Well, Well, Paul Rolly
Just when I dish on the fluffiness of the Media, Paul Rolly writes a very substantive analysis of the Treasurer’s race. The first substantive analysis I’ve seen, as a matter of fact.
I’ll disagree with a few of Mr. Rolly’s points: The scandal played a big role in the outcome (and I still haven’t seen a hint in the Media yet about the fact that the source of the allegations is a key backer for Ellis and that he stands to make millions for his employer/self(?) based on decisions made by the Treasurer or even an acknowledgement that any questionable conduct arose out of a CONVERSATION, NOT A SOLILOQUY, involving both candidates and the witness/kingmaker) . Qualifications also played a role in the outcome; Ellis’s background experience looked better to voters. The UEA was in the thing more for voucher payback than concerns over retirement benefits. And, from my perspective, the defined benefit (DB)/defined contribution (DC) issue doesn’t have enough legs to be the key motivating factor; though a shift from DB to DC could make sense in some ways, the transition would be problematic (the transition problem requires a separate, quite-detailed post; it has to do with exponential cost increases that would be incurred in providing defined benefits for a long, but diminishing, tail of DB recipients as other workers moved to a DC system).
But, I do agree that competing philosophies were (and still are) at the root of the battle. Largely, people who want tax cuts aligned behind Walker, and people who oppose tax cuts aligned behind Ellis. It’s another round of the role-of-government debate. And, as Mr. Rolly writes, special interests worked hard and, ultimately, effectively. And, good for them. That’s a legitimate part of the process. If people don’t like that fact, they need to dig in and outwork the special interests.
UPDATE: I don't know what to make of it, but it is interesting to note that the number of readers rating Mr. Rolly's column was way up (by a factor of 7 or 10 or so), and that they weighed in to rate it low.
posted by steve u. at 7/09/2008
Subscribe
16 Comments:
Tax cuts? Really? C'mon Steve, you think we're stupid? I think it was a bit more about finding a candidate with actual qualification for the job.
Not knowing who you are, anon., I can't comment on your level of intelligence, but, yes, at the root of this kerfuffle are competing political philosophies.
A reporter just asked me about a political hit list that David Irvine (who's paying him, by the way?) and other Democrats/Moderates are rumored to have of legislators they're going to try to find "stuff" on, to file complaints, actions, etc. Only conservatives are on that supposed list. Correction, only conservatives who are effective at getting things done. Tell me this isn't about political philosophy.
Of course the media is biased.
Hard not to be in a state where the business of the people is conducted behind closed caucus doors and ethics are so conveniently situational.
As usual, it is the extent you guys go to cover up such ethical lapses as exhibited by Walker (does anyone really believe he stepped down for any reason than to avoid further exposure of his own wrongdoing, and that of others higher up in the political power structure?) that is far more disturbing than the initial act itself.
12:57 anon.,
Other than to avoid a witch hunt, why else would Rep. Walker have stepped aside?
The criminal investigation did not go away. There, professional prosecutors will go over facts, interview people, subpoena documents, and, then, move forward as they determine best. I'm sure they'll even look to see if there's a "Mr. Big." Don't worry. Nothing goes away.
If you want justice, that investigation is the right forum. If you want political theater, then, sure, you lost out on something.
As the House Chair of the retirement committee, I am unaware of anyone looking to force employees from the DB to the DC. The discussion and legislation has focused on providing greater retirement options for employees (providing the opportunity for more employees to fully participate in a DC instead of a DB). Therefore, any portrayal otherwise by the UEA or any other employee organization would be an attempt to deceive the public.
There is a list and you are on it, Steve. In fact, target No. 1 is Greg Hughes; No. 2 is Greg Curtis; and No. 3 is YOU.
This has been in the works since the end of the session. Each of you will be hit with either a criminal referral or an ethics charge. Whether anything sticks is not the point. It will hurt.
I hope you liked that voucher bill.
Anonymous-
I can only imagine how such a strategy would backfire. You understimate Rep. Greg Hughes. He would make such an embarassment of any ethics complaint, I bet he's praying you do it.
You understimate the intelligence of Utah voters as well. They might watch with some interest as Rep Walker resigns, but they'll smell a rat if you propose ongoing, endless investigations. And I'm guessing these legislators would love to indulge you.
I imagine this will turn out much like the match between Drago (demos) and Rocky (Republicans. That's convenient, eh?) in Rocky IV: "I must break you." Rocky's response: "Go for it." Guess who wins?
As a soon to be returning Utah resident I must say this is fun to watch. My favorite part so far is when some Anonymous troll threatened Steve with the promise of a criminal referral while clearly lacking any motivation other than some personal grudge. I can't wait for the movie to come out.
This "bias media" argument Steve is so desperately trying to prop up on this blog is the weak mans argument. We only hear it when a party falls under attack on an issue they can't defend.
Like it or not, and regardless of party allegiance, ethics investigations are an important part of the process. And of course the Democrats will try to get some political leverage out of it (it is, after all, politics Steve), and frankly I would be disappointed with them if they didn't (again, politics).
But all contrived spin aside, asserting that the media in Utah has a "leftist" slant is nothing short of ludicrous, and also asserts that readers here and voters in the state are dense enough to fall for it. One simple look at not only media ownership, but average coverage of candidates this election season fights against what Steve would have us believe.
And it is unfortunate that Steve is applauding Rolly in this post, because based on the bad logic I am reading in this series of overly defensive posts and petty comments left throughout the bloghive (speaking of which Steve, re: your comment on Don's post at the Amicus, how did that run against Hatch go for you? That bad, huh? Probably best you shut up about campaign history as a measure of credibility then, huh?) attempting to portray an ethics investigation as something other than Democracy at work is a disservice to the Republican Party, the voters of the region, and the integrity of our political institutions. Therefore I have deemed that if Steve U is whining about a reporter, that reporter must be doing his/her job and reporting factually.
I'm sure this is just a slip for Rolly. He will be back on Steve's "Big Meanies" list within a matter of days.
Sometimes, when these desperate debates pop up on the bloghive, there is really only one good response that is much shorter than what we have all typed: "Grow up. The voters are not that stupid."
I'm not aware of any "Hit List", but Hughes and Curtis are on there way out because we have better candidates.
The Utah Democratic Party didn't recruit candidates to do a hit. We recruited candidates that would actually listen and represent their constituents.
We recruited legislators.
You will have a tough race Steve. Brooks Pace is one of our best candidates and he plans to give you the run of your life.
And, he certainly is the better man.
BTW, Uncle Don (my Uncle Don) says hello.
3:53 anon.,
The UEA was correct with its prediction about voucher retribution. But, why am I just no. 3 on the list? I'm 43 years old; surely, I've done something scandalous.
And speaking of Rep. Hughes, where did Craig Johnson run after he was outed a few posts ago for doing his wife's dirty work? Once the Hughes-is-a-rascal bomb thrower was unmasked, the conversation was just starting to get fun. Now, he doesn't write; he doesn't call.
Rob,
That's the spirit! Keep hope alive!
Uncle don looked a lot like a ugly version of Elton John. I wonder why his super handsome nephew didn't take him to glamor shots with him.
Jason,
Urquhart argues that Rolly, Walsh, Warchol and others are liberal and there are no conservatives at the Tribune to balance them out.
It's ludicrous to deny that claim.
So, Steve you are the party that get things done. I believe that bubba will get it done also. The only thing is that what bubba does will not hurt as bad as what you neo-cons have done. Yea right, getting things done. Here comes bubba now and you had better pucker up.
What a bunch of crooks in the republican leadership. I can't believe how you self righteous right wing wakos think. First you should start with you selfs and then point fingers at the rest.
I'm sure Steve can continue with the he said she said arguments of who is more political than thou forever on this blog. Anything that someone says about a precious Walker-type toadie will be countered with another finger-pointing. Hmmm, maybe someone patted an intern on the shoulder??
The fact is, we're tired of this. It has nothing to do with the voters not understanding how righteous the republican leadership really is or faulty logic in a reporter's report. The big picture is clear. Power corrupts and the game playing needs to stop.
Honestly, how did anyone think they could hoist Walker on us without a word of protest . . . I mean a word of dissidence.
Post a Comment
<< Home