Three Open Letters Regarding Christina Abt

Dear City and State NY:

Thank you for listening to the outcry and inviting Ms. Abt to next Tuesday’s debate. I understand that she declined the invitation, because she determined that it’s more useful for her to go out into the community than to debate the four other candidates.

This was not, however, a demand that she be allowed to debate, but merely that she be granted the courtesy of a timely invitation – that she be recognized as one of the five current candidates vying for that Assembly seat, and that she is engaged in a primary race against Mr. Humiston.

Late yesterday, I received an email from your director of marketing, Andrew Holt. He explained that the original idea for next Tuesday’s debate was to just hold a debate for the Republicans in the 147th race, and that someone then decided to expand it to other races. You folks are from downstate, and you wanted to maximize your time in Buffalo. The NY-27 debate is to be the centerpiece.

Perhaps you can consider the barrage of emails regarding Abt as a sort of hazing into western New York politics. Christina is very well-respected by Democrats and Republicans alike. I’ve never heard a negative word about her. You wrote,

Regarding the 147th AD: Several folks had forwarded emails from Christina after the initial promotion, and encouraged us to reach out and to possibly include her in that specific debate. As the original concept was to only invite folks involved in the Republican primary, and already confirming their participation, I did think it didn’t was fair to the process to include her as she is a declared Democrat, also running on the Indy line. I spoke to Christina and explained it wasn’t a slight, just wasn’t part of the original primary debate programming, and that we would be happy to have her attend next Tuesday, and I would introduce her to our editor Morgan Pehme (who will also be moderating). She confirmed that she wasn’t being invited to debate, and I said that is correct, with the caveat that we were hoping to do a follow up closer to the general election, for which we would be happy to include her at that time.

In fact, you have it backwards – Abt is an Independence Party member running on the Democratic line. She is engaged in a primary race against Mr. Humiston. Although you intended no slight, she (and others) perceived it as such, because you made the decision to expand the debate to other races – mostly, but not exclusively, primaries.

After receiving a host of emails following your blog post, I conferred with our partners and the editor, and agreed to configure a way to include her in the discussion. When I called her to let her know, she declined to participate citing that it was a near 50 mile roundtrip drive. To which I was very confused, and only then understood that I was being taken for a bit of a ride. I left it off that we were hoping she would attend.

Here’s the thing – this wasn’t about her being given an opportunity to debate. It was about respect and consideration. The key here wasn’t the debate, but the invitation. In this case, it came too late and a bit begrudgingly. The organizers of this event didn’t have their ducks in a row, and didn’t think this out fully. That’s a shame, but your publication should take it as a teachable point.

Our politics here are so very petty and transactional. That’s why it’s so outrageous that the least petty and un-transactional candidate in any race was deliberately excluded from the original invitation. I would also note that you’ve omitted two of the most important, contentious primaries from your roster: the race for Grisanti’s senate seat has four very interesting candidates, and would be a huge draw.

Nevertheless, I thank you for you re-assessing the situation, and ultimately doing the right thing. I look forward to learning more about your publication in the future.

Dear Sam Magavern, Co-Director, Partnership for Public Good:

I received a very cordial note from you detailing that Christina contacted you and the YWCA – the two local organizers of next Tuesday’s debate regarding the lack of an invitation. You wrote that you and the Y went to bat for Christina, and this is appreciated.

I would point out, however, that when you affix your organization’s name as a co-sponsor or co-organizer of a political event, you need to think about it politically. That means you and your co-sponsors should err on the side of inclusion, and make sure that the courtesy of an invitation is given to all candidates in a race who meet the debate format. These are local races, and your organization advocates for fairness, equality, and good government. I treat this unintended slight as a mere oversight, and not as some sort of animus.

Thank you for pushing City and State towards ultimately doing what they should have done in the first place.

To Deborah Lynn Williams, Executive Director of the YWCA of WNY:

At around 10:30 yesterday morning, you sent this to Christina Abt:

Hello Christina

I was disappointed to see Alan’s rantings today. He made no effort to contact anyone but you it seems. He also seems not to have been informed that after you and i spoke that I was intervening to have you invited based on the fact that you were still in a primary on the I line. A shame that that route was taken when your case was being carried.

I hope that you will contact Alan and correct the record.

dlw

Your arrogance and condescension is as expected as it is unnecessary. But it comes with the territory. Everybody else involved in this was somehow mysteriously able to recognize a slight and work to rectify it, without being an insufferable jerk, (and I know all about being an insufferable jerk). In writing my piece yesterday, I went to great pains to not personalize my anger to any individual or group. All of the organizations trying to pull this shambles together should either do it right, or not do it at all. Being unsurprised at the aggressive tone of your note to Christina, I’ll respond in kind.

First of all, I don’t really care whether you’re disappointed to see my “rantings”, ever. If I could, I’d ban you and other nasty people (you know who you are) from reading. Regrettably, I can’t.

I didn’t need to contact anyone before writing yesterday’s piece. Christina posted a set of facts – none of which anyone has controverted in any way, at any timeand I wrote what I thought about those facts. I didn’t realize you thought I needed to run my opinion by you first, and I can assure you it’s not a practice I’ll be commencing anytime soon. I didn’t run it by anyone.

You assume that I contacted only Abt. Wrong. I never contacted her, either. On Tuesday night, Alan Oberst alerted me to Christina’s blog post about the debate snub, and because it was written with “just the facts”, I had no need to expand on that.

You write that I wasn’t aware that you were intervening on her behalf. You’re right – I wasn’t. That’s because I didn’t contact anyone before writing my reaction to Christina’s post.

Presumably, as co-sponsor of the debate – one of the two locally based co-sponsors – you had an opportunity to see the proposed debate roster before it was finalized, right? You knew the City & State guys running the show are from out of town, and may not be up to speed on who’s who and what’s what, correct?

As a local sponsor, this was your opportunity to step up and do the due diligence needed, and take appropriate action before it blew up in everyone’s face. You should have compared the City & State list and compared it with who was running. You’d likely have noticed that Abt was in a primary against the invited Humiston, and had a discussion about including her. However, that happened only after Abt protested. That’s your poor work and – at least partly – your oversight. Not my fault. When you don’t do what’s right from the get-go, expect to be criticized, and deal with it – as your cohorts were able to do.

I can understand that PPG may not be up to speed on the political machinations around town, and obviously City & State has no clue. But you – you’re the one who worked in live-shot-Schumer’s office. You’re the one who’s tight with Steve Pigeon. You’re as politically plugged in as anyone in Buffalo. You have no excuse.

You did the right thing by inviting Abt, but that “right thing” is something you could have – and should have – done earlier. Abt was disrespected and you should couple your invitation with an apology.

Instead of being contrite and apologetic about sending out an incomplete debate invitation, you’re abrasive and insulting. Typical.

Consider the record corrected.

 

Disrespecting Christina Abt

Christina Abt is the Democratic Candidate for the 147th Assembly District. She is also running a primary race for the Independence Party line under our system of electoral fusion. Abt is, incidentally, a member of the Independence Party. She has an opponent for the IP primary, millionaire owner of the Tanning Bed chain, Dan Humiston. 

Abt is also a real cheerleader for Buffalo & Western New York. A genuinely good person, with ideas and intentions that are also good. She deserves your support. 

A candidates’ forum and debate is scheduled to take place on August 21st at the Historical Society. The debate is being organized under the auspices of the YWCA, City & State, and the Partnership for the Public Good. Abt took to her campaign blog to outline the facts surrounding the organization of this debate, and who is – and isn’t – invited to participate.  She started out by republishing an email about the event that she received from the PPG’s Sam Magavern. 

Candidate Debate, August 21

There are some hotly contested races this fall – in both the primaries and general elections.  Join us for debate night at the Buffalo and Erie County Historical Society, 25 Nottingham Court, starting at 5pm on Tuesday, August 21.  Here are some of the confirmed and invited participants:

 Assembly District 149

Sean Ryan, Confirmed
Kevin Gaughan, Confirmed

 Assembly District 147

David DiPietro, Confirmed
Chris Lane, Confirmed
Dan Hummiston, Confirmed
David Mariacher, Invited 

Senate District 63

Betty Jean Grant, Invited
Tim Kennedy, Invited 

Congressional District 26

Kathy Hochul, Invited
Chris Collins, Invited

Presented by City and State, PPG, and the YWCA of Western New York.  Free and open to the public.  RSVP to the YWCA at 852-6120, ext 0,or info@ywca-wny.org.

As “fact two”, Abt notes that she was never informed of, or invited to the debate. 

FACT THREE

When I questioned the sponsors of the event (City and State Magazine, Partnership for the Public Good and the YWCA of WNY) as to why ALL of my opponents, both GOP and IP, were invited and I was not, I was told that it was planned as a primary focused event with the Hochul/Collins general election debate serving as a grand finale/audience draw.

FACT FOUR

When I further pointed out that I was in fact in a primary for the Independence line against one of the gentlemen who is also in the GOP battle in the 147th district— and that they were therefore were providing my opponent with a public debate forum that was being denied to me— I received compliements for a good point and an invitation to possibly interview with the editor of City and State and perhaps participate in a debate in the future.

FACT FIVE

When I asked the representative of City and State Magazine (the prime sponsor of the event) if I would be receiving an invitation, his response was that if they invited me it would not be fair to the gentlemen already invited— and also, they might decide not to show up.

FACT SIX

I am a graduate of the YWCA Political Institute School for Women.

Abt doesn’t offer her opinion on the matter, and she doesn’t express any reaction or emotion to what’s happening. 

So I will. 

This is an outrage.

The YWCA is, in part, organizing this event, and its motto is “eliminating racism, empowering women”. The Partnership for the Public Good is a progressive organization. Yet these two groups and their leadership see fit to exclude a female from this debate. Not just any female – but a female who is currently engaged in a primary campaign against one of the invited men in her race. City and State should have simply offered up an apology and quickly invited Abt to the debate. It did not, and has a poor excuse for it. 

The notion that inviting her – late, as an afterthought, and after-the-fact – would dissuade one of the men from attending is also outrageous. I can’t even begin to understand or fathom the rationale behind that statement. Who cares if they don’t show up? In what way would an invitation to Abt be unfair to the four men who are invited? It strains credulity to the point of being an utter falsehood – a cover-your-embarrassed-ass moment by a collection of alleged progressives who should know – and do – better. 

Maybe this explains why the PPG’s website’s section on gender inequality is blank. 

The YWCA – it hosted a “candidate’s college” earlier this year, which was specifically designed to get women active and involved in the electoral process.  It hosts it every year, and as Abt noted, she’s a graduate. Yet she was specifically and deliberately excluded from the coming debate. Every other candidate for the office she seeks – all of them male – were invited without hesitation. When confronted, the PPG, the YWCA, and City & State offer up ridiculous excuses and deflections.

These organizations should add “Factually Unsupported Rank Sexism” to next year’s candidate’s college syllabus. And they should absolutely invite Abt to the debate, and apologize to her for their knowing, deliberate insult. 

Visit Abt’s website here

//

//

 

Hochul vs. Corwin 2.0

The only thing missing so far is a kid dressed like Fonzie shoving a camera in an old man’s face. 

Issue: Medicare, Paul Ryan, and what noted Marxist philosopher Newt Gingrich called “right-wing social engineering”

The Buffalo News’ Jerry Zremski wrote Monday about how Chris Collins refuses to comment on the Ryan Budget, which would fundamentally transform Medicare from the popular single-payer system seniors enjoy – and future seniors pay into throughout their work history – into an expensive voucher-based privatized program.  

Of course he’s keeping mum. This issue did tremendous harm to his neighbor, Jane Corwin’s, campaign in 2011. 

At the heart of the Republicans’ Medicare Privatization Syndrome Because is to replace a reasonably efficient government bureaucracy with a 97% approval rating from users, and replace it with the fragmented, fundamentally broken, redundant, private (oft for-profit) bureaucracy to take money from the patients through premiums, and nickel-and-dime the physicians on payouts, and futz with what is and isn’t covered. Ungrateful looters & moochers

Mitt Romney has now selected the architect of that unfair and likely unconstitutional Medicare voucherization plan to be his running mate, and the fallout is spilling over into the hotly contested NY-27 race. 

Incumbent Democrat Kathy Hochul released this Monday morning: 

“Try as he might, Chris Collins cannot run from the fact that he said a budget that ends Medicare as we know it and forces seniors to pay more for their healthcare to fund tax cuts for his millionaire friends ‘doesn’t go far enough,’” said campaign manager Frank Thomas. “Voters deserve to know how much further Chris Collins would go when he already supports decimating Medicare so he can give tax breaks to the rich. How can voters be expected to trust a candidate who will not be candid about his position on an issue that will crush seniors and the middle class.”

Collins told the Batavia Daily News that the Ryan Budget “doesn’t go far enough.” According to the Batavia Daily News, “Collins said he favors the Tea Party push to reduce the federal government. He praised Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, for ‘starting the conversation’ about reducing entitlement programs. But Collins said Ryan doesn’t go far enough. Ryan believes the budget could be balanced in 30 years, Collins said it needs to be done in 10 years. To delay it longer isn’t fair to young Americans who will have to foot the bill.” [Batavia Daily News, 5/9/12]

Collins said his stance on the Ryan Budget is similar to Jane Corwin’s. In March 2012, Collins has admitted that his position does not differ significantly from Jane Corwin’s position. Corwin supported the Ryan Budget, which “would essentially end Medicare.”  [Buffalo News,3/25/12; Wall Street Journal, 4/4/11]

But now Collins refuses to even answer questions on the Ryan budget.  According to the Buffalo News,

Asked in a weekend telephone interview for his reaction to Ryan’s selection, Collins, the former Erie County executive, would not – even when asked again and again – endorse or even comment on Ryan’s budget, which would partly remake Medicare into a voucher program for future seniors while drastically cutting most domestic spending. [Buffalo News, 8/13/2012]

Republican Chris Collins released this, in response: 

“What we are seeing is a desperate public sector millionaire employ every scare tactic under the sun to distract from the issue that matters most to voters – fixing this economy. Of course, with her record of massive tax increases and job killing regulations, it’s no wonder Kathy Hochul wants to talk about anything other than her failed plan to fix the economy. 

With her whole-hearted embrace of ObamaCare, Kathy Hochul has jeopardized the future of Medicare for current seniors. More incredibly, she turned her backs on the seniors she promised to protect when she voted to cut their Medicare and Medicare Advantage by $700 billion. 

The only way we will solve our budget problems is by adopting pro-growth, pro-small business policies that cut our debt, protect Medicare from going bankrupt, and let small businesses thrive. Kathy Hochul’s plan is to cling to ObamaCare, gut $700 billion from Medicare and watch our economy go down the drain. That’s not a leader – that’s a politician. Our region simply deserves better.”

A few quick observations: 1. Hochul’s release is more effective because it takes Collins’ own words and uses them against him. 2. Anyone else find it odd that Collins, of all people, is using “millionaire” as a pejorative against Kathy Hochul? I thought that was “class warfare” or something. 3. Collins’ statement is so much unsupported pablum about tax & spend liberals. 4. Collins is particularly vulnerable when it comes to being consistent and transparent. Whereas he merely spouts off talking points recycled from his last re-election campaign, Hochul provided hyperlinks to the things Collins has said in the past, and merely hoists him by the petard he so carefully constructed. 

From Zremski’s piece, Collins says

All I’m saying is that I’ll never support cuts to Medicare for current seniors or anyone close to retirement age, including Medicare Advantage, which my opponent has actually voted to cut.

But if you’re not “close to retirement age”, yet you’ve been paying into Medicare through your FICA for years and years, relying on the promise of hassle-free Medicare coverage when you retire, you can go pound salt. 

Now – about that $700 billion claim. Collins has been using that for weeks – you should follow his aide Michael Kracker on Twitter, and watch him do battle with Hochul’s campaign manager, Frank Thomas. This claim comes up a lot. 

The claim is that Obamacare rips $700 billion out of Medicare – that it’s a cut, that it steals from Medicare to fund Obamacare, etc. The claim is clumsy, palpably and provably false, and worse – assumes you’re stupid and will accept it as truth. 

Does Obamacare cut $700 billion from Medicare? No. Obamacare saves $700 billion in waste while enhancing and improving seniors’ access to healthcare.  This savings extends Medicare’s solvency by a full eight years. 

A Redditor independently examined the claim and reached the same conclusion – that Chris Collins and other Republicans are criticizing Democrats for saving $700 billion from a socialistic, redistributive, government-run single-payer health care system. 

CBO breaks out the $716 billion that Reibus refers to:

  • Medicare Part A (Hospital Insurance) = $517 billion
  • Medicare Part B (Medical Insurance) = $247 billion
  • * Medicare Part D (offset) = ($48 billion)
 = $716 billion 

To make a little more sense of this, I also referred to CBO’s Analysis of the Major Health Care Legislation Enacted in March 2010 – start at page 24 which basically bulleted the reasons, as follows:

  • Changes to Payment Rates in Medicare: “Permanent reductions in the annual updates to Medicare’s payment rates for most services in the fee-for-service sector (other than physicians’ services) and the new mechanism for setting payment rates in the Medicare Advantage Program will reduce Medicare outlays by $507 billion during the 2012-2021 period” I found this very confusing, so I referred to Politifact which states: “The biggest portion of that savings…will come from reducing annual increases in payments to medical providers….The healthcare law does not cut $500 billion from Medicare. It just reduces future growth.” So in essence, it aims to curtail Medicare spending, not outlays to recipients. Ironic how the GOP is attacking Obama for an initiative to save money.

  • Disproportionate Share Hospitals: CBO states that “Both Medicare and Medicaid provide additional payments to hospitals that serve a disproportionate number of low income patients. PPACA…modified the formulas use to calculate such payments under Medicare. Projected to reduce direct spending by $57 billion over the 2012-2021 period.” The Urban Institute explains that ” the loss of federal disproportionate share hospital payments and potentially high uncompensated care costs borne by state and local governments on behalf of the uninsured will also motivate states to expand Medicaid under the ACA. On balance, states would experience net budget gains from implementing the Medicaid expansion.” So they are basically phasing out a federal program (disproportionate share hospitals) to expand another (Medicaid) and States would have a net budget gain!

  • Thus far we have accounted for $650 billion of the $716 billion and NONE of these “steal money from Medicare.” They simply attempt to save money, reprogram funding.

As for the remaining $65 billion, CBO says “many of those provisions will reduce spending, whereas others will increase it. The provisions that will reduce spending make a variety of changes to prior law, including establishing a mechanism to reduce the growth rate of Medicare spending if projected growth exceeds a given target, initiating a number of programs intended to modify the health care delivery system, and adjusting payments for prescription drugs in Medicaid….PPACA and the Reconciliation Act include numerous provisions intended to identify opportunities and create incentives for providers to make changes to the health care delivery system that will reduce costs and improve the quality of care.”

So, there you have it. Chris Collins and the Republicans are lying to you about Obamacare, about how it affects Medicare, and about myriad other things. Collins isn’t talking about the Ryan budget and how it effects Medicare because he saw what it did to Jane Corwin. Instead, he’s trying to pivot the debate (by the way, has he agreed to any debates? Will he be releasing any tax information at all?) to lies about how Obamacare is stealing money from Medicare. Are we going to re-litigate the Corwin vs. Hochul debacle of  May 2011? Looks like it, and even with a re-worked district geography and demographic, it’s still got a lot of seniors who don’t appreciate being lied to, and don’t like that Collins supports the partial privatization, decimation, and increased user cost the right wing is proposing for Medicare. 

Ryan, Romney, Regression

So, Mitt Romney selected Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan to be his Vice Presidential candidate. Ryan is popular among conservatives, so this should help shore up some rightist support for the wishy-washy Romney. Ryan’s popularity comes despite the fact that his policies are all about doing more for those who have everything and doing less for those who have nothing. 

Don’t say there’s no difference between the Republican and Democratic tickets this year. The difference couldn’t be starker. 

Forward!

Mike A vs. a Hater

One of the things I love about the contemporary internet is that I hold in my pocket, at any given time, a miniature touchscreen computer that’s always connected. If I’m on a road trip, and find myself in the middle of nowhere at mealtime, I have an easy way to research – on the go – a good local place that isn’t McDonalds or Subway.  

White Castle, however, is an exception. 

So, I have the Urbanspoon app, I use Yelp, and I use Chowhound to quickly look up what are good places to try that are off the Interstate, because travel should be about visiting other places, people, and things. 

Sometimes, however, these social review sites can invited bad behavior. Owners puff their joints while falsely driving down competitors’ ratings. Buyer beware is still in full effect. 

Back in early July, Buffalo Rising published a quick story about a Boston Globe writer praising local chef Mike Andrzejewski’s “Mike A’s at the Lafayette”. I’ve dined there, and although I have a few issues with the decor in particular, I thought it was outstanding. It’s easily one of the best special occasion/fine dining restaurants in Buffalo now. 

Some anonymous commenter posted a mockingly negative review of Mike A’s. It mirrors one that’s posted as a one-star review at Yelp – by someone with only one review listed. An anonymous reviewer also joined Urbanspoon on August 7th for the sole purpose of repeating the exact same review to that site. Clearly, someone with a vendetta. 

Usually, this would just be ignored or downvoted or similar. People are obviously entitled to their opinions, and to trash places where they had a bad experience. But here, there may have been more to the story, as Andrzejewski published his own scathing, exasperated, and indignant response. It’s worth a read, and it’s indicative of restaurateurs being able to put up with a lot of nonsense from horrible people, up to a point. 

 

Dino the Disgrace

I don’t live in Lancaster, so I don’t really care very much whether its rude, glibertarian supervisor, Dino Fudoli, fails or succeeds. However, Wednesday’s Buffalo News published a profile of Fudoli which revealed that some are turned off by his aggressive, obnoxious behavior, and that he’s occasionally willing to take unpopular stands. BFD. 

But it also featured this quote: 

“Sometimes I feel like I’m on an island, that nobody else is looking out for the taxpayers but me. People need to start waking up and realizing that the government’s not their friend, the government’s their enemy,”

I added the emphasis there, because it took me aback. I had to re-read that second sentence several times. Here’s a sitting supervisor – the government executive for a municipal entity – informing his constituents that he’s their enemy – after all, he is the chief executive of that government. That their neighbors are their enemy. 

What does government do? It provides us with the foundation for a civilized society. Because our government(s) are representative democracies, the government is us. The people who work as clerks and highway workers and teachers crossing guards and cops and firefighters and librarians and assessors and plow drivers and garbagemen – you know, these guys (NSFW):

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3mw49mk_x0]

These people do hard work, and they’re not monsters or the enemy or Hitler or Tojo or mad King George. They’re your neighbors. They’re your family and friends. They’re also part of “government”. Do you think they’re your “enemy“? 

I can’t think of a more fundamentally stupid notion than for an American elected official to promote the notion that government is the people’s enemy. Even if you disagree with a person or a policy or how money is being spent – do you think Boehner or Pelosi or Obama or Romney are your enemy? Do you think that your town supervisor or your county legislator are your enemy? Do you operate under the mindset that, if the town of Lancaster thinks that it really needs another cop, and the entire town board votes to hire a new cop – these people are all your enemy, and here’s Dino Fudoli to protect you from the tyranny of the extra cop? 

Fudoli is promoting not just a ridiculous, tea-partyist, idiotic idea of town government as someone’s “enemy”, but brewing up a recipe for anger, aggression, violence, and harm. It’s much, much easier for some lunatic to commit a physical assault of some sort on a government official if he’s been told by some simpleton that this official is the “enemy”. You go to war with enemies. Anyone with an ounce of decency should condemn this fundamentally un-American, un-democratic view of what our system of government is, especially on the local level.

Accused former drug dealer and undemocratic Collins apparatchik Dino Fudoli is a disgrace to his office, to Lancaster, and to WNY. 

Familiar Buffalo

On Tuesday, I wrote a post demanding an immediate end to the use of “Better Days” as Buffalo’s official anthem. omeone on Reddit pointed out that some of the images used in the WGRZ Olympic promotion video were lifted directly from CVB videos like “Buffalo: A Sense of Place” and “Buffalo. For Real.” Sure enough…

click to enlarge

 

Click to enlarge

 

Click to enlarge

In the foregoing images, the one one the left is taken from a CVB video, and the one on the right is from WGRZ’s Olympic promotion. I contacted the filmmaker whom the CVB commissioned to do their videos, John Paget, but he has not responded.  Neither a Tweet nor an email to @WGRZ was answered.

I don’t know whether Channel 2 commissioned Paget to do this video, or if it lifted the shots from his productions. But at least the scenes above are identical. 

 

Reid Gives Republicans A Taste of Their Own Medicine

Did you hear how Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) took to the Senate floor to accuse Mitt Romney of not having paid income taxes in 10 years? He says someone with deep knowledge of Bain Capital finances told him that, but he’s unwilling to reveal his source, and the Republicans and Romney are going absolutely out of their minds about it. 

Is the charge true? Is it false? Who knows? Obviously, the easiest way to prove its falsity is to release 10 years’ worth of tax returns – something Romney has repeatedly refused to do. The Romneys say we people have all we’re going to get from them – an incomplete 2010 return and a 2011 estimate. Romney deliberately omitted a document he would have filed with the IRS detailing the holdings he has in foreign banks in Switzerland, the Caymans, Bermuda, and other traditional tax-evasion havens with expanded secrecy laws to help, e.g., absolve Americans of their duty to pay taxes (and more nefarious reasons like money laundering). ABC News pointedly asked Romney whether he’s ever paid less than 13.9% in income taxes, and he said he’d go back and check – that’s not a “no”. He never came back to tell us one way or another. 

The Republicans are going nuts, demanding Reid’s taxes, Pelosi’s taxes, Obama’s college transcript – they’re grasping at completely manufactured straws and bringing up remarkable non-sequiturs to avoid one salient fact: 

While the rabid right-wingers in Breitbartland demand a “vetting” of Obama that happened in 2008 and they’ve conveniently ignored, they absolutely refuse to vet their own nominee. That refusal to vet – hey, rich white guy, former Governor – is already haunting them. You can’t complain about transparency when you have a candidate who’s hiding something. You can’t complain about job creators and taxes when your ultrawealthy one percenter candidate pays no taxes. 

(Why aren’t we demanding to see how much Chris Collins has been paying in taxes?)

But if you read anything about the set of balls on Harry Reid, you should read this piece from the Rude Pundit. His writing is NSFW, but I haven’t yet found anything that more creatively and pointedly explains why this is all fantastic.  (Quote after the jump, due to language – those with vapours should avoid).  Read more

Buffalo's Got a Spirit (Ban "Better Days")

No. Please, stop. I can’t take it anymore. Originally recorded for a Christmas album, the use of the Goo Goo Dolls’ “Better Days”  to promote Channel 2, its love of Buffalo, and water splashing is downright insufferable, and it’s become our unofficial civic anthem. You should be insulted. 

It started back in February, during the Super Bowl. Channel 2 showed this, which everyone immediately recognized as being derivative of the Sabres’ own “Better Days” video from the 2007 playoffs:  

Channel 2 updated it for the Olympics. Instead of a blurry sea of lights behind the interstitial captions, now we have water splashing. Why? A statement about the weather? Something about diving or swimming? Foreshadowing? Symbolically reinforcing that we’re just drops of water in a big pond? Who the f*ck knows?

I detest these commercials. I have come to have an almost visceral, physically negative reaction to the song itself. Aside from the fact that it’s a maudlin, depressing, weepy dirge, I object to the song’s lyrics and sentiment. “You ask me what I want this year” is the opening line – it’s a Christmas ballad. Why have we turned a Christmas ballad about Jesus and forgiveness and redemption and lifting oneself up from a horrifically depressing tough time into the de facto anthem of Buffalo and western New York? Is living here so bad that we have to pine for the Messiah, or the Rapture, or Christmas? Is living here so fundamentally awful and sad that we need big business (Sabres) and big media (Gannett) to tell us, in effect, that it gets better? 

We’re watching these young, talented athletes compete at the highest levels of their respective sports.  We’re watching a rare display of international sportsmanship and peace. Channel 2 decides to chop up that coverage by occasionally making you feel like a chump for living here. 

Is there a story, or is it just a slideshow? The new video opens with sunrise over Buffalo and Lake Erie. Fade to helicopter shot of our downtown. Fade to kid swinging on a swing? Then – a splash of water with a “what I want this year” caption. It’s not Christmas. Why do I care what you want? Fade to Kleinhans – pan left to right. Quick cut – a couple walking in the park; quick cut – a little girl with what appear to be her grandparents. They’re laughing at something unknown and unknowable. They’re loving each other. They’re happy. Maybe it’s an ad for Caucasians. 

Fade to a beach on the Lake and the Lackawanna windmills. The lake appears cold and choppy. The beach is groomed. The lifeguard’s chair is empty. Abandoned. Like someone had prepared for a busy day of sun and sand, and then abruptly fled. Wait – quick cut to another Caucasian, this time a female, playing with her black lab, which is cavorting in the surf. Quick cut to the dog carrying a stick, quick cut to the woman kneeling by her seated dog, looking wistfully at the camera. She, too, appears to be wondering where and why everyone fled. 

Fade to water droplets overlaid with the words “Better Days”. 

Next, apropos of nothing, we fade to a soldier hugging his wife or girlfriend. They run to each other, and we quick-cut to him hugging two little kids – a boy and a girl. Fade to another water splash with “take these words” captioned over it. Fade to – whoa, fish eye shot of Coca-Cola Field from a passing vehicle. Quick cut to African-American hotel porter giving the thumbs up. Seriously, it’s like something out of a Marx Brothers movie – back before the War when African-Americans were able to be cast in motion pictures, but only as servants. Fade to water splashing and “sing out loud”. 

Quick fade to the Botanical Gardens. Cut to two perfect white people in their perfectly manicured backyard, hugging their perfect little kids. It’s ok. Everyone’s happy. Even these people. Almost as much as thumbs-up-porter guy. Water droplets behind “everyone”.  Then we cut to a time-lapse photo of cloudsmovingveryfast behind part of the Buffalo skyline, and we cut to a mother greeting her young boy, apparently just arrived off the school bus. Cut to American flag wafting gently in the breeze. We’re very proud to be proud. Cut to two teenage girls picking peaches out at the Bidwell Farmer’s Market. Cut & quick pan to a street sign reading, “Buffalo” at the corner of First Street. White fade to a helicopter shot of the American Falls. Fade to splashes, “tonight’s the night”, which, as we established above, is an allusion to Christmas or Christmas Eve. 

Cut to sun shining through some trees. Cut, zoom, focus on the “Village of Hamburg” welcome sign. Cut to boats in front of the rusting, hulking grain elevators. Flags of Canalside, pan up. Time-lapse of the corner of Main & Huron at dusk. Cut to a female looking at some Frank Lloyd Wright stained glass, then turning her head to the camera, smiling. Shot at sunset from a moving car out by the marina, with “tonight’s the night” captioned over it, fade to helicopter shot of downtown at dusk, with “to start believing in” captioned over it, as the words “better days” fade in beneath. Shot of the sunset as the Channel 2 logo flies in, and the Olympic rings embed themselves in it. 

I guess the story is sunrise to sunset and an average day in western New York, that is if your average day is made up of generic b-roll. 

Buffalo has problems just like everyplace else. Perhaps they’re more chronic, systemic, and difficult to improve, but it’s a great place to live. We love our seasons, our sports, our arts, our schools, our people. It’s a nice place, not a depressing place that needs a Christmas song perpetually to cheer itself up. Things are indeed looking up, but we hit bottom long ago – the song would have you believe everything is awful, but we’re about to turn a corner, if only you’ll watch Channel 2. I think the corner’s been turned, and we don’t need cheering up. We like it here just fine, and we don’t like people suggesting to us that we’re a bunch of cretins for living in such a rust-laden, depressing place. It’s not sad. Hell, the Sabres doing well in 2007 wasn’t sad, either. Stop making me sad, Channel 2. Stop playing Christmas songs in July.  As cheesy as “Talking Proud” was, at least the song showed that Buffalo is a happy place with happy people. Buffalo’s got a spirit, bitches.

This song and its overuse as Buffalo’s anthem was the topic of discussion on our “One Thing” podcast with Brad Riter at Trending Buffalo

TBOneThing08-06-12.mp3

Do you have a better idea for Buffalo’s unofficial anthem? Some ideas are being thrown around the Twitter machine under the hashtag “#betterdays2“. 

1 122 123 124 125 126 165