Refuse the Juice

All the Bombs Fit to Drop

I've noticed that a fellow blogger has made it his mission in life recently to beat Representative Lilly over the head with his blog.  Jaime Abeytia has made no secret for his love of Lyda Ness and his hatred for Lilly.  I like things when they are sporting, so I'm going to even the odds a little.

I know that Ness is working with Jaime and others on a media strategy that focuses heavily on on-line whisper campaigns carried out on blogs and in the comment sections of those blogs.  And let's not forget that Ness has made sure that her folks comment and spread nasty rumors on the El Paso Times comment forum section thingy too.  They are marking up the proverbial electronic bathroom stall wall.

Ness has proven quite good at keeping her dirty laundry out of the media spotlight.  I have a hunch that she's in good with the right people at the right news outlets and has used those connections to make sure she's the shiniest turd in the pageant.  But... she doesn't know me and I'm not going to sit by as Theresa Byrd (she's a perfect mix between Theresa Caballero and Susie Byrd) walks away with this one due to a whisper campaign based on allegations that she's more guilty of than Lilly.

Jaime Abeytia has deployed a series of planned attacks on his blog in the last 36 hours or so.  The most laughable attack was his questioning of when Lilly was going to "go negative."  He forgets that only one candidate has been talking about issues - Lilly.  Ness has run a mudslinging campaign form day one and has yet to earn a headline that doesn't center around her throwing of saturated dirt.  How could such an astute political observer miss the actions of his own candidate? 

What's really at play here is that Jaime knows that Lyda's past isn't all that great.  He knows that at some point somebody is going to start talking publicly about the mess that is Ness.  I guess I'm that guy.  He even had to preface this blog post with a comment on my preface to this blog post (did you get that? neither did I).  He's scared and she's scared.  They shouldn't be - it's not like the real media is going to report on anything you find here.

Here we go....

Lyda Ness has made an allegation that Lilly is bought and paid for by certain campaign donors.  She also has said that Lilly has campaigned using public resources on the 10th floor of city hall.  Although, Ness has been reluctant to file a complaint with the Texas Ethics Commission on either accusation.  Funny, judging by the document I'm attaching below, she's familiar with the Texas Ethics Commission and its complaint process. 

Want to see Ness' introduction to Texas Ethics Commission complaint process?  Here you go -Download Texas_Ethics_Complaint_-_SC2803116.

It seems that Lyda once took a lot of money from one single donor and a third of it was from the guy's corporation.  I think the "Inc." at the end of the name generally signals that you shouldn't put the check in your campaign account.  Nobody told poor Lyda about this.  Had she had some background in law, she might have known this when she read the rules governing campaign donations... Oh wait - she's a lawyer!  She should have known.  Or, did she know and she didn't care?  Just think of all the idiots who have run for office in town and not been fined by the Texas Ethics Commission - surely she's smarter than Alex Lozano?!?!?!?

So, while Lyda is off claiming her opponent is bought and paid for, she had people breaking the law in order to giver her money - I wonder what they wanted?  Which one of her two faces took this money?  At least Lilly's PAC money is legally changing hands.  There's some kind of old saying that applies here...

By the way - http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/dfs/COH_delinquent.htm... guess who's a delinquent filer already...  Lyda Ness-Garcia.  She can't even file a campaign finance report on time, but wants to run your city.  Go figure.

---------------------------

What does Lyda Ness think about taxes?  It's a big issue and I think most people in her district are concerned with them.  The good news is that Lyda doesn't care much for taxes.  The bad news is that the government has a problem with her attitude on taxes. 

Read the following:

Download Tax 1

Download Tax2

Download Tax3

Looks like Lyda Ness doesn't think she needs to pay taxes.  Also notice that the government isn't playing the "Ness-Garcia" game.  As far as they are concerned she's just "Ness." 

I want to ask where Lyda gets off throwing bombs at Lilly when she can't even pay her taxes.  What kind of low-life piece of you know what runs for a office where the position has control over the taxation of their neighbors and they won't even pay those taxes themselves.

Check this link out http://www.bipac.net/elpaso/EP_Voter_Guide_Primary_2008.pdf.  When asked if she's up to date on her tax obligations, she said she was.  Liar, liar - paper pants on fire.

What makes all of this worse is that Ness is a devout tax raising liberal who thinks you don't pay nearly enough, often enough.  Too bad she doesn't feel the same way about herself.

-----------------------

Then there's the matter of two lawsuits where the El Paso County Sheriff had to go over to her house recently and try to collect on one of the decisions.  It's just embarrassing.

Download Lawsuit1

Download Lawsuit2 

-------------------------------------

All of that must be coupled with rumors of her being married to two men at once (allegedly - probably not true) and those men are brothers.  She's known to have a particularly nasty disposition and fights like Theresa Caballero over any little thing she can cook up in her mind.  The general opinion of her in the law community is extremely low - so low that they are circulating emails around hoping to encourage people not to vote for her.

I don't know what the hell my buddy Jaime is thinking going all in for a candidate like this.  She's a mess!  He thinks I'll look dumb for mentioning all of these problems, but he looks worse thinking they are no big deal.  I guess if you follow his logic in this race, Gilbert Sanchez is Jaime's dream candidate.  Weird... He could have done better and his only love for Ness centers on the gay issue, which Lilly was on his side to begin with.  His credibility is hurt by his endorsement of such a candidate.  I can't help but think that Ness will be his second Norma Chavez affair - ending with a fire where they are both burned.

Lilly may not vote the way I want on every issue, but she doesn't have multiple sanctions against her from several different entities.  If you're giving points for not getting in a lot of trouble all of the time - give one to Lilly, but none to Ness.

Bombs Will Be Dropped

Since Rep. Lilly is being skewered (wrongly) on another blog and I think it's an organized effort between the Ness camp and Abeytia, I'm going to even the playing field.
The utter BS coming from the Ness camp should not go unrewarded with my attention.
Tune in later for a full exposure of Ness' strategy and why her own history draws into question every aspect of her candidacy.
The truth about who has really been bought and caught will come out among other things. Also, two husbands in two countries? Say it isn't so!
People in paper pants shouldn't play with fire.

The Tea Gathering

It wasn't really a "Tea Party," was it?  A party has attendees that want to be there.  A gathering, on the other hand, is something that is not well attended and not really enjoyed either. 

What am I talking about?

I'm talking about the secret "Tea Party" event that took place a week or two ago at Western Playland.  The only person who really covered the secret meeting was Jaime Abeytia.  I can only imagine he was giddy with glee after seeing the number of Tea Partiers go from the thousands to the dozens in just twelve short months.  Jaime no longer has to sit in silent respect of the organization and popularity of the Tea Party movement in El Paso.  It's now just another failure hanging on the wall at the local Republican Party Headquarters (wherever that is now). 

So what happened? 

Well... Genna Pendergras and the board of Grass Roots El Paso shut down the operation and went on with their respective lives.  Without Genna's tireless work, personal investment and winning combination of leadership and "just do it" attitude, the movement was set to die so we made it a planned exit.  The very things (people) that killed Grass Roots El Paso killed the latest attempt at having a successful "Tea Party." 

When Genna started Grass Roots El Paso she put together a board and had a meeting.  In that meeting we set out the very clear path we would take.  We were to be a nonprofit educational group.  Our issues would be limited to the constitution, taxes and general fiscal policy.  We explicitly decided that social issues would be off-limits.  Things couldn't have been better.

Then we had the first public meeting...

The attention seeking wackos showed up in force and saw a huge opportunity for themselves.  Many of these people were happy to see a structure in place that they felt they could steer toward their personal goals.  These people's pet issues ran the gamut of modern right-wing thought.  Some were simply against abortion while others were conspiracy theorist whose fuel for thought was deep misinterpretations of Ron Paul's ideas and thoughts on American government.  It was obvious early on that we weren't going to easily assimilate the general public into the structure of the organization. 

Later on the board decided to search for some regional coordinators to help bring the spirit of the big successful tax day tea parties to their local neighborhood.  This only caused more headaches.  The local republican party and all of their flunkies decided that Grass Roots El Paso should operate under their command. They bothered Genna and the board incessantly with abortion, immigration and a plethora of other social issues.  There was no way of stopping these folks when they set out to wreck our organization like they wrecked the local republican party.

Long story short - the outsiders caused nothing but headaches for Genna and the board. They were adamant about getting their way and would do nothing for the "cause" if the cause didn't decide to put huge billboards around town with anti-abortion messages.  And they didn't get the concept that since we were a nonprofit, we couldn't endorse candidates or post huge billboards saying that Congressman Reyes supports child murder (abortion) and not to vote for him.  I won't say that the Grass Roots El Paso email list  was "stolen" per se, but it was definitely acquired and used by someone without permission - more than once.

The whole thing was a mess and from what I understand Genna was just beaten down via phoe calls and emails all the time. Many people had an agenda they wanted her to carry and they ignored the fact that she had already set the agenda on day one.  Everybody forgot that she is a mom, wife and businesswoman first and the head of a wildly successful grassroots organization second.  People like me on the board didn't help by being absent when she needed us - I do wear that blame with deep regret. 

Once our group was gone the people who killed it were left to try and replicate it.  You can see how they did... awful.  The general public can smell a rat when a rat is present.  The gay benefits message and the abortion message have replaced the one of fiscal conservatism that the Tea Party was founded on and nobody cares for the change.  The same people who can't fix the broken republican party are now failing at something new.

The lesson to them is clear, but they won't get it.  They don't see the error of their ways.  Their political views aren't their problem.  The way they prosecute their the promotion of their political views is the problem.

You Learn a Little More

A few weeks ago I wrote about the city's ridiculous move to a $50,000 blanket bond for anyone looking to pull a permit.  The El Paso Times wrote another article about the issue and by God it proved me right... again.

Do you remember when I told you that the higher bond would attract attorneys and inspectors looking to turn some quick profit?  Well you can see me vindicated HERE.

Anybody who has been involved in any level of the construction business knows that the roofing sector is the most controversial.  Often people have their roof replaced after it's damaged by weather.  Those cases involve insurance companies and it's the dirtiest thing you don't ever want to know about.  However, this article and this issue isn't about those cases.  When your insurance company pays, they do the fighting with the contractor.  This is about your average homeowner doing what they think needs to be done and it's often right around the time the out-of-town roofers invade El Paso after a storm.  You may have had a neighbor who is getting their roof done because of storm damage and that roofer goes to your house and offers you a screaming deal on a new roof.  After all, they're already there - they might as well hit you up because they know that people get in the mood when they see the work being done close by. 

anywho...

The real story here is that you have an attorney and an "inspector" who make their living suing roofers.  The huge blanket bond makes their quick cash lawsuits all that much easier to prosecute.  We're talking a couple of hours work time for the "inspector" and lawyer and they get as much as 30% of whatever they take from the surety.  Now that the bond is $50 grand the "inspector" and lawyer can go find multiple "victims" that hired that same roofing company and go after $50k now instead of a paltry $10k.  Their profit margins from filing numerous lawsuits just hoping for "go away money" just went up 500 percent.

The move wasn't made by the city to make this lawyer rich. It was done to stop the phone calls bitching about bad roofers.  Too bad it won't stop the calls.

The bad news for the consumer is that the new bond requirement along with an even more active market for frivolous lawsuits will drive up the price of a new roof.  It will drive it up so high that you insurance company will not pay for the whole roof - possibly leaving you out more than a deductible, but more like $3 thousand bucks.  That's what you don't see. Insurance companies are only willing to pay so much for a roof and they don't give a damn about extremely high blanket bonds or litigious markets.

The issue is obviously centered on roofing and the city wanting to limit the amount of complaints they get.  What they don't realize is that small contractors who do little jobs that require permits are either going to charge more, or do it without a permit.  Both scenarios are playing out right now.  Like I wrote before - thousands of contractors haven't signed up for a blanket bond in order to pull permit due to the new bonding requirements.  It's doubtful these contractors gave up their trade and moved on to something else.  Their doing what they've always done and their doing it without a permit now. 

The good news is that the 5th floor is a lot less crowded than it used to be.  The revenue from permitting construction projects must be way down.  I'm not sure if anyone realized that would happen after they did this.

-----------------

Sorry if tihs makes no sense... so much going on around the house tonight.

A Good Point on Proxies

I was watching with interest a video Jaime Abeytia put up on his blog and was struck by a comment made on the post.  If Jaime doesn't think his blogging is valuable, he should think again - here I am writing a post inspired by his work.  Go see his work HERE.

The video is of Pastor Tom Brown addressing MABA (a racial separatist group where a law degree is required for admission) in place of his wife... who is the actual candidate.  Now, nobody believes his wife wanted to run for office - we all know it's pastor Tom Brown who wanted to run, but sent his wife instead.  

The video is quite revealing. It's obvious that Brown sees himself as the candidate.  I think this guy thinks he can fool the flock anywhere the flock will give him an audience.  I think he's wrong, but we'll see - election day exposes fools and geniuses and you never really know where you're going to end up until the votes are counted (put me in the "fool" category). 

After watching the video I went to read the comments and noted one particular one from my friend Tim Collins.  You might remember Collins was the write-in candidate who got himself on the ballot by collecting signatures.  His effort to collect signatures was the only attempt at campaigning anyone in the race made.  Fat Dummy (Besco) and Congressman Reyes sat around and did nothing and were rewarded with plenty of votes. Meanwhile, the guy who showed the most promise as someone who can actually get things done (collect signatures and do such a quality job of it that he got on the ballot - something that groups of well funded El Pasoans have failed to do over the years) got next to zero votes.  If you wonder why El Paso is last in everything, just remember that we rewarded Reyes' flat out laziness with another trip to Washington to make $200 grand to sit around and do nothing... which is the theme here - he does nothing and we are might happy to pay him to do it.

Where was I? - oh Tim Collins.  So Tim kind of pokes at Jaime by mentioning the fact that Congressman Reyes sent his proxy, Vince Perez to speak in his place during campaign forums.  And Tim has a point - where was Jaime's disdain for proxies when Reyes was giving the middle finger to voters by sending his assistant to speak to them?  I know the answer - if you're a democrat in this town you don't tug on Superman's cape and in this case Congressman Reyes is Superman.   

(quick side note - do not confuse Reyes as "Superman" and Chente "Portly" Gente who is "Supperman" - they are two different kinds of local superheroes) 

Jaime has had no problem standing up to a myriad of local democrat figureheads, but knows better than to mess with Reyes.  I wouldn't say it's a "double standard" on Jaime's part, just a means of survival.   Just imagine, as I do, that you're the type of guy that prides himself on not letting anyone tell you what to do, but make a special exception when the wife demands the garbage be removed immediately.  There are just certain things you do for you own health and safety.

I guess the bigger story here is why nobody really gave a damn back when Reyes was sending his press secretary to campaign for him (there's a thin line between Perez's duties on the tax payer's dime and those that are campaign related - If I were either Vince or Silver I'd just get a guy who doesn't draw a government paycheck to do what Vince does and avoid any questions that might be raised by some asshole blogger).  Because pastor Tom Brown is something we all fear (religious leaders bringing their religious views into the hall built on laws), we tend to take notice.  However, the use of a proxy is still wrong and should be treated equally by the press... and asshole bloggers alike. 

Vindicated

Remember when I told you a while back that commercial property owners hate highways and love congested one lane roads?  I was referring to how a highway and access roads did nothing to increase the value of the commercial land abutting Transmountain.  Some of you who make being stupid a hobby disagreed with me.

So what do you think of THIS.

Major commercial real estate guy hates the idea of a new highway next to his property because it kills commercial properties.  It's proof that the Transmountain expansion does nothing to make the landowners abutting the road richer.  It's bullshit - it makes their land worth less and they're willing to take the hit to move El Paso forward.

The Biggest Corruption Story You Didn't Read

A sharp reader caught something in the El Paso Times today that I missed.  It's story of a man named Brady... Not really.  It's the Adrian Pena/Joe Gallegos/Sal Mena story that you know nothing about and its monumentally bigger/worse than anything Gilbert Sanchez and Luther Jones ever did.

Read the article HERE.  It's not really an "article," it's a blurb.  It should have been front page news.  It's a million times bigger and dirtier than the corruption scandal they're covering like it's the OJ trial.  But... since it's construction and it's hard to figure out unless you're in the business, it goes basically unreported.

The crux of this case is the fact that it involved a very high level of coordination between school board members, EPISD staff, architects, suppliers and contractors.  The fix was in from top to bottom and YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT!  

It's the biggest crime you'll never care about. 

Do a Little Planning

If you're going to request I become your friend on facebook, make sure you hide all the pictures of you hanging out with the candidate who wants to see my head on a pike in front of city hall.  Did you think I wouldn't notice?

And what exactly were you going to do if I had "friended" you?  Were you going to try and dig up some dirt on me via facebook?  Were you going to make the dreadful mistake of attacking a faux media figure because you can't get your shit straight on the campaign trail and I happen to call you on it? 

Do you think a bunch of videos of my baby trying to crawl is going to be good ammo for you?  I bet the general public will be real impressed that instead of focusing on the issues pertaining to city government, you're trying to sabotage a blogger into silence.  That's exactly the thing that voters love to see - you wallowing around in the mud with a pig like me.  Not.

You're not clever.  You're not going to succeed.  I'm just very sad that two people I think were great got sucked into your mess of a campaign and life.  They don't realize it, but after this they're done in El Paso politics.  That's the real tragedy. 

Next time you send an assassin dressed as a messenger, do a better job with the costume. 

I'm at a candidate forum....

Over here at the district 8 forum put on by the coronado hills neighborhood association and I'm dying.
One candidate is visibly sexually aroused. 
A guy sitting next to me has a briefcase and I'm sure it's full of things that can kill other people or soiled underwear.
This is sad.
Average age is 60 plus. No young people to really speak of.
I don't miss these at all.

All the Garbage Fit to Print

Here's what's happening:

The locks on a certain city councilor's office were changed yesterday.  It seems as if there's a real fear that an extra key is roaming around.  Sometimes when people work for one rep, then another, the old key doesn't get passed back to the city.  Who knows?  Just a precaution, I guess.

DO YOUR RESEARCH MEDIA! THERE'S A DAMN STORY HERE AND YOU'RE TOO BUSY REPORTING THAT THE POOR KID WHO GOT HIT BY A TRAIN "didn't see it coming."  YOU ARE ALL AN EMBARRASSMENT TO THE FOURTH ESTATE.

You may not agree with Rep. Lilly's politics, but she is not a liar.  And the comments about her age are getting ridiculous.  The next time you see your mother or grandmother, say those nasty things to them and see how you feel.  There's no need for that. The tree hugger crowd is obviously more sensitive to cacti than they are to people.  Just because you didn't get your way, isn't a reason to rip someone's age and accuse them of being "senile" or having Alzheimer's - it's definitely not funny to those who have family members suffering from either ailment.  You liberals are walking contradictions.

-------------------------

District 8 candidate, Lisa Turner was the only person running for a city council seat that noticed that the council raised our "debt ceiling" and borrowed more money (without voter approval) via item 11a and 11b on today's agenda.

Kudos to Lisa Turner for paying attention.

------------------------

Bring it on Mayela.  You have the goods on me?  I have an entire Wal-Mart superstore full of goods on you. 

Clean up on aisle five?  Better bring something bigger than a mop.

------------------------

Has Lyda Ness encouraged others candidates to drop out of her race?  Where has Honest Abe Pienado been?

Great strategy for Ness if she wants into the run-off.

-----------------------

Why is that some people ask certain people for millions of dollars in donations, but turn around and shit on those donors when they give a thousand bucks to a candidate? 

----------------------

This is hilarious - kudos to Jaime http://thelionstarblog.blogspot.com/2011/04/this-is-what-its-like-talking-to-some.html.

------------------------

Who had out of state plates until their campaign manager demand they be changed?  And by "out of state" I mean - not New Mexico.

------------------------

That's all I have for now.  I have a piece coming up on how the anti-Transmountain crowd couldn't use democracy to get their way and are now resorting to bureaucratic terrorism to achieve their goal.

Revealing Revelation From Ness

Apparently Lyda Ness told a group of people attending what was essentially the "Save the Valley" (aka the get out and stay out greasy mexicans coalition) forum something very very telling.  Ness told the group that we don't need businesses like Western Refining and ASARCO.

WOW.

Somebody just out-liberaled Susie Byrd! 

I was told that Ness was business friendly.  I was lied to.  She apparently has the progressive leanings of a few people currently on council.  Ness and the progressive obviously agree that any job that doesn't require an office is a job that isn't needed.  They're wrong.

In reality, any job performed in an office is probably second in overall importance to those that take place outside of one.  Remember, when the town's water well runs dry, they don't call the town accountant. 

I was planning on laying off of Ness because my expose on "Copygate" really sent shock-waves through her little community.  I felt bad for them that they were exposed to the truth most of us already know - liberals think they're smarter than the rest of us, but they're not.  Getting caught trying to play the masses hurts.

What I found funny about tonight's forum was that Ness was in bed with the "Save the Valley... From the Mexicans" group even though their fearless leader is a Tea Partier and not a fan of gay rights.  Most of their members were at the Tea Parties I was involved in.  Most of their members are staunch republicans who think gays shouldn't marry.  I guess her own personal ideals are second to the need to be elected. 

It's Frightening How Little They Know

I read the El Paso Times' big Sunday piece on city council candidates and their thoughts on eastside growth.  I came away with the idea that nobody involved in that article, including the author, has any idea about the issue.  At least, ideas based on facts or simple realities. 

I take that back - Representative Holguin was exactly right when said that attempts to stop sprawl have only spurred it on (they didn't quote him directly so I didn't quote their indirect quote of him).  I stand corrected - by myself.

The dumbest comment in the article goes to Mayela Mejia.  The paper had this to say

"Mayela Mejia, candidate for the East Side District 5 council seat, said the intersection of Joe Battle Boulevard and Montwood Drive is one of the city's most dangerous.

"We need to address issues like these instead of building highways way out there," she said, referring to Rich Beem Boulevard."

We can only assume that Mejia reason that urban sprawls creates dangerous intersections.  I guess poor design and bad driving aren't to blame?  The building of houses is, I guess????  It's like the old joke - Statistics say that most accidents happen within five miles of your house.  I don't want to get in accident so I'm moving! 

If the intersection of Joe Battle and Montwood is dangerous, it doesn't matter how many cars travel through there each day - it's dangerous to all that drive through there.  Now, if the intersection isn't dangerous, but inconvenient because of the amount of traffic, that's a different story.  Drivers who are trying to escape a wait may make poor decisions when trying to navigate themselves out of a traffic jam.  Running red lights or suddenly darting into a turn lane tend to be the cause of many accidents at these high use intersections.  The obvious culprit here is not the intersection, but impatient/bad drivers. 

And guess what?  More highways fix the problem for which Mejia couldn't properly associate blame.  She was wrong on all accounts and it's strange because I'm the only one who picked up on it.  I figured you'd guys would be all over it. 

Representative Lilly missed the mark when she mistakenly refereed to "smart code" policies as "smart growth."  They are very different things and "smart code" does nothing to curb growth.  We don't currently have government mandated "smart growth" policies, so they're not applicable.

Then the the author - Marty Schladen - interjects his own incorrect synopsis of "smart growth," which is comically opposite of the "smart code" people want.  He wrote:

"Put simply, smart growth seeks to build communities in which houses are closer to each other and to shopping, entertainment and work. It also seeks to make them easier to get around on foot or by bicycle."

First of all, "smart growth" is many different things to many different people.  Some proponents of "smart growth" principles talk about large lots and huge setbacks.  Others push development of extremely high density "town centers" where many people can live and get all the things they need for life in a very small area - think Japan.  The "small growth" movement isn't a "movement," more than it is a marketing term used by real estate developers to get municipalities to approve their projects. 

"Smart growth" as Representative Susie Byrd and others have talked about it for El Paso resembles what Schladen claims minus the houses being close together. They hate new developments with high density housing. 

The person proving himself to be a socialist in the article is... Gerardo Rosiles.  His portion of the nonsense goes:

"Development in the far east is a reality, and the city should work to bring amenities there, said Gerardo Rosiles, who is running for the District 6 seat, which represents the far East Side and the Lower Valley.

"The East Side is getting isolated," Rosiles said.

"On the East Side, there's nothing to do from a cultural perspective."

The city needs to do what?  They need to  "work to bring amenities there" - what?  Since when is it the city's job to bring you a skating rink and a Peter Piper Pizza?  This guy is delusional.  Knowing our luck he'll win.

I could go on and on, but what's the point?  Even Representative O'Rourke gets the bottom line argument between the free Americans (us) and the communists (council's progressives) - they want our tax revenue and they want us to live how they see fit.  It irks him to have to annex county developments because the people aren't living how he thinks they should live, but by God he loves their tax dollars.  It's a hard choice for him.

The whole article serves as a sad scene that is our local government and the people who wish to become a part of it.  They don't get the issues.  They don't get the law.  Some of them don't get simple logic.

Learning From the Brawl at the Sportspark

UPDATE: I just read this again.  It was a terrible effort.  I'm embarrassed by it.   But it stays.  Where was my mind?

-------------------

Joe Muench made a good point using great humor this morning in his weekly editorial.  You can read it HERE. 

Too lazy to read it?  The subject matter was the brawl between the Bombers and the Benchwarmers and how ridiculous the incident was.  Muench has a knack for making us see that in almost everything we do. 

I had received a few emails from folks as the story unfolded during the past couple of weeks.  There was one theme in all of them - these teams have a way of becoming like gangs that play sports and what went down wasn't a surprise to parents, nor was it the first time it had happened.  There's something bigger going on here than adults acting like children.

I've noticed a trend in the past few years of local youth sports team becoming franchises-like in their nature.  Team members are not chosen by random selection or turn-based draft.  The teams are formed by parents with specific players in mind and they keep these kids together year after year and in different sports.  It's common to have a team of kids playing together from age six or seven until high school.  This is not good for the kids and even worse for the parents who are way too  emotionally invested in something that's "just for fun."

When these teams stick together for so long the dads get to be a little crazy when it comes to winning and losing.  The gang mentality starts in when these teams start having stickers, logos and other insignia that identifies them not on their jerseys, but on cars and other objects.  The dangerous cycle of becoming more involved than just casually starts.  It ends with fist fights over a kid's game.

The best way to keep this from happening in the future is to make sure leagues have a either a blind draft and kids switch teams every year.  These "cliques" that are forming all over town are especially bad for kid's development as far sports go.  A kid stuck in left field at age seven on one of these teams is likely to still be in left field on that same team when they are 13.  Once roles are set, they are set in stone.  Any change would be bigger than just writing in a different position on the lineup card.  It would require explanation to both the team and the team's parents.  Because nobody wants to shake up team moral, the kid stays stuck where he started no matter how good he's gotten, or could be.  It's likely that once you're not labeled as "good" on these teams, you're doomed to never achieve.

With a new team and teammates every year, a kid has a chance at trying out for new spots.  He can grow as a player each year.  It also keeps the immature parents from having the time to get overly invested in the team.  Constant change is good.  In leagues where teams change every year, you have far less instances of these incidents.

My, My, My Mayela - Bringing Sexy Back to City Hall

I hear that if someone were to send an open records request for Mayela Mejia's personnel file at the city, they'd get back a treasure trove of damning evidence as to why she'd make... well... either the worst city council person in the history of El Paso or the best thing that ever happened to this blog.  I don't know which is worse for the voters. They're both great for me.  

We do know that Mayela is rumored to be a home-wrecker leaving at least one city employee divorced and out of the job.  The other rumors have that she was pulled into HR repeatedly for "cat fights" on the 10th floor with Rep. Quintana and a female employee to be named at a later date.  The fights were over "boys."

It's also well known that Mayela was more than happy to play (at work during work hours) the infamous voice mail of Rep. Quintana allegedly performing a sex act on a man in a Hummer (grow up... better yet don't - it's funny).  She apparently didn't think this was inappropriate behavior, which only excites me when I think about the shit she'll pull after winning the seat (she is going to win - Hispanic Female Syndrome is alive and well in El Paso and it's centered in that district). 

When she's elected she's likely to add to the train wreck that is the 10th floor.  Rep. Acosta is already a disturbing force with the females given that she's very paranoid about everybody and everything they do or say.  She goes through staff rapidly.  I have a feeling that Mayela will be doing much of the same.

One former city employee told me "women with a man working in that building better watch out because Mayela is the hunter and they are all in season."  I can not wait. This is as exciting as it can possibly get in the blogosphere!

Again, if someone were to get a hold of her file, they'd be in a wonderful position to put her out of a race she has in the bag at this point.

I should note that Mayela will probably vote in the pro-business category.  She wants to be connected and the business lobby will make her feel that way.  She'll be a solid vote for the suits.  It doesn't matter what she says now.  Remember, she's an empty suit.  Had there been an IQ test to qualify for office, she'd still be answering phones.

-----------------

I suspect Mayela is another of Jaime Abeytia's favorites, so he will be all over this post.  Looks like I wrote something about all of his favorites this week.  I feel bad, but the numbers are off the chart for the last three days... It's been a huge week.  Nearly 1,000 unique users between 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.  Wow.  You people are hungry for city council info. 

Edit - Jaime may only be behind Lyda Ness.  I'm hearing he's not all that big on Mayela.

I guess Jaime is a better blogger than he is a king-maker.  I know I am.

This is the Guy the Womens Lib Crowd Endorsed?

You may have heard that District 8 candidate, Ernesto Villanueva got the endorsement of WoPAC - the Womens Political Action Committee for those of you scoring at home.  WoPAC is a very liberal operation and they showed that they aren't just into girl power when it comes to who they endorse. 

I wonder if they saw these pictures taken very recently at Mr. Villanueva's birthday bash.

 

 

 

 

Looks like this might be how he salutes everyone!

Ness vs. Lilly - Copygate - Plot Thickens

Disclaimer: Everything below represents my opinions and my observations of what's going on and  are in no way based on actual knowledge or privilege of anything other than what I know through telepathic communication with people, places and objects associated to the subject matter.  This should not serve as evidence of any wrong-doing by anyone mentioned below.  Some names have not been changed in order to avoid protecting anyone's identity and some aimals were hurt during the making of this movie.

(I have to do things like that when I talk about people who are lawyers.  They solve all their problems in court and I need all my cash in order to procure a new liver from an unlucky prisoner in China, which is expensive.)

-----------------

The response to this "story" has been immense.  Admittedly the emails have skewed towards the "I hate Lilly because she's old and a closet republican/democrat so whether or not she did anything wrong, she still did something wrong" theme.  People are inclined to believe bad things about people they don't like even if the evidence is shaky at best. 

I now don't think Lilly has a strong chance of winning... at least with those tuned into the digital-political scene here in El Paso.  It really seems as if she's hated from both sides and there may not be enough people in the middle turning out to vote in this election.

A couple of the emails alluded to something I was pondering last night, but didn't explore further because somebody is teething in the Karlsruher household (poor kid - are dentures for babies out of the question?).  Lyda Ness' campaign manager is married to someone on the tenth floor named Diana Ramirez.  Mrs. Ramirez works in Representative Beto O'Rourke's office and also worked on Jay Kleberg's campaign last year. 

Is Ness' provider of 10th floor evidence - who would prefer to remain anonymous - actually her campaign manager's wife who works on said floor?   Only Ness knows for sure, but it seems odd that all of the media reports leave this fact out.  Statistically speaking, how many people on the tenth floor are in a position to advise Ness on the goings on up there?  Any right thinking person has to imagine that Mrs. Ramirez talks shop with her husband.  What does she know about all of this?  It's truly an interesting development and something Ness should be very open about with the public in the name of "accountability."  Remember, Ness was less interested in doing the right thing and filing an official complaint with the Texas Ethics Commission and more concerned with making sure Lilly is accountable to the public instead.

But... there's another issue here that would preclude Ness from outing her source.  The person who found Lilly to be in violation of state law (allegedly) didn't turn her in. They took the information to her opponent.  You now have an employee of the city refusing to report a crime (at the least a "violation of law," which sounds like it's less than a crime, but is the same thing in the end), but instead taking the evidence of the crime and giving it to a candidate who used it to further her campaign.  Wow... lots of issues just came flowing out of that little scenario.

1. Who's really using city resources to campaign?  Is it Ann Lilly?  Or is it the public employee fishing around the 10th floor for campaign fodder while on the clock?  If they provide anything used in a campaign during work, are they breaking the law?

2. Should the city employee who decided to run to Lilly's campaign opponent with the evidence instead of the city's legal department (or his/her boss) be investigated?  The person saw something illegal and took it outside the 10th floor for public consumption instead of adhering to protocol.  What other things does this person share with non-city staff outside of city hall that may be evidence of illegal acts?  What if this person doesn't report corruption when he or she sees it?  

3. What if the "city staffer who would rather remain anonymous" is in fact the campaign manger's wife?  Do we have scenarios 1 and 2 in play at the same time and what does it mean for Lyda Ness directly?

This whole thing stinks to high heaven and it makes me wonder what kind of people we are dealing with here.  Is the drive to win greater than the need to preserve your ethics?  When is it too much?  Is Ness avoiding filing an official complaint because of the scenarios I've laid out above and the implications of what an investigation by an outside party may yield?  Is her little game now going to backfire and hurt her worse in the end?

Who knows?  This is no longer as simple as it once was.  It's not how I would have played it and I can assure you that YOU HAVEN'T HEARD THE LAST OF THIS!  Okay... it probably dies with my blog, but don't say I didn't try.  I fed the media the entire ambulance billing story along with an incredible email to boot and they just sat there on their thumbs wondering why their hands stink.

The news media should have figured out the campaign manager/10th floor employee wife connection before I did.  How lazy are they?  So lazy that they let Jaime and I scoop them on a weekly basis.

I will tell you one thing - the first claim will be that Ramirez's husband isn't Ness' campaign manager.  I can tell you he was before I published this post and wasn't shortly after.  He'll be "loosely affiliated" by tonight and a complete stranger to the campaign tomorrow.  Which is too bad because I really like the guy.  He is going to hate me after this.  And I don't blame him - I'm not a likable person.

By the way - if I was running Ness' campaign her slogan would be "Vote for Ness, I wouldn't Lyda you!"

Lilly vs. Ness - The Whisper Heard 'Round El Paso

I'm waiting for some bad news at the doctor's office, so I decided to pass the time checking the headlines from my phone. I had no idea that some bullshit anonymous tip would garner so much media attention!?!?

Coming up we will talk about Ness' claim that she won't turn Lilly in. We will also examine the open records request and how you can identify who is pulling Ness' strings by the words she put in her list. And we'll talk about voter fatigue and how rampant corruption and corruption claims have made everyone guilty as charged by the baseless claims of other candidates, bloogers and commentors.

All that and more this afternoon... or tonight... or I might just forget all of this and move on to guns on campus.

Make it a Race War

Kudos to Jaime Abeytia for having this subject on his blog two years ago.

I noticed that Lyda Ness is now Lyda Ness-Garcia.  When the front runner is white, I guess it pays to be brown.  That's if you can pull it off.  I'm not sure if a whisper campaign containing the truth about Ness' browness would be effective or not.

I have no ill will towards Ness who is a lawyer and most likely only interested in this race for the gay benefit issue.  I do think it's odd that's she is "Ness-Garcia" now.  I can't blame her, though.  People want to win and you got do whatever it takes in your mind to say at the end, "I did everything I could to win that race."  If that means painting yourself Brown (figuratively), so be it.

Let's be honest - Dee Margo had a two loses before he discovered his Latino roots and won his first race.  Maybe there's something to this brown tihng with voters.  I'd hate to think people would vote on that line, but they just might.

I do remember a very elderly lady asking me once during my campaign - well I guess "asking" isn't the right way to describe it... she said "your name is something out of German, but you look like a Jew."  Maybe if I had been a Garcia she would have thought differently and voted for me. 

There's something that makes it okay to brown yourself when you're a liberal in this town and  it's frowned upon if you're conservative.  I wonder why that is. 

You're Always Going to be Wrong - an Advice Column

One day this blog is going to be gone (maybe very very soon if things work out the way I want them to) and you're going to have move on to another source of entertainment.  Because I care so much, I need to share some things with you about your commenting on blog posts.

I think the golden rule about posting a comment on a blog is:  No matter what you write, you're wrong.  Once you've engaged a blogger on his turf, you're pretty much proving that you don't know enough about the world not to pick a fight inside the enemy's headquarters... while in handcuffs. You can't "win" and if your aim is to "win" in the first place, you're a loser.  It's the internet. If you don't like what you're reading, stop.  There are plenty of other sources of opinion out there that you can agree with.  There is zero need to torture yourself by reading stuff you disagree with to a point of commenting on it.

Have you ever noticed that Jaime and I never comment on each others' blog?  I have commented on his a couple of times and they were either funny or simple clarifications.  We both know that engaging the other on their turf makes you wrong from the first word you write to the last.   And speaking of Jaime - he doesn't even put up with your bullshit.  You can't post a comment on his blog without his approval.  He does many of you a favor by doing that.  I just let you look stupid at your own risk.

Recently I posted a piece about teachers. It is quite possibly the most commented post in the short, miserably pathetic life of this blog.  Much of the comments are garbage aimed at attacking me instead of the premise.   What makes it worse is that I put a warning at the top of the post not to read it if you are sensitive to people criticising teachers.  Did you heed that warning? Not a single one of you did.  Even a family member of mine who is a teacher passed the warning right by and posted a nasty comment... which was nice since my family generally dislikes each other and never speak.

The lesson here is simple - if the author warns you that you won't like it, don't read it.  Save yourself the trouble.  Life is way too short to sit around reading stuff that makes you angry.  Be happy that someone gave you warning for once.

The teacher post did garner a few good commentors who spent a lot of time arguing their points against my points.  "Tim" was one of these people and he did a good job staying on topic and even encouraging me to look into some of his claims.  The rest of you thought that the best way to fight my argument was to fight me.  What you really did was validate my claims and show a myriad of people - who read the blog and never post comments - that not only was I right about teachers, but I was right about the intolerance of criticism aimed at them.  The emails came pouring in after most of you acted as I thought you would - like guilty people.

The bulk of the emails said something close to "I've always thought the way you do, but have been scared to say anything.  You know who vicious people can get when you prove them wrong and your post proved it."  Others simply told me that they disagreed initially with my assessment of people's behavior in relation to the criticism of teachers, but found that I was right after the comments started coming in.  Funny how that works. 

On the email topic... People who want to disagree with me, but see the fallacy in posting an argument under an assumed, or anonymous, name tend to email me directly.  They want the credibility of their identity, but they don't want it made public for various reasons, and I'm okay with that.  It's funny how these people can argue against my points via email and they never once attack me personally.  It seems that serious people with serious thoughts are more inclined to have a discussion with me rather than sling insults at me anonymously.  They realize that I've won the second I've pushed them to the point that they attack me and not my argument. 

(And don't confuse rules governing your attacks on me for the rules governing my attacks on you.  If you say something stupid, I'm going to let you know about it - that's my job as the proprietor of this crappy joint.  You have the choice not to make yourself available to my critical eye - I suggest you do so.)

Those of you who think you're "getting David K good" by hurling anonymous insults at me via the comments section on the blog don't realize that anonymity reduces the impact of those insults.  If you want something to mean nothing, refuse to put your name behind it.  Nobody thinks you've "shown David K" when you do it anonymously. Their first thought is "they're real brave making claims anonymously, what an asshole."  The same goes for people saying nice things about me anonymously - it means nothing.

The lesson here is that anonymous comments don't carry weight.  Why waste your time?  If you're going to go after a guy who has the guts to use his real name, you're at a disadvantage if you don't do the same.

Then there are those of you who don't realize it, but make an argument that any stance on an issue can be "right" as long as you are coming from the right situation.  Your reasoning of circumstance makes actions like theft, rape and murder all acceptable as long as "your reality" allows for it.  For example, you all think that had I not gone to work for my parents, my outlook on welfare (and other things) would be different.  As if my moral compass would be moved 180 degrees if my parents weren't able to hire me to work for them.  Somehow you think I'd be okay with receiving a handout if my situation were different.  And not only would my thoughts on welfare be personally different if my situation was different, they'd be morally correct!  With that reasoning you could make any behavior morally correct and socially acceptable and that includes things like incest, child pornography and spousal abuse.  Do you see where you're wrong on that?  My personal situation doesn't change my view of what's right or wrong and it shouldn't be the crux of your argument as to why your moral compass is broken and doesn't align with mine.  Wrong is wrong - you can't get around it with a thousand excuses.

The lesson there is that my circumstance in life is not a good argument against my argument.  If that were the case, everybody would be right and nobody would be wrong.

I guess the final piece of advice is about not spitting on the cook at the kitchen where you get your free meals.  I don't charge for this, you're not required to read it and the world would keep spinning if you or I disappeared tomorrow.  Dropping by here and antagonizing somebody who entertains you for free makes you look like an idiot and makes people wonder why you don't have something better to do. 

I really don't mind all that much that you spend your precious time here on earth dying to tell me I'm stupid all the time.  I think it's neat you care so much.  It makes me much more important than I ever needed to be and it doesn't take up nearly as much of my time as it does yours.  Besides, you look silly to others out there how read this blog.  Maybe that's why you guys refuse to use your real name, you're afraid people will make fun of you.

When this blog goes away, it won't bother me a bit.  However, you're going to move on and I hope you take my advice and use it.  I don't want my former readers going around making my old blog look bad. And God knows you need to put your best foot forward with the next blogger you become obsessed with.

Name One...

There was a comedian years back who once asked his parents to "name one" in response to their insistence that there were starving children in Africa that would love to eat his broccoli.  That joke has always stayed with me because there are so many situations it can be used.

I found a use for the question this morning when I read Representative Marquez's guest editorial in the El Paso Times.  She wrote:

"Leaving more than half of the Rainy Day Fund unused means schools will have to be closed, the elderly kicked out of nursing homes and people with disabilities thrown out on the streets."

To that I have only one demand of Rep. Marquez - name one.  Name one old person or one disabled person who will be "thrown out on the streets."  I bet she can't.  Because if she could, she'd be parading the soon-to-be-homeless person around town as a living, breathing example of why republicans are satan's children.  Too bad she's full of it.

I do take issue with her claim that schools will now have to be closed due to the fact we're not diving into our savings account to maintain our lavish lifestyle (more on this in a minute).  We've been closing schools in the El Paso area for about three years now.  To claim that this is something happening due to a bill that hasn't yet been implemented, is to lie your ass off. 

I hope all of you noticed how democrats plead for bipartisan cooperation when they're in the minority and are pretty mum about it when they aren't.  Marquez didn't show much imagination here.  Plus, there's the question I always have when local democrats write in to the paper to bitch about republicans like they're not preaching to a very supportive choir.  I think the editorial would have been more effective had it been published in a republican stronghold city like Lubbock. 

Telling the people of El Pasothat the big mean republicans have cut off the funds for all the free shit isn't effective at all.  It's an excuse for not being a better representative.  Maybe she shouldn't have run on the "I'm going to give you a bunch of free stuff" ticket in the first place and she wouldn't have to explain to her constituents why they now have to get jobs. Besides, crying about losing doesn't help anything.

---------------

As for using the "rainy day fund" to keep the state running at the previous budget - are you serious?  How many people out there take a reduction in income and use their savings to supplement their lifestyle at the level it was before the reduction?  Nobody!  If you have less money to spend, you don't pay the cable bill out of your savings! You cut cable until income increases.

Here's a little known fact that many of you don't know that will give you an idea of the amount of waste that Texas sponsors within its own government agencies.  The Texas Department of Transportation now spends more money paying people to work there than they do actually building roads.  Yes, folks - they spend more money employing people than they do actually executing their one job.  That's insane.  And I'm told that they're not the only agency in that position.

Okay, back to whatever you were doing. 

A Good Question

My wife often questions my actions and those question almost always begin with "since when."  Maybe you've heard them:

"Since when did we start storing your underwear on the floor in the bedroom?"

"Since when do we leave the closet light on when we're not using in there?"

"Since when are peanut-butter chocolate chip pancakes a suitable meal for dinner?"

While the questions are rhetorical, they do make one think about the exact moment when something changed and something new began.  I often wonder about this with many things.  Maybe that's why I've been obsessed with books on odd facts and little known trivia bits - you often get the answer of "since when" something started.

My "since when" question might have an answer that crisp and clear, but I doubt it.  I will venture to guess that your answers will be varied and mostly general, however, they'll probably interesting.  So here's my question (drum roll)... Since when is the government's primary function to take care of the sick and poor? 

Now, don't get bogged down wondering if the government takes care of the sick and poor - they do.  I just want to know when that started.  I know when our federal government was designed that both of those groups were not necessarily the focal point of the government's available funds.  I also know that the specific roles of the government and it's branches were stated quite clearly. What's not clear is how we got here. 

I imagine the first government handout was not received with joy.  Our older generations were embarrassed by charity and found begging to be an atrocious activity.  People who took the government's help were driven by necessity and wracked with guilt for doing so.  Later on people were driven by convenience more than necessity.  And now people are driven by entitlement as if the government's only role is to fund their inability to provide for themselves.   When did this happen? I know why - it's knowing when that I'm interested in.

Anybody care to venture a guess?

The Role of Money in Education

Caution: If you're sensitive about teacher criticism - STOP READING NOW.  Go back to your little criticism proof box and don't come out until I tell you. 

"Just a few more dollars and our kids will all be geniuses!"  Have you heard something like that lately?  Probably not, because those insisting that a child's IQ is directly proportionate to the amount of tax dollars spent on him every day are a little more careful about how they phrase their begging.  Although, at its core it's no different than a TV preacher telling folks that their donation is a stepping stone to heaven and he knows it because God told him so.  In the end, the preacher's promised outcome is based on about as much fact as the "more money, smarter kids" crowd's claim.

For those teachers who bitch that they don't make enough money - welcome to the club called "Every Other Working Stiff."  Nobody thinks they make enough and God knows we're all under-appreciated.  

I know, you're special and you're doing special work because you're a "teacher."  Being special doesn't really pay the rent, now does it?  And they don't "special" at Albertsons in trade for food.  Let's be honest, it's not like teacher's salaries were some big mystery that nobody knew about before you signed up.  If you're going to bitch that you work nine months out of the year and your salary is an unsatisfactory sum to cover that time, blame yourself - you weren't forced to be a teacher. 

If you joined up for the "love of teaching," then don't complain at all - only athletes and rockstars get paid to "do what they love." The only difference - we as consumers tend to pay the other two more for doing what they love than we pay you.   Really look at it this way - you get to do what you love and that's a big perk almost no one else gets at work. 

If you signed up for any other reason, it was more than likely the benefits.  Not the best reason to venture into the job of shaping young minds, but a smart move in a world where good health care options and a great pension are hard to come by.  I can't blame you for securing your future, but pardon me if I'm a little suspect of the veracity in which you approach your job.

I would be remiss if I didn't point out that not everyone in the education system is paid like a pauper.  One step up from teaching is the administrative branch of our education system.  Here's a group of people who can't teach, can't manage and have no accountability, but make great money.  A current teacher is only a master's degree away from joining that elite club and can only blame themselves for not striving for that position. 

Now that we've got that out of the way, let's talk about what a failure we all admit our school system is.

You see, it's no secret that both the pauper teachers and the aristocratic administrators hate (HATE!!!) any effort to measure their ability to teach children.  This means they hate any kind of test that would prove either their success, or failure at executing their job.  The reason they hate these tests is that the current way in which we educate our children (which includes not only the curriculum, but the people delivering it and how those people are managed) is inadequate at best and probably just really wrong from top to bottom.  Nobody wants to fix this problem because nobody wants to do anything because education has become a place where lazy people congregate and compete in the age old sport of "who can sit around doing nothing while still getting paid."  You can thank teacher's unions for that. 

Every year during budget time, in good times and in bad, the education sector starts asking for more money.  They say that the added funding will improve our children's education and provide us with a brighter future.  Meanwhile, the teachers are also lobbying those same legislators to get rid of standardized testing. They give lots of reasons like "teaching to the test," but we all know the real reason - they're not interested in anyone tracking their effectiveness as teachers (see above).

What's lacking in their lobbying is a new plan to educate our children.  The mantra of "pay us more and we'll get it right this time" doesn't fly in the real world.  I hate to liken teaching to Baseball, but they don't pay a player more hoping it will spur him to play better.  He first plays well, then gets paid.  That's how the world works for the rest of us.  Anyone who has ever sought better pay in the business world realized that money comes with performance.  Teachers don't seem to get this.  Then again, they're completely clueless as to how a competitive market works. 

Remember, teachers only get pay increases for time on the job... not effort on the job.  The worst teacher in the world could be the highest paid if she's been there the longest.  And the best teacher in the world might be paid the least because she's new.  The spirit of a competitive work environment is killed and so dies the will to do anything but remain.  That's why teachers hate the idea of ever being held accountable for test scores - they like raises being tied to time, not effort.  Sadly, the teachers who work the hardest and do the best job teaching our kids are not rewarded for doing so.  Often those teachers leave the public school system for private schools or simply find a new career path that rewards their efforts.

I can't get too far away from a point I just made - What's the new plan?  Why should the legislature continue to fund our schools if they have no proposal to fix what everyone knows is a problem?  The answer is not to stop standardized testing so that we can remain ignorant to just how ignorant our students are.  Don't be surprised that level headed conservatives aren't anxious to fund a faulty educational system with no way of accounting for its efforts.  They want to back a winner that proves it's a winner.  If you want to get your money "up-front," propose a plan we can invest in.  If it works, the money will keep coming.  If it doesn't - money is cut off and a new solution is sought. 

That was really the point I wanted to make with this piece even though I took the teachers out to the woodshed in the process (I'm not done yet).   Take something new to the legislators and sell it.  Stop begging and start bargaining. 

---------------

If teachers want to be paid more, they need to ditch the tenure system and go with the performance system that governs everyone else but government workers.  In an environment where a teacher is either rewarded or fired for their yearly performance, you'll see the cream rise and rest jettisoned.  A teacher motivated by the carrot of success is somebody you want teaching your child!  A teacher scratching off days on the calendar until retirement is part of the reason why your kid is an idiot. 

Competition is good and if people think they can earn some real dough through hard work and innovation, they'll sign up and give it a shot.  We are naturally competitive and that spirit shouldn't be suppressed in the one place our children spend most of their time (sleeping at home doesn't count).

Some people have suggested that we start teachers at higher salaries so that better candidates will be attracted to the profession.  Great idea, but it has one sad reality for those who think your current crop of teachers will be employed after the increased salary offering.  Instead of being pitted against the normal clan of clock watchers in the profession now, they'll be up against really talented, capable people. They won't have a job when it's over.  Anybody willing to enter teaching as the environment is now, isn't capable of keeping up with a motivated private sector badass looking to maximize his or her earning potential.   

Say, for example, that the new starting salary will be $100K plus benefits.  Now you've got an incentive for those who might be looking into other industries to enter the teaching world.  These people will be impressive and they'll come ready to fight.  You can throw tests at them all day long and they'll figure a way to get those kids to pass them.  A shocking reality exist outside the teaching world where every employee is expected to have a 100 percent success rate - all the time, every single day.  This BS of "adequate" doesn't cut it and it wouldn't cut it if we were paying teacher six figures. 

So, you can bitch and moan, but it won't get you anywhere.  I'm not sorry at all that I had to slap you in the face with the cold dead fish of reality.  Somebody had to do it.  You can only grow knowing how the rest of us see you. Even if most of us are scared to say it to your face.

Here's your plan of action:

1. Propose a new solution/method/curriculum that will best serve to educate our children.

2. Ask that your pay become merit based and beg for a million ways to be judged on your performance so you can make more money.

3. You're rich and our kids are smart.  Buy a yacht.

-------------------------------

I know it's not politically correct to ever say a single bad thing about a teacher, but I don't care.  Somebody needs to say something and that somebody is me.  I once told a crowd of people I barely knew that the Beatles are a shitty band that stole their first music from Black Americans who couldn't get air play because they were... Black Americans.  By their initial facial expressions, you would have thought that I beat a baby seal with a puppy in front of a class of retarded children (yes, I wrote "retarded" and you're just going to have get over it).  You simply never mention the Beatles, Star Wars or teachers in a negative light - ever.

Please don't write below "try being a teacher for a day!"  How about you try doing my job for a day?  I bet everyone's job sucks equally, so don't even try playing that game. 

And, yes, I do know that parenting is a problem.  However, we all have factors we have to deal with at our work that may, or may not be within in our scope to affect on a daily basis. We deal with it or we get fired.

I look forward to your complete meltdowns in the comments section below.  If you say something you really regret, just send me an email and I'll remove the comment with no questions asked.

What Does She Really Mean?

I was looking over my buddy Jaime's blog today and getting caught up on the latest happenings with the city races (the only place to get any analysis on city council races) when I noticed that he has a post containing statements from two local state legislators.  It seems that Naomi Gonzalez and Chente "portly gente" Quintanilla have something to say about H.B. 1.

Thanks to Jaime for turning me onto this - go see him http://thelionstarblog.blogspot.com/.

I'll quote-tab Rep. Gonzalez's words and then answer below them. This is a statement she sent out (not to me directly because nobody wants to poke the pig) in defense of her "no vote" on H.B. 1.  Remember, Naomi is a lawyer by trade, so she speaks/writes in a way that fools you into seeing only one side of the story - she can't help herself.

"Cuts to education and healthcare will be devastating and in the end these cuts affect all of us, not just the young, sick and poor."

Yes, for the vast majority of us who are not young, sick or poor, it means our taxes won't be raised in order to continue funding these failed programs at their previously bloated levels.  So while it's a bummer for some, it's not that bad for others.  You can't solve being young, but sick and poor is something you can fix on your own.

"Our citizens and the economy will suffer."

Are both citizens and the economy not currently suffering?  The reason you don't have the money to spend on the young, sick and poor is because those who are not young, sick and poor are suffering from a bad economy brought on by democrats like yourself who think spending zillions of dollars you don't have on shit you don't need is the best idea since we decided to shit and eat in two different places.

"Texas already ranks 44th out of 50 states in education spending per pupil. Don't our children deserve better? It is economically shortsighted to increase class sizes, fire teachers, and underfund classrooms."

The Yankees spend a lot per player and look where that gets them!  Our children don't deserve "better" when you mean more money for more teachers just looking for benefits and summers off.  The "Greatest Generation" was educated K through 12 for the cost (in today's dollars) of what we send one kid to school for just one year.  They were born before commercial flight and died after putting a man on the moon and inventing the internet. Our kids spell "you're" as "ur" and are too lazy to type "to" and instead type "2."  Money is not the problem.

"Texas already ranks 48th out of 50 states on spending for health and human services. Sick people will get sicker and their care more expensive, increasing not only their burden but that of the rest of the state's."

Every state is "48th out of 50" when someone wants more money for their program.  As far as "sick people getting sicker," I can't see one solitary case where money cured anyone of anything.  And the burden won't be increased for the rest of us - the very point of reducing the spending of my tax dollars on other people's free health care is to reduce the burden on me.  I'm paying for mine and their care - I just want to pay for mine, thank you.  And don't worry - I will never ask you to pay my part.  I'm a nice guy like that.

"Legislators have a moral responsibility to make sure that our most vulnerable, our children, families, and seniors don't have to bear the hardship of the state's multi-billion dollar budget shortfall, but we have failed them so far."

Where is it written that "legislators have a moral responsibility?"  Don't make that claim and then turn around and bash right-wingers for following their moral compass when it comes to gay marriage and abortion. You can't have it both ways.  That's precisely why legislators deal with the law using the law instead of feelings, morals and emotions.  Again, our children aren't bearing any hardship.  They don't work and they don't pay taxes and if schools were closed tomorrow they'd be the happiest people on the face of the planet, so stop spreading that lie.  Besides, the "it's for the children" line gets old when we're looking at higher taxes for the adults.

"Since being elected to office, I have tried to work across party lines, set priorities, and look for creative ways to raise revenue that do not cut the programs that are integral to our children, the poor, and the sick."

 That's where you're wrong - we're not "raising revenue," we're reducing our spending.  You don't have to be a fan of Dave Ramsey to know that the first rule of budgeting is live within your means, not increase your means to match your living.  Please refrain from declaring that you sought to find new ways to tax us - your opponent did that and she lost to... to you. 

"Unfortunately, the budget in its current form is balanced on their backs and I cannot support it. I will continue to work hard to improve this bill when it is returned from the Senate and be honest, up-front, and accountable to the public regarding this and other important decisions as the legislative session continues."

The budget is balanced on the taxpayer's back.  After all, without taxpayers, there would be no budget to balance.  I appreciate you being honest and up-front, but I wished you'd just lie in the future.  Government does not exist to enable the poor and bolster our idiotic education system.  We should de-fund both and make them perform or die. 

Sorry to be so harsh, but that's the truth.  Stay tuned for me ripping those who think money educates people.

The $50K Bond - City Wrong on All Accounts

I'm glad the El Paso Times did the story on how the City of El Paso raised their blank construction bond form nothing to something.  It's not a sexy story, but it has serious ramifications for both contractors and the general public - so it's a necessary story.  Click HERE for the story.

I know all of you think that all contractors are a bunch jerks who take your money and leave your project unfinished.  You're wrong.  Just like there are priests who touch children and doctors who kill Michael Jackson, there are contractors who do bad things.  However, most of them aren't bad.

Construction bonding is tricky, expensive and completely necessary - necessary to a point.  If you're not sure what bonding is, here's a quick run down.  It's basically an insurance policy on your work.  The surety (bonding company) is saying that they think you can not only perform the work, but are financially fit enough for them to take from you what they lose on your work if you don't perform.  Others will argue with my assessment, but they're wrong.  The only reason they look at your financial health is to size you up for the time when they need to get reimbursed.

The city admits that the arbitrarily raised the blanket bond.  For those of you who went to public school, arbitrary means- they woke up one morning and picked a number that sounded big and went with it.  Like any rash decision made with the best intent, this one also managed to screw everyone. 

Requiring a bond that size means that contractors have to come up with as much as $7,000 to get qualified with the city.  Remember, this "qualifies" you to pull a permit with the city.  If you don't have the money to get a blanket bond and your business is building stuff for people who live in El Paso... well, you quit and find a new line of work.  Not really.  You just start lying to people and performing work without permits.  If the city wanted to combat crappy contractors, they went the wrong direction.  They created, by the paper's account, roughly 2,100 of the contractors they were trying to rid themselves of and they did it over night.  I have to give them kudos - at least they did something quickly for once. Too bad it was fill the city with uninsured contractors.

The fact that the contractors who can pull a permit to do work in this city are now insured up to $50 big ones, hasn't gone unnoticed by the local law community.  An enterprising lawyer can run around town with his own construction inspector convincing homeowners that their contractor screwed them.  The payoff is easy - the contractor can't go to trial due to the general public opinion that all contractors are crooks (see the first sentence and remember how you first felt when you read the story in the Times... you have a bias - you know it) and most contractors/bonding companies will just pay the lawyer and his client to got away knowing that fighting over a $6,000 roofing project will cost roughly $6,000.  If a client goes after the company that bonds you (surety) for work you did... you won't get bonded ever again.

In fact, there's a lawyer in town doing just as I suggest right now.  Roofs that were inspected by the city and passed with big green check marks are coming under the scrutiny of one particular lawyer and his "inspector."  They are raking in the dough knowing that contractors will pay a couple thousand bucks rather than fighting the claims to the tune of a few thousand bucks.  It's a lose-lose situation for the contractors, it's just a matter of minimizing the loss. 

As the risk to the contractor increases, so does the price for the consumer.  Hell, as the cost of doing business goes up, so follows the price. Not all contractors are millionaires.  In fact, the vast majority of them generate around $200,00 a year in revenue and maybe pocket a quarter of that if they are lucky.  For every big rich contractor out there, there are a million little guys who are just barely scraping by.  So don't get on your high horse like we're all rich and can afford an extra $7,000 off of our bottom line.  And don't fool yourself into thinking that cost won't be passed on to you the next time you need something done at your home or business.  

The real answer here is some kind of qualification process that proves to the city that the contractor is capable. Currently they only require you acquire bonding, which is really a test of your financial health, not your abilities as a contractor.  When your roof is leaking, you don't need a guy who has a great credit score, you need a guy who is a great contractor.  The city is certifying the credit score guy.  Go figure.

Again, the problems caused here were all due to a reckless legislation that lacked thought or research.   What do you expect?  It's El Paso.