May 11, 2009

Waiter! I’ll Have What Steve Hoffman Is Having…

“Sure ma’am, Mr. Hoffman is having our ‘Falsehoods & Innuendo’ entree with a side dish of hate.”

Oh…never mind…I’ll stick with an order of truth, thanks.

I’ve been meaning to get to this laughable editorial by Steve Hoffman (ABJ).  It’s almost as if Steve was in a hurry to get it posted and didn’t have time to “check his work.”  Relevant however, is the clear sign of what we are going to see en masse from the liberal press as they scramble to help the democrats maintain seats in 2010…

Here is the tripe in its entirety (counterpoints are outside the block):

In the catbird seat, thanks to John Kasich

Strickland looks strong against another ideologue

By Steve Hoffman
Beacon Journal editorial writer

When the head of a well-respected think tank on public policy solutions for Ohio recently described Ted Strickland as ”in the catbird seat,” the hope being expressed was that the governor would eventually end up in an enviable position in budget negotiations.
Once the House (dominated by Democrats) and Senate (led by Republicans) pass their versions of the two-year spending plan, a conference committee will sort out the bloody details. And that, perhaps, could provide Strickland with political cover.
Stop. Why Steve, because it would be “bad” if Republicans slow the damage that [your] man-crush Mulligan has done to this state, or are you saying nothing “Republican” could ever be good?  Wow, your Uncle Karl would be so proud of you Steve-o…

Such a scenario seems wildly optimistic. When asked about it, Strickland said he sees himself ”in the hot seat” instead as Republicans criticize his spending blueprint as too dependent on one-time money to be sustainable in the long run.

Stop. So you condone Strickland taking a one-time, federal hand-out to plug holes in the state budget leaving us to clean up the mess after we throw [your] man-crush Mulligan out of office?  We’ll remember that Steve, when you complain about any, future budgets…

Last week, the House passed a budget bill to the governor’s liking, hiking spending by using rosier projections. But this week, Strickland’s budget director, Pari Sabety, projected a $600 million deficit in the current budget year, which ends June 30. That will put a big dent in the $948 million rainy day fund, which Strickland was counting on for the next two fiscal years.

Stop. Strickland can’t count Steve, that is the problem.  Your man-crush Mulligan is a buffoon.

Republican Bill Harris, the Senate president, indicated the Senate might have to draw up a whole new budget. Will Republicans blink and agree to a tax increase, even a temporary one? Don’t bet on it. Instead, they will cut, even if it means trashing Strickland’s sweeping plan to change school funding. Republicans will blame Strickland for acting irresponsibly, then portray themselves as bravely (and responsibly) making the tough choices.

Stop. Oh that’s rich.  You will blast Republicans for making tough choices in light of how Strickland has “turned around” education for the most vulnerable in this state?  Funny, I cannot find one post where you criticized your man-crush Mulligan for stripping (vetoing) vouchers away from disabled children, And how did he “turn that around?”  Well, instead of making provisions for them in the education budget, he (and the other “for the children” democrats) are trying to make small businesses pay for the gap through their insurance (via the costly HB 8 entrenched in this year’s budget)  Wow, nothing says “I love you educational lobby and want to pay you back for getting me elected,” like taking resources from disabled children.

From a public policy perspective, it’s hard to see how anything good would come out of that, since what Ohio needs to change course is increased investment in education and technology.

Still, it is entirely possible, even likely, that Strickland will be elected to a second four-year term next year. His path to the catbird seat isn’t a House-Senate conference committee, but the Republican Party’s apparent determination to nominate another right-wing ideologue as its candidate, John Kasich.

After sending Ken Blackwell up against Strickland in 2006 in a campaign that saw Strickland get 61 percent of the vote to Blackwell’s 37 percent, the Republicans might want to reconsider returning to the pragmatic, centrist approach that rebuilt the party in the 1980s.

Stop. Clearly you haven’t you been paying attention.  Republicans governing “in the center” is exactly why they have experienced the blood baths of 2006 & 2008.  While some might argue that NO Republican was going to win in 2006, Blackwell’s ideas were fine to most until he came out of the primary battered, bruised & broke and allowed the centrists up at the ORP (who were responsible for that condition), to run his campaign.  Note to Kevin DeWine & John Kasich.

But it’s probably too late for that. Kasich filed papers last week to begin raising money for next year’s race. Possible primary opponent Kevin Coughlin, a state senator from Cuyahoga Falls, is said to be getting out of the race.

Kasich is a former U.S. House member from central Ohio, not a position that generates statewide visibility. He is an on-air commentator for Fox News and was, for six years, managing director of Lehman Brothers’ investment banking division, until the company collapsed last fall.

Democrats are already targeting the Lehman Brothers connection, and being a television commentator might not be the kind of experience Ohioans want to turn to during a budget crisis.

Stop. Maybe not, but in 1994, John Kasich set out to get Washington’s house in order, and by 1997 his budget committee balanced the nation’s budget for the first time in 30 years.  Make no mistake Steve-o, THAT is EXACTLY the kind of leader we want.

Kasich’s big idea (Blackwell had his proposed constitutional amendment to cap state spending) is to gradually eliminate the state income tax, already trimmed 21 percent by members of his own party when they were in power in Columbus. (In fairness, the final phase of the cut is under Strickland’s watch.)

Stop. Ha!  By now we all know you haven’t ANY interest in being fair.  Regarding spending, that’s the problem with you marxists…you all think that it is good to spend more than any budget takes in…

Rather than stimulate the economy, growing it to the point where a lower tax rate generates the same or additional revenue, the tax cuts so far have helped contribute to the state’s bleak fiscal future, a structural deficit.

Stop. Ha!  That’s the other problem with marxists…you say things as if they are fact when they are only [hopeful] opinions that fit whatever cockamamie narrative you are trying to spew.

The end of Ohio’s income tax would result in the loss of 34 percent of the state’s revenue, a stunning number even in good times.

Stop. Gee, you forgot to mention here the upside of eliminating the income tax, the revenue it would generate, or give examples of the nine states like Texas, who currently run just fine without it.

So, yes, a recent Ohio Poll from the University of Cincinnati shows Strickland’s approval rating dropping to 56 percent, 5 percentage points less than a year ago, among Ohio adults. Given the circumstances, that’s not bad.

Stop. Interesting, whatever happened to “if the incumbent is barely breaking 50%, he’s in trouble” guideline?  Additionally, if very few have heard of Kasich as you assert, then I think those numbers are pretty impressive, especially with so much time left.  Lastly Steve, I can’t seem to find a post where you made the same allowance for G.W. Bush with something like: “The President’s poll numbers are dropping, but he did inherit a recession, had to deal with 9/11, successfullly prioritized national security, not to mention is dealing with a inept Congress & even more inept press corps.  Given those circumstances, his ratings aren’t bad…”

The latest statewide survey of Ohio voters by Quinnipiac University, in Hamden, Conn., shows Strickland looking strong in a matchup with Kasich, beating him 51 percent to 32 percent, Blackwellian territory.

Stop. Ha!  Dream on sparky, even the most uninterested citizen is not going to buy a Blackwell comparison…

Sadly, Republican primary voters show signs of knowing better. In a hypothetical gubernatorial primary between former U.S. Sen. Mike DeWine and Kasich, DeWine would win 35 percent to 23 percent. DeWine would lose to Strickland, but by 48 percent to 36 percent, if the race were held now.

Stop. Ha!  Funny you mention DeWine…there are many who plan on throwing [your] man-crush Mulligan out of office with as much fervor as they did DeWine.  You see, it’s not about D or R for many of us…it’s about good, responsible, LIMITED government, and Strickland simply isn’t getting it done.

Numbers like that have kept the former senator below the political radar as 2010 approaches. Not so with Kasich, something for which Strickland should give thanks every day.

So which is it, Steve?  A few paragraphs ago, you said it was unlikely that [your] man-crush Mulligan would be re-elected.  Now, Strickland should be happy that Kasich will be fraudulently beat up by two-bit partisan hacks pretending to be journalists who will “sway” the vote?

Don’t flatter yourself…you’re not that talented.

Share

7 Comments

  1. Good dissection of a textbook example of why newspapers are dying in Ohio and America.

    For more on what eliminating the income tax could mean for growth and prosperity in Ohio, see our report on how to elimiminate it and still grow spending (modestly) in the state: http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/article/1172

    David Hansen, Buckeye Institute

    Comment by David Hansen — May 12, 2009 @ 9:53 am

  2. #1 David, great point about newspapers. Who would actually buy an ABJ to read that nonsense? Bring back Ben Keeler!

    I really don’t think jacking up the CAT tax is a good alternative. It’s a ready-made reason for start-ups not to locate here (they pay tax while losing money), and for existing ones not to expand here (see Honda, Greensburg IN).

    I’ll bet that keeping spending growth to a percent or two below inflation (which is low) and pop growth (of which there is almost none) would enable the income tax phase-out to occur with no deficits — if a growth-oriented admin returns to Washington, but maybe even without one.

    Comment by TBlumer — May 12, 2009 @ 11:11 am

  3. Rose,

    thanks for clearing up that you’re the insane lunatic who wrote this. hugs and kisses.

    Comment by Tim Russo — May 13, 2009 @ 7:29 am

  4. #3 Tim, thanks for stopping by (really).

    Y’know (actually, you don’t; now you will), I wrote the PD twice in June 2006 objecting to how they outed your criminal past, apparently without your advance knowledge, when it didn’t seem to be called for.

    The text of those e-mails follows.

    If reading those e-mails makes you feel like a despicable ingrate, that will be a good thing. But I tend to doubt it will penetrate your clearly thick skull.

    Now that you’ve decided to go after my female co-blogger with the standard Stalinist psych-ward language, with the requisite whiff of condescension, let me make something very clear — Absent a comprehensive apology from you for repeatedly defaming me as a racist at your blog, and absent an apology for the above comment, every time you comment here, whether or not I happen to post your comment, I will more than likely respond by referring to the PD’s report (original) that you were “convicted of importuning in an Internet sex sting.”

    +++++++++++++++++++++++

    June 6, 2006

    What in the world possessed the PD to “out” Tim Russo’s previous history in the profiles section of its story on Ohio bloggers?

    He’s decided to quit blogging. I fail to see how this is an improvement.

    If this implies that the PD saw fit to do background checks of everyone it profiled, which would include me, I am profoundly angry. I don’t recall being asked permission, and wonder how you might feel if the tables got turned (which I wouldn’t do unless any of you decides to run for political office :–>).

    Tom Blumer
    BizzyBlog

    (later on June 6, 2006, responding to Jean Dubail’s response)

    Jean,

    Thanks for your response. As long as you’re looking only at free public record items, it’s hard to complain. If you’re looking at public records that require a subscription to access, especially government-sponsored subscriptions, I would question whether you are really staying within the bounds of their subscription agreements. I’ve seen the ones relating to criminal backgrounds and driver’s licenses, and though I don’t remember them verbatim, I’m not certain the PD would automatically qualify as having the right to access them in all cases. I would assume/hope your legal beagles have thought this through.

    I appreciate the difficulty of your position. I would hope that you at least gave Russo a chance to respond or describe his take on the matter before dropping it in his lap by surprise on Sunday or having his wife, girlfriend and/or family see it first without warning. I would consider it a serious oversight if you didn’t.

    I don’t think you volunteer to be blindsided until you run for office. Even then, I think it’s normal practice (for a newspaper, and not a blogger — that’s one of the differences) to seek a response when you have something important.

    Tom
    BizzyBlog

    Comment by TBlumer — May 13, 2009 @ 12:00 pm

  5. go right ahead, Tom. more proof you’re a completely disingenuous liar and coward. you refer to a lot of people with ad hominem horsesh*t, why should i be any different?

    i never apologize when i’m right, btw.

    hugs and kisses, comrade!

    Comment by Tim Russo — May 13, 2009 @ 2:51 pm

  6. #3 Paesano, non c’è di che, ti vecchio sporcaccione. Dovrebbe vergognati di te stesso.

    http://www.freetimes.com/stories/15/56/unforgiven

    Also saved here.

    Comment by Rose — May 13, 2009 @ 5:34 pm

  7. #5, well, I keep promises, so I’ll just suggest that you’ve just proven to the world that you are indeed a despicable ingrate, and that it’s not particularly surprising, coming from someone who the PD reported (original) was “convicted of importuning in an Internet sex sting.”

    Given that, I hope you don’t mind if I take a pass on the hugs and kisses.

    11:50 — You know that what I’m posting about you is true, and that the racism charges against me are false. You know it. If you won’t admit it, God help you, because your immortal soul is in grave danger.

    Comment by TBlumer — May 13, 2009 @ 10:58 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.