Bombastic Pomposity

We all know and accept that Dan Rodricks cannot put a logical argument together if he saved his life. But please read his column on gun violence today and try to make some sense of his idiotic conclusions regarding how gun control impacts law abiding citizens.

"REALITY killed the gun control debate," Volensky, the e-mailer from Alabama, went on. "People are finally realizing how foolish 'gun control' is and that they have a RIGHT if not a duty to take responsibility for their own safety. They are finally realizing that criminals are criminals and are not going to obey the laws that hack politicians put in place to appease people such as yourself. They are finally realizing that the only people affected by gun control laws are the law abiding."

There's some truth to that, Bruce.

I'm sure the 13 people who were shot to death at the immigration center in Binghamton were law-abiding, maybe even perfectly peaceful, people. I'm sure the children of Christopher Wood, the Middletown dad who apparently shot them before killing himself, respected the laws, as much as they even had an awareness of them.

Indeed, law-abiding people are profoundly affected by our gun-control laws - the lack of them.

So to recap Rodricks point, the lack of gun control laws are responsibile for senseless killings. The lack of gun control laws, not law-breaking murderers, are responsible for their deaths. And that additional gun control laws would have stopped the Binghamton shootings, shootings that took place in a state with some of the most draconian gun control laws already on the books.

It's not that Rodricks support for gun control offends me so much as his complete lack of logic and a basic understanding of human reasoning. Clearly, in Rodricks elementary view, America needs more of whatever is not working. But taking what isn't working and doing more of it, it will solve the problem.

Riiiiiight.

Then, let's move on to this nugget:

We can keep arguing about this - that it's people, not guns, that cause all the violence. But guns make it easier for disturbed people to kill their spouses or children. Guns are behind most of the gang terror in America, and guns make the mass killings possible.

The following items also make it easier for disturbed people to kill their spouses or children

• Cars
• Knives
• Rope
• Chains
• Cords for Window Blinds
• Icepicks
• Hammers
• Screwdrivers
• Gasoline
• Box Cutters

This would probably be a good time to also point out that the largest mass murders in American history took place because terrorists used boxcutters to hijack planes. The second largest required a nut job who bought fertilizer and rented a truck. Good times Should we have draconian, unconstitutional on all of those items. Of course not, because that would be idiotic. Just like Rodricks suggestion about guns.

Maybe this would be a good time for Rodricks to actually read something other than the Journolist talking points.....such as yesterday's decision on the right to bear arms from the Ninth Circuit!(!) upholding gun ownership as an individual right, and maybe that will educate him a bit as to why we aren't trying to hinder the basic constitutional rights of Americans.

Not the very model of a modern Money Manager

By now you are probably familiar with the fact that I don't find Dan Rodricks to be particularly bright, insightful, or generally having any grasp of common sense. And while today's column does not rival his several treatises on involuntary servitude, Rodricks again shows his complete lack of understanding of the theory of money as it relates to corporate bonuses, hoarding, and the fall of Western Civilization:

It's not just greed that drives this behavior, though greed is certainly part of it......

There's something else going on. I call it: hoarding up for the apocalypse.

I have been watching the concentration of wealth in this country accelerate during the past 10 years in particular. The gap between middle class and rich has become wider and wider, and the gap between rich and poor has become so vast as to be immeasurable.....

Knowing that it wasn't always so, I've tried to figure out why so many millionaires of the corporate class do everything within their power to become multimillionaires and even billionaires, piling on layer after layer of wealth, beyond anything most people can imagine as necessary in a lifetime.....

...Hoarding for the apocalypse calls for belief that the end is coming and that wealth will insulate the wealthy from the misery that will befall the rest of us. (The rest of us might harbor apocalyptic fears, from time to time, but we haven't figured out what to do about them. We're wage-earners, for the most part, or the owners of small businesses. We haven't all that much to hoard - not enough to make a difference, anyway - so we keep working to keep the bills paid and the kids fed.)

The apocalyptic rich have hoarded cash and assets - and they continue to accumulate as much as possible - and they've built retreats to allay a deep fear that, when the world starts to fall apart, they will be at the top of a mountain, in a secure compound with its own source of energy and potable water (and a decade's supply of cabernet), isolated from the screaming, rioting masses.

As the world's population grows, as the recession expands and unemployment worsens, as the globe continues to warm and the oceans rise, as questions about the future of energy and natural resources become graver, as civil unrest becomes a greater concern, the masters of the universe grab all they can. It's an Idaho panhandle mentality on Wall Street - hoard money and assets, and enough golf balls to ride out the coming cataclysm. There's social Darwinism at play in this, to be sure - survival of the richest - but it's the most cynical and self-centered kind, based not on enterprise or capitalism, but on a dark view of the future. Their concept of the greater good is gone, and they certainly display nothing you might call civic-mindedness or patriotism.

Now, if you follow Rodricks' logic here, the rich on Wall Street are hoarding money and resources to stave off the collapse of civilization (at least that's what I think Rodricks means; you've got to do a good job of suspending belief in logic and reason because this guy is a few peas short of a casserole).

Now I'm no expert on the end of the world, but I have read Lucifer's Hammer several times. And in that apocalyptic, post-civilization landscape, the last thing that was of any use to anybody was paper currency or money that was accounted to them in a computer system that was no longer functional. And while the accumulation of resources such as non-perishable food, water, guns, and ammo are important to surviving the end of the world, it's not exactly like there has been a demonstrable run on most of these things. And what increases there have been in the sales of guns and ammo have more to do with concerns over the Obama Administration's warped view of the Second Amendment more than it does with an impending breakdown in law and order.

What's equally absurd is Rodricks assertion that these folks are building such compounds, stocking up on supplies and "upgrading their corporate jets." It seems like Rodricks imagined these so called trends of the rich while on whatever planet he just checked back in from and didn't bother to supply one iota of even anecdotal evidence to back up his point. It's not like there are a multitude of hedge fund managers wandering the streets in Brooks Brothers suits buying ammo, 4 tons of beef jerky, and a subscription to Soldier of Fortune.

Truth be told, I think that Rodricks issue here has little to do with bonuses, survivalism or "the concept of the greater good." I think that the probleme here is actually jealousy. Dan Rodricks is a hack writer for a failing, increasingly irrelevant newspaper. His tv show stunk. He hosts a show on a radio station nobody listens to. And it's quite apparent that his ideas for nationalized forced servitude, nationalization of industry, and wealth equalization are mocked and not accepted by the preponderance of the middle and working class readership that see through his shtick. Rodricks probably was the guy who made fun of people in high school who worked hard and paid attention to their studies, and those are the guys getting bonuses. Meanwhile, a guy with no demonstrable skills, original ideas, or clue like Rodricks can't get ahead and it drives him crazy. Rodricks is living a freaking Morrissey song, and it eats him up.

I'm not going to argue that the bonuses Rodricks rails against are a good idea, good policy, or good public relations for the companies that are or were considering offering them to employees. Companies look silly for offering them, and the Government looks silly for companies receiving government funds to allow them. But to extrapolate and accuse "the rich" of hoarding and preparing for an imagined apocalypse is a bridge too far, and proves that the crackpot ideas being put forth by Dan Rodricks are not to snuff even for an increasingly less relevant Baltimore Sun.

Misplaced Priorities

I know it sounds like a broken record, but I can never be amazed how much Dan Rodricks can misplace his priorities. Time and time and time and time again, Rodricks has shown us he would rather spend a billion dollars on new sports facilities than he would dealing with real problems facing Baltimore's residents.

Now apparently, Rodricks also thinks that the arena project is more important than other state projects too. Because while Rodricks thinks there is money for arenas, apparently the Intercounty Connector is just a bridge too far:

The ICC has been sold to us - first by Republican Gov. Bob Ehrlich, then his Democratic successor, Martin O'Malley - as one of those costly but necessary government projects that support development and commerce. It's an 18.8-mile stretch of expensive toll road to move cars and trucks between congested areas, relieve some of the traffic on the Other Beltway, the one that snakes around the nation's capital, and even enhance homeland security. Accepting all these arguments, the Bush administration put the Intercounty Connector on the fast track for Ehrlich five years ago.

But in 2008, it's the Intercounty Anachronism.

With an economic downtown fueled by a housing bust and the cost of energy, the so-yesterday quality of the ICC should be apparent to most Marylanders now.

Why not scrap the whole thing? Why should we feel stuck with building a highway that first hit the drawing boards in the 1950s?

That's right. Rodricks sees no problem in wasting money on an unnecessary project like an arena, but when it comes to building a vital and necessary transportation and economic lifeline, well we certainly can't be having any of that, now can we?

And what exactly is Rodricks solution to deal with the transportation problems that would not be solved by the construction of the ICC? Transit projects that will allegedly alleviate congestion on the Capital Beltway. Never mind the fact that one of the purposes of the ICC was to.....alleviate congestion on the Capital Beltway by removing through traffic going from the Baltimore area to Montgomery County, particularly trucks and business vehicles that would never use this proposed transit model.

Rodricks misplaces his priorities once again. I wonder how much of this is related to Rodricks myopic, Baltimore-centric universe, or just to the fact that Rodricks is ignorant of issues that actually matter to the rest of Maryland's citizenry.

Rodricks a waste of printable space

Dan Rodricks, as usual, proved he's not that smart today with his column regarding Michael Phelps and the drinking age.

Rodricks tries to make the argument that because Michael Phelps was arrested for drunk driving at 19, clearly it proves that the drinking age should not be lowered from 21 to 18.

That's his entire argument. As illogical as it is. Never mind the fact that drunk driving is a crime separate from that of underage drinking. Never mind the fact that he makes no other connection between Phelps' arrest and the drinking age. Rodricks just wants the reader to make some sort of unspoken, innate connection between drunk driving and lowering the drinking age.

It is reasonable to believe that the drinking age should remain 21. Rodricks argument, however, is somewhere between ridiculous and nonexistent.

Maybe if the Sun really wanted to attract readers, they would stop redesigning the paper every six months and instead replace columnists like Rodricks with reasonably talented, reasonably intelligent writers who can defend their positions in a logical, reasonable manner. Because let's face it, printing a Rodricks column is little more than a waste of paper and ink.

The Collision of Flash and Substance

Blair Lee, as usual, makes a very common-sense argument against the new arena in Baltimore by reminding readers:

When Baltimore goes, hat in hand, to Annapolis or Capitol Hill we hear about the city's terrible murder rate, unemployment rate, property tax rate, test scores and tax base. We hear about abandoned housing, population decline, drug addiction and the concentration of poor people. Baltimore will sink into the Patapsco without huge infusions of state and federal aid they say.

But when Baltimore politicians run for re-election or seek statewide office we hear about Harbor Place, gleaming waterfront condos, new biotech centers, skyrocketing housing prices, rising test scores, property tax cuts and the return of the middle class.

It must be difficult for city politicians to keep their stories straight lest they forget and give the wrong speech to the wrong audience.

As I have been saying for a long time, there are a number of problems that the city of Baltimore has before tackling the issue of a new sports arena. Schools are and remain a disaster. The population is continuing to decline. The drug culture continues to run roughshod through the poorest parts of town. Crime remains high for a city of its size. These are all concerns that state and city leaders should be focused on.

But, of course, dealing with serious issues such as education and crime control aren't as flash and aren't as sexy as a brand spanking new arena and other construction boondoggles:

Baltimore loves construction projects whether they make sense or not, especially if state taxpayers foot the bill. We poured millions into the Columbus Center and various city museums that went bust. Likewise, the $600 million light rail system is a loser and the millions we spent on the Hippodrome Theater simply put the Morris Mechanic Theater out of business. Then there are the state-financed Ravens and Orioles Stadiums, terrible business deals for the state but "must-haves" for the city. But at least the two stadiums have tenants.

That's the kind of thing that gets positive press from the tv stations and constant genuflection from Dan Rodricks. Arenas are flash, but not nearly as positive as dealing with the issues that immediately impact every man, woman, and child living in the city of Baltimore and yes, the surrounding suburbs.

As Lee points out, the city is still suffering the consequences of O'Malley's Folly from his term as Mayor of Balitmore, insisting on a taxpayer funded Hilton hotel in downtown despite the complete lack of need for it, despite the avoidance of the market to determine a need for the construction of such a hotel, and despite the clear example that Myrtle Beach, Sacramento, and St. Louis gave for the city leaders long before the commencement of construction here.

The moral of the story, as usual, is that Maryland Democrats have issues finding appropriate things to spend money on.

All of which makes this video that much more infuriating.

Take a look at the record. Sadly, the day that Martin O'Malley puts the people first as opposed to his political career will be the first day that he actually does that. If O'Malley put people first, there would be no new hotel in Baltimore, nor would there be higher taxes or even a hint that a penny of taxpayer dollars would be directed to help fund construction of this new arena. Unfortunately, O'Malley as well as leadership in Baltimore looks prepared to make the same mistakes again...

Quote du Jour

"Rodricks is a whiny pinko idiot."
- Kenny Burns on the Sun columnist before our Word on the Street show this evening

Sure, why the hell not

Apparently, Dan Rodricks' obsession with building a new arena on taxpayer dollars is growing to other projects, too:

Chris Stoner, a civic-minded fellow who works at T. Rowe Price, has this idea: Build an 18,000- to 20,000-seat stadium out at Canton Crossing, by the interstate in Southeast Baltimore, for professional soccer and lacrosse teams. Stoner points out that Major League Soccer recently announced an intention to expand by 2011. So let's get a soccer-specific stadium and expand Ed Hale's Baltimore Blast into two teams - one for outdoors, one for indoors.

"While the MLS is anxious to expand west, a team in Baltimore would only add to a regional rivalry with Washington, Philly and New York," Stoner says. "Games against those teams mean shorter travel at less costs and the ability for fans to travel."

A stadium of this size could draw Major League Lacrosse back here, too. It could handle events too small for M&T Bank Stadium: ethnic festivals, revivals, an all-new Baltimore City Fair, some concerts, and high school and collegiate athletics.

So instead Rodricks supports this idea of building a new 18-20,000 seat outdoor venue in Canton....but does not support building a new 18-20,000 seat indoor arena in Canton, which really makes more sense than the current project.

How much money does Rodricks and Company think the city has to spend on this stuff?

Go Green by Saving Green

Resident arena apologist Dan Rodricks couldn't go three days without talking about the new arena, with yesterdays column adding new levels to his preposterous stance on the matter:

Here's how Baltimore gets the world's attention, attracts an NBA or NHL franchise, pulls in a major corporate sponsor, establishes another tourist destination a couple of blocks from Camden Yards, helps foster a new sector of jobs in Maryland and reduces long-term operating costs of its new downtown arena: with pizza made from tomatoes grown on the premises.

It is absolutely essential that the city recruit a visionary architect to design the new arena, and this design must be green from the ground up - even below ground - and I'm not kidding about including a terrace or hothouse for a tomato garden.

When I say "green," I don't mean 20 percent green. I mean green beyond green - far beyond what has been achieved in public and private spaces so far. Baltimore's new arena should meet or surpass goals of the U.S. Green Building Council. It should have a major wow factor architecturally but also set an example of sustainability for the nation and the world.

So to recap, Dan Rodricks, who already thinks that spending millions to build a new arena is more important than fixing schools and eradicating violent crime, now wants to double the cost of the arena, while increasing the price of tickets and concession on the middle and working class families of the area, just to make his bleeding heart feel better.

That's not to say that some of his ideas aren't good. I have no problem with the use of solar panels, particularly in light of the more effective and cheaper solar technologies that are out there these days.

But when you consider that fact that this new arena will be used more than the current arena, and the fact that the probably location of this arena is going to create traffic congestion worse than what we current see for the facility, wouldn't the most environmentally friendly suggestion regarding the new arena, if Rodricks were really serious about putting the environmental issue first, would be to not build it in the first place?

Rodricks support for the arena is somewhat inconvenient given his wacko environmental stances over the years. The easiest way to reconcile this is to save Baltimore taxpayers some green of their own, in the manner of the money that can be saved by not building this silly project.

The Tool and his Arena

Baltimore's favorite toolbox Dan Rodricks once again pipes in with his tired argument about how important it is to build a new arena in downtown Baltimore:

As for the nattering negativists who will surely say this is a dumb idea, that it will never work, that Baltimore will never get this and never get that - well, blah, blah, blah. We've heard it all before. Mr. Grumpy-Gills really should treat himself to the big picture sometime. I know. It's hard. You've grown accustomed to thinking weenie and being cynical. After all, that's part of our national culture, and the condition has long been acute here in Baltimore...

...But, really, the many of you who think small, and who make a hobby of ridiculing Baltimore and taking glee at the city's flaws, you who today think building a big, new arena on the site of our old, dumpy-but-still-bookin'-dates one is a foolish idea - you really need to get out more.

Seriously, the city has changed and is continuing to change. News flash: It's getting better. You should swear off blog entries, power down your PCs and get out of your basements for a day. Take a walk downtown.

Seriously, Rodricks needs to lay off the bong water and get real. Baltimore has sky high crime, with crime still at near crisis levels on a per-capita basis. Taxes are out of control. The Mayor is on the take. Schools are falling apart and failing to educate people. But Rodricks, in his infinite wisdom, thinks the most important thing to do is building a friggin' arena.

It takes a sports columnist, Rick Maese, to bring any common sense to the pages of the Baltimore Sun on this issue:

It's handy and it's dandy. Easy to fold and easy to hold. When you see your favorite politician, pass it on. When you see your local sports team owner, be sure to share. Because here it is for the very first time: The definitive, dead-on, no-excuses checklist.

If your city can't check off each of these items - ahem, pay attention, Baltimore - then maybe it should think twice before throwing public money at a sports arena or stadium.

And Maese goes on to list several common sense things that should be required to be in place before the city of Baltimore spends one penny on the construction of this new arena.

Somebody in Baltimore needs to get their priorities straight. Better schools, better roads, and safer streets are more important than a brand new sports arena. An arena is a symbol, yes it's true. But only an idiot like Rodricks would place more importance on spending hundreds of millions on a symbol, then spending money to truly reform the city's needed substance.

Of course, the city has other problems too, which I'll address in my next post.

Setting the Bar Lower

Somebody call Dan Rodricks because his dream might come true. But probably not for the reasons he thought it would be:

Representatives of the WNBA have met with Mayor Sheila Dixon to discuss the possibility of moving a franchise to Baltimore once a new downtown arena is built, Dixon said today.

The mayor also said she'd like to see the new facility built on the same downtown site where the 14,000-seat 1st Mariner Arena stands.

Dixon mentioned the possibility of attracting a women's basketball franchise after being asked if a new arena should be large enough for an NBA team.

"I think we need a larger arena," she said. "But I don't think we should rely on attracting the NBA."

The idea is now for the city of Baltimore to use taxpayer dollars in order to build an arena for a WNBA team? Seriously? That's how low the bar is now set? The WNBA is barely a blip on national sports radar. If the league wasn't subsidized by the NBA, the league would have gone under years ago for lack of interest and poor play. But do you really need an arena to hit these numbers?

The NBA founded the women's league and has traditionally subsidized it to cover operating losses. Average attendance has remained relatively stable in recent seasons, though at 7,742 in 2007, it fell more than 3,000 below the league's 1998 peak. ESPN recently extended its television deal with the league through 2016.

Should Baltimore be concerned with building a new arena for what is basically a low-level sports outfit that would draw no differently than the Baltimore Blast currently do in the antiquated facility? Absolutely not. But knowing that Mayor Dixon and the City Council often have misplaced priorities. Despite her past record and the fact that she is basically radioactive right now, I expect this to be priority # 1 for Dixon and her cronies.

Baltimore does need a new arena. They do not need to spend a penny of taxpayer dollars on it. If the city thinks that it needs a new arena to keep the Blast and to draw a WNBA team.....well, call Ed Hale or get Dan Rodricks to do a fundraiser, because only somebody devoid of rational thought would think building a small facility for that reason with taxpayer dollars is a good idea.

Rodricks Drafting Again

It's been a while, but Dan Rodricks has once again pulled out his call for a return to involuntary servitude. The thing is so silly that I'm not even going to bother quoting it.

Of course this is not the first time that Rodricks trots out the idea of forced servitude, though his call for compulsory military service is different than his November 2006 call for mandatory volunteerism, or his May 2006 for forced "national service." And as usual, he glosses over the 13th Amendment conundrum.

Still, I always get a funny feeling when somebody in the "mainstream" media calls for a return to this kind of serfdom, because let's face it, there is no real benefit to the kind of compulsory service that Rodricks demands. There is absolutely no need for it, no desire for it, and it will do nothing for our country other than to force more and more able bodied citizens into positions where they are doing the bidding of the government. Such a cockamamie scheme takes money and jobs out of the economy and will negatively impact the education of our next generation.

Besides, if Rodricks wants folks to serve so bad....he can volunteer to go first.

Dan Rodricks and his usual misplaced priorities

Baltimore has a sky-high crime rate. It has a declining population. It has a horrific drug problem. Among national leaders in the transmission of STD's. A declining infrastructure for transportation. And a criminally negligent and incapable school system.

Of course Dan Rodricks doesn't care about any of this because it's more important that we build an arena for an NBA or NHL team.

Now this would have been cute once, to ignore actual priorities for problems the city really needs to address and talk about an arena. But now that he has harped on the arena again and again and again, I wonder why Rodricks thinks it is so important.

Urban liberals like Rodricks usually complain about corporate welfare that benefits multi-million dollar businesses and their owners. Rodricks' insistence to prioritize the financial support of such corporate welfare over better schools, lower crime, and safer roads is a criminally stupid and misguided way of organizing one's priorities.