In support of Dan S.'s attempt to elevate the discussion in a lower thread, let me offer the following three items:
The first, more good ink for Ogden in this morning's Standard-Examiner. And if any one doubts the importance of having good education opportunities available right here in Ogden as a lure for residents and businesses, I can give you examples of business moves that were canceled at the last minute in another state because the company managers learned that their skill people "will not move there because of the poor schools and lack of higher education opportunities close by." It matters.
The second item is yet another example of the arrogance of power evident in our elected officials. It's from Paul Rolly's column in today's Salt Lake Tribune. Here's the gist of it:
Elsewhere the Salt Lake Tribune reports that supporters of the referendum on the voucher plan collected 30K more names than they needed to trigger a referendum.Rolly: Legislators - Free speech? What's that?
By Paul Rolly
Tribune Columnist
Top officials of the state Office of Education were summoned to Star Chamber-type meetings with Utah legislators last month to defend their support of a referendum drive to repeal the voucher bill.
How dare they exercise their First Amendment right to free speech? Don't they know this is Utah?
One meeting was called by Sen. Margaret Dayton, R-Orem, and included Senate President John Valentine, R-Orem, Senate Majority Leader Curtis Bramble, R-Provo, and Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper.
Dayton, in an e-mail I obtained through a government open-records request, told the senators she wanted state Schools Superintendent Patti Harrington to bring the Office of Education's attorney, Carol Lear, to the meeting to explain "her perspective in trying to undermine the Legislature."
"Patti reminded me that what Carol does on her own time is her own business as a citizen," Dayton wrote.
What a radical concept.
Harrington and State School Board Chairman Kim Burningham were summoned
to another meeting with House Speaker Greg Curtis, R-Sandy. In an e-mail to fellow board members, Burningham reported that Curtis implied he would have fired Lear. He also said Curtis hinted that the referendum movement would hurt the state Office of Education's future relationship with the Legislature.
Regardless of where you stand on the voucher plan, the attempt by elected officials to intimidate state employees from on their own time working to support a referendum drive [as is their right under Utah law] is, I think, reprehensible. Who do these legislators think they are? The Mayor of Ogden?
Update 4/11/07 7:48 a.m. MT: Don't miss this morning's followup Salt Lake Tribune editorial on the voucher referendum topic.
We exerpt an astute observation appearing at the bottom of the article:
In fact, vouchers and tuition tax credits have been defeated in every state where they have made it to the ballot in the past 30 years.Will arrogant legislative leadership continue to undermine the common sense and popular will of the people of Utah?
That's probably why pro-voucher groups, including Utah legislators, worked so hard to undermine the referendum petition drive, claiming it would be a waste of time even if it succeeded.
57 comments:
Sure has a familiar ring, Curm. I'm surprised that you didn't include your personal tirade against Republicans!
But, I'm sure those will appear, from you or the others who will gleefully remind us that these 'coercers' are Republicans!!
These strong-arm tactics aren't just limited to the State Legislature, are they? We have plenty of back room deals and arm twisting right here in the Top of Utah!!
Wonder if Rolly would like to do an 'expose' of the inner workings of Ogden starting on the ninth floor? That is, if he isn't afraid of heights as he plumbs the lower depths of our city's 'leadership'.
Thanx, Curm
Sharon:
You wrote: I'm surprised that you didn't include your personal tirade against Republicans! But, I'm sure those will appear, from you or the others who will gleefully remind us that these 'coercers' are Republicans!!
Don't need to. You did it for me. Many thanks.... [grin].
Just helping out a fellow blogger who appears too busy this morning to get up much of a lather.
Haveaniceday,curm
Education...hmmmm
WSU expansion...or gated development.
There was a time when home building was not the foundation industry and a state university was a plum of a development engine. Small towns blossomed under the state university systems. Santa Cruz, Boulder, Flagstaff, Davis, to name just a few.
Now we have developers and dreamers denigrating University personnel, thumbing their nose at educational expansion, and pushing for the sale of the last remaining Wasatch foothill open space in favor of gated development. You call this progress??
It's truly a shame that instead of building all that "stuff" where the old mall stood, the mayor and the good people of Ogden didn't push for a Community College in it's place.
Think of the benefits it would have on the local community, offering college classes for an Associates degree for $13-$17 a credit. Getting a chance to better oneself and their community through education, and getting a chance to gain an AA/AS at a relatively cheap prices (compared to WSU or USU) and saving gas for those that commute to SLCC.
If we want to better our dear city, we need to empower our people, and there's no better way to do so, than to provide them with education and opportunities to change their situation.
I know some people will claim that ATCs are like Community Colleges, ya maybe, but they teach skills, which are good, I don't want to bash on them, they serve a purpose, but a Communtiy College in the greater Ogden area would be so good for everyone! Not to mention it would bring a lot of students into the area that would frequent local eateries and businesses.
Thats my little plug for education in Ogden, I know elementary schools, Jr. & Sr. highs are also in need of help, I pray that they'll get it somehow..someway.
I love this city, and even though I'm not a native, I want to see Ogden become the city it once was.
In reference to Paul Rolly's column, I cannot restrain myself from blowing off some steam on the arrogant attitude of the Utah Legislature.
Let's call it like it really is-
It is predominantly Mormon, predominantly male and predominantly Republican.
Senator Stephenson's narrow-minded dictatorial position on most issues means that I will even quit supporting the Utah Taxpayers Association. I am sad about that because they have done a good service for Utah taxpayers for many years.
Senator Stephenson always puts his pressure on hard to push for things like the $900,000.00 Utah grant that Ogden's Mayor Godfrey wanted to use to buy the American Can property.
That has turned out to be not what it was sold to the State it was going to be.
I feel disgusted by the whole political mess from Ogden's Mayor to the Governor.
Huntsman has turned out to be a real disappointment - from the soccer stadium to the school vouchers to the deliberate failure to fund the Veterans home in Ogden that had been promised for years.
Huntsman would rather save a family a few bucks or less on their grocery bill.
From news reports it was Governor Huntsman's wife that dictated the Soccer Stadium decision. So please, don't attack the Governor, he was only doing what he was told by the Real bosses (both of them). She apparently doesn't like our veterans anymore than he and the State Legislature does, and hey, if she can save her rich friends a few bucks on their private school tuition who are we to complain?
Just for your info.
It was the Lt. Governor that twisted the arms of the freshman Legislators to vote for the voucher bill and now if it does make it on to the ballot, It will be him, that will chose the date for which we will go to the polls to vote on the measure.
This will be fun to watch how it plays out from here.
{by the way not one democratic legislators vote for it either.}
the real question is how much will this issue cost the state and will there be any accountiblity for this issue, or can we just chalk this up for being politics
Sine the topic is, generally, the arrogance of legislators, I thought it would be fitting to announce this month's winner of the Richard M. Nixon "I Am Not A Crook" Chutzpah Award.
And the winner is.... Cong. Rob Bishop [R-UT]. An elaborate four color postcard arrived today from Congressman Bishop ["published and mailed at taxpayer expense"] informing his constitutents of his committment to fiscal conservatism. This is the same Cong. R. Bishop who voted, during the last Congress, for the largest pork-stuffed expenditures bill in the history of the nation. It contained several thousand "earmarks" --- personal spending items inserted by congressmen and senators --- including the infamous "bridge to nowhere" in Alaska at a cost to taxpayers of over $200 million dollars. That one so embarassed even the Republican majority of the last Congress once the public found about about it... and you know what it takes to embarass a Republican these days... that the Republican majority subsequently passed an amendment deleting the specific use to which the money would be put, but left it up to the state of Alaska and Senator Stevens [R-Alaska] to decide how to spend it instead. [Surprise! Sen. Stevens then announced it would be spent on the Bridge to Nowhere!]
That Rob Bishop now claims he's a fiscal conservative, hard at work watching after the taxpayers' dollars is enough to gag a maggot. He is a worthy winner of the Richard M. Nixon "I Am Not A Crook" Chutzpah award if ever there was one. [This month's runner up was "I have been a hunter all my life" Mitt Romney, Republican candidate for the presidency.]
Cong. Bishop will be at the Weber County Commission Chamber at 2380 Washington Blvd from 8 to 9 PM on 12 April, 2007 to hold a town hall meeting for his constituents. Perhaps a few of them might want to attend and ask Cong. Bishop [politely] about his curious understanding of what "fiscal conservatism" means.
Great post Curm,
Searching using "Gravina Island Bridge" or "Bridge to Nowhere" reveals a pile of articles about Alaska's equivalent to our urban gondola. A project that just won't go away. The overkill of this project is just astounding. That one of our Utah legislators licked Ted Stevens ass makes me sick.
It is truly astounding that we are now in the Peak Oil Era and our leaders are still eager to spend more for highways. We will still be paying for these highways when gas tops 10 bucks a gallon and highway use drops to a fraction of todays profligate fuel orgy.
We are still using the Freeway to Sprawl economic model for our development strategy. Hopeless. America is a dying power, unable to make the simplest of choices to assure future generations an economy and an infrastructure that will support healthy growth.
SL Trib editorial today, again, deals with legislative arrogance. Link here.
The editorial concerns the drive to put the voucher law up for a direct vote, a referendum, by the people of the state and legislative efforts to prevent the voters having a say on the matter. Money quote:
And the claim of voucher proponents that the referendum is the work only of whiny teachers and education bureaucrats? That nonsense is belied by the staggering number of signatures collected.
Obviously, many Utahns believe this law, setting up the nation's first universal voucher system, is bad policy. That it is also likely the result of one of the most Machiavellian legislative maneuvers ever hatched on the Hill is not lost on them.
Utah lawmakers passed two voucher bills this year. The second was cast by Republican leaders as simply an amendment of the first narrowly approved bill, but, more likely, its role was insurance against a threatened referendum to put the unpopular law to a public vote. They say the second bill could be used to enact the voucher law, even if Utahns voted to repeal the first.
The original law, passed by only one vote in the Utah House after six years of campaigning by well-funded out-of-state groups, could be voted down at the polls. If that happens, courts then would have to decide if the will of the people overrides their legislators' effort to thwart it.
The last time voters actually got a referendum on the ballot, the Legislature [ah... the Republican-dominated legislature] promptly revised the laws to make it much much more difficult for that the happen again. It became so onerous, the legislators thought they'd plugged the "referedum" hole for good and never again would a bill they passed actually come up for public approval. Regardless of how the referendum turns out, I think we can look for the Republican legislature to tighten up the law on referenda even more. I mean, this could get out of hand, people actually demanding a chance to repeal a law their Overlords have stuffed down their unwilling throats. That sort of thing is permitted, why somebody might start wondering about that other progressive era reform --- recall --- and what Utah law says about it.
Moral dilemma regarding Congressman Bishop's pork: A million dollars of that pork came to the Ott Planetarium at WSU. The money came from the NASA budget and is being spent on outreach programs, which will benefit not only the local community but also other planetariums and science education nationwide. Some of the money went for new computers to do all the fancy animations for planetarium shows. And when the computers aren't being used for that, I get to use them for some of my teaching and other work.
Curm, nice try "elevating the discussion" this Utah legislature seems to be a haven for the most pompus, arrogant, myopic bunch of self serving wannabe demigods, but I guess shifting from a discussion of Godfrey, you could constue this to be a rise in elevation. Maybe this time the sheep will bite the wolf?
The biggest joke of all is that we sheep here in Zion actually think that our electected representatives in the State Legislature represent our interests in government.
Not the case at all as they have proven time and again. OUR representatives actually do the bidding of a very small handfull of the so called "leaders" in the Legislature.
The real and only power in the Utah State Legislature is: Valentine, Bramble, Stephenson, Curtis, Clark, Urquart, and a few lesser, but none the less evil, operatives. All of them go to bat routinely for big money special interest groups while throwing the rest of us to the wolfs, who of course just happen to be those same rich special interest groups.
The rich get richer, the poor get poorer and the middle class keeps shrinking with each Legislature performed sheering.
Bah Bah Bah said the voters of Utah as they cued up at the polls to sustain the wolf pack leaders dressed in sheeps clothing.
The thing about sheep is that they forget from one day to the next.
Dan S.
Well, Dan... pork is pork, even when it ends up at WSU. There were many projects funded via earmarks in the Bridge to Nowhere Pork Explosion Appropriations bill that, on their merits, were fine projects [and there were many that were not]. The good ones could and should have been funded in the regular way [not via last minute insertions by earmark] in the appropriate budget bills.
The problem is, once we start making exceptions for, say, a WSU bound pork earmark because it's a beneficial project, it becomes impossible to say to Senator Shoat or Congressman Piglet that their projects can't be included by earmark. And we get appropriation bills with thousands and thousands of un-vetted projects stuffed into bills at the last moment.
This earmark system very often involves big-ticket science projects. I recall that Baton Rouge, LA got a huge-ticket magnetic research facility [Center for Advanced Microsystems I think it was called] purely through the intervention of Sen. Breaux at the time. It had not been recommended for BR by the physics advisers of the administration [Clinton as I recall] who wanted it to go to another university which had several allied facilities, because the synergistic possibilities of locating it there. But Breaux thew his weight around and it ended up in a horse pasture in Baton Rouge, miles from the LSU campus. It was, the city was assured, to be the seed of a new Silicon Valley on the Bayou. All kinds of companies would locate nearby to take advantage of the research possibilities of the center. It is now twenty years later. The center is still out there in the empty field. No companies moved in next door. It ran into shortfalls on its budget because the revenue it was expected to generate selling research time to academics and industry fell short right from the git go. It has been a disappointment all around. And all because Breaux earmarked it as personal pork for the home town folks.
Far far too much of this goes on. Good projects should go through the regular appropriations process, be vetted, and funded after review because they are good projects. Not because Sen. Shoat wants something for the home folks.
Not even computers for WSU.
Thnax for that information, Dan.
I do agree with Curm (imagine that!) that "good projects should go through the regular appropriations process......".
I wonder how many 'good' bills would actually be passed then?
Two items of interest in today's SE for Weber County folks. One good news, and one that should make us --- and our Council members --- blush with embarrassment. [The Mayor should be blushing with shame too, but it's getting increasingly hard to figure out what if anything can embarrass the Mayor these days.]
The first item reports that the city has reached contract agreements with the city's three employee unions. Why is that news? Because for the first time, seven years into Mayor' Godfrey's term, the city has actually decided to negotiate contracts. [Last year, the city simply said to the unions "this is our offer. Take it or leave it." Only a Republican mayor could possibly consider that "negotiation."] Happily, the Council decided enough was enough and insisted on a larger role in the process. This time the city actually negotiated a contract. Will wonders never cease! Kudoes to the City Council for insisting on being made part of the negotiation process and so for driving the change.
Here a few key paragraphs from Mr. Schwebke's story [front page of the Top of Utah section. The SE is being persnickity at the moment about sending email links.]
Schwebke reports that the contracts were
"hammered out through 'interest-based' bargaining initiated in October.
"The interest-based system was implemented to avoid the controversy encountered by the council last year when negotiating with the Ogden Police Benefit Association and Ogden Fire Local 1654.
"Representatives of the city council, administration, police and firefighter associations and Utah Alliance of Government Employees participated in the interest-based negotiations.
"Officer Tyler Hanson, president of the police association, said....'The process worked very well, much better than any system that has been in place before....'
"Council Chairman Jesse Garcia said he was pleased with the negotiations. 'When all the unions, the city council and administration are working off the same page, good things happen....'
"Interest-based bargaining was implemented so disputes encountered last year during salary negotiations with the police and fire groups could be avoided, said Mark Johnson, the city’s management services director. 'It wasn’t pleasant for anyone.'
The item that should have the Council [and Mayor] blushing also appears in the Top of Utah section. Here's the key graph:
BOUNTIFUL — Davis Chamber of Commerce President John Pitt believes the hiring of Channel 17 station manager Michael Johnson will fit plans to make the station much more than it is right now.
“We are going to take the channel in a whole new direction,” Pitt said.
At a recent city council meeting, Pitt told of his plans to overhaul the station into a product that will be more beneficial to the public and to chamber members.
Mayor Joe Johnson, an active member of chamber committees, said he was pleased with the station’s efforts to improve.
“Channel 17 has been lousy, but I hope you’ll make it an advantage to the city and the community,” he said.
Johnson also asked for officials and residents to be educated on how the channel works and how to use it more to their advantage."
Good grief! Davis County is going to improve its Community Cable Channel? It's going to try to arrange to make it more useful for Davis County residents? What an idea! You mean it's possible for a Community cable channel to carry something other than Godfrey/Geiger/Gondola programing all the time? Who could have imagined that?
It is LONG past time when the Ogden City Council should have acted to turn the Community cable channel Ogden taxpayers help finance into a true community channel instead of the personal political plaything of Mayor Godfrey, to be used to push his own personal agendas and to which access is denied to those who think differently than the mayor does. [Recall his taking to the Community channel to oppose a school bond issue and his denying access to the same "community" channel --- politely so called --- to advocates of the bond issue.]
It is long past time for the Council to act. Either take management of the Ogden Community channel out of the Mayor's hands and make it into a true community channel, or pull the plug on it. But the present form of operation and management needs to end. Soon.
Curm and Sharon: I wasn't trying to defend the pork that came to WSU--merely point out the pertinent facts and how I'm affected. I played no role in bringing the pork here, but I didn't actively oppose it either, and I haven't sought to punish my colleagues who did support it. The moral dilemma is between one's duties as an employee and one's duties as a citizen. What would you have done?
Dan:
What would I have done? About that specific grant? Nothing. If you're asking if, say, a physicist at WSU has some moral obligation to refuse the equipment or criticize colleagues for not doing so, that answer is "no." And even "absolutely not." The only exception I can see would be if I thought the project was a complete boondoggle and waste of money. In that case, I wouldn't take part in any of it.
Now, that said, speaking only for me, what I have done, for a while, and am doing still, is blasting my own party's "leaders" [far too often an honorific rather than a descriptive title] on the matter of pork and earmarks. The Democratic majority came in promising an end to earmarks, and then began to waffle, particularly the Senate leadership, saying "well, maybe a few, really really good ones, but not a lot." They were hit at once by a blizzard of emails, web postings, letters and phone calls on that and they backed off... at least for a time. And a good part of the revolt that forced them to back off... at least for a while... came from the newly elected Representatives and Senators. Good sign, though whether they can continue to stay un-corrupted, or they will be seduced by the "get along to go along" ethic [politely so called] of the House and Senate remains to be seen. History suggests the prognosis is not good.
From my own partisan POV, I have to keep reminding the players, the incumbents of my own party who are not as addicted to pork as the other party's incumbents [that would be damn near impossible], but far too addicted for their own and the public's good, that it has to stop. And that as a Yellow Dog Democrat, I'm holding them responsible for stopping it. I have no control over what Republicans do. I have some say over what my party does. Not much, but some. And if there are enough of me-s out there, saying "no" and staying away from the polls occasionally if need be, maybe we can embarrass them, or scare them, into behaving well, if for no other reasons.
And part of that process means I have to be willing to have MY preferred pork taken off the ear-mark table as well. The only defensible position, from my POV, is that all earmarks must stop. All of them. Even for programs I would like to see enacted and that might benefit me directly. [Clearly, all reasonable people would agree that the nation needs a $50,000,000 National Center for the Study of the American Revolution in the Inter Mountain West and that WSU is clearly the natural site for it to be located. But not by earmark.]
County political conventions are coming up. I'll be at mine. I usually don't presume to give advice to Republicans. As Rudi keeps reminding me, "you take care of your party; we'll take care of ours." But I'll make an exception: maybe it would be helpful if Republicans who are fed up with the pork parade [and they've been in charge of it for the past six years] turned out at their County conventions, and at Cong. Bishop's town meeting, and made their views plain. Just a suggestion.... As I said, I'll be at mine.
Curm:
This discussion of earmarks reminds me of the first Congressional campaign that I witnessed after moving to Utah. This was in 1994, when the Democrats still controlled Congress. Jim Hansen was our representative, and his Democratic opponent was a woman from Cache County whose name I forget. I attended a couple of her speeches and her number-one talking point was that because she's a Democrat and the Democrats control Congress, she would be better than Hansen at bringing home the pork to Utah.
Of course you know what happened: Hansen was reelected and the Republicans took control of Congress. Years later, shortly before the Olympics, Hansen gave a speech here at WSU in which he alluded to all the earmarks he and his Utah colleagues had obtained in the name of the Olympics. His exact words were: "We've played that Olympic card so much, I'm almost embarassed."
Re: Earmarks:
Quote of the Day
Now this is jaw-dropping. Congressman Jeff Flake (R) is contending, as the following video will show, that the House is violating its own rules on earmarks. As an example, Flake points to one earmark in the war supplemental bill that is designated for NASA. Because it wasn't reported in the bill correctly, Flake was seeking clarification. In response, Congressman David Obey (D) said:
"The fact is, that an earmark is something that is requested by an individual member. This item was not requested by any individual member. It was put in the bill by ME!"
Either Obey believes he is above the law when it comes to enforcing House rules, or he doesn't believe he is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Which is it?
View the video
Threadjack!
Tonight the City Council will consider an administration-proposed rezone of the area west of Wall, between 20th Street and the Ogden River. The area is currently zoned for manufacturing, and the administration wants it zoned CBD (central business district), effectively extending "downtown" to include this area.
This rezone may or may not be a good idea. What I find odd, though, is that the administration has declined to provide any specifics on what kind of redevelopment it would like to see in this area. Furthermore, a large majority of the property to be rezoned has recently been acquired by Mr. Gadi Lesham, a known friend of the administration. As far as I'm aware, Mr. Lesham has expressed no public opinion on the rezone, and has provided no information to the Council or to the public regarding his plans for the property.
I should think that the Council would wish to obtain more information before proceeding with this rezone.
And talking about the geniuses that continue to make the Utah State Legislature the laughing stock of the whole world, this in today's DNews:
http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,660210666,00.html
My favorite quotes from this article are:
"Now, Google, other search leaders and trademark experts are taking notice of Utah's latest grand experiment in trying to control the global Internet. An earlier law to ban advertising spyware was knocked down in the federal courts. Only the federal government can try to regulate interstate commerce."
and
"Goldman maintains that Utah has made a mess of trying to regulate the Internet. McLaughlin said the law is so badly written it allows anyone to register another's trademark or any generic word. We got some scientists in the Utah Legislature cooking up some really bad experiments," Goldman said."
Proof positive that Godfrey isn't the only world class nut case in Utah politics!
Rudi:
There really is a Republican Congressman actually named Flake? Wow. Kind of takes truth in advertising to a whole new level....
Now, about your comment [taken from the web]: Glad you included the link to the video of the discussion on the floor. Provided some significant context for the snippet you reported. Obey's point was not as bizzare as you tried to make it. As I understand it, the discussion was over the definition of "earmark" in the revised rules of the house, put in by the recent Democratic majority, to make sure that no earmark inserted by a member goes in without the member being identified. [Under the Republican house rules previously, earmarks could be and often were inserted into bills anonymously].
Mr. Obey's point was that the particular spending appropriation under discussion [for the Stennis Space Center in Mississippi to make it more hurricane proof] was put in by him [Obey is from Wisconsin], and so was not an "earmark" put in by a member to bring money to his own district or state. Sending money to the Stennis Center in Mississippi does nothing for Obey of Wisconsin.
That said, Flake's point was a good one. By Obey's definition, Representatives could trade off "earmarks" --- Obey would put in something, say for Mississippi and a Mississippi House member would put in something for Wisconsin, but technically neither would be considered an "earmark" because the recommender was not sending money to his own district. Flake is right: there is indeed a hole in the system. Obey's reationalizing justification is precisely the kind of sophestry from my own party's "leaders" [politely so called] that drives me bats.
But I also note that Cong. Flake's complaint was "you guys are sneaking in stuff just like we did when we were in the majority. Not fair!" Crocodile tears, seems to me.
Flake's best point, to which Obey did not reply, was "NASA did not request the money." I suspect Obey did not reply because there was no reply he could make. Which Obey's refusing the yield the floor to continue the discussion made plain.
Obey is part of the safe-district long-time Democratic establishment in the House and an accomplished pork-farmer. He and Byrd and Murtha are three my party has to rein in on matters of pork and some of us are working on that. Pork is pork and earmarks are earmarks, and they are no less egregious violations of the public trust when they come from Democrats than when they come from Republicans.
However, Rep. Flake has no moral standing to climb onto his high ethical horse about the matter, given the orgy of pork production and anonymous earmarks in appropriations bill after appropriations bill over the last four years that he and his ilk bobbed their heads silently in favor of, like the good little Bushie sock puppets they were. And are. If you can convince me that if the Republicans had held the House, that Rep. Flake would have risen today to condemn Hastart-flavored pork, then I'll take his pretended shock seriously. But not until them.
Want to do something about it? Take it to Rep. Bishop's town meeting and to your county convention. Raise it within your party, and make sure when you do that the issue is pork, and not just Democratic pork. I'll be doing the same from my side.
A Republican congressman name Flake... Imagine that. There is a god!
Off topic, my apologies...
Just to bring this whole Don Imus flap close to home, Katie Adams is a member of the Rutgers Womens basketball team. She is from Ogden and excelled at Ogden High.
Well, I hope Katie knows that we here in Ogden are very proud of her and we don't think she is a ho (whore). I'm sad that she has had to endure this controversy due to the racist and sexist comments of a conservative talk show host.
You make us proud Katie! Thanks for representing Ogden so well.
Curmudgeon,
You are way out of line about Congressman Flake. He's a good guy. He was the only Republican in Congress to speak out against earmarks in the previous session (that I know of) and was reprimanded, repeatedly, for doing so. Take a few moments and check out his record. He represents No. Arizona and his family helped found Snowflake, AZ. He is not a flake.
However, you are right on about the rest of those guys.
Disgusted:
I saw the Ogden connection in Gwen Imis's excellent op ed piece in today's NY Times. Wonder if the SE will jump on it, get an interview from the home town girl.
Sorry to say that Imus is not generally considered a conservative talk show host. I don't watch/listen to his show, but I think he's considred a little further left than that.
All the comments so far, or most of them, have dealt with the remarks being racist or sexist [which they were]. My first reaction was a little different. It was this: "Hey, you son of a bitch, pick on somebody your own size." Mega-rich celebrity and he takes on college kids most of them a year out of high school? SOB deserves what he gets.
Just Sayin:
I am not, I admit, up on my Republican iconography. If Flake was speaking out against the porkfest when the Rs were in chage, my hat's off to him. There were a few. A very few. As I recall, McCain was one of them. For a time. But if Flake stuck his head above the trenches on this when his party owned the trenches, I agree, my comments were in re: him were unwarranted.
Threadjack!
Well, well, well ... after all the discourse about malcontents and ne'er-do-wells like me calling people names (Mike Dowse: Gondola boy! Jackass! Mr. Safsten: You Know What You Are!), you've all "elevated the discourse" on the blog and relegated comments about the number of onion rolls the Giegers ingested per day versus juice boxes ingested per day to the banned bin, and promoted thoughtful discourse via national politics to the fore, so good on ya! But here's something for all of us died-in-the-wool OTowners to chew on: I have word from a Davis County municipality meeting where some state highway representatives said they are waiting for a letter from Gondola Godfrey so they can tell him where to shove his circus ride to nowhere; problem is, Gondola Godfrey will be looking for another route. Beware, OTown! These clowns (especially you, Bernie Allen, whom of yourself you think you are so above the fray, but in reality you are the state's worst) are not letting up. Oust Gondola Godfrey!
Curm,
Well put. It just pulled my heart to see adorable Katie Adams get up in front of that mic and say she was from Ogden and then have to respond to everything being said. But it did make me proud to see one of Ogden's finest so composed in the national media. This will be a bit of education she never bargained for.
So Imus is a moderate? I guess I don't listen to him. I'm an Independent, so my choice: Ed Schultz. But I usally prefer music anyway. And yes, I listen to uncensored rap music... am I a hypocrite?
Imus should not be suspended for two weeks...He should be fired for the disgusting remarks he made.
Imus was a creep, no doubt about that.
Who is incensed over Rosie and her mouth? She denigrates our country, Great Britain, IMHO, and gives fodder to to the enemy.
So, where are the feminists now? Shouldn't they be jumping on the NAACP bandwagon and demanding Imus' head? Why are they quiet? After all, the rotten remark Imus made was also SEXIST!
When I can understand them, rappers say worse about their own 'sisters'. Why aren't Sharpton and Jackson and the other black talking heads demanding that their record contracts be torn up and their records banned from the airwaves?
How come films that have black or Hispanic characters portraying the gangsta element speaking deplorable and offensive dialogue are not picketed and the two 'reverends' demanding their films be withdrawn from theaters?
Thre is a double standard for sure. The blacks have one that says anything THEY say, and the accent they use is okay...but woe to anyone else who does the same.
ABC should get rid of Rosie. She offends more viewers than Imus any day.
One thing in Imus' favor...he hasn't checked into rehab yet!
Please don't bother throwing a bomb thru my window...I'm not defending Imus. Just asking why there is a double standard and why the NAACP and Rutger's can DEMAND that Imus be fired?
Imus makes so much friggen money for the company he works for that they aint going to fire him over this latest in a long line of social insults. Just like the company that the other piece of shit DJ Howard Stern works for isn't going to fire him for the disgusting and insulting stuff he does every day on America's airwaves (now via satelite. Stern has been fired before only to go to the next station group and double the money he and the stations make.
This kind of stuff only makes the ratings go up. Meanwhile Imus is taking a two week paid vacation that he may very well have had planned anyway. The two week "suspension" is just so much mush to placate the Blacks and liberals.
These guys are known as "Shock Jocks" after all. Insulting people and doing outrageous stuff is there stock in trade. If I am not mistaken they insult anybody and every body. They rank on all politicians and even each other. They are sort of equal opportunity flamers, no politician or famous person that is stupid or disingenuous gets a free pass with these guys - and gals. Yes there are women in this WFC style radio world as well.
Imus is about money, big money. His company will spread a little of it around to those insulted, grease that horrid Al Sharpton's greedy palm, and every thing will be peaches and cream before you know it.
Maybe our home gal will pick up a few bucks to make the stupid insults a little more palatable. I am sure there have been other idiots that have insulted her and she didn't get jack shit for recompense.
Hey, if it weren't for this dick head Imus our home gal wouldn't a got on National TeeVee! I'm proud of her too.
jason w,
You're absolutely right they are not letting up.
All one has to do is look at the wording in the proposed Mixed Use and Sensitive Overlay ordinances that the administration is trying to push through via greg montgomery. The two documents are obviously written with more in mind than their stated objectives.
I once thought that greg had Ogden's best interests at heart. He played a major role in crafting our original general plan that's a great document. But he's lost all of my respect as I see him destroying all of the good things that he worked so hard for over the years. It's sad to think this is how he chose to be remembered, as the guy that threw away 20 plus years of work.
People need to get involved with regards to these two documents and with regards to the Mt. Ogden Community Plan. Please let your thoughts be known because this fight is a long way from being over.
Dan....I'd be grateful for the 'pork' and use the money as you are doing!
Ozboy...When Stern goes to each new station..he more than doubles his money!
When thinking of Sharpton...(not a paragon of virtue) can anyone say "Tawana"???? Who's calling the kettle black or something like that?
Curm - I am no apologist for Rep. Bishop BUT, are we to believe that these were ALL R E P U B L I C A N earmarks????
Let me see now - Mr. Imus (a person I admittedly dislike) says what he did and he should be fired BUT, recording studios (including CBS and NBC) make MILLIONS off of this language (and worse) and that is ok?? And for Al Sharpton (after what he has done) of all people to lead the charge...well, that does not say much for us as a people - or does it!
Sharon:
People like Imus and Stern and OReilly and Rush Limpaw get away with spouting their racist and sexist idiocy because people, by the millions, tune them in to hear them do it. If only a handful tuned in to hear Imus go after college women basketball players or to hear Rush Limpaw announce on his coast to coast radio show that the then teenaged Chelsea Clinton was "ugly," they'd be off the air lickety split. All that happens is the controversies bring them more listeners.
It's kind of like complaining about the legislature or the Congress. They do what they do because we keep on electing them more or less automatically most of the time. We stop doing that, things might change some. We stopped listening and tuning in, the shock jocks and in-your-face "talk" shows [think Beck just for openers] would disappear pretty quick.
We get the "entertainment" we want to see and hear, for the most part.
Good Lord, Curm,
WHAT do you watch? Do you watch Katie Couric? Matt Lauer?
I listen to Rush...he's an entertainer, for heaven's sake! I listen to Bill O'Reilly...he backs up his statements with facts...and if he goes ballistic over judges who don't jail child rapists and let them off....what's wrong with that?
I don't see Al Franken doing much good for the country.
I was born in MN...sure hope my relatives there don't vote that jerk into the Senate.
You keep blatehring about Republicans....what do you say about Pelosi's little trip to the Mid East? Shameful.
Sharon:
I don't know who Matt Lauer is. I don't watch Katie Couric. Mr. Limpaw [confessed drug addict as I recall] does not excuse his racist and bullying rants [calling a president's 15 year old daughter "ugly" on coast to coast radio for example --- classy guy] anymore than Imus calling his show a comedy show did. Al Franken's show [which I did not listen to] was as much, or as little, a comedy show [actually a mixture of comedy, satire and commentary as I understand it] as Limpaw's. Not much difference between them. Except I'm not aware that Franken used his national talk show to call a president's teen aged daughter ugly on the air.
As for OReilly backs up his rants with facts... well, the fact-checker websites devote a lot of their time to identifying flatly false statements of fact made frequently on the OReilly show. And no, when errors are pointed out... which they are, often... he usually does not correct them on air. But he is getting better. So far as I know, he hasn't sexually harassed and stalked a female aide and had to settle out of court recently. So maybe the Falafel King is mending his ways. Just a family values kinda guy, I guess.
Pelosi's trip shameful? Then of course you thought DeLay's trip to South America during Clinton's term during which he directly contradicted the Clinton foreign policy was OK? And New Gingrich's trip to China during Clinton's term on his own and without White House approval was shameful too? And the five man Republican congressional delegation that visited Syria and Assad the week before Pelosi went was reprehensible too? And the trip by the Republican congressman who visited Assad the day after Pelosi was there was shameful as well? And Republican criticism of the President Clinton's policy when American troops were in combat in Bosnia, that was reprehensible too?
Sharon, Presidents and Congresses have been contesting foreign policy matters since Washington's first administration. Presidents have insisted they have sole responsibility for foreign affairs [as Washington claimed] and Congress has insisted that as the co-equal branch of the national government it has shared responsibility. Nothing new. Seems to me you only find it "shameful" when its a Democratic congressperson travelling without the approval of a Republican president. But I could be wrong. Maybe you were criticizing Republican congressmen who attacked the President when American troops were fighting in Bosnia as "aiding the enemey." Maybe you did attack DeLay and Gingrich for their foreign policy trips and intervenetions as shameful when Cltinton was in office. I wasn't here then, so I don't know for sure.
Not to mention the fact that the Republican congressman along with Pelosi... yes, she took members of both parties with her... attested that in her conversations with Assad and the Syrian government she reiterated the American government's [Bush's] stances on all matters that came up. On all matters. Not my report, the report of the Republican congressman who went along.
Sadly, Sharon, you seem to be getting your "facts" [politely so called] from OReilly. That's about as wise as getting your "facts" from Rush Limppaw, as Sen. Hatch found out last week when he had to retract and apologize for a good deal of what he said on the Sunday Talk shows [in re: the removed federal prosecutor Ms. Lam] when all of it... all of it... turned out to be completely untrue. [It was reported in the Salt Lake papers. Surely you saw it.]
That happens a lot when you get your facts from right wing talk radio.
Curmugeon
American troops in Bosnia? I thought we just lobbed a few bombs at them. I may be wrong as I don't listen to Limpaw, Hannity or O'Reilly. I find them all to be loud mouth bores and bullies.
I do recall the fighter pilot from Hill Field that got shot down over there and was rescued by some American troops who choppered in for the occasion, but troops on the ground? Please enlighten me on this one.
And Sharon, keep it up girl you add a lot to the Emerald City dialogue and you call it like it is most of the time - even if you do like those nut case loud mouths on the radio.
Ozboy, suh
My honor has not been so gallantly defended since Mr. Rhett Butler squired me to the Cotillion.
Mr. Curmudgeon is taking liberties again. I usually think for myself...and then when I watch O'Reilly or listen to Rush...I can say...'hey...I just said that!'
Methinks that Mr. Curm listens to those rightwingers too...else how could he know how WRONG O'Reilly is?
Curm - If you really believe LimBAUGH and O'Reilly are racists, then you had better dig much deeper into their lives!
Curm, if your girlfriend, Nancy, 'reiterated' Bush's policy...then why did she go?
Condi Rice is our Secretary of State!
Perhaps you could help your girlfriend and HER boyfriend, Reid, on how this all supposed to work?
BTW...Chelsea was descibed as a 'spaniel' by someone back in the day...not Rush. AND,Chelsea, tho a 'very sweet spirit', and is even lovlier now...was ugly!
If you think Imus is bad (no argument here)...try deciphering what the rappers have to say about their women...killing po leece and such things.
If you really want to get an ear full of racial hate and outright advocacy of violence against a racial class, just tune into some of these hate filled black programs that feature Louis Farrakan and his teachings. It makes this dim witted stuff that Imus said look like a Sunday school lesson.
I wonder where Sharpton is with this stuff? Why isn't he trying to extort Farrakan for stoking the flames of racial tension?
Why isn't going after all the record companies and radio stations that spew forth a steady stream of contempt for blacks and whites from the filthy and bigoted mouths of these rap artists?
How can Snoop Dog, a convicted druggy and pistol packing rapper get a slap on the hand for one more felony arrest? This guy has denegrated more black women with the "ho" moniker than all of the shock jocks combined.
How come all these cry babies and extortionists are not mentioning how Imus raised $50 million for charity last week, and is apparently closing in on $100 million? That is one hell of a lot more money than this disgusting idiot Sharpton has ever raised for the underpreviledged in our country.
I'm not excusing the stupid remark Imus made, but come on, just where is the fairness in all this furor?
And Curmudgeon, I'm still curious about the American troops in Bosnia?
Yes, Ozboy, and Imus and his wife, Deidre, actually have a 'working' ranch for the cancer stricken kids. They eat together and the kids have chores. MANY of the children beg to live with the Imus's rather than be sent home.
For many of these little kids...this is the only structure and happiness they have in their chaotic lives.
Kudos to Don and Diedre for their unselfish humanitarian works.
I'm with you, Ozboy...why aren't black so-called leaders 'calling out' as Sharpton likes to say, these foul mouthed and venom spewing folks of their own color?
God bless Bill Cosby who attempts to make a difference and then so many of the ignorant castigate HIM instead of trying to elevate the status of the 'ghetto' minded youth.
Sharon:
You asked: why aren't black so-called leaders 'calling out' as Sharpton likes to say, these foul mouthed and venom spewing folks of their own color?
Just FYI, Sharpton [and Jesse Jackson] have repeatedly condemned black rappers for their lyrics involving both race and women. And both did so again this last week, on TV, when discussing the Imus matter.
So, by the way, did black newsmen and women and black academics who were interviewed on a variety of shows discussing Imus.
Imus made his reputation [and his money] primarily as a shock-jock, saying things considered by many to be outrageous, and profiting handsomely from the reactions he got among listeners and guests. Hey, he's in show business. But he's hardly in a position now to complain about the consequences of his having, in the opinion of enough people to scare his TV sponsors [and possibly his radio sponsors] off, gone too far. His whining now -- and he's started to indulge himself in that and to describe himself as a victim -- is not unlike Paris Hilton complaining about the paparazzi. Or a porn star complaining that people don't respect her privacy.
Imus makes his living via notoriety. He can hardly complain if his notoriety is now working against him.
No one is defending Imus, Curm. Sharpton has said that he has 'called out' rappers. But, tell me...have the good reverends and the black talking heads forced any record label to tear up the contracts of those foul mouthed gangstas?
I haven't heard of that happening. Talk is cheap...except when a jerk like Imus 'talks badly' and then it costs plenty.
Also, why is the Ogdenite Rutgers woman saying that Imus' remark 'has taken all the joy' out of her accomplishments?
Shame on her! A REMARK can negate her remarkable college career?
Since when is it okay to spawn a bunch of victims? The Rutgers coach should have told her players that Imus is a creep and for them to remember who THEY are, what they've accomplished and what they will continue to accomplish throughout their lives. Instead, the coach helps them to be helpless ANGRY 'offended' young women, who just can't have a good life with that bad white man saying those bad things about them.
Bull! I've been called names...been denigrated for my beliefs, and for the stand I take.
So what?
I bet a lot of you have also. The remarks from small minded people do not define ME...and even tho attempts are made to marginalize me...I know who I am.
I am not the sum total of bad press.
Colleges should teach young people to go out and conquer the world with talent and integrity. Not encourage them to be whiners and cowards.
I'm so sick of people being 'offended'. I've never heard the word so over used as in Utah...'oh, I am SO offended!'.
Get over it.
BTW...go back and read the racist remarks from Sharpton and Jackson! N....., many times...sick of the holocaust...hymies...etc, etc.
Sharon:
You asked: Sharpton has said that he has 'called out' rappers. But, tell me...have the good reverends and the black talking heads forced any record label to tear up the contracts of those foul mouthed gangstas?
What got Imus canned was this: by today, the number of advertisers pulling their ads from his show had hit three figures, and was still climbing. That's what got CBS to pull the plug. If he had not lost over 100 advertisers with more to follow, he'd have done his two weeks and been back on as usual. I don't know anyone who thinks Al Sharpton got him fired [though the Rev. Sharpton would very much like people to think he did.]
Imus was a celebrity. When association with him, because of his actions became an embarassment or economically not-wise for his advertisers, they pulled out. At which point, CBS which had until the advertisers fled thought a two week furlough would be enough, climbed on its Ethics High Horse and made its statement saying it fired him out of concern for the youth of America. Right. And the Great Pumpkin every Easter visits the most sincere pumpkin patch in the land, just like Linus says. [I note that Imus has been making "jokes" about race, gays, women, etc for a very long time. But so long as he kept generating advertising revenues, CBS left him alone. When the advertisers jumped ship, CBS pulled the plug. The market at work.]
He was in show biz, Sharon, and he screwed up so badly that the very celebrity for which he had been paid handsomely turned against him. He has nobody to blame but himself.
A hundred bucks says that after the smoke clears Imus will be back bigger and richer than ever. If it isn't on CBS it will be on a competitor. The radio world isn't going to walk away from the proven twenty million dollars per year that he generates. All of this big to do has only exposed him to a bigger audience.
Imus is playing a very smart PR game, the offended ladies have apparently forgiven him and so will the spineless sponsors and broadcasters.
Amen, Brother Ozboy....Imus brings in more money that a dog food manufacturer.
Both are 'stinky'....but smart boys know not to close them down.
I imagine there is a lot of second guessing in some corporate offices over the firing of Imus.
You make a good point OB...MORE audience for Imus now!
Oz:
Over a hundred sponsors pulled their ads by the morning of the day CBS fired him. Absent major and many sponsors, he cannot generate 20 million a year in revenues for the network, or anything like it. He may still be able to generate listerner numbers, but if the advertisers figure they can't be associated with him, it won't matter. The show won't generate big bucks for the network that might hire him. I notice that until the 100 plus advertisers bailed, CBS thought a two week furlough was enough. Only when the money dried up did they can him. I doubt deep pockets advertisers will be back for him any time soon.
He may well get back into radio, but I doubt it will be on any of the major networks like NBC, ABC or CBS radio. Not if he can't bring advertising millions along with him, and right now, he can't.
The whole thing would have blown over if the bigwigs hadn't capitulated to the rants of the black talking heads.
A slap on the wrist...a hefty fine...a two week suspension...a chunk into Sharpton's charity, if he has one besides himself...and bingo..Mr Imus would be baaaack!
Maybe he'll end up next to Howard Stern?
Methinks:
Sorry, but the notion that all the complaining came from "black talking heads" won't stand up on the evidence. The criticism of his appalling comments came from all across the racial and ethnic spectrum. Nor did Al Sharpton get Imus fired [though I am absolutly certain Mr. Sharpton would be delighted for people to believe your suggestion that he did.]
Having only seen the Imus show, or parts of it [fifteen minutes or so], twice [and having found it pretty dull stuff both times], from my POV losing Imus is not much of a loss anyway. Clearly, millions of listeners disagree about that. But just as clearly, millions [including all races] found his comments way over the line of common decency. They didn't represent "hard hitting radio commentary." They represented only thuggery and bullying. Next time, maybe that fatuous lump of ego will pick on someone his own size. But I doubt it.
The appeal of Howard Stern also escapes me. I saw a simulcast of his show twice, again about fifteen minutes each time. He spent most of the time trying to talk women guests into baring their breasts. Now I concede, that might have a certain appeal for the audience of the playboy channel. But I'll be damned if I can figure out the appeal of listening to him do that [even successfully] on the radio day after day.
Well Curmudgeon
It is a little late to post on this thread, but here goes.
Stern has been fired for misconduct on the air on a number of ocassions, both he and the radio stations he has been on have been fined millions for breaches of FCC laws. Sponsors have pulled out on him to the tune of millions each time.
And.......each and every time he has come back bigger and stronger with more listeners and more millions.
So a hundred sponsors pulled out on Imus. There are thousands more waiting to take their place. Even the hundreds that succumbed to the black talking heads will be back in large numbers once the furror dies down. And yes, it was the so called "black leaders" that forced this issue. Ya, I know a bunch of other lilly livered white talkers jumped on the band wagon, but none of them would have made this happen without the black extortionists leading the parade. Yes, extortionists! Every time some idiot celebrity spouts off about something black, Sharpton and Jackson become the official face of the black race and stir it up until they are paid off. They rake in big time dough from the moronic ramablings of stupid assed rich white folks. The common black person never sees a penny of this extortion. They take the abuse and these phony so called leaders rake in the millions!
This fiasco with Imus is all about ears to speakers and eye balls to screens. Imus delivers big numbers and will now produce even more. It is all about numbers and dollars, Imus brings both to sponsors. It is the very rare sponsor indeed that truly has a social concience about stuff like this. They are much more concerned about next quarters profit numbers than they are about a bunch of College girls and their hurt feelings. College girls incidently who are being taught the benefits of being victims of dick heads like Imus.
At least we can agree that Imus and Stern are dick heads, can't we? I hate to go cynical on you Curm, I know that kind of stuff jars your dreamy perception of the world we live in, but its all about money my friend. Nothing more, nothing less.
Post a Comment