%).   Half the recent college graduates in the country are unemployed or underemployed.   The weak jobs numbers earlier in the week are a clear testament to the Administration's failures in this area.

"The private sector is doing fine.  Where we're seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government.."  - So the President believes that state and local government employment is the driver of the economy?   Part of the reason for the declines is that a lot of the stimulus artificially increased the number of public employees.   The President goes on to blame fewer revenues coming in on this situation - but what would he say about 40% of the federal budget coming from borrowed money?

"And so if Republicans want to be helpful, if they really want to move forward and put people back to work, what they should be thinking about is, how do we help state and local governments..."   I have left off the sop to the construction industry because the President's conception of helping the construction industry is in "shovel ready" projects.  We've tried that and it did not work.   The way to build the economy is to enlarge the public sector?  Really??? So how is growth in the Euro zone?   

Many people are appalled by these comments.  I was pleased.  Although the President tried to cover his blunder at the end of the day - expect his words to come back to him many times before November.   In 2008, for a lot of reasons, the President was able to shield his views on the economy.  Yesterday, he presented a clear and unambiguous view of how the economy should grow - a higher fraction of resources being dedicated to the public sector.  It is pretty clear that in all of his education the President never thought much about supply and demand and other basic economic concepts.  That lack of knowledge is troubling.    As he tried to do yesterday afternoon he will try to get the rabbit back in the hat.   This time I do not think that will be possible.

Parallel Paranoia

Occasionally I will listen to left wing radio for chuckles.  As I was driving back from a board meeting this afternoon I listened to Randi Rhoads try to explain away the victory of Scott Walker in Wisconsin.


Rhoads is one of the best cheap shot artists around.  She consistently claimed in the half hour I listened to her that the Governor is under investigation (no credible news source can confirm that and the one story in a Google search suggests that the Governor himself initiated the Grand Jury like proceeding) and that Walker continued a deficit brought on by his predecessor (according to David Brooks of the New York Times Walker  "did turn a $3.6 billion deficit into a $150 million surplus, albeit with the help of a tax collection surge. He did make it possible for willing school districts to save money on health insurance so they could spend it on students."   The PEW Center for the States counts it the same way.)


But what struck me as particularly amusing about her rants was two things.   First, left wing and right wing radio have very similar sponsors (Gold sellers, stamps.com, a testosterone and female hormone replacement pills).   Second, both have their dark villans (which are different) but they use remarkably similar adjectives to describe them.  Rhoads boogie man was "billionaires" - who spent eight times what her poor underfunded candidate, the Milwaukee mayor, had.   Interesting but wrong.   There seems to have been a funding advantage for Walker's side although most people are still sorting out the dough.  It is clear that organized labor contributed some pretty huge checks.  


But third, lout mouthed (and I intentionally changed the D to a T) people like Rhoads and Michael Savage on the other side, tend to disrespect the idea of civil discourse.   Ultimately the way we will work ourselves out of the problems we face on public budgets is to begin to a) look at the facts and agree on them and b) then begin to quit calling each other names.


Tom Sowell, in a book called A Conflict of Visions, argued that the left and the right actually have different meanings for the same words (so for example Equality means something different between the two sides).  In this case while the language may be the same, their meanings are different.  In the long term that does not help us out of our fiscal mess.

The Election Results

Tuesday's election was remarkable for its clarity.  In addition to Mitt Romney winning 81% of the GOP primary there were some other results.   Scott Walker won by about the percentage that most of the polls had him at although early in the evening he was up by as much as 15%.   At least according to NPR in Wisconsin(with 99% of the votes in) three of the GOP senators held on to their seats and the fourth looks to have lost by the narrowest of margins.   That is a stunning defeat for the public employee unions.   Remember that the GOP controlled redistricting in the state and so the districts in which legislators will run in 2012 are different than the ones for the recall.   Many pundits expect the GOP to pick up seats in the state senate in the fall.

This was somewhat strange territory for me.   In my home state it is easy to find results almost instantaneously.   But in this case as you did a Google search, a lot of the results were either not this election or were written from a point of view.   My daughter relies on Huffington Post for a lot of her news and at least in this case their coverage was almost completely useless.  Huff post spent a lot of time quoting democratic hacks who complained about not having any money (they were outspent) - organized labor, according to John Fund, spent $35 million to try to defeat Walker and the four senators (from my perspective that is not chump change) yet both the Democratic Chair and one labor union leader (Richard Trumpka) used the phrase "Nobody wants divisive policies."  - Exactly what would you call the policies advanced by those "leaders" in the last year and a half?

There were two exit poll findings which interested me.  First, pro-Walker voters were much more motivated to vote than anti-Walker voters.  When the news about turnout (which was high) came out many speculated that would mean a democratic tide.  In this case that was not true.   Second, according to one exit poll, 60% of the voters thought the recall strategy was inappropriate.  This is only the third recall election against a governor since the procedure was first implemented (North Dakota in the twenties was the first and California in 2003 was the second) and this was the first one which was unsuccessful.

In California, voters seem to have accepted by pretty wide margins the change in term limits.   I thought the arguments against this change (which will allow future legislators to be elected for a total of 12 years in either house - so in one sense a shortening and in another a lengthening -Assembly members can now serve 6 terms rather than 3) were downright silly.   The tobacco tax, Proposition 29, failed by the narrowest of margins.  The map to the right shows the vote on Prop 29 - you can see the significant political divisions in the state (the blue is YES on 29 - these maps are from our Secretary of State and are quite useful - they can be found at http://www.ss.ca.gov ).    It is unclear what will happen to the initiative on the ballot in November which would eliminate the ability of public employee unions to extract involuntarily political contributions from their members.  The expected result is that California will not vote for such a measure - but the Wisconsin results may suggest a slightly different result.   Another concern, at least for the blue politicians in the state, is what the fate of the Governor's massive tax increase will be.  These numbers could bode poorly for that measure.   Our long time Senator, Diane Feinstein, failed to garner 50% of the vote from a field of candidates who were notable for their lack of name recognition.

From my perspective, this puts yet another Obama state in play (North Carolina and Indiana already seem to be there).   As I think I have said before, this election will be about American's perspectives on the President's handling of the economy.  And there is a lot of time between now and November.

Shad Fishing with Bob Sparre

Yesterday, my son and I went fishing for Shad on the American River with a local guide named Bob Sparre.   We were fishing for Shad.  Most of the fish we caught were about 2-3 pounds.   We used Spinner rods - which I had never done before.   During the afternoon we hooked into about 10-12 fish each.

At this point in my fishing I have been with a lot of different guides.  I have fished with some of the best guides in various areas and with some who are not so skilled.   The value of a good guide comes from two things.  A good guide will get you where the fish are.    That is both a skill and an art.   At the same time a good guide is a good teacher.   The guide helps you get better at fishing.

Sparre fills both of those roles quite well.  We had a fun and low key afternoon.  Like the best guides I have been with, he was constantly checking conditions and offering suggestions but never seemed to intrude.  The most interesting thing about Shad fishing for me was the release; people who read this blog know I am a catch and release fisherman.  When the fish is netted, one gives them a pancake flip and the hook (which is barbless) is released.  The second flip then puts the fish back into the water.

Sparre has a wide range of trips and fishes about 200 days a year.

Why the Episcopal Church is in trouble

Yesterday we attended the ordination of our nephew at Grace Cathedral.  I have not been at Grace for a long time and it is a marvelous place.  Our nephew completed seminary and was ordained a deacon yesterday with the expectation that he will become a priest in about six months.   He has a position in Jacksonville, Fla.   As part of the service the President of the Episcopal Foundation gave a homily off the following gospel (according to Mark 8:34-38):

³⁴ And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

³⁵ For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it.

³⁶ For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

³⁷ Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

³⁸ Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

As a part of the his homily he argued that being a priest in these "Post-modern (Postmodernism is a range of conceptual frameworks and ideologies that are defined in opposition to those commonly associated with ideologies of modernity and modernist notions of knowledge and science,such as formalism,materialism,metaphysics,positivism, realism,reductionism, and structuralism. ) and "Post-Christian" times is tougher than it once was.  I've always thought the term post-modern to be as Wikipedia defines it - a silly bit of muddled thinking.   Just what is post modern?  Is it antiquated?  Does modernity or change happen in one direction?   And what about being a post Christian?  

What bothered me about the discussion was that besides the sloppy thinking - it clearly had only occasional acquaintance with the passage he was explaining. It is hard to think of a time when Christianity was the dominant force.  Certainly there have been times when parts of the world had a larger share of Christians than they do today.  But fundamentally the notion that living a Christian life has been easier in other times is just plain nonsense.   The challenges that are presented in the passage are both universal and timeless.   Mark's challenge in the passage is that it is hard work to live up to the ideals set by Jesus.   That was true in Christ's time; it was true in the modern period (whenever that was) and it will be true in the future.

Crock of Crap

Mayor Michael Bloomberg has advocated banning sugared drinks that are served in excess of 16 ounces. At the same time he is supporting National Donut Day.   Here some Bloomberg groupie try to explain why the Mayor holds such contradictory positions.  Is he for "public health" or not?

Obviously when the Nanny State picks winners and losers you come up with idiotic distinctions that even a third grader could see as absurd.  Unfortunately, Linda Gibbs, who is a deputy mayor and is speaking in this video does not seem to have graduated from the third grade.  This would be sad if it were not so blatantly ridiculous.

Doc Watson and Bluegrass

  I first heard Doc Watson at the UCLA Folk Festival, I think before he appeared in the Newport Festival (which was in the Summer of 1963).   The UCLA Folk Festival was something to present mostly old-time music and Doc's musical mastery figured right in the center.   This is a 1991 video of Doc playing Black Mountain Rag.  Listen for the triplets that he throws in just for embellishment.   I had two conversations with Watson - at the UCLA folk festival and then at the Ash Grove which was a folk hang out in Hollywood.  In both cases he was patient to listen to a young bluegrass musician babble on about how I loved his music.

Doc lived in Deep Gap, N.C.  He died at the Wake Forest Hospital - which is in the town where part of my family came from.

The UCLA Folk Festival was a great experience.  The first year I went, I think I was 17.  I played in a bluegrass group called the Orange County Cross Junction Fruit Stompers .  For most of Easter Week there were concerts and workshops.   I went to see the New Lost City Ramblers (Mike Seeger, Tom Paley and John Cohen) who was my favorite group at the time (they remain high on my list) but in the mix I also got Doc and Libba Cotton and a raft of other traditional musicians - some famous, some not.   Fame for many was not rock stardom but an audience that knew some of their tunes.

At that first year I also had the chance to meet the Rev. Gary Davis. There were some parallels between Watson and Davis - both became blind at a very young age.   Both lived for a good part of their life in North Carolina (Davis was in Durham.) Davis played a Gibson (Hummingbird) rather than a Martin as Doc did.   One afternoon we were walking back from lunch and set up outside the main conference hall to jam.   Davis and his handler came up and asked "Do you boys mind if I play with you?"   We were flabbergasted.  Davis first asked "What do you know?" and then he would play along and embellish.  And then the UCLA Chimes sounded and he asked if he could riff off those - we watched in amazement as he caught the tone perfectly and then improvised off the hour sounds.   Luckily for that event a photographer from the Saturday Evening Post took a shot.  You can see from the picture that the musicians (including me) did not really understand the concept of Jam.  Davis started to play and we just sat there in awe.

One of the other amazing things was the ability to get the photo.  The Post never did publish the photo but I wrote the Post and asked for a copy - which is reprinted above.

Perspective

Yesterday we were given passes to the Solon Club at Raley Field. (Top shot is from there.) At our baseball park there are a couple of places where you can be separated from the common fan.   As you can see in the upper left of the picture there are a series of sky boxes that corporate seat holders get to entertain clients. Each can accommodate up to about fifty people (in the larger ones.) But then there is the Solon Club.  For an extra fee you can gain admittance to the area.  In the row right ahead of where our seats are located and forward, in addition to the price of a ticket, you pay an annual fee.  That gets you into the Solon Club.

Both photos are from an iPhone

                                                                           What is the attraction?   First, (and this is true) you avoid lines.   So even on the most crowded nights you can get a beer or a nosh quickly.   Second, there is a shaded area, which for day games is helpful.   My wife and I avoid day games because down where we sit it can be toasty.  But third, and this is my point, you get a very different baseball game - one that is detached.  I have always believed that baseball is a participatory sport.   Hearing and seeing what is going on is part of the attraction of the game.  Being able to yell at a lousy call is integral.  And from my perspective that simply is not possible in the Solon Club.   (Second shot is from our seats.)  Often when I get invited to major league parks to the sky boxes I politely decline.  What's the point?   Why not watch it at home? - at least there you don't have to fight the traffic.

The Rivercats played like they were in the sky boxes yesterday.  Although Manny Ramirez finally got his bat to work - he got two hits and an RBI - which brought him back to .250.   Yoenis Cespedes also is the lineup in a rehab situation and went one for three.   The rest of the team went back to its no energy mode.   The Reno Aces popped off for 17 hits and 10 runs to our 7 hits and 2 runs.   We ended up splitting the series with Reno which is leading its division - although we have a better record.  After the first losing series of the 2012 season against the hapless 23-29 Round Rock Express that is not a good trend.   Tonight we begin the first series of the season against the red hot Fresno Grizzlies (who are three and a half games up on us - although we have the second best record in the league).   Let's hope the Cat's get out of the sky boxes for this series.

Manny, Rain and a Lousy Call

iPhone Photo

On Thursday the Cats lost their first series of the season to the Round Rock Express.  Last night the Rivercats returned to a large (estimated at about 10,000) crowd wanting to catch a glimpse of Manny Ramirez who is spending the last couple of days of his suspension with the Cats before he goes back up to the bigs perhaps on Wednesday.    Manny had an unimpressive evening - keeping his average at .250 with a single followed by a ground out fly out, pop out combo.  This is the guy who was quoted in the Bee saying "I expect the attention, after all I am one of the best right handed hitters in the game."  Yeah, right - one for four - so far 20 at bats - five hits no extra bases.

Things started to get interesting when Travis Banwart was replaced with Neil Wagner.  We had been in the lead 3-1 but through a couple of doubles the Aces tied it up.   It then started to drizzle - rare for Sacramento in May but still possible.  Rich Thompson had replaced Wagner and he allowed a hit and a then a series of walks that moved one run across the plate.  But the bases were still loaded. Trey Barham came into to relieve Thompson.  Adam Eaton, the Aces best hitter (over .400) came up and at first was called out on an interesting play - the ball rolled down the bat and hit him pretty seriously in the hand.  Gallaraga tagged Eaton and then tagged home plate scoring an unassisted double play.   But then the Umps decided that Eaton had been hit by a pitch. I'm not sure how they changed their minds - from the description on the radio (By the time all this happened we decided, with a lot of other fans, that the mist was a bit more than that and were listening to the game on the radio.) Eaton had taken a swing at the thing - but that was the decision.

Thompson had had trouble on the mound getting his footing in the rain - he fell a couple of times after his follow through.   When the Eaton play was changed, Thompson got a bit grumpy and was tossed by Herzog - the home plate umpire.   Things fell apart and the Aces scored 6 in the 8th and 4 in the 9th to make the game 13-3.

AARP v. AMAC

For months now I have been hearing about the Association of Mature American Citizens or AMAC - they say they are the conservative alternative to the AARP.

AARP is a horrible organization.  It is a construct of fantasy that somehow is able to contact every person in the US at age 50 to tell them of all the benefits that it offers to "seniors."   When I turned 50 I wrote the then CEO of AARP and argued that they were a bunch of "greedy bastards" intent on bankrupting the country.   I knew the CEO then and he wrote me back a personal note, complimenting me on my moderation from when I knew him when he worked for Chuck Percy.   But I was not joking.  AARP claims to represent all people over 50 but fundamentally and dogmatically represents only the left of the spectrum.   Want to privatize part of Social Security like Chile and a host of other countries did?  No, that would be wrecking Social Security.   Want to balance the budget?  Not on the "backs of seniors."  The AARP is all of what is wrong with Washington politics.

AMAC was developed as a conservative alternative to AARP.  They present a more conservative approach to issues including support for balancing the budget.  And at the same time they offer a raft of services to seniors similar to the group buying programs of AARP.

But I have chosen not to join.  Were I forced to choose between the looney left of AARP and AMAC, I would, of course choose AMAC.   But I fundamentally disagree with the need to be represented as a senior.   Shouldn't we be trying to reduce the size of government by all reasonable means?  I really do not want my concerns presented to Congress - what I really want is Congress to reduce its intrusions into my life.

Facebook Election

The map at the right is from a new new APP (Wisdom) that generates data about Facebook.  It shows political preferences for Facebook users.   That is a quite different picture than what seems to be going on in the electorate.  But then the average Facebook user is 32 years old and has an income of about $49,000.   Even Texas is questionable for Romney.   Wisdom is able to produce a whole bunch of interesting data which I think sets out who users are and what they think.

There are a couple of obvious cautions.  First, not all users fill out a profile.  Second, and more obviously, Montana, which is seen as a blue state - probably has a lot of Montana college students and not to many ranchers in the profile.   This is a lot like the popcorn poll which projected that Truman would lose in 1948.  I think the picture is reliable of who fills out the profiles - just not reliable about the larger trends.   If, over the next few months, this map begins to turn redder - Obama will be in big trouble.

The Professor and the Madman

When my wife and I go on a longer drive we often purchase an Audible book for the ride.  This time, for a trip to a wedding in San Luis Obispo, we chose Simon Winchester's "The Professor and the Madman" - read by its author.  This is not a new book but one recommended by our Priest.

I've always been fascinated by the Oxford English Dictionary.   It was an odd project when it was first proposed (in the time of Queen Victoria) and unlike some of the other language dictionaries, which often rely on a panel of experts to determine meaning and background of words, the OED relies on a small group of professionals and a larger group of volunteers who go through both common and obscure texts to discover the meaning of words and to find out when those words came into the language.   English, more than many other languages takes phrases and words from many locations and languages.  In the beginning the researchers took a slip, like above, and wrote the word and then offered a quotation properly footnoted.   That in turn would eventually result in an entry for the OED which looks like this (for the word fascinating) - which

includes a couple of quotations plus the proper spelling and pronunciation of the word as well as a couple of historical references.   The process now is done with computers and a lot of cross referencing and use of databases - but in the time when the project got started in the late Nineteenth Century - all of this was done by hand.   When the current edition came out its leadership said this was the last version that would offer a print edition.

The project was originally able to go forward as  a result of two additions - one a Brit - James Murray who assumed leadership about twenty years after the project had first been proposed.  But the second was a former American Army Captain who was quite mad and confined to a British Asylum.  He had been a physician in the Civil War for the Union and ultimately after his mental state began to decline wound up in London where he shot a man and was judged to be criminally insane.  He spent the rest of his life in asylums but made prodigious contributions to the project and devised a novel way to catalogue words which turns out was much more efficient than had been used before the doctor discovered it.  In the end the two men had a collaboration that lasted decades.  One odd fact was that near the end of their lives they even looked a bit alike - the picture above is of Minor.  The book is interesting but the Audible book also includes a lengthy interview with a current researcher on the OED about how they do their work now.   All in all this was a superb and interesting way to spend the drive down and back.

The Romney Decision on Attack Ads

Mitt Romney's decision to rebuke supporters who wanted to produce a series of ads on the extremist statements of the President's pastor was a good one.   Many of the hard core opponents of Obama thought he was doing a McCain but I think his decision was both sound and good politics.

Here are some reasons why -

1) Jeremiah Wright is old news - Indeed, Pastor Wright is an offensive racist.  His sermons reek of tired cliches of the left.  It is impossible to believe that Obama did not get at least some of the extreme rhetoric in a church he claims to have attended for more than 20 years (Wright married the Obamas and baptized their children.)   But all of this was known in the 2008 campaign.   It is my judgment that Romney would not increase his share of voters - people who know about Wright and think negatively about his rants - are not likely to vote more for Romney because of a commercial which points out Wright's absurd notions.  Those who think Wright is a victim are unlikely to be convinced to change their opinion of the President merely because charges are repeated.  Attacking Wright does not get you any new voters but not attacking him may get you some.

2) Romney can claim the high ground - One of the more telling remarks in Romney's press conference on this issue was that he would like to stick to the issues in this campaign.  The problem(s) with this Administration are based on economics not theology.  By rebuking the politicos here, Romney can continue to press the attack on Obama's manifest failures in restoring economic growth.

McCain's stance here is not dispositive.  His campaign was a hodge podge of organization.  Romney's team seems well disciplined.   They can make the point - winning the office does not require such lot shots - that may turn the tactic on Obama.

3) If Romney Wins - this will put him in better stead to lead - One of the major failings of the Obama Administration has been his complete inability to work with the other side.  While critics have argued that he did not even try (and there is truth to that) a case can be made that his inability to develop less partisan solutions was caused by the type of campaign he ran.  But Romney can claim, if he wins, I did not attack personally but on policies and we can have a discussion about alternatives.   That could change the conversation in Washington.

4) Obama is poised to run an old style campaign - The feeble attempts by Joe Biden to attack Romney on his wealth (Biden went to Archmere Academy another elite prep school) this week were silly and mostly laughed at.  Their attempt to tie Romney to Bain's M&A activity was responded to quickly and decisively.  Contrast the whiney ad produced for the president (GST Steel - which was taken over by Bain and eventually failed  - but that is a reality of the business world some attempts are unsuccessful) versus the ad produced by the Romney team that hit the airwaves almost immediately on Steel Dynamics.   In an interview Romney went on to make the point that  indeed some of the efforts by Bain were unsuccessful but the sum total of those efforts is not as large as the clumsy restructuring of the auto industry done by the Administration.  Romney seems poised to go toe to toe with the Obama attack dogs.



The Obama ad - which is more than 6 minutes distorts the reality of the issue.   GS Steel was in deep trouble they brought Bain in to turn the aging plant around - according to Reuters - "The old mill, renamed GS Technologies, needed expensive updating, and demand for its products was susceptible to cycles in the mining industry and commodities markets."   The ad could get labor unions fired up but between its length and the distorted picture it offers - I suspect it did not do much for the President's re-election campaign.


The Steel Dynamics Ad is shorter and better focused.  




Polling on the type of attack ads done by Obama have mixed results.  First, most political advisors think they are effective.  But when voters are polled - most think the type of ads are over the top.   Conventional wisdom here by the consultants may be wrong.

Health Insurance Fables

Like many others in my generation I take Lipitor.  Last year, after an extended period, where Pfizer tried to protect their franchise a generic version (Atorvastatin) was released.  Blue Cross immediately switched me to that cheaper alternative.  There was no choice.   But what they did not do was reduce the price.   I wondered why that was.  So I went to my pharmacist and inquired.  I was told that it takes them a couple of months to "update the formulary" before I will see the price reduction.    I thought that a bit odd and so I went to Blue Cross and was told the same fable.

What confuses me is that the formulary listing which drugs they will cover was updated immediately but for some reason the price list could not be updated with the same rapidity.  This was on Medicare's Part D plan offered by Blue Cross.  At five months I am still waiting for the updated price.

One of the arguments that the President made when he passed the pending monster called the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was that the new ton of regulations would ultimately reduce prices.   As a relatively new participant in Medicare, I guess I will hold my breath.   One of the oddest things you find when you become a Medicare participant is that for Parts A and B you cannot get an electronic bill nor can you send an electronic payment (although it may be possible when I begin to receive Social Security).   That does not look like a cost saving measure until you realize that all those people at the billing center are part of the President's promise about all those jobs that the Stimulus Bill created.

Politically Correct Cacophony

California will go through a primary vote in a couple of weeks and this is one page out of the sample ballot.  A sample ballot was supposed to be designed to assist voters in making intelligent choices but this mess turned out by the County of Sacramento makes it almost impossible to understand any issue with any clarity.  

California is a diverse society - fully one quarter of our residents were born outside the United States.  But does this mix of lousy printing and obligatory listing of a bunch of languages assist or deny that intended purpose?

Walkoffs a Pair

Last night the Rivercats opened a four game series against the Omaha Stormchasers.  In the end the Cats scored a come from behind win with a walk off home run by Josh Donaldson - the homer was wonderful if for nothing else in that it was well out into center.   That gave the Cats the win.   But what put us back into the game was Colin Cowgill's homer in the eighth - again a very long hit.   For most of the game we war down as many as 3 runs.  SO the win was extras sweet.

In tonight's game we went up early - 2-0.  But then in a series of miscues we let them tie it up in the ninth.  We came down to the bottom of the ninth and after getting someone on case Derek Norris came up and belted one to left - another walk off homer - but this time worth two runs.   It was just as exciting the second night in a row.

Richard Lugar

I first became aware of Richard Lugar when he was Nixon's favorite mayor.  The mayor of Indianapolis was an innovator.   He was a big supporter of something Nixon pushed called "revenue sharing" which distributed money from the feds to state and local governments based on a formula.   When he was elected as a senator I was impressed with his judicious approach to the issues.   But Lugar was badly defeated (by 20 poitns) in last night's Indiana primary even though he outspent his opponent 3:1.

Richard Mourdock's key to victory was simple - people in Indiana are grumpy about the federal government.   The left will try to make the fall race into something it will not be.  Mourdock is not a conservative ideologue.  Although he did make use of some of Lugar's votes in pressing his campaign my suspicion is that if Mourdock is elected against three term Congressman Joe Donnelley, he will not be an ideologue.   His role in previous elected office does not suggest that.

Lugar spent a good deal of his campaign on defense and as John McCain, who survived a similar challenge in his last race commented defense is not the place to run a campaign.   Lugar assumed a lot.  He assumed that Indiana voters would understand that he no longer lived in the state; that they would value his vast knowledge of foreign relations (much of which was based on principles of the Washington establishment) was more important than key issues like the economy in the state - neither assumption was a good one.

Peggy Noonan in the Wall Street Journal commented "What Washington needs is sober and responsible adults. We are as a nation in a moment of real peril, facing challenges that are going to become existential—maybe already are—if we don’t do something about them."   The problem with her argument was that she did not consider Lugar's opponent.  At the same time it ignored a basic principle of representative government - the position of US Senator is not a sinecure.   Part of the reason for elections is to allow voters to gauge the ability of their elected representatives to understand current problems in the state.  Lugar failed that test.


Lugar was somewhat ungracious in defeat.  He commented "He has pledged his support to groups whose prime mission is to cleanse the Republican party of those who stray from orthodoxy as they see it," he said of Mourdock. "This is not conducive to problem solving and governance.”  That diminished my admiration for the Senator.    In his formal concession speech he was more gracious and even expressed the hope that Mourdock would prevail in November and would help contribute to a new GOP majority.


One final comment.  I believe that Richard Lugar had a distinguished public career.   But I also believe that he did not deserve re-election.   

Scholarly Twaddle

A publication called The WEEK published an article on the 2d which asked "Are Highly Religious People Less Compassionate?" - the issue has been covered in place like the Huffington Post.   Each of the articles covered some "research" at UC Berkeley which conducted a series of experiments to discover compassion.  One of the researchers commented "Overall, we find that for less religious people, the strength of their emotional connection to another person is critical to whether they will help that person or not," study co-author and University of California, Berkeley social psychologist Robb Willer said in a statement. "The more religious, on the other hand, may ground their generosity less in emotion, and more in other factors such as doctrine, a communal identity, or reputational concerns."


If you read the coverage of the research (I will admit that I have not read the article in the Journal Social Psychology and Personality Science to be published in the July edition) it has so many flaws one is limited only by the number of options on where to begin.   One of the experiments had subjects see an emotional or neutral video and then received $10 fake dollars which they could give to a stranger.  The non-religious people gave more after seeing the emotional video.   The flaws in the methodology and assumptions on this study are huge.   Did the religious people give less because they knew that simply giving money to a stranger, even one in apparent need, may not help the situation?  (Is that really a doctrinal issue?)   Did the subjects of the study perform differently because they were given "fake" dollars?   The potential for absurd conclusions is gigantic.


One wonders why this research is important.   There is plenty of evidence that both in terms of dollars contributed and in volunteer time that religious people contribute more to charitable causes.  (See for example Why Good Things Happen to Good People).   But the state of Publish or Perish in many universities encourages people to conduct this kind of silliness.

The Johnny Mercer Presidency

One of the members of congress that I worked for had a joke he told to aspiring politicians.  He said a good politician needs to only be able to do three things.   First, they have to be for everything that is good.  Second, they need to be against everything that is bad.  But third, they need to be able to tell the difference between the two.

For the past couple of days the Obama administration has been trying to "spike the Osama Bin Laden football."   They've staged a couple of events, including the President's trip to Afghanistan in which Hamid Karzai was a willing accomplice.  (He has always been such a picture of integrity.)   They have even made the claim that George Romney would not have been willing to make the decision to go after Bin Laden.  (Which is a ridiculous claim on its face.)  

I suspect that the staffer who staged the Bush fly in after the toppling of Hussein has had second thoughts about the efficacy of football spiking in politics.   If the Obama people have any grace they should be a bit chagrined about all this nonsense on the one year anniversary of Bin Laden's death.  The president did make the decision and he should receive credit for that but all the extra claims are silly.

One of Mr. Obama's predecessors had a penchant for cataloguing all of his accomplishments in the style of the old song - accentuate the positive - eliminate the negative. Ultimately all that enumeration did not save Richard Nixon.  A president is ultimately judged on his record.   No matter how successful his spin doctors are in weaving the story, ultimately the voters will make a judgement about whether he deserves re-election.  The stunt(s) in the past few days made this president look a bit smaller.   I would not be surprised to see the following campaign slogan appear soon - Everything good came from me, all the bad things came from George Bush.

Jury Service

Today I was asked to report for jury service.  The trial I got called for involved the murders of three people by two others who were members of a Mexican Mafia gang called the Suerños.   The trial was projected to take most of the month of May.   That would have been a problem for my new consulting venture (no income for May) so I was released from serving.

In the time that I have lived in the Sacramento area I have been called for Jury Duty three times.  But to date I have never served on a jury.  The most harrowing was one about a decade ago which was a similar case (complicated and violent) but which I ended up getting excused from as an alternate because I was going to be the final alternate and the one person ahead of me was able to serve.    My impression(s) about jury service - or at least getting called for it - have not changed much - but here they are based on this visit -

#1 - It is a remarkably diverse group but that is a bit deceptive.  While there are all sorts of people in the jury room, that does not mean they all serve.   One guy caught my attention.  He was an aging hippie who reeked of alcohol and tobacco.  (I know because he sat next to me while waiting for a hardship request and grumped that by this time in the day he had normally already had a couple of beers - from his appearance I am not sure what "a couple" means in this instance.)   He was eventually excused and then grumped about having to get the bus to take light rail back to his "place."   Compared to the last time I was there a lot fewer suits (I was not wearing one.)   And some people dressed like they were at Walmart. (No offense to Walmart - but shorts and flip flops does not seem like something one would wear to a court room.)

#2 - My fellow citizens have a lot of reasons to claim a hardship from serving.   The process which the judge used to find people with hardships.  Was to have each of us fill out a questionnaire.  We were then individually interviewed - or so it seemed.   Of the 120+ veniremen about half raised their hands when the hardship request was raised.  We were then sent out of the courtroom and asked to wait for an interview with the judge.  The interview process for the first 15 or 20 took about 5-7 minutes a piece.   If a person came out of the courtroom with a questionnaire (which is a 21 page document filled out to help lawyers choose the jury) their request had been denied.   Of the first group only two came out without the questionnaire.   That started chatter in the remaining group about how impossible the odds were for getting a hardship request approved.   But then the bailiff came out with a sheaf of the remaining requests and called each person's name and we were excused - evidently the judge wanted to interview the marginal claims.  

#3 - The process is a bit bureaucratic.  You are told when to report, then given a little information (very little), then if you are chosen you are asked to go to a courtroom and told to turn off all your electronic goodies (no iPads in the courtroom).  They then run you through introductions including information about the nature of the crime or proceeding.  But the whole process could be simplified.  I suspect part of this comes from the need to be fair to the parties involved but in doing that it may not be fair to the citizens called to serve.   One other impression - the schedule is not intense but not lax either - Monday through Thursday - 9-4:30 - no session on Friday - I suspect that the judge and the lawyers need that time to get all the things done they miss during the trial.

#4 - California is a diverse state. There were two translators in the room and four people had headphones (Both defendants had headphones) and the judge specifically said that two languages were necessary here.  I could hear one of the translators in Spanish - but I wonder what the other language was.

#5 - My impressions of both the defense lawyers and prosecutors reinforced my decision long ago not to be a lawyer.  There are two defense attorneys in the case.  One took an extra step to introduce himself and his client to the group (as introductions were going around).   He seemed a lot more on top of his game than the other defense guy.   The prosecutor made little impression although she was young.

#6 - I was confronted with my own moral beliefs - As the judge introduced the case she explained that the defendants were accused of killing three people who were on bicycles from a car.   She then said that the death penalty was not on the table.  It would have probably been inappropriate to explain why but I wondered.   Over the last decade my views on the death penalty have changed and I wondered before the judge said it was not an option whether I would be willing to impose the death penalty.