GOP primary marred by gotcha politics

You expect gotcha politics these days, when sound bites are short and the public discourse often seems comprised of little more than shallow, opportunistic demagoguery. When we do hear something positive, it’s (all too often) positively platitudinous. Many have lamented such a state of affairs, and there are plenty of fingers to point.

What irks me today though is a particular brand of sniping as of late in the GOP presidential primary. Joining the likes of DNC press release writers and labor union bosses, Newt Gingrich and Jon Huntsman have criticized Mitt Romney for his background as an executive and entrepreneur. In an attempt to gain traction in Iowa several weeks ago, Gingrich blasted Romney’s work at private equity firm Bain Capital. Since then he’s continued to make statements similar to this one:

“I would just say that if Gov. Romney would like to give back all the money he’s earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over his years at Bain that I would be glad to then listen to him.”  (LA Times, Dec. 12, 2011)

This morning in New Hampshire, Romney said he would like to see individuals have their own health insurance and be able to fire their insurers (in favor of another carrier) at will. That’s what any sensible listener would have taken from his statement. Gingrich, Huntsman, the DNC and others pounced however, lampooning the Iowa caucus winner for wanting to “fire people.” Rick Santorum and Rick Perry have also attacked Romney’s professional background.

Barack Obama and Democrats will attack Romney for being a successful executive who was involved in the breaking down and building up of commercial enterprises (as I understand it). It’s untoward to watch Republicans do the same. Conservatives should voice their displeasure with this kind of anti-capitalist rhetoric, and put its practitioners on the defensive.

Republicans should not forfeit the debate over capitalism and freedom in this country. Unfortunately, in their quest for personal political gain, some of Romney’s rivals push the party that direction with their choice of language. It’s not just the attacks, either. It’s also the ridiculous proposition that private investment is solely for “job-creation,” and that creating employment opportunities for others, in and of itself, is the only morally legitimate function of business enterprise.

That is the natural and  desirable outcome in many cases, but it is not the first purpose of the innovator or investor in most cases. In fact, innovation may mean a single worker can do more with less – a productivity gain. That same progress means other workers who were once needed for one one task might move on to another, with jobs being lost – and regained – in the process. Or, maybe some jobs are lost, but a leaner and more efficient operation reduces costs for the consumer.

Romney’s record – as a public figure and private professional – is fair game, just as the record of every other candidate is fair game. But questions and criticisms should not be skewed by anti-private, anti-profit bias. If Romney behaved unethically or illegally, bring that to the fore. If not, desist with the obscene charges and absurd insinuations. They should be taken unkindly by us all.

Is mayoral takeover undemocratic?

E. Thomas McClanahan of the The Kansas City Star writes that the mayor’s plan to take over the city’s troubled school district is a non-starter. While I often agree with this columnist, he fails to explain why mayoral control of the district is less desirable than any of the current alternative scenarios. KC may have a weak mayor’s office by design, but has relative independence of the school board done anything for public education in the city?

Mayoral takeover is not a panacea. But the immediate practical alternatives would seem to be either state takeover or some continuation of the dismal status quo. To McClanahan and others who oppose a local takeover (perhaps State Senator Victor Callahan, etc.), what is your solution that will work better?

In school turn-around efforts nationally, mayoral control of city school districts has picked up steam in recent years. For communities mired in civic squabbles for decades, the idea of a strongman who can make decisions at will can seem attractive. It’s less democratic as McClanahan points out, but particularly at the local level, isn’t there still room for republican rather than participatory governance?

Kansas City schools need a major shakeup, and it’s hard to see how anything but a major solution can provide that. Again, I’m not saying mayoral takeover is ideal, but until another (politically feasible) answer presents itself, I don’t know what the city has to lose. 

Mayor James takes risks on KC schools

Steve Kraske of the Kansas City Star writes that Mayor Sly James is betting his future on the schools, as he vies to take control of the troubled district while the state considers a takeover. The columnist strikes a down note, noting that James is a Marine and a lawyer by training, not a school administrator (Is that necessarily a bad thing, considering many administrators’ track record in this district?). He can’t eliminate urban poverty and give every child a good home.

All that is true. If James gets the control he wants, it’s on him. He owns it. And it’s hard to see how even the most successful singular leader can make a major turnaround in just a few years. Nevertheless, without having followed every twist and turn of this latest crisis in the district, I like the fact that James wants to take control. To assume responsibility. It would be hard to do any worse than the current state of affairs.

The only question is, could the state do any better? That’s a matter of speculation at this point. A state takeover signals just how dire the situation is, and may offer some relief from local bickering over problems and solutions. Yet, we shouldn’t forget that management from above and layers of bureaucracy has helped create the mess seen today.

When state and federal policymakers want to “help” local school districts by “giving” them money, locals must remember there are always strings attached. That’s just common sense. Yet education types everywhere hoot and howl whenever someone attempts to micromanage them or restrict them. Usually it’s the same people who constantly clamor for more state and federal “aid.” Resources without responsibility, say some public education backers.

Do they also not expect that in the bizarre world of public education where human resource decision-making is so regimented and restrained, the inevitable alternative is micromanagement of personnel? Autonomy without accountability, cry the teachers unions. Myriad tests and measurements, and a battery of mind-numbing, soul-sucking regulation are the impotent, annoying substitutes for this refusal within public education to accept responsibility or accountability.

In the interest of local control, a mayoral takeover at the city level is probably superior to an education department takeover at the state level, in theory. Again, I don’t know all the specifics of the current situation, and I don’t know Sly James or what his learning curve would be like. But if he can convince DESE and others that he’s the man with a plan, then more power to him.

As for what he should do if and when that happens – or what the state or anybody else should do – that’s another discussion for another day. For starters, every student, parent, and especially every public educator can start by adopting James’s attitude when it comes to education: It’s on me.

A great lesson on taxes

Students everywhere, journalists and all citizens, observe:

You’re violating my civil rights…

…By not giving me an extra long booth for my rapidly expanding thighs. So says Martin Kessman – an obese man living in New York – to the fast food chain White Castle. If this isn’t proof that the “civil rights” rhetoric has gone too far, I don’t know what is. Everything’s a “civil right” now days. Just ask Kessman, et al. A local Fox affiliate has the story. Kudos Drudge.

A side note: a lawsuit has been filed, which presumably means a lawyer is involved. Can you strip an attorney’s license for this kind of non-sensical behavior? Reminds me of the time a Washington, D.C. resident (a judge!) sued the little dry-cleaners place he went to for losing his pants….in the amount of 80 million dollars or so.

Man faces 75 years for taping cops

The State of Illinois is fighting to put a 41 year old mechanic behind bars for the rest of his life because he videotaped cops. Michael Allison faces five charges of eavesdropping, each carrying up to fifteen years in jail. He refused to cut a deal with prosecutors, because he does not believe he committed a crime.

Unfortunately, the video footage shot by Allison isn’t available, because it was confiscated by cops. News coverage of the story, however, is available in these clips from NBC Channel 2 of Wabash Valley. The ACLU is defending the man, who says he has never been arrested or accused of a time. Similar charges have been dropped or reduced in other states.

 

Food Police

In a nation of fatties, you’d think the food police would have better things to do than raid natural food stores. Apparently not, at least in LA County.

Drudge links to this story from Natural News, which describes an armed raid by local and federal government agents on a food co-op selling raw milk and cheese. Four agencies conducted the raid on Rawsome Foods, took the owner into custody and destroyed private property, but never produced a warrant according to the news source.

Read the story for details. If all happened as being reported, this is a distrubing example of government overreach into the lives of citizens. The entities and officials involved should be investigated and if appropriate, subject to disciplinary action or some other form of sanction.

GOP continues to take shape

With the entry of Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minnesota) into the GOP presidential primary, the field continues to take shape. The first effect would seem to be that Sarah Palin is far less likely to run.

It’s not just that the two would be in natural competition as strong, attractive female candidates. They also have overlapping messages and appeal to similar constituencies. Bachmann is instantly a serious contender, and Palin would be risking political prestige and financial earning opportunity to take her on.

Palin has some natural talents as a candidate, while Bachmann’s have not yet been on display long enough to observe (at least, on a national stage). All in all though, I’d take Bachmann over Palin , and I’m glad to see her enter the race.

She deserves serious consideration.

Sarah Palin stirs the waters

The political universe is atwitter at the latest sign that Sarah Palin may run for president. Politico and others have reported on her bus stop tour and a promotional documentary soon to be released. This comes on the heels of unconfirmed reports that she has bought or is buying a home in Arizona.

There are several questions here. The first is will she run. The second is how well would she positioned in the GOP field as it is currently shaping up. And the third of course is could she realistically take on Barack Obama in a general election.

The bus tour all but says “I’m in,” although I don’t think it’s a lock. It’s possible she’s leaning that way but not yet made a final decision, and wants to keep her options open. This keeps her in the game, and possibly keeps others – like Michelle Bachmann – out. You can do a lot on a bus tour besides run for president: make endorsements, spotlight issues, raise money, sell books, and generally pump up your reputation. It’s also a great way to test the waters and make a splash, without actually jumping in. Still, common sense says this means she is more likely to be running.

Governor Palin would be an instant front-runner – which is not to say the front-runner. I think that would still have to go to Mitt Romney. But clearly she would be in select company with Romney, Tim Pawlenty and Jon Huntsman if she gets in.  She’s already way ahead of the latter two in name ID, and will be for some time.  She would definitely fill a perceived void in the primary right now, that of a grassroots, cultural conservative. She can no doubt speak to important constituencies in the Republican primary, especially in some of the early state contests. Without discussing this at length, it’s safe to say that yes, Palin is well-positioned to shake things up and do well in a GOP primary.

How well she does may depend on the degree to which the other candidates can convince the base that one of them is more electable in a general. That shouldn’t be hard to do, although the task will be complicated because you don’t want to alienate her fans. All the good folks out there who really like Sarah Palin.

That of course points to her political problem. She’s easy to like if you are like her, or if you happen to relate to or admire her personality. She’s also made progress in the last couple years in the way she carries herself on screen.  I think the Fox gig has helped her with that.  But fundamentally, she tends to see  America as red or blue, with her own idea of the shade of each color. That is at lesat the impression that she can sometimes give.

Like any aspiring politician, she’s got to be able to talk to a variety of people in a way they can understand and appreciate. That doesn’t mean she has to compromise her values, but she’s got to consider the issues that are important to others, and offer ideas and solutions in a way that reflect empathy. The sooner she starts doing that the better. For the time being, I like Romney, although of course I’ll be giving Pawlenty and Huntsman a look.

Pawlenty, anyone?

Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty makes a great presidential primary candidate, writes Stanley Curtz at The Corner of National Review Online. He says that it’s time to take a look at Pawlenty, even if by name-ID alone he may not currently be a top-tier candidate.

I’ll take Curtz up on it. The GOP contest is only just now picking up steam, and the field is broad but deep only in a few places. That is, there seems to be only a few very serious candidates. I don’t know Pawlenty’s record in detail, but at this stage in the game he deserves a look. At a minimum, he won office twice as a red governor in a blue state, and earned a reputation for fiscal responsibility in the process.