Speed Gibson

August 1 is the anniversary date of the Excellence in Broadcasting (EIB) network, i.e., Rush Limbaugh. Today closes out his 21st year, and I look forward to many more. Now if only I could lose weight as easily as he's done this year.

Locally, it was one year ago that David Strom pondered as to when people were going to discover that then Senator Obama is a jerk - before or after Election Day. Obviously after. And especially now.

Both came together in this astounding quote from Joan Walsh, Editor-in-chief of Salon, on Hardball:

"There's a clear case of projection here where these guys [Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh] with really suspect racial feelings and perceptions are projecting their own hate and their own divisiveness onto a President, who as you [host Chris Matthews] said, had a white mother, was raised by white grandparents and there's absolutely no evidence at all that he anything but loves white people. Obama got to where he was in my opinion largely because he makes white people feel like he knows we're all trying really hard, and we really like it when black people make us feel that way."

I again requote James Lewis at The American Thinker, that this level of ignorance has to be taught.

Rush has heard it all before, from people like Walsh who apparently have never really listened to his program. Me, I was proud to renew my charter Rush 24/7 subscription this week.

Happy Anniversary, EIB!

The facts seem pretty clear now regarding the Henry Louis Gates issue. Gates acted stupidly from the start, not first contacting the police in advance of his forced entry. He could afford a hotel room. He could have hired a locksmith in the morning. But no, he flew into an unprovoked tirade, counting on and getting the usual support from other prominent members of his race, including the President of the United States, who also acted stupidly.

One error in the analysis I see is the public consensus that police Sergeant Crowley should have let it go, not arresting Gates for disorderly conduct. They assume this would have avoided much if not all of this embarrassment. I disagree. This is static analysis, which doesn't apply to playground bullies like Gates.

My reading is that even if Crowley walks away, Gates would have filed charges of police profiling and brutality anyway, possibly with a press conference chaser. His ego is clearly large enough for that. Bullies who want to fight will always find a reason. And Crowley would have faced almost as much criticism regardless.

You can't take a incident started by an irrational man and then apply logic as to its conclusion.

From Richard A. Sloma's "No-Nonsense Management" (1977):

"If planned new orders do not exceed planned shipments, management has announced its intention to liquidate the firm."

The so-called Health Care Reform bill is lengthy, but one thing is clear: private health insurance will be all but dead. Actually, it will be totally eliminated, unable to compete for several reasons, like mandates and unfair competition from an organization that does not have to make a profit. Some report that private insurers will not be able to take on new customers, maybe not even change the terms of existing customers, like changing the deductible. There will be price controls, external decision-making, and with "no pre-existing conditions" you could argue this isn't insurance at all. And of course, many employers will simply bow out of providing health care coverage, paying the 8% (today!) penalty.

The government plan will have its own problems, but not enough to matter in the short time it will take to kill the insurance companies. For with no prospect to grow, they will quickly liquidate.

No, whether you like your current plan or not, you won't be able to keep it under ObamaCare. To say otherwise, and this includes our President, is to lie.

It's Weight Watchers night, and I'm very pleased with this week's three pound loss. In my football scoring, that's 3 of the 5 pounds I need for a first down, 60%, hence it is now 2nd and 4 to go as noted on the left sidebar.

As I listen to President Obama stumbling and stammering in defense of his health care initiative, and he is definitely on defense, I'm starting to feel some sympathy for the Congressional Democrats. To the last man and woman, they want European-style state run health care, even if they won't admit that's what they want. The 2008 elections plus Al Franken have their Party firmly in control in Washington. The polls were all on their side to "fix" health care. And yet, the whole thing is starting to run down their leg, enough to even make them rethink 2010. What happened?

Obama happened. As I said, the President has offered an initiative, nothing more, not a plan, not even an outline for a plan, certainly not a bill. Such detail work is below his pay grade, and always has been it appears. As I posted before the election, Obama has no executive experience. As I suspected, we now see why. He has no visible executive ability. He cannot plan, execute, and follow through. At least he's honest enough to not even try.

Meanwhile, back at the Capitol, the Congressional Democrats are trying to craft a bill, but their own leadership isn't providing any direction, either. All they can do is cobble and patch, not write and legislate.

And just when they think they're getting their arms around it, Obama goes and nails another platitude up on the wall, like "if you like your current plan, you can keep it." Only their bill says otherwise and even CNN is catching on.

Soon they'll recess, and they'll get an earful from the majority who aren't fooled, and the minority who will ask what's holding up their free lunch.

I'm a little sympathetic as I said, but it's what they signed up for as Democrats, the mathematically certain dead end called Liberalism.

I noticed via Twitter that King at SCSU Scholars picked up on the "civic engagement community" reference in my prior post of Dane Smith's latest op-ed in the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

I had started a separate paragraph on it myself, but I later deleted it, unable to keep from writing several more, as I am now about to do. It's a classic ploy, playing on our insecurities to squelch challenge and debate. Let me fully re-quote Mr. Smith, emphasis mine, incorrect hyphenation left as is:

In mostly smaller groups throughout Minnesota's still vibrant civic engagement community, innovative ideas are being generated about ways to save money, to make health-care and education systems work better, to reinvest in human capital and infrastructure.

It's a familiar script.

1. Postulate the existence of a group in the vaguest of terms.
2. Ascribe warm, glowing, and cerebral attributes to it and its broad, glibly stated goals.
3. Leave unstated the clear implication that you are somehow flawed if you do not support the group, its goals, and of course, its proposed strategies for achieving those goals.

It is designed to silence debate, not embrace it. It's an appealing strategy for the liberal factions here in Minnesota, increasing unable to separate themselves from the increasing obvious gap between their promises and the subsequent results.

Our public school districts are fond of this strategy. Everyone who doesn't vote for a referendum, well, there's something wrong with them. Don't they know that they're "stakeholders" in the community?" Don't want their kids or their neighbor's kids to get educated. It's never viewed as a vote of no confidence or as a response to past poor performance or poor choices in spending public money. At most, they'll concede that "they didn't get their message out," that if those voters only knew what they knew, they'd have voted yes.

Then there's the "willing to pay for a better Minnesota" crowd. When we look behind the curtain, we find that this "community" is even more enthusiastic about having someone else pay even more for that better Minnesota. Part of "community" seems to involve getting something for nothing.

I have and will continue to volunteer in various civic causes. I believe that many of my readers do as well. Just don't sell your soul to "the community" in the process.

Dane Smith is back with an opinion piece in the Minneapolis Star Tribue. He admits that, well, yes, things are kind of messed up right now, but hey, if we just "Think Big" we can again make Liberalism work in Minnesota.

In [...] Minnesota's still vibrant civic engagement community, innovative ideas are being generated about ways to save money, to make health-care [sic] and education systems work better, to reinvest in human capital and infrastructure.

"Reinvest in" of course means "spend still more on." You can also infer that while Growth & Justice which Smith heads is a member in good standing of this "civic engagement" community, Phil Krinkie and Craig Westover are persona non grata.

Smith lists a number of the ideas that community has generated, starting with:

On health care, why not combine the purchasing power of our state and local governments for a "total-cost-of-care" package deal, one that pays health providers for public health objectives reached, saving as much as $1 billion annually?

Why not? Because one size doesn't fit all and because even if it saves the $1 billion, those savings will not find their way back to the taxpayers. Moving on:

In education, why not impose a strict "what works" screen to every additional dollar we invest in public education, and get ruthlessly focused on increasing our higher-education attainment rate by 50 percent over the next 10 years?

"What works?" "Ruthlessly focused?" "LOL!" Seriously, the key word is "additional" - the baseline will not be questioned. They'll only be responsible with the new money. But here's the big idea that prompted this post:

For our chronic revenue shortages, why not begin repealing more than 200 special tax breaks and exemptions in Minnesota law, many of which have crept in as a result of interest-group politics? These "tax expenditures'' -- such as sales tax exemptions on lawn care and clothing and legal bills -- cost the state $11 billion annually.

The point of view is breathtakingly myopic. We're short on revenue, not long on spending. And we're chronically short, meaning frequently and frustratingly. "Habitally" might be a more accurate word. But let's get to those tax breaks that have crept in, like the sales tax clothing exemption that was there from the start in Minnesota. Just eliminate them and we go from a $6 billion biennial deficit to a $16 billion biennial surplus. We'll need that to cover the unintended consequences of such folly.

For just who does Dane Smith think will pay that $11 billion? Corporations? Tourists? President Obama? No, we will, of course, over $2,000 per capita, nearly $10,000 a year for a family of four. But there I go, thinking this is our money again. These tax breaks don't let us keep our own money, they "cost the state" money.

At the end, Smith quotes Sean Kershaw of the Citizens League: "We're at the point where more of the same is just not going to cut it in Minnesota." True enough. But what Dane Smith advocates is just that, doubling down on what got us into this mess.

It was weigh-in #1 tonight in my quest to lose the 100 pounds to reach my Weight Watchers goal. As is typical, first week results after "normal" consumption often are large, something many other weight plans depend on to tell you how you'll lose 9 pounds in 9 days or similar. My first week at Weight Watchers in 2006, I lost almost 15 pounds.

Tonight, I posted a 6.2 pound loss, atypical but most welcome, and a good time to explain my football scoring I'll be posting at the left.

I give myself 4 weeks to lose 5 pounds, just like 4 downs to gain 10 yards. This is right in the middle of the Weight Watchers recommended 0.5 to 2.0 pound per week pace. Like football, I hopefully won't let it get to fourth down very often.

So, I moved the chains in just the first week, 94 pounds to go.

I've seen a number of ugly, regrettable, and misleading Presidential speeches and press conferences over my many years. There was "Checkers" and "I'm not a crook!" from Nixon. There was Jimmy Carter's malaise and "moral equivalent of war." There was "I did not have sex with that woman" from Clinton. Immediately to the top of my list will go President Obama's performance tonight. I have never seen such outright deception on such a scale. And unlike many of the previous speeches I cited where some time went by before we came to know better, Obama's prattling tonight is immediately and obviously false.

The most charitable defense would be that he clearly has no idea what he's talking about, that he's too easily talked into concepts like these, failed concepts like Socialized Medicine and Keynesian Economics. Only I think he does, because every facet of his so-called plan funnels power to his Administration. Whatever happened to "Power to the People?" - like malpractice reform, Health Savings Accounts, even private insurance itself? Strangely absent, just like the funding for it all.

Consider this statement in response to a question:

"With regulation, there's already going to be some improvement in the insurance industry. But having a public plan out there that also shows maybe if you take some of the profit motive out, maybe if you are reducing some of the administrative cost, that you can get an even better deal, that's going to incentivize [sic] the private sector to do even better."

Here you see a little of every trait - arrogance, ignorance, confusion, sophistry, contradiction, and of course, deception.

We learned nothing about health care in general or ObamaCare in particular tonight. But whatever it is, Groucho Marx speaks for me:

I don’t know what they have to say,
It makes no difference anyway --
Whatever it is, I’m against it!
No matter what it is or who commenced it,
I’m against it.

Your proposition may be good
But let’s have one thing understood --
Whatever it is, I’m against it!
And even when you’ve changed it or condensed it,
I’m against it.

Any seasoned bureaucrat - public or private - knows that you never run a surplus if you can help it. Another bureaucrat will see it and steal it. That's what's happening to Southwest Transit and the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority. These are outlier public transit providers that work with Metro Transit but are otherwise distinct agencies. They largely run service to the two downtowns plus some local shuttle service.

These agencies run modest schedules, targeting rush hour commuters, luring them with more luxurious buses and large Park and Ride facilities. If your job has regular hours downtown, it's a great way to commute, especially given the cost of downtown parking. It's therefore probably as successful as public transit can probably be. That and the fact that they have no commuter rail to heavily subsidize has allowed them to build some significant cash reserves.

Meanwhile, Metro Transit is quadrupling down on Light Rail, starting work on the completely unneeded Central Corridor line, as if the current deficits aren't enough. Where or where to get more money to cover those deficits? Oh look! Those rich suburban systems have lots of money, several months, maybe even a year's worth of operating expenses in the bank.

Think of all the junkets, seminars, dinners, office furniture, conferences, and so on that those responsible agencies could have rung up. Frankly, had we all known the money would have been stolen from them anyway, even I would have looked the other way.

A St. Paul fireman has filed suit, repeatedly passed over for a promotion despite his high exam score. Sound familiar? As in Ricci and Sotomayor?

The use of testing in hiring and promotion seems logical enough, that it should impart a strong measure of fairness. And yet it doesn't somehow. Worse, these matters seem to be increasing winding up in the courts. But even here justice isn't always obtained, even if the testing in question should be the sole criterion.

A certain amount of testing is good, essential in some cases, including fire fighting. But mostly, that's at the entry levels. There is critically required knowledge. There is also physical ability, where strength and agility translate into speed, speed that saves lives as well as property.

But above the first level or two, it's a lot more subjective. As a supervisor, you must be a leader, one who gets things done by organizing and directing others to do it. As a line manager, you must now also analyze methods and the results they produce, and try to find better, faster methods. As a general manager, you have to balance results and the budget. As the chief executive, you must deal with the public, and increasingly, government.

Testing other than on the job evaluation isn't much help. Neither is formal education. The higher you go, the more subjective it becomes. It has to, because this is "born, not made" territory, and most of us aren't born that way.

It used to be that businesses and other organizations could hire and fire at will. Yes, that meant racism, sexism, nepotism, and all those other ills that we thought government could prevent, and it did to an extent I suppose. But I'd argue that this was a problem that was getting better anyway. The net gain is hard to quantify.

The unintended consequence is that it has enabled a new class of incompetent, clueless managers who hide behind these tests and regulations. Conversely, let us suppose that an able St. Paul Fire Chief has valid reasons for picking around the candidate now suing. Despite making the right decision, the law may force the City to hire the wrong candidate.

I know I'm just dreaming and pontificating, but that's what blogs are for. Me, I'd do away with most of this managerial level testing and certification. The best of principals may have been the most mediocre of teachers. The best of teachers seldom make great principals. They're totally different jobs and you cannot measure the differences. The old ways were the worst possible system - except for all the others.

I'm a loser, just not a good enough loser. I speak of my weight. It was weigh-in day at Weight Watchers. Well, at least I went. I always do, even when out of town. And as you may know, I do walk a lot, every week. The result after over three years: minus 39 pounds. This beats the gain I otherwise would have seen, but at one point I was down 77.

It's time for a stimulus plan. I'm going public and it seems like a good time from a numerology perspective. I have exactly 100 pounds to reach my goal weight. Watch the left sidebar and you'll see how I'm doing. I'll post after every weekly meeting, meaning you can encourage me or kick my posterior if warranted.

Tomorrow, July 14th, starts year six here at Speed Gibson. To my readers, commenters, and fellow MOBsters, I can only thank you for indulging me in this wonderful therapy.

To those new here, I am a self-described recreational blogger. Oh, I try to wax eloquent like Craig Westover from time to time, with little success. Mostly I just hope to pass along some news or perspective you otherwise might have missed. I also try to keep it clean, much as certain Democrats and a couple of Republicans try my patience. And finally, I try to keep it simple, with no ads, no pop-ups, and few graphics.

Who is Speed Gibson? He's an adventurous teenager who traveled the globe chasing The Octopus on a radio serial circa 1938. His uncle Clint was the top agent of the International Secret Police, played by Howard McNear who later became Floyd the Barber on The Andy Griffith Show. The Octopus was played by Gale Gordon, of The Lucy Show fame. You can hear an episode every Friday night (early Saturday) on WBBM, AM 770 out of Chicago at about 12:40 am.

See? Where else can you acquire such useful information? And there's more to come!

Marty Siefert, former House Minority Leader and now candidate for Governor, was interviewed (very ably) by the First Team of the NARN today. Siefert told of his travels around Minnesota, where project after project, and therefore job after job, was tied up in paperwork across many public agencies. In one case, the investors packed up and built in Wisconsin.

I'm sure Minnesota is typical in this regard, but that's no excuse not to re-examine the proliferation of government entities. And besides their numbers, besides their overlap, there is also the matter of how many are appointed, not elected.

This is not a new problem, either. Thirty years ago, a frustrated State Representative from St. Cloud toyed with a bill to, well, here's how Lori Sturdevant of the Minneapolis Star Tribune told it last Feburary:

About 30 years ago, twinkle-eyed state Rep. James Pehler drafted a bill that, had he introduced it, would have caused a stir in his district. It would have planted a compass point on a map of downtown St. Cloud, drawn a circle with a 30-mile radius and made it the boundary of a new jurisdiction, to be aptly named "Round County." Existing county boundaries inside the circle were to be erased.

He was only half-joking, the retired legislator and educator recalls. He'd had it with the jurisdictional squabbles that were slowing the construction of the Hwy. 15-Interstate 94 junction and complicating a lot more of government's work.

Per Rep. Taryl Clark, there are 47 units of local government today operating in "Round County." This includes four existing counties, at least six cities, plus schools, watershed districts, and whatever else.

Minnesota has 87 counties, probably due to its agricultural heritage. (Iowa has 99.)

Map Courtesy of Digital Map Store
We could play "SimCounty" to put together various combinations to lower the number of counties. It might also make sense to break up Hennepin County or reorient around major cities like St. Cloud. Regardless, it sure looks to me like 20 or so counties should be enough. Don't forget the roles modern transportation and communications play here, overcoming the original needs of proximity.

Of course, this will never happen because it would eliminate public sector jobs in rural Minnesota. Even though most of their constituents would benefit, their Legislators including most Republicans, would stand with the minority.

The Minneapolis Police and Fire departments aren't the only agencies threatened with budget cuts. The Minneapolis Park Board is seeking downright independence via a Charter Amendment they hope to get on the November ballot. I don't live in Minneapolis, but I'm all for it. It's that rare exception where I'd be willing to pay for a better Minneapolis. Not a lot, but it shouldn't take a lot, either.

The Minneapolis Park system is easily, far and away the best in Minnesota and many other states. It is as much as anything, the very identity of Minneapolis, the City of Lakes. Even most of the neighborhood parks, even in the tough areas, are large and scenic, and compare well with their suburban equivalents. I think I'm qualified to make such an assessment, having walked every street of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Robbinsdale, Golden Valley, Crystal, New Hope, Plymouth, Maple Grove, Osseo, Champlin, St. Louis Park, Fridley, St. Anthony, Columbia Heights, Spring Lake Park, Mounds View, and New Brighton. And close to 40% of Minneapolis to date.

There is also talk of merging it with the Hennepin County Three Rivers park system, entirely the wrong answer. Turn these family jewels over to likes of a Mike Opat and he'll soon pave over Powderhorn Park to build a Vikings stadium.

The truth is, Minneapolis has more than enough income to support police, fire, and its park system. Support this amendment and force the Mayor and Council to cut the real fat, like their political pals in Community Development.

In her Friendly Advice for Norm Coleman post at the Freedom Dogs, "Activist Next Door" Shelia again necessarily raises the question of Conservatism vs Principled Pragmatism. In the comments we again hear that we Conservatives are the problem, unwilling to settle for half an electable loaf. What's the point ask the Conservatives, even when they do happen to get elected? And somehow this is a grassroots vs elites struggle, and I'm not even sure which is which.

Later in those comments, Sheila made a point that clarified things for me.

"Here's the thing with Coleman/McCain-- they don't make you feel good about being a Republican, they make you feel bad about being a Republican...catch my drift?

Everyone says that they want people in the middle, they want moderates, blah, blah, blah...but they typically don't vote that way."

Did you catch her drift?

Take our Governor, Tim Pawlenty. At his worst, he can be positively infuriating, signing the junk science smoking ban, yanking the stadium referendum out of our hands, needless raising taxes then lying about it, and of course, his continued enviro-lunacy. And yet we like him, and we'll stand with him. We know we could do a lot worse, like Arne Carlson. And at his best, he not only holds off the DFL tax raising hordes, he exposes their leaders as inept fools.

But John McCain? Senator John *#&#@ elitist *@*&!# Gang of 14 %#@$# Palin back-stabbing @&$#! McCain? Catch my drift? I'll be kinder to Norm Coleman, who at least got national security right, but let's face it, he's not one of us, either. And neither proved electable. Yes, I know Coleman truly did get more legal votes than Franken, but in the Republican disaster of 2008, almost any other DFL candidate would have crushed Coleman.

The point is, Coleman and McCain are NOT the middle ground, the fertile middle ground that can produce winning candidates. That ground is further to the right. There is room between Norm Coleman and Jason Lewis, and that's where we'll find that blend of electability and principle we should all be proud to call Republican.

I just watched the 1953 "War of the Worlds" with Gene Barry as Dr. Clayton Forrester. Yes, the original Dr. Clayton Forrester for you Mystery Science Theater 3000 fans out there.

The Martians are everywhere, destroying every city in the world, curiously saving Los Angeles and Washington DC for last. The weapon of choice? Ray blasters of course, burning, blasting, and vaporizing everything before them. But for forgetting to get their shots they would have won easily. Trouble is, all they would have gained is a charred planet. What might a more clever space invader do, particularly to stop us from assembling a coordinated defense?

First, you have to disrupt communications. Instead of destroying transmission towers and jamming frequencies, just kill a big name celebrity or two each month. The news media will lock in for weeks on each, each claiming to have new information! Only talk radio will be relatively immune, so bump off a couple of their hosts for the survivors to talk endlessly about.

Second, you disrupt transportation. Since to even reach Earth you are already Zen masters of transportation, you don't need our planes, trains, and automobiles. You only need keep us from using them and there is no better way to interdict the efficient, spotaneous flow of people about town than to impose a expensive, sluggish system that seldom will take people where they want to go, when they want to go. The perfect weapon for this? Light Rail. Build all the lines being planned, and maybe half a dozen more.

On this Independence Day, never has it been more apparent the value of education to a free society. Thanks to my friends at District 279 United, I found a remarkably clear explanation of this. In an interview with the author of WALKING TARGETS: How Our Psychologized Classrooms Are Producing a Nation of Sitting Ducks, B. K. (Beverly) Eakman says the primary mission of our schools should be to (paraphrasing):

1. Create a literate citizenry, capable of self-government.
   
2. Ensure financial independence for that free citizenry, helping ensure political stability.
   
3. Bolster moral standards consistent with the Founders’ unique and Christian-based concept of democracy: life, the pursuit of happiness, national sovereignty, property rights, and free speech.
   

That an Al Franken could get over a million votes in a supposedly well-educated state tells me that we have failed on all three. So what are our schools doing instead, according to Eakman?

"The current function of school is to produce “happy children.” In education jargon, the aim is to produce a “child-centered curriculum[.]" [...] Of course, most schoolchildren are not happy. Proof is in the graffiti, vandalism, arson, school shootings, and just plain non-engagement on the part of students with what should be academic achievement."

That's a bit dismissive of much genuine achievement by most of our students, but producing happy children does not preclude that outcome. It's just not a good enough outcome.

Our school leaders constantly talk about preparing students for the 21st century business world of high technology and global competition. This certainly addresses the financial independence goal, but only the half about making money, not the half about keeping it from an ever expanding, ultimately unsustainable dictatorial government.

The three intertwined goals for preserving liberty? If anything, we seem to be going in the opposite direction, in the name of political correctness. Standards have been lowered and testing has been eased. And our heritage is clearly suspect to many educators: how dare we think our culture is better, despite the economic, social, and political evidence?

The concept of capitalism's virtues and beneficent "invisible hand" require an educated mind to comprehend. We all have the more primal "something for nothing" weakness upon which socialism feeds. It is education that overcomes it, making one realize, "That won't work," and ultimately, "That's not right."

A competent 21st century education can and must include new events and ideas, but not at the expense of the foundation of our liberty. Education is the fountainhead of our freedoms. Let us always remember that, especially today.

First, we all owe Norm Coleman our thanks for sparing us six years of Walter Mondale and six months of Al Franken in the U.S. Senate. He was mostly a good Senator, always strong on defense, and points for that. And points for conceding gracefully now, something Al Franken never would have done.

But let's face it, he made a few too many liberal votes for his and our own good. That's been his style, to reach across the aisle to moderate Democrats, only they no longer exist. He gained nothing while losing the confidence of enough Republicans to cost him the election. Has he learned his lesson, like Pawlenty apparently did this term?

I don't know. I think most of those liberal votes were political calculations, not principled stands. I will therefore be wary of any return to a firmly Conservative domestic policy. As such, it would be easy to declare his political career over. He failed to generate much heat in his run for Governor in 1998. One could argue that Wellstone Memorial is what put him over the top in the Senate race of 2002. His 2010 prospects for Governor or Senator (vs Klobuchar) look no better. But I think he's got one strike left.

That would be the Fourth Congressional District that includes St. Paul, his old Mayoral stomping grounds. Incumbent Betty McCollum would normally be safe, but she could also get caught up in President Obama's wake of economic destruction. The right candidate could have a chance. Well-known in St. Paul as a former Mayor, Norm Coleman might be that candidate. His liberal dalliances may actually prove valuable here among voters ready for a change but not ready for a Conservative.

The irony has been that Coleman has defeated traditional, dogmatic DFL candidates like Walter Mondale and Skip Humphrey. It's populist road apples like Jesse Ventura and Al Franken that make him look clueless. That won't be the case here in the Fourth District assuming McCollum seeks re-election.

So run, Norm, run, where you're needed, where you're known, and where you can win. It'd be good for St. Paul.

The Minneapolis Star Tribune supports St. Paul's plan to buy new accounting systems. It will cost about $14 million, and use software from Lawson, a company headquartered in St. Paul. I don't see much to quibble with here, even the price.

St. Paul has been limping along with a Flintstones system while some other regional governments, including Hennepin and Ramsey counties and the city of Minneapolis, are on their second generation of Jetsons technology.

The current systems are 24 years old, which supposedly explains why (per the Editorial):

• [Tracking] a simple municipal purchase order can take weeks, sometimes months.
• Basic supply orders can be so cumbersome that employees buy the items and expense them.
• It's difficult for city officials to determine when checks have been issued [... or] determine whether departments are on budget.
• Departments use 35 different computer programs to keep track of people and spending
• [Within] the past year, a weeklong system crash cost the city about $40,000

This strongly suggests to me that there's more wrong here than just technology or a supposed lack of money. A private concern this size would never tolerate this. And while the auditors might recommend new technology, they wouldn't accept old technology as an excuse for problems like these.

There are people and procedure issues here, too. These must be fixed as well or the new systems will soon be exhibiting the same sorts of problems.