Egos Patting Their Backs

Some of the biggest egos in local politics are wasting time patting each other on the back. It’s a nauseating thing that’s not normally worth mentioning, except gun control is one of the things they congratulate each other on.

“Mayor Richard Daley and his wife, Maggie, took a bow for their stewardship of the city at an Art Institute of Chicago fundraiser held Friday night in their honor … New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg called Daley “the best damn mayor this country has ever seen” during post-dinner remarks … Bloomberg pointed to Daley initiatives on handguns, education, the environment and the arts that he said he has happily copied in New York …”

Feel free to copy the Daley policies on handguns, Mayor Bloomberg. In case your staff forgot to tell you, we defeated those policies once.

Buying Controversy

Morgan Spurlock needs to make a point about the proliferation of advertising in America. In order to make that point in a Hollywood film, he had to buy off a town in an area making massive budget cuts for $25,000.

Between April 27 and June 24, residents of Altoona will be living in “POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold, Pennsylvania.”

So he’s creating controversy in order to make a film about the controversy of advertising. Remember that next time you ever see his name attached to anything.

WaPo Hating on My Home State

The Washington Post has apparently decided that they’ve hade enough of people who don’t like Obama, so they are setting their sights on the only state in the union that overwhelmingly rejected Obama & his policies back in 2008. Oklahoma was the only state in the union where not a single county voted for Obama. (The closest any county came was still a 12 point gap for McCain.) So the WaPo says Oklahomans are hypocrites for taking federal money.

Their reasons are ludicrous. They cite the existence of federal highways as an example of huge federal spending in the state. There are three.

  • The one we call I-35 is somewhat parallel to an old trading route that most people learned about in 5th grade called the Chisholm Trail. It wasn’t about Oklahoma porking the hell out of the federal government, but about getting cattle from Texas to the stockyards and rail lines in Kansas to feed the people in the East.
  • The one we call I-40 parallels much of that little road some might have heard of – Rt. 66, a road meant to facilitate travel and trade between Chicago and Los Angeles. It’s also a major east-west route from North Carolina to Southern California that just happens to be a tad easier to cross in the western portions than other areas in the Northern Rockies.
  • The one we call I-44 is also connected to following the old Rt. 66 path in the northeast part of the state. However, it was a series of toll roads that were built before it was designated a federal interstate.

Most of the spending the WaPo cites as evidence that Oklahoma benefits from too much federal government is related to military spending. Their first target: Tinker Air Force Base. There aren’t too many places in this country where there’s enough space to be near a reasonably major city and still secure 9 square miles of space. While it’s an Air Force base, it also serves the other branches. So we’ve got multiple military branches making use of one facility in a state where employees and land are cheaper than many other states. It’s previously been home to key military weather services. Another place that takes up space? Fort Sill. Especially for the fun stuff they do with artillery. We heard that stuff from 70 miles away. I’m not naive about military pork and political favors, but as it goes, I’m all for consolidating what we can in areas where the labor and property are cheap. That’s called getting the most for your money.

I think the bias in this hit piece is best illustrated by the fact that they spend two paragraphs with the mayor of Oklahoma City citing the benefits to having federal jobs in the area. But only one sentence sums up the key issue if the GOP has the nerve to cut a number of those jobs: “Given what he called the area’s entrepreneurial bent, the mayor said, his city would probably withstand large cutbacks in federal largess ‘better than most places.'” That’s certainly not a spirit that Obama’s adoring fans the WaPo wants to promote.

Falling Down on the Job of Gun Rights

While working on a Pennsylvania-version of news from NRA-ILA about the national reciprocity bill, imagine my surprise when I found some key names left off of the sponsors list. These are the members of the Pennsylvania congressional delegation who support the bill:

  • Rep. Jason Altmire (D)
  • Rep. Mark Critz (D)
  • Rep. Charlie Dent (R)
  • Rep. Tim Holden (D)
  • Rep. Mike Kelly (R)
  • Rep. Tim Murphy (R)
  • Rep. Todd Platts (R)
  • Rep. Bill Shuster (R)
  • Rep. Glenn Thompson (R)

These are the members of the Pennsylvania congressional delegation who sought & received NRA’s endorsement in 2010 against anti-gun opponents who are not on that list:

  • Rep. Jim Gerlach (R)
  • Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R)
  • Rep. Pat Meehan (R)
  • Rep. Joe Pitts (R)

These are the members of the Pennsylvania congressional delegation who sought NRA’s endorsement in 2010 and received high grades while running against a friendly incumbent, but who have not stepped up to support gun owners on this issue:

  • Rep. Lou Barletta (R)
  • Rep. Tom Marino (R)

Notice a trend with the party affiliation of those who wanted our support for the election, but who aren’t even sponsoring a bill for us? Every single one of the pro-gun Democrats who survived the 2010 elections has come through. Only half of the Republicans with previous endorsements and high grades have been willing to lend their names to the cause.

Being un-PC

I’m not always the biggest fan of Congressman Don Young. But when I read his comments about why he is publicly declining an award from HSUS, I *heart* him.

Alaskan Congressman Don Young refused an award this evening from The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and the Humane Society Legislative Fund that would have honored his work for animals in 2010. While capitalizing on the good work of local humane societies that shelter, spay, and neuter animals, the HSUS does not own, operate, or directly control a single animal shelter in our country, despite a budget of well over $100 million.

“HSUS are hypocrites, plain and simple, and I will not join them by accepting this award,” said Rep. Young. “Local animal shelters and humane societies do excellent work by caring for neglected and homeless animals, and through their spaying and neutering programs. This organization, however, has absolutely nothing to do with animal welfare. Instead they prey on the emotions of big-hearted Americans. They flash images of abused animals on our television screens to raise money that will eventually go to pay their salaries and pensions, not to helping better the lives of these animals. They run anti-hunting and anti-trapping campaigns and are of the same cloth as PETA and other extremist organizations. I can only guess that I was to receive this award due to my support of the Wildlife Without Borders program, which develops wildlife management and conservation efforts to maintain global species diversity. That program is true conservation; what this group wants is preservation. To accept this award would be supporting their manipulative ways and misguided agenda, and I want no part of that.”

Because HSUS is so good at what they do – lying & misleading Americans into believing that they are giving to help their local shelters – it’s really tough for a politician to take a stand against them. It’s times like this that I remember Ronald Reagan’s attitude on political agreement.

Reasonable Redistricting

It looks like the GOP might not get greedy in the redistricting process for Pennsylvania. That’s a good thing. When they tried it 10 years ago, the Democrat who was supposed to lose his seat in a “safe” GOP district with an incumbent managed to hang on. And he’s still there. That’s a lesson the party folks needed to learn since the GOP has control of the House, Senate, and Governor’s office.

Politico reports that they believe the redistricting process will rework PA-4 & PA-12 – Jason Altmire & Mark Critz (used to be John Murtha’s district). On the gun issue, it’s a not really a loss. Both are good on the gun votes. On one hand, we lose one pro-gun Democrat in the process, but we would likely lose one anyway if they tried to merge any of the seats with the anti-gun Rep. Mike Doyle in PA-14. It also makes the most sense since that is the corner of the state that is actually losing population – not “not gaining as rapidly” as is the case in most lose-a-seat scenarios, but actually losing.

They are also talking about creating a very long district for PA-17 to include Scranton. It would tighten up the Democratic seat, but give a chance to make Lou Barletta in PA-11 a little more safe. The downside for gun owners is that it sets up a potential primary challenge to pro-gun Democrat Tim Holden by an extremely anti-gun Scranton mayor.

Here in our little corner of the world, they don’t seem to want to pit two Philly Dems against each other. It makes sense given the population numbers. It does appear, according to Politico, that they will dump the heavily Democratic neighborhoods from our district, as well as PA-7 and PA-6 – Pat Meehan & Jim Gerlach. That would be very handy, indeed.

And for any Iowans, get ready for your big day tomorrow!

Disclosure

The media loves disclosure of potentially conflicting interests, except when it comes to their own business. Something about the reporter’s notebook story Sebastian linked to kept rubbing me the wrong way. Then I realized that while the reporter disclosed the source of his funding & research in the notebook, the stories that came out of the Joyce Foundation fellowship made zero mention of the fact that they were bought & paid for by an organization that views gun ownership as a public health problem.

Looking at the work by Brandt Williams, there’s no mention on the website or in the audio files of what aired that he was paid $5,000, plus additional support to cover meetings with anti-gun groups. In fact, the audio files start with an introduction that asks listeners to support their work. The bio for Williams makes no mention of the fact that he’s a Joyce Journalism Fellow, another clue that would tip listeners off to any potential bias in his articles funded by the Foundation.

There’s no way that Williams and any other reporters involved can claim that their work is free of bias since a stipulation of taking the $5,000 was that their work be written in order to “have a major public policy impact.” In addition to Williams, Joyce was willing to fund up to six other writers or broadcasters who were based “in midwest and northeast region with priority given to journalists in Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.” Since Joyce doesn’t appear to list them, the coordinating organization doesn’t list them, and no results turn up on media sites for titles and terms such as “Joyce Journalism Fellow,” it could be hard to figure out exactly who was paid for these planted stories.

In addition to outright paying for coverage at the rate of $5,000 per story or series, Joyce also funded travel & networking opportunities for their grantees to hang out with the leaders of anti-gun groups. The Foundation describes it rather innocuously:

To kick off the project, the Center will hold regional hands-on workshops for the selected reporters.

In reality, fellows were flown to Chicago for a workshop that primarily featured these speakers:

  • Tom Diaz, Violence Policy Center
  • Ben Van Houten, Legal Community Against Violence
  • Rose Cheney, Firearm Injury Center
  • Ben Hayes, ATF
  • Nicholas Roti, Chicago PD CAGE (Chicago Anti-Gun Enforcement) program

Yet, not a single mention of the obvious slant in speakers by Williams in his notebook entry for the trip. It begs to question whether any of the fellows raised any serious concerns about this project whatsoever.

Beyond the initially purchased stories, this fellowship program from Joyce is seeking to create a long term network of journalists working to advance their public policy initiatives. Take a look at some of the other resources that Joyce helped fund to keep them on a short leash:

To help facilitate the reporting program, the Center will also provide research assistance to help the Fellows gather data, develop contacts, and manage resources on gun violence stories. The Center will also create online tools for project participants to exchange information with colleagues and post questions for Center trainers and administrators. An electronic library containing articles, research, and media sources will be developed for peer journalists unaffiliated with the project.

Gee, the funders looking to advance policy in a specific direction set up a database of source material for the fellows to use – there’s no chance of bias there, is there? But they are members of the esteemed fourth estate, so we’re supposed to trust them instead of asking them for a bit of honesty or disclosure in this case.

If we want a general guide to where the articles bought by Joyce ended up, we can probably get a pretty good idea from the mention in the Williams notebook that one anti-gun group focused on gun laws in Minnesota, Illinois, Ohio, and Michigan. If you see any obviously biased feature stories dated from late last fall to the end of this month turn up in those states, then you likely have a Joyce-funded reporter on your hands. Just don’t expect them to reveal that fact.

Food Bleg

Sebastian requested some old family recipes for his birthday, and received scanned copies of them from a cousin this weekend. I’m now adding these to my database of recipes, but I need a little help from some of you who might be a bit older and have memories that stretch back a litter farther than my own.

At least two of the recipes call for half a can of evaporated milk, but they include a notation that half can sizes are “now” available. While I love old family recipes, this is one reason I hate old family recipes. I have no idea what can sizes were common when these recipes were written down. They are billed as Sebastian’s grandmother’s recipes, but one of them is cited as “Aunt Florence,” who Sebastian believes was older than his grandmother.

I know I can get evaporated milk in little squat cans like the sweetened condensed milk I have on hand, but when I looked at that can, it says 14 oz. I don’t know if that means the original sizes were 28 oz. or if there are (or were) 7 oz. sizes available. Any help or random kitchen/shopping memories would be helpful at this point.

In the meantime, I’ll have fun guessing the proportions of some of these old recipes that simply have the ingredients listed with no measures whatsoever. It could make for some interesting dining in the future.