Q&A: What happened in Hoboken, what happens next

Cammarrano won as expected, but it was damn close. What does it mean?

Q: Zimmer lost by fewer than 200 votes. How could that happen, when Mason's vote and Zimmer's vote made up a plurality?

A: Michael 'Fat Tony' Lenz and Tony 'The Joke' Soares have been running a protection racket for Hoboken's reformer-wannabes for years. In other words, if you have any kind of political footprint and want to run as a 'reform' candidate in Hoboken, you either go through them or they'll scuttle your campaign. No need to take our word for it, just ask Scott Delea or Beth Mason for their experiences in that regard.

So when it came time for the runoff, Mason threw in her lot with Zimmer (aka Soares/Lenz), but it was understandably less than wholehearted. That's not Mason's fault - it's the Zimmer campaign's responsibility to collect those votes. If they didn't make Mason happy, that's their failing.

There are so MANY ways Lenz and Soares screwed the pooch, that it's impossible to list them all. But here are a few:

1) Failing to get their handpuppet, Marsh, to make nice with Mason. We last saw Marsh running on a nightmare (losing) HCDO ticket with party hack Sal Vega, in one of the nastiest campaigns ever. This was at the behest of her guru Lenz. Lenz SHOULD have instructed Marsh to smooth things over and work with Beth, setting her a place at the table. But the cardinal rule with Soares and Lenz is that their glorification is always more important than winning a campaign. So it's no surprise they favored their usual clumsy, heavyhanded tactics here.

Number of votes lost: We'll be super-conservative with these numbers and assume that many Mason supporters held their noses and voted for Zimmer. But it's clear that not ALL of them did. Let's say, just 75 votes of Mason's 2500 or so went down the drain here.

2) Losing Inez Garcia-Keim. This happened during the freeholder elevction, when party functionary Lenz (along with the other 'reformers' in that camp), turned their backs on a woman they knew to be honest, so that the HCDO candidate would have a clear field.

As usual, Lenz and the self-proclaimed 'reform' thugs did nothing to make this right. Keim has lived in Hoboken a LONG time, and is well-known among oldtimers. They did her so wrong that she didn't just abstain from endorsing 'reformer' ZImmer - she went clear over to the other side. This reinforces point #1, above, re the loss of Mason votes, as Keim was well within the Mason camp. Let's say 10 votes were lost here.

3) Pissing off Hoboken411. Whatever you think of manchild Perry Klaussen, he runs arguably the biggest news outlet in town. How brilliant of loserboys Lenz and Soares to tick the guy off SO badly that not only did he loudly ban them from his site, he also very conspicuously pulled his former support of ZImmer.

Since that wasn't quite enough damage for them, these brilliant political operatives hit the 'net (under various names) and rumor mill to slander Klaussen. Natch this attempt inspired subsequent bad publicity for Zimmer at 411 - not just as a matter of salving wounded pride, but also as a serious matter of self-preservation on Klaussen's part.

Brilliant, boyos: Alienating the media is EXACTLY what you wanna do to help your candidate. Even readers not particularly sympathetic to the greasy Klaussen (a majority of Hoboken, apparently) were moved to sympathy for the position in which he had been placed. Votes lost: Probably closer to a thousand, but again we'll be super-conservative and say 100.

And that's the difference in the election tally, right there. A couple hundred votes, lost for no good reason. All because of the sort of stunts Soares and Lenz have pulled before and will do over and over and over again as they can find another patsy stupid and/or lazy enough to empower them. Reform's not the issue to them. Neither are the best long-term interests of Hoboken. All that matters is that they appear, to SOMEbody, to be important and powerful, right now.

We knew they would. That's why we predicted a Cammarrano win. Not because he was the people's choice - clearly, he was not. But we knew the losers would find a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, once again. THAT is something we weren't about to bet against, not on your life.

Q. What does the close vote, and Cammarrano's lack of coattails, mean?

A. It suggests Cammarano (i.e., the HCDO) rigged votes at the polls, for one thing. To be specific: Cammarrano's backers rigged more voting machine votes (as opposed to paper votes) than Zimmer's insurgent HCDO backers could.

When you send in homeless people to stand in for registered voters, you don't strain their brain pan with a whole slate of names. You give them one name - the lead candidate. Paper ballots are a different story: Someone fills them out for someone else to sign, or you fake a signature. Either way, no memorization required.

That's why Cammarrano's paper ballots supported a whole slate, but at the polls it was a different story.

But the gap between Cammarrano and his slate also tells us that many Mason voters simply would not pull the trigger for Zimmer. We covered this in the previous question.

Finally, the vote tells us that mainline HCDO pols are in rough shape, despite their ability to get Healy re-elected in Jersey City. Healy waltzed in largely because of the lackluster campaigns waged against him. Not that ANY of the mayoral campaigns waged in Hoboken were anything to be proud of, but in JC even calling them 'token' is too kind. Anyway, the bottom line is that Corzine is going to have problems in November.

Q. But doesn't Zimmer more or less control the council now? Her slate won!

A. You'll have to wait a minute while we finish laughing.

OK, that's better. No - wait. OK, let's go.

First: Zimmer couldn't even control 'her' ward's vote - it went to the other guy. As we've said before, she NEVER won her ward. The HCDO swooped in and handed it to her when Campos went off their reservation. Since the HCDO mainstream wanted Cammarrano, and not Zimmer, for mayor, they simply handed those votes to him this election. That's why ZImmer's no 'reformer', she's just just an HCDO rent-a-Councilperson du jour. Her usefulness to them is that she can split the 'reform' vote and render it harmless. (At least for the time being.)

Second: As noted earlier, those votes for Zimmer's slate were actually an ANTI-Zimmer vote. Many of those votes came from Mason voters who couldn't stand the people around Zimmer and didn't like the way Mason was treated by Marsh and others. NEITHER ZImmer nor Cammarrano has 'coattails'. Cammarrano doesn't have 'em because no one on his slate made it. Zimmer doesn't have 'em because, in order to have coattails you have to ....wait for it.... ACTUALLY GET ELECTED! (duh)

Third: Council members traditionally swing their support to whomever they figure will get them re-upped. That's why, for example, DelBoccio and Cricco had no problems when Russo fell from power. They just ran on the HCDO's (Roberts) slate. The question is, who will the new Councilmembers run with come re-election time? Well, think about it. Right now, Cammarrano's got nothin'. He's going to be wooing the Council from Day One to ride his train. Zimmer, and probably Mason, will be doing the same thing. Since Cammarrano is now the guy with the keys to the HCDO's car, he's going to have an edge in wooing support from the Council. By contrast, what can Mason or Zimmer actually deliver? Yes, Zimmer will remind them 'you won on my slate', but that will only stretch so far.

So: Not only does Zimmer NOT control the new councilmembers - the new councilmembers, effectively, control HER. They are very much in the driver's seat, and she has nothing - NOTHING - to keep them in line.

Zimmer doesn't control the Council - that's a bad joke. Ultimately, the state controls the council... at least as far as the bottom line goes. Zimmer controls her newly-elected slate to about the same degree that she controls the flooding in her ward.

According to her various statements, Zimmer does not control where her money comes from, nor does she control the actions of people ostensibly working for her. We really don't know if Zimmer has any control of ANYthing.

Q. But Cammarrano IS a weak mayor, right? Doesn't that mean he can be kept in check - that he can't do too much harm?

A. Roberts was the weakest mayor Hoboken has seen in a while. Yet he managed to leave Hoboken in pretty bad shape. We're pretty confident the SS Hoboken has yet to hit bottom. Why, you can still hear the orchestra playing on deck!

It's OVAH!

The election's well over a week away, and 'Zip' Zimmer's already lost. All that's left to do is watch the rats jumping ship.

Over at Hoboken411, perpetual front-runner Perry Klaussen has distanced himself from Zimmer, who he supported (to the point of libeling her opponent) in the past. His excuse is that 'her people have acted unprofessionally' towards him. Of course, such a remark is meaningless from someone as self-indulgent as the smarmy Klaussen, who makes up the rules as he goes along. In Klaussenese, he means his butt wasn't kissed sufficiently by the Zimmerites. Since 411 is the only thing Klaussen has in his life, he's going to milk these fleeting moments for all they're worth.

The real bottom line is that Klaussen just didn't want to be seen backing a loser. After bashing Cammarrano from Day One, he's suddenly 'neutral' (neutered?) in this election. That's just the way you roll when you pretend to have principles, but your real goal is popularity. Speaking of which, let's consider Soares and Lenz.

Soares and Lenz, like Klaussen, are deathly allergic to floundering political campaigns. You gotta feel some sympathy for that, since most of the campaigns they've been involved with in their lives HAVE floundered, precisely because they've been attached to them. It's the ultimate Catch-22.

Since we've been involved in past campaigns with those two (the only ones they ever won, in fact), we've seen their behavior when things get iffy. They go into full-blown scapegoat mode. That's demoralizing enough when you win, but when the water's rising all around you it's cancerous. We can only imagine the petty bickering and fingerpointing going on, even now, among the Zimmerites. Soares will scream, loudly for all to hear, that the campaign is lost because he was not listened to. (He does it every campaign.) Lenz will likewise blame whoever is above him in the food chain, hoping all the while someone from the Cammarrano camp will throw him a bone. (But no one will. They hate him over there, much more even than the odious Soares.)

The HCDO's plan worked perfectly. They got rid of Mason, the only candidate who was actually likely to ask embarrassing questions and maybe screw up a few of their favorite honeypots. It was a simple task to split the fickle, vain and self-referential 'reformer' vote and skew it toward Zimmer. With Mason out of the way, it's now easy enough to pull the rug out from under the clueless Zimmer, whose existence as a councilperson is due entirely to HCDO support (mainly by way of the somewhat resurgent Amato gang). A few HCDO mavericks looking for an edge are indeed supporting Zimmer, in hopes she can pull her chestnuts out of the fire. It's a risk/reward sort of thing, like JC Mayor Healey's support of Obama when everyone else lined up neatly behind Billary. Obama won, Healey lucked out. But they still have to keep a low profile, so as not to antagonize the real powers (Menendez, etc.). Cammarrano's in, and Dawn Zimmer and Peter "I'm My Own Man, As Long As They Let Me" Cunningham get a sharp lesson in who's boss. (Hint: Not them, and not the voters, either.) Like Soares, Marsh, and Lenz, they'll call themselves 'reformers' as long as the can find someone to buy into it. (I.e., someone who just moved into town. Maybe.) It's the great circle of life in Hudson County politics, where 'reform' is nothing more than a ruse to gain control of the machine.

Life in Hoboken continues to head back, back, back to the 1970's. High interest rates, plummeting property values, rampant and unrepentant official theft. When the town truly hits bottom, buy a condo. Assuming, that is, you can stand to live in a place that will be universally labeled "SO OVAH". Just like this election.

Who will win the Hoboken runoff?

A mind-numbingly simple guide.

Q) Will Lenz and Soares be in charge of Zimmer's campaign message?

A) It's unlikely, given their rep. But if so - can you say "Mayor Cammarrano"?

Q) Will Lenz and Soares be prominent in Zimmer's campaign?

A) If so, forget about any support from Beth Mason. Here's the formula: Her support of Zimmer will be in inverse ratio to theirs.

Q) Does machine politics still run Hoboken, despite its standing on the brink of disaster?

A) Of COURSE it does! Therefore, the most machine-like candidate has a distinct advantage. That's Cammarano. But Zimmer has her own HCDO ties, which Lenz and Soares (remember when they used to cite the evils of HCDO connections? ah, but that was before they knew the power of the dark side) used to endlessly flog as evidence of a sellout.

Definition of a sellout: Someone who cashes in the way you wish you could.

Q) WIth Mason as good as finished in Hudson County politics, will anyone ever look into the finances of Hoboken's hospital?

A) This has nothing at all to do with the runoff. But the answer is: Not until after it collapses, money gone, records destroyed. Neither remaining candidate would dare turn over those rocks. Whazzamatter, don't you WANT your money stolen?

Q) Never mind all that - who the hell wins?

A) Cammarano, of course. The people's choice.

••••••••••••••••••••••

The HCDO has already won this election, regardless of what happens in June. The people of Hoboken have chosen to re-elect the group that brought them the state takeover. They have changed clothes, lost weight, and shined their shoes, but it's the same game, different dealer.

And back to the Seventies we go. High interest rates, joblessness, urban flight to the suburbs, and cheap Hoboken real estate. Like that last part, do ya? Ah - but it was cheap for good reason. Enjoy.

The Emperor's New Clubs

Once upon a time there lived a vain Emperor whose only worries in life were to dress in elegant clothes, and own the most wonderful set of golf clubs in the world...

      Word of the Emperor’s refinement and willingness to disparage his own country for a soundbyte spread to Europe and beyond. Two scoundrels who had heard of the Emperor’s vanity decided to take advantage of it. They lobbied the halls of Congress with a scheme in mind.

      "We are two very good golf pros and after many years of research we have created an extraordinary set of clubs so divine that they appear invisible to anyone who is too stupid and incompetent to appreciate their quality."

      Nancy Pelosi heard the scoundrels’ strange story and sent for Harry Reid. Reid notified the Rahm Emanuel, who ran to the Emperor and disclosed the incredible news. The Emperor’s curiosity got the better of him and he decided to see the two scoundrels.

      "Besides being invisible, your Oneness, these clubs will be created especially for you." The Emperor gave the two men a bag of bailout money in exchange for their promise to begin working on the clubs immediately.

      "Just tell us what you need to get started and we'll give it to you." The two scoundrels asked for an unused Chrysler plant and some more bailout money, and then pretended to begin working. The Emperor thought he had spent the taxpayers’ money quite well: in addition to getting a new, extraordinary set of clubs, he would discover which of his subjects were ignorant and incompetent. A few days later, he called the old and wise prime minister, Barney Frank, who was considered by his peers as a man with common sense.

      "Go and see how the work is proceeding," the One told him, "and come back to let me know."

      Frank was welcomed by the two scoundrels.

      "We're almost finished, but we need more bailout money. Here, Excellency! Admire the workmanship, feel the quality!" The old man bent over the assembly area and tried to see the clubs that were not there. He felt cold sweat on his forehead.

      "I can't see anything," he thought. "If I see nothing, that means I'm stupid! Or, worse, incompetent!" If Barney Frank admitted that he didn't see anything, he could be discharged from his office and be forced to look for a private sector job!

      "What a marvelous set of clubs!” he said then. "I'll certainly tell the Emperor." The two scoundrels rubbed their hands gleefully. They had almost made it. More bailout money was requested to finish the work.

      Finally, the Emperor received the announcement that the two golf pros had come to deliver his new clubs.

      "Come in," the Emperor ordered. Even as they bowed, the two scoundrels pretended to be holding the bag of clubs.

      "Here it is your Oneness, the result of our labour," the scoundrels said. "We have worked night and day but, at last, the most wonderful golf clubs in the world are ready for you. Look at the Corinthian Leather grip and feel how rich it is." Of course the Emperor did not feel any grip and could see neither woods nor putters. He panicked and felt like fainting. But luckily Nancy Pelosi was right behind him and he sat down. But when he realized that no one could know that he did not see the clubs, he felt better. Nobody could find out he was stupid and incompetent, except a few bloggers who nobody ever read anyway. And the Emperor didn't know that everybody else around him thought and did the very same thing.

      The farce continued as the two scoundrels had foreseen it. With great ceremony, they pretended to hand him one of the clubs.

      "Your Oneness, you'll want to take a practice swing.” The Emperor was embarrassed but since none of his bystanders were, he felt relieved. He proceeded to swing his arms back and forth, recalling Ralph Kramden learning to golf from Norton in that Honeymooners episode.

      "Yes, this is a beautiful club and it feels very good in my hands," the Emperor said trying to look comfortable. "You've done a fine job."

      "Your Oneness," the Rahm Emanuel said, "we have a request for you. The people have found out about this extraordinary set of clubs and they are anxious to see you try them out." The Emperor was doubtful showing his 50 handicap to the people, but then he abandoned his fears. After all, his magnificent clubs would far overshadow his poor golf game.

      "All right," he said. "I will grant the people this privilege." He summoned his enourage and the ceremonial parade was formed. A group of dignitaries walked at the very front of the procession and anxiously scrutinized the faces of the people in the street. All the people had gathered in the main square, pushing and shoving to get a better look. An applause welcomed the regal procession. Everyone wanted to know how stupid or incompetent his or her neighbor was but, as the Emperor passed, a strange murmur rose from the crowd.

      The leftleaning pundits said, loud enough for the others to hear: "Look at the Emperor's new clubs. They're almost as beautiful as he himself!"

      "And the grip! Such a grip! It is not unlike the grip he has on all our hearts and minds!"

With great fanfare, the two golf pros placed a tee in the ground upon which they placed an invisible ball. The Emperor swung, and all gasped at the stupendous flight of the ball.

“Look at it rise! Just like the stock market! Surely this is the beginning of a golden age!”

They all tried to conceal their disappointment at not being able to see either the clubs, or the ball, and since nobody was willing to admit his own stupidity and incompetence, they all behaved as the two scoundrels had predicted.

      A child, however, who had no government contracts and could only see things as his eyes showed them to him, went up to the designated media area.

      "The Emperor has no clubs," he said.

      "Fool!" his father reprimanded, running after him. "Don't talk nonsense!" He grabbed his child and took him away. But the boy's remark, which had been heard by the bystanders, was repeated over and over again until everyone cried:

      "The boy is right! The Emperor has no clubs! It's true! Plus, we now think the market will crash again in the fall!"

      The Emperor realized that the people were right but could not admit to that. He thought it better to continue the photo op under the illusion that anyone who couldn't see his clubs was either stupid or incompetent. And he smiled stiffly for the media, while behind him a page held an imaginary stress test.

Cruelest Christmas message ever uttered

Don't let your kids see this.

Sorry. But we thought you'd want to know.

Get ready for Black Friday

The day after Thanksgiving, retailers discount products to kick off the Christmas shopping season...

The Black Friday site will alert you so these sales - and point you to online links that will allow you to take advantage of sales online - so you WON'T spend your time waiting on lines.

Wrong AGAIN on global warming

Proving again that Nobel prizes are given BY idiots, TO idiots.

Or, perhaps WORSE than idiots. Incompetents? Habitual liars?

A surreal scientific blunder last week raised a huge question mark about the temperature records that underpin the worldwide alarm over global warming. On Monday, Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), which is run by Al Gore's chief scientific ally, Dr James Hansen, and is one of four bodies responsible for monitoring global temperatures, announced that last month was the hottest October on record.

Except that - er - it WASN'T:

Across the world there were reports of unseasonal snow and plummeting temperatures last month, from the American Great Plains to China, and from the Alps to New Zealand. China's official news agency reported that Tibet had suffered its "worst snowstorm ever". In the US, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the month, and ranked it as only the 70th-warmest October in 114 years.

The anomaly was the result of a GISS data error. So - did they correct it? Yeah, kinda:

GISS began hastily revising its figures. This only made the confusion worse because, to compensate for the lowered temperatures in Russia, GISS claimed to have discovered a new "hotspot" in the Arctic - in a month when satellite images were showing Arctic sea-ice recovering so fast from its summer melt that three weeks ago it was 30 per cent more extensive than at the same time last year. ...last week's latest episode is far from the first time Dr Hansen's methodology has been called in question. In 2007 he was forced by Mr Watts and Mr McIntyre to revise his published figures for US surface temperatures, to show that the hottest decade of the 20th century was not the 1990s, as he had claimed, but the 1930s.

This is what happens when you're more invested in PC ideology and politics instead of - oh, we don't know... actual science?

Corzine gets 'F' for fiscal policy

Considering his abysmal performance in office, you wouldn't think Corzine... had ANY background in running a private business. But then again, considering the performance of companies such as Lehman lately, running a Goldman Sachs appears to be proof of nothing beyond the ability to manipulate markets to a few players' advantage. As Warren Buffet colorfully noted: 'When the tide goes out, you get to see who's wearing a bathing suit'.

That said, get the links to the unflattering portrayal of Corzine's disastrous fiscal policies here. Corzine was one of eight governors getting an 'F'. If you missed it, his latest bright idea is to have the government buy houses whose owners are failing - as if that would solve anything.

Really, Corzine's just running out the clock, hoping that Obama will gain office and get him the hell out of Dodge before Jersey's inevitable fiscal collapse.

Howard Stern asks voters about their support for Obama

Hilarious and brilliant, though completely unsurprising. (audio)

What this points to, actually, is the real way people make decisions. It has little to do with independent analysis (especially in urban areas) and everything to do with tribal identification.

Stern, God bless him, IS an independent mind. He may speak to the lowest common denominator, but he sure doesn't follow the crowd. That's how he got to where he is today, by following his own muse wherever it took him. All things considered, this is a pretty courageous piece, but then Stern's never been afraid of controversy, either.

Orson Scott Card reflects our own feelings toward Obama

It's as if we had written this post ourselves.

The creator of Ender's Game was rooting for Obama when he first emerged. Then he got a better look at him, and was horrified.

Once you scratch the surface, Obama's as cynical and dangerous a demagogue as you'll find. Beyond that, though, is the emergence of an interesting trend. It's an extension of the trend away from newspapers (leaving them increasingly in the hands of the hard left) and towards the web.

The first wave of web commentators were full-time pundits, dedicated to their positions (whatever they were). Now we're seeing a move toward people like Orson Scott Card, who make a substantial living in an unrelated area (Card made his name writing sci-fi), openly taking a position as a citizen.

This is something that few are willing to risk, unless of course it's an already-popular position. Bush-bashing carries zero risk in the 'creative' community, so actors, writers and other artistes continue to pile on. Going against the grain and speaking one's mind, though, is a different matter. The downside risk of loss is considerable.

Here's another example of this, from Baseball Crank. This is a very successful baseball site whose author has stepped well outside the chalk outlines of the game to speak passionately from his heart. He's risking his audience, but as you can see he's moved by a higher purpose. That's something rare and wonderful in a media age where everyone (yes, even bloggers) have a hidden agenda.

California may beat New Jersey to bankruptcy

...but don't worry. We'll get there too.

Not to be left out in the rush to the Federal trough, California is crying "me too" and threatening dire consequences unless the Feds cough up $7 billion.

The story over there is pretty familiar. Like Corzine, Schwartzenegger presides over an unmanageable morass of corrupt Democratic pols, who have been completely ignoring his pleas for fiscal constraint. Now, it's all about to collapse. The only difference between The Arnold and The Jon is that in California, the mob is ignoring a member of the opposition party. In Jersey, they've ignored one of their own.

Fall is here, and The Big Fall is not far off. (As we've predicted, for about as long as this blog's existed.)

Scared yet? You will be.

Obama's teleprompter issues its demands

A hilarious video.

If there's gonna be soup lines, someone's gotta make soup

In the overnight market results (via Bloomberg), only one stock rose since yesterday. Guess.

Campbells' Soup was up 6 points hen we looked early this AM. The cheery thinking, no doubt, is that lots of us will be eating out of tin cans for awhile.

Campbell's should have some company today, though, as we experience a sharp relief rally. Looks pretty bleak for the next few years for overleveraged, badly-run New Jersey though. Our crooked pols have to go to the well again, but not only is the well dry - it's been ripped right out of the ground.

How bad is New Jersey's financial situation?

It's THIS bad:

Jersey has the highest median real estate tax in the nation.
It's truly in a class by itself - about 50% higher than the next-highest state.

Jersey has about $25 billion in debt.
That's "billion" with a "b". Most of this is in unfunded union pensions. In other words, the state is obliged to pay out money it does not have.

Jersey takes the highest percentage of income via real estate tax of any state.
New York is not even close. (Same link as the top link.)

Jersey's population is dwindling.
And no wonder. Corruption and other factors have spiked the cost of living.

Add it up:

The state's debt is increasing, the economy is down ('collapsing' does not seem like an exaggeration), and fewer people are sticking around to pick up the tab. And if you've ever been to this site before, we don't need to tell you about the wholesale corruption that's ravaging towns like Hoboken. This is a cycle that feeds on itself. In other words, it gets worse - lots worse - before it gets better.

Corzine sees it coming. Should Obama win, he'll set world speed records for moving to DC. Adios.

We've said before that the only way to cap the state's corruption will be a complete, NYC 70's-style economic collapse. All the signs certainly seem to be pointing in this direction.

How you know when a politician is lying

His lips are moving. HA. OK, now here's how you know when anyone ELSE is lying.

Actually, that crack about politicians and their lips moving was unfair. Hoboken Mayor David Roberts can lie just sitting there. And his bestest buddy Tony Soares moves his lips when he reads (and he's NOT lying), but not when he posts under various Internet aliases (when he definitely IS).

Just wanted to clear that up.

Want to know how this financial mess happened?

Thought you'd never ask. Watch the most talked-about vid on YouTube right now:

Some folks won't like it - not that we care, mind you. (You're only as good as the people you tick off.) All we care about is gathering the facts, just like this fellow did. A dynamite piece of resaerch work, though the sound track gets a bit overwhelming. (Turn the sound down.)



RELATED: Econbroswer discusses the housing meltdown, but without following the breadcrumb trail all the way to its government underpinnings. The blog also discusses the bailout plan, which right now looks stillborn, on NPR. (You can listen, below. The NPR widget is kinda balky, but it's the same way of NPR's own site.)

The smartest man alive saw this coming 5 years back.
Fortunately, all OUR money is in our mattress.

Hacker fun

The Boston Globe lists the ten most common Internet passwords.

In other words: If you're on this list - get OFF it, fast.

Does the Instapundit understand every post he links?

Well, no. Today: Is the iPod 'over'?. Problem: The post is 2 years old.

The online credo is: Reader beware. (Yes, he corrected it, and quickly. We and no doubt a million others sent emails.)

BTW, today iTunes is the Number One seller of music, online or off, in the world, and Apple has almost 80% of the MP3 player market.

This two-year-old post is quite a prediction. We should all be so 'over'.

But this matters in more ways than meet the eye. Actually, in TWO more ways, by our reckoning:

1) It makes us wonder how Glenn Reynolds comes by his posts. He must get tons of email 'suggestions', for one thing, but one does not often come by a two-year-old post that way. Certainly the blog owner, at least, wasn't sending that one out.

Nor would this come through Reynolds' RSS feed reader. Again, it's too old.

It's more likely this came about as a result of a casual glance at a search result for something iPod-related. Which is something we do often - comment on something revealed through a search result or Site Meter result. We just didn't think The INstapundit did this.

2) The post itself reveals how a tainted survey can lead to bad judgement. SInce the survey mentioned was taken, Apple has passed both Amazon and WalMart in total music sales.

How did the survey get tainted? In the usual subtle ways. In brief, it was tailored toward the 'technological elite', and not the man in the street. The elite want a product that's special or exclusive, as it boosts their own self-worth. The man on the street just wants the thing to work, and not demand much of him.

This is the sort of folly to which 95% of all poll results, focus groups, surveys, etc., fall prey. And it is why Apple is such an astonishing company.

At the core, if you will, of Apple is one man who gathers information and listens to feedback, but also is guided by his own gut. He asks himself one simple question: What does that man in the street want? By cutting past the egos, waffling, and agenda that comprises 95% of public opinion, Steve Jobs has learned how to key in to the essence of his customers' needs.

If more companies, or our government, worked the same way, we'd live in a much different world. But at the end of the day, there are only a handful of Steve Jobs out there.

Paul Krugman: Wrong again

Trying to pander to a Manhattan audience, Krugman trips over his own ego.

This level of insight is par for the course from Krugman, but he'll never be the biggest horse's ass in the media biz. We still have Olbermann.

RELATED: Another recent gaffe by former Enron advisor Krugman here.

How to know it's time to sell your Microsoft stock

Just watch this ad. (BUMPED TO TOP & UPDATED)

Microsoft has just cancelled the campaign shown below, which we mocked in this same post last week. They're replacing it with this 'me too' ad.

You know, the Feds have just offered a bailout plan to AIG. AIG was once one of the world's largest, wealthiest companies.

You don't suppose...



This is a company with a LOT of 'disposable income' (i.e., the money you paid for their stock), but whose next big idea will have to come from SOMEWHERE ELSE. Now go sell that stock. FAST.

UPDATE #2: Could this be a screen clip from the new ads?

Because a day without a Hillary-for-VP rumor is like...

...uh, dunno WHAT it's like. Normal? Boring? Anyway: Your daily serving of you-know-what.

Take Our Country Back believes the rumor, though he says it's 'political suicide'. That's pretty much our take on it, too. Some good points at the link.

ABC's Jake Tappert (and apparently the rest of the media) asks: 'Joe who?'

And the Lucianne crowd seems to have a pretty informed handle on the current happenings (check the comments).

Seems like only yesterday that the all-seeing, all-wise Jack Cafferty was telling us about a likely VP-switcheroo. He just got the party wrong.

What will McCain do if Obama swaps Biden for Billary?

How will he strike back? Well, for starters, he could peruse the lefty blogs for ideas...

Most likely McCain's advisers have already done their homework on this, just in case. There's a mountain of Hillary-bashing material to sift through, it's merely a question of picking the best stuff and polishing it to a high gloss. Since it all comes from the Dems themselves, it'll be difficult for the Dems to defend.

You know what this campaign reminds us of? Yeah, you do:

Uh-oh: Second thoughts on the Hillary as VP meme

Whoops - we can't discount the rumors anymore!

Having just written a couple of posts debunking the Hillary-replacing-Biden rumors, we came across something that made us rethink the possibilities. (Hey, it's what we call a fluid situation.)

We just found this nugget:

Talk of replacing Biden with Hillary must be under discussion. I just got a follow-up survey from – William Arnone Phone: 212-773-3285 asking me if I would change my mind about voting for McCain if Biden was replaced with Hillary.

Read between the lines here: William Arnone is affiliated with the CLINTONS, not Obama. This means one of two things: (1) Obama really HAS asked Hillary to replace Biden, and the Clintons are trying to figure out if they could actually pull Obama's fat out of the fire. Or, (2) Arnone's survey is part of the Clintons' disinformation campaign designed to put Obama under water.

We have to admit the possibility that the Clintons' outsized egos and ambition might in fact cause them to decide to rejoin the fray. Perhaps, rather than wait four more years, they may simply go for it.

The Clintons may figure it like this: If they go for it, and Obama loses - it's OBAMA who loses. (They'll figure they can spin it that way, anyway.) But if they win, then they (NOT Obama) are the saviors of the Democratic Party.

That's a big upside, weighed against a manageable downside.

Obama's in rough shape, and on his knees. The Clintons LIKE that. They'll write their own ticket, and offer Obama a take-it-or-leave-it proposition. They'll run the campaign from here on, of course. Obama's people will take a backseat. They won't like that.

But unlike Hillary's people, Obama's people have (mostly) never HAD the kind of power the Clintons have enjoyed. They can't engage in a 'work slowdown' in protest, like the Clintons have engineered. This may be their one and only shot at the brass ring. So really, if the Clintons shove them aside, they'll have to take it and like it.

Hmm...

It's not a 'smart' move for Obama, it's a desperate one. We still think this will NOT prevail in the long run, but it will give Obama a sharp boost and force McCain to do something besides coast along on Palin's sudden popularity. On the other hand, in making the switch, Obama will be giving McCain plenty to work with. (They'll attack Obama's judgement, for one thing.) It will also create a LOT of turmoil within the ranks of Obama backers, at all levels. But, his core support is already hedging their bets on him anyway, so he has little to lose.

Yeah, we can see it now. There's a real chance Obama will drop the soap and take it from the Clintons. Yow.

And we just realized something else: In both parties, it's women who are driving the bus.

So just in case, let us be the first to welcome our new female overlords.

AND: "If Mrs. Clinton accepts the V-P offer -- and it appears she will -- the damage to our nation's political system would be enormous. On a lesser plane, it could destroy her reputation."

Now it gets ugly: Obama supporters jumping ship

The number of Obama pundits heading for the lifeboats continues to increase.

What you need to understand is this: Politics is a big business. Lots of the folks who promote a candidate make their living, in one way or another, off their punditry. So when your candidate starts to tank - you don't wait until AFTER the election to distance yourself anymore. By then, you see, everyone else has already bailed, and like a sped-up game of musical chairs, YOU could get stuck holding the bag.

That means you'll vacation in the backyard next year. That new car will just have to wait. You may even have to cut back on Mistress Hildegarde's House of Pain (and you know she won't like that).

When this starts to happen, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's dominos. Because some people are pulling back, other people pull back, and then other people pull back.

Yes, it's an ugly business. Yes, it should be about ideals and morals and values. But most of the time, it just ain't. Most of politics is about a bunch of cynical, manipulative people trying to grab power. Once in a while, one of them does something decent, but even that's usually by accident.

(What can we tell ya, there's a reason we rarely do that stuff anymore.)

There's panic at the core of Obama's campaign, and at the sensitive, loosely-connected fringes. Soon he'll lose the middle.

Rumor du jour: Biden will get 'sick', step down, Oct. 6th

Highly unlikely, but it's all over the 'net. We collect some samples.

Before you go much further, there's an important UPDATE to this post here. This is a fast-moving target.

No sooner had we written about why there's no WAY this would happen, than the rumors that it was about to happen started flying. There's even been a date - Oct. 6th, and a PR rationale - ill health - attached to it.

Of course, were this to now transpire, Obama on top of everything else would be painted as a liar. After all, everyone's already exposed the ruse.

But even in the few hours since we wrote this, things have gotten much worse for Obama. SO much worse, in fact, that we think this crazy idea might actually happen. Good God.

Anyway, we've collected some of the choicer posts among the rumor-mongers and chewers of this hot bit of business. And we've fashioned them into a nice stew for your amusement and possible nourishment. Enjoy.

On or about October 5th, Biden will excuse himself from the ticket, citing health problems, and he will be replaced by Hillary.

We actually don't know what to make of this site - it LOOKS like a spam site, but it's hard to be certain. Anyway, they picked up the rumor.

Conservatives fear Obama will switch VP- Biden for Hillary Clinton

This one perpetuates the rumor of a switch, but offers no evidence whatsoever that conservatives "fear" such a move. Maybe they fear laughing their butts off or not getting a prime position in the feeding frenzy when that blood hits the water. But it's doubtful the McCain campaign is afraid of ANYthing Obama might do these days.

Joe Biden can DESTROY the McCain camp

This Kos diarist prefers things as they are, says Biden's completely competent to stop McCain. Today, though, he's clearly in the minority.

The political science class lessons of the Obama Campaign

Does not involve the rumored 'switch', but offers a thoughtful analysis of events to date. Also, we like the site's tagline: The nine most terrifying words in the English language are 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help'

Does anyone really think that’s [replacing Biden with Hillary] a good idea at this point?

Define 'anyone'. Andy Ostroy thinks it's a keen idea. Is he 'anyone'?

Barack buys a lemon

Says it all. Next?

Barack Obama has gone to Bill Clinton–with his hat in hand, chin on chest–and begged Bill to campaign for him. My first impulse thought was “What’s in it for Bill?” A cabinet post? Nomination to the US Supreme Court? Dump Biden and take Hillary as his VP running mate? Bill Clinton doesn’t work for free! If I were a betting man, my money would be on Obama dumping Joe Biden and taking Hillary on as his running mate...

OK, but the SS Clinton sailed the day Biden was selected. It won't be back in port for a few more years.

We re-thought this one a few hours after we wrote this post. Not so sure anymore... starting to see how the Clintons, with Obama so badly weakened, might take a shot.

The Obama campaign sold “better judgement” as the reason to vote Obama rather than all the Democrats in the primary that had actual accomplishments and experience. So I thought I’d review what this week reveal about Obama’s better judgement.

Well, you can already tell where THAT post is headed. Next?

There are a whole host of women in the Democratic Party who believe the Democratic Party does not understand what sexism is, routinely underestimates the impact of women, and they are coming in droves to the Republican Party because they think the party and John McCain get it. That’s a fact.

Again, you get the message.

According to the New York Post, internal polling by both Democrats and Republicans show Barack Obama beginning to fade in New York.

Hell will freeze over before that happens in Jersey. Just in case, though, if you're visiting - bring a parka.

Sarah "Lying Sack of Shit" Palin was widely panned on the Sunday talk shows...

OK, there's 'whistling-in-the-dark', and then there's 'foaming-at-the-mouth-in-the-dark'. Moving on...

Let me share some info with you that i have gotten from excellent sources within the DNC: On or about October 5th, Biden will excuse himself from the ticket, citing health problems, and he will be replaced by Hillary. This is timed to occur after the VP debate on 10/2.

Back to the rumor. You thought we forgot about the rumor, didn't you? Well, here it is. One thing that makes this allegation bizarre, though, is the supposed timing: Hillary's supposed to come aboard AFTER a VP debate? Why?

People have begun predicting Biden will fall "ill" and Clinton will humbly move in and accept the role as VP.

He's not buying it. Maybe he doesn't know about those 'excellent sources within the DNC'.

Biden's upcoming "Health Issue"

This one also cites those 'excellent sources'. But this blog may be pulling our leg. You decide.

Will Hillary end up running against Sarah?

This one's just tossing the rumor out there. No opinion on its veracity, no citing those 'excellent sources'.

Could Obama replace Biden with Hillary and, if so, would she take it?

This blogger says the answer is 'no' on both counts. Makes good rational sense, but of course THAT's no fun.

Letter to Obama: Why not replace Biden with Hillary?

For answer, see previous blogger.

I've been the main voice on the Internet discussing the story that Hillary Clinton -- early in October, it appears -- would replace Joe Biden on the Democratic ticket. I stand by this revelation because I believe it's true.

And we believe we could hit .400 in the bigs. But the Yankees NEVER call us!

Barack failed to pick Hillary because as Roeser says he is a "very-very soft" man who felt "threatened by [Hillary] and her husband-which tells us much about the wispy poetical presidential candidate."

Now THAT's a spicy meatball. And written by a liberal, too. Mamma mia!

Desperate Obama to replace Biden with Hillary? I can't vouch for the voracity of this but it sure sounds like an Blowhard Obama move.

This one just wants to spread the rumor, to hurt Obama. We saw a number like it.

Obamatrons put lipstick on Obama's decision to pick Biden

We're still a sucker for those 'lipstick' headlines.

But our favorite reaction du jour was the following image:

The clarion call to replace Biden with Hillary

Do yourself a favor and note the names of the pundits calling for this. Make a list, and hang onto it. Then, in the future, you can save yourself the trouble of listening to any of these clowns ever again.

The heavily self-promoting (we nearly wrote 'heavily self-medicated', but it's such a nice day that we don't want to be MEAN) Andy Ostroy is only the latest in a series of clowns exiting the 'replace Biden' clowncar. Of course, Obama can afford to do no such thing, because:

1) Having Hillary run as VP was a no-brainer decision - so why do you think Obama didn't go that route in the first place? Obama knew that having a Clinton at his side in the White House was the political equivalent of locking a fox in a room with a chicken. (Guess who the fox is.)

2) Replacing Biden at this point would be a PR disaster, and there's no time left to recover. Obama would spend the rest of his campaign slogging through the fallout from that one decision. He'd be doomed. (Not that he isn't anyway, but we mean - If you're doomed already, why go to all the extra trouble?)

3) If Obama DID extend an offer to the Clintons at this point - THEY WOULD NOT TAKE IT! Obama's a sinking ship. Exactly why do the Clintons want to board the Titanic and start bailing, when they can sit back all nice and dry and watch their only future obstacle to the White House sink from view?

UPDATE: Important new information and developments. Swapping Biden for Clinton is still a bad strategic idea - but it may happen anyway!

Obama and marketing 101

Just another tone-deaf, clumsy move by the Obama campaign & its supporters.

MoveOn thinks they're pushing "Obama/Biden" stickers (see image at bottom). But the takeaway, for a LOT of casual observers, is support for Osama Bin Liden.

Think that's farfetched? Think again... and then think again.

This is VERY fixable, by the way. A smart communicator recognizes and breaks up the unfortunate rhythm and pattern of the words, by (for example) inserting the first names in small type.

Why doesn't MoveOn 'get' this? Maybe it's because they don't really have the same problem with Bin Laden that most of the rest of America does. But if B'ani Brith was sponsoring something that read like 'Hitler', think they'd notice?

Obama stubbornly compounds the problem by insisting on "Barack" instead of the more familiar and voter-friendly "Barry". And then there's the issue of his middle name...

What happens in a political campaign is, all these little messages add up. These stickers, Obama's body language as he bowls or places flowers at 'Ground Zero', various gaffes and gotchas, etc. The voters total it up somewhere in their subconscious, and pull the lever. These messages carry far more weight than what a campaign is trying (and paying good money) to say. At the end of the day, most of the centrally-planned 'canned' messages are heavily discounted.

You can see a train wreck like Obama's campaign coming from WAY down the line. But there's no stopping it. And when it's over, Obamaphiles will blame everything (racism, sexism, any other 'isms' you care to name) except the campaign's real failings.

People make the same mistakes over and over and over again when they fail, for whatever reason, to recognize their real problems. The American left fails repeatedly because it refuses to acknowledge and account for perceptions beyond its own sphere of influence.

RELATED: Great strategic advice for Obama, from Mickey Kauss. Unfortunately, it's pearls before swine.

Here's the new gold standard for 'flaming idiot'

"I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels." - Nancy Pelosi

The remark's in context - it's not a 'gotcha' moment (we don't do that). She really DOES NOT KNOW that natural gas IS a 'fossil fuel'. Utterly clueless. And she's a LEADER of her party. Out there setting policies that will strangle the rest of us. (Shudder.)

Interesting that Pelosi has avoided criticizing Sarah Palin. Holding out for Hillary? Or afraid she'll get her head handed to her when it backfires?

Surely, it's a bit of both.

Does the Jersey Journal actually read what they publish...

...or are its editors too busy placing bets?

Presented for your approval, a newspaper column like few you've ever seen. So tortured is its prose that it defies comprehension, just as the baffling decision to print it defies rational explanation. The columnist dodges and weaves from 1948 to 1960 to last winter - and then, apparently, meets his word quota and turns it in.

The headline says 'Campaigns never make sense until they're over'. But when will this column make sense? What does it MEAN? We don't know. We're pretty sure the author doesn't know either. In any case, we'd hate to wake him just to ask. Something about... politics being strange? No doubt, this news would be a revelation to most folks in Hudson County. Someone, please - stop those presses.

If it's too bizarre for The Twilight Zone, it's perfect for the 'all the news that fits, we print' Jersey Journal. Let's have another round for the boys in the newsroom - they look a little dry. We're buyin'!

What is it about Sarah Palin...

...that has driven so many smart, thoughtful Obama supporters around the bend?

That's EASY. They thought their candidate would always be the prettiest one in the race.

AND: Obama asks (begs?) Bill Clinton for help. In keeping with our Hillary slowdown theory, we don't expect much. Here's what Bill says he'll do:

Clinton said he will start campaigning for Obama as soon as he is done with work on the Clinton Global Initiative... Clinton, when asked how frequently he would be campaigning for Obama, said that he has “agreed to do a substantial number of things, whatever I’m asked to do.”

So - just as soon as Bill's done with his Clinton Global Initiative, he'll be out there stumpin' 'substantially' for Barack. Well, lessee. Their annual meeting is on September 23-26, so he definitely won't start before that. Then, in the first week of December, CGI will convene in Hong Kong. That's their first meeting there, ever, and gosh durn it, he'll have his hands full preparing for THAT... but don't worry, he'll squeeze you in somehow, Barack!

'Talkleft' didn't get the memo

Talkleft has some advice for Obama. What they don't get is: It's not part of the plan.

Talkleft: "If I were running Obama's campaign, I would have Obama campaign with Bill Clinton next week in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan for a few days." Sounds good, right? Instapundit says: "Excellent advice." In fact, we'd be surprised if Obama's people hadn't ALREADY thought of this.

Just one little problem: It's not in the plan. Bill's going to be busy, too busy to help out - just like Hillary. Oh, maybe he'll put in a token appearance somewhere, offer a soundbite. But that's just for show. Actual campaigning? Fighting to save Obama's campaign? Forget it.

The fact that 'Talkleft' actually thinks the Clintons have any motive for propping up Obama now, when he's all that's standing between them and the White House in 4 years... well, let's just say the word 'clueless' is inescapable.

Bird, bird, bird - Bird is the word

Chaz flips the bird. We have the shocking proof!

Chaz at Dustbury updates his site design and publishing platform. His is one of the oldest blogs (from before there WERE blogs, really) on the 'net. But why oh why did he have to change his bird?

Still more signs of a Democratic Party meltdown

Joe Biden: "Hillary might have been a better VP pick than me."

You can bet you'll be hearing THAT little sound bite for a while.

Another sign: Some lefty blogs are becoming unhinged - and the more rational liberals are telling them to knock it off. The significance here is that this is exactly the pattern of behavior one expects when a message is getting zero traction.

And here's a biggie: Dem pundits second-guessing the Obama campaign's strategy. (They're starting to jockey for position in the NEXT election - presumably with Hillary on the ticket. At least vultures wait until you're actually DEAD.)

Starting to get the feeling that, like Dukakis and that tank, the name 'Barack Obama' is destined to be associated with the phrase 'epic fail'.



RELATED: More Joe Biden fun, as he tells a paralyzed state senator to 'stand up':

The Amazon red/blue political book map...

...is showing a surprising amount of red. In New Jersey.

Does this mean New Jersey will go McCain? No. Not as long as Jersey's votes can be freely manufactured by the Democratic mob. But it does correlate with the man on the street around here, who's been more than willing to tell us about his (her) doubts about Obama.

Another snippet from our 9/11 documentary

Video images of The Missing, with some fine original music by Cecilia and Don Slepian.

Slepian composed his music on the spot, and mixed it with pre-recorded narration and Cecilia's studio-produced work. The soundtrack you hear was, therefore, recorded live at the documentary's one theater performance (at Stevens Institute). That's why the sound is of uneven quality and volume. We'd like to reassemble the pieces in a more polished fashion, if we come across an interested backer at some point.

Obama and the pig remark

What REALLY happened.

So the latest hoo-ha is: Did Obama just call Palin a pig?

Actually, what happened was more sloppiness than artifice. Obama wasn't trying to tell the faithful that Palin is a pig. Even red-meat stump speeches (well, in this case, white meat - unless that's racist... it's SO confusing these days...) won't go that far, not if there's any chance they'll spread outside the echo chamber. (As almost everything does in the YouTube age.)

But as you'll see, this gaffe is just as bad as if Obama HAD such an intent. In fact - his LACK of intent may actually be a worse sign than if he'd meant it.

Had Obama (or, his speechwriter... whatever...) been so clever as to get in a veiled dig or two (Palin=pig, McCain=old fish), s/he also would have been clever enough to parse how the message could have boomeranged. Well-written political text (yes, this is work we have done a good deal of) is bulletproof. It's bulletproof because it's examined and tested from all sorts of angles before it's turned loose into the wilds of political pundits, opponents, bloggers, radio hosts, op-ed columnists and others who will interpret and torment it in ways beyond belief.

Good political communications don't backfire. Because if you're releasing text that your candidate winds up having to defend, you're better off NOT having written ANYthing. Rather than put your candidate in jeopardy with weapons that aren't battleready, have him/her smile and kiss babies instead.

If you know what you're doing, you just do not mess with this prime directive. Like a doctor, first do no harm. Otherwise, you will spend most of your time issuing press releases designed to fix your mistakes (which often as not just fan the flames anyway). Those are not fun to write, and the self-created need to write them does not enhance anyone's reputation.

What's happening here is pretty clear to us: Obama's inexperienced campaign is working OT to put out messages that will dampen the Palin conflagration. They're feeling the pressure of dealing with a Republican surprise with two months to go, and they don't have a handle on it.

They're issuing a sort of damage control hastily mixed with a half-baked strategy to get McCain and Palin on the defensive. They're also messing around with the most dangerous, incendiary message possible: THEY ARE TRYING TO BE FUNNY. When that fails, it fails badly.

The Dem reaction so far to Palin has been sloppy, scattershot, and angry. It betrays desperation. Like all things hasty, it's flawed. They're firing a howitzer made on a Monday by hungover workers in Thailand. The question isn't whether it will blow up in their hands, but how much damage it will self-inflict.

If you're a politician, everything you say will be analyzed to death. When you're running for president of the US, multiply the preceding statement by ten. You don't write political material the way you'd dash off, say, a blog post, memo, or a Twitter tweet. (Not that THOSE can't come back to bite you, but let's face it, they rarely get POTUS-level scrutiny.)

Sloppy, untested, rushed messages from anyone in a highly visible situation are a recipe for disaster, yet that's EXACTLY what Obama and his handlers have been issuing. Add to this the simple fact that the TOP of one ticket is attacking the BOTTOM of the other (a strong signal of fear - Biden isn't sufficient to go after Palin? Uh oh.) and it's easy to see that the campaign isn't at all sure of itself.

All this says Obama's campaign is presently unsteady at the least, and quite possibly far worse off than that.

AND: More commentary on this than you'll ever want to read, here.

AND: Here's the speech...



...parts of which were apparently lifted from a cartoon.... (Swinegate?)

...the New York Post oinks away, while The New York Times tries to see it from Obama's POV... Lileks bleats hilariously...

AND: Here is what a balding, out-of-shape man with a pig actually looks like:

The 9/11 television archive

Look back and remember.

A project from The Wayback Machine.

How to listen to the grassroots

Deli workers in NJ, Oprah fans everywhere. That's the way to tell how this election's going.

During the Corzine campaign, if you'd looked around urban New Jersey for a Forrester sign, you'd have had a hard time finding one. That's not because no one voted for the guy (many did, and the race was reasonably close, all things considered). It was because rabid Dem workers tore them down almost faster than they could be posted. If you talked to someone on the street, they'd have voiced unwavering certainty that Corzine was going to win, even though Forrester had pulled to within a few percentage points at times.

This was because Corzine enjoyed the full-bore support of grassroots, take-no-prisoners party bosses like Menendez and Norcross, whose loyalty he had bought. In Jersey, when guys like that get engaged, the man on the street gets the vibe. He knows what's about to happen.

There's NO such vibe about Obama among the various shop owners, deli folk, and other everyday people we've spoken to in the Democratic Bunker we call urban New Jersey. A Vietnamese fellow running an area restaurant told us Sunday that he didn't think Obama could win.

This is what happens when the engines who usually pull the Democrats' train get uncoupled.

Then there's the Oprah metric. She wants Obama in office, and her apparent snub of Palin has driven her usually loyal and loving audience ballistic.

There's a very real 'echo chamber' in political commentary, especially in a place like Jersey. When that's all you listen to (as too many do), you're apt to be surprised when 'what everyone knows' turns out to be worthless.

MSNBC: Gee, we really WERE God-awful, weren't we

After bashing the Repubs during their own party, MSNBC admits the GOP had a point.

Time after time during the Republican convention, the biggest horse's ass on TV (and it's a crowded field) told the public, with a straight face, how wrong the Republicans were to complain about media bias.

Well, not only did the public vote with their remotes (the odious Olbermann and crew eked out the lowest ratings by a big margin), present and former MSNBC officials have, sometimes grudgingly, acknowledged their embarrassment.

“The most disappointing shift is to see the partisan attitude move from prime time into what’s supposed to be straight news programming,” said Davidson Goldin, formerly the editorial director of MSNBC.

...In interviews, 10 current and former staff members said that long-simmering tensions between MSNBC and NBC reached a boiling point during the conventions. “MSNBC is behaving like a heroin addict,” one senior staff member observed. “They’re living from fix to fix and swearing they’ll go into rehab the next week.”

...MSNBC insisted that Mr. Olbermann knew the difference between news and commentary. But in the past two weeks, that line has been blurred...

...Tom Brokaw and Brian Williams, the past and present anchors of “NBC Nightly News,” have told friends and colleagues that they are finding it tougher and tougher to defend the cable arm of the news division...

No kidding. We can understand MSNBC's temptation to boost ratings by playing to the Kos Kids (the groundlings of modern politics), but such pandering comes at the long-term cost of reputation. (Granted, MSNBC doesn't have much of a rep to salvage, so there's always THAT justification for a full-bore sellout.)

Reminiscent of the famous Steinberg New Yorker cover skewering (yet flattering) Manhattan's vainglorious self-absorption, Olbermann is a slave to a small but rabid audience that will reward only his constant, fawning fealty. If he loses them, he has nothing - a fact of which he's painfully aware. It's a mesmerizing dance, but journalism it ain't. MSNBC, its wagon securely hitched to its bloviating, pandering, journalistic joke of a star, can only follow helplessly along.

If anyone actually cares, Olbermann's transparent act only fosters a widespread (and growing) resentment of the left out there in the heartland. Whether they realize it or not, Keith Olbermann right now is the GOP's best media friend. This will manifest itself come election day.

Willie Brown, former San Fran mayor, lauds Palin

He's 100% Dem, but Willie calls 'em like he sees 'em. Also: A tip for dining out in Oakland.

Quite surprised to hear an entrenched Dem like Brown rave on about Palin, but he's a political realist. A dead-on assessment of the political situation for the next two months, we think. It was so good, we looked in his archives. We had no idea his SF Gate column was so worthwhile. In fact, he's better than ANY newspaper columnist we can think of here on the East Coast. He's a rare bird - a Dem pundit from a deep-blue urban area who's able to transgress his Party's talking points. (Making his San Fran readers very unhappy - see the almost 500 comments.) Besides maybe Ed Koch, we can't think of another Democratic pol this iconoclastic.

Plus, this vital tip for those of you who might find yourselves in an Oakland bistro:

Be sure to order soup. That way when the robbery starts, you can slip off your jewelry and drop it into soup so the robbers won't see it.

Like we say, Willie's nothing if not pragmatic.

Palin, Obama, and the subconscious message

Who's winning the war of the messages that fly under the radar? (They're the only ones that really matter.)

• Exhibit A: Palin with a grizzly bear (and a crab that could have been a stand-in on the Alien set):


















Subconscious message: "D. Boon Cilled a. Bar on [this] tree"

• Exhibit B: Obama goes bowling:



Subconscious message: "Hey! Remember Mike Dukakis?"

Hillary's work slowdown

The latest chapter in the Clinton strategy of foot-dragging for Obama.

As you know, Palin made a big splash, energizing the Republican convention. Predictably, Obama's advisers have hit on a strategy of deploying its own wave of female Democrats. The idea is to have these women attack Plain.

Now, the other day, we described the Clintons' strategy the rest of the way through. She, and those allied with her, will institute what's known in union circles as a 'work slowdown'. It's used in circumstances where a strike is forbidden or inappropriate, which is exactly what the Clintons are facing. They very much want - need - Obama to fail, but they can't be too obvious about it.

Naturally, Obama expects Hillary to be out front and center for him in this wave of Democratic estrogen he's unleashing. So we're reading between the lines to see how Hillary will lay the groundwork for the propagation of her rope-a-dope strategy.

And sure enough:

...Obama aides say they are counting on not only Mrs. Clinton but also Democratic female governors to criticize their Alaskan counterpart, Ms. Palin — and, by extension, Mr. McCain... Advisers to Mrs. Clinton, who has been on vacation this week, said that she stands ready to help the Obama-Biden ticket, but they urged not to overestimate the effect she could have, noting that she had other commitments this fall, like campaigning and raising money for Senate candidates.

We are, of course, completely unsurprised.

Unfortunately for Obama, all politics IS local

The other day we were told it was unfair of us to expect change from Obama...

...and after Palin's speech to the Republicans, we started getting hits from search results for the words 'Obama Chicago machine'. This was one of the primary subjects of the Republicans' rhetoric on Wednesday night, so we figured the spinmeisters (some of the hits were from DC) might have begun rationalizing Obama's connections with the Chicago political mob.

So: Were we being unfair to Obama? Do people expect the agent of change to be credible in his promises, or are they more than willing to discount his rhetoric and elect him anyway? Is there a GOOD side to his 'practicality' in dealing with crooked Chicago politics? Does anyone care about a candidate's track record, or does the guy with the best PR win? We followed the Google search, through ten pages of results. Below is a snippet of everything we found that actually addressed the issue. (We ignored links, like this one and this one, that merely contained the search terms without addressing them.)

These were NOT culled from 'right wing' or 'conservative' blogs. These are just the blogs Google found, period.

Here we go (and we are NOT responsible for their spelling and punctuation errors... keeping up with our own is problem enough):

...will this complex dance with the Chicago Machine continue if Obama wins the presidency? What’s the payoff for Daley and his cronies? To believe that those fellows support a candidate out of altruism is ...

For all the sanctimonious rhetoric, you can count on Barak Obama's Chicago style campaign to do their own version mudslinging...

Obama’s record as a state senator in Illinois hardly represents reform. He spent eight years cozying up to the Chicago machine and failed to challenge status quo politics there.

"Mr. Obama rose through the Chicago Democratic machine without a peep of push-back. Alaska’s politics are deeply inbred and backed by energy-industry money. Mr. Obama slid past the kind of forces that Mrs. Palin took head on.” (This blogger was quoting the Wall Street Journal.)

We can only hope Fitzgerald comes out with more indictments against the Chicago machine naming some of those backing Obama now.

He was a community organizer in Chicago "machine politics", followed by a bunch of "boooo!"'s and him harping on Obama not being able to make decisions. Valid point, I guess.

In Chicago, there is a political tension between reform Democrats and machine Democrats. Sen. Obama has always aligned with the machine Democrats. All of his endorsements go to machine Democrats.

A Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of The Chicago Machine

He was on the inside of Chicago politics and endorsed the very powers that allowed corruption, patronage, and nepotism here.

When Obama had an opportunity to prove his self-described "reformer" credentials, he backed away, disappointing both Democrats and Republicans in Chicago who were tired of the corruption and patronage of machine...

…the most impressive part of Palin’s resumé, and the sharpest contrast with Obama’s, is how she has taken on Alaska Republicans... Palin at least has a reform resumé, something that Obama cannot legitimately claim.

Now - here's the first actual defense of Obama's Chicago connections we found:

He then talks about Obama and basically accuses Barack of being a “Chicago Machine” politician who never had to lead anyone in a time of crisis. Yeah, but what about his ideas?

Got that? Here's how you explain Obama's deeply corrupt roots: 'Yeah, but.' Should be on a bumper sticker.

Back to Google:

Obama claims that he is, but he has precious little demonstrated record of ever standing up to the corrupt Chicago political machine from which he came.

Barack Obama has never found a corrupt Chicago machine politician that he didn't want to play footsie with and even endorse for reelection. That's not exactly change you can believe in.

Obama’s calculus in protecting his interests meant first and foremost showing deference to the Chicago machine...

Gov. Palin has walked the talk so to speak as compared to Obama. She has actual risked political capital on confronting coruption and old boy politics.

The following post consisted of a massive list of links to news stories on Obama's unsavory Chicago connections, including:

Obama helped ex-bos get $1 mil. from charity [Chicago Sun-Times], Barack Obama — Operation Board Games for Slumlords [Best Publishing], How Obama and the radical became news [Boston Globe]

Anonymous smears that cannot be sourced to the Obama campaign have, sadly, become an integral part of his political operation. That’s the way they do things in Chicago.

Here's a pretty reasonable explanation - but note that the author isn't letting Obama off the hook:

Nobody expected Obama to become a one issue crusader against corruption in Chicago. Even most anti-machine politicians attempt to work within the system. But it is one thing to remain silent and another to use the system to climb the ladder and then claim to be something different. Obama’s record is the record of a politician accommodating himself to the system not challenging it.

...Chicago-machine pols, unrepentant home-grown terrorists and foaming at the mouth racist pastors...

...the Democrat do-gooders of the Daley machine who have run Chicago for years only wanted one thing from these people. They'd round them up like cattle on Election Day to vote. And then, you go back, and you go back to your drugs...

The flaccid friend of unrepentant terrorists and product of Chicago machine politics is running on the typical hard Left message of class envy and faux compassion...

More “Chicago-style” Politics as Usual?

At this point, we're on Page 4 of Google's results, and we find another rationalization of Obama's background:

Ohh! scary “chicago machine politics.”

Another bumper sticker candidate! Back to Google:

...the presidential candidate has learned and internalized the lateral thinking that any Chicago machine politician uses.

The Ethics of Obama’s Mentor: Chicago Machine Hack Emil Jones... he can now give himself a $578000 gift. It is a perfectly legal and completely corrupt arrangement that he made ten years ago, with just a little help from Obama.

A Chicagoan's Perspective on Obama, Rezko and Corruption

Obama - a quintessential, privileged, yes-man Chicago machine politician

...Resko, Wright, Ayers, the corrupt Chicago machine, and who in the hell knows how much more….

Obama declined to join challenges to the Chicago Democrat political machine. Instead, he curried favor with the machine, and he won his elections with its support. Obama's former fundraiser Tony Rezko, now in prison...

This one takes down Obama, but is more of an equal-opportunity cynic:

“Change” Is Just Empty Rhetoric

Unlike Obama, who played ball with the notorious Chicago machine, Palin took dead aim at the bosses of her own party...

This fight is going to get vicious, which is the only thing the Chicago machine knows.

Obama’s Acceptance Speech: A Symphony of Deceit... These attacks might have worked in his past days as a tool of the Chicago political machine, but...

Despite his unimpressive record, Obama’s history is of “a shrewd, Machine-aligned politician from Chicago — a charismatic, smooth-talking politician...

Here's the most palatable (though convoluted) explanation of Obama's Chicago roots. (It's too involved to summarize, you'll have to read it.)

Obama: Worked his way to the top by cultivating, pandering to and stroking the most powerful interest groups in the all-pervasive Chicago political machine ensuring his views were aligned with the power brokers there.

Palin because she’s authentic. She’s got an irrefutable history of reform. Sen. Obama talks incessantly about change. He’s never lifted a finger to expose the corruption known as Chicago machine style politics.

It's not the supposed associations with radicals that is the problem, it's the associations with the Chicago Machine...

Mayor Daley runs the Chicago machine just like his father did. And it elected Obama. And that means it has the goods on Obama...

Chicago Obama Backer Calls For ‘Dirty Politics’ To Win In November... Typical Chicago Machine Politics and the people that support it...

that's the kind of town Chicago is—diverse, vibrant, tolerant … as long as you've got clout and are willing to put aside petty differences and play ball with others with clout to mutually defraud the public.

"Brand Obama," I argue, is no special exception to the basic essence of American presidential politics. Every four years, many Americans invest their hopes and dreams in an electoral process that does not deserve their trust.

Andy Martin on the "Obama Smear Machine: (Part One) It's Real... That's the way they do things in Chicago. They are a standard part of any David Axelrod operation...

In contrast, Obama began his political career with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, other Hyde Park lefties and the Chicago political machine of the Daly variety. He has picked politics as usual and reinforced that with Joe Biden...

Obama went to Chicago and promptly played ball with the Chicago Machine, the Cook County Machine, and criminals like Rezko.

Yeah — lets have an honest comparison of her time in Alaska machine politics, and Obama’s time in Chicago machine politics. Lets hear some more about Obama’s great strides at ethics reform — the kind of reform that next year will allow his political mentor in Springfield, Emil Jones, to retire and at that moment transfer about $550,000 from his campaign fund into his personal bank account just as if he had earned it through hard work.

Unlike Barack Obama who did the bidding of the Chicago Democrat machine and ignored its institutional corruption, Palin actually fought corrupt Republicans in Alaska, including the chair of the Alaska Republican Party...

She took on her own party's corrupt political culture directly while Obama was sucking up to Wright and Ayers and being just another get-along Chicago machine pol (see his campaign's thuggish attempt to throttle Stanley Kurtz and Milt Rosenberg on WGN the other night).

Source: Palin is a Nazi Sympathizer... a knowing lie by the Obama campaign, employed in order to scare old Jewish voters. Hope™ & Change™ sures does look a lot like ruthless Chicago machine politics....

Obama the Potential Thug-in-Chief - Silence the Opposition! ...This kind of response may be acceptable in Chicago Machine politics, but it is not acceptable from a candidate for president.

Obama was making shady real estate deals with convicted felon Tony Rezko and he was obtaining earmarks for the University of Chicago while his wife was given an insanely huge pay increase...

Mr. Obama worked his way into Chicago politics by ingratiating himself to corrupt officials...

OK, we're at page 9 of the Google results, and we finally find an exoneration of Obama's affiliations... sort of...

Obama and the Chicago Machine...Yes, he is a politician with a good whiff of the old but still much of the new. His interrelationships are as complex as the man himself.

He's 'complex'. Hey! Lincoln was complex! So was Darth Vader. Somehow, that's not very reassuring.

...nor for his constituents in the manner of protecting them from the graft and corruption of the Chicago machine which he tolerated and accommodated...

Obama chose to go along with his party and adopt the dirty tricks of the Chicago political machine to get elected.

Now we come across a unique take:

Barack Obama came up through that crucible [of Chicago politics], and triumphed.

It's sort of a feel-good, catchall phrase. They used to say that about Capone, too.

Finally, we arrive at page 10:

Obama SAYS leave the families out of it, on the surface, while I bet his “machine” is stoking the fires underneath. This is the kind of politician he is - out of the corrupt Chicago political machine, now being used on a...

Richie Daley runs Chicago and the Chicago democratic machine politics. Richie Daley supports Obama just as his daddy supported Jack Kennedy.

Obama has extensive ties with these scum as they helped introduce him to Chicago Machine politics and provided him the support to launch his political career.

Unfortunately, with the Chicago political machine that produced Barack Obama in power, school reform is unlikely and these protesting families will have to endure the sub-par education the city provides.

USA Today finally notices the Obama-Ayers connection

Obama’s support for and alliances with Chicago machine politicians, that’s chapters one and two. The “political machine” is all about using the apparatus of the government treasury, using the taxpayer’s money to keep yourself in power...

And that's it. Whew. From nearly 100 Google results, we could find maybe 3 or 4 limp attempts to align Obama's promises with his political roots and actions. If it's unfair to demand that 'the agent of change' produce his 'resumé of change', there sure are a LOT of people being 'unfair' to Obama.

'A house divided against itself cannot stand'

A story in the Star Ledger unwittingly demonstrates why Obama will lose.

Bob Menendez refusing a chance to make a key speech at the Dem convention is like a lion refusing a wounded gazelle. Reason? Bad blood between him and Obama. And the reason for that leads, inevitably, back to the Clintons.

He SAYS all the right things:

Menendez stressed he is committed to Obama.... "I am fully enlisted in Obama's campaign to achieve the change we all want."

He even claims the offer to speak was never made:

"Despite these anonymous rumors, Sen. Menendez was not given a firm offer to speak during the convention."

But focus on what he actually DOES:

a longtime -- and strident -- Clinton supporter, Menendez was expected to address the convention and take an active role in Obama's campaign. He is a popular presence in the Latino community and Obama is aggressively courting that group in his effort to win the White House. Menendez's absence from both the podium and Obama campaign events has become conspicuous.

Why is this happening, and why do we expect to keep reading stories like this throughout the campaign? Simple math, and basic human nature. The Clinton gang includes some of the most ambitious, power-hungry and ruthless political opportunists on the planet. If Bill and Hill help Obama into office, they've helped themselves OUT of power (as they once knew it), forever.

Rather than cater their own funeral, they're looking to surreptitiously undermine Obama at every opportunity. That means calling in political favors, whispering in the ears of their media friends (watch Paul Krugman and Arianna Huffington, among others), and convincing power brokers like Menendez that their best interests lie in dragging their feet wherever Obama is concerned.

The same Star-Ledger story, though, depicts Jon Corzine as hell-bent for Obama:

After Obama locked up the nomination... Gov. Jon Corzine, moved quickly to show...support.

Digging elsewhere, it's easy to find examples of Corzine's very active support for Obama:

Corzine urges Dem Party unity behind Obama... [he] has become an informal economic adviser to Obama in recent weeks...

Corzine smoothes the road for Obama in the Holy Land... he'll be in Tel Aviv and Haifa when Obama is in Jerusalem for a one day stop...

New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine... was very animated... 'New Jersey, I want to see you stand up and cheer!'

And yet Corzine, like Menendez, was once fully prepped to endorse Clinton:

Corzine, who claimed Obama as protégé in ’04, will endorse Clinton... he would become the first sitting Democratic governor to endorse her over her two main rivals... he is an old bond trader, and he’s looking at who has the best odds of who’s going to win...

So, what gives? Simple. Menendez worked his way up through NJ's miserable political machine. He's learned one thing, and he's learned it well: If you're not the lead dog, the view never changes. By supporting Obama, he'd be taking a number and getting in line behind all the other power broker wannabes. (Bob remembers bitterly being vastly overshadowed by Obama at his own fundraising event, which he saw as a harbinger of things to come.) Menendez is not ready to settle for being a supporting player, and figures that by holding out for Hillary (i.e., witholding support for Obama), he'll be on the ground floor for the Clinton's next charge at the top slot. He'll be in the center ring, not the sideshow. It's a siren song the vain, yet insecure Menendez can't resist.

Corzine's in an entirely different place. He's made more money, semi-honestly, than Menendez could ever hope to steal. He bought his way into Jersey's corrupt political system in hopes of a run at the White House. His sideways move from the Senate to the Governorship was part of that scheme, since in recent years conventional wisdom said that Senators can't build the political bases that Governors can.

But having bought his way to power, Corzine's discovered that he's now trapped. He cannot act against corrupt interests, since those same interests brought him into the statehouse. The state is sinking under the weight of its own corruption, and as Jersey bleeds jobs and population, the message is that Corzine is either useless, part of the problem, or both. Hillary - and now Obama - is Corzine's exit strategy. If the Dems take over the White House, Corzine wants IN, so he can escape a situation that's well beyond his control.

There are plenty of Corzines, who figure Obama is their ticket to something better, among the Dems. And there are the perpetual second-bananas like Joan Quigley, who know their place, have done well by knowing their place, and expect YOU to know yours (and get behind the leader, whoever that might be).

But there are also some like Menendez, who are placing clandestine but significant side bets on a Clintons' comeback in four years. The big problem for the Dems is that guys like Menendez - honest or not - are the real grass roots, the real movers and shakers in the party. This type is fewer in numbers, but unlike the Corzines and the Quigleys, they're not along for the ride - they ARE the ride.

The Dems' house is a house divided, and it won't stand.

Hoist by his own literary petard

Next to the phrase 'hoist by one's own petard', you'll find this example.

When basing your opinion on 'common knowledge', remember that popular opinion is the black hole that has devoured fortunes in real estate, tulips, and stocks. It's how 70's fashion and other cultural decisions were made. It has given us government intelligence, hospital food, and institutional art.

And it's how this book came to be: An author and publisher who wanted to hop on a hot idea, irrespective of its actual veracity. The Amazon comments have (so far) shown remarkable restraint. Still, we suspect it's time for the Numa Numa boy to move over and make way for a new Internet laughingstock.

Finally, Jersey can focus on what it does best: Stealing & whacking

The end of Murray Hill's fundamental physics work.

We'd like to thank all the corrupt politicians and asleep-at-the-wheel Jersey media who made this possible necessary inevitable.

Obama, as seen from Chicago

What do writers covering the Windy City beat think of their native son?

Somehow, the nomination of Palin has REALLY brought out the ire of these (mostly) Chicago-area writers in full force. This sort of stuff existed before, for sure, but now it's everywhere. If McCain actually planned this explosion of outrage, his campaign has a Rovelike genius behind it:

Obama the Practical

He seems to have always understood that the way to power was the path of the empty vessel—allowing himself to be filled by his fans with whatever they needed to see in a national leader. And so he was painted as a change agent, a new kind of politician. And much of this has come from a national perspective. But in Illinois the view has been just a little bit different.

The salient point to understand about Illinois is that it is one of the most politically corrupt states in the nation. We have one scandal after another, one trial after another, and we probably hold the record for the number of governors sent to the big house. Our current leader just may be on the first leg of that journey.

None of which is to say that Obama is corrupt. But he didn’t get where he got by failing to understand how the system works. And there is no question he has been part of that system.

Palin: Corruption fighter, Obama: corruption tolerator

Palin has doggedly fought Alaska corruption, even though much of it has emerged from her own party. Barack Obama has not only tolerated graft in his own state, he has fed off of it. His first political sponsor was since-convicted felon Antoin "Tony" Rezko. Obama never denounced John and Todd Stroger, the former supplied votes for Obama, the latter initiated Cook County's "corruption tax."

In 2005, Obama worked up the courage to criticize corruption within the administration of Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, but backed off of it an hour later. Obama must have gotten a phone call from the fifth floor of Chicago's City Hall.

Obama has done nothing to fight Illinois corruption. Nothing.

Media’s full court press against Palin

[Palin] took on a notoriously corrupt political establishment and took great risks in battling her own party to ensure miscreants were identified and corrupt practices ended..
Now contrast that with Barack Obama who has run on the issue of ethics reform. In fact, he ran on the same issue in Chicago-both at the state level and when he ran for the role of a US Senator. As David Freddoso points out in his superlative new book ” The case Against Barack Obama” (and as others have also pointed out), Obama’s claim to be a reformer was a fraud.

Who sent Barack Obama?

The most trusted leaders of the Democratic party, such as John Kerry and Ted Kennedy, ought to be ashamed of themselves for supporting Barack Obama. With use of the internet, a fifth grader could connect the dots to show a picture of a guy who was picked up in college and carried up the political ladder by a corrupt gang of influence peddlers.

Myth of Hope in Cook

...Todd Stroger and the Democrat Machine that muscled him into power, including, of course, the sainted Senator Barack Obama. Business as usual, hope and change a myth in Chicagoland.

Obama and the Chicago Machine

One of the more puzzling developments in Obama’s career is how he has been able to position himself as a reform style politician - as an outsider who can come in and clean up the mess politicians have made. This simply doesn’t match reality. And yet the media seems uninterested in exploring and explaining Obama’s past.

...at practically every opportunity he has chose the safe route rather than the route of reform; of challenging the system...

In 2006, he endorsed the re-election of Rod Blagojevich, despite very real concerns about the Governor’s ethics. Since the endorsement, Blagojevich has come very close to full blown indictment, so close that some Illinois Democrats tried to have him recalled. But Obama’s voice has been silent on the matter.

In 2007, incumbent Cook County Board President and long-time Machine candidate, John Stroger, faced a tough challenge from a reform candidate in the Democratic Primary. Obama refused to make an endorsement... when the Machine replaced John Stroger [who'd suffered a stroke] with his inexperienced and unimpressive son, Todd, well Obama endorsed him.

Since Obama’s endorsement, Todd Stroger has gone on to break promises, lie to the public, and raise taxes to support six-figure salaries for his family and friends.

Meet the new boss, same as the old Chicago boss

Obama notes that his opponent, Senator John McCain, voted with President Bush 90 percent of the time. Obama sides with Mayor Richard M. Daley 100 percent of the time, whether in regards to Stroger’s election or anything else that helps keep Chicago politics dirty. That is the real Barack Obama — not the smooth-talking Greek god who plays a reformer on television, but the man who has never met a Daley-backed Chicago pol he could not support.

Stroger's Mess

While Barack Obama holds himself out as some sort of agent of change, he is in fact a product of the same corrupt and cynical political machine that produces the likes of Todd Stroger. Everything I have reported is common knowledge here ...

Welcome to Chicago: Now Fork Over the Dough

Cook County is one of the largest employers around, with thousands of people who owe their livelihoods to Todd Stroger and the Daley family. By nature of the patronage system, elected officials are "elected" for life, or until they piss off someone higher up the food chain. The fact that Todd Stroger directly got his job because his father had a stroke is indicative the entire system is corrupt.

What can really be done? Lawsuits and lots of them.

Er... no mention of Obama in that last one. But, hmm, lawsuits... where have we heard that idea before...?

AND VOICES FROM POINTS BEYOND CHICAGO NOW SPEAK OUT:

Third of Five: You probably don't know what it's like to be lost and frightened. You will listen to any voice who promises change.

Commander Riker: Even if that voice insists on controlling you?

Third of Five: That's what we wanted. Someone to show us a way out of the confusion. He promised clarity and purpose; he seemed like a savior; promised to make us superior, but he had no idea how to keep his promise. He began to ask for sacrifices for the sake of the greater good....

What folks want from Sarah Palin...

...depends on who they are.

Conservatives want her to keep McCain in line.

Hillary diehards want her to stick it to Obama. (Except for those who don't.)

Viking warriors want her to shoot stuff:





















Oil companies want her to drill, drill, drill.

Hef wants to staple her tummy.

Librarians want her to make them 'cool'. Or, uh, 'hot'.

Speaking of which, Maria Bartiromo wants her to respect the established order of wonkette babeitude.

Apple fanbois want her to dump her Blackberry and get an iPhone.

Polar bears want to kill and eat her (but, they feel that way about everything).

If you can grok 'VPILF', this is the post for you

Mary Lois sent us a cheesecake pic of McCain's VP choice. So, it's caption-contest time.

We figure it's Photoshop, but Mary Lois says it was presented to her as 'real':

























Possible captions (but you'll do better):

• Oh. I thought you had the ELECTION in your pocket.

• Why Mister Speaker, I'd love to see your gavel.

• ...and Hef's putting absentee ballots in the centerfold.

• Happy Birthday, Mister President!

• Now let me show you MY campaign strategy.

• Trophy running mate.

We checked Google Images early Sunday afternoon, and couldn't find this pic anywhere. By Monday, it'll be everywhere.

To be fair and balanced, we'll put Biden in a similar pose later today. We thought about doing the same with Cheney, but there's a big difference between 'not safe for work' and 'not safe for anything'.

The Agent of Change, and Business as Usual

A familiar subject for our readers: How 'reformers' use a corrupt system - Chicago style.

We believe New Jersey is the most corrupt state in the nation, but Chicago is the most corrupt Big City by far. Since Obama is running as a 'reformer', we've been looking at the deeply and undeniably corrupt Chicago system that backs him. This lengthy article goes into considerable detail, drawing on the book 'When Corruption was King'. It's an analysis of the Chicago political system, similar to Jersey's Soprano State.

Both books examine the fixed elections, co-opted judges, and machine pols who grease the skids for increasing levels of political crime - up to and past the point where funded projects never materialize (and the funds earmarked for them disappear as well) and entire towns go bust. (Chicago suburbs -no longer a haven from the city's ills - are being sucked into the gravitational pull of Chicago graft, and surely we don't need to remind anyone what recently happened to Hoboken.)

In the cultures of corruption that permeate and rule Hoboken and Chicago, the thieves are praised as pillars of society, while those pressing for actual change are derided as troublemakers. In Chicago, a made guy was declared a "committed public servant" who "[left] his family a legacy of public service". In Hudson County, a city that violated state spending laws was recently placed under the care of a machine politician who had left his own city over $30 million in debt.

In Hudson County, Joe Doria can be passed off as an 'agent of change' to repair Hoboken's fiscal ills. In Chicago, that title has been self-conferred on the far-slicker Obama, who will heal a national malaise he cannot identify in his own backyard. And so it goes.

Seemingly inexplicably, the Mayor of New Jersey's largest city has been campaigning loudly against one of the state machine's favorite engines of fraud. Here in Hoboken, we have one woman speaking plainly about the city's waste and fraud, while 'reformers' look for ways to 'work with' the machine pols creating the problems. (God forbid they should upset these upstanding citizens by actually "reforming" anything.). Anomalies in the system such as Beth Mason or Cory Booker, though, are mathematically inevitable and are eventually eliminated.

"If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten"

Advice on life from the late George Carlin.

Today, the words of the prophets issue from the mouths of professional comics. For example:

• Always do whatever's next.

• By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth.

• Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time.

• Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things.

• Electricity is really just organized lightning.

• Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.

• Frisbeetarianism is the belief that when you die, your soul goes up on the roof and gets stuck.

• Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?

• I have as much authority as the Pope, I just don't have as many people who believe it.

• I think people should be allowed to do anything they want. We haven't tried that for a while. Maybe this time it'll work.

• I was thinking about how people seem to read the Bible a whole lot more as they get older; then it dawned on me - they're cramming for their final exam.

• I went to a bookstore and asked the saleswoman, "Where's the self-help section?" She said if she told me, it would defeat the purpose.

• If God had intended us not to masturbate he would've made our arms shorter.

• If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little.

• In comic strips, the person on the right always speaks first.

• Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist.

• Just cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town.

• Most people work just hard enough not to get fired and get paid just enough money not to quit.

• Not only do I not know what's going on, I wouldn't know what to do about it if I did.

• One can never know for sure what a deserted area looks like.

• One tequila, two tequila, three tequila, floor.

• People who say they don't care what people think are usually desperate to have people think they don't care what people think.

• Some people see things that are and ask, Why? Some people dream of things that never were and ask, Why not? Some people have to go to work and don't have time for all that.

• Standing ovations have become far too commonplace. What we need are ovations where the audience members all punch and kick one another.

• The main reason Santa is so jolly is because he knows where all the bad girls live.

• The reason I talk to myself is that I'm the only one whose answers I accept.

• There are nights when the wolves are silent and only the moon howls.

• There's no present. There's only the immediate future and the recent past.

• Think off-center.

• Weather forecast for tonight: Dark.

• What does it mean to pre-board? Do you get on before you get on?

• When Thomas Edison worked late into the night on the electric light, he had to do it by gas lamp or candle. I'm sure it made the work seem that much more urgent.

• When you step on the brakes, your life is in your foot's hands.

More here. See also life advice from WC Fields.

Sarah Palin for president

At last, a candidate prettier than Obama. Too bad she's on the wrong end of the ticket.

Look at that resume - McCain's just-announced VP choice has called out Republicans on ethics violations, hunted moose, AND competed successfully in beauty contests. Outside of not being in the top slot, she's the political equivalent of beer that makes you smarter.

NIce Boston Globe summary, here.

AND: Our favorite cultural critic, Camille Paglia, says: “We may be seeing the first woman president. As a Democrat, I am reeling.” A lot of folks were surprised, Camille. Plus - look at those legs!

How and when to break the rules of language while blogging

Our rules of thumb, inspired by this post.

Rules are made to be broken, and the nature of blogging in particular demands such. Blogwriting is meant for an informal voice, but there still are reasons to hew to convention. (The NY Times or AP style books, or your eighth-grade English teacher, take your pick.)

The delimiter is that someone out to break the rules of language must first know what those rules ARE. Otherwise, they won't know how far outside the lines they've colored, and how many people will find the resultant picture unrecognizable.

Constant rule-breaking tires the reader, who is obliged to strain for understanding. By contrast, occasional rule-breaking draws attention ("Hey! Didn't he sound like The New York Times up until that paragraph?")

Constant rule-breaking suggests ignorance. Occasional rule-breaking suggests mastery of language. (The writer knows what (s)he is doing to such a degree that (s)he can flout the rules for effect.)

More rules of writing, here.

Unamericans for Obama

Why aren't these endorsements for an American election from Americans?

UMDNJ officials finally find something worth some outrage

Millions in theft? Hey, that's life. But a bad-taste hazing ritual - that's intolerable.

We missed this story, from a month back. Note the immediate firings of the 3 paramedics, for what amounted to a hazing ritual in (very) bad taste:

"This is wrong," Owen said. "This is not UMDNJ, and it's not going to be tolerated at any level."

Where, exactly, was this sort of official outrage when millions of dollars were being stolen (not that this isn't happening even today)?

Well, these newly-discovered standards are better late - and selective - than never and none at all, we suppose. Therefore, let it be known that UMDNJ won't tolerate wrongdoing at any level. Not unless Bob Menendez gets his taste.

Insta-payola?

In the '50's, radio had a payola scandal. Today, is Instapundit paid to 'spin' blog traffic?

We just saw this post on Instapundit:

STARSHIP TROOPERS 3 ON BLU-RAY: I didn't even know there was a Starship Troopers 2. Interview with Casper Van Dien at the link.

The post links to an Amazon blog, pitching the disc which Amazon sells. Now, Glen Reynolds has been a big Amazon fan since Day One, so it's no surprise to see him sending traffic their way. But in the case of ST3, it's clearly something Reynolds isn't even aware of. (He "didn't even know there was a Starship Troopers 2".) So, it's not as if he's steering us to something he endorses.

Therefore - why the link?

The only reason we can imagine is that Reynolds is being paid to sprinkle a certain number of Amazon links into his mix, the same way he is now quite obviously obliged (via some undisclosed agreement) to send PJ Media (and its affiliated sites) a certain amount of traffic. If you haven't noticed already, take a look at Prof. Reynolds' URL. 'Instapundit.com' is history. The site is now 'http://www.pajamasmedia.com/instapundit', which as search engine optimization mavens know, is a gimmick designed to prop up the Google Page Rank of Instapundit's new parent - PJ Media.

We now have to wonder what Reynolds was paid to change his URL, what he's paid to favor PJ Media links over others, and what he's paid to send traffic to Amazon. And mostly, we wonder why he never bothered to tell his readers. Could it be that he thought his choices of posts for reasons other than merit would not be applauded?

We also wonder just when Reynolds decided his integrity was a salable commodity. We don't MIND that he makes money doing what he does. In fact, he'd more or less have to be reimbursed for his time, after all these years. But, a guy who spends his days pondering the credibility of others (especially the paid media) should be strictly above-board. And taking money without disclosure, in any business, is just sleazy. We recognize that the graphics running along the top and side of Reynolds' blog are ads. We don't know which of his posts are also ads, and there is no way for us to tell the difference.

Slate proclaims that radio payola is not exactly illegal (aside from the possibly knotty problem of doing it over the publicly-owned airwaves). Nor is it illegal (or even unethical) for Glenn Reynolds to post-for-pay. But we should not have to explain to this law professor why it's unethical to present his "paid" linkage as no different from his other linkage - he knows full well what the problem with that is.

Reynolds built a rep as a strictly unpaid blogger. Those circumstances have obviously changed, but it appears that Reynolds wants it both ways - he wants to hang on to that 'amateur blogger' street cred, but he also wants that paycheck.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the center-right blogosphere to call Reynolds out on this - most of those sites are waiting for their next Instalanche. We're probably not the first blog to figure this out - we're just the first willing to SAY anything about it.

Never thought we'd have to place a 'culture of corruption' tag on the Blogfather, but it demonstrates what we always say sometimes: Anyone can be corrupted.

Our own Michael Lenz experience

Lenz was attacked in the paper by someone just getting to know him. But we knew him when.

From a letter by Jake Stulver, in The Hoboken Reporter, via 411 (go there and read the whole thing):

"Lenz, who four years ago created a textbook example of how to lose a perfectly winnable election, did one thing extremely well during the Marsh campaign - he chased out the door numerous people with strong talent and desire to help us. I am not referring exclusively to one incident in particular, but rather a steady string of volunteers who came into the campaign office eager and able to help and left jaded and turned off. I would even count myself among people who came off that debacle feeling used, abused, under-appreciated and in no hurry to get back into politics anytime soon. Observing Lenz’s behavior in many of these instances, I came to suspect that he would rather lose an election than win without getting full credit for it."

Here's our Lenz story:

At the height of Russo's power, one of the few people brave (or foolish, if it matters) enough to stand up against him on a regular basis was Phyllis Spinelli. Spinelli decided to run for Council against Russo's candidate, at a time when Russo's candidates met token opposition at best.

Not only did Spinelli have no chance, but the Hudson County Dems (spearheaded by Menendez) decided to run their own slate. It would turn out to be one of the most hapless ad campaigns of all time, but no one knew what was coming. All Spinelli or anyone knew was that an independent didn't stand a chance in that environment, where she would be wildly outspent by two big political war chests.

I (have to go first-person here now, to avoid confusion) figured this campaign was a good opportunity. Not because she was a cinch to win (obviously, she wasn't), but because I saw an unusual chance to put out my message, my way. I had a message in mind that I believed in, but too often elections (especially in Hudson County) indulge in message-by-committee, and they're always awful. Spinelli and her people (Lenz was the 'campaign chair' or something) were not only dispirited, they had no idea what her message should be. Although she was running against a Russo-backed candidate, that candidate was Richard Del Boccio, who was popular in his ward. Therefore, she and her people felt, you could not even attack him! Their heads were spinning at the idea of trying to devise a strategy, and basically from their POV I was merely offering to relieve them of their headache.

Since my services were free, and since no one really wanted to take credit for what they figured would be a doomed campaign, Spinnelli et al let me do exactly what I wanted. Which, really, was all I required.

Then the unexpected happened: She won. That is - she finished first in the 3-way election, forcing a runoff. And media flooded in to ask her how she did it. Suddenly, she was the talk of the town. Suddenly, her campaign mattered.

When that happened, Lenz emailed the rest of the campaign committee and offered to reward my effort - by replacing me with his own "ad guy" for the runoff. To their credit, the rest of the campaign - and the candidate herself - were aghast at this. It made no sense to anyone (except Lenz, obviously) to get rid of a guy whose message had taken them a whole lot further than they'd ever thought they could get. They didn't entertain the idea for a second, and Lenz was forced to back down. Since then, I have observed this pattern of self-serving behavior from Lenz over and over and over again.

"He would rather lose an election than win without getting full credit for it."

Yes, Jake... you have indeed met Michael Lenz.

Corey Booker speaks up against teachers' unions

A NJ Democrat talking openly about the Dems' favorite scam?? The world has gone mad.

A shocker from Slate:

Then Cory Booker of Newark attacked teachers unions specifically--and there was applause. In a room of 500 people at the Democratic convention! "The politics are so vicious," Booker complained, remembering how he'd been told his political career would be over if he kept pushing school choice, how early on he'd gotten help from Republicans rather than from Democrats. The party would "have to admit as Democrats we have been wrong on education." Loud applause!

We thought 'reformer' Booker would have been assimilated by now. If it's hard to be a saint in the city, it's gotta be damn near impossible to be an honest pol running New Jersey's biggest municipality.

We've talked about the teachers' unions and related state education scams before. They're neck and neck with hospital fraud as the favorite of the political mob. (If you oppose the elected mobsters' schemes plans for education and hospitals, you'll discover it's because you hate kids and sick people.) We've also said that nothing in Jersey will improve until a bottom is reached.

Never have we found a Jersey pol who met a union he didn't like. (Of course, SOME of our pols like unions a bit too much and take the 'in bed with unions' cliché too literally.) So we have to wonder - is Democratic applause for Cory Booker's union-bashing a sign of the Apocalypse?

Good insights re the history of newspapers' online failures

A well-researched piece on this subject, at Valleywag.

The article covers past forays into the 'online space', such as Viewtron, New Century Networks, Abuzz, and Real Cities. The common problem was the papers' desire to continue to control the news, which they had been able to do since the first paper rolled off a press. Their culture and tradition just had no place for the idea that they could no longer monopolize the news. Nor could they nurture the concept that their solutions might have to come from the outside - that is, until it was too late.

Our favorite part of the piece is actually at the beginning:

"Daily deadlines did in the newspaper industry. The pressure of getting to press, the long-practiced art of doom-and-gloom headline writing, the flinchiness of easily spooked editors all made it impossible for ink-stained wretches to look farther into the future than the next edition."

Yes, commercial pressures were a large part of the problem. Then again, this is a factor to which the online space is NOT immune. Commercial blogs, like Valleywag and its Gawker brand brethren, share this illness, which often leads to sloppy reporting and stories that focus on the least relevant aspects of an issue.

Not that we want to pick on Gawker, particularly. They acquit themselves pretty well, most of the time. Actually, the worst offender we've seen in this regard has been Pajamas Media, a rudderless 'open source' news service that has not figured out a way to 'open source' itself some quality control.

PJ Media is the online equivalent to a vanity press. It's not surprising this meme hasn't spread on the right, with the mighty Instapundit at PJ's forefront. However, the left likewise seems not to have noticed. Perhaps that's because so many leftist blogs could be painted with the same brush, but that's probably giving them too much credit for self-awareness. More likely, this particular criticism just has not occurred to them.

McCain campaign posts video ad re Obama's VP choice

What's amazing is how FAST this was pulled together after the announcement of Biden. Especially considering how SLOW the McCain campaign had been on the uptake all through the primaries. New folks in charge on the McCain side making a difference, no doubt.

eBay edging out of the auction business

It's true. And, if you've been reading Mr. Snitch, it's not such a surprise, either.

The big problem for eBay this time out is Amazon, which makes sales much easier for sellers.

EBay's not exactly going out of business. But they are discovering the limits of the niche they pioneered - limits that Amazon has taken very clever advantage of.

This is a real lesson for the novice tech investor. Quite often in tech, the business model is not fully understood, because it is only just emerging. It has not been market-tested for generations - or sometimes, even weeks. When the glitches finally reveal themselves, the sudden knowledge drives down market cap (and share prices) sharply.

Waiting and waiting and waiting for.... Joe Biden?

Hilarious video of TV correspondents awaiting Obama's VP announcement. It's a great commentary on what gets passed off as 'news'.

The only surprise is that three states finished worse

New Jersey is ranked the fourth-worst state in which to do business.

The Jersey Journal column pointing this out was no surprise. Anyone with more than a passing interest in Jersey knows any business that's been able to escape in recent years, has already done so. And the businesses that are thriving or moving in to Jersey are those who do well in Jersey's look-the-other-way culture. You know the kind we mean. Businesses like this or this.

Nor do we find it particularly 'ironic' that Corzine's flogged-to-death 'business savvy' is not reflected in Jersey's current straits.

First off, we don't know that Corzine ever possessed said 'savvy'. There's a big difference between having made a pile of money and being Warren Buffett. We can think of any number of supposedly self-made people (OK, David Roberts - happy?) who we would not entrust with handling anything more complex than a routine bank deposit. Corzine's success at Goldman may actually be indicative of any number of things (theft, dumb luck, corporate raiding, pyramid scheming, being credited for others' work, etc., etc.) unrelated to business acumen or wisdom. (The day it's Warren Buffett telling us 'Corzine's got it goin' on', instead of some unknown quantity of a reporter who's only repeating what he's heard a million times, that's the day we'll believe the guy's financial wizardry.)

Take well-off former JC Mayor Bret Schundler as a case in point. While Corzine's manipulations within Goldman are somewhat murky and third-hand, Schundler's story is clear-cut. Schundler made a pile in Fanny Mae, buying when no one would touch the stock. The financially clueless local press therefore framed him as a financial wizard, but in fact he was no such thing, and never was. Schundler was, in fact, from the Riverboat Gambler school of finance. He placed an enormous and risky bet on Fanny Mae (an institution which, through happenstance, he had become well-acquainted), getting himself highly leveraged, selling at peaks and buying back on dips as the battered stock continued to rise. More power to him, of course, but this is reflective more of nerve (or possibly blind greed) than general financial savvy. A willingness to take risks of this sort does NOT constitute a resume for sound municipal fiscal management, yet that is how he sold himself to the public. Believing his own press, Schundler managed Jersey City's financial house pretty much the way he managed his own, and the end results weren't pretty.

All that aside, even if Corzine were the Smartest Businessman on Earth, he'd have made no difference in New Jersey. Corzine's plan, really, was to use the Governorship as a stepping stone for the Presidency. (In recent years, Governors have been far more effective than Senators in mounting successful Presidential runs. That streak is, of course, about to end, but when Corzine left the Senate it was considered Political WIsdom.) Jon Corzine was never about 'reforming' the state - how could he, when his biggest backers were those most in need of 'reform'? No, he merely wanted to 'buy in' to the political tribes that run (and rape) Jersey, so they would smooth his way past any opposition (even acting Gov. Cody, knowing his place, stepped smartly aside for Corzine's run).

Corzine's sideways gubernatorial move, in itself, reflects a real lack of political (if not business) savvy on Corzine's part. Corzine was actually far better off in the Senate, where he could enjoy some distance from the open sewer that is Hudson County politics. Just ask Bob Menendez, who is desperately trying to escape his roots. Menendez regularly complains of "guilt by geography". Of course, with Menendez it's really "guilt by guilt", since he learned to use the Hudson County machine to climb to power just as did Boss Hague, and any number of Jersey bosses before him. Both Menendez and Corzine are mired in the Hudson County muck, and there's nothing they can (or at least, nothing they WILL) do to escape it. Corzine now has as much hope of becoming president as he does of (- hmm, what's a highly improbable simile... oh yeah -) reforming Jersey politics.

A 'wise' businessman would have seen this coming from miles away, and steered clear. An ego-driven man, guided by yes-people, glad-handers, and sycophants looking for payback, would blunder right into it.

Consider this: New Orleans is famously corrupt, but it is also known for Mardi Gras and jazz. Chicago is famously corrupt, but it is also known as the slaughterhouse of the nation, for blues, for a famous comedy troupe, for a namesake band, and for the Cubs.

What's Jersey known for?

You don't see Warren Buffett doing anything as stupid as buying into a political machine in a state better-known by far for its legendary corruption than anything else – do you?

File this under 'can't anyone here play this game?'

Yahoo Buzz opens its doors to all comers. Still, dissatisfaction with 'social news' continues.

Yahoo Buzz will upend Digg's dominance - and cause Google to have second thoughts about that $200 million price tag. Look for a markdown, as Google begins to wonder if it wouldn't be better off just building its own Digglike newsgathering site, and Digg's investors get more than a little desperate.

Meanwhile, on various chat boards, users of these sites frequently express frustration with the quality of news that ALL these sites deliver.

At the end of the day, it seems that in the fevered crush to capture enormous audiences via tech means, one thing has been forgotten: You truly cannot please everybody.

Yahoo's formula for finding news is irrevocably going to take it mainstream, if indeed this has not already happened. The front pages of Yahoo, and Buzz, might as well be The New York Times.

Digg and Reddit, for that matter, are virtually interchangeable. Their front page posts are definitely of a different, fresher flavor than Yahoo or Buzz. On the other hand, they are more often than not completely sophomoric. And utterly predictable. (What's the "Bush is a moron" or "Cheney/Rove is evil" post on Digg today? Where's today's Star Wars reference? Where's the "stupidest thing ever" that happened today - not that this should be confused with the "stupidest thing ever" that will happen tomorrow.)

In this space, there's room for something better, and new, that avoids the traps these two approaches have fallen into. It STILL won't be for everyone, but the real trick, you see, is to stop thinking that this matters. The Readers' Digest isn't for everyone, either, but it's done damn well for itself over the years.

The future will see many independent publishers, each sifting through news and events to bring just the right mix to its audience. In this world, knowing who that audience is and what they're looking for, is the key to a good product.

RELATED: Two million opinions on why open source projects just, uh, don't work well.

'Letting failing hospitals close leads to BETTER health care'

That's the opinion of a former president of the New Jersey Hospital Association, a Princeton-based trade organization that represents 114 hospitals throughout the state.

Excerpts:

Another interesting aspect of the closing of almost 20 [New Jersey] hospitals is that during this time, according to the findings of the state Department of Health and Senior Services, the quality of care in New Jersey hospitals has improved.

I live in a community without a hospital, and the closest one is, on a good day, 20 minutes away, and I don't believe I have an access issue.

Now, according to "Healthy interest in Pascack" (Page L-1, Aug. 17), Hackensack University Medical Center has proposed the development of a new acute-care hospital at the Pascack Valley site. For all of the reasons I have outlined above, and many more, this is not a good plan. It flies in the face of the findings of the governor's commission, and will only serve to weaken the hospitals that have so ably served the patients of the Pascack Valley Hospital service area.

It is tempting to say the investment of $80 million by a for-profit, outside firm is a good idea. But in reality excess capacity, regardless of whose money it is, only increases the cost of health care, and it is already too expensive. While we have taken many steps in the past decade to correct the fact that there are too many hospitals and beds in New Jersey, this would be an enormous step back. I wonder how the state could ever accept an application to essentially reopen Pascack Valley Hospital when its own commission indicated that the area had too many hospitals.

Closing a hospital is a gut-wrenching, emotional decision, but in the end, those communities that do so are the ones best positioned for the future of health care.

In Jersey, the call for 'more hospitals' (state-supported, natch) is a time-tested political ploy. It's used by 'reformers' to signal their 'superior compassion', and by those in office as an opportunity for grand larceny. Legitimate experts like Mr. Carter here, whose only agendas are better health care and sound public policy, are routinely ridiculed and drowned out by those with political agendas. (Note the comment following the article, which neatly follows the party line.) The St. Mary's/HUMC swindle was perpetrated despite the testimony of experts like Carter, who knew that Hoboken needed, at most, an emergency care facility to stabilize acute cases before moving them to a hospital facility. (And that there were private enterprises willing to build such facilities without the need for public money.) These experts were shoved aside by local special interests (a swimming pool of cash for Bob Menendez, as well as income and opportunity for the politically connected, like Joan Quigley). In this way, public policy is determined by political mobsters.

A tax revolt in the Tea Party state

If passed, it "will mean less money in the hands of politicians". What else do you need to know?

In Hudson County, hoping that 'reformers' will make a difference is just a form of denial. (Boss Hague came into office as a 'reformer', as did Anthony Russo, Bob Menendez and many other Hudson County political Sopranos.) Asking entrenched machine pols to "do the right thing", is an exercise in futility. (Secretly, they think you're an idiot who doesn't get how the game is played. Or even what they game really is.)

The way you combat institutional corruption is as follows:

1) You start changing the rules that enable the machine. (For one thing, you change the way County Prosecutors and judges are appointed. For another, you ban anyone on a state or city payroll - or whose relatives are on said payroll, or whose company does business with local government - from serving in elected office. Ban the practice, period. In Jersey's municipalities, elected officials are routinely on the government dole. It's no wonder they are unaccountable to the public.)

2) You cut off the money supply. Your tax dollars, in the hands of government, IS wasted, stolen, and misspent. Much of it is spent in ways that ensure the continued existence of bad government.

What a handful of patriots in Taxachusetts are attempting, is tactic #2. It's been described as 'taking a chainsaw to government'. Now THERE'S a warm and fuzzy thought. Better still, the idea is catching on in other states.

None of that is happening HERE, of course. That's because Jersey's problem isn't mere corruption. It's a CULTURE of corruption.

AND: Hear an interview with Carla Howell, the leader of the Massachusetts citizens' movement. She tried this before, in 2002, when she got 45% of the vote.

The Republicans are coming! The Republicans are coming!

Some are, at least. Will the call to arms deflect voters' anger? In Hudson, it always has!

So Bret Schundler's running for Jersey City mayor, and as per today's unfocused, rambling Jersey Journal editorial (which we cannot find on their unfocused, rambling website), Chris Christie may run for Governor, as well.

What will follow, natch, is heavy-handed HCDO propaganda about the dangers of allowing evil Rethuglicans to gain a foothold in the Ethical Wonderland Known As Hudson County. Never mind how mismanaged, corrupt, and unresponsive to the public the state is now: Republicans, we will be assured, would only make things worse.

Will this work? Traditionally, it works like a charm in Hudson County. Frank Hague, the infamous Jersey City mayor who was the most powerful and corrupt politician of his era, invoked 'creeping Communism' as a useful bogeyman.

Same tune, new lyrics.


Frank Hague vs. The Red Menace, by Bob Leach from Mister Snitch on Vimeo.

'Video sketch' from our 9/11 documentary

Here's a 'proof of concept' for a documentary we made in Hoboken, shortly after 9/11.

This test was made for a short documentary about the street art that appeared in NYC immediately after the 9/11 attacks. The music's original, but was not used in the final video. (Other original music was composed by this and other musicians.) This project was commissioned by Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, NJ. The opening photo was taken as the WTC was beginning to collapse, from Castle Point (Stevens' elevated Hoboken location).

We apologize for the truncated ending - it WAS a test, after all.

This test piece, and the documentary that it grew into, are very much of that time. There's a genuine, tender emotion in the music. It's a haunting melody - appropriate for the subject. This was a period when a lot of the self-involved posturing we take for granted in everyday life was dropped. For a brief time, at least, many New Yorkers seemed to have a different set of values. They wanted very much to connect, and street art (like these 'missing' posters) was a means to that end. We think some of the flavor of that moment comes through here.


After-9/11 documentary (test) from Mister Snitch on Vimeo.

The NY Times is garbage - may we sell you a subscription?

Hypocrisy abounds in the 'sphere. MSM is biased. Only one trustworthy source remains.
























We spotted the two banner ads shown above appearing simultaneously on Instapundit yesterday (Friday). You'll note that the horizontal banner wants to sell you a subscription to the New York Times, while the vertical banner to the right tells you that the Times (and several other media outlets) are garbage. According to the ad, only Pajamas Media - the very folks running the banner ad hawking Times' subscriptions - is to be trusted with 'REAL' news.

Professor Reynolds' blog was once an independent entity, linking freely around the 'net. Now it's the front end for Pajamas Media, and linking mainly to PJ-affiliated blogs. In its ambition and fervor to be 'important', PJ Media increasingly promotes work so sloppy the junior high school newspaper would reject it.

Much of PJ's tripe, ironically, is intended to document the biases of mainstream media. This is a constant and ongoing theme of theirs, and it now dominates their ads. But their posts on this subject generally fail to prove their point. Sometimes, in fact, they fail to make any point at all.

Take this recent post from Classical Values, which contends MSM bias in the way economic results in Germany are covered, as opposed to the US. When it is pointed out to the blog's author that, in fact, the press was ACCURATE in its assessments, he pretends that the article was about the relative economic performance of the two countries, and NOT about the way the press characterized the news. The author even feigns ignorance re why his post received an Insta-link, though the link clearly noted the blog's mockery of the press. Incredibly, even while dodging his own culpability, the author continues to bash the press: "...we try to keep it honest here and fix our mistakes when pointed out. The NYTs? Not so much."

PJ Media needs to dramatically improve its vetting process, but that's extremely unlikely to ever happen, due to PJ's basic business model. Pajamas Media depends on open-source reporting. In fact, they were originally hell-bent to call themselves 'Open Source Media', except for the inconvenient fact that there was already a company using that moniker. (The fact that PJ failed so miserably to do their homework on this most fundamental premise says everything one needs to know about their approach to basic research of ANY subject. But we'll press on anyway.)

The problem with Open Source tends to be accountability. This leads to problems with any product - news or anything else - that is based on an Open Source model. Let's say for example, you are a company trying to produce an iPhone-like cellphone. Apple makes one, and Google is attempting to make one. At Apple, anyone responsible for a problem with the product reports to Steve Jobs. Even the independent contractors making iPhone apps are obliged to go through an Apple Apps Store, putting Apple (and Steve) in a position to control their quality. But Google depends on hardware and software manufacturers who, in the end, answer only to themselves. And Google is learning, the hard way, that it's virtually impossible to get the participants to all row in the same direction.

While Open Source endeavors will enjoy some successes, they are typically plagued with nagging failures that no one involved ever feels obliged or empowered to address. Nearly always these failures lie in the details, and these details are sufficient in numbers and importance to relegate the products to a permanent second-rate status. In the case of iPhone wannabes, these details are enough to keep the Android clones from 'elegance'. In the case of an enterprise like PJ Media, it will keep them from their ambition to supplant the NY Times. The Times will, eventually, hit bottom. Either they will utterly fail and go out of business or (more likely), new, better management will take over and turn the company around. But at PJ Media, no turnaround is possible. The company has reached is zenith, because its fundamental model is critically flawed. From this point on, they are running on a treadmill.

If the NY Times, as we are told, cannot be trusted due to its bias, PJ Media cannot be trusted because its authors answer to no one. There's just no one minding the store. To whom does one complain about a fundamentally dishonest Classical Values article? What discipline will be meted out for it? What measures are in place to prevent a repeat performance? What standards are these writers obliged to meet?

If neither the Times nor the emerging leaders of the blogosphere can be trusted, who CAN readers trust for honest reporting?

The Enquirer, for one.

According to a former employee (who blogs here):

"these days they vet a story like they’re clearing up the Pope’s bio. If there’s even a whisper that the story they’re considering running is a false allegation, they back off as if bitten by kryptonite spiders."

The Enquirer was first out of the gate - and dead-on right - about the John Edwards affair. And anyone who saw Men in Black knows they publish the only REAL news on the planet.

When someone's rep is already in the toilet, and they've got nothing to lose by doing so, THAT's when you start hearing the straight truth from them. But when they're telling you what a pillar of society they are, or when they're explaining how they came to be the salvation of the news industry, you ought to be skeptical.

'Jersey Freakshow': Twelve thousand Diggers can't be wrong

Well, actually, yeah, they CAN. But not this time.

We saved the best for last: The accompanying commentary. Let the Guido-bashing begin!! (Lucky for us, the local Guido-types only read Hoboken411. Or, you know, look at the pictures.)

'It's not the short end of the stick - it's no stick at all'

On politics, political correctness, and leadership.

It's very PC to blame others for failures of leadership in the black community. This approach has served charlatans like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson well.

Occasionally someone like Bill Cosby will declare that the emperor has no clothes, incurring the wrath of the demagogues of the black community.

It's far rarer for a WHITE writer to hint at failures of leadership among the black community, since the results are so predictable. Recently, the Jersey Journal's Angelo Torres (whose spankings are usually administered by the HCDO) came under bitter criticism for some rather mild remarks.

Today a black Jersey City minister (and candidate for City Council), Tyrone Ballon, offered some refreshing and straightforward remarks on the subject. It's a courageous approach for a man seeking office, since the Sharpton approach plays better (safer) around these parts. Then again, what Ballon is doing is so unusual, he'll certainly stand out.

As Ballon correctly points out, the lack of leadership in our society is not limited to African-Americans. And the void is hardly filled by those blithely proclaiming themselves as 'leaders'. Witness the Cagle cartoon below.

Bad boy Fulop spanked for not 'working with' HCDO

The Jersey City clerk rejects Fulop's petitions.

As we expected, the Jersey City Clerk turned Steven Fulop's petitions away, citing legal precedent as quoted to him by the city's politically-appointed municipal attorny. Rarely-sober Jersey City Mayor Jeremiah Healy blasted Fulop for not "accept[ing] the fact that he did not follow the laws of the state of New Jersey". (As opposed, we assume, to Healy's HCDO backers who DO follow the state's laws so very scrupulously.)

The City Clerk is in no position to refute what the corporation counsel is telling him, and Fulop should save his ammo for his legal battle. He's got a good shot at winning. The HCDO's city's counsel states that Fulop needs more signatures because his proposal deals with 'salaries'. That's not quite correct. What Fulop is proposing is limiting the number of government 'jobs' a public official can hold. (Most of the JC Council would be monetarily downsized by this, so it's easy to see why they're against it.) While limiting the number of salaries one can collect DOES affect one's paycheck, it's quite a different matter from determining the amount of any one of those paychecks.

Fulop has a good chance to win his legal battle. But considering the opposition stacked against him, it's no surprise he's facing a rhetorical battle as well.

The war of words being waged against Fulop is very similar to that being waged against Beth Mason in Hoboken. That is to say, that this pay-to-play measure would ensure that 'only the rich will hold office'.

The problem with that argument is the unspoken presumption that the present system is preferable. With few exceptions (like Fulop), only those willing to 'work with' the HCDO may hold office. Considering the conditions that 'system' has wrought, that's a poor argument.

Pay-for-play a situation we've brought on ourselves. It's not something that was forced on us, as the 'reformers' like to tell you. Years ago, the Spinelli campaign we worked for earnestly attempted to collect public donations to pay its way. While we did collect some money, it wasn't nearly enough. In our campaign materials, we drew the parallel between 'free' campaigns (i.e., which did not depend on public donations) and unresponsive government (that is, a government that worked for those who footed the campaign bills, rather than the public at large). Alas, while the campaign was unusually effective in getting its message across, it didn't really take hold. It was the last Hoboken campaign in memory, and maybe the last time in Hudson County, relying on a campaign message that "free" elections aren't "free". So from here on, your only choice may indeed be between candidates who can self-fund (the wealthy, or those with access to wealth), and those willing to 'work with' a deeply corrupt system. But keep in mind that this choice was not made FOR us - it's a decision we made for ourselves.

The Wall Street Journal re fighting CIty Hall in New Jersey

We love opening 'graph, and the head: 'That's not blight. It's New Jersey.'

When one lives in New Jersey, one sets one's expectations accordingly. We are a people, after all, whose two pro football teams still call themselves "New York." Whose governor responded to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks by appointing a man he later said was his lover to be the state's adviser for homeland security. Whose most famous mayor -- Jersey City's Frank Hague -- left office more than 60 years ago but is still remembered for having a special desk drawer he could push out like a bank teller, the easier for those sitting before him to deposit their cash. Whose . . . well, you get the point.

The point is that these aren't aberrations. These more or less represent business as usual in our beloved Garden State. So when the good guys actually win one, it's big news.

Yes, it's come to this: In New Jersey, the government WILL steal your home, if you let them. And that's why, when local 'reformers' tell us they want to 'work with' those causing the problem, it's bad news.

New Jersey doesn't need another 'reformer' who'll 'work with' government. We've had PLENTY of those, thank you. Jersey needs elected officials who'll 'work with' - and for - its people.

via a side post on Overlawyered, and via Point of Law.

Who are you, and what have you done with the Steinbrenners?

Yankees' chief: 'Get off the players' backs, they're doing the best they can.'

What happened to 'anything less than a championship is a failure'? What happened to the mass firings (20 managers in his first 23 seasons, 11 GMs in 30 years, under George) of yesteryear? Isn't this the guy who was so eager to show Hall-of-Fame manager Joe Torre the door for the Yank's 'uninspired' performance last season?

Hank quickly reverted to form, though, promising perfection - next year. Uh - doesn't 'wait 'till next year' signal surrender?

RELATED: "When you come to a fork in the road, take it. And then, stick it in the Yankees, they're done.

Why, it's just like Hudson County polls at election time!

Empty seats at the Olympics? No problem: The Chinese gov't hires seat-fillers.

The Chinese soci-capitalists know how to put a face on things. To be fair, though, they're being heavily pressured by the TV networks and the IOC. Neither cares HOW the stands get filled, so long as they are filled. (And the practice of paid-seat-filling is certainly not unknown among capitalists promoting, say, Broadway shows or the Oscars. If anything, the Chinese are guilty mainly of being less slick in their approach.)

Masking the problem is one thing. Solving the problem, of course, is another matter. Especially when it appears the problem has not really been adequately identified. Is this a matter of dwindling interest in the Olympics? Is it a matter of communications and marketing? Or is it a backlash against China?

It appears, at least, that state snafus in handling ticket sales are at least part of the problem.

And nothing's changed

A page from an old Hoboken Community Coalition newsletter says it all:

Found while sorting out a hard drive: Former city auditor Joe Lisa admitting that there were "no internal controls" on spending at City Hall. And Lisa would know - he was eventually indicted.

This was in 1994, but it was ever thus. And it remains so today: A Culture of Corruption.

Bob Menendez finds health care corruption, blames Feds

If he'd stayed home, he could have found health care corruption and blamed himself.

You can really understand why Bob Menendez chooses to tour detention facilities in places where he can blame someone else for fraud and poor conditions. Otherwise, someone might actually ask about his connection with, say, Santusht Perera.

Forget about '1984' - Now Big Brother lives next door

Government censorship and McCarthyism is so, like, 1950's. Today's censors may not even work for the government. And unlike McCarthy, they (mostly) aren't from the right side of the political spectrum.

The Newark Examiner looks at ongoing censorship efforts from the left. The site says: "politically correct speech codes on college campuses — created by liberal administrators and faculty — are invoked primarily against conservatives and others on the receiving end of liberal ire."

Not always, though. Sometimes the left censors itself.

Hillary's inevitable ambush of Obama

If you think Hillary's done, it's because you don't really understand the Clintons. She's far from done - she's just gone underground. Watch for the Clinton Gang to emerge, guns a-blazing, in what's likely to be the bloodiest Democratic convention in history. Watch Jersey's Silly-Putty Governor Corzine flip-flop his support from Obama back to Hillary.

We been prescient on the Clintons' moves before.

Rush Limbaugh (usually not a read for us, so it's first time we've ever linked him) has a pretty good handle on what lies ahead.

RELATED: Obama's lead evaporates. A liberal pundit takes Obama to task. WaPo's Dana Millbank contemplates Obama's colossal ego. And here's yet another in the long line of liberals who's tired of Obama's act, comparing him with (shudder) John Edwards.

What do you say when you lose an election?

This question came by way of a search inquiry that reached us. It's a good question.

First off, we haven't had that much experience losing elections - most of those we've handled, the candidates have won. Second, we're never the person who's asked to explain a loss to supporters or the media. That's the candidate's thankless job.

We suppose there have been instances where a candidate has held someone in our position (handling communications, creating a campaign theme or platform) responsible for a campaign loss. But no one we've worked with has ever done that to us, and we can't recall a candidate we know of blaming their communications director, at least publicly, for their loss.

That's not to say communications people don't get fired during a campaign. That happens all the time. Hillary did it during her recent run. But that's quite different from publicly blaming your communications people for a campaign loss. That's NOT something a candidate should say when (s)he loses an election. It's just bad form.

We have heard losing candidates blame the message, though. That's an oblique way of blaming those crafting the message. That's still not such a hot idea, because a losing candidate should not say ANYTHING that paints him/herself as a victim.

People don't care if the rain kept your voters from the polls, if your campaign director was a drunkard, or if a scandal broke a week before election day. People don't vote for excuses. They either vote for you as a solution, or (more likely) they're voting AGAINST the other guy. When you start making excuses for your campaign, you sound like someone who would have made excuses in office. In other words, you make people who voted against you feel better that you lost, and you make the people who worked for you feel that they backed an incompetent.

People who back a losing candidate ALREADY feel they've backed a loser. You'll never hear such bitter attacks as you'll hear from within a candidate's own camp after a loss. The first time we saw this, upclose and personal, was among 'reformers' after Ira Karasick lost to Anthony Russo for mayor, years ago. Though we cannot speak for Ira, we believe the appalling acrimony and blameshifting from his own supporters was what drove Karasick not only out of politics (he was never involved in another campaign), but out of town. One poignant moment from that campaign came about on election night, when one ambitious hanger-on who saw Karasick as a means to her own ends insinuated herself into a highly-visible position: Toting up the results on a blackboard in front of the crowd. When she saw which way the wind was blowing, she left the room before even posting the final figures. Later we learned she had shown up at the winner's camp, congratulating him for his fine campaign and petitioning for a job. Which she got. So much for principle - welcome to politics.

So while a politician might be moved to lash out with something like: "This town doesn't deserve me", such remarks tend to add fuel to a fire that's already smoldering. Though we do remember one losing politician grumbling to the press: "I'm getting too old for this sh-t". That was Helen Manogue, same election. She never ran for office again, either.

Making self-indulgent and blame-shifting remarks kind of preclude a pol's future efforts. You might feel good for a moment, but you're dooming yourself. Unless you're pretty sure you're not coming back, don't say anything like: "You won't have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore". 'Cause they WILL remember it.

Whatever his/her failings, at the end of the day voters want a candidate who'll take responsibility. What that means, a lot of the time, is that (s)he's the fall guy. It's a bitter pill to swallow, and is one big reason most people shy away from involvement in politics. What the public demands from it leaders is, in fact, well beyond reason - and it always has been. Any candidate who wants a future in politics first and foremost must accept that this goes with the territory.

So, if you're really washing your hands of it - go down in flames, if you like. Remember, though, that you still may want to LIVE in your community.

Assuming you at least want to keep your options open, here's what you should do:

1) Thank your supporters for all their sacrifice and effort. (This will at least blunt their recriminations.)

2) Congratulate the other side. (You know they're scumbags, but you may as well present yourself as gracious.) Actually, most candidates find this fairly easy to do, because they've pretty much exhausted their supply of vitriol during the campaign.

3) Thank your spouse. (Because the last thing you want is problems at home on top of everything else. Your supporters blame you for the loss, your campaign has debts to settle, and everything else in your life has gone to hell from neglect. Save what you can.)

4) Most candidates will find themselves limited to the three, rather bland, steps above. But for a very few, a fourth step is possible. If you've run one of the rare campaigns that gets a message out or makes a difference in some way, revel in your moment. You may have lost the election, but you won a place in people's hearts and minds. This is why we believe that EVERY campaign ought to have a message that resonates with voters. 

Very few politicians ever know what it is to deliver such a message. Major campaigns like to talk about how their message made a difference, but if you polled the public on election day most people wouldn't have a clue what either side was about. They'll remember a scandal, or whether taxes went up, and that's about it. Fact is, most campaign messages aren't worth a damn.

Phyllis Spinelli's late 90's city council campaign offered the greatest message of any campaign we've ever been involved with. Though she lost in a runoff (Russo's people beat down the doors of the 2nd ward projects, demanding votes under threats of eviction), there were more TV cameras on her during election night then there were in the winning camp's HQ. In fact, Spinelli's message resonated so strongly that Russo - who backed the WINNER, remember - on the night his candidate won, felt obliged to tell the press that 'he was not a devil'. (This was in response to a humorous Spinelli ad regarding Russo's proposal for a NJ Devils' arena, which some took as comparing Russo to Satan himself!) Del Boccio, who won the election, assured the local papers that Russo was going to "work on" his personal "problems". Even Russo's wife took some digs at him. 

Certainly this ranks as the most unusual VICTORY rhetoric we've ever heard in any election, anywhere.

Whatever you say on that night you lose an election, it should be sincere. Not BITTER and sincere, just sincere. The press and public are hoping to finally catch a glimpse of something genuine peeking out from behind that carefully-constructed veneer of your campaign. If all you can offer is more canned PR, you'll even lose that modest opportunity to do yourself some good.

On election day, if you lose, deal with the moment appropriately. The actual words will take care of themselves. Keep in mind that EVERY politician loses an election or two along the way. The only ones who win are the ones who come back from a loss. Just make your speech, and handle your moment, and 'stay within yourself' as baseball pitchers like to say. Picking up the pieces and charting a new course - those are tasks for another day.

The last article on the future of newspapers you'll ever need

This one really covers all the bases.

Now you know whether or not to pull the trigger on that New York Times stock.

Heh. OK, this is a little over-the-top-snarky - and maybe you ARE thinking about picking up some of that downtrodden Times' stock, eh? So what do we -who take them to task so often - REALLY think about the future of newspapers? Well, we think THIS is the wave of the future - for newspapers that are WELL RUN. Which the Times, as yet, is not. But stay tuned, there's a visionary management team out there somewhere just waiting to swoop in and pick the carcass clean, er, create value.

HuffPo, of all people, says 'Obama can't win'

A surprising post, in light of its placement. Unsurprisingly, many of the natives disagree.

Many HuffPo commenters are taking umbrage with this post, which is unsurprising considering HuffPo's backing of Obama and All Things Democrat. But not all of them, which (we suppose) shows you how Hillary supporters are hanging tough.

The post makes many points we agree with wholeheartedly:

1) Obama is a brand, like Coke or Pepsi. Beyond that, he isn't much of anything. He's no agent of change - he's backed by the Hudson County-like sleaze that runs Chicago. (Naturally, he ALSO enjoys the backing of the sleaze that runs Hudson County.) Were Obama truly a messenger of bad tidings for the status quo, the status quo would have shot the messenger long ago.

2) McCain isn't a compelling candidate, and hasn't run much of a campaign. On the other hand, he runs close enough to mainstream America (just right of center) that he would be acceptable to a majority.

3) A guy with a resume as thin as Obama's is going to tend to expose himself between now and the election.

This seems to be happening already. McCain doesn't really have to worry about 'portraying' Obama in one way or another. Not that he's inclined to do so - McCain doesn't really have a Rove type behind him who's focused on how the media 'images' your opponent. It's the sort of thing that happens organically. It's a drip here and a drop there, and all of a sudden little Toto pulls back the curtain and exposes The Wizard. A good example is how one usually reliable scion of the left - Garry Trudeau, Doonesbury's creator - recently ran a series of strips making 'The Obama Truth Squad' look ridiculous. Another stalwart of the left, Glenn Greenwald, has likewise been critical of the campaign's phony veneer. And The Nation, usually in Barack's corner, just posted this rebuke to the candidate.

Drip, drip, drip.

Not that McCain doesn't have his own problems with 'core' supporters. But while McCain has lukewarm support, Obama is experiencing outright backlash.

4) 'Everybody' believes Obama is going to win. Especially Obama.

This is ALWAYS dangerous. 'Everybody' thought stocks could only rise in early 2000. 'Everybody' thought there was no way to lose money in real estate a few years ago. 'Everybody' thought the idea of a successful terrorist attack on the World Trade Center was ridiculous in 1993. 'Everybody' thought the Red Sox would just fold as usual against the Yankees in 2005.

Beware of what 'everybody' believes.

RELATED: 'The Bloom is off the Rose'. There are a LOT of disillusioned Dems out there. This is not just opposition - Obama has created a grass-roots resistance among his own would-be support base:

Greatest internet viral prank ever?

You MUST check out this brilliant viral prank - before someone pulls it on YOU.

(Now send it to someone.)

Moving the goalposts on multiple-salary reform in Jersey

Steven Fulop vs. the established order, in yet another bizarre tale of New Jersey 'reform'.

Recently, two letters in the Jersey Journal caught our attention. One was a fulsome pean of self-congratulations from one Valerio Luccio, of Civic Jersey City. This is the Jersey City equivalent of Hoboken's People for Open Government, and they were moved to proclaim that the end of public officeholders with multiple government revenue streams was near at hand.

(aside: We wish we could link more of this stuff from the JJ, but the paper's website is so horrendous that letters to the editor - and even entire articles - simply vanish from the face of the earth. In this case, though, we scanned the paper.)

Adjoining that letter was a letter from Ruben Ramos, blasting Beth Mason for offering the very same measure. 'She's no reformer, she just wants power!' he shrilly intoned. (We're paraphrasing, but see for yourself below.)

As you may have guessed, Ramos is one of the very same ethically-conflicted double-dippers who'd be directly affected by this proposed ordinance. Peter Cammarano, the man who would be mayor, has a similar conflict, though not one covered by the proposed ordinance. (Cammarano, through the business his law firm does with local government, profits from his political position.) In Jersey City, seven of the nine city council members hold full-time public jobs.

New Jersey, if you didn't know, is a company town. The company just happens to be the government itself, and its GM-like motto is: "What's good for Jersey Officeholders is good for New Jersey". People with a stake in the growth (and continued corruption) of government are placed in office. Ambitious 'reformers' grasp this early on, and either drop out (Phyllis Spinelli), drop dead (Tom Vezetti), or drop the pretense of reform and learn how to 'work with' a deeply corrupt system (Soares, Zimmer, Cunningham, etc.). In Jersey, state employees control the levers that determine their own salaries and future prosperity. Advancing that agenda is the bottom line of New Jersey politics - everything else is PR.

Turns out, though, that the trumpeting of imminent 'ethics reform' was just more chickens counted before hatching. Jersey officials - unhappy with this sort of initiative, as Ramos' letter attests - have moved the goalposts.

The July 30th JJ reported that Jersey City councilman Steven Fulop had come up "a few hundred signatures shy" of qualifying the 'pay to play' initiatives for the November ballot. Officials going over his lists found reasons to disqualify a good many names. No problem. Fulop quickly delivered (he had them in reserve) several hundred new names, meeting the standard given to Fulop by JC's City Clerk Robert Byrne.

But now the city's corporation counsel, Bill Matsikoudis, has told Fulop that the Faulkner Act, cited by Byrne, did not apply in this case. So instead of having to collect 1800 or so names (10% of the number voting in the last election), Fulop now has to collect 10% of all the names living in Jersey City (that is, about 12,000 names). This would be, of course, virtually impossible in the ten days allotted to him. Fulop says he'll fight it in court.

Even if you only care about Hoboken politics, this affects you, because the Faulkner Act applies to Hoboken as well. If Fulop fails, similar initiatives by POG and Mason fail as well. (Somewhere Ruben Ramos is breathing a sigh of relief.)

Given our experience with corrupt and incompetent 'reformers', we considered that it was possible that Fulop screwed up, rather than the city. So we poked around to find out just what it takes to get on a New Jersey ballot.

Turns out, the degree of difficulty depends on what you're trying to do. Want to run for office? Jersey doesn't care. Get 800 registered voters to sign up, and you're in. (Though the state does demand that you sign a bizarre 'oath of allegiance' to the NJ and US constitutions.) Compared with states like North Carolina, where you'd have to collect 2% of all the state's voters, it's a cakewalk.

But Jersey does NOT have uniform laws governing the introduction of popular initiatives. And it bodes badly for Fulop that the Supreme Court has upheld some pretty onerous ballot-access restrictions elsewhere. That's at least partly because referendums can themselves become instruments of  corruption. The courts, therefore, allow considerable latitude in terms of what can and cannot make it to a ballot.

Fulop has a shot at getting this through. His initiative does not deal directly with salaries as such, which is the objection being used against him. Instead, Fulop's motion involves the right of an elected official to hold ANY other government job. Fulop, Mason, Kurta and others are right to point this practice out as a key element of Jersey's culture of corruption.

What Fulop et al are doing, though, is attempting to treat the symptom. Of course, we can understand how they'd feel they were dealing with the cause. The thing is, once you get past the fact that our elected officials represent government (i.e., themselves) instead of the public, you're forced to ask why that happens. And looking at Hudson County's history, you have to ask how and why it happens over and over and over. Only then do you realize that the problem is systemic. It's the underlying system itself that cries out for change.

As we've said before, the only hope New Jersey has for change does not lie in electing new representatives. They will find a way to survive in a corrupt system, rather than change it. This is why 'reformers' perpetually become those in most need of 'reform'. Change cannot come about through 'ethics bills', even proposals as high-minded as this one. Though these initiatives are a threat to people like Ramos (and most of the JC council), they can (and will) be circumvented as long as there is an institutional will to do so. This case demonstrates our belief that meaningful change can only come about by significantly altering the laws governing our state.

This is something even the most fervent 'reformers' seem to have no grasp of. Therefore, radical change is likely to be forced on our government only when our state's finances finally collapse like the Berlin Wall. How do we know we've arrived at this point? Good question. One would think the state takeover of Hoboken's finances might spur such radical change. Instead, they're busily rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Probably we won't know that we've arrived at that point until we have actually passed it. What we CAN know for sure is that we are headed inexorably in that direction.

Your local law enforcement officials in action

Pulling guns on citizens, assaulting bicyclists, incompetent investigations and prosecutions.

'People should not be afraid of their government. Government should be afraid of its people.'

In The Sopranos, Federal officials reported to Tony Soprano so he could sidestep their investigations. The Sopranos were an examination and indictment of the real and pervasive corruption of our society. The show was fiction only in that the names and details were changed, but the stories were pulled from the headlines. We see similar events, illustrating our government's law enforcement incompetence, every day:

• A NYC cop knocked a Hoboken bicyclist to the ground, then arrested the cyclist for assault. (This one was 'caught on tape', and appears at bottom.)

• A US marshal whose car was blocking traffic in Jersey City pulled a gun on a citizen, who fled the scene to seek help.

• The US Attorney's office demanded that former Newark Mayor Sharpe James be put away for 'a history of corruption', even though it only made a case for ONE relatively minor incident. The judge (correctly) told the prosecutors that he would not be 'intimidated' into handing out unfair punishment, saying: "Prosecutors have a responsibility to look for justice". (Chris Christie expressed outrage at the decision. His disgust should have been properly directed to presumptuous lead prosecutor Judith Germano - and his own office. It certainly was not the judge's job to build a case that would have put James away for a 'lifetime of corruption', nor was it his responsibility to cut corners on Christie's behalf.)

While government law enforcement officials do occasionally resolve some important and high-profile cases, our experience has been that for every case handled competently, many more are buried, ignored, or botched.

The underlying problem here is that our expectations are based on a fallacy: We rely on our corrupt and incompetent government to address issues arising from the corruption and incompetence of government. Fox, guard the henhouse.

What's needed are laws enabling citizens and private businessses to bring their own investigations and prosecutions of government officials. These would, of course, be based on the same rules of evidence that apply to prosecutors today. For example: Several years ago, we uncovered a great deal of evidence that exposed wrongdoing at the 916 Garden automated garage. It lead back to Bob Janizsewski who, in connection with a crooked construction firm and insurer, had performed a series of state-enabled construction scams in New Jersey. This netted the participants millions. But after we turned the evidence over to David Roberts and local law enforcement officials promising "a full investigation", the case vanished from the face of the Earth. We did not have the clout to get the FBI or Chris Christie's office to give us anything more than lip service. (It probably goes without saying that the local papers wanted no involvement, preferring to write the case off as "a mystery". No newspaper has ever mentioned the disappearance of Robert's promised investigation. Other papers, such as The Record, considered the crimes to be out of their 'coverage area'.) Without the involvement of a law enforcement agency, our evidence was unusable.

In a world where citizens were empowered to bring criminal charges against government officials directly, that case would have been resolved long ago. Subsequent Hoboken scams, such as what is going on at the Parking Authority and St. Mary's right now, would never have even been considered in a culture where crime stood a good chance of punishment. But in a state where prosecution of public officials is rare - and usually meaningless in relation to the actual crime - anything goes.

It's hard to believe that anyone would claim that the slap on the wrist given to Sharpe would lead to consistent prosecution of corrupt officials. Based on what?? Occasional, symbolic prosecution of public officials for a fraction of the crimes they commit, is hardly indicative of any new trend. That's been going on, especially in Jersey, just about forever. Unless we change the rules of the game, we can only expect the usual outcome. The only difference will be the occasional appearance of new players - the game remains the same.

Attend MIT via iPhone

At a greatly reduced tuition (i.e., free).

Free online classes and lectures, from many institutions of learning, existed on the 'net previous to this. But now you can easily 'attend' those courses on the train to work, or just about anywhere.

A note to regular readers

...you know who you are...

Regular readers of this space have noticed that, while we used to publish 10-20 posts per day, we're down to between around one and three.

Since this sort of thing is often the precursor to the abandonment of a blog, we want to let readers know that the opposite is the case here.

Actually, Mister Snitch is gearing up to a whole new site, at a non-Blogspot address. Said new address will be posted here at the old stand, and we are told that Google/Blogger will automatically send inquiries to the new hotness. Once the site is up and functioning, we'll resume the previous level of posting.

In addition, we expect to incorporate a new algorithm for finding new posts and sites of interest to feature here. This algorithm, actually, once existed on another site and was very effective in finding unique material. Unfortunately, the site has been discontinued, but we ("we" meaning "programmers we've hired", because what do WE know) hope to replicate the formula here, with some improvements. We are excited about this. More on that later.

Our usual curmudgeonly coverage of the snakepit that calls itself New Jersey politics will continue, but in a sequestered area that will make said Jersey-specific material easier to find.

We hope this will enlighten or confuse you. (Either works for us at this point.) More as we get closer - meanwhile we'll leave this post at the top for a while.

The REAL reason Steve Jobs won't talk about his health

Cynics claim he's hiding something. We say it's to avoid a flood of posts like this.

Don't read this before lunch. Or, uh, even after.

UMDNJ may fire over 300 workers

The systemic corruption, ignored by local media (Jersey Journal, Hudson Reporter) until it became terminal, continues to exact a toll.

UMDNJ was a scandal so enormous, the only way local media could miss it was because they have evolved, over time, to ignore such stories. We don't expect the St. Mary's scandal will be deemed as newsworthy by the local media until after it's been bled completely dry, unable to juggle its books any further, and its land sold at auction.

Dr. No

All that stands between you and a $17 billion earmarks stampede is Tom Coburn. (video)

When you thin out someone's wallet, or intrude on a man's ego, you make enemies. Hats off to this intrepid Senator, who's making them by the score. (And hats off to another fine Drew Carey-produced mini-documentary. A brilliant video form, built for the 'net.)

Newspapers comment on commenting and anonymity

Comments from journalists who made the transition online have relevance to Hudson County.

One of the finest online 'newspaper' efforts we've seen is The Knoxville News-Sentinel. It puts efforts by our local papers, such as they are, to shame. Jack D. Lail, the managing editor/multimedia there, offered a thoughtful and highly commented post re the online community that revolves around local news.

Derek Powazek, author of Design for Community, makes ten points that are directly applicable to our local situation.

1) Require Accounts:

Anonymity is important in journalism, but not for comments.

There are a lot of good reasons to allow anonymity, especially in the news. Sometimes a source needs to speak out against an employer or the government without being named. Fine. But there is no reason, really no reason at all, to allow people to post comments without having to first sign up for an account. Simply requiring an account will remove 80% of your comment problems.

This is a point we have brought up to Hoboken411 and NJ.com, to no avail. As a result, Hoboken411, whose unintentionally ironic slogan is "making our community stronger through technology", has done nothing of the sort. Instead, by allowing a signup procedure that abdicates personal responsibility, he's enabled something that acts like an online mob.

Why? Because that's what mobs are - anonymous groups of people, acting badly because no one expects to be held personally accountable.

When we brought this up to Klaussen, he professed ignorance of the many ways online communities can maintain decorum. Of course, he's being disingenuous. As any political boss knows, there's simply more power in owning a faceless mob than in moderating a healthy community forum. (In the case of 411, the site owner's power is more perceived than real. But Klaussen believes it, and that's what motivates him.)

2) Set and Enforce Rules

Nobody likes finding out about a rule after they’ve broken it. Write a human-readable set of community guidelines (Flickr’s are excellent). Make all new members agree to it when they sign up, and link to it prominently from every comment form. This way, if you have to take action later, you can say “We warned you.”

Then enforce the rules. Delete bad comments and publicly promote the ones that are great. There’s a common misconception that moderating comments makes you more liable. This is not true. Managing your community does not have any baring on your DMCA compliance, safe harbor standing, or any other legal issue.

Recently, Tony Soares and Micheal Lenz were banned from Klaussen's site. We have no sympathy for them - they are two of the most duplicitous individuals we've ever encountered.

Nevertheless, had Klaussen set and maintained standards as we (and others) have advised him, the banning of Soares and others (and the attendant division of "community") need not have happened.

Ironically, had Soares and Lenz concerned themselves with convincing Klaussen to set and maintain standards in the first place, they could have avoided their fate. Instead of doing that, and attempting to earn the respect of the 411 community, they were preoccupied with battling site owner Klaussen for control of the crowd. This was a very foolish battle they were fated to lose.

3) Employ a Community Manager

As his pretext for not moderating his site in a consistent manner, Klaussen objected that he simply lacked the time to run the site AND moderate comments. But as we pointed out to him, modern comment moderation can be done by empowering those within the community itself. Says Powazek:

Yes, you should be paying someone on staff to be the Community Manager. In addition, you can also enable the community to help. Give every post a “This is Bad” button. Then give the community manager a private page where they can see the comments with the most bad votes and take appropriate action. For bonus points, give each post a “This is Good” button, too, so they can also tell you about the good ones. Remember that your members are not the enemy: they want to help you keep the place clean, too.

This process works extraordinarily well on sites like Superhero Hype, where the potential for community-wrecking friction among the fanboys is as high as anywhere on the 'net. The unspoken reason for Klaussen's objection to community self-moderation was, again, the diminution of his own personal control of news on 411. Ironically, were he to empower community members in this way, his site would be exponentially larger (and more lucrative) than it is today.

But then, of course, Klaussen would no longer be quite the center of attention and self-styled 'power broker' (as if) that he is today.

4) Sculpt the Input

Just because your users can post comments doesn’t mean you can’t help them shape them.

Back in the day, when we had people posting comments to Fray, we were constantly tweaking the form’s automated responses. If you tried to post something too short, it asked you to expand on it a bit. If you posted something too long, it asked you to edit yourself down. If you posted in ALLCAPS, we translated it to Title Case for you (Flickr does this now). These are easy things for computers to do, and they make a huge difference.

5) Empower the Community to Help

If you think bad comments bug you, they bug the good commenters twice as much.

AMEN. (And we covered this in Point 3.)

6) Link Stories to Comments

The worst thing you can do is separate the “community section” away from your content. That creates a backchannel, where people feel safe being inappropriate because, why not? They’re at the kids table, anyway.

Powazek here is referring to sites that shuttle reader comments off to a chat area. We don't care for the practice, either. However, we can think of one reason for it which we will discuss in the next point.

7) Enable Private Communication

The internet didn’t create the angry letter to the editor, but it definitely put it into overdrive. And that’s okay - sometimes people need to vent. Your job is to direct the venting.

Some papers’ comments are so crazy because there’s no other way for the reader to respond. People will gladly communicate with you privately if you gave them a way to do so... You may get some angry email this way, but it’s better in your inbox than on the website where it will just start, or add to, a fight.

This is so true, and so rarely addressed. But as much as speaking privately to the site's management is vital, speaking privately to other commenters is vital as well. This is one reason why comments are sometimes shuttled to chat rooms - because that's where the infrastructure for private messages exists.

This sort of thing really needs to be handled within the site's structure. Members should not have to post their email addresses for other members to find. Lines for private communication should be just a click away.

8) Participate …

Get your writers involved in the conversation... This is part of journalism’s evolution, and you’re either on the boat or you’re not.

Quite right. This is The New Journalism, and integral to establishing a News Community.

9) … But Don’t Feed the Trolls

Members participating with good intentions are generally pleased when the authority figures are participating. Unfortunately, that can also bring out the trolls - bad users who are playing a game called “suck up as much of your time as possible.”

A community with sound, consistent moderation AND a non-anonymous user base will have this problem pretty much licked.

10) Give Up Control

Newsrooms are top-down places, but the internet is not. Get used to the fact that people online won’t do things just because you told them to. In fact, the only thing you can absolutely count on is that something will happen that you didn’t expect. When it does, you’ll be defined by what you do next. Be ready to be surprised.

'Giving up control' hits the mark - it is the real reason Klaussen will never address, or even admit, his site's deep-seated problems.

Or his own.

The non-wisdom of crowds, by Dave Winer

Winer's often off base, and sometimes even off-planet. But here, he's on the money.

From Winer:

I am not part of a crowd, I am an individual, I'm a one man band by the quick lunch stand, playing real good for free. When you mash us all together you miss the point...

In the 20th century everything was about mass markets and centralization. You could explain things with concepts like crowds. In this century we're going the other way. The technologies push us there in a positive way, because the cost of communication is so low it doesn't need to be financed by moguls the way printing presses and TV stations were. And in a negative way because while our desire for information is increasing, the ability of professionals to provide it is decreasing. So we have to fill the gaps ourselves... And the individuals you want to turn back into a crowd won't go for it...

There is no "wisdom of crowds". That's a fallacy, and a nifty hook for a book title, but it's a lie. We constantly find evidence of the falseness of this idea.

There is only the wisdom of individuals that a discerning eye may find AMONG the crowds. This is the wisdom that leads men, and sometimes defines the destiny of nations, but it never is the wisdom 'of a crowd'. What one finds so often on Wikipedia, Digg, and other sites, is the 'wisdom' of a mob. This 'wisdom' is the same groupthink that gives us corporate snafus, nonfunctioning government, hospital food, institutional art, and polyester pantsuits. That is how the 'wisdom of crowds' manifests itself. It ain't pretty.

Who's watching the Watchmen (trailer)?

The millions flocking to see the record-breaking Dark Knight, that's who. But do they know what they're watching?

While Batman is a world-wide symbol, The Watchmen (whose trailer leads off the current Batman installment), though well-regarded, are relatively unknown. Yet, Warner Brothers is betting heavily that The Watchmen will be next year's Dark Knight. So here's a quick Watchmen primer:

• The Watchmen trailer (as currently playing with The Dark Knight)

• A detailed, expert analysis of The Watchmen trailer

• The original Watchmen comic books - animated, scored and narrated (beautifully done)

Looking at the dying newspaper business from a new angle

Are the financials bad because of bad journalism, or because of bad business practices?

If you follow the links from Instapundit or any number of right-of-center blogs (see, for example, the comments here), you'll read that papers like the Times are dying because of bad journalistic and political practices. We have also criticized the Times' journalistic decisions, but mostly because of its top-down decision to hang on to opinionistas while canning news-gatherers. (Which remains a very backwards-looking idea. The opinionistas are pricey, and compete against abundant online opinion leaders who work for free. Beat reporters and stringers are comparatively cheap, and have relatively little - and sometimes NO - competition.)

However, we've been seeing big-money players scooping up dying papers near the bottom. Do they like losing money, are they looking for a hobby (a la Citizen Kane, or this wealthy dilettante), or do they know something we don't?

Chances are, at least some of them know something we don't. Sam Zell and some other buyers-in-at-the-bottom are finding that journalists are more than willing to adjust to a new-media world. It's the business end that's cantankerous.

This makes a lot of sense, when you think of how newspaper MANAGEMENT sat on its hands and lost its centuries-old lead in classified advertising (Craigslist), job listings (Monster), and even death notices (Tributes.com). The writers, and even the papers' politics, had nothing to do with this catastrophic loss of core revenue streams.

The challenge now is for the buyers of these fallen giants to create a new business model and new revenue streams. The old ones may not be completely lost, but the resources expended to regain a share of them would be, in most cases, better spent elsewhere. As we've said all along: The Times and its brethren would do well to refocus on gathering local news, building a monetizable community around it. That is where these brands could still have an enormous impact.

Some of these 'new newspapers' seem to get it. Here's the Philadelphia Inquirer's Brian Tierney, for example:

Tierney outlines one of the more plausible-sounding plans for wringing real dollars from underachieving newspaper sites. “A year from now, I hope Philly.com will be the largest producer of short-form video in Philadelphia,” he says. This means that instead of asking print reporters to blog around the clock, producing repetitious versions of the same story, Tierney wants to “monetize” the most common surplus commodity in any newsroom: the reporters’ nonstop gabbing about local politics, hometown sports, business, movies, wine, car prices, undiscovered restaurants, and so on.

The NY TImes will not go quietly into the night. It will be bought, and it will be bought by someone with a plan.

RELATED: What happens when you put a small, cheap video camera in a journalist's pocket: You soon find unique, local content that will drive online traffic.

Illustrating the problem with newspaper-generated blogs

The Jersey Journal hawked their new 'Bayonne Blog' yesterday. Then we saw this.

That's the problem when a newspaper starts 'blogging': Whatever the newspaper does badly, the blog will do badly as well.

And the Journal has done SO much, so badly, for so long, that it's tough to know where to start.

If blogs represent the grassroots, the Journal's blogs are lead-tainted Astroturf. What's really telling, though, is that while the paper has been expanding its in-house blogs, it's long since given up on its experiment of giving space to commentary from independent Jersey blogs. That's not true elsewhere - the Knoxville News, for one, fearlessly and thoroughly covers local blogs in all their wild wooliness.

Unfortunately, 'fearlessness' and 'thoroughness' are not words commonly (or, well, EVER) associated with the Jersey Journal.

UPDATE: "Who watches the watchmen?" In a sign of these changing times, a host of bought-out bloggers are NOT keeping the MSM in line. It seems only the Inquirer and Gawker are doing any real journalistic heavy-lifting on the Edward's 'love child' story. Most newspapers, and their related blogs, have decided to turn a blind eye. From now on we'll rely on those two, and maybe Pink and the Weekly World News ("The World's Only Reliable Newspaper")as well. We don't know if we can say they've never lied to us, but we're dead certain they've never held anything back.

Will the Obama Truth Patrol condemn this, or link to it?

And it came to pass, in the 8th year of the evil Bush the Younger, that a Child appeared.

We're inclined to find this hilarious, but we'll reserve judgement until they officially tell us what to think.

Where's the beef? That's easy.

The real questions are: Where's the story, and where's the punchline?

The other day, a man stole a hundred dollars worth of frozen meat by stuffing it down his pants in a Bayonne Shop-Rite.

The Journal noted it in Police Beat, and Letterman (who thinks anything involving meat is funny anyway) used it on his show.

Letterman must have the most broken sense of humor in the biz. He started into a 'how hot is it' bit which was an opening for a frozen-meat-in-the-pants story if we've ever heard one. But instead, he talked about a guy who drank his own pee to cool down, which has a gross factor that negates any chance of humor. It's a sophomoric Fark joke, and somewhere Carson is moaning in his grave.

When Letterman finally used the item, he did nothing with it. Of course, stuffing frozen meat down your pants is pretty funny, and doesn't really demand a punchline, but geez - the guy is a professional comic. There oughta be a certain craftsmanship involved.

Leno, on the other hand, would have had more curiosity about the whole thing. In fact, he would have had more curiouslty than the Journal, because he would have wondered the same thing we did:

What happened to the meat?

Yes, the story says the meat was returned to the store. That's not what we mean. We mean, did they just put that meat - a hundred bucks worth, after all - back on sale?

This is Jersey. You know the answer.

UPDATE: Bayonne Now follows up with a Shop-Rite spokeswoman, who says 'of course' the meat was discarded. Hmmmm. We might say 'of course' they'd tell us that, but we won't. Not us.

Comedy Central asks Code Pink the Big Question

"So if we didn't have any police, we wouldn't have crime?" (video)

What's particularly choice in this exchange is that the Code Pink rep is forced to consider, just for a moment, how ridiculous her entire position is. She hesitates - and then hedges - on the answer. Watch for the woman in the hot-pink feather boa, about halfway through.

Is Beth Mason aligning herself with the Russos?

Our Magic 8-Ball: "Signs point to yes".

From a recent comment:

"...is there any truth to the rumor that Beth is aligning herself with the Russo folk? I like that she's independent and would like to put these rumors to rest."

That's a good question. We have no inside information on Mason's current strategy, but let's break it down logically. We'll start our evaluation with the time-tested axiom:

'The enemy of my enemy is my friend'

Who are Mason's most bitter enemies? If you guess the Hudson County political bosses - you're wrong. They don't give a damn about her, by and large. Even as a public office holder, she's barely on their radar screen. Oh, she ticks off Roberts now and then, but that's only because Roberts is so vainly obsessed with his image. Neither Roberts nor anyone supporting him sees her as a viable political force beyond her neighborhood. The boys running the HCDO know it's only a matter of time before Mason burns out, and they know she can't really stop what they're doing. (In fact, Mason doesn't REALLY comprehend the clandestine workings of Hudson County machine politics. At best she's still on the outside looking in.)

No, her real and immediate enemies are the 'reformers'. That is to say, a group that wants and needs to make the same claims, and occupy the same political turf, that she does. She's cutting into their game, and impeding their most important weapon: The ability to declare who is accepted as a "real" reformer and who isn't. This bunch includes Zimmer, Cunningham, Lenz, Soares, etc.

The 'reformers' are Mason's most bitter and immediate enemy. The enemy of her enemy is her friend. Who's the enemy of the 'reformers'?

Again, it's NOT the HCDO. Zimmer et al want to 'work with' the HCDO, remember? Lenz and Soares want to be (and have been) affiliated with HCDO-backed 'winning' campaigns, and they even pushed the hapless Carol Marsh to whore herself out and foolishly waste her 'reformer street cred' on HCDO slates.

No, the enemy of the 'reformer' group is Michael Russo. Here's why:

Clueless political hack Michael Lenz thought he'd worked out a gentleman's agreement with Russo during the last mayoral race. It went like this: The Marsh campaign would go out of its way to avoid criticizing Russo, and whichever of Marsh and Russo was left standing, the odd man out would step up and support them. Of course, Lenz had every intention of dumping Russo after the campaign was over. (An affiliation with Russo, as you'd imagine, would not sit well with 'reformers'.) Of course, Russo knew full well Lenz' reputation for throwing allies under the bus (Inez Garcia Keim, anyone?). So rather than back Marsh, Russo cut a deal with Roberts' backers for the mayoral runoff.

Since then, you've probably noticed that Soares and Lenz have been especially vindictive towards Russo. They see him as a traitor, though of course he merely backstabbed them before he himself was to be cast adrift. And Soares, Lenz, et al see the HCDO as providing the support for their efforts they had once hoped for from Russo. (Look for 'reformer' support in Cammarano's bid for mayor.)

With the 'reformers' (foolishly) behind Cammarano (it's 2001 all over again), the HCDO will have little need for Russo. This places him at a significant disadvantage. Ever since Anthony Russo was voted from office, the Russos have sought leverage through contrarian alliances. When everyone else was supporting Hillary, for example, they backed Obama. This isn't a matter of marching to a different drummer (the Russos have no ideology beyond self-interest), it's simply a matter of political positioning.

The HCDO sees Michael Russo as a necessary evil, and while they'd take his support, they'd also love to make him less necessary. There's been plenty of bad blood exhibited between the Russos and HCDO representatives over the years.

The Russos cannot go into the next election unallied, or they will be isolated and eliminated fairly easily. This would diminish their power. In fact, it may be said that if the Russos do not gain something during this election, they're pretty much over in Hoboken. (Even while Anthony was at his height as mayor, his reach NEVER extended past the city limits. Today, they can barely get beyond their ward. They could continue perhaps to hang on to what they have, but it's not much and even that is slipping away.)

They also cannot meekly fall behind Cammarano, because there's simply no leverage in that. (And it would be galling to the Russos to fall behind someone like Michael Lenz in the political food chain.) They could ally themselves with Raia, but that would be an uneasy alliance to say the least. And while they have complementary resources (Raia has money, the Russos have a vote-generating machine), they cover a lot of the same turf. Citywide, that's not an appealing match.

Mason might be a very good fit for the Russos, especially if (as she has suggested) she does not want to run for mayor herself. Mason would lend the Russos credibility with some citizens who want reform. Remember that the 'reformers' like Zimmer are going to be lined up behind Cammarano, so if you want reform you'll have to hold your nose to vote ANYway. The comparison with Cammarano makes Russo something of an easier 'sell' to the 'reform' crowd, as does the fact that Lenz and Soares' past endorsements and support of Russo would be dredged up during the campaign.

For her part, Mason can't stand alone. She's already pulling the 'reformers' knives out of her back. The Russos represent a bare-knuckled political ally who could cover her back, which no one else in town seems willing to do. For Mason, this is really a matter of political (and even personal) survival. Frankly, we think retirement from public life is a saner option for Mason, but politics is not a sane pursuit.

So yeah, an alliance between Mason and the Russo gang makes a lot of practical sense. We think it's likely. Do we like it? No, but it's the sad reality of the political world. Will we think less of Mason for it, should it come to pass? Probably not. Would we think more highly of the Russos for it? Again, probably not.

We see a Mason/Russo alliance as a catalyst for a revival and escalation of the Stack/HCDO wars. The resulting mayoral race would dwarf anything that came before it in terms of spending. It would be a scorched-earth battle for Hoboken. (Or whatever's left of it at this point.)

One last thing: You may think you have a hard time accepting a Russo/Mason alliance. But it's no harder a time than many Russo supporters will have in getting behind Mason, who they see as something akin to the AntiChrist. This is very much an oil and water situation here. But you know how it is: Politics, bedfellows. Fact is, a proper fusion of oil and water might prove a powerful tonic indeed.

RELATED: Previous prognostications on Hoboken's upcoming mayoral race.

Trust us, this vid's funny if you're a typographer

Maybe even if you're not: Courier held for Ransom at the Font Conference.

(Don't let Charles know that it's Comic Sans who saves the day. If you see him, just shout 'Mailbox! Mailbox!!!' and RUN.)

Journal again spanks Mayor, Council for lack of oversight

But who's going to spank the Jersey Journal for not doing THEIR job?

The Jersey Journal published yet another editorial yesterday chastising Hoboken's mayor and council for allowing the city to sink to its present state.

Seems to us, however, that this member of the Fourth Estate just a few months ago published a 'Political Insider" column telling us that city residents didn't properly "appreciate" the fine work being done by David Roberts. Roberts was allowed to portray residents' disgust of him as the result of "poor communication of [his] achievements". This statement went unchallenged by the paper's "insider", who's also crowed about the 'success' of the Hoboken hospital scheme.

We won't hold our breath waiting for the Journal's admission that it, too, played a part in Hoboken's current situation. That would require a self-awareness and integrity the paper has never possessed.

Worst newspaper in America, and a proud contributor to Jersey's culture of corruption.

Multiple-salary ordinances to break the cycle of corruption

The use of salary ordinances as a tool to break corruption's back does not go far enough.

Beth Mason and Steve Fulop, mirror-image councilpeople who should do lunch, both want to put some teeth into state ordinances designed to keep elected officials from drawing more than one salary.

The way to address corruption is to follow the money, but this approach in not sufficient. Not in a county where the firm employing a leading candidate for mayor (Hoboken) does business with the government.

An effective approach would be pretty draconian, but then again the wealthiest urban municipality in the state, the city of Hoboken, just went belly-up. When your house is burning to the ground, you don't ask the firemen to wipe their feet.

Since the council basically has nothing to do right now but bluster, it might consider something constructive for a change. Such as a set of ordinances dictating the following:

1) If you or anyone in your family works for a company doing business with the state, or did so over the past 5 years, you cannot run for office. (That would end Cammarano's bid for mayor.)

2) If you contribute to a local political candidate, or any fund contributing to a local candidate, you cannot work for any entity over which that official has jurisdiction. (One result of this would be that butcher Santusht Perera would NOT have been named head of the Hoboken hospital's thoracic center.)

3) No legal professional holding office can be given a contract for services either while serving, or for 5 years after. Period. (What Bernie Kenny did in Hoboken, for years, was a blatant ethical conflict. Not that any 'reformer', legal board, or media outlet ever mentioned it.)

Measures like these take the motivation for corruption out of the equation, rather than merely addressing the symptoms. They're strong medicine. They would be a radical departure for New Jersey (and therefore, controversial), but Jersey is in desperate need of bold moves. Our house is now on fire, and it's nearly out of control.

RELATED: How political machines work.