Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon is stepping down, the result of a guilty plea entered Wednesday on one count of perjury.
Dixon's resignation will become official Feb. 4, when she is sentenced. Dixon, a Democrat, was convicted in December on one count of embezzlement stemming from her use of gift cards given to the city by Patrick Turner, a developer. Turner claimed the gift cards were intended for the needy.
The trial offered a window into what critics have long derided as a pay-to-play mentality at City Hall that tarnished Baltimore's reputation.
Dixon will receive four years probation as part of her plea. The mayor will hold a press conference is at 5 p.m. at City Hall.
Dixon was the former president of the Baltimore City Council who became mayor in January 2007. She ascended to the top job after then Mayor Martin O'Malley became governor, defeating Republican Robert Ehrlich.
Baltimore City Council President Stephanie Rawlings-Blake will ascend to the top job after Dixon's resignation.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/07/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Stephanie Rawlings-Blake is Dicon's backfill? Excellent choice. Lets be sure and keep it Alpha Kappa Alpha. No needless elections please.
Jan. 7 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, then led by Timothy Geithner, told American International Group Inc. to withhold details from the public about the bailed-out insurer's payments to banks during the depths of the financial crisis, e-mails between the company and its regulator show.
#3
It was pretty clear at the time this was what the money was being used for. If it was so 'clear' why were the details withheld? We're still on the verge of a banking collapse, in any case. The Fed has just been buying time until the big bank execs can suck every bit of out the system until the banks can somehow 'grow' their way out of insolvency.
#5
More from the economist's conference:Simon Johnson, an economist at MIT's Sloan School of Business, said that by propping up the financial sector, government efforts to date are only delaying another inevitable crash. By giving large financial institutions the assurance that they are too big to fail, and thereby offering an implicit guarantee to excess risk-taking, the administrations of Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama have made the problem worse.
"The crisis is just beginning," Johnson said. "Have bankers won? In the short-term, absolutely. The immediate opportunity for change has already been missed." That's because a broken political system leaves politicians beholden to the financial industry, argued Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel laureate and professor of economics at Columbia University.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar on Wednesday announced policy changes he said will bring more scrutiny and greater public voice in how oil and gas leases are awarded on public lands.
Salazar said the changes should ensure stricter environmental standards in oil and gas leasing while bringing more clarity to the process to energy companies hoping to drill on public lands, mostly in Western states.
"We don't believe we ought to be drilling anywhere and everywhere," Salazar said at a news conference. "We believe we need a balanced approach and a thoughtful approach" that allows development of oil and gas leases on public lands while also protecting national parks, endangered species and municipal watersheds.
Salazar, a former Democratic senator from Colorado, criticized the Bush administration for what he called a "headlong rush" to lease public lands. Early last year, Salazar suspended 60 of 77 leases in Utah approved in that administration's waning days.
The changes announced Wednesday are intended to bring greater consistency and public engagement to onshore oil and gas leasing, Salazar said, with a goal of reducing legal challenges that have cost taxpayers millions of dollars and energy companies months or even years of delays.
About 1 percent of oil and gas leases on public lands were protested in 1998, he said -- a figure that jumped to about 40 percent in 2008. The main reason for the increase was that leases were offered in places where they should not have been or without enough agency scrutiny or public participation, Salazar said.
"In the prior administration the oil and gas industry was the king of the world. Whatever they wanted happened," Salazar said, adding that those days are over.
Democrats and environmental groups hailed the announcement, saying it marked a significant step toward a balanced, common-sense approach to energy development on public lands.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/07/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"We don't believe we ought to be drilling anywhere and everywhere," Salazar said at a news conference.
Aren't the overwhelming majority of public lands where oil & gas are known to exist in significant quantities already off limits? Or so defended by litigious lefty groups that it's essentially impossible to drill there already?
#5
"In the prior administration the oil and gas industry was the king of the world. Whatever they wanted happened," Salazar said
Yeah, lookit all them wells off the Caliphornia coast, all over the continental shelf on the east coast, and spilling out of ANWR and all over the defrosting tundra. And I'm an idiot, Ken.
The Governor-elect (R) of Virginia reportedly said he wants to use off-shore drilling to shore up (sorry)the state's Commonwealth's devastated budget. Gitcher popcorn!
Posted by: Bobby ||
01/07/2010 6:27 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Salazar has always been a toadie to environmentalist groups. Never mind what it does to the common man or how it ruins his livelihood.
#9
Kenny should have made this announcement in Riverton, Wyoming. The folks there would be so-o-o-o 'supportive'. An unemployed roustabout (or two) would then likely 'help' him to his car (or whatever form of transportation he might use to leave town).
Instead, he used the relative safety of the Beltway.
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
01/07/2010 13:15 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I'd place the ETA of $8/gal gas at about 7 days after Israel goes after Iran's nuclear program. Dreamer! In your proposed scenario I foresee either outright rationing &/or tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to keep US motor vehicles running. $80/barrel petro (where we are now) is a severe drag on a nearly crippled economy. Drilling more widely now will not affect the near term price & availability of petro to the US, in any case.
#11
Yesterday we had an article about drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico in water nearly a mile deep, an impressive and expensive technical feat. One of the ironies of closing public land to drilling is that it keeps the little guy out of the game and limits oil production to the evil Big Oil companies.
#12
Quite correct Steve. Also interesting to note is the fact that off-shore US Territoral water leases are owned by the Federal Government, to which the oil companies pay their lease and production fees.
#14
Drilling more widely now will not affect the near term price & availability of petro to the US, in any case.
Hey, any time you want lower oil prices, just start drilling three years prior.
The rest of y'all got a lot of years of Credit Default Swap profits out of decapitalizing all the physical industries. And if you didn't you should have invested that money more wisely. But there's nothing I can do about y'all's poor decisions. Y'all are going to have to suffer through this stuff until three years or so after you decide to stop hitting the crack pipe.
#1
What in pluperfect hell is a high end health plan? One that covers dental? One that provides hip replacements? Treatment for cancer? Geriatric care? Pediatric care?
One that covers surgery? Anything more than preventative care?
#2
Its all about higher taxes and more gov't control. Start collecting taxes asap, the details for coverages can be worked out later and implemented in 2013.
Checkout this Obama pre-election campaign ad, how ironic.
Posted by: Tom- Pa ||
01/07/2010 14:16 Comments ||
Top||
Might be interesting to remember that the Social Security Act was passed in 1935. The Federal withholding tax on wages was introduced in 1943 and was instrumental in increasing the number of taxpayers to 60 million and tax collections to $43 billion by 1945. Initially, only the very rich paid income taxes. Check out the photo and the political party represented in 1935.
#5
the $8k limit for individuals ($23k for families) that constitutes the beginning of the High-End plan will end up many, many union members (e.g., almost everyone in coal mining, almost everyone in machine tools, most in auto manufacturing).
Finally, the union people may realize that the donks have been using them all these years
Posted by: lord garth ||
01/07/2010 14:21 Comments ||
Top||
#6
A high end health plan is one with minimal co-pays, low or nonexistent deductibles, coverage for optical, dental, chiropractic, acupuncture, voodoo and god knows what else. (note the conflation of health benefits with health insurance) This is the sort of plan you have if you belong to a big union. The rank and file are going to be very, very grumpy over this.
#8
I believe that there is a provision in the health care bill that specifically exempts "people who work on docks" - i.e.,the Longhshoremens Union.
Other people can be exempted with a simple insertion of a few paragraphs during the House-Senate conferences.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
01/07/2010 14:37 Comments ||
Top||
#9
SteveS, how many of those pricey add ons are mandated by state governments? This whole this is, as all R'burgers know, nothing but a scam designed to suck more money from the masses for the elite to play with.
We reported Tuesday after word leaked of Bill Ritter's decision to retire that Democrats were already speaking to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar about leaving the Obama Cabinet to run for governor in Colorado. Today, the Denver Post reports that Salazar has been given permission, reluctantly, from the White House to leave his post and run, if he so chooses.
But a new Rasmussen poll (500 LVs, 1/6, MoE +/- 4.5%) released today shows that Salazar, a former state attorney general and U.S. Senator, is no by no means the strongest candidate Democrats could field against former Rep. Scott McInnis, the likely GOP nominee.
General Election Matchups
McInnis 47 -- Salazar 41 -- Und 9
McInnis 47 -- Romanoff 37 -- Und 11
McInnis 45 -- Hickenlooper 42 -- Und 8
John Hickenlooper, the popular mayor of Denver, said at a press conference that he was considering the race, but that if Salazar runs, he'd "probably be his first volunteer." Andrew Romanoff, the former state House Speaker, is still at this point challenging fellow Democrat Sen. Michael Bennet, appointed by Ritter to Salazar's old seat.
PPP (D) released some more data from its polling in Connecticut (522 RVs, 1/4-5, MoE +/- 4.3%), showing a precipitous drop in Sen. Joe Lieberman's (I) approval rating. It now stands at just 25 percent, with 67 percent disapproving. By comparison, that's lower than even Chris Dodd's showing at 29 percent approval.
Digging deeper, PPP finds that 81 percent of Democrats disapprove of Lieberman. Among Republicans, 39 percent approve and 48 percent disapprove; among indies the split is 32 / 61. Lieberman is up again in 2012; Attorney General Richard Blumenthal was thought to be a potential challenger, but he's now running for Dodd's seat. PPP speculates, based on the pre-Dodd announcement polling, that Rep. Chris Murphy (D) could step up.
Connecticut voters support the health care legislation narrowly, 47 percent to 43 percent. Only 19 percent support how Lieberman handled the legislation, while 68 percent oppose.
The sudden retirement announcement Tuesday by North Dakota Sen. Byron Dorgan (D) set off a chain of events that has brought a rage of intrigue and GOP confidence in a state whose congressional delegation is currently dominated by Democrats.
Democratic Rep. Earl Pomeroy, the state's lone congressman, considered running in Dorgan's place but quickly announced Wednesday he would instead seek re-election. Meanwhile, a potential Republican challenger to Pomeroy has said he is now rethinking his earlier decision not to run. As for Dorgan's seat, popular Republican Gov. John Hoeven is expected to soon announce he is running.
At a press conference in Bismarck Wednesday, Pomeroy said he opted to seek re-election because he did not want the state saddled with two freshmen in Congress.
"We would have gone from a position where we hold powerful chairmanships by each of our Senators and senior status on Ways and Means Committee to a position where we would have a brand-spanking-new House member and a brand-spanking-new Senator," said Pomeroy.
However, many felt Pomeroy had the best chance to defeat Hoeven and keep Dorgan's seat in Democratic hands. Plus, his re-election to the House is no foregone conclusion, according to Eric Raile, a political scientist at North Dakota State University.
"I think that Pomeroy has enough to worry about with his House seat," Raile said when asked what Pomeroy's chances would have been against Hoeven. "There is a lot of talk in the state about dissatisfaction with healthcare reform and other Democratic-led initiatives. This could be trouble for Pomeroy in the upcoming election."
First elected in 1992, Pomeroy has won his last three elections with at least 60 percent of the vote, but in 2002 -- a strong year nationally for Republicans -- he won with just 52 percent. Running statewide, Pomeroy will again need to overcome the Republican leanings of the state and the anti-incumbent mood hanging over the 2010 midterms.
After turning down national party entreaties last year, Public Service Commissioner Kevin Cramer -- who challenged Pomeroy in 1996 and 1998 -- has now told state party operatives that he will make his decision on running in "the next day or so." Also, in an interview with Politico, Cramer said it was Dorgan's retirement announcement that caused him to rethink his decision.
Other potential Republican challengers to Pomeroy include Tax Commissioner Cory Fong and Rick Clayburgh, the former tax commissioner and current executive with the North Dakota Bankers Association.
"Pomeroy stands to face his toughest election in his political career, and we're confident it will be his last year in office," said Adam Jones, executive director of the North Dakota Republican Party.
While Democrats now hold all three of the state's slots in Congress, North Dakota may indeed find itself a year from now with two freshmen in Washington -- despite Pomeroy's desire to keep that from happening.
With Pomeroy out of the running for Senate, state and national Democrats have been feeling out MSNBC talk show host Ed Schultz, who is a former Fargo radio show host, and former state Attorney General Heidi Heitkamp, who lost to Hoeven in the 2000 governor's race. Neither has yet to say whether they are interested.
"Pomeroy's House seat is not necessarily safe," said Raile. And as for the Dorgan's Senate seat, "Governor Hoeven is extremely popular in North Dakota. The Democrats are facing a difficult situation here. They likely need to find a popular and recognizable figure to be competitive."
Four Republican opponents lead Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) in potential general election matchups, according to a new Rasmussen survey. On top of trailing each Republican by at least 8 points and never reaching even 40% support, 55% say they hold an unfavorable opinion of the second-term senator.
Those tested against Lincoln include: State Senate Minority Leader Kim Hendren; State Sen. Gilbert Baker, a former state GOP chair; Safe Foods CEO Curtis Coleman; and Tom Cox, a Tea Party organizer.
Hendren 47 - Lincoln 39 - Und 10
Baker 51 - Lincoln 39 - Und 7
Coleman 48 - Lincoln 38 - Und 9
Cox 48 - Lincoln 38 - Und 9
Health care could be weighing down Lincoln, who supported Senate Democrats' reform bill in the Christmas Eve vote. The survey found just 35% of Arkansas voters support the proposal.
#1
A surprisingly fair article from the NYT about the Republican primary race for Martinez's senate seat in Florida. Just a light dusting of New York snark.
On Tuesday, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs declined to answer questions about the president's campaign commitment to hold health-care negotiations on C-Span. Gibbs said he had not seen a letter from C-Span's Brian Lamb to congressional leaders requesting the coverage and thus could not comment on it.
On Wednesday, Gibbs was asked again about the C-Span commitment. The story had gotten pretty big in the intervening time, and presumably Gibbs had had a chance to familiarize himself with it. So reporters tried for a second day to get him to comment on the president's commitment to holding televised health-care talks. Gibbs' answer? "We covered this yesterday." Here's part of the Wednesday silliness:
QUESTION: During the campaign the President on numerous occasions said words to the effect of -- quoting one -- "all of this will be done on C-SPAN in front of the public." Do you agree that the President is breaking an explicit campaign promise?
GIBBS: Chip, we covered this yesterday and I would refer you to yesterday's transcript.
QUESTION: But today is today and --
GIBBS: And the answer that I would give today is similar to the one --
QUESTION: But there was an intervening meeting in which it's been reported that the President pressed the leaders in Congress to take the fast-track approach, to skip the conference committee. Did he do that?
GIBBS: The President wants to get a bill to his desk as quickly as possible.
QUESTION: In spite of the fact that he promised to do this on C-Span?
GIBBS: I would refer you to what we talked about in this room yesterday.
QUESTION: But the President in this meeting yesterday --
GIBBS: And I addressed that --
QUESTION: -- pressed for something that's in direct violation of a promise he made during the campaign.
GIBBS: And I addressed that yesterday. Got that, you plebes? "We answered that yesterday... and gave it a B+!"
#10
Here's my theory on WH press conferences, FWIW. First, tell them that the whole thing will be exactly 30 minutes long or whatever, and stick to it. After that, answer whatever questions come in the order they are presented. If the talking heads want to talk about Tiger Woods the whole time, let them. Answer away. If the talking heads want to ask the same question 15 different ways, let them. Answer away. Never play games, just answer the questions. Yes, no, don't know, no comment, an explanation, or whatever is most appropriate. Don't take anything personally. After a while, the talking heads will figure it out and use their time wisely. In this case it was a good question I think, because Obama is about as easy to pin down as a water-weenie. It would have been far less time-consuming and just about as informative to have just said "Yes" in this case, rather than to have said "Yes" using this more round-about approach.
#12
Hellfish, 2010 comes first. I have become more and more concerned that the 3rd box may have to be opened yet.
The Tea Party philosophy of a more libertaraian, fiscally conservative, populist bent is the last hope. Yes I do know that there are contradictions within the elements of that list but those will get worked out. Basically it means get the gov't AND the pols. oligarch friends, be they from Wall St., Academia or the Labor bosses, out of our wallets and lives.
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) vowed Tuesday that a provision in the Senate's healthcare bill exempting Nebraska from additional Medicaid payments would be eliminated. "You can bet that won't be law by the time that goes into effect," Brown said during a town hall meeting, as reported by the Toledo Blade.
Nebraska secured $100 million in funds to pay for its additional obligations to Medicaid under a deal struck in late December to win Sen. Ben Nelson's (D-Neb.) crucial vote for the Senate's health reform bill. Republicans had pounced on the provision, naming it the "Cornhusker Kickback," while trying to force politically embarrassing votes to either remove or expand the reimbursements.
Brown's pledge marks some of the most pointed words directed by a fellow Democrat toward the deal Nelson secured. Brown said that lawmakers would repeal the controversial measure before the new Medicaid obligations go into effect in 2016, the Blade reported. Right. We can trust them to do that.
Vermont and Massachusetts also received assistance under the Senate healthcare bill for their own obligations. The provision for the three states was said by the Congressional Budget Office to cost $1.2 billion over the next 10 years.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/07/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Gee, does that mean they can go back and change his vote from Xmas eve? /sarc
Posted by: Tom- Pa ||
01/07/2010 7:45 Comments ||
Top||
#2
How about we nix the entire bill and declare a Mulligan?
Several North Dakota Democrats are urging MSNBC host Ed Schultz to run for soon-to-retire Sen. Byron Dorgan's (D-N.D.) Senate seat in 2010. This was the guy who was supposed to dislodge Rush Limbaugh a few years ago...
The liberal talker said on air this morning that Merle Boucher, minority leader of the North Dakota House of Representatives, officially asked him last night to run for the seat being vacated by Dorgan during the year's midterm elections.
"I asked him point blank if this was an official ask," Schultz said. Boucher said it was.
Schultz indicated he was leaning against a run but wouldn't rule it out.
"I'm flattered. I'm honored. I can't say I'm even considering it right now," he said. "I'm in a different place right now. So we're a long way from any consideration. We're a long way from any decision."
Dorgan's unexpected retirement left Democrats scrambling to find a suitable candidate. Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D-N.D), who already runs a statewide race every two years, has been mentioned by many analysts as Democrats' strongest choice.
Schultz, a native Virginian, worked as a sportscaster and news host in North Dakota for about two decades.
If Gov. John Hoeven (R) jumps in the race, Democrats will have a hard time holding the seat, regardless of their candidate.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/07/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'm sure he will be just as good as Al Franken and the race will be equally clean.
A 2009 spending spree has left the Republican National Committee (RNC) with its worst election-year cash flow this decade.
I guess life's tough. The last few times the RNC's called asking for donations we've turned them down, and now when we see their number on the caller ID we don't answer. The Dems have done terrible things to the country in the past year, but the reason the Dems are in power is because people are cheesed at the Publicans. They still seem like they're going through the motions.
The other day we had a story that Denny Hastert's kid is running, which amounts to dynastic poltix as usual. Pop was dirty and there's no reason to think Sonny's not cut from the same mold, whether he's actively dirty yet or not. The Pubs aren't leading the Tea Party Movement -- in some cases they're following it, in others they're pretending it doesn't exist. That's why nobody except the most committed feels the least urgency to kick in.
The largest GOP party committee has $8.7 million in the bank heading into an election year with 37 governors' races, a dozen major Senate contests, dozens more in the House and an all-important redistricting cycle on the horizon.
Said one RNC official: "It is very troubling, and the thing is, most people don't understand this. But it is really troubling."
The RNC had $22.8 million in cash and no debt when Michael Steele was elected chairman at the end of January, but has since seen its cash on hand drop to less than $9 million at the end of November.
Over the previous five months, while governors' battles were being waged in New Jersey and Virginia, the committee saw its cash reserves drop by a full $15 million. Through November, the committee spent more than $90 million last year, which is nearly $20 million more than the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
"They're spending money at 2002 levels when they are not raising money at those levels," said a GOP operative. "That kind of thing worked when RNC was awash in money, but you can't do that in this environment."
Off-years like 2009 are generally a time for committees to get their financial house in order. They work to retire any debt left from the last election cycle and then build a war chest in preparation for the even-year election.
The RNC, though, made huge investments in New Jersey and Virginia, betting on the momentum created by those gubernatorial races to spur more giving.
Both were big GOP wins, but the question for many in the party is whether they were worth such a dent in the party's coffers. And even subtracting the $13 million spent in those races -- $9 million in Virginia and $4 million in New Jersey -- the committee has just about broken even since Steele took over.
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) lost both races, but saw its cash on hand climb to a debt-free $13 million. That's not a whole lot better than the RNC, but the DNC began the year in much worse fiscal shape, with $5.6 million in cash and $5 million in debt.
RNC spokeswoman Gail Gitcho noted that Republicans had taken just one governorship or Senate seat from Democrats in the last four years before the wins in New Jersey and Virginia.
"The fact that the RNC committed a large amount of resources and staff in 2009 did yield a significant dividend," Gitcho said. "The goal of the RNC is to raise money and win elections. We had a strong fundraising performance last year, but have an even more aggressive approach for the 2010 midterms."
Posted by: Fred ||
01/07/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Much of the RNC's problems come from insisting that unpopular RINOs run in races that popular conservatives could win, using the excuse that they want to be more "inclusive". When they do this, conservatives turn off the cash flow.
The current RNC leadership has tries very hard to shut the conservatives out of leadership positions, because they know that RINOs are an endangered species, and when conservatives get the leadership positions back, they are going to return the favor.
Ironic, in that when RINOs are in charge, they love to be "mavericks" and vote against the party, but now have to keep party discipline, at least among the RINOs, to survive.
#3
I mail the mailers back with my comments to let them know "no ticky, no laundry". I also tell them to knock of the opinion polls and mailers and stick to the meat of the matter and what counts. No Rino's.
Posted by: Art ||
01/07/2010 10:01 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I sent 'em back the mailer with the statement, "You don't support canidates like Brown and keep supporint RINOs, I won't support you."
#5
I mail them back with Scazafava, sNOWE AND mCcAIN WRITTEN ON THEM. i SUPPORT CANDIDATE DIRECTLY - ANG YOU SHOULD CONSIDER SUPPORTING THE r IN tEDDY'S OLD SEAT.
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/07/2010 19:46 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Today I "unsubscribed" from the GOP mailing list when they claimed Obama can still be stopped, but with no hint as to how they plan to do it. As far as I am concerned, GOP email is as worthless as any other spam...
The Chicago Police Department is seriously considering scrapping the police entrance exam, sources tell Fran Spielman. Oooh! Oooh! I seen dis movie! It's called "Police Academy"!
Dropping the exam would bolster minority hiring and avert legal battles, according to one source, while others confirm that the exam could be scrapped to open the process to as many people as possible. However, the lack of an exam would make Chicago the lone major city without one, and experts contend that the exam is integral to eliminating unqualified applicants.
The CPD has tried in recent years to boost minority hiring by offering the police exam online and turning to minority clergy to help in the recruitment effort. But those efforts have met with frustration. Despite seeing an increase in the number of minority applicants in 2006, the last year the exam was offered, the online component was never launched.
And as of last year, one in four patrol officers were African-American, but just one in 12 Lieutenants were of color.
Fraternal Order of Police President Mark Donahue said the plan "sounds ridiculous."
"With this, you're taking away one of the steps that attempts to legitimize the (hiring) process," he said.
Officials at City Hall have admitted that they have been exploring exam options since last fall, according to the Sun-Times.
The CPD is currently operating at 2,000 officers-a-day short of its authorized strength. Police hired only 46 officers this year, with plans to hire less than 100 next year -- and those hirings rely on federal funds.
What's more, City Hall has floated the idea of imposing cop furloughs to meet a tight budget.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/07/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#4
What next? Do away with rules like "no drug convictions" or "no felony convictions"? I mean, those practices discriminate against the criminals who want to turn their lives around, or those who have "experience" in the criminal justice system.
#5
But wait! What if the more desired applicant entrance testing scores could be set very, very low, say at the 45% or 55% minimum passing level and other, less desired applicants could be systematically excluded by elevating their minimum passing scores higher, say for instance at the 97% or 98% levels? A range of minimum scores could be established should recruitment objectives involve a range of differing applicants.
Of course a few of the undesirable applicants would still 'game the system' through high scoring achievement and sneak through. You might then design a weighted oral interview follow-up phase, where the desired applicants could be given additional bonus points for "life experience" or "cultural appititude, race, gendor" or other unique skills and attributes not generally found in initially in the higher scoring non-desireable applicant.
Of course this techique would involve a great deal of reading, math, and additional effort by the testing staff. Therefore, the testing staff should be selected on the basis of their ability to fully understand the testing system and entrance goals, read and write, add and subtract, exercise confidentiality, etc. It will also be helpful if they are identical in appearance as possible to the desired applicant.
I know this really never been done before, out-of-the-box thinking, but I just thought I might offer it.
#7
More social engineering at work, the 'dumbing down' of America. What's the drop out rate of Chicago? 30/40%?? Too many unqualified minorities to 'fit the bill'. WGN Chic news last nite had poll, 89% against this.
Posted by: Tom- Pa ||
01/07/2010 7:57 Comments ||
Top||
#8
A good resolution could come to this if the police start to recognize the need to create the equivalent of R.O.T.C. in the colleges.
Right now, the track goes differently, from criminal justice major to patrolman, then patrolman for years until promoted to lieutenant. Instead they need a dual track, the equivalent of NCOs and officers.
Like the military, this preserves the promotions from the ranks, in the "command" structure, but it also creates something of an administrative "officer corps", uniformed administrators that hold mid level management police jobs, and are separate from the "N.C.O. chain of command."
Currently a lot of those jobs are held by "civilians", who just do generic OTJ training for fairly specialized work. But as the military learned a long time ago, the better the administrative and logistics support mechanism works, the better combat personnel can perform their mission.
#9
No, what it does is de-legitimize the uniform; the authority a citizen gives a police officer. Complain as people do when ticketed etc. but the authority is given to a police officer because there is a certain level of training and behavior that person must achieve in order to carry a badge.
But maybe it will avert legal battles,
"Your honor, my client was wrongfully arrested!"
"The officer was clearly not legally held to any standard of understanding the local laws and therefore cannot be held responsible for his behavior and/or misunderstanding of local procedures. Case dismissed."
#10
This was tried already in Miami during the 90's. The result was cops working for the drug gangs, cops forming their own gangs, all the way to killing for hire.
If you like the Mexican police, you'll love the Chicago PD without an entrance exam.
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
01/07/2010 11:31 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Instead of taking a police exam, you'll merely need to pay off your local Democrat Ward boss to get a police job in Chicago. Of course once you have the job, the ward boss will want a percentage.
#14
i think they are saying that they cant find 100 smart black people who are willing to work in union job with promotions handed out by patronage and with absolutely no appreciation of ability.
Posted by: abu do you love ||
01/07/2010 22:20 Comments ||
Top||
A founder of the Tea Party movement said Wednesday he had a warning for Republican leaders: Back conservative candidates or else other states will suffer the same backlash that toppled Florida's Republican Party chairman this week.
"We are turning our guns on anyone who doesn't support constitutional conservative candidates," said Dale Robertson, who operates TeaParty.org out of Houston and helped start the movement nearly two years ago.
He declined to say which states are next on the Tea Party's hit list. He said party leaders in those states would be warned privately, but the movement's wrath "will be very clear publicly" if they don't listen.
"If they continue to do things like they did in Florida, it's not going to be good for them," Mr. Robertson said. "If they don't get that and their party chairmen don't get that, they are going to be ostracized."
In Florida, a struggle between conservative activists and the Republican Party establishment forced state GOP Chairman Jim Greer to quit Tuesday. He blamed his decision on activists who he said "turned their guns on fellow Republicans instead of focusing our efforts on defeating Democrats."
Mr. Greer had been under fire for backing Gov. Charlie Crist, considered a moderate in the party who last year praised President Obama's $787 billion stimulus plan, in the race for the Republican nomination for Senate over former state House Speaker Marco Rubio, who is supported by the Tea Party movement.
The chairman's resignation headed off a party meeting Saturday where he expected to face fierce opposition from conservative activists.
Mr. Robertson planned to deliver the warning in a phone call Wednesday to National Republican Committee Chairman Michael S. Steele, who a day earlier said he supported the Tea Party activists and that he didn't think their movement had caused a schism in the Republican Party.
Democrats say the tension between the Tea Party and mainstream Republicans is a "civil war" that will undermine Republicans' hopes for significant gains in the mid-term elections in November.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/07/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I really don't care if we start as a splinter group of the Republican Party, lets get this thing going and get rid of the "moderates" (liberal). The sooner the better.
#3
I really don't care if we start as a splinter group of the Republican Party
Ya know Sarge I respectfully disagree. Having the Republican Party co-op the Tea Party is counter-intuitive to the movement itself. First, they dont deserve it. Second, it will become the caricature that the left so loves to paint. And finally, its the message of NON-partisanship that seems to resonate. It seems to me the common denominator here is citizens demanding their elected officials put principle over party. However, I agree the notion that Americans want some bi-partisan, RINO/DINO love stew is complete bullshit. If, in the end, all the Tea Party accomplishes is to be counter balance to the Progressive movement that has permeated both major political parties Ill be satisfied.
Both Roll Call and The Atlantic say that a position in the administration is possible, after Dodd announced his retirement. Given his financial connections, the Treasury seems most likely spot. But those connections are dirty -- Dodd is racked with financial scandals after playing footsie with AIG and the insurance industry.
...then again, that could make him the perfect Obama appointment!
Posted by: Fred ||
01/07/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Fred ||
01/07/2010 10:17 Comments ||
Top||
#7
dems dropping like flies.
Don't know about that. In other words, Obama's loyal followers in Congress who have been catching the wrath of the people are moving away from Congress so that they can be under his control and not the people's control any longer. They are betting the ranch that Socialism will replace Democracy in America, real soon.
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger savaged congressional plans for health reform in his 2010 State of the State address on Wednesday, calling the legislation "health care to nowhere" that's infected with "bribes, deals and loopholes."
With the nation's largest state enduring a fiscal crisis, Schwarzenegger said California's lawmakers should vote against the bill or push to get the Medicaid subsidies that were written into the Senate bill in order to secure Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) as the 60th and passing vote for that chamber's version of reform. The deal has been attacked as the "Cornhusker Kickback."
"While I enthusiastically support health care reform, it is not reform to push more costs onto states that are already struggling while other states get sweetheart deals," Schwarzenegger said before a joint session of the California State Legislature.
"Health care reform, which started as noble and needed legislation, has become a trough of bribes, deals and loopholes. You've heard of the bridge to nowhere. This is health care to nowhere. California's congressional delegation should either vote against this bill that is a disaster for California or get in there and fight for the same sweetheart deal Senator Nelson of Nebraska got for the Cornhusker State. He got the corn; we got the husk."
Posted by: Fred ||
01/07/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Anybody check the statment for more hidden messages?
That pretty much describes ALL legislation congress of any party passes. Democrats are worse cause they want to pass more of it as a general rule though 'pubs have been trying to catch up.
[California] Assemblyman Anthony Adams will not seek a third term, he announced Tuesday, putting an end to a tumultuous 11 months that saw him censured by his party, hectored by talk-radio hosts and targeted by an unsuccessful recall campaign. Adams, R-Claremont, voted in February for a state budget package that included more than $12 billion in tax increases. That vote, which Adams called an act of courage but that opponents said broke a campaign pledge, sparked a recall drive that could have ousted Adams early this year.
Allan Hoffenblum, a California political analyst said Adams next career move could be accepting an appointment to a state board or commission. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger appointed Sen. Abel Maldonado, another Republican who voted for tax increases last year, as his new lieutenant governor.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon is stepping down, the result of a guilty plea entered Wednesday on one count of perjury.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar on Wednesday announced policy changes he said will bring more scrutiny and greater public voice in how oil and gas leases are awarded on public lands.
PPP (D) released some more data from its polling in Connecticut (522 RVs, 1/4-5, MoE +/- 4.3%), showing a precipitous drop in Sen. Joe Lieberman's (I) approval rating. It now stands at just 25 percent, with 67 percent disapproving. By comparison, that's lower than even Chris Dodd's showing at 29 percent approval. 
The sudden retirement announcement Tuesday by North Dakota Sen. Byron Dorgan (D) set off a chain of events that has brought a rage of intrigue and GOP confidence in a state whose congressional delegation is currently dominated by Democrats. 
Four Republican opponents lead Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) in potential general election matchups, according to a new Rasmussen survey. On top of trailing each Republican by at least 8 points and never reaching even 40% support, 55% say they hold an unfavorable opinion of the second-term senator.
A 2009 spending spree has left the Republican National Committee (RNC) with its worst election-year cash flow this decade.
A founder of the Tea Party movement said Wednesday he had a warning for Republican leaders: Back conservative candidates or else other states will suffer the same backlash that toppled Florida's Republican Party chairman this week.
Both Roll Call and The Atlantic say that a position in the administration is possible, after Dodd announced his retirement. Given his financial connections, the Treasury seems most likely spot. But those connections are dirty -- Dodd is racked with financial scandals after playing footsie with AIG and the insurance industry.
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger savaged congressional plans for health reform in his 2010 State of the State address on Wednesday, calling the legislation "health care to nowhere" that's infected with "bribes, deals and loopholes."
