By now everyone with even half a brain has heard about all the lame-brained liberal programs that have been loaded into the “Stimulus Bill”. I wonder if President Obama is wishing he had never used this phrase during the campaign…

That there’s a whole lot of pork chop sandwiches!

I almost broke the steering wheel in my car on the way to work this morning listening to “Brian & The Judge”. It’s one of my favorites and I usually agree with Judge Andrew Napolitano. Not so much today. The topic under discussion was the bonus payments at the investment firms that were bailed out with the TARP funds. My hard-earned tax dollars. The Judge – who has been breathing too many fumes from Manhattan – was of the misbegotten opinion that the bonuses were part of the Wall St. workers’ salary and was sticking up for those poor souls who are now being unfairly hammered for being the recipients of this largesse.

Pardon me, Your Honor, but you’re all wet on this one. Over the course of my employment history, I have had a job where I worked on a base + bonus basis – as a marketing manager for a Fortune 100 company. It was real clear from day one that the bonus only kicked in if I exceeded my “objective”. Objectives for the sales teams were established by management as a reflection of how much revenue the company needed to reach profitability. If we didn’t reach our goals, the company didn’t reach the magic black ink. No black ink – no bonus. Pretty simple concept. And guess what – there was a year when we didn’t get the company out of the red – and the year-end bonus didn’t happen. Nobody was shocked or surprised. Disappointed – oh yeah. Poorer for the experience – you got that right. Bailed out? Silly Rabbit, those tricks are for suckers.

I didn’t think the TARP money was ever intended to assure that the worker bees who didn’t meet those companies’ financial goals would be compensated for incompetence, and I have a real problem with those that do.

So now we hear President Obama and Senator McCaskill among others wringing their hands over how to reverse this situation. I’ve got an idea. Actually happened to me at the above mentioned company. When the bean counters tallied up the beans at the end of that one year they found out they were a few beans (ok – a few hundred thousand beans – and possibly a few marbles too) short of the expected total annual revenue. So, those of us who had been expecting year-end bonuses to round out our quarterly bonuses which we had already been paid (and pretty much spent) – got cute little love notes from the Big Boss, wishing us a “Happy New Year and by the way you owe us all the bonus money we paid you last year. Did you want to pay that in installments over six months or write us a check now?”

I’m not at all comfortable with the whole TARP thing anyway, but for sure the idea of paying out bonuses to people who failed to achieve profit-status for their company just doesn’t work at all for me. I’m working for less than $30K a year and some ivy-league MBA dude who makes a base salary in the mid-to-high six figures and can’t do his job right gets a multi-hundred thousand dollar bonus??? I don’t think so.

Nope, Judge. Objection denied. And Mr. President – just take a minute or two away from healing the planet and receding the oceans – and get some flunky on your staff to draft a letter. Something to the effect of, “Gosh we made a mistake. You didn’t earn the bonus, your company went belly-up, you don’t get to keep the money. Please send your check for $______________ in the enclosed return envelope. Love, The One.”

I am very proud to announce that Montana’s former First Lady, Betty Babcock is now a bona fide member of the blogosphere. Her new blog, 1st Lady Insights is a welcome addition to the group of Montana conservative bloggers. Her passion for Montana and its people will be a hallmark of the site, and I hope it will become a regular stop on your internet browsing – I know it will be on mine! I bet this is another example of a strong Montana woman blazing a trail for the rest of us to follow. Way to go, Betty!!!!

On a similar theme, Sarah Palin is continuing to fight for our energy independence. Another formidable force meeting an issue that needs to be conquered. I’ve always said that when you need something done, a woman’s the man for the job!

To announce that 2HelenaHandbaskets is the proud winner of the

courtesy of Iowahawk

Thank you, thank you. No applause, please. Just throw money.

You may now return to my award-winning blog.

Trust me – you won’t get this song out of your head anytime soon…

It’s too early in the new year to determine the year’s best snark, but HillBuzz is certainly in the running for the 2009 Award with their piece on the new First Lady’s inaugural ball gown.

Calling the one-shouldered white creation by 26 year-old Jason Wu (No, I’ve never heard of him either), “Vintage Hanna Barbera, … looking like Wilma Flintstone covered in prehistoric dryer lint” definitely reaches the highest level of snark in my book.

Funny how these announcements always show up in the Saturday papers, so the outrage is muted. For those of us who have been watching this little drama with, shall we call it a “jaundiced eye”, can retreat into our “I knew he’d do that” mode.

Four years ago, the Montana legislature appropriated $7.5 million to purchase property for a new History Center. All discussion centered around locating the new building at the current Capitol Hill Mall – an aging retail complex a few short blocks from the capitol campus, right on Highway 12. The mall location has practically everything going for it: size, location, lots of convenient parking, a willing seller. Everything, that is except for one key element: Governor Schweitzer’s support. For some unknowable reason, the Gov has never liked the proposal and has used his considerable political skills to insure that the project would fail, all the while making it look like he was supporting the efforts of First Lady Betty Babcock to make it happen. He even allowed his wife, Nancy to join with Mrs. Babcock in promoting the fundraising efforts over the past few months. But the conditions he placed on the project were designed to guarantee it’s failure. And lo! – today, Janet Kelly announces with a heavy heart, that the fundraising efforts fell short and – alas! – the governor will have to give the go ahead to the counter proposal to build a new building on the parking lot across from the current museum. Heavy sigh.

For those of us who live in Helena, and especially those of us who live or work in or near the capitol complex, this is a serious economic and quality of life blow. For the people of Montana this is a politically motivated, short-sighted mugging that will rob us of our heritage.

There’s been a lot of conversation in the media, the blogosphere, around dinner tables, and water coolers for the past few weeks about the future of the Republican Party. The tone of these discussions runs the gamut from sincere to snarky, from condescending and nasty to thoughtful and hopeful. The result of these conversations is a long way off, but the discussions themselves are vitally important for the future of the party and the country.

I’ve been around for a pretty long time (Please tell me that 60 is the new 30!), and I’ve seen periods when the Republicans were in the majority and times when the Democrats were. The pendulum swings. Actually, that’s a good thing in my opinion: No one party has a monopoly on all the right answers. As they say, an eagle needs two wings to fly.

But the purpose of this post is to have a conversation about how we can make the Republican Party stronger.

We talk about our principles, but sometimes the principles and policies get so intertwined we can’t tell one from the other. It seems to me that we need to define those driving principles that we can all agree on and that will then provide the foundation for a stronger and more explainable Republican message. Well, duh. Yet what seems to have happened is that we have stumbled into defining beliefs in terms of litmus tests. And then demand that our fellow Republicans must unquestioningly adhere to those beliefs or risk being ostracized from the group.

I would submit the following two quotes as an illustration of why the prospects for party unification may be about as likely as peace in the Middle East.

First, from the Hoover Institute, a conservative think tank: “The decline of Republican strength occurs when strong Republicans become weak Republicans, weak Republicans become independents, and independents lean more Democratic or [are] even becoming Democrats. . . . The problem for Republicans is that their base is slowly shrinking, and they cannot win without the support of moderates”.

And then from a recent blog comment, “What they don’t understand about Ron Paul supporters is that we don’t want to be a part of the GOP – we want to BE the GOP! We want the GOP to represent exactly what we believe.”

How can we possibly reconcile those two disparate views? Let alone the other millions of diverse opinions of those Americans who consider themselves Republicans or conservatives.

I have always considered myself a moderate Republican, and while I respect John McCain for his service to this country and admire his attempts to reach across the political aisle, I firmly oppose most of his bipartisan legislation – McCain/Feingold for example. The compromise proposal for immigration reform is anathema to me, and I am dismayed by the fiscal mismanagement of all levels of government. So perhaps I must find a new way to define myself in terms of my political persuasion. If I am not a “moderate”, and I certainly have never subscribed to the uber-conservative mandates of the Constitutionalist/Ron Paul/Pat Buchannan republicans who are now committed to “taking our party back”, where do I fit?

Philosophically speaking, I believe that the best government is small and local, but due to an appalling lack of interest and involvement by the citizenry in local government, our schools, cities, and counties are woefully inadequate, inept, or corrupt; there is a vital role for federal government, but it is not always, or even usually, the best, right, or only answer to most of society’s ills. The federal government is responsible for our national security, interstate commerce and for those things that cannot be more efficiently and effectively done by the states, local governments, the private sector, or the people themselves – education, healthcare, and welfare (small “w”). Bailing out people and companies who have made stupid financial decisions just doesn’t seem to be an appropriate role for an unwieldy bureaucracy. I believe in the sanctity of life, but I recognize that abortions are a fact of life – always have been, and always will be – but I cannot justify the expenditure of tax dollars to pay for them. I believe that marriage is a sacrament, instituted by God (can you see the nun standing over my shoulder?) and is, therefore, the province of religious institutions, and the government should have no role in defining who can or can’t, should or shouldn’t, get married. I believe in equality for all, regardless of race, creed, color, or religion, and that government should insure a level playing field; yet we all have an equal right to fail as well as succeed. I believe in the Rule of Law, of equal justice, and the freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

So what kind of Republican am I? Moderate? No, that’s already been established here. Conservative? That contingent doesn’t like me much either. Pragmatic? Possibly. Realistic? Probably. After a lifetime of being politically active, and after having lived in Oregon where my conservative bent left me feeling like a “right-wing-nut”, and Idaho where my political philosophy was suddenly almost “whacko-liberal”, I am back in Montana where my ideology seems pretty much middle-of-the-road.

I call it “Mainstreet” Republicanism. And I think that’s where the party has to be to regain the majority we once had.

What say you?

[Note: While I believe in freedom of expression, I also believe in CIVIL discourse. I will delete any comments that are rude, vulgar, or otherwise inappropriate. It’s good to be Queen.]

After decades of watching the price of new homes skyrocket, we may now be witnessing lead ballon phase of the cycle. A couple in Missoula have scored a fantastic deal.

I’ve always been intrigued by home design and building. We’ve built two houses – the last one in 1997 and the cost per square foot came in at about $78 – without the lot. Since moving back here, we’ve been contemplating another build-job, but haven’t yet come to an agreement on a couple of the basics: First, I want to, hubby doesn’t. So that slows the process a bit. The other issue is, of course, price. Can we get what we want/need/would like to have for the amount of money we are able to spend? Up until today, I really felt pessimistic about the prospects. First thing Monday morning though, I’m calling Tom Swenson, the CEO of the Bank of Montana. I really want to know how to build a house for about 50 cents a square foot!

Because some of us have shoveled way more global warming off our sidewalks this winter than we really want to, it is incumbent upon me to share a couple of my favorite drinks for warming up after coming in from the cold – as a public service. Trust me, these are not the same as your mother’s hot cocoa with marshmallows.

HOT TODDY
Double Shot of Crown Royal (or the cheap stuff if you’re not too picky)
1 1/4 oz Real Lemon Concentrate
1 Squirt Vanilla Syrup (it’s not just for lattes any more!)
Fill cup with boiling water

IRISH COFFEE
Double Shot of Bushmills Irish Whisky (no substitutions, please)
1/2 tsp. Sugar
2 Squirts Irish Cream Syrup
Add Fresh Hot Coffee almost to top of cup
Top with real whipped cream (I use one of those fancy cream whipper doohinkies like they use in Starbucks – really makes a difference – honest!)

After two or three of either of these fine concoctions, you’ll find that: a.) Global Warming may not be such a bad thing after all; b.) the oceans are receding and the whole Hope! Change! thing is starting to make sense; and c.) Caroline Kennedy deserves to be coronated correlated color-coded senatored. Whatever.

Enjoy – and stay warm!