No need to wait to start building Third Span

Long before Sunday morning's tragic accident on the Bay Bridge, the need has been existent for a new span across the Chesapeake Bay. This has little to do with the accident, and everything to do with traffic, congestion, and public safety.

Well Paul Foer, ever the voice of failure and bad public policy, spouted off about how horrible that thought was:

It was not long after the recent fatal crash on our Bay Bridges (yes there are two of them as well as the bridge-tunnel near Norfolk) that some clamored for another crossing, a third span...yada yada yada...Okay-how often is there a fatal or serious crash on the bridges? Well they happen, but seriously, how often? Any more than on any other busy road? Of course the aftermath of tie-ups is worse, but does this mean we need another bridge? Sure, if you just want to build and develop and slash and burn, go ahead and make another bridge.

Of course, the construction of the new bridge has little to do with growth and little to do with development. Those are county zoning issues that are not impacted by the state. True, it may make the Eastern Shore more accessible, but isn't that the point of building a new span? Not necessarily for development, but to allow to improve the economy and to provide a more adequate public safety capability for the Shore?

I mean, does anybody really want to see a 25-mile backup on Route 50 if thousands of Eastern Shore residents are trying to evacuate to the Western Shore due to an imminently landfalling hurricane? Because even with a contraflow traffic pattern, five lanes going westbound would not be able to handle that capacity in an emergency, and if an accident were to close one of the spans during that evacuation the impact could be catastrophic.

Foer continues:

But we cannot build our way out of this one. The first crossing was in 1952 and then just 21 years later we opened a second one. Even if we could and did build a third to open in five years or so, would we find ourselves crying for another--a fourth crossing in the year 2020 or 2025? And we must ask ourselves that given what we can reasonably expect about the future of oil and all energy, as well as the environmental concerns, are we sure we really want to keep building as usual, imposing 1950's solutions on 21st and 22nd century challenges? If traffic is the problem and cars and roads make traffic, why would we want to continue adding cars and roads in order to alleviate traffic? Surely the argument is vastly more complex than I make it here, but we must really face the facts and ask ourselves if building more roads and highways is a viable or even sustainable option.

Obviously, Foer wants to talk about the need for a fourth span when we haven't even built the third span. As usually, Foer goes straight for the strawman argument that we may need to do more in the future. Well, not if you plan appropriately now. I have called for a six-lane span to be built at the current site, which would allow for eleven lanes of traffic crossing the Bay. And the span can even be constructed in a manner that allows multi-modal transportation options, including light or heavy rail, and dedicated rapid bus transit lanes. That's not a "1950's solution"; that's a solution that looks toward the future and allows for considerable relief options for transportation planners.

And if Foer wants to make an environmental argument, I say this: isn't it more environmentally sound for traffic to move at a reasonable rate than to have a five-mile backup of cars inefficiently spewing pollutants into the atmosphere?

Then, because Foer has no intelligible points to make, he switches over to yelling:

THE DAYS OF CHEAP OIL ARE OVER. EVENTUALLY WE WILL RUN OUT. EVERY ALTERNATIVE IS FRAUGHT WITH DIFFICULTY AND DOWNSIDES. HOWEVER, WE MUST FACE THE FACTS AND THEY ARE THAT WE CANNOT BUILD OURSELVES OUT OF TRAFFIC CONGESTION. IT MAY HAVE WORKED IN SOME PLACES FOR SOME TIMES, BUT THOSE DAYS ARE BEHIND US.

Of course, we can build ourselves out of congestion by adding highway lane-miles to our infrastructure. Foer says we can't, because only because the thought makes him unhappy and he likes to pout. Obviously if you expand highway capacity, you reduce highway congestion. Even a third-grader could figure that out.

The ostrich philosophy of the left, that by sticking our head in the sand and hoping our traffic problems disappear, is problematic. We do not have a transportation infrastructure that can sustain the amount of traffic in the area, the legacy of the de-mapping trend from the 60's and 70's (something I wrote about three years ago). Not dealing with the issue, by not adding more lane-miles to Maryland's transportation system, we are doing little but to further degrade the economic, public safety, and yes environmental posture of our state..

We have the capability to do this, to not only build a third span, but also improve mass transit options, through privatization as I have long been advocating. This project needs to be started, and started as quickly as humanly possible.

So much for Hollywood's worship of "Truth to Power"

The Hollywood left always like to rally around the flag of somebody who stands up to Republicans or, more specifically, stand up to the Bush Administration. They are "saying truth to power" as the kids like to say.

Well, actor Jon Voight wrote a column in fact stating truth to power, at least the truth to the powers that be in the Democratic Party:

The Democratic Party, in its quest for power, has managed a propaganda campaign with subliminal messages, creating a God-like figure in a man who falls short in every way. It seems to me that if Mr. Obama wins the presidential election, then Messrs. Farrakhan, Wright, Ayers and Pfleger will gain power for their need to demoralize this country and help create a socialist America.

The Democrats have targeted young people, knowing how easy it is to bring forth whatever is needed to program their minds. I know this process well. I was caught up in the hysteria during the Vietnam era, which was brought about through Marxist propaganda underlying the so-called peace movement. The radicals of that era were successful in giving the communists power to bring forth the killing fields and slaughter 2.5 million people in Cambodia and South Vietnam. Did they stop the war, or did they bring the war to those innocent people? In the end, they turned their backs on all the horror and suffering they helped create and walked away.

A very much needed slap to the face of the Hollywood left.

Of course, the mindset of the fringe of the fringe of the fringe of American society can be best summed up by this idiotic post by some idiot named Jeffrey Wells at a blog called "Hollywood Elsewhere":

My honest deep-down reaction is that I now have a reason to feel negatively about the guy. I'm not saying Voight is on the HE shit list (although the idea certainly feels good -- just as it felt good to imagine the same thing last spring about Tina Fey when she became a rabid Hillary person on SNL), and I certainly don't think a symbolic condemnation along these lines would matter much to anyone. Nonetheless, it's going to be hard henceforth not to think of Voight as some kind of diseased wingnut.

That's right, the people who are trying to entertain America thinks that anybody who doesn't believe the Barack Obama, and that people who are not obsequiously subservient to the extreme leftist direction he is taking the Democratic Party and the direction he wants to take America, these people think that you and I (and probably 52% of their potential audience) are diseased. Diseased.

What a sad and pathetic statement from a sad and shallow community that isn't half as smart as they think they are.

What of course is most humorous is the fact that the same people who glorify Communist sympathizers who were blacklisted during the 1950's, these people who stood out for the crowd and stood up and spoke truth to power, are the same ones who ostracize conservatives for speaking up for the things that they believe in. These people are shallow, smug, and narrow minded in ways that I cannot dream of.

Hollywood's intolerance in the name of tolerance is said and pathetic, and maybe explains why the movies that most push a left-wing agenda bomb at the box office.

Al Gore: Owned

The Al Gore is God Society may take umbrage with this, but let me share with you this clip from Meet the Press yesterday as Al Gore tries to defend his "do as I say, not as I do" lifestyle:



Glenn Reynolds notes the following:

My observation is that Al Gore is looking (and sounding) more and more like a Baptist televangelist all the time.

Amen...

The Continually Unraveling Consensus

If there is anybody left who actually believes that there is a scientific consensus that global warming is happening, chew on this:

The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science. The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming "incontrovertible."

In a posting to the APS forum, editor Jeffrey Marque explains,"There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution."

The APS is opening its debate with the publication of a paper by Lord Monckton of Brenchley, which concludes that climate sensitivity -- the rate of temperature change a given amount of greenhouse gas will cause -- has been grossly overstated by IPCC modeling. A low sensitivity implies additional atmospheric CO2 will have little effect on global climate.

Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chairman of the New England Section of the APS, called Monckton's paper an "expose of the IPCC that details numerous exaggerations and "extensive errors"

Now obviously, an influential component of a very large and important organization of scientists distancing themselves from this unproven theory should shatter the notion of a consensus in support of anthropogenic global warming.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Al Gore had his little shtick the other day, and Michelle Malkin helps expose he and his minions for what they are:

David Paulson needs to lay off the bong water

David Paulson is either or drugs or has completely lost his mind:

It's not every day that the state Democratic Party's communication director and one of Maryland's most prominent Republicans agree on a party's political fortunes. But after former Lt. Gov. Michael Steele told a crowd of Republicans that "the Republican brand quite frankly sucks," David Paulson emailed PolitickerMD.com to express his empathy for Steele's idea.

"I don't disagree with Michael Steele on his low opinion of the Republican brand - it's in the toilet for a lot of reasons," Paulson wrote in an email to PolitickerMD.com. "But Republicans who think they only have a branding problem are fooling themselves. This isn't a public relations problem. This is a public trust problem."....

..."Andy Harris is just more of the same - all talk and no action, especially when it comes to gas prices," Paulson wrote to PolitickerMD.com. "If Harris is so concerned with gas taxes why didn't he sponsor a bill as a state senator? He has even failed to officially request that any action be taken now. Proof once again that Harris (sic) all talk and no action."

Paulson concluded the email by criticizing Republicans even further: "Republican hypocrisy is not a branding problem. It's more like we-can't-believe-you-because-we-don't-trust-you problem."

Wow.

I mean, wow.

The Democrats in this country and this state have repeatedly found themselves to be either under some sort of cloud involving shoes, involving money stored in freezers, involving shady land deals, involving undisclosed employers, involving State Senators with drugs, involving unsafe vehicles on the road, accepting bribes, nepotism at the state and county levels, firing political appointees after spending millions to investigate Ehrlich doing the same, appointing lobbyists to patronage gigs, and nominating a pre-packaged walking, talking scandal waiting to happen for President.

And David Paulson thinks that Republicans are hypocrites that can't be trusted. He needs to either get a mental examination, or he needs to lay off whatever substances he is currently using. Because nobody can be as self-deluded as he is.

It's true Republicans that have a branding problem for their inability to follow their principles while governing at the national level. But I'd say we look pretty good standing next to the chain gang wandering the streets under the label of the Maryland Democratic Party these days....

John Leopold took money from Lipscomb

John Leopold's campaign committee accepted a $4,000 contribution on September 15th from Doracon Contracting, Inc. of 3500 East Biddle Street, Baltimore. That company is one of the companies controlled by developer Ronald H. Limpscomb, who has been implicated in the Sheila Dixon Corruption Scandal.

What's curious about the donation is the fact that Leopold is the only Republican to recieve a donation from Lipscomb or one of his holding companies. But it also came days after Leopold held a $4,000 per plate fundraiser at the Baltimore Marriott at which he was criticized for breaking his campaign promise regarding fundraising and getting cozy with developers.

Looks like we may now know why exactly John Leopold started taking developers money.....

What's good for the goose....

Here's something funny regarding legislators getting wined and dined by lobbyists:

Sean Dobson, executive director of Progressive Maryland, is critical of the current system but said the state should not revert to allowing individual meals.

"There should be zero tolerance for giving a lawmaker anything of value," said Dobson, whose group advocates for working-class families.

So, who commented on the story discussing these dinners?

In January, shortly after O'Malley introduced the bill, the entire membership of the House and Senate committees with jurisdiction over the legislation was invited to Ruth's Chris Steak House by Alexander & Cleaver, the firm hired by ACS. Among the attendees was the company's director of marketing.

Del. Tom Hucker (D-Montgomery) said that no hard sales pitch was made at the dinner but that it did provide a chance for the company to make its case in a relaxed atmosphere to lawmakers with qualms about speed cameras.

"If people went in agnostic about how they were going to vote on the bill, they probably had their questions answered," Hucker said.

And of course Tom Hucker was a...former executive director of Progressive Maryland.

So, can one suppose that Hucker's position on these free dinners changed somewhat when he become the recipient of such largesse?

John the Destroyer

Tax-hiker John Leopold looks like he wants to be at it again, with the proposed hotel tax sparking well-deserved outcry:

Anne Arundel County Executive John R. Leopold's proposal to raise the hotel tax to generate revenue for the financially strapped school system has drawn sharp opposition from state and local tourism officials, who say it would have a devastating trickle-down effect on the county's economy.

The measure - which combined with Maryland's 6 percent sales tax would give the county the state's highest checkout fee and one of the steepest in the country - will drive visitors to competing destinations, officials predicted, saying they've seen it happen elsewhere in Maryland.

"People will be laid off, they will lose jobs, shops will close, and hotels will go bankrupt - the mid-size hotels that can't survive this - if we have a decline in visitors coming here," said Connie Del Signore, president and CEO of the Annapolis and Anne Arundel County Conference and Visitors Bureau.

Of course, Leopold tries to defend this, but there is a noted change in his rhetoric from previous years:

"Because of the well-established aversion to any increase in property and income taxes here, it requires me to secure revenue for our public school system through other means."

Once again, Leopold is going to blame country residents opposition to higher taxes as a justification to raise the hotel tax. But as usual, Leopold fails to see the forest for the trees. Yes, people are opposed to higher income and property taxes. But they are also opposed to liberal County Executives trying to tax businesses out of existence too. The Convention Bureau is correct in that the tax will destroy the local tourism industry. And when you think about how many people cycle into and through Annapolis, and cycle through the hotels at BWI each year, such a tax would have a devastating effect on the economy.

What's even more ridiculous about the proposed tax hike is the fact that Leopold is trying to have it both ways on school funding. He wants to be able to tell Superintendent Kevin Maxwell to pack sand on Maxwell's egregious and outlandish budget proposals, but still wants to raise taxes in order to increase the education spending that he himself has proposed.

Leopold's usual run towards hypocrisy and tax increases is becoming more and more ridiculous. Leopold wants to take money out of the pockets of Anne Arundel County's businesses through higher taxes that will drive businesses and visitors out of our county. Unfortunately, it seems that the closer we get to 2010, the more it is starting to look like 1998....

But what about the independence of scientists?

What about it? You see, William Gray (as I have noted before) is the world renowned meteorologist from Colorado State University, famous for his hurricane season predictions. He's also a global warming skeptic. And one for whom the university tried to curtail funding for recently:

By pioneering the science of seasonal hurricane forecasting, William Gray turned a university far from the stormy seas into a hurricane research mecca.

But last year, the long-term relationship between Gray and Colorado State University, where he has worked for nearly half a century, nearly unraveled in an episode that highlights the politically charged atmosphere that surrounds the global warming debate.

University officials told Gray that handling media inquiries related to his forecasting required too much time and detracted from efforts to promote other professors' work.

Gray, who has emerged as a leading voice of skepticism about global warming, reacted hotly, firing off a memo to Dick Johnson, head of CSU's Department of Atmospheric Sciences, and others. He didn't buy the too-much-media reasoning.

"This is obviously a flimsy excuse and seems to me to be a cover for the Department's capitulation to the desires of some (in their own interest) who want to reign (sic) in my global warming and global warming-hurricane criticisms," Gray wrote in the memo obtained by the Chronicle.

Gray initially declined to speak about the issue. But on Tuesday, Gray acknowledged the dispute.

"You see, so many people in our department make a living off the global warming threat," he said. "So I think that's part of why they came to me."

Since last year, he said, the university has "backtracked" on its position.

CSU officials said late last week that they intend to support the release of Gray's forecasts as long as they continue to be co-authored by Phil Klotzbach, a former student of Gray's who earned his doctorate last summer, and as long as Klotzbach remains at CSU.

Gray, an emeritus professor at CSU who has taught dozens of graduate students who populate the National Hurricane Center and other research institutions, has become increasingly vocal in his skepticism about climate change, saying the planet is warming due to natural causes.

Other than once again noting the fact that the concept of scientific "consensus" on global warming is pure crap, I have to ask this question; is the row over funding at Colorado State related to his skepticism of global warming. And if it is, would not the global warming believers be crying foul if, say, a scientist who believed in global warming had his fundingcurtailed by a Republican administration?

Leopold's at it again

Look, John Leopold has found another way to want to bilk more money out of taxpayers:

County Executive John R. Leopold wants the state to lift the cap on license fees for food establishments so the cost of inspections and regulation are fully covered.

Under current law, local governments must license, inspect and regulate food establishments. Outside of Baltimore City, Montgomery County and Prince George's County, jurisdictions can only charge a maximum fee of $300 - regardless of the annual cost of doing business.

Anne Arundel County is losing about $225,000 a year by having the cap, said Sen. John Astle, D-Annapolis, who presented the bill to the Senate Finance Committee Wednesday.

"This is simply a bill that … would allow them essentially to break even on this essential service," Mr. Astle said.

Of course, ultimately it is going to be the consumer and the business owner that is going to pay for the cost of this hike in fees. What's even more disturbing is the fact that Leopold supports removing the cap completely; not just raising the cap. So what would Leopold's ultimate license fee be? Who knows, but you as a taxpayer willwind up footing the bill.

What's even crazier is that even Liberal Democrats are starting to criticize Leopold's anti-business approach:

By itself, the proposal sounds reasonable, said Del. Pamela Beidle, D-Linthicum, a former member of the county council.

But the wider economic picture also has to be considered, she said, including the impact on businesses from November's special session, where the General Assembly raised the sales tax and corporate income taxes.

Couple that with other initiatives from Mr. Leopold - such as a desire to significantly raise impact fees - and the business climate in Anne Arundel County could suffer with each new fee hike, Ms. Beidle said.

When you are a Republican and a liberal like Pam Beidle is criticizing your ability to provide a friendly business climate, then you are seriously in the wrong.

It's hard to take John Leopold seriously as a County Executive. His job performance in office resembles that of the performance of Janet Owens more and more each day. That's how far off the conservative reservation Leopold has strayed...

Martin O'Malley must govern some other state I don't live in

So Governor O'Malley unleashed his State of the State address (and you can even listen to it, if you really are in to self-flagellation) on an unsuspecting populace today, and apparently the Governor is seeing things just a bit differently than the rest of us.

Let's review some "highlights":

But the future of our State is very much determined by the strength and the security of the families of Maryland – the hard-working and loving families that we have the honor and responsibility to represent. And today, the vast majority of Maryland’s families, like families throughout our country, are finding it harder and harder just to pay their bills and maintain the quality of life that they have worked so hard to achieve.

The Governor is absolutely right. We need somebody who is going to make sure that taxes are not raised on the Middle Class, and that somebody is standing up for those who are subjected to ever rising energy costs. I just only wish that this imaginary person were Governor, instead of Governor O'Malley, who continues to do what he can to make it tougher and tougher for families to survive in our state. It is stunning that he can say this without snickering, given the financial harm he has inflicted upon the middle and working class people of our state.

Continuing....

For the sad truth of our shared reality is that over the last seven years, real wages in our country have grown by only 1 percent. And unfortunately, the same cannot be said for everything else a family needs to survive.

Over the last seven years, the price of a gallon of milk is up 30 percent, the cost of a loaf of bread is up 20 percent, and yet real wages have increased by just 1 percent.

The cost of a gallon of gasoline is up almost 100 percent over that same time-frame.

And the cost of health insurance is up 78 percent, and yet real wages have by only 1 percent.

Yes, and the State of Maryland was nice enough to drive the cost of the sales tax up in this state by 20-percent and also raise the cost of income taxes as well. So realistically, that makes Martin O'Malley a key part of the problem and not part of the solution.

But we don’t need those numbers and figures to tell us that people are hurting; we see it in their eyes, we hear it in their voices.

And I see it in my bank account, with the numbers and figures tell me how much money Martin O'Malley is responsible for taking from me.

No wonder many of us are frustrated when – in the midst of this national economic downturn – we were also forced to confront a long neglected and huge structural deficit. The frustration is totally understandable. And there is good reason for all of us to be concerned and worried about our economic future.

But, as we have seen, Governor O'Malley has done anything to actual address the structural deficit. All Governor O'Malley did was ensure that the middle and working class families suffered financially, while making minimal cuts to the budget while still making sure that pet projects are funded at impractical and unaffordable spending levels.

Apparently, O'Malley has also established priorities for the state as well:

• To strengthen and protect our middle class, our family owned businesses and family farms,
• To protect our commitment to improve public safety and public education in every single part of our State,
• And to protect opportunity – the opportunity to learn, to earn, to enjoy the health of the people we love, as well as the health of the land, the water, the air and the Bay that we love – for more people rather than fewer.

Is this a joke? Is he serious? Because I'm not sure that anybody is doing less to address these priorities than Martin O'Malley. Families, businesses, and farms have been weakened by O'Malley's reckless spending and tax priorities. How is public education being improved given O'Malley's personal vendetta against Nancy Grasmick, focusing more on removing her than taking real steps to improving our schools? How are the people of Maryland having greater opportunities to learn and earn in these O'Malley years?

It continues to go on like this:

In the coming weeks, months and years ahead, we will be undertaking a number of efforts – legislative, regulatory -- and legal if need be -- to secure fair and reasonable energy rates while also ensuring an adequate supply for our future. Deregulation has failed us in Maryland and we cannot allow our future to be determined by that mistake.

And isn't it something that this gem is contained in a speech the same day that we get reports of higher electric rates?

Now, let's wrap it up towards the closing statements:

Let’s stay focused on the fact that people are counting on us to make these tough times more bearable. Let’s work together – regardless of personality, party or place – to face the challenges ahead.

What tough economic times call for is leadership. Leadership that is responsible to the needs of the people and the needs of the citizenry. What the people need is lower taxes. What the people need is a government that spends within its means. What we need is leadership that will in fact face the challenges without regard to personalities or party. Unfortunately, we currently have a Governor that governs on the basis of his partisan stripes, his desire for revenge, base jealousy, and the greed of personal power. This Governor is the antithesis of what he calls for in his own speech.

We know that Maryland is a stronger state than most. We can get through these tough economic times more quickly than other parts of our country, but only if we can continue to come together to protect the priorities that make us strong.

And again, what we have here is a Governor that is not committed to real priorities that benefit Maryland's working and middle class families. We have a Governor who is committed first and foremost to putting politics before people, and in governing only to benefit his party and his political career.

This Governor's State of the State address is a hubristic nightmare that can only come from the mouth of somebody who believes more in his press clippings, self-genuflection, and his own greatness than he does in doing what is best for the people of Maryland. While the people of Maryland suffer through an impending recession and higher taxes, O'Malley tries to takes steps to improve his political standing, and to continue to implement his O'Malleynomics on our state, with potentially disastrous (yet strikingly obvious) future consequences.

It is sad and depressing to think that middle and working class families of Maryland have to suffer through another three years of Martin O'Malley's reckless mismanagement and misplaced policy priorities.

Denials, Ego, Mistruths

The Sun documents more absurdity in the life and times of John Leopold....

In one story, Leopold goes out of his way to again deny that he is running for Governor:

Leopold said he is committed to seeking a second term as the county's chief executive. A gubernatorial candidate in Hawaii in 1978, he said he is not setting his sights on higher office in Maryland.

All I can say is this: that for a guy who says he is committed to serving a second term (and God knows Anne Arundel County doesn't need that), he sure is spending a lot of time denying that he is running for Governor in 2010...

Next, the Sun turns its attention to impact fees, particularly the fact that a consultant (as we have noted before) has suggested to Leopold that the county drastically raise the fees:

Relying on a study by a nationally known consultant, County Executive John R. Leopold is calling for substantial increases in the fees levied on developers -- and, in the cases of homes, typically passed onto the buyers. The current flat rate of $4,904 for a single-family home would increase to $28,315 for a four-bedroom house and $39,257 for a home of five bedrooms or more, according to the study. The highest proposed residential fee would be for a condominium or apartment of four or more bedrooms: $53,322, or more than 12 times the current top rate of $4,274.

Leopold said his bill, which the council will introduce Tuesday, seeks to offset the full burden that new building -- homes, hotels, hospitals, warehouses, nursing homes, offices, marinas and retail -- places on roads, schools and public safety. The figures in the bill have not been finalized.

All of this seemed to be news to the County Council. It was the understanding of Councilmembers that Leopold's office would work the with the Council on an impact fee bill, but instead dropped Leopold dropped his own bill on his own:

Councilman Ronald C. Dillon Jr. and Vitale said that the Leopold administration late last year had offered to work with the council to settle on fee amounts. But when council members asked for more information, Leopold pushed ahead with his legislation alone, they said.

"I was taken off-guard when the administration introduced the bill," Dillon said. "Until then, I thought there was a desire to share information. Then things went awry."

And Councilman Ed Middlebrooks fortunately comes out and states the obvious:

Other council members said Leopold sent down a bill knowing that it stands no chance of passage. They accused the county executive of using the bill as a political ploy in hopes of currying favor with anti-growth interests.

"I don't think [Leopold] is being honest with the citizens. ... It's just politics," said Councilman C. Edward Middlebrooks, a Severn Republican.

So there are a lot of notable, albeit unsurprising issues going on with Leopold. He continues to deny his ambition for higher office. He is back serving as the Lone Ranger, working on his own without trying to come to a reasonable compromise with Councilmembers on the issue (not saying that anybody should be raising such taxes). And Leopold is intentionally introducing legislation designed to give him political cover for the hundreds of thousands of dollars from developers that he took as donations in direct opposition to his campaign promises.

Once again, we have to come back to John Leopold and the issue of character. People have known that this is the kind of operator John Leopold is in his forty-years of public service, going back to his 1968 election to the Hawaii Board of Education. The fact that Leopold was able to be elected to the top post in our county is an unfortunate to good governance and the future of our county. And every couple of days we see another reason as to why Leopold's election was bad for our party and bad for our county...

Leopold goes native

John Leopold used his own money to buy his way into the House of Delegates, and to buy his way into being the County Executive. But apparently, he has had a change of heart:

Leopold, a longtime state delegate, lost the Republican nomination for county executive that year. He raised nearly $500,000 in 2006 to beat his Democratic opponent, George F. Johnson IV, who had a war chest of more than $1.3 million. About $260,000 of Leopold's total was in the form of personal loans.

"I don't think I should have to spend any more of my own money in future campaigns," Leopold said. "I don't think the system that requires such outlays is funds is unfortunate, but that is the system we work with."

If you remember back to the campaign, in one of the money stories that noted Leopold lavishly spending his personal fortune to buy his way into office, Leopold noted that this meant that he wouldn't be beholden to special interests. Apparently, Leopold's newfound power as a County Executive has made him change his mind.

I don't begrudge our elected officials who do have to raise enormous sums of money in order to be competitive, nor do I begrudge somebody who has the financial resources to invest in their own heavily in their own campaign. But I do begrudge somebody as arrogant as Leopold continuously changing his story on the financing issue. He can't be a rich self-financer, an anti-special interest money populist, and be the guy raising all of his money from developers all at the same time and make it believable...

Read between the lines

Folks, it's right and front of you, and it's the reason Mr. Unimpeachable John Leopold once again violated his favorite campaign promise:

County Executive John R. Leopold has amassed a half-million dollar campaign war chest during his first year in office, shattering previous records for Anne Arundel County, campaign finance reports filed yesterday show....

According to records obtained by The Capital, more than half of the $504,325 Mr. Leopold raised during 2007 came from the development and land-use community. At least another $14,000 came from his employees and political appointees. Mr. Leopold nearly matched what Robert L. Ehrlich raised during his first year as governor four years ago, and far surpassed the $62,178 Janet S. Owens collected during the first year of her first term.

Despite the hefty contributions from developers - garnered largely at private, $4,000-a-head fundraisers - Mr. Leopold said he has a record of independence that would be untainted by the contributions.

"I've said from the outset that builders and developers should have a voice at the table but should never be able to drive public policy in the county," Mr. Leopold said.

Well, other than John Leopold once again breaking a campaign promise (which might as well be his middle name), you can see that this is more than just a Liberal Republican gearing up to run for another four year term.

John Leopold is preparing a run for Governor, something that I have been saying for a long time. At the end of the day, he may not actually run for Governor, but nobody can deny the fact that Leopold is certainly trying to position himself as a player in the 2010 gubernatorial race.

The Republican Party is going to have to make sure to come together before 2010 and ensure that the we do not get stuck with someone like John Leopold as our party's statewide standard bearer....

Donna Edwards gets kiss of death

Yup, she got the MoveOn endorsement, and the folks at Free State Politics are drooling about it.

Given MoveOn's successes, I'm not sure that I'd want the endorsement. Just ask U.S. Senator Ned Lamont...

I see no shortage of humor in the fact that the crew that has been bashing Congressman Al Wynn for accepting out of state PAC money is.....all excited that Donna Edwards has been endorsed by an out of state PAC.

Hysteria, meet reality

This is less than surprising (H/T Instapundit):

The Kyoto treaty was agreed upon in late 1997 and countries started signing and ratifying it in 1998. A list of countries and their carbon dioxide emissions due to consumption of fossil fuels is available from the U.S. government. If we look at that data and compare 2004 (latest year for which data is available) to 1997 (last year before the Kyoto treaty was signed), we find the following.

• Emissions worldwide increased 18.0%.
• Emissions from countries that signed the treaty increased 21.1%.
• Emissions from non-signers increased 10.0%.
• Emissions from the U.S. increased 6.6%.

In fact, emissions from the U.S. grew slower than those of over 75% of the countries that signed Kyoto. Below are the growth rates of carbon dioxide emissions, from 1997 to 2004, for a few selected countries, all Kyoto signers. (Remember, the comparative number for the U.S. is 6.6%.)

• Maldives, 252%.
• Sudan, 142%.
• China, 55%.
• Luxembourg, 43%
• Iran, 39%.
• Iceland, 29%.
• Norway, 24%.
• Russia, 16%.
• Italy, 16%.
• Finland, 15%.
• Mexico, 11%.
• Japan, 11%.
• Canada, 8.8%.

Which ties in nicely with this editorial from Governor Pete du Pont in today's Wall Street Journal:

In light of all this criticism, what is the status of global emissions over the past few decades? Compared with other countries, how has America done? We generate about 25% of the world's global warming emissions, which is not surprising since we are about 27% of the global economy.

From 1990 to 1995, America's emissions increased 3.9% compared with 3.4% for other developed nations.

From 1995 to 2000, the emissions increased to 11.3%, compared with other developed nations' decline of 1.4%.

From 2000 to 2005, our increase was 0.6% compared with other nations' 2.7%.

So we are making progress. Comparing us with other nations over the 1990-2005, period we are doing better than Canada, Greece, Ireland, New Zealand, Portugal, Spain and Turkey, and not as well as Australia, France, Germany, Britain and the Scandinavian nations.

There is no question we must do the research to find ways to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and that is going forward. As President Bush pointed out in last year's State of the Union address: "Since 2001 we have spent nearly $10 billion to develop cleaner, cheaper and more reliable alternative energy sources." If the Congress fully funds the President's 2008 budget it will total $15 billion.

Governor du Pont also postulates that the real reason for the insistence of developing nations to get the U.S. to adhere to Kyoto and Bali is to slow the American economy to the levels of these developing nations. And when you consider that the liberals don't blink an eye when China, home to 16 of the world's most polluted cities, keeps building coal-fired electric plants to keep with their electric demand, that point seems rather strong.

What the fringe environmental alarmists fail to see is all of the progress that we have made in the United States. I have seen pictures of the 1960's and 1970's, all of the haze in the air. All of the pollution in the waterways. The Cuyahoga catching fire. Can people honestly look around at the air, at anti-pollution measures, at Green Space initiatives, and say that our air quality and our environment in these United States are worse now than it was thirty or forty years ago?

I am a conservationist, in the sense that it is not good politics or good policy for us to be trashing the natural resources that we have been blessed enough to receive here in this neck of the galaxy. But there is not a panacea or a magic wand that will be able to fix pollution without doing serious damage to the American economy. When you consider that it is currently countries that have lousy economies where a large chunk of the pollution is coming from, how is shrinking the American economy going to be able to save the environment when folks who are forced out of their jobs due to inflation and the hyperinflating cost of doing business? You think folks struggling to make ends meet are going to care at that point?

Nothing's Shocking

Our ethically challenged Anne Arundel County Executive John Leopold is at it again :

Anne Arundel County Executive John R. Leopold's campaign reaped an estimated $100,000 at a fundraiser hosted by a wealthy supporter four days before the passage of a county bill that granted the supporter a break on a private 18-hole golf course he is building on property he owns in Harwood.

A Leopold administration official testified in support of the bill just before the County Council's unanimous vote Dec. 3 to waive a requirement that Albert Lord, chairman of student loan magnet Sallie Mae, build a mile-long road to his proposed $15 million clubhouse. The bill's approval saved him hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Mind you, this is once again the candidate who campaign on clean government and not being bought off by special interests due to his extensive inheritance and trust fund.

But it gets better:

Lord attended a fundraiser for Leopold in September at the Baltimore Marriott Waterfront, where the county executive raised at least $100,000. Each of the 25 to 30 participants - mostly developers - was asked to contribute $4,000.

Which of course, gives me a chuckle only because Leopold told anybody who would listen last year that he wasn't in the pocket of developers and accused his opponents of being bought off. Of course, we clearly see that he may not be (fundraising is part of the game) but as usual Leopold thinks he is above the game and above the fray when it comes to ethical questions like these. Of course, Leopold's incessant whining and defense of his fundraising vis-a-vis his previous statements regarding fundraising make his self-created predicament even more laughable. He is trying to martyr himself on the issue of campaign finances; the same issue he wanted to nail Phil Bissett, Dave Boschert, and George Johnson to a cross for just last year.

John Leopold's problem is not that he is raising money from developers. It's the fact that he's a liar who was elected on a number of false pretenses. But we Republicans here in Anne Arundel County know that John Leopold drifts in whichever direction most directly benefits John Leopold. Once again, this fundraising fiasco is merely further proof that John Leopold's hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Inside the Fringe Left Mind

I don't think anybody ever accused Andrew Kujan (left) of ever getting it when it comes to the discussion of issues and the undertaking of political discourse. So needless to say when he "replied" to my challenge to a debate today, even I was somewhat stunned that instead of actually sticking to the issues, he went off in directions that even I could not fathom that Kujan could come up with.

Are we in Jr. High Brian? Are you going to give a me purple-nurple and take my lunch money? Maybe give me a wedgie or throw some spitballs?

Huh? But it gets better....

While debating a conservative parody might be interesting, I think I will take a pass.

Because God knows we couldn't possibly talk about issues in a public forum.

I mean, you got what you wanted already, right? You got to humiliate several people you have never met.

No, what I wanted was a freaking debate on issues with you, Smith, Luedtke, or some of the other spewers of vitriolic, hate-filled babble over at FSP; maybe you didn't get the memo. Bruce Godfrey stepped up, and he has never been afraid to take on the issues. Robb Black asked to participate and I think it's great to include a third perspective. I was never out to embarrass anybody. The only thing that would seem embarrassing, in my eyes, would be that you and some others got called out on the carpet and backed down when challenged on your ideas; and Kujan did that to himself.

Readers of this blog are familiar with conservative wet dreams of liberal humiliation. I would appreciate if you would LEAVE ME OUT OF YOURS in the future.

Uh....I'm not even sure how to respond to this claptrap, though I think he's projecting again.

Kujan's screed about my "bravado" just proves my point about the far left who wish to scream about issues and cry about Conservative bullies. When it's time to talk issues, they are no where to be seen. It's why liberal talk radio fails. It's why the mass media is losing readership to the internet. And it's why certain members of Free State Politics won't debate me....

Hey...look.....a Hypocrite Convention

Well....that's not what it's supposed to be:

Never before have so many people converged to try to save the planet from global warming, with more than 10,000 jetting into this Indonesian resort island, from government ministers to Nobel laureates to drought-stricken farmers.

But critics say they are contributing to the very problem they aim to solve.

"Nobody denies this is an important event, but huge numbers of people are going, and their emissions are probably going to be greater than a small African country," said Chris Goodall, author of the book "How to Live a Low-Carbon Life."

Interest in climate change is at an all-time high after former Vice President Al Gore and a team of U.N. scientists won the Nobel Peace Prize for highlighting the dangers of rising temperatures, melting polar ice, worsening droughts and floods, and lengthening heat waves.

Two big climate conferences have been held in less than a month, both in idyllic, far-flung holiday destinations -- first Valencia, Spain, and now Bali. They were preceded by dozens of smaller gatherings. In Bangkok, Paris, Vienna, Washington, New York and Sydney, in Rio de Janeiro, Anchorage, Helsinki and the Indian Ocean island of Kurumba.

You would think it couldn't get any harder to take these clowns seriously.....but it's incredibly hard to take them seriously when they do stupid stuff like this.