Mayor Luke Declares War on College Students

I've kept my mouth shut for a while, but after reading Luke Ravenstahl's comments about his proposed 1% tax on the tuition of college students, I couldn't help but think of the Pittsburgh budget and the places where they could start trimming the budgets. The first place that the mayor should offer to cut himself is his personal security detail. So how about it, Lukey? How about cutting at least one of your friggin bodyguards from the budget? I know you're a celebrity who needs to be protected from the masses, or your fans when you go out to the clubs, but do you really need a bodyguard with you at all times? When I saw Luke at a Steelers game back in fall of 2007 he had three bodyguards surrounding him while he hit on college chics. Earlier this year I saw County Exec and Gubernatorial candidate Dan Onorato walking with his son in the strip district on a Saturday morning. No security detail was present.

I guess that where I come from, when it comes down to having to ask others to make sacrifices, good leaders will do what they themselves have asked of others, such as cutting their own bonuses or salaries when their employees had to forgo bonuses or raises so that the company could afloat during difficult times. What city of Pittsburgh residents, business owners, and now students should ask the mayor "Aren't there some other areas you could first cut before raising my taxes?" You know, things like bodyguards, annual raises for the mayor and his chief of staff (who both now make more than six figures running a city that cannot even balance its budget), or, as Pittgirl pointed out, how about stopping the wasteful spending on things like gold plated garbage cans?

A thought on the Tea-party movement

Think what you will of the rallies that took place today, there is an undercurrent of growing discontent in America over the general direction of the country and the condition of the government, a discontent that transcends party affiliation. There are a growing number of people so disaffected by the trangressions of both the Republican and Democratic parties that they are looking for a wholesale replacement of leadership. Of course those who are threatened by such a movement will look for excuse to deleigitimize or destroy it and those who think they can turn it to their own advantage try to usurp it. If current trends are any indicator, neither is likely to succeed. People are tired of being exploited. They're tired of being patronized and lied to. Tired of recycling the same fradulent parties and failed policies season after political season.

The fire that burns in the hearts of the people can become a consuming fire when fanned by rhetorical winds. This is something that governments have exploited since the inception of government as a means of moving the people in the direction of the governments choosing, but such tactics aren't the exclusive property of government. Those who are of a mind to discount media figures such as Glenn Beck who get involved in such causes would do well to research the influence of the Pampleteers of the American and French revolutions. When a popular movement combines with mass media, the effects can be nation-shaking.

JVS

"an arrogant, arrogant snit"

What did the Representative from Reading mean when he referred to to Dread Lord Yarone Zober as a "snit"? I've never heard a member of the state house publicly refer to another official as a snit. The definition of snit is at Urban Dictionary.

I'm not sure what leverage Ravenstahl and Zober have to strong arm Harrisburg, but I was not surprised when I read that those two clowns have been talking down to Harrisburg. People who think that Luke Ravenstahl has matured over his almost three years in office have another thing coming to him. It is hard to see Lukey boy as a mature adult because Lukey boy has always had things handed to him. He has yet to be humbled and he lacks any sort of humility, despite his repeated screw ups. Like his slimey henchman, the Dread Lord Zober, maybe the right medicine for Luke Ravenstahl is for him to be taken "to the woodshed."

The incomplete paradigm

What has become more and more apparent to me in watching our nation tear at itself from the left to the right is the seductive power of oversimplification. All too many Americans are caught up in an incomplete paradigm that pits "The Left" or "Liberals", represented by Democrats, against "The Right" or "Conservatives", represented by Republicans. This paradigm has trapped us into a political parlor game wherein we shift from one party to the other election after election, ad nauseum. What is lost is this paradigm is an added layer of subtlety that includes a Libertarian-Statists dialectic. As it is currently structured, our system gives voters a Pepsi challenge that includes one of two parties , one of which is supposed to favor "big government" and the other "small government", but the accuracy of that juxtaposition is dubious.

In practice, both parties tend to expand government, but they do so in differing areas for differing reasons. Democrats tend to expand government in the realm of social programs and Republicans tend to expand government in the realm of defense programs. It was once true that Republicans were more likely to expand government culturally, attempting to enforce "Conservative values" through legislation (think "prohibition", anti-sodomy laws, marriage regulation, etc) but today Democrats are increasingly engaging in the same behaviors, enforcing "Liberal values" often in the name of private or public health and welfare (banning trans-fats, smoking, regulation of parenting, home-schooling, etc.) and, most notably in the 21st century, "saving the environment" (e.g. green energy policy). Neither side seems any less ideologically driven than the other or any less willing to legislate that ideology, individual liberties be damned.

The time has long since arrived for the American electorate to dispatch with the old shell-game paradigm of Democrat/Left-Republican/Right and embrace a new paradigm that adds Statist- Libertarian into the dialectical formula. Until such a shift takes place we will continue to welcome the new boss, same as the old boss, the government will continue to grow, to encroach upon the liberties of the people and to do what power does most naturally, consolidate itself. We will wake up one day to find that the nation our forefathers bled to build a shadow of its former self, that our lives regulated from the womb to the tomb, our liberty in chains, and our pursuit of happiness under the threatening gaze of a leviathan we neglected, by ignorance or apathy, to tame.

JVS

Onorato at Netroots?

What the heck was Dan Onorato doing at a progressive blogger conference? There is nothing progressive about this guy. Pennsylvanians - if you want the keystone state to continue its slide towards being a no growth ultra high taxed state, elect Dan Onorato for Governor in 2010.

photo courtesy of 2PJ's.

The most overly scrutinized President in US History?

The American Presidency is now officially on the same performance time line as corporate America. Remember the days when a President had an entire term to prove his effectiveness in both domestic and foreign policy? Remember when the President was judged on whether or not the country was better off when he left office than when he came into office? Now, with President Obama in office, the mainstream media can't help itself but over-analyze, rate, or grade each and every decision or word from this President. It's annoying, and I think the media's obsession with everything the President says or does makes him seem annoying to some Americans, even the ones who voted for him.

How can you rate Health Care reform when it is still a work in progress? Ditto for the environment. And don't even get me started on the stimulus, which some in the media were considering a failure even though not even one percent of the funds were spent. Good grief. There are already some signs that the stimulus has help increase the rate at which the economy bottomed out. That is a good thing, but it also shows that the items that were front loaded into the stimulus - mainly tax cuts, haven't had that much of an impact on the economy. Why is that? When people receive a tax rebate check they do one of three things - they save it, they pay down debt, or they spend it. I think that the people who receive the rebates are most likely to do the latter of the two, but even if only half of the tax rebate recipients paid down debt it would have a negative impact on the economy. Why? Because banks do better when Americans have more debt. They earn more interest revenue from me when my credit card balance is $1000 versus $500. When the stimulus money is used for roads and other infrastructure that money is pumped back into the economy. New Jobs are created in the region where the work is being done, leading to a real trickle down effect instead of a rhetorical trickle down, which is what you get with the Conservatives and their tax cutting obsession.

An issue of trust

As Americans, we are almost genetically predisposed toward a distrust of government. We recognize the need for things such as regulation and taxation, but often regard them as nothing more than necessary evils. Unless one understands that inherent distrust, they will never understand the growing public disapproval of the so-called 'Public Option' being bandied about as a potential salve for the wound upon our nation's healthcare system.

How, in a country wherein as many as 47 million people are without health insurance, can any rational person balk at the idea of any solution that may help to fill in that gap? History teaches us that power attained is often power abused, and no greater power can be given to an individual or an institution than power over ones healthcare decisions. Witness the outrage that continues to surround issues such as abortion and euthanasia as evidence of how personal such decisions are and how apoplectic people become when they feel that the government may be interfering in such decisions, or even being given the option to do so.

Thus, when Americans hear of a plan, no matter how well packaged, that has the potential, even the potential, to lead to government run healthcare, they have a tendency to recoil. Government run healthcare? The same government that has failed to properly maintain existing responsibilities such as social security and medicare? The same government that makes any interaction with its offices an exercise in meditative patience, wherein one may wait for an entire afternoon to simply register a car? The same government that has notoriously failed to provide proper care to its veterans? The same government that takes us to war on the most abysmally flawed of evidence? The same government that feels it its place to regulate who may or may not be married? That is the government that could potentially act as an intermediary between my doctor and I? And this is the plan that could open that door? "Thanks", they seem to say, "but no thanks".

Lest you argue that no such plan for "government run healthcare" is being proposed, I should again point out that merely the potential for such an outcome is enough to raise the ire many and such a plan does introduce that potential. They have seen the footage of their elected officials opining the virtues of "Universal" or "Single payer" medical insurance and read the statements of those in positions of power and influence who would like to see such a system put in place and they are not convinced that those designs have been abandoned. They have heard that a public option could save us millions, if not billions of dollars, but they remain incredulous. They have little confidence that the costs of a public option would be controlled and that it wont be used as a gateway to an even greater amount of government interference in the lives of private individuals. The precedents to allow for such optimism and faith are lacking.

It says something profound about a peoples distrust of their government when millions upon millions would rather take their chances with insurance companies who often look for any excuse to deny their customers coverage than with their own elected officials. They have learned all too well over the years that plans professed are not always plans possessed and that promises made are often broken. They have learned that those of the political class are easily corruptible and given to untruths, especially when such untruths seem politically expedient. If given the choice between those in business and those in government, many would still seem to prefer settling with those in business, because if nothing else, at least those in business will admit that they're trying to sell you something.

JVS

John Adams' work on Display in Raleigh

The original copy of "Thoughts on Government", written by John Adams in 1775 and 1776, is now on display at the state capital building in Raleigh. Adams was one of the first, if not the first, of the founding fathers to put his ideas for an ideal republican government down on paper. Adams believed that the "happiness of the people was the purpose of government," and that the form of government that was best was the one that produced the "greatest amount of happiness for the largest number." It's a shame that our government today writes and passes laws that work in reverse of the order suggested by the great John Adams more than 230 years ago. Our legislation today is written to out for big business interests. Rarely does a bill get passed that actually works for the people. If I had my way we would start with a clean slate in both houses of Congress. I call this the "Mars Attacks Scenario." While this scenario is highly improbable, we at least have some great folks working on changing Congress. The great Lawrence Lessig has been focusing on reforming Congress from the ground up through his Change-Congress initiative. Please take a minute to check them out.

Mark DeSantis endorses Kevin Acklin for Mayor

"It's not about political party. It's about making a difference."

A Message in Support of Kevin Acklin from Mark DeSantis on Vimeo.

I knew it

Luke Ravenstahl really is a Republican after all. The Democratic party can finally move on from this embarrassment. Oh wait, you mean to tell me that Luke Ravenstahl is both the Democratic and Republican candidate for mayor in the November election? Which city is this again? Moscow? Tehran? Caracas?

Luke Ravenstahl is still the mayor, still a coward, and still a chump

Pittsburgh has at least 4 more years of Luke Ravenstahl at the helm. I am not shocked that he won, although I was surprised that he did win by such a large margin. I can't give too much credit to the mayor or his campaign for the huge victory. He out fundraised his closest opponent, Patrick Dowd, by a ratio of 10 to 1, and let's face, with most of the nation's cities in the crapper economy wise, Pittsburgh is looking pretty good right now. The mayor will take credit for that, but he shouldn't, because that's just the nature of Pittsburgh - it's a city that doesn't see much fluctuation during housing booms and busts as it has a very stable economic base. To boot, I felt that while Dowd campaigned like a madman, all over town, his campaign's performance was just lousy. From communications to field operations to GOTV, his campaign did not perform up to the level of Patrick Dowd, the candidate. Dowd really needed a campaign staffed with folks who have worked on citywide campaigns in the past. He needed folks on his side who were not outsiders to the political establishment - like he is, because in order to win in this town a candidate must build bridges to the other community and political leaders. More on the Dowd campaign to come in a future post.

Now, I think a lot of people have accepted the fact that Luke Ravenstahl won. I'm over it, I think a lot of people are. It's not a shocker. The shocker is how someone with as my screw ups and embarrassments as Luke Ravenstahl could have the audacity to not thank and congratulate his opponent during his victory speech, and then, have the nerve to demand an apology. Boy Mayo has the transcript of his election night interview with the Mayor, as well as a link to the video:

"My mom always told me 'if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all', so that's what I chose to do tonight. I think Patrick crossed the line in this campaign. I asked for -- a couple of times -- an apology, he didn't want to offer it. Hopefully, in the very near future he will so that we can continue to work together, ideally, to move the city forward."

Do you folks out there, including those in the media, really believe that Luke has matured since his last election? He behaved much more like an adult this time around, but the Steelers parade fiasco was just a few months ago, and then this, refusing to even mention his opponents name, or, as Bob Mayo uncovered, refusing to accept or return Patrick Dowd's concession phone call. Once again, Bob Mayo has the rundown, including a Q and A with Councilman Patrick Dowd:

Dowd told me that he offered Mayor Ravenstahl a sincere congratulations on election night.

Q: Did you call him to concede?

A: "Oh, yeah, absolutely."

Q: You spoke with him?

A:" No, no. He's not returned my call."

What happened? Councilman Dowd says he'd previously proposed that he be given the mayor's cell phone number for an election night call -- but that the Ravenstahl's campaign did not provide it. Dowd says that on election night his campaign manager called Ravenstahl's campaign manager:

"We were told at that time that he wasn't available. They didn't know where he was."

The councilman says his campaign manager waited, then placed a second call to the mayor's campaign manager -- again with no results. Dowd says they eventually tried reaching the mayor's chief of staff, Yarone Zober, because they presumed he would know where the mayor was. Dowd says that Zober did not answer their first call.

Dowd says Zober did pick up their second call.

"He was obviously at the Hofbrauhaus. You could hear the music; it sounded like you were in Bavaria. He said he didn't know where the mayor was, and I said 'could you have him give me a call'. He said he would see."

The councilman says that Mayor Ravenstahl never returned his calls.

Not mentioning Dowd's name, or thanking him, or even saying he ran a good campaign, and then not accepting or returning his phone call, well, that's not only disrespectful, and unprofessional, it's cowardice. Luke Ravenstahl is a coward. As a person, he hasn't matured over the years, he's still not a man, or an adult yet, but as a politician, he has been able to pull the wool over a lot of people's eyes, and so I will concede that he has matured into a slimeball politician who is likely to fool a lot of people into thinking things are going well while in reality, the city is sitting on top of a ticking time bomb in not only pension liabilities but decaying infrastructure that is only going to saddle this region with more debt and taxes.

Unless that bomb blows up in the near future, the Luke Machine may be ever stronger come January of 2010, when the newest members of city council are a sworn in. Luke will have a city council made up of a majority of reform minded and solutions oriented council members. They will offer up ideas and solutions to the city's biggest problems - only to have the credit for them stolen by the mayor. Bill Peduto knows how this works all too well. To all of the Pittsburghers and burgh bloggers out there - it might be time to lay off the mayor for the time being, or at least once the general election is over. Without the scrutiny of the media, the citizens, and the burghosphere, and left to his own devices, Luke Ravenstahl is almost guaranteed to produce more screw ups and possible a screw up so big that it lands him in a courthouse, or prison, meaning that the majority of Pittsburgh's citizens may finally have a reason to elect a mayor that this great city deserves.

PG: Natalia Rudiak declares victory

WOW! Talk about an upset. According to the Post-Gazette Carrick's Natalia Rudiak, who finished a distant 3rd place in the Democratic committee endorsement race, has just declared victory over Tony Coghill and Patrick Reilly in the district 4 city council race. Way to go Natalia!!!!

Here is Natalia's statement:

"I never doubted our victory. I always believed we would win, because I believed in all of you. I believed in the residents of District 4, I believed in our power and our voice, our work ethic and integrity, our love for our neighborhoods and our city, and our desire to bring the investment to our neighborhoods that we deserve.

As your City Councilmember I promise to be a bridge-builder, and fight for the investment that we deserve. But this isn't the end of a journey - this is just the beginning. In order to build a better Pittsburgh, I need your help. So please join me these next four years, as we strive to find creative solutions and recruit the talent and investment necessary to address the important issues in our community. We have a lot of work to do."

Note to Matt Hoagie: My $100 contribution did not go to the 3rd place candidate - YOURS DID!!!