PAWaterCooler.com

Without question, Avalon is one of the best beach towns on the South Jersey coast. Jutting a mile further out in the Atlantic than other shore points, its cool ocean breezes and pristine beaches make for a fantastic family vacation.

That is, unless you happen to cross the Avalon Beach Patrol, who seem to relish acting like storm-troopers.

A case earlier this month illustrates just how out-of-control the Beach Patrol — and by extension, Avalon itself— has become.

As is the case with most shore towns, beach tags are required. This policy has long irked the vast majority of beach-goers, who believe they more than pay the cost of beach preservation by the many taxes and fees levied on them.  And they also believe, not unjustifiably, that the beach belongs to everyone, and no one should have to pay to use it.

Disdain aside, most comply.  Incredibly, though, that wasn’t good enough for the Avalon Patrol.

Most days, beach tag inspectors guard the entrances to beaches, checking to ensure that beachgoers have tags.

On a recent weekend, a woman with three young children — including one with a broken arm — was entering the beach. Asked for her tags, she informed the 14-year old inspector that her husband had them on the loaded beach cart. He was 50 feet behind her, in clear view. The woman’s two youngest then sprinted to an open spot near the life-guard stand, where they always set up camp for the day.

No problem, since the woman and her husband had seasonal tags — just as they had for the past 11 years.

Or so it seemed.

As the husband approached, he showed his tag, and started onto the beach.  The checker asked if he was with “that other woman.” Having no clue to what she was referring, he inquired what she meant. After discerning it was his wife, he showed the second tag (children under 12 do not need tags).

He had no issue showing the beach tags at the entry point, but stated his frustration over continually getting harassed throughout the day by teams of roving tag inspectors. These teams work the beaches, routinely awakening people, interrupting conversations and even demanding swimmers leave the water to show tags (many people have their tags affixed to bags or chairs.)

The point the man was making was simple.   Logic dictates that if tags are inspected upon entry, then inspectors walking the beaches aren’t necessary.

At that point, the inspector snapped, “That’s enough out of you.  Keep quiet. I don’t want to hear another word.”  This, from a 14 year old girl!

That attitude should be grounds for dismissal for any employee, but for a minor to speak to an adult in that manner is utterly unacceptable. This fresh-mouthed child was completely out of line as a representative of Avalon.

The man asked who she thought she was to speak to anyone like that, whereupon she made a beeline to the lifeguard stand and reported that someone actually had the “gall” to speak back to her.

Within minutes, four guards showed up in trucks, and began interrogating the husband and wife, while Little Miss Personality was high-fiving one of the lifeguards.

The Lieutenant — yes, they take that army title way too seriously — then proceeded to demand answers from the man, asking, “Do you think it was right to talk to a 14-year old girl like that?  That’s harassment!”

The man replied that the Lieutenant had not been there, took the word of one of his own as gospel, and didn’t even ask what had actually occurred.  So much for due process.

At this point, the Lieutenant’s “backup” — a Captain, and obviously the real brains of the group — stated that he could have the man “arrested for harassment.”

How so?  Because the husband had his arms folded while he was talking.  This, he was told, “…was harassment.  It’s a defensive posture, and I know about these things, because I deal with bad people like you all the time.”

How’s that for incoherence?

The end result was that the wife was issued a citation for $80.  The “crime?”  Failure to have beach tags.

Even though she had a seasonal tag.

Go figure.

And the icing on the cake?…..

Read the rest at Philadelphia Magazine:

http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2010/08/31/vacation-in-avalon-think-twice/

Chris Freind is an independent columnist and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com

Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick Morris’ recent bestseller “Catastrophe.”

Freind also serves as a weekly guest commentator on the Philadelphia-area talk radio show, Political Talk (WCHE 1520), and makes numerous other television and radio appearances.  He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Join the discussion or Share This...

Faced with a budget crisis of his own making (with implicit collaboration /leadership from Joe Hoeffel), Jim Matthews is looking for politically expedient ways to get Montco out the mess and still get re-elected. Peggy Gibbons has the story at The Intelligencer:

“What we are looking for over the next several months is ideas, solid ideas,” said Matthews. “What is not tolerable is second guessing after the fact. That is not helpful to anyone.”

How to pass a tax increase to pay for your cronyism without making it look like you are passing a tax increase to pay for your cronyism? Crony Jim Maza, who makes $90,000 a year in his capacity as a part time county employee, has an idea:

If the county labeled the tax a “public safety” tax, most would not object to paying higher taxes, said Deputy Chief Operating Officer James W. Maza. But when it is listed as just a tax increase for government, most would object “because they think government is a waste,” said Maza.

As usual, Commissioner Bruce Castor is being especially “unhelpful” in solving Matthews’ and Hoeffel’s image problem caused by the budget crisis, caused by they themselves:

While Republicans across the country snapped to attention when the economy collapsed and realized our country could not spend its way to prosperity, and that the times called for austerity, Jim Matthews teamed up with Joe Hoeffel to oversee a massive expansion of our county government spending fueled by borrowed dollars.

Sound familiar? Sounds a lot like the way Barack Obama is running the Federal Government. Flashback to the 1990s, a time I referred to during the 2007 campaign as “Hoeffel I.” We find ourselves in exactly the same place we were when Hoeffel was commissioner before: broke. You see, in the 1990s, Hoeffel pushed the sham “bipartisan” government against the wishes of the voters and the result was a disaster. In fact, when Jim Matthews announced his run for Commissioner in 1999, he said he was running to oust the “traitor” who aligned himself with Democrat Hoeffel to bring the county to the brink of financial ruin. Ironic, isn’t it? In 2007, I said we couldn’t afford “Hoeffel I” and we can’t afford “Hoeffel II.” Well, thanks to Jim Matthews, we got “Hoeffel II.” And the results, predictably, were the same. Some say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Welcome to the asylum.

My guess is that a new “public safety tax,” will indeed be coming to your Montgomery County household soon.

Email LisaMossie, Join the discussion or Share This...

            Much has been made about the new “Blogger Tax” that Philadelphia has put in place recently. Many people have stated how this tax is malicious in the fact that typically this tax is taking 6x’s the amount of money that any person has made from their individual blog. What’s also been said is how this is just another way to show how a city that is incapable of creating anything even remotely looking like a balanced budget is just trying to figure out how to shake more money loose from people’s pockets, just like a bully in your old school yard from when we were kids.

            What most people are not recognizing though is that this isn’t about money. This isn’t about taxes. This isn’t about trying to balance a budget or receiving the proper tax money that the city feels entitled and owed. This is about control.

            Anyone that has ever experienced the wrath of a bully, like myself (I mean seriously people…how could I not with a name like Ian), knows that the point of what a bully is doing to you has nothing to do with your lunch money, or wanting to really hear you scream Uncle when your arm is wrenched behind your back, or calls you names in front of the whole school to make people laugh at you. The whole point of what a bully does is to make you dance to their tune and do as he says. He wants to flex his muscles and hurt you because he can, and because it gives him power over someone that he believes is weak or powerless to stop them. Control. “I can make you do what I want and there’s nothing you can do to stop me!” That’s the credo and mantra of the bully clan, and Philadelphia just showed its true colors.

            When you decide that the voice of another person is somehow subjected to an erroneous and outrageous fee on their thoughts and words, you’re doing this not to collect the maybe couple of thousands of dollars that a city could make from such a tax, but to specifically target those individuals that have the courage to make their voices heard and speak against the wrongs of an out-of-control government. It doesn’t matter what side of the aisle that the voice speaks from, the point is to shut them up or make them pay. What do you think is the likelihood that a stay-at-home mom with no extra income, and certainly none made from her blog, is going to do when the city comes along and tells her that you need to pay us $300 right now or cease and desist speaking your mind. She’s going to stop speaking her mind, and the bully will have won. This is the government version of “Gimme your lunch money or I will punch you in the face!”

             Whether this is a local borough, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the US Federal government, the City of Philadelphia, or a big dumb jerk in the playground, a bully is still a bully.

              In my younger days, when I was a small, four-eyed, scrawny little kid, I was at the mercy of these types of bullies at first. Mine was a boy by the name of Scott. After a while though, there’s only so much pain, fear, and teasing a boy can take. It wasn’t until I stood up to Scott one day on a spring morning in 4^th-grade and fought back that the teasing stopped. Sure I lost that fight, after all he was bigger and stronger than me, but it was from that moment forward that the veil of fear was lifted from him and everyone saw that even a little pipsqueak like me could make a bully bleed. Once that happens, a bully becomes nothing. A bully becomes something to have contempt and pity for, not fear.

             This is Philadelphia’s version of the bully wrenching your arm and telling you to scream Uncle. We need to stand against this intimidation, all of us who write on the web and have people who read us. We need to focus our attention on the City of Brotherly Love, like that fits right now or has for years, and verbally punch the bully in the face and make him bleed. Once that happens, he will lose all the power of a mean boy on the playground and become what he really is, a pitiful child with no self-control and something that we “Little Pipsqueak’s” should not tolerate any longer.

Email Ian Hayes, Start the discussion or Share This...

There’s good news and bad news.

First, the bad.  As we all know, there just aren’t enough places to play skee-ball in Mount Holly, New Jersey.

Which just ain’t right.

But fear not. The good news rights that wrong.

I have found the perfect location for skee ball this side of Steel Pier.

Unfortunately for Mount Holly Mayor Tom Gibson, that location happens to be where his house now sits.

Hey, stuff happens. 

All that remains to be done is grease the political skids and file the paperwork required to seize Gibby’s house through eminent domain. 

Isn’t it great when the government can take private property in order to….develop more profitable private property?  What a country!

*****

In 2003, Mount Holly Township unveiled its plan to take —or “purchase,” as it is known in eminent domain parlance — the 350 homes in the Mount Holly Gardens housing complex so that 25 acres of land could be turned into a housing and commercial complex.

The plan?  Build 292 townhouses (costing roughly $225,000 each), 228 multifamily apartments and 54,000 square feet of commercial space.

And they even have a cute name for the redevelopment:  the Village at Parker’s Mill. You have to admit that sounds better than Mount Holly Gardens.

Residents of the Gardens have had appraisal inspections conducted on their properties so that “negotiations” can soon begin on the final price the government will pay the homeowners. But regardless of the price, the residents will be far worse off than they are now.

Fancy names, nice houses and new stores…is this all that’s necessary to invoke eminent domain and destroy people’s lives?  How is it that we’ve given politicians eager for a 30-second sound bite the power to dictate who stays, and who goes?

Is this the new Amerika?

Sadly, the answer is yes.

*****

In 2005, ruling on what many consider the worst U.S. Supreme Court decision in history, five mind-numbingly obtuse Justices decided that citizens’ land could be taken by the government for private economic development, even if those properties were not in areas of blight or decay.

The criteria?  When local or state officials think the public would benefit.

Whatever that means.

Forget the original intent of eminent domain, which actually had the public’s best interest in mind when considering public projects, such as utilities, railroads and highways. 

It seems those things, while necessary, just weren’t sexy enough for today’s pols.

Where’s the fun in just building a road when you can construct a mall with all the perks that come with being Mayor or Councilman in that location?

So when houses are bulldozed to make way for a plush private golf course — and wealthy duffers happen to line the campaign pockets of politicians who decide such matters— is that in the public’s interest?

As then-Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote in her dissent to the eminent domain decision, the “specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory.”

In other words, the rich and powerful get….

Read the rest at Philly Mag and post a comment:

http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2010/08/10/can-greedy-politicians-throw-you-out-of-your-house/

Chris Freind is an independent columnist and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com

Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick Morris’ recent bestseller “Catastrophe.”

Freind also serves as a weekly guest commentator on the Philadelphia-area talk radio show, Political Talk (WCHE 1520), and makes numerous other television and radio appearances.  He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Join the discussion or Share This...

In a February, 2008 media report, Delaware River Port Authority (DRPA) Vice Chairman Jeff Nash, also an elected Camden County Freeholder, ominously warned that “…the deck of the Walt Whitman (Bridge) HAD a 50-year life span….We’re at 50 years, two months.”

Two and a half years later, the decking project of the Walt Whitman has not yet begun.  Why?  Lack of money, we are told, which is in part why the Port Authority just went further into debt by borrowing $320 million.

Of course, as with all things DRPA, that’s not the whole story.

The money was there.  They just chose to ignore the bridges, instead channeling huge bucks to perks and political patronage deals.

The DRPA has squandered nearly $400 million in so-called “economic development” projects that have nothing to do with the bridges, and now finds itself more than $1.5 billion in debt.

Due to intense media scrutiny, a series of reforms have been suggested by Ed Rendell, who, as Pennsylvania Governor, appoints the DRPA Chairman.  After his election in 2002, Rendell appointed himself Chairman, and last year made his former Chief of Staff and longtime political fundraiser and confidante John Estey —a partner at Ballard Spahr, the Governor’s former firm — the Chairman.

The reforms, while noteworthy, do not resolve the immense conflicts of interest which have gone unchecked for years and still permeate the entire Authority.

Like the fox being given oversight to “guard” the henhouse, Rendell and the DRPA audaciously expect the forgotten tollpayers — on whose back the DRPA has trodden — to believe that the reforms will be effectively implemented by the very people who are knee deep in all the conflicts.

For an example, let’s look at a conflict involving Vice Chairman Nash….

Read the rest at Philly Mag:

http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2010/08/03/more-questions-and-conflicts-at-drpa/

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...

The demonization of Pennsylvania’s biggest industrial phenomenon in the last 50 years continues. This time, it’s not just hyperventilating environmentalists getting into the act, it’s gubernatorial candidate Dan Onorato (D):

First the thuggery…

Democratic gubernatorial nominee Dan Onorato says he’d pressure natural gas drilling companies to hire Pennsylvania residents by threatening to withhold state drilling permits.

snip…

Onorato says he’d be justified to use permits as leverage, arguing, “I think all governors apply pressure on every industry. The whole idea of being governor is you try to bring jobs and improve the economy of your state. We have a golden opportunity here, with the Marcellus Shale find. But we get one chance to get it right.”

The problem is, Onorato’s idea isn’t legal. “It’s not what we do,” says Governor Rendell. “And you might be able to do that, but you’d probably have to change some regulations or get some legislation.”

OK–when Ed Rendell suggests to you that something is illegal, that should be your signal to back away slowly and not make any sudden moves.

Actually, this is a real shame. I like Onorato and have even had some personal dealings with him where I thought he was both fair and open-minded. This kind of thing is, frankly, beneath him, and is exactly the kind of sleazy crap that everybody’s sick of.

Now on to the hype. The P-G never disappoints. From Saturday’s letters to the editor, we get this gem:

The Marcellus Shale drilling plans of the carpetbagger natural gas interests are going to create disasters for many Pennsylvania communities.

Our most precious water supplies are being totally put at risk. Pennsylvania politicians sit idly by, doing nothing to stop this attack upon our commonwealth.

It is not a matter if such disasters occur, but when and how many times.

The promise of economic benefit to Pennsylvanians is only a pipe dream to mollify those who think such financial gain would justify the ecological risks.

Come on, people, wake up! Get our state politicos to get with it and put a complete halt to this; otherwise thousands of Pennsylvanians will have to deal with poisoned water supplies.

This is the Silent Spring of the 2010 decade !

AH HA! AH HA!! THE MARCELLUS SHALE PEOPLE ARE POISONING OUR WATER AND AIR AND SUNSHINE! AND THEY’RE ATTACKING US! ATTACKING US WITH JOBS! WOO-HOO! WOO-HOO! I’M CUCKOO FOR COCOA PUFFS!

For the love of Pete man, calm down. Zoloft. Seriously. Like 50 mg is all you need. It’s heaven in a little pill.

What amazes me is the accusations of “carpetbagging” that are thrown at natural gas drillers. First of all, has anyone actually looked to see how many jobs are out there because of natural gas drilling? A quick search on indeed.com lists about four pages of natural-gas related jobs in Pennsylvania posted by one company in the last 30 days. And has anyone ever stopped to think about Pennsylvania’s long history of oil and gas drilling? Perhaps if we hadn’t driven all those jobs away to places like Texas, we would still have people living in Pennsylvania who know how to drill.

And finally, reason. Also from Saturday’s P-G:

The Environmental Protection Agency recently held a meeting at Southpointe in Washington County to receive public testimony on the possible negative effects of hydraulic fracturing on fresh water. I spoke and was received with a chorus of boos from the crowd because I presented a factually based argument in support of hydraulic fracturing.

Based on my own research, more than 48,000 wells have been hydraulically fractured to date in Pennsylvania. Other studies have estimated that more than 1 million wells have been fracked throughout the United States since 1960. Yet not one case of fresh water pollution by hydraulic fracturing has been documented. This is a large enough database to conclude that it is highly unlikely that any future contamination will occur.

Physics also dictates that fractures created at depth do not reach the water table, which has been verified in lab and field tests. Upward growth of induced fractures cannot reach above about 2,000 feet in depth — approximately 1,500 feet below the deepest fresh water. Below 2,000 feet, fractures in the Appalachian Basin for geological reasons are propagated vertically in a general northeast-southwest direction. Above 2,000 feet, the basin’s geological characteristics stop fractures by forcing them to move horizontally.

It is physically impossible to force a vertical fracture upward from the Marcellus Shale to shallow fresh water layers. And no matter how hard anti-Marcellus zealots try to connect hydraulic fracturing to the contamination of fresh water, they won’t be able to do so unless they repeal the laws of physics.

GREGORY WRIGHTSTONE
McCandless
The writer is a petroleum geologist

Holy crap! These are actual facts based on real science articulated by someone who has a background in the subject! Sanity–so refreshing ™.

As an aside, I’ve met Greg Wrightstone, and he is a terrific guy. He heads up an organization called the Pennsylvania Coalition for Responsible Government. Check it out.

Email Fred Mullner, Start the discussion or Share This...

Oh the hypocrisy.

Ever since Arizona passed its controversial law allowing police to check a suspect’s immigration status, the federal government had been intimating that it would file suit to stop the measure. 

Which it finally did.  (Although, in a moment of utter embarrassment, Attorney General Eric Holder testified of his intention to file suit despite his admission that he’d NEVER READ the ten page Arizona law!) 

And the results of the lawsuit?  Wholly predictable.

The Right is furious, the Left satiated, and, as always, common sense people are still out in the cold.

Fact is, the Arizona law, signed by a Republican Governor and a red-meat issue to the GOP base, is 100% meaningless.  Beyond providing fiery agenda-driven rhetoric — for both sides —, it’s just the latest futile attempt to solve America’s out-of-control illegal invader problem.

Why the hypocrisy? Because instead of focusing on the real issues, like building a border wall and cracking down on employers who hire illegals, the Administration is trying to score political points by hoping the Republican position alienates Latino voters.

If Obama and the Congress were really concerned about reigning in a state for doing its own thing — against the wishes of the federal government —perhaps a better lawsuit would be one against those who are in flagrant violation of federation immigration law. After all, these states are the biggest obstacle to sound immigration policy.

New Mexico would be a good start.

*****

After we get through the white noise of Arizona’s law being one that harasses the good illegals who have broken America’s laws to get here, or conversely, that such a measure is mandatory to protect our citizens from the invaders, it would be nice to stop and actually ask the most basic question:

How, exactly, are the police supposed to check the immigration status of people they suspect are in the country illegally? What document proving citizenship will they be seeking?

There is no national ID card, and probably about six people nationwide even know where their Social Security card is, so, for the most part, that leaves the driver’s license.

Granted, not everyone drives, but it would be a good starting place. 

Well, except for one small thing.

Several states still issue drivers licenses to illegal invaders.  States like….New Mexico, which just so happens to border Arizona.

(This practice does not comply with Federal Real ID Act requirements.  The Act mandates that, in order for a license to be recognized by the U.S. Government, states may issue licenses only after determining “proof of identity and lawful status of an applicant” and “verification of the source documents provided by an applicant.”)

So when Juan Valdez is pulled over for a traffic stop, on suspicion that he is an illegal, he will be required to prove his status as a citizen or legal immigrant.

As he whips out his license from New Mexico, Utah or Washington, or any of the eight other states that until recently issued licenses to known illegals, along with car insurance (because you can’t get car insurance without a license), a sly smile will creep across his face. There will be no deportation this night.  God Bless America!

Of course, it doesn’t stop with licenses….

Read more at Philly Mag’s Philly Post and post a comment:

http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2010/07/27/arizonas-immigration-law-well-intentioned-but-meaningless/

About Chris Freind:

Chris Freind is an independent columnist and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com

Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick Morris’ recent bestseller “Catastrophe.”

Freind also serves as a weekly guest commentator on the Philadelphia-area talk radio show, Political Talk (WCHE 1520), and makes numerous other television and radio appearances.  He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...

(h/t Micek)

Please, oh please, let the Democrats try to introduce a “jobs” bill.

Gov Ed was on Hardball recently discussing the Democrats’ chances in the fall elections.  There’s a lot of typical garbage in this clip, but I want to focus on two things: (1) The battle plan, and (2) Ed’s suggestion of a jobs bill.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The battle plan is to hit Republicans with…

(A) Republican opposition to Obama’s agreement with BP. (GOP is in bed with big oil.)

(B) Republicans opposed FinReg. (GOP in bed with Wall Street.), and

(C) Republicans opposed extending unemployment benefits (again). (GOP out of touch/uncaring.)

And the coup de grâce, Ed’s suggestion of a jobs bill, that if the Republicans don’t want to vote for, the Donks can “hang it around their necks”.

Ed may or may not be right (from an optics/political perspective) about the first three items.  (He is most assuredly wrong about the substance.)  So that’s an FYI to campaign staff as to what’s coming their way.  I’m not entirely sure what Ed means by the BP agreement though I can’t think of a single thing the White House did right with respect to the Gulf incident.  FinReg can be spun as (1) a job killer that harms credit availability, (2) a permanent bailout bill, and that (3) it didn’t fix any problems (past, present, or future) that have anything to do with preventing a financial crisis.  The unemployment thing was probably a political loser, I hate to say.

But oh, please, let the Democrats introduce a “jobs bill”.  The prospect gives me a thrill up my leg, so to speak.

Ed’s right that voters will care more about jobs than about the deficit.  But the GOP is very much winning the war as to whether government stimulus works.  If the “jobs” bill is anything other than a Lindsey-style payroll tax holiday, Republicans will be more than happy to shoot it down as just more-of-the-same pork spending that didn’t work before and probably made things worse.

It’s not enough that voters care more about jobs than the deficit — they have to think that what the “jobs bill” will actually accomplish something.  With all the more that government has to show for its previous stimuli, that’s gonna be a tough sell.

Email Joe Collins, Join the other 2 commenters or Share This...

 Governor Christie:

Political courage.

That is the description you have earned as Governor.  And for good reason.

You have successfully confronted the most powerful special interests in the state, sending a message that there are no sacred cows. In doing so, to the pleasant surprise of millions, the entrenched “business as usual” crowd is finally on the run.

In that regard, I want to discuss what is perhaps the most patronage-laden and inefficient entity in the state — the Delaware River Port Authority.

As you are aware, the contract of Authority Chief Executive John Matheussen expired July 17. While he is still functioning month-to-month as the CEO, his future rests with you.

There has been much coverage devoted to the largesse of the DRPA, specifically the $400 million in “economic development” funds that were spent on everything under the sun — except the bridges — leading to massive debt and rising tolls.

In addition to the misuse of the people’s money, there are a number of other factors to consider when deciding whether Mr. Matheussen’s contract should be renewed by the Board and approved by you.

Following are several examples of John Matheussen’s failed leadership:

1) Permitted Immense Conflicts Of Interest

Without question, Matheussen’s greatest failing is his toleration of the unfettered conflicts of interest that permeate the DRPA Board.

Upon assuming office in 2002, Governor Rendell appointed himself Chairman of the DRPA. One of the major beneficiaries has been his former firm, Ballard Spahr. In the three years preceding Rendell’s election, Ballard received $25,000 in legal fees from the Port Authority, including only $480 in 2001. From 2002 until the 2009, Ballard has received over $2.7 million.

Ballard, its attorneys and associated entities have contributed $1.5 million to Rendell’s campaigns.

Two of the governor’s former top aides, John Estey, his former chief of staff and Adrian King, his former deputy chief of staff, are currently partners at Ballard, and both hold or have held influential positions related to DRPA.

Estey has chaired virtually every Board meeting since 2002, and Mr. King served as the Authority’s Outside Counsel. Mr. Estey and Mr. King are brothers-in-law, and together have contributed over $35,000 to Mr. Rendell’s political coffers.

Former Pennsylvania Treasurer Robin Wiessmann, who had been a Rendell appointee, sits on the DRPA Board. Her husband, Ken Jarin, also a partner at Ballard, served as DRPA Outside Counsel and occasionally chaired board meetings

Incomprehensibly, Matheussen never raised an eyebrow when Estey, King, Jarin, and Wiessmann voted to “accept and receive” Ballard’s legal bills to DRPA, since that action amounted to money going into their law firm’s pocket, and, ultimately their own.

As you know better than most, Governor, the toughest challenge of being a leader is to buck the crowd and do the right thing, no matter how difficult.  But instead of illustrating that trait, John Matheussen was an instrumental part of the go-along, get along crowd — to the detriment of all but the insiders

2) The Campaign Finance Report Conflict Of DRPA Executive John Rogale ….

(Read More at Philadelphia Magazine: Comments welcome)

http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2010/07/21/its-time-to-clean-house-at-the-drpa/

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...

The cries are getting louder.                                   

Despite their sweep of the Reds before the All Star break, the Phillies are still in third place, 4 1/2 games behind the Braves, with the trade of Cliff Lee last year looking more dubious by the day.

The criticism of that decision continues to grow.

After all, Lee went 4-0 with a 1.56 ERA in five postseason games last fall, including winning two against the Yankees in the World Series.  He was also a major reason the Phils were playing October baseball at all. 

After the season, fans salivated at the prospect of having Lee and Roy Halladay as the team’s top two starters, an unbeatable combination that all but guaranteed another deep playoff run.

But it was not to be.  Instead, Lee went to Seattle. 

And last week, the big news was that he was traded to the first place Texas Rangers, bolstering a team that always seems to fade in the second half of the season.  Now, they’re a legitimate threat to go all the way.

There’s only one problem.  That was a trade that should never have happened. 

The fact that it did is a direct affront to every Major League team owner, every player and every fan.

All except the Texas Rangers, that is.

Why?

Because the Rangers are in bankruptcy.

So instead of getting their financial house in order and doing the right thing — paying the people to whom they owe money —, Texas just pulled out the most improbable victory of the season.

But unlike most games, when there is one winner and one loser, the Rangers’ achievement came at the expense of the other 29 teams.

*****

How did a team in bankruptcy hit this home run?

That bastion of corruption, Major League baseball, came in as the relief pitcher.

Last year, it loaned the Rangers $18.5 million. That wasn’t enough, however, as the company of the team owner defaulted on its $525 million debt.  So MLB came through again in May with another $21.5 million.

So let’s get this straight.

A team that can’t pay its bills or meet payroll receives a loan from the League — whose money comes from the teams themselves, directly and indirectly — and then uses that money to acquire arguably the best pitcher in the game.

Hmmm.  Something with that picture just doesn’t seem right.

The result is similar to what happens when the U.S. government subsidizes companies, such as the GM bailout, in that it victimizes those who have done nothing wrong.  In effect, companies like Honda are punished for their efficient operations, fiscal responsibility and turning a profit. Why should they now have to compete against the unlimited resources of the United States government?

But here’s the difference. GM still makes a vastly inferior product, so Honda will continue to rule the day, although its road to success will be substantially hampered.

Not the case with the Rangers.  The “product” they acquired — with OTM (Other Teams’ Money) — happens to be superior to virtually all others on the market. And that will lead to a tougher road for a number of other teams.

How many millions in additional revenue is a playoff appearance worth to a given team?  Win the League Pennant and it’s even more.  Throw in a World Series showing, let alone a Championship, and the number skyrockets.

So if the Los Angeles Angels, second in the division behind Texas, lose out on a Division Title because of Lee’s prowess, or if, say, Detroit misses the Wildcard slot for the same reason, that’s millions down the drain because of what amounts to an illegitimate trade.

Competitors have given the Rangers the rope — in this case money — to hang the rest of the League.

And should we even mention the riot potential in Philadelphia if the Phils meet Texas in the World Series, only to lose Game 7 to Cliff Lee?

*****

Perhaps the most disturbing, but least surprising, aspect of this debacle is the lack of on-the-record displeasure from the other baseball teams.

Unfortunately, too many business “leaders” in this country, if that’s what they can be called, exhibit more cowardice than guts. And since baseball is a business, team owners, presidents and general managers are no exception.

Two things are certain:

1)  Most, if not all, of the other owners are furious that the Lee trade was permitted to occur, especially those vying for playoff spots.

2)  You will not see any of them publicly voice their opinion — with attribution —on the matter.

Oh, we’ll see anonymous quotes from owners and other executives deriding the decision, but none will dare cross the biggest hypocrite of all, MLB Commissioner Bud Selig.

(It was Selig, after all, who looked the other way during baseball’s Steroid Era, raking in billions while hallowed records fell, but feigned outrage when Barry Bonds broke the Big One — Hank Aaron’s home run record.  But hey, under Selig’s disgraceful reign, baseball finally —FINALLY — got around to outlawing steroids —in 2005, thirty-two years after the Olympics! Welcome to the party, Bud!)

Just look at Rangers’ general manager Jon Daniels’ quote, as reported by the Associated Press, when asked if he anticipated any backlash from other clubs:

“I’d guess they’ll be some unnamed sources, but I don’t expect a lot of phone calls.”

Or another  “unnamed” baseball executive, as reported in the New York Times: “The Rangers are acting as if they can go out and spend money….They’re attempting to try and spend money they don’t have for players.”

How typical.  And pathetic. 

Not only does Selig know he won’t be opposed, he counts on it.  So the arrogance only grows.

Need proof?  Consider the following:

The Rangers filed for Chapter 11 protection in May, intending to pay creditors $75 million.  They would then sell the team to an investor group led by Hall of Fame pitcher and team President Nolan Ryan.  But after creditors’ objected to that plan, the Rangers agreed to an auction.

Here’s the part that defies comprehension:

According to the AP, the team’s auction proposal specified that “Major League Baseball would decide who was eligible to bid and set strict guidelines, including a $1.5 million deposit and an opening bid of more than $500 million. The league could have rejected the highest bidder and selected the runner-up instead.”

The motion also included paying a $15 million ‘break-up’ fee to the Ryan group if it was not chosen as the buyer.”

Disgusting as the thought is, Nolan Ryan being in bed with Bud Selig clearly has its advantages: bid on a Major League Baseball team, and if you’re not successful, you receive a $15 million payment anyway.

One could say that such a consolation prize smacks of insider-trading corruption.

Thankfully, though in no way due to owners, that auction plan is in limbo.  For now.

Bankruptcy experts think the MLB bidding suggestions were a “clever maneuver” to push the sale toward Ryan’s group. 

But let’s call a spade a spade. It’s business as usual.  And because it continues unchecked, all of baseball suffers.

Do we really think it’s a good idea to have a 2010 Texas Rangers’ World Series Championship blemished with an “asterisk” next to it?  That’s a definite possibility.

Asterisks in the baseball record books — delineating that a particular feat was flawed — are becoming commonplace. How many more will it take before the whole sport implodes?

For once, Baseball’s owners would be wise to come in from the cheap seats and step up to the plate.

The integrity — what’s left of it — of America’s favorite pastime depends on it.

Chris Freind is an independent columnist and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com

Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick Morris’ recent bestseller “Catastrophe.”

Freind also serves as a weekly guest commentator on the Philadelphia-area talk radio show, Political Talk (WCHE 1520), and makes frequent television and other radio appearances.  He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...

When you sit in a traffic jam caused by an Obama busywork project that seemingly has no end in sight (ahem 422), perhaps you think about the people it is employing to calm your fury at the constant inconvenience. Perhaps you kid yourself that hiring people to dig holes and then hiring other people to fill them in is meaningful job creation.

Here’s something else to think about while your commute is extended:

As the midterm election season approaches, new road signs are popping up everywhere – millions of dollars worth of signs touting “The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act” and reminding passers-by that the program is “Putting America Back to Work.”

On the road leading to Dulles Airport outside Washington, DC there’s a 10′ x 11′ road sign touting a runway improvement project funded by the federal stimulus. The project cost nearly $15 million and has created 17 jobs, according to recovery.gov.

However, there’s another number that caught the eye of ABC News: $10,000. That’s how much money the Washington Airports Authority tells ABC News it spent to make and install the sign – a single sign – announcing that the project is “Funded by The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act” and is “Putting America Back to Work.” The money for the sign was taken out of the budget for the runway improvement project.

ABC News has reached out to a number of states about spending on stimulus signs and learned the state of Illinois has spent $650,000 on about 950 signs and Pennsylvania has spent $157,000 on 70 signs.

70 signs for $157,000 works out to $2,242.86 per sign. Figures were not immediately available for how many jobs created or saved by sign production. Rest assured, however, that only about $5 million of taxpayer money has been spent on signs advertising Barack Obama. ABC further reports:

At the center of the controversy are a series of guidelines provided to stimulus recipients. In the letter, Rep. Issa cites what he calls “perhaps the most overly political guidance on stimulus advertising” involving the Department of Housing and Urban Development and a stimulus recipient. According to investigators from the oversight committee, HUD provided the Office of Native American Programs with information on “signage requirements.” The document suggested a sign template informing the public the projects had been, “Funded By: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Barack Obama, President.”

In response to ABC’s questions, Jill Zuckman of the Department of Transportation demonstrates out-of-touch government arrogance at it’s best:

“The best estimate is that states have spent about $5 million of the $28 billion spent on road projects on signs – or less than .02 percent of overall project spending.”

Only $5 Million? Your average American’s tax bill runs in the thousands and takes a big chunk out of their potential qualtiy of life. These thousand page bills, labyrinthine bureaucracies and trillions in spending have had the effect of numbing those spending our money to the real consequences that the absence of this money causes to the people who have actually earned it: the taxpayers. If I had an extra $5 million laying around, or even an extra $2,246.86, I could certainly find a better use for that money than on a sign announcing that the reason I am again late for dinner is because my tax money has been carelessly misspent.

Again.

Email LisaMossie, Start the discussion or Share This...

The cries are getting louder.                                   

Despite their sweep of the Reds before the All Star break, the Phillies are still in third place, 4 1/2 games behind the Braves, with the trade of Cliff Lee last year looking more dubious by the day.

The criticism of that decision continues to grow.

After all, Lee went 4-0 with a 1.56 ERA in five postseason games last fall, including winning two against the Yankees in the World Series.  He was also a major reason the Phils were playing October baseball at all. 

After the season, fans salivated at the prospect of having Lee and Roy Halladay as the team’s top two starters, an unbeatable combination that all but guaranteed another deep playoff run.

But it was not to be.  Instead, Lee went to Seattle. 

And last week, the big news was that he was traded to the first place Texas Rangers, bolstering a team that always seems to fade in the second half of the season.  Now, they’re a legitimate threat to go all the way.

There’s only one problem.  That was a trade that should never have happened. 

The fact that it did is a direct affront to every Major League team owner, every player and every fan.

All except the Texas Rangers, that is.

Why?

Because the Rangers are in bankruptcy.

So instead of getting their financial house in order and doing the right thing — paying the people to whom they owe money —, Texas just pulled out the most improbable victory of the season.

But unlike most games, when there is one winner and one loser, the Rangers’ achievement came at the expense of the other 29 teams.

*****

How did a team in bankruptcy hit this home run?

That bastion of corruption, Major League baseball, came in as the relief pitcher.

Last year, it loaned the Rangers $18.5 million. That wasn’t enough, however, as the company of the team owner defaulted on its $525 million debt.  So MLB came through again in May with another $21.5 million.

So let’s get this straight.

A team that can’t pay its bills or meet payroll receives a loan from the League — whose money comes from the teams themselves, directly and indirectly — and then uses that money to acquire arguably the best pitcher in the game.

Hmmm.  Something with that picture just doesn’t seem right.

The result is similar to what happens when the U.S. government subsidizes companies, such as the GM bailout, in that it victimizes those who have done nothing wrong.  In effect, companies like Honda are punished for their efficient operations, fiscal responsibility and turning a profit. Why should they now have to compete against the unlimited resources of the United States government?

But here’s the difference. GM still makes a vastly inferior product, so Honda will continue to rule the day, although its road to success will be substantially hampered.

Not the case with the Rangers.  The “product” they acquired — with OTM (Other Teams’ Money) — happens to be superior to virtually all others on the market. And that will lead to a tougher road for a number of other teams.

How many millions in additional revenue is a playoff appearance worth to a given team?  Win the League Pennant and it’s even more.  Throw in a World Series showing, let alone a Championship, and the number skyrockets.

So if the Los Angeles Angels, second in the division behind Texas, lose out on a Division Title because of Lee’s prowess, or if, say, Detroit misses the Wildcard slot for the same reason, that’s millions down the drain because of what amounts to an illegitimate trade.

Competitors have given the Rangers the rope — in this case money — to hang the rest of the League.

And should we even mention the riot potential in Philadelphia if the Phils meet Texas in the World Series, only to lose Game 7 to Cliff Lee?

*****

Perhaps the most disturbing, but least surprising, aspect of this debacle is the lack of on-the-record displeasure from the other baseball teams.

Unfortunately, too many business “leaders” in this country, if that’s what they can be called, exhibit more cowardice than guts. And since baseball is a business, team owners, presidents and general managers are no exception.

Two things are certain:

1)  Most, if not all, of the other owners are furious that the Lee trade was permitted to occur, especially those vying for playoff spots.

2)  You will not see any of them publicly voice their opinion — with attribution —on the matter.

Oh, we’ll see anonymous quotes from owners and other executives deriding the decision, but none will dare cross the biggest hypocrite of all, MLB Commissioner Bud Selig.

(It was Selig, after all, who looked the other way during baseball’s Steroid Era, raking in billions while hallowed records fell, but feigned outrage when Barry Bonds broke the Big One — Hank Aaron’s home run record.  But hey, under Selig’s disgraceful reign, baseball finally —FINALLY — got around to outlawing steroids —in 2005, thirty-two years after the Olympics! Welcome to the party, Bud!)

Just look at Rangers’ general manager Jon Daniels’ quote, as reported by the Associated Press, when asked if he anticipated any backlash from other clubs:

“I’d guess they’ll be some unnamed sources, but I don’t expect a lot of phone calls.”

Or another  “unnamed” baseball executive, as reported in the New York Times: “The Rangers are acting as if they can go out and spend money….They’re attempting to try and spend money they don’t have for players.”

How typical.  And pathetic. 

Not only does Selig know he won’t be opposed, he counts on it.  So the arrogance only grows.

Need proof?  Consider the following:

The Rangers filed for Chapter 11 protection in May, intending to pay creditors $75 million.  They would then sell the team to an investor group led by Hall of Fame pitcher and team President Nolan Ryan.  But after creditors’ objected to that plan, the Rangers agreed to an auction.

Here’s the part that defies comprehension:

According to the AP, the team’s auction proposal specified that “Major League Baseball would decide who was eligible to bid and set strict guidelines, including a $1.5 million deposit and an opening bid of more than $500 million. The league could have rejected the highest bidder and selected the runner-up instead.”

The motion also included paying a $15 million ‘break-up’ fee to the Ryan group if it was not chosen as the buyer.”

Disgusting as the thought is, Nolan Ryan being in bed with Bud Selig clearly has its advantages: bid on a Major League Baseball team, and if you’re not successful, you receive a $15 million payment anyway.

One could say that such a consolation prize smacks of insider-trading corruption.

Thankfully, though in no way due to owners, that auction plan is in limbo.  For now.

Bankruptcy experts think the MLB bidding suggestions were a “clever maneuver” to push the sale toward Ryan’s group. 

But let’s call a spade a spade. It’s business as usual.  And because it continues unchecked, all of baseball suffers.

Do we really think it’s a good idea to have a 2010 Texas Rangers’ World Series Championship blemished with an “asterisk” next to it?  That’s a definite possibility.

Asterisks in the baseball record books — delineating that a particular feat was flawed — are becoming commonplace. How many more will it take before the whole sport implodes?

For once, Baseball’s owners would be wise to come in from the cheap seats and step up to the plate.

The integrity — what’s left of it — of America’s favorite pastime depends on it.

Chris Freind is an independent columnist and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com

Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick Morris’ recent bestseller “Catastrophe.”

Freind also serves as a weekly guest commentator on the Philadelphia-area talk radio show, Political Talk (WCHE 1520), and makes frequent television and other radio appearances.  He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...

Victor Davis Hanson has an excellent piece at NRO today entitled “The Psychology of Recession“. Here’s a taste:

Out-of-control government spending depresses small businesses in other ways beyond leaving them with less cash. Growing government entitlements and redistribution are seen as undermining personal initiative. The more we provide subsidies for housing, health, education, food, and entertainment, the more the individual seems to want more compensation for less work — and the more the employer feels he has been had, as he works while others do not.

Finally, business operates best under the assumption that the law is applied equally and that there are no insider cronies who are favored by government because of their contacts, cash, or politics. The problem with socialism as we see it practiced abroad is not just that it hates private business in general, but that it hates some private businesses far less than others. Crony capitalism is the statist habit of farming out government concessions to friends and fellow travelers who spout the same revolutionary slogans, or who promise bribes or jobs to their particular government overseers. We would have more readily believed Barack Obama’s Wall Street populism had he not been the largest recipient of Wall Street cash in presidential history, and Goldman Sachs’s largest political beneficiary.

So when immigration law is unenforced; when an arbitrary $20-billion punitive payout is mandated from BP; when some creditors are deemed more important than others; when some states are sued for racism, but cases against racist individuals are dropped — then a general impression takes hold among business people that it is safer to lie low and avoid the gaze of government — lest a particular law be applied in punitive fashion.

Read. It. All

Email LisaMossie, Start the discussion or Share This...

I know that this is a fairly long post, but I believe in sharing with friends and this discussion gave me a snapshot of the inner mind of a Socialist.

The following was the chain for a discussion with a classmate that I have in my present Business Communications class. The initial question posed that started this chain was “Why do you feel that you can trust NPR over other media outlets? Why can you not trust other media organizations? If this is true can we change the way we gather and distribute news to our audiences?” I felt you should all see the fight we have ahead of us and the war of the minds we are waging today.

Here is how I started the response chain for the class to this question:

Honestly, why would you trust NPR over the other media news outlets, especially since NPR is National Public Radio and is paid by the Federal Government? That, in my mind, makes them even less trustworthy than any other independent organization because they are beholden to the federal government and the whims of whatever the Fed feels like giving to them depending on how much they support the federal government’s agenda than an independent organization that raises their money the independent and capitalist way, through independent contributions and companies paying money for airtime on their channels via commercial time. When an organization is dependent on an cash cow, visa-vie the Federal government, and the trials and tribulations of that group and how much you toe the line for whatever talking points they demand of their groups that take money from them makes them, in my book, less trustworthy than independent companies that raise their money the old fashioned way, through selling commercial time to private organizations and companies. The independent companies are, in my book, more trustworthy by a long shot, than any organization supported and funded by the federal government, regardless of whatever administration is in charge of them.

This is how Lori (get to love her folks…she’s our Socialist in the left corner in this particular boxing match) responded to my reasonable assertion:

Ian,You said “When an organization is dependent on a cash cow…”

Wouldn’t you agree that the cash cow you are referring to is really capitalism at its best? I mean isn’t that what capitalism is about? It’s all about the money. Whoever has more gets to put their message out there. FOX news operates the way it does and has that rightish slant because Rupert Murdoch owns the organization. He won at the capitalist game and now he gets his own channel to broadcast whatever he wants.

NPR is not owned by the federal government. It’s just called National because it’s well national and it operates on airwaves that are public. NPR is donor supported and that’s how they operate.

 Ultimately I believe all organizations are dependent on cash cows- the American consumer.

Lori

Bakersfield, CA

I had to respond to this dripping with socialism-love nonsense:

I personally believe that you are missing a fundamental aspect to what Capitalism is all about. It’s not about money, but money is partly the motivator (or gasoline if you want to think of it in another fashion). Capitalism, and more specifically the Free Market System, is based on personal choice. It is based on you setting your own personal priorities as to what you want to earn money to buy, what you want to spend, what you feel is important to you and your family, if you have one. In a free market system, you or I could decide that we can do something better than someone else out there and start a business to make it better than them. We could also decide that we want to start a business to become our own boss and do something new, or better, than the rest of the world. The Free market is an extension to the freedoms inherited in all of us by the Natural Laws we were born with and endowed by God with. This is just the economic system version of that.

A market that is controlled by a government, or a planning commission or whatever terminology or group you want to assign there, is a Socialist system and it has the opposite priorities and affects on its citizens than a Free Market system does. When a person believe they can do something better than someone else in the market, or cheaper, or faster, or whatever that betterment may be, a Socialist and top-down controlled system locks that individual out because they are not and their new system is not “Part of the Plan.” Socialism stifles creativity, inventiveness, and the entrepreneurial spirit in much of humanity. There is no incentive to do better because to do so would throw off “the Plan” from the central planning committee, which top-down governments never allow. They never allow these things because in then moves the control from those at the top make the choice to those at the bottom, you and me, in making decisions on what is best for ourselves and the economy. Tyranny’s never allow control to move down, because if they do then they lose control and they will never allow that.

This was not meant as a taking to task. I just want everyone who reads this to understand the fundamental differences in those 2 economic and social philosophies. And NPR is partially subsidized by the Federal Government through federal grants. This can be found on pg. 9 of their 2009 Fiscal budget (http://www.npr.org/about/statements/fy2009/2009_LA_NPR_Cons.pdf). Their operational revenue amount is found on pg. 5.

When you divide that amount the government gives them by their operating revenue, this money accounts for approximately 13% of their overall operating capital. Obviously, this does not make them a Federal mouth piece per se, but when 13% of your operating budget comes from 1 source, you are pretty beholden to them to make sure that money keeps flowing in. Any business that has 1/8th of its operating budget come from one location would jump through hoops to make that customer happy. It just becomes very bad for freedom of speech and differences of opinion when that 1/8th is coming from the government. That’s all I’m saying.

Here is how she countered back:

Hi Ian

I would have to disagree with you. Capitalism in theory may be about freedom but it really is about money (CAPITOL=money). In my opinion there are lots of companies who exemplify this, all you have to do is look at the corporate scandals of the last few years. I take offense to your use of using God as a defense for capitalism also. God has nothing to do with all the money hungry hoarders in this world who only care about themselves.

I don’t think Socialism is perfect but I do think there are advantages to that type of system. People in these types of systems tend to do things that actually make them happy rather than what will get them the most money. I for one would love to have lived in a country where we didn’t have to pay out of the nose for an education. Education is something, in my opinion, that can make and break a country.

NPR may be partially subsidized but Chrysler and AIG were both bailed out by the government because if not the country would have gone into a tail spin. I don’t agree with that and I’m sure as a capitalist enthusiast you probably don’t either. I’m curious to know, what would your solution have been?

I really enjoy your perspective Ian. Please don’t misunderstand my posts to you as anything other than an educated discussion.

Lori
Bakersfield, CA

Notice how she didn’t argue my facts, but went to the tried-and-true tactic of attacking the messenger initially and then say that it was an emergency and we “Had to do it!” I couldn’t let this sit, so here is how I replied:

There are no advantages to a Socialist system, unless you are looking for someone to take all the chances and possibilities of wild success OR failure out of life. The problem with that though is that in order to make sure that everyone is taken care of equally, you must make everyone equal. In order to make everyone equal, you must, by definition, hold people back from achieving too much or being too successful in work, in life, in thought, in ideas, in happiness, in health, in family status or position, in ethics taught by parents to children, in religion, and the list goes on and on and on. All of this “Equality” must be dictated by the state and not by our own personal hopes and dreams. We would no longer be in charge of the dreams and goals we believed we could achieve, by the state would.

Your child could tell you one day that “Mommy…I want to be a doctor someday and help sick boys and girls.” and you would have to follow that childhood dream up with this, “That’s nice sweetie…but the state says we already have enough doctors, so it’s been decided that you will be an auto mechanic because the state says we have a shortage of those.” What kind of parent would that make you? More importantly, is that the world you want to raise your child in?

And Lori, I believed you missed what I was saying about God. I was not saying that God was about money. I was saying that Capitalism is an extension, in an economic sense, of the Natural Laws that were endowed to us by our creator. This is a fundamental concept of what our country is founded on. Without God being at the top, or whatever you believe of as God since it is a personal choice and relationship, then those rights we enjoy are not inherit inside us but given by the state. God must be at the top because if not then those rights are no longer rights but freedoms we were given by a government, and what a government gives, then can take away. Power is supposed to go from God, to you and I, to the government…not the other way around. The former is freedom, while the later is tyranny..

Don’t you see, in order to make all equal, then we must all equally suffer and be restrained from the individual greatness each of us has inside ourselves. This is counter to what we know is the human yearning to achieve greatness and do great things. Socialism holds you back. Capitalism unchains you and says “Go!” And capitalism is not about money, it’s about getting the hell out of someone’s way and saying “You choose your own path to what your dreams are, if you do this right, the world will be your oyster, and we will all be better for your success.” Money is nothing more than the fuel to that fire.

Whether it’s a dollar bill or a pucca shell on an island, we all want to be fairly compensated for the hard work we do. That right now comes in the form of a Dollar. Don’t be angry at the dollar because it is nothing more than a representation of the fair reward for work done. Capitalism equals freedom to dream and strive to make yours and your family’s lives better. Socialism equals accepting your lot in life determined by someone else that doesn’t know, or frankly care, what you dreamed for yourself, and determines what “Freedoms” they LET you have. That’s not freedom at all…that’s slavery, and I thought we fought and died as a people to throw those shackles off. Don’t chain your dreams to the ground in the mud…but give them wings and tell them “fly”

__________________

I’m still waiting for her counter-argument to this.

I may be waiting a while.

Email Ian Hayes, Join the discussion or Share This...

Lovely

The new $28 billion state budget was part of a deal that would boost state borrowing by as much as $600 million to pay for construction projects such as new public buildings to be named after U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter and late U.S. Rep. John Murtha.

About half of the projects it will finance are being hand-picked by Gov. Ed Rendell. Legislators expect to assemble a second list in the coming months that also must be authorized by legislation before they can receive money.

Rendell is earmarking $10 million for the Arlen Specter Library at Philadelphia University and another $10 million for the John P. Murtha Center for Public Policy at the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown.

Clearly Jack Murtha doesn’t have his name on enough buildings.

In case you forgot, the budget relies on $850 million (heretofore unallocated) from the federal government as well.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

You bet it would, but only if it came from the right place. Unfortunately for the liberal meritocracy insistent upon enslaving the American public with their policies, that place is not Government, and people on both sides of the aisle are starting to figure that out. Read it and weep as the liberals are finally figuring out the cost of demonizing business. I give you Fareed Zakaria’s July 6 column in Newsweek at length:

The American economy is sputtering, and we are running out of options. Interest rates can’t go any lower. Another burst of government spending—whether a good or bad idea—looks politically impossible. Is there anything that could protect us from the dangers of stagnation or a double dip? Actually, there is a second stimulus, one that could have a dramatic effect on the economy—even more so than government spending. And it won’t add to the deficit.

The Federal Reserve recently reported that America’s 500 largest nonfinancial companies have accumulated an astonishing $1.8 trillion of cash on their balance sheets. By any calculation (for example, as a percentage of assets), this is higher than it has been in almost half a century. And yet, most corporations are not spending this money on new plants, equipment, or workers. Were they to begin loosening their purse strings, hundreds of billions of dollars would start pouring through the economy. And these investments would likely have greater effect and staying power than a government stimulus.

Now, let me be clear. I think there is a strong case for a temporary and targeted government stimulus. Both people and companies are being very cautious about spending. Right now, government spending is what’s keeping the economy afloat. Without a second stimulus, state and local governments will have to slash spending and raise taxes, which will produce a downward spiral of higher unemployment, slower growth, lower tax revenue, and a larger deficit. Joel Klein, the New York City schools chancellor, told me that when the stimulus money runs out at the end of this year, he will be forced to lay off 5,000 teachers. Multiply that example a thousand times to get a sense of what 2011 could look like.

But government spending can only be a bridge to private-sector investment. The key to a sustainable recovery and robust economic growth is to get companies to start investing in America. So why are they reluctant, despite having mounds of cash lying around? I put this question to a series of business leaders over the past few days. They were all expansive on the topic, and all wanted to stay off the record, for fear of offending people in Washington.

Economic uncertainty was the primary cause of their caution. “We’ve just been through a tsunami, and that produces caution,” one said to me. But in addition to economics, they kept talking about politics, about the uncertainty surrounding regulations and taxes. Some have even begun to speak out publicly. Jeffrey Immelt, the CEO of General Electric, complained last Friday that government was not in sync with entrepreneurs. The Business Roundtable, which had supported the Obama administration, has begun to complain about the myriad new laws and regulations being cooked up in Washington.

One CEO said to me, “Almost every agency we deal with has announced some expansion of its authority, which naturally makes me concerned about what’s in store for us for the future.” Another pointed out that between the new health-care bill, financial reform, and possibly cap-and-trade, his company had lawyers working day and night trying to figure out the implications of all these new regulations. Lobbyists in Washington have been delighted by all this new activity.

CEO’s afraid of speaking lest they incur the wrath of their government keepers? Afraid of spending because of uncertainty about government regulators imposing impossible new mandatory policies? How could something like this happen in a free society?

Unless, of course, we’re no longer living in a free society.

Email LisaMossie, Join the discussion or Share This...

No, I’m kidding.

Philadelphians may soon start seeing more fresh produce at their corner stores.

The city is getting $25 million in stimulus funds to fight obesity and smoking.

Fighting the obesity of government is not on the agenda.

Mini-grants to about 100 corner stores will help them buy refrigerators or shelving to accommodate fresh produce.

Store owner Juan Carlos Romano says business is up 40 percent at his Romano’s Grocery Store in North Philadelphia thanks to the addition of produce.

In related news, Juan Carlos Romano is the worst businessman in Philadelphia. He couldn’t have installed a fridge on his own? He didn’t know his customers wanted produce? For real?

Or perhaps he’s the greatest businessman in Philadelphia, since we as taxpayers bought him a fridge, and improved his business at no expense to him.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

Bill Murray must be furious.

Two decades after the release of his classic “Groundhog Day” —- in which a series of events is repeated over and over — Governor Rendell and the Pennsylvania legislature have trumped him.

The passage of yet another horrendous budget has made our politicians the new poster children for “Groundhog Day.”

While, ironically, the movie and budget debacle are set in the same state, there is one key difference.

The movie is a make-believe two-hour comedy.  But the budget is a tragedy that will play out for decades to come.  And it’s one from which we can’t awaken, relieved that it was all a bad dream.

*****

Give Rendell and the legislature credit where it’s due.  If nothing else, they’re consistent.

Collectively, they haven’t executed a budget on time in ANY of the eight Rendell years.

And each budget is a replay of the year prior: bloated spending, job-crushing tax increases, more bureaucracy, and the preservation of pols’ pet projects.

The consequence of this deliberate malfeasance is no longer opinion, but simple fact:

Our state is at or near the bottom of job creation, employment prospects, and college students remaining in the state after graduation.  We have the most hostile legal system in the country, levy some of the highest taxes, and produce a vastly inferior educational product.

Our bridges and infrastructure are, literally, falling apart, and, year after year, we earn the dubious distinction of having the worst roads in the nation.

And, certainly not least, the legislature’s excessive coddling of the unions and their sacred-cow state pension system has made the state insolvent, with bankruptcy in the next two to three years a very real possibility.

Quite a legacy.

We are imploding, and will soon reach fiscal Armageddon. 

(As an aside, it was quite strange to repeatedly hear the Governor refer to our situation as “Armageddon,” a term he seems to have borrowed from Yours Truly, despite that fact that 1) he won’t consent to an interview with Freindly Fire, and 2) he, more than anyone, is responsible for the financial calamity in which we find ourselves.)

Why?

Because our elected officials “have theirs.”  It’s that simple.

The Governor will parachute into a seven-figure job when he’s done in January, and legislators enjoy one of the most lavish pension and perk systems in the country. Which, of course, they voted to give themselves, courtesy of we the (forgotten) taxpayers.

Oh, and one more thing.

In order to facilitate this legendary budget prowess, they break the law on an annual basis….

Read more at Philadelphia Magazine’s Philly Post:

http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2010/07/06/armageddon-in-pennsylvania/

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...

Bill Murray must be furious.

Two decades after the release of his classic “Groundhog Day” —- in which a series of events is repeated over and over — Governor Rendell and the Pennsylvania legislature have trumped him.

The passage of yet another horrendous budget has made our politicians the new poster children for “Groundhog Day.”

While, ironically, the movie and budget debacle are set in the same state, there is one key difference.

The movie is a make-believe two-hour comedy.  But the budget is a tragedy that will play out for decades to come.  And it’s one from which we can’t awaken, relieved that it was all a bad dream.

*****

Give Rendell and the legislature credit where it’s due.  If nothing else, they’re consistent.

Collectively, they haven’t executed a budget on time in ANY of the eight Rendell years.

And each budget is a replay of the year prior: bloated spending, job-crushing tax increases, more bureaucracy, and the preservation of pols’ pet projects.

The consequence of this deliberate malfeasance is no longer opinion, but simple fact:

Our state is at or near the bottom of job creation, employment prospects, and college students remaining in the state after graduation.  We have the most hostile legal system in the country, levy some of the highest taxes, and produce a vastly inferior educational product.

Our bridges and infrastructure are, literally, falling apart, and, year after year, we earn the dubious distinction of having the worst roads in the nation.

And, certainly not least, the legislature’s excessive coddling of the unions and their sacred-cow state pension system has made the state insolvent, with bankruptcy in the next two to three years a very real possibility.

Quite a legacy.

We are imploding, and will soon reach fiscal Armageddon. 

(As an aside, it was quite strange to repeatedly hear the Governor refer to our situation as “Armageddon,” a term he seems to have borrowed from Yours Truly, despite that fact that 1) he won’t consent to an interview with Freindly Fire, and 2) he, more than anyone, is responsible for the financial calamity in which we find ourselves.)

Why?

Because our elected officials “have theirs.”  It’s that simple.

The Governor will parachute into a seven-figure job when he’s done in January, and legislators enjoy one of the most lavish pension and perk systems in the country. Which, of course, they voted to give themselves, courtesy of we the (forgotten) taxpayers.

Oh, and one more thing.

In order to facilitate this legendary budget prowess, they break the law on an annual basis….

Read more at Philadelphia Magazine’s Philly Post:

http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2010/07/06/armageddon-in-pennsylvania/

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...

First off, kudos to Roberta for her post. She wins my “First Person to Actually Look at Pennsylvania’s Very Own Constitution” award. A budget that depends on money that doesn’t yet exist is not a balanced budget. QED.

There there’s this. A new bureaucracy to analyze the budget? Really? THAT WILL FIX EVERYTHING!!! Hey–don’t we elect something like 253 legislators to do that? And pay the handsomely (if unconstitutionally)?

This budget is crap. Joe Scarnati, I’m talking to you. Kill this thing, throw it back in Fast Eddie’s face, and fight for a real budget that controls spending, does NOT tax the Marcellus Shale (which is the biggest thing to happen to Pennsylvania industry since coal and steel), and forces the government to live within our means.

There are plenty of conservatives in Warren County. I’m sure at least one of them would love to run for the State Senate.

Email Fred Mullner, Start the discussion or Share This...