Monday, June 30, 2008
Thank You Louisiana
Thanks to everyone who called their legislators, emailed the governor, held up portest signs, and did any number of things that stopped this ridiculous pay raise from happening.
A guarded measure of credit goes to Governor Jindal as well. Though he wavered here and there, if nothing else he was responsive to the voice of the angry masses.
God bless Louisiana.
--Chad E. Rogers
|
Monday, June 16, 2008
Jindal Can Veto the Pay Raise or Kiss it Goodbye
I've been trying to find the best way to say this for hours now, and I think I've found it.
If nothing else, I'm sure Mr. Jindal can be counted on to look after his own narrow, selfish interest (like any politician).
I don't count him to do what's in the best interest of Louisiana, but I think I can count on him to look after his own hide- if he knows what's good for it.
And I'm not sure that he does know right now.
But if he's interested in saving his career, then he will veto the legislative pay raise proposal.
If he doesn't veto this bill, he can kiss it all goodbye.
That's not a threat. Influential as I may be, I don't have the power to single-handedly take him down, and I don't really know that I would want to.
But there are others who will go out of their way to destroy him if he doesn't veto this thing and they will likely succeed.
Your move, Bobby.
|
Friday, June 13, 2008
Tucker Tucker Tucker Tucker Tucker Chameleon
When I think of House Speaker Jim Tucker, I think of these lyrics to the song "Karma Chameleon" by the band Culture Club:
If I listen to your lies would you say
Im a man without conviction
Im a man who doesn't know
How to sell a contradiction
You come and go
You come and go
Karma karma karma karma karma chameleon
You come and go
You come and go
How perfect in describing Republican House Speaker Jim Tucker. For he is indeed a man with no apparent conviction, who is trying to sell a contradiction. The contradiction is that he has paraded himself as both a fiscal conservative who demands responsible spending, and a man who joyfully praises a left-leaning Democrat for sponsoring a bill that increases legislators' pay and thereby increases government spending.
Apparently, Tucker is against any increase in government spending that does not suit his own narrow selfish interest.
First, he cloaks himself as a fiscal conservative, standing up to governor Jindal for busting the spending cap in a previous session. The great lie here is that because Tucker is willing to stand up to his own governor who is in his own party, he must indeed be a man of principle when it comes to fiscal responsibility.
Fast forward to today when I saw him, with my own eyes, gushing over Anne Duplesis' bill raising legislators pay. Tucker endlessly droned on and on how what a great leader Duplesis was for doing that which he himself has fought against in the past: increasing government spending,.
He also took the time to take a stab at bloggers who had the gall to post a photo of Anne Duplesis' Mercedes. Duplesis is a Democrat who had sponsored a bill whose goal was to increase government spending, which makes Tucker's praise for her downright sickening.
The good news is that the public has grown tired of being mocked by this man and he now has a permanent target on his back. People like my friend Moon Griffon are already calling on Tucker to be replaced as house speaker, and people I talk to say that this could actually happen within the year.
No matter what Tucker's fate is as house speaker, he will be shown no mercy here.
|
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Et tu, Bobby?
Governor Jindal has said that he is against the proposed pay hike for lawmakers, at least in principal. However, he doesn't seem intent on vetoing it:
Jindal said he wouldn't veto the pay raise if it gets to his desk,
saying he didn't want to give lawmakers a reason to jettison any of his
outstanding legislation. He wouldn't say, however, whether lawmakers
had threatened to spike any of his bills if he intervened in the
pay-raise debate.
The governor needs to realize that this isn't 1988- it's 2008. There's a much stronger nucleus of conserative, grass roots support. The blogosphere, talk radio, and a variety of burgeoning grass roots organizations are calling on Jindal to do the right thing and veto this pay raise. Numerous columnists have also come out against the pay raise.
Speaking as a member of the alternative media, I have been hopeful, yet skeptical of the governor's sincerity about reform and limited government. I know that there are countless others who feel the exact same way who run operations similar to mine.
Jindal needs the support of those who have fought the longest and the hardest for reform in this state.
If he vetoes the pay raise, he will be the hero of the day and 90% of the ambivalence toward him will vanish. For my part, if he vetos this bill he will have much more enthusiastic support. I know he will.
If he fails to veto this bill and allows it to become law, the consequences will be disastrous, for his future and to the future of this state. Among the ranks of reformers I have spoken to, a kind of despair is already setting in. It is painfully clear that if Mr. Jindal doesn't take a stand on this, the hopes reformers (most of whom have worked longer and harder than I) will be dashed and many of us will acknowledge permanent defeat.
It will be considered nothing less than treason, a knife plunged into the heart of anyone who had hopes for Jindal as a reformer. If the legislators get a raise, Jindal will have left them for dead crying "Et tu, Bobby?"
These are the stakes.
|
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
An Open Letter to Lawmakers Supporting Pay Raises
Dear Ladies and Gentleman of the Legislature:
Go to hell.
Love and kisses,
Chad E. Rogers
Publisher
THE DEAD PELICAN and ROGERS RANTS
P.S. Legislators not supporting pay raises are excluded from THE DEAD PELICAN'S all expense paid trip to hell.
|
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
I Will be Your Villain, Baby...
|
Note: The following is a bit tongue-in-cheek.
Below is an anonymous email I got yesterday.
|
ANONYMOUS EMAILER: My god (Chad), you are the creepiest mother-f#@ker ever.
CHAD'S
RESPONSE (borrowing heavily from Samuel L. Jackson in the movie Unbreakable): You know what the creepiest thing is? To not know your place
in this world. That's just... that's just an awful feeling.
I almost gave up hope. There were so many times I questioned myself... so many sacrifices, just to find you.
But I found you. I finally found you.
Now
that we know who you are... I know who I am. I'm not a mistake!
It all
makes sense. In a comic, you know how you can tell who the
arch-villain's going to be? He's the exact opposite of the hero, and
most time's they're friends, like you and me. I should've known way
back when. You know why? Because of the kids. They called me "Bad Chad."
|
|
Saturday, May 24, 2008
Is Jindal "Limited Government" After All?
Sure, there's been some suspicion about Governor Jindal's conservatism. Many argue that he hasn't been hawkish enough on tax cuts, and doesn't want to cut government spending. My assessment to date is that these observations aren't completely wrong, but an article in today's Times Picayune demonstrates that they aren't completely right either.
The fact that council members are griping about not getting their fair share of pork leads me to suspect that Mr. Jindal is doing something right:
Council members griped about how Jindal's
administration has dashed Jefferson's legislative wish
list of late. They criticized his crew for not initially
honoring an agreement with the New Orleans Public Belt
Railroad crucial to the Huey P. Long Bridge expansion and
for giving the populous parish short shrift when doling out
the capital outlay budget to fix roads. The council's third beef was over a
hospital-financing bill that would reimburse public
hospitals like West Jefferson Medical Center and East
Jefferson General Hospital for treating uninsured patients.
The bottom line here is that someone isn't getting what they think is the fair share of our tax dollars.
The typical Louisiana way of thinking seems to be "My parish's pork barrel projects are life and death- but in any other parish, it's called "waste" and/ or "big government."
This could be why Jindal is criticized for both expanding government and cutting government.
No one can accuse me of being a Jindal sycophant. I have challenged him and will continue to as I see fit.
But clearly some people are angry because they haven't gotten to gorge themselves at the public trough, which forces me to believe that while Jindal certainly isn't doing everything right, he's not doing everything wrong either.
And I haven't dispensed with all of my skepticism- the title of this blog is in the form of a question- not an answer.
|
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
Newt Sees the Gathering Darkness
It's obvious that Newt Gingrich reads this blog and is stealing my ideas. I've had these same pessimistic observations for a long while now. That is, he foreshadows doom for the G.O.P. in '08. Newt is a politician, so he states it much more diplomatically than I. But he foresees the same end result:
Second, there is a grave danger for the McCain campaign that if the
generic ballot stays at only 32 % for the GOP it will ultimately
outweigh McCain's personal appeal and drag his candidacy into defeat.
If the leading lights of conservatism are suspecting doom this soon, well...
|
Monday, May 05, 2008
Less Nudity? How About Less Government?
Here's the latest crazy legislation, by Sen. John Smith (D) of Leesville. It was sent to me by a character I often talk to when I'm doing radio, who calls himself "The Flaming Liberal." Here's the story:
Smith wants a statewide regimen of strict new regulations on businesses
that sell sexually oriented entertainment and products, including
exotic dance cabarets, adult book and video stores, and movie houses.Six
of the bill's 13 pages are devoted to definitions of terms used in the
law, including nudity, which is forbidden and seminudity is OK, but
only if the seminude person remains on a fixed stage at least 6 feet
from all patrons.Semi-nudes can't touch patrons.
No, I don't approve of stripping.
But I don't approve of hauling some twenty something college girl off to jail and charging her with a felony for getting naked and getting too close to a patron. There's just something creepy about jailing people for behavior that is taking place between consenting adults, in a place where ONLY consenting adults are allowed.
Call me crazy. It won't be the first time, and there may be some truth to it.
--Chad
|
Republicans Have Likely Lost Sixth District for Good
Politcally, I would describe myself as conservative with a few libertarian impulses here and there. Some people think that means that I am supposed to play along with any delusions that come out of Louisiana Republican machine. Sorry folks, but it ain't gonna happen.
The latest delusion concerns the results of the recent sixth district congressional race. Democrat Don Cazayoux has taken the seat formerly occupied by Republican Richard Baker. Moderate Republicans are claiming that Woody Jenkins lost to Cazayoux because he was too extreme.
They claim that if a more moderate Republican runs against Cazayou |