Political map of America

Explains a lot, don't it?

How David Lynch goes fishing

Won't mean much to you, perhaps, unless you're one of those rare people who truly does go fishing for ideas.

Why does the world keep lying about Tony Soares?

"I can't believe my eyes!" "Well, who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?"

We were reminded of that old Groucho Marx bit by the reactions of Tony Soares to some of the recent stories on him.

When Dawn Zimmer did not name Soares to her vacant 4th Ward seat, witnesses saw Soares outside the council chambers accosting the new mayor, and demanding his political payoff. "You owe me!" he shouted.

Never happened, says Soares (scroll down to the Update section). Those witnesses were just a pack of liars, no doubt sent by Soares' political enemies to besmirch his fine name.

Of course, Beth Mason had a similar experience when she refused to hand Soares control of her first run for Council. But she could just be another liar.

Also lying, says Soares, are the people who claim to have seen him ripping down Mason for Mayor posters. He 'proved' they were lying, too, by explaining in a press release that he was too short to reach the posters. (Apparently in his 50 years on the planet he has never learned how to stand on a box.)

People, people, people. Who are you gonna believe, Soares or your own lying eyes?

It ain't we, babe

Seeing posts by 'Mister Snitch' on nj.com? It's not us.

Recently Smarty Jones alerted us to a post attributed to 'Mister Snitch' on nj.com. The post specifically mentioned a meetiing between local slimebag Tony Soares and Dawn Zimmer. The purpose of said meeting was, presumably, to offer Soares some position of authority (probably a Freeholder slot).

It's not us. We haven't posted on nj.com in years, and we very rarely read it. The place is a foul stew of innuendo, lies, posturing, fraud, and character assassination. The culprit? Probably Soares himself, doing a little self-promotion. It would not be the first time Soares has tried to use us when he needs to borrow steal a cup of integrity.

The last time we were there actively, ages ago, Soares was posting under multiple names, including MikeyRox. (This was when Soares was out of office and politically dead.) MikeyRox loved Michael Russo beyond reason, praising him to the skies. MikeyRox wanted Russo to run for mayor in the worst way, and, by the way, thought Soares and Marsh should be 'in the mix' of candidates on his slate. This went on day after day after day. Then one day, MikeyRox and several other posters posted the EXACT same message - word for word, cut and paste - one after the other. We emailed Soares, telling him people would see through his multiple posting scheme if he was that sloppy.

All the cloned postings immediately vanished.

A similar business happened after Scott Delea's first campaign. Soares/Lenz/Marsh demanded that Delea endorse their slate. When he didn't, ugly messages began appearing on his website, drowning out all discussion. But Delea is in the internet ad business, so he's pretty net-savvy. He easily discovered that all the nastiness was coming from Soares' work address. He sent Soares a cease-and-desist email, threatening to inform his employer. Soares scurried back into the woodwork, and the trolling ceased.

We would not be surprised at all if Soares were put up for Freeholder or some similar position. He's always had the makings of an HCDO wiseguy.

UPDATE: Smarty Jones writes us to say that the nj.com boards aren't the chat-sewer they once were. We don't go anymore, so we don't know. All we know is, someone there is playing off our name. That's enough sleaze to keep us away, no matter how 'reformed' the joint may be otherwise.

UPDATE 2: It probably is NOT Soares posing as us on the nj.com boards. Because whoever it is, is linking to some posts that are VERY unflattering to him.

Do we feel badly about having accused him? Nah. After years of this kind of behavior (all the while denying every instance - even when caught red-handed), Soares has thoroughly earned his rep as a lowlife slimeball. Pull enough fire alarms and you become known as the guy who pulls fire alarms. Soon you become the first suspect for every false alarm, and whose fault is that?

Stop the presses

"The [Jersey City City Council] is a... joke... the worst administration in the city's history."

That unusually strong statement appeared in today's Jersey Journal. They also mention that "too many of the city's lawmakers are also on the county payroll".

All this has been the case for quite some time, of course. (We do wonder what the "acceptible number" of city officials on the county payroll would be.)

The occasion that apparently caused the veils to fall from the Journal's eyes was the guilty plea of Phillip Kenny, who was not part of the recent FBI sting, but nevertheless was found guilty of taking $5000 in bribes. The paper is 'surprised' because Kenny 'exuded sincerity'. The paper, in fact, endorsed his election. (Their embarrassment at being so transparently and completely wrong, rather than any newly-discovered zeal for investigative reporting, was almost certainly what precipitated the editorial. In other words: This was butt-covering.)

It's quite a claim to say the current administration is the 'worst in Jersey City's history'. This is the city that spawned Boss Hague, after all. But you don't get a situation this bad unless you have a God-awful newspaper. The kind that's regularly 'shocked and surprised' by revelations of corruption. But the Journal would be surprised much less often if it were not so busy willfully turning a blind eye to the rampant corruption taking place all over the county, every single day. It's no surprise to us that not a single one of the 44 arrested in the recent FBI sting (nor Kenny) had been a target of a Journal investigative report prior to their arrest.

It remains the worst newspaper on the planet.

WTF?

The Wisconsin Tourism Federation finally gets the joke.

What can we tall ya? Your government in action.

RELATED: This never happened to Paul Rand.

Zimmer speaks!

And you know, she REALLY shouldn't.

Dawn Zimmer had a fundraiser the other day, and a couple of her remarks cry out for comment.

"I'm the most transparent mayor Hoboken has ever had."

That's the kind of statement that's a bit difficult to refute - it's a matter of opinion, after all. Except that, uh, she's been mayor for about five minutes now, so that's not much to measure. Hell, you could stack her in-office record up against Peter Cammarano's for all you could learn from it. (Remember, Cammarano was caught stuffing money into his trunk BEFORE he took the oath.) More to the point of this post, though, is the depressing lack of knowledge of and respect for Hoboken's history that she betrays.

Hoboken, after all, elected The Wackiest Mayor in America. While Zimmer does come across refreshingly unscripted (she looks as if she downed too many Red Bulls while Phyllis Diller did her hair), she's got nothing on the legendary Tom Vezzetti. Zimmer hasn't actually been elected yet, and when she (inevitably) is, outside circumstances will have played a major role. But when Vezzetti was elected, it was clearly because Hoboken believed that a (painfully) badly-dressed but extremely gracious man who shuffled around town with a bullhorn could be nothing but EXACTLY what he seemed. He was the very embodiment of transparency, making Zimmer look positively Machiavellian by comparison.

The more significant historical gaffe, though, was this bit:

"I want to keep working to restore the fiscal situation in Hoboken..."

Uh.... 'restore' what?? She's obviously not talking about her immediate predecessor, since Cammarano was only around long enough for a cup of coffee before they came with the 'cuffs. Is Dave Roberts' administration her standard for fiscal stability? Considering the fact that he started out spending more than he had, and left the city a basket case, let's rule that out - for Zimmer's sake.

Perhaps she's referring to the situation Roberts inherited from his predecessor. Are we 'restoring' the city's fiscal situation to the state of affairs under Russo, who routinely sold off city assets to pay the bills until he was run out of office and was then, of course, arrested for numerous fiscal misdeeds? Hey - there's a campaign slogan: 'Bringing Back the Good Old Russo Days'.

Pasculli, before Russo? Nope, he was just a placeholder after Vezetti's death. Vezzetti, then? We think it was a look at the city's books that killed him. Vezzetti inherited the city that Steve Cappiello ran, so don't look for hope there, either.

Fact is, Hoboken's history has been that half the books are crooked, while the other half is missing. State oversight? Please, girlfriend. You're in Jersey!

Those with no sense of history are doomed to repeat it, and that's what we've always sensed from Zimmer. In the end, she'll give us more of the same-as-it-ever-was. It's unsurprising that a woman who campaigned to 'end the flooding in her ward', despite the fact that Hoboken (built at sea level, mostly on landfill) has always flooded, would make such empty statements.

Beth Mason's probably running for mayor

And she's probably going to lose.

Before we get into this, you need to indulge us in a little philosophizing.

The key to being successful in your endeavors, whether you're a sculptor, an inventor, or a marketing strategist, isn't talent. Talent's important, sure, but what's really key is the ability to say 'no' to a client, or to refuse a job outright. The world is full of bad ideas, bad products, and people who just generally want to waste your time.

If you need to live in the poor part of town, take a second job, or eat nothing but baloney sandwiches for the luxury of 'no', that's what you need to do. Of course, most people don't run their lives that way:

Jack Sprocket, of Jack Sprocket, Inc., walks into Joe Blow's Ad Agency and demands to know what Joe will do to market his new cog. Blow picks up the cog, studies it, and says, 'Well, first off, I'll have to advise you to design a better cog.' Sprocket, outraged, vows to take his business elsewhere and steams out the door.

You probably know what's true/not true about that little scenario without our telling you. (But we'll tell you anyway.) No head of an ad agency is going to risk insulting a potential new client that way. On the other hand, a client thus insulted probably will head elsewhere.

The average ad agency client expects to enter into a relationship in which (s)he is top dog. He expects to hear what he wants to hear, he expects the agency to deliver anything he demands, and he expects to be dominant and serviced in every aspect. In other words, the only meaningful difference between this relationship and that of a hooker and her John is that the latter arrangement is more straightforward.

The agency head, for his part, wants to keep his staff generating money. He's got a payroll to meet, greens fees, a mortgage, office rent, kids in private schools, and a mistress. To him, the client and his problem are just a means for paying the bills.

Sounds like business as usual, right? Yeah, pretty much. So what's the problem?

The problem is, both parties' priorities are wrong. Specifically, no one wants to address the issue of the cog. So a campaign is launched to sell a lousy product. The public buys it, but they're not thrilled about it.

Jack Sprocket wants to know why his ad money hasn't gotten him a larger market share. Joe Blow says they need to spend more on marketing. Sprocket complains that all Blow wants to do is bleed him. Blow grumbles (but mostly to himself) about the lousy product he has to sell. The relationship deteriorates. Eventually, Sprocket finds a new agency, or Blow resigns the account. It's the cycle of life in the ad biz.

Now let's backtrack. Say Jack and Joe are different kinda people. They meet, and Joe tells Jack he's got to build a better sprocket, or he can't take him on as a client. Jack's never had an agency treat him this way, but he can look down the road, and realizes that fixing the problem - now - is the best course for the long run.

Now and then, such things DO happen. But they rarely happen in the moral sewers of Hudson County business relationships.

And that brings us, finally, to Beth Mason.

Beth Mason has hired a Hudson County 'political advisor'. The woods are full of them, and they're pretty much all alike. All of them hope to snag HCDO-backed clients, where the fix is in and they can chalk up a win. They don't care about what policies or slimy pols they peddle, or their public impact once the election's over. The guy Mason just hired had previously foisted Peter Cammarano (the bribe-taking, freshly-arrested-ex-Mayor) on Hoboken. He'd also created one of the most vile campaigns ever seen (even by Hudson County standards) for 'reformer' Carol Marsh. (The stench of it still clings to her.)

He's not going to tell Beth Mason to get her cog fixed. He's going to tell her what she wants to hear: That she can win.

Except that she CAN'T win. And she needs a new cog.

One can pretty easily imagine how Mason, with helpful input from her advisor, internally rationalized her second mayoral race this year:

• Zimmer would be tougher to beat after having been Mayor a few years - so now's the time to run.

• She has to run again now, to remain a potent political force.

• She knows who she can/cannot trust this time, so she won't make the same mistakes.

• The vote that went to Cammarano is an anti-ZImmer vote, which Mason can pick up.

Whether or not any or all of those rationales are valid, here's what they have in common:

NONE of them demonstrate why a Mason run for Mayor at this time is good for Hoboken.

Mason is selling a damaged cog. If her advisor gave a damn about her, or Hoboken, or anything besides his spurious rep and his bottom line, he'd tell her to fix it before doing anything else. He'd tell her NOT to run.

But of course, he WON'T do that. Mason's a high-profile job and a fat payday, and that's all he cares about.

Since WE have no payday at risk, we can tell Mason exactly what she needs to do now, and for the next few years:

• STEP ONE: She needs to announce, immediately, that she is NOT running for mayor. She needs to state clearly that she has decided not to run because her entry into the race would merely raise the stakes and force Zimmer to raise more money. Which, in Hudson County, means Zimmer would owe more favors.

In addition, she should state that Hoboken is exhausted from the previous election, runoff, and arrest of the new mayor. Not to mention all the city's other (considerable) problems. She will step aside for that consideration, as well.

This would be generally acknowledged as an honest and selfless gesture, since it involves obvious sacrifice on Mason's part. Even Zimmer's allies would be forced to concede this. It's not an easy move, but it's a vital part of the process by which Mason fixes her cog.

Mason has foolishly placed so much trust in self-serving, carpetbagging consultants over the past few years that she's completely forgotten what she SHOULD be trusting: The common sense of the people of Hoboken. And that's exactly the sad, self-defeating message she's been subliminally sending to Hoboken's public: She believes the only way they'll ever do the right thing is to be hustled, tricked and manipulated into it. The inevitable result is that Hoboken doesn't trust her, either.

The public no longer sees Beth Mason. (It may be that even Beth Mason no longer sees Beth Mason.) All anyone sees of her is the cloud of machinations, illusions, marketing and media-moments conjured up by a parade of ultimately clueless, caustic advisors. There's no longer any there, there.

It's seductive, the position of a marketing client such as Mason in relation to her paid advisor. People jump at your command, you're told comforting things and follow comforting formulas to (presumed) success. But a famous definition of insanity is 'trying the same thing over and over, expecting a different result'. And that's where Mason's headed.

It's time she asks herself a simple question: Who managed Tom Vezzetti's image? Who coiffed his hair, chose his wardrobe, administered his message, and created the PR that won him the mayor's seat? If the answer is 'nobody', it's time for her to consider why she keeps letting the tail wag her dog. She needs to get her priorities straight, and get back to basics. What it's NOT time for is another campaign that's doomed to be as God-awful as her last one. She'll emerge with only the public's resentment for having put them through it.

It's a long, long road to fixing that cog. It begins with Mason stepping away from this race, for the good of the town. And for her own good, too, because two losses in a row WOULD be political suicide. Beth Mason has a serious problem, and the first step in addressing it is recognizing her situation for what it is.

• STEP TWO: Get back to pure 'reform' - not spurious 'deals' and alliances - as Job One.

This is what the public needs and wants to see, but it's not without its political angles.

First off: Zimmer's going to be the mayor. She'll have the advantages of the office, but at the cost of 'reformer' street cred. That's inevitable, regardless of how well or badly she does. Mason will be the standard-bearer of the town's loyal opposition, while Zimmer and her gang (many of whom are already well-known to be in the HCDO's pocket) will increasingly be associated with the town's problems, rather than the hope for any solutions. And those problems WILL get worse under the HCDO-constrained Zimmer, as Jersey's general economic environment continues to deteriorate. That's bad for Hoboken, but potentially good for Mason's political ambitions.

Second: Mason would do well to place special focus on issues that Zimmer will be unable to face honestly, and are likely to become bigger issues going forward. She should keep pressing on the local hospital, in particular. It's a money-laundering operation and patronage mill designed to serve Boss Menendez. Inevitably, like the UMDNJ scandal, its problems will become too big to disguise. In the meantime, though, Zimmer allies like her attack-dog Peter Cunningham, are too deeply compromised to confront the fraud. This amounts to an opportunity for Mason to build credibility, even as the 'former reformers' around Zimmer destroy their own.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

One day, Mason will need to strike new alliances for a fresh run for mayor. If she cleans up her act, she can do this from a position of strength which she has lacked in her previous attempts. She'd do well to block out some time and read a bio of Churchill written from a political perspective. (Churchill held fast to his ideals when they were unpopular, and waited for them to come into vogue.) Or she could look to Jersey City, where woebegone Governor Jon Corzine has recently been obliged to approach, hat in hand, 'outsider' pol Steve Fulop in hopes of borrowing a cup of scarce election-year integrity. With sadness, we note that no one looks to Beth Mason for the same.

Why Tony Soares won't sue (anyone, ever) for defamation

Permanently-outraged Tony Soares finds yet another target to threaten. But as usual, Soares' bluster means less than nothing.

As noted in Al Sullivan's 9/6/09 column, Tony Soares has another Internet flame war going on. This one's with the Hudson Shark, who Soares has 'revealed' to be Tom Bertoli. Bertoli's known as a Russo backer, and no friend of Soares for sure.

Last time we looked, Soares was trying desperately (that might as well be his middle name) to work his way back into the graces of the Zimmer camp. Soares, with his customary political acumen, had declared the Zimmerites losers and was running headlong into the open arms of the Cammarano camp when, er, Cammarano got arrested. Soares backtracked so fast he nearly got whiplash.

With the Zimmer contingent now in power, Soares wants to demonstrate his loyalty and value to them in his usual fashion: The relentless posting of online sleaze under various names, all in the name of 'reform' and designed to enhance the acting Mayor's position.

Bertoli, for his part, denies being 'The Hudson Shark' and says:

"If Tony sues me for defamation of character, I'll sue him for lack of character."

Yeah, that's about right.

Soares has threatened any number of Hoboken citizens with defamation suits. He's threatened us, too. But he'll never do it, because a lawsuit would violate his modus operandi.

For many years, Soares has spent his days (usually anonymously) spreading innuendo, half-truths and outright lies for one self-interested purpose or another. He operates in the shadows, from the safety of distance, where he never can be called upon to back up his attacks with substance. But in a lawsuit, he'd have to stand like a man and face his accuser. (Or - more likely - his accusers.) In a court of law he'd have no place to hide, and Soares is just not equipped to deal with that.

Tackling tough problems head-on is just not Soares' thing. His style is the sucker-punch, the hit-and-run, the blindside blow. He prefers his fish in a barrel. While in office, Soares faced a vote on a raise for Hoboken's cops. He had campaigned, as had his running-mate Carol Marsh, against rubber-stamping raises for city employees. But Soares knew that voting the raise down would turn the cops' ire against him. So, while Marsh voted against the raise and took the subsequent heat, Soares left his ally holding the bag - alone - by abstaining.

Soares has doublecrossed more people than he cares to count. Folks in his condo and at his workplace (he's been known to threaten his employers with lawsuits, too) loathe him. Taxi drivers dread picking him up. He consistently ranks lower in local phone surveys than pols who've done jail time. He's been banned outright from more than one local blog. He's trashed and slandered former supporters, permanently alienating at least one former campaign manager we know of.

The thought of standing up in open court and facing even a fraction of the people he's screwed in his life terrifies Soares. He's not suing anyone for defamation - ever. Because, as Tom Bertoli suggests - what happens when they sue him back?

The Wile E. Coyote market maneuver

Notes on the imminent collapse of the US equities market.

First let's get the heavy lifting out of the way. Then we can have some fun, 'cause it's a whole lot easier to find the comedy in the tragedy if the tragedy's not happening to YOU. So, the first order of business must be to get you in the driver's seat of the steamroller, rather than leave you stumbling around blindly in front of it.

Long story short: The market's setting up for a sudden move down. You won't exactly find this in the technical tea leaves, and that's why most investors will miss it. (Just as most investors missed the beginning of this move up, and missed last year's big collapse, too. The market's a herd, following the same information right off a cliff. But there ARE other ways to analyze the market, and that's what we're about today.)

The chart below shows the S&P from April up to last Friday, August 28th. The red lines at right show our projections for the next few weeks. It's a wide chart, and you may want to click on it to see details.

UPDATE: We have revised our expectations for the downside and the rebound, marked on the chart as (I) and (J). We expect the market won't fall much past 843 (S&P), and will rebound to about 906 (though we expect to see some quick deterioration from the rebound high in the days following this move). The numbers are based on the recent movement of the Shanghai Composite Index, which has behaved in a manned similar to the US markets this year. We consider its behavior a fairly reliable forecaster of what we can expect in the days and weeks ahead.



Going through this alphabetically:

(A) is where the market was on Friday, August 28. The green box shows we are in a period where the market has plateaued, and is in fact slowly trending down.

(B) shows a previous plateau, from June. Here again, the market could not push above a certain level.

(C) shows the immediate aftermath of the plateau, with the market trending down heavily. This market is being heavily shorted, and this move attracted a great deal of short interest.

(D) shows the impact of heavy short-covering and an investor base that has been trained, by the market action since March, to BUY ON DIPS.

(E) projects a continuation of the current downtrend.

(F) projects a likely increase in the downtrend, attracting short interest as noted in (C).

(G) projects the same results shown in (D), and an upward trend culminating somewhere above S&P 1054.

(H) This uptrend represents the end of the rally, with a rapid (about two weeks) move down to somewhere around S&P 843, and a bounceback (I) and leveling-off (J) at around S&P 906.

If you've been watching this market, there are a couple of obvious questions you should be asking: Why will the market plunge this way? Why won't it drift off to new lows? Or, why won't it just climb to a new level, as it has after dips since March?

The reason the market keeps climbing on dips is a combination of speculation and short-covering. This is the essence of a market bubble, or a bear-market rally (same thing) like this one. A market with this mindset simply CANNOT drift off. Bears waited a couple of years for the dotcom bubble to drift off, and it never did. Instead, it spiked and popped. As will this one.

The more compelling question is: Why will THIS move be the last move up? What will change? Well, essentially NOTHING will change - except the result. We'll have a dip, and a strong move up, but THIS upmove will be followed with a loud thud.

The reason we will get a different outcome for this upcycle is threefold:

(1) The market has been strongly conditioned, over the past few months, to buy on dips.
(2) Shorts are as determined as ever, but they have been likewise conditioned to cover quickly, on any hint of an upswing. They're on a hairtrigger.
(3) The trading is noticeably thin right now. There simply are not a lot of participants remaining. Most investors have taken their profits and have moved to the sidelines.

Here's what this adds up to: The market now is poised so that an unusually large percentage of its participants will move in the same direction. At first, the remaining herd will sell off reluctantly and uncertainly, feeling that a fresh move up could begin at any moment. Then selling will tick up. At some point the crowd will spot a shift in sentiment, and those who sold off will buy back in quickly and decisively on the dip. Shorts will cover just as quickly, injecting more upside pressure. This move up will be very strong, since there will be few sellers interrupting it along the way. At that point this will be a market united, moving upward as one.

In the immediate aftermath of the hard push up, however, as the prices start to drift down, the market action will again shift quickly. This time, it will produce an unusually large percentage of sellers. The powerful move and fresh high will insure profit-taking, and many sellers will anticipate a step back down (to be followed by another surge up in accordance with recent market behavior). The problem is - with the market all moving as one on the way up, and then either selling or at most holding existing positions - who's left to buy?

Nobody, that's who.

With buyers cleared out, prices will do what they always do when there is insufficient demand: They will move down. But now we will have reached a key saturation point where a large number of stop-loss orders will be triggered. New buyers, who might have entered on a drift-down, will see prices falling with increasing speed, and will hold back (waiting for someone else to buy first, or for better technical numbers). Before long, the market will become a falling knife that no one will touch.

That's how a bubble bursts, and the market now appears properly set up for this plunge to begin. We have a thin number of traders who have been well-conditioned to move in the same way by the recent market behavior.

We believe the bottom is somewhere around S&P 800, with a bounceback of around 25% of the plunge. That's the end of Phase One of this three-phase market move to the bottom. (We'll explore Phases Two and Three at some future date.)

If you are buying an ETF to track the lower prices, we suggest bidding only fractionally under the previous 52-week lows. The market will go well under those lows, but the pricing action will be swift and furious - and you may not get your bid. If you miss the swing, you'll never catch up to it, and you'll miss the whole move down. Keep that in mind.

What if we're wrong, and there's another swing up?

Glad you asked, shows you're paying attention. Fortunately, this market should offer another swing down before it shoots back up again, so you can extricate yourself without too much damage. You're better off, though, focusing on the market swing you could miss by not acting, rather than the mistake you could be making by acting here. Fear of going against the crowd is something one must overcome to become a successful investor. (Or, one might argue, a successful human being.) If you're struggling with this, congratulations. You have met the enemy, and he is you.

Now notice what we DIDN'T say

You may notice that we didn't refer to Fibonacci retracement numbers or technical analysis, or any such crap, in this post. That's because such things ARE crap. Crap, crap, crap, crap, crap. Well, OK: They're useful in certain circumstances at certain times. But these things are, in reality, crutches, and are often absolutely useless when they are most needed. Look at what happened in the market just last year. The entire world had these tools, yet most everyone lost money anyway.

CRAP.

There are more frauds posing as investment advisers than there are ambulance-chasing lawyers. The next time you're tempted to PAY someone for advice, ask yourself: If he knows so much about the market, how the hell come he needs my money?

(Notice, while you're at it, that OUR advice is free. Which either means it's worthless - a distinct possibility, BTW - or we just don't need your money, thanks anyway.)

Now, this is a question would-be investors should have asked themselves about Bernie Madoff. The really successful hedge fund guys won't take your money most of the time. It's only once in a while, when the market's really down, that there's a break in the big hedge funds and they'll take fresh money. And even then, you oughta ask the question. Really, what you need to do is find a Jim Rodgers or Warren Buffet just starting out. Assuming of course you have the instincts to identify such folk.

A lot of people come to more or less this same conclusion, and decide that what they really need to do is to develop their own instincts as investors. Unfortunately, what happens to a lot of them is that they fall into a dependence on a whole different type of crutch and trap. They don't fall prey to a jingo-spouting investment charlatan, but instead they get trapped by a self-perpetuating system.

The Motley Fool and Investors' Business Daily are two examples of such systems. They way they work is rather cultlike: If the system fails you, it's because you didn't use it properly. If you're losing money in the market, IBD will tell you you're not applying their rules correctly. You're not cutting your losses quick enough, or you're not letting yur winners run, or you can't tell the difference between a cup-and-handle and a head-and-shoulders. The Motley Fool will tell you you're not patient enough, or you don't recognize the changing marketplace for whatever your stock's company produces.

Which brings us to the real point here: Instead of hewing to some guru or philosophy, develop your own damn convictions. Easier said than done? Probably. Most folks are convinced they already think for themselves, and are masters of their own destinies. Alas, the example of the investor community (not to mention every other community we've ever studied) puts the lie to this self-absorbed notion. If investors were truly masters of their own destinies, they would not have marched like lemmings off the stock market cliff last year. Or off the real-estate cliff a few years ago. Or... well, trust us: Examples of the mob mentality rampant in the marketplace, and nearly everywhere else, are virtually endless.

Fleshing out the inherent nature of the struggle for true self-determination in its entirety would fill a book - a far larger task than we care to embrace today. (Maybe tomorrow we'll feel more ambitious.) For the remainder of THIS post we'll content ourselves with a few blithe observations of human nature, as they relate to the current market situation. Situationally-aware instinct is the place from whence springs the best investment (and life) decisions, and that is what we care to discover and nurture.

Let's start with a simple question:

Why does Wile E. Coyote keep buying ACME products, anyway?

Now there's a question the world REALLY wants answered. (And you thought you were wasting your time here!) But what does this have to do with the current market? Plenty.

We were fairly sure that the true reason for Wile E.'s unusual devotion to products synonymous with failure had never been explored, but we took a quick look at the usual sources. We found answers offered here, here, here, here and here.

Many of the answers were entertaining, some were pragmatic ("because a cartoon is supposed to be funny") and few were demonstrably wrong, but only one approached the truth:



"Because he was a Genius."

And that's exactly right. Wile E. Coyote kept buying ACME products because that's the only way that any self-respecting Super-Genius (especially one who had business cards to that effect printed up) would go after the Road Runner.

For all his trouble, Wile E. Coyote could have easily eaten quite well, if that was his entire concern. But his ego demanded that he demonstrate his superior intellect. No matter that he would be demonstrating it to his intended victim, who would (presumably) soon be in no position to spread the tale of his conquest. Ego is the enemy of logic, and must be served at any price.

OK, maybe you understand Mr. Coyote's problem a bit better, but you still don't understand what that has to do with the equities market.

Well, how many offers have you seen for a method to BEAT the market? How many times have you seen a SURE THING promoted? How many people, on telling you of their market exploits, have told you how they bought at the bottom and sold at the top, making a KILLING?

Now - how many offers have you had from people willing to help you UNDERSTAND the market, through study and by better understanding and controlling YOURSELF?

We'd bet you've seen a countless number of the former, and damn few of the latter. And that's the coyote's perpetual fate - searching endlessly for that vainglorious method of vanquishing his - uh, dinner. Never once does it occur to him that he should try studying and understanding the Road Runner to achieve his goals.

Great investors like Jim Rogers urge study and self-understanding as the keys to successful investing. Others offer ACME-like methods, systems, 'advice', gimmicks, and sure-fire tips. As you'd expect, ACME's methods get 99% of the traffic. Yet despite the fact that 99% of investors lose money, few ever seem to draw the obvious conclusion.

All great comedy is based on keen observation of human nature. The Coyote amuses us because he keeps making the same error, ever-hopefully and ever-obliviously, over and over and over. Likewise, there are patterns in market behavior (which is, after all, HUMAN behavior) that a keen observer may exploit. One such pattern, a splendid example of which we saw at the end of the dotcom bubble, is playing out in the markets now.

Those Wile E. Investors are at it again.

Peter Cammarano: The most honest man in town

An abject lesson in etiquette for the ambitious Hudson County power pol.

For one brief, shining moment, mayor-for-five-minutes Peter Cammarano was the most honest man in Hoboken.

That moment came about when he told a man he thought to be a developer that, for him to do business in Hudson County, The Powers-That-Be (i.e., him) would have to get a taste.

Truthier than that, it does not get. And this fact of local life should hardly shock anyone living in a town where 2 of the last 3 mayors have gone to jail. For those who never ever read a paper or turned on The Sopranos, Tom Vezetti once marched up and down the streets with a bullhorn, airing Hoboken's dirty laundry. Listen quietly, and the buildings and streets themselves will whisper of the troubles they've seen. There's no way NOT to know.

So, when the Cammarano tapes were made known, why did the public and media trot out their best Captain Renault impressions?

The fact is, average Hudson County denizens KNOW the local elections are largely predetermined. They know about the envelopes full of money. They know the Hoboken hospital is designed for laundering cash (as was the UMDNJ before it), they know about payola, they know the books are cooked, they know the relatives and asshole-buddies are on the take. They know damn well the fix is in, because it's never NOT in. Cammarano didn't cross any uncrossable lines in this regard. It wasn't the cash in his car trunk that gave a whole town an enema. It was his frank talk about business as usual - and the fact that it made the papers - that pushed people's buttons. Sure, go ahead and steal from us - we're used to it - but at least respect us enough to pretend it's not happening.

Mind you, it's embedded in Hudson County's wiseguy culture that there's no point in being connected (politically or otherwise) unless you FLAUNT it. Same way there's no point in pulling down deep six figures and driving a Dodge Neon. A real wiseguy ain't putting a coin in that parking meter. He parks where he likes, and as he saunters out of that bistro with his friends, he makes a show of tearing up that ticket. Better still - he tells them over their unhurried lunch that no cop in town would dare give him a ticket. Sure enough, in the apres-bistro glow they see his windshield is pristine. That's Jersey bliss. Fuhgetaboutit.

That's why a lot of the midlevel wiseguys and wannabe power-brokers prefer The Malibu to the smoky back room. In the back room, you're hiding from somebody, but in The Malibu, you ARE somebody. You can say whatever you want, and you don't care who hears you. This is YOUR town. Nobody's gonna stop you - except maybe for a high-five - you big-time, important PLAYA, you.

The older hands, like Menendez and Corzine, know their profile is so high that there's someone, somewhere, watching their every move. That is to say - someone who actually has the juice, and the motivation, to take them down. They have mastered the art of more subtle exercises of power, which from their high stations need consist of nothing more than denying access to the levers they control. Those who can manipulate and crush others as easily as you or I tie our shoes are beyond mundane forms of bragging. They manipulate others through fear, despite demons of their own. They're well aware of the fragile nature of their power. At any moment, a skeleton could slip out of the closet, and suddenly - they're McGreeveyed.

Had Cammarano been subtler, making do with a wink and a nod, he'd have survived at least until his trial. But with his braggadocio splashed across front pages not just locally but country-wide, his higher-ups felt uncomfortably exposed. They had to demonstrate their opposition to this sort of thing (though, leave us face it, they're anything but opposed) and lower their profile, so they took Cammarano aside and gave him his orders: Resign. Now. And that was that. Had he gone against them, he'd have been a man without a party. For a career political soldier like Cammarano, that's suicide.

Cammarano should have known better. When David Roberts, his predecessor, told his appointees to the Parking Authority that Hoboken was about 'jobs, power, and money', he honestly thought he was just imparting some cracker-barrel political wisdom. But when word spread, and people took the phrase quite badly, he denied saying it.

Perhaps the lesson of Roberts' gaffe was too subtle for Cammarano to absorb. In which case, he should have observed the more extreme example of Jersey City councilman Stephen Lipski about a year back. If you're unaware of Lipski's transgressions, let's just say that he did openly and in public what Hudson County pols usually do only in (relative) privacy. As with Cammarano (who did with his mouth what Lipski did with his, er, other part), the anti-halo effect of Lipski's behavior obliged the County bosses to heave him under the bus.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

So Zimmer has been ushered into office, at least until a November special election. What does this mean? Well, it's obvious what many WANT it to mean: That corruption in Hoboken has been dramatically, almost magically, vanquished. Then again, many also want the recent stock market move to mean that our economic problems are over. Regardless of such wishful thinking, it's evident that the real City Hall, and the real economy, will manifest themselves in the months ahead. In both cases, it's unlikely to be pretty.

Smarty Jones writes:

"I am still [holding] out hope for Dawn. She's the closest thing to a real person in that office in a while. And you don't need to be Lincoln to do some good. All you have to do is be decent. Decency over competence, because we need the former that badly."

Point well taken. We feel the same way. Nevertheless, she'll fail, for reasons we're about to go into.

Again, from Mr. Jones:

"[Zimmer shifted] powers [to appoint Zoning Board members] from the mayor's office to the City Council. That's significant and telling and perhaps foreshadowing other good things."

Anyone following the Cammarano case should remember that zoning was more or less at the heart of the matter. By appointing the Board, Cammarano was telling developers that he controlled the fate of their projects. So if they wanted to move forward and build anything, they had to let him wet his beak.

Mr. Jones believes that, because Zimmer moved immediately to end the practice of the mayor appointing the Zoning Board, she showed that she'd be a mayor who would move decisively to confront corruption. And we agree, it's a good thing. But we have two major reservations:

1) Zimmer is actually CAMPAIGNING for mayor right now. This highly-visible move is more along the lines of a campaign stunt - anyone in her position would have done the same, with the possibility of rescinding the move (under one pretext or other) after the election.

We're not saying she WILL call backsies after November. We're just saying that a highly symbolic gesture that spoke to aspects of the Cammarano story is no surprise. But let's set that aside - we mention it mainly because it's so obvious. It's our second reservation that we find troubling.

2) Those already on the Zoning Board are expected to answer to the mayor, who in turn answers to the Hudson County political bosses. With Cammarano gone, all that's changed is that the middleman has been cut out.

One recent Zoning Board appointee is greasebag Tony Soares, named at the near-eleventh hour by outgoing mayor (and steadfast Cammarano/HCDO man) David Roberts. Which of the two following statements do you suppose Roberts might have made to Soares?

HYPOTHETICAL STATEMENT 1: "Remember, what Cammarano and I both want is for you to vote for the best possible project. We expect you to reject any and all political influence or pressure, even if it comes from Peter or me."

HYPOTHETICAL STATEMENT 2: "Remember, this is probably your last chance EVER to show us you can play ball, so if you start freelancing or getting cute in the press, it's over. When Peter or I tell you a project's going through, it goes through. Period. Your job is to attack any opposing votes, or any whining 'reformers'. Got it?"

'Reformer' Soares was obviously appointed to deliver an HCDO-friendly vote. Zimmer need not have an HCDO-friendly agenda herself - the Board already has its marching orders. 'Reform' of the Zoning Board can only take place by replacing its members. But would Zimmer replace Soares, who worked on her behalf?

The illusion people are clinging to (like a life raft) is that when Cammarano left, the HCDO's corrupting influence left with him. And that's nonsense. When Zimmer got in hot water re those lottery tickets, who was at her side? An HCDO attorney. Who did the HCDO buy votes for in the 5th Ward race? Zimmer's 'reformer' buddy, Peter Cunningham.

Think the HCDO won't hand-pick the next 4th Ward Council rep? Think again. They control that vote - not Zimmer. They'll deliver it as they like - and Soares wants it. (Hence the Zoning Board appointment, to prove he can play nice in the HCDO sandbox.) Zimmer has no grass-roots base she can draw upon. (Even Mason can at least more or less depend on her own neighborhood to come through.) That means she's dependent on the machine to deliver her votes, and it's hard to be very 'independent' with that hanging over your head.

Right now, she's in a honeymoon period. This is her best chance to set the terms for her (inevitable & unavoidable) relationship with the HCDO, because right now they need her at least as much as she needs them. She's suddenly the one to beat in the race for mayor, and even the machine can't invent a palatable mayoral persona in the allotted time. (Though if Zimmer badly overplays her hand with them - well, there's always Marsh.) In the back of her mind she knows that she's surrounded by people who owe the County machine. In the long run, she knows she'll need them herself, unless she can somehow develop her own dependable core constituency. Which seems unlikely.

And this is how the HCDO has controlled Hoboken (with a few interruptions) through the years. For local pols, it's the convenience of easy campaign money - no humiliating, time-consuming begging for dollars! (But no asking where it came from, either.) It's knowing that many of the people you deal with (even/especially the 'reformers') owe them something. And then there's fear. Maybe your colleagues are reporting your 'private' conversations to the party bosses. Maybe they're planning to trade you in, the way they did with Bernie Kenny. (Some believe Kenny was roughed up by a mysterious speeding car, to get the point across. For his part, Kenny pretty much stopped fighting having the rug pulled out from under him after that hit-and-run.) With the HCDO, the knives are always out.

The only way to fight the HCDO's influence is to stay completely clear of them. Russo did it - he strongarmed them out of his way. Vezetti did it, because he just wouldn't stand for that type. He just wouldn't have them around him. Dawn Zimmer has been quoted saying, "I want to work with the HCDO". Substitute those last four letters for B-O-R-G and you'll understand the inherent nature of the problem. Unlike the Borg, resistance to the HCDO is not futile. But it's quite challenging, and few attempt it.

Dawn hasn't steered clear of HCDO entanglements, because she sees no need to. She thinks she can handle it. So has every 'reformer' who found his/herself in office, only to one day become the target for the next 'wave' of reform.

Russo, Hague, Roberts, Ramos - the list goes on and on - all entered office on 'reform' platforms, and wound up as part of the county machine. (Except for Russo, who created his own citywide machine. Boss Hague, who entered office as a fire-breathing 'reformer', ran the machine at his peak, as Boss Menendez does today.)

Zimmer's original 4th Ward campaign centered on a vow to fix the flooding that plagues the area. Her rabid boosters champion her as the answer to corruption, as well. But walk through her ward after a heavy rain. It's the same as it ever was. We'll soon be saying that about Hoboken's corruption issues, too.

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,