Ethics End-Around

I've been trying to get my fellow Republicans to marginalize our loud, small minority of anti-gay activists - and here comes Rep. Galizio with the perfect tool for furthering that worthy goal.

Now that Galizio is dating a union lobbyist, he's announced that whatever they do together is "private" - so the union can pay for meals, gifts, trips to golf in Hawaii, whatever, and Galizio doesn't even have to keep records of it, let alone report it.

It's the "we're on a date" loophole to the new ethics rules (SB 10).

Now, fast-forward a year. Republican lawmakers go out to lunch with lobbyists, and don't want to report it. Bingo! "We're on a date. It's our personal lives."

Once we see male and female Republicans going out on "dates" with both male and female lobbyists, it'll be even more mainstream to be tolerant and inclusive of all sexual orientations and lifestyles.

My hat is off to Larry Galizio. He's playing a very deep game, at some personal political risk, to move our society towards greater tolerance and inclusion. Bravo.

Toll Road Offers New Jersey a Fiscal Test Drive - New York Times

Toll Road Offers New Jersey a Fiscal Test Drive - New York Times

Some pros and cons around leasing toll roads to private operators.

'A Glorious Mess' - WSJ.com

'A Glorious Mess' - WSJ.com

In an otherwise reasonably good editorial, the WSJ's editors wrote a hideous sentence:

Mr. Dingell was perhaps overstating his case when he said it had "the potential for shutting down or slowing down virtually all industry and all economic activity and growth," but not by much.

Quick review: the position of emphasis in a sentence is at the end. This sentence ends with, and emphasizes, "but not by much."

Without looking back, what was the thing being modified by "but not by much" - was it the "shutting down or slowing down" of the economy? Oh, well, then nothing to be worried about - the economy might take a little hit, maybe it'll be slowed, "but not by much." Sigh of relief.

Uh, oh. That's counter-intuitive. The WSJ wouldn't make that point. Look back... oh, it's Dingel, who is either not overstating his case at all, or perhaps overstating it, "but not by much."

With bad editing and bad sentence construction, the WSJ manages to take a crucial point, and suck all the energy out of it.

Word to the wise: put your modifiers near their modify-ees, keep your points clear, and remember that the end of the sentence is the position of emphasis.

Gotta brag - I bagged a drunk driver

I feel good enough about this to brag - on my drive home tonight, I noticed a driver ahead of me driving erratically. I was worried enough to call the police - the driver could be drunk, or suffering a seizure, or need insulin... or just be distracted. And the police are well trained to handle any of those - I'm not.

So, I called in, and our highly professional Hillsboro police responded quickly and pulled him over, and took my statement. Afterwards one officer said the driver definitely seemed intoxicated.

Score one for the good guys.