Detroit News - Daniel Howes gets bored, takes sad, half-assed swing at Dan Mulhern

Normally I respect, although usually disagree with the writing of Daniel Howes. He is one of the few "names" at the Detroit News i would usually not bother responding to because his columns and arguments are well thought out, and although flawed, usually provide more insight into the thought process of pro-business Republicans than the usual mindless drivel.
That's why I was really surprised when I read this column, where in Daniel Howes states:

"If the symbolism of leadership means anything -- which it does -- what's the unintended message from the closest adviser to Michigan's chief executive? If nothing else, it's that the Granholm-Mulhern administration's coastal-elitist leanings tend to disconnect it from the parochial concerns of working folks and Michigan's own automakers.

"I just can't think of worse timing," says a General Motors exec, adding that colleagues were "fuming" about Mulhern's missive and what it suggests about the governor's support for Michigan business in general and Detroit's automakers in particular."

Wow. Mulhern must have done something terrible. If you read the whole column, and I recommend you do, Daniel Howes spends all 762 words on questioning whether Dan Mulhern is in fact "even thinking at all?"
So, what was the terrible gaffe that Dan Mulhern made? What did he do to earn the scorn of not just Daniel Howes but also unnamed execs at GM and Ford? Well, allegedly (because I haven't actually seen it) in an email sent monday, the first Gentleman wrote:

"These Toyota execs are like those I have gotten to know from Fortune magazine's '100 Best Companies to Work For,' in that they get totally fired up when they start talking about the culture in their companies. The Toyota folks and the great company folks know that 'culture beats strategy' every time. They have strategies to achieve results."

So. Toyota, one of the most profitable and generally regarded as one of the most business savvy car companies, their executives are pretty intense about cars. Huh. A guy currently writing a book about leadership was impressed with the executives of a lean and undeniably successful company, and in no way denigrated or dismissed the big three. Oh, and as Daniel Howes notes, Mulhern's father worked at Ford for 38 years and he still drives a Ford.

That's it? That's what you got a quote from Rep. Joe Knollenberg for? What about that quote is actually bad? Let me put it this way. I work in advertising. If someone says to me "You know what commercial I like? The 'Emerald Nuts' one with Robert Goulet." I don't get offended. My company has nothing to do with Emerald Nuts and compete directly with their ad agency for accounts. But a comment like that has no effect on us.

I realize there's a lot of sensitivity about the auto industry right now, but there are much bigger and better targets out there than Dan Mulhern's emails. Mr. Howes, this column is beneath you. Please use your writing skills on bigger and better issues.

UPDATE: Cathleen over at for my amusement only... has a fuller and much better written takedown of Daniel Howes.

Detroit News Editorial could have been written by a teenager.

Selling lottery may be winning ticket

So, sayeth the editorial of the Detroit News. I will give them this, at least the put the qualifier "may" in the title. Selling the state lottery may be the winning ticket in the same way that Iraq "may" have weapons of mass destruction and Dick DeVos "may" be a successful businessman instead of the scion of Amway.
Anyhow, the Detroit News finds the idea of selling the lottery "exciting". Why they find it so is beyond me. They discuss how much money and how much good the lottery is doing the school system presently, and then go on to claim that it could be worth a lot of money in one lump sum, or in payments over the course of many years. Then they state that

"But there's a possibility that the state could reap even more revenue by selling the lottery and investing the proceeds."

They then fail to say what investments would constitute. At some point they announce that "Lots of factors could turn this into a bad deal for taxpayers." Shhhh, baby. Please don't elaborate. That would make us consider both sides of the issue, and nobody wants that. Lets just leave it as some ambiguous warning to cover your ass if things fall apart.

Let me summerize the editorial for you:

They're advocating, sort of, looking at selling the state lottery. Unless it's a bad deal. In which case, then, don't. But it is good that they're considering it, which they are.

So, what's your fucking point? What opinion is being expressed here? This is about as non-editorial of an editorial that you can get. They could have written the title to this piece and just left it and you'd be as informed as having actually read through the whole thing.

Moving on:
The Conservative Media has been putting up some really good stuff on their blog recently. I recommend checking it out. They highlight the smear campaign that's started against Senator Levin.
Send them some love.

Dick Cheney's daughter and irony found skipping hand in hand through the Washington Post Op-Ed.

I know I normally stick to Michigan related posts on this site, but...

Hooo boy. via MSNBC per the Washington Post.

So much is wrong with this i almost don't know where to begin. Let's start with a summary statement:

Liz Cheney gives Sen. Hillary Clinton a courtesy clap for being a woman and running for President, and then attacks her for not having "spine" for the Iraq debacle.

from MSNBC story:

"Anyone who has watched her remarkable trajectory can have no doubt that she'll do whatever it takes to win the presidency. I wish she felt the same way about the war," Liz Cheney, a former deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, said in an opinion article in The Washington Post.

Yes. Indeed. She'll do whatever it takes to win the presidency, instead of running on the high moral ground her father and W. ran on in 2000 and 2004. And apparently Sen. Clinton's views finally coming into line with that of the majority of the public and the majority of her constituents represents doing whatever it takes. God forbid she actually listened to the voters that elected her. In a weird way it implies that if it weren't for her attempt at the presidency that Hillary might be all for this flawed, widely criticized meaningless troop increase. Which, honestly, i highly doubt.

The next part of the MSNBC article, and Liz Cheney's op-ed piece is the best to me:

"I suppose Hillary Clinton's announcement was a sign of progress. In 2007, a woman can run for president and show the same level of courage and conviction about this war of her male colleagues have," Cheney wrote. "Steel in the spine? Not so much."

Yes, Hillary's announcement was definitely a sign of progress for women everywhere. That she can run for President, my how far women have come. How very noble of you to acknowledge that Hillary Clinton is a woman forming an exploratory committee to run for President of the United States of America. Except this was a sign of progress in 1999 when Elizabeth Dole ran for President (remember that?) She actually waited until after the Iowa Caucuses to withdraw, so, maybe google before you start typing?

And the last part quoted in the MSNBC article:

"In fairness, Clinton, with her proposal for arbitrary caps on troop levels and hemming and hawing about her vote for the war resolution, has company on both sides of the aisle," Cheney wrote.

"Let's be clear: If we restrict the ability of our troops to fight and win this war, we help the terrorists," she wrote.

No, let's be PERFECTLY clear: the number is NOT arbitrary. It's not a number pulled out of thin air. The number represents the current troop levels on the ground. And there's a reason there's questions about the latest escalation in on both sides of the aisle. Because the strategy is flawed. They're trying to prevent more people from being blown up needlessly.

They are NOT restricting the ability of our troops to fight and win this war. The military targets have been accomplished for years. Right now we are policing a civil war. In order to "win" the war in the terms that Liz Cheney is talking about, according to most experts and generals, you would need FAR MORE TROOPS than Bush is proposing to send. And in this political climate, with all of the poll numbers so low, that will not happen.

We are NOT helping the terrorists win. By all accounts we're dealing with "sectarian violence" in Iraq. Nobody associates the war in Iraq with the war on terror no matter how many times you say it. The "war on terror" is like the "war on drugs" and so on. There is no battlefront, all you can do is hope to stem the tide.

I can't believe i'm actually writing in defense of Hillary Clinton. Out of all of our presidential candidates I like her the least. She's been too hawkish on the war and too DLC friendly for my taste.

Detroit News seen mumbling incoherently to self about charter schools, many worry if sanity has slipped away forever.

In today's updated online editorial the Detroit News pleads for the cap of 150 charter schools to be lifted as a cure for what ails detroits students.

"Charter schools are independent public schools, usually chartered by a state university, that operate outside of some work rules imposed on standard public schools. They are variable in quality -- but parents, especially in Detroit, should be given more options to escape a clearly failing school system."

Ahh, yes. The tried and true "deserve more options" option. That bastion for the free flowing of thoughts and ideas to solve problems in a serious way. Results be damned. Sure, the education your child receives may be worse than the one in the Detroit Public School system, but, garsh darn it, your child DESERVES to underachieve. Aren't you happy? You get a choice!

Are Detroit Schools falling apart? I dare anyone to argue otherwise. But sending more money out of the district? That doesn't seem like long term solution. It sounds like adding more anchors to a ship that's listing badly. Now, here comes the part where a Republican would attack my stance on this issue.

What's my solution? Don't have one. That doesn't make adding even more charter schools with questionable results to the mix the solution. Here's the thing. There is no easy fix. There really isn't. Adding more charter schools adds more mediocre options to an already bleak education situation. And the "well at least it's SOMETHING" argument falls flat. I'm all for education. I think education is one of the big keys for any sort of economic development in this state. It has to be a place that's attractive to employers. If they are to live here, and their children, and their workers children to attend the schools in the area, it's essential to have good, quality schools. I'm in favor of raising the quality of the education system, but i think spreading the education dollar even further across this area is a mistake.

Detroit News is living in pre-1989 world, woefully seen wearing shoulder pads, large bangs

I think someone should make it a full time job to monitor the meds and alcohol that the fine people over at the Detroit News seem to be mixing.
Let me explain.
In an editorial today titled "Larger military needed to face growing threats" wherein, get this, they take to task the Bush Administration for not spending enough money in Defense spending and military troop strength. They bemoan that troop levels have fallen so much since the cold war, and that an increase in troop strength of up to 25% will be necessary "if America is to meet the long term threat from terrorists, extremists and rogue regimes. "
LMAOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!

Oh. My. Fucking. God.
Follow me on this little journey and watch how i come to completely different conclusions than the Detroit News.
Terrorists and extremists were responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center. A 25% increase in military troop strength would not have prevented that in any way shape for form. The only reason we would have to increase troop strength is because we are bogged down in Iraq. Kinda seems like troop strength wouldn't be such a critical issue if not for that disaster.

Now, I'm not associated with the military, I have no actual knowledge about the real world needs of our military and troop strength thereof. But I doubt the Detroit News does either. I would love to know where the 25% troop increase number came from. It's thrown out there as though it were fact, when they site no studies to that effect. Further they argue that funding for a much larger military will be a strain on the government but absolutely necessary.

I say bullshit. I say that what threatens our country, when it comes to actual physical harm, comes from "terrorists and extremists" so to speak. They are defeated with better intelligence, not bigger guns. I submit that had our military been triple it's current size on September 11th, 2001 that the results would have been the same. I submit to you that with better intelligence and allegedly more sharing of information among agencies, then and only then would you have had a shot to prevent the tragedy that got us stuck into this quagmire that we call Iraq.

Someone call a Proctologist, the Detroit News has their heads up their asses again.

MBT, Granholm and the Detroit News as the Republicans Judge Dredd

The Detroit News, the propaganda arm of the Michigan RWNM, printed an editorial yesterday entitled:
"Use tax plan to make state more competitive"
and subtitled:
"Governor seeks to maximize revenue rather than attract jobs"

The opening run on statement reads:
"W e'll withhold judgment on the business tax restructuring that Gov. Jennifer Granholm is set to unveil this morning until we see all of the details, but the method for crafting the plan was flawed, and that leaves us pessimistic that it will accomplish its mission."

Boy, they sure did withhold judgement, didn't they? They waited until the first comma. The rest of the editorial is spent re-hashing the talking points of the Republican party. They wanted a net tax CUT, because, you know, the state and the schools and the services are flush with cash. Who needs to pay for education when businesses can make bigger profits?

Anyhow, I'm greatly amused that a credible news organization would contradict itself within the first sentence. They've clearly passed judgement on it already. If they were withholding judgement they wouldn't have launched this attack before the plan was made public. What they withheld was the piece by piece assassination attempt of the tax bill before it hits the floor. But ya gotta give them credit for having the balls to contradict themselves within the very first sentence of the editorial.

Here's the link.

In today's editorial, they mildly praise Granholm's tax plan. The big issues they seem to have are 1. again, not a tax cut 2. it "doesn't make Michigan stand out against other states." and 3. they find the Governors definition of "assets" to be too broad.

I'm not a policy wonk, but follow me here for a second:

1. Does anyone really think that Michigan is in a position to cut taxes? This isn't the go-go 90's with the Ford Taurus as the number one vehicle in America or the tech boom. The state isn't flush with cash. When they say tax cut it sounds like they mean tax shift. It seems that if you cut taxes you have to cut spending. If you cut spending you cut services and probably education. If you cut education, the community will have to make it up. Same thing with services like police, fire, security. Am I right?

2. DOESN'T MAKE MICHIGAN STAND OUT???? That's what a business tax is supposed to do? Huh. I never knew.

3. I can't comment on the definition of "assets" as I have absolutely zero background in business ownership and tax responsibilities. But based on their other two beefs, i question the legitimacy of their complaint.

Here's the link.

Hope everyone had a great holiday.

Hello, and welcome

I noticed a modest increase in traffic. And coincedently all of my posts have appeared on Lefty Blogs all at once.
I thank you for the attention and hope you enjoy or agree with the silly things i shout from atop my tiny soapbox. Typically I post once, sometimes twice a week. It's less breaking news oriented and more "I have something to say!" to steal a line from Jerri Blank.
Comments and suggestions are always appreciated, and you can email me at anytime at shipofgold@gmail.com

Again, thanks and welcome. Have a wonderful holiday and I hope to see you soon.

Enjoy this lovely video from the band Muse (who are phenomenal):