Dismal Showing
You figure, Belarus has lost their previous games by a combined score of 19-4, and the US had beaten the teams that had beaten Belarus, so it should be a walk in the park.
Wrong. When you fail to play defense, you lose. The US dropped their game in the World Junior Tournament, 5-3. They slide to 2-1 in the standings, with a game against a very good Czech team tonight.
Still no word from ESPN on future programming for the Tournament. It probably depends on the USA's seeding.
Thursday, December 30, 2004
Wednesday, December 29, 2004
Wide World of Sports
This is usually the most fun time of the year for sports viewing, but with the NHL still in their pathetic lockout situation, my fun is greatly diminished.
Fortunately, there is some hockey to watch, as the World Junior Tournament is going on right now. The US team has won their first two games, and plays Belarus tonight. ESPN2 will air the game at 9:30pm (EST), and I'll be in front of the set. Unfortunately, there aren't any other games scheduled yet. Maybe ESPN is taking a wait-and-see approach to scheduling more games. Hopefully, the ratings for this game will be high enough to bump a re-run of the World Series of Poker.
I like the World Series of Poker, by the way. Texas Hold-Em is a great game, and it's fascinating to watch the pros play. It's just that they've aired the 2003 & 2004 tournament to death.
The death of Reggie White was startling. He was only 43, and unlike jocks who die young due to substance abuse problems, such as Ken Kaminiti recently, this just makes you shake your head. He was playing in the NFL just four years ago. ESPN Classic will air a day of tribute on Friday. It's just another reminder that you don't know when your time will come, and to take advantage of every minute.
This is usually the most fun time of the year for sports viewing, but with the NHL still in their pathetic lockout situation, my fun is greatly diminished.
Fortunately, there is some hockey to watch, as the World Junior Tournament is going on right now. The US team has won their first two games, and plays Belarus tonight. ESPN2 will air the game at 9:30pm (EST), and I'll be in front of the set. Unfortunately, there aren't any other games scheduled yet. Maybe ESPN is taking a wait-and-see approach to scheduling more games. Hopefully, the ratings for this game will be high enough to bump a re-run of the World Series of Poker.
I like the World Series of Poker, by the way. Texas Hold-Em is a great game, and it's fascinating to watch the pros play. It's just that they've aired the 2003 & 2004 tournament to death.
The death of Reggie White was startling. He was only 43, and unlike jocks who die young due to substance abuse problems, such as Ken Kaminiti recently, this just makes you shake your head. He was playing in the NFL just four years ago. ESPN Classic will air a day of tribute on Friday. It's just another reminder that you don't know when your time will come, and to take advantage of every minute.
Tuesday, December 21, 2004
Less Blue
OK, I was a tad harsh on the Mayor with yesterday's post on the agreement with the Colts on a new stadium. Since the plan is clearly not going to be tax-funded, I will today give him credit for that. Good show!
On the other hand, I still think that the quest for funding could be done better than by using gambling revenue. The possibility of using gambling revenues as the source of funding is as troubling to some as using taxes is to others. Fortunately, three good options are available that are enormous civic pride opportunities.
1. Join a consortium of investors
2. Purchase shares of stock in the project
3. Purchase bonds in support of the project, a la WW2-era War Bonds
By using these three methods, the funding is achieve solely by the choice of the participants, and directly so, as opposed to the gambling funded method. People will choose to get involved because they believe in the project. They will have a stakeholder interest far beyond the guy who drops ten bucks on pull tabs and loses.
Civic projects can and should be a source of pride to as many people as possible. Using funding that people will be eager to provide is an excellent way for everybody to come out a winner.
Good so far. Make it better.
Notes:
Is the sale of stock in a stadium a good way to raise money? In 1998, the Cleveland Indians sold shares of stock in an IPO at the initial offering price of $15/share. This raised $60 million, selling out the stock in rapid fashion. That's not a huge percentage of the $800 million or so needed to be raised. No problem. Set the amount to be raised by this device to $150, with a higher initial offering price tag, and this can be achieved easily.
Will the stock be worth anything to the investor? Possibly not. There is always the risk of a crash when investing in the stock market. Many subscribers will be glad to simply buy the stock certificate as a piece of history and something to frame and hang in the den. The 1998 Indians stock certificate goes for $150 on collector sites. Others will treat it as a business and look for a dividend, or to sell if the price rises with the success of the complex. The story of the Indians stock had a happy ending.
War Bonds sold phenomenally well because the public believed in the cause. I think that enough people in Central Indiana would buy Stadium Bonds because they believe in it. Pie in the sky guess? I think $150 million could be raised from investors on this.
OK, I was a tad harsh on the Mayor with yesterday's post on the agreement with the Colts on a new stadium. Since the plan is clearly not going to be tax-funded, I will today give him credit for that. Good show!
On the other hand, I still think that the quest for funding could be done better than by using gambling revenue. The possibility of using gambling revenues as the source of funding is as troubling to some as using taxes is to others. Fortunately, three good options are available that are enormous civic pride opportunities.
1. Join a consortium of investors
2. Purchase shares of stock in the project
3. Purchase bonds in support of the project, a la WW2-era War Bonds
By using these three methods, the funding is achieve solely by the choice of the participants, and directly so, as opposed to the gambling funded method. People will choose to get involved because they believe in the project. They will have a stakeholder interest far beyond the guy who drops ten bucks on pull tabs and loses.
Civic projects can and should be a source of pride to as many people as possible. Using funding that people will be eager to provide is an excellent way for everybody to come out a winner.
Good so far. Make it better.
Notes:
Is the sale of stock in a stadium a good way to raise money? In 1998, the Cleveland Indians sold shares of stock in an IPO at the initial offering price of $15/share. This raised $60 million, selling out the stock in rapid fashion. That's not a huge percentage of the $800 million or so needed to be raised. No problem. Set the amount to be raised by this device to $150, with a higher initial offering price tag, and this can be achieved easily.
Will the stock be worth anything to the investor? Possibly not. There is always the risk of a crash when investing in the stock market. Many subscribers will be glad to simply buy the stock certificate as a piece of history and something to frame and hang in the den. The 1998 Indians stock certificate goes for $150 on collector sites. Others will treat it as a business and look for a dividend, or to sell if the price rises with the success of the complex. The story of the Indians stock had a happy ending.
War Bonds sold phenomenally well because the public believed in the cause. I think that enough people in Central Indiana would buy Stadium Bonds because they believe in it. Pie in the sky guess? I think $150 million could be raised from investors on this.
Monday, December 20, 2004
Wearing Colts Blue
So, Mr. Irsay got the City of Indianapolis to shell out some money to build him a new palace, so that he can make some more money, thus preventing (for the next 5-10 years) Colts from taking the moving van night express down the interstate, just as the Baltimore Colts did back in the early 80s.
I can't say I blame him for having asked. So many cities give the moon. City officials always cite jobs, but are also always certain to insist that the prestige of the city would dive if a major sports team left.
I'm a big sports fan, but I'm also a big fan of classic and exotic automobiles. I drive a 1997 Saturn, which is neither of these things, but it sure gets me from-A-to-B. It's a reliable car, and gets very good fuel economy.
Just the same, I'm thinking that I'd like to have a Rolls-Royce... and a Ferrari... and a Maserati. These would look really good in my driveway, and I would look and feel much better about driving them than I do about my Saturn.
I'm thinking that I'd like everyone on my block to pay for these luxury automobiles. Heck- it will improve the prestige of my neighborhood if out-of-towners were to drive down my street and see the Rolls. My neighbors will enjoy the benefit of this enhanced prestige, and it will only cost them each a little bit. They'll hardly notice how much it is.
I'm even thinking that about 10 to 12 times a year, I will allow my neighbors to take a spin with me in the Rolls or the Maserati. They can pay me admission to ride in my car, getting the direct benefit of having purchased the cars for me. Sometimes they can even ride shotgun. Of course, you don't always get to sit on the 50-yard line, so sometimes, my neighbors will have to ride in the trunk. Heck, though- the tickets are almost half price!
Maybe they can't afford the price of tickets for the whole family to ride. Well, they can stand on the sidewalk and watch as I drive by with those who can afford the price of admission. Still- they're getting the enormous benefit of having created a sense of civic pride and prestige for our neighborhood, thanks to my cars. Of course, I'll only let them stand on the sidewalk if I've sold out the admissions to all of the seats, including the trunk. I'm not kind of idiot who is going to let people watch for free from the sidewalk when I have empty seats!
So, hats off to Jim Irsay. He sold his bill of goods lock, stock, and barrel. I'm impressed with his moxie.
I'm less impressed with Mayor Peterson. He gave away the store and gets very little in return. He'll claim it was great leadership to keep the Colts here. Great leadership would have included a stadium that was fully privately funded.
This is not impossible. Look at the Brickyards or Nationwide Arena in Columbus, Ohio for good examples of privately built arenas that were built with private funds and are thriving.
While the Mayor or Mr. Peterson may not have been able to locate a single source of funding, think of the extraordinary opportunity to build civic pride that was lost. They could have built a consortium of local business who would have invested in the project, thus taking a real stake in the success of the project. They could have sold shares of stock to Colts fans and raised a huge sum, rather like the Cleveland Indians did a few years back.
Nope. Easier to tax or to create a government monopoly casino to pay for it.
Maybe it's time to ask for that Rolls Royce.
So, Mr. Irsay got the City of Indianapolis to shell out some money to build him a new palace, so that he can make some more money, thus preventing (for the next 5-10 years) Colts from taking the moving van night express down the interstate, just as the Baltimore Colts did back in the early 80s.
I can't say I blame him for having asked. So many cities give the moon. City officials always cite jobs, but are also always certain to insist that the prestige of the city would dive if a major sports team left.
I'm a big sports fan, but I'm also a big fan of classic and exotic automobiles. I drive a 1997 Saturn, which is neither of these things, but it sure gets me from-A-to-B. It's a reliable car, and gets very good fuel economy.
Just the same, I'm thinking that I'd like to have a Rolls-Royce... and a Ferrari... and a Maserati. These would look really good in my driveway, and I would look and feel much better about driving them than I do about my Saturn.
I'm thinking that I'd like everyone on my block to pay for these luxury automobiles. Heck- it will improve the prestige of my neighborhood if out-of-towners were to drive down my street and see the Rolls. My neighbors will enjoy the benefit of this enhanced prestige, and it will only cost them each a little bit. They'll hardly notice how much it is.
I'm even thinking that about 10 to 12 times a year, I will allow my neighbors to take a spin with me in the Rolls or the Maserati. They can pay me admission to ride in my car, getting the direct benefit of having purchased the cars for me. Sometimes they can even ride shotgun. Of course, you don't always get to sit on the 50-yard line, so sometimes, my neighbors will have to ride in the trunk. Heck, though- the tickets are almost half price!
Maybe they can't afford the price of tickets for the whole family to ride. Well, they can stand on the sidewalk and watch as I drive by with those who can afford the price of admission. Still- they're getting the enormous benefit of having created a sense of civic pride and prestige for our neighborhood, thanks to my cars. Of course, I'll only let them stand on the sidewalk if I've sold out the admissions to all of the seats, including the trunk. I'm not kind of idiot who is going to let people watch for free from the sidewalk when I have empty seats!
So, hats off to Jim Irsay. He sold his bill of goods lock, stock, and barrel. I'm impressed with his moxie.
I'm less impressed with Mayor Peterson. He gave away the store and gets very little in return. He'll claim it was great leadership to keep the Colts here. Great leadership would have included a stadium that was fully privately funded.
This is not impossible. Look at the Brickyards or Nationwide Arena in Columbus, Ohio for good examples of privately built arenas that were built with private funds and are thriving.
While the Mayor or Mr. Peterson may not have been able to locate a single source of funding, think of the extraordinary opportunity to build civic pride that was lost. They could have built a consortium of local business who would have invested in the project, thus taking a real stake in the success of the project. They could have sold shares of stock to Colts fans and raised a huge sum, rather like the Cleveland Indians did a few years back.
Nope. Easier to tax or to create a government monopoly casino to pay for it.
Maybe it's time to ask for that Rolls Royce.
Monday, December 13, 2004
LPIN Grows Today!
Excellent news for the Libertarian Party of Indiana, with the re-affiliation of Allen County. This county is home to Fort Wayne, one of the largest cities in Indiana, and traditional a power base of fine libertarian activism.
I am looking forward to seeing Allen County rival LaPorte, Monroe, Wayne, Hamilton, and others for #2 county status amongst the LPIN. It is conceivable that with the momentum they create today, they could have the second-greatest number of Libertarian candidates in 2006.
Of course, we here in Hamilton County will give them a run for their money. Watch us grow, while the other parties hibernate!
Excellent news for the Libertarian Party of Indiana, with the re-affiliation of Allen County. This county is home to Fort Wayne, one of the largest cities in Indiana, and traditional a power base of fine libertarian activism.
I am looking forward to seeing Allen County rival LaPorte, Monroe, Wayne, Hamilton, and others for #2 county status amongst the LPIN. It is conceivable that with the momentum they create today, they could have the second-greatest number of Libertarian candidates in 2006.
Of course, we here in Hamilton County will give them a run for their money. Watch us grow, while the other parties hibernate!
Sunday, December 12, 2004
Telegraphing Future Disappointment
Well, my fellow fiscal conservative! You come knowing that it is a well-known fact that the state of Indiana faces an $800 million structural deficit. You are desperately hoping that spending cuts are the means to solving this problem rather than tax hikes.
Bummer for you: the Republicans lack the will to cut spending.
They do not lack the tools. The GOP inaugurates a governor next month and will usher in majorities in the both houses. There are the tools. They will sit in the woodshed while the spending tools will be used. From an editorial in today's Indy Star:
Spending cuts are likely, yet Kenley is preparing for a flatline budget? Cuts and a flatline are two different things.
Instead of really cutting spending, this is how Republicans plan to close the gap on the deficit, per the Star:
I am calling for a baseline 10% cut in spending. I'm not calling for a radical slash-and-burn. I'm calling for something that can be done without the usual accusation that the Libertarian solution will leave the state in ruins. I urge my readers to write the editors of their newspapers and their representative to urge a baselline 10% cut. Make sure to tell them that you are a fiscal conservative and that you expect this sort of action from a GOP majority, and that if you don't get it, you'll vote Libertarian in the future.
If the GOP proceeds as they plan to, this will indeed be the session from hell- not for poor Luke Kenley, but for fiscal conservatives across the state.
Well, my fellow fiscal conservative! You come knowing that it is a well-known fact that the state of Indiana faces an $800 million structural deficit. You are desperately hoping that spending cuts are the means to solving this problem rather than tax hikes.
Bummer for you: the Republicans lack the will to cut spending.
They do not lack the tools. The GOP inaugurates a governor next month and will usher in majorities in the both houses. There are the tools. They will sit in the woodshed while the spending tools will be used. From an editorial in today's Indy Star:
Tax increases cannot be ruled out? Why not?"Indiana's structural deficit stands at near $800 million. The state also owes schools and universities more than $700 million in deferred payments. The rainy day fund has been largely depleted, dropping perhaps to only $46 million by the end of this fiscal year.
Factor in eventually repaying the $380 million borrowed from the Pension Stabilization Fund to keep the state afloat for the past two years. Plus rising Medicaid costs, potentially another $300 million in additional spending. Plus $160 million the state will pay out in property tax relief.
It all adds up to what some legislators are describing as, in Kenley's words, "the session from hell." Tax increases certainly cannot be ruled out. Spending cuts are likely. Kenley, chairman of the Senate Education Committee, says he's preparing for a flatline budget -- meaning no extra money for schools. Others wanting more money likely will be turned away as well."
Spending cuts are likely, yet Kenley is preparing for a flatline budget? Cuts and a flatline are two different things.
Instead of really cutting spending, this is how Republicans plan to close the gap on the deficit, per the Star:
That's all very nice and commendable, and should serve as an excellent start towards fiscal health at the state level. The other very necessary component is a real cut in spending."But there's also opportunity. It starts with reforming the maze of 74 agencies and 319 boards that is Indiana state government.
Gov.-elect Mitch Daniels has proposed a government reorganization plan that must be pushed forward at the same time Espich and other lawmakers are shepherding the budget through the Statehouse."
I am calling for a baseline 10% cut in spending. I'm not calling for a radical slash-and-burn. I'm calling for something that can be done without the usual accusation that the Libertarian solution will leave the state in ruins. I urge my readers to write the editors of their newspapers and their representative to urge a baselline 10% cut. Make sure to tell them that you are a fiscal conservative and that you expect this sort of action from a GOP majority, and that if you don't get it, you'll vote Libertarian in the future.
If the GOP proceeds as they plan to, this will indeed be the session from hell- not for poor Luke Kenley, but for fiscal conservatives across the state.
Thursday, December 09, 2004
More Hockey Fill-In
As with last Wednesday, I enjoyed another replay of some old-time hockey with FoxSports Midwest's airing of a 1986 St. Louis Blues playoff game. With the NHL lockout appearing to be an endless proposition, these re-runs have been a welcome sight.
This time, the Blues won Game Seven of the Norris Division Finals, defeating Toronto 2-1. More observations on how the game has changed:
There were two fights... during power plays... in the first period! In today's NHL, you wouldn't see two fights in a playoff game at all, unless it was late in the game and something stupid inspired it. These were just de rigeur scraps.
The goalie equipment was so small! And the pads were brown leather! No team colors on the pads.
The games were desperately played, with an emphasis on offense. Today's playoff games only have that feel when it's a one-goal game and in the latter half of the third period.
A Sutter was on the ice instead of behind the bench.
FoxSports will show more games so long as the lockout continues:
2004-05 FSN Midwest Schedule of Classic Blues Games
Air Date Time (CT) Game Game Date
Wed., Nov. 24 7 p.m. Pittsburgh at St. Louis April 14, 1981
Wed., Dec. 1 7 p.m. St. Louis at Minnesota April 15, 1986
Wed., Dec. 8 7 p.m. Toronto at St. Louis April 30, 1986
Wed., Dec. 15 7 p.m. Calgary at St. Louis May 12, 1986
Wed., Dec. 22 7 p.m. Detroit at St. Louis April 16, 1991
Wed., Dec. 29 7 p.m. Detroit at St. Louis Jan. 23, 1993
Wed., Jan. 5 7 p.m. St. Louis at Toronto Nov. 29, 2000
Fri., Jan. 14 7 p.m. Dallas at St. Louis May 3, 2001
Missed that old Pens' game, when they still wore blue uni's, prior to the Mario Lemiuex era, but I won't miss that game with Calgary!
As with last Wednesday, I enjoyed another replay of some old-time hockey with FoxSports Midwest's airing of a 1986 St. Louis Blues playoff game. With the NHL lockout appearing to be an endless proposition, these re-runs have been a welcome sight.
This time, the Blues won Game Seven of the Norris Division Finals, defeating Toronto 2-1. More observations on how the game has changed:
There were two fights... during power plays... in the first period! In today's NHL, you wouldn't see two fights in a playoff game at all, unless it was late in the game and something stupid inspired it. These were just de rigeur scraps.
The goalie equipment was so small! And the pads were brown leather! No team colors on the pads.
The games were desperately played, with an emphasis on offense. Today's playoff games only have that feel when it's a one-goal game and in the latter half of the third period.
A Sutter was on the ice instead of behind the bench.
FoxSports will show more games so long as the lockout continues:
2004-05 FSN Midwest Schedule of Classic Blues Games
Air Date Time (CT) Game Game Date
Wed., Nov. 24 7 p.m. Pittsburgh at St. Louis April 14, 1981
Wed., Dec. 1 7 p.m. St. Louis at Minnesota April 15, 1986
Wed., Dec. 8 7 p.m. Toronto at St. Louis April 30, 1986
Wed., Dec. 15 7 p.m. Calgary at St. Louis May 12, 1986
Wed., Dec. 22 7 p.m. Detroit at St. Louis April 16, 1991
Wed., Dec. 29 7 p.m. Detroit at St. Louis Jan. 23, 1993
Wed., Jan. 5 7 p.m. St. Louis at Toronto Nov. 29, 2000
Fri., Jan. 14 7 p.m. Dallas at St. Louis May 3, 2001
Missed that old Pens' game, when they still wore blue uni's, prior to the Mario Lemiuex era, but I won't miss that game with Calgary!
Tuesday, December 07, 2004
What's The Point?
That's the question I hear over and over again from my non-libertarian friends with regards to Michael Badnarik's involvement with the Greens in Ohio, requesting a recount.
What's the point? Kerry has conceded.
What's the point? It won't change the outcome.
What's the point? It won't move Badnarik any higher, so it won't bring the Libertarian Party of Ohio (LPO) the automatic ballot access it craves.
The point is, says Badnarik, is to make sure that every vote counts so that people believe in the system. This is an excellent principle, and a fine reason to participate. So who has complained that they feel left out? Not sure. The answer gets vague there, and that's a surprise. You would expect a whole lot of Democrats to be clamoring. But, they're not. Is Badnarik representing any constituency? It seems not. There are a handful of voters on the complaint, along with Badnarik and Green candidate David Cobb.
So Badnarik, who struggled mightily to raise $1,000,000 nationwide is now trying to raise $100,000 for a recount. It would have been far more valuable in my estimation to raise that extra $100,000 before the election, spending it on TV ads. The recount effort would be worthwhile if it were generating good will. It is doing the opposite, and reinforcing the idea that the LP is a bunch of kooks. We aren't even getting good press out of it from friendly sources. WorldNet Daily's article quotes the Green spokesperson, but not a Libertarian, which is typical of the articles.
I had the opportunity to interview Badnarik on the radio 10 days ago. I asked him if the recount effort was being done to support the LPO, who fights some of the toughest ballot hurdles in the country. His answer? "No." It seemed that it hadn't even occurred to him.
That leads me to ask, what's the point?
That's the question I hear over and over again from my non-libertarian friends with regards to Michael Badnarik's involvement with the Greens in Ohio, requesting a recount.
What's the point? Kerry has conceded.
What's the point? It won't change the outcome.
What's the point? It won't move Badnarik any higher, so it won't bring the Libertarian Party of Ohio (LPO) the automatic ballot access it craves.
The point is, says Badnarik, is to make sure that every vote counts so that people believe in the system. This is an excellent principle, and a fine reason to participate. So who has complained that they feel left out? Not sure. The answer gets vague there, and that's a surprise. You would expect a whole lot of Democrats to be clamoring. But, they're not. Is Badnarik representing any constituency? It seems not. There are a handful of voters on the complaint, along with Badnarik and Green candidate David Cobb.
So Badnarik, who struggled mightily to raise $1,000,000 nationwide is now trying to raise $100,000 for a recount. It would have been far more valuable in my estimation to raise that extra $100,000 before the election, spending it on TV ads. The recount effort would be worthwhile if it were generating good will. It is doing the opposite, and reinforcing the idea that the LP is a bunch of kooks. We aren't even getting good press out of it from friendly sources. WorldNet Daily's article quotes the Green spokesperson, but not a Libertarian, which is typical of the articles.
I had the opportunity to interview Badnarik on the radio 10 days ago. I asked him if the recount effort was being done to support the LPO, who fights some of the toughest ballot hurdles in the country. His answer? "No." It seemed that it hadn't even occurred to him.
That leads me to ask, what's the point?
Wednesday, December 01, 2004
A Hockey Puck in the Desert
With the NHL in day 75 of its' lockout situation and the temperatures dropping, I've really begun missing watching hockey on TV. So, it was a very pleasant surprise to be channel surfing this evening and to happen upon a St. Louis feed to Fox Sports.
There, in fuzzy splendor was a re-run of an original CBC broadcast of Game Five of the 1986 Norris Division semi-finals between the Blues and Minnesota North Stars!
Egad, the players I hadn't seen play in ages- former NHL Cleveland Baron Dennis Maruk; young Dino Cicerelli and Brian Bellows; promising prospects that never emerged, like Brian Lawton and Doug Wickenhiser; future NHL head coaches Craig Hartsberg and Curt Giles; yeoman players that ended their careers in the minors such as Greg Paslawski and Scott Bjugstad; the coming-out party of Doug Gilmour, with a five assist game.
Thanks, FSN! I felt like a man in the desert who found an artesian well. I miss the NHL. I hope all involved come to their senses soon enough to salvage a season.
With the NHL in day 75 of its' lockout situation and the temperatures dropping, I've really begun missing watching hockey on TV. So, it was a very pleasant surprise to be channel surfing this evening and to happen upon a St. Louis feed to Fox Sports.
There, in fuzzy splendor was a re-run of an original CBC broadcast of Game Five of the 1986 Norris Division semi-finals between the Blues and Minnesota North Stars!
Egad, the players I hadn't seen play in ages- former NHL Cleveland Baron Dennis Maruk; young Dino Cicerelli and Brian Bellows; promising prospects that never emerged, like Brian Lawton and Doug Wickenhiser; future NHL head coaches Craig Hartsberg and Curt Giles; yeoman players that ended their careers in the minors such as Greg Paslawski and Scott Bjugstad; the coming-out party of Doug Gilmour, with a five assist game.
Thanks, FSN! I felt like a man in the desert who found an artesian well. I miss the NHL. I hope all involved come to their senses soon enough to salvage a season.
Tuesday, November 30, 2004
Wednesday Happy Hour Reminder
Hamilton County Libertarians will gather informally for happy hour tomorrow night to kick back and discuss sports, work, and oh, maybe a little politics.
Meet us at Barley Island right in the center of Noblesville, from 6 to 9pm... or maybe longer. It all depends on you. Everyone is welcome to join us- Republicans, Democrats, Marxists, independents, you name it.
A note on Barley Island. I come from Cleveland, home of the mighty Great Lakes Brewery, which is easily one of the five best in the world. That's no stretch. They have the medals to prove it. So, when I say that Barley Island's brews are pretty wonderful, you have something to base my compliment on. If for nothing else, stop in and have a pint.
Hamilton County Libertarians will gather informally for happy hour tomorrow night to kick back and discuss sports, work, and oh, maybe a little politics.
Meet us at Barley Island right in the center of Noblesville, from 6 to 9pm... or maybe longer. It all depends on you. Everyone is welcome to join us- Republicans, Democrats, Marxists, independents, you name it.
A note on Barley Island. I come from Cleveland, home of the mighty Great Lakes Brewery, which is easily one of the five best in the world. That's no stretch. They have the medals to prove it. So, when I say that Barley Island's brews are pretty wonderful, you have something to base my compliment on. If for nothing else, stop in and have a pint.
Sunday, November 28, 2004
Stand and Deliver!
On the surface, the analysis of this recently concluded election cycle is easy to cast. The Republican Party ran the table with victories high and low. From the Presidency to the houses of Congress, from the Governor's mansion to the Statehouse, Republicans enjoyed a November like few before.
New majorities have been borne of these victories, and with them come rare opportunities. Conservatives can look ahead to January, when a great deal of business can be accomplished through new legislation and policies. It is a safe bet that the opportunity will be taken advantage of.
This is not breaking news. Pundits have spent much of the last month making the case for pity on the sad sack liberal, who has only anguish and trepidation for the near future. Liberals will helplessly look on as conservatives chart the course of this state and of the country. While certain that bad policy will be the rule of the day for now, liberals can only dream about 2006 and 2008, and hope Democratic leadership crafts a winning plan.
This is the kind of pain that delights most conservatives. For now, the whole range of conservatives are smiling.
But, behind some of the grins, there is a group within the broad spectrum of conservatives that is gritting its clenched teeth behind a half-hearted smile. While excited for the possibilities Republican majorities bring, this group shares a great deal of the anxiety liberals have in anticipation of the first wave of new policy that will soon greet us. This group is the fiscal conservatives.
It was not a series of referendums on capping budgetary growth that swept George W. Bush to re-election. It was a series of referendums on gay marriage. It was not a promise of lower spending that Mitch Daniels gave Hoosiers in addressing the $800 million budget deficit he will inherit. It was... What was it? There must have been more to it than Joe Kernan's negativity. Was it really sufficient that Daniels wasn't a Democrat?
For most fiscal conservatives there is a precarious balance between three pressures. Fiscal conservatives trust Democrats to do one thing- to increase the size of government, so they can't vote Democrat. Most fiscal conservatives couldn't bring themselves to vote for Libertarian candidates for fear that Democrats might win. They want to vote Libertarian, but they just can't do it yet, especially because the possibility of a Republican majority was imminent. Their trust in the GOP is waning, but fiscal conservatives were willing to give them one more shot.
This thinking is rooted in the past. It used to be that Republicans grew government, but at a much slower pace than Democrats. This was still troubling for fiscal conservatives who wanted their government to shrink, but these days, as the Bush Administration has shown, Republicans actually grow government faster than Democrats. It used to be that Republicans said, 'Only we can cut the size of government. Just give us the tools!' Now?
Well, now they actually have the tools. Fiscal conservatives want to see the chain saws blazing and front end loaders scooping out pork, but are afraid they will only see the penknife and the tweezers, if they see any cutting at all.
This leaves fiscal conservatives with a daunting prospect. If there isn't any cutting, but only more public sector growth, where should fiscal conservatives turn in 2006?
There isn't even the slightest chance that disaffected fiscal conservatives will turn to the Democrats. If their wishes are ignored, fiscal conservatives may finally part ways with the GOP and turn to the Libertarians.
The Republican Party's largest base constituency is on the line. Since Ronal Reagan left office, fiscal conservatives have put up with a lot of disappointment in the quest for one last great opportunity for the GOP to prove its' worth to them. Is a 10% reduction in spending across the board too much to ask? Is it genuinely impossible to find the courage to find a few redundant offices and departments and to eliminate them with the power of majority on your side?
If Republicans won't do the job of reducing spending this year, with their majorities at home and in Washington, fiscal conservatives will know that it is time to look for a new political home. They will have no choice but to conclude that if spending won't be cut this year, it never will so long as Republicans are in charge.
On the surface, the analysis of this recently concluded election cycle is easy to cast. The Republican Party ran the table with victories high and low. From the Presidency to the houses of Congress, from the Governor's mansion to the Statehouse, Republicans enjoyed a November like few before.
New majorities have been borne of these victories, and with them come rare opportunities. Conservatives can look ahead to January, when a great deal of business can be accomplished through new legislation and policies. It is a safe bet that the opportunity will be taken advantage of.
This is not breaking news. Pundits have spent much of the last month making the case for pity on the sad sack liberal, who has only anguish and trepidation for the near future. Liberals will helplessly look on as conservatives chart the course of this state and of the country. While certain that bad policy will be the rule of the day for now, liberals can only dream about 2006 and 2008, and hope Democratic leadership crafts a winning plan.
This is the kind of pain that delights most conservatives. For now, the whole range of conservatives are smiling.
But, behind some of the grins, there is a group within the broad spectrum of conservatives that is gritting its clenched teeth behind a half-hearted smile. While excited for the possibilities Republican majorities bring, this group shares a great deal of the anxiety liberals have in anticipation of the first wave of new policy that will soon greet us. This group is the fiscal conservatives.
It was not a series of referendums on capping budgetary growth that swept George W. Bush to re-election. It was a series of referendums on gay marriage. It was not a promise of lower spending that Mitch Daniels gave Hoosiers in addressing the $800 million budget deficit he will inherit. It was... What was it? There must have been more to it than Joe Kernan's negativity. Was it really sufficient that Daniels wasn't a Democrat?
For most fiscal conservatives there is a precarious balance between three pressures. Fiscal conservatives trust Democrats to do one thing- to increase the size of government, so they can't vote Democrat. Most fiscal conservatives couldn't bring themselves to vote for Libertarian candidates for fear that Democrats might win. They want to vote Libertarian, but they just can't do it yet, especially because the possibility of a Republican majority was imminent. Their trust in the GOP is waning, but fiscal conservatives were willing to give them one more shot.
This thinking is rooted in the past. It used to be that Republicans grew government, but at a much slower pace than Democrats. This was still troubling for fiscal conservatives who wanted their government to shrink, but these days, as the Bush Administration has shown, Republicans actually grow government faster than Democrats. It used to be that Republicans said, 'Only we can cut the size of government. Just give us the tools!' Now?
Well, now they actually have the tools. Fiscal conservatives want to see the chain saws blazing and front end loaders scooping out pork, but are afraid they will only see the penknife and the tweezers, if they see any cutting at all.
This leaves fiscal conservatives with a daunting prospect. If there isn't any cutting, but only more public sector growth, where should fiscal conservatives turn in 2006?
There isn't even the slightest chance that disaffected fiscal conservatives will turn to the Democrats. If their wishes are ignored, fiscal conservatives may finally part ways with the GOP and turn to the Libertarians.
The Republican Party's largest base constituency is on the line. Since Ronal Reagan left office, fiscal conservatives have put up with a lot of disappointment in the quest for one last great opportunity for the GOP to prove its' worth to them. Is a 10% reduction in spending across the board too much to ask? Is it genuinely impossible to find the courage to find a few redundant offices and departments and to eliminate them with the power of majority on your side?
If Republicans won't do the job of reducing spending this year, with their majorities at home and in Washington, fiscal conservatives will know that it is time to look for a new political home. They will have no choice but to conclude that if spending won't be cut this year, it never will so long as Republicans are in charge.
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
I Rather Think I Might
I haven't watched CBS' Evening News for years because of Dan Rather. He's just always rubbed me the wrong way, with his biases pretty apparent, and not much to my liking. It isn't just Rather, though. I don't care much for Peter Jennings or Brokaw, either. I haven't watched 6 O'Clock news broadcasts for years, because these three men have anchored the broadcasts for years.
So, the welcome news is that Rather will soon be history, and the news will be presented by someone new. I'll be glad to check out his replacement to see if there is any appreciable change, along with Brokaw's replacement.
I haven't watched CBS' Evening News for years because of Dan Rather. He's just always rubbed me the wrong way, with his biases pretty apparent, and not much to my liking. It isn't just Rather, though. I don't care much for Peter Jennings or Brokaw, either. I haven't watched 6 O'Clock news broadcasts for years, because these three men have anchored the broadcasts for years.
So, the welcome news is that Rather will soon be history, and the news will be presented by someone new. I'll be glad to check out his replacement to see if there is any appreciable change, along with Brokaw's replacement.
Friday, November 19, 2004
Oh! Canada?
Being a fairly rational person, I believe that the most pressing problems before a government should be addressed first. I know, that means heavy lifting now, but it means smooth sailing later.
I'm going to guess that a recent Royal Decree- yes, her Majesty in England is still the ultimate authority in Canada, with the assistance of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario- has not addressed Ontario's most pressing issue when She banned dwarf tossing.
Yes, dwarf tossing.
As Sheri Sharlow Conover points out to me, there is a gret flaw in this Decree. While it specifically bans dwarf tossing, I still appear to be free to toss midgets when next I am in Toronto, Sudbury, or Brantford, without the slightest threat of prison of a $5,000CDN fine.
Being a fairly rational person, I believe that the most pressing problems before a government should be addressed first. I know, that means heavy lifting now, but it means smooth sailing later.
I'm going to guess that a recent Royal Decree- yes, her Majesty in England is still the ultimate authority in Canada, with the assistance of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario- has not addressed Ontario's most pressing issue when She banned dwarf tossing.
Yes, dwarf tossing.
As Sheri Sharlow Conover points out to me, there is a gret flaw in this Decree. While it specifically bans dwarf tossing, I still appear to be free to toss midgets when next I am in Toronto, Sudbury, or Brantford, without the slightest threat of prison of a $5,000CDN fine.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004
On The Air Friday!
I've been itching to be behind the mic for quite some time now, so it's with great pleasure that I will sit in on Abdul in the Mornings on WXNT 1430-am this Friday, from 6:00-9:00am.
It's a one-day Libertarian takeover, with LP Political Director Brad Klopfenstein at the helm, Al Barger and myself as the supporting cast. Abdul is taking a day off.
It's all subject to changes based on the news that breaks between now and Friday morning, but the show should look a little like this:
6:00-7:00 Indiana elections recount-o-rama. Problems in Franklin & LaPorte Counties, and in Congressional District 9
7:00-8:00 Will the GOP be fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, both or neither in the upcoming legislative session?
8:00-9:00 Special phone-in guests. Big secret. Can't tell you. Have to listen to find out.
Be sure to listen and to call in on 317-228-1430!
I've been itching to be behind the mic for quite some time now, so it's with great pleasure that I will sit in on Abdul in the Mornings on WXNT 1430-am this Friday, from 6:00-9:00am.
It's a one-day Libertarian takeover, with LP Political Director Brad Klopfenstein at the helm, Al Barger and myself as the supporting cast. Abdul is taking a day off.
It's all subject to changes based on the news that breaks between now and Friday morning, but the show should look a little like this:
6:00-7:00 Indiana elections recount-o-rama. Problems in Franklin & LaPorte Counties, and in Congressional District 9
7:00-8:00 Will the GOP be fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, both or neither in the upcoming legislative session?
8:00-9:00 Special phone-in guests. Big secret. Can't tell you. Have to listen to find out.
Be sure to listen and to call in on 317-228-1430!
Experiment Failed
I thought for sure that if I only dropped a few key words into the blog, I would get mega hits. So, about 20 minutes after Scott Peterson received his verdict, I posted an item dropping his name and others.
It didn't work. I was advised that I would have had some success if I used words like "Britney Spears naked", or "Paris Hilton naked", or, name any popular, young female entertainer and the word "naked".
In fact, I might start to get the hits now that I've done so! On the other hand, the blog could get screened as prono...
I thought for sure that if I only dropped a few key words into the blog, I would get mega hits. So, about 20 minutes after Scott Peterson received his verdict, I posted an item dropping his name and others.
It didn't work. I was advised that I would have had some success if I used words like "Britney Spears naked", or "Paris Hilton naked", or, name any popular, young female entertainer and the word "naked".
In fact, I might start to get the hits now that I've done so! On the other hand, the blog could get screened as prono...
Saturday, November 13, 2004
This is Only a Test
I've had a few conversations with bloggers over the nature of hits on the blog sites. It's always disappointing to see that some toss-off comment about some innocuous pop culture tidbit gets more traffic tot he site than anything else, especially in light of the fact that the blog is primarily about libertarian politics.
I would have expected that of all the key words that might have led people to this site, "libertarian" should rank way up there. It doesn't. Way up at the top is "Victoria Snelgrove". She wasn't a candidate for office. She was the unfortunate college student killed by police in an attempt at crowd control after the Boston Red Sox eliminated the New York Yankees from the playoffs about a month ago.
I'm not one to get too hung up on this issue. Sure, it's dismaying that more people were interested in some tidbit about an innocent bystander than, say, insider insights on a candidate for governor, but that's our culture. Most bloggers who've been around long enough have as their number one draw the Janet Jackson Super Bowl incident. They may have said as little as, 'gosh, I don't know what all the fuss is about Janet Jackson's exposure on the Super Bowl'. The right words on a google search, and enough links to other websites, and voila! Your blog is at the top of the google search results!
Very well. Let me say the following with nothing more than an eye towards google traffic:
I don't give a rip about the Laci Peterson case. I don't care that Scott Peterson was found guilty yesterday. Don't get me wrong- if a man is guilty of killing his pregnant wife, I have a tiny feeling of satisfaction that the criminal justice system works. It's just that I find it incredibly dismaying that as many people were hanging on to the outcome of this trial as to the outcome of the Presidential election. I loathe the fact that so many people remained glued to the sets sufficient that CNN, Fox News, and CNBC have shown wire-to-wire coverage and analysis of these high-profile idiot cases, from OJ Simpson on to this wretched case.
Let's see what kind of traffic flows.
I've had a few conversations with bloggers over the nature of hits on the blog sites. It's always disappointing to see that some toss-off comment about some innocuous pop culture tidbit gets more traffic tot he site than anything else, especially in light of the fact that the blog is primarily about libertarian politics.
I would have expected that of all the key words that might have led people to this site, "libertarian" should rank way up there. It doesn't. Way up at the top is "Victoria Snelgrove". She wasn't a candidate for office. She was the unfortunate college student killed by police in an attempt at crowd control after the Boston Red Sox eliminated the New York Yankees from the playoffs about a month ago.
I'm not one to get too hung up on this issue. Sure, it's dismaying that more people were interested in some tidbit about an innocent bystander than, say, insider insights on a candidate for governor, but that's our culture. Most bloggers who've been around long enough have as their number one draw the Janet Jackson Super Bowl incident. They may have said as little as, 'gosh, I don't know what all the fuss is about Janet Jackson's exposure on the Super Bowl'. The right words on a google search, and enough links to other websites, and voila! Your blog is at the top of the google search results!
Very well. Let me say the following with nothing more than an eye towards google traffic:
I don't give a rip about the Laci Peterson case. I don't care that Scott Peterson was found guilty yesterday. Don't get me wrong- if a man is guilty of killing his pregnant wife, I have a tiny feeling of satisfaction that the criminal justice system works. It's just that I find it incredibly dismaying that as many people were hanging on to the outcome of this trial as to the outcome of the Presidential election. I loathe the fact that so many people remained glued to the sets sufficient that CNN, Fox News, and CNBC have shown wire-to-wire coverage and analysis of these high-profile idiot cases, from OJ Simpson on to this wretched case.
Let's see what kind of traffic flows.
Friday, November 12, 2004
Feet To The Fire
The most significant bit of analysis comes out of counting noses. The GOP won going away.
New Governor: Republican Mitch Daniels
State House majority: GOP
State Senate majority: GOP
For years, Hoosiers have heard the following from Republicans regarding taxes and spending:
"Give us the tools, we'll do the job".
OK, you got the tools. Let's see what you can do, GOP.
My money is on the job not getting done. My bet is that nothing will be cut. Programs and bureaus will not go away. The Republican Party simply is not serious about being fiscal conservatives. Those Hoosiers who are will be sorely disappointed that their votes failed to bring the lower taxes they wanted.
There is only one true home for fiscal conservatives in Indiana: the Libertarian Party.
This will be proven over and over again in the next four years. Mark my words.
The most significant bit of analysis comes out of counting noses. The GOP won going away.
New Governor: Republican Mitch Daniels
State House majority: GOP
State Senate majority: GOP
For years, Hoosiers have heard the following from Republicans regarding taxes and spending:
"Give us the tools, we'll do the job".
OK, you got the tools. Let's see what you can do, GOP.
My money is on the job not getting done. My bet is that nothing will be cut. Programs and bureaus will not go away. The Republican Party simply is not serious about being fiscal conservatives. Those Hoosiers who are will be sorely disappointed that their votes failed to bring the lower taxes they wanted.
There is only one true home for fiscal conservatives in Indiana: the Libertarian Party.
This will be proven over and over again in the next four years. Mark my words.
Monday, November 08, 2004
You Get What You Pay For
There is much analysis that has been running through my mind in the wake of the recent elections. I could blog the major party stuff, but why bother? It's all been done to death elsewhere. I'm happier to present analysis that won't be available elsewhere.
To wit, hadn't anyone in the Badnarik For President team ever seen the Austin Powers movies? One of the classic moments in the film is when Dr. Evil hatches his first crime plan after 30 years in the freezer. He looks for a ransom of, say it with me while raising your pinky finger to your lips, "one millllllllion dollars".
Team Badnarik made a big deal about their 'massive' fundraising hitting the 'magical' figure of, say it with me while raising your pinky finger to your lips, "one millllllllion dollars".
Throw me a frickin' bone! Had Team Badnarik been frozen for 30 years? The major party candidates for Attorney General in Indiana raised more than our presidential candidate. Crimony!
Team Badnarik did give us some excellent stats, though. They showed how much each candidate 'paid' per vote. From the Badnarik website:
Bush/Cheney $4.40 per vote
Kerry/Edwards $3.86 per vote
Nader $3.19 per vote
Badnarik $2.88 per vote
What you see is that the costs per vote are very similar. What you must deduce is that you get what you pay for.
If Badnarik raised $10 million dollars, I have no doubt that he would have received far more votes than the paltry sum recorded. It might not have been a direct correlation of 10 times more money = 10 times more votes. But heck, 10 times more money = 5 times more votes = a new record for votes for a Libertarian presidential candidate.
In 2008, it CANNOT be enough to nominate a candidate who simply wins the debate at the convention. It MUST be a serious focus that the nominee is committed to 21th Century fundraising, rather than 1960s level fundraising.
There is much analysis that has been running through my mind in the wake of the recent elections. I could blog the major party stuff, but why bother? It's all been done to death elsewhere. I'm happier to present analysis that won't be available elsewhere.
To wit, hadn't anyone in the Badnarik For President team ever seen the Austin Powers movies? One of the classic moments in the film is when Dr. Evil hatches his first crime plan after 30 years in the freezer. He looks for a ransom of, say it with me while raising your pinky finger to your lips, "one millllllllion dollars".
Team Badnarik made a big deal about their 'massive' fundraising hitting the 'magical' figure of, say it with me while raising your pinky finger to your lips, "one millllllllion dollars".
Throw me a frickin' bone! Had Team Badnarik been frozen for 30 years? The major party candidates for Attorney General in Indiana raised more than our presidential candidate. Crimony!
Team Badnarik did give us some excellent stats, though. They showed how much each candidate 'paid' per vote. From the Badnarik website:
Bush/Cheney $4.40 per vote
Kerry/Edwards $3.86 per vote
Nader $3.19 per vote
Badnarik $2.88 per vote
What you see is that the costs per vote are very similar. What you must deduce is that you get what you pay for.
If Badnarik raised $10 million dollars, I have no doubt that he would have received far more votes than the paltry sum recorded. It might not have been a direct correlation of 10 times more money = 10 times more votes. But heck, 10 times more money = 5 times more votes = a new record for votes for a Libertarian presidential candidate.
In 2008, it CANNOT be enough to nominate a candidate who simply wins the debate at the convention. It MUST be a serious focus that the nominee is committed to 21th Century fundraising, rather than 1960s level fundraising.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)